Harry Potter Fantastic Beasts movie will be a trilogy
31 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26812277[/url]
[quote]JK Rowling's Harry Potter spin-off Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is to be made into a film trilogy.
The book, published in 2001, was originally billed as one of Harry Potter's Hogwarts textbooks.
Warner Bros chief Kevin Tsujihara persuaded author Rowling to adapt the book for the big screen.
Last week, he told the New York Times there would be a trilogy of films based on the book, which follows a "magizoologist" named Newt Scamander.
Scamander is the author of a guide to magical creatures. Set in New York, the book is neither a sequel nor a prequel, but an "extension" of Harry Potter's "wizarding world", Rowling said.[/quote]
I really don't think it needed three films
I'm just hoping that they'll also make a trilogy of the porn version, Fantastic Breasts and Where to Find Them
Interesting parallel to The Hobbit dough
Milk it dry, gotta milk it dry.
[QUOTE=Warriorx4;44459675]Milk it dry, gotta milk it dry.[/QUOTE]
Milking as it may be, if the quality is on par with the Harry Potter films I'm probably going to check it out.
tbh id love to see more from the same universe on the big screen if handled with the same care
i like harry potter and all, but im suprised they chose to make a movie about this book
hell the last time i read it was in 2002 or 2003 and i forgot about it until just now
[QUOTE=Warriorx4;44459675]Milk it dry, gotta milk it dry.[/QUOTE]
Hey, that's the slogan of the porn version
"Today we are hunting down the rare Volde-nose, this beast has never been caught on camera before. Luck is on our side and reports have been coming in just over 4 miles away."
I hope it's styled like a documentary rather than being a structured story about the adventurer or something. Either way, I did really like this book (though it was a tiny little thing) and some of the monsters were really cool.
[QUOTE=HyperTails;44459643]I really don't think it needed three films[/QUOTE]
You don't even know the plot of the movie, how can you judge whether it needs three films or not?
I just found a plot hole... Already:
[quote]The book was written by Rowling between the publication of the fourth and the fifth books in the Harry Potter series. It is set 70 years before we first meet Harry.[/quote]
Harry potter was born 31 July, 1980, therefore the film happens at 1910
According to the book written by JK for comic relief "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them"
Newt Scamander was born on 1897
1910 - 1897 = 13 years old
So apparently Newt Scamander is 13 when he does this... i find that hard to believe... i wonder if that will be in the film too.
As a irrelevent note, he therefore written the book when he was
1927 - 1897 = 30 years old
I have no life.
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;44460066]I just found a plot hole... Already:
Harry potter was born 31 July, 1980, therefore the film happens at 1910
According to the book written by JK for comic relief "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them"
Newt Scamander was born on 1897
1910 - 1897 = 13 years old
So apparently Newt Scamander is 13 when he does this... i find that hard to believe... i wonder if that will be in the film too.
As a irrelevent note, he therefore written the book when he was
1927 - 1897 = 30 years old
I have no life.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't seem unlikely. It might be shown as a flashback, the 30 year dude writes the book and narrates the events that happened when he was adventuring as a kid. Remember how young the Potter actors were in the very first movie.
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;44460066]I just found a plot hole... Already:
Harry potter was born 31 July, 1980, therefore the film happens at 1910
According to the book written by JK for comic relief "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them"
Newt Scamander was born on 1897
1910 - 1897 = 13 years old
So apparently Newt Scamander is 13 when he does this... i find that hard to believe... i wonder if that will be in the film too.
As a irrelevent note, he therefore written the book when he was
1927 - 1897 = 30 years old
I have no life.[/QUOTE]
Well when you consider all the shit Harry did in the first three books when he was 11-13, this guy exploring all over the world at 13 doesn't seem that implausible.
Whilst it seems interesting, I'd probably be more interested in a Harry Potter series wherein the "masquerade" of hiding magic from the Muggle world ends up crumbling away, and it becomes practically impossible for the magical community to disguise the existence of the magical world any longer.
