Harry Potter- round 6-who's ready? - Page 14

Strangler Lewis · 07-23-2009, 06:59 AM

Spoiler:

Cadaverous Pallor · 07-23-2009, 07:57 AM

I was going to post about how I disagree regarding Rowling's handling of these huge deaths and then I remembered that I disagreed with how she handled the last 3 books entirely...so I should probably shut up now.

BarTopDancer · 07-23-2009, 09:06 AM

Rowling had stated that once someone died they were dead, as to not confuse kids.

I was more affected by Siruis' death then Dumbledore's. I'm not sure why because in the books I was bawling through both. I think I was still so far removed from Potterland and stuck somewhere between LOTR, StarWars and HP that it didn't bother me.

innerSpaceman · 07-23-2009, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Rowling had stated that once someone died they were dead, as to not confuse kids.

Yes, she said that in interviews ... but that's not how she wrote it in her novels.

Serious fell through that mysterious veil portal, he was not Avra Kedavera death-cursed. There was a lot more about the veil portal in the book, so it seemed like a one-way trip, but it was left decidedly unclear. And since he fell through it without being killed first (like in the movie), all the kidlets were left unsure whether he was dead .... unless they also read every word J.K. says in interviews.

With Dumbledore, a lot more was made of the mysterious phoenix that appears at his funeral. His death was a lot more definiate, but that rise-from-the-ashes portent was not exactly subtle in the book. I didn't know till Book 7 whether he was going to be revived all Gandalf-like or not.

Speaking of which, yeah, some of the LotR touches in the current movie were not, to my memory, in the book - - specifically the ring touching that was totally Peter Jackson (i.e., that sort of thing was not in Tolkien either).

Alex · 07-23-2009, 09:23 AM

If she'd applied that rule to Voldemort then things would have been easier, wouldn't they?

But even if dead things stay dead that doesn't prevent it turning out that something never actually died despite appearances. (Besides, I never believe authors about their characters until they -- the author -- is dead.)

Gemini Cricket · 07-23-2009, 11:54 AM

Avada Kedavra... reminds me of Abra Cadabera.

I started reading the last book again last night. Within the first chapter, there's a scene that I'm wondering if the filmmakers will actually film. It's pretty gruesome.

innerSpaceman · 07-23-2009, 12:10 PM

Heheh, I'm reading the current movie's book, as I always do right after the movie comes out.

Won't get to Deathly Hallows again till right after the next movie (but does that mean I should only read half of it?)

I'm with CP ... I hate the direction the last 3 books took ... though Order of the Phoenix is my favorite of those because it (and the movie) contain a heavy dose of funny satire on education, media, and politics. The final two books have no such redeeming qualities.

And I call shenanigans on Rowling's claim to have made them joyless because the kids of the first books are no longer kids. What a sad commentary on life.

I don't know if it's a coincidence or not, but I love Prisoner of Azkaban best (book and movie), and it's the only one not about the Trouble With Harry and Voldemort. The only one Voldemort's not in. I'm sure that's one of its many unique appeals as contrasted with the rest of the series.

Oh, and GC, I'm sure the similarity between Avada Kedavra and Abra Cadabera is purposeful. A while back, Alex linked to some research on the history of the once-powerful, now Bugs-Bunny comical magic spell ... but I'm too lazy to find that post.

Disneyphile · 07-23-2009, 12:38 PM

Well, I still didn't finish the book, but opted to see the movie two nights ago. It was kinda fun not knowing what was going to happen, unlike the previous films.

Snape's a traitorous ass. That is all.

Chernabog · 07-23-2009, 12:50 PM

I saw it a few days ago and rather liked it. It did seem like a "random crap happening" sort of storyline (such as when Dumbledore takes Harry to the cave.... it just seemed so random in the movie). Of course major parts of it deviated from the book, but all of them do when they're condensed so much.

Order of the Phoenix was such total garbage (book, which needed a good editing, and movie, which was morose and boring) that I wasn't going in with great expectations (due to the same director as OotP). He did better this time around.

But the special effects were good as always, the guy with the crush on Hermione was cute as can be (and FYI he is also an underwear model, yummy), and Rupert Grint is shaping up nicely for a soul-less ginger.

Three and a half demons out of five.

innerSpaceman · 07-23-2009, 12:56 PM

Wow, mileage varies, I guess. I thought Yates was a hack this time around.

The story last time leant to this, but I rather liked the montages and the use of moving-photo newspapers, and the joke of nailing proclaimation after proclaimation to the same wall. These cinematic, montagean tools helped condense the book nicely, allowing 50 pages to be communicated in 20 seconds. It's very filmic, and the kind of condencing I prefer over simply leaving things out ... especially when, as in the case of the new film, leaving certain things out makes other things left in completely senseless and moot. (cough*vanishing cabinet*cough)

07-23-2009, 06:59 AM	#1
Strangler Lewis Doing The Job Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: In a state Posts: 3,956	Spoiler: For someone truly dead, Dumbledore has an awful lot to say in Book 7. __________________ Live now-pay later. Diner's Club!
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 07:57 AM	#2
Cadaverous Pallor ohhhh baby Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Parental Bliss Posts: 12,364	I was going to post about how I disagree regarding Rowling's handling of these huge deaths and then I remembered that I disagreed with how she handled the last 3 books entirely...so I should probably shut up now. __________________ The second star to the right shines in the night for you
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 09:06 AM	#3
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	Rowling had stated that once someone died they were dead, as to not confuse kids. I was more affected by Siruis' death then Dumbledore's. I'm not sure why because in the books I was bawling through both. I think I was still so far removed from Potterland and stuck somewhere between LOTR, StarWars and HP that it didn't bother me. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 09:23 AM	#5
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	If she'd applied that rule to Voldemort then things would have been easier, wouldn't they? But even if dead things stay dead that doesn't prevent it turning out that something never actually died despite appearances. (Besides, I never believe authors about their characters until they -- the author -- is dead.)
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 11:54 AM	#6
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Avada Kedavra... reminds me of Abra Cadabera. I started reading the last book again last night. Within the first chapter, there's a scene that I'm wondering if the filmmakers will actually film. It's pretty gruesome.
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 12:10 PM	#7
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Heheh, I'm reading the current movie's book, as I always do right after the movie comes out. Won't get to Deathly Hallows again till right after the next movie (but does that mean I should only read half of it?) I'm with CP ... I hate the direction the last 3 books took ... though Order of the Phoenix is my favorite of those because it (and the movie) contain a heavy dose of funny satire on education, media, and politics. The final two books have no such redeeming qualities. And I call shenanigans on Rowling's claim to have made them joyless because the kids of the first books are no longer kids. What a sad commentary on life. I don't know if it's a coincidence or not, but I love Prisoner of Azkaban best (book and movie), and it's the only one not about the Trouble With Harry and Voldemort. The only one Voldemort's not in. I'm sure that's one of its many unique appeals as contrasted with the rest of the series. Oh, and GC, I'm sure the similarity between Avada Kedavra and Abra Cadabera is purposeful. A while back, Alex linked to some research on the history of the once-powerful, now Bugs-Bunny comical magic spell ... but I'm too lazy to find that post.
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 12:38 PM	#8
Disneyphile SQUIRREL! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: On the curbside. Posts: 5,098	Well, I still didn't finish the book, but opted to see the movie two nights ago. It was kinda fun not knowing what was going to happen, unlike the previous films. Snape's a traitorous ass. That is all.
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 12:50 PM	#9
Chernabog Biophage Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The Moon Posts: 2,679	I saw it a few days ago and rather liked it. It did seem like a "random crap happening" sort of storyline (such as when Dumbledore takes Harry to the cave.... it just seemed so random in the movie). Of course major parts of it deviated from the book, but all of them do when they're condensed so much. Order of the Phoenix was such total garbage (book, which needed a good editing, and movie, which was morose and boring) that I wasn't going in with great expectations (due to the same director as OotP). He did better this time around. But the special effects were good as always, the guy with the crush on Hermione was cute as can be (and FYI he is also an underwear model, yummy), and Rupert Grint is shaping up nicely for a soul-less ginger. Three and a half demons out of five. __________________ And they say back then our universe Was a coal black egg Until the god inside Burst out and from its shattered shell He made what became the world we know ~ Bjork (Cosmogony)
	Submit to Quotes

07-23-2009, 12:56 PM	#10
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Wow, mileage varies, I guess. I thought Yates was a hack this time around. The story last time leant to this, but I rather liked the montages and the use of moving-photo newspapers, and the joke of nailing proclaimation after proclaimation to the same wall. These cinematic, montagean tools helped condense the book nicely, allowing 50 pages to be communicated in 20 seconds. It's very filmic, and the kind of condencing I prefer over simply leaving things out ... especially when, as in the case of the new film, leaving certain things out makes other things left in completely senseless and moot. (coughvanishing cabinetcough)
	Submit to Quotes