7 Books, 7 Movies?

[Ninya]

Do you think that WB will make a movie for each book?

It is possible, at least to me, that the audience will tire of the movie if not made well (say, bad directing for example). While the books, their storyline and creation, are solely from the author Rowling....the movies have several who are creating it. The actors are playing in the creation of the character, even though they are going according to the outline of the character in the book. I think it would be more easy to tire of the movie than the book. There are more factors involved with the movie than the book.

Personally, I think it's a bad idea to take so much time in between the release dates of the books and the movies. CoS was released in theaters in 2002, and now the proposed release date for the 3rd movie is in Nov of 2004? The Star Trek movies could get by with that, but the HP movies are based on a book series. If the two are to correspond with each other, then both should be released the same year with maybe a 6-month period in between the two releases.

But, that's just my opinion.

[harryton]

i think that it will get old by book 5 becuase book 2 made a little less then movie 1, and this beheavior will coutinue, which means that less people will watch harrry potter when more movies come out, but im not sure about this cause there is a 1 year between the movies.

[Ninya]

The time issue could result in another, a competing, storyline being a factor. What if a story not the same but similar in a small way were to come out while the HPs were waiting to be released? Competition.

I don't see this happening, but it could.

[Rowayda]

i think that after movie number 3 they will stop because

a:-Theyre thinking its nearly impossible to write the script for Number 4 (and i see their point!!)
b:-The 3 main stars(emma, daniel and rupert)are thinking that they wont continue after film 3 and it would be weird to have different characters than we are used to.
c:-At the rate the books are coming at they would have to replace nearly every character for the films to continue until...say book 6!!!

[Jedi Potter]

They seem to be working on 4 now, and I don't think they will stop realize Hp2 will make more than 800 WW than there is the merchandise the up coming DVD and you are looking over a billion dollars in money from it. Still, they need to film a movie a year and I think after film 3 is done they will approach the actors and ask them if they want to continue. I think it will be up to them, they seem willing to want to do them all, but think it is out of their hands, still I am not sure what they will do they still might bolt because they want to concentrate on school, it is impossible to say at this point and I guess we will have to wait until probably the summer of fall of 2003 to find out.

[hpangel102]

Well, if book 5 comes out and then by the time book 6 comes out we'll probably have movie 3 and 4, and they might be working on 5 or starting to, and then when book 7 comes out, they will be working on the 5th and 6th movies, so it could work, as long as they took their time. I think they might try to continue on.... I would really like to own the whole Harry Potter set on dvd!

[daniel4hp]

I think its certainly possible to make seven, and if done right, it shouldn't be to hard.

By the time movie 3 comes out book 5 will already have been realeased, and by the time of movie 4 we will have book 6. When movie 5 is done book 7 will probably be complete, or nearly so. So, the time shouldn't be to big a problem.

The biggest problem will be the audience losing interest, but as long as they are made right, that shouldn't happen.

[Qeomash]

Originally posted by Rowayda
b:-The 3 main stars(emma, daniel and rupert)are thinking that they wont continue after film 3 and it would be weird to have different characters than we are used to.

Actually, Rupert Grint has stated on afew ocasions that he would stick as Ron through book 7 if given the chance. Its mostly Daniel Ratcliffe that is getting antsy.

Though I do agree that they will probably stop after Book 3.

[chiseledpheonix]

I believe that WB will get millions of e-mail or letters from fanatics that will force them to go until book 7 if they stop. I also think that each movie will be better than the first.

[Lupin Loopy]

There will come a point though, where the films catch up with the books. This will cause long delays in the films meaning that a new cast will definatley have to be used.......its a shame though, it would have been interesting to see the kids all grow up alongside their characters.

[Lee]

I hope they use all seven books for films, and that they use the same cast (especially Rupert, who is just ace!) but I can't see it happening... :'(

[RAiNbOw_BriTe]

I also think they may stop after movie 3 but who knows. I would love to see all 7 books made into movies.

[emma1HP1]

I just don't understand why in the world they wouldn't continue on to make 7 movies if there are going to be 7 books. I understand they messed up with filming and the kids are gonna be really old but it just sucks. I'll tell you something though...if they decide to make 7 movies with DIFFERENT actors...there is no way I will be able to see them. I love Daniel, Rupert, and Emma. They are like the 3 musketeers. Comments?

[Dedalus]

There may be more than 7 - they're definitely splitting the Goblet of Fire into 2 films, and the next 3 might be as big!

I wouldn't care if they got new child actors. It's not the actors we're seeing - it's the characters. And so providing they have all the bits they should have, and act well then they'll always be a good interpretation of that character. None of the characters look much like the actors, in my mind, anyway and so it won't effect the way I see it, since it doesn't anyway.

One person's interpretation of a character is as good as any others. So a good choice of actor is as good as any other.

[Lee]

I dunno... It'd be really odd to see Harry or Hermione or Ron morph into someone else suddenly...

[dog star]

Originally posted by Lee
I dunno... It'd be really odd to see Harry or Hermione or Ron morph into someone else suddenly...

And you just can't have Professor Snape without Alan Rickman, or Hagrid without Robbie Coltrane. It'll be hard enough having Dumbledore played by someone else. :(

[martinnyg]

If they change the child actors i won't be mad, i don't really like any of their performances. Dan is rather stiff as Harry, Rupert is soooo overplaying, he would be great in roles like Jim Carreys imo. Emmas performance i kind of like, but it wouldn't kill me to live without it.

And if they split GoF into 2 and release 'em a month a part, i think it'll still be counted as one movie.

[martinnyg]

BTW shouldn't this be in the muggle media area, please move it some mod.

Sorry for double posting

[harryton]

i think that after the fourth movie, they are going to stop becuase, as many of you have said. the characters will be old, and i guess some people would get bored of some many movies.

i wouldnt :)

[HandsClean]

Actually, I heard that GoF Will be divided by 2 parts. And first one wil be released on Thanksgiving day or some day around, and another part will be shown on Christmas or something. Whatever, WB said that they will finish the Harry Potter series until 2010, if possible - it means that JK Rowling has to finish the Harry Potter books at least 2009. Whatever, I am not sure exactly, just Time will tell.

[scrimp_1987]

well i love rupert, emma and daniel if they change the actors i dont think i'll go and see the movies, but if they don't change the actors then they will be really old by the time the book and movies have been done so i dunno.
Amy

[emma1HP1]

ok so......to reply to all of urs.....i think emma and rupert are doing a great job acting considering that this is their first project ever. emma is a cutie and a natural (although i can sense somewhat of an attitude in interviews) and rupert is a great kid who is the comic relief but i cannot wait to see his dramatic side put to the test when him and hermione start fighting and such. dan is at times stiff but remember, he's an amateur. give him a break. i dunno about this whole GoF into 2 films...where did we hear this? i dunno if i could stand waiting for part 2. also, i read an interview with tom felton and he said his plan is to act until he is 16 and then get a good education and do something with his life....and since he is already 15 he doesnt seem as though he is planning to continue with the HP movies. uh oh...:-( i know i gave u a lot to think about haha

[Weatherby]

As long as the films keep making WB money they'll making them.
They'll find a director to take the challenge. Who knows maybe two directors?

The cast isn't a problem.
I don't mind seeing Tom Ripley be Matt Damon and later John Malkovich.
I'm flexible.

[emma1HP1]

im not flexible like that at all-----i cant see any other actors playing the 3. emma rupert and dan were like MADE for the parts. lol. i just hope they dont mature so rapidly that it comes down to new actors. they make the movie in my opinion.

