HBP Movie Spoilers ~ Far Afield From the Canon We Know
The more I read about the Half-Blood Prince movie, the more I feel that WB is really going Hollywood on this one and changing nearly every scene. Just in the past two weeks I have read things that have made me scoff out loud only to discover they were in reputable magazines and from quotes straight from the actors and the director. Things are gettin' weird. Maybe all the strange changes are to insure that the movies will never spoil someone who hasn't read the books? *lol*
Here's what we know so far - I will add links for all these when I have time.:
1. No Madam Trelawney.
2. No Vernon Dursley, but Petunia is in.
3. No Bill and Fleur.
4. Added: A Battle at the Burrow in which Tonks fights a fiery snake.
5. Added: According to Snitchseeker there is an article in Movie Magic magazine that says the following:
"...in his attempt to create 'an army of werewolves' Fenrir attacks Harry, but Harry or (someone unseen) petrifies him in time. But Ron’s Dad is not so lucky-Fenrir mauls his face and nearly kills him.”
So Arthur may get bitten instead of Bill - this is what set me off a little tonight. It's so completely far from the canon that I almost can't believe it. Not that I would have minded an "Army of Werewolves" in HBP or Deathly Hallows. I thought JKR was going that way and I really wanted to see Lupin having to fight one of his own kind, but it was a big zero in the books. Cinematically it would be great, but having Mr. Weasley get bitten is just a bit too much for me. It's not the same story at all.
The problem is, if the studio needed to split up DH because they didn't want to cut anything out, then why add extra things to HBP which is only one movie? Won't that mean that important things are left out? I'm bracing myself for a two minute Spinner's End and another ending that is too rushed so they can put in the Army of Werewolves and the extra fiery snakes.
There are folks on every forum and message board who say, "Oh, but you peasants and ingrates don't understand - the movie studios HAVE to do that when writing a script, and someone who is not in the MOVIE BUSINESS cannot question the judgment of the people who KNOW how to make movies. So shut up and just wait and see."
Well, to the "insiders" and "know-it-alls" out there, let me just say that no, I am not grateful to WB for changing things around in every movie.
Other people say, "Oh, but you must be a moron - these are movies, not books." Well, duh - thanks for that glowing insight.
However, I believe that in the history of cinema there are hundreds of movies based on wonderful books that fell flat because the filmmakers lost their way. The Shipping News, for one (no, that is not about Harry/Hermione). Bonfire of the Vanities for another.
And lately with all the Jane Austen movies coming out, I would say most of them are not true to the original and the fans of those books do not appreciate that. I saw a version of Persuasion on PBS that was laughably rewritten and condensed to the point of idiocy. This Review refers to it as a "screwball comedy" which I doubt is what they were shooting for. Why was Captain Wentworth blond? And why was Anne Elliot running through the streets of Bath like a marathoner? Trust me - go get the 1995 version with Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root which has only minor changes and captures the beauty of the book.
I've liked about half of the versions of Pride and Prejudice I have seen. I love the classic 1995 Jennifer Ehle/Colin Firth version, I can tolerate the 1980 Elizabeth Garvie/David Rintoul PBS version, I haven't seen the Keira Knightly version because I just don't like the actress (although my daughter likes that version), and I loathe the completely absurd Greer Garson/Laurence Olivier version with the antebellum dresses that made it look like Gone with the Wind.
I could go on and tell you about the different versions of Jane Eyre which drive me crazy, or Emma, or even Tom Sawyer, but you get the drift. Most of them I will never see again.
Of course, sometimes the studios get it exactly right. Lord of the Rings is a perfect example and I thought it couldn't be done. The first two Anne of Green Gables movies with Megan Follows are nearly perfect, but don't watch the third in the series because, again, it strays too far from the canon of those books. Stephen King's The Shining made a great adaptation on the big screen, as did his story that was the inspiration for Stand By Me. They ought to film his Cycle of the Werewolf, which I just read again and was so impressed with.
I wonder sometimes how many versions of HP there will be in the future?