Jeph Jacques's comics discussion forums

  • 16 Jan 2022, 19:28
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Harry Potter Again  (Read 24720 times)

scarred

Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #50 on: 20 Jul 2009, 01:33 »

Oh hey, I talked to a girl who has seen it. No Luna Quidditch scene apparently.

No commentary, but she wears the lion hat.

Good enough for me.

/wants a Luna spinoff series
Logged
tumblr | wordpress | last.fm

Quote from: De_El
nick is a dick so you don't have to be!

supersheep

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,276
  • you'll have to speak up, i'm a fish and lack ears
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #51 on: 20 Jul 2009, 12:31 »

the luna quidditch scene is pretty much my favourite thing in the whole books. actually, i think that luna in general is my favourite thing in the books.

a lion hat is not an adequate substitute. i was very saddened.
Logged
DJ Weight Problem: if you think semantics isn't that important maybe you should just can dig four banana nine jenkins razor blade dinosaur

Mr. Doctor

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,323
  • X-Ray Rod
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #52 on: 20 Jul 2009, 13:37 »

There were some problems with the book but I think the movie was good enough. Except the ending that was just fucking MEH! I mean... "This is pretty..." ... and that's it?!

O well... At least I got to see Ginny on bathrope. And she was cute & hot as HELL. Easily the most beautiful girl so far after Emma Watson and the crazy Luna [I don't know why I like her, I just do]
Logged

lprkn

  • Obscure cultural reference
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #53 on: 21 Jul 2009, 19:35 »

Radcliffe's lips creep me the hell out.

Otherwise: Long, boring, very pretty.
Logged

billiumbean

  • Pneumatic ratchet pants
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
  • "Clamsss... Waa!"
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #54 on: 24 Jul 2009, 22:37 »

Something I liked about this movie (as opposed to the others in the series) that I felt noteworthy:

In Harry Potter's universe, much like ours, there is genocide, racial cleansing, and oppression.  Since the books are third-person limited, they can only really illustrate this by showing Harry's perspective of it all.  Since displaying a single, primary character's internalized struggle is a very slippery slope in filmmaking, the creators of these movies seemed to have resigned themselves to just reiterating what literally happened, hoping we would fill in the blanks and sympathize with Harry anyway.  Hasn't worked out so well, I'm afraid.

This movie, though, I liked (romance bullshit aside).  Tom Riddle seemed less like a posh dick and more like the brilliantly evil motherfucker he actually was.  Voldemort in the fifth movie reminded me of Billy Corgan having a migraine, so this was definitely an improvement.  Snape seemed much darker and more looming than whatever mannequin impersonation became of his previous roles.  All that takes subtle film techniques and angles, as well as good acting, and though Harry was still a bit of a dweeb (though I sensed an improvement in his acting), the characters had a bit more dimension this time around.

Ginny, however, sucked.
Logged
Quote from: Alex C
I do agree that this could potentially have some dire ramifications in regards to purple drank.

variable_star

  • Furry furrier
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
    • BATTLE MASTERS!
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #55 on: 25 Jul 2009, 12:07 »

I still find Emma Watson to be mildly attractive and I now feel weird about it because so many people seem to hate her.

Oh yes, Hermioninone...Hermeione...Hermeiones? She's the only thing notable about the Potter films. The rest is for wankers and pre-teens.

But Hermoionene? I would . . . rend her buttocks.

TMI?

Logged

Ozymandias

Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #56 on: 25 Jul 2009, 13:39 »

Nope. Just fucking creepy.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

billiumbean

  • Pneumatic ratchet pants
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
  • "Clamsss... Waa!"
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #57 on: 26 Jul 2009, 00:47 »

See kids, this is what happens when you learn sex ed from bus stop graffiti.
Logged
Quote from: Alex C
I do agree that this could potentially have some dire ramifications in regards to purple drank.

