I really hope that David Yates doesn't mess this movie up in any way. I mean he's alrady comented that he might not film it in England (which is blasphemy) and he's mentioned a broom chase, and I don't remember one in the book, do any of you? I really love this book over all the others, it's just the most fantastic thing I've ever read and I don't want to see it screwed up by somone's idea that they have to make it their own thing. I would have to hunt the man down if he does mess it up.
What are your thoughts?
Full Version: Yates?
I agree,
In my opinion it is the fifth best book ever written (after the first four) and I hate it when people add stuff to movies that shouldn't be there. When this happens it is almost like they are trying to make it better or something and I doubt anybody could do that to that story.
In my opinion it is the fifth best book ever written (after the first four) and I hate it when people add stuff to movies that shouldn't be there. When this happens it is almost like they are trying to make it better or something and I doubt anybody could do that to that story.
I know, IMHO you don't mess with the actual story line of a book; the writer knows what they're doing with their own story.
And if they don't film in England then that means that once again Hogwarts will have a diferent landscape for all the outdoor scenes. I think it's already changed enough, it changed in PoA and I think it changed in GoF too, when that happens it shatters a lot of the consistency you want with a series of movies like these.
^And actually I thought OotP was better then the first four and it's my favorite one which is a big reason I'll be much more upset if this one gets messed up than any of the others.
And if they don't film in England then that means that once again Hogwarts will have a diferent landscape for all the outdoor scenes. I think it's already changed enough, it changed in PoA and I think it changed in GoF too, when that happens it shatters a lot of the consistency you want with a series of movies like these.
^And actually I thought OotP was better then the first four and it's my favorite one which is a big reason I'll be much more upset if this one gets messed up than any of the others.
Yeah, the only reason I can think they'd have a broom chase down the Thames (sp?) is if Death Eaters attacked, and that would kind of screw up the rest of the story line, as well as making Moody seem less paranoid and more realistic. 
I, too, love OotP the best. It's wonderfully written; you can just feel Harry's frustration as he struggles to figure out why he's dreaming about a hallway. You get angry with him when Umbridge is cutting open his hand; you laugh with Ron after the Christmas kiss; everything in it is powerfully written, that it's extremely difficult to come across in a movie.
Movies have their forte, they can bring scenery and action to life, special effects can create the greatest explosions known to man. (Hey, I'm a guy, I love my fire.
) But they can't bring out the feeling and depth that books can, which is why, in my opinion, books are still superior. At least when well written as this series is.
As such, I think that Yates cannot possibly please every Potter fan out there; we all have slightly, or not so slightly, different views on how things should be/look, which is yet another great thing about well written books. Obviously he's going to try to use JK's imput as much as possible, and since she's the authority on all things Potter, it should come out like the book's. Even so, some people will be disappointed, even mad, if certain things aren't to their likeing. I highly doubt anyone will be completely pleased with Tonks, for instance.
But he's going to do a good job, and the movie will have the general story of the books.
We've just got to realize that the movies and books, however closely related, are not the same. Unfortunantly.
I, too, love OotP the best. It's wonderfully written; you can just feel Harry's frustration as he struggles to figure out why he's dreaming about a hallway. You get angry with him when Umbridge is cutting open his hand; you laugh with Ron after the Christmas kiss; everything in it is powerfully written, that it's extremely difficult to come across in a movie.
Movies have their forte, they can bring scenery and action to life, special effects can create the greatest explosions known to man. (Hey, I'm a guy, I love my fire.
) But they can't bring out the feeling and depth that books can, which is why, in my opinion, books are still superior. At least when well written as this series is. As such, I think that Yates cannot possibly please every Potter fan out there; we all have slightly, or not so slightly, different views on how things should be/look, which is yet another great thing about well written books. Obviously he's going to try to use JK's imput as much as possible, and since she's the authority on all things Potter, it should come out like the book's. Even so, some people will be disappointed, even mad, if certain things aren't to their likeing. I highly doubt anyone will be completely pleased with Tonks, for instance.
But he's going to do a good job, and the movie will have the general story of the books.
We've just got to realize that the movies and books, however closely related, are not the same. Unfortunantly.
I don't exspect the movie to be dead on the books, I just don't want him srew it up like IMHO what's his name did with PoA. Now don't get me wrong I still think it's a good movie and I still like watching it, but I think he srewed it up.
I have only positive feelings about the upcoming movies. Id be really sad if they made a bad movie from Gof/OotP, but i dont really care. Ok, id be a bit furious, but nobody can take away the books from us. And thats the only thing that matters. 
You shouldnt make such a fuss about the movies.
You shouldnt make such a fuss about the movies.
Yeah, but you want to be able to enjoy the movies and know that they got it right so it doesn't annoy when someone wants to watch them, but you don't want to because you can't stop thinking of how they messed them up. Also you want to people that like the movies but don't want to read the books (like one of my older sisters) to get the full HP experence.
I think I've more or less decided that I'm probably not going to see OotP now. The thing is, as I just said in the GoF thread, I understand that cuts are necessary and I fully expect them and support a lot of them, but the near-axing of Sirius from GoF has left me a bit rattled that the new scriptwriters are not totally in touch with the heart of the books anymore and it really does amaze me that JKR has allowed them to butcher her books as they've already clearly done. Either I'm completely mis-reading some of the subtext that I honestly thought was there, or else they really have totally lost the plot...pardon the pun.
I could live with the cutting of the Marauders from PoA because I thought...hey, you know...it's okay...I'm sure that will come eventually. But nope, doesn't look as though it will. Which means that maybe they aren't as important to the main thread of the whole story from SS to the end as we've been led to believe they are. If Sirius isn't important enough to have in GoF, then what on earth are they planning on doing with OotP? Cut the house elves, cut the Marauders, cut Grimmauld Place, cut half the characters out - I thought that the house elves would be important in the final battle, I thought the history of the Marauders would become important as this secret 'truth' about Lily is revealed, I thought that Sirius' death would be important....if all these things have been substantially removed so far - and certainly look as though they're for the chop in OotP too, then what exactly are we going to be left with?
A flippin irrelevant broomstick scene over the Thames that will allow George Lucas' guys to make a bit more money coming up with the CGI that will look great in a trailer and no doubt make them heaploads of cash.
Well, not from this HP fan, they won't.
Whatever they do, I'm going to be disappointed, so, like I said earlier and in the comments on the main site, I think this is the point where the films and I shall be parting company.
I agree with QQS - books are far and above the capabilities of a film crew ever to recreate and do justice to. Whatever adaptation is made will fall well short of the heart and true magic of a good story and will inevitably end up disappointing fans in some way, so perhaps it's best for people who feel like I do about it just to steer clear of the films. If you do decide to go, then be prepared to be disappointed - I think that's more or less a certainty now, particularly if you go there hoping for a faithful recreation which simply just isn't going to happen.
I could live with the cutting of the Marauders from PoA because I thought...hey, you know...it's okay...I'm sure that will come eventually. But nope, doesn't look as though it will. Which means that maybe they aren't as important to the main thread of the whole story from SS to the end as we've been led to believe they are. If Sirius isn't important enough to have in GoF, then what on earth are they planning on doing with OotP? Cut the house elves, cut the Marauders, cut Grimmauld Place, cut half the characters out - I thought that the house elves would be important in the final battle, I thought the history of the Marauders would become important as this secret 'truth' about Lily is revealed, I thought that Sirius' death would be important....if all these things have been substantially removed so far - and certainly look as though they're for the chop in OotP too, then what exactly are we going to be left with?
A flippin irrelevant broomstick scene over the Thames that will allow George Lucas' guys to make a bit more money coming up with the CGI that will look great in a trailer and no doubt make them heaploads of cash.
Well, not from this HP fan, they won't.
Whatever they do, I'm going to be disappointed, so, like I said earlier and in the comments on the main site, I think this is the point where the films and I shall be parting company.
I agree with QQS - books are far and above the capabilities of a film crew ever to recreate and do justice to. Whatever adaptation is made will fall well short of the heart and true magic of a good story and will inevitably end up disappointing fans in some way, so perhaps it's best for people who feel like I do about it just to steer clear of the films. If you do decide to go, then be prepared to be disappointed - I think that's more or less a certainty now, particularly if you go there hoping for a faithful recreation which simply just isn't going to happen.
Well, Dana i agree with most of the things you have said. But though, i think we should wait with all the judgements till the movies come out.
I dont think i will have enough nerve not to watch the movie.
About the cuts made in GoF...im really sad about Mrs. Weasley, and all the Burrow scenes, but i could deal with that. But what the did with Sirius. I try to be optimistic but a cant.
I dont think i will have enough nerve not to watch the movie.
About the cuts made in GoF...im really sad about Mrs. Weasley, and all the Burrow scenes, but i could deal with that. But what the did with Sirius. I try to be optimistic but a cant.
i just can't beleive it. the movie hasn't started filming and everyone's alreayd threatening with what they will do if Yates does this or Yates does that.
first of all, i want to say that my first reaction when i saw PoA was dissapointment, but in the end i bought the DVD and watched it thousand times. the difference is that when you watch the HP expecting them to contain all the details from the books you're more than likely to be dissapointed because it's just impossible. you guys should try watching them for the movie's sake and then you'll feel fine about them.
what's the problem with filming the movie outside UK. this suggestion showed how open the director was to new ideas and suggestions. he wants to make a good MOVIE, not a visual version of JK's books.
and why not have a nice visual effects scene with the brooms? so what that it's not in the book.
god, just stop whining!
(sorry :S i didn't mean to be harsh)
~ana
first of all, i want to say that my first reaction when i saw PoA was dissapointment, but in the end i bought the DVD and watched it thousand times. the difference is that when you watch the HP expecting them to contain all the details from the books you're more than likely to be dissapointed because it's just impossible. you guys should try watching them for the movie's sake and then you'll feel fine about them.
what's the problem with filming the movie outside UK. this suggestion showed how open the director was to new ideas and suggestions. he wants to make a good MOVIE, not a visual version of JK's books.
and why not have a nice visual effects scene with the brooms? so what that it's not in the book.
god, just stop whining!
(sorry :S i didn't mean to be harsh)
~ana
Hmm...Sirius doesn't really play a huge part in the GoF book, ya'll. I mean, I know we all love him, but he only has two (I believe) parts that he actually shows up in person in the book, and he just gives us information that would be easier to show in the movie without all the lead up to seeing Sirius. It's impossible for them to show the feelings that Harry is starting to develope for the old guy, so the anticipation and such wouldn't do much for the movie.
I hadn't known they'd cut his two parts out; I know the actor said he's just a face in the embers, but that's not official, he could have been exagerating. And the meeting in the cave is not vital to the story; just background on Mr. Crouch that could be given us some other way.
It just goes back to what I said in my first post; the books have been, are, and always will be superior to the films. Neither one translates well into the other; HP didn't do so well in films, and I don't know if any of you have wasted the time reading the Star Wars books but.....
Like Ana said, we've got to appreciate the movies as just that; movies. But I can sympathize with Dana, it's disappointing to go and see our favorite parts out, but hey, they're still entertaining, right? That's what we pay out the wazoo to see anyways. Good entertainment.
Honestly though, I can't figure out the usefullness of a broom chase when we could be getting important information, background or otherwise, or showing more of what actually happened.
I hadn't known they'd cut his two parts out; I know the actor said he's just a face in the embers, but that's not official, he could have been exagerating. And the meeting in the cave is not vital to the story; just background on Mr. Crouch that could be given us some other way.
It just goes back to what I said in my first post; the books have been, are, and always will be superior to the films. Neither one translates well into the other; HP didn't do so well in films, and I don't know if any of you have wasted the time reading the Star Wars books but.....
Like Ana said, we've got to appreciate the movies as just that; movies. But I can sympathize with Dana, it's disappointing to go and see our favorite parts out, but hey, they're still entertaining, right? That's what we pay out the wazoo to see anyways. Good entertainment.
Honestly though, I can't figure out the usefullness of a broom chase when we could be getting important information, background or otherwise, or showing more of what actually happened.
Excuse me - I was not whining. If you believe that, then I think perhaps you should go back and read what I said again.
Actually, you know, I think you've both (Ana and QQS) completely missed the point of everything I said.
My point is that I am perfectly aware of how books and movies are completely different - I'm not five years old. The point is that if they are making these sorts of cuts, then I question how relevant certain things are to the overall gist of the plot that runs through all seven books - i.e. the Marauders, Sirius, Lily's so called secret, Snape's Worst Memory, his history with the DE's, the whole backstory of elves etc. If JKR is allowing these things to be cut, then why are they in the book in the first place? Is she just padding out the books so the publishers can charge more for them or something? It makes me think that I'm reading far too much into a lot of the subplots of the books and that makes me think that maybe these books really are just meant to be read on face value - and that kind of disappoints me because I thought the books were far more than that.
Anyway - I won't be the first fan to refuse to see the movies anymore, believe me, there are plenty of us around.
I came out of PoA with the worst feeling in the world, I have to say....I felt so....flat, I suppose...disappointed that after all the hype it didn't live up to my expectations. And, after being made to feel that way once, I would rather not feel that way again when I see GoF and OotP. It costs nearly £6 to get into cinemas these days over here anyway, and that seems quite a bit to sit there and be ultimately disappointed - which it seems I inevitably will be.
I just choose not to see the films because I refuse to be a part of a commercialisation bandwagon that is sapping all the life and richness from JKR's creation - a choice I'm perfectly entitled to make, for all the reasons I've given - opinions which I am also perfectly entitled to express, seeing as how this *is* a discussion forum for giving opinions.
I'm not trying to force them on anyone else - you are all quite free to go see it if you want, but I really do not appreciate being told to stop "whining".
Actually, you know, I think you've both (Ana and QQS) completely missed the point of everything I said.
My point is that I am perfectly aware of how books and movies are completely different - I'm not five years old. The point is that if they are making these sorts of cuts, then I question how relevant certain things are to the overall gist of the plot that runs through all seven books - i.e. the Marauders, Sirius, Lily's so called secret, Snape's Worst Memory, his history with the DE's, the whole backstory of elves etc. If JKR is allowing these things to be cut, then why are they in the book in the first place? Is she just padding out the books so the publishers can charge more for them or something? It makes me think that I'm reading far too much into a lot of the subplots of the books and that makes me think that maybe these books really are just meant to be read on face value - and that kind of disappoints me because I thought the books were far more than that.
Anyway - I won't be the first fan to refuse to see the movies anymore, believe me, there are plenty of us around.
I came out of PoA with the worst feeling in the world, I have to say....I felt so....flat, I suppose...disappointed that after all the hype it didn't live up to my expectations. And, after being made to feel that way once, I would rather not feel that way again when I see GoF and OotP. It costs nearly £6 to get into cinemas these days over here anyway, and that seems quite a bit to sit there and be ultimately disappointed - which it seems I inevitably will be.
I just choose not to see the films because I refuse to be a part of a commercialisation bandwagon that is sapping all the life and richness from JKR's creation - a choice I'm perfectly entitled to make, for all the reasons I've given - opinions which I am also perfectly entitled to express, seeing as how this *is* a discussion forum for giving opinions.
I'm not trying to force them on anyone else - you are all quite free to go see it if you want, but I really do not appreciate being told to stop "whining".
sorry Dana, i came to read your post after reading the comments on the news section about cutting out a lot of sirius's scenes and it just felt like continuation of all the complaints that we heard there.
of course you have a right to watch or not watch any movie. as i mentioned before, i too was very dissapointed after watching PoA-- they had cut out some of my FAVORITE scenes. you know, sometimes it's theTINY details that make us love the books and that's what the movie lacked. it also lacked the spirit of the book. the fact is that if i hadn't expected the movie to be exactly like the book then i wouldn't be dissapointed. again, i'm repeating that after i bought the movie and watched it together with my mom (as in FORCED her to watch it with me, but i don't really think i succeded) i became more focused on what was in the movie itself, instead of comparing it to the book. now i like the movie-- i honestly think that the 3rd movie is the best so far.
of course you have a right to watch or not watch any movie. as i mentioned before, i too was very dissapointed after watching PoA-- they had cut out some of my FAVORITE scenes. you know, sometimes it's theTINY details that make us love the books and that's what the movie lacked. it also lacked the spirit of the book. the fact is that if i hadn't expected the movie to be exactly like the book then i wouldn't be dissapointed. again, i'm repeating that after i bought the movie and watched it together with my mom (as in FORCED her to watch it with me, but i don't really think i succeded
) i became more focused on what was in the movie itself, instead of comparing it to the book. now i like the movie-- i honestly think that the 3rd movie is the best so far.| QUOTE (AnaT @ Jun 15 2005, 08:47 PM) |
| you guys should try watching them for the movie's sake and then you'll feel fine about them. |
you know, i think that is the key of all things.
but its really hard if they are making a film from your favourite book, and you want to watch it perfectly directed and everything, but you wont because its almost impossible. i also think that you sholud walk into tne cinema without prejudices, without saying 100 times "i hate it they messed it up", because if you do that, you wont be able to enjoy the movie even if it isnt that bad.
Well, I'm not as "whiny" as my posts may make me appear. I was really more just annoyed at the thought of a broom chase that wasn't in the books and that can't really advance the story at all, and is taking up film time which is already very limited. And the thought that it would be filmed outside of England (which I think is a mistake) because I don't think that you can get all the outdoor scenes to look right.
Now I do enjoy all the movies so far and I'm sure I will enjoy this one. I just have my doubts because he's only ever done TV and never any movies. So for him to choose one of this caliber that requires so much adaptation to be his first worries me.
Now I do enjoy all the movies so far and I'm sure I will enjoy this one. I just have my doubts because he's only ever done TV and never any movies. So for him to choose one of this caliber that requires so much adaptation to be his first worries me.
I've so many things to say, I just hope I can organize my thoughts and get them to come out remotely comprehensible...
Right-o, here goes.
Louise, you know I feel very strongly about the HP movies () but I respect your opinion to not want to watch them anymore.
Right-o, here goes.
Louise, you know I feel very strongly about the HP movies (
) but I respect your opinion to not want to watch them anymore.| QUOTE |
| books are far and above the capabilities of a film crew ever to recreate and do justice to. Whatever adaptation is made will fall well short of the heart and true magic of a good story |
Yes, that is true. As I've said many, many times in this forum, books and film are two totally different mediums (I'm not pointing this out to you, Louise, I know you're not five
, just stating a fact). Of course the HP films will never live up to the books, this is an obvious given. The beauty about books is there is no limitation on the author's part; they can go on at length about something for as long as they want, they can go down to the tiniest of details if they so wish - it's totally open for them. Unfortunately it is not so for film. Film have time and budget constraints to take into consideration among other things. Film can never ever dig too into details, not like books can. But what is the main strength of film then? It can tell a story visually...and that's where all the visual effects come in. I know some of youse are going on about how they're making all these cuts at the expense of seemingly unnecessary, "can do without" special effects. But they're just playing on the strength of what a film can and should do most of all, and that is to make it as visually compelling as technology will let them.
I agree with AnaT, when it comes to the HP films, you just have to watch them as that - HP films. If you go with the mindset that you are about to see a visual version of what you've read, then of course you're going to be extremely disappointed. Because that is not what the movies are for. I've said this about a thousand times - the films are merely BASED on the books. They were never meant to be an exact visual representation of what we've read. If it was, the film would be about 19 hours long!! And realistically, that's not possible. So when going to watch a HP film, tell yourself that this is the film version of the HP book. It is almost like a separate series of it's own, depicting certain events/facts from the books, yes, but essentially an independant set of movies. Did that make any sense??
| QUOTE |
| I question how relevant certain things are to the overall gist of the plot that runs through all seven books [...]If JKR is allowing these things to be cut, then why are they in the book in the first place? [...] It makes me think that I'm reading far too much into a lot of the subplots of the books and that makes me think that maybe these books really are just meant to be read on face value - and that kind of disappoints me because I thought the books were far more than that. |
Yeah I know what you mean. And I can see why you'd be disappointed. Believe me, I'm a purist when it comes to the books. The only difference is I can do what I explained in my previous paragraph - I can separate the two mediums and watch the movie appreciating it as a movie. That's why, when it comes to the film cuts, even the shocking ones, at most they just surprise me, but that's it. To me, I've read the books, I know how it really happens/plays out, so I'm fine. I just feel sad for those who don't read the books but watch the movies. They will never fully know how brilliant a writer JKR is nor be able to appreciate her masterpiece that is HP. But it's their loss as far as I'm concerned hehehe
But as you yourself have pointed out, Louise, JKR has allowed these things and she after all, knows best. She herself said that she was incredibly nervous at the initial prospect of having her books made into films because the film crew would essentially be "ripping up her baby". Today, even though she still wishes the films could represent her books in it's entirety, she does acknowledge and understand that books and film are two different mediums and therefore it can never be done. As to whether the things that are being cut are because they really aren't that important as most of us have thought to be, well only JKR knows that eh?! I do think that a lot of fans out there tend to read into things too much. I used to think I was a pretty fanatical fan, but after joining this forums, I realized that I'm not really that big a fan compared to the lot of ya...
Well even if they ended up just being face value, Louise, as disappointing as it is, what does it matter? We all come from different backgrounds, we all have different characteristics and traits about ourselves, we all have different opinions on things. That's why when we read the books, we all will form our different ideas and theories. It's the same with movies. When we all first read the books, we all had a different image of each character, of the HP world in general, painted in our heads. That's why I've said that you could assign ANY director to the HP films, even the best, most qualified one. He or she will never be able to please every single fan on this planet. So the only thing he or she can do is present the film through his or her eyes. How he or she interpreted that particular book.
I do agree with what you said at the end, Louise. If you just can't accept the books and movies being different from each other, if you are outraged by the cuts that they've made, basically if you know you'll be disappointed - then just don't go for the films. Simple as that. Stay clear of the movies and build your own pictures. I just don't get fans who dissed PoA till thy kingdom come but yet went out and bought the DVD, only to diss about it some more!!
Save yourself the angst, and save people like me the saliva. 
And that's the end of my thesis, thank you.
(I truly hope I didn't put all of youse to sleep
) Oh btw, I agree with Ghost. I am a tad bit nervous about their selection of director since all he's done before this is TV stuff. For a first attempt at film, OotP will definitely be a mighty challenge for him, that's for sure!! Still, me being the optimist as always, I trust that he was probably the best one for the job at that point in time. We must all bear in mind that OotP is set to be the biggest HP film thus far due to the book's length, so not many of the "seasoned" directors would be too keen on committing to spending so much time on one film. Either that, or possibly all the other directors WB had in mind, were fully booked. *shrug*
wooh, i can't beleive i actually read it,ashleigh07. actually i kept checking this thread but couldn't get myself to read your writing-- gotta admit that even though it was very interesting, it's a little too long.
only one confusion: is Louise Dana_Scully?
basically, i agree with you. is the thread kinda closed then, since we basically covered all the points plus there's another similar thread bout the cuts?
only one confusion: is Louise Dana_Scully?
basically, i agree with you. is the thread kinda closed then, since we basically covered all the points plus there's another similar thread bout the cuts?
Wow, that was good, Ash... Not being biased because you're my mate, but you *almost* had me willing to part with me six quid there...but not quite..
I understand what you're saying...you know that......which is why I've made the choice not to see the movies anymore because I totally agree with you - whining about it and then going out to buy the DVD is just ludicrous. If the movies bug you that badly - which they will inevitably do if you go there expecting a literal page-to-screen translation - then just don't go, end of story.
Not being biased because you're my mate, but you *almost* had me willing to part with me six quid there...but not quite..I understand what you're saying...you know that...
...which is why I've made the choice not to see the movies anymore because I totally agree with you - whining about it and then going out to buy the DVD is just ludicrous. If the movies bug you that badly - which they will inevitably do if you go there expecting a literal page-to-screen translation - then just don't go, end of story.| QUOTE (Ashy) |
| Well even if they ended up just being face value, Louise, as disappointing as it is, what does it matter? |
Well, I guess it doesn't, in the long run. This is a personal thing on my part that is a pretty long story, but I'll try and sum it up briefly - basically, I'm a conspiracy theorist. I love to believe that there is always more to something than first meets the eye. It's why I loved the X-Files, why I believe that 'Alice in Wonderland' and 'The Chronicles of Narnia' were extremely clever digs at social stereotypes and organised religion at the same time as getting children to open their eyes a little to the world around them and to get them to look at things in a different way, albeit subtley. So, I'd like to believe that there's more going on in HP too - that she really is trying to make moral statements about racism and friendships an all the other things that she's hinted at, including the hidden 'backstory' against which the events in Harry's life are being set. If you take that backstory away, if the subplots don't matter, then maybe the books are just simple stories about a wizard and his friends and that's all. Not classic literature. Not hidden social statements. Not supremely cleverly woven subplots that will all come together in the end. But little more than padding so the publishers can charge more. That just makes me really sad and almost makes me feel as though I've stepped back rather than forward in choosing to pick up a HP book in the first place, do you know what I mean?
But yeah, maybe I shouldn't be reading so much into the cuts either. Maybe the screenwriters and directors are doing the best they can under the circumstances...but then, the movies really are beginning to become completely separate entities, particularly as the books themselves get longer forcing them to make even more cuts - as I said earlier on in another thread, to me, they're becoming simply movies about a wizard with none of the heart and true magic that makes Harry Potter the phenomenon it is.
EDIT : Ana posted while I was writing...
Yeah, I'm Louise, Ana... And nope, the thread isn't closed...this is just one of those rare occasions when the mods get to do something that we actually enjoy doing, something which is the reason we first came to the site - not to yell at everyone, but because well...we really do love HP and like to *actually* talk about it sometimes... As I said, a pretty rare occurance these days when time is limited and mod'ing tends to take up most of the time...
Yeah, I agree with dana, it's nice be be able to discuss somthing insteid of yelling about somthing.
Now another thing I'm worried about with this one is if they exspect to cram the entire book into 150 mins like they did with the last four. I just don't see how they could do it in that length without cutting out not only subplot but major plot lines in the book. In my opinion anything under 180 mins would be trouble.
Now another thing I'm worried about with this one is if they exspect to cram the entire book into 150 mins like they did with the last four. I just don't see how they could do it in that length without cutting out not only subplot but major plot lines in the book. In my opinion anything under 180 mins would be trouble.
I don't get it? Why do they keep changing the directors in the firt place? It seems so weird and not in flow. The first and second movies where similare but then the third one... well that one had a lot of mistakes and looked more than a little different from the first two. And it was really disappointing that they didn't show the quidditch game in which they won the cup. Anyway, I think I'm getting off the topic a bit. The point is that if Yates messes up, he'll end up with a footprint on his face from when I kick him.
Anyway, I think I'm getting off the topic a bit. The point is that if Yates messes up, he'll end up with a footprint on his face from when I kick him.
The reason they keep changing directors is because first: Chris Columbus was so worn out after the first two he coulden't do the third, whats his name that did the third said he only wanted to do one so they had to change for the fourth, and I haven't heard why Newell didn't do the fifth and I don't know if Yates is planing on doing the sixth. But I did hear that Columbus said he might do another one of the films.
I'm not sure what I would do! I would probably be in the movie theatre yelling everytime anything is changed. I would probably think the movies are messed up, but but it anyway!
if he screws up i will fly my harrier into him!
MOD EDIT : One-liners are not allowed in the forums. Please check the rules.
MOD EDIT : One-liners are not allowed in the forums. Please check the rules.
Dana, I felt the same way after PoA. It left me feeling a little weird, like I'd been cheated...
On re watching it at home once I got the DVDs as a present, I liked it a little bit more. There are some interesting things that Cuaron did which I thought were pretty interesting as far as cinematography goes.
But I digress. Books will always be much better than movies for one simple reason: your mind is the best director, the best special effects crew and the most accomplished casting director you will ever encounter. I have never, ever, in 37 years of life (31 of which have been spent reading and watching movies) been 100% pleased by a movie adaptation of a favourite book. The closest I have come is with the series Band of Brothers, based on the Ambrose book of the same name. But that took a 10 episode mini-series totalling over 10 hours! Clearly not possible for a big screen picture!
I also agree on the switching directors all the time. For my money, they should've gone with Terry Gilliam for all 4 movies and left it at that. Or maybe Danny Boyle...
I'll see it, but I know ahead of time I'll be disappointed.
Cheers!
On re watching it at home once I got the DVDs as a present, I liked it a little bit more. There are some interesting things that Cuaron did which I thought were pretty interesting as far as cinematography goes.
But I digress. Books will always be much better than movies for one simple reason: your mind is the best director, the best special effects crew and the most accomplished casting director you will ever encounter. I have never, ever, in 37 years of life (31 of which have been spent reading and watching movies) been 100% pleased by a movie adaptation of a favourite book. The closest I have come is with the series Band of Brothers, based on the Ambrose book of the same name. But that took a 10 episode mini-series totalling over 10 hours! Clearly not possible for a big screen picture!
I also agree on the switching directors all the time. For my money, they should've gone with Terry Gilliam for all 4 movies and left it at that. Or maybe Danny Boyle...
I'll see it, but I know ahead of time I'll be disappointed.
Cheers!
I was watching a film the other night, purely because I happen to be a bit of a Bill Nighy fan - 'The Girl in the Cafe'. I was really surprised, as the credits started rolling, to see David Yates as the director. I thought, ooh, great - a chance for me to see how he handles things.
You know, I think he's going to do a really good job of directing OotP, judging from how he handled 'The Girl in the Cafe'. I mean, Richard Curtis, who wrote it, has to take some of the credit obviously, but that film was really well done. It had a very minimalist feel to it - hardly any incidental music, the script was very scant...brilliant, but not overly wordy - Yates managed to capture emotion beautifully with no need for flashy special effects, trawling orchestration or sentimentalistic dialogue. If he can do with OotP what he did with 'The Girl', I think I'll be pretty happy.
You really should rent that movie if you get a chance - it will give you an excellent idea of how Yates is likely to handle things. I can't wait to see how he does Sirius' death - I have a feeling I'm going to be needing a whole box of Kleenex
You know, I think he's going to do a really good job of directing OotP, judging from how he handled 'The Girl in the Cafe'. I mean, Richard Curtis, who wrote it, has to take some of the credit obviously, but that film was really well done. It had a very minimalist feel to it - hardly any incidental music, the script was very scant...brilliant, but not overly wordy - Yates managed to capture emotion beautifully with no need for flashy special effects, trawling orchestration or sentimentalistic dialogue. If he can do with OotP what he did with 'The Girl', I think I'll be pretty happy.
You really should rent that movie if you get a chance - it will give you an excellent idea of how Yates is likely to handle things. I can't wait to see how he does Sirius' death - I have a feeling I'm going to be needing a whole box of Kleenex
| QUOTE (Omerus_Banning @ Aug 29 2005, 07:57 PM) |
| Books will always be much better than movies for one simple reason: your mind is the best director, the best special effects crew and the most accomplished casting director you will ever encounter. |
I must agree.
It is really impossible to make the perfect HP movie. PS and CoS were pretty much based on the books. When i first watched PS i was in shock. I hadnt experienced anything like that before. I saw my own thoughts and imagination on the screen. That was really scary. I remember the feeling, when Hogwarts first appeared on screen. I couldnt believe my eyes, how good job they did.
And though, this feeling cant be compared to the feeling when i read PS. Still, after reading it 100 times, i feel excited when Harry first walk into the Great Hall.PoA was different. It was a really good movie, but it was Cuaron's interpretation of the book. They had cut off some important stuff, but it was an individual movie and i think the best yet.
I feel sorry for the important information they didnt include (Lupin, James, Sirius, Peter stuff), but i wont go mad just because they had cut it off. I think OotP will be a good movie too. I dont care if they cut stuff out as long as they will make Sirius' death credible and true to the book. Its the only part i wanna see on screen as Jo wrote it.
Ok, Ash, you convinced me (even if Louise is still holding out... )
I've watched all three movies over and over recently. I have my 3 year-old son to thank for that, as he LOVES the movies (he doesn't really actually sit there for the duration very often, but don't you dare turn them off!!)
I think I am starting to appreciate them on their own as films based on the books, or adapted from the books. Contrary to most people here, I actually prefer the first two movies. OotP was good, but I felt that the cinematography was too "artsy" for my taste. My perfect example of this: When the Dementors fly by and we are left to watch a flower wither and die in the frost. A nice image and one conveying the right message to be sure, but I thought it was a little overdone for the movie... Call me boring, but I like feeling to be expressed by actors. In comparison, I thought the scene where the Dementors are borading the train was excellent, especially the bit where we see the window frost over as Ron has his hand on it...
There's no doubt in my mind that Cuaron is a great director, I'm just not sure he was a great Harry Potter director... Columbus stuck very close to the books and didn't take chances very much. Newell, well, we have to wait and see... Same with Yates...
I still think Terry Gilliam would've been grand!
Now that he's done with Tolkien's world, anyone want to take a crack at getting Peter Jackson on board??
Cheers!
I've watched all three movies over and over recently. I have my 3 year-old son to thank for that, as he LOVES the movies (he doesn't really actually sit there for the duration very often, but don't you dare turn them off!!)
I think I am starting to appreciate them on their own as films based on the books, or adapted from the books. Contrary to most people here, I actually prefer the first two movies. OotP was good, but I felt that the cinematography was too "artsy" for my taste. My perfect example of this: When the Dementors fly by and we are left to watch a flower wither and die in the frost. A nice image and one conveying the right message to be sure, but I thought it was a little overdone for the movie... Call me boring, but I like feeling to be expressed by actors. In comparison, I thought the scene where the Dementors are borading the train was excellent, especially the bit where we see the window frost over as Ron has his hand on it...
There's no doubt in my mind that Cuaron is a great director, I'm just not sure he was a great Harry Potter director... Columbus stuck very close to the books and didn't take chances very much. Newell, well, we have to wait and see... Same with Yates...
I still think Terry Gilliam would've been grand!
Now that he's done with Tolkien's world, anyone want to take a crack at getting Peter Jackson on board??
Cheers!
A broom chase? thats ridiculous! I agree with Dana. The writers are losing touch with the books.
I'm still in love with the first movie. To me it was true to the book in most cases. I think my judgment will be held until GOF comes out. But i loved OoTP and i want to the movie to be great. There is so much in that book that needs to be said.
Not to mention for the actors, it will be more challeging. More of an emotional spectrum.
i just jope i dont leave the theatre being upset like i did after i saw lord of thr rings. When they cut out major parts it just makes me mad.
I just hope they keep the parts with the DA true. thats some of the best stuff. Also Fred and Georges pranks. but i think they will only show that swamp part. gr...
I'm still in love with the first movie. To me it was true to the book in most cases. I think my judgment will be held until GOF comes out. But i loved OoTP and i want to the movie to be great. There is so much in that book that needs to be said.
Not to mention for the actors, it will be more challeging. More of an emotional spectrum.
i just jope i dont leave the theatre being upset like i did after i saw lord of thr rings. When they cut out major parts it just makes me mad.
I just hope they keep the parts with the DA true. thats some of the best stuff. Also Fred and Georges pranks. but i think they will only show that swamp part. gr...
I agree with you, Omerus_Banning, a lot of the stuff in the third movie seemed over done, or put in for no good reason. Like the bird getting torn apart by the whomping willow.
I also have to agree with, keepstar1331, and a few of you others that the first two are my favorites, especially the first. And that a broom chase would be totally ridiculous.
I actually hope that Peter Jackson doesn't do any of the films. I think he's a great director and all, but I would just prefer he didn't. Though I would love to see Stephen Spilbeirg do one.
I also have to agree with, keepstar1331, and a few of you others that the first two are my favorites, especially the first. And that a broom chase would be totally ridiculous.
I actually hope that Peter Jackson doesn't do any of the films. I think he's a great director and all, but I would just prefer he didn't. Though I would love to see Stephen Spilbeirg do one.
I think that the problem (not thats it's really a problem) is that a there are a number of peopple who just see the movies and dont read the books. I'm sure if you had never read a page of Jo's you wouldn't be disapointed. Actually from the movie standpoing only, the pictures are quite good. The issue is that we already know whats going to happen and have , in our mind, it already written out.
So when it's not true to the book (adding scenes and characters) it throws us off. There are little chracter building points in the books that they can't convey in the movies. Things Harry thinks, the tensions between characters, facial expressions we imagine in our minds. The hardcore HP fan base is large, and we would sit through three hour movies, but would the rest of society?
The movies are a monetary issue. They are going to do whatever gains the most money. Even if it doesn't exactly go along with what us true HP fans beleive should happen...
So when it's not true to the book (adding scenes and characters) it throws us off. There are little chracter building points in the books that they can't convey in the movies. Things Harry thinks, the tensions between characters, facial expressions we imagine in our minds. The hardcore HP fan base is large, and we would sit through three hour movies, but would the rest of society?
The movies are a monetary issue. They are going to do whatever gains the most money. Even if it doesn't exactly go along with what us true HP fans beleive should happen...
Budgetary issues definitely have an impact on what gets filmed, but overall I think that they often err on the artistic side for something as big as the Harry Potter franchise. However, that is not to say that they will film every scene as it is in the book.
Obviously, someone (Hiya Ash!) has made an impression on me where movie adaptations are concerned...
You are quite right in saying tha many people only know Harry Potter through the movies, most obviously people who cannot (yet) read, and many people who simply don't like to (I know, but there are some people who actually don't!) To them, the movies only need to flow in some logical sequence, plotwise, to have decent acting and special effects, and as long as it tells a compelling story they will be satisfied.
For us hardcore fans of the Potterverse, glossing over the minutiae found in the books may be sacrilegious, but for the great (unwashed or otherwise) masses, these points are unimportant because they are unaware of them.
In some cases (Hi again, Ash! ), the films are appreciated on their own merit, separately from the written versions of the story. They are adaptations of the books and, for the most part, pretty much keep within canon, as laid out in the books.
Actually, this is a good side point: Has it been determined if the movies are actually canon or not? The situation often varies: Star Trek books, for instance, were not considered canon when I was involved in fandom there... But Star Wars books were always considered canon... Anyone know for certain if the movies are considered canon or not in Harry Potter?
Any road, I'll reserve judgement until I actually see the movie to determine if Yates did a good job or not. My concern is more along the lines of directors trying to be too "artsy" with their cinematography than with them taking liberties wit the actual storyline (which they don't really...). They may choose to gloss over some parts, or outright not mention them, but they generally don't add things that aren't in the books (at least not things which change the plot in any significant way...)
Wow, that was all over the place and quite a rambling post! So, I'll just shut up for now!
Cheers!
Obviously, someone (Hiya Ash!) has made an impression on me where movie adaptations are concerned...
You are quite right in saying tha many people only know Harry Potter through the movies, most obviously people who cannot (yet) read, and many people who simply don't like to (I know, but there are some people who actually don't!) To them, the movies only need to flow in some logical sequence, plotwise, to have decent acting and special effects, and as long as it tells a compelling story they will be satisfied.
For us hardcore fans of the Potterverse, glossing over the minutiae found in the books may be sacrilegious, but for the great (unwashed or otherwise) masses, these points are unimportant because they are unaware of them.
In some cases (Hi again, Ash!
), the films are appreciated on their own merit, separately from the written versions of the story. They are adaptations of the books and, for the most part, pretty much keep within canon, as laid out in the books.Actually, this is a good side point: Has it been determined if the movies are actually canon or not? The situation often varies: Star Trek books, for instance, were not considered canon when I was involved in fandom there... But Star Wars books were always considered canon... Anyone know for certain if the movies are considered canon or not in Harry Potter?
Any road, I'll reserve judgement until I actually see the movie to determine if Yates did a good job or not. My concern is more along the lines of directors trying to be too "artsy" with their cinematography than with them taking liberties wit the actual storyline (which they don't really...). They may choose to gloss over some parts, or outright not mention them, but they generally don't add things that aren't in the books (at least not things which change the plot in any significant way...)
Wow, that was all over the place and quite a rambling post! So, I'll just shut up for now!
Cheers!
Well when I heard that they were going to film outside of England, I was like 'Why?'. They are keeping all of the cast English so why would they chose to go outside of where the story is based. Its like making Crouching Tiger in the middle of Chicago. It just wouldn't fit. I know that they are just movies but they should be based on the books as much as possible. As for the broom chase, that would lead someone who hasn't read the book think that there is a broom chase in the book, and when they read it they'll ask where the broom chase was. I know that the OotP won't have all of the details that the book had but to ADD something to it would make me outraged if I were JK.
Which star wars books are you talking about? the ones before or after what takes place in the movies...because the movies are based off an book. Or a "graphic novel".
Any who....i agree the movies should be appreciated for their "movieness". Even though i'm not a huge fan of POA the directing was brilliant. it cought an overall mood, which is hard.
Let's hope the movie stays canon. Otherwise, if they change too much...i dunno. I'll be sticking to my well worn books
Any who....i agree the movies should be appreciated for their "movieness". Even though i'm not a huge fan of POA the directing was brilliant. it cought an overall mood, which is hard.
Let's hope the movie stays canon. Otherwise, if they change too much...i dunno. I'll be sticking to my well worn books
I know that there were differences between the books and movies, but you could at least give some credit for the imagination and visual effects that the directors worked hard on. When I saw PoA myself, I thought it kind of boring in a way, but I have to give props for Cuaron for making the HP series to a new level which turned out to be darker and more satisfying than the previous two by Chris. Newell will be on the level and I'm happy about that and about Yates, we'll see...
i dont think he'll mess up. the cuts and other things does not rest solely in the hands of the director, its in the hands of the scriptwriters. i dunno any of yates' works but fromwot ive read he's more of a tv-guy rather than a movie guy which i think its great cos....tv movies' got restricted air time but it does mean all tv adaptation of books are crap...sometimes they are still very well made, totally concised but still full of details...and details (aside from bringing the heart and soul of the books into the screen) is wot we wanna see in the OotP movie....
im actually more worried with the dumbledore actor than the director (as the director comes and goes....not same with the actors....we might be stucked with the new dumbledore till the 7th movie).............i dun see the dumbledore in the books in the new dumbledore.
im actually more worried with the dumbledore actor than the director (as the director comes and goes....not same with the actors....we might be stucked with the new dumbledore till the 7th movie).............i dun see the dumbledore in the books in the new dumbledore.
I hope he doesn't, either. I'm kinda mad that the 4th movie didn't show Winky, the house elf (she's sounded cute in the book), but doesn't matter, anyway. I just realized that they might film the movie in the Czech Republic. Wow! Even, over there, it's the place where they film fantasy movies (i.e. the upcoming Narnia movie). I'm sure it'll be filmed in the UK, anyway.
Does anyone know who is writing the script for 0oTP? Is it the same guy who did GoF?
All I have to say is this: if they add a broom chase to OOTP, they will definitely ruin the film. Just like whatshisname with POA added that scene for WAY too long with the Knightbus.
I'm sorry to bring it up, but it's a magic bus. Show it, and get over it.
Who freakin cares about a shrunken head (that had nothing to do with the books anyway) compacting itself when it squeeses between two buses? And to waste 5 minutes on the annoying thing?
Sorry, off topic, but my blood boiled over that one - I would hate to see something similar in OOTP, which became my favourite book when it came out (but before OOTP was released, POA was my fave - see my frustration with the films!)
Must say though, loved GOF film, maybe I was less critical of that one
I'm sorry to bring it up, but it's a magic bus. Show it, and get over it.
Who freakin cares about a shrunken head (that had nothing to do with the books anyway) compacting itself when it squeeses between two buses? And to waste 5 minutes on the annoying thing?
Sorry, off topic, but my blood boiled over that one - I would hate to see something similar in OOTP, which became my favourite book when it came out (but before OOTP was released, POA was my fave - see my frustration with the films!)
Must say though, loved GOF film, maybe I was less critical of that one
well i thought newell messed GoF up and if yates does it with Ootp i am going to go off in a rage and i am literally going to scream in the cinema when the film is over, then im going to demand the cinema to contact warner bros. imediately and then i will grab the phone off them and scream at them. then i will walk of swearing loudly.
I think I'll accept it however he does it. GoF was a little messed up, but I still love the movie. People don't seem to realize that the books and movies aren't the same thing. They only share the same title. Yeah, it's the same background story, but not everything has to be the same. I think OotP will be a great movie, not because it will be a complete copy of the book, but because it will have the same exhilarting plot. I think that's all they need.
If the Director copied the books word for word then it wouldn't really be a movie, more of a visual story. They have to add bits to movies to keep the audience captivated, make it fresh. But I agree, the shrunken heads in PoA were weird. I was like 'What the.....?', I didn't like that movie. But if Yates does muck up OotP then I will scream. It is a good book and it deserves to be made into a good movie, I would hate to see it end up like PoA. Um, I just went totally off topic aye? Sorry, I'll go now.
lol yay tomz_girl well said, if there was a smilie for an applause then i would use it lol. yeah they were abit strange in PoA but i thought they did add a touch of humor to it. it is a good book Ootp and it needs doing justice i totally agree with you.
I have a feeling Yates will do a better job on OOTP than Newell did with GoF. I liked GoF, but it sort of felt incomplete. There's so much important information in OOTP that shouldn't be cut (or changed), so I'm hoping that Yates will take those things into consideration, especially since it'll affect what stays in Half-Blood Prince.
Wasn't JKR pregnant during the filming of Goblet of Fire? She was probably too busy to consult on how the film was being made -- which can explain why Newell left out some important scenes...
Wasn't JKR pregnant during the filming of Goblet of Fire? She was probably too busy to consult on how the film was being made -- which can explain why Newell left out some important scenes...
I had never even heard of David Yates, so i looked him up. I have never heard of any of the things he's directed. Scary to me. Any one here seen anything he's directed before? Were they any good?
