Beginning of GoF: No Dursleys

[Neonorne]

CBBC Newsround confirms that there will be no Dursleys in GoF. No ton-tongue toffee and blasted fireplace at Privet Drive, that is.

So what do we think about this approach to shortening GoF, people? Terrible or ok?

Personally, I don't think this is the worst they could have cut. Some potential comic relief gone, certainly, but the Dursleys are not essential in GoF. In OotP they are, but not in GoF.

What do you all think?

[brisa]

Oks...I know Dursley's aren't so nice...but they are a part of this puzzle...they are always needed for the beggining of each book....why Mike Newell cut them...I can't understand...in fact I can't understand why Cuaron didn't take the HP4 project...and this is my fav book, and I'm afraid Newell will try to "cut" more things in the story...

[Doggy]

They're going to have to cut a lot of things in GoF to ensure that

a) The movie won't be 10 hours long
or
b) The movie isn't full of a lot of rushed scenes noone understands, in order to fit everything in.

And when you see it that way, I think it's perfectly fine to cut the Dursleys. The scene(s) with them in the beginning aren't crucial to the plot. They're funny, yes, but they aren't necessary.

Better to take them away and leave more time for the Tasks than vice versa.

[Atalanta]

GoF is about 800 pages long and of course some scenes have to be cut, but at the start of the movie you need the Dursleys. How else would the story start, with Harry being at the Weasleys already? I agree that the Dursleys are not essential in the rest of the book (if present at all), but I think the story should start with Harry being at Privet Drive.

[Mrs Padfoot]

Will the film start with Harry at the burrow then?

[lxs234]

I am a little upset they aren't going to be in it. Even though the scenes with Harry at private drive were always boring, it just felt good that each movie started at the same place. Its going to change the movie with them not there, even for a few minutes...

[lxs234]

Will the film start with Harry at the burrow then?Most likely... It's going to be pretty confusing for some people...

[Mrs Padfoot]

Most likely... It's going to be pretty confusing for some people...

Yeah they'd have to do an explanation for those people who haven't read the books.

[Disarming Charm]

I will miss the Dursley's this time if only because of the scene when Harry gets the letter from the Weasley's with all the stamps on it. I think that would be pretty funny to show.

I also think it may confuse people who do not read the books but go see the movies, esp. when they get to the 5th movie and it is expalined why Harry has to stay with them every year. I assume some people will think back and wonder why we didn't see them in the 3rd movie.

That being said, the book is long and I can see why this would be one of the first scenes to go. I would much rather see the tasks and other really important scenes stay than have them cut to fit in a Dursley scene.

[herbertsandbach]

I don't mind losing the Dursleys if we gain time at the Burrow but one of the quotes says the film will start at Hogwarts,that means no Quidditch world cup !!!!!

They can't cut out the Dursleys,the Burrow and the Quidditch World cup surely !!!!!

[martinnyg]

This was the only proper way to do it. If they are set on only making this movie 2½ hour long, then there's no way the Dursley's would fit in the time schedule. And the problem with it being confusing can be solved in one simple way: Having Harry say to Ron or Mr. Weasley "Good you could come and pick me up, so I can go see the Quidditch World Championships".

[Weatherby]

I'll really miss the Dursleys and therefore will always infinitely prefer the books to the films.
Dudley's diet was a real gem. There will be no chocolate bars, burgers, cake, fizzy drinks, etc. in the film?! As if!

I hope they consider cutting out Hagrid and Maxime's dating. At least most of it.

[dobby_rocks]

Cant say I’m pleased with this news, i think the D's are a big part even though we only see them very briefly at the start and end of the books. I wish fans could do something but it seems if their minds are made up its not likely anyone could chance it except JK Rowling, if she thought it was needed that they appear in the 4th movie she would have said so. I still don’t like it but such as life. Yes i was looking forward to the D tongue thing. Surely they could at least shoot some scenes for the DVD. Of course if there were to do that it likely be near the end of filming late early 2005. Well they will have to be in the 5th movie at least Aunt Petunia

I also looked forward to Vernon face when the Weaslys pop out of the fire place and Arthur trying to be civil and everything. I suppose they will likely start out at the World cup or going there. It will might seem confusing to those who don’t read the books

[Atalanta]

If the Quidditch World Cup is not to be included in the movie, there has to be found some other way to make clear that Voldemort will return. Somehow the tension has to be built up and the scene with the death eaters at the Quidditch World Cup is vital to the story. Or will they be using Harry's dreams for that? And what about Krum, he's introduced at the World Cup!

About the Dursleys: maybe the movie will start with Harry at Privet Drive, when he's leaving for the Burrow or the World Cup. We might just catch a small glimpse of the house, but not of Vernon, Petunia or Dudley. I think they should be mentioned at least, to make clear that Harry has spent a part of his summer holiday at their place.

[SomeDevils]

I hope that the movie opens with the scene at the Riddle's house with LV. It's my favorite opening of the books so far. Also, Harry waking up to the "dream" of LV and his plot is important as well, but that takes place at the Dursley's. I wish the Dursley's were in it, but obviously everything can't make it into the movie. I just hope they keep the opening scene with LV at the Riddles.

[teth]

Aww...the Dursley scene is my favorite Dursley chapter out of all 5 books. I love the idea of the Weasleys bursting through the fireplace while it's blocked. (sigh) oh well...they must do what they must do.

[Jedi Potter]

It doesn't bother me, I will miss them in the beginning but things have to be cut. Interesting the movie is starting like the screenplay Daniel4HP had up here.

[Miasma]

I don't really like the films (probably because they're really cheesy and Harry looks about 2) but I do like the Dursleys in it (although I think Dudley should be larger!) and I think that they're funny. I don't think that they should be cut out - even if they were only in it for about 2 minutes. And no, they're not crucial to the plotline, but it develops their characters, if not much else.

[lxs234]

one of the quotes says the film will start at Hogwarts,that means no Quidditch world cup !!!!!

What??? You have got to be kidding me!!! That means we will miss Draco leaning sexily against the tree!! Plus the whole introduction of the dark mark, winky, and some of the characters most important to the plot!

(Please excuse my yelling, but I was looking forward to seeing Draco.)


OH MY GOD, that means we won't see Naricssa!!!!
Augghhhh.....

::Runs around screaming and tearing out her hair::

[MadMagic]

Aww, this is so disappointing. Seeing Dudley eat the ton tongue toffee would be priceless, as would be his diet. Is he still going to be having the Voldemort dream in the beginning, because that was pretty important.
I guess I don't want to see anything cut, but seeing the Dursleys' reaction to coming in contact with real wizards would be great.

[Jedi Potter]

I am sure the dream will be the opening sequence, he will probably be at the Burrow at the beggining of the film.

[lxs234]

I am sure the dream will be the opening sequence, he will probably be at the Burrow at the beggining of the film.Do the directors have any idea how confusing that's going to be for everyone?

[MotherBear1975]

Before book I would've said ok, sorry to see 'em go... but *some*thing has to be cut. But for those of us wo *do* read the books (yes, I know a few who just watch the movies) we have seen just how crucial the Dursly's are to the story. Personally... I think they should go ahead and make the movie 4 hrs long with an intermission in the middle. *I'd* go... and so would most people I know, book-readers, and movie-onlies alike.

[Dagmar]

I've always enjoyed the scenes where Harry is at Privet Dr. It gives a nice contrast, and sets up the tone for Harry through the rest of the story. His accomplishments are so much sweeter when he starts with the bitterness of the Dursley's. :td:

[MotherBear1975]

grr. five-ten minutes for the Weasley-picking-him-up-and-the-ton-tounge-toffee scene... thats not asking too much, is it?... another couple minutes actually *at the burrow* to introduce Bill and Charlie (or could just do that at the campground) and to set up what Percy's up to... heck they could cut the going-for-water scene... maybe the whole first tent scene (thought they've got to do the DE's march *after*the match). There's *plenty* of other stuff they could cut or just shorten up a bit. No reason to cut them completely out. I think we ought to do some sort of revolt... but what could we do that the directors would pay attention to? Its not as if we could hit em in the pocketbook... I know *I* couldn't just not go see it... *sigh*.

[Bagshot]

I have enough reservations about the Prisoner of Azkaban movie and now even more for the Goblet of fire! You can't cut out the Dursley scenes, not only because of the ton tongue toffee scenes but because in the later films it will be revealed that Harry must go back to the Dursley's house so that he will be safe. How can they do this if in the fourth movie he's not even going to be there? It missed out so much,especially on Fred and George,it's the start of their business and very funny.

[pegoheart144]

They're going to have to cut a lot of things in GoF to ensure that

a) The movie won't be 10 hours long
or
b) The movie isn't full of a lot of rushed scenes noone understands, in order to fit everything in.

And when you see it that way, I think it's perfectly fine to cut the Dursleys. The scene(s) with them in the beginning aren't crucial to the plot. They're funny, yes, but they aren't necessary.

Better to take them away and leave more time for the Tasks than vice versa.
I agree with you! They're going to have to cut a lot to fit important things into the film. The Triwizard Tournament and Voldemort's subsequent return are the crucial things.

They really don't need the scene with the Dursleys to tell the story. I've always felt the only real purpose of the Quidditch World Cup was to introduce a few characters. I can also see them cutting way back on Hermione's S.P.E.W. campaign, the blast-ended skrewts and the Yule Ball. (Maybe we'll just hear about them).

Face it a lot will need to be cut. Even though they cut alot from the first two movies. They stand up on their own. I know some people who haven't read the books but like the movies.

[MotherBear1975]

They could start the movie w/Vernon pacing in the sitting room grumbling about them bein late. 'course, that cuts out the dream and the painful scar... but Harry could just mention it in passing to Hermione and Ron to let them know he wrote Sirius.

[persian85033]

That means we won't see the Ton-Tongue Toffee. :upset: I really wanted to see the living room blown up and everything. Well, now let's hope that they don't leave out the Riddle House, at least.

[pegoheart144]

They could start the movie with dream of the Riddle House but Harry wakes up in bed at the Burrow or already be at Hogwarts. There is a lot that can be cut without ruining the main points.

[thethirdman]

I don't mind them cutting out the Dursleys. Something about them can be mentioned later on. The World Cup is important since that's where we first get a glimpse of Krum and the return of the Death Eaters. Also considering we won't meet Cedric in POA, it'll be a good introduction to him. But the Dursley scene, while it's an amusing one, it's not that necessary.

[Nycade]

Without the Dursleys, it seems like it will be hard to set it up correctly to get Harry to the Quidditch cup. I hope they don't skip that... I don't think there's ANY way they could make that work, though it would save a lot of money. I'd like it if they kept the Dursleys, but I agree it isn't the worst that could be cut. I just wonder how they'll do it... that'll be interesting to see.

[daniel4hp]

The Dursley's are not needed in Goblet of Fire. They are in Order of the Phoenix, but as long as the film makes it clear that Harry was with them and then left to go to the Burrow, they'll be fine. The Dursley's, although somewhat comical, do not serve any purpose in Goblet of Fire.

I think the Dursley's would only slow up the movie. You obviously need the Dursley's in PS, and in CoS and PoA, something happens (Dobby, Aunt Marge) at the Dursleys. In GoF, nothing happens, so they would only serve as an odd little scene at the beginning of the movie that served no purpose whatsoever. The film would have better pacing if it started out with the Burrow, or even skip the burrow and start with the Qudditch World Cup.

The dream at the beginning of the book is the logical first scene. After this, the film needs to straight into the story; there's a lot to cover, so time shouldn't be wasted on meaningless scenes that will slow the film up.

[LumosSoleil]

I personally don't care that they cut that out. I'm just worried about how they're to begin the movie now that Harry will not be there. They also can't just start it with Harry being at the Burrow cuz it'll just look like the Weasleys adopt him after he ran away from the Dursley's home his previous year. That would mess up the beginning of the fifth movie since the Dursleys (well, Petunia) surprisingly have an important role and Harry HAS to be at Number 4 Pivet Drive. Well, the actors shouldn't complain because they might just get a call later on during the shooting. I mean, I know that Cuaron didn't shoot everything in order for PoA. They shot Trelawney's lesson scene in November and the Shrieking Shack scene in July. It's still too early to tell.

