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

Harry Potter assignment. Adaption

KreshSKreshS Posts: 2
edited January 2010 in General
Hi!
I'm currently writing an assignment where I compare the books about Harry Potter to the movies. My theme is adaption.
I would very much like it if anyone could help get me started, I find that very hard.

Telling a story through a book and through a movie i two way different things. What impact does this transition have on the story? I usually hate the movie of the book, if I've read it. Why? I find this very interesting. Is it possible to avoid? Do you keep the big picture in the story? (The changes of directors does not help...)

I plan to use stuff from mots of the books, but mostly number four. I think there are a few very clear situations that illustrate my point here.
One of the things i get most annoyed by, is the changing of characters personalities, and appearances in the movies. Of course this is individually because we all read the books differently, this is also one of the topics i want to discuss.

So:
In what way is the characters changed by adapting the story from book to movie? Is this necessary?

I would also very much like it if anyone had any concrete examples of how situations are changed from the book to the movie.

Thanks!
Kresh.

Comments

  • lupinshowllupinshowl Posts: 369
    edited January 2010
    I would have to say that........anytime you make a book into a movie..............it will not be as good as the book......the visuals may be there.........but character roles always change...........Dobby for example............after the 2nd film he was not in any movies......instead they used others do what Dobby was supposed to do..........like in book 4...........instead of Dobby giving Harry the gillyweed it was Neville...........and in book 5........it was Dobby who told Harry about the Room of Requirement.......but again they used Neville.......

    And.........also they are trying to cram an entire year (the books) into 2 1/2 hour films.............lots of things will be missing.........and the directors and producers will only put what they feel is necessary to the audience............

    Plus another example.......they never really show the summer breaks in the movies..........it just starts with them getting ready to go to Hogwarts.........but in the books...........the first couple of chapters are about what the characters are doing on their summer breaks........example........book 5........the beginning before returning to Hogwarts was pretty long..........they spent alot of time cleaning Siruis' house........and not to mention the twins finding ways to experiment their new items..........Harry giving them the funding.......and Ron and Hermoine being made prefects........and in the 5th film.........they left out quidditch.......also Ron getting his new cleansweep..........plus I wanted to hear "weasley is our king".........film 5 was a big disappointment to the books............again directors and producers only putting in what they feel is good for the audience..........

    And in book 6 the beginning..........there was Flegm.......which she was not in the film........and Harry was there at the Weasley's and they played quidditch alot and Harry starts feeling real comfortable around Ginny.........and she grows on him from there......what do they do in the film......they make him see her from far away and his heart just jumps.............and all of a sudden he likes her........wth?........again.....directors and producers only putting in what they feel is best for the audience..........

    The overall big picture is there in the films............but the little steps it takes to get to the ending of a wonderful story.......will always be missing.........only key points that the directors/producers feel should be there will only be in the films........they can not possibly put in all the small steps that the characters go through in order to accomplish what they need to.......

    so I would have to say..........to each their own.............everyone would've done things differently............there would be those that will always protest........no matter who made what films...........the director and producer only try to make the film more understandable and enjoyable to watch for readers and especially non readers............after all they have only less than 3 hours to show everyone what they have made from a masterpiece of a platform........the books.............the films of any books will always be enjoyable and entertaining.........but nothing beats the books and the READERS imaginations.......

    exept Braveheart...........I found the book to be slow and kinda boring..........but the movie was a timeless masterpiece........Mel Gibson is the man........same with the LOTR series..........I can't read it without falling asleep after one chapter..........but the films......BRAVO!!!
  • Thanks for good examples and thoughts!
    Yeah, it's hard to tell a 500 pages (1 year) written story in 2,5 hours, and that's why it's necessary for the directors to change the story. It's lika a domino effect, when they change one thing, they have to change all the things that the first thing affects. It's like taking a great piece of art, smashing it into pieces, and then put it back again to look good. The directors can't make a good movie, and at the same time retell the book in a great way.

    I would dare say that the LOTR movies are even more boring than the books :D They are great films, but the books are even better, if you first get into the story (the first 100 pages of FOTR is boooring). An even greater example of how they change the story and the characters from the books is LOTR (maybe because the books are so long).
Sign In or Register to comment.