While I hear your grievances, this was bound to happen starting with book 4, because that's where the books got *really* long, and there's just no way to cram it all in. Subplots and details will be lost in favor of the larger story arc. I need to re-watch 4, I just watched 5 for the first time the other day, which I really enjoyed. After the third one I had to stop expecting them to be visual projections of my imagination of the books, which the first 2 basically were.
I understand that they can't include everything, but at the very least, they need Percy, the money, and the house elves. Those are integral to the next few books.
I respectfully disagree. What makes a movie series work is its ability to remain true and constant to itself and not anything else. I truly believe the Harry Potter movies have, more the most part, captured the essence and spirit of adventure and wonder that I loved about the books without insultingly distorting the plot.
If you're looking for an adaptation that faithfully re-enacts everything from the source material, then I hope you're also talking ill of Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare, because its original The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet by Arthur Brooke was then also painfully distorted.
As to the specific points you mentioned, why do you need those? Yes, I understand their importance in the book series--which has thousands of pages to spend on exposition--but do they even need explanation in the film series? For example, the twins can still open their joke shop without needing an explanation as to where they got the money, because in a film interrupting the pacing with a pointless explanation is damaging. Can't
( ... )
And I disagree. First, I think that a movie based on a book has a responsibility to maintain the important plot and character points. Also, because this is a series that really does build on information that you get in previous books, it's important to make sure that information is consistent. Otherwise, plot points in the future will come out of nowhere. I don't think *every* point needs to be kept
( ... )
Most of those movies have been a huge disappointment. How about the fact that they're pretty much totally ignoring one? two? weasley brothers? I can't remember the specifics since it's been a few years since I've read them or seen the movies, but yeah, MAJOR holes.
Bill and Charlie don't figure in much until 5+. Percy, however, should have been in 4. Again, I know they can't show everything, but at least put in the important parts.
Comments 7
Reply
Reply
If you're looking for an adaptation that faithfully re-enacts everything from the source material, then I hope you're also talking ill of Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare, because its original The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet by Arthur Brooke was then also painfully distorted.
As to the specific points you mentioned, why do you need those? Yes, I understand their importance in the book series--which has thousands of pages to spend on exposition--but do they even need explanation in the film series? For example, the twins can still open their joke shop without needing an explanation as to where they got the money, because in a film interrupting the pacing with a pointless explanation is damaging. Can't ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment