|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 5, 2009 11:59:43 GMT -5
This book was one of the weakest, and so is the movie.
As for the romance, the film Ginny is just too weak. I think they lucked out with most of the actors (casting children is always a big risk), but I'm not convinced the girl who plays Ginny is up to it.
On the other hand, Emma is amazing.
I have heard that the scene where they fight the Deatheaters after fleeing from the wedding was filmed in a public location in London, so apparently that's still in the movie.
By skipping all the back story about the ring they really do leave you blind on the identity of the horcruxes. But they are pretty blind on them in the book, too. And they turn out to be not as important as we think they will be anyway. They drive the plot around, but they aren't that big of a deal otherwise.
It was a bit annoying that the whole "Half-Blood Prince" mystery plot was completely dropped. It didn't mean all that much in the end for the plot, but it added a lot of color and some characterization that was missed from this very plot-centric sixth movie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2009 13:30:53 GMT -5
But they are important in that Vollie can't be offed until they are destroyed. Sure, there's a twist to that, but they still need to be destroyed.
As for Ginny, it may well be that they decided the actress wasn't up to the part as written in the book, but I do think the movies suffer by not having the book Ginny in it: athletic, daring, wiseass, funny -- a nice contrast to Hermione and someone you can believe would attract Harry.
I'm interested to see if they even touch on Dumbledore's weaknesses and his murky past.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Aug 5, 2009 13:54:34 GMT -5
I have just finished re-reading the last two books (amazing what one can accomplish when one stays away from VolleyTalk). I think the way the solve the horcrux problem p-dub originally posted about is to find a way to still give Harry access to the memories Dumbledore showed him in the 6th book But how do they pull that off? Under what pretense do they use to get back into DD's office? They can't say they are doing it under DD's orders, like Harry did to search the castle at the end of the last book. Even if McGonnigal is still in the office, she won't let them into it without getting the reason? And note that none of the Order can know about his search for horcruxes, because if they know, they will take over and not let Harry walk to his death (ok, they could take some liberties in the movie, but they can't seriously consider letting Harry be the leader in the search for horcruxes, can they? It would be way past credibility). So Harry says, "I need to get into DD's office" "Why?" "Can't tell you." "OK, go ahead." Nah, it doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Aug 5, 2009 14:15:06 GMT -5
By skipping all the back story about the ring they really do leave you blind on the identity of the horcruxes. But they are pretty blind on them in the book, too. I disagree. There are 4 horcruxes left. They have a pretty good idea what three of them are (the locket, the cup, and the snake) and they can really narrow down the last one (something of Ravenclaw's or Griffyndor, which are not exactly common, everyday objects). Moreover, while they don't know exactly where they are, they have ideas of where to look (while Gringotts is not one of the obvious locations, it is consistent with their thinking). Also, the have a clue on the locket with RAB. That's anything but "pretty blind." Especially compared to the movie where they know there are 4 horcruxes left, they have a clue on the locket with RAB, and...that's it Notice that they don't even have a reason to think those memories DD's office might be able to help them, since there is no sign that DD had any insight from them (recall in the movie the fact there were 6 horcruxes surprised DD; even the horcrux he found was located by "identifying the signs of dark magic" as opposed to "identifying important features from Valumart's life") Had they not been introduced, it could have survived without them. However, once they are brought into the mix, they are absolutely a big deal - you can't end the thing without them being destroyed. Which means they have to be found.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 5, 2009 14:51:16 GMT -5
Well, that's why I said they are kind of like McGuffins. Yeah, they drive the plot, but they aren't in themselves all that crucial (except for the "extra" horcrux that only Dumbledore realizes exists).
I think you are worried over nothing, here. All they have to do is have some sort of message from Dumbledore. Perhaps it's a sealed letter. Or maybe somebody else steers them in the correct direction.
It's rather bad for the characterization that we didn't see the year-long special mentoring of Harry which is supposed to prepare him for this. But we didn't see a lot of things.
