Welcome to Harry Potter Forum! Below you will find many interesting threads and discussions. Enjoy.
Why the films have killed the books
teenagekicks
Posts: 3
(New member admittedly, been a fan since I was 7; currently 16. I'm aware I may get a few complaints for this but its my opinion, and forums tend to be the place where people are able to display their opinions to others.)
Right. Where to begin?! The books have so much depth. When I was alot younger; when the first two films were released for instance, and the excitement was enough for me to enjoy the films, but the acting is pretty poor. There is no passion, its like they think the words can be said and a spell can manifest itself. It takes thought to process spells. JKR makes this clear in the way she describes the use of spells within the pages of her novels. Yet the actors portray very little emotion and grit for the parts.
I dread this new film (Half Blood Prince). They have been deteriorating in quality since The Philosophers Stone. So much has been missed from the books of which will be important to the finale which is, shockingly being separated into two films (don't even get me started.) Anyone who read the books after the films will be elated to see how much better the books are. The amount of detail and the sheer imagination that goes into them is stunning.
All this said, I will still spend about £8 in the cinema on the night (around £6 on a ticket and some popcorn.)
Feel free to curse me. I'm a master of non-verbal spells as retaliation.
Right. Where to begin?! The books have so much depth. When I was alot younger; when the first two films were released for instance, and the excitement was enough for me to enjoy the films, but the acting is pretty poor. There is no passion, its like they think the words can be said and a spell can manifest itself. It takes thought to process spells. JKR makes this clear in the way she describes the use of spells within the pages of her novels. Yet the actors portray very little emotion and grit for the parts.
I dread this new film (Half Blood Prince). They have been deteriorating in quality since The Philosophers Stone. So much has been missed from the books of which will be important to the finale which is, shockingly being separated into two films (don't even get me started.) Anyone who read the books after the films will be elated to see how much better the books are. The amount of detail and the sheer imagination that goes into them is stunning.
All this said, I will still spend about £8 in the cinema on the night (around £6 on a ticket and some popcorn.)
Feel free to curse me. I'm a master of non-verbal spells as retaliation.
Comments
Whilst small things have been left out of previous films that become important in the last ones, it is still very easy for them to bring these things back in. And you know that they will bring them back in, because the Half-Blood Prince is the first Harry Potter movie to have knowledge of the ending on it's side. That is one BIG reason why you should not be worrying about the Half-Blood Prince movie.
Splitting Hallows is a genius idea. It's essentially a five hour film, with a 6 month intermission. But when you go to see it, you really will feel the benefits. It gives them a lot of space to keep things in, as Deathly Hallows is essentially sub-plotless. EVERYTHING in Hallows is integral to the plot. Which is the main reason it's being split. Hallows has to tie off all the loose ends the previous movies have left, and also add in some more. There is nothing they can cut from the book, so the split really is in the best interests of the fans.
Now I don't mean to be rude, but I find it hard to take you seriously when you said they have been deteriorating in quality since the Philosopher's Stone. Because amount of book plot included does not = Quality. Columbus did a very horrible thing with the first two films, and that was essentially make a carbon copy of the books. Columbus is not the right guy for a book-movie adaptation, as he does not understand what works and what doesn't. Half of the scenes Columbus put in could have been removed and/or replaced with more important/entertaining and well-thought out scenes. Columbus put little of his own creativity into the movies, and as a result, we have a horrible Hollywood kids movieish feel. The cinematography is bad, the directing of the kids is TERRIBLE (they really could have given a lot better. If you compare how much progress was made between PS and CoS (which was minimal) and compare it to the huge leap they made from CoS to PoA).
Now Cuaron, Newell and Yates all proved that you don't have to copy the book exactly to get it's themes, feeling, tone and story down properly. Yes, they cut things, but they couldn't not, otherwise we would end up with ridiculously long and, like PS and CoS, boring things which we could have had in a more entertaining way if we'd just picked up the books. Columbus' films are shallow. Newell had it down better, Cuaron better than Newell and Yates better than all of them. You only need to watch the images shown in the posession scene, the interaction between the characters, the canonicity of the characters and the deep running themes of Order to see what a magnificent piece of work the Order of the Phoenix really is. Who cares if they left out the locket and the mirror, those are two things that can be put in in the Half-Blood Prince movie. And Yates didn't know what the outcome out the stories was, so you can't really blame him for leaving out a mirror (an object that, through what it's story involves, makes Harry look like a bastard).
I'm not quite sure what you were saying about the spells, whether you were referring to the everyone or just the child actors. Because for the first two films, I will agree with the child actors. But you only need to see Harry's Patronus and Expelliarmus, Voldemort and the Death Eater's Unforgivable Curses, Snape's Legilimens and all the teenager's stunning spells to see that things have changed since the kiddie days.
Please, do tell: What is your problem with the split of Deathly Hallows?
but thats ok... i understand the movies would be so very very long and alot of people arent big enough fans to watch them if they were that long.
but seriously, i would be willing to sit and watch a 5/6/7 hour (however many hours it had to be!) harry potter movie to see every scene and detail like it is in the book... and i would pay like $50 for a ticket! i dont care... i would leave the cinema so much more satisfied and happy. then i would like the movies.
an i think... judging from this website... there is alot of people out there that would gladly to the same!
But also, they made some mistakes. They bring in the character of kreacher in the fifth one for no reason and he is not in the 6th one where he is of more need, i hav to blame yates for dat.
Nothing can be made completely perfect, if some1 finds it perefect some may criticise bcoz people hav different opiniions and we hav 2 live with it.
IMO, a good director should be a master in miniature. He could put anything on the tip of a pin, instead of using a pin to thrust a little here, a little there and make a mixture of craps. Any scripts can make a good movie, and even a good script can make a crappy movie, it all depends on the director's hand.