Undeathly Hallows ?

[Carol]

bboyminn:
> 
> My point is that the first movie needs to end before that is
resolved. In a sense, the second movie needs a brief 
> introcution and the transition between finding the sword, and
> temporarily losing it at Malfoy manor are the introduction 
> that bring us up to Dobby's burial. And that event, leads us
> into the next phase of the story.
> 
> But again, not knowing what they will and won't cut, it is
> hard to tell if that is an effective breaking point. But in
> the story, it is the breaking point for Harry, it represents
> a transition in his attitude toward what he is doing. So, the
> end either has to be before Dobby's death or just after.

Carol:
I'm not suer what we're arguing, then, because I agree that the movie
had to end with Dobby's death or just after. That's the point at which
Harry's doubts and wavering end (even though the inner conflict
regarding DD remains unresolved), when Harry at last has a clear
course of action, The second DH film would begin with Gringotts or the
planning for Gringotts, carrying out the action on which Harry
resolved at the end of the first film.

Whether the movie needs a brief introduction or not is up to the
filmmakers. I'd say that beginning in medias res with preparations for
the Gringotts break-in is a better option. Any background or other
exposition to clarify for the reader what's going on can be done
through dialogue as they prepare for the break-in). 

Carol earlier:
> > Why not put Malfoy Manor and Dobby's death in the first film, so
that the second film can begin in reality rather than "in earnest"
with Harry's "clear course of action"? ...
> > 
bboyminn:
> 
> We agree that from a story perspective, Dobby's death is a 
> transition point, but is it a good place to break the movie?

Carol:
Well, Heyman says he's organizing thematically, and certainly breaking
after Dobby's burial (rather than immediately after his death) makes
sense from that perspective, assuming that Harry talks to Ron and
Hermione about his decision. How the filmmakers will deal with
Ollivander and Griphook is anybody's guess. That could be your
"introduction"! 

bboyminn: 
> What do we need in terms of movie elements to make a satisfactory
break? Well we need climax, wind down, and resolution. Is the escape
from Malfoy Manor a sufficient climax, and does Dobby's burial
constitute sufficient wind down, and resolution? 

Carol:
Harry's escape and Dobby's death: climax.
Dobby's burial: Wind down.
Harry's decision to forgo the wand and go after the Horcruxes (no more
indecision or confusion): Resolution.

Works for me. Besides, putting Xeno Lovegood and Malfoy Manor in the
first half gives that film more action and ties in thematically with
Harry's indecision and lack of direction, which is the chief "theme"
of the first film/first "half" of the book.

> bboyminn:
> 
> Dividing the last two movies is not an enviable task. What to keep
and what to lose is difficult. But I do know this, the existing parts
of the Series have been tolerable, but just. <snip> but these last two
movies of the final books are their chance to redeem things. They've
got the time, let them tell the story. But I fear they have so many
poorly developed characters, and no motivation setup up in earlier
movies for action that must take place in the later movies, I'm not
convinced they can pull it off. <snip>

carol:
Well, true. But that doesn't really tie in with where they'll break
the two halves of DH. Anything that was left out of the previous films
will have to go into HBP, or into dialogue when HRH talk during the
long camping trip. But I have a feeling that we'll just have to live
without an adequate explanation of Snape's role in sending the Order
to the DoM, adequate development for Kreacher, and so on. The
requirements for a successful film are obviously different than for a
successful film, the audiences and their expectations are different,
and the alterations and omissions already made can only partly be
remedied. That's the problem with basing a series of films on a series
of books that has not been completed. (Chris Columbus, for all his
faults, was wise to deviate as little as possible from the books in
making the first two films. Cuaron started a trend of altering
elements of the books, continued in GoF and OoP, from which the films
may never recover. But making DH in two parts will insure that it, at
least, incorporates as many as possible of the structural and thematic
elements of the book. Will we see Auntie Muriel? Who knows? Will we
see Bellatrix and the Malfoys and Snape and Wormtail? you bet.

Carol, who sees no resolution except to *Ron's* internal conflict with
the destruction of the locket Horcrux, whereas Harry's decision to
pursue the Horcrux would resolve not only his dilemma but the loose
ends of the necessarily episodic plot of the first film