Harry Potter Discussion Thread

[Flacolaco]

I am trying to find a review written by an actual Harry Potter fan after the premier last night in New York....can't find one. There are a dozen reviews out there written by people that just flat out suck...but none written by an actual fan, which is the only kind of review I care about.

[Rick41]

I saw Emma's undies....w00t!

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by Rick41

I saw Emma's undies....w00t!

[alby]

I'll be joining nikeball on Tuesday night for the midnight showing.

[Big Boy Laroux]

So ABC Family is airing an HP marathon yesterday and today, up through GOF, all in HD. It's been a while since i watched all of them, so I'm TiVoing them. Watched the first two already, and i just wanted to comment on how AMAZING rickman is as snape. I guess i had kind of forgotten. Best casting in the entire movie franchise. Can't wait to see his performances in HBP and DH.

[fluid.forty.one]

Originally Posted by TheMaverick

I just wanted to say props on the discussion... some really good stuff here.

I just wanted to echo this. You guys are really making me want to go watch the movies again (I've only seen them all once I believe.. obviously not a huge fan of them).

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

You know what sucks? I don't see the Dursley's on the cast list. That blows.

How could you resist the comedy of the wine glasses bumping on their heads and that whole scene with Dumbledore as a filmmaker? I don't get it.

No doubt. That would have been some good comedy. I fear they won't do the funeral..... and if that is so I will walk out of the theater(of course the movie will be over then anyway so I won't miss anything).



Of course they kind of have to do the funeral don't they? To establish the white tomb as the final resting spot of Dumbledore? And to get Scrimgeour to confront Harry so he can prove he is "Dumbledores man through and through". I'm just scared they have left it out.

Think Gambon Dumbledore will ever be seen with half moon spectacles? Or will it be Tylock Eye Care Dumbledore again?

[Flacolaco]

Well seeing as how they just cast Bill Nighy as Scrimgeour for DH, I'm guessing he's not in HBP.

[Flacolaco]

BTW, wife and I are watching POA right now and Gambon has the specs on...at least for one particular scene.

[jthig32]

POA...probably just behind GOF as the worst movie in terms of getting things right and explaining the true story.

[jthig32]

I sat down with my wife this evening as she was halfway through GOF.

Mistake. What does it say about a movie when watching it makes you much LESS fired up about watching the newest release in the series?

I'd forgotten just how terrible Gambon's portrayal was even beyond that one scene after the GOF that sticks in my mind. Just atrocious.

The maze was horribly done, the end of the movie was horribly done. Nothing was explained, not even a hint of people not believing Harry's story. Can you imagine the severe left turn OOTP gave people that didn't know the books? You leave GOF thinking, wow, Voldemort's back, what is everyone going to do about it. Then OOTP starts and you're thinking "wait, no one believes him, what the heck?". Ugg.

At least I sat down late enough to miss the ball. And the dragon chase.

Double ugg.

</rant>

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by jthig32

POA...probably just behind GOF as the worst movie in terms of getting things right and explaining the true story.

Is it bad then that I think of POA as my favorite so far?

The first two are so disney-esque stupid kiddy crap that I hardly even consider them. They're the truest to the books and yet as stand alone movies offering me entertainment I find them borderline silly upon rewatching.

I still think you guys are holding the movies up to impossible standards. The only thing I remember bothering me at the time (and I've let this crap go about the movies by now) is that they didn't explain where the map came from. I felt very strongly about that at the time. It doesn't really matter to the movie goer. I guess.

The problem with all the continuity stuff with the movies is A, different directors, and B, not waiting until the series was done to start making them. A perspective on the series as a whole and time to reflect would have given these movies consistency throughout, and a greater understanding of what's important for the whole arch and what isn't.

Half Blood prince is the first movie to be made while they knew what the conclusion of the whole shebang is, so I'm curious to see if they changed their approach, foreshadowing what's to come and being mindful of it, or if they just kept making the damn films like each one is it's own thing, and the hell with the movie that came before or the one that comes after.

[Big Boy Laroux]

Maybe they could have given more time to making the maze scene better/more like the book if they didn't spend like 30 freakin' minutes on the ball and dragon chase. Horrible.

POA is decent to me, at the very least for being the first movie to darken the tone a little more. That and introducing oldman - love him in everything he does.