[springthing4]

hmmm i don't really care that they're cut out...they don't really play a big role. i suppose that they'll just have harry getting a letter from the weasleys saying that they're going to the quidditch world cup. they have a lot to cut from this book, so a lot of our favourite things to the book will probably get cut. i like watching what they cut from the movies, because sometimes it gives clues as to what will play out later in the books.

[lxs234]

I guess I could live with no Dursleys... As long as the world cup (draco and narcissa) are there. I could see him having the dream at the weasleys...

[daniel4hp]

I'm just worried about how they're to begin the movie now that Harry will not be there. They also can't just start it with Harry being at the Burrow cuz it'll just look like the Weasleys adopt him after he ran away from the Dursley's home his previous year.
That partially depends on how they end PoA (if they show Harry rejoining the Durselys, that wouldn't be a problem, or if Ron made some comment that he might invite Harry over during the summer). In any case, they will need to explain it in GoF, but that would be as easy as a simple "thanks for inviting me over" line. It would be easy to quickly explain why Harry's at the Burrow.

[LumosSoleil]

That partially depends on how they end PoA (if they show Harry rejoining the Durselys, that wouldn't be a problem, or if Ron made some comment that he might invite Harry over during the summer). In any case, they will need to explain it in GoF, but that would be as easy as a simple "thanks for inviting me over" line. It would be easy to quickly explain why Harry's at the Burrow.
True but do they knew how PoA ended? I don't know if it's still being edited but I surely hope it doesn't end with the firebolt scene like some people who viewed it said.

[daniel4hp]

The firebolt ending was just a rough cut. It sounded to me like they tacked it on quickly so they had something to screen to people -- a substitute for an ending that they were still working on. At least, that's how I read it.

But, in the end, it doesn't matter how PoA ends -- if it sets up the beginning of GoF, great, if not, they can still include some dialog in GoF to explain it away. A good ending for PoA would enhance the beginning of GoF, but however PoA ends, they'll still need to explain it in Goblet of Fire. That shouldn't be that hard, though.

[Chloe]

I would miss the Drusleys in the film but if it the difference between having the Riddle House or Back to the Burrow or the Quidditch World Cup chapter, I say get rid of The Scar and the Invitation chapters because they only tell us what we already know.
True. I think if they have to cut the dursleys, they should start with the Riddle House and then have Harry wake up, his scar burning, at the weasleys- it's the only way they could maneuver it

They could start the movie with dream of the Riddle House but Harry wakes up in bed at the Burrow or already be at Hogwarts. There is a lot that can be cut without ruining the main points.

Pegoheart, this wouldn't be possible- what about the quiditch world cup? That is essential to the plot of the book! If he is alreadu at hogwarts, then there would be no Winky and when she comes in later people would be very confused.

[Dominor4]

I bet the entire beginning of book 4 (Riddle House, Dursleys, Burrow, Quidditch World Cup) will be left out, because you can dive straight into the plot by beginning with Harry on the Hogwarts Express or arriving at school. For example, Krum can be introduced when he arrives at Hogwarts (the movie doesn't need to show him as a Quidditch Champ), the Crouch thing can be explained by the pensive scene and confession (just leave out Winky and the incident at the World Cup), and Voldemort explains everything about why he needed Harry at the gravesite at the end anyway. I know there would be a lot of cool stuff missing, but all the really important stuff is still left in.

[xena40403]

I'm pretty sure they will cut out the S.P.E.W and the Yule Ball. The only thing that they would have needed the Yule Ball for was to show that Hermione's teeth were smaller--which isn't an issue in the movies--and the chemistry between Ron and Hermione--which is already being established. I'd say a lot of things will be removed to be able to successfully tell the TriWizard, and Voldemort rising storylines.
I don't see why they don't shoot for 3 1/2 hours long--I mean people sat through Lord of the Rings and Gone with the Wind.

[FoolOnTheHill]

I think it would work to have the dream wake up Harry at the Burrow. Then they could go straight to the World Cup.

I don't really care too much that they've cut out the Dursley's, they serve no purpose in GoF and nobody likes them anyway. :lol: I'd rather have the five minutes of film time Harry would spend at Privet Drive devoted to the much more important ending. If cutting that gives us more time at the graveyard or something then YAY!

[daniel4hp]

I bet the entire beginning of book 4 (Riddle House, Dursleys, Burrow, Quidditch World Cup) will be left out, because you can dive straight into the plot by beginning with Harry on the Hogwarts Express or arriving at school. For example, Krum can be introduced when he arrives at Hogwarts (the movie doesn't need to show him as a Quidditch Champ), the Crouch thing can be explained by the pensive scene and confession (just leave out Winky and the incident at the World Cup), and Voldemort explains everything about why he needed Harry at the gravesite at the end anyway. I know there would be a lot of cool stuff missing, but all the really important stuff is still left in.
That's an interesting idea. I think you would need to establish that Voldemort is a growing menace, so Riddle House would stay at the beginning -- it would make a cool opening scene, plus introduce the important Voldemort plot. Harry could then wake up at Hogwarts (which, although it would seem abreviated, wouldn't seem as jarringly abreviated as it would if Riddle House was cut), and the movie can get started with the Triwizard Tournament.

Admittedly, there is important stuff that happens at the Quidditch World Cup, and it would be nice to keep, but if you needed to trim 20 minutes off, it would be an easy way to do it. It would, I think, work reasonably well. Some other stuff would have to be bent a little bit, but it could be done.

[pegoheart144]

Pegoheart, this wouldn't be possible- what about the quiditch world cup? That is essential to the plot of the book! If he is alreadu at hogwarts, then there would be no Winky and when she comes in later people would be very confused.
Sure it would. The Quidditch World Cup is like the Death Day Party in CoS. All it really does is introduce characters and the Dark Mark. That can easily be handled by having the characters introduced when they show up at Hogwarts for the Triwizard Tournament. The Dark Mark can be explained by showing and reacting to Rita Skeeter's article about the Quidditch World Cup. That could also cover Bertha Jorkens disappearance.

[Chloe]

Sure it would. The Quidditch World Cup is like the Death Day Party in CoS. All it really does is introduce characters and the Dark Mark. That can easily be handled by having the characters introduced when they show up at Hogwarts for the Triwizard Tournament. The Dark Mark can be explained by showing and reacting to Rita Skeeter's article about the Quidditch World Cup. That could also cover Bertha Jorkens disappearance.
But then would they kick Winky out of the movie? And they need to introduce crouch and bagman then... I personally might not think the movie is worth seeing if they do not include the Quidditch World cup or the Dark Mark!

[FoolOnTheHill]

I personally might not think the movie is worth seeing if they do not include the Quidditch World cup or the Dark Mark!
As long as the graveyard scene is in there (which it will be of course) I think it's worth seeing. :D

The Quidditch game itself isn't very important, so maybe they'll have the Dark Mark incident disrupt it so it never gets played or something? I don't know. The game would be cool to see but I'd much rather see the whole Dark Mark thing if we had to choose...

[Dominor4]

That's an interesting idea. I think you would need to establish that Voldemort is a growing menace, so Riddle House would stay at the beginning -- it would make a cool opening scene, plus introduce the important Voldemort plot. Harry could then wake up at Hogwarts (which, although it would seem abreviated, wouldn't seem as jarringly abreviated as it would if Riddle House was cut), and the movie can get started with the Triwizard Tournament.

Admittedly, there is important stuff that happens at the Quidditch World Cup, and it would be nice to keep, but if you needed to trim 20 minutes off, it would be an easy way to do it. It would, I think, work reasonably well. Some other stuff would have to be bent a little bit, but it could be done.

I agree, it would be nice to see the Voldemort sub-plot left in, but in order for it to make sense to a movie-going audience, you'd have to show the relationship between Frank Bryce and the Riddles, the Riddle's murders, Frank's arrest, etc. In other words, you'd need a very long and elaborate flashback that does little more than establish mood and a little of Voldemort's background. That's too much. A more reasonable approach would be to leave out the house but keep the graveyard. Then have Voldemort say something like "after I killed my father, they buried him here".

[arwin]

i really think it's a shame some really great scenes, especially the Dursleys, have be cut from GoF... i really enjoyed that scene!! but alas, i know they HAVE to cut certain things and to be honest it really isn't that important to the entire book... i would love for every great scene to be in the movie, but seeing as how each book gets thicker and thicker, i know they can't produce a "10 hour" movie (as much as i would actually sit to watch it)... it would cost too much money & it would probably over work the cast.... so oh well...as long as they continue making the movies, i'm almost perfectly content!! :) i will definitely miss the Dursleys in the beginning though!

[Dominor4]

But then would they kick Winky out of the movie? And they need to introduce crouch and bagman then... I personally might not think the movie is worth seeing if they do not include the Quidditch World cup or the Dark Mark!

Why not kick Winky out? She only has a few scenes in the book anyway, and most movie goers probably wouldn't want much more house elf aside from Dobby. Bagman doesn't even need to be shown at all, and Crouch can be introduced in the Pensive and later when he shows up at Hogwarts confused and delirious.

[Chloe]

Why not kick Winky out? She only has a few scenes in the book anway, and most movie goers probably wouldn't want much more house elf aside from Dobby. Bagman doesn't even need to be shown at all, and Crouch can be introduced in the Pensive and later when he shows up at Hogwarts confused delirious.


No, Bagman does need to be shown. It would help explain a lot of things, plus the pensieve seen. And winky tells harry, ron and hermione a lot about Crouch. They can't really cut that out.

[lxs234]

There is no way they can cut the quidditch scene. You meet a lot of the main characters there, and we get to see more of Draco, and actually see Narcissa.

I am starting to think that GoF isn't going to be a very good film, they shouldn't make it, and it would be the last one.

I have to see the malfoy family, or I will personally go to the director and kick his.... fill it in yourself.

I also think they will have him waking up from the dream, and Mrs. Weasley yelling up the stairs it's time to go, or ron waking him up.

[daniel4hp]

I agree, it would be nice to see the Voldemort sub-plot left in, but in order for it to make sense to a movie-going audience, you'd have to show the relationship between Frank Bryce and the Riddles, the Riddle's murders, Frank's arrest, etc. In other words, you'd need a very long and elaborate flashback that does little more than establish mood and a little of Voldemort's background. That's too much. A more reasonable approach would be to leave out the house but keep the graveyard. Then have Voldemort say something like "after I killed my father, they buried him here".
Frank Bryce can be cut. All you need is a short scene with Voldemort and Wormtail talking. Voldemort could mention that he had killed his parents, as well as talk about regaining power. It would establish mood, introduce the Voldemort plot, and keep the beginning from seeming to cut off. I think starting at Hogwarts might seem wierd for some people; giving them an introductory scene before this would help solve this problem. As long as you edit the Riddle House scene, it doesn't need to take more than 2-3 minutes.

[Dominor4]

Frank Bryce can be cut. All you need is a short scene with Voldemort and Wormtail talking. Voldemort could mention that he had killed his parents, as well as talk about regaining power. It would establish mood, introduce the Voldemort plot, and keep the beginning from seeming to cut off. I think starting at Hogwarts might seem wierd for some people; giving them an introductory scene before this would help solve this problem. As long as you edit the Riddle House scene, it doesn't need to take more than 2-3 minutes.

Wait a second, if you keep this whole scene in, but take out Frank, where's the tension? The exposition between Wormtail and Voldemort is just a bonus. Actions speak louder than words, and Frank's death more than anything said between the bad guys establishes the rising menace. If Frank doesn't die, then the scene is completely boring and pointless. Voldemort mentioning the death of his parents doesn't happen until the end anyway. As I said before, I don't think the movie should start at Hogwarts per se, but it could start by panning down to the Hogwarts Express moving through the countryside, then to a window or something with Harry looking out. Then, we could have a conversation between the trio about Harry's scar hurting, the Dark Mark, leaving the Dursleys, and then have Draco interrupting them and giving hints about the upcoming Triwizard Tournament.

[pegoheart144]

I agree, it would be nice to see the Voldemort sub-plot left in, but in order for it to make sense to a movie-going audience, you'd have to show the relationship between Frank Bryce and the Riddles, the Riddle's murders, Frank's arrest, etc. In other words, you'd need a very long and elaborate flashback that does little more than establish mood and a little of Voldemort's background. That's too much. A more reasonable approach would be to leave out the house but keep the graveyard. Then have Voldemort say something like "after I killed my father, they buried him here".
They don't need to show the whole Frank Bryce-Riddles backstory (that would be boring). His speech at the end to the Death Eaters explains how he murdered his own father and that's as far as that needs to go.

They start the movie the scene where Voldemort and Wormtail are plotting and Frank overhears them. Frank is then killed .... Harry awakens (now that I think about it this makes more sense) at Hogwarts with his scar burning.

Bagman does need to be in the movie because he is one of the judges for the Triwizard Tournament but I can see the whole gambling problem being glossed over if it's touched on at all. Face it. They'll only keep what is necessary to advance the plot.

[thethirdman]

The World Cup is a natural place to introduce Krum, Bagman, Crouch etc. If they cut the World Cup and save those intorductions until later I'm afraid it'll seem like a whole bunch of information spewed out just for the audience. I'm afraid I'll watching the film and thinking, "Shouldn't they already know that? Are they saying this just for my benifit?"

[daniel4hp]

Wait a second, if you keep this whole scene in, but take out Frank, where's the tension?
True. But you certainly don't have to go into detail about Frank. Frank can be a neighbor who sees lights in the deserted house, or something like that. The important thing is that Voldemort murders an innocent person, not who the person is.

Then, we could have a conversation between the trio about Harry's scar hurting, the Dark Mark, leaving the Dursleys, and then have Draco interrupting them and giving hints about the upcoming Triwizard Tournament.
Could work, but it sounds awkward to me. To much contrived dialog. If the movie is going to even mention the Dark Mark thing, it needs to go into some depth -- more depth than you'd get from teenagers talking. Its possible it would work, but it could easilly fall apart and sound fake.

Bagman does need to be in the movie because he is one of the judges for the Triwizard Tournament but I can see the whole gambling problem being glossed over if it's touched on at all. Face it. They'll only keep what is necessary to advance the plot.
Yes, he's a judge, but in the film, he doesn't even have to have a name. He's just a random person from the ministry who's filling in as a judge. The gambling subplot has to go, because in a book already ridden with subplots, there just isn't room for it. There really isn't any point to developping anything with Bagman, so I don't think he ever needs to be introduced.

[Pazarius]

The film could start after the World Cup but still include it... Harry could be at the burrow with Ron, and they could be flicking through a copy of the daily prophet with a report on the quidditch world cup...

Page 1, Moving picture of Krum catching the snitch
Page 2, Moving picture of Dark Mark in the sky/Muggles being tortured?
Page 3, Moving picture of Winky? (If Winky still around...)

A conversation involving Ron's hero-worship of Krum and Harry's fears about what the Dark mark might mean for him would be a good excuse to mention important details.

[silver ink pot]

The Quidditch World Cup will have to be there in some fashion! I think it is important for reasons we don't know yet. For one thing, there is the "tent city" which is Harry's introduction to the diversity of world-wide witches, and he see the small children playing. I think that is an overlooked scene that may be referred to in later books. Remember "Archie" the old man in the nightgown. Bet we see him again!

I would just hate it if the entire Quidditch World Cup was left out, and where else are they going to show the Dark Mark and the whole Barty Crouch plot???

Winky is important later, I think, because she knows alot about dark wizards. She is also sort of a parallel to Prof. Trelawney - they both need alcoholic's anonymous!

And Krum has to be shown to be this larger-than-life Quidditch champion, so that it will set up the conflict between Harry and Krum in the tournament and the Ron/Hermion/Krum love triangle.

However, I am not too upset about the Dursleys being gone. I've never liked that scene with the ton-tongue toffee, and we find out about the Twins and their outrageous candy schemes in Order of the Phoenix anyway.

[_Hermione_]

I wish they had kept the Dursleys. Those poor people who want to see the movie but haven't read the book will be confused. I really wanted to see Uncle Vernon chuck china figures at Mr. Weasley and the ton-tongue toffee!

[lxs234]

For one thing, there is the "tent city" which is Harry's introduction to the diversity of world-wide witches, and he see the small children playing. Remember "Archie" the old man in the nightgown. Bet we see him again!

I could see the film makers overlooking that scene. They aren't huge Hp fans like us, so they just think everything is how it looks on paper.
I really think people from this site should be the ones who work on the movie. We would make the best movie ever, with perfect casting.

[Jonny Boy]

Change the director.

[OhZenOne]

Ok. Lets just have the movie made to be like LOTR! Make it three plus hours long, give it an intermission and viola! You have a huge movie that the fans would love, its just like titanic, except without the crappy parts, and it'll rule. Plue you wouldnt have to cut out things like the D's and WWW.

hat would rulzorz

[daniel4hp]

Change the director.
What's that supposed to mean? Care to explain how that relates to the screenwriter's decision of cutting the Dursley's from the screenplay?

I really think people from this site should be the ones who work on the movie. We would make the best movie ever, with perfect casting.
About 37 people participated in this thread. Most movies have a single director, a single screenwriter, and a single person in charge of directing. There's a reason.

And how many of us are professionals?

Ok. Lets just have the movie made to be like LOTR! Make it three plus hours long, give it an intermission and viola! You have a huge movie that the fans would love, its just like titanic, except without the crappy parts, and it'll rule. Plue you wouldnt have to cut out things like the D's and WWW.
Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers both had running times of just under three hours. Return of the King was about three hours twenty minutes. Titanic was roughly three hours. None had intermissions.

And don't forget, even with a running time of 3:20, you'd still have to make signficant cuts to the story. Philosopher's Stone, a book about 1/3 the length of Goblet of Fire, had a running time of 2:50.

[Jedi Potter]

I think the Quidditch World Cup will stay, I think the match will be shorter, we will only get part of it, I think starting at Hogwarts might seem odd to people. Also somebody mentioned the yule ball I read somewhere it is going to be in the movie. Kinda of makes me wonder what else will get cut though to keep that in.

[lxs234]

About 37 people participated in this thread. Most movies have a single director, a single screenwriter, and a single person in charge of directing. There's a reason.

Um, I wasn't saying we were going to try and take over the studio or something. Just a real Hp fan, who comes on this site or a similar one, and is a professional, would be good.

[lorna]

Sad as it is not to see the Dursleys fireplace explode and have Arthur, Fred, George, Ron come tumbling out, it's not necessary to the main story.
I do wonder about starting the story at the school. (if that's what
they do)
Whatever they do Voldemort needs to be established as a growing threat. Films like these rise and fall on their villian. IMO, Voldemort's menace has been gutted a bit in the films simply because several characters (Hermoine sticks out as one) seem to have no trouble saying his name. The book's quite clear on that, very few wizards say his name because they are still afraid of him.
The Quidditch Cup chapters establish that a)that there are still plenty of Death Eaters around b) visually show the reader the Dark Mark and the fear it inspires
And they need to have that Dark Mark established if it's going to the kind of jolt it was in the book when Snape displays it to Fudge in the attempt to convince him LV has returned.
For me, HP has always been about Harry (the hero) vs LV (the villian who killed his parents)
IMO, he's not been a stand out villian in the first two films. (Aragog was scarier) and he doesn't appear in person at all in
POA.
So GoF is going to be his "entrance" into the films it needs to be stong.
He can't just stand around that graveyard talking about what a scary guy he is.

[rotsiepots]

So far we only know that Vernon is absent, no? Dinky Diddy and Petunia might still be present in some capacity.

Either way it's no big loss. The Dursleys will be back in full force in OotP, I'm sure, plus their role in GoF is menial at best. They're simplified in the films to Harry's "wicked step family", so by the time OotP is written they might have some dimension to them.

I'm really nonplussed at what everyone is getting upset about. The film isn't called The Dursleys and the Ton-Tongue Toffee, after all.

I also agree with daniel4hp's last post. :D

[swishandflick]

I have a personal affinity for one particular line in that GoF scene. Its when Arthur holds Harry back and makes Vernon say goodbye to him. That's really the only thing that I would miss from those chapters. I suppose they would keep the Riddle house though---simply because it sets a dark tone right from the beginning.

I have a feeling the actor was feeling a bit bitter at not being asked for a role. A very Dursleyish thing to do, actually so it suits him well >:).

[rotsiepots]

I just found this at IMDb.com (not the most reliable news source):

Boy wizard Harry Potter's evil uncle and aunt have been cut from the fourth movie in the fantasy series. British actors Richard Griffiths and Fiona Shaw were shocked to discover scenes involving their characters Vernon and Petunia Dursley have been scrapped from the film adaptation of JK Rowling's fourth book Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire. Sleepy Hollow star Griffith explains, "Filming had already started on the fourth and Fiona and I asked the producers, 'Are we in it?' and they said, 'Oh, did no one tell you?' The problem is that the fourth book is just too long for a film, so they've done away with our bit - where Harry is at home with the Dursleys - and will just begin with him at school." The 56-year-old even begged Rowling to write a special scene for the scheming pair. He adds, "I said to JK Rowling, 'Couldn't the Dursleys turn up to an open day at Harry's school or something?' But she said, 'I don't think so.'" Griffiths, Shaw and Harry Melling - who plays the Dursleys' indulged son Dudley - have yet to find out whether they will be reappearing in the fifth movie.

----

It's really quite exceptionally poor form if they didn't bother to inform the actors that they weren't appearing in GoF until after it had started shooting. They actually seem quite genuinely upset about it, which is fair enough if they were relying on GoF as a source of income.

I actually feel quite sorry for the actors. Poor Dursleys.

[teth]

I just found this at IMDb.com (not the most reliable news source):

Boy wizard Harry Potter's evil uncle and aunt have been cut from the fourth movie in the fantasy series. British actors Richard Griffiths and Fiona Shaw were shocked to discover scenes involving their characters Vernon and Petunia Dursley have been scrapped from the film adaptation of JK Rowling's fourth book Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire. Sleepy Hollow star Griffith explains, "Filming had already started on the fourth and Fiona and I asked the producers, 'Are we in it?' and they said, 'Oh, did no one tell you?' The problem is that the fourth book is just too long for a film, so they've done away with our bit - where Harry is at home with the Dursleys - and will just begin with him at school." The 56-year-old even begged Rowling to write a special scene for the scheming pair. He adds, "I said to JK Rowling, 'Couldn't the Dursleys turn up to an open day at Harry's school or something?' But she said, 'I don't think so.'" Griffiths, Shaw and Harry Melling - who plays the Dursleys' indulged son Dudley - have yet to find out whether they will be reappearing in the fifth movie.

----
I actually feel quite sorry for the actors. Poor Dursleys.

Wait...begin with him AT SCHOOL? Are they cutting out the whole Death Mark thing!? (gasp)

[Alastor D]

In the BBC news site it was said: "It now looks like if the action will start at the Burrow or the Quidditch world cup." I think that 'beginning at school' is just a rumour we have no reason to take seriously. Or not yet.

I agree with those who don't think the Dursley scenes in GoF are very much essential. As already said something must be left out if you have to cram a book into two and a half hours.

There is hope that we will have the Dursleys back in OotP. Because both Petunia's howler and the Order members' little chat with Vernon at the railway station are (in my opinion) quite important scenes.

[fawkes5]

I will miss the Riddle House and the Ton-Tongue Toffee but something has to go.

[Potassium]

Cutting out the Dursleys isn't as big of a deal as cutting out the World Cup. And I see only one person mentioned it starting then. I'll miss seeing the Burrow before they all go, but that's another thing that could easily be scrapped. It's a very good scene, but it's not essential.

I can see how they would want to also cut out the World Cup to save time for the tasks and such, but the events of it should at least be covered at some point during the story. Perhaps even just, as someone said, reading through a back issue of the Daily Prophet about it? It wouldn't take forever to explain, and could just be there for the watchers of the movie to keep in mind.

And I'm sure the Dursleys will be back in OotP. They play a major part in that book, and it would be ludicrous to cut them out.

[Megan Mystic]

TERRIBLE! Thats one of my favorite parts! There gonna ruin GoF. I can tell you that right now. *grumbling*:grumble: Sometimes I can't stand the fact that they actaully wanna shorten it. Next we'll loose watching the Quidditch World Cup! I can't believe this...

[pegoheart144]

TERRIBLE! Thats one of my favorite parts! There gonna ruin GoF. I can tell you that right now. *grumbling*:grumble: Sometimes I can't stand the fact that they actaully wanna shorten it. Next we'll loose watching the Quidditch World Cup! I can't believe this...But the Dursleys are not needed to tell the story. Get used to it. They're going to have to cut a lot to bring it down to a reasonable viewing time.

[eggplant]

How about a brief scene at the Riddle House were Voldemort [we just see the back of his chair and a hideously misshapen hand] mentions to Wormtail a number of people he’s killed and tortured and then says there is one more left to die, Harry Potter. We then cut [or better than a cut, a high tech computerized 100 mile pan and zoom] to Harry sitting up in bed holding his scar. Cut to the opening credits and then cut to Harry at the word cup thanking Ron for rescuing him from the Dursleys.

I’m afraid the may eliminate out the second task entirely, not so much because of time but because it will be nearly imposable to put on film. I mean, if you were the director of the “Goblet Of Fire” how in the world would you do it? The entire thing takes place underwater so Harry can’t have any dialog, and sticking in a narration at that point would be very awkward. I don’t see how the audience would understand what was going on unless they read the book; when they saw the hostages at the bottom of the lake tied to a rock they’d probably think they were dead. The director may just give up and eliminate the it, but maybe a way could be found, after all I didn’t think you could put Quidditch on film either but they could.

Also they are going to have to tone down the ending A LOT! Think about it, a little boy tied to a tombstone and tortured so horribly he wants to die, you can read stuff like that but if it was put on film people would trample each other as the raced for the theater exists.

Eggplant

[LumosSoleil]

Well what do we expect when the director's decision is to make ONE movie. They have limited time so therefore a lot of trimming is necessary to fit their budget and time. I hope they make it 3 hours instead of the usual 2.5 hours. This book is a very essential book to the whole HP plot of Harry v. LV. swish and flick, I like the idea that Arthur holds an unconcerned Harry back and asked the Dursleys to say goodbye. Very fatherly of him. Too bad that part will be non-existent in the films. I'm a lot more critical of this film than I ever was for PoA. Maybe it's me but I honestly think that Newell is a bad choice. Too bad Cuaron was busy with PoA because he probably would direct GoF. He was asked by WB but he turned them down due to editing PoA and with the intention of working on only ONE HP movie.

I think the actors had the right to be upset about being left out of the script. It was very rude of the filmmakers not to call and at least inform them. Ridiculous of them to inform the actors only because the actors were the ones who made the effort to call to get confirmation.

[teth]

How about a brief scene at the Riddle House were Voldemort [we just see the back of his chair and a hideously misshapen hand] mentions to Wormtail a number of people he’s killed and tortured and then says there is one more left to die, Harry Potter. We then cut [or better than a cut, a high tech computerized 100 mile pan and zoom] to Harry sitting up in bed holding his scar. Cut to the opening credits and then cut to Harry at the word cup thanking Ron for rescuing him from the Dursleys.

I’m afraid the may eliminate out the second task entirely, not so much because of time but because it will be nearly imposable to put on film. I mean, if you were the director of the “Goblet Of Fire” how in the world would you do it? The entire thing takes place underwater so Harry can’t have any dialog, and sticking in a narration at that point would be very awkward. I don’t see how the audience would understand what was going on unless they read the book; when they saw the hostages at the bottom of the lake tied to a rock they’d probably think they were dead. The director may just give up and eliminate the it, but maybe a way could be found, after all I didn’t think you could put Quidditch on film either but they could.

Also they are going to have to tone down the ending A LOT! Think about it, a little boy tied to a tombstone and tortured so horribly he wants to die, you can read stuff like that but if it was put on film people would trample each other as the raced for the theater exists.

Eggplant

That's kinda pointless for that one quick scene though. He can still have the scar hurt at the world cup.

Maybe they'll change the task completely...I mean...the task itself is not THAT important. As long as they do something to show that Harry cares for his friends and etc etc....then it's fine.

[lxs234]

You know how when the death eaters start their rampage, and Mr.Weasley wakes Harry up? Well, maybe Harry will have the dream why he sleeps.

[silver ink pot]

eggplant: I don't think the underwater sequence in GoF will be a big deal to film. I don't know how old you are, but when I was a kid we watched Tarzan movies all the time where some of the action scenes happened underwater with no dialog. Filmakers won't be too scared about that, especially now that they have computer graphics. I've always wanted to see the merpeople!


Also, have you ever seen The Creature From the Black Lagoon? They made a whole series about that and the monster never uttered a sound!

When I re-read GoF, the Quidditch World Cup just seems so cinematic - I can't imagine JKR allowing them to make a film without it!

[RonFan24]

I just read about the Dursleys not being in GOFon imdb.com and that the movie would start with Harry already at school. So I was going to ask if anyone knew if they would cut out the World Cup, but I think my question was just answered! How could they cut it out, isn't it important?? I think they should just make the movie in two parts like Kill Bill. It looks like that technique is going to work for Tarantino and Miramax, plus they could make the each installment a barable length for younger viewers. I suppose if they cut A LOT of material from the book, the best way to view the films is as a seperate entity from the books.
Oh one more thing, it also said on imdb.com that it is still unsure that the Durseys will appeare in the 5th movie. So if they do that, they're probably going to cut out the trial too because the trial is kind of pointless without seeing why exactly Harry is there.

[Cat]

I'm not surprised that they cut the Dursley bit at the beginning out, and I think that if people are going to be surprised every time we hear something has to be cut, eyebrows are going to be permanently raised to aching point.

I hope though - I really hope - that they include the Frank Bryce bit, even if it isn't obvious that it was a dream. It is a fantastic introduction to the book and sets the tone beautifully. I have a sinking feeling that they're going to play up to the death of Cedric by excluding the death of Frank. I find that quite sad. I could understand, almost, if it was a time issue (though it would be stark raving mad to get rid of a beginning like that) but I hope, if it's cut out, that time is all there is to it. I despise the notion that the death of a valiant, handsome young classmate matters but the death of some old Muggle is expendable. I think the fact that the book both starts and ends with a death is significant and should be recreated on film to capture the full effect of the rise of Voldemort.

[Voldemort II]

Hiya, I'm startin a fan's revolt like Richard G. said. I already got about 100 peeps doin it. u hav 2 write to the castin office and complain about no Dursleys. Send loadsa letters and get every1 u no 2 do it 2. They can't ignore us if we hav enough people takin part. Pass it on 2 every1 u no. Also, if they still don't do anything bout it, the fans will go on STRIKE. We won't buy or see anything related 2 HP. It's gonna be tough, but Warner Bros'll go bankrupt if they don'y put the dursleys bak in. So hu's with me?

[Cat]

Hiya, I'm startin a fan's revolt like Richard G. said. I already got about 100 peeps doin it. u hav 2 write to the castin office and complain about no Dursleys. Send loadsa letters and get every1 u no 2 do it 2. They can't ignore us if we hav enough people takin part. Pass it on 2 every1 u no. Also, if they still don't do anything bout it, the fans will go on STRIKE. We won't buy or see anything related 2 HP. It's gonna be tough, but Warner Bros'll go bankrupt if they don'y put the dursleys bak in. So hu's with me?

That's absurd. The Dursleys are not important characters in this book and the bit where the Weasleys come crashing in is funny but not particularly necessary in the terms of the film. It's too late to petition them to split GOF into two films (I wish it wasn't - important things will have to be cut and the rest will have to be rushed. It will not flatter the book to do it this way).

But if you insist that they should include this bit, then you might as well insist they include every insignificant scene. If you expect them to include every insignificant scene from GOF in a normal-length movie, you're expecting them to perform miracles.

And you can't solve all the problems by starting petitions.

[Vicky_M]

Really? Finally when we could have seen some real comebacks from Harry, the Ton-Tongue thingy and the actually COOL begining that GoF has? Tsk tsk guys.

[NeuroComp]

i wonder if they could do a 6hr dvd version but shred the theater time to 3-4hrs

[Pegasus]

TERRIBLE! Thats one of my favorite parts! There gonna ruin GoF. I can tell you that right now. *grumbling* Sometimes I can't stand the fact that they actaully wanna shorten it. Next we'll loose watching the Quidditch World Cup! I can't believe this...
I'm sorry, people, but it would take at least three movies just to cover Book 4! Here are the essentials: the Triwizard Tournament and the graveyard. Anything needed for the essential plot will be somehow incorporated into those events, I'm sure. There will probably be a little more, but that's all we really need to make the story, and that alone will be plenty long and complicated. It's not like LOTR, where much of the length comes from long, boring descriptions of mountains and valleys. (Sorry, I'm mostly quoting my extremely intelligent 13-year-old niece who had as much luck plowing through the first few chapters of even the first book as my 31-year-old genius brother--and I'm not being sarcastic.) With Harry Potter, you can't just cut out scenery and songs and end up with 1/2 or less of the book. (And yes, I've read LOTR in its entirety.)

[Tirwen Lupin]

Hmm, though the Dursleys were fun to read about in GoF, I can understand them being cut in the movie. GoF is very long (obviously) with loads of things more important than the Dursleys. They can't put everythin that all fans want in--it'd either be absurdly long, or hideously rushed. It's acceptable that a few episodes have to go for the benefit of the entire movie's quality.

[teth]

People must remember that there's A LOT OF MATERIAL in book 4. And to make ONE MOVIE, some things have to be sacrificed. A book adaptation is NEVER a page-by-page to screen thing. As disappointing as this is, we have to move on. Would you prefer them cut on the Dursleys or cut out important scenes from the tournament? You decide.

[skypher]

the dursley scene is important, cos it sets up the fact that Harry MUST return there each summer.

[teth]

But it's not like they're saying that he never stayed there during summer. It's just that we don't see it. They can have a narration saying that he did or he can say it himself. "It's so much better to be here than back at the Dursleys" or something.

[Pegasus]

Which means a lot in the books, but not in the movies.

[skypher]

posted by teth
But it's not like they're saying that he never stayed there during summer. It's just that we don't see it. They can have a narration saying that he did or he can say it himself. "It's so much better to be here than back at the Dursleys" or something.

good point, maybe they could have harry wake from his dream of LV, then he comes downstairs at the Burrow where Mrs. Weasley is making breakfast or wot not, then she says sumthin like "oh harry, so nice of ur aunt and uncle letting u stay here for the rest of the holidays"

?????????????

[teth]

good point, maybe they could have harry wake from his dream of LV, then he comes downstairs at the Burrow where Mrs. Weasley is making breakfast or wot not, then she says sumthin like "oh harry, so nice of ur aunt and uncle letting u stay here for the rest of the holidays"

?????????????

Definitely. It'll probably be something along the lines of that. (Unless they cut the burrow and go straight to the World Cup.)

[Pegasus]

I do feel sorry for the Dursleys, though. Someone could have told them. My brother-in-law was in a local independent film and was able to support his family quite nicely on the proceeds for a while. He was all set to do another one with the same filmmaker and was expecting quite a large sum--and then the movie got cancelled, just before he was supposed to fly in. It was quite a blow. Can you imagine how much a Harry Potter film brings in?

[teth]

Well...I don't think they earn THAT much for appearing in that one scene.

[Aseldar]

I do feel sorry for the Dursleys, though. Someone could have told them. My brother-in-law was in a local independent film and was able to support his family quite nicely on the proceeds for a while. He was all set to do another one with the same filmmaker and was expecting quite a large sum--and then the movie got cancelled, just before he was supposed to fly in. It was quite a blow. Can you imagine how much a Harry Potter film brings in?


As much as I would love to see the Dursleys in the film, I could handle it. If they MUST take the Dursleys out, here's how it should be done:

The film should open with a outside view of the Riddle house, and it should slowly pan in towards a window until we are in a dimly lit hallway, light emitting from a door far at the end. Murmurred voices can be heard, but not very well. Outside once again, Frank should be seen, a look of confusion upon his face as he sees dim light emitting from the house. Back inside, we should hear the door slowly creak open, and he should amble his way down the hallway. From here, a shortened version of what happened in the book should take place, and Frank should be seen, a look of terror on his face, and he should then fall dead to the floor. There should be a fade out, and we should see Harry wake up at the Dursleys, holding his scar.

He should then look at the clock, and realize that he needs to get downstairs fast, that the Weasleys are planning to take him away without the Dursleys knowing it. He should arrive at the fire place, and leave from there.

Then, we should see the words "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" from bright orange cloouds at dawn, and it should zoom in to see them at Stoatshed hill at the port key. There should be a quick conversation about how happy Harry is that they got him from the Dursleys so that he could go to the world cup.

All of this would take, what? 10 minutes of the movie? The the World cup could easily be done in another 5-10 minutes. At most, this would all take 20 minutes, then he could go to Hogwarts.

Movie 1 took an hour to get him to Hogwarts. This would be easy. They should keep in the Riddle House as the opening and the World Cup--the Dursleys should be kept in too, but oh well.

[Nycade]

I think it'll be interesting to see how they handle the transitions without the Dursleys, and what they'll change to make it work. It's possible. I'm not particularly happy about it, but of course things must be changed for the movies somewhat, and regardless someone's not going to like it. I do agree that they ought've been told- I don't think that was fair.

Wow, Aseldar, quite the filmmaker :elaugh:... you've got it all planned out, haven't you? It's not perhaps what I'd pick, but I do like the Frank part, and it's well thought-out.

[SamIAm]

awwww...im pretty disappointed about them not being in the movie..:shrug: i really enjoyed how the actors played the Dursleys! If they get to making a 5th movie, they better be in it!!

[Aseldar]

awwww...im pretty disappointed about them not being in the movie..:shrug: i really enjoyed how the actors played the Dursleys! If they get to making a 5th movie, they better be in it!!

Thank you! ^^ I was just trying to think of a way to make it known that Harry DID stay at the Dursleys for part of the summer. If I had it my way, it would be exactly like in the books!

And it would be 10 hrs+ too =P

[wongclaire]

If they don't cut the Dursleys, they need to cut the other things. Do you want the Qudditch world cup to be cut? Do you want the Triwizard tasks to be shortened? Do you think there are many things can be cut? Of course NO. Compared with other content, Dursleys is much less important. Cutting them will make the movie lose a bit of fun, but think about it. If you are the director, waht can you do? Open Book 4 ad see what can be cut!

[Aseldar]

The SPEW storyline can be cut, Cedric can be cut out because we don't really need him, the third task can be cut out, Harry can just go to the forbidden forest, get the ford anglia, and fly to the grave yard. The entire Voldemort confronation can be cut out...we can just have Harry talk about it later on ....Moody can be cut out...and who really needs Cedric's death? In fact, let's cut Ron and Hermione out of the movie, they aren't needed...

[smschrader]

There have been plenty of movies that have been 3-4 hours long because the story just couldn't be cut into something shorter: Schindler's List, The Right Stuff (although that probably could have been), Titanic, etc. People still went to see them, still own them, still watch them. I believe that sometimes it's necessary for a movie to be long in order to stay true to the message (or the book in this case). I think the push to keep it short is because the directors are still seeing it as a children's movie, when GoF in reality isn't. I think that the attempt to keep it short is to make is so parents will take young children to see it so that the movie will make more money and tha'ts just being greedy. Whatever happened to artistic integrity?

[Aseldar]

It died when Peter Jackson wrapped up with Return of the King.

[teth]

I don't see how the world cup can be done in 5-10 minutes...unless the dark mark appears before the competition even begins.

The tournament is a big plot in this book...I don't think they would want to introduce this idea until 30 minutes into it.

Even though it took a while for Harry to get to Hogwarts in the first film, it was important to include all that because it was a main set-up. Now that people are supposedly familiar with the film, they cannot spend that much time on set-up. They must get to the main parts of the story quickly. A 2 hour film cannot spare 30 minutes of that kind of set-up when there's SO MUCH to be told.

I do forsee SPEW getting cut though.

For those who are bored, go through the book and pick out the IMPORTANT (and I mean important...not a part that you like) parts of the book that are relevant to the immediately story about the Tournament (and the ending). Once you have the list, I'm sure you'll see that there's A LOT to be told and some stuff must be cut for that.

BUT, maybe they can still film some scenes and just leave them out of the theatrical version of the film. They can later release an extended DVD for the fans! Just like the LOTR movies.

[Weatherby]

I'd rather the tournament be shortened. Rather.. Fleur and Krum's scenes.
'Eee is too young".. zzzzz.
Instead having chocolate bars, fizzy drinks and burgers? *claps*

Alright, I'm being silly but you get my point. There's a reason the story opens with the Dursleys. It would feel unnatural to just open the film at the tournament.

[Jinxie Cat]

Well, it'll be pretty wierd not seeing the Dursleys in the movie at all. But I can understand why they'd cut that scene out of the movie. It's not really important at all and the movie would be quite long...

[wongclaire]

I'd rather the tournament be shortened. Rather.. Fleur and Krum's scenes.
'Eee is too young".. zzzzz.
Instead having chocolate bars, fizzy drinks and burgers? *claps*

Alright, I'm being silly but you get my point. There's a reason the story opens with the Dursleys. It would feel unnatural to just open the film at the tournament.

I don't think the movie must open with the Dursleys. They can open it at Ron's house, right? The Dursleys scene isn't really that important.
I think Fleur and Krum's scene may not appear in the movie,too. The cutting of the Dursley's scene doesn't mean that other scenes don't need to be cut. There are many things need to be covered by the movie. We must sacrify some of them. :)

[Lady Greyjoy]

I think its the first good thing we've heard about Goblet of Fire...Give the Yule Ball, Give me the second task...give me drunk winky over the opening Dursley scene in GoF.

A slavish adaptation of the books is nice to watch a few times, a great adaptation is forever , hopefully GoF will at least be a good one, which requires hard decisions on the part of the screenwriter and director.

No one ever asks what happened to Scarlett's two other children by her first husbands when they watch "Gone with the Wind". :)

[teth]

Yes...there is a reason why he must stay with the Dursleys...but seriously, to a casual viewer, they won't care. As long as Harry says he stayed with them, then it's fine.

[smschrader]

I think its the first good thing we've heard about Goblet of Fire...Give the Yule Ball, Give me the second task...give me drunk winky over the opening Dursley scene in GoF.

A slavish adaptation of the books is nice to watch a few times, a great adaptation is forever , hopefully GoF will at least be a good one, which requires hard decisions on the part of the screenwriter and director.

No one ever asks what happened to Scarlett's two other children by her first husbands when they watch "Gone with the Wind". :)

You make an excellent point, a great adaptation is necessary. Being so, some things will need to be cut. We do have to ask, why are the Durselys being cut out. Is it for another scene to be put in. I think we all remember the silliness of cutting original story line in CoS to put in that stupid falling out of the car part. They shouldn't be taken out at the expense of putting something stupid in.

Great analogy with Scarlet's children though, no one ever does miss them in the movie, do they?

[smschrader]

If anyone is interesed, someone started a petition online to have the Dursleys put back in GoF. If you go to www.petitiononline.com and click on Entertainment, it's under Dursley's in GoF.

[Charmed]

I can't say that I'm not dissappointed that the Dursley's will not be in GoF. It seems strange to start the movie any other way-than with the Dursley's.
And I have to admit I was looking forward to Arthur blasting his way through the fire place and the ton tongue toffee.

[wongclaire]

I am also diappointed. Actually I don't mind sitting in the cinema for more than 6 hours to watch this movie. but It's impossible. Some interesting scene must be cut. :(

[Baron_G]

I really don't see why they had to cut it. The dream about Frank Bryce's death could have preceded the credits, followed by the credits with Harry's voiceover reading the letter to Sirius. As soon as that's over, cut to the Dursleys saying the Weasleys are late, with Vernon whipping out the envelope with too many stamps to check the time they were supposed to arrive. Harry's departure wouldn't take more than three minutes(mostly spent for laughs on Dudley's tongue) and it would be a great prelude to the introduction of the Weasleys. They can't begin showing the movie from the start of the World Cup or later because they have to establish how a portkey works. They can cut out spew, but not Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes!!

Forget the movies. Bring on the miniseries!

[eggplant]

I have a hunch they may cut out SPEW in the movie and that’s a shame because SPEW is one of the things that makes GoF more than just another good children’s book and elevates it to the excellent book category.

Eggplant

[Pegasus]

Well...I don't think they earn THAT much for appearing in that one scene.
You'd be surprised, on a high-budget movie like this. I've seen what my brother-in-law made on a low-budget local one. Maybe not as much as Mel Gibson in a starring role, but a lot more than my husband brings in in a few months. It depends on where you're coming from, I suppose.
I don't see how they can possibly keep SPEW in. I'm still wondering what Rowling is going to do with it. I want it to go somewhere, but the elves are really resisting it. Of course, I, personally, don't see how they can keep the World Cup in there, either--didn't just the beginning, before Hogwarts, take as many pages as Book One altogether? (I may be exaggerating, but not much.)
For die-hard fans like us, a 12-hour movie would be great. But many people out there are put off by a 3-hour movie.

[FRED ASTAIRE]

If they start cutting book 4 into ONE movie (this will be a lousy movie, mark my words) can you imagine what they will do to book 5???


Some (me included) people are signing petition (not sure if it will help; it can't hurt, right?) to bring back the Dursley. Do anyone here want to sign??? Here is the link: http://www.petitiononline.com/WCity/petition.html!

I also have some thing for you guys to (and TPTB if they are reading this board) read. I think if "they" follow these guide lines (dos and don'ts) about making movies, then the HP movies will be fine! Here is the link: http://entertainment.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=153362
Movie Sequels: Dos and Don'ts
Get your pens out, Hollywood... it's time to start taking notes

[teth]

If anyone is interesed, someone started a petition online to have the Dursleys put back in GoF. If you go to www.petitiononline.com and click on Entertainment, it's under Dursley's in GoF.

What a terrible petition. I don't really care for the cause so I won't sign it. BUT, if one wants to sound convincing, why can't they write it more professionally? (instead of just some random quotes from an IM and random yelling of anger)

can you imagine what they will do to book 5???

I can imagine them cutting out a lot of stuff. But, I'm not AS worried about book 5. IMO, a lot of things in book 5 are just repeated plotlines. How many times do we really need to see Harry get mad?

[lxs234]

What a terrible petition. I don't really care for the cause so I won't sign it. BUT, if one wants to sound convincing, why can't they write it more professionally? (instead of just some random quotes from an IM and random yelling of anger)



I actually signed it. I like how the movie always starts in the same place, giving it the feeling more that it's a new year. I feel sorry for the Dursleys, not even being informed about how they weren't in it.

I am getting the feeling that there isn't going to be a fith movie. That will be the end of the HP fanominon, (sorry, can't spell it) and we will barely see anymore of Dan and Rupert, and no more of Emma.

I don't think it was a good idea to make the books into movies.....

[pegoheart144]

I think its the first good thing we've heard about Goblet of Fire...Give the Yule Ball, Give me the second task...give me drunk winky over the opening Dursley scene in GoF.

A slavish adaptation of the books is nice to watch a few times, a great adaptation is forever , hopefully GoF will at least be a good one, which requires hard decisions on the part of the screenwriter and director.

No one ever asks what happened to Scarlett's two other children by her first husbands when they watch "Gone with the Wind". :)You have a very good point. The Triwizard Tournament and Voldemort resurgence are the most important points. Alot of the subplots are going to have to be cut.

[Aseldar]

Here's my petition, it's one of the ones with more signatures
http://www.petitiononline.com/d4d6k7d8/petition.html

[hermeeownninny]

I personally am kind of upset that the Dursleys are not in GoF. I don't like them, but they are an integral part of the story. Harry NEEDS to start off each year at the Dursleys. . for his own protection. Where is Harry's scar going to hurt when Voldemort kills Frank Bryce? At the Weasleys? At Hogwarts already? I shudder to think what they are going to do to GoF. While the Dursleys are not the most important parts of GoF, I agree with lxs234 that it establishes continuity having it start in the same place. I also agree that they never should have made movies in the first place.

I disagree with Lady Greyjoy about a "slavish adaptation of the books" is nice to watch only a few times. I prefer faithful adaptations to when directors decide to put their own touches into a piece of classic literature (as Harry will someday be) and the resulting movie is totally unrecognizable from the work that inspired it. For example, the Lord of the Rings movies are very close to the books, with only minor changes, and I love watching those over and over. The TNT adaptation of Mists of Avalon took too many creative licenses and was just horrible to watch. When directors leave out a lot from their adaptations, they lose the author's message. I have long since thought that Warner Bros. has "dumbed down" the Harry Potter story, turning it into a simple adventure story for little kids, and leaving out the deeper meaning. I will sign the petition, although I doubt it will be effective. (Remember the petition to keep Sean Biggerstaff in PoA??)

[Cat]

I personally am kind of upset that the Dursleys are not in GoF. I don't like them, but they are an integral part of the story. Harry NEEDS to start off each year at the Dursleys. . for his own protection.


The fact that it won't show the Dursleys in this film doesn't mean that they're trying to suggest that Harry didn't stop at the Dursleys that summer. They're an integral part of the story, but not something that specifically needs to be shown in the film.

If they were cut out of Philosopher's Stone, I would have had an eyebrow raised to the point of no return. If they were cut out of CoS, I would have been bewildered, because the introduction of Dobby and the warning he gives is necessary. If they had been cut out of Prisoner of Azkaban, I would have been a bit miffed because that would also mean no running away and no Knight Bus.

But in Goblet they're not required for anything that happens specifically in that book.

It's a shame that they're not in it but, like I said earlier (or at least I think I said it), we can't be surprised and outraged every time we hear something has been cut from Goblet. There's simply no time to include everything!

[LumosSoleil]

It's a shame that they're not in it but, like I said earlier (or at least I think I said it), we can't be surprised and outraged every time we hear something has been cut from Goblet. There's simply no time to include everything!
As much as this is a surprise to a lot of fans, I find that it'll also be surprise when they announce that they'll extend the running time to 3 hours. And even with 3 hours, I'm sure they can't squeeze the Dursleys in.

[mirandam]

I have to agree that I too do not like that they will cut out the Dursleys in GoF, but I think that they will integrate it somehow in the movie. Maybe only a line or two, but it should be there about his dream and the scare. I feel that they will probrably start the movie with Voldemort at the Riddle house. Which is very important part of the process of the plot, but the fact that Harry saw this scene in his dream and felt the pain of the scare should somehow be worked in because this is also important. It is hard when they need to put so much book into so little time with a movie. I really hope that they capture the full meaning of the book.

[Neonorne]

The Dursleys are not necessary for GoF. The fact that Harry must stay with them for a while each summer to maintain his protection is a point of reference needed for the OotP, but not for this film. Therefore it is not necessary to SHOW it, only to mention it briefly.

But to cut the world cup is a bad idea. Some of you sound as if the film should be like a kind of lexicon - as long as all the important information is in there somewhere, no matter how, it will be ok. But film is a visual medium, and to have too many important elements introduced by people TALKING about them won't make a good film. The introduction of the Dark Mark and the Death Eaters really need to have a lot of weight in the film to make it work as the Dark Saga it's supposed to be, so we need to see it, not just hear about it.

Same goes for the inivisible Crouch jr. - come on, the fact that it was he who posed as Moody and turned out to be the traitor at Hogwarts is THE pivotal plot point!! The surprise of this is one of the chief delights of the book! Not sure if the Winky part is necessary, but we need to be confused about who conjured the Dark Mark and HOW was Harry's wand involved?

But the actual Quidditch game itself need not be shown much, true. One minute of flying brooms and cheering crowds is more than enough. It's the Dark Mark thing that is important. Bagman can be ditched altogether, certainly, and Krum needs only be introduced very briefly.

Newell has said he wants to make this film in the thriller format. Then he needs to set up the chief elements of it early, he can't afford to slow down the story or stop it altogether to have somebody make a speech to introduce something. Opening it like the book does with what Frank Bryce learns before he is killed (no, we don't need his whole background story) is a perfect set up for a thriller: we will learn that there is a plan to use Harry for something even worse than just killing him, although we don't know what, and that there is a traitor placed at Hogwarts. But Harry can wake up from seeing this in his dream anywhere, in the tent at the world cup if need be. If the next big scene then is the Dark Mark, we will see directly that the dark forces are moving already and start to worry what will come next. I hope something along these lines is how the filmmakers will do it. We'll see.

And petitions are stupid, sorry to those of you setting them up and signing them, but I really mean that. The making of these films shouldn't be based on votes from fans. Then they will never become the masterpieces we want. The director needs to have his own vision and never be bothered about what fans think. If he does, the film will stink. I think I will set up a petition to ask WB not to care about petitions.

[OrlisGrape]

CBBC Newsround confirms that there will be no Dursleys in GoF. No ton-tongue toffee and blasted fireplace at Privet Drive, that is.

So what do we think about this approach to shortening GoF, people? Terrible or ok?

Personally, I don't think this is the worst they could have cut. Some potential comic relief gone, certainly, but the Dursleys are not essential in GoF. In OotP they are, but not in GoF.

What do you all think?

I personally think they should keep them in. At the beginning of each book, Harry is Living with them! And what about his scar hurting? I know it's not really important, but if they are going to take so much stuff out of it to try and squeeze it in to a sitable-through movie, whats the point? Too many important things happen in that book!

[daniel4hp]

I fully agree with Neonorne. Well said. :tu:

I do think that right after the Riddle House scene, we should go to the Quidditch World Cup (which, as Neonorne said, doesn't need to be shown per se). The Dark Mark scene should get quite a bit of attention. It sets up a lot and would provide good atmosphere. Also, if it followed shortly after the Riddle House scene, it would add to the feeling of foreboding and backup what Voldemort said.

I am interested to hear that Newell plans to make GoF a thriller -- although I can see some thriller elements in it (and how you could stress those elements) GoF doesn't seem, to me, to be a thriller at its core. Do you have the artical/interview where Newell said this? I'd be interested to see where Newell's coming from with this.

[pegoheart144]

Neonorne made some good points. However there are lots of times in GoF when people are rehashing what already happen. Be ready for a lot of that to be cut. If they focus on the thriller aspects alot of the subplots will need to be cut.

[Neonorne]

I am interested to hear that Newell plans to make GoF a thriller -- although I can see some thriller elements in it (and how you could stress those elements) GoF doesn't seem, to me, to be a thriller at its core. Do you have the artical/interview where Newell said this? I'd be interested to see where Newell's coming from with this. Sorry about my bad organisation (you should see my desktop - or, even worse, my room...*shudders*) - but I can't find the references. It was in a couple of interviews with him a while ago, the links were on Mugglenet too I think, as they were on many other fansites.

But I copied some of the interviews. Here is the relevant quote about how he sees GoF as a thriller from one of them:

>>>>"He sees this book as a "classic thriller" explaining how Harry Potter got the scar on his forehead. He's particularly excited about the "big shootout at the end" when the antagonist becomes a huge looming presence. "At the beginning, the antagonist, the anti-hero, the creature of supreme evil, has a plan. He needs one tiny, tiny little thing from the boy: three drops of blood. Therefore he sets up this gorgeous piece of clockwork which will get him what he needs. And the boy, classically, starts, as all thriller heroes do, in complete ignorance, and then you watch him ratchet around until and he and the antagonist are in exactly the same place at the same time, knowing everything," Newell explains."

From what he says here, it sounds as if the Frank Bryce scene might be in.

I agree that GoF can be seen as having a thriller surface structure - sort of. It can be seen in other ways too, but this is one valid way of reading it. I am not sure if I trust Newell entirely with it though...

It is ok to use the thriller format to get the story told. You can still get the deeper underlying themes of the book across - like the choice between right and easy, and rivalry, and how far you can go to defend the good against evil (Crouch sr.) or to win glory - in the triwizard cup (Harry - the underwater task, the cheating question, the choice to take the cup together with Cedric) or in the wizarding world as the greatest wizard of all (Voldemort). These themes are far far more important than ton-tongue toffee. A thriller format could still emphasize these things while working with the suspense building - but is Newell cut out to pull that off? Not too sure.

[NorthStar]

I'm inclined to agree with those who think the Dursley's aren't essential to the plot-line - it can be mentioned that he was at their house during some of the holidays, we've already seen Harry going to the Burrow to stay with Ron during the holidays in the second film after all - it won't be too confusing for those who haven't read the books.

If it comes down to choosing what parts of the book make it on-screen, then the beginning of the holidays would be the least of the bits I'd be worried about - there's so much else to be worked in not counting the main plotline, such as Hagrid's giant ancestry, Rita Skeeter to name just two (these are both essential in book 5's storyline), plus all the stuff which will be important in later books which only JK knows about.

I still don't like the films, but with two kids who are too young for the books but are mad on anything Harry Potter, I'm doomed to watch them!

[Baron_G]

Y'know, I'm surprised that the earlier HP movies had runtimes that lasted longer that 2.5 hours. They lacked in emotional content. That and the theme music which always manages to set the wrong mood. I'd rather have an interpretation of phoenix song as the theme for these movies.

I think what makes GoF or any HP book for that matter great thrillers is the same for movies. You're too caught up in the cutesy stuff to realise it when the horror finally hits you. And the chapters after Harry lands up in that graveyard definitely rate high on the creepy scale! But the clockwork precision of the thriller needs to be offset by Harry's tribulations and triumphs as he progresses through it.

[DarkMark90]

The Dursley's are nice to have in the movie, but there not essential. There so much other horrific stuff happening in this movie, that if something that doesn't play an important role to the plot of this particular book had to be cut, it's best that it's the Dursleys. I'd rather see them do a longer graveyard scene than a short one with fifteen minutes of the Dursleys.

[LuckyPheonix]

URG this is seriously dissapointing to me. Harry Potter isnt Harry Potter unless he makes a "great escape" from the Dursleys each summer! Arrgg, Im going to have to like, take the GoF book with me and read the 2nd chapter before the movie starts, so I can get the full effect lol. I think if they can make a LoTR movie reallllyyy long then they should just make a HP movie that long too! So what if the Dursleys "arnt part of the major plot line in GOF" they are still a significant part at the beginning of EVERY SINGLE BOOK book!! Arggg, as Doctor Phil would say, "What ARE you thinking???" lol.

[Scout1980]

Arrgg, Im going to have to like, take the GoF book with me and read the 2nd chapter before the movie starts, so I can get the full effect lol.

:agree:

What a fabulous idea!!! I was wondering how I was going to deal with the massive disappointment of not seeing the Dursleys. Thanks for showing me the silver lining on this dark cloud.

[SiriusPig]

Cutting the Dursleys from the movie really sucks.Like where are they going to start the movie from the Burrow?The Dursleys make a big contribution to the books and should be in the movie as well as the future movies.

[harryfantotheend]

This is really terrible! They can't drop the Dursley's! Now there's a problem- how are they gonna start the movie? It makes no sense! Its terrible how they cut out things as important as the Dursley's, but add in stupid "action-scenes." Also, now we run into another problem!! Remember how Harry needs to return to the Dursley's every year? How is that going to work in movie five? There's going to be a big gaping hole- if you're only a movie fan. Oh this is terrible! Just horrid!

Happy Posting? :sad:

[Neonorne]

This is really terrible! They can't drop the Dursley's! Now there's a problem- how are they gonna start the movie? It makes no sense! Its terrible how they cut out things as important as the Dursley's, but add in stupid "action-scenes." Also, now we run into another problem!! Remember how Harry needs to return to the Dursley's every year? How is that going to work in movie five? There's going to be a big gaping hole- if you're only a movie fan. Oh this is terrible! Just horrid!

Happy Posting? :sad:
Read some of the other posts in this thread. We've had some ideas on how to solve the two problems you mention! :agree:

[CRH_Ravenclaw]

I think it's dumb that they make movie time limits. I don't know why they can't just add more tapes if the film runs out on one. Yes, it will be long, but at least you wouldn't be disappointed at cuts that were made. Harry Potter books are long . . . especially book 5, I dunno how they're gonna make that movie, so many cuts will have to be made . . . I hate it when they make cuts of good parts!

[Jedi Potter]

I really don't see an issue their are time constraints no movie can be longer than 3 hours, and GOF will be 3 hours at the most. Anything longer and people won't go see it, and they will lose money. And lets stop with the 2 movie thing, it has been seen as a failure. WB won't do that again after the Matrix debacle. Sure the Matrix made a profit but the third film did half what the second did that is a big difference. And they are scared it could happen with Harry Potter too. Also there are other problem with two movies this book doesn't have a good cut-off point, it takes longer to film, etc. So one movie is what you will get and that is fine with me. Also some things aren't important to the plot like Spew, the Dursleys, Bagman's problems with the Goblins, etc they aren't important to the main plot. As NeoNorne said they can explain why he is with the Weasleys easily so that isn't an issue. Still I hope they keep the Quidditch world Cup, in though I feel it will be shorter. I don't like they idea of introducing Crouch later in the story it makes it easier if you introduce him into the beginning with the World Cup and then people will know who he is later. So I hope that happens. That is my only worry honestly everything else can be cut down if directed right. Also about book 5 if it gets made will be determined by how well POA does in theaters the better it does the more likely it will get made. WB will probably bring the kids back because they are despeart. Harry Potter has been the only money maker franchise for them of late and they need it badly so they will probably keep the kids for that reason. Also I think 5 is easier to cut down there was a good thread on that by Daniel4hp he made some really good points of how it could be done.

[springthing4]

i don't really want to comment on what should be cut out, and i really don't think we should because, the thing is, we really don't know. there are always some obvious things that can be cut. but there can just as easily be something that is important to the plot that needs to be in the movie, that we looked over. i think they will show parts of the quidditch world cup, and then go right to the dark mark thing.

[lxs234]

I think it's dumb that they make movie time limits. I don't know why they can't just add more tapes if the film runs out on one. Wait, that's the reason there's a time limit???How stupid! We won't mind if there is a quick pause to change the tape. They could also just make them longer.... geesh...

[nimbus4000]

yeah but they could make two parts to it but then again its seems like a stupid idea

[Scout1980]

GOF will be 3 hours at the most. Anything longer and people won't go see it

I'm not sure I agree with that. Harry Potter has a very loyal fan base. I'm sure all of the people who saw PS and COS several times wouldn't walk away from a longer GOF. I know I wouldn't think, "Gee it is so long. I LOVE Harry Potter, but I am not going to see GOF, because its too long." Yea right! I would totally go see it multiple times, because in my mind longer = better= more Harry Potter fun.

And like many people have said, Return of the King was super long, and I didn't see them suffering at the box office. I personally saw it three times, and I am not even a big LOTR fan. I just thought the effects, camera angles, acting, etc. was impressive enough to see multiple times.

[springthing4]

they should make it 3 and a half hours if theres a time limit at least!

[AWallZ0715]

I'm dissapointed by the cutting of the Dursleys, but just like everyone else was saying, it's not that important to the storyline. It's still going to be a crazy movie! (Can't wait to witness the First, Second, and Third Tasks of the Triwizard Tournament!)

[Pazarius]

A good movie is always too short, a bad movie always too long... :)

[lxs234]

A good movie is always too short, a bad movie always too long... :)Huh?

If it's a movie that comes from something I love, the longer the better. If it's a animated disney, the shorter the better. Same with scary movies.

If the want to get people to stay throughout the whole long movies, they just shouldn't serve extra large sodas! :p

[Jedi Potter]

Wait ROTK was just a little over 3 hours and to me that is as long as a movie should get. No film has been over 3.5 hours and has made money not since the 50's at least that is a fact. People don't want to go to movies that long, any more. Also you got to consider people taking kids to movies WB is trying to make money they aren't going to want to make a 4 hour film. A 3 hour film is the best idea, to me for GOF.

[Death of Rats]

Alrighty, here's my theory on what they're going to do with GOF.

They are going to have the vision at the begining, with Harry waking up at the Weasley's house. It is going to be the day that they leave for the World Cup, and they are going to include the Portkey. To "include" the Dursleys in some way they will have Harry and Ron (or someone) talk about the excape on the way to the portkey.

Notice, they have to have the portkey, and the world cup, or else the plot of the movie would be paper thin. The portkey is fordshadowing, and the world cup introduces too many plot points that still arn't resolved, even in the books. They will have to include these points at least in the world cup :

The twin's bet with Bagman (So the twins can leave school in Movie 5)
The Dark Mark (for reason pertaining to this movie's plot)
The idea of foriegn wizards (To solidify the magical world even further)

And a bunch of other points which I can't think of at the moment.

Either way, the Dursleys don't do much in this book. Their part in it is the most obvious thing to cut out that wouldn't ruin any on-going plot points. It would be just like in the LOTR movies, where something isn't shown, but it is implied that it happened.

What I don't understand about people's reaction to this is why does everyone act like the Dursleys being cut would mean that Harry didn't stay there for a good portion of the summer? I mean, by this movie, it will have been shown 3 times already. The audience would already understand that Harry stays there. In some ways, it would be redundent to show him there again.

[nyotonks]

CBBC Newsround confirms that there will be no Dursleys in GoF. No ton-tongue toffee and blasted fireplace at Privet Drive, that is.

So what do we think about this approach to shortening GoF, people? Terrible or ok?

Personally, I don't think this is the worst they could have cut. Some potential comic relief gone, certainly, but the Dursleys are not essential in GoF. In OotP they are, but not in GoF.

What do you all think?
I think it sucks! :grumble: :td:

[Jedi Potter]

I think they will cut the betting with Bagman out be hard to explain. I am not sure how they will handle the Weasley Twin escape. Also you are right about the Portkey if they didn't show it, people would be greatly confused when they pick the trophy up and it transports them to voldemort.

[springthing4]

I've said this before...they will have the Weasley's take him right to the quidditch world cup, they can still have the portkey in it, it won't take long to explain. I wonder if they've chosen the actor for Cedric??

[gabby]

I don't like the idea of the Dursleys being cut out. I know that they are not essential to the plot...but they are part of the story. I will miss them if they are not it.

I was looking forward to the Weasley's meeting the Dursleys...and seeing Dudley's super long tongue.

[Death of Rats]

I know that they could just cut right to the WWC, but they won't. The portkey is an important peice of forshadowing. If the writer is any good, he will realize this. There need be no Scooby-Doo type dialouge at the end of the movie that explains that the trophy is a portkey. Either they have it used to get to the WWC, or they use a portkey else where in the movie, prior to the ending. If they don't, then the movie will, quite frankely, be lessened because of it. (this is just from the point of view of story telling in a visual medium, not from the point of view of a Harry Potter fan)

[Lady Greyjoy]

Good catch about the Portkey...since it is an important part of climax (Harry escapes with it after all). The Director and Producers will probably start at the Weasly's. Anything is possible though. Dumbledore could mention it at the Yule Ball for its introduction.

[lxs234]

Dumbledore could mention it at the Yule Ball for its introduction.I don't know. That guy can be a little boring and difficult to understand at times. I don't think that's the way to go.

[daniel4hp]

Good catch about the Portkey...since it is an important part of climax (Harry escapes with it after all). The Director and Producers will probably start at the Weasly's. Anything is possible though. Dumbledore could mention it at the Yule Ball for its introduction.
I think it could work quite well to have it introduced in class -- Flitwick or someone could teach the students about portkeys. This would, I think, be better than wasting time at the beginning with unneccessary material.

If they do want to include a scene at the Burrow for other reasons, that's fine, but I don't think it should be put in just for the sake of the portkey. That's to easy to introduce some other way.

[lxs234]

I think it could work quite well to have it introduced in class -- Flitwick or someone could teach the students about portkeys. This would, I think, be better than wasting time at the beginning with unneccessary material.

If they do want to include a scene at the Burrow for other reasons, that's fine, but I don't think it should be put in just for the sake of the portkey. That's to easy to introduce some other way.Oh, you all meant discussing the portkeys in class. I thought you meant the dark mark. Yeah, talking about portkeys in class would be fine.

[Neonorne]

Yeah, the best thing is to have the portkey introcuced early. But I think it should be shown, not talked about - film as a visual medium you know....It doesn't HAVE to be from the Burrow till the Cup, if they don't want to set up the whole Burrow scene. But why not use the portkey to travel from the Cup directly to the Hogwarts express for instance? Good transition to Hogwarts.

I guess a class demonstration could work too - but then someone must use it to show how it works.

Yes, many ways to do it. They just shouldn't let it be placed too far into the movie.

[Death of Rats]

The reason I think they will start at the Burrow after the vision, is it's the best place, besides the Dursleys, to have Harry wake up to. One thing, thematically, about the Burrow is that it is some place where the audience feels comphy with. They've seen it, and only good actions have taken place in it (so far). So, go from a rather dark and gloomy intro, into a place where the audience and Harry feel comphertable in.

It would give Harry that relief that he would need after seeing something like that, and it would also give the audience their relief.

Think about it this way, the first scene would suck the audience in, with how out of place it is with the rest of the movies, and then bam!, you're at the WWC, a place that the audience doesn't know about. It would feel rather... jumbled and unfamiliar.

If it's bam!, you're at the burrow, then the audience would feel safer, and it would make them feel more... "at home" with the opening of the movie.

Hope this makes sense to you guys.

[herbertsandbach]

I hope they do stay a little longer at the Burrow, I wanted to see a lot more in cos,maybe the bedrooms and how they stacked up ontop of one another and more Weasley family life.

[strwznbrry]

I completely understand that they need to make only the really important parts for the movie because otherwise the movie would be really long.

But it doesn't mean I wasn't looking forward to the whole Weasley family meets the Dursley family scene. I guess I will get over it though.

I kind of think the idea that is mentioned about them starting at the Burrow is a nice one. That comfortable familiarity thing has a nice sound to it. Plus then you would get to see how the portkey works when they use it to get to the World Cup. I think that seeing it work would be better than just hearing it explained for later in the movie.

[darklord_grindelwald]

I think the Dursleys are really funny characters and I would like to see when they meet the Weasleys either. When I first heard that they will be cut from the film I was a bit angry, but now I can accept that.
But I hope the filmmakers will put them in an extended version of the film or the DVD.

[Dobbys_sock]

I am very disappointed! The Dursleys provide humor and entertainment! I for one will miss their presence in the films! They are important and shouldn't be tossed a side to shorten the time for people that havn't read the books to feel comfortable watching! Any person that has read the books wouldn't have an objection to a couple extra minutes of footage ACTUALLY from the books. And they also show contrast from the muggle world to wizarding world.

[lxs234]

I am very disappointed! The Dursleys provide humor and entertainment! Well, as much as I miss them, they weren't extremely funny. More of an overexagerated funny. I still wish they were there, since it's great having Harry start in the same place in each movie.

[Godrics_Heiress]

As much as I enjoy the Dursleys in the movies, they are not exactly a big loss. Their role in GoF does not affect the plot of the story, they kind of existed to provide some comic relief.

