Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)

[Carol]

Cabalwrote:
>
> There are two ways, I see of cutting the film.
 
> The first is linear. Basically I think you end part one when Ron
returns and destroys the locket.  This is literally the dead center of
the book and marks the end of the camping trip.
 
> The problem here is that the first film will be rather slow compared
to the second, only three main sequences, the wedding, Godrics Hollow
and Bathilda / Snake.
> 
Carol:
You forgot the MoM invasion in which they steal the locket, and the
doe Patronus (which is tied in with the destruction of the locket), as
a climactic fifth sequence. (There's also Kreacher's backstory; he and
Regulus will definitely be in the film, so we can add that to the
"action" count even though it will be a flashback.) I agree, though,
that the first half of the book is *comparatively* short on action (at
any rate, it's spread out with lots of thinking and talking and
camping in between. The filmmakers would have to squeeze the
disastrous visit to Xeno Lovegood and the Malfoy Manor sequence into
the second half if they divided the film by page count. In my view,
those incidents belong thematically to the first film, not to mention
that they would provide additional action sequences to the first half
while allowing the second half to concentrate on the defeat of
Voldemort. (FWIW, the action from the Gringotts break-in to the defeat
and death of Voldemort takes place in about twenty-four hours.)

Cabal wrote: 
> The other option is to focus the first half on the Horcruxes
(knowing the final Horcrux is in Hogwarts and has to wait until the
end) and moving things around so that they go to Bill & Fleurs before
visiting Lovegood. This way you concentrate the first film on the
horcruxes and end on the grand finale of breaking out of Gringots and
flying away on a dragon.
> 
Carol responds:
That would work, I suppose, especially if Heyman considers Hallows and
Horcruxes to be "themes" (see my earlier post). But as I see it, the
Gringotts break-in is the first step in the defeat of Voldemort and
sets in motion everything else, including Voldemort's panicked Horcrux
search for his Horcruxes and invasion of Hogwarts. It also, as I said,
occurs in the same twenty-four hours as the battle of Hogwarts. IMO,
it definitely belongs in the second film in terms of both plot and theme. 

Cabal: 
> The second film would then start at the Lovegoods, where the search
for the Hallows really takes off. It would make a good bit of action
for the opening. You could still have them get caught and escape to
Bills but instead of plotting the Gringots heist again they would
simply bury Doby and move on. 

Carol:
I think that the first half of the film would benefit from the
Lovegood scene, which in any case has nothing to do with the final
destruction of Voldemort and his Horcruxes. (They may find and destroy
one Horcrux in the first half, but if we're dividing between Hallows
and the nearly omitted Hallows, the place to break would be where
Harry chooses Horcruxes over Hallows. From Gringotts to the end, the
focus is on Horcruxes, with the Hallows playing a role only in "The
Forest Again." Really, I can't see organizing the film around either
of them.
> 
Cabal: 
> It would mess up continuity, but maintain faithfulness, spread out
the action more evenly and allow the entire second half of the second
film to be what it should be, the assault on Hogwarts and the
destruction for the tiara and nagini.

Carol:
I agree that the second film should focus on the defeat of Voldemort,
but it doesn't have to involve only the last nine chapters (and
possibly the Epilogue). Put Gringotts in the second film, and you have
a unified assault on Voldemort, with all the other action, including
the Lovegood house and Malfoy Manor, in the first film.

As I said, the first film would focus thematically of Harry's struggle
to embark on and make sense of the impossible mission that Dumbledore
has assigned him. The film could end at the point where he finally
understands what he has to do and why. (Not counting the
self-sacrifidc, of course.) The second film would focus on carrying
out the mission.

Carol, who thinks there are more than two ways to divide a two-part
film and the key in this case is theme