You can tell from the travel time - yeah I know it is a magic train so anything can happen. In 'Fantastic Beasts and where to find them' by Newt Scamander. In the Acromantula section it says "Rumours that a colony of Acromantula has been established in Scotland are unconfirmed"

With the 'unconfirmed' bit crossed out and written 'Confirmed by Harry Potter and Ron Weasley'

Yeah I read that somewhere too about Michael Gambon's grand-daughter! I wonder if she's happy!

ROUND 2...FIGHT!!

ekekekekekeke Your turn to rise up to the challenge eh, Kreacher?! We're looking like a bit of a team I reckon, since we do have the same opinions on this!!

OMG I'm starting to sound like a broken record, repeating the same things again and again, but anyhow...

As I've said before, I don't deny that Cuaron disrupted most of the continuity from the first 2 movies. Thing is, continuity is difficult to maintain in a series if more than one director is involved. Sure, Cuaron could have stuck to what Columbus had established and need not have made all those changes, but I believe a director has the right to depict the film as how he/she sees it to be. So the set looked different from what we saw in the first 2, that was how Cuaron envisioned Hogwarts. So the film was darker than the first 2, that was what Cuaron got from reading POA.

As Kreacher said and as I have been saying, every director is different and has their own unique style. In the same way, each and everyone of us are different, unique individuals. Therefore it would be simply impossible to please every single person. So to me, it really doesn't matter who takes on a HP film because not everyone is going to be satisfied. Therefore all a director can do is put his own personal stamp to the film and present the film through his/her eyes.

To me, Cuaron's only "crime" was that he was different. I mean, yeah Cuaron has probably gotten more negative than positive response, but had another director taken up POA, it wouldn't have been any different. The percentage may have changed but there will still be some that liked and some that disliked the film. Columbus got negative comments as well from the first 2 but not as much as Cuaron because he took less risks. Cuaron could have easily been complacent and unadventurous and stick to what was already established. But he didn't, and I saw it as a good thing because he brought a new flavor to the HP series. After 2 movies under Columbus, it was a breath of fresh air to watch a HP movie from a different perspective. And it couldnt' have come at a better time because I felt that POA is very different from the other books because it's more of a turning-point in Harry's life.

There I've gone again, I've rambled and bored all of you to death. Sorry!! I know I'm very long-winded. In conclusion, maybe you didn't like POA because you didn't like the changes that were made and Cuaron's style of directing and telling the story just didn't agree with you. That's totally fine, and it's fair enough. BUT I just think that the important thing is that the movies retain the SPIRIT of the books, because in terms of content, due to the timeframe, the movie would never be able to do justice to the books. In my opinion, THAT'S how we should measure how good the adaptation is, not whether they've got Hagrid's hut in the right place.

Hogwarts apparently was always meant to be set in Scotland, I did read it somewhere. JKR herself said that POA was her fave film out of the 3 so far. This tells me that Cuaron's vision of Hogwarts was probably the closest to what she had painted in her mind's eye. Speaking of which, back to the sets, a lot of people didn't agree with Cuaron's changes to it, like the clocktower. Well look at it this way. Before the movies, when we all read the books for the first time, we all had our own vision of how Hogwarts looked like. None of us would have come up with the exact same picture no matter how well and detailed JKR described it. It's the same way with directors. Cuaron's Hogwarts was slightly different to Columbus' Hogwarts coz they both envisioned it differently.

Albus, I tihnk it's a shame that you don't wanna watch anymore HP films because of your disappointment with POA. Well like Kreacher, I'm not gonna question that, but I do think that it'd be interesting to see what Newell has to offer. He may decide to follow on from Cuaron's Hogwarts or he may bring us a new Hogwarts according to how he envisions it, OR he may come up with a good balance of the 2 and adding his own touches. GoF is definitely something I'm looking forward to!! Who knows Albus, you may actually agree to and like his directing style more!!

