|
|
Post by Bre on Apr 7, 2006 7:39:06 GMT 10
I hope it's a long movie! The longer the better (if you know what i mean..  ). But yeah, I'd watch a 4 hour long Harry Potter movie. But that's just me. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Apr 7, 2006 22:17:43 GMT 10
Bre  No double entendres in the Harry Potter section if you please  I could gladly watch a 4 hour Harry Potter film but not at the cinemas because i am too easily annoyed by rattling and kids. I think they should do a LoTR and have a theatrical release and then an extended edition on DVD |
|
|
|
Post by Bre on Apr 8, 2006 2:10:28 GMT 10
Lol so sorry Glenn..
But yeah I agree. They should definitely have an extended edition release. I'd buy them all!
|
|
secret
Guest
Nov 27, 2024 6:35:36 GMT 10
|
Post by secret on Apr 15, 2006 19:19:45 GMT 10
I hope it's a long movie! The longer the better (if you know what i mean.. ). But yeah, I'd watch a 4 hour long Harry Potter movie. But that's just me. I think all Harry Potter fans would. But then the film would have 'too long' plastered all over it's reviews. Also, the directors have reputations to uphold and they don't wanna be known as the director who has the longest films as Mike Newell said. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Apr 15, 2006 21:54:19 GMT 10
Screw them. How selfish of the gits, they dont want to get a bad reputation so they will shorten the films down as much as they can. That is so annoying, its supposed to be about the fans not about the directors reps. Grrrrrrrr that has made me mad  |
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Apr 15, 2006 22:23:17 GMT 10
It is about the fans. Kids don't like watching movies that long. Neither do most adults. More than 3 hours is just too long.
|
|
secret
Guest
Nov 27, 2024 6:35:36 GMT 10
|
Post by secret on Apr 16, 2006 6:48:47 GMT 10
But I guess the older fans would want longer films that stay closely to the context of the book (like me!!!) Then again, the directors have to consider everyone and they think that most of the fans come from kids aged 8-13.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Apr 16, 2006 8:43:31 GMT 10
The fans are wide spread. I would not want to watch a 4 hour movie, it would bore me no matter how entertaining it was. Its too long. Unlike books, movies do not need to be drawn out that much. I am happy for them to cut what they want out and then do an extended edition on DVD for those that want to watch more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bre on Apr 16, 2006 12:47:15 GMT 10
See but there are how many hard core Harry Potter fans who are willing to watch the movies that are over 3 hours long. But we all know that with young children, there's no way in hell they could sit through that long of a movie, but the thing is the HP books are maturing to where the kids aren't going to be as interested, and the movies might not be good for them to watch, so why not make it longer.
But then there's people like you, Beck, that would get bored also watching a really long movie. So even if the theatrical version is about 2-3 hours, then they could release an extended version that would be closer to the book. That way, everyone would be happy, and the directors wouldn't have to worry about their precious reputation.
|
|
secret
Guest
Nov 27, 2024 6:35:36 GMT 10
|
Post by secret on Apr 17, 2006 23:28:19 GMT 10
The fans are wide spread. That's true. Many adults love Harry Potter too. There's even the adult editions. But that was a statistic taken from a survey in january 2006. Edit by Beck - fixed Quote |
|
|
|
Post by Lexie on Jun 2, 2006 1:58:31 GMT 10
January 2006 wasn't that long ago, hun.
I do wish the movies were longer so they could be more true to the book. Even an extra half an hour makes a difference.
A four hour movie would be too long for the theaters, but I agree with the idea of having a theatrical version and an extended version like Lord of the Rings does. I have actually thought that for some time.
In general I think the movies have been true to the books. The third movie is the one I am dissapointed about, though. Which is weird because Prisoner of Azkaban is my favorite book. I think too much was left out of that one. There was no explanation about the Marauders at all and that is such a big part of Potterverse.
I have been on a Harry Potter forum where fans moan and groan about the fourth movie, saying it left too much out and blah, blah, blah. Yeah, I would have liked to have seen everyhing too, but how long is the book? Over 700 pages! That's just unrealistic. Think about money and time restraints! I actually think Mike Newell did a good job with choosing what's important to have in the movie and what isn't.
As I said, POA is my favorite book, though I love all of them. Sirius is my favorite character. (I was practically in tears when he died in OOTP) It brought in more about Harry's parents and their past. The story of the Marauders was great. The map was great. The Dementors were fantastic as the scary element. Then there was the quidditch cup and the character development in all the characters, especially Harry. I loved it and can't wait to read it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lizzie on Jun 2, 2006 20:02:57 GMT 10
I think of the books as completely separate to the movies. Completely different medium, and obviously things are going to be left out. My favorite movie so far has been GOF. I think Newell really made a movie for the fans, whereas Alfonso Cuarón made a more artistic film aimed more at the casual viewer who might not have seen the other films/read the books. I used to really dislike the first two movies, but in retrospect, I think Columbus did a great job. He's definitely a "family" director, and he made two excellent family movies. The first movies are the most 'childish' and his directing style suited it perfectly. In HP news, a dinosaur was found that looked a lot like a dragon. It's been named Dracorex hogwartsia after the books. I think that's fantastic.  |
|
secret
Guest
Nov 27, 2024 6:35:36 GMT 10
|
Post by secret on Jun 5, 2006 0:14:27 GMT 10
January 2006 wasn't that long ago, hun. LOL, It feels like centuries agooooooooooo. How time flies when you're reading Harry Potter hehe ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Loz on Jun 27, 2006 10:54:57 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Jun 27, 2006 11:28:17 GMT 10
If it is Lupin I am burning my books And if Snape turns out to be a baddie, likewise. Voldemort has to die, and Harry is likely to die too imo. Perhaps Snape as well though, in an act proving where his loyalties lie? I assume more than 2 characters will die though, the 2 must mean main characters. |
|
|
|
Post by Loz on Jun 27, 2006 11:33:47 GMT 10
I agree. Lupin or Ron die and i will burn the lot of them. And i will be extremely pissed if Snape turns out to be bad. When they say two i assume for some reason they mean two main 'goodies'.... Surely Voldemort and Harry will kill each other at the end. But there is sure to be other casualties along the way  |
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Jun 27, 2006 11:37:00 GMT 10
She'll have to pair of Ron and Hermoine, but I think if Harry dies, they are safe. One of those three will die for sure, most likely Harry. And I reckon Neville will do something heroic too. Dumbledore... he'll return in some form, whether it be in person and alive (nah... doubtful) or through one of his memory thingies in his office. Would LOVE to see Sirius back, his death was never truly confirmed and no body found... but I am not hopeful. So goodies likely to die, Harry (or one of the other two), oooo what about Hagrid? Though for what reason I can't really see  |
|
|
|
Post by Loz on Jun 27, 2006 11:45:22 GMT 10
I thought Hagrid, simply because everyone loves Hagrid I defintely think its a possibilty.... Would do flips if Sirius came back - he's my favourite It better be some sort of happy/hopeful ending or i will be pissed  |
|
|
|
Post by Beck on Jun 27, 2006 11:51:52 GMT 10
It will end with a hopeful ending, and with the Death Eaters and Voldemort defeated... but I dont think it will be a happy ending  |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Jun 28, 2006 1:46:46 GMT 10
I think there will be plenty of Deaths.
Im not sure if Ron/Hermione will ever properly get together. She may just well kill one of them before they do.
Hagrid will never die, she just cant do that surely
|
|
). But yeah, I'd watch a 4 hour long Harry Potter movie. But that's just me.
