Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

living dead girl · 02-05-2009, 09:04 PM

I'm wicked stoked for this. It was my favorite book by FAR and they've really done a brilliant job of making the movies almost as good as the books
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Caesar · 02-06-2009, 01:44 AM

After seeing some recent Emma Watson photoshoots, I'll be watching this one alone in my room.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Lost · 02-11-2009, 12:43 AM

lol ^^^

I was going to say... theres only one reason I watch these movies!

Emma Watson
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Arn't they making two movies for the last book?

James Deuce · 05-24-2009, 09:24 PM

Wasn't the last one PG13?

Daddy · 05-24-2009, 11:24 PM

I was a little pissed off that they moved it to this summer but none the less I am anxious to see it, even though they cut out the most important part of the book because they didn't want to have something like that in the movie.

RaiZ-R · 05-28-2009, 06:25 PM

Harry Potter 1 - Passable
Harry Potter 2 - Good
Harry Potter 3 - Rubbish
Harry Potter 4 - Awful
Harry Potter 5 - Dismal
Harry Potter 6 - Could be good?

Considering these films pretty much get worse as they go on, my optimism may be unfounded, but the book is 90% exposition, so cutting out useless crap shouldn't be too hard. Plus Emma Watson's a fitty.

Daddy · 05-29-2009, 01:32 AM

I haven't minded any of the films honestly. I hadn't watched any of them til this past summer but they were entertaining. I won't say they were great by any stretch of the imagination but very entertaining.

Necro · 06-09-2009, 04:07 AM

Quote:

Harry Potter 6 IMAX Wide Release Delayed Two Weeks
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
June 9, 2009

The Hollywood Reporter says that although Warner Bros. Pictures will release Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince in theaters on July 15, it will only hit two IMAX screens in New York and Los Angeles that day -- the wide IMAX release won't be until July 29th.

The two-week delay is fallout from the decision by Warner Bros. to push "Potter" from its originally-scheduled November 2008 opening. The new July opening overlaps with IMAX's month-long window dedicated to Paramount's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.

Still, "Potter" contains 12 minutes of 3-D footage that moviegoers can experience only through IMAX, so that could cushion the blow.

Actually works out well. A lot of people will now see it twice.

Daddy · 06-11-2009, 11:36 AM

I will be in the seeing it twice category. I will go see it in the theaters when it opens, and I will be taking my niece and nephew to see it in IMAX as well.

Necro · 07-07-2009, 10:31 AM

'Harry Potter' returns to PG territory
How will rating affect Warner film?

Quote:

After two recent PG-13 outings, the latest "Harry Potter" film is back to PG territory -- so is that good news for Warner Bros.?

Success is virtually guaranteed for "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," which bows day and date globally July 15; the only question is how much success. And despite conventional wisdom that PG is a more family-friendly rating, the last PG film -- 2004's "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," the third in the series -- was the lowest grossing of the five domestically with $249 million.

B.O. numbers climbed for the fourth and fifth editions, which were rated PG-13: The 2005 "Goblet of Fire" scored $290 million, and the 2007 "Order of the Phoenix" tallied $292 million domestically.

There's little question that some parents would feel more comfortable OK'ing a trip to see a film rated PG rather than PG-13.

But by this point, "Harry Potter" is a known commodity. Obviously, parents feel safe entrusting their kids to Hogwarts films, and the PG-13 has a bonus of indicating that a film is cool and slightly more grown-up. Sometimes, a studio prefers a PG-13 rating because it will draw teenagers. A PG rating can be viewed by teens as too juvenile.

The MPAA and NATO ratings board gave PG ratings to the first three "Potter" pics, including the original, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," the highest grossing of the six films at the domestic B.O. at $317 million.

The second in the series, the 2002 "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," grossed $261 million.

Warner Bros. knew going in that the "Harry Potter" franchise wouldn't remain a family property as the characters morphed from kids into teenagers and the storyline grew more complex.

Neither the studio nor the filmmakers went into the ratings process with the intention of securing a PG rating for "Half-Blood Prince," insiders said. Rather, the ratings board determined that nothing depicted on the screen warranted the more restrictive PG-13 designation.

"Half-Blood Prince" is no lighter in tone than the previous two films, according to early reviews.

From a box office perspective, PG titles fall squarely in the family category, one of the most lucrative for any moviehouse.

Both "Goblet of Fire" and "Order of the Phoenix" were rated PG-13 for "sequences of fantasy violence and frightening images," according to descriptors provided by the ratings board.

"Half-Blood Prince" is rated PG for "scary images, some violence, language and mild sensuality."

While a PG rating has become synonymous with a family film, that wasn't the original intent. A PG rating was a signal to parents that there may be some material not suitable for a child under 10. A PG film may contain some mild language, crude humor, thematic elements, sexual themes and some scary moments. No drug content is permitted.

Source: Variety

uh ohh.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

This is a discussion on Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) within the Released Movies forums, part of the Coming Attractions category; I'm wicked stoked for this. It was my favorite book by FAR and they've really done a brilliant job of ...