There is really so much you can do with the HP universe, more in-depth details about Voldemort and the other villains may be cool, perhaps Hogwarts in its starting years or perhaps how the 'muggles' see the wizards and their response when Voldemort invaded.
But all in all.. [I]Please handle with care[/I].
You guys complain about almost all movies. fuck it, I'm excited
[QUOTE=nuttyboffin;44460066]I just found a plot hole... Already:
Harry potter was born 31 July, 1980, therefore the film happens at 1910
According to the book written by JK for comic relief "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them"
Newt Scamander was born on 1897
1910 - 1897 = 13 years old
So apparently Newt Scamander is 13 when he does this... i find that hard to believe... i wonder if that will be in the film too.
As a irrelevent note, he therefore written the book when he was
1927 - 1897 = 30 years old
I have no life.[/QUOTE]
Harry is 10 in the first book, wouldn't that make this one set in 1920 and make Newt 23?
Isn't Newt's grandson the husband of Luna or something?
Perhaps Warner Bro's wants to milk it dry, but JK Rowling is writing the trilogy, and she's doing it for two reasons; firstly, she really missed writing the world of Harry Potter, and secondly, she wanted the movies to be done right. These are gonna be fantastic for Harry Potter fans.
[QUOTE=Sam Cutt;44461005]These are gonna be fantastic for Harry Potter fans.[/QUOTE]
Maybe you'd like to tell Poster 2 and Poster 4 that. They seem to have wands stuck up their arses
[QUOTE=Sam Cutt;44461005]Perhaps Warner Bro's wants to milk it dry, but JK Rowling is writing the trilogy, and she's doing it for two reasons; firstly, she really missed writing the world of Harry Potter, and secondly, she wanted the movies to be done right. These are gonna be fantastic for Harry Potter fans.[/QUOTE]
Maybe if JK Rowling writes it the characters will wear ACTUAL ROBES for once and not dress like Vegas magicians
[thumb]http://111booksfor2011.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/dh1_ron_weasley_promo_02.jpg[/thumb]
FUCK OFF WARNER BROTHERS WIZARDS DON'T DRESS LIKE THAT
AND THEY DON'T PLAY IN FUCKING ROCK BANDS WITH ELECTRIC GUITARS
[QUOTE=macdoo999;44460004]I hope it's styled like a documentary rather than being a structured story about the adventurer or something. Either way, I did really like this book (though it was a tiny little thing) and some of the monsters were really cool.[/QUOTE]
I agree, it totally needs to be a mockumentary.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;44460734]There is really so much you can do with the HP universe, more in-depth details about Voldemort and the other villains may be cool, perhaps Hogwarts in its starting years or perhaps how the 'muggles' see the wizards and their response when Voldemort invaded.
But all in all.. [I]Please handle with care[/I].[/QUOTE]
To be honest, you could just as easily flesh the universe out, outside of the UK. At the end of the day, Voldemort really was more of a local nuisance, not a global threat.
I read that as fantastic breasts
[QUOTE=ThatSprite;44463504]I read that as fantastic breasts[/QUOTE]
Smurfy already beat you and beat off.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;44463167]AND THEY DON'T PLAY IN FUCKING ROCK BANDS WITH ELECTRIC GUITARS[/QUOTE]
Actually I think some of them did, like the Weird Sisters. However in the context of the fourth movie, I'm pretty sure the electric guitars would explode or something just by being near Hogwarts.
[b]FANTASTIC BEASTS!:[/b] Because we need more JK Rowling themed movies to make money with because Harry Potter is over.
I have this book, I guess it has to be kind of loosely based because the book is 42 pages long and just describes some of the creatures in the Harry Potter universe. Though I'll totally see it because it does sound like a good idea.
Loved the tie-in book when I was a kid. Maybe it'll be good.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.