Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince

I really can't wait for opening night. I am sure about going to see it, but will they ever make one that is better than the original?

I'll be in a big reclining leather seat in my local cinemas VIP lounge on the opening night, ohh yes. I hope the age rating is incresed this time around to make up for the darker aspects of HBP. To do the last books right its gonna need to be at least a 12 imo.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this -- the film's release has been delayed until next summer -- July 17th.

And it's on the cover of Entertainment Weekly this week. You think they could have timed their announcement better.

To be honest, this just royally pisses me off. I'm so angry about it, I'm tempted to boycott the film. Why in the hell would they make us wait that long when the film is complete!

WB should be ashamed. What, they're afraid they won't get enough money?

One of the questions raised in the EW article was, now that the world knows the ending of the Potter saga, will audiences care anymore?

Well, I don't. I'm done.

Even Alan Rickman can't save this for me.

/rant

Well a little movie called Twilight which seems very similair to Harry Potter was coming out a month sooner (or later, too lazy to check) and they were worried that Twilight might get into their profits. Since, ya know, they have the same audience.

__________________
I used to be addicted to crystal meth, now I'm just addicted to Breaking Bad.

Twilight -- December 12.

Well, I don't care. I still say it's b.s. And I guess you can make the argument it's the same audience, but when I was at the last Harry Potter, there were quite a lot of middle aged people there. I don't really buy it.

Im cant wait to see this its going to be awsome.

Has the release date been moved?

__________________

~In the event of a Zombie Uprising, remember to sever the head or destroy the brain!~

n3wt, just announced it three posts up. Next summer.

You should be thankful you've only had to wait just a little over a year between each film thus far. I'd say that's pretty quick considering the Spider-Man films and the Star Wars prequels have each been released 2-3 years apart, among other notable franchises. The Lord of the Rings franchise managed to release a new installment exactly one year after the last, but the films were made concurrently with the same crew and director attached. The Harry Potter franchise has gone through writer and director changes since The Chamber of Secrets, and the films are still delivered in a timely fashion.

I'm pretty disgusted that you would consider boycotting the film over a delay. These things happen all the time in Hollywood, and are much more prominent in the video game industry (some major video games get delayed for years before they're finally released). It's not like the studio is really damaging anyone directly by pushing the film back. It's a business decision. They're not destroying the rain forest. You can say they went back on a promise, but the film will get released eventually. It's not going to kill you to wait.

Look, you're obviously a fan of the films. So you'll agree that this franchise has been stellar, considering the level of production required to adapt a complex seven-book series to film. Warner Bros. knows it needs to deliver a Potter flick worthy of the franchise's established success, so I can imagine pushing the film back is in your best interest. Better to wait longer for a great film than rush the release and pay for an unfinished one.

But the film is finished. It was ready for release. They pushed it back because they were afraid of the competition. I don't think it has to do with the quality or non-quality of the film.

I don't think the films have been stellar, either. Azkaban was stellar (interesting, it made the least money) and Order of the Phoenix was good, too, imo. But I think the others have only been fair. As a whole, though, I think it is a good franchise.

I'm sorry you're "disgusted" but I'm disgusted at this delay. I just think its ridiculous.

See, I haven't seen one article citing this as a reason for delaying the film. If you can provide that, I'll gladly sidle a little closer to your camp. However, delaying a film to avoid sizeable box office competition isn't an unwarranted decision. Again, this is business. They spend a good penny on these films, and while I can't imagine a Potter flick wouldn't get a good return anyway, you can't blame a studio for wanting to release on a clear weekend. I mean, come on... if the film had been scheduled to release the same weekend as The Dark Knight, could you really have blamed them for pushing it back?

Well, notice I wrote, "stellar, considering the level of production required to adapt a complex seven-book series to film." None of them are cinematic masterpieces, but they're far and away better than they really could have been. I mean, look at Eragon. You may not think the first two Potter films are phenomenal, but at least they got the series started on the right foot, and set standards for the rest of the films to follow. The only one I can really say I've been disappointed with, so far, has been Goblet of Fire, but it's still by no means unwatchable. And in my view, that's a considerable testament to the ongoing production of this series. Things could have been FAR worse.

I'm not saying it's unreasonable to be angry at the delay. I'm pissed off, too. I hate when this kind of thing happens. But I'm not about to go boycotting the film. That would just be counter-productive on my part.

