Warner Bros. Gets Classy, Cancels 3D Version Of Harry Potter Film

Topic started by Rorie on Oct. 8, 2010. Last post by Nictel 2 years, 8 months ago.
Post by Sharpshooter (184 posts) See mini bio
Fair balls to them for taking the high road.
Post by LiquidSwords (467 posts) See mini bio
Sounds good to me
Post by justjonny (1 posts) See mini bio
Stupendous. Can't wait any longer
Post by skrutop (679 posts) See mini bio
@ScanCase said:
" This is a massive blow to the "growing" industry that is 3D. "
Not really.  It's not like they planned to skip 3D entirely, they just couldn't get it done in time.
 
I applaud this decision, though I suspect they're just spinning the situation to look more fan friendly.  No skin off their ass; Warner Brothers knows that they're still going to make upwards of $800 million, if not closer to $1 billion, on this movie.
Post by TrueEnglishGent (195 posts) See mini bio
Ouch, that's going to hurt the 3D industry (and fad).  
 
Couldn't care less about it being in 3D to be honest so bravo WB. 
Post by thabigred (439 posts) See mini bio
I want to see Emma Watson in 3D.
Post by MisfitToy (4 posts) See mini bio
For those of you who don't want to see it in 3D, guess what?  YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEE IT IN 3D!  There are far more 2D options for movies than you accidentally stumbling into the 3D theater.
Post by Scroll (51 posts) See mini bio
So they'll release the 3D version shortly before part 2? Sounds about right.
 
I still find these films pretty boring. I fell asleep in The order of the phoenix or whatever; And I was in that one!
Post by uskomaton (31 posts) See mini bio
@Vince said:
" Good idea because... 3D sucks. "
 
A-fucking-men!
Post by Icon (544 posts) See mini bio
@Cybexx said:

" You know what I don't get about all this is why they did not shoot this in 3D in the first place. I mean they started shooting after Avatar was released so they don't really have a good excuse. If your going to do 3D you do it right. Is the 3D conversion process so much cheaper that even the highest budgeted films pass on the real thing? "

I know right.   
 

@misfittoy

 said: 

" For those of you who don't want to see it in 3D, guess what?  YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEE IT IN 3D!  There are far more 2D options for movies than you accidentally stumbling into the 3D theater. "

People like to bitch about it anyway. Rational thinking not required. 
Post by MichaelBach (231 posts) See mini bio
I think they will still convert part one and release it in theaters together with or just before Part II.
Post by WickedCobra03 (58 posts) See mini bio
Yeah, I am pretty happy that they decided to go ahead and cancel this.  I have hated this 3D movie crud from the start.  There is nothing that I really have gotten out of 3D.  Actually, to this day, I have not gone into a movie theatre and paid more just to see a movie in 3D compared to the 2D version in the other theatre.  When I went to go see Toy Story 3, I saw that in 3D only because I was getting in for free.
Post by smi1ey (140 posts) See mini bio
awesome! it makes me sad that dumb people have made 3D movies a success. :(
Post by LiquidPrince (70 posts) See mini bio
@Vince said:
" Good idea because... 3D sucks. "
High five.
Post by Nictel (12 posts) See mini bio
YES. Anything but full filmed 3D just looks stupid. I spend extra on Airbender just to see 3D subtitles...  
 
Plus they should always release 2D versions for people who can't watch 3D movies because of medical reasons.
166 votes, 3.8 avg.

  • 4.5

  • 7.9

  • 79

  • B+
General Information Edit
Name Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I
US Release Nov. 19, 2010
UK Release Nov. 19, 2010
AUS Release Nov. 18, 2010
Runtime 146
Language(s)
Add a new language
Genre(s)
Add a new genre
Theme(s)
Add a new theme
Rating PG-13
Alias(es) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1
Harry Potter 7
Top Rated Lists
Movies I've Seen Since Screened.com Launched a list of 130 items by Rorie
Screened Community Best of 2010 a list of 25 items by Badfilms
Mini Reviews a list of 202 items by Winston
  • In today's dollars
    Domestic $295,001,070
    Foreign +660,416,406
  • = total worldwide gross $955,417,476
  • - a reported budget of $250,000,000
  • = a 282.2% net profit of $705,417,476
Top Editors
Mandatory Network

Submissions can take several hours to be approved.

Save ChangesCancel