[jthig32]

I couldn't disagree more about the standard. What if the Rings movies had gotten Gandalf COMPLETELY wrong. Just utterly, horrendously wrong.

And the continuity point has some merit. However, OOTP WAS out when GOF came out. In fact I think HBP was out when GOF came out as well. It should have been patently obvious that they needed to set the scene for the next movie at the end of GOF.

POA probably is the best overall movie, but I think it failed miserably at conveying the true story behind Sirius, Pettigrew and how all that went down.

Maybe I'm misremembering.

[Flacolaco]

It all comes back to Dumbledore then I guess.

I actually think Gambon was quite passable as Dumbledore in POA, now that I have some things to compare it to. The bit when he's in Hagrids cabin distracting them is fun. He was still, as a character, kind of on the periphery a little in that one, like the first two. A whimsical sort of character. When they brought him into the forefront in 4 and 5 they just lost it.

That probably boils down to direction though, doesn't it? He had awful lines in GOF, and clearly he had directions from a director who just didn't get it. Chris Columbus at least did something right with Dumbledore, though I doubt Harris had the energy and demeanor to play him any other way.

[Flacolaco]

lol....ok, this is copied directly from wikipedia, and will make several of you boycott HP movies forever.



Massive movie spoilers follow, I guess, if true....

There are a number of changes from the book in the film. Much of the book's ending has been changed, with the climactic battle and Dumbledore's funeral being removed. Heyman commented that the end battle was removed to "(avoid) repetition" with the forthcoming adaptation of Deathly Hallows. The funeral was removed as it was believed it did not fit with the rest of the film.[72] The collapse of a Muggle bridge mentioned briefly in the book serves as the film's opening sequence.[73] Scenes of Diagon Alley being demolished by Death Eaters and an attack on the Burrow by Bellatrix Lestrange and werewolf Fenrir Greyback are added, as can be seen in the trailers. All but two of the memory scenes, including that of the Gaunts, have been cut. Only the flashbacks of Tom Riddle at the orphanage and Riddle asking Slughorn about Horcruxes, shown twice, remain.[73] Yates said they made the decision to compress the memories, but still "got some really cool ones".[74] Characters who are cut include the Dursleys, Kreacher, Dobby, Bill and Fleur, Rufus Scrimgeour, Cornelius Fudge and the Muggle Prime Minister. However, Quidditch,[75] being excluded from the previous film, returns. Bellatrix Lestrange will also participate in the battle of the astronomy tower, whereas she did not in the book, as seen in a picture with the Carrows and Greyback, celebrating Dumbledore's death. In the book, on the Hogwarts Express, after he is paralysed and hidden under his Invisibility Cloak by Draco Malfoy, Harry is rescued by Nymphadora Tonks. In the film, Luna Lovegood saves him instead, using her Spectrespecs to find him.[76]

Personally, I am not surprised.

[alby]

48 hours away. Stop spoiling it!

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

lol....ok, this is copied directly from wikipedia, and will make several of you boycott HP movies forever.

Massive movie spoilers follow, I guess, if true....

Personally, I am not surprised.

This is why I don't get excited about these movies.

The ADDITION of senseless scenes combined with the DELETION of important, pivotal, seminal moment scenes is the reason these movies are stupid and gutted versions of the books.

Although, in reality, why should they do the funeral of a character that isn't really all that endearing or important based on the movies.

Triple puke.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

It all comes back to Dumbledore then I guess.

I actually think Gambon was quite passable as Dumbledore in POA, now that I have some things to compare it to. The bit when he's in Hagrids cabin distracting them is fun. He was still, as a character, kind of on the periphery a little in that one, like the first two. A whimsical sort of character. When they brought him into the forefront in 4 and 5 they just lost it.

That probably boils down to direction though, doesn't it? He had awful lines in GOF, and clearly he had directions from a director who just didn't get it. Chris Columbus at least did something right with Dumbledore, though I doubt Harris had the energy and demeanor to play him any other way.

I don't necessarily care whose fault it is.

I just know it sucks.

Your spoiler post has left me incredibly Potter-grumpy. Ugg.

[u2sarajevo]

I refuse to read the spoiler post. But I have gleaned from thigs response the funeral won't be part of the movie.

I'm going on HP blinder mode so as to not pick up on anything else.

Word up.

My daughters and I watched GOF and OOTP on Saturday to ramp us up for the movie tomorrow night. I just wanted to comment on how Dobby looks alot like Longbottom.

[u2sarajevo]

and I forgot to add my question in relation to Neville being Dobby.... So are he and Kreacher going to chase Malfoy in this movie? I want to see Kreacher and Neville fighting as they apparate in front of Harry the first time he calls for Kreacher. That would be funny.

[Flacolaco]

[WARNER BROTHERS]Neville fight with who when Harry does what?[/WARNER BROTHERS]

Honestly...unless some uber fan a la Peter Jackson remakes these movies 25 years from now and actually cares about the source material...better yet makes a large miniseries or something...the problem is running time... we're never going to be satisfied.

[Flacolaco]

Oh and as far as "spoilers" go, I'm not sure what you mean. We already know how it ends, and you know we're not discussing things that will be awesome about the movie.

By process of elimination you know that we're talking about things that we don't like; Things that will make everyone angry.

So you're making a conscious decision to delay your disappointment (understandable). I like to think I'm getting mine out of the way. I was so mad after GOF I couldn't sleep when I got home. Now I know a little more about what to expect.

[Flacolaco]

http://www.californiachronicle.com/a...s/yb/132885666

Now that the books' many million fans know the fates of Harry and Voldemort, the movies can and must stand on their own. So how do they measure up? Are they comparable to the James Bond movies, which long ago eclipsed their literary origins? Or are the Harry Potter films still ultimately to be judged by how expertly they translate what Rowling put on the page?

Steve Kloves has written all but one of the screenplays ("Phoenix"), and the series has had four directors, with British director David Yates taking the reins for "Order of the Phoenix" onward. Their challenge has been different from, say, Peter Jackson in his three-film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings," which at the time wasn't so fresh in so many moviegoers' minds. A Fandango survey of more than 3,000 moviegoers planning to see "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" indicates that a whopping 85 percent of them have read all seven Potter books.

"The difference between 'Harry Potter' and 'Lord of the Rings' is that a lot of 'Harry Potter' depends on the specific details, what happens when," said Melissa Anelli, who runs the Leaky Cauldron fan site and authored "Harry, A History."

"With 'Lord of the Rings' it was less dependent on plot points, more dependent on the overall feeling, the characters on their journey."

So the Potter filmmakers have had to cram many large chunks of increasingly ambitious books into movies that tend to hover around the 21/ 2- hour mark. Yet the filmmaking style has evolved over the series.

Director Chris Columbus' first two entries were dedicated to satisfying devotees' desire to see as much of the books on screen as possible.

Director Alfonso Cuaron's "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" (2004) shifted the series' focus to Harry's point of view, sacrificing plot points for a deeper emotional experience.

"I think it was a very wise choice that Alfonso made because it allowed us to make films that were more organic as films," Heyman said. "You can't translate a book ultimately, especially as the books expand in length. You have to make choices."

Huh.

[Big Boy Laroux]

that's probably the most upsetting about the entire series - that they have decided to essentially drop the house elves completely. Going back to our discussion before, the house elves are one of the things that voldy and the death eaters just simply overlook, while harry and the other good wizards use them to their advantage by being kind to them. I do think that Chamber of Secrets got that aspect right. But then they just dropped them.

[Big Boy Laroux]

thanks for posting that flaco. But it goes back to what thig said. why in the hell are they ADDING stuff that is not in the books? Or changing it to things that make no sense. And it all seems to center around the romance angle. More Yule ball stuff. Cho being the one to rat out the DA (betrayal by a girl harry likes! let's add that!)

[Flacolaco]

I never had any delusions that Hepzibah Smith was someone that would actually be put into a summer blockbuster movie, but I'll tell you this....if I don't here mention of the diary AND the locket AND the cup AND the ring AND the snake in this movie, I am going to...well I don't know. Something bad.

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by BBL

hanks for posting that flaco. But it goes back to what thig said. why in the hell are they ADDING stuff that is not in the books? Or changing it to things that make no sense. And it all seems to center around the romance angle. More Yule ball stuff. Cho being the one to rat out the DA (betrayal by a girl harry likes! let's add that!)

