Yates estimates OOTP running time
Empire magazine's latest edition included a three-page spread on the Order of the Phoenix movie, where director David Yates spoke about the length of the film. "The book's huge, but it actually distills quite easily. That said, I've shot a movie that's probably over three hours, so I'll have to lose 45 minutes in the edit."

Also, Imelda Staunton (Umbridge) has been trying for some time to get involved in the franchise and joked: "Well, actually I was rather insulted they'd never asked."

Finally, producer David Heyman praised Evanna Lynch as Luna: "She's an obsessive Potter fan who'd actually had correspondence with Jo Rowling. When she was cast Jo rang me up because she just couldn't believe it - from her letters she said, 'She is Luna.'"

You can view scans of this spread here, thanks to reader Elle!
Posted by Ciaran on Oct 29th | 173 Comments
Visitor Comments
Posted by purplepeopleeater92 Oct 29th 2006

COOL!


Posted by uknowho Oct 29th 2006

its sad that they have to lose 45 minutes. i would watch them. 2nd?


Posted by Chrisell Oct 29th 2006

Why so short?


Posted by unforgivable_curses Oct 29th 2006

why do they have to cut out the 45 minutes..... id watch it if it was 6 hours long!!! top 5?


Posted by purplepeopleeater92 Oct 29th 2006

no, never mind what i said. that's not cool. not cool at all.


Posted by CrAzY_4_HP Oct 29th 2006

They have to lose 45 mins??? NOOOOOOO!!!!


Posted by ihavethepower Oct 29th 2006

noo. why they like shortening stuff? its gonna be shorter than gof? how long were gof n poa?


Posted by dumbledoresman Oct 29th 2006

thats not FAIR!!!!just 2:15 mins moviee!!:O:O i m shocked!!!!!!!!


Posted by LadyM Oct 29th 2006

lol i was just reading this on TLC..they have scans of the article on it..they labeled a pic with umbridge (the one in her office) and it says that the hues of pink that she wears gets darker as her mood gets darker..


Posted by rachel9isfine Oct 29th 2006

Why is it so short? It's such a huge book. I don't want it to be all rushed again like GOF.


Posted by LadyM Oct 29th 2006

oh ya and that cutting 45 minutes thing sucks, too......they have to find ways to ruin it, don't they, ah well...i still have good vibes about yates....i think they should pic fans to examine the directors before they chose them ^_^


Posted by purplepeopleeater92 Oct 29th 2006

well, this would be (according to Mr. Heyman) 145 minutes (2 hours, 25 mins.) If he didn't cut the 45 mins, it would be 190 minutes. GoF was 157 minutes, PoA was 141 minutes, CoS was 161 and SS was 152. Cos Was the longest so far, and maybe people complained it was too long and now they aim to keep them shorter than that. Even though the fifth movie is so action-packed, etc etc that i figured it would have to be at least three hours (180 minutes). Discuss =D


Posted by Nusayba Oct 29th 2006

Let us all write to Yates and tell him to keep it in!!! I don't think that people would mind watching a long movie. They can do an intermission. Don't forget the power we Harry Potter fans have!


Posted by LindseyBindsey Oct 29th 2006

purplepeopleeater92, OOTP isn't as action packed as GOF. It's just one depressing thing after another (Dementor attack, Hagrid only showing up later in the year, Umbridge and her decrees etc) then at the end there's real action. They should just get the end right. And the wording of the prophecy...


Posted by lillink1222 Oct 29th 2006

-tear- Well, he doesn't exactly say how much over 3 hours it is. It could be 3 hours and 45 minutes, meaning we get a 3 hour movie.


Posted by Helene Oct 29th 2006

Oh, I hope they don't edit any more than they have to! *sigh*--- "She IS Luna"--That's encouraging! LOVE The countdown clock, btw!


Posted by LadyM Oct 29th 2006

LindseyBindsey has a point.....all the action is at the end...BUT...Harry goes many places in the books, just like Jo said...The ministry twice, hogwarts, the burrow, 12 grimmauld place, e.t.c..and Jo of course needs time to stick in all those little things like descriptions and conversations...so really, just making the whole movie a big angst-cake and leaving the action till the end wont do it as must justice as u might think..thats kind of what they did in GoF....purplepeopleeater9 2 i think it will be around 2 hr 30 minz because he had it a bit more than 3 hours...and im sure he'll leave the stuff that need to be there, right? I like Yates, and i think we should give him a chance..................a nd THEN we can write an angry letter to him ^_^


Posted by LadyM Oct 29th 2006

oh and all of those places he goes to through voldemort's mind, and the D.A. meetings, and...ok ill stop now......


Posted by Matrinka Oct 29th 2006

There really is no need to trim it. I think Peter Jackson proved that people will sit in a theatre for over 3 hours with Lord of the Rings. Come on, if the film is GOOD, people won't be upset about the length!


