Harry Potter- round 6-who's ready?

[innerSpaceman]

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)

[mousepod]

Finally saw it last night at the Grove with Heather and our pal Johnny. None of us have read any of the Potter books, but we've all enjoyed the movies so far. In fact, the movies that have gotten "thumbs-down" from book fans (like iSm), were just fine by us.

But, for someone who hasn't read the books...

This. Movie. Sucks.

There's no dramatic tension whatsoever, a weak thread of a plot, and when I wasn't battling sleep, I was scratching my head in confusion.

It seems to me that they (the screenwriter, director, whoever) picked some key scenes and lines of dialogue from the book and then just filmed them.

For me, the measure successful adaptation of one art form into another is whether each work can stand on its own.

In the case of this movie...

FAIL.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by mousepod

For me, the measure successful adaptation of one art form into another is whether each work can stand on its own.

I agree. As the books got longer the movies had to cut more and more out, leaving non-book readers without crucial knowledge that came in the books. Really glad the last book will be split into two movies but I fear they won't do much to add in those important parts.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by mousepod

It seems to me that they (the screenwriter, director, whoever) picked some key scenes and lines of dialogue from the book and then just filmed them.

For me, the measure successful adaptation of one art form into another is whether each work can stand on its own.

It's funny because I felt that way about the previous movies but thought they avoided that for the most part this time. Now, I still didn't think the result was all that interesting but I found it much more coherent than the last few.

Maybe my expectations have finally just reached so a low level that it was possible for them to be exceeded.

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

I think it was a terrible adaptation and a mostly awful movie. I can't imagine it standing alone. Starting with the 5th film, the movies seem incomprehensible to those who haven't read the books. That is really their biggest offense. People invested in the movies and not the books probably feel especially annoyed.

Jesse, I feel like they actually omit some of the more important dialogue and scenes in favor of what the writers think will most appeal to tweens and visual effects lovers. I do think they get some of that right, but it's not my favorite part of the story.

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by mousepod

Finally saw it last night at the Grove with Heather and our pal Johnny. None of us have read any of the Potter books, but we've all enjoyed the movies so far. In fact, the movies that have gotten "thumbs-down" from book fans (like iSm), were just fine by us.

But, for someone who hasn't read the books...

This. Movie. Sucks.

There's no dramatic tension whatsoever, a weak thread of a plot, and when I wasn't battling sleep, I was scratching my head in confusion.

It seems to me that they (the screenwriter, director, whoever) picked some key scenes and lines of dialogue from the book and then just filmed them.

For me, the measure successful adaptation of one art form into another is whether each work can stand on its own.

In the case of this movie...

FAIL.

Originally Posted by Eliza Hodgkins 1812

I think it was a terrible adaptation and a mostly awful movie. I can't imagine it standing alone. Starting with the 5th film, the movies seem incomprehensible to those who haven't read the books. That is really their biggest offense. People invested in the movies and not the books probably feel especially annoyed.

Jesse, I feel like they actually omit some of the more important dialogue and scenes in favor of what the writers think will most appeal to tweens and visual effects lovers. I do think they get some of that right, but it's not my favorite part of the story.

I can't remember who it was (director, Rowling...) but one of TPTB mentioned that this time around, the script was not going to "explain things" (as the previous movies did) so that people who hadn't read the book could understand the plot better. They figured that a majority of people seeing the movie had read the books (and therefore knew the background and/or the fleshed out story) and, in any event, if they hadn't they were already invested in the series. This allowed them to cut a lot of what, would have otherwise, would have been (arguably) superfluous information. Did they cut too much? In my mind yes. On the other hand, this makes me glad they split the final book into 2 parts.