[Weatherby]

Originally posted by emma1HP1
im not flexible like that at all-----i cant see any other actors playing the 3. emma rupert and dan were like MADE for the parts. lol. i just hope they dont mature so rapidly that it comes down to new actors. they make the movie in my opinion.

I see where your coming from. If they made a Hobbit film without Ian
Holm I doubt I'd be able to watch it.
But he's one of the greatest actors living today. To hear the lotr cast talk about him in the extended dvd was fantastic. He sounds so giving to the director and the material. He's so versatile..but enough about Holm.

But I'll do my best to give any new actors a chance as long as Keanu Reeves isn't Harry Potter. I'm not that generous.

They had no choice but recast Dumbledore and we'll have to wait and see. I'm disapointed the Gambon rumour isn't true. He's just the actor to make me forget about Harris and see Dumbledore as the same character. He wouldn't imitate Harris but understand the character and treat us fans with respect.

I was so worried about the bodydouble rumour. We deserve better than that.
John Malkovich made me see John Cusack when he played Craig during half of Being John Malkovich without mimicing.
but I'm not holding anyone else to his standard

It'll take a brave actor to continue on as Harry if Radcliffe is replaced.
Those kids might want to hate him at first.

[dog star]

Originally posted by Weatherby
The cast isn't a problem.
I don't mind seeing Tom Ripley be Matt Damon and later John Malkovich.
I'm flexible.

I read an interview with Alan Rickman earlier today and he said that JKR demanded (I believe that's the word he used, I know it was a very strong word) that the cast be British. He said it wasn't going to be that way, but she wouldn't have it any other way. So, if she wouldn't then, I doubt she will in the future.

[Weatherby]

Originally posted by dog star
I read an interview with Alan Rickman earlier today and he said that JKR demanded (I believe that's the word he used, I know it was a very strong word) that the cast be British. He said it wasn't going to be that way, but she wouldn't have it any other way. So, if she wouldn't then, I doubt she will in the future.

I have mentioned Malkovich as my ideal choice before but this time all I was posting was an example of a character being played by two different actors.
Last I checked The Talented Mr. Ripley and Ripley's Game weren't written by J.K Rowling.

[emma1HP1]

just wondering.....do you guys sense an attitude in emma watson? i mean i think she is so pretty and very mature for her age but i get this feeling that the guys don't really like her. comments?

[dog star]

Originally posted by Weatherby
I have mentioned Malkovich as my ideal choice before but this time all I was posting was an example of a character being played by two different actors.
Last I checked The Talented Mr. Ripley and Ripley's Game weren't written by J.K Rowling.

Oh, sorry...I got a little bit confused by your post. ;) But there have been a lot of people suggesting American actors in various parts, and I just don't think JKR would want that...especially after what Rickman said she did. Sorry for the confusion.

[pasalita]

This thread sounds like it should be in Muggle Media. So...

To the Muggle Media forum area we go!

[martinnyg]

Originally posted by emma1HP1
just wondering.....do you guys sense an attitude in emma watson? i mean i think she is so pretty and very mature for her age but i get this feeling that the guys don't really like her. comments?

Who Rupert and Dan, or just guys in general ?

[martinnyg]

Originally posted by emma1HP1
dan is at times stiff but remember, he's an amateur. give him a break.

But he isn't a amateur, he's getting payed for what he's doing, so therefore he is not a amateur.


Again sorry for double posting, i don't know how to have two quotes in one post :o

[emma1HP1]

martinnyg---i meant by saying he's an amateur that this is one of his first acting jobs and he isn't some veteran actor who has all these different techniques to warm-up for their scene and get in character and that sort of stuff. and with the emma watson attitude thing....i mean dan and rupert. i get a sense that they don't enjoy her company all the time. maybe cause she is so young but i dunno. she did say she bosses them around on set?

[daniel4hp]

just wondering.....do you guys sense an attitude in emma watson? i mean i think she is so pretty and very mature for her age but i get this feeling that the guys don't really like her. comments?
Yeah, I sensed that. In one thing, in particular, she had a strong attitude. Each actor could say something about the movie, or something like that, and she was ranting on about how unfare the film was to woman because she was just about the only girl on the set and had hardly any lines... that was after the first film. They seem to have given her more lines, at least, for the second. But yeah, I sensed an attitude problem with her in some interviews.

Dan is rather stiff as Harry, Rupert is soooo overplaying, he would be great in roles like Jim Carreys imo. Emmas performance i kind of like, but it wouldn't kill me to live without it.
I don't consider that the actors fault--that is 100% Chris Columbus' fault, in my opinion. I often don't blaim directors, but here I do.

I read once that he was saying what a good actor Dan was becoming. He said that in the first movie it took five or six takes to get a scene, but in the second movie, he often got it the second time. In the extended LotR DVD, Christopher Lee was saying how Peter Jackson had made him try twelve times and another actor had to repeat two lines twenty-four times before PJ was satisfied. Considering this, there is absolutely no reason why Dan, Rupert, and Emma shouldn't have done better--CC was just to easy on them.

[Kingdom Ops]

I myself hope they don't swich parts. I hope they get into gear and make the movies.. Two things are stopping this though(least I think they are). First is how JK gets the books out. I mean it's taken her long enough for the 5th book, I could see a repeated prosses for the final two(maybe even a longer wait). There's also the contracts to the actors. I'm sure they have some form of contract for X amounts of movies. My guess it's for 3-4. They might not want to keep playing the role of the Harry Potter trio. They might want to go back to their lives. Their parents might want them to go back to their lives. Who knows.. I sure hope they stay, I like all three of them. As for The Goblet of Fire, I could see two movies, about the length of the 1st one each(possibly). I'd imagine one would come out Nov./Dec. then the next comming out in Late Spring early summer of the next year. Working on each at the same time.

[Benzo]

Sorry guys, but are you sure there will be seven books????

- a desesperate HP fan.

[Demona Snape]

I personally like the cast.

As far as the "aging comment" goes, to me it only makes sense that the actors grow up along with the characters of the group. You have 21 year olds playing teenagers all the time I don't see why it would be wrong for this particular cast to continue playing the parts of Hogwarts students.

The actor who portrayed Oliver Wood was actually 20 and Tom Riddle or more precisely the person who played him is 24.

I can see where it would be a problem if Rowling decided to do something drastic like wait 7 years before releasing the movie...possibly forcing the movie to have a brand new cast.

However as far as her "demanding" that the actors be British I would think she has no say over that since they are trademarks of WB...meaning they would have the final say in anything HP related. However I could be wrong but at least that's my understanding of trademark laws.

Anyways but like anyone else I would love to see all 7 movies with the same actors if possible. If anything I'm attached to these kids and I couldn't imagine anyone else playing the role of "Hermione" or "Draco" without ruining it for me. :p

[Talon]

Originally posted by Benzo
Sorry guys, but are you sure there will be seven books????

- a desesperate HP fan.

It has always been my understanding that Harry Potter was supposed to be seven books long, since each book would encompass one of Harry's 7 years in Hogwarts.... who is to say she may or may not write more after that (which may or may not be in the HP universe)... I but I think that it is supposed to end with book seven.

~Talon

[dog star]

Well, here is the URL where the transcript is at for the Alan Rickman HardTalk interview...and the excerpt in question also.

http://pages.prodigy.net/emeraldegg/articles/hardtalk.html

TS: A place where British actors do extraordinarily well. I mean, it was a huge vote of confidence in this film, the Harry Potter film, that there was an entire British cast wasn’t it?