What I hated was the producers did not notify the actors beforehand. The actors apparently had to call them to ask about their status in the movie. That upset me. The filmmakers should have at least shown some sense of dignity to tell the Dursley actors earlier that they would be cut from GoF. :(

[lxs234]

What I hated was the producers did not notify the actors beforehand. The actors apparently had to call them to ask about their status in the movie. That upset me. The filmmakers should have at least shown some sense of dignity to tell the Dursley actors earlier that they would be cut from GoF. :(That's what really makes me mad, too. If the movie people think they are so important that they can't be bothered by talking to a couple of people, then they are wrong. I find it hard to believe that they just realized recently that the Dursleys wouldn't be in GoF. In the interview with J.K.R. on the second dvd, I think they said the screen writer was already starting work on book three's movie. That means the fourth movie should have been started to be written a while ago. They should have told the actors WAY before them.

One question: Is it actually official they won't be in there?

[Neonorne]

I agree that if they were told just now, that was very bad. But how reliable is that info? Appearantly, this was a tabloid story. The BBC didn't confirm that part of it and I don't think it is very likely. This is a big company, and Heyman too has been around for a long time, he knows how to handle these things. Plus if they want them back for the next film, they can't treat them this badly, so - I really think they are more proffessional than this, I don't quite believe it.

Of course we could all say we want two movies, or a five-six hour movie, with intermission. But we all know by now, that is NOT gonna happen. So I think it's interesting to discuss here how they can make reasonable cuts that won't hurt too much. Then the Dursleys are actually one of the most sensible of cuts, imo.

Same for the Burrow, actually. I understand what you say about the cosy and familiar, Death of Rats - but again, what would you cut instead to keep the Burrow in? I want to have a lot of room for all the important set ups round the World Cup, with the Dark Mark and all, and then for all the three tasks and the graveyard scene - that GOT to be given a lot of weight, that CAN't be rushed!! Then we also will need time for the exposition of the false Moody - THE plot point . And I want the pensieve in too...

We pretty much know the yule ball and the "romantic comedy" stuff will be in, so...yeah - I sooner loose the Burrow than have only two tasks for instance...Remember, the magic tent at the world cup was pretty cosy and comfortable, and all the Weaslys will be there with Harry, Bill and Charlie too - if they want to, they can have Mrs. Weasly there too, just to get to say hello to her again before all the action starts -even if that is not canon. If they want the tent to replace the Burrow, why not. At least, that would be a change I would not complain about, since it would only help to get some "Burrow feeling" into the World Cup.

Gosh, I should write the script, shouldn't I - move over Kloves! :p

[Cat]

That means the fourth movie should have been started to be written a while ago. They should have told the actors WAY before them.


He may have started writing it, but he wouldn't have had a finished copy of the script right away. He might have originally written a script that included the Dursleys but the scene was cut out at a much later date. It's a shame the actors didn't know, but it shows that it takes some time and consideration before giving something the chop.

[swishandflick]

It would've been the right thing to do to tell the actors that they weren't going to be in the next film, but it's probably not the way things work. On such a huge production I doubt they have time for those sorts of things. I think John Cleese, the man who plays Nearly Headless Nick, was not told that PoA was starting without him as well. Hmmm...the actors who played the Dursely's weren't protesting about unfairness then...

[Cat]

It would've been the right thing to do to tell the actors that they weren't going to be in the next film, but it's probably not the way things work.


Yes, but other people might not have known that they weren't going to be in the next film, either. The decision to axe the Dursleys might only have been made very recently. How could they have forewarned the actors if that was so?

[swishandflick]

Its hard to say if they would've been able to tell the actors because we don't know when they made this decision. Kloves could've decided it a long time ago, or it could've been recently. Either way I don't think that in general actors are warned about such things, unless you're a huge part of the production. If they didn't tell Dan Radcliff he wasn't coming back for the fifth film as soon as they knew, then that would be really poor of them. It sounds like in this situation the actor had to go and seek the information for himself, rather than someone letting him know.

[lxs234]

. But how reliable is that info? Appearantly, this was a tabloid story. The BBC didn't confirm that part of it and I don't think it is very likely. This is a big company, and Heyman too has been around for a long time, he knows how to handle these things. Plus if they want them back for the next film, they can't treat them this badly, so - I really think they are more proffessional than this, I don't quite believe it.

Woah, so this means it might not be authentic??? I am going to have to look on the internet for the GoF cast...

[MnMbabe]

so this means it might not be authentic??? One can only hope....

[Neonorne]

I'm afraid that the news story about how the Dursley's are cut IS authentic. CBBC Newsround - and that is usually a very reliable site - say they got this fact confirmed from Griffith's agent.

It's the story about how they were not told by the producers and had to call them themselves to know, that I don't believe. Appereantly that news item came from some tabloid, and is therefore not necessarily authentic.

[lxs234]

I'm afraid that the news story about how the Dursley's are cut IS authentic. CBBC Newsround - and that is usually a very reliable site - say they got this fact confirmed from Griffith's agent.

It's the story about how they were not told by the producers and had to call them themselves to know, that I don't believe. Appereantly that news item came from some tabloid, and is therefore not necessarily authentic.Oh... This really sucks... You're probably right that they were at least informed a little bit earlier. We never know though...

[Nys]

I can understand why they've been cut.. they're not really in the books very much, and to compress such a large book, they're going to have to cut somethings... and unfortunately, the Dursleys are gone.

[DrummerboyDT]

I can understand why they've been cut.. they're not really in the books very much, and to compress such a large book, they're going to have to cut somethings... and unfortunately, the Dursleys are gone.

I think that in book 5, Molly Weasley has more respect for Harry and tries to protect him as if she was the mother. I think she gains this understanding from GoF so for OotP and it allows the audience to understand how Molly feels. I think that would be the only thing that would effect the later movie.

[LumosSoleil]

I'm not sure if imdb.com is a reliable source, but I read their cast list for GoF and Fiona Shaw's name has been added to it pretty recently. I don't know about Griffiths yet though.

[dracosgoddess89]

I've heard that before and i dont really think that matterz they arent really that big a role in the GOF

[ravenclaw02]

I have to say, I'm actually pretty upset that they're (supposedly) cut from GoF! The Dursleys are a constant throughout the films, and I feel like they need to be in every film, if only to reiterate the definite split between the Muggle and Magical worlds. Also, the ton-tounge toffee and the exploding fireplace are HILARIOUS! I was really looking forward to seeing the Weasleys burst into the Dursleys' living room on screen ... talk about your foil characters!

[Magi]

CBBC Newsround has been wrong about the movies in the past (remember the John Malkovich rumour?). But if the Dursleys have been cut from GoF, I'm not surprised, nor am I disappointed.

However, if the Quidditch World Cup is cut.... hrmph. Not happy!

[Lupins Lover]

So are they still leaving in the whole Voldemort thing at the beginning?

I think its quite good that they've cut the Dursleys. The story has so much in it that they will need all the time they can get to fit it in. It will make the story better as it wouldn't be as rushed. Not having the Dursleys in will cut about 20 minutes off the time, that could mean 20 more minutes of action! yey!

But they will have to leave them in for the fifth film. Oooo I can't WAIT to see that Dursley scene ;)

[PaDfOoT5]

Im kind of dissapointed that the Dursleys are being cut, i find it very enjoyable watching them, they are quite funny.

Does anyone know if they are leaving in the whole thing with the Riddle House and Frank Bryce in the beginning?

[tyro]

Lupins Lover - Cutting the Dursleys will save about 5 minutes, maybe 7. Check the CoS script - by page 25 they're at Hogwarts. (It's a page a minute).

Also, with any luck they will have adapted OotP and cut the need for Dudley to get Demented. I see where people are coming from saying they add consistency and stuff, but it's not like they've dissapeared, remeber the paradigm "if you can show it don't write it".

[HpFreak726]

this seems really stupid in my opinion. i fail 2 c y they're so obsessed with making every movie 2 and a half hours long. i mean they can't keep doing that in every movie, it'll cut out 2 many important parts. i mean the last lotr movie was 3 and a half hours long 4 cryin out loud

[daniel4hp]

this seems really stupid in my opinion. i fail 2 c y they're so obsessed with making every movie 2 and a half hours long. i mean they can't keep doing that in every movie, it'll cut out 2 many important parts. i mean the last lotr movie was 3 and a half hours long 4 cryin out loud
The reason with the "obsession" is that most people do not want to sit through three and a half hours. Lord of the Rings was an exception to the rule (and, technically, it was 3:20, not 3:30, and part of that was credits). It is very rare for a movie to be more than 3 hours long, and theres a reason for that. In all honesty, the difference between 3:00 and 2:30 is not so great that all that much will be cut. If you can show it in 3:00, chances are you can cut a little bit more and get it into 2:30. And people are more likely to like a movie that's 2:30 and one that's 3:00.

[Godrics_Heiress]

My other disappointment with the Dursleys being cut is that we won't get to see the funny moment between the electric fire and the Weasleys being stuck in the fireplace. The scene would have cracked me up, not to mention the twins playing the tongue-toffee trick on Dudley. :(

[tyro]

I really can't understand people saying "I really want to see x y and z". An adaptation should be about bringing a book to a screen, one medium to another and seeing how it works. What's wrong with preserving your imagination as the interpretation? It's like in LOTR, the enourmous scale of the stories and JRRT's Universe can only truly be represented in our minds, and that's the magic (excuse the pun) of books, they live in our imagination, not on the screen. All these scenes that people want to see, they can see them whenever they read the book, in your mind. Transferring every word into every line in a film isn't what it's supposed to be about.

[mevam]

I liked the scenes with the Dursleys, but if cutting them out will mean more scenes of actual value like Harry and his Tasks, and the rebirth of Voldemort, then I'm all for it. GOF is a huge book, so they're going to have to snip and cut certain things. The Dursleys were never important characters in Harry's life, and they are not the main focus of GOF.

[Wab]

The Dursleys don't play a signinficant role in GoF. By now we know they're horrible to Harry and so forth and unlike PoA their actions don't force Harry to flee.

OotP is so far the most important book Dursley-wise.

[Haeton]

Not having them in GoF is of no real significance. One place I do want to see them is when they finally make OoTP. The scene with Mad Eye facing down Dursley helps to lighten a rather severe ending.

[DolphinChica]

The Dursleys don't play a signinficant role in GoF. By now we know they're horrible to Harry and so forth and unlike PoA their actions don't force Harry to flee.

OotP is so far the most important book Dursley-wise.

I agree with that about OotP. The only thing that would be messed up would be the connection with "home" that protects Harry. But since most people read the books, everyone knows that anyway.

I do still think the Dursleys should be in GoF somehow. Even if the scene just opens with Harry stepping into the fire, with just a shot of the Dursleys in the back.

[rednow]

bleh... not to be mean or anything, i don't think that anyone would want to see their fat face yelling at Harry anyway...

[Bloo]

So what happened to all the rumours about GoF being two movies? I mean, that would make much more sense than cutting out scenes. I won't mind if they do that even if the second part of GoF has to come out 6 months after the first part! And wouldn't they make more money that way anyway?!

It's obvious that even though the Dursleys don't appear that often in the books or the movies, they play a big part in Harry's life. And anyway, are they gonna show the Riddle House scene and then straight to The Burrow? Where's the fun in that...?

Another rumour that I heard is that they're gonna skip the Quidditch World Cup or they're gonna start GoF at Hogwarts!

[eedoe]

I must be one of the rare few who would be willing to sit through a four hour movie with an appropraite intermission to be able to see everything. Society's patience level is too short in modern times as it is. If it isn't quick they don't want to be burdened with it. Sometimes true quality takes time. I personally want to see the Dursleys in every movie. They might have a small part in each book/movie but they are still instumental in explaining why Harry is who he is.

[tyro]

bloo: -
one film. no dursleys. that is all anyone knows. i'm just remembering what Mike Newell said about this being a thriller, and looking at it from that angle. Therefore opening with the Riddle House would be a good idea.