I just think they have a hesitance at adding those little fringe characters. I think they feel like they have too many already, so they let Neville do Dobby's work. They use Cho instead of her friend that was never introduced. They leave out Ludo Bagman...they use the Dursley's sparingly (not in this new movie once again), and they included Kreacher in the last movie only at the behest of Jo herself, because she told them he would be important going forward.

Then they take it the other way and add the random black kid in the third movie, or they give us this Nigel character for some reason. Why do we have to call him nigel? Didn't we have Colin Creevey for that?

I don't get it. It's useless to sit here and bitch about it because the reality is that they have to shove a huge book into 150 minutes and it's impossible. THank goodness they've split the last book into two.

[Big Boy Laroux]

yeah, it's just baffling. I understand things must be cut. And i do understand some changes at the expense of fringe characters. But the addition of things that aren't in the books at all?

[nikeball]

Wearing this to work tomorrow:

I think don't think wearing a robe would be work appropriate.

[u2sarajevo]

The scarf too? People are going to think you've flipped your lid when it's 102 outside and you are wearing a scarf. (but go Gryffindor!)

[u2sarajevo]

I think I would have been satisfied with OOTP if they could have had Snape calling Lily a mudblood. I understand that they filmed that, just cut it.

At least then I could keep a little hope inside that there would be payoff for the movie viewer when they went and saw DHp2. I mean surely they will include the storyline of Snapes love for Lily? Since they are fascinated with the love stories?

[nikeball]

Originally Posted by u2sarajevo

The scarf too? People are going to think you've flipped your lid when it's 102 outside and you are wearing a scarf. (but go Gryffindor!)

Sigh..and in Houston too with 1287925% humidity. I am probably going to nix that idea.

[Flacolaco]

Shocking words from the mouth of Gambon himself....

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/20...-by-jk-rowling

The choice not to read Rowling’s book series, he explains, is deliberate and he points out that costars Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman haven’t taken up the books either.

“You’d get upset about all the scenes it's missing from the book, wouldn‘t you?” Gambon said via phone from New York, where he was promoting the opening this Wednesday of the sixth "Potter" film. “No point in reading the books because you’re playing with [screenwriter] Steve Kloves' words.”

And Kloves, along with director David Yates, have demanded an intense Dumbledore, who in the fourth film physically shook Harry when the boy wizard's name wound up in the Goblet of Fire. It’s a characterization that isn’t as pronounced in the book -- Dumbledore doesn’t yank and jostle his star student, for starters -- and it upset many "Potter" fans.

....

“He’s got to be a bit scary," Gambon said of his Dumbledore. "All headmasters should be a bit scary, shouldn’t they? A top wizard like him would be intimidating. And ultimately, he’s protecting Harry. Essentially, I play myself. A little Irish, a little scary. That’s what I’m like in real life.”

The actor says the enormity of the "Potter" phenomenon hit him again recently at the London premiere of “Half-Blood Prince,” where more than 4,000 kids turned up to get a glimpse of the magical cast. Gambon called it both heartwarming and bittersweet.

“I was really moved by the number of children there. It was raining and everyone was drenched, some of them had been there for hours. You feel responsible for them in a way. All their books and pieces of paper for autographs were all wet, the pens wouldn’t work. It was so sad. It makes you realize how big this thing is.”

The filming of the final Harry Potter movies, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” is underway but Gamon's contributions aren't schedule until February. He says that makes it feel as if the end is still far away for him, but he has already begun to reflect on the experience.
“It’s been," he said, "a real privilege.

[u2sarajevo]

[Flacolaco]

It's amazing. It's coming from every possible angle...the screen writer wants him like that, the directors are telling him to play it like that, and he AGREES.

Of course he does....he doesn't know any better because hasn't read the frakking books.

Bottom line is that the people in charge don't want to make the movies that we would make if it were up to us. We shouldn't go see them expecting to see what we want to see.

[sike]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

Bottom line is that the people in charge don't want to make the movies that we would make if it were up to us. We shouldn't go see them expecting to see what we want to see.

there is only 1 Peter Jackson...and even he ruffled some feathers of the faithful.

[u2sarajevo]

Failed bit warning: The DMN gave the film an A-...

[Flacolaco]

I'm still looking forward to tonight.

[u2sarajevo]

I am too. My girls are pumped.