AR: Well, it was a measure of J.K. Rowling’s power, because it wasn’t going to be that way.

TS: She insisted on it?

AR: Uh-huh. (Nods assent)

TS: How hard a fight was that?

AR: I think if it’s in her contract--. She just... dug her heels in, you know. She’s got a wonderful sense of when to say no!

[emma1HP1]

it said that daniel4hp replied to me yet i do not see a response anywhere on this page. will someone tell me if they think that emma watson has somewhat of an attitude? i love the girl to death and maybe its because her maturity but ya know what....nevermind this was a stupid topic. rowling better get the 5th book out SOON. i understand she is having/has had a baby and with the success of the movies she must be busy, but still. she can't keep us waiting much longer!!!

[Jedi Potter]

I am hoping they do all 7 movies, but I imagine it will be up to them and I have no clue if they will continue or not they have seen in interviews that they want to keep going so maybe they will. I think it will depend on when they film each film. Hopefully there are no more delays in the last two books or there could be problems there.

[Dedalus]

But for those people who said they wouldn't like a change of characters ...

Do you think the actors are as important as the characters they portray? I'm sure you don't, and so, therefore, why should it matter if the actor was changed, if they still portrayed that character well?

Even if Rupert Grint, say, was your ideal interpretation of Ron - you can't deny that he isn't the only one. Everyone sees the characters differently and so it wouldn't matter if the movie changed - it's only another person's interpretation! As the movie is only someone elses' visualisation of the books. It might be nice to see, but it isn't all that important and so the actors you see needn't define the characters how you see them.

[She's Crafty]

Gonna chuck in my two cents here:

I'm not sure about the idea of seven movies, franchises that run that long tend to have completely petered out before the end. But then again, Harry Potter is working from a very good text so unless the books really start to suck (and we all know that is very unlikely to happen) quality shouldn't really be a problem.

Goblet of Fire being split into two films seems daft and patently unecessary - Peter Jackson managed to adapt Fellowship (which i've just finshed reading!) and The Two Towers, both about as long as GoF, without leaving any really major plot points out (since i haven't read TTT, feel free to correct me - i know they took Tom Bombadil, Goldberry and Glorfindel out of FOTR but i didn't really miss them) so i don't see why GoF can't be adapted into one film.

Changing actors - i'm in two minds on this one. I can accept another Dumbledore simply because i know it's necessary but then again, i would feel quite wierd watching other kids playing the Trio. I would not hate it, but i wouldn't like it that much either. Tom Felton is looking to be a shue-in to not see the whole series out and although i wasn't too keen on his performance in CoS i would still hate to see him replaced as Draco, based on his spot on sneering alone! :p

Still, if they have to replace Tom, i suppose the kid who plays Damien in Only Fools and Horses wouldn't be a bad choice. He's got a 'foul rat face' after all!

Sorry, kind of rambled away there!

[emma1HP1]

i just read the transcript for when dan was on the caroline rhea show in november...i dont understand why he is sooo nervous?! well i guess i do, but hasnt he done tons of these types of interviews before? and it made me mad cause caroline rhea did most of the talking and hardly let him speak.

[emma1HP1]

sorry for doubling posting but....

I understand that HP is all about the characters and some people are thinking, "Who cares if there are different actors as long as the movies continue" But honestly, Dan Emma and Rupert ARE the HP movies as far as I'm concerned. If they got new kids to play the parts it would be as though they were trying so hard to live up to the former 3 that their performances would be stiff and nervous. Maybe I'm wrong...maybe they'll find 3 AMAZING celebrity children to take over the parts but I go to HP to see Dan Emma and Rupert and see how they've matured. It's fun to watch them grow and get hotter and prettier. LOL.

[You-Know-Who]

There is an edit button above your username emma1HP1 (next to the quote button). Instead of double posting it's better to edit your last post and put the stuff you want to say there...

I'm not sure if they will do 7 films, it sounds nice...

However I'll be glad if they do GoF in 2 parts. Is just too much to do in 1 film. Nice example is TTT
Officially speaking The Two Towers of the LotR series is divided into 3 films, the end of FotR (Boromir's dead) is in TTT. They stopped TTT 3/4 through the book. That just shows that large books cannot be adapted into 1 film.
So RotK starts with the last quarter of TTT still to be shown...

[Jedi Potter]

LOTR is different that Harry Potter, LOTR is easy to cut things out because Tolkien rambles a lot and there are lot of really important scenes that you can cut, (Tom Bombadil for example) GOF is different, I think there is a thread on this that goes into why it is harder to cut, so I think Two movies would be better. As far as different actors to me it would stink. For example it would be like if they ever did part 7-9 of SW and Harrison Ford didn't play Han Solo it just wouldn't work that is why I hope they keep the same actors if they can.

[dog star]

Originally posted by Dedalus
Do you think the actors are as important as the characters they portray? I'm sure you don't, and so, therefore, why should it matter if the actor was changed, if they still portrayed that character well?


Because I just don't think that anyone could possibly match Alan Rickman's portrayal of Severus Snape. He has him nailed. Positively perfectly. He truly brings that character to life exactly as he should be, with no additives and certainly nothing missing. If there were to be a different actor playing that character, they would really have to outdo themselves to win the affection of those who have become so drawn to the mystery that is Severus Snape.

Furthermore, when you're dealing with a long series such as this, you have to have continuity, and continuity of actors is a big part of that. If we were to suddenly have a Ron or Harry or Hagrid or whoever who looked COMPLETELY different, it would destroy that continuity in our minds, whether we consciously meant for it to or not.

[DogStar87]

Well said dog star. I agree with everything you said. Alan Rickman is pretty much a perfect Snape, he does everything right, from his voice to those icy glances he gives. The movies are no subsitute for the books, that's for sure but they do help readers to envision certain scenes more vividly, but JK's use of imagery in her writing is so good that the movies are almost uneccesary. I think the movies but emphasis on the character's personalities, such as the line added about Goyle not being able to read, and Uncle Vernon being shown falling from the Dursely's window.

But say the characters do change and this messes up our mindsets giving us different visuals of different characters. What do you think you would prefer to do, watch the movie with different characters or not watch them at all? Personally, I'd watch the movies with different HP actresses and actresses because maybe we'd find someone who portrays their character BETTER than the previous actor or actress did!

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by dog star
Because I just don't think that anyone could possibly match Alan Rickman's portrayal of Severus Snape. He has him nailed. Positively perfectly. He truly brings that character to life exactly as he should be, with no additives and certainly nothing missing. If there were to be a different actor playing that character, they would really have to outdo themselves to win the affection of those who have become so drawn to the mystery that is Severus Snape.

Furthermore, when you're dealing with a long series such as this, you have to have continuity, and continuity of actors is a big part of that. If we were to suddenly have a Ron or Harry or Hagrid or whoever who looked COMPLETELY different, it would destroy that continuity in our minds, whether we consciously meant for it to or not.
But that's what I'm saying, they wouldn't be completely different, because the character remains the same. And so any actor who was chosen for the part will be able to do the part well, and probably look similar too, since the main characteristics will be the same. All the extras are down to the readers imagination, but we all see Ron, say, with the basic Ron-iness. For instance, the actor who plays Ron looks very little like the Ron in my mind, but he's still a good Ron, whether how I see him or not. As would any others, if chosen well.

But I think that rule doesn't apply with some of the adult actors. Like you said, Alan Rickman is the ideal Snape, Fiona Shaw is the best Mrs. Dursley, Robbie Coltrane the best Hagrid ... kids are a little different because they aren't so well defined (or such good actors), and some of the other adult actors don't have such a unique bond with their characters (as in, it could easily be someone else and still be a good representation), either, because of what I said in the paragraph above :)

[Cat]

I don't care about the three main actors being changed, but I know in my heart that none could be better chosen for certain other roles. But, really, I just don't think about the film when I'm reading the books. I have my own mental image for everybody. So a change wouldn't change my mind.

Personally, I flippin' well hope they don't make seven movies. Books are there to be read, not watched. Three or four is a nice way to get fans into the story, but they can stop there. Let us read, gentlemen.

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by Cat
I don't care about the three main actors being changed, but I know in my heart that none could be better chosen for certain other roles. But, really, I just don't think about the film when I'm reading the books. I have my own mental image for everybody. So a change wouldn't change my mind.

Personally, I flippin' well hope they don't make seven movies. Books are there to be read, not watched. Three or four is a nice way to get fans into the story, but they can stop there. Let us read, gentlemen.
You've just managed to say what I could only ramble about :)
This is precisely how I feel too (especially about them not making all the movies - that'd be like saying that they each need a film to polish them off, which they definitely don't. The books don't need visual aids!)

[dog star]

Originally posted by DogStar87
But say the characters do change and this messes up our mindsets giving us different visuals of different characters. What do you think you would prefer to do, watch the movie with different characters or not watch them at all? Personally, I'd watch the movies with different HP actresses and actresses because maybe we'd find someone who portrays their character BETTER than the previous actor or actress did!

I'm not sure which I would prefer. If the actors change, the characters will change slightly, it's unavoidable because different actors will interpret and portray the same character in slightly different ways. There's no way to get around that, simply because they're different people, so they aren't going to think 100% the same. In the case of some characters, maybe we would gain a better portrayal, but I think with Snape, Hagrid, and McGonagall, there's no way we would.

The kids are another matter...they've been so in the spotlight (moreso than Snape, Hagrid, and McGonagall) OUTSIDE of the movie that, if the actor were to change, it would certainly throw everyone for a loop. No matter how great an actor the new person was, it still wouldn't be the same, to the majority of people.

As I'm sure you all have noticed...haha...I have a certain attachment to Snape, and Rickman's portrayal of him, in turn. If someone else were to start playing Snape in the movies, I'd probably still go to see them, but it would be difficult, because, in my mind, the character would never be the same.

As was said a couple of posts above this....no, the books don't NEED a visual aid, but I can't honestly say that I don't enjoy the movies. The movies bring the books to life. I don't require them, but I get a great deal of enjoyment out of seeing my favorite books come to life on the big screen.

[emma1HP1]

Originally posted by Cat
Personally, I flippin' well hope they don't make seven movies. Books are there to be read, not watched. Three or four is a nice way to get fans into the story, but they can stop there. Let us read, gentlemen.

I do not agree with this. If the movies are a huge success and people like us are this obsessed with them, why not make seven and see how well they do? There is no reason they should not continue. If someone has a problem with making books into movies, than just don't go see the movie!

[Kingdom Ops]

About the whole seven movies idea.. I would like it, if they keep the same actors(at least the trio and Snape). I couldn't imagine anyone else to play Snape. When I read the books, thats who I see. I'd have a hard time seeing someone play Ron when those facial expressions we are given are just too good. Emma.. she just makes it for me. I think she plays Hermione perfectly. If there is a 4th movie, I wonder how the whole kissing thing would go down, she had a hard enough time hugging Daniel...

[Weatherby]

Originally posted by daniel4hp
Yeah, I sensed that. In one thing, in particular, she had a strong attitude. Each actor could say something about the movie, or something like that, and she was ranting on about how unfare the film was to woman because she was just about the only girl on the set and had hardly any lines... that was after the first film. They seem to have given her more lines, at least, for the second. But yeah, I sensed an attitude problem with her in some interviews.

I think a lot of actresses get a bad rep. for caring about the movies or trying to stick up for themselves in a boysclub.
She could easily be trodden over if she doesn't speak up for what she wants.
Mira Sorvino and Samantha Morton get made fun of by the press for the same thing.
Mira Sorvino says she's gotten more relaxed about this sort of thing. Give Watson time to adjust and she'll find her way of making things work without "a bad attitude".
Christina Ricci went through this same thing too.

I know I couldn't hang out with a lot of boys, be teased and do a ton of press junkets at her age and keep a great attitude all day.

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by emma1HP1
I do not agree with this. If the movies are a huge success and people like us are this obsessed with them, why not make seven and see how well they do? There is no reason they should not continue. If someone has a problem with making books into movies, than just don't go see the movie!
When people only show the movie as a face for the books, then we can't avoid it.

Merchandise/constant references to the movie without aid of the books/people running away with the silly idea that the books need the movies ... all these things are constantly in the air, and it's hard to avoid whether you watch the movies or not. Critically (though I personally couldn't care less for critics) Harry Potter might lose acclaim if the movies "get boring" (I'm afraid some of the more daft people and critics might get sick of at least 8 movies of the same characters - though it can work wonderfully for books, it doesn't work in the same way on screen) and that might lose a lot of acclaim for the books, too. Considering that the books could become classics I don't like the idea of people seeing them as yesterdays fad, all through fault of the movies.

[emma1HP1]

i see where you are coming from--that some people might become bored with the movies but the cool thing about the movies is this----each movie it is a different story. a new plot line and all new situations. yes, u have the same characters but isn't it exciting to see the youg'ns grow up and watch them mature in looks and acting? i think that is what keeps many movie goers coming back for more.

[Jedi Potter]

I think WB will keep making them regardless of what anybody thinks. Sure the critics might get sick of them (the way they have gotten sick of Star Wars but that hasn't hurt its popularity), I really would like to see them make all 7 with the same actors but I have no idea if that will happen or not.

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by emma1HP1
i see where you are coming from--that some people might become bored with the movies but the cool thing about the movies is this----each movie it is a different story. a new plot line and all new situations. yes, u have the same characters but isn't it exciting to see the youg'ns grow up and watch them mature in looks and acting? i think that is what keeps many movie goers coming back for more.
You misunderstand my objection. I would hate to see the future of the books as classic pieces of literature go up in flames all down to critics and the public seeing the Harry Potter books and thinking it as just a hype. With 8 or more movies, many many people will think they've just kept going on a good idea to sell out. We know that they always wanted to make the same number of books - but they don't.

And I'll be ****ed if I let a few years of the movies ruin the future in 100 years for the books. I don't think people will take them seriously (if they're not fans now) if every single movie was made.

I feel that the books will be (or would have been) honoured, 40-50 years on, which the movies wouldn't. But would it be the same if people saw the books and only thought of the movies?

But that's just my opinion. I really didn't like the films anyway, so perhaps I'm biased. But I also believe that the books more than support themselves. I think that the movies lost a lot for the books because of childish merchandise and stupid hypes, but then it gained a lot of new fans of the books too. So I suppose everything has at least 2 dimensions :)

[DocHollidaywe]

Yes, I believe that they have a contract

[theodyssey42]

The books in this case are actually MORE popular than the films, which is the difference. More people are excited about OotP than the film of PoA.

The films won't spoil the reputation of the books and instead will attract more people.

I think that all of the actors should remain the same, if possible, but the films should go on anyway.

Plus CoS is one of the highest grossing films of all time, I don't think that ratings are going to be a problem unless some people get very, very bored of waiting for films, but normally a long gap means higher ratings.

