Why Harry Potter’s ‘Deathly Hallows’ Is Two Movies

Published 5 years ago by , Updated June 27th, 2013 at 3:07 pm,

harry potter and the deathly hallows Why Harry Potters Deathly Hallows Is Two Movies

We’ve not even seen the release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince yet (although we would have if Warner Bros. hadn’t have delayed it…), and yet there’s already talk about the next and last film in the successful series. If y’all are wondering what is happening with the seventh Harry Potter tale, titled Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, then Screen Rant is here to help.

It was announced over a year ago by WB that Deathly Hallows is going to be split into two separate movies because, as franchise producer David Heyman stated back then:

“[The last book] is so rich, the story so dense and there is so much that is resolved that after discussing it with Jo [Rowling], we came to the conclusion that two parts were needed to do it justice.”

Now over a year on, courtesy of Empire, we have some new info on the matter. In an interview with Harry Potter himself, Daniel Radcliffe, along with Heyman, explained how the film is going to be split (sort of…):

“We’ve played around with a couple of places… and ultimately settled on a place that we think is very exciting, and I think quite bold, in that it’s not necessarily where one might expect. You want to give a sense of completion, on one hand, but a sense that there’s another piece, more to come. We tried one and then Steve (Kloves, screenwriter) came up with the idea to try it another way and when we tried that, it felt just right.”

Radcliffe chimed it in with a clue-like piece of info, for those who have read the book(s), by saying the first part will end on a major cliffhanger of some sort.

When looking ahead to how they were going to deal with the later part of the last book [possible spoilers ahead about the Deathly Hallows book and story], Radcliffe and Heyman noted that it takes place almost 20 years later, and they discussed how they would like that to be portrayed on-screen – Heyman is keen to employ the revolutionary technology used for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but Radcliffe wasn’t so keen on that idea:

“I am nervous about that because if it’s good I’ll be really, really pleased; if it’s not good and that’s what people are left with, that would be awful. If it’s a choice between having me, Rupert [Grint] and Emma [Watson] looking a bit stupid and it being slightly comical or having other actors play us, I would go for other actors every time. So, we’ll see.”

I look at this in two ways: on the one hand I can see the need to split Deathly Hallows into two parts – Not only going by what this experienced franchise producer says, but also on the word of those who have read and are mega fans of the books. The last book is very heavy and detail-laden (as I expect most, if not all, of them are, but this one even more so), and let’s not forget this is the closing out of a long running and very successful franchise, and WB may want to “do it justice,” as Heyman said last year.

If there’s just so much in there that doing it one film, even if it were to have a longer run-time than the others, will only feel rushed and unsatisfying, then for the sake of making it high quality they simply have to split it into two… if that’s what’s needed.

However, on the other hand (and I’m sure a lot of fans out there lean more towards this angle) this may just be a sly move on WB’s part to get fans to pay $20 instead of $10 to see how the franchise concludes. I’m sure WB knows that they have something very valuable on their hands with the Harry Potter franchise, and this splitting move could be looked at as them just wanting to make as much money as possible before there’s no Harry Potter’s left to make.

Ultimately, from a purely story-telling point of view, I actually think splitting Deathly Hallows into two parts might be not be too bad of an idea. As I said, if it needs the extra time then by all means it should be given it, and that ultimately would make for a better overall viewing experience in that things don’t feel rushed, incomplete and ultimately unsatisfying.

There’s also the reason of us getting more movies out of the franchise… that’s nothing but a good thing…

The information given in the above interview obviously seems vague to someone who only knows these stories through the movie versions, but it sounds like they’re at least giving some serious thought as to how to do it right. Hopefully, anyway…

What are your thoughts on Deathly Hallows being split into two parts? And what about the possibility of using the Benjamin Button technology?

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I is currently scheduled for a November 19th, 2010 release and Part 2 is currently scheduled for a July 15th, 2011 release.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is being released on July 15th this year.

Source: Empire

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: harry potter

42 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. i like this idea, cant wait for this film.

    i just hope these films will get delayed.

  2. I don’t want to see this becomming a trend. With both Harry Potter and the Hobbit spliting one book into two movies, I feel like we’re gonna be seeing a lot more books split into two different films.

    I don’t like this at all. I have no problem sitting through a four hour movie (though I know a lot of people do, but that’s beside the point) and I just think it best to keep the story together than split it in two.

    I said it once and I’ll say it again, they were able to condense each LOTR book into a 3-4 hour movie, they can do the same with considerably less dense stories like Deathly Hollows.

  3. I think that this is a great move, even though it is a thinly veiled attempt by the studio to increase their profits. I’m still all for it though. They almost made “Goblet of Fire” into two movies, but the director of “Prisoner of Azkaban”, Alfonso Cuaron, reportedly convinced them to do it in one. Not really sure why they would have listened to him since he didn’t even direct “Goblet”.

  4. “i just hope these films will get delayed”

    i meant to say i hope they DONT get deleayed, sorry human error

  5. I’m in the more-is-better camp so I don’t mind that they’re splitting the last book into two movies.

    However, I don’t buy for a second that this is anything other than an attempt to make more $$$. It’s been widely discussed how the last book really dragged in some places and could have used another edit. I believe it could easily be shrunk down into a three hour movie.

  6. I think they should split it up for a longer more detailed movie experience..

    It worked for The Matrix: Reloaded and Revolutions sequels didn’t it?

    Oh, wait..

  7. If the bean counters insist on 8 Harry Potters, better this than a made up prequel or sequel.

  8. My kids and I are HP strong fan, and I’ll tell ya, I will pay the $20/per/person for the ending of this movie. HP3 was rush and allot was missing and if the last one HPDH need to cover 6hr in 2 movie overall I will be one of million of fan supporting this.
    JR knew what was going to happen with this last book, especially when her comp was hack and she needed to change few stuff on this last book and now we really going to get a big bang on this last movie.

  9. the thing is that all of the other story threads finally arc into the last book and have some semblance of closure. I understand why they are doing this because this simply takes time and there are a LOT of things that happen that I won’t go into not wanting to spoil anyone’s fun. We have to watch them flow down the path that the book takes because there aren’t any side trips, the focus is on the main three characters (four if you include Voldemort) and they’re solving of the final set of puzzles, because it’s not just the task itself that is set out before them, but how to accomplish the task and that matters.

    Don’t get caught up in the comments above regarding the ending; while it is important, I believe that the movie industry is up to the task that’s required to bring this off properly.

  10. Oh,my god!!! i mean wowwwwwww!!!
    I read the book. It’s so cool. I can’t wait till the film.
    I kind of like Draco Malfoy. ( the most )

  11. I have read all of the books and I am glad that they are splitting the last film up. Throughout all of the films the one complaint I have always had is that they leave out too much from the book. The stories all felt rushed and compacted and felt like they HAD to be fit into a 2-hour film.

    Let’s allow Deathly Hallows to breathe a little and conclude the right way. If you’re a Harry Potter fan, this is good news. You’ll have to be more patient, but in the end, I think we’ll be rewarded and the HP franchise will go out with a bang.

  12. I’m completely fine with splitting the last book into two parts. On the downside, we’ll have to wait longer, but on the upside, we’ll probably be given an even more emmersive and exciting story. The Deathly Hallows was not my particular favorite book, but I still loved it. The only thing I’m wondering right now is what will the two parts be titled? Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I and Harry Potter and th Deathly Hallows Part II? That’s tacky. Maybe they should keep the Deathly Hallows title for one of them, possibly the last one, and come up with a different title for the first part. Please leave comments on what you think the parts should be called!

  13. I have to say, having read the books, they definitely should have split Goblet of Fire into two films or dropped unimportant details like Order of the Phoenix did. Prisoner of Azkaban was easily the strongest film, and even when I read it, I knew it would be. It’s a dense book, but just short enough to get the details in at a good pace. With Goblet, it felt like watching someone go through all the details while on speed. I think that the decision to split Deathly Hallows in two is really the ONLY way to do it right.

  14. The reason behind splitting the last book is fairly legitimate (though there’s no doubt a search for more money was partly behind it). With all the other books, any bits they left out were left out because they only really make the books and characters richer, but didn’t add to the narrative… or they were trying to get around some clunky writing (I remember people complaining about how much was left out of the end of ‘Prisoner of Azkaban’ without realising that in the book, there’s about 6 odd pages of exposition given right at what should have been the climax, only half of which was really needed to further the plot on, and the rest was just nice to hear, but not overly important).

    But in Deathly Hallows, there’s an awful lot of exposition needed for the ending to make any sense, and that’s without the whole Dumbledore sideplot. Plus a good chunk of the middle of the book is taken up with the trio camping in the countryside for months on end doing almost nothing (no really, almost nothing is accomplished for a good few chapters).

    As far as where the split happens, I’ve had a fairly good idea of where in the book it’d be when they first announced the split and this news only really confirms my suspicions (hint to those who’ve read the book, it involved Ron).

