Extended Movies... (was: Re: Ordering UK version ...)

[Elizabeth Snape]

Right you are, Steve!  How many minutes would it have added to PS/SS 
to include the entire initial potions class scene?  IIRC it really 
set up whe whole Harry/Snape dynamic.  And how about the 
Karkaroff/Snape scene in GoF?

The only extended scene movie that I've been able to record was SS, 
however, it was during a bad snow storm and the telecast was spoiled 
by all the weather updates -- the worst during the potions scene! I 
don't have cable so haven't seen the others.   

Snape's Witch


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
 
> 
> Off on a wild tangent here. For one of the HP movies
> I added to the total run-time of all the relevant
> deleted scenes and it was something like 10 to 15
> minutes. Is Warner really so stupid that they think
> us poor movie going souls will collapse from 
> nervious exhaustion or go into hysterics if we have 
> to sit 10 minutes longer to see a movie? If these
> deleted scenes had been put into the movie, it 
> would have had much better continuity. The whole 
> movie would have made immensely more sense? 
> 
> So in reality they sacrificed the quality, continuity,
> and integrity of the movie just so it could be 10
> minutes shorter. Really? What sense does that make?
> 
> I remember in the good old days when you got the cut
> down version on TV and the extended version in the
> Theater, and the even more extended version in the
> Director's Cut DVD. Now we get the extended version
> on TV and the crappy version in the theater and on
> DVD. The world is turned upside down.
> 
> For every HP movie I've been to in the theater, which
> is all of them, there isn't a single one where the 
> audience wasn't dying to see more movie. There wasn't
> a single person at any showing I've been to that
> wouldn't have love 15 minutes more movie. Better yet
> 30 minutes more movie.
> 
> On this issue of cutting the heart out of the movie
> for no reason other than needing to make it LESS THAN
> 2-1/2 hours, I think Warner is hopeless foolish and
> completely misguided.
> 
> As Roger Ebert once said, no good movie can be too 
> long and no bad movie can be too short. 
> 
> Simply make a good movie and we will sit there as long
> as it take to tell the story.
> 
> Just one man's opinion.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>