I don't think I'll be dissappointed in the next movie, mostly because I don't go into the movie with any expectations other than the name Harry Potter must be mentioned and Snape had better get some lines. I love the books, and they are definately far superior. . .but I love the movies for what they are: adaptations from the book. Am I happy about everything they do with them, no, but that's just the thing with adaptations.
As far as the canon question goes (posted WAY back when by Omerus, I think), I believe the general rule is that the "Canon" is that which appeared first. So, in the HP world, only the books are canon since the films are telling the same story and are treated as an adaptation. Star Wars canon is different, because each story is different. . .of course, if the screen-play is published first, then that would be treated as canon. I suppose it does differ with each fan-base as to what's acceptable: But for the most part, the rule is that which is published first is the canon, particularly in the cases where the same story is being told.
I don't think I'll be dissappointed in the next movie, mostly because I don't go into the movie with any expectations other than the name Harry Potter must be mentioned and Snape had better get some lines.
I love the books, and they are definately far superior. . .but I love the movies for what they are: adaptations from the book. Am I happy about everything they do with them, no, but that's just the thing with adaptations. As far as the canon question goes (posted WAY back when by Omerus, I think), I believe the general rule is that the "Canon" is that which appeared first. So, in the HP world, only the books are canon since the films are telling the same story and are treated as an adaptation. Star Wars canon is different, because each story is different. . .of course, if the screen-play is published first, then that would be treated as canon. I suppose it does differ with each fan-base as to what's acceptable: But for the most part, the rule is that which is published first is the canon, particularly in the cases where the same story is being told.
| QUOTE (Quality Quidditch Supplies @ Jun 13 2005, 07:49 PM) |
| Yeah, the only reason I can think they'd have a broom chase down the Thames (sp?) is if Death Eaters attacked, and that would kind of screw up the rest of the story line, as well as making Moody seem less paranoid and more realistic. I, too, love OotP the best. It's wonderfully written; you can just feel Harry's frustration as he struggles to figure out why he's dreaming about a hallway. You get angry with him when Umbridge is cutting open his hand; you laugh with Ron after the Christmas kiss; everything in it is powerfully written, that it's extremely difficult to come across in a movie. Movies have their forte, they can bring scenery and action to life, special effects can create the greatest explosions known to man. (Hey, I'm a guy, I love my fire. ) But they can't bring out the feeling and depth that books can, which is why, in my opinion, books are still superior. At least when well written as this series is. As such, I think that Yates cannot possibly please every Potter fan out there; we all have slightly, or not so slightly, different views on how things should be/look, which is yet another great thing about well written books. Obviously he's going to try to use JK's imput as much as possible, and since she's the authority on all things Potter, it should come out like the book's. Even so, some people will be disappointed, even mad, if certain things aren't to their likeing. I highly doubt anyone will be completely pleased with Tonks, for instance. But he's going to do a good job, and the movie will have the general story of the books. We've just got to realize that the movies and books, however closely related, are not the same. Unfortunantly. |
I completely and utterly agree.
I highly doubt that Yates will mess this movie up, and I think he'll do better than what Newell did with GOF. Plus, now that I see and hear all these castings, it seems that they're keepin a lot of stuff, and the movie'll probably be at least 3 hours. I mean they're keeping dudley's gang, mrs. figg, snapes memory, thestrals, grawp and probably more. I have a feeling that this will be a much better movie than the first four. I only have three concerns, goldenburg or whatever his name is filling in for steve kloves, because I have know idea what he'll bring because kloves did the first four. My second is hoping that coltrane will come back for hagrid, because he's the perfect hagrid; and I hear that Rowling thought of him as hagrid while writing the books. And my last concern is for gary oldman returning because people are saying that he might not.
This one, to me, is already doing well. I am not upset with any casting decisions yet, though I'm not sure Yates has anything to do with that. But I think anyone is better than Newell. I thought he messed up royally on that last one but.... I'm preeety sure this on will be okay because they casted the Dursleys and all the young adult people and guys like Zacharias Smith, so I think we can count on this movie to do pretty good. I haven't seen any of Yates' works previous to this, but I trust him as of now.
All I want to say is that they better not mess up this movie. There are a lot of fans who would have many things to say about it if they messed up, and I for one do not want to be let down. I will still enjoy the movie though, it has to do with Harry Potter!
Say
Say
I have to say that I tend to be very prejudice - I always think that the books are better than films (not just HP), because your own imagination has a much wide scope than a movie crew/cast, and often get a shock (and disappointment) whenever I see a film adaptation because it is generally far removed from my imagination
but it is impossible for a crew/cast/director to show a film that fits everyones view of the book (we are wonderfully diverse creatures
) - I have to admit that by the time I have seen it again (or perhaps the 67th time (I can get a little addicted 
)) I usually see the film as a seperate rough copy of the book and appreciate it for what it is, a short adaptation - (I coulnd't imagine attempting it myself) (I have to admit that when I first saw sirius - Gary Olman, even though I love Gary oldman, I was disapointed because he was not like I pictured - but now I happily swoon over him 
, the same goes for other little changes to my mind-eye-book version)
but I do think that they can (and have) gone too far with some things (for example, the major cutting of sirius (not that I'm biased) which may adversely affect the effects of his death because the sirius-harry bond is not well established in the film, or the cutting of other characters such as Dobby (GOF) and bagman)
...
I especially think that the cutting of the dementors' kiss on Crouch junior was dissapointing, as it showed how Fudge is a bit erm...(tries to think of a nicer work)...'mad and weak' and that relates nicely to Fudge's behaviour (or rather, lack there of - with regards to LV ) in OotP
I have no idea what is with the chase scene - perhaps it the DA flying on brooms rather than thestrals to the MOM - just a thought (I would be disapointed - although I would also be disapointed if they were just adding a random scene too - hey I'm hard to please)
I think that the HP film are good at what they are meant to do - bring in the audiences and cash, they are nice to watch but are certainly not contest for the books, so I think that many people who haven't read the books will love the films, and a majority of those who have read them will enjoy the flms - I think it is safe to say the most of us prefer the books (and many of us will always have a bit of a moan (I know I do) that they tampered with it (just my humble opinion)
The good thing about the film adaptations is that they appear to have encouraged manu people who weren't particularily interested in reading the HP books (or any books) to have a read - which is always a good thing
but it is impossible for a crew/cast/director to show a film that fits everyones view of the book (we are wonderfully diverse creatures
) - I have to admit that by the time I have seen it again (or perhaps the 67th time (I can get a little addicted )) I usually see the film as a seperate rough copy of the book and appreciate it for what it is, a short adaptation - (I coulnd't imagine attempting it myself) (I have to admit that when I first saw sirius - Gary Olman, even though I love Gary oldman, I was disapointed because he was not like I pictured - but now I happily swoon over him , the same goes for other little changes to my mind-eye-book version)but I do think that they can (and have) gone too far with some things (for example, the major cutting of sirius (not that I'm biased
) which may adversely affect the effects of his death because the sirius-harry bond is not well established in the film, or the cutting of other characters such as Dobby (GOF) and bagman)...
I especially think that the cutting of the dementors' kiss on Crouch junior was dissapointing, as it showed how Fudge is a bit erm...(tries to think of a nicer work)...'mad and weak' and that relates nicely to Fudge's behaviour (or rather, lack there of - with regards to LV
) in OotPI have no idea what is with the chase scene - perhaps it the DA flying on brooms rather than thestrals to the MOM - just a thought (I would be disapointed - although I would also be disapointed if they were just adding a random scene too - hey I'm hard to please
)I think that the HP film are good at what they are meant to do - bring in the audiences and cash, they are nice to watch but are certainly not contest for the books, so I think that many people who haven't read the books will love the films, and a majority of those who have read them will enjoy the flms - I think it is safe to say the most of us prefer the books (and many of us will always have a bit of a moan (I know I do) that they tampered with it
(just my humble opinion)The good thing about the film adaptations is that they appear to have encouraged manu people who weren't particularily interested in reading the HP books (or any books) to have a read - which is always a good thing
I think what Yates needs to do in order to redeem the movies is somehow figure out a way to bridge the gap that has been made. One of the greatest things about the HP books, or any well-written series (whether it be a movie series or book series) is its ability to take multiple books/ episodes/ stories and make them in to one flowing piece of work by creating themes, ideas, characters, motifs, and concepts that are woven in and out throughout the entire series. I think the movies feel choppy and disjointed because they fail to do that.
The first two films flow together very nicely (which is logical because they have the same director and composer) the visual, audio, and sentimental components are consistant throughout both films. This, I believe, is why you so often hear people saying things to the effect of "The first two films were good but then they went down hill from there..." Through these first two films, the overall "feel" of what the Harry Potter world is like is established.
The third film comes complete with a new director who takes the film, visually, in another direction. The overall "feel" the first two films established is slightly corrupted, but the film is, musically, consistant with the first two films. In my opinion, John Williams use of leitmotif was one of the few things that gelled the third and first two films together.
The fourth film, which has neither the same director nor composer as the first three films, is very disjointed from them, almost as if it was a movie from a different series. Those intrinsic themes (Hedwigs theme, A Window to the Past, Harry's Parents Theme, Hogwarts Theme etc.) that brought us back to the Harry Potter world and conjured up certain feelings and emotions (even if it was only subconsiously) were lost in the fourth film. Music, I believe, plays such a vital roll in a movie. Imagine if in "Return of the Jedi" the Imperial March theme was suddenly replaced with something else, or if Superman III had a new theme song, totally different from the previous, in Superman I and II....the movies just wouldn't be the same. Music triggers retrieval cues which causes us to feel things, even if you don't know it's happening (psych 101 rears its ugly head). The loss of Williams as a composer, I think, was the the single biggest blow to the harmony of the films.
If they had used the same director throughout the movies, or even the same 2 or 3 directors, they would have been able to communicate what ideas, plots, concepts, character traits, etc. they wanted to bring out or concentrate on and in doing so continue them througout the movies. The way WB has chosen to do it, each director pushes his own agenda of what he wants to do with the characters and/or ideas and because of that we end up with things like...
- Two total differnt Dumbledores (character wise)
- Three different renditions of the Hogwarts landscape
- Two different professor flitwicks
- Inconsistantsies with what witches and wizards do and don't wear (Robes in the first two, sloppy clothes in the third, and Hogwarts hoddies and muggle clothes in the fourth)
- Characters that unexplicably dissapear before their time (Wood, Dooby, etc.)
- Characters that unexplicably show up for no reason (the big black kid in PoA, Nigel in GoF)
- An entrance to the Gryffindor common room that appears in a differnt location in different movies.
- etc..
These things on their own may not seem like that big of a deal, but when coupled together along with a change in composer which, in my opinoin, drastically changes the "feel" of the movies, the films are left choppy and disjointed, sharing little between them. With no fiber that survives throughout the movies tieing them together, viewers are left with nothing to cling on to, and instead of one story that slowly unfolds in seven parts (as the books do) they are left with 7 seperate stories that try (and fail) to stand on their own, and don't really flow together to make a single comprehensive story.
For us, Harry Potter fans who have read the books, we are able to put the missing pieces back into the puzzle and make sense of the jumble, but for others this isn't the case...I don't think I am the only one here who has had to explain to someone who has not read the books why something did or didn't happen.
So, I said all that to say this. I think if Yates wants to make a decent film what he needs to do is
1). Put what he artistically wants to do on the back burner and concentrate on the actual story that is there- not going off on wild tangeants that aren't in the books (like the chase scene) and are only going to add the the disjointedness of the films.
and
2). Concentrate on themes, ideas, concepts, and motifs that have already been established, elaborate upon them and see them through, rather than concentrating on new themes that will be left incomplete by the end of the movie and disregaurded by the next director.
I would suggest he moves the film back to the look and feel and overall ambience of the first three films, rather than focus on elaborating on the fourth film because, to me, the fourth film didn't even seem like it belonged with the the previous three.
The series (movie wise) needs to be brought back to its roots; that is the most important thing for Yates to do....in my opinoin
The first two films flow together very nicely (which is logical because they have the same director and composer) the visual, audio, and sentimental components are consistant throughout both films. This, I believe, is why you so often hear people saying things to the effect of "The first two films were good but then they went down hill from there..." Through these first two films, the overall "feel" of what the Harry Potter world is like is established.
The third film comes complete with a new director who takes the film, visually, in another direction. The overall "feel" the first two films established is slightly corrupted, but the film is, musically, consistant with the first two films. In my opinion, John Williams use of leitmotif was one of the few things that gelled the third and first two films together.
The fourth film, which has neither the same director nor composer as the first three films, is very disjointed from them, almost as if it was a movie from a different series. Those intrinsic themes (Hedwigs theme, A Window to the Past, Harry's Parents Theme, Hogwarts Theme etc.) that brought us back to the Harry Potter world and conjured up certain feelings and emotions (even if it was only subconsiously) were lost in the fourth film. Music, I believe, plays such a vital roll in a movie. Imagine if in "Return of the Jedi" the Imperial March theme was suddenly replaced with something else, or if Superman III had a new theme song, totally different from the previous, in Superman I and II....the movies just wouldn't be the same. Music triggers retrieval cues which causes us to feel things, even if you don't know it's happening (psych 101 rears its ugly head
). The loss of Williams as a composer, I think, was the the single biggest blow to the harmony of the films.If they had used the same director throughout the movies, or even the same 2 or 3 directors, they would have been able to communicate what ideas, plots, concepts, character traits, etc. they wanted to bring out or concentrate on and in doing so continue them througout the movies. The way WB has chosen to do it, each director pushes his own agenda of what he wants to do with the characters and/or ideas and because of that we end up with things like...
- Two total differnt Dumbledores (character wise)
- Three different renditions of the Hogwarts landscape
- Two different professor flitwicks
- Inconsistantsies with what witches and wizards do and don't wear (Robes in the first two, sloppy clothes in the third, and Hogwarts hoddies and muggle clothes in the fourth)
- Characters that unexplicably dissapear before their time (Wood, Dooby, etc.)
- Characters that unexplicably show up for no reason (the big black kid in PoA, Nigel in GoF)
- An entrance to the Gryffindor common room that appears in a differnt location in different movies.
- etc..
These things on their own may not seem like that big of a deal, but when coupled together along with a change in composer which, in my opinoin, drastically changes the "feel" of the movies, the films are left choppy and disjointed, sharing little between them. With no fiber that survives throughout the movies tieing them together, viewers are left with nothing to cling on to, and instead of one story that slowly unfolds in seven parts (as the books do) they are left with 7 seperate stories that try (and fail) to stand on their own, and don't really flow together to make a single comprehensive story.
For us, Harry Potter fans who have read the books, we are able to put the missing pieces back into the puzzle and make sense of the jumble, but for others this isn't the case...I don't think I am the only one here who has had to explain to someone who has not read the books why something did or didn't happen.
So, I said all that to say this. I think if Yates wants to make a decent film what he needs to do is
1). Put what he artistically wants to do on the back burner and concentrate on the actual story that is there- not going off on wild tangeants that aren't in the books (like the chase scene) and are only going to add the the disjointedness of the films.
and
2). Concentrate on themes, ideas, concepts, and motifs that have already been established, elaborate upon them and see them through, rather than concentrating on new themes that will be left incomplete by the end of the movie and disregaurded by the next director.
I would suggest he moves the film back to the look and feel and overall ambience of the first three films, rather than focus on elaborating on the fourth film because, to me, the fourth film didn't even seem like it belonged with the the previous three.
The series (movie wise) needs to be brought back to its roots; that is the most important thing for Yates to do....in my opinoin
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.