  15. i think splitting the book is the only way to do it justice, i have read the book and i dont think it would be possible to put everything into one movie… as for the company’s “scheme” to make more money.. i honestly think it’s worth it, who cares if its more money, its better value.
    as for the benjamine button technology… 1. i hope they dont use it all throughout the second movie because it just wont be harry potter and 2. if its only for the last chapter scene in the book, i dont really think its worth using so much money when you could just have older actors for the end.

  16. No – Harry Potter and the Interminable Emo Camping could have been half a film. Two movies is just milking the franchise for every last dollar. What a crock.

  17. Split them, I say. After every film people always start complaining about how much they left out from the books. You’ve all heard, you are probably one of those people.
    And I think they should name the Part II Deathly Hallows and Part I something else because you don’t even hear anything about the Deathly Hallows until halfway through the book.

  18. There were parts of Deathly Hallows that really dragged out and now they’re going to drag it out in the film? Ugh.

    Oh well, I can wait till video on all of this.

  19. What do you think they should name both the parts. Part two should be called Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, but I have no idea what they should call part one.

  20. What about Harry Potter and the Blatant Money Grab?

    Or Harry Potter and the Extensive Franchise Milking?

  21. I thought for a minute that the title of the 7th movie could possibly be one of the titles that JKR considered before settling on Deathly Hallows, but unfortunately, “Harry Potter and the Elder Wand” and “Harry Potter and the Peverell Quest” are both titles that would likely have no relevance to the first movie, only the second.

    Possibly something with Horcrux in the title, but that seems a bit on the nose really.

  22. all i can say is that…. WOW!!!! its amazing… its something i am looking forward to. thank you.

  23. i promise to have the book as soon as i pass the board exam,

  24. I bet that the split will take place sometime around the escape from Nagini at Bathilda Bagshot’s house in Godric’s Hallow. It might also take place somtime around the area when harry follows the silver doe and finds the sword of Griffindor or when Ron returns. My las two theories might be when they escape from Xenophilius Lovegood’s house before the Death Eaters come or when they escape (or get captured) from the Death Eaters at Malfoy Mannor. On the whole, these might all be great places for the first part to end. If it ended any earlier, then the first part would be completely taken up with the camping scenes, which would make it entirly boring (even though I would still love it). About the 19 years later part, it should be before the end credits, that way the story eases out a little better. If it were after the end credits, it would have the same effect that Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End had, which was not the best way to end the series. (Luckily, they’re working on a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean right now)!

  25. I hope they can expand this movie as much as the film makers think. Most of the book is wasted on pointless camping scenes, and if they adapt the battle of Howarts similar to the battle in the Order of the Phoenix, then it will definitely be waaay to short. I like the idea of two films to expand the story, but I’m just not sure if they picked the right part of the series to do it. Then again, it would be awkward to split any of the other parts in the series…it would feel incomplete. I hope they can pull it off. I think that it’s funny, because the first director, Christopher Columbus, stated in an interview that they though about combining the first two movies into one, but it would ruin the series, and now they’re planning on splitting up one of the adaptations.

  26. I already gave hints at where I thought they’d split the movie, but just to be clear, I think the perfect place (well… one perfect place, there are many) would be when Ron saves Harry from drowning. If we don’t see who it is, but simply a hand pulling Harry out of the pool, and then, after Harry has spluttered a bit, he looks up and we get a shot of Ron holding the sword in one hand and the locket in the other, that’s our hero shot and that would be the perfect place to end the first film. It also gives the film a sense of things finally get back non track and things looking up, which is a good place to end as the first half of the book has everything pretty much going wrong with them.

    That’s just me though.

  27. You know, I think if WB wanted to “do the books justice” then they probably should have done that in the first place. Most of the movies vary so much from the books, or are such pruned down versions that it’s laughable, I highly doubt they’re going to start doing this one “justice” if they haven’t been able to do it for the last five (possibly six, as it’s yet to be seen). They’re not bad movies, per se, but bad book adaptations (in my opinion) and I’ll believe the “justice” they’re doing by splitting this movie in two when I see it. For now, I think this is a cheap ploy to keep the Harry Potter brand name running as long as possible. I do hope I’m wrong, but if their previous productions are any indicator? I doubt I am.

  28. does any body have any idea when they are going to start selling tickets for the half blood prince.

  29. All the characters are getting REALLY old. How are they going to fix that for the upcoming movies?

Be Social, Follow Us!!