I'm a little confused by the way this was phrased but I think this is the answer I want... I don't think it's a BAD idea. It's a different way of doing things, and they'll be able to include more bits in the movies that way so... I think it's an idea. It's definitely one way to do it.

I honestly couldn't care less, as long as they are released at the same time. Maybe watch the first part, then a 15 min break, then the second part. Each part being 1 hour and a half long. (strictly in theatres of course)

They also need to make sure it does the series justice!

Cinders i wrote this and i agree so ive re-phrased it lol xxx

It doesn't make sense!

I want details. That's what makes a movie nice.

if they only had one film they wouldn't be able to fit all the book in. so it wouldn't be as good. and everyone would mone that lots had been left out.

OK but I'm still a little confused. "Who thinks it will ruin it" should be "Yeah, it will ruin it" or "No, it won't ruin it." So I feel like the answers are reversed. LOL. Not a problem, though, I think folks'll figure it out.

im for both. i =n a way im going to die because we have to wait another year for voldemort to be killed.....kind of a cliff-hanger. but that also means that the last one will be extra long, probly like a total of 5 hours of movie! that would be really great. but omg waiting a year, i am completely torn.

I don't care which one they do, but by splitting it, it would give them more time to explain things better, an maybe follow the books a little bit better.

i'd rather have one 3 hour film...like Return of the King =)

I would rather have one really long film because I wouldn't mind watching it if it was good. The fifth movie really disappointed me as it left out loads of the story to focus on the action because it was too short.

they definately should split it if they can because there is not nearly enough time in just one regular movie length to fit in everything that needs to be put in. out of all the books this is the one that can't be cutting much out and ofcourse its the one where they shouldnt anyway. 2 part movie would rock!

They definately should do this!
That way there is a lot less they'd have to cut out! I all of the other movies they cut so much of the good parts out.This is a fantastic idea.

It's a little confusing, the way that the question was phrased.
I think that they shouldn't break up the film because it would disrupt the continuity of the action. Also, even if they make it over 3 hours long, people are still going to go to the cinema to watch it, because it's Harry Potter. But by breaking it into two parts, I think the public would be less inclined to view each segment.

In all, I think that they should keep it as one film, and not divide it into segments.

I WANT ONE BIG MOVIE!
But, oh well
MORE BOOK!

I DIDNT KNOW IT WAS GOING TO BE PUT INTO TWO!!!!!!

that way they can do all the detail but either way im so watchin the movie the day it comes out!!! :)

no its a brilliant idea becuase there is no way tey could fit the main story into one book need it in two films

I would rather have two films and wait, instead of one film and lose half the story.

i hate it being two films

I didn't like it being broken up at first but after seeing DH part 1 I'm glad they broke it up, they would've cut out too much otherwise. And this pick was super confusing...

I thought it was fine! means Harry Potter will last longer, and they'll be able to fit more in, which is obviously really important because it's the last book. they could want to build a bit of a fuss as well, and it's working because i am so freaking excited!!!!!!!!!!!!!