Talk:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (film)
From Harry Potter Wiki
[edit] Rated R?
Does anyone think it will be rated R? And if not, what?
Seeing as its a kids film, I doubt it would be an R. But as the film doesnt come out for another three years this whole conversations pointless. - Vaysey – Gryffindor 15:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- There is a possibility it will be R. At least PG 13...-Matoro183 (Talk) 19:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Why in the world word it be rated R? --Lupin & Kingsley 23:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, especially if you don't have any proof to back this claim up. -Adv193 16:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Matoro was just saying it was possible that it will be rated R in response to somebody else's question. He never said that it was definitively going to be rated R; it's his opinion, not a "claim" requiring proof.
- While I personally doubt it will receive this rating, considering the audience for the novels, it is possible -- R ratings are typically given for violence, especially violence that includes blood. Deathly Hallows includes scenes of Harry and Ron losing teeth (Harry in the Battle over Little Whinging, Ron when he's punched by a Snatcher), which has to be bloody; Ron severely bleeds from being Splinched; Hermione gets tortured (even if they don't show it directly, as in the book, it's an extremely violent and disturbing act); Harry gets bitten by a snake after it comes out of a corpse (again, disturbing); numerous characters die... There's a lot of violence in Deathly Hallows, and I can't see the filmmakers being able to depict the Battle of Hogwarts as bloodless, even if curses tend to make deaths a little 'cleaner', as it were.
- However, nobody has "proof" about the rating, seeing as the films won't be coming out for years (as Vaysey already pointed out). Oread 16:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Matoro I never mint to accuse you of saying that it will be rated R, sorry about that. --Lupin & Kingsley 20:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think the DH films will get an R rating, given that their core audience is under 18, but I do think they will be a strong PG-13. DH, as a book, is dark and violent, so bringing those elements to the screen is unavoidable if the filmmakers want to do justice to the original story. But I do think some stuff will have to be left out or toned done considerably because it is simply too intense for family movies. Two particularly gory scenes that come to mind are George's ear and Snape's death. Indirect camera angles could be used for the ear, like was done with Pettigrew's hand in the GoF film, but I think it will more likely be left out, as it is not integral to the plot. Snape's death cannot be cut, because it is integral to the plot, but they'll definitely tone it down, maybe having him die from venom instead of extreme blood loss.
- At this point, though, everything about how violent the movies will be or what ratings they will receive is speculation. We'll just have to wait and see as more information comes in over the next few months. ★ Starstuff (Owl me!) 14:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
No it should not be a 15 (R rating). The story of Harry Potter is for kids no matter how dark it gets. It will most likely be a 12A (PG-13) though. 90.211.84.247 13:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Two Articles
When the films are closer, should this article be split in two? RaggieSoft 04:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- There are two films, so I definately think that the articles should be split in two at some point. --Freakatone 12:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
well what I dont understand is why they are spliting it into 2 movies??? --Its_A_Sammy 12:53, 23 May 2008
- There's too much important information in the final book. If they cut out/alter too much, the movie loses its faithfulness to the novel. And they can't fit everything into, call it, a two and a half hour movie. --Cubs Fan2007 19:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, we should split this article into two pages. ----ÈnŔîčö
(Send me an Owl) 11:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I also agree --Hellabore
(Deathly Hallows)(contribs)
- I personally think the article should be split when we know where the films will be split -Smonocco 12:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Smonocoo --Hellabore (Deathly Hallows)(contribs)
If there is going to a huge difference in the cast between both films then I'll agree with the idea of splitting this article into two. If not then I'll that needs to be done is create 3 cast sections, one for characters that appear in both movies and the other two for those that only appear in one movie each. It also depends if there are any changes at all between the books and the movie that occur in this film because there is no telling what may happen until the release date. -Adv193 14:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Furthermore this also reminds me of why I created an omissions section for the film version of the Goblet of Fire, because it had to do with controlling potential overflowing information since I did it to make it easier to navigate. Though from what I figure there is likely going to be enough information that is massive enough that will require the need to create 2 pages for this film to control the massive details. -Adv193 01:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Cast
The cast list is reaching a ridiculous size if we continue like this. Only the main cast (the cast that is always on the posters and promo's and dvd's) should be noted like this. The rest of them should be in the text down below. That would mean that aside from the trio the following actors would be on the list (alphabetical order): Helena Bonham Carter, Robbie Coltrane, Warwick Davis, Ralph Fiennes, Michael Gambon, Brendon Gleeson, Richard Griffiths, John Hurt, Jason Isaacs, Alan Rickman, Fiona Shaw, Maggie Smith, Timothy Spall, David Thewlis, Julie Walters and Mark Williams. 16 names, the rest in the article section. If you agree, I'm willing to change it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.176.153.6 (talk • contribs).