Home General
Welcome to Harry Potter Forum! Below you will find many interesting threads and discussions. Enjoy.

I've Always Been Reasonably Patient With Mugglenet

XDMorsmordreXDXDMorsmordreXD Posts: 6,730 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited March 2012 in General
http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/hpboy13-9.shtml
But not a fan of this article...at all.
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Mysterious thing time.

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Are they really HP fans? What the hell is wrong with them?
  • BraveheartBraveheart Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭✭
    I saw them refer to Gambon as a travesty then never bothered reading.
  • JasonJason Posts: 7,279 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    "And Hunger Games, at least for now, does not have these problems. To be fair, neither did Harry Potter at first, which is why the first two movies remain my favorites. But things very quickly went downhill..."

    8-|
    image
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • phoenix1phoenix1 Posts: 2,293 mod
    That's not from Mugglenet, they post opinions from this jerk hpboy13...although I can't figure out why the the guy calls himself 'hpboy' when he obviously isn't a fan (they've posted a few others of his) and I can't figure out why MN posts his trash.

    Fan opinion: Why the 'Hunger Games' movie was better than 'Harry Potter'

    Our oft-thought controversial editorialist in The Three Broomsticks saw a very excellent film this weekend - so good in fact that it made him question why he hasn't quite felt the same magic in Harry's movie adaptations the past few years.

    In this new quibble, hpboy13 tracks the top seven reasons why he believes the new Hunger Games movie was a better film than most of the Harry Potter adaptations. His reasoning is that in addition to engaging in smarter marketing techniques and budgeting, the team that made The Hunger Games tried to keep it closer to the original text - more than WB ever attempted.

    This is just one fan's opinion, and - as per usual - we invite you to pull over a chair, grab a butterbeer, and meet him for interesting discourse in the Three Broomsticks section.

    If you have a strong opinion related to this article or anything Harry Potter feel free to submit your short piece to us at [email protected] Just don't forget to review our Rules of Submission before you do send something in.


    :-?? Sometimes I don't know about them...when they get the site updated, I hope they ignore idiots like him.
    photo niffler3b.jpg
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Then you complain why I hate purists.
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    New popular thing > last popular thing

    The cycle continues.
  • RyGuyRyGuy Posts: 7,837 mod
    I can't even stand Mugglenet even more after them posting these articles...I do not know what is more pretentious, a good chunk of the staff or these opinions by so called "Harry Potter fans." What a joke...
    image
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    Someone should tell them that if JK never wrote the books as long as the last three, the movies wouldn't cut that much.And that if the Hunger Games books we're twice as long, they would have cut so much more than just Madge and the avox storyline.

    Also, that J.K. was almost always in agree with all the changes and cuts (especially with the DH films as producer), and that she knows that even if the movies we're six hours long, people will be complaining.
  • BraveheartBraveheart Posts: 1,910 ✭✭✭✭
    Someone should also tell them that besides DH, each of the later books was composed approximately half of fluff. Immensely enjoyable fluff mind you, but fluff nonetheless.
  • XDMorsmordreXDXDMorsmordreXD Posts: 6,730 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Someone should also tell them that besides DH, each of the later books was composed approximately half of fluff. Immensely enjoyable fluff mind you, but fluff nonetheless.
    I agree. Yes, I agree.
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
    Mysterious thing time.
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    And also, that the first two movies we're the most faithful, but as a standalone films they we're the weakest of all eight films.
  • mattStrelowmattStrelow Posts: 3,183 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • XDMorsmordreXDXDMorsmordreXD Posts: 6,730 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I read a couple good points. :-?
    :))
    As did I, but overall...
    :-&
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
    Mysterious thing time.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    I love how people around the internet think they are better than movie producers. After all, it's soooo easy to produce a movie.
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I love how people around the internet think they are better than movie producers. After all, it's soooo easy to produce a movie.
    THIS.
  • GodricGryffindorGodricGryffindor Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I love how people around the internet think they are better than movie producers. After all, it's soooo easy to produce a movie.
    #TeamHenrick

    G.G.
    image
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    People don't know that much about filmmaking, as they frequently demonstrate on the internet. It would be one thing if they would at least acknowledge this at the beginning of their bullshit fan-rage article, but because they don't, they're open to criticism. If it started with "Please note: before you read this, know that I don't understand anything about the filmmaking process and I am clearly incapable of processing how lucky Harry Potter fans got with the films" then it would be fair enough.
  • KranenKranen Posts: 4,770 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #7: Market the movie well!

