lol, those failblog style captions are everywhere. Here are some equally popular ones...

 

 

^:lol::lol:

 

 

Daniel Radcliffe is seriously a perv!

I have to agree with you there chief, the pics don't lie! ;)

Based on these pics, I'd say Rupert is uncomfortable kissing Emma because he is more caring and more like a friend:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it was Daniel having to kiss her he would just maul her.:dozey:

Lol, if Emma says Rupert is like a brother to her, Dan is her creepy uncle Frank... :P :dozey:

Lol, if Emma says Rupert is like a brother to her, Dan is her creepy uncle Frank... :P :dozey:

:laugh3::laugh3:

 

creepy uncle Frank...priceless!:lol:

 

 

 

 

 

they all look weird in this pic but Dan just looks like a pedo:P

^huh, don't think I've seen that one :thinking:, doesn't really look like dan with the the green shirt and large hair. Kind of a weird photo shoot actually, standing in the woods with those clothes and poses...Doesn't exactly work as a harry potter promo or even just a regular photoshoot.

^huh, don't think I've seen that one :thinking:, doesn't really look like dan with the the green shirt and large hair. Kind of a weird photo shoot actually, standing in the woods with those clothes and poses...Doesn't exactly work as a harry potter promo or even just a regular photoshoot.

well the woods scene was used in an Emma Watson photo shoot, I think in that particular pic though, they were all photoshopped in.

Sorry, you're right, clearly photoshop. Should've noticed...

Sorry, you're right, definitely photoshop. Should've noticed...

;)

 

 

 

 

so what are your thoughts on them splitting the final movie into two?

Sort of a relief. If I had my way, each movie would be an hour longer (especially OOTP). Even if it's being a bit unrealistic. Deathly Hallows is obviously the most important book, and so requires more attention and detail. The last thing fans want is for them to cut corners (even if the movie is 3 hours long), so I'm thrilled that it's being split up because the added length, and the fact they are two separate films ensures that very little will be left out of the story.

 

So unlike the way they did OOTP, they won't be dashing from the burrow to the woods, to godric's hollow to gringott's etc. without taking breath's in between. Which is great because some of my favorite parts of the book aren't action scenes, but the drama and dialogue, like when they're talking in the tent, or walking through the graveyard at godric's hollow.

 

I guess that since deathly hallows is shorter and less complicated in some ways than OOTP, or even HBP, they won't only feature all the major events in the book and thensome, but will leave some time in between.

I sort of agree, but in my opinion they should just take a lesson form Lord of the Rings. All 3 movies were well over 3 hours, and they were the most successful movies of all time.

 

 

I think they should just extend the overall length to over 3 hours, it should be exciting enough that it won't seem long. I don't like the idea of 2 separate movies. Mostly because there is no good place to split the book. All the HP books build up slowly, and then suddenly explode into action at the end. What'll most likely end up happening is the first one will cover a lot of detail, but be more dull and get up to 3/4 the way through the story.

 

Then the second one will be 2 hours of the Battle of Hogwartz. WB is just fucked up enough to screw it up like that.

Well I'm hoping that both movies together will add to up 3:20+ (optimistic), or a lot longer than they would be willing to release as one film. They'll probably split it sometime after ron comes back, and the first horcrux is destroyed. I expect the film's will only be released a few months apart. I guess I like it because I'm such a purist/canonist, that I want as much movie as possibly so that they can portray as much of the book as is possible. Since two parts together will surely add up to more screentime than they would allow for just one movie.

 

:edit: and since they want to make each film exciting apart from it's counterpart, it'll be less condensed, since both films are working on only half the book.

 

They might screw it up, they probably will, but 2 hours and thirty minutes probably won't be enough to satisfy fans, and it seems WB wouldn't be willing to make it much longer since they're shooting for a PG, ADD audience.

Well I'm hoping that both movies together will add to up 3:20+ (optimistic), or a lot longer than they would be willing to release as one film. They'll probably split it sometime after ron comes back, and the first horcrux is destroyed. I expect the film's will only be released a few months apart. I guess I like it because I'm such a purist/canonist, that I want as much movie as possibly so that they can portray as much of the book as is possible. Since two parts together will surely add up to more screentime than they would allow for just one movie.

well LOTR movies were about 3 hours each and they did not leave much out from the books either.

 

 

O see why you would expect the movies to be better split up, but based on how WB has treated the movies and the fans, they will do whatever they have to to make the biggest buck. I am really nervous that they will somehow ruin the final book with how they are doing it. If they do, I will be so pissed.

