**NOT ANOTHER HARRY POTTER LJ ENTRY**
Yeah, I know, another geek whinging about the new Harry Potter film - I do this for my own amusement ^_^ And it's gonna be a long one.
I don't know how to do cuts, so if you ain't seen/read the Half-Blood Prince AVERT YOUR GAZE. Although, what the hell have you been doin all this time?? (And yes Louisa I'm looking at you ~_^)
ANYWAY.
As usual, the film was a total dissapointment.
I can usually be relied upon to be a total literary snob, but I love this series and I take it surprisingly seriously, especially when I start analysing why it means so much to me.
So it really sucks when I see it so messed up on the big screen. I know I have very high expectations, but it's not as if they couldn't have made them better - there are brief shining moments when I think 'Yeah, that was good...'
These are usually the bits where they've actually stuck to the book.
Like the bit with Ron being poisoned. I don't know about anyone else but that moment when he was lying on the floor looking very dead, and very much like Ron, made my heart ache. There ain't enough love for Ron - he's one of my favourite characters in the books, he's just comedic genius. Favourite quote, as chosen by Louisa: 'I've got an unbeatable wand! Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!' ^_^ And I do like Rupert Grint, but sometimes in the films he seems a little more.... pathetic than he should be.
Then that moment was ruined by the fact that no mention had previously been made of a bezoar and how exactly Harry knew to just stick one down his throat. The whole mystery of the identity of the Half-Blood Prince is quite underplayed so when Snape reveals that it was in fact his awesome potions book, it's almost like an afterthought and totally anti-climactic. It seems the films rely on the audience making a lot of assumptions and the fact that most people will have read the books.
And that whole bit with the Burrow. Yes very dramatic, rather moving, but it did not happen in the sodding book. I can understand them cutting out stuff - it's necessary when transferring from page to film. But removing what seem to be pretty important plot points and then filling a few scenes with something completely made up? That seems... stoopid.
Fenrir Greyback. Yeah he's a werewolf. I'm sorry, you didn't know that? Hm I can see how that whole part of the plot may have passed you by seeing as it is NEVER MENTIONED IN THE FILM. The only indication is Remus looking a little angstier than usual. Greyback is important because he's part of Lupin's character - one of my favourite scenes in the book is Lupin revealing he's been chillin with the feral wolves for awhile and Greyback is in fact the one who bit him. It's called character development people, it is not your enemy. And it makes Greyback all the more disturbing because he specifically preys on children - Rowling created a lot of seriously fucked up characters and that's part of what makes the story so addictive because you know these people have to be beaten. The story loses a lot due to minor changes like that.
Lupin is also not great. The dudes a good actor, but apart from not looking anything like Remus Lupin (ginger moustache? wtf?) he's way too grumpy and intense. Lupin is supposed to be kindly, sensible and to have a tendency to want people to like him too much - none of this is reflected in the films.
Oh and yeah that was Tonks with him. Missed that? Don't blame you. Again Tonks is one of Rowling's most brilliant characters and she is totally neglected. They might aswell have done what they did with Bill and Fluer and just left her out entirely. Along with the other neglected Weasley, Charlie, the Percy-being-a-git plotline, the Creevey brothers, Grubbly-Plank, Firenze, the Hogwarts kitchens, Winky, Dobby...
Oh and [DEATHLY HALLOWS SPOILER]
What are they gonna do about Dobby dying? He's just not been in the films at all so even if they do it, it won't have the unbelievable emotional impact it had in the last book. I seriously sobbed like a little girl through the whole burial scene (Here Lies Dobby: A Free Elf), and that is yet another thing the poor audience will miss out on.
Another part I actually liked was the whole Felix Felicis and Slughorn bit. When Harry is persuading him to handover the memory, he gives a speech about his mother's death that is pretty much verbatim from the book and one of the few times when I think Daniel Radcliffe actually delivered it well, without too much overacting. Of course, it's ruined by the little anecdote Slughorn gives about the goldfish which results in them adding 'Or else that bowl may remain empty forever' or sumin, to the end of the speech.
...
Come again? So if you beat Voldemort, then what? Your mother will come back? The fish will come back? I closed my eyes in pain. -_-
Also, welcome back Aragog, the film makers totally didn't think they'd be needing you again.
Draco Malfoy. Tom Felton has always done him well and he really pulled through in the film. He was probably the best part of the whole thing and the sectumsempra scene was great. Again, it is sullied by the fact that the plot is all messed up - they put the Peruvian Instant Darkness Powder in the wrong place, they had Harry and Co knowing what it was Malfoy was messing about with, they showed the audience what he was doing and there was no battle at Hogwarts. I was looking forward to the part when Harry and Dumbledore are racing back on the brooms and the Dark Mark is hanging ominously over the castle... doesn't happen.