And all you 'the kids are getting too old' complainers. They are supposed to age...

[Pucko]

i really don't think everyone will want to do movies of all 7 books adn it wouldn't be the same now would it?
the books are so long that they would ahve to do two movies for each books..maybe three if the books keep growing...
so there is no way there will be 7 movies for the 7 books ;)

[mystically_mad]

I heard recently that Dan Radcliffe has officially quit the role of Harry and now they are wondering if they should keep on Emma Watcon and Rupert Grint. That sounds like they are going to do all the books.

[Sebastian06]

Originally posted by mystically_mad (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=378025#post378025))
I heard recently that Dan Radcliffe has officially quit the role of Harry and now they are wondering if they should keep on Emma Watcon and Rupert Grint. That sounds like they are going to do all the books.


And I guess you heard that this was because his schoolwork was suffering? :rolleyes: That's just a rumor. Warner Bros. has stated that Daniel is not quitting, and Dan himself has said that there is a 90% chance that he will be in the 4th movie.

[HPviolinist85]

I think they might stop after the fourth book. I think that they have to make that one extra long because who would see a movie in two parts. That's stupid. It is also to detailed to cut stuff out. You will miss things. I believe that book four will be their downfall and they won't do the movies after this.

[mystically_mad]

Originally posted by Sebastian06 (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=379200#post379200))
And I guess you heard that this was because his schoolwork was suffering? :rolleyes: That's just a rumor. Warner Bros. has stated that Daniel is not quitting, and Dan himself has said that there is a 90% chance that he will be in the 4th movie.

Actually I heard it was because he got toomuch attention. I am glad he hasnt quit, it just wouldnt seem right if he wasnt Harry.

[DWeasley]

Well, I would LOVE to have 7 movies, and I think it could work if JK gets those last two written in a decent amount of time. Don't worry, I certainly wouldn't want to rush her. Honestly, as long a she doesn't take 20 years writing them, it should be okay for the actors to play them. I mean, its not unheard of for actors over the age of twenty to play 18 year olds. The trio being a little older than their character would not be a disaster, and we probably would really notice too much. Also, I think that it is probably going to take longer than a year to film GOF/Ootp if they decide too, so that gives her more time to finish the last two books.

Second, I love the fact that the actors are British. It just feels right to have them play the parts. It's so much more real, and I hope it stays that way. Hope that made sense.

[mystically_mad]

Yes it made sense. I feel the same way.

[dumbleedore]

The actors are already older than there charecters anyway (or in Emma's case younger).

And it won't be as bad as TV, with 30 yr olds playing 18 yr olds.

[JustRelax!]

I always thought they should perhaps stop after book 4 - especially if book 4 is in two parts, and Order of Phoenix will probably have to be even longer, and also split up into 2 parts i suppose - it might be too much. It's a bit of a dilemma though to stop halfway through the series. It will be interesting to see how the third film comes out with a different director - i may change my mind if it turns out to be the best yet.

Oh and they definately shouldn't change actors. Even though i HATE Daniel Radcliffe as Harry it would be weird changing them at this point.

[Jedi Potter]

Daniel's mother came out and said that article was wrong actually. I think they will do GOF after that who knows but if they are able to do OOTP I bet they will do all 7. Right now only Rupert is older than his character (by 6 months) the others are right age, and if they keep doing the movies about one a year they won't really have a problem. Also according to a Reuteurs article they are playing on doing GOF for 2005 and OOTP about 18 months after GOF.

[mystically_mad]

Yes, it doesnt really matter if the actors are a few years older than their characters and I would definitely go and see the GoF even if it was 6 hours long.

[ana_banana]

The actors have CONTRACTS, first of all. There is a lot of money going on with this movie to make just 3. The story line says it will be 7.
They are already making us wait even more, by making us wait until next year, when we thought it would come out in a few months, (the PoA movie i mean). Of course they will do the 7.

[dobby_rocks]

as far as i know currentely WB has plans to make 7 movies, they have already set a relalse for at least 3

Potter 3: as we all know June of 2004
Potter 4: Nov 05
Potter 5: spring of 2007

i dont think 6 and 7 have been decide yet as it depends on when JK gets the books out , but i say
Potter 6 - 2008 or 2009
potter 7- 2010 or 2011

[dobby_rocks]

Originally posted by Dedalus (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?postid=117465#post117465))
There may be more than 7 - they're definitely splitting the Goblet of Fire into 2 films, and the next 3 might be as big!

I wouldn't care if they got new child actors. It's not the actors we're seeing - it's the characters. And so providing they have all the bits they should have, and act well then they'll always be a good interpretation of that character. None of the characters look much like the actors, in my mind, anyway and so it won't effect the way I see it, since it doesn't anyway.

One person's interpretation of a character is as good as any others. So a good choice of actor is as good as any other.

where have you read for ceartin that movie 4 will be a 2 parter.

I guess it just person opinion i acuatlly saw movie one before i even read any of the books, i cant piture anyone else as harry, ron, and herimone even Neville. They have become the charachters in away. if you know what i mean :grumble:

[dobby_rocks]

Originally posted by martinnyg (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?postid=117630#post117630))
If they change the child actors i won't be mad, i don't really like any of their performances. Dan is rather stiff as Harry, Rupert is soooo overplaying, he would be great in roles like Jim Carreys imo. Emmas performance i kind of like, but it wouldn't kill me to live without it.

And if they split GoF into 2 and release 'em a month a part, i think it'll still be counted as one movie.


i dought it would be a month apart most likely 6mo to 9mo

[dobby_rocks]

Originally posted by Demona Snape (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?postid=119165#post119165))
I personally like the cast.

As far as the "aging comment" goes, to me it only makes sense that the actors grow up along with the characters of the group. You have 21 year olds playing teenagers all the time I don't see why it would be wrong for this particular cast to continue playing the parts of Hogwarts students.





That is so right i mean look at James Van Beeker when he took on the role of Dawson, the charchter at the time was 15 and James was like 22

[dobby_rocks]

Originally posted by Talon (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?postid=119248#post119248))
It has always been my understanding that Harry Potter was supposed to be seven books long, since each book would encompass one of Harry's 7 years in Hogwarts.... who is to say she may or may not write more after that (which may or may not be in the HP universe)... I but I think that it is supposed to end with book seven.

~Talon


There will be 7 JK has even already said she has already written the last chapter of book 7. so there will defeinetly be 7 as far as stuff afterwards JK has said we should wait to see if harry is still alive after book 7,

[Muggle]

I don't think that they will make 7 movies. We might see a 4th one, but i think that will be about it.

[hedwigs_keeper]

Personally I think it was a bit silly of them to start making these films if they aren't going to do it for the whole series. I'm sure they were well aware that there would be 7 books in the series when it was done, and if they didn't want to make more than say, 3 movies, they should have taken that into consideration. Why start something you can't finish? I think the main motivation to get the first film out was to get money-hungry Hollywood in on Harry Potter phase. All they were after was money, but I'm hoping they'll actually put some thought into these next movies and make them worth while, instead of just trying to keep up or quit.

[Heir_of_Ravenclaw]

No, I'm sure they will make films for all the installments of the Harry Potter book! And "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" will be made into two films, due to its lasting! (The ones who will watch it may fall asleep!)