Other things we also haven't seen enough of are the other key students -- not just Ginny but also Neville and Luna.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2009 15:27:13 GMT -5
I have just finished re-reading the last two books (amazing what one can accomplish when one stays away from VolleyTalk). I think the way the solve the horcrux problem p-dub originally posted about is to find a way to still give Harry access to the memories Dumbledore showed him in the 6th book But how do they pull that off? Under what pretense do they use to get back into DD's office? They can't say they are doing it under DD's orders, like Harry did to search the castle at the end of the last book. Even if McGonnigal is still in the office, she won't let them into it without getting the reason? And note that none of the Order can know about his search for horcruxes, because if they know, they will take over and not let Harry walk to his death (ok, they could take some liberties in the movie, but they can't seriously consider letting Harry be the leader in the search for horcruxes, can they? It would be way past credibility). So Harry says, "I need to get into DD's office" "Why?" "Can't tell you." "OK, go ahead." Nah, it doesn't work. Dumbledore's a bright guy -- and he knows magic! Seriously, there are several ways it could be done, where he's left the memories, even with an explanation, for Harry. Heck, Snape gets him Gryff's sword. Why not Snape? Anonymously. I just don't think it will be that hard to get the three on the right track, plausibly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2009 15:38:42 GMT -5
Well, that's why I said they are kind of like McGuffins. Yeah, they drive the plot, but they aren't in themselves all that crucial (except for the "extra" horcrux that only Dumbledore realizes exists). I think you are worried over nothing, here. All they have to do is have some sort of message from Dumbledore. Perhaps it's a sealed letter. Or maybe somebody else steers them in the correct direction. I do think it needs to come from Dumbledore, however. Otherwise, they pretty much have to rewrite the direction of the 7th book which is all about everyone doing what Dumbledore hoped they would do. A letter isn't very cinematic. I still think the best way to go is to get the memories to Harry somehow. The movies have really done a nice job with the special effects for the Pensieve. Dumbledore's portrait -- in his office -- communicates with Snape quite a bit in the last book. Again, they'd need to get in the office (cloak?), but that's another option. The problem there is it messes around with the Harry-Dumbie 7th book relationship. On another topic, there's an awful lot of Polyjuice transforming in the last book. They are going to have to be careful with that. One, it gets old and two, you end up not using your actors -- the ones people want to see. I liked The Deathly Hallows a lot more with this reading than I did the first time. First time I read it, it felt like they spent 600pp sitting around in tents talking about how they had no idea where to look. It was actually only 200pp or so.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 5, 2009 16:22:09 GMT -5
I liked The Deathly Hallows a lot more with this reading than I did the first time. First time I read it, it felt like they spent 600pp sitting around in tents talking about how they had no idea where to look. It was actually only 200pp or so. I had the same reaction to my re-read of Deathly Hollows this past winter.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Aug 5, 2009 20:06:23 GMT -5
Well, that's why I said they are kind of like McGuffins. Yeah, they drive the plot, but they aren't in themselves all that crucial (except for the "extra" horcrux that only Dumbledore realizes exists). I think you are worried over nothing, here. All they have to do is have some sort of message from Dumbledore. Perhaps it's a sealed letter. Or maybe somebody else steers them in the correct direction. I do think it needs to come from Dumbledore, however. Otherwise, they pretty much have to rewrite the direction of the 7th book which is all about everyone doing what Dumbledore hoped they would do. A letter isn't very cinematic. I still suspect they are just going to spill the beans right off, basically saying, "these are the horcruxes and here's where they are" and make the movie about the quest to get them, as opposed to the mission to figure them out and get them. Keep in mind that The Lord of the Rings, for example, has no mystery about Frodo's quest, but is about the challenges he faces in accomplishing it. I wouldn't be surprised if they do that with HP 7ab. You gotta admit, the break-ins to the Ministry, Gringotts and the final battle of Hogwarts ends up being pretty exciting.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 6, 2009 0:20:29 GMT -5
ugh what I found incredibly annoying is that they didn't have a final fight scene between the death eaters and dumbledore's people. NOTHING!!!! the death eaters just marched through the castle unscathed...yeah right. and in its place we get that stupid scene in the middle of the movie where Bellatrix and Greyback burn down the Weasley's house....OMG give me a break. If Mr. Weasley, Lupin, Tonks (a trained auror), Mrs. Weasley, Fred, George, Harry, Hermione, Ron, and Ginny can't stop two death eaters from burning down their house then voldemort can claim victory right now....pathetic...
