ByReid Jones, writer at Creators.co
Everything Marvel Studios, and then some. All the rumors, all the news, all the hype.™ Follow @ReidJones5
Reid Jones

With the young adult films constantly splitting their films into two parts, you can't help but ask why? The trend that started with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows then went on to overtake the Twilight Saga's Breaking Dawn, only to be done again by the Hunger Games' Mockingjay later this year, and finally the Divergent Series' Allegiant. By the end of this article, you might just be asking why not?

When it comes to films based on books, especially widely-known best seller hits among teens who get so attached to them that they'll cry about the death of a character, or break-up, or a terribly emotionally-wrecking moment months after they've put down the book, you could say that we're very... how do you say it... emotionally attached to the books. You know us teens: hormones flying out the window like smoke out of a meth lab gone wrong.

Therefore, the film adaptation has to follow every single minute detail of the book, including casting the PERFECT version of the book characters, and including parts of the plot that don't exactly matter in the main scheme of things. When you screw with fragile emotions, you get the horns from millions of screaming "young adults" who will have your head on a silver platter, and will talk about how you ruined their childhood and they will tell their children how terrible of a studio, or director, or even actor the people from the film were for the next century. Exaggeration? With the crazies of our society today: not a bit.

So how, as a studio, do you combat this? Well, you have two options: You make a 5-hour movie that has critics and fans alike claiming to be bored out of their minds at the conclusion of the film, people missing major scenes to go to the restroom, and you still only get the same income from box office as if you had made it 2 hours long and cut out the unessential parts. Or, you could split the film into two parts, still cover everything that the 5-hour long movie would cover, but instead have two box office hits on you resume, have double the ticket sales, and good ratings on both. Not only this, but as director, you now have time to insert your own creative flare on things and add scenes you feel weren't included due to the reader's first person perspective from the book.

I think by anyone's standards, the answer is obvious. Perhaps the real question is: why don't they do this with all the other movies in the series? Some, given, don't have complete storylines that can be split into two parts. But many have mid-book climaxes that can easily part for the sake of adapting the book properly to film. Is it worth the sacrifice of splitting the story for the sake of accurate adaptation?

Poll

Is Part One-ing and Part Two-ing okay or not?


Latest from our Creators