The hormones. Good gawd the hormones. Ok so the book has a lot more focus on teh shmex cause they're all at that awkward, hair-where-there-wasn't-any-before, oh my god are those BREASTS stage. But Rowling does not make a big deal about it - she certainly doesn't turn it into the fuckin OC where the action is only a plot device to further the romantic relations of the characters. It should be the other way around! I've always thought the books were so great because the character development was so real, and as much as your raging libido affects your development, between that and growing up in the midst of a War and facing the possibility of everyone you know and love DYING PAINFULLY AND SLOWLY, I think I know which one is likely to define you more as a person.
And the relationships of the main characters - Ron and Hermione, Harry and Ginny - are the kind of relationships born of war, that is strong, true and lasting. It's a deeper connection of trust and loyalty, rather than lust. And the portrayal of Hermione, in particular, belittles this. It just makes me feel that there is so much more to the whole thing that people watching it will miss and I think that's a real shame.
Ginny. I don't mind the actress, in a way I think she could have been a good Ginny, she's got that kind of tough, wiry, mischievious look about her that I think the character should have. But them getting together had pretty much no build up, except again with the 'angst-face' from Harry, and they made way too big a deal about Ginny and Dean fighting. She's more likely to throw a punch than sit sobbing in the corner. And when they finally kiss it's supposed to be after a Quidditch match... for some reason that seemed more real... I think that was the problem with the hormones - they made it too serious. Well, obviously Lavender is just comedy central, but in the books it all comes off as vaguely ridiculous, the usual OTT teenage misunderstandings. But in the films it's all red eyes and sitting in the dark and feeling oh my god like my heart may just break. It's not fucking Twilight.
Dumbledore's death. Vying for best part of the film along with Draco-in-a-pool-of-his-own-blood. But still completely, inexorably, obviously WRONG. If Harry was not frozen he would have done something. There is no way he could have resisted the urge. And again this is a part of Harry's character that they have omitted or changed and as such they have changed the entire premise of the story. The happy ending relies on Harry's character and everything that he's done, been put through, every way that he's reacted throughout the books has been building up to that. I know it seems like a little thing to make a big deal of, but doesn't Dumbledore say all the way back at the start of the series that it's our choices that make us who we are? And this shows the dismissive way they deal with the characters. Harry's choices have changed,so as far as I'm concerned, the story has changed.
And there's no funeral. There's no Hagrid carrying Dumbledore wrapped in the purple, star covered cloak (seeing as the film Dumbledore never wore it) with tears flowing into his beard. There's no white tomb in the sunshine by the lake. There's no mourning song from the Merfolk or solemn tribute from the centaurs. There's no Hermione crying on Ron's shoulder or tears dripping from his own long nose. There's no dry eyed Ginny saying goodbye to Harry. There's no pheonix song, or brief flaring image of a joyful, fiery bird.
All in all, it's just not Harry Potter.
+_+
I don't know how to do cuts, so if you ain't seen/read the Half-Blood Prince AVERT YOUR GAZE. Although, what the hell have you been doin all this time?? (And yes Louisa I'm looking at you ~_^)
ANYWAY.
As usual, the film was a total dissapointment.
I can usually be relied upon to be a total literary snob, but I love this series and I take it surprisingly seriously, especially when I start analysing why it means so much to me.
So it really sucks when I see it so messed up on the big screen. I know I have very high expectations, but it's not as if they couldn't have made them better - there are brief shining moments when I think 'Yeah, that was good...'
These are usually the bits where they've actually stuck to the book.
Like the bit with Ron being poisoned. I don't know about anyone else but that moment when he was lying on the floor looking very dead, and very much like Ron, made my heart ache. There ain't enough love for Ron - he's one of my favourite characters in the books, he's just comedic genius. Favourite quote, as chosen by Louisa: 'I've got an unbeatable wand! Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!' ^_^ And I do like Rupert Grint, but sometimes in the films he seems a little more.... pathetic than he should be.
Then that moment was ruined by the fact that no mention had previously been made of a bezoar and how exactly Harry knew to just stick one down his throat. The whole mystery of the identity of the Half-Blood Prince is quite underplayed so when Snape reveals that it was in fact his awesome potions book, it's almost like an afterthought and totally anti-climactic. It seems the films rely on the audience making a lot of assumptions and the fact that most people will have read the books.
And that whole bit with the Burrow. Yes very dramatic, rather moving, but it did not happen in the sodding book. I can understand them cutting out stuff - it's necessary when transferring from page to film. But removing what seem to be pretty important plot points and then filling a few scenes with something completely made up? That seems... stoopid.
Fenrir Greyback. Yeah he's a werewolf. I'm sorry, you didn't know that? Hm I can see how that whole part of the plot may have passed you by seeing as it is NEVER MENTIONED IN THE FILM. The only indication is Remus looking a little angstier than usual. Greyback is important because he's part of Lupin's character - one of my favourite scenes in the book is Lupin revealing he's been chillin with the feral wolves for awhile and Greyback is in fact the one who bit him. It's called character development people, it is not your enemy. And it makes Greyback all the more disturbing because he specifically preys on children - Rowling created a lot of seriously fucked up characters and that's part of what makes the story so addictive because you know these people have to be beaten. The story loses a lot due to minor changes like that.