Posted by TheFifthMarauder Oct 29th 2006

I would watch it if it was three hours long or more!!! Why do they have to cut out 45 mins? That would be way too short...So much good stuff would be cut. Maybe, just maybe, he was exaggerating a bit? That's my hope anyway...


Posted by purplepeopleeater92 Oct 29th 2006

'Tis true, LinseyBindsey, the action is at the end. But still, the action at the end is a pretty long amount of action, but still don't forget, there also has to be a story told. GoF seemed to have forgotten that. It was a graphics-fest, but that was it. There was none of the deepness needed to hold someone's attention and captivate them, like Mission Impossible Three. That had lots of effects but still told a story, and captivated the audience (well the one i was with anyway...) So if hte movie is long, people will still go see it, it's not like millions of people are going to all not going to see it becuase it's over three hours. Just my two cents.


Posted by LadyM Oct 29th 2006

yea thats true and they got lord of the rings thats god knows how many hours long....how cum they dont make harry potter that long? anyone know?


Posted by danfan1o1 Oct 29th 2006

the longer the better


Posted by RedJackett Oct 29th 2006

We will wait in line for a book for 3 hours, why can't we sit in a theater to watch a movie about that book for that long? The Lord of the Rings fans never have had to wait to buy the books and they got like a 4 hour movie. We always have to wait except for SS, but still Potter fans would watch the movie if it was a week long, let alone a few hours. I care more though that the story flows well as opposed to GOF which felt so rushed and had I not read the book could have been lost within. As long as all that is needed is in the movie, I don't care how long it is, but hopefully these movie makers would not just see $$ as oppose to trying to tell the great epic of Harry Potter, but let's not worry too much because with the way movies are going the Harry Potter movies will be re-made by 2020 anyways!


Posted by roonilwazzzlib Oct 29th 2006

I wish they wouldn't cut any of it... but we must realize that WB is making this for the general public to see as well as us die hard Harry Potter fans. And also OOTP is my favourite of the series, I didn't think it was disappointing? Ahh well, to each their own.


Posted by LindseyBindsey Oct 29th 2006

purplepeopleeater92, ok that's you opinion. I thought GOF did tell a good story and sure held my attention. danfan1o1 said "the longer the better" not necassarily. PS was long but I struggle to watch it to the end coz it gets a bit boring. not that is isn't a good movie... but i suppose it's coz the book isn't as action packed as GOF... yes, that's why. lol i wish the trailer was out already


Posted by TriWizKid Oct 29th 2006

Nice. i'm with RedJackett. they got a good point.


Posted by Wassan Oct 29th 2006

I HOPE THEY MAKE IT ATLEAST 3 HOURS! I MEAN LOOK AT TITANIC AND PEARL HARBOUR! THEY WERE BOTH OVER THREE HOURS & THEY WERE BOTH AT THE TOP OF THE BOX OFFICE! PEOPLE NEVER MIND LONG MOVIES! IF OOTP IS SHORT I WON'T ENJOY IT THAT MUCH JUST LIKE GOF! IT'S LIKE IN GOF I WATCHED IT ONCE, TWISE, THREE TIMES & THEN WHEN THE STORY ALREADY SANK IN I DIDN'T ENJOY RE WATCHING IT BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS JUST SOOOOO RUSHED LIKE EVERYONE IS SAYING! IT'S SO TRUE, WHEREAS I ENJOY RE WATCHING POA BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE TELLING A STORY, NOT TO MENTION THE ARTY EFFECT!


Posted by Wassan Oct 29th 2006

OOTP IS SUCH A BEAUTIFULL STORY & DESERVES 3 HOURS! IF THE ESSENTIAL MOMENTS OF THE BOOK IS LOST IN THE MOVIE THAN IT WON'T LEAVE THE SAME EFFECT IT LEFT ON ME AFTER READING OOTP!


Posted by LindseyBindsey Oct 29th 2006

Ohh... caps lock ^^


Posted by nerdygirl Oct 29th 2006

i am hermione i sent it in earlier oh well but yeah it needs to be longer it just wont have the same effect as the book did but then again how many of the movies have been as good as the book?


Posted by alipotter Oct 29th 2006

AWWWW! Y can't we av the three hours??? It's pretty useless with all that other 45mins of film time! All those lines and scenes that the actors had to do--GONE to waste! I wana see it ALL! lol!


Posted by iwishiwashermione Oct 29th 2006

why do they have to lose stuff?! LOTR was more than 3 hours long! i hate it when they cut stuff and then it seems like the storyline is rushed when you watch it.


Posted by howamazingyouare Oct 29th 2006

Maybe we'll get an extended edition DVD or something.


Posted by purplepeopleeater92 Oct 29th 2006

Sorry, i wrote the wrong thing in my earllier post. I think GoF did tell a story, but it was rushed. That's what i meant. (eek don't hurt me!)


Posted by uberskittles Oct 29th 2006

NOOO! WE WANT THE EXTRA 45 MINUTES!