    Lionsgate’s marketing of The Hunger Games is a textbook example of how to market a film: show enough to get people interested, but don’t show the whole film! If one were to watch all the advance material released before a Potter movie, he wouldn’t even need to go see the actual movie! I made this mistake before Order of the Phoenix and watched all the preview clips and trailers, and then while watching the movie I was surprised to find that I had seen most of it already. The trailers show all the most important parts, lots of scenes are released early… the hosts of MuggleCast have complained about it in nearly every trailer review episode, and I quite agree.

    As for Hunger Games, they have not shown a single scene from the actual Hunger Games! Their marketing has been omnipresent, with posters and billboards, trailers and teasers, but the only part of the main action we’ve seen is the initial sprint for the Cornucopia. We get plenty of material from the first half of the movie, such as the Reaping and the Capitol, but everyone was on the edge of their seat throughout the second half of the movie waiting to see what happens.

    In fact, I find the Hunger Games trailers to be far more intriguing than the Potter ones, showing coherent bits of scenes that pull on my heartstrings. Compare this to Harry Potter trailers, with their split-second flashes and audio of Voldemort screaming and muffled yells of “Harry!” If the Hunger Games trailers were like that, we would have seen flashes of a dead Rue, Katniss and Peeta holding nightlock, and the cave kiss, all to audio of the characters screaming. Flashy, but not as effective. And while I enjoy freeze-framing Potter trailers as much as any other fan, Muggles I’ve spoken to were not convinced by the trailers.
    I do agree with this.
    image
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That's the only thing they're right. Lionsgate knows how to make a marketing without showing all the movie on the trailers and clips.
  • TheDoctorTheDoctor Posts: 3,941 ✭✭✭✭✭
    While it is true that lions gate does better not spoiling the major parts of the movie, I completely disagree that the Hunger Games trailers are more intriguing. I know many will agree with me when I say that Lionsgate didn't do a great job making the movie look very interesting/appealing to non book readers.
  • KranenKranen Posts: 4,770 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I know many will agree with me when I say that Lionsgate didn't do a great job making the movie look very interesting/appealing to non book readers.
    The trailer was what made me want to read the book...
    image
  • yonythemoonyyonythemoony Posts: 5,638 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The Hunger Games trailers were great...




    ... for readers and fans of the saga.
  • RyGuyRyGuy Posts: 7,837 mod
    While it is true that lions gate does better not spoiling the major parts of the movie, I completely disagree that the Hunger Games trailers are more intriguing. I know many will agree with me when I say that Lionsgate didn't do a great job making the movie look very interesting/appealing to non book readers.
    I have to agree with this. I only ended up reading the Hunger Games because I had a friend who loved the book and recommended it to me, picked up a copy and gave it a read. I seen the trailers and well I wasnt bought on it. I still havent seen the movie lol I may tomorrow if I have time. lol

    Owned.
    Kranen doesn't speak for everyone who ended up reading the book lol so sadly not owned lololol :P


    You know what I am getting sick and tired of? Comparions between Hunger and Potter. lol Hell any crackpot that writes 3+ paragraphs can have their crass opinions posted on Mugglenet. Hell I could ramble on how I didn't like Snape in the movies (which I truly loved his performance) and give the worst points ever and it would still be posted. It just shows what kind of "news" site Mugglenet has become lol

    image
  • TheDoctorTheDoctor Posts: 3,941 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lol well clearly guess I was wrong lol

    Nope still stand by what I said. People on this forum and all over the Internet said that they couldn't understand the hype over it. I firmly believe that anyone who had never heard of the Hunger Games before and saw that trailer wouldn't think that much of it.
  • RyGuyRyGuy Posts: 7,837 mod
    The Hunger Games trailers were great...