Lupin is also not great. The dudes a good actor, but apart from not looking anything like Remus Lupin (ginger moustache? wtf?) he's way too grumpy and intense. Lupin is supposed to be kindly, sensible and to have a tendency to want people to like him too much - none of this is reflected in the films.
Oh and yeah that was Tonks with him. Missed that? Don't blame you. Again Tonks is one of Rowling's most brilliant characters and she is totally neglected. They might aswell have done what they did with Bill and Fluer and just left her out entirely. Along with the other neglected Weasley, Charlie, the Percy-being-a-git plotline, the Creevey brothers, Grubbly-Plank, Firenze, the Hogwarts kitchens, Winky, Dobby...
Oh and [DEATHLY HALLOWS SPOILER]
What are they gonna do about Dobby dying? He's just not been in the films at all so even if they do it, it won't have the unbelievable emotional impact it had in the last book. I seriously sobbed like a little girl through the whole burial scene (Here Lies Dobby: A Free Elf), and that is yet another thing the poor audience will miss out on.
Another part I actually liked was the whole Felix Felicis and Slughorn bit. When Harry is persuading him to handover the memory, he gives a speech about his mother's death that is pretty much verbatim from the book and one of the few times when I think Daniel Radcliffe actually delivered it well, without too much overacting. Of course, it's ruined by the little anecdote Slughorn gives about the goldfish which results in them adding 'Or else that bowl may remain empty forever' or sumin, to the end of the speech.
...
Come again? So if you beat Voldemort, then what? Your mother will come back? The fish will come back? I closed my eyes in pain. -_-
Also, welcome back Aragog, the film makers totally didn't think they'd be needing you again.
Draco Malfoy. Tom Felton has always done him well and he really pulled through in the film. He was probably the best part of the whole thing and the sectumsempra scene was great. Again, it is sullied by the fact that the plot is all messed up - they put the Peruvian Instant Darkness Powder in the wrong place, they had Harry and Co knowing what it was Malfoy was messing about with, they showed the audience what he was doing and there was no battle at Hogwarts. I was looking forward to the part when Harry and Dumbledore are racing back on the brooms and the Dark Mark is hanging ominously over the castle... doesn't happen.
The hormones. Good gawd the hormones. Ok so the book has a lot more focus on teh shmex cause they're all at that awkward, hair-where-there-wasn't-any-before, oh my god are those BREASTS stage. But Rowling does not make a big deal about it - she certainly doesn't turn it into the fuckin OC where the action is only a plot device to further the romantic relations of the characters. It should be the other way around! I've always thought the books were so great because the character development was so real, and as much as your raging libido affects your development, between that and growing up in the midst of a War and facing the possibility of everyone you know and love DYING PAINFULLY AND SLOWLY, I think I know which one is likely to define you more as a person.
And the relationships of the main characters - Ron and Hermione, Harry and Ginny - are the kind of relationships born of war, that is strong, true and lasting. It's a deeper connection of trust and loyalty, rather than lust. And the portrayal of Hermione, in particular, belittles this. It just makes me feel that there is so much more to the whole thing that people watching it will miss and I think that's a real shame.
Ginny. I don't mind the actress, in a way I think she could have been a good Ginny, she's got that kind of tough, wiry, mischievious look about her that I think the character should have. But them getting together had pretty much no build up, except again with the 'angst-face' from Harry, and they made way too big a deal about Ginny and Dean fighting. She's more likely to throw a punch than sit sobbing in the corner. And when they finally kiss it's supposed to be after a Quidditch match... for some reason that seemed more real... I think that was the problem with the hormones - they made it too serious. Well, obviously Lavender is just comedy central, but in the books it all comes off as vaguely ridiculous, the usual OTT teenage misunderstandings. But in the films it's all red eyes and sitting in the dark and feeling oh my god like my heart may just break. It's not fucking Twilight.
Dumbledore's death. Vying for best part of the film along with Draco-in-a-pool-of-his-own-blood. But still completely, inexorably, obviously WRONG. If Harry was not frozen he would have done something. There is no way he could have resisted the urge. And again this is a part of Harry's character that they have omitted or changed and as such they have changed the entire premise of the story. The happy ending relies on Harry's character and everything that he's done, been put through, every way that he's reacted throughout the books has been building up to that. I know it seems like a little thing to make a big deal of, but doesn't Dumbledore say all the way back at the start of the series that it's our choices that make us who we are? And this shows the dismissive way they deal with the characters. Harry's choices have changed,so as far as I'm concerned, the story has changed.
And there's no funeral. There's no Hagrid carrying Dumbledore wrapped in the purple, star covered cloak (seeing as the film Dumbledore never wore it) with tears flowing into his beard. There's no white tomb in the sunshine by the lake. There's no mourning song from the Merfolk or solemn tribute from the centaurs. There's no Hermione crying on Ron's shoulder or tears dripping from his own long nose. There's no dry eyed Ginny saying goodbye to Harry. There's no pheonix song, or brief flaring image of a joyful, fiery bird.
All in all, it's just not Harry Potter.
+_+