http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/harrypotterandthedeathlyhallows/

bout to be sweet

I don't really get into the Harry Potter thing, but is this the book that is supposed to be divided into 2 movies?

yea

I think the final battle will be epic. im pissed about it being divided up lol

It either needed to be divided or about 5 to 6 hours long.

Tiny285Joey;405618 wrote:I think the final battle will be epic. im pissed about it being divided up lol

i believe pretty much the whole second movie will be the final battle

It will likely make up 2/3 of the second movie. I am guessing the first part will be in regards to revealing some truths about Dumbledore's background which will all be introduced in the first movie.

Im so fucking pumped for these movies. Sure it kinda sucks that its in two parts but at least Im hoping these movies wont really miss any of the important stuff like the others. But as long as the final battle is sweet I probably won't care.

I have never read the books but have enjoyed the last 3 movies and am looking forward to these. Sounds like they had to split up the book into two movies or they would have left out a ton of stuff and people probably would have flipped out.

^^

that...and they'll make twice as much money

It really does need to be split into two. Or else they'll end up having to cut out half of the book and there wasn't a whole lot of fluff in the last one.

Nice movie....I watched the movie in Theatre...It's very nice,The Background Music,The Screnply all are nice,I watched the Trailer Before watching the Movie,In here http://www.mtjunkie.org/harry-potter-and-the-half-blood-prince-2009-07-06/

At least we don't have to wait a year between movies. Part I comes out around Thanksgiving and Part II in the summer.

I think they did a good job with the movies so far. About as best as you can do for this type of story. But I think anyone who's a fan of the books can agree with me that the movies don't do the books justice at all. I remember back in 4th grade when the first book came out. It was the first book I can remember really being "absorbed in," you know, that sensation when you're reading and you forget what's going on around you, you let your imagination go, and you're really in the story. Something a movie can never do. These books were THE thing to read going up through grade school as each book was released. I remember how some teachers raved about them because kids who didn't have interest in reading books, for some reason, read these. They were the only book to do that as I remember. I can't believe the final movie is already coming out, hard to believe it will be 14 years since the first book by the time this movie comes out.

I think Peter Jackson has done the best job of turning an epic book series into film, but these films aren't too bad themselves. In my opinion, all of them should have been at least two parts. There's just so much detail and plot left out.

I have some catching up to do. Don't think I've seen the 5th or 6th.

i've only seen 1 harry potter movie and thought it was really good.

i'm tempted to read all the books. then catch the movies via netflix, all in time to see this bad boy in december. I think this will be my first 3-d movie.

namod65;438790 wrote:I think they did a good job with the movies so far. About as best as you can do for this type of story. But I think anyone who's a fan of the books can agree with me that the movies don't do the books justice at all. I remember back in 4th grade when the first book came out. It was the first book I can remember really being "absorbed in," you know, that sensation when you're reading and you forget what's going on around you, you let your imagination go, and you're really in the story. Something a movie can never do. These books were THE thing to read going up through grade school as each book was released. I remember how some teachers raved about them because kids who didn't have interest in reading books, for some reason, read these. They were the only book to do that as I remember. I can't believe the final movie is already coming out, hard to believe it will be 14 years since the first book by the time this movie comes out.

I think Peter Jackson has done the best job of turning an epic book series into film, but these films aren't too bad themselves. In my opinion, all of them should have been at least two parts. There's just so much detail and plot left out.

I completely agree with you man although I think the first 3 were ok with only being 1 movie but books 4-7 should definetely had two parts to the movie. I just wish they wouldn't add stuff to the movies that wasn't in the books either(aka the Weasley's house burning down in the 6th movie). Also I think what has really made the movies work is the actors/actresses they have choosen to play the characters.

trackandccrunner;439103 wrote:I completely agree with you man although I think the first 3 were ok with only being 1 movie but books 4-7 should definetely had two parts to the movie. I just wish they wouldn't add stuff to the movies that wasn't in the books either(aka the Weasley's house burning down in the 6th movie). Also I think what has really made the movies work is the actors/actresses they have choosen to play the characters.

Yeah there were a few things I didn't like in the sixth movie like their house burning down. I'm pretty sure Dumbledore knew about the horcruxes before he saw the real Slughorn memory. I also didn't like how they changed the final climax scene. In the book I think it takes place on the ground outside the front door, and Dumbledore has to put a restraining spell on Harry so he doesn't interfere with his and Snape's plan. In the movie it takes place up in the tower and he just tells Harry to hide and not to come out. Bullshit; anyone who knows Harry's character would know that there's no way he doesn't try to stop Snape or the others right there at that time.

Like you said most of the characters are great and pretty accurate to how the are in the book. I think they made Bellatrix a little too crazy and not as cynical as I pictured her in the books. I also don't really like how Snape is pictured either. I didn't ever picture him as a guy that always talked in a low, slooooow, monotonous tone. It's not really the casting people's fault, because when they casted Ginny for the first movie they hadn't known yet that she would become the love interest of Harry later on. I bet if they could go back now they might have casted a different actress for the part.

Physcially speaking, the imagge of Severus Snape in the book is much more hideous than the apeparance of Alan Rickman. From the descrption in the book, I pictured a tall, skinny man with pale skin and greasy hair with frightening facial features.

That being said, I think Rickman pulls off the character very well. Severus is without a doubt the most complicated chartacter in the series. In one hand he is cold, calculating, sarcastic, and bitter. On the other hand, he might be the most pathetic characters in the story. At various points in the series you either despise him, feel sorry for him or admire him. He is my favorite Potter character by the way.

I agree with Danny's post and you make some awesome points namod I agree with them especially about what happened at the end of the HBP movie. Also out of all my friends who are huge HP fans I was the only one who did not like Jim Broadbent as Slughorn... I mean sure he kinda fit how I pictured him but I still thought of him as a little shorter and fatter but my biggest complaint was they just made him seem so stupid in the movie and I also hated Broadbent's voice haha.

I also thought they didn't show a very good job of showing how much of a man crush Slughorn had on Harry.

Little Danny;439390 wrote:Physcially speaking, the imagge of Severus Snape in the book is much more hideous than the apeparance of Alan Rickman. From the descrption in the book, I pictured a tall, skinny man with pale skin and greasy hair with frightening facial features.

That being said, I think Rickman pulls off the character very well. Severus is without a doubt the most complicated chartacter in the series. In one hand he is cold, calculating, sarcastic, and bitter. On the other hand, he might be the most pathetic characters in the story. At various points in the series you either despise him, feel sorry for him or admire him. He is my favorite Potter character by the way.

Snape is probably the best character in the books. Pretty much from the first chapter of the first book the audience is conditioned to hate Snape, or at the very least to have a great deal of mistrust towards him. Prior to the 7th book Snape was poised to go down as the most reviled literary creation of a generation. But Rowling changed all of that in the Prince's Tale. As for Snape being the most complicated character in the series I would disagree, I think that's dumbledore. Once the complete story of Snape is known the motivation for his actions is plain for all to see, dumbledore on the other hand is never made to be completely understood. The audience only ever gets a superficial understanding of him, even during Kings Cross it is about Harry finding the answers he sought, not about providing some sort of definitive word on who or what dumbledore is as a character.

I agree with you about Dumbledore. When I say Snape is the most complicated I mean to say his character gives the reader the widest range of emotions about the character. I do have mixed feeling about Dumbledore as well, however even after reading all the books there are still a lot of questions for me to make a final decision.

**Spoiler Alert- Do Not Look Below If You Have Not Read Deathly Hallows****














When I first read the book I clearly thought the book was about Harry Potter. In the end, one could make the arguement the central theme of the series was more about the redemption of Severus Snape than anything else.

Im so fucking pumped for these movies.

Have you ever heard of a vagina? Prolly not.

Ha Ha.

Little Danny;441535 wrote:I agree with you about Dumbledore. When I say Snape is the most complicated I mean to say his character gives the reader the widest range of emotions about the character. I do have mixed feeling about Dumbledore as well, however even after reading all the books there are still a lot of questions for me to make a final decision.

**Spoiler Alert- Do Not Look Below If You Have Not Read Deathly Hallows****














When I first read the book I clearly thought the book was about Harry Potter. In the end, one could make the arguement the central theme of the series was more about the redemption of Severus Snape than anything else.

I agree completely with that. Reading Snapes chapter in the Deathly Hollows was surreal as everything the first 6 books was pointing as proof for Harry's hatred of him was flipped on on its head and proven false. He winds up being the most sympathetic character in the book by the end.