Harry Potter Movies...what if it was like that?

Question

What if the movies were done after all seven books were completed?

--Would the movies hold true to the book? Would characters that were left out/ or had no significant movie time in the current movie series have major roles (aka Dobby, Firenze and Centaurs, Tonks, Mundungus, Fenrir, Bill) as they were shown to be of importance in Book 7?

--If they did hold off on the movie series until Book 7 ended, what if Peter Jackson was at the healm of this septology? After doing LOTR, what if he recruited Ian McKellin to play Dumbledore? Would Ian McKellin have been a better Dumbledore than the previous two in the current series? Would Peter Jackson's movie contain all parts of the books?~would his movies be 4 hr long movies?

--Would Ralph Fiennes still be a good choice for Voldemort? Would Daniel Radcliffe and crew still be considered for roles in book 6-7 (being that actors in 'American Teenage movies' are played by some in their early to mid 20s)?

What if it was like that?...

Answer 1

The movies 4 and 5 have left too much out, things that particularly bothered me were them leaving out the elf liberation front in 4 and everything about Ron in 5.
I think the movies are enjoyable but the books are so much better. Plus I think that if they had waited until they were all done, there would be less interest in actually reading the books. Look at how many people only know LOR from the movies? I think PJ would have done a great job with HP too though. I think Dumbledore has been done well in the movies, but Ian McKellan yes is one of my favorite actors.
I think the movie series is cast really well with the current actors, especially Harry, Ron and the Fred and George. Hermoine is a lot prettier in the movies than she comes across in the books. I would not want to change to a different set of actors so they will have to do 6 and 7 quickly.

Answer 2

What if's are hard to tell sometimes. After all a 20-year-old can't play an 11-year-old. That is stretching it a little far. The actors had to grow up through the movies. I think it would be hard to find another Dan, Rupert, and Emma. Not to mention that they really lucked out in finding good actors (not that they could tell that early). I still think that the original Dumbledore was the perfect one. I still see it even in his other last movie (the Count of Monte Cristo). But I must admit if they could replace him they could have used actors available today.

I do think the movies would have been longer (at least the last 4) if Peter Jackson did them.

But I also have to say that they have really lucked out in that all of the actors are staying for all seven movies too.

The first 3 movies certainly consulted with Rowling about what could be left out. There were a few scenes she wouldn't let them cut because they would be needed in future books. In one interview she said that there was a scene that any other director would have tried to cut, but that she was really glad that this one didn't. So, in that regard, I'm not sure it would matter. But who knows. Unless you can enter a parrallel universe and check, we'll never know.

Answer 3

Well... I think Daniel Radcliffe and his co-stars, Rupert and Emma, would have some difficulty playing 11 year olds now. They're around 18, at least I know Dan is, and while they did a good job of making him look 15 for the 5th movie, I think trying to make an 18 year old look 11 would be a heck of a job. By the time they got to the seventh movie, these guys would be in their 30s! The casting would be entirely different. The movie would have to be a lot longer than 4 hours to contain all the details. I don't know who would be a better Dumbledore. And as for the ones who have minor roles, I don't think anyone can help it if they didn't have time to put them in, even if they're shown to be of importance in Book 7. That's what I think.

Answer 4

Recently I find myself enjoying the books far more than the recent movie. I was really disappointed in the latest movie. They left a lot out that they are going to have a hard time piecing together in later movies. I do think that they should make the movies longer, it adds the little extra details that make HP special and enjoyable. As for the actors I like them all except for Dudley. His acting was terrible in the Order of the Phoenix.. but other than that they have amazing actors that bring their light to the books bringing it to life in the most believable way possible.

Answer 5

Ian was approached to play Dumbeldore, but wanted to avoid being typecast in the wise old man role. However, I think it would've been awesome if he was Albus.
It would be cool if they were four hours long, and if PJ directed. Ralph fiennes is a great Voldemort.

Answer 6

if the movies were like 4 hours long and exactly like the books it would be awaosme but dobby was only in one movie and they still havent brought him back yet even though he is in the books

Answer 7

........Maybe one could go to see the movie on three or more successive days, and watch it in parts 1, 2, 3 etc., to have the thread in continuum, without a break or two in between!

Answer 8

than they would suck J/K! they would be better and worse id like all parts in the books in the movies but i wouldnt like watching it 4 hrs straight