    ... for readers and fans of the saga.
    I agree. I didn't like the first two trailers. The third one to me looked decent. Its all in the eye of the viewer what you like. Anyone like the Mugglenet poster can say that they didn't like the potter marketing, or the trailers and fall head over heels with the hunger games material released. Its all a matter of opinion and the way they are sounding is generalizing it to be that everyone hated Potter's marketing and loves Thg's when that is simply not true. lol
    image
  • XDMorsmordreXDXDMorsmordreXD Posts: 6,730 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I know many will agree with me when I say that Lionsgate didn't do a great job making the movie look very interesting/appealing to non book readers.
    The trailer was what made me want to read the book...
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
    Mysterious thing time.
  • RyGuyRyGuy Posts: 7,837 mod
    Lol well clearly guess I was wrong lol

    Nope still stand by what I said. People on this forum and all over the Internet said that they couldn't understand the hype over it. I firmly believe that anyone who had never heard of the Hunger Games before and saw that trailer wouldn't think that much of it.
    hahaha I'm in this boat and agree :P

    image
  • phoenix1phoenix1 Posts: 2,293 mod
    Nothing I've seen on the Hunger Games makes me want to see the movie or read the books. But having first seen Harry on the older ABC Family marathons (going back to the time they showed only the first 3) I was instantly hooked, then got into the books. I'm sorry, I just don't want to watch a group of kids killing each other...I see enough of that on the evening news.
    photo niffler3b.jpg
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The Hunger Games trailers were great...




    ... for readers and fans of the saga.
    I agree. I didn't like the first two trailers. The third one to me looked decent. Its all in the eye of the viewer what you like. Anyone like the Mugglenet poster can say that they didn't like the potter marketing, or the trailers and fall head over heels with the hunger games material released. Its all a matter of opinion and the way they are sounding is generalizing it to be that everyone hated Potter's marketing and loves Thg's when that is simply not true. lol
    Couldn't agree more :D
  • Martin1Martin1 Posts: 7,849 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Today, I saw a guy in a hummer stop at an opening to a gas station and let five people out. I slowly thought my faith in humanity might return.

    needless to say, that ain't happening now.
  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    "While it is certainly too early to tell, I’m guessing Hunger Games will have some buzz in the coming awards season, because it is a fantastic movie by itself."

    I'm guessing he will end up disappointed come awards season. It's out of the question that it will be nominated for anything outside the technical categories, seeing as the even better critically received Deathly Hallows: Part 2 didn't make it this year. I hardly think the concept appeals to the Oscar voters' tastes. However, I will not be the one to complain in this case.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited March 2012
    "While it is certainly too early to tell, I’m guessing Hunger Games will have some buzz in the coming awards season, because it is a fantastic movie by itself."

    I'm guessing he will end up disappointed come awards season. It's out of the question that it will be nominated for anything outside the technical categories, seeing as the even better critically received Deathly Hallows: Part 2 didn't make it this year. I hardly think the concept appeals to the Oscar voters' tastes. However, I will not be the one to complain in this case.
    The Hunger Games will have buzz for the MTV Movie Awards and Teen Choice Awards. LMAO
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    But seriously, The Hunger Games has absolutely no chance in the Academy Awards. Not even in the technical categories. I would say it could have a slight chance in Costume Design, but as always, there will be a lot of epic/historic movies like Anna Karenina, The Hobbit, Snow White and the Huntsman and much more to come, so it's basically impossible.

    Besides, the movie has only 81 in BFCA and 67 on Metacritic. We all know that reviews don't mean anything (cof... Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close... cof), but if they didn't help Potter to get something being that high, I doubt they will make a difference for The Hunger Games.

    I can be totally, entirely wrong, but the movie won't get no nominations at important awards. Besides, remember how the academy avoids praising violent movies and stories. So yeah. No chance.
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    "While it is certainly too early to tell, I’m guessing Hunger Games will have some buzz in the coming awards season, because it is a fantastic movie by itself."

    hahaha oh god, it just keeps on delivering!
  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It has indeed no chance. It came out too early, the concept and violence will not appeal to the Academy members and it was just not a great movie in my opinion. Costume design and music are the only nominations I could see it getting. It could have had a good shot at art direction too if the director had actually shown us the spectacular arena and lingered the establishing shots of the Capital.

  • TheDoctorTheDoctor Posts: 3,941 ✭✭✭✭✭
    He kinda sounds like us when we're trolling and stuff, but he's actually serious lol

  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting. His second point was to stick to the source material and his third was to make a good movie. Hm, perhaps he should clarify what his own definition of a good movie is, i.e. how closely it resembled the book, just to avoid making a fool of himself?
  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2012
    "And if the film is good, only then will it get award recognition...."

    In an ideal world, yes, but I'm sure his naivety will disappear once the Oscar nominees for 2012 are announced.
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting. His second point was to stick to the source material and his third was to make a good movie.
    Kind of sounds like the Harry Potter movies.
  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting. His second point was to stick to the source material and his third was to make a good movie.
    Kind of sounds like the Harry Potter movies.
    Lol, it does. Fans should be thankful for the level of respect towards JKR's books shown in these films. In my opinion, many don't deserve it, as evident by such rants. If the films were to be remade, they should damn well focus entirely on making awesome films that such people would downright hate.
  • PumpkinjuicePumpkinjuice Posts: 2,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting. His second point was to stick to the source material and his third was to make a good movie. Hm, perhaps he should clarify what his own definition of a good movie is, i.e. how closely it resembled the book, just to avoid making a fool of himself?
    On the other hand, he did have a point about the two-way mirror and other shortcomings in adaptation, but it's so obviously hypocritical given that he wanted more faithful adaptations. Those shortcomings are an unfortunate result of that, you blithering idiot, to quote good ol' Minerva.
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lol, it does. Fans should be thankful for the level of respect towards JKR's books shown in these films. In my opinion, many don't deserve it, as evident by such rants. If the films were to be remade, they should damn well focus entirely on making awesome films that such people would downright hate.
    Give it time. When people are a bit more... well, sort of through with obsessing about every detail and what makes it in vs. what didn't make it in -- I guarantee that over time people will start considering them classics. The first few movies already have that aura about them despite being inferior in every conceivable way, so just imagine the perception of the later films on down the line.

    I haven't seen Hunger Games yet, but I think at best it will just be "pretty good," at least well made enough and entertaining and I imagine the same will ring true for its sequels. I would absolutely love it if the sequels end up being superior, let's be rational here, but it's going to end up as a series with what, 3 films, 4? They will by default be better than Twilight, but I think, like I said, after some time people will look back at Harry Potter and go "oh wow, they made eight of those bitches and they (arguably, naturally) got better as they went."
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    With time comes respect and more rational thought. After the hype is down and people know how the movies play out, they will begin to look at what actually matters on a cinematic level and that's when more eyes will start to be opened.
  • BaneBane Posts: 9,869 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The problem with the movies, aside from some miscalculations here and there on the filmmakers' parts, the problem is that Harry Potter has fans. It had fans before any of the movies and because of that, a sense of self-entitlement drove many opinions. Either they get it 100% right or may all of their dicks roast in hell. One wrong move, Heyman, and you're fucked. The filmmakers danced a fine line for about a decade, trying their best to get that story on the screen in the most efficient and cinematically effective way they could. And whether people liked it or not, the fans were always taken into consideration. The filmmakers were fans of the books. I remember an interview with David Yates where he was talking about how he would read through the Order of the Phoenix book while on flights, trying to find details that he could work in that maybe weren't in the current draft of the script.

    The Harry Potter movies carried a burden that few films in history have had to endure -- since they're adaptations of pre-existing material, millions of people familiar with the story had already "directed" their version of the story in their minds, whether while reading or after. And in the end what it comes down to, compared to the quantity of fans, is a mere handful of people trying to create something, to the best of their ability, that these people will actually like. It wasn't a near-impossible journey, it was impossible. Not even Lord of the Rings which ran away with like a billion academy awards pleased all of its readers. While they are in a vocal minority, there are some LOTR purists who downright despised the movies because it was literally not every single page put on screen.

    Somehow.
  • aaronaaron Posts: 20,950 mod
    Even if the Academy Awards were based off of my experiences at the cinema this year, I doubt it'll have a slot in the Best Picture category. It's the best picture I've seen this year thus far, but there's so much more cinematic beauty coming this year that it'll most likely be forgotten by next January. :P
    imageimageimage
Sign In or Register to comment.