 

It's really going to be hard to screw up though. You have one of the greatest final books of all time, a set of experienced and gifted actors, a decent director, and a huge fan base. it'll be hard to ruin it I guess. they just better know what they are doing.

 

 

so which Dumbledore do you like better? I personally always pictured Dumbledore like Richard Harris, but Michael Gambon seems to do good in HBP (based on the trailers)

Yeah, I agree making it two films will (theoretically) result in twice the income, but the fact that OOTP, the longest book became the shortest movie, makes the fact that the most important book will be two medium sized movies, a little comforting. Even if it's a tad inconvenient. In David Yates I trust :P.

 

As for dumblydork...

 

I'm inclined to say Richard Harris simply because Michael Gambon always seemed to ignore the adjectives and adverbs surrounding J.K. Rowling's Dumbledore. He was just ridiculous in GOF and even in OOTP he was always angry and aggressive. Have you ever seen Gambon smile? Because even when dealing with umbridge and the ministry, the real dumbledore was constantly humble, nonchalant and even amused while Gambon is closer to a WWF wrestler. Even when Gambon cools it down, he's never mastered the almost annoying politeness and charm of Dumbledore.

 

It's tough to judge how Harris would've faired in the later films (since he ain't around no more), but he was perfectly suited for the first couple films. It is a little hard to picture him fighting voldemort at the ministry, though, since he did have a very sluggish, grandfather quality.

Yeah, I agree making it two films will (theoretically) result in twice the income, but the fact that OOTP, the longest book became the shortest movie, makes the fact that the most important book will be two medium sized movies, a little comforting. Even if it's a tad inconvenient. In David Yates I trust :P.

 

As for dumblydork...

 

I'm inclined to say Richard Harris simply because Michael Gambon always seemed to ignore the adjectives and adverbs surrounding J.K. Rowling's Dumbledore. He was just ridiculous in GOF and even in OOTP he was always angry and aggressive. Have you ever seen Gambon smile? Because even when dealing with umbridge and the ministry, the real dumbledore was constantly humble, nonchalant and even amused while Gambon is closer to a WWF wrestler. Even when Gambon cools it down, he's never mastered the almost annoying politeness and charm of Dumbledore.

 

It's tough to judge how Harris would've faired in the later films (since he ain't around no more), but he was perfectly suited for the first couple films. It is a little hard to picture him fighting voldemort at the ministry, though, since he did have a very sluggish, grandfather quality.

man you nailed it!:D

 

I agree with every single word, and I could not possibly have put it better myself. Especially the bits about his almost annoying politeness, how Gambon is too aggressive, and how Harris might not have looked right heaving thousands of shards of glass over his head at Voldy.

 

 

Very well said.:clap:

:wacky: :blush: :shy: :pleased: :smug: :wiseguy:

So what did you think of the titles of the books? That is, before you read them... Personally I hated the title "deathly hallows". But apparently the working title for several years was actually "Harry Potter and the hallows of hogwarts", before she changed it. :\

So what did you think of the titles of the books? That is, before you read them... Personally I hated the title "deathly hallows". But apparently the working title for several years was actually "Harry Potter and the hallows of hogwarts", before she changed it. :\

Well I don't really remember from the first four since I read them when I was a kid. I do remember thinking that the picture of the Snitch on the cover of Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone was the stone itself, but my brother told me it wasn't.:nice:

 

 

OOTP I didn't really think much of the title. But HBP I thought was an awesome title and I immediately knew that meant it was going to be a good book. Deathly Hallows (at first I didn't know how to pronounce Hallows...hal or hol) I loved the title. But after reading it realize it is the only title in the series that has no real relevance to the story. The DH had no big part in the story, they were just an idea that faded away. I heard it was possibly going to be called Harry Potter and The Elder Wand, and I think that would have been more appropriate since the Elder Wand was the focus of the story towards the end and it is what killed Voldemort.

I still kind of like the ring of "Harry Potter and the Mystic Kettle of Knackledirk" :P

 

btw on the same site as failblog is 'loflrazzi', something dedicated to celebrity shots...anyway, here's the latest one.

 

^LULZ:lol:

 

 

 

 

 

I don't have a wand...you do the math:rolleyes:

:stunned:

 

 

 

 

If only the pic wasn't so obviously photoshopped. :dozey:

:stunned:

 

 

 

 

If only the pic wasn't so obviously photoshopped. :dozey:

which? that last one?

 

 

that one's real baby:cool: