Latest Movie News Headlines

C'mon Hollywood #143

Dec. 19, 2007by: Sturdy

... finish Harry Potter!
by Sturdy

**Spoiler Alert: If you don’t know whether Harry Potter lives or dies at the end of the seventh book and you don’t want to know, don’t read this article.**

First, I know how the seventh and final book ends. I completely understand the message Rowling was sending with her book and I respect her as an author, but Harry Potter needs to die in the seventh movie. However, before the Potter-fanatics get upset, you have to acknowledge the books and movies have slightly different tones and the movies appeal to an audience the books couldn’t reach. It’s not that I don’t like Harry Potter, because I actually think he’s a cool character, I just think his death would make for a great movie.

If the seventh film manages to get a great director like Spielberg, Del Toro, or any of the other big name directors that have been linked to it, I think they have to do something special with it. By now, the target audience is no longer fifth graders like it was with the first film. Each movie has gotten progressively darker and therefore has started to appeal to an older audience. Giving the subject matter to a proven director would allow Rowling the opportunity to have two endings to her series. The book could be the happy, fluffy, fair-tale ending and the movie could be the good ending. There’s no rule saying the stories have to be exactly the same.


Is it still wrong to find her attractive?

Of course, Rowling would have to agree to this and she seems reluctant to relinquish any control. She’s very protective of her universe and rightfully so. But she doesn’t have to give complete control over to someone else, in fact, it would be better if she wrote the new ending herself. I’m not so sure she doesn’t want Harry to die. It seemed like the entire series was building up to his death and then in the last couple of chapters she chickened out. I bet she had two endings planned and decided to go with the happier of the two. Why not go with the sadder ending in the movie? If it’s in the hands of a talented director, it could work, and work very well.


Whoa…what’s going on there Harry?

No one has anything to lose by killing off Harry in the seventh movie. They’re obviously not going to make any more Potter films, so Warner Brothers won’t lose a franchise. Rowling can chalk it up to a creative, film decision and the director can take credit for ending the franchise the way it should have ended in the first place. Plus, by the time the seventh film rolls around, Pottermania will be at an all time low and it will need something to generate some buzz. What better buzz than killing off one of the greatest heroes of our time?


They’re old enough, and so is the audience

Can you imagine the emotional shock it would be to watch the seventh film on opening day and then to watch Harry die? I don’t want to sound morbid or anything, but it would be awesome. Aside from the third film, all of them have felt very formulaic and this is just the thing they need to spice up the series. Even with the bland directing (again, the third one was awesome), they’re all decent films that have good stories, fun settings and characters that are interesting. But with the time has come for Harry to die and Warner Brothers and especially Rowling need to let it happen.

Tags: Hollywood

Related Articles

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

1:20PM on 12/21/2007

P.S.


I'm going to agree with the pro-Cuaron lot here:

I thought his style was perfectly suited to the material...which is probably why the subsequent directors have emulated Cuaron's Potter (and not, say, Columbus').

I'd also argue that Cuaron got the best, most natural performances from the three leads.

And, IMHO, Cuaron's Potter is the only one, thus far, that feels like a cohesive film...and not just a Cliff's Notes summation of the novel.

Hopefully, WB sees sense (unlikely, given

I'm going to agree with the pro-Cuaron lot here:

I thought his style was perfectly suited to the material...which is probably why the subsequent directors have emulated Cuaron's Potter (and not, say, Columbus').

I'd also argue that Cuaron got the best, most natural performances from the three leads.

And, IMHO, Cuaron's Potter is the only one, thus far, that feels like a cohesive film...and not just a Cliff's Notes summation of the novel.

Hopefully, WB sees sense (unlikely, given that it's the same lot that still insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that JLA's a good idea), and hires Cuaron for The Deathly Hallows.
Your Reply:



4:12AM on 12/20/2007

Love Cuaron's HP...

..but anyway, I always knew he wouldn't die, here we get a character that has to go through so much and we digest his grief through the books and movies and I feel he's plainly in a "pursuit of happyness" so sure, having him die would surely be a bucket of cold water thrown at us, but it would be a literary device used solely for the purpose of creating emotion but not for taking the characters where they are supposed to be, where they deserve to be. And besides, even if it was decided to go
..but anyway, I always knew he wouldn't die, here we get a character that has to go through so much and we digest his grief through the books and movies and I feel he's plainly in a "pursuit of happyness" so sure, having him die would surely be a bucket of cold water thrown at us, but it would be a literary device used solely for the purpose of creating emotion but not for taking the characters where they are supposed to be, where they deserve to be. And besides, even if it was decided to go ahead and kill him, will create so much dispute with loyal fans, sure it would definitely be very ballsy but so many people will get angry. So, in conclusion.. I disagree.
Your Reply:



7:19PM on 12/19/2007

NO

Sturdy, what's the deal? I almost always love your column, but this marks twice in a row that I have strongly disagreed with you. Do you really want the Matrix Revolutions again?

SPOILERS
In the book he dies, and is alive again. Um . . . Christological film personification, anyone? Why would you want to change that?
END SPOILERS

And BTW, the 3rd film is actually one of the weakest films thus far. A director's style should always be in service to the story, but in this case the style was
Sturdy, what's the deal? I almost always love your column, but this marks twice in a row that I have strongly disagreed with you. Do you really want the Matrix Revolutions again?

SPOILERS
In the book he dies, and is alive again. Um . . . Christological film personification, anyone? Why would you want to change that?
END SPOILERS

And BTW, the 3rd film is actually one of the weakest films thus far. A director's style should always be in service to the story, but in this case the style was fighting AGAINST the story.

Alfonso Cuaron is a VERY overrated director. Children of Men was one of the biggest disappointments in recent memory, although I was impressed with the long, unbroken shot in the climax.
Your Reply:



+0
5:08PM on 12/19/2007
Not sure I agree as I liked the way the 7th books ended. Well, not a huge fan of the epilogue but whatever.

I think Harry should live but then I also wonder whether LOTR would have been better if Frodo had died in the end.
Not sure I agree as I liked the way the 7th books ended. Well, not a huge fan of the epilogue but whatever.

I think Harry should live but then I also wonder whether LOTR would have been better if Frodo had died in the end.
Your Reply:



3:14PM on 12/19/2007
Sure, the films have deviated from the novels somewhat (necessary, really, considering that each of the last 4 novels is longer than the first 3 combined), but why would they film all 7 novels...and then change the ending? How's that make any sense, other than to deliberately piss people off?
Sure, the films have deviated from the novels somewhat (necessary, really, considering that each of the last 4 novels is longer than the first 3 combined), but why would they film all 7 novels...and then change the ending? How's that make any sense, other than to deliberately piss people off?
Your Reply:



3:02PM on 12/19/2007

Ummm...

I hate to be the cold cup of water on this roaring flame of contreversy, but I think killing him in the 7th movie wouldn't make any sense frankly. Spoilers aside, Rowling's vision of the 7th book transfers perfectly into a movie. When you make creative decisions with a book going to a movie, you shouldn't change ESSENTIAL plot points for the sake of tone. Rowling's creation should be left untouched and systematically recreated by a skilled and edgy director, if not a great storyteller.
I hate to be the cold cup of water on this roaring flame of contreversy, but I think killing him in the 7th movie wouldn't make any sense frankly. Spoilers aside, Rowling's vision of the 7th book transfers perfectly into a movie. When you make creative decisions with a book going to a movie, you shouldn't change ESSENTIAL plot points for the sake of tone. Rowling's creation should be left untouched and systematically recreated by a skilled and edgy director, if not a great storyteller.
Your Reply:



1:25PM on 12/19/2007
I could go both ways on this one. My excitement for the books ended about a week after I finished the last one so, I wouldnt altogether mind this. It would definitely make for a very interesting ending, much in line with, as you said, the increasingly darker tone of the recent movies. But, Harry is the main character, and if he died in the process of killing voldemort, then in my mind it would be stupid to see teh resolution without harry being there to be the central focus.

And I doubt
I could go both ways on this one. My excitement for the books ended about a week after I finished the last one so, I wouldnt altogether mind this. It would definitely make for a very interesting ending, much in line with, as you said, the increasingly darker tone of the recent movies. But, Harry is the main character, and if he died in the process of killing voldemort, then in my mind it would be stupid to see teh resolution without harry being there to be the central focus.

And I doubt Rowling would like the ending change, and if the studio decided to deviate from her book this drastically it would be quite an "F you!" after having given Warner such a money gathering franchise.

And I agree with Inar. didn't Shatner bring his character back to life in some of his star trek books, even after the guy died in Generations? Or even, a prequel! Some dumb movie about Harry's life from 1-10, being bullied by Dudley. We could see each moment that Harry first used his wizard powers!
Your Reply:



1:09PM on 12/19/2007

I'm down!