FIXDIX

  • Pneumatic ratchet pants
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 306
  • Waka waka flocka flame
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #58 on: 26 Jul 2009, 02:49 »

My girlfriend and I saw it last night, we both thought it was pretty solid until the last quater of the film, so pretty much what a majority of people here thought really. I know time constraints and money budgets would've been a big factor in this but I was pretty let down that the battle at Hogwarts was cut down to Bellatrix blowing out the windows and kicking some cutlery around. C'mon, really?
Logged

feerqeer

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #59 on: 26 Jul 2009, 11:46 »

Otherwise: Long, boring, very pretty.

Hi yall.  Now, I don't feel qualified to say anything, ever, because someone might use it to 'action their life' and that hella scares me.  Hiiiiiiiii though.  Seriously, this hi goes out to all my bros and bitches, this hi is going to resound throughout the universe and cave my tower of sweaty balls onto itself.  :police:, you lot OK.  In fact, some of you damn fine.

With the awkward introductions out of the way, let me begin my tale.  Now I did see this movie, and I have at some stage read the books and since forgotten most of whatly and the byandby. So I figured this movie required getting my drink on.  So I did, and got called out in the ticket line for ordering a half-full cola :evil:.  I got way bored of the movie at what I could imagine, if pressed, was 3/4 of the way through it.  I was also rude enough to talk on my mobile once, because organising my post movie drink was more important.  

Then I went drinking at a bar I used to work at, failed to find the only song I wanted to sing at karaoke.  Got majorly weirded out and then kicked out for drinking from a hipflask...there's a reason I shouldn't drink rum, alone, in public places but I forget exactly why. Then I went to a pink bar and starred at the wall.  There was ska [not dead?] on the radio and it was pretty great. In fact, I was listening to ska during some of the movie, something about the pacing of HP6 really wore me down.  

Also, Ginny and Harry had some mad chemistry.

I came back to this to add I will actually watch this while sober and not distracted. And flowers teach sex education way better than toilet walls, I hope, I'm counting on them to undo my horrendous mistake in learning from the former. 
« Last Edit: 29 Aug 2009, 15:59 by feerqeer »
Logged

Border Reiver

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,192
  • Yes, I painted this.
    • The Pet Patch
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #60 on: 27 Jul 2009, 07:28 »

Saw the film on the weekend - definitely stronger than the goblet of Fire, not as strong as the others -
a.  The film needed to focus a wee bit more on Malfoy, who went from simple bully to realizing that he'd gotten in way over his head in the book; and
b.  They needed the fight scene at the end - otherwise why bring the Deatheaters in?  Just so Draco could have a cheering section?;

What did they do right?  Well -

a.  The teenage romance bits worked surprising well;
b.  The finding of the horcux scene was well shot and carried out;
c.  The scene where Harry gets the real memory from Slughorn was nicely done, and reasonably true to the book.

Generally, I enjoyed the movie - it did what I expected it to do (which was entertain me) and didn't make me go WTF? or why is this in this movie?
Logged
"It's a futile gesture that my sense of right and wrong tells me I should make." Is It Cold Here, 19 Mar 2013, 02:12

nurgles_herald

  • Plantmonster
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #61 on: 28 Jul 2009, 07:51 »

If anyone has seen Galaxy Quest, I really feel like Alan Rickman delivered the "I am the Half-blood Prince" with scorn equal to when he has to say "By Grapthar's Hammer, what a savings."  It's a horrible line, and it demeans Alan as an actor and Snape as a character, especially after the movie cut out like 75% of the Half-blood Prince stuff.  I watched that scene going "the Half-blood... who?"  The kids, especially Daniel Radcliffe, aren't getting any better at dramatic scenes.  Harry looks like he's savagely constipated when he's standing over Dumbledore's corpse.

THAT SAID, I still enjoyed the movie.  The retarded teenaged angst stuff that clogged the book was mostly cut out, with most of the remains being more funny than tiresome.  I literally lol'ed a few times.  The comedic sections were good enough to inspire me to find any other comedy involving the kids, leading me to Extras, and the conclusion that Daniel Radcliffe is, in fact, a great actor- he's just awful at doing dark scenes.

I guess what this review is trying to say is- the most recent Harry Potter movie is definitely worth your time and money- it may be horribly flawed, but it is still quite entertaining- but if both are in limited supply, watch Extras instead, because it rules.
Logged

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #62 on: 28 Jul 2009, 08:37 »

I will definitely agree that the HBP thing was terribly handled. You'd think they'd handle the titular plot line with some care, but it was really just boiled down to a couple brief mentions and the sectum sempra thing. On the other hand, when you get down to it, the whole Half-Blood Prince thing really wasn't all that important to the book's plotline anyway and it really wouldn't be considered an issue if the book were titled something else. The line was very shoe-horned, though.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

Orbert

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 877
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #63 on: 28 Jul 2009, 09:22 »

I'd actually forgotten what the title of the movie was by that point (since it doesn't matter that much), so when Snape turned around and said "I am the Half-Blood Prince" I thought:

1 Was that supposed to be the big dramatic reveal?  Because it was kinda lame.
2 How did Snape even know that Harry was wondering who the Half-Blood Prince is in the first place?
3 Were we supposed to be wondering?  Because it really didn't seem that important.  A curiosity at best.
Logged
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

nurgles_herald

  • Plantmonster
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #64 on: 28 Jul 2009, 09:33 »

Exactly.  Movie producers should've just realized that they had cut out the whole HBP storyline all ready and just renamed the movie.  But for the love of god, I feel bad for Alan Rickman.  I want to send him a Wallgreens card or something.  "Sorry WB ruined your artistic integrity!  Please don't kill yourself.  Love, fans."
Logged

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #65 on: 28 Jul 2009, 09:36 »

Oh please, like that would've worked. Can you imagine the fanboy/girl outrage if they changed the title of the movie? Let's disregard the fact that the title of the book was kind of stupid on its own (Naming an entire book after what essentially amounted to a subplot? No thanks), that aside, people still would've bitched a lot more about that happening than the plotline seeming rather shoe-horned in (Which it honestly kind of was in the book too).

It was basically a shitty situation all around.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

nurgles_herald

  • Plantmonster
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #66 on: 28 Jul 2009, 09:40 »

An alternative solution would be to have filmed another 15-20 minutes of the Half-blood Prince subplot so that, when the revelation comes, we actually know about the character in question.  HBP was only like 2.5 hours long as it stands.  If you're going to sit through a movie for 150 minutes, I, for one, wouldn't mind spending another 15 so that the movie has some sort of cohesion and satisfying closure.
Logged

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #67 on: 28 Jul 2009, 09:43 »

You're probably in the minority on that one. Two and a half hours for a movie that is essentially for teenagers is a bit much as it is, clocking in just shy of three hours would probably really hurt it. I really don't see much room for adding the HBP subplot. What I think they'll more likely do is make reference to it in the eighth movie. It would be very easy to slip reference to it in Snape's flashback at the ass end of Deathly Hallows.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

Mr. Doctor

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,323
  • X-Ray Rod
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #68 on: 28 Jul 2009, 11:12 »

2 How did Snape even know that Harry was wondering who the Half-Blood Prince is in the first place?

Because Harry tried to use a spell created by the hald-blood prince against Malfoy and also against  Snape. So I think Snape knew about Harry having the book.
That's the best answer I can think about.
Logged

Orbert

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 877
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #69 on: 28 Jul 2009, 11:23 »

I guess.  The half-blood prince had all kinds of great notes in his books, and Harry was definitely fortunate to get them, but I didn't realize that the HBP had actually cooked up his own spells.  So when Snape said Harry was trying to use one of his own spells against him (right before the "big reveal") I didn't quite buy it. 

