Will you continue to support films being split into Part 1/2/3s?

[BK007]

After Deathly Hallows did it in 2010, every idiot on studio boards have jumped in too.

 

Deathly Hallows itself did lose admissions and failed to beat its predecessor but of course the amount of money it made sealed the fate of franchise finales everywhere. 

 

Breaking Dawn that had barely anything going on did it and neither movie topped the franchise peak. Superb. 

 

The Hobbit then decided to split from 1 to 2 to 3 and every one of them is down at least 30% or 40% in admissions from LOTR. This one I've actually seen, and after how it ended, really didn't need the third. A pointless adaptation.

 

Mockingjay, after two $400m HG entries, decreases nearly $100m. It is a pretty damn good movie, better than all the Hobbits and every single Twilight film (not saying much) and arguably even better than its predecessors, but we'll see if it really needed to be split next year.

 

But that's not all.

 

The infant series and relatively lightweight Divergent's finale has been split into two as well. It'd be good if this were confined to "young adult" series but no. We have Avengers Infinity War Part One and Two and Justice League Part One and Two as well. That's fucking annoying. Why can't they simply tell a story in one fecking movie. Make it 3.5 hours long if you must, but this is just blatant cash grabbing. Let's face it, there's no real artistic integrity for ANY of these movies. 

 

The only one you can argue a case is for the original creator of this disgusting trend. Harry Potter fans had been clamouring for years, since Goblet of Fire's perceived mishandling, to split movies into two and not because anyone cared about Daniel Radcliffe's bank account but to be "faithful to the books" and whilst being faithful does not equate a good adaptation, after the generational phenomena that was Harry Potter and the immense final book, it did deserve its eventual split.

 

Twilight, Hobbit, Hunger Games, Divergent, Avengers and Justice League don't. The latter is the absolute worst with not even the first movie of this purported universe having released and they are already planning to split their finale into two. What the fuck. If you can't tell a story in one go, it's you who is the problem.

 

So, whilst I did see the entire Hobbit trilogy, being a fan of the original LOTR and Mockingjay too, I do not like where this is headed and indeed, I might join the rank masses of deserters to not turn up to Part Ones. A drop in an ocean, probably won't change the direction of the wind on this issue, but every penny counts and this trend is one of the worst yet. Furthermore, especially both Avengers and Justice League, if a movie isn't even based off a book but an "original" idea, they have no excuses to lengthen it out. I don't want to be seeing "Reign of the Planet of the Apes Part One/Two" or "Part One of the James Cameron Epic Trilogy Avatar Oxymoron". Hell, even book series are doubtful. Perhaps one day there will be another on the level of Harry Potter, a sweeping epic planned from the start, but none of these recent young adult books deserve it. Even the idea of Harry Potter has been now utilized for mercenary purposes, and this I mean the structure for more than three books, so when the next real phenomenon is out, then we can revisit this otherwise disgusting practice by Hollywood. 

 

I'm sure we'll see the WB owned, Harry Potter inspired, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them having its finale split if the trilogy is a success and I really wouldn't want but wouldn't be surprised for Disney to join in the act with Star Wars. So, time to vote for artistic integrity.

Edited December 29, 2014 by BK007

[rukaio101]

Honestly, I don't really give much of a crap one way or another. If I enjoy a franchise then I'm not too adverse to seeing more of it. Especially since an extra part can be used to add more depth and intrigue to a character/world. Sure some series, like the Hobbit or Mockingjay, are probably going mishandle or fuck it up, but that's true of almost every filmmaking technique. Admittedly, if every two part series ends up being like Mockingjay, where it's evidently clear there's no need to split it, then I might get annoyed, but we're still a long distance from reaching that.

 

And, to be honest, it's not as if Hollywood is ripping us off in any way doing this. We still get the content we pay for. There's now just potentially more of it.

[peludo]

Hobbit should have never been just one movie. That for sure. For me the problem with Hobbit has been that the initial decission was to make 2 movies. The trilogy was announced a few months before AUJ release. Probably, they could have kept the two movies initial idea and leave the extra footage for Extended Editions. But I never saw one simple film. IMO, as a reader of the book, it has not been a so bad initial idea, but I agree that it could be better executed.

 

Concerning Justice League, we know nothing about it. Both movies could tell different stories, like Avengers and Age of Ultron. Just a sequel, not a unique story splitted. We will have to wait and see.

[Avatree]

This is like anything for me: I don't have an issue with the concept, I just care about how well it's done.

 

Deathly Hallows was well done, making 2 films for the finale to a 10-year series (and a denser book than the previous ones) made a lot of sense. Mockingjay's split has hurt the first film. I don't have an issue with The Hobbit's split in the slightest, I think all the films stand fine on their own.

 

Best example of a split is Lord of the Rings. Based on one book, is one complete story, and is very good.

[baumer]

Wtf are u talking about....didnt top the predecessors? Movies maje money world wide not just North America.The final Potter destroyed the others WW and BD2 took the honours by 100 million. Sorry bud....get your facts in order before posting.

[baumer]

Unless you mean the first parts. But still.....they make piles of money so as a busimess decision its brilliant.

[rockNrollaDIM]

Yuck, I don't like it unless it's absolutely necessary.

 

Just make a complete film guys.

 

"Three part" finale is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

[Noctis]

Deathly Hallows split was entirely justified. Every studio's incentive is to make a profit, and there's nothing wrong with that. But Potter wasn't a cash grab. WB was the first to split a book into two films. And it was necessary. Not even a three and a half hour single film would have worked. It made for a much better cinematic experience. Which is why DH1/DH2 are so far much better received than any other instalment that has been split. 

 

BD1 was a horrible, horrible, horrible film. BD2 was better, but average. But...of course, they made a lot of money. $715m and $830m, respectively.

 

MJ1 being split has really hurt it, and the first film to have suffered significantly at the box office. Eclipse finished with $698m, and BD1 increased to $715m. Half-Blood Prince finished with $935m, and DH1 increased to $960m. But MJ1's drop has been very alarming. Thankfully, it's managed to sprout surprisingly great late legs and will finish with the best multiplier in the franchise. But it's going to fall $130m+ from CF worldwide. 

 

Hobbit...they fell hugely in admissions from LoTR and their reputation speaks for themselves. I could go on and on, but yeah...

 

Allegiant being split is INSANE and still pisses me off.  

[TServo2049]

Best example of a split is Lord of the Rings. Based on one book, is one complete story, and is very good.

There were three books, there were three movies. (Yes, Tolkien's publisher split his one huge book into three smaller ones, but there were three books as published.)

Also, it's funny how things have changed. Back then, it was a gamble to commit to three films and film them all together. Now we're having studio-dictated splits, trilogies announced in advance, and so on.

The Avengers and JLA ones don't bother me as much because they are not direct adaptations of existing stories, and they do not have to be direct cliffhangers, or even have Part I and Part II titles. They could even be changed to have different subtitles, for all we know.

Also, because comics have a long history of serialized storytelling, and multi-issue events are a big part of comics, it does kind of make sense. (Well, at least for Avengers: Infinity War.)

I do have a little nagging fear about Star Wars Episode IX being split. Kathleen Kennedy, if you are listening, don't let this happen, no matter how much Iger and/or Rasulo and/or whoever succeeds Iger plead. One episode, one film.

Edited December 29, 2014 by TServo2049

[Avatree]

I don't mind Avengers 3 being 2 parts, in fact I'm glad it is so, rather than in one film. We're talking about a film with what could be upwards of 30 superheroes. One film alone would make it possibly too jam-packed.

 

There were three books, there were three movies. (Yes, Tolkien's publisher split his one huge book into three smaller ones, but there were three books as published.)

Yes, published as three books, but it was written as one. FOTR, TTT and ROTK are not three separate stories, they aren't sequels to each other in the way that other trilogies are.

[Kalo]

I don't mind Avengers 3 being 2 parts, in fact I'm glad it is so, rather than in one film. We're talking about a film with what could be upwards of 30 superheroes. One film alone would make it possibly too jam-packed.

 

Yes, published as three books, but it was written as one. FOTR, TTT and ROTK are not three separate stories, they aren't sequels to each other in the way that other trilogies are.

I completely agree with this. there is just way to much build up for them to all go at it in one 2 1/2 hour movie. I don't have a problem with the concept in general, but sometimes it is completely unnecessary. Harry Potter was excellent being spilt, I think Hobbit should have been 2, not 3 films, but I still liked them all. Mockingjay did not need to be split. it really just deepens if the source material justifies it.

Edited December 29, 2014 by KaloVisor

[DAR]

Why would Episode IX be split?

[Kalo]

Why would Episode IX be split?

I don't think it would, I do think that they'll be an episode X, XI and XII though.

[TServo2049]

As one of the people who brought it up, I think that worries about an Episode IX split are more "Hollywood is so mercenary these days that I wouldn't put it past them" than a genuine belief that it's certain to happen.

Basically, "they're splitting every other 'final chapter', who's to say they won't try to pull it with Star Wars?"

Edited December 29, 2014 by TServo2049

[Ozymandias]

Its an incredibly awful trend that is here to stay unfortunately.  Each of The Hobbit films made about 1 billion for a total of 3 billion and I'm sure both parts of Avengers 3 will make about 1.5 billion for a total of 3 billion.  Floppingjay may have underperformed quite a bit, but with part 2 they will still make far more money than they would have with just 1 movie.  Also keep in mind 2 movies is double the amount of BR/DVD sales too.  Only way it will ever change is if 2 part finales drastically under perform and I don't see that ever happening to a point where they are forced to stop splitting up the end of franchises.

[Mango]

Hollywood is d00med 

[Plain Old Tele]

I'm pretty sour on the concept, unless a couple of factors are present: the novel is just too much to try and cram into one single movie (and there are very few such books), and the filmmakers aggressively do whatever they need to make each part feel like a complete movie (even if it means dramatic changes).

 

Almost no one does both these things.

[AniNate]

In theory: No

In practice: Probably

[Deep Wang]

Yeah, Avengers having a Part 1/Part 2 is not the same thing as splitting a book into two parts, but I think they are doing the films a disservice by calling them that.  I think the grosses will reflect what we have seen in pretty much all Part 1's and Part 2's.

[mahnamahna]

Other than Avengers Infinity Wars 1 & 2, probably not.

 

My reasons

 

• Infinity Wars is likely to feature:

1. Iron Man
2. Thor
3. Loki (possibly)
4. Captain America
5. Winter Soldier (possibly)
6. Hulk
7. Black Widow
8. War Machine
9. Falcon
10. Nick Fury
11. Star Lord
12. Rocket
13. Groot
14. Drax
15. Gamora
16. Quicksliver
17. Scarlet Witch
18. Ant-Man
19. Wasp
20. Doctor Strange
21. Black Panther
22. Captain Marvel
23. Inhumans
24. Daredevil
25. Thanos

Not to mention Marvel could secretly be working out a deal to include (not likely, but not impossible... especially with Spider-Man given Sony's troubles over the last few years):

1. Spider-Man
2. X-Men
3. Fantastic Four

I'd say 2 films spread over 4-5 hrs is warranted for something of that magnitude.

Edited December 30, 2014 by mahnamahna