HP Friday Five for May 4th, 2007
Happy Friday everyone!
1. Which character do you actually prefer the movie version of?
2. Which character do you usually love, but dislike his or her movie portrayal?
3. What is your favorite moment/line/etc. added to the movies that doesn't show up in the books?
4. In a perfect world, ________ would play _________.
5. What is your overall ( Read more... )
1. Which character do you actually prefer the movie version of?
2. Which character do you usually love, but dislike his or her movie portrayal?
3. What is your favorite moment/line/etc. added to the movies that doesn't show up in the books?
4. In a perfect world, ________ would play _________.
5. What is your overall ( Read more... )
This is a hard question for me to answer because I tend to enjoy the movie versions of the characters for the most part, whether they matched my mental image of them or not. I have often found myself defending Michael Gambon's Dumbledore (which I think very much captures many elements of the character, just not necessarily the ones people want to see - I guarantee you that he will look quite impressive in combat in Order of the Phoenix),* but I can't really say that I prefer the film counterpart of a character more than what appears in the book (but the same is true the other way around). I guess the only thing to mention here is that I think that some of the best casting in the series thus far has been Alan Rickman and David Thewlis.
2. Which character do you usually love, but dislike his or her movie portrayal?
Well, I don't exactly love him, but I kind of wish that Barty Crouch Jr. in his natural David Tennant form was rather less histrionic, but I generally don't have a problem with the film cast, so that is the only issue I really have.
3. What is your favorite moment/line/etc. added to the movies that doesn't show up in the books?
"Housekeeping... I'll come back later."
4. In a perfect world, ________ would play _________.
Rik Mayall → Peeves!!!
5. What is your overall opinion of the movies?
Of the all but one, I think they are fun diversions, interesting to me primarily because of my associations with the books and my interest in the scores. I usually don't have a problem with storylines being streamlined to fit a decent running time because that is just the nature of the cinematic medium, which is more visceral than it is narrative. However, I feel that Chris Columbus' entries are somewhat stilted and wooden in comparison to the latter two. Goblet of Fire is pretty entertaining, but has a certain air of being a 'franchise entry.'
However, as I have mentioned on several occasions, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is a very different storyl I feel that it captures the emotional thrust of the book while being very enjoyable in its own right. It was made more as a film than as a book on film, and I feel that the experiential aspect, overlapping dialogue and tactile quality that Alfonso Cauron brought to the film was the perfect fusion of a filmmaker's style and the subject material. My only caveat is that the identity of the Marauders is never made explicit, but that was an issue I only had the first time I saw the film.
* - Does that count as a spoiler?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment