MyLeaky Login

Join the largest Harry Potter Social Network on the Web! | FAQ

In the News

WB: "Deathly Hallows: Part 1" to be Released in 2D Formats, Not 3D

DH Film
Posted by: Edward
October 08, 2010, 02:24 PM

WB has issued a press release regarding the decision to release the "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1" film in a 2D format for conventional and IMAX theaters.  The first half of the final Harry Potter film was originally slated to be converted into 3D during post production, however, as the press release notes, "Despite everyone’s best efforts, we were unable to convert the film in its entirety and meet the highest standards of quality."


The full press release is as follows:

Warner Bros Pictures has made the decision to release “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1” in 2D, in both conventional and IMAX theaters, as we will not have a completed 3D version of the film within our release date window. Despite everyone’s best efforts, we were unable to convert the film in its entirety and meet the highest standards of quality. We do not want to disappoint fans who have long-anticipated the conclusion of this extraordinary journey, and to that end, we are releasing our film day-and-date on November 19, 2010 as planned. We, in alignment with our filmmakers, believe this is the best course to take in order to ensure that our audiences enjoy the consummate “Harry Potter” experience.     
Producer David Heyman said, “For 10 years, we have worked alongside Alan Horn and the studio, whose priority has always been to preserve the integrity of Jo Rowling’s books as we have adapted them to the screen, and this decision reflects that commitment.”     
Director David Yates continued, “This decision, which we completely support, underscores the fact that Warner Bros. has always put quality first.”     
As scheduled, on July 15, 2011, we will deliver to conventional and IMAX theaters our final installment of the film franchise, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2,” in both 2D and 3D formats.

Previous Article | Next Article Browse all Recent DH Film News

130 Comments

Trio_poster_thumb
1293 Points

Who cares, important is that they didn’t push the release date… :D

Posted by Petra on October 09, 2010, 06:09 AM report to moderator
Dobbysnap_thumb
85 Points

Kind of a bummer. The 3D wasn’t at all necessary, but I was planning to see the 2D, the IMAX 3D, and the RealD versions just for the hell of it. It would have been fun to compare the experiences, since I planned to see the film multiple times either way. What I’m slightly more worried about is the fact that the general public knows nothing of these press releases. You’ll have people who are not crazy HP fans who were possibly drawn in by all the 3D hype, and this just feels like something that can potentially backfire.

They really should have thought this through. Like a few others have mentioned, the process isn’t something Warner could have possibly thought would be quick. I remember hearing about the 3D Potter plans in January, so it’s not like the deadline suddenly snuck up on them. They had to have known [earlier than now] that they weren’t going to finish in time. I’m glad to hear Warner decided to go with quality instead of giving us a shoddy/incomplete conversion, and I would have been extremely pissed if the release date changed, but I’m surprised they were willing to scrap it [simply thinking in terms of finance]. Some reports put the potential lost revenue in the neighborhood of $50 or $60 million, since 3D tickets are more expensive. I know that’s not much compared to what the films bring in, but it’s still $50 million they won’t be pocketing. Even if Warner isn’t worried about the money loss, they should still have considered the bad press. At the very least, they should have announced this months ago to allow word to spread a bit more about the change. There will still be uninformed people who will show up expecting 3D.

Added note: As a few people have mentioned before me, 3D wasn’t the only version being released. I’m not understanding all the 3D hate flying around, since the 2D option was always going to be there. One wasn’t replacing the other. If you’re not a fan of 3D, the choice to see the 2D version instead was still available all along. [Sorry for the wall of text.]

Posted by Justin the Mighty on October 09, 2010, 06:28 AM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb

Hooray! Personally I think the 3D gimick is getting a bit much and adds nothing at all to the quality of the films, even films like Avatar and Alice in Wonderland didn’t look any better for it.

Posted by anne1 on October 09, 2010, 08:39 AM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb

I’m actually happy this happened, to be honest. I won’t go so far as to say that the recent flood of 3D films is just another “fad”, the way it was in the 1950s (when it served the purpose of bringing viewers of the new television technology back into movie theaters), but it does seem like 3D is being applied awkwardly to movies that don’t really need it and weren’t filmed with it in mind. Also, even with the strides they’ve made it 3D technology, they still haven’t managed to erase the problem of the darker levels of the images on the screen, due to wearing the glasses. Also, watching something for prolonged periods in 3D gives me a headache. I’m perfectly fine with both parts being released in 2D (although it looks like they will stick with 3D for the second part of the finale). Call me a traditionalist if you will, but I want to enjoy the movie for what it is, and not have it be weighed down by an unnecessary effect.

Posted by critterfur on October 09, 2010, 08:54 AM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb

Also, to those who have stated that the movie was also going to be released in 2D anyway, and don’t understand the dislike for 3D, here’s my situation…I live in a smallish town. We’re big enough that we have a movie theater which currently has 6 screens, and recently went through a pretty big renovation (increasing the size of the screens and putting in stadium-type seating). This means that in order to play the 2 or 3 (or sometimes more) new movies that come out every week, and still keep older ones around for a few weeks for those who don’t catch them right away, these 6 screens get filled up pretty fast. When our movie theater was doing its renovations, the recent 3D craze had yet to appear (Avatar hadn’t been released yet), so none of our theaters were equipped to even show films in 3D (I saw plenty of films that were meant to be in 3D in 2D, like Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, How to Train Your Dragon, etc). Now our movie theater wants to cash in on the craze, but they only had enough money to convert one of our screens to incorporate 3D (and it’s one of the smaller screens…our screens aren’t all the same size because our movie theater wasn’t built as a multiplex or anything, it’s the same movie theater that’s existed in our town for 50 years, it’s just had upgrades and screen additions over the years…it started out as one big screen, which still exists). So anyway, having only 1 out of 6 screens able to show 3D, and it being a tinier, cramped theater, is not so good. That also means we have less options when it comes to a 3D movie. When Toy Story 3 came out, our theater put it in the little 3D equipped theater, but when Last Airbender came out, our theater was still playing the 3D version of Toy Story 3, and had to put Last Airbender in a traditional 2D theater. What I was always afraid of (and what would likely happen here) is that Deathly Hallows would be sandwiched into the little 3D theater, because our movie theater couldn’t afford the space to put up both the 2D and 3D versions. The town I live in is sort of out on the prairies, and the closest multiplex theater is 2 hours away, so I really might not have had the option to watch the film in 2D if I’d wanted to. Also (and this might be my more cynical, geeky side talking), when George Lucas released the Special Editions of the Star Wars movies back in 1997, everyone was really excited, until they learned that Lucas intended to these new versions to permanently replace the old ones I grew up on, meaning that now it’s almost impossible to find the original movies in any sort of good quality, and every digital cleanup or 3D process is giving to the Special Editions, and not the originals. I just don’t want to be permanently saddled with a version of a film that ruins the experience.

Posted by critterfur on October 09, 2010, 09:21 AM report to moderator
Wand_thumb
4852 Points

I am glad they chose what they did and did not give up the quality of it. All the others have been in 2D and they have all been, to say the least, spectacular, so I am sure this one will be too. And it is an added excitement that the last one will be in 3D.

Posted by #1 Witch ROAR! on October 09, 2010, 09:42 AM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb
133 Points

damn it, 3D is awesome… Excited anyway

Posted by KeaHellstorm on October 09, 2010, 09:48 AM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb
127 Points

still excited but now theres no hope of it crossing 1 billlion :(

Posted by hallowman on October 09, 2010, 09:48 AM report to moderator
1zlq6ps_thumb
66 Points

WHAAAATTTT? NOT IN 3D???!!!!

Posted by nearramorgan on October 09, 2010, 10:07 AM report to moderator
Puppet_pals_yes_thumb
3238 Points

Im happy about this. I glad that they would rather not put the movie in 3D than put a bad 3D movie in theaters. I also didn’t want it to be in 3D.

Posted by phoenixes are in ravenclaw on October 09, 2010, 12:38 PM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb
13651 Points

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I HATE 3D!!!!!!!! HARRY POTTER IS A 2D MOVIE AND THAT’S THE END OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@

Posted by hp931 on October 09, 2010, 02:11 PM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb
49 Points

As several people have pointed out, it was only ever going to be a conversion job (i.e. artificial 3D) anyway. 3D, schmee-dee, who needs it?

Posted by SpellWraith on October 09, 2010, 03:29 PM report to moderator
Noavatar-thumb
254 Points

Mm, I’m actually glad it’s not in 3D- the technology was pretty exciting when it first came out, but it’s so overused now. I like that they’re sticking with 2D format, and keeping Nov. 19th.

Posted by andarocketship on October 09, 2010, 05:33 PM report to moderator
Batman_thumb
177 Points

Disappointing. :( Of course I’ll still go and see it, I just hope that soon after they try to release it in a 3D format too.
Though after some 3D films I’m unsure if it really is disappointing or a slight blessing.
The 3D might have ruined the quality of the movie. :S

Posted by Crazy and Proud on October 09, 2010, 05:47 PM report to moderator
Owl_watermelon_thumb
1242 Points

3D conversion just isn’t as good as filming in 3D in the first place. I did like the 3D scenes from OotP and HBP, but I was also glad that the entire film wasn’t in 3D. Maybe I will go to the IMAX screen after all.

Posted by Lucia Meadows on October 09, 2010, 06:11 PM report to moderator
You must be logged in to MyLeaky to comment. Please click here to log in.

Finding Hogwarts
PotterCast Interviews Jo Rowling! Click here to Listen! The Books Everything...Half-Blood Prince...and the rest of the HP Films Leaky Apps
Learn to knit your own 'Weasley Sweater'. Learn to brew your own 'Butterbeer'. Find out how at Leaky Crafts!

Scribbulus Essay Project

Issue 28 - Aug. 2014

Scribbulus is THE place for Leaky Cauldron readers to submit their essays and opinion pieces!
See more over at Scribbulus!

Guess That Book

"And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death? They, who had seen proofs of the immensity of my power in the times when I was mightier than