All I'm saying is, I can't understand why there's such a huge, out-of-nowhere backlash from fans on the delay. The studio has never failed to release a Potter film on time before; and as I said, they've cranked out five major average to above-average to incredible films with no more than a year-and-a-half wait time between them. I'd say that's something fans shouldn't so easily forget.

Sleezy, they decide to pull it rather suddenly -- jeez, EW didn't even have time to change their front page. I don't have a link, but I did read that people from the studio stated the film was finished. No, they didn't come out and say the delay was because of the competition, but what else could it possibly be?

I don't think a fan backlash is "out of nowhere." They screwed up, imo. It was too close to the fall season and this was one of the biggest fall films. Now, suddenly, next summer?

I do wonder about something, though... an actors strike still looms, right? Do they know something we don't? Are they banking on the strike and maybe next summer will be weak? (I don't know, I'm just guessing.)

Sleezy, maybe I should be totally truthful. Maybe I am like the people that EW wondered about; I do know how it all ends and maybe I've lost interest?

I'm not really sure, but this delay certainly doesn't help.

Re-shoots? Marketing snags? Distribution problems? You might very well be right, but I don't recall seeing much marketing on this film, and it was already due out in the Fall? Seems like maybe they'd want to hype it a little more, in lieu of The Dark Knight's phenomenal 8-month viral marketing campaign. I don't know. That's the thing. I'm not about to criticize a studio for making a decision without knowing why, especially since I'm no expert on the process of releasing a film.

Of course it is. One day, everything is fine and dandy. The next day, Warner Bros. pushes back the film till the summer, and suddenly everyone wants to burn effigies of Barry Meyer on the front steps of the studio. I'm still trying to figure out what is so maddening about a delay. Sure, it's a long delay. But Christ, people are supposed to boycott films for real reasons, like being racist or depicting gratuitous scenes of violent rape. It seems a little naive and selfish to me that so many people would boycott a film over a delay. You can expect a studio to deliver a product on their promised release date all you want. But in the end, the brutal reality is this: Warner Bros. doesn't owe us anything.

It's certainly possible. If the film is done, I don't know how that would affect it, seeing as how all the actors would have already given their performances. But Ed Norton has shown that actors can dispute the final edited version of a film to which they contributed. Perhaps?

Judging by the extremely positive reaction to the trailer released some weeks ago, I don't think that's the case for anyone. I think it's pretty clear that most people are anxiously anticipating this film after such a stellar summer blockbuster showing, and nobody could really cope with the fact that they're now being forced to wait another eight months for no explicit reason. But hey, it could be worse. You could be unemployed. Your mother could have cancer. I'm just sayin.

Although Harry Potter movies always made me disappointed because of its cut from original paper-book, I've been still looking forward its 6th part.

Aha! I just happen to be looking around for convention news, lol, and found this:

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,405362,00.html
Hmmm... I never thought of this!

Yeah, I completely forgot about that. I can totally see why Warner Bros. would want to push the film back. So now, instead of burning effigies of Barry Meyer, all the disgruntled fans out there should be blaming their beloved Harry Potter for shaking his willy on Broadway and delaying their fix for another eight months.

This pisses me off. Harry Potter would have been so awesome, now that they moved the release date, this makes me so mad. Oh well, then again it will be sort of fun to wait for the new release date

Absolutely--what a horrible film. There is better writing in a Steve Alten novel!

Horrible film but great books. But thats always the way with it.

This isn't quite true--without audiences to pay for seeing the movies Warner Brothers makes, there would be no movies made. Movie studios owe much to the people who help keep them in business. However, if a movie studio does not owe audiences anything, the inverse is true--audiences do not owe the studio anything. It may seem silly to give up on a movie because the release date changes, but it is not wrong of audiences to be upset by that and makes their concerns heard.

You're right, but let's not stumble into generics here. This isn't some longshot Indie flick Warner Bros. is trying to sell. This is a Harry Potter film. People are going to see it, regardless of when it gets released. Fans are screaming that a delay is utterly egregious, but this is the product of Warner Bros. If they want to delay it, they can delay it. If they want to can it, they can do that too. Even a canned Potter flick wouldn't sink the studio.

I agree, it's not wrong for fans to be upset. And sure, who expects Potter fans to sit down and wait quietly? That's a rabid bunch. It just seems to me like the overwhelmingly negative response the delay has garnered, coupled with widespread suggestions of boycott, completely misses the fact that delays happen all the time in more than just Hollywood. I mean, you'd think Warner Bros. was murdering kittens in public. Doesn't that strike you as a little naive and selfish?