[Cammie]

No matter how long it takes, I'm sure all 7 books will be made into movies (for WB, it's all about the $$, after all). I don't know about splitting books into two movies, but the film makers are going to face problems either way. I just hope the movies continue to be good. And I hope that the same actors are in all the movies, assuming that this remains a possibility. I really like Daniel, Rupert, and Emma in their roles. Of course, I saw the movies before reading any of the books, so maybe my perspective is a little different. I'm not too worried about the whole aging thing; I could be well into my thirties before all the books and movies come out, so what the heck? Oh and to those who haven't seen it, Mugglenet has a news item from Newsweek about the PoA film, and it has a bit of info about future HP movies.

[AmbushRedCM21]

Look at this:

Release Dates:
1997: SS book
1998: CoS book
1999: PoA book
2000: GoF book
2001: SS movie
2002: CoS movie
2003: OotP book

Rumored Release Dates:
2004: PoA movie
2005: GoF movie
2007: OotP movie

Does anybody see that either a movie or a book is being released each year...never two in one year?

So that means that Book 6 should fit in for 2006 and Book 7 should come out in 2008 or 2009 depending whether they make the 6th movie first. Does anybody else agree with this or has anybody else noticed this already?

[mystically_mad]

The sixth book is coming out in 2005 isnt it?

[edam]

Ambush: It is obviously a conspiration.

seriously. its kinda interesting. Obiously a marketing trick

[WatsonFan11]

It is pretty likely that there will be 7 movies, and it will even be likely that they will have new actors for future movies. If J.K.R. makes more books (most unlikely) then there will probably be more movies too.

[Mega]

I think PoA will make more then CoS because HP fans will still be buzzing from OotP. PS and CoS where not release near book release dates. PoA will come out a few months after OotP so people will wanna see it because it's the closet thing to book six.

[Gilderoy Lockhart]

I read in quite a few places that GoF may be two films. (I myself would prefer a very long movie with an intermission, but whatever works). If this is so, then OotP will probably be two films, and who knows for the rest of the other movies. So I bet we'll have more than 7.

On the basis of all 7 books being made into movies, I really think they will be. The make much lesser books into films, and the amount of money these books are making coupled with the fact that the films make tons shoudl be enough to make a good 7 plus film series.

[TheBoss]

ofcourse they are going to make 7 movies... how many copies of book5 were sold the same day it came out? yeah.. thats what i thought.. its a cash cow for WB.. millions of people read the book.. millions will watch..

"money money money? money money! but money money, if money money? suuuuuure money money money!" - CEO of WB (okay he didnt actually say it, but im sure thats what he thinks all day:))

[mystically_mad]

Apparently WB have said that they are making GoF into a 2 1/2 hour movie like the rest.

[Gilderoy Lockhart]

There have been all sorts of different reports. Another one said they were reconsidering a 4 hour movie. I'm not really sure what is going on....

[Dragonfly the 2nd]

personally I hope that they make Gof & Ootp into 4 or 5 hour movies. I hope they make seven movies. I hope the movies get much better. It's really frustrating having to watch these movies being made from the sidelines. I have no say in the movies, that annoys me, because I feel I could do a much better job than they are doing. I hope they make all seven tho. I'm pretty much existing right now to see OotP, to see how they're going to bring that to the screen...that's why I'm watching the other movies. I'm waiting...waiting...

And I forgot to mention how I would feel if the characters suddenly changed. I'd feel empty, lost, angry. It would just be such a sudden transition. I don't mind how Daniel's hair sticks up in PoA, I like the change. I'm glad they're making changes, it gives a sense that the world is aging and growing. If I were in charge PoA's Hogwarts would still be recognizable, but very much expanded. Hogwarts would just get bigger and bigger throughout the series. Harry would change as well. In the first movie he was that little kid, he grew in the second movie, in the third movie his hair is wilder, and for GoF, OotP and movies six and seven there would be small changes to him in each one. The world would just keep evolving. It'd be recognizable, but very different. I've had time to begin to love what they already have in the movies. The actors, the settings, everything. I liked how it was the same. If they changed the actors it wouldn't be right anymore. I've built my vision of the HP world around the movies (my original vision really sucked) and if the movies suddenly changeds I would be suddenly forced to adapt. I've spent ages just studying the movies, studying the characters, locations, styles, music (the music rules by the way)...everything, and if they all turned way different I would hate it because I love what he movies are. I just want them to add to that, not change it completely. You know, he outside of the Leaky Cauldron looks completely different in PoA than in SS/PS. It's not the same, you can tell. That annoys me.

[slickshoes]

Do you think that WB will make a movie for each book?


The way I see it is they started so they should finish it. I mean this isn't any series we're talking about. I don't know if anyone has brought this up or not but I heard that if they continue doing the movies, at one point they'll to hire new actors because the others are getting too old. I hope they don't. Harry Potter would be the same without the actors we love so much.

[Jedi Potter]

The way I see it is they started so they should finish it. I mean this isn't any series we're talking about. I don't know if anyone has brought this up or not but I heard that if they continue doing the movies, at one point they'll to hire new actors because the others are getting too old. I hope they don't. Harry Potter would be the same without the actors we love so much.


I agree with you I don't see the problem here, sure they might be a couple of years older (like 18 playing 16) but to me that is not a problem. From 15-21 there aren't really any noticable differences except maybe hight (in cases of a late growth spurt) so I don't have a problem with them playing the same character even if they are a couple of years older. Personally I think a lot of this is contract stuff. WB is using this excuse in case they can't resign them. I have to admit though if it takes too long for the next book to come out age could be an issue for 6 and 7. Book 6 would need to come out by 2005 for it not to be an issue.

[rotsiepots]

I think it's almost definite that WB are going to make seven Potter films. The first two have proven to be absolute goldmines for the company and the following sequels will, no doubt, be the same.

I don't think they care so much about translating the book to screen. It's all about the bottom line. ;)

[daniel4hp]

Also, they currently have plans up through Order of the Phoenix, so it seems very likely that they will finish out the series. They could have stopped after PoA, possibly after GoF, but now that they appear to have plans for OotP, it seems very likely that they plan to finish out the series.

[Zachary1993]

I hope that they make a book for every movie but if J K Rowling keeps making the books longer then the seventh movie will be over five hours long.

[daniel4hp]

...if J K Rowling keeps making the books longer then the seventh movie will be over five hours long.
If the movies lengths were proportional to the length of the books, we'd have (based on the length of the first movie):

- The Philosopher's Stone - 300 pages, US ed. - 2:50 hours
- The Chamber of Secrets - 350 pages, US ed. - 3:20 hours
- The Prisoner of Azkaban - 430 pages, US ed. - 4:00 hours
- The Goblet of Fire - 730 pages, US ed. - 6:50 hours
- The Order of the Phoenix - 870 pages,* US ed. - 8:15+ hours

* Note that the number of words per page is greater in Order of the Phoenix, so if formatted the same as the previous books, it would be even longer.

Considering that the second movie, rather than being 3:20 hours long, is only 2:40 (shorter than the first one), and we know that Prisoner of Azkaban is going to be a single movie of a normal length, as is Goblet of Fire, it is clear that the plan is to make each book into a single movie of 2:30 to 3:00 hours, regardless of the length of the source material.

It is always possible to further condense a book, largely by cutting out subplots, simplifying the main plot, and removing large chunks of action. When you cut a book down to its bare bones, then add whatever "extras" you have room for afterwards, it is almost always possible to fit it into a single average-length movie.

[davickm1]

i heard its already been confirmed that their is going to be 7 books and 7 movies but a possibility for an 8th book but it hasnt been confirmed.

[daniel4hp]

Everything about an eigth book is totally rumour -- JKR has said repeatedly that she has no plans to go beyond seven books.