Posted by call_me_crazy Oct 29th 2006

Noooo! I want my extra 45 minutes! It's an 870 page book, it has t be at least three ours, or else it's squishyed


Posted by polish Oct 29th 2006

im not sure if i want to read every single comment, cause i bet a percentage of them are just crying for those 45 minutes, when WE KNOW is not going to be 2:15 minutes long, i'll be more. plus, i bet his making a supposition about it.


Posted by Anjyp Oct 29th 2006

Yeah, they lose 45 minutes but we're only going to get 10 minutes of deleted scenes on the DVD! That's the way it always is, and it's so frustrating! We know that they shoot so much and yet they don't release it when they can! They hold back, and that is so annoying! I don't know about you, but I would sit through 45 minutes of deleted scenes.


Posted by SiriusBlak Oct 29th 2006

Thats Pretty Cool!!!


Posted by HProxmysox2252 Oct 29th 2006

I can't BELIEVE we are losing 45 minutes of the movie....THIS STINKS!!!!!!!! i would sit and watch the movie for 3 1/2 hours........wouldn't almost any HP fan do that???!!!!


Posted by totalvirgo Oct 29th 2006

Seriously, it should be 2 1/2 minimum. They're losing so many important parts this way!


Posted by ihavethepower Oct 29th 2006

yeah 45 mins makes alot of diff. how can they cut, its the longest book so far. cant make it the shortest movie. They spent so much time filming and they dont wanna give us the whole movie?


Posted by Why_Here Oct 29th 2006

Why I'd be insanely excited to have a three hour HP movie, we have to realize that only 5-10% of the market for the movies are die hard Harry Potter fans that would see the movie if it was a month long. The rest of them are casual viewers, just enjoying an afternoon at the movies and even though they might have read the books before, they won't compare it so painstakingly like us fans do. Instead of posting a long OoTP movie, I believe that when the DVD's come out there should be a theater version and then an extended version for us fans. That's just my thoughts though.


Posted by alien_from_mars Oct 29th 2006

Hmm, this doesnt sound good, cutting 45 MINUTES? I mean.. okay cutting 15 mins but 45? Thats a big chunk.. We will see..


Posted by LindseyBindsey Oct 29th 2006

I agree with Why_Here ... we're in the minority


Posted by Nusayba Oct 29th 2006

If they want to keep it short but also keep important plot points, they should cut the kiss. People are going to hate me for saying this, but that is just my opinion.


Posted by Why_Here Oct 29th 2006

That wouldn't be a bad idea, actually, Nusayba. But we're not down to it what is kept in and what is taken out-it us up to the directors and the producers and to an extent, Jo.


Posted by peacebyanymeans Oct 29th 2006

Guys, what you have to understand not everyone will sit through a 3 1/2 hour movie. Even with LotR, only RotK was 3 hours and people started to walk out on it. We know Harry Potter fans would, hell I would, sit through a 3-4 hour movie. The problem is, a average Joe can say "This is too long, I have to go." And get a refund for the film. THAT'S WHY you can't have a 3 hour+ movie. Besides, I'm sure the deleted scenes will be on the DVD anyway.


Posted by smiley41 Oct 29th 2006

cut 45 minutes. come on. titanic,pearl harbor, and lord of the rings were long movies and very succesful. OOTP could be 6 hours long and i would still watch it. the editor should leave it hust how it is.






Translate


MuggleNet is an unofficial Harry Potter fan site. Please email us if you have any questions or concerns. MuggleNet's original layouts were designed and created by Navy. All subsequent layouts by Dylan Spartz.

© 1999-2009 MuggleNet.com. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy | COPPA Policy | Feedback | Credits
Random Addresses

916 muggles currently online






Poll
In your opinion, which Potter story was the biggest of 2008?

Updates
Today's Updates
· Added The Magic Quill #145 and #146 [January 5]
Recent Updates
· Released first AudioFiction [January 4]
· Released 2008 Year in Review [December 28]
· Debuted new Harry Potter social network, MuggleSpace [December 25]
Mail

Quotes
Twitchy little ferret, aren't you, Malfoy?

Hermione Granger
Goblet of Fire, Chapter 23, Page 404

See Another Quote
Big News
(12/03) - Beedle the Bard NOW AVAILABLE! - first general review
(11/14) - Warner Brothers releases new Half-Blood Prince trailer!
(10/26) - New Half-Blood Prince international teaser trailer!
(9/08) - WB/RDR Trial Verdict: Judge halts Lexicon publication
(8/14) - Half-Blood Prince delayed until July 17th, 2009
(6/11) - JK Rowling's Harry Potter Prequel now online!
Release Dates
The Exhibition - Chicago opening:
April 30th, 2009
Deathly Hallows paperback:
July 7th, 2009
Half-Blood Prince:
July 17th, 2009
Wizarding World:
2010
Deathly Hallows, Pt 1:
November 19, 2010
Deathly Hallows, Pt 2:
May 2011

Advertisement