Undeathly Hallows ?

[Carol]

Cabal wrote:
>
> If they do two 2hr 30min films they won't have to cut much if
anything. I mean, 4 ½ - 5 hrs is a lot of screen time.
> 
> The book is not as long as OOTP <snip>   
> 
> The only real issue at 5 hrs is where to separate the head from the
body.
> 
> I think the best option for two films (aside from just stopping a la
"Lord of the Rings") is to devote the first half of the film to the
Hallows and the second film to Horcrux's.
> 
> You'd have to change the timeline to do that, but I think having all
the key scenes is more important than the order they happen, and
anything they can do to make the Camping Trip more exiting (like
cutting most of it) will be welcome to most fans, I think.

Carol responds:
Easiest, maybe, but probably not the most satisfying. And why change
the timeline when you have a natural break between the confused
preparations and an indecisive Harry and the actual confrontation with
Voldemort, starting with seizing a Horcrux and ending with voldemort's
defeat?

You have to have a coherent plot with its own resolution for Part 1,
and you need thematic unity (which an awkward switch from the rather
boring Hallows mystery in Part 1 to actively dsstroying Horcruxes and
confronting Voldemort in Part 2 would only partially accomplish. You'd
have to move the whole locket subplot, including the MoM raid, the Doe
Patronus and Ron's destruction of the Horcrux, to Part 2. What would
Part ! be left with? (You can't do it the other way around--Horcruxes
first and Hallows second, because the theft of the cup Horcrux sets
off the main action, and Neville's killing of Nagini has to occur
after Harry's "death"--otherwise, there would be no Horcrux holding
him and Voldemort to life.

BTW, Malfoy Manor has to occur at Easter break so that Draco will have
a reason to be home. The main action has to occur after he's returned
to school (though not necessarily a full month later. Easter 1998
should be in June, not March, anyway. JKR either forgot which year it
was, just as she has DD dying in 1997 on her website, or she forgot to
consult a calendar. There's really no practical reason for Malfoy
Manor to occur in March, not April; it's just a blunder, IMO.)

Regarding LOTR, the filmmakers didn't "just stop," IMO. Fellowship
ends exactly where it should end, with Frodo and Sam starting off
alone (so they think) on their journey to Mordor, leaving Aragorn and
the others to search for the young Hobbits. It's not much different
from the book. They've just included a couple of chapters from Two
Towers to make a satisfying ending to that part (with a sequel or two
obviously coming). Two Towers focuses on Rohan (including the search
for the young Hobbits and the Battle of Helm's Deep) on the one hand
and Gollum's externalized internal conflict on the other. I can't
recall exactly where that film ends, but I don't remember it's seeming
arbitrary, however different it may have been from the division of the
books (which was also somewhat arbitrary, even if we look at Tolkien's
original six book division as opposed to the publisher's three volumes
of two books each). 

Carol, who see no need to distort the chronology and thinks that doing
so would cause more problems than it solves