Did anyone else here that Daniel Radcliff who plays harry will look too old to play harry in the last two films!? well he will be a lot older than harrys real age! But this means that only four films will be made, i read this in three magazines i hope they are lying...

Hello, ro minx, welcome to Immeritus. I guess you've had a look at the 'first stop for newbies' topic in the 'aiding magical mischief' section of the site? It's probably a good idea to keep your eye on things like capitalisation; though obviously we all make mistakes.



There's a bit about this in 'the Cinema' section but no-one's asked this exact question. I'd sort of assumed they'd just replace Daniel Radcliffe. Surely they (cynical movie people that they are) would much rather do that than say goodbye to the huge revenues they must be generating from each Harry Potter movie. It'd be tough, fitting OotP into a three-hour movie, but movie people are in it for the money - it might be a bad film but they wouldn't care as long as people went to see it. So surely we're safe from the threat of no more Harry Potter films? It's just a case of if they're at all true to the essence of the book. I'm inclined to a cynical view of this; that the movies will get worse in quality and begin to be sold on the stars they've bribed to appear and the fact that we like the books.



*grumbles cynically to self about human nature; recalls Douglas Adams and his 'small green pieces of paper' comments; subsides into bitter silence; slinks out, embarrassed*

'Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day; but set fire to him, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life' - Terry Pratchett



Quanti canicula illa in fenestre? Spero ut Padfootus sit!

I'm confused. Is the person who started the thread asking if Daniel will play in only four movies or if only four movies will be made? I'm assuming the former.



Personally, I don't see why they need to change characters. I don't think they look too old, and if it worked for Beverly Hills 90210, I say let it work here. Cause the people in that show were at least in their late 20's and playing high school kids (I never really watched it but I know they were not in their teens). It's so horrible when they switch actors and I think it will really detract from the whole experience.



Phooey.

sorry i should of been more clearer, i meant will there be more than four films made or not..nobody knows..

Moved to the Cinema, as it makes more sense there than here.

I shall never forget that the probability of a miracle, though infinitesmally small, is not exactly zero.

David Thewlis mentioned future filming for Order of the Phoenix in 2006 (?), after Goblet of Fire in done, in an interview with Kerry-Anne Kennerley on Australian TV when he was over here promoting POA.

Alfonso Cuaron also said in one interview that he hopes the young actors will stay in the series for the whole time. Like mentioned before, the people in Beverly Hills were much older than their characters, and anyone remember Michael J. Fox in his Back to the Future days?



Nowadays young people also tend to look older than they really are. For me it is sometimes hard to say how old someone is as even the 14-year-olds look like 18. I think it wouldn't be a problem to Daniel, Rupert and Emma to stay in the series till the end. At least that is what I hope

***it can't rain all the time***

I'm pretty sure that there will be more than four films. I think GoF is being made into two films - or at least, there was some discussion going on about that. There have to be more films...how can they start and not end it? That would be very frustrating.

I am well and good with the fourth one I don't want to see what they do to the fifth one.

I read in a recent, Entertainment Weeklymagazine that the director of PoA, Alfonso Cuaron had convinced, Mike Newell, who is directing GoF, to do it as one film. Also, somewhere in the back of my brain, I think I remember reading that they had signed contracts to do all seven books. Though I don't know who 'they' are. And this was before the first movie came out so I could be remembering wrong.

---

<span style="color:#6A0645;]There was once something witty sitting on the tip of my tongue just waiting for me to write it here. But when I laughed, I swallowed it.[/color]Edited by: <A HREF=http://p072.ezboard.com/bsiriusblackfanclub.showUserPublicProfile?gid=siriusstar@siriusblackfanclub>Sirius Star[/url] at: 6/21/04 1:25 am

One film? One film for Goblet of Fire? Are they insane? That will never work - they'd have to cut out the tasks. And that's the whole point of the thing! Oh, God, I hope they don't listen to Cuaron and go with the two films thing. They could probably make a lot more profit that way and it would make the fans a lot happier, I'd wager.

I would be surprised if they didn't make a minimum of 7 films, and if JKR would authorize it (she won't, thank heavens) I'm sure they'd make infinite prequels and sequels beyond the 7 books. The HP movies make big money, and money is king in Hollywood.



I too hope they keep the same actors--they're improving in every film, and I just think there would be major continuity problems if they switched all 4 main characters just because they got too tall or their beards came in... It's not &quot;Annie&quot; for heaven's sake!



But then, who can say what Hollywood people are thinking about. If they think they can make more money with different actors/directors/whatever... they'll probably go for it.

<span style="color:orange;font-family:comic sans ms;font-size:large;]Crookshanks: Toujours Purr ^..^[/color]

Well, it's not just the directors who choose the actors - the actors themselves may not want to star in all the movies, however many end up being made. Cause of the whole type-casting thing or what have you.



Prequels? That idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth. That would be utterly horrid, I think. Oh well - they may do it and I'd probably give in and watch it.



I'm ashamed.

I went through the rumor-mills: Only one movie and they're cutting the scenes with the Dursley's. Bummer. No Ton-Tongue Toffee<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :grr --><img src=http://pages.prodigy.net/siriusblack/boards/smilies/grr.gif ALT=":grr]<!--EZCODE EMOTICON END-->



We'll just have to hope they don't mangle the rest of it. But of course they will.Bitterness? From Star?

---

<span style="color:#6A0645;]There was once something witty sitting on the tip of my tongue just waiting for me to write it here. But when I laughed, I swallowed it.[/color]----------<span style="color:#4A244B;]We are only our words. . . and I am a 'mispelled' one.[/color]

I, too, as an avid HP fan have spent many a hour thinking on how books four and five could possibly be made into movies. I have, however, come to the conclusion that the GoF could be made into a fairly decent movie without cutting out too much.

My point is based on this: as somebody wisely pointed out, the tasks are the whole point of the book and w/o them, there would be no plot. That is the exact reason I think the fourth movie will work better than the third. The tasks take plenty of pages to fill up; as anyone who has every written anything knows, it takes much longer to tell people about something via the written word than it does to show them. I think cinema is a fantastic medium with which to bring GoF to life. Think about it: showing Harry raching away from the Hungarian Horntail instead of simply describing it?!? I can hardly wait!

Yes, I know the editors will cut a lot out because of time. But I don't think the tasks will take as long to show on screen as they do pages in the book. Book four will just be missing all the sweet nuances that make the books so much better than the movies, but at least the film will be action-packed and exciting, even if it is a bit long (like my post - sorry!)



~Star