[davickm1]

i didnt think it was true but i saw it on a news site about a month ago.

[DrummerboyDT]

I think that JK and Steve Kloves, if he's still going to work as the screenwriter, will be able to condense the movies down. There will just be less down time in the movie version and it might make the movies really exciting. Realistically, people age, and the three main cast members may feel that they need to try other roles. Dan, Emma, and Rupert have chemistry on and off the set. Replacing one of them would seem awkward. I also think that Alan Rickman should stay as Snape. It might turn into a James Bond type deal where multiple actors play the roles. I hope it doesn't come to that.

[HogwartzGrl4]

I`m pretty sure that they will make seven movies.I mean they can`t just stop after the fourth or third movie.They`d have to keep going don`t you think? It would be really weird if they didn't.Another reason is they money.I`m pretty sure they get lots of money from the movies.Considering many people like Harry Potter.Why would they give it all up?I wish J.K. Rowling would make a book about the Marauders in their time and maybe even about Lily and James.It would be cool.Even though the movies will get longer it won`t really matter to me.I just like watching HP.

[canteurervan]

I don't know if there will be 7 movies, but I definitely like to watch them...if that makes sense.

***van.

-----------
My Website (http://cs.wisc.edu/~hiep)
-----------
http://cs.wisc.edu/~hiep/images/hermy.jpg

[Dedalus]

One thing that I do worry about, if there were a film for every book, is that people might become even more insistant that the films are a supplement to the books, like a set of Harry Potter handbooks, rather than just an interesting artistic tribute to them. I fear that people will persist even more strongly to believe that you can't have the books without the films, which is slightly worrying.

But maybe I'm worrying unecessarily. I just know that a lot of people now act like the films are a whole part of it and you can't visualise the books without the film beside it, like the film is a part of the book. Or like they walk hand in hand, rather than the films bowing to the books feet. With a film for every book, will many people feel like they don't need an imagination, or that there's no such thing as another interpretation?

[canteurervan]

If you asked me couple of months ago, I would say that there should be 7 movies. I hate not to have movies...

Fortunately, over time as I keep reading the books, I fell in love with it. If there are movies, I'd definitely watch them. But even if without movies, I wouldn't care less, since there are books...

***van.

[canteurervan]

Films are another way to visualize the images created out of the book, as undoubtedly everyone should agree. I alwasy preferred movies before since it's easier to understand than books.

But, once you read the books, and savour every description of the details surrounding the character, the explaination of the scenes, and the gaps leaving us to do the guessing and inferences, you'll find the books a lot more enjoyable than watching a movie. You are only satisfied for a short time watching movies, but reading books will give you satisfaction beyond time.

***van.

[LumosSoleil]

That's was beautifully explained canteurervan. :tu: I read the books before I saw the first movie and I had no problem visualizing these things on my own. When I saw the movie, I just thought that this is exactly how I imagined everything. But, that's the problem. For me, after watching the first movie, I can't picture the characters the way I did before I saw the movie. I could only picture the characters as the ones portrayed onscreen now. But I guess that's ok. If they change the characters, my head may go haywire. Hehe, I just can't picture anyone else playing these characters I have seen onscreen. And the acting isn't bad; the kids are growing to be better actors. They can't get worse, they can only get better. I just read somewhere last week that Cuaron made Daniel do a dementor-reaction scene 40 times! I can imagine how many other takes they had to redo repeatedly. This can only be an improvement for the film as well as the characters.

And yes, I feel WB is doing all 7 book adaptions for money, and nothing but money. At least the makers of the film are the ones with the vision and passion. They're the ones who pour their talents and knowledge into the making of these movies. If they don't love the books, why would they work on the films. Also, of course they get huge benefits like good salaries, but at least they're getting paid to do what they love and admire. Especially if JK has a lot of say of what is allowed in the movies, I doubt the movies would run dry. There's a lot of speculation whether the third film is going to be any good. But, look how excited people get when they see a new official photo released from the PoA film. I would like it if Cuaron stayed on board for the 4th film, but he seems worn down from filming and editing. I reallly really hope he does the fifth movie; he just understands teenagers alot and this is a really good book to adapt. Well, if all goes well, there will be 7 movies.

[Mrs Padfoot]

I just don't think that OOTP could be made into a film. The book is almost as long as LOTR - and it needed about ten hours film time to do that justice, and they still missed out a lot.

In OOTP I can't imagine what they would leave out, theres so many little things that lead up to the endind, or to events in future books. It's an amazing book, but I think that it should be left at that.

[daniel4hp]

I don't see any reason why OotP can't be cut down enough to make it into one film. I don't think it should be compared to LotR, because they are very different, and although Peter Jackson used 9 hours to make LotR into a film, that doesn't mean you'd need a proportionally large amount of time for OotP. Note that there are many books larger than OotP that have been made into single films (for example, Les Miserables).

Obviously stuff would have to be cut. You would even have to go beyond that. You would have to identify the main plot(s), decide on one or two subplots that you wanted to include, and basically restructure the movie around those plots. The result is that anything relating to certain subplots would be cut, events might be "out of order" and the details might be different. For example, if you cut a certain subplot out, you might have to come up with a new way of explaining how something happened.

So in other words, it would be a very tight movie, centered entirely around the important events, and it would vary from the source material on a lot of minor points. However, I do think you could adapt it without changing the main plot or ruining the book. If done right, it would maintain the plot and spirit of the book, even if smaller plot elements were gone or changed. But there's no reason why it can't be done. It wouldn't be easy, but it is certainly possible.

[SilverStar]

IMHO: Of course, there will be a movie for each book!! Well, there might be two for some (OoTP) but there will be at least one for each book. I don't see why there would be movies for 1-5 and then they just stop! That would be uber stupid!!!!!! There will be movies for all the books as long as I am around to direct them!!!! (coughsigcough) mwahahaha!!!!!

And we know some devoted HP fans will be going to see them, right?

[davickm1]

I do like the movies but once a saw the first movie everything i pictured in the books i now see as what was in the movie. I mean we saw hogwarts and all the other things and now when i read them i kind of see them as the movie made them. I pictures them a little diff at first but after the movie i cant remember how i use to see everything. The movies are fun to watch but they cant beat the books.

As for making all 7 movies i think they will. I mean they got ythe director for movie 4 and 5( Mike Newell) so they have to go that far and i dont think they would stop after 5 movies. They have to make the 6 and 7 movie.

[daniel4hp]

I mean they got ythe director for movie 4 and 5( Mike Newell)
Mike Newell isn't signed on for Order of the Phoenix, and there is nothing to suggest that he will direct this film. However, Kloves has written or is writing the script for Order of the Phoenix, so its pretty certain this film will be made.

[Mad Macca]

I like to think that there will be 7 movies for the 7 books, but once the final cut is made, I sometimes think that for the larger books, the movies won't be like them much at all. Too much will have to be changed and left out to make the movie short enough for a suitable children's length movie. Kids just can't sit around for over 3 hours.
I think that so long as there's a dollar to be made, the movies will keep coming. What worries me is that the makers are more interested in the money than the actual product, and that they would rather make the movie, and have it of poor quality and get heaps of money for it, than have no movie. I don't know whether I'd prefer no movie over something of poor quality, but that's just what I was thinking.
Also, it'd be terrible if JKR actually wrote the book, thinking from the films persepective of writing, if that makes sense...Like writing the book so that it can be made into a film without any changes... meh, im rambling:D

[Mrs Padfoot]

I don't see any reason why OotP can't be cut down enough to make it into one film. Obviously stuff would have to be cut. You would even have to go beyond that. You would have to identify the main plot(s), decide on one or two subplots that you wanted to include, and basically restructure the movie around those plots.

