J.K. Rowling is killing two characters off at the end of the seventh, and final, Harry Potter book. I know this news more directly relates to literature than movies, but it will certainly affect the film franchise, and since I stopped reading the series after #5 (I nearly even gave up on the films, but I finally just saw Goblet of Fire and was surprised to find it is the first great Harry Potter movie), and the fact that the books have been discussed here before, I find it appropriate.

Because I didn't read the sixth book, I couldn't tell you with logic who the two might be, although just about everyone thinks one of them will be Harry. Even Rowling hints at this: "I've never wanted to kill him off before the end of book seven, because I always planned seven books and that's where I want to go." Does that mean she did want to kill him at the end? She also told Britain's Channel 4 on Monday that she understands the desire to kill off the main characters in the end so that nobody else can resurrect them after she's done.

Then again, she says of her most recent draft of the final chapter, "One character got a reprieve, but I have to say that two die that I didn't intend to die." So that could mean that Harry is not one of these two. Perhaps he's the one who got a reprieve? The thing is, if you think about her comments, there is no certainty that only two will die. Heck, she could have killed off every character but the saved one.

The best way that I can relate to this is, what if George Lucas had killed off everyone at the end of Return of the Jedi, except Chewbacca? Okay, I'm sure many would have enjoyed seeing the Ewok village go up in flames.