But whatever.  I think we're all in agreement that that part of things was poorly handled.
Logged
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

maxusy3k

  • FIGHT YOU
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 445
  • Lurker of Lovecraftian proportion
    • Obligatory Social Networking Page
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #70 on: 28 Jul 2009, 11:26 »

That's what I thought about the HBP line being pointless, really. If Snape had reflected the spell, walked over to Harry and just said "You dare to use my own spell against me?" or whatever he said, that would have been it, mystery solved, Snape is the Half-Blood Prince. Show, not tell, in a backhanded kind of way. Takcing on the "Yes Harry I am the Half-Blood Prince" was ridiculous and redundant. It's the kind of thing that would have some kind of DUN-DUN-DUUUUUUUUN music behind it in a spoof movie.

I generally wasn't sold on this one... I'm not much of a Potter fan regardless, but I enjoy watching movies, particularly at the cinema, and have seen all the HP films so far ( it is like a tradition for my mother and I now) but this is the first time I've ever left the cinema feeling underwhelmed after any of them. Most tellingly is that even my mother didn't really enjoy it, for many of the same reasons I didn't.

I eventually came to the conclusion that, had the entire film be a sort of 'break from the norm' of the HP films and focus entirely on the characters as they develop into young adults, relationships and all, that it would have been a better film and a much better lead-in for the next. As it was it felt like the film-makers were finishing up the script, realised they were running out of time, and shoved all the exposition in for the last twenty minutes, in a very basic synopsis-like (synoptical?) fashion. "Okay, they find a Horcrux in a cave, go back to Hogwarts, Deatheaters attack, Malfoy can't kill Dumbledore so Snape does... that covers it, right?"

I also thought - admittedly I haven't been bored enough to read the most recent book yet - that it doesn't seem to be as much of a shock when Snape kills Dumbledore... the fact he knew Harry was down there seemed to suggest he had ulterior motives in doing the deed, which I'm led to believe is because it is part of The Plan and Snape is a good guy? I don't know if that's true or not. Reading the book it was much more of a hammer blow and completely out of nowhere.
Logged

Blyss

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 822
  • I got skillz with the plastic motherfucker. SKILLZ
    • Gamers like games
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #71 on: 06 Aug 2009, 11:15 »

I have yet to see this - however, my other half went to see it, and I will report, as best I can recall, what she said - verbatim. 

"We were told it was going to be 3-D.  The only thing 3-D was the intro, and then we were left holding onto these stupid glasses for two hours."

"In the other Harry Potter movies, you could always just jump in, no matter where the movie was, and you could expect a reasonable amount of fun, magic, and just generally enjoy it.  It didn't have to be prefaced with, 'well, this is what happened before to lead to this'.  I felt like this one needed that.  There was definitely a lack of fun - and the scenes where they could have gone crazy with CGI magic, they didn't.  It's like they held everything back for some reason.  They barely even showed any moving pictures, and that's been an inclusion of all the other films; the photos in the newspapers moved, the paintings came alive, and there was almost none of that."

"I really wasn't impressed, and wish they'd not only made it shorter, but maybe used someone that could have done a better job of depicting the Harry Potter world."


Now, some disclaimers here:  She has not read any of the books, so she had no idea going in what to expect, because I expressly did not tell her.  I wanted to know what she thought about it without knowing.  She's not a huge fan of Harry Potter, even though I am - and she knows that I am.  She's just your average viewer, that went to the movie without the knowledge of what the book held.  Without knowing what was canon or what wasn't - this was what she thought of the movie.

Myself - I will be waiting for it to hit DVD before I bother with it.
Logged
"Psychos?!  Did they look like psychos?  They were vampires!  Psychos DO NOT explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are!"  Seth Gecko

My blog

johnreynolds10

  • Guest
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #72 on: 17 Aug 2009, 08:12 »

I've watched Harry Potter 1-5 but I never watched them again. I am wondering if anyone of you watched the latest Harry Potter. Was it good?
Logged

Orbert

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 877
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #73 on: 17 Aug 2009, 10:09 »

Waht?
Logged
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

LTK

  • Methuselah's mentor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,011
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #74 on: 17 Aug 2009, 16:30 »

The only thing I can say about this movie is that even though it's been a while since I read the book, and the movie is always significantly cut in some places, I felt like I just saw half of what actually happened. I think they were focusing too much on the romance and too little on what was actually going on behind all of the hormones.
Logged
Quote from: snalin
I just got the image of a midwife and a woman giving birth swinging towards each other on a trapeze - when they meet, the midwife pulls the baby out. The knife juggler is standing on the floor and cuts the umbilical cord with a a knifethrow.

rc2429

  • Notorious N.U.R.R.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #75 on: 21 Aug 2009, 09:18 »

Movie Sucks
Thanks
RC
Logged

Synthetic

  • Not quite a lurker
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #76 on: 07 Sep 2009, 22:15 »

I must be one of the few people that actually enjoyed it for what it was, and not what it could/should/would have been. :|
Logged

Orbert

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 877
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #77 on: 08 Sep 2009, 10:39 »

Too many people have read the books and are constantly comparing the movies to the books.
Too many people get hung up on the bad and don't enjoy the good.

I thought the movie had some funny stuff, some interesting stuff, and some cool effects.  A movie is not "ruined" by some bad bits of dialogue or weird choices by the director; it's just not perfect.  If you come away from a movie feeling like you were entertained and got your money's worth, it was a good movie.

I think most people, even here, thought it was pretty good.  It's just natural to pick things apart.
Logged
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #78 on: 08 Sep 2009, 10:55 »

I did enjoy the movie quite a bit. But I don't know how the 7th movie is going to work out considering some major chunks of information they left out of the 6th movie, but I guess I'll just have to suck it up and wait and see.
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #79 on: 08 Sep 2009, 11:05 »

I think that clues and such are a big part of why they've broken the movie into two books. It's hard to argue that, due to content involved, both Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix probably needed to be broken up even more, but they'll probably be shoving a lot of that exposition and foreshadowing into the seventh one.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

Orbert

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 877
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #80 on: 09 Sep 2009, 08:58 »

I understand the rationale for splitting the last book into two movies; there's so much story to tell, and they don't want to cut too much.  What I'm wondering is why the change of attitude.  The first movie was nearly three hours, and I thought it was great.  Harry Potter books are big; not just in number of pages, but in scope.  They could (for example) spend half an hour on a quidditch match and a lot of people would be okay with that.  So I was all set for a whole series of "epic" movies, a la Lord of the Rings.

But then the movies started getting shorter, even as the books they were based upon were getting longer, which was weird.  So why are they now suddenly concerned about giving the last book a proper treatment?  They didn't seem to have a problem short-changing some of the middle ones.
Logged
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #81 on: 09 Sep 2009, 10:55 »

For one, you're mistaken. Half-Blood Prince is actually third longest of the films, only eight minutes shorter than the longest, which is Chamber of Secrets. I will concede that, ironically, the shortest film yet is dedicated to the longest book of the series (Half Blood Prince), but it honestly didn't miss nearly as much important content as the Goblet of Fire, which was only four minutes shorter than Chamber of Secrets. Also, none of the flicks even sniff the three hour mark. Chamber of secrets is almost two and a half on the dot, which is the norm for a blockbuster flick.

The thing you have to remember here are these are movies aimed at children and teens with a principle cast made up primarily of children and teens. When most people are growing up, anything more than that magic 2 1/2 hours is usually way too drawn out (It was almost impossible to get anyone I knew to sit through any of the Lord of the Rings movies). There's a reason blockbusters clocking in past 2 1/2 hours are pretty rare, the average movie going audience doesn't want to sit in a crowded theater for three hours and change counting previews. Hell, I dug the LotR movies, but getting through them in theaters was a chore, and I still don't like to do the extended editions at home in one sitting for any of them.

The final movie is being split up because they have a lot of left over ground to cover, but splitting up the earlier films isn't really plausible either. Again, I remind you, the principal cast of these movies is almost entirely under twenty years old. Logically speaking, if they were going to split up movies other than the latest, the fourth would've been the logical point, which would put the series on pace for eleven movies. Can you imagine filming eleven movies through your formative teen years? That would essentially destroy what little bit of a childhood any of the cast had and probably kill any interest in the series due to over saturation (To keep them on pace with the actors' ages, we'd need a new one damn near every six months).

Logistically speaking, it would've been an absolute fucking nightmare. It essentially couldn't be done without a revolving cast. Comparing it to Lord of the Rings is about the worst comparison possible. The entire cast of LotR was already adults and thus unlikely to change appearance over a lengthy production and the series was only three books long, less than half the length of the Harry Potter series.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

BeoPuppy

Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #82 on: 10 Sep 2009, 06:11 »

[...] The entire cast of LotR was already adults [...]

No way ... those hobbits were tiny!

And I see your logic. It's just that as Rowling junkies we want more.
Logged
My Art.
I was into Stumpy and the Cuntfarts before they sold out.

AanAllein

  • Furry furrier
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #83 on: 10 Sep 2009, 17:03 »

The reason they're breaking up the last book rather than any of the others is pretty straightforward if you think about it. The earlier books, while longer, had a lot of exposition/dialogue/subplots that could be comfortably excised without upsetting any but unnecessarily obsessed fans. However, the last book has a lot of actions - scenes that will make for great cinematic pieces - the dragon tearing out of Gringotts, for example. They don't want to cut any of the action down, because they know the audience will appreciate that, and they can't really trim everything else down and just make it a slideshow of action scenes. The only realistic way to approach it is two halves.

At least the narrative naturally splits in two - there are two points in the middle you could do it, but best would probably be after the escape from the Malfoy's.
Logged

0bsessions

  • Born in a Nalgene bottle
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,314
  • Change Is Taking the Seventh Dick
    • Quiki
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #84 on: 10 Sep 2009, 21:03 »

Thank you! I've been saying all that since the split was announced. I still don't comprehend all the people bitching that S.P.E.W. was cut. No one here is doing it, but fuck it's around.
Logged
I've decided to give up psychology and become a peacock
Quote from: Tommydski in Gabbly
JON MADE ME GAY

Lines

  • Awakened
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10,330
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #85 on: 11 Sep 2009, 09:00 »

SPEW was not really necessary to the plot. At all. Hermione will probably still feel horrible if they do the scene with Kreacher about the locket, but the club itself is unneccessary. There have been a lot of things cut in the films that are largely unneccessary to the plot. Really the only reason I think they brough Quidditch back in the 6th movie was because of McLaggen and having Lavender be a fan girl over Ron. The only time I get upset over cutting material is when they cut something that's actually important to the plot or add things that are kind of stupid. Lack of more memories that are pretty damn important for the next movie was just straight dumb and wouldn't have taken much time to add. However, though setting the Weasley's house on fire was stupid, since they haven't had Bill as a character in the movies and they didn't bring back Fleur, I severely doubt there will be a wedding now, so that's not an issue. But without those two, H,R,G, + others can't escape from the Malfoy's and hide at Shell Cottage. So yeah. Problems.
« Last Edit: 11 Sep 2009, 11:29 by Linds »
Logged
:grumpypuss: :grumpypuss: :grumpypuss:

JD

  • coprophage
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7,935
  • The Phallussar
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #86 on: 11 Sep 2009, 20:58 »

Couldn't they just add a couple of people wearing the buttons? Maybe an offhand comment on it?
Logged
Quote from: Jimmy the Squid
Hey JD, I really like your penis, man.

Mein Tumblr

AanAllein

  • Furry furrier
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #87 on: 11 Sep 2009, 22:27 »

I'm pretty glad that plotline was removed. Easily one of the worst elements of the books. Like, I get why it was there, but it was executed so poorly and never really went anywhere.
Logged

look out! Ninjas!

  • The Tickler
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 903
Re: Harry Potter Again
« Reply #88 on: 14 Sep 2009, 22:39 »

I thought it was just there to show how bad author avatars can get when they forsake the need for subtlety.
Logged
Tina Turner kicking the crap out of Zombie Ike Turner?
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up