and yes, NOTHING about the horcruxes ties to either voldemorts past or the founders of Hogwarts...NOT EVEN THE SNAKE!.....ugh....are we really going to believe that Harry figures that kind of stuff out on his own?
On the plus side, Cormack Mcglaggen was pretty damn good looking for playing a character who, in the book, was supposed to be a big fat loser
That movie was WAY to filled with innuendo's to be PG. lol Hermione was practically chugging the butterbeer....Ginny and Harry basically had sex in the room of requirement....
if they mess up the fight scene in the 7th movie I will be severely disappointed. It's the same director as the 6th movie. shame.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 6, 2009 8:03:52 GMT -5
Yes, I had problems with the missing fight in the castle and the burning down of the Weasley house. The missing fight is a big deal, because for the first time Hogwarts truely loses it's aura of protection. The war comes in to Hogwarts. That sets up the final battle in book 7.
As for the rest, these kids in the novel are in their late teens. You didn't think when you read the book that all they were doing was sneaking off and kissing, did you?
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Aug 6, 2009 8:11:55 GMT -5
I didn't mind the burning down the Weasley house. It was used to setup Mrs Weasley's vengence on Bellatrix. Notice how they focused in on her face at the end of the scene.
However, to put it in at the expense of the final fight is loopy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2009 12:08:31 GMT -5
I wonder if it was cut (the first battle at Hogwarts)? That is, filmed, then dropped (as opposed to just cut from the script).
Bad planning on the Weasleys part not to have any sort of protective charms around the place. (They added Bellatrix to the tower crowd when Dumbie is killed, too.)
There is no sex in the Harry Potter books. Zilch. Kissing is it. That's why I was surprised to see, in my 2nd reading of DH, the part about Ariana (is that the right name or am I thinking of Huffingtonpuff?) Dumbledore and the Muggles. I don't think there's any way to read that other than as her having been molested or raped. Nothing like that anywhere else in the books.
HP was always the oddest of "childrens'" stories.
|
|
|
Post by panthatheprince on Aug 6, 2009 12:59:35 GMT -5
On the other hand, Emma is amazing. I have heard that the scene where they fight the Deatheaters after fleeing from the wedding was filmed in a public location in London, so apparently that's still in the movie. Right on. Emma keeps surprising me with her improvements as an actress as the series goes on. Good to know the Deatheaters fight might show up on the DVD as a bonus feature! I am going to play with my new rc helicopter now.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 6, 2009 15:38:39 GMT -5
There is no sex in the Harry Potter books. Zilch. Kissing is it. That's why I was surprised to see, in my 2nd reading of DH, the part about Ariana (is that the right name or am I thinking of Huffingtonpuff?) Dumbledore and the Muggles. I don't think there's any way to read that other than as her having been molested or raped. Nothing like that anywhere else in the books. Oh, I don't know. There are definitely some allusions to sexual situations. This is especially true starting with the fourth book, when they start doing things like falling for veelas and going to balls. Remember the scenes in the prefect's bathroom, where Harry is naked with Moaning Myrtle? There also seems to be a lot of extracurricular activity happening in the bushes after the Yuletide Ball. It's also interesting that (at least in Gryffindor) there is a magical restriction on boys going into the girls' bedroom area, but no restriction the other way around.
|
|