You are right. But I just don't think that it would do the book justice if this was done. So many little details about each character would be lost.

But I'm probably just being silly because I love it so much, and couldn't imagine any bits that I would want to be cut. Still, I think just because something is an amazing book, doesn't nessessarily make it into a good film. So (I know I'm going to upset a lot of people here) maybe they should have left them as books, that all.

(Please don't get worked up about it, this is just my opinion)

[davickm1]

I think that if they make all the movies, they will have to leave a lot of things out which might make some epoeple angry and not want to watch the movies any more. The movies are great but nothing to the books. If the movies arent good then we still have the books. I like the movies but waht i dont like is once i see them, i see everything in the books like the movies. In the beggining i thought everything looked diff but once i saw the movies i see it that way. I do want to see the movies but if they dont make them all i want be too dissapointed.

[Lord_Chatterley]

The movies will be better and more mature as harry grows...I think that's why they choose a childish director for the first two movies,a more mature for the third,and a director who never made this kind of movies before.The sistem will just improve.

[Godrics_Heiress]

I could care less if some moments in the books are cut, as long as the plot of that book is intact and that readers (in turn moviegoers) can still relate to the story. Anyway, I think there will be seven movies. The thing that makes me wonder is considering it might take another four to five years for JKR to release the seventh one is, will we see the same actors who have been protraying the roles in the first four films do the seventh movie? I really doubt it and I wonder whether there is going to be a backlash against having new actors to play the roles, like having a new Harry, Ron, Hermione, etc. I'd personally feel ambivalent whether I should welcome the change or not. Well, I guess we can only judge until those movies are out. But I'm hoping that the actors will play the role 'til the end of the series.

[daniel4hp]

The acting thing has been discussed many times before, but I'll throw in my opinion again. I don't see any reason why the current actors couldn't stay on. GoF is scheduled for Nov./Dec. 2005, OotP for Summer 2007, and we can assume, based on this, that #6 would come out Nov./Dec. 2008, and #7 Summer 2010. Filming would probably conclude in 2009. That would put the actors around 19-20 years old, depending on exactly how the scheduling went, possibly 21.

This is not to old to play a 17 year old; it is not uncommon for actors in their early 20's to portray characters in their late teens. As I see it, age isn't the question. The question is whether or not the current actors would want to star in all 7 films, and this is really hard to know. It is quite likely that after #4 or #5 they would get bored with the franchise and want to move on, but this isn't neccessarilly the case.

For me, I don't really care whether or not they choose to stay on. New actors wouldn't bother me at all. The current actors aren't brilliant, and although they look the parts, I'm sure there are plenty of other child stars out there who would fit the part just as well and, if anything, be able to act better. Continuity isn't an issue for me, because I take each film independantly, so if Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson want to leave, that's fine with me.

[hawk1245]

For me, I don't really care whether or not they choose to stay on. New actors wouldn't bother me at all. The current actors aren't brilliant, and although they look the parts, I'm sure there are plenty of other child stars out there who would fit the part just as well and, if anything, be able to act better. Continuity isn't an issue for me, because I take each film independantly, so if Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson want to leave, that's fine with me.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but you HAVE to admit that it would be cool to see Harry go from being Eleven to Seventeen! I mean, it is cool already to see them grow up, imagine taking about three days in the summer holidays and have a Hp party, and watch all seven movies, the WHOLE saga of HP! And see the characters grow up before your eyes. Now this COULD still be done with new actors, but it wouldn't be quite the same as KNOWING that the SAME kids have just come of age. Wouldn't you agree?

[daniel4hp]

Seeing them grow up would be mildly interesting, but its not all that important to me. As I've said before, I tend to see the HP series as adaptations of individual books, not as a single series, so as interesting as it would be to see the same actors grow up, I don't really care whether they stay on or not. Just my opinion.

[RangerKing]

We can assume that the Order of the Phoenix can be released in 2006. That's if the Half Blood Prince is released by the end of 2004 and the last one in 2005. But regardless I think they can make for a 2006 release for the Order of the Phoenix.

[DarkThunder]

I dont see why actors should change. I mean, theres adults playing teenagers in shows and movies all the time!

PoA was the most sucessful yet, so theres a good chance they'll adapt a film for each book.

[Sirk Rolyat]

true and they can make adults look younger just like they make kids look older. Take for example: If any of you watch Days of Our Lives, Bell she looks older in that but she is also in a disney channel movie the just came out and she looks younger. Makeup does alot.

[starxgazer]

I don't see that happening. I believe they already said there only doing five of the seven books. But I'm not too sure if I am correct on that. Also the time frame, if they want it to be right, they need to do the movies each a year apart. And I don't see that happening.

[SiriusBlack22]

They can't stop, the HP movies make too much money... they made Gigli, they can finish the HP series! I've seen HP and the POA 3 times and I'm gonna see it again... they just can't stop... :upset:

[rmjoots]

You know this has happened before. From 1937 - 1946, there was a popular movie series featuring "The Hardy Family" and Mickey Rooney played the teenage son Andy Hardy all that time. And he was 16 in 1937.. he was still doing the films at age 26! And audiences still watched these films all that time.

I see the same thing plausible with 7 Harry Potter movies that are proposed. It's not often in history that an audience watches the actors grow up in the same characters, and estimating the "kids" will be in their early 20's at the 7th movie, at least it won't be any older than 22. If critics looked back on Hollywood history, they wouldn't see the need to make a big deal about actors aging during a movie series.

[rockthevote]

We can assume that the Order of the Phoenix can be released in 2006. That's if the Half Blood Prince is released by the end of 2004 and the last one in 2005. But regardless I think they can make for a 2006 release for the Order of the Phoenix.

I think the biggest mistake was made when The Powers That Be (TPTB) decided to start cashing in on the franchise before all seven books were written. Warner Bros. could have contracted the actors to all seven movies, and could have released them each year instead of having 15-18 month breaks between each film. They also wouldn't have had to worry about the kids "outgrowing their parts", but that's not how it all went down.

Now, we have 5 books and 3 movies completed with another on the way. The author is probably now feeling some serious pressure to finish the books in time. I do not doubt that all seven movies will be made, but things happen in life and people will die, or not want to do the whole series, therefore don't be surprised by cast changes.

[RangerKing]

I think JK has finished all the books and she is just editing and revising them. And we really don't know the terms of the contracts. Some say that the actors sign a new contract for every movie. But some also say that it's only for 1-4. Who knows. We also don't even know the details of JKs and Warner Bross joint contract.

[Hermywormy]

I can't really imagine any of the chacters changing. The only one I think would suck totally would be Tom (even though, please don't hate me, he's kinda ugly!) leaving. He's the best child actor. The best in the trio, they each have they're strong points. I don't really like any of the movies that much, so I really wouldn't care. But whenever the GoF comes out, I'll see it.

[Krystallia]

Cuaron said that he thinks they'll be able to make the stretch, and they are in the process of rebuilding the sets so they'll be more fit to Dan, Emma, and Rupert. (to make them look a little smaller) Why would they do that if they didn't intend to keep them? They are filming GOF, they'll probably do an overlap for OOP (like for POA, GOF) and well, oop and hbp...hbp and ??? That will be only a few more years for them to hang in for!
(But if they need a new Hermione in a year or two, which they might, I might be her O_o Seriously.)