Yeah I preferred the original Dumbledore, but hey, what can we do eh? Unforeseen circumstances caused a need to recast, and although Richard Harris played a better Dumbledore, that must not have been an easy task for Gambon...to step into shoes that had already been filled. And all things considering, I think he did it well. He didn't try to follow Harris (aside from the accent hehe), and he didn't try to outshine him either. I saw him bring a different facade of Dumbledore - the more whimsical, warm, slightly eccentric side.

I shall stop here before I actually write a whole thesis paper on POA!! I hope all of you can see that all I've said here is MY OPINION and I'm not trying to push it on anyone nor am I trying to prove Albus or anyone wrong. Like I've said many a time, this is a forum and we are all entitled to our own opinions. I respect Albus' opinion even though it's opposing to mine, hope you feel the same way, mate!! And I hope you can do the same, Ginebra.

We can argue out our points till the end of days, and we will still be stubborn on our own opinions, so the only thing we really can do is hear each other out, accept what that person has said, and that's that. Nobody is right or wrong when it comes to open discussion, and in a forum environment, it is not right to say someone's views are wrong just because their different from ours.

Ok shutting up now.

Exactly!

Cuaron did his best considering his task!

I like the new way things are set up for the Hogwarts grounds. It proves more how really large Hogwarts is, and I think that's important as well.

Cuaron is a very different sort of director than Columbus. Columbus is an american director and very good at what he does. But he never really captured the Castle like it should of been done.

EXACTLY!!

That's the thing people have to realize. As it is, every director is different and unique, having their own personal style. Getting to specifics, you couldn't get two more different directors style-wise, than Columbus and Cuaron!! To me, neither (or any director) is better than the other, they're just different. So obviously, both are gonna envision the world of HP differently and present it from their perspectives.

We, ourselves, are all different, unique individuals, so we will all have different tastes and opinions too. So no matter which director takes up a HP film, they will never be able to please every single person. Therefore all they can do is put their personal stamp to the film and present the happenings of the book the way they see it.

And as long as it captures the overall spirit of what the book was about, and that it covers the central theme(s) and presents the main plots in it, I think that's all that matters.

As I've said before, with the limitations they have to go up against, particularly the time frame, whatever the final product, I will always have the utmost respect to the director and crew, coz realizing a book like HP is no easy feat, but they rose to the challenge!!

And remember...whatever we see has been pre-approved by JKR so if it's fine by her, we should be cool about it!!

Also too PoA was a very different book storyline wise. There is a lot of hidden stuff that hasn't been in the previous books. There is a lot more back story to include and everything. Plus it is a more emotional stage for Harry. So I think different storyline different director = newer and fresher Hogwarts = excellent!

Spot-on, mate!! That's what I've been trying to say all this time. Shame some people just can't seem to get it.

To me, POA is the turning point in the series because it has a different core in the storyline. Yes as Kreacher said, it has a bit more back story in it, we get to go deeper into Harry's life as he discovers his past and learns more about himself through the emotions he faces and battles with. So in POA it is essentially more focused on Harry rather than Voldemort (as it was in the first 2).

And that's why I've been saying that Cuaron could not have jumped on board at a better time. With POA being the different book it is compared to the first 2, it would make sense to bring on a different director. So to me, Cuaron directing the 3rd installment was like a breath of fresh air. It was great to see the world of HP through another person's perspective.

It is because of that that I'm now looking forward to GoF because with Newell now taking the reigns of directorship, I am expecting there to be a different take to our HP world yet again. And like POA, this is a good thing coz GoF is *also* another very different book. With the Triwizard Tournament bringing us the 3 tasks, the Yule Ball, International wizards and witches among some of the heaps of details in book4, it is going to be interesting to see how Newell is gonna rise up to the challenge and give us his vision of the book and its events, plus put in his personal stamp to it at the same time.

I just think that it is soo unfair when people criticise a movie. Any movie! ~when people say a movie it crap it just makes me crazy !!! I think that all movies are works of art and whilst some are bad They all have their own individual merit.

Thankyou.

Yeah same!! Some people I feel are just too quick to judge, and sometimes their reasons are so flippant!! Another thing that ticks me off is when people say that the reason they didn't like the movie was because the direcotr is bad. To me, it's not about the director being bad, it's more that you didn't like his style..there's a difference. Shame some can't see that distinction. In the same way it's like what you said about each movie having it's own individual merit. It wasn't so much that the movie was bad, but more the genre or maybe the way it was done didn't quite agree with you.

Especially when some people criticise Actors and Actresses and I go to them "I'd like to see you do better" I know I criticised Dan R. and Emma's acting in SS but I looked at it from all angles and I stand by saying that they were awkward in their characters!

I am such a hypocrite!

Yup totally see where you're coming from coz I'm like that too!! I definitely enjoyed them better in POA coz they've certainly developed as actors. In the first 2, they were still pretty young and inexperienced, their facial expressions were controlled and inflexible, and yeah they were pretty awkward playing their characters. But in POA, they looked more natural, they were more comfortable playing their characters and they were exploring new territories in expressions and things like that.

I look at things from all angles too. Like I've said before, I may be pro-POA but I never said that it was a perfect movie. I admit that there are some stuff that I didn't quite like and thought maybe Cuaron could have done better. But looking at it overall, I thought it was very well done. People just need to be more open-minded and not just look at things one way but see what other people have to say and consider them too.

Cribbens I missed a lot! Opinion wars? Quotes up the wazzoo, what the heck! But I also saw some stuff that I'm just like, "Errrr gotta answer it!"

The clock tower: I've seen this question about ten million times and my personal, attached to no one in particular except me, and is certainly in no way anything anyone with HP has ever said, but looking it at it from the point of view as a writer and hopefully a director, but the clock tower itself looks like a precursor. Like you know, maybe because they use a form of time travel in the movie? This just screams "HELLLLLOOOOOO!" to me, because the clock seems to be talking about how there isn't enough time or that time is a GIGANTIC part of the movie.

What's Harry Doing using magic: I thought there was something at the beginning of POA that got him in trouble, but because he was "The Boy who Lived" he got out of it, which is brought up later in GOF, or OTP when people are slowly turning against Harry. So I think it's accurate, but do I think it went a bit too long... Yah.

Hilly sets and a new castle: A director's vision... All directors have their own ideas of what they want, Colombus had his own idea of Hogwarts and so does Curaon. That's the point of artistic freedoms, I would actually hate to have to stay with the sets from the first two movies, just because I thought they were flat, and not very thought provoking!

Well I can't remember what else I was going to gripe about, and dinner's awaitin' and since I'm in DC (Wearing my Rosie the Riviter shirt by the way!) can't really call for take out!

Raven

Hehe yeahh you missed the opinion wars, Raven!!

Yup totally see where you're coming from Raven, we're both studying film (or at least I've studIED fil,m) so we both know what we're on about.

That's what I've been trying to say all this time, but some people still don't get it or won't accept it. We are all different unique individuals, so, in the same way, are directors. When we read the books, we all had our own version of Hogwarts painted in our mind's eye. So yeah, what we saw in the first 2 movies, that was how Columbus envisioned Hogwarts, and in POA, that was how Cuaron pictured Hogwarts to look like. Because we all have different tastes, it would be impossible to please every single person, no matter who the director is. So all a director for any HP movie can do is present Hogwarts and the world of HP to the audience through his eyes and putting his personal stamp (style) to it. And that's exactly what Cuaron did.

About the clock tower, you're spot-on Raven. That's exactly what it is!! I read it somewhere. TIME is really one of the central themes in POA, and if you've noticed, Cuaron plays a lot with that through the clocktower and even the clock in the Dursleys.

I guess that just kinda did one of those smack in the face moments and smacked me a good one it did. So I'm glad that it's a confirmed theory!

Raven

Blimey, another one!! Once again, I've decided to keep the discussions of PoA the movie to one thread, which I've now pinned to the top of this section.

I will not delete these duplicate topics of course, as there have been some brilliant opinions and arguments penned in them (most of them mine, I believe ), but I will close them to keep things a little more organized and straightforward.

That being said, this topic is now locked.