Random Thought

[tealin]

I was cleaning out my computer desk and found this note, which I had jotted months ago, when thinking about how all the big Moments in the Potter films seem to be bland:

I often hear from people that they find the movies boring because they too closely resemble the books. They aren't on the edge of the seat to find out what will happen next... These are the same people who I know have read each of the books ten times each. Surely the book wouldn't be any different the tenth time through? It's the lack of drama in the movie that loses people's interest.

Just thought I'd throw this out there ...
[Note that I said loses people's interest, not makes them dislike the movie.]

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

There's also that thing where they add random stuff and forget to put important stoylines in.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

That's a different category of non-movie-liking. No less valid. Probably more valid. But some people still subscribe to the above opinion.

[thorn-of-blood.livejournal.com]

I have problems with the third movie, but I will not air them here, there doesn't seem to be much point, I am resigned to the fact that they will never be as good as the books. Thats one of the resons that I don't wan't the discworld books to be put in to movie version, I just don't think it would fit, although i think that putting Moving Pictures on the big screne would be delisiously ironic.

The thing with books is that they allow you to see the characters and the situations in your own way, a movie stamps someone elses view across your eyes, changing how you see things.

Also movies (because of time restraints) miss so much of the stuff that we love.

[octaveleap.livejournal.com]

Oh gosh- thats a WONDERFULLY valid point. I think it's really silly to blame the lack of excitement in the movies on their loyalty to the books. I mean, if the books are exciting and the movies aren't, then they screwed something up in the movies.

[miss-ida.livejournal.com]

well...i cant understand those people you describe... when i saw the Prisoner of Azkaban movie on the danish premiere i was on the edge of the seat when Sirius was going to have sucked out his soul.... of course i know he'll survive but...its to exciting!

i love movies...so i dont understand why the drama should break the interesst of the movie...

but i was VERY dissapoited over the cut off that the marauders map was made of lupin, sirius, harrys father and peter pettigrew...

shame on Steve Cloves and Alfonso Cuarón!

[canisdoofus.livejournal.com]

Alfonso Cuaron had a mysterious, noisy truck with very bright lights comming out of the windows, parked on a remote corner of the production set as he directed this movie. Unbeknownst to Scotland Yard, he had a Hydroponic Canabis production center in that truck, and spent many hours a day therein with Mr. kloves!

That's how much he and Steve twisted the plot! :-P

At least Columbus' movies were comprehensible, meaning that while he did leave out a few things here and there, they were usually either a) unimportant fodder, or b) he incorporated them some other way that was still understandable.

[fryingpanofdoom.livejournal.com]

I think it's that we all have movies in our heads while we read. I personally give characters (especially Terry Pratchett and Rowling's) distinct voices in my head. Movies supposedly give us the visual of the books as well, with added music and dimension and theme. But honestly, I think we probably do all that better in our heads, yet expect movies to be more than our brains. Movies take all the creativity away. Maybe that's why they leave us more disappointed.

[rebekah-weasley.livejournal.com]

You make a really good point.
I've always found movies of my favorite books exciting. I guess it's just the fact that it a movie! *shrug* Who knows.
It's more the things that get left out that bug me.

Canon and Comfort

[inkblot-fiend.livejournal.com]

An interesting point. But familiar characters and situations are comforting, they make us feel at home and on well-worn territory. It's the sudden deviations from the comfort zome the authors create to the vision of the director/writer that shock me into dislike of the film.

For example, I knew it was Lupin asleep on the train, I knew what was supposed to happen to reveal him, but I didn't find it any the less exciting to see him jump up just in the nick of time to fend off the Dementor. But, I was deeply disturbed by the Hogwarts choir. And Lupin's moustache, but that's beside the point. I also found the "Magical Cloud Dog" really aggravating, as the whole point is he's a real dog, not a Trewlawney induced fantasy.

So, I suppose the point I am trying to make is that visualisations of our well-thumbed books can be exciting - they give us different ways of looking at characters and plot. But when the director/writer (who knows which?) takes such appaling liberties with it we are dragged away from familiarity and forced to confront a new/incorrect situation which overrides the good aspects of the film as a whole and leaves us with a sour taste.

I could rant about the poorness of this film forever, by the way. It is so bad, not just from a HP-obsessive viewpoint that I get a bit carried away. So, sorry for the mini-essay, it just erupted.

[fryingpanofdoom.livejournal.com]

I completely agree. I can go into any movie, no matter how good, and come out dissatisfied because they changed a few little details or dialogue. Why can't directors just get it into their heads that they can't better the authors' creativity? I think there is really only one movie that I know of that is better than the book: Mary Poppins, and that is because of skillful acting versus bad writing.