Normally I would saw NO! Stay true to the original source material and don't stray. However, because the previous 5 HP films have already strayed from the original source material by changing, adding, and taking out key elements from the book, I really don't think it would matter if they changed the ending. I was one of the few people who hated The Order of the Phoenix because of how much it changed from the book but with David Yates back for the sixth movie, I know it will too suck and be very
Normally I would saw NO! Stay true to the original source material and don't stray. However, because the previous 5 HP films have already strayed from the original source material by changing, adding, and taking out key elements from the book, I really don't think it would matter if they changed the ending. I was one of the few people who hated The Order of the Phoenix because of how much it changed from the book but with David Yates back for the sixth movie, I know it will too suck and be very different from the book. So why stop the unfaithful adaptations at movie number 6? Take it to 7 and KILL HARRY POTTER. He should have died in the book but J.K. sold out. Less gay Dumbeldore and more dead Potter.

P.S.- Would an Emma Watson sex scene be too out of the question considering the "darker" tone of these films?
Your Reply:



+0
12:51PM on 12/19/2007

Agreed

It would certainly be awesome and it could use the buzz, make people buy the books thinking they will get one thing but actually get something else.

And to Ammon, killing off characters does not stop someone making another movie revolving around that character.
It would certainly be awesome and it could use the buzz, make people buy the books thinking they will get one thing but actually get something else.

And to Ammon, killing off characters does not stop someone making another movie revolving around that character.
Your Reply:



+0
12:08PM on 12/19/2007

Yes

Another reason to make sure Harry dies in the final movie? So more movies/spin-offs can't happen! If he lives, that means a few years down the road someone will buy up the rights and make an original Harry Potter movie written for the screen. And it will suck. Killing him off will make sure THAT doesn't happen.
Another reason to make sure Harry dies in the final movie? So more movies/spin-offs can't happen! If he lives, that means a few years down the road someone will buy up the rights and make an original Harry Potter movie written for the screen. And it will suck. Killing him off will make sure THAT doesn't happen.
Your Reply:



10:03AM on 12/19/2007
Well firstly, Rowling had the books and ending already planned out WAY before, so that negates what you said.
Secondly, why should he die, so it can become like the same ending in Matrix Revolutions (that seems like you guys already despise)

So as an EXCLUSIVE here is the final scene in Harry Potter 7:
Harry is touching his forehead.
Ginny (looking up at her husband): "Are you alright?"
Harry (smiling): "All is well."

-End Scene-----Credits Roll-

Well firstly, Rowling had the books and ending already planned out WAY before, so that negates what you said.
Secondly, why should he die, so it can become like the same ending in Matrix Revolutions (that seems like you guys already despise)

So as an EXCLUSIVE here is the final scene in Harry Potter 7:
Harry is touching his forehead.
Ginny (looking up at her husband): "Are you alright?"
Harry (smiling): "All is well."

-End Scene-----Credits Roll-

Your Reply:



9:49AM on 12/19/2007

While I agree with you somewhat...

Harry did die in the final book...sure he went to Jack Sparrow land and had a nice chat with Master Gay Wizard Dumbeldore, but he still died. And then poof - he's back alive. I actually really enjoyed the last book and thought the ending was exactly what it needed to be. I can't wait to see it on screen.
Harry did die in the final book...sure he went to Jack Sparrow land and had a nice chat with Master Gay Wizard Dumbeldore, but he still died. And then poof - he's back alive. I actually really enjoyed the last book and thought the ending was exactly what it needed to be. I can't wait to see it on screen.
Your Reply:



7:26AM on 12/19/2007
Spoilers..

Fine by me! In fact, if she'd re-write the whole shitty, asinine 7th book altogether, that'd be just fine. Maybe drop a few completely useless things like, oh, let's say...the Deathly Hallows themselves...and 8 months of meandering boring useless camping...the Harry-is-a-Horcrux nonsense (which breaks her own established rules on how Horcruxes are made, see book 6).

Damn, I forgot how much hatred I had built up for the shittiest ending to a book series ever.
Spoilers..

Fine by me! In fact, if she'd re-write the whole shitty, asinine 7th book altogether, that'd be just fine. Maybe drop a few completely useless things like, oh, let's say...the Deathly Hallows themselves...and 8 months of meandering boring useless camping...the Harry-is-a-Horcrux nonsense (which breaks her own established rules on how Horcruxes are made, see book 6).

Damn, I forgot how much hatred I had built up for the shittiest ending to a book series ever.
Your Reply: