From pkerr06 at attglobal.net  Sat Dec  1 00:42:32 2001
From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (pkerr06 at attglobal.net)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 00:42:32 -0000
Subject: Sean Connery
In-Reply-To: <20011130.170314.-609613.1.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9u991o+ij8c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Laura Klotz <laurakay76 at j...> wrote:

> 
> Can anybody think of a way we can get Sean Connery into these films? 
 =D 
> I'm not holding out much hope, but he's always fun to look at...
> 
> ~Laura K.
> ________________________________________________________________
>

Sure.  Let him be Mad-Eye Moody.  You'd have to pad him a bit, of 
course, but after all, Moody's older--he's supposed to be retired.  
I'm sure Sean could give him the menace the role needs.

Peg




From ardhrianna at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 01:05:21 2001
From: ardhrianna at yahoo.com (Ardhrianna)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:05:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Question about the meaning of the word "Immortal"
Message-ID: <20011201010521.41889.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com>

My apologies if this has already been discussed, but
it's BUGGED ME both times I've seen the movie.

Okay, Hermoine says that Nicholas Flamel is "Immortal"
so he *can't die*.  Her exact words, I believe, to
Ron.  So that makes me think that Nicholas will live
forever, with or without the Elixer from the
Philosopher/Sorceror's Stone.

So why, at the end of the movie, does Harry ask
Dumbledore if Nicholas and his wife are going to die
now that they no longer have the Elixer?  What
happened to them being Immortal?

Or am I watching far too much "Highlander:  The
Series" here?


Colleen

=====
So never mind the darkness
We still can find a way
'Cause nothin' lasts forever
Even cold November rain
--"November Rain," Guns N Roses

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 01:57:11 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 01:57:11 -0000
Subject: Voldemort in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <20011130.173715.-609613.6.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9u9ddn+10111@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Laura Klotz <laurakay76 at j...> wrote:
> So the bit with us seeing Voldemort in the mirror is technically
> okay.  As to not having Quirrell turn his back on Harry, I suspect
> that it was easier (how exactly, I don't know) for the special
> effects people to CGI Voldie's face in the mirror than straight
> on.  I'm not sure why that would be, but I know very little about
> special effects, so that's really just a guess.

It's been too long since I've seen the movie, as my memory is already 
beginning to fade a touch.

But as I recall, it seemed to me the entire purpose in showing 
Voldemort in the mirror as opposed to having Quirrel's back facing 
him probably wasn't necessitated by special effects limitations . . . 
rather, it struck me as a pretty clear Standard Issue Director's 
Trick (tm): the point being to have Harry and Voldemort's face in the 
same camera shot, which is of course not possible if Quirrel's back 
is facing Harry and we have a standard shot on Voldemort's face.

I have no idea how well I explained that.  Sorry.  In brief, you get 
the following image:

We have Harry's reflection in the mirror, with Voldemort's reflection 
looming over his shoulder talking to him about how he can restore his 
parents to life, as Harry is gazing into the mirror, being reminded 
of same . . .

Okay, that explanation was even worse.

I concede defeat.

All I really needed is a still image of this scene and the above 
would make a heck of a lot more sense.

-Luke




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 02:10:48 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:10:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sean Connery
In-Reply-To: <9u991o+ij8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011201021048.7821.qmail@web13703.mail.yahoo.com>

Peg wrote:
> Let him be Mad-Eye Moody.  You'd have to pad
> him a bit, of 
> course, but after all, Moody's older--he's supposed
> to be retired.  
> I'm sure Sean could give him the menace the role
> needs.
> 
> Peg
> 

Hey, I could agree to that! Love that man! He made a
great king Aruther! He would make a great auror! He
has that wonderful Scottish brouge when he lets it
slip out! It certainly would prove interesting to see,
if got the part!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band
of Muggles, slowly getting Merrier

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From valjean131 at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 03:54:31 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 03:54:31 -0000
Subject: Question about the meaning of the word "Immortal"
In-Reply-To: <20011201010521.41889.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u9k9n+7b8n@eGroups.com>


Ardhrianna <ardhrianna at y...> wrote:
> My apologies if this has already been discussed, but
> it's BUGGED ME both times I've seen the movie.
> 
> Okay, Hermoine says that Nicholas Flamel is "Immortal"
> so he *can't die*.  Her exact words, I believe, to
> Ron.  So that makes me think that Nicholas will live
> forever, with or without the Elixer from the
> Philosopher/Sorceror's Stone.

Why do you assume with or without the Elixer? 

> 
> So why, at the end of the movie, does Harry ask
> Dumbledore if Nicholas and his wife are going to die
> now that they no longer have the Elixer?  What
> happened to them being Immortal?
> 
> Or am I watching far too much "Highlander:  The
> Series" here?

LOL.. Well, my take is pretty simple. Flamel is immortal,
not an Immortal btw, as long as he continues to take the
Elixer. Once he stops, so do the effects.

-Monique



> 
> 
> Colleen
> 
> =====
> So never mind the darkness
> We still can find a way
> 'Cause nothin' lasts forever
> Even cold November rain
> --"November Rain," Guns N Roses
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
> http://shopping.yahoo.com




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 04:56:43 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 04:56:43 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u9nub+s0c2@eGroups.com>

I kinda liked Snape, in a perverse way. Maybe it's just because I 
like the actor (Alan Rickman). I don't think Snape is the proverbial 
mean-professor-with-a-heart-of-gold, but he WAS performing a 
countercurse on Harry's broom. 

Nancy




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 05:02:45 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 05:02:45 -0000
Subject: HP swears
In-Reply-To: <015401c179d5$ae08ece0$53af1e3e@stephen>
Message-ID: <9u9o9l+a1tf@eGroups.com>

Thanks, Lucy! 
I didn't realize that "bloody" is a mild swear word. I went to a 
catholic school for three years, and I can guarantee nothing 
but "yes, Sister" and "no, Sister" would ever have crossed our lips. 
Were I confronted by McGonagall, I'd never, ever, curse in front of 
her. But that's just me, not wishing to rock the boat or say rosaries 
three times a day. (And I'm a protestant, too!)
"Fixin' to" isn't really rude, per se, but is often interpreted by 
non-Texans as common or uneducated speech (in my experience). But 
it's just a phrase. 

Nancy




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 05:11:03 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 05:11:03 -0000
Subject: Ass
In-Reply-To: <1007151945@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <9u9op7+ulhf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., bert.coules at f... wrote:
> Sara wrote...
"Ass" is a pretty mild swear word. When the FCC (Federal 
Communications Commission--they oversee everything that goes out over 
the airwaves such as TV and radio) began censoring, they used the 
famous "Seven dirty words". "Tits", interestingly, was one of those 
words, while "Ass" was not. Now the "seven dirty words" standard is 
no longer used; things are looked at more in context, and between 10 
pm and 6 am we have "safe harbor"; you can play just about anything 
you want, with a proper disclaimer. 
I'm a disc jockey and had to learn all of this before I was allowed 
to go on the air. For a party trick, I can say all of the seven dirty 
words, forward and backward. With enough beer in me. <G>

Nancy




From chappnee at hotmail.com  Sat Dec  1 05:14:29 2001
From: chappnee at hotmail.com (~ chappnee ~)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 22:14:29 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused
Message-ID: <F2274gVvpQN1RmpS31b00015133@hotmail.com>


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dawncad1 at y... wrote:
So if "a--" isn't "ass" (or "arse") what the bloody hell is it?

Incidentally, I'm hoping to see the film tomorrow, so at last I
might actually know what some of these discussions are really about...
Bert

I'm pretty sure Malfoy said "a-s-s". After seeing the movie the
first time, I was discussing this with my friend. We were both surprised
that a child was allowed to say it in a PG movie. In US television,
saing a-s-s is no longer censored, I don't know if this is the case
for other countries, but I was still shocked to hear a child say it
in a children's film.

OK. Here's how I understand this. Malfoy says "arse" in the film at
some point [which I don't remember after 2 viewings, probably
because I was so exercised about Ron saying "bloody brilliant" to
McGonagall]. How do I know he says "arse"? because the word
"ass" in British English, as far as I know,  means donkey, and I
can' t think of a situation where Malfoy would reference such a creature.

However, what a lot of Americans don't know is that the "r" in arse
is silent. So yes, the words "arse" and "ass" sound the same.  Sort of.

In fact, I learned when I worked in London that when English-speakers
[as opposed to American-speakers] want to indicate what we
Americans call an "ah" sound, they write "ar". Yes it's true. Think about
the singer Sade, who for years over here in the US was called "ShaRday"
because that's what her  British publicists put out as the pronunciation,
meaning of course "Sha-day".

Getting back to the a-word, like "bloody brilliant" I don't remember
"arse" in the book. Maybe Steve Kloves thought they needed to
modernise things a bit.

Ivis the elderly

Well, thank-you for clearing that up for me.  Maybe, because I live in 
Canada and got to see the British version, Malfoy might have pronounce 
'arse' like 'ass'.  While in America, Malfoy might have pronounced 'arse' 
with the 'r' in it's version.  I'm assuming I got to see the British version 
because it was titled "Philosopher's Stone".  I'd like to point out that 
Canadians, well most, say the word 'arse' with the 'r' too.  It isn't just 
the Americans.  I know I'm being a little too touchy about that, it is just 
that I was angered in an earlier discussion about Canada being ignored and 
I'm feeling a little, oh, what's the word, territorial?  Anyway, I didn't 
mean to offend anyone by it.

-Jenn

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 05:20:56 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 05:20:56 -0000
Subject: Canada HP fans
In-Reply-To: <F2274gVvpQN1RmpS31b00015133@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u9pbo+aviu@eGroups.com>

Jenn, don't feel left out. After we were attacked Sept. 11 (Osama bin 
Ladin is a known consort of Voldemort) I got the most beautiful 
message from a Canadian, saying how sorry they were for what 
happened. In today's Dallas Morning News, there is the nicest letter 
from a Canadian expressing the same sentiment, and asking what they 
can do to help. (As a Texan, I'd love for you to send me a White 
Christmas!)
Other than the title, how is the British version of the film 
different? 

Nancy




From ardhrianna at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 07:08:59 2001
From: ardhrianna at yahoo.com (ardhrianna at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 07:08:59 -0000
Subject: Question about the meaning of the word "Immortal"
In-Reply-To: <9u9k9n+7b8n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u9vmb+r76d@eGroups.com>

*SNIP*

> > (Moi:) So that makes me think that Nicholas will live
> > forever, with or without the Elixer from the
> > Philosopher/Sorceror's Stone.
> 
> (Monique:) Why do you assume with or without the Elixer? 
> 

I said "with or without the elixer" because he's already taken it 
once, so why should he have to take it again if he's Immortal and 
can't die?

O-kay.  FAR too much of Duncan and co.  :)  It's just bugging me.  
Thanks for replying!


C




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 09:59:05 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 04:59:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Versions (was RE:mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused)
Message-ID: <b9.17a829e3.293a03e9@aol.com>

In a message dated 01/12/2001 05:15:34 GMT Standard Time, 
chappnee at hotmail.com writes:
<< Well, thank-you for clearing that up for me.  Maybe, because I live in 
 Canada and got to see the British version, Malfoy might have pronounce 
 'arse' like 'ass'.  While in America, Malfoy might have pronounced 'arse' 
 with the 'r' in it's version.  I'm assuming I got to see the British version 
 because it was titled "Philosopher's Stone".  I'd like to point out that 
 Canadians, well most, say the word 'arse' with the 'r' too.  It isn't just 
 the Americans.  
 -Jenn >>


I'm in Britian and Malfoy says arse the way we would say arse over here. That 
is "Arse", and it sounds like how it's written. So if you get the british 
version in canada, that's what you would have heard. 
So now I'm confused, cos do you mean that in America they say arse as, 
well... arse? Because I always thought they said it ass, like the donkey, but 
not meaning the donkey. I don't think I've ever heard an American say arse.
Also, something I missed last time, Arse & Ass don't sound the same. Arse has 
an r in it and you hear the r. Ass doesn't so sounds like A-ss, as opposed to 
Ahr-se

If anyone still thinks they missed it, Tom Felton's speech is quite quick, 
and it's not like he puts great emphasis on the r. Bit it is there, and so he 
doesn't ever say it the way an American would say it, as I've heard it from 
US films/TV shows/people...

Sara




From prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Dec  1 11:09:55 2001
From: prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk (prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 11:09:55 -0000
Subject: Ludo Bagman, and our new casting game
In-Reply-To: <20011130.170314.-609613.1.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9uadq3+j8fh@eGroups.com>

> >I love Stephen Fry, but what position did Ludo Bagman play?  Fry 
is a 
> >BIG fellow, he wouldn't look too plausible as a Seeker, though I 
could 
> >see him as a Beater.

I can't believe this didn't occur to me - he's just how I pictured 
Bagman!

> Someone requested that we find a role for Helena Bonham Carter in 
one of
> the future movies.  How about casting her as Madam Rosmerta, 
landlady of
> the Three Broomsticks?  PoA describes her as a pretty woman.

Nope, I think I'm with whoever it was who suggested Kate Winslet on 
this one.

> As for Sirius Black -- how about the noteworthy Jeremy Irons?  [He 
was
> the voice of Scar in "The Lion King."]

I'm not really sure about this one. Then again, I don't think I'll 
ever be entirely with anyone as Sirius, because I've always imagined 
him looking exactly like a friend of mine. Actually he's rehearsing 
the part of the Phantom in Phantom of the Opera in an amatuar 
production and he can be *very* scary sometimes. <bg> he's definitely 
right.

> Can anybody think of a way we can get Sean Connery into these 
films?  =D 
> I'm not holding out much hope, but he's always fun to look at...

Mad Eye Moody. Definitely.

Kim




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 13:32:34 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 13:32:34 -0000
Subject: Question about the meaning of the word "Immortal"
In-Reply-To: <20011201010521.41889.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9uam5i+7c7l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Ardhrianna <ardhrianna at y...> wrote:
> Okay, Hermoine says that Nicholas Flamel is "Immortal"
> so he *can't die*. . . . > 
> So why, at the end of the movie, does Harry ask
> Dumbledore if Nicholas and his wife are going to die
> now that they no longer have the Elixer?  What
> happened to them being Immortal?

Seems to me that the problem is that Hermione's been reading classical 
literature, rather than Rowling!  Yes, traditionally the Philosopher's Stone 
could confer immortality, not just the deferment of death that Rowling's 
Flamel has achieved.  Perhaps his philosopher's stone is somewhat 
substandard, producing only a temporary reprieve from mortality?




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 13:48:48 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 13:48:48 -0000
Subject: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uan40+av1d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Hollydaze" <hollydaze at b...> wrote:
> Sissy Wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > However, he is only 30 years old. He 
> > would be painfully young on the screen compared with Mr.Rickman's 
> > Snape while they are supposed to be around same age. I don't 
think 
> > even the make-up people can cover the 20 year age difference.
> 
> But you have to remember that Rickman is a 55 year old playing a 
(in 
> the first film) 32/33 year old so by the 3rd film he (Snape/ Lupin) 
> will be a 34/35 year old, and it is not that impossible to make 
Ewan 
> look between 5 and 3 years older (than he will be during the 
filming 
> of number 3).
> 
> HOLLYDAZE!!!

 They don't really appear to be worrying too much about making sure 
the physical appearances match. It's possible to argue that, although 
it was never stated as such in the books, Snape's time as a Death 
Eater and his implied subjectivity to Crucio has caused him to appear 
older.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 13:53:55 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 13:53:55 -0000
Subject: Ludo Bagman, and our new casting game
In-Reply-To: <20011129.221441.-587369.1.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9uandj+77mp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Laura Klotz <laurakay76 at j...> wrote:
> 
> As for Sirius Black -- how about the noteworthy Jeremy Irons?  [He 
was
> the voice of Scar in "The Lion King."]  He might also be good as 
Fudge,
> come to think of it.  Or maybe Barty Crouch, Sr.
> 
> Can anybody think of a way we can get Sean Connery into these 
films?  =D 
> I'm not holding out much hope, but he's always fun to look at...
> 
> ~Laura K.


 I'm holding out for Voldemort here. As I pointed out before, 
Voldemort is essentially the same sort of role as What's-his-face-the-
Evil-Wizard from DUNGEONS & DRAGONS (a film which I am mercifully 
blotting from my Pensieve), and karma owes Irons a *big, big* favor 
for arsing up that dog.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 13:57:02 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 13:57:02 -0000
Subject: Blond Malfoy (was RE: HP swears)
In-Reply-To: <91.14461fe4.29393d4d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9uanje+rima@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., SALeathem at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 30/11/2001 04:04:26 GMT Standard Time, 
> nancyaw2001 at y... writes:
> 
> << Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised 
to see 
>  a blond. >>
> 
> It's stated in the books that Malfoy is a blond. All of the 
Malfoy's are 
> blond in fact, and Lucius has greased back hair, much like his son. 
I work 
> with someone who I think would be perfect for Lucius in every way 
but one. 
> He's too young. Oh well...
> 
> Apparently they died Tom Felton's hair though. But I thought it 
looked 
> natural. Is he really blond in real life and they just made it even 
lighter, 
> or does he normally have darker hair? He had blond spiky hair when 
he was on 
> Blue Peter at Halloween.
> 
> Sara

 Oh, wow, Blue Peter! I worked support when they did their shoot at 
Universal Studios Florida - at Islands of Adventure, as I recall.

Uhm, I have nothing to contribute; it just tickled me to see the 
title come up in conversation. 

:: backs away sheepishly::




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 14:32:40 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (Zarleycat at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:32:40 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's Gift and Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uapm9+j1q9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Hollydaze" <hollydaze at b...> wrote:
> Sissy Wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > However, he is only 30 years old. He 
> > would be painfully young on the screen compared with Mr.Rickman's 
> > Snape while they are supposed to be around same age. I don't 
think 
> > even the make-up people can cover the 20 year age difference.
> 
> But you have to remember that Rickman is a 55 year old playing a 
(in 
> the first film) 32/33 year old so by the 3rd film he (Snape/ Lupin) 
> will be a 34/35 year old, and it is not that impossible to make 
Ewan 
> look between 5 and 3 years older (than he will be during the 
filming 
> of number 3).

I'm with Sissy on this one.  One of my main problems with the movie 
Snape is that he already looks like he's mid-forties at the 
youngest.  Given that canon-age has been thrown out the window, I 
don't think that actors of Ewan's age bracket can cut it as Lupin or 
Black.  I think what WB will do is cast 40+-year-olds to make sure 
all three look about the same age. 

On to the next subject - the book of photographs Hagrid gives Harry 
at the train station.  Hagrid gives Harry the book, Harry sees the 
picture of him with his parents and gives Hagrid a hug.  We know 
Harry is moved by this gesture, and we can see in Hagrid's face that 
he really cares about Harry.  And this is fine as a way of further 
establishing the relationship between Harry and Hagrid. The person I 
saw the film with, who hasn't read the books, thought it was just one 
photo in a somewhat elaborate frame.  She wondered what the 
relationship between Hagrid and Harry's parents was like, since 
Hagrid must have had this picture sitting in his house and only now 
was giving it to Harry.

So, I explained to her that the book version had Hagrid asking old 
friends of James and Lily to send pictures to him, and that he was 
really giving Harry a photo album.  We both feel that the book 
version is more moving in that it shows Hagrid thoughtfully going out 
of his way to try to give Harry some sort of tangible connection to 
his parents.  

Oh, well, I guess this just illustrates the problem of going from one 
medium to another - we all have pictures and preferences in our heads 
and no one will ever be able to replicate what's in our own 
individual imaginations.  There's no telling what will make us cranky 
about what is left in or out or how it looks right or wrong.  I'm 
already cranky about the character of Arwen riding a horse and waving 
a sword in the upcoming "Lord of the Rings."  

Marianne



  






From hermione_heidi at hotmail.com  Sat Dec  1 14:49:37 2001
From: hermione_heidi at hotmail.com (Heidi Henshaw)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 10:49:37 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Canada HP fans
Message-ID: <F160LfbGnk3FthArLMC000115cd@hotmail.com>

Nancy wrote
>Other than the title, how is the British version of the film
>different?
>
>
Nancy,
  The only real difference between the movies it that in every scene that 
the Sorcers's (I know that is spelled wrong and I am apologising in advance) 
Stone replace it with the Phiolsoper's Stone and you've got it. About 
Canadian Hp fans, as a Canadian myself I know that I was touched my the 
attack on the US, giving help and being nice is something that Canada is 
sterotyped for. I think if we had to be known for soemthing that is a pretty 
good sterotype to have
   Sincerely
Heidi H

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From dawncad1 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 14:49:53 2001
From: dawncad1 at yahoo.com (dawncad1 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:49:53 -0000
Subject: Versions (was RE:mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused)
In-Reply-To: <b9.17a829e3.293a03e9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9uaqmh+u2bs@eGroups.com>


Because I always thought they said it ass, like the donkey, but 
> not meaning the donkey. I don't think I've ever heard an American 
say arse.
> Also, something I missed last time, Arse & Ass don't sound the 
same. Arse has 
> an r in it and you hear the r. Ass doesn't so sounds like A-ss, as 
opposed to 
> Ahr-se
> 
> Sara

Sara, I think you are right. 
I'm in the US and we never say "arse". We say "ass" as in a donkey 
(rarely used), a stupid person, or someone's hindquarters. I thought 
Felton said "ass", (but I may be wrong)and I was surprised because I 
rarely hear children say "ass" in a movie. It's more likely that a 
teenager or adult would say it.




From changeling707 at lycos.de  Sat Dec  1 16:24:45 2001
From: changeling707 at lycos.de (Christina Gross)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:24:45 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>
References: <9u662m+njr0@eGroups.com> <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <s9sh0usbeklsm03gippin046b88vijnd2o@4ax.com>

On Fri, 30 Nov 2001 23:19:55 -0000, "Hollydaze"
<hollydaze at btinternet.com> wrote:

>But you have to remember that Rickman is a 55 year old playing a (in 
>the first film) 32/33 year old so by the 3rd film he (Snape/ Lupin) 
>will be a 34/35 year old, and it is not that impossible to make Ewan 
>look between 5 and 3 years older (than he will be during the filming 
>of number 3).
>
>HOLLYDAZE!!!
>
Much as I love Alan Rickman, he was by no stretch of imagination 33 in
the movie and they will never make me believe that he and Ewan
McGregor were in the same year at Hogwarts (or not really them, well,
you know what I mean). But there's the horrible suspicion creeping up
at me that the reference to the roots of Snape's hatred for Harry and
James was left out on purpose in the PS/SS movie because they are
going to change that part of the story to allow for the age
difference, if McGregor really were to play Lupin. 
Would Ms. Rowling agree to that?

Christina, fearing the worst

We interrupt this program to annoy you and
make things generally irritating
                            --- Monty Python

Check out our book and movie reviews:
http://sites.inka.de/darwin



From teeravec at fas.harvard.edu  Sat Dec  1 17:05:31 2001
From: teeravec at fas.harvard.edu (Samaporn Teeravechyan)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:05:31 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] switching character parts (was Hagrid's Gift and
  Ewan as Lupin)
In-Reply-To: <9uapm9+j1q9@eGroups.com>
References: <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.20011201120531.009ef5ec@pop.fas.harvard.edu>

At 02:32 PM 12/1/01 -0000, you wrote:

<<
Oh, well, I guess this just illustrates the problem of going from one 
medium to another - we all have pictures and preferences in our heads 
and no one will ever be able to replicate what's in our own 
individual imaginations.  There's no telling what will make us cranky 
about what is left in or out or how it looks right or wrong. I'm already
cranky about the character of Arwen riding a horse and waving a sword in
the upcoming "Lord of the Rings."  
>>

Okay, I can't resist following up on that LoTR movie comment =P. I promise
an in-topic discussion will follow.

Very mild 'Lord of the Rings' book SPOILER
*
*
*
*
Actually, I was thinking about that too. My impression is that they
replaced Glorfindel with Arwen, so that they don't have to introduce yet
another character who will have no role later. That's sort of okay with me
-I always felt cheated by the lack of Arwen's character development.
*
*
*
*
END OF SPOILER


As you say, that's the difficulty in making movies based on books.
Actually, I wish the Harry Potter movie did more of that. Sure, they
changed the dialogues around and let Harry or Ron deliver them instead of
other nonessential characters. But, as most people noted before, the movie
is still trying too hard to be faithful to the book. 

Personally however, I am rather optimistic on that part. My feeling is
that, for the first movie, they were working to capture all the sights and
imagery of the books, at some expense of continuity and flow. Having
established that and satisfied the fans' hunger to see a visual depiction
of Hogwarts and the Quidditch game and Diagon Alley, later movies will be
able to focus more on the storyline. Or so I hope.



Samaporn





From sherratt at mediaone.net  Sat Dec  1 17:36:11 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:36:11 -0000
Subject: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <s9sh0usbeklsm03gippin046b88vijnd2o@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <9ub4eb+5onj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Christina Gross <changeling707 at l...> wrote:
> Much as I love Alan Rickman, he was by no stretch of imagination 33 
in
> the movie and they will never make me believe that he and Ewan
> McGregor were in the same year at Hogwarts (or not really them, 
well,
> you know what I mean). But there's the horrible suspicion creeping 
up
> at me that the reference to the roots of Snape's hatred for Harry 
and
> James was left out on purpose in the PS/SS movie because they are
> going to change that part of the story to allow for the age
> difference, if McGregor really were to play Lupin. 
> Would Ms. Rowling agree to that?

I know JKR wanted Alan Rickman for the part of Snape, but I can't 
believe she would have gone along with that degree of rewriting just 
to get him.  This whole story is built on people's connections with 
each other - Snape, James, Lupin, Black, Pettigrew - you can't take 
Snape out of the equation without really messing up the plot.  I think 
a better way of doing it would be to be rather vague about the age of 
Harry's parents.  In the book they're very young when they die, but is 
that strictly necessary?  Why not make them 28 or so when Harry is 
born; that would make Snape about 40 when Harry gets to Hogwarts, and 
older actors could be cast for the other characters who are his 
contemporaries.  So Voldemort had a few more years to tyrannize over 
the wizard world, Snape was a Deatheater for a bit longer - I don't 
see that that matters all that much.  It isn't necessary to explain 
what James, Lily and the others were doing for the extra intervening 
years; we'll just assume that life was going on as usual.  

Wanda





From Nmhitz630 at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 18:13:20 2001
From: Nmhitz630 at aol.com (Nmhitz630 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:13:20 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Blond Malfoy (was RE: HP swears)
Message-ID: <a2.1d6eafd1.293a77c0@aol.com>

I'm sure its dyed blond because I remember Tom Felton from previous works and 
it was medium/light brown. And I have an eye for telling if someone has dyed 
their hair (skin tone/eye color always gives it away)

And if you look closely you can tell they dyed the roots at least twice 
because usually natural roots are darker but Tom's roots are platinum blond 
whereas the rest of his hair is a few shades darker blond. 

Overall I found the hairstyling for the students in the film to be rather 
mediocre. I mean, look at Hermione's hair! It's obvious they used different 
methods each scene to make it unruly! Sometimes its straight but extremely 
teased, sometimes they used a crimping iron, sometimes they made it wavy! 
They need to be consistant!!!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 19:38:04 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 19:38:04 -0000
Subject: Rumor: Cho Chang casted
Message-ID: <9ubbis+urg3@eGroups.com>

I didn't find anybody report this, maybe most people here already 
knew. Anyway, here it goes:
>From Mugglenet:

"Cho Chang will be played by fourteen year old actress Sarah Lee. 
Sarah lives in Sussex and is currently attending Hastings Stage 
Studio, a dancing school in Sussex. She lives with her English 
parents, but her grandparents were Chinese which made her perfect for 
the part."

How could somebody has "English parents" but "Chinese grandparents"?  
Does this mean her parents are U.K. Citizen but her grandparents are 
not? Or one of her parents is white? Or she was adopted? It's really 
confusing.

Anyway, she is 2 year older than Dan. This shouldn't be a big problem 
but Cho is kind of short. Hope Dan will be tall enough when the 3rd 
movie filming begins. Wish she is good looking too. I don't want a 
mini-Lucy Liu (no offense to Ms. Liu.I just don't think she is pretty)




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 19:45:41 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 19:45:41 -0000
Subject: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9ub4eb+5onj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubc15+kuer@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Wanda Sherratt" <sherratt at m...> wrote:

> I know JKR wanted Alan Rickman for the part of Snape, but I can't 
> believe she would have gone along with that degree of rewriting 
just 
> to get him.  This whole story is built on people's connections with 
> each other - Snape, James, Lupin, Black, Pettigrew - you can't take 
> Snape out of the equation without really messing up the plot.  I 
think 
> a better way of doing it would be to be rather vague about the age 
of 
> Harry's parents.  In the book they're very young when they die, but 
is 
> that strictly necessary?  Why not make them 28 or so when Harry is 
> born; that would make Snape about 40 when Harry gets to Hogwarts, 
and 
> older actors could be cast for the other characters who are his 
> contemporaries.  So Voldemort had a few more years to tyrannize 
over 
> the wizard world, Snape was a Deatheater for a bit longer - I don't 
> see that that matters all that much.  
Great idea Wonda. That explains why in the movie James looks so old, 
but if this is what they are doing, casting Ewan as Lupin is even 
more impossible. maybe the rumor is false after all.




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 20:02:38 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (ktchong73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 20:02:38 -0000
Subject: Rumor: Cho Chang casted
In-Reply-To: <9ubbis+urg3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubd0u+91bg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hunao01 at y... wrote:
> "Cho Chang will be played by fourteen year old actress Sarah Lee. 
> Sarah... She lives with her English parents, but her grandparents
> were Chinese which made her perfect for the part."

> How could somebody has "English parents" but "Chinese
> grandparents"?  

She's adopted.  Interracial (and probably international) child 
adoption.

> Wish she is good looking too. I don't want a mini-Lucy Liu (no
> offense to Ms. Liu.I just don't think she is pretty)

I'm Chinese, and I don't think Lucy Liu is even remotely pretty.




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Sat Dec  1 20:32:08 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 20:32:08 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe's birthday?
Message-ID: <9ubeo8+ev9i@eGroups.com>

Like many of you, I heard that DR's birthday was July 31, and that was 
posted on www.imdb.com for awhile, along with a "trivia note" pointing 
out what a coincidence this was.

IMDB now says July 23, though the outdated trivia note is still there. 
 Does anyone have good support for the July 31 rumor, or was it just 
someone generating a good story?

Amy Z





From srae at mindspring.com  Sat Dec  1 20:59:26 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:59:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9ubc15+kuer@eGroups.com>
References: <9ub4eb+5onj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011201155926.00aaa368@pop.mindspring.com>


>Great idea Wonda. That explains why in the movie James looks so old, 
>but if this is what they are doing, casting Ewan as Lupin is even 
>more impossible. maybe the rumor is false after all.

I don't really see what the fuss is about.  Doesn't anyone know anyone who
looks 20 years older than they really are? I know quite a few.  And
considering the...interesting...life that Snape has apparently led, it
wouldn't surprise me in the least if he looked older than he is.  I suppose
I could be just rationalizing since I do love Ewan McGregor so, but it
doesn't seem like such a terrible stretch to me.

Shannon





From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 21:50:30 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 21:50:30 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <F160LfbGnk3FthArLMC000115cd@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9ubjb6+34b2@eGroups.com>

Remind me to visit Canada one of these days! Especially as it's 75 
degrees here in Texas and I want snow! I've also always wanted to 
visit the UK as well. So much history!
Why did they change the title of the book/movie? In the US, a 
philosopher is some guy dressed all in black, carrying a book by 
Kierkegaard, wondering whether or not there is a God. (I majored in 
anthropology and had to take a class called the Philosophy of Social 
Science--don't ask!). 

Nancy aka Clueless in College Station 




From valjean131 at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 22:14:53 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:14:53 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubjb6+34b2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubkot+chj8@eGroups.com>


nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> Why did they change the title of the book/movie? In the US, a 
> philosopher is some guy dressed all in black, carrying a book by 
> Kierkegaard, wondering whether or not there is a God. (I majored in 
> anthropology and had to take a class called the Philosophy of 
>Social Science--don't ask!). 

It's my understanding that the title was changed to avoid this very 
misconception.

The Philospher's Stone is a legendary substance that alchemists and 
others have sought for ages. JKR didn't make it up. Here's a brief 
excerpt from an encyclopedia...

"The stone, also referred to as the "tincture," or the "powder" 
(Greek xerion, which passed through Latin into Arabic as elixir), was 
allied to an elixir of life, believed by alchemists to be a liquid 
derived from it. Inasmuch as alchemy was concerned not only with the 
search for a method of upgrading less valuable metals but also of 
perfecting the human soul, the philosopher's stone was thought to 
cure illnesses, prolong life, and bring about spiritual 
revitalization. The philosopher's stone, described variously, was 
sometimes said to be a common substance, found everywhere but 
unrecognized and unappreciated." (Encyc. Brit., 15th ed., 1976)

-Monique







From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 22:23:00 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:23:00 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubkot+chj8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubl84+kqi1@eGroups.com>


Gee. And to think I thought I'd gotten a good education! <G> I don't 
know of any object called the "sorcerer's stone". Nor had I ever 
heard of the Philosopher's Stone. Just thought it came from the 
windmills of JKR's mind (very impressive windmills, they are!). The 
fact that it's already a legend makes the story, to me, that much 
more believeable. She mixes lots of already existing legend into the 
books, and it spills into the movie. Wish they'd done a bit more 
explaining about how Hagrid wrote to all Lily and James's friends and 
gathered the pictures together for Harry. 

Nancy (who is finding it hard to type with a cat in her lap!)












































From valjean131 at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 22:31:13 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:31:13 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubl84+kqi1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ublnh+7025@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> 
> Gee. And to think I thought I'd gotten a good education! <G> I 
>don't know of any object called the "sorcerer's stone". Nor had I 
>ever heard of the Philosopher's Stone. 

LOL. You're not alone. 

I don't think there is anything called "The Sorcerer's Stone".
I'm assuming the title change was made so that American's, who
didn't know the legend of the Philosopher's Stone, wouldn't
be confused as to what philosophy had to with the thing at all. ;-)

It was easiest to call it a sorcerer's stone, thus implying the
magical qualities, as opposed to the spiritual/philosophical. 
Although, philosophy actually has a great deal to do with it.

Hope that made sense.

-Monique




From laurakay76 at juno.com  Sat Dec  1 22:39:26 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:39:26 -0500
Subject: turbans and Voldemort
Message-ID: <20011201.174619.-580993.1.laurakay76@juno.com>


Nancy wrote:
>(Osama bin Ladin is a known consort of Voldemort) 

That's actually kind of funny, now that I think about it.  I know this
wasn't intended, but it made me think of this -- why DOES Quirrell keep
Voldemort hidden under a turban?  Why not just an ordinary wizarding hat?
 Any ideas?


________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.



From sesyredchoos at aol.com  Sat Dec  1 22:55:02 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:55:02 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daniel Radcliffe's birthday?
Message-ID: <158.501cfad.293ab9c6@aol.com>

Yea, it was probably someone just trying to generate another captivating news 
story  because Daniel Radcliffe, as he said it himself in the Today Show, was 
born on July 23.  Katie Couric even commented that he shares the same 
birthday as her daughter, so there ya go.  I have to admit, though, that the 
thought that he could've had the same birthday as Harry was cool!  It made 
for a good coincidence for a while.  =)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 23:35:47 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:35:47 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ublnh+7025@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubpgj+rrhu@eGroups.com>

Gee, Monique, you're a Ravenclaw if I ever saw one. How'd you get so 
smart? Are you in the UK? 
(and now back to topic...)
Did anyone else think "child abuse" when Dursley grabbed Harry and 
was yelling at him? I mean, they make him sleep under the stairs! If 
not physical abuse, surely it's psychological abuse. It says a lot 
for Harry that he survived that environment with his ability to love 
(and his sanity) intact.





From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  1 23:39:16 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:39:16 -0000
Subject: Q's turban
In-Reply-To: <9ubpgj+rrhu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubpn4+u1pa@eGroups.com>

Here in the US, anyone with a turban is immediately suspect. Is that 
right, to generalize like that? No. But Osama bin Ladin's on 
everyone's mind, and turbans recall bin Ladin. 
My guess is that JKR put Q in a turban because it covers the back of 
the head more completely than a hat does, and it also adds an air of 
the exotic. 
Just a guess. 




From LivBeatles at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 01:57:32 2001
From: LivBeatles at aol.com (LivBeatles at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 01:57:32 -0000
Subject: Tie Answer
Message-ID: <9uc1qc+6rg8@eGroups.com>

I may be wrong, but wasn't someone asking in the past about the color 
of Hogwarts' students' ties in the movie before they are sorted?  I 
don't know if they got their answer already, but I saw the movie 
again today (only my 2nd time) and noticed that they wear black ties 
with the school emblem on them and that their sweaters do not have 
any colored trim on them either.  Once they go up to their rooms they 
see their colored clothing.




From dpitzel at mindspring.com  Sun Dec  2 02:28:29 2001
From: dpitzel at mindspring.com (dpitzel at mindspring.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:28:29 -0000
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
Message-ID: <9uc3kd+6s5r@eGroups.com>



I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but did anyone notice 
that McGonnagal had a quidditch trophy which was dated 1971?  James 
Potter's was dated 1972.  I never thought these characters were 
supposed to be anywhere close to the same age.  Nor did I ever think 
they went to Hogwarts at the same time which the dates on the 
trophies imply. We know Harry was the yougest seeker in a century by 
being a first year quidditch seeker.  If this is the case, the 
earliest James could have been a seeker was in his second year- 
1972.  This would make James' first year 1971, potentially 
McGonnagal's last year at Hogwarts.  

I don't know, maybe I just read the dates wrong, afterall they're 
only shown for a second.

EJ 




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 03:41:04 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara Pratt)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 03:41:04 -0000
Subject: harry's broomstick surfing
In-Reply-To: <9u8j7c+h1d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uc7sg+3i7l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., deely168 at y... wrote:
> I'm just wondering if anyone else thought that Harry's scene where 
> he's 'surfing' his broomstick during the quidditch match was a 
teeny 
> bit cringeworthy? I personally thought it was a bit too much and 
over-
> the-top. Otherwise, the rest of the quidditch scenes were excellent.

The first time I heard about it (I think it was where Dark Mark had a 
list of movie mistakes before it was released) I thought my eyes were 
going to bleed from seeing it.  But I really didn't think it was that 
bad.  I think it would have been a lot worse if it had been a full 
body shot - at least they only showed his feet on the broom then cut 
to his hand reaching out for the snitch.  Somehow made it less 
obvious, either that or I was expecting the worst (ya know, Beach 
Boys music playing in the background, that sort of thing) and didn't 
see what I had envisioned.  I can forgive it.




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sat Dec  1 18:51:01 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 18:51:01 -0000
Subject: The 'A' word confusion and going back to the sheild debate!
In-Reply-To: <9uaqmh+u2bs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ub8ql+aaoj@eGroups.com>

I just managed to see a bootleg US version of the film on DVD and 
checked on what Malfoy actually says. To confirm, he says 'arse' as 
we Brits would say it, not ass! This, as I stated was a US version. I 
also managed to note a couple of extra word changes from UK speak to 
US speak!

Also, going back to the shield debate a while back, I managed to get 
a screen grab of the frame and it defintely says 'James Potter - 
Seeker - 1971'. The other two names in view are M McGonagall and an R 
H King.





From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sat Dec  1 22:34:14 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:34:14 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubjb6+34b2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ublt6+4ot5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> Remind me to visit Canada one of these days! Especially as it's 75 
> degrees here in Texas and I want snow! I've also always wanted to 
> visit the UK as well. So much history!
> Why did they change the title of the book/movie? In the US, a 
> philosopher is some guy dressed all in black, carrying a book by 
> Kierkegaard, wondering whether or not there is a God. (I majored in 
> anthropology and had to take a class called the Philosophy of 
Social 
> Science--don't ask!). 
> 
> Nancy aka Clueless in College Station


Well, according to a newspaper article I read, the title was changed 
because WB were hoping to cash in bigtime due to there being a craze 
in the US...a TCG called "Magic". Apparently there is a Sorcerors 
Stone Card or something and they were hoping the similarity would 
mean big bucks as people would flock to see and and buy the 
merchandise. Will try to find the article if anyone is interested!

John





From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sat Dec  1 22:54:30 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:54:30 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ublnh+7025@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ubn36+tkff@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Monique" <valjean131 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > 
> > Gee. And to think I thought I'd gotten a good education! <G> I 
> >don't know of any object called the "sorcerer's stone". Nor had I 
> >ever heard of the Philosopher's Stone. 
> 

If you go here http://www.crystalinks.com/philosopherstone.html 
you can find out all the info you need. It has also gone by other 
name including Sword in the Stone, Magnum Opus, but I suggest you 
check out the above site as it contains lots of interesting info on 
the subject.

John





From helanne at start.com.au  Sun Dec  2 05:27:07 2001
From: helanne at start.com.au (~Helen ~)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:27:07 +0800
Subject: Hurrah!
Message-ID: <B1514594061@i01sv0649>

Hi guys!

I've been a lurker here since this list started, simply because the
movie wasn't released here until Thursday. I've already seen it twice
(Friday night and yesterday afternoon) and I'd sooo go back and see it
again today, that's how much I loved it. 

My first comment: how ADORABLE are those three kids?!?!?! I can't get
over their cuteness, but it's NOT that bad, sickly sweet cute like in
most "kids" films, they're just plain gorgeous. Ahem, anyway....

I have so many fave bits. The two bits where my cousin and I (who went
with me both times) were practically on the floor in fits of laughter,
and yet no one else laughed at all, was when Snape bursts through the
potions room door and storms to the front of the class, and when the
flying keys all smash into the door after Harry flies through. Did
anyone else find these bits funny, or are my cousin and I just weird?
(Actually, I already know we are).

The cutest bits are any bits with Dan Radcliffe in them, and that's
practially the whole movie, so you get my meaning. We spent the whole
time just whispering to each other, "Aw! Cute!.... Did you see that,
that was sooo cute!.... That's so gorgeous!... etc etc". Emma and
Rupert were very sweet too. One bit I really liked was when Ron's
broom hits him in the face, Harry laughs and Ron says, "Shut up,
Harry!".

Anyway, since you guys have already talked about this kind of stuff, I
won't bore you any more. I just want to say that the movie was
wonderful, it met all my expectations, and I can't wait for the next
one.

Cheers, 
Helen :o)

P.S. Speaking of casting, has anyone here seen "Strictly Ballroom"?
Me, my mum and my cousin think that the perfect guy to play Gilderoy
Lockhart would be the actor who plays Ken Railings in "Strictly". He
cracks me up. Whenever I read Chamber I always picture Lockhart as
that guy.   



__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 05:34:33 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancy woods)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:34:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hurrah!
In-Reply-To: <B1514594061@i01sv0649>
Message-ID: <20011202053433.33582.qmail@web20802.mail.yahoo.com>

One of my favorite bits is also the one where Ron's
broom hits him in the face and you hear him saying
"Shut up, Harry!" That bit does so much to establish
the relationship between the two. 
I saw "Strictly Ballroom" a while ago, but if you're
talking about who I think you are, Helen, I
agree--he'd be great as Lockhart. 

Nancy


--- ~Helen ~ <helanne at start.com.au> wrote:
> Hi guys!
> 
> I've been a lurker here since this list started,
> simply because the
> movie wasn't released here until Thursday. I've
> already seen it twice
> (Friday night and yesterday afternoon) and I'd sooo
> go back and see it
> again today, that's how much I loved it. 
> 
> My first comment: how ADORABLE are those three
> kids?!?!?! I can't get
> over their cuteness, but it's NOT that bad, sickly
> sweet cute like in
> most "kids" films, they're just plain gorgeous.
> Ahem, anyway....
> 
> I have so many fave bits. The two bits where my
> cousin and I (who went
> with me both times) were practically on the floor in
> fits of laughter,
> and yet no one else laughed at all, was when Snape
> bursts through the
> potions room door and storms to the front of the
> class, and when the
> flying keys all smash into the door after Harry
> flies through. Did
> anyone else find these bits funny, or are my cousin
> and I just weird?
> (Actually, I already know we are).
> 
> The cutest bits are any bits with Dan Radcliffe in
> them, and that's
> practially the whole movie, so you get my meaning.
> We spent the whole
> time just whispering to each other, "Aw! Cute!....
> Did you see that,
> that was sooo cute!.... That's so gorgeous!... etc
> etc". Emma and
> Rupert were very sweet too. One bit I really liked
> was when Ron's
> broom hits him in the face, Harry laughs and Ron
> says, "Shut up,
> Harry!".
> 
> Anyway, since you guys have already talked about
> this kind of stuff, I
> won't bore you any more. I just want to say that the
> movie was
> wonderful, it met all my expectations, and I can't
> wait for the next
> one.
> 
> Cheers, 
> Helen :o)
> 
> P.S. Speaking of casting, has anyone here seen
> "Strictly Ballroom"?
> Me, my mum and my cousin think that the perfect guy
> to play Gilderoy
> Lockhart would be the actor who plays Ken Railings
> in "Strictly". He
> cracks me up. Whenever I read Chamber I always
> picture Lockhart as
> that guy.   
> 
> 
> 
>
__________________________________________________________________
> Get your free Australian email account at
> http://www.start.com.au
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From seacoastie at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 06:24:25 2001
From: seacoastie at aol.com (seacoastie at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 01:24:25 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The 'A' word confusion and going back to the sheild debate!
Message-ID: <120.81797b1.293b2319@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/1/2001 7:52:39 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk writes:


> I 
> also managed to note a couple of extra word changes from UK speak to 
> US speak!
> 

Like what? 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From erin9 at paris.com  Sun Dec  2 07:04:05 2001
From: erin9 at paris.com (Missy Lim)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:04:05 +0800
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <20011202070406.24338.qmail@mail.com>

Hello!! I've watched the movie twice and some bits (aside from the Quidditch and the like, of course) stand out... I really liked that the movie incorporated some details that were not in the book and which added to the movie's overall charm... 

1. That sad scene of Harry wishing himself a Happy Birthday at the Hut on the Rock, complete with a "birthday cake" 

2. Harry diligently taking down notes at Snape's class-- adorable... 

3. The Mirror of Erised scene where Lily places her hand on Harry's shoulder... I think Daniel was able to execute this scene exceptionally well... 

4. Oliver's "encouraging" pre-Quidditch game talk with Harry 

5. Dudley jumping on the stairs directly above Harry's cupboard--pure Dudley 

6. The vanishing glass scene with Dudley at the zoo 

7. Snape clapping like a man possessed at the Leaving Feast-- Great job, Alan Rickman 

8. Harry gazing out the window of his dormitory, with Hedwig at his side and a small smile on his face... 

There are probably lots more that I've missed... 
Re Dan playing Harry, I think he did a good job. Of course, sometimes one wishes that he be more animated but there were a lot of scenes where he just shone... In the Mirror of Erised scene, for one, Dan was able to convey all the emotions that I felt when I read the same scene in the book... Great job as well Daniel! 

Missy 


-- 

_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!

http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com





From Zarleycat at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 11:30:46 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (Zarleycat at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 11:30:46 -0000
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <9uc3kd+6s5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ud3d6+3eia@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dpitzel at m... wrote:
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but did anyone 
notice 
> that McGonnagal had a quidditch trophy which was dated 1971?  James 
> Potter's was dated 1972.  I never thought these characters were 
> supposed to be anywhere close to the same age. We know Harry was 
the yougest seeker in a century by 
> being a first year quidditch seeker.  If this is the case, the 
> earliest James could have been a seeker was in his second year- 
> 1972.  This would make James' first year 1971, potentially 
> McGonnagal's last year at Hogwarts.  

I saw it, too, but I thought the abbreviation for the first name was 
an "R."  Which, if I wasn't hallucinating, would not have been our 
favortite Transfiguration professor, but perhaps a child of hers.  
This may be turn out to be a classic example that shows how 
unreliable eyewitnesses can be - we know we saw something, we can 
come to some agreement about what we saw - yes, it was definitely a 
trophy awarded to McGonagall, and then we go off in two different 
directions...

Marianne, who hopes never to be called to a witness stand...




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 14:04:09 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:04:09 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ublnh+7025@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9udccp+7fkd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Monique" <valjean131 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > 
> > Gee. And to think I thought I'd gotten a good education! <G> I 
> >don't know of any object called the "sorcerer's stone". Nor had I 
> >ever heard of the Philosopher's Stone. 
> 
> LOL. You're not alone. 
> 
> I don't think there is anything called "The Sorcerer's Stone".
> I'm assuming the title change was made so that American's, who
> didn't know the legend of the Philosopher's Stone, wouldn't
> be confused as to what philosophy had to with the thing at all. ;-)
> 
> It was easiest to call it a sorcerer's stone, thus implying the
> magical qualities, as opposed to the spiritual/philosophical. 
> Although, philosophy actually has a great deal to do with it.
> 
> Hope that made sense.
> 
> -Monique

 Uhm, I'm an American, and I knew the legend of the Philosopher's 
Stone. Exactly how widespread is common knowledge of the PS in *every 
other country but America*? Nobody else felt the need to change the 
term. It's the one thing that really annoys me about the Scholastic 
editions; it tends to assume Americans are just too stewpidd to 
geddit unless we're spoonfed.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 14:14:23 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:14:23 -0000
Subject: No subject
In-Reply-To: <20011202070406.24338.qmail@mail.com>
Message-ID: <9udcvv+b347@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Missy Lim" <erin9 at p...> wrote:
> 
> 7. Snape clapping like a man possessed at the Leaving Feast-- Great 
job, Alan Rickman 
> 

> 
> Missy 


 Yeh, interesting you mentioned Snape's rather lackluster applause 
during the Leaving Feast. I paid attention to it last night (2nd 
viewing) and noticed that Snape seemed rather underwhelmed. There are 
a variety of *standard* reasons why he would react this way -- 
Slytherin has won the House Cup for the past few years running, so 
it's nothing noteworthy to him; Snape just doesn't seem the type to 
get excited in public in front of the students.  But it also occurred 
to me that Dumbledore might well have warned him in advance what was 
coming, and Snape just had to sit there and go through the motions 
with an internal sigh of resignation. You know -- "well, if you 
insist, Albus."




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 14:17:40 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:17:40 -0000
Subject: switching character parts (was Hagrid's Gift and Ewan as Lupin)
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.20011201120531.009ef5ec@pop.fas.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <9udd64+s5d8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Samaporn Teeravechyan <teeravec at f...> wrote:
> At 02:32 PM 12/1/01 -0000, you wrote:
> 
> <<
> Oh, well, I guess this just illustrates the problem of going from 
one 
> medium to another - we all have pictures and preferences in our 
heads 
> and no one will ever be able to replicate what's in our own 
> individual imaginations.  There's no telling what will make us 
cranky 
> about what is left in or out or how it looks right or wrong. I'm 
already
> cranky about the character of Arwen riding a horse and waving a 
sword in
> the upcoming "Lord of the Rings."  
> >>
> 
> Okay, I can't resist following up on that LoTR movie comment =P. I 
promise
> an in-topic discussion will follow.
> 
> Very mild 'Lord of the Rings' book SPOILER
> *
> *
> *
> *
> Actually, I was thinking about that too. My impression is that they
> replaced Glorfindel with Arwen, so that they don't have to 
introduce yet
> another character who will have no role later. That's sort of okay 
with me
> -I always felt cheated by the lack of Arwen's character development.
> *
> *
> *
> *
> END OF SPOILER
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samaporn

  I'm rather suspecting Arwen may end up getting some of Eowyn's 
schtick as well. Poor Boromir, nobody to settle for him after 
realizing they'll never get the much cooler Aragorn.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 14:21:37 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:21:37 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9udccp+7fkd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9udddh+tk3a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> Nobody else felt the need to change the 
> term. It's the one thing that really annoys me about the Scholastic 
> editions; it tends to assume Americans are just too stewpidd to 
> geddit unless we're spoonfed.

Here's an interview with the Scholastic editor who initiated the title change.  
It's every bit as idiotic and condescending as you'd expect.  I'm appalled to 
think that this guy is making big-time decisions in such an organization.

http://www.hpgalleries.com/c117.htm




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 14:26:38 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 06:26:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sensual bodywork in NYC has nothing to do with movie
In-Reply-To: <200112021026.fB2AQkb02165@pnmweb.com>
Message-ID: <20011202142638.21504.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com>

What has this to do with the HP Movie? Wouldn't this
be very off topic? Should check out with the
moderators.

Wanda
               
--- yahoo35 at male.ru wrote:
> 
>   *** http://www.crazyrussian.com/kamasutraxxx/bdw/
> ***
> 
> Like to feel sensual? 
> I do. This is why I do sensual bodywork, I enjoy it.
> A pretty sexy blond with beautiful body and soft
> touch 
> that I perfected during some 5 years of practice.
> The 
> sweetest sensations that will make your body melt, a
> 
> very relaxing experience!
> Also, this bodywork will make you more attractive to
> 
> women and a better lover. How? It make you more
> sensual, 
> and this is what girls like to begin with. 
> I work with women too, with the same effect: the 
> bodywork will make you very sexy and attractive to 
> every man in the world.
> Me and my partner, we work with couples, with
> similar 
> effect: you will want to pleasure each other like
> never 
> before.
> All sessions are done in my Manhattan office, at 101
> 
> Maiden la #505, 5th floor
> Please call for an appointment first!We do outcalls
> as well.
> Call 212 635 2911 or 347 837 2848
> Rates: $80/single person; $200/couple
> We are open: Monday-Saturday 12noon-9pm 
> No sex services available.
> Anya
>  
> 
>  
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From pennylin at swbell.net  Sun Dec  2 14:49:38 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 08:49:38 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sensual bodywork in NYC has nothing to do with movie
References: <20011202142638.21504.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C0A3F82.6000005@swbell.net>

Wanda Mallett wrote:

> What has this to do with the HP Movie? Wouldn't this
> be very off topic? Should check out with the
> moderators.

The message has been deleted & the poster has been banned.

Penny




From changeling707 at lycos.de  Sun Dec  2 15:15:29 2001
From: changeling707 at lycos.de (Christina Gross)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:15:29 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9ub4eb+5onj@eGroups.com>
References: <s9sh0usbeklsm03gippin046b88vijnd2o@4ax.com> <9ub4eb+5onj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <d9vj0ucvcg9edgtfjeaau692s7i2hgh350@4ax.com>

On Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:36:11 -0000, "Wanda Sherratt"
<sherratt at mediaone.net> wrote:

>I know JKR wanted Alan Rickman for the part of Snape, but I can't 
>believe she would have gone along with that degree of rewriting just 
>to get him.  This whole story is built on people's connections with 
>each other - Snape, James, Lupin, Black, Pettigrew - you can't take 
>Snape out of the equation without really messing up the plot.

I agree. Didn't Rowling say she thought about Alan Rickman while she
was writing and not just when the movie started to take shape and
casting decisions had to be made? Rickman would have been the right
age back then. 

>  I think 
>a better way of doing it would be to be rather vague about the age of 
>Harry's parents.  

I don't have a problem with that. I always pictured Sirius, Lupin,
Snape and Harry's parents, had they lived, in their late thirties or
early forties anyway. I can also pretend that Alan Rickman is actually
ten years younger, unless they cast somebody like Ewan McGregor and
expect me to believe that they are the same age. I like the idea of
Snape looking older because of what he has been through as a Death
Eater and spy, but it doesn't really work as an explanation why he
looks so much older than his former classmates. Sirius had Azkaban to
live with and Lupin's life is a mess because he's a werewolf. 

Best
Christina

We interrupt this program to annoy you and
make things generally irritating
                            --- Monty Python

Check out our book and movie reviews:
http://sites.inka.de/darwin



From kierjcs at hotmail.com  Sun Dec  2 15:45:18 2001
From: kierjcs at hotmail.com (kierjcs at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:45:18 -0000
Subject: lee jordan (was Re: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark)
In-Reply-To: <9rudc4+thrp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9udiae+6nea@eGroups.com>

> >  Lee Jordan looks too much like a girl (that is, they 
might 
> as well=
> >  
> > have just made him a girl)
> > And the point is?  Actually Lee (like Robin) Is both a male and 
> > female name in Britain. So this could be a visualisation thing, 
> > personal preferences or maybe we will see a switch and a serious 
> > content change (But I cant remember without the books if Lee is 
> > refereed to as `He' in canon). 
> 
> 
> Wasn't Lee the boy on the train with the tarantula?  Didn't he have 
> dreadlocks?  So wouldn't he maybe look like a girl?  Not a problem 
> for me.

i also found that lee was too much like a girl.  i saw him in the 
background a few times, and decided it must have been 
angelina...until i saw angelina in the quidditch match.  it was a big 
shock when we saw him doing commentary on the quidditch match, 
because in my opinion, he not only looked like a girl, he *sounded* 
like a girl.  i have a friend who's convinced they did character 
shifting and whoever was on commentary *was* a girl, and lee was 
reduced to background character status.

although i may be being a bit too picky, what with my f/g/l slashy 
background...on the other hand, it'd fit fine if lee was just a girly-
boy...hmm...

massiveroadtrauma.




From sesyredchoos at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 16:24:26 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:24:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hurrah!
Message-ID: <104.d2e6ead.293bafba@aol.com>

Helen wrote:
The two bits where my cousin and I (who went
with me both times) were practically on the floor in fits of laughter,
and yet no one else laughed at all, was when Snape bursts through the
potions room door and storms to the front of the class

All right!  I'm so glad you mentioned that part when Snape stormed into the 
room because I had almost forgotten!  That was a very weird moment for me 
because I was CRACKING UP and no one else, not even my own sister who usually 
shares my humor, cracked a smile.  But it was HILARIOUS!  He just banged the 
door open and...I don't know..it's kinda silly. hehe  But I'm very happy I'm 
not the only one!  It's kinda strange when you think something's funny and 
your ribs are practically breaking under the pressure you're making so the 
sound won't get out because absolutely no one else is finding it 
funny....ahh, next time, I won't care.  I might even throw in a snort or two, 
for effect!  =)

The cutest bits are any bits with Dan Radcliffe in them, and that's
practially the whole movie, so you get my meaning.

ITA, Dan Radcliffe is definitely a cutie patootie.  That last scene when he's 
saying goodbye to Hagrid and he just finishes hugging him was one of my 
favorites because he looks so tiny!  It makes it hard to believe that he just 
finished semi-defeating, yet again, You-Know-Who.  And don't even get me 
started on Rupert!  That look he gave Harry after Hermione popped into her 
compartment in the train was classic!  You could see and feel the chemistry 
between the three.  I hope that in the next movie, though, they spice it up a 
little more with humor.  They can't go wrong there.  =)

Milly V.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec  2 17:37:12 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 17:37:12 -0000
Subject: What one piece of information...
Message-ID: <9udos8+o822@eGroups.com>

would you put in the movie that was left out? I really enjoyed that
list of "positive changes" from book to film--and agreed with all of
them--but there were some changes--things that were left out that I think 
were VITAL.

My first choice was Christmas--I love Christmas, and the scene when
Harry realises he's gotten actual presents for the first time, and his own
Weasley jumper [sweater] was really sweet. It establishes Harry's closeness
to the Weasleys and distance from the Dursleys. Plus, I just liked it. But,
not really vital I suppose.

Then I thought of Dumbledore awarding all those extra points at the
end. As someone in this group pointed out earlier, it really looks unfair
unless you know that the trio [well in the book of course it was different,
but...] have lost Gryffindor all those points, taking them from first to worst 
and in the process earning ostracism from the rest of the house. I'm really 
sorry all that was dropped, it makes Dumbledore's actions in the end look 
completely unfair.

Finally, though, I think it is too bad they have practically every
character bandying about Voldemort's name as if it were no big deal. I don't 
understand this change at all. To me it's really important that we
understand, as Harry learns, exactly how evil Voldemort is. I most especially
missed Harry's speech that begins : "Don't you understand? If Snape gets
hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back!...There won't be any Hogwarts to 
get expelled from!...etc" when he's persuading Hermione and Ron that he's 
got to get the Stone himself. [or am I having an old-timer's moment and he 
_does_ give that speech?...]

So I couldn't really decide on one thing, between more on their
losing all those points for Gryffindor, and Voldie being so--so NOT 
he-who-must-not-be-named.

what do you think?

Ivis the elderly

PS: department of "huh?" changes: why Dark Forest instead of
Forbidden Forest????




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec  2 17:45:22 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 17:45:22 -0000
Subject: The 'A' word confusion and going back to the shield debate!
In-Reply-To: <120.81797b1.293b2319@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9udpbi+etav@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., seacoastie at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 12/1/2001 7:52:39 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
> seeker at h... writes:
> 
> 
> > I 
> > also managed to note a couple of extra word changes from UK speak
to 
> > US speak!
> > 
> 
> Like what? 


I'm guessing here--girls toilet to girls bathroom, for one. If you
are interested, there is a complete [and I do mean COMPLETE] listing of the
differences between the US and the UK books on 

www.hpgalleries.com

in the "Word Galleries" section. It's very interesting if you don't
have access to a British version of the books.

They very cleverly got around the jumper-sweater thing in the film by
not using _either_ word in the Christmas scene. 

I did find it distracting, though, thinking every time they said
"sorcerer's stone" that they'd already filmed it with "philosopher's stone".
Hopefully, Chamber of Secrets with just make do with the UK version! 

Ivis the elderly




From Nmhitz630 at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 17:51:20 2001
From: Nmhitz630 at aol.com (Nmhitz630 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 12:51:20 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Q's turban
Message-ID: <6d.1e643d3d.293bc418@aol.com>

If you think about it, because Voldemort is inside Quirell's head, it makes 
his head large and abnormal and only a turban would cover his entire head and 
mask the size. 

The Osama Bin Laden connection is simply coincidental. Osama Bin Laden was 
out of the public eye while JKR was writing. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 18:38:50 2001
From: newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com (Alexander W. Hertzog)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 12:38:50 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] What one piece of information...
In-Reply-To: <9udos8+o822@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <D4783AF0-E753-11D5-B563-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>

What I miss most is Snape's potion/logic puzzle at the end. I rememeber 
reading the book for the first time and being pleasantly surprised to 
see not one, but two challenges that had nothing to do with the magical 
world, but just brain power (the other being the chess game). I know 
it's a longshot, but knowing how popular the books are, I hope that 
perhaps an interest in mind games is sparked among the throngs of 
children reading these books.
Also, without that logic puzzle, Hermione's bonus points at the very end 
seem much less justified. OK, so they rewrote the devil's snare scene to 
make her keep her cool and remember her herbology lessons, but why not 
keep the movie accurate to the book, especially when the book's version 
was better?

Alex




_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 18:47:31 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 18:47:31 -0000
Subject: lee jordan (was Re: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark)
In-Reply-To: <9udiae+6nea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9udt03+qt9q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., kierjcs at h... wrote:
> > Wasn't Lee the boy on the train with the tarantula?  Didn't he 
have 
> > dreadlocks?  So wouldn't he maybe look like a girl?  Not a 
problem 
> > for me.


The only other problem I had with Lee is that he was far too young.  
He seemed to be about Harry's age instead of Fred and George's.  I 
sure hope he matures a little (especially voice deepening!) in future 
movies!

Meg Rose




From margdean at erols.com  Sun Dec  2 19:40:15 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:40:15 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] What one piece of information...
References: <D4783AF0-E753-11D5-B563-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C0A839F.D3B0302D@erols.com>

"Alexander W. Hertzog" wrote:
> 
> What I miss most is Snape's potion/logic puzzle at the end. I rememeber
> reading the book for the first time and being pleasantly surprised to
> see not one, but two challenges that had nothing to do with the magical
> world, but just brain power (the other being the chess game). I know
> it's a longshot, but knowing how popular the books are, I hope that
> perhaps an interest in mind games is sparked among the throngs of
> children reading these books.
> Also, without that logic puzzle, Hermione's bonus points at the very end
> seem much less justified. OK, so they rewrote the devil's snare scene to
> make her keep her cool and remember her herbology lessons, but why not
> keep the movie accurate to the book, especially when the book's version
> was better?

I suspect it's because it's a scene that works much better in a
book than it would on film.  Visually it would pretty much amount
to Harry and Hermione standing in front of the row of bottles and
talking.  Also, without the verse to refer back to (most people
wouldn't retain it after listening to it read =once=), the viewer
wouldn't really have the opportunity to try to solve the puzzle
along with Hermione, which is part of the fun of the written
version.

Same reason in reverse is, I suspect, why much of Lee Jordan's
commentary is left out of the Quidditch match.  Rowling uses the
device in print to convey information about the game to the
reader in a fun way.  On film, you can SEE the match (boy howdy!)
and don't need the information; in fact the visuals are so
riveting that too much commentary might be perceived as an
unwelcome distraction.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From rainy_lilac at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  2 20:00:44 2001
From: rainy_lilac at yahoo.com (rainy_lilac at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 20:00:44 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Casting rumor
Message-ID: <9ue19c+4cmv@eGroups.com>



Has anyone else heard of Robson Green? I got this info at 
upcomingmovies.com. Not confirmed by any means, but wowie!!

http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/studio/9325/robread.jpg


Suzanne




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Dec  2 20:34:38 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 20:34:38 -0000
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <9uc3kd+6s5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ue38u+6jjr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dpitzel at m... wrote:
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but did anyone 
> notice that McGonnagal had a quidditch trophy which was dated 1971?

I saw the name McGonagall but not the initials or date. Others have 
said M. G. McGonagall 1971. JKR said in an interview that McGonagall 
is 'a spritely 70' and I think it was the same interview that she 
said Snape was 35 or 36 -- Snape was in school at the same time as 
the Marauders, therefore McGonagall is old enough to be James' 
grandmother not classmate. I hope the plaque is a different 
McGonagall.





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Dec  2 20:45:05 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 20:45:05 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubn36+tkff@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ue3sh+ocn6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote:

> It has also gone by other name including Sword in the Stone, Magnum
> Opus,

I thought Sword in the Stone was a reference to smelting iron ore to 
make the steel to make the sword!




From valjean131 at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 20:56:34 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 20:56:34 -0000
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <9ue38u+6jjr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ue4i2+nsrl@eGroups.com>


> > I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but did anyone 
> > notice that McGonnagal had a quidditch trophy which was dated 
>>1971?

> I saw the name McGonagall but not the initials or date. Others have 
> said M. G. McGonagall 1971. JKR said in an interview that 
McGonagall is 'a spritely 70' and I think it was the same interview 
that she said Snape was 35 or 36 -- Snape was in school at the same 
time as the Marauders, therefore McGonagall is old enough to be 
James' grandmother not classmate. I hope the plaque is a different 
McGonagall.>

Okay, here's my BFR (Big Fat Rationalization) for that.

The McGonnagal on the plaque is a relative of our Minerva. A child 
perhaps.  A contemporary of James Potter who was yet another victim 
of the war against Voldemort. 

After all, we know that it was a terrible time. Surely more relatives 
of characters we already know died than simply the Potters. We know 
the Longbottoms were driven mad. Perhaps Minerva lost a child in the 
battle. Maybe other teachers suffered from similar losses.

If we're going with the whole WWII metaphor. Then practically every
Professor and even every wizarding family would have been touched by 
the war. Sort of a magical version of the Blitz.

I think it would be a nice revelation and give Harry some strength at 
a crucial moment. He is not alone in loss. Others who he respects 
have suffered as much and continued on. What other choice is there?

Or maybe I've just seen too many WWII movies. ;-)

-Monique




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec  2 21:14:57 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:14:57 -0000
Subject: No subject
In-Reply-To: <20011202070406.24338.qmail@mail.com>
Message-ID: <9ue5kh+9j43@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Missy Lim" <erin9 at p...> wrote:
>  details that were not in the book and which added to the movie's
overall 
charm... 
> 
> 1. That sad scene of Harry wishing himself a Happy Birthday at the
Hut on the Rock, complete with a "birthday cake" 

Oh yes...completely unexpected & I nearly had the hankies out only
ten minutes into the movie..

> 2. Harry diligently taking down notes at Snape's class--adorable... 

I LOVED that--it was so sweet!
 
> 3. The Mirror of Erised scene where Lily places her hand on Harry's 
shoulder... I think Daniel was able to execute this scene
exceptionally well... 

Agreed, although I'm with those who liked his acting throughout..I
read an interview in which he said the mirror scene was the most
difficult for him, not physically but mentally, which I thought was
pretty mature.

> 4. Oliver's "encouraging" pre-Quidditch game talk with Harry 

Hilarious! The only joke to consistently get a big laugh the three
times I've seen it. I hope there is more humour in Chamber.

 
> 5. Dudley jumping on the stairs directly above Harry's
cupboard--pure Dudley 

another laugh-out-loud moment...

 
> 6. The vanishing glass scene with Dudley at the zoo 

ditto


> 7. Snape clapping like a man possessed at the Leaving Feast-- Great
job, Alan Rickman 

I also found his "grand entrance" into first year potions a hoot!


> 8. Harry gazing out the window of his dormitory, with Hedwig at his
side and a small smile on his face... 

I agree with all of these, they're great--and ADORABLE has pretty
much been my complete vocabulary in regards to these children. I've
been giving myself a headache imagining them as 16-year olds,
though... ;)

I would add to your list--

1. The ending. I quite liked the film's scene with Voldie & Quirrell,
especially Voldemort showing Harry his parents in the mirror again,
and John Williams doing a minory variation on the music from the
first time Harry sees them. I haven't seen either Mummy so the
disintegration didn't  bother me. And Harry doing the only thing he
knows will 
stop Quirrell is completely self-defense. I did always think
Dumbledore's 
showing up in the book was a little deus ex machina. 

2. The infamous "transition" scene [A Change of Season]: As
explicated by Chris Columbus [Harry gives up Erised, dreams of what
can't be, etc.--Hedwig takes off in the freedom of flight]--I don't
think I would have gotten all that out of this scene intellectually,
but the
terrific music makes it work for me, and it's a beautiful scene.
However, I
don't think  it would work at all without the music.

I want to talk about the music but will do so later in a different
thread...

Ivis the elderly

PS: sorry about the weird formatting in this post. I ran it through preview 5 
times, every time it was different, every time I tried to fix it it still didn't work
:(





From eleri at aracnet.com  Sun Dec  2 18:20:17 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:20:17 -0500
Subject: Language
In-Reply-To: <1007293904.542.15076.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011202131629.025f0230@mail.aracnet.com>

I've kinda had the giggles through this whole thread, cause here we are, 
debating 'ass' 'arse' and 'bloody' as bad words, when Wood says 'damn', but 
says it in such a thick Scottish accent (*pause while I wipe up drool*) 
that no one seemed to notice.
Considering some of the stuff I've heard out of other PG movies meant for 
'kids', 'ass/arse' and 'bloody' are pretty mild.

Eleri
Eleri Hamilton
Chronological Grownup
"Honestly woman, and you call yourself our mother!"




From valjean131 at aol.com  Sun Dec  2 23:11:16 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:11:16 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ubpgj+rrhu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uecek+f4bd@eGroups.com>


nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> Gee, Monique, you're a Ravenclaw if I ever saw one. How'd you get 
>so smart? Are you in the UK? 

LOL. I'm American. Born in Texas, raised in Los Angeles. And I'm 
always sorted in Gryffindor. Go figure. ;-)


"Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
>  Uhm, I'm an American, and I knew the legend of the Philosopher's 
> Stone. Exactly how widespread is common knowledge of the PS in 
>*every 
> other country but America*? Nobody else felt the need to change the 
> term. It's the one thing that really annoys me about the Scholastic 
> editions; it tends to assume Americans are just too stewpidd to 
> geddit unless we're spoonfed.

It is frustrating, isn't it? But I'm afraid, more often than not,
we ain't got teached so good.


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> Here's an interview with the Scholastic editor who initiated the 
>title change.  It's every bit as idiotic and condescending as you'd 
>expect.  I'm appalled to think that this guy is making big-time 
>decisions in such an organization.
> 
> http://www.hpgalleries.com/c117.htm

Wow. Uniformative *and* trite. Sigh.

I'd be curious to do a poll here and see how many Americans, and
others for that matter, knew that the Philospher's Stone was an
existing legend. Not to judge who's better educated than whom, just
as a point of curiosity.

-Monique







From sherratt at mediaone.net  Sun Dec  2 23:16:30 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:16:30 -0000
Subject: Q's turban
In-Reply-To: <6d.1e643d3d.293bc418@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9uecoe+9nhq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nmhitz630 at a... wrote:
> If you think about it, because Voldemort is inside Quirell's head, 
it makes 
> his head large and abnormal and only a turban would cover his entire 
head and 
> mask the size. 
> 
> The Osama Bin Laden connection is simply coincidental. Osama Bin 
Laden was 
> out of the public eye while JKR was writing. 

Honestly, I *never* even once thought of Osama bin Laden in connection 
with Quirrel's turban!  I just thought of it as an exotic, eccentric 
detail, and connected it with images of India - magicians, snake 
charmers, etc.  Never once thought of the Middle East.

Wanda





From miredinthemarrow at email.com  Sun Dec  2 23:19:50 2001
From: miredinthemarrow at email.com (miredinthemarrow at email.com)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:19:50 -0000
Subject: lee jordan (was Re: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark)
In-Reply-To: <9udiae+6nea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uecum+s0lc@eGroups.com>


> i also found that lee was too much like a girl.  i saw him in the 
> background a few times, and decided it must have been 
> angelina...until i saw angelina in the quidditch match.  it was a 
big 
> shock when we saw him doing commentary on the quidditch match, 
> because in my opinion, he not only looked like a girl, he *sounded* 
> like a girl.  i have a friend who's convinced they did character 
> shifting and whoever was on commentary *was* a girl, and lee was 
> reduced to background character status.

You can tell your friend that definately WAS Lee, and Lee is played 
by someone named "Luke", so he is definately, without a doubt, a boy 
^_-

shanna




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sun Dec  2 22:30:01 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 22:30:01 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9ue3sh+ocn6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uea19+10f1i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote:
> 
> > It has also gone by other name including Sword in the Stone, 
Magnum
> > Opus,
> 
> I thought Sword in the Stone was a reference to smelting iron ore 
to 
> make the steel to make the sword!



I've been doing some research for a while on the subject and its all 
to do with things, that through time have been given different names. 
As God is known by different names throughout the world and through 
history the same is said of the philosophers stone. Its mostly known 
for its "elixir of life" properties and is also known by other 
names/items like the sword in the stone which was also known to make 
the holder "immortal"

John





From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 00:06:22 2001
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 16:06:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <9ue38u+6jjr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011203000622.33396.qmail@web10907.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at wicca.net> wrote:
> I saw the name McGonagall but not the initials or date. Others have 
> said M. G. McGonagall 1971. JKR said in an interview that McGonagall 
> is 'a spritely 70' and I think it was the same interview that she 
> said Snape was 35 or 36 -- Snape was in school at the same time as 
> the Marauders, therefore McGonagall is old enough to be James' 
> grandmother not classmate. I hope the plaque is a different 
> McGonagall.

My take on the plaque is this - I thought it was very odd that the shield
for James was very large and had his position on it, while the other two
were quite a bit smaller and only had the names.  I thought that possibly
McGonagall and King were faculty sponsors or somesuch, and that could
explain the age problems.


Andrea

=====
"Reality is for people who lack imagination."

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 00:45:51 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:45:51 -0000
Subject: Philosopher's stone v. sorcerer's stone
In-Reply-To: <9uecek+f4bd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uehvv+a7cb@eGroups.com>

Hmmm, I got sorted into Gryffindor, too, tho I would have bet I'd end 
up in Ravenclaw. (just feeling lucky that I wasn't put in Slytherin!)
I wasn't born in Texas, but was raised there (tho I lived in Sherman 
Oaks for a few years and can do a mean Valley Girl).
(and now back to topic)
I are a college graduate and I had never heard of the Philosopher's 
Stone. (and to think I minored in both ancient history and 
literature...sad, sad, sad...)


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Monique" <valjean131 at a...> wrote:
> 
> nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > Gee, Monique, you're a Ravenclaw if I ever saw one. How'd you get 
> >so smart? Are you in the UK? 
> 
> LOL. I'm American. Born in Texas, raised in Los Angeles. And I'm 
> always sorted in Gryffindor. Go figure. ;-)
> 
> 
> "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> >  Uhm, I'm an American, and I knew the legend of the Philosopher's 
> > Stone. Exactly how widespread is common knowledge of the PS in 
> >*every 
> > other country but America*? Nobody else felt the need to change 
the 
> > term. It's the one thing that really annoys me about the 
Scholastic 
> > editions; it tends to assume Americans are just too stewpidd to 
> > geddit unless we're spoonfed.
> 
> It is frustrating, isn't it? But I'm afraid, more often than not,
> we ain't got teached so good.
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> > Here's an interview with the Scholastic editor who initiated the 
> >title change.  It's every bit as idiotic and condescending as 
you'd 
> >expect.  I'm appalled to think that this guy is making big-time 
> >decisions in such an organization.
> > 
> > http://www.hpgalleries.com/c117.htm
> 
> Wow. Uniformative *and* trite. Sigh.
> 
> I'd be curious to do a poll here and see how many Americans, and
> others for that matter, knew that the Philospher's Stone was an
> existing legend. Not to judge who's better educated than whom, just
> as a point of curiosity.
> 
> -Monique




From rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 01:54:55 2001
From: rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com (rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:54:55 -0000
Subject: Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
Message-ID: <9uem1f+ivcm@eGroups.com>


What do you all make of the plunging box office receipts for Harry 
Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States?  I anticipated 
the movie would be making far more at this time than it has.  Box 
office reports for this weekend are indicating bigger drop-offs than 
initially expected. 

I know this does not affect our love for the Harry Potter book series 
or the one movie...but...why do you think this is happening?

Thanks,

RodeoDangerQueen




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Dec  3 01:56:18 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 3 Dec 2001 01:56:18 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1007344578.435.75157.w32@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Philosopher's Stone vs. Sorcer's Stone:  The 
American editor of HP/PS changed the title 
"Philosopher's Stone" to "Sorcerer's Stone" 
because he thought Americans wouldn't 
understand the original term.  Before the HP 
books were published, did you know about the 
(legendary?) Philosopher's Stone, which 
conferred immortality? 

  o I'm an American and I had heard of it. 
  o I'm an American and I had NOT heard of it 
  o I'm not American, and had heard of it 
  o I'm not American, and had NOT heard of it 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From Nmhitz630 at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 01:58:49 2001
From: Nmhitz630 at aol.com (Nmhitz630 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:58:49 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
Message-ID: <d3.2b4e325.293c3659@aol.com>

I honestly think the bulk of everyone saw the movie in the first 2 weeks. I 
have seen it 3 times, once a weekend. Most of the people have probably read 
the book and wanted to see it as soon as possible.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 02:09:19 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:09:19 -0000
Subject: What one piece of information...
In-Reply-To: <9udos8+o822@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uemsf+d1g6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> would you put in the movie that was left out? . . .  
> My first choice was Christmas--I love Christmas, and the scene when
> Harry realises he's gotten actual presents for the first time, and his own
> Weasley jumper [sweater] was really sweet. 

Keep your hopes up!  In the Katie Couric special filmed at the  Hogwarts set, 
Dan Radcliffe showed Katie several props, including his Weasley sweater with 
a big "H" knit into it.  Since the prop was created, perhaps the Christmas scene 
was filmed (beyond the invisibility cloak) and we'll see it on the DVD.  




From valjean131 at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 02:20:00 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:20:00 -0000
Subject: Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
In-Reply-To: <9uem1f+ivcm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uengg+a8o9@eGroups.com>


> 
> What do you all make of the plunging box office receipts for Harry 
> Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States?  I 
>anticipated the movie would be making far more at this time than it 
>has.  Box office reports for this weekend are indicating bigger drop-
>offs than initially expected. 
> 

I think you're over-stating a bit. Granted, the 58% drop-off is
significant and is a sign of vulnerablity, but there are mitigating
factors. 

The Thanksgiving Day weekend is notorious for huge B.O. numbers,
just as the weekend following is notorious for low numbers. So
the drop-off is somewhat expected. It was sharp, however.

That aside, Harry Potter did manage to retain the crown for a
third weekend and is the second fastest film ever (behind only 
Star Wars: The Phantom Menace) to reach the $200 million mark.

Not too shabby really.

Although, I personally expect Lord of the Rings to eclipse Phantom
Menace's record and put Harry in 3rd. We'll find out soon enough.

-Monique




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 02:42:34 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:42:34 -0000
Subject: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <d9vj0ucvcg9edgtfjeaau692s7i2hgh350@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <9ueoqq+gnbs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Christina Gross <changeling707 at l...> wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:36:11 -0000, "Wanda Sherratt"
> <sherratt at m...> wrote:
> 
> >I know JKR wanted Alan Rickman for the part of Snape, but I can't 
> >believe she would have gone along with that degree of rewriting 
just 
> >to get him.  This whole story is built on people's connections 
with 
> >each other - Snape, James, Lupin, Black, Pettigrew - you can't 
take 
> >Snape out of the equation without really messing up the plot.
> 
> I agree. Didn't Rowling say she thought about Alan Rickman while she
> was writing and not just when the movie started to take shape and
> casting decisions had to be made? Rickman would have been the right
> age back then. 
> 
> >  I think 
> >a better way of doing it would be to be rather vague about the age 
of 
> >Harry's parents.  
> 
> I don't have a problem with that. I always pictured Sirius, Lupin,
> Snape and Harry's parents, had they lived, in their late thirties or
> early forties anyway. I can also pretend that Alan Rickman is 
actually
> ten years younger, unless they cast somebody like Ewan McGregor and
> expect me to believe that they are the same age. I like the idea of
> Snape looking older because of what he has been through as a Death
> Eater and spy, but it doesn't really work as an explanation why he
> looks so much older than his former classmates. Sirius had Azkaban 
to
> live with and Lupin's life is a mess because he's a werewolf. 
> 


 Actually, in the books the Marauders Generation are all in their mid-
30's, roughly 35 in POA.  But I noticed last night that while yes, 
Snape looks a leeeeetle bit older than 33 in the movie, the "aged up" 
parents Harry sees in the Mirror look about the same age as Snape; 
they all look roughly late 30's. I don't think there will be all that 
much of a problem if either Christian Bale or Ewen MacGregor 
eventually signs on as Lupin. In any case, it's not horribly 
difficult or expensive to do a makeup which ages an actor about ten 
years or so -- I don't think such a smallish transformation requires 
any latex pieces or the like.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 02:47:27 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:47:27 -0000
Subject: What one piece of information...
In-Reply-To: <D4783AF0-E753-11D5-B563-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9uep3v+tudf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Alexander W. Hertzog <newton_nicodemus at y...> 
wrote:
> What I miss most is Snape's potion/logic puzzle at the end. I 
rememeber 
> reading the book for the first time and being pleasantly surprised 
to 
> see not one, but two challenges that had nothing to do with the 
magical 
> world, but just brain power (the other being the chess game). I 
know 
> it's a longshot, but knowing how popular the books are, I hope that 
> perhaps an interest in mind games is sparked among the throngs of 
> children reading these books.
> Also, without that logic puzzle, Hermione's bonus points at the 
very end 
> seem much less justified. OK, so they rewrote the devil's snare 
scene to 
> make her keep her cool and remember her herbology lessons, but why 
not 
> keep the movie accurate to the book, especially when the book's 
version 
> was better?
> 
> Alex
> 



 Well... logic puzzles just aren't all that visually exciting to 
watch. (Again I'll mention the MAD magazine movie satire, in which 
they restored the potions puzzle and turned it into a hysterical 
piece of product placement schtick involving Diet Coke. It really 
clued the reader in that whoever wrote that satire for MAD is a sick 
puppy who loves the books to distraction. A very affectionate sendup.)




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 02:49:32 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:49:32 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Casting rumor
In-Reply-To: <9ue19c+4cmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uep7s+5eb9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., rainy_lilac at y... wrote:
> 
> 
> Has anyone else heard of Robson Green? I got this info at 
> upcomingmovies.com. Not confirmed by any means, but wowie!!
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/studio/9325/robread.jpg
> 
> 
> Suzanne

 Never heard of him before, but if this is really the front runner 
for Sirius then it bears up the theory that they're making all of the 
Marauders older in the movies than they are/would be in the books.

 What a cute receding hairline this guy has!! Is he swoon-worthy, o 
Britchicks?




From seacoastie at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 03:08:47 2001
From: seacoastie at aol.com (seacoastie at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:08:47 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The 'A' word confusion and going back to the shield deb...
Message-ID: <112.8b0befe.293c46bf@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/2/2001 9:45:47 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
irbohlen at email.unc.edu writes:


One thing I wish they would do with books that turn into movies, to stick 
with what lingo they were written in, at least it is in a lingo that is not 
understood by all (ie: non-english). I am sure if something like Harry 
Potter, for example, that was written in 'british english' would come across 
to Americans without an problems.



From asjuha at hotmail.com  Mon Dec  3 03:34:34 2001
From: asjuha at hotmail.com (Krolik)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 03:34:34 -0000
Subject: Voldemort & Mirror / Going Through Harry
In-Reply-To: <9u1kf4+ki3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uersa+jird@eGroups.com>

They probably had their reasons for having Quirell's face also visible 
while Harry talked to Voldemort. Some possibilities I can think of: a) 
It is interesting to see his facial expressions - what does it feel 
like when you have a scary thing like that talking out of the back of 
your head? b) He had to make sure Harry did not escape - turning his 
back would have given Harry a head start had he decided to run for it. 
The previous scenes with the mirror seemed to suggest that it only 
works when you stand directly in front of it and look at yourself. 
Presumably, it works like a regular mirror otherwise. This is not 
consistent with the book, but probably makes good sense 
cinematographically.

Regarding Voldemort flying through Harry and all the flying 
Voldemort/Quirell does in general (in the forest as well as during the 
final confrontation) I don't think it works as well. What do you guys 
think? What's up with all that levitation? And what exactly was 
Voldemort flying through Harry supposed to mean?


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., kel4 at c... wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> Have really enjoyed reading the posts which I have had the time to 
get 
> through.  I've only seen the movie once, but wanted to point out one 
> detail which bothered me as I watched it.  In the final scene with 
> Quirrell and the stone, I seem to remember that we see Voldemort as 
> reflected in the Mirror of Erised.  Quirrell is facing Harry, and 
thus 
> Harry (and us, the viewers) are seeing Voldemort in the mirror.  
But, 
> knowing how the mirror works, this would not be the case.  Is this 
how 
> others remember it? Why didn't they just have Quirrell put his back 
to 
> Harry?
> 
> Katie




From LivBeatles at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 08:19:14 2001
From: LivBeatles at aol.com (LivBeatles at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 08:19:14 -0000
Subject: Trying to find certain trailer..
Message-ID: <9ufci2+kuq3@eGroups.com>

Hello, I am trying to find a certain HP trailer to download.  It is 
the one where the narrator says that Hogwarts' is a "school just like 
yours."  I downloaded all three trailers from HP Galleries (which 
describes the one I'm looking for as being #3), but two of the three 
downloaded were practically the same!  I'm sorry if this message 
sounds a bit jumbled, but can anyone help?

Cynthia




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 09:08:56 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:08:56 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius Black Casting rumor
Message-ID: <162.4f4988a.293c9b28@aol.com>

In a message dated 03/12/01 02:52:17 GMT Standard Time, 
heathernmoore at yahoo.com writes:


> What a cute receding hairline this guy has!! Is he swoon-worthy, o 
> Britchicks?
> 

Well....Erm, a little old for my liking, but I wouldn't say bad looking!  
He's popular over here though and just recently came number one in a top 10 
tv heart-throb thing on channel 4! lol  There's also a very amusing christmas 
advert involving him in a box, but I shan't go into it on here as it's 
completely OT!

hugs
Rach
xxx

"But the fact is, Harry Potter pisses all over Star Wars!"

'The Face' magazine article 2001


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gryphon at mgd.com.au  Mon Dec  3 10:01:59 2001
From: gryphon at mgd.com.au (Gryphon)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:01:59 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Trying to find certain trailer..
In-Reply-To: <9ufci2+kuq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <NFBBLAAFPLOAJJBKGKIGOEFMCCAA.Gryphon@mgd.com.au>

Not sure of the exact trailer that you?re talking about but give the link
below a try
they pretty much have trailers for everything.

http://www.movie-list.com/

Cheers,

Gryph

-----Original Message-----
From: LivBeatles at aol.com [mailto:LivBeatles at aol.com]
Sent: Monday, 3 December 2001 7:19 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Trying to find certain trailer..

Hello, I am trying to find a certain HP trailer to download.  It is
the one where the narrator says that Hogwarts' is a "school just like
yours."  I downloaded all three trailers from HP Galleries (which
describes the one I'm looking for as being #3), but two of the three
downloaded were practically the same!  I'm sorry if this message
sounds a bit jumbled, but can anyone help?

Cynthia




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=178320.1681224.3270152.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050209
48:HM/A=879172/R=0/*http://www.fastweb.com/ib/yahoo-75f>


________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Mon Dec  3 11:21:08 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 11:21:08 -0000
Subject: good information sources?
Message-ID: <9ufn74+h7f2@eGroups.com>

Well, now that the film has been out for a while...can you think back to all the 
scoops, info, etc. we got over the past year? Was there any source that 
turned out to have consistently accurate info?

I thought of this because I recently got back a Sept. Entertainment Weekly I'd 
loaned to a friend with a cover story on HP. I skimmed it again and noticed 
two pieces of info:

1) " a recent edit clocked in at four hours" -- I guess this is the source of the 
"four-hour director's cut" dream.  Well, nobody wants a 4-hour Harry Potter 
more than I, but think about it--did they really pay John Williams to score 4 
hours of film? And the editor to do a four-hour version? Sadly, I think not. 
However, we may be lucky and get a few unused scenes on the DVD, as on 
the Gladiator DVD.

Just when I got excited about the possibility of the above, I read this:

2) Because Radcliffe didn't have green eyes, "computer animation painted 
them in during postproduction." Well, we all know this didn't happen. 
Although, given the green eyes in all the printed stuff from the movie it was 
obivously meant to. [If I had a chance to ask Chris Columbus one question, it 
would be "what was the problem with Harry's eyes?" just out of technical 
curiosity]

Anyway, I would have thought Entertainment Weekly was a fairly trustworthy 
publication--it's not a tabloid and in fact is part of the Time Warner empire. 
I've even grown skeptical of direct quotes that I read online or in magazines 
because who knows if they were transcribed correctly? Perhaps only 
interviews that you see yourself on video or radio are trustworthy?

Any thoughts?

Ivis the elderly




From helanne at start.com.au  Mon Dec  3 11:33:06 2001
From: helanne at start.com.au (~Helen ~)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:33:06 +0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 66
Message-ID: <B1514629698@i01sv0649>

Margaret Dean wrote:

"I suspect it's because it's a scene that works much better in a
book than it would on film. Visually it would pretty much amount
to Harry and Hermione standing in front of the row of bottles and
talking. Also, without the verse to refer back to (most people
wouldn't retain it after listening to it read =once=), the viewer
wouldn't really have the opportunity to try to solve the puzzle
along with Hermione, which is part of the fun of the written
version."


Thankyou for this. I was disappointed when I heard the Potions
challenge wasn't going to be in the movie, but after reading your
reasoning I really think it was a very sensible move. A scene like
this just would not translate well to film. 



Some other comments I have:

Why are people complaining about Harry "surfing" his broom at the
Quidditch match? It wasn't tacky or OTT, I thought it was really cool,
and so did everyone else I've discussed the film with. And not once
did I think of it as "surfing" anyway. It was a really pleasant
surprise; as was Harry swallowing the snitch, because it's been so
long since I've read the book that I'd forgotten about that bit.
Incidentally, didn't Dan look so cute when he was trying to "vomit"
the snitch out? *crickets chirping* .....Ah, I see, that's just me and
my Dan Is Too Cute obession. Sorry.

I've seen the movie 4 times in 4 days now (some kind of record for
me). I know the thing nearly off by heart, yet as soon as I walk out
of the cinema I want to go straight back in again. Did anyone else
find the movie this addictive, or am I some kind of freak? Actually,
don't answer that. lol

Some people have been talking about Daniel not being particularly
emotive or even being a little wooden in his acting. Gah! I sooo
disagree. I was actually blown away by Dan's acting. I didn't realise
there were kids out there who could act this well; that is, a kid who
doesn't always sound like they're reading straight from the script and
doesn't resort to the use of unrealistic emotions and facial
expressions. He's simply a natural, and anyway, Harry in the books
isn't an animated sort of person anyway. Why would Dan want to portray
him as such? People would complain Harry was out of character then.

Anyway, I'm saying too much, as usual. :o)

Cheers, 
Helen.   




__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 13:09:04 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 13:09:04 -0000
Subject: Voldemort & Mirror / Going Through Harry
In-Reply-To: <9uersa+jird@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ufthg+i4lo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Krolik" <asjuha at h...> wrote:
> They probably had their reasons for having Quirell's face also 
visible 
> while Harry talked to Voldemort. Some possibilities I can think of: 
a) 
> It is interesting to see his facial expressions - what does it feel 
> like when you have a scary thing like that talking out of the back 
of 
> your head? b) He had to make sure Harry did not escape - turning 
his 
> back would have given Harry a head start had he decided to run for 
it. 
> The previous scenes with the mirror seemed to suggest that it only 
> works when you stand directly in front of it and look at yourself. 
> Presumably, it works like a regular mirror otherwise. This is not 
> consistent with the book, but probably makes good sense 
> cinematographically.
> 
> Regarding Voldemort flying through Harry and all the flying 
> Voldemort/Quirell does in general (in the forest as well as during 
the 
> final confrontation) I don't think it works as well. What do you 
guys 
> think? What's up with all that levitation? And what exactly was 
> Voldemort flying through Harry supposed to mean?
> 
> 


 <sings> "I've got a theory: they could be bunnies...."

  Sorry. Channeled Anya there for a second; won't happen again.

  My theory is actually that wizards who practice Dark Arts might 
have a "standard set" of magical practices which is a little 
different than most. We already tend to know that they rely on 
curses, and I think we might see that they also tend to operate on a 
power level which allows them dispense with some of the normal props, 
like brooms for flying and wands, for some tasks. As I recall, 
Quirrell *also* at one point was able to use a hand gesture to make 
something happen (gaa! what was it?), where you would expect a wizard 
to have to channel power through a wand.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 13:15:48 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 13:15:48 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 66
In-Reply-To: <B1514629698@i01sv0649>
Message-ID: <9uftu4+nm7e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., ~Helen ~ <helanne at s...> wrote:

> I've seen the movie 4 times in 4 days now (some kind of record for
> me). I know the thing nearly off by heart, yet as soon as I walk out
> of the cinema I want to go straight back in again. Did anyone else
> find the movie this addictive, or am I some kind of freak? Actually,
> don't answer that. lol
> 
  <snip above and below> 
  
  Cheers, 
> Helen.   
> 

  I've got two viewings under my hat, and am destined for _at_least_ 
one more with some other friends. But don't worry, Helen -- I recall 
being a little weirded out when *on the _Sunday_ after the film 
opened,* I began reading posts starting, "Okay, on my 6th viewing I 
noticed..."

 (ps -- I kinda liked Harry's creative broom use during the Quidditch 
match, too.)




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 14:16:50 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 14:16:50 -0000
Subject: good information sources?/score/surfing
In-Reply-To: <9ufn74+h7f2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ug1gi+ig4d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:

> 1) " a recent edit clocked in at four hours" -- I guess this is the source of 
the 
> "four-hour director's cut" dream.  Well, nobody wants a 4-hour Harry Potter 
> more than I, but think about it--did they really pay John Williams to score 4 
> hours of film? And the editor to do a four-hour version? 

They might have been referring to an early "draft" version that included all the 
scenes that were shot.  We know that this included unused several scenes (or 
parts) that have been referred to by the actors or shown in previews, and  by 
evidence of props shown on TV but not used.

A film can't be scored until after its final edit, because the timing is so 
crucial.  I assume that Williams worked up the basic themes and such based on 
the screenplay and then scored the final edit.   Since much of the score was 
repetitive and derivative, this was not such an imposing task anyway.  Yes, I'm 
one of those people who thinks Williams now is sleepwalking thru his 
assignments.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., ~Helen ~ <helanne at s...> wrote:
> Why are people complaining about Harry "surfing" his broom at the
> Quidditch match? It wasn't tacky or OTT, I thought it was really cool,
> and so did everyone else I've discussed the film with. And not once
> did I think of it as "surfing" anyway. 

Well, we fanatics don't want anything included in he film that doesn't 
materially improve the text version.  My main objection is that it didn't make 
sense as a flying strategy -- if he wanted to free up his hands, he could grip 
the broom with his knees, which would leave him less off-balance than 
standing.  To me, it felt like unnecessary over-stretching to make the scene 
exciting.  




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Mon Dec  3 15:19:24 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:19:24 -0000
Subject: Voldemort & Mirror / Going Through Harry
In-Reply-To: <9uersa+jird@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ug55s+ggjm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Krolik" <asjuha at h...> wrote:
What's up with all that levitation? And what exactly was 
> Voldemort flying through Harry supposed to mean?

I thought it was sort of Voldemort "lunging" for Harry as he was freed 
from Quirrel's body.  But as he was now only a ghost, he was unable to 
do anything except pass through him, and then, enraged, he sped away, 
obviously to plot more evil.

Wanda





From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Mon Dec  3 15:30:11 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 10:30:11 -0500
Subject: [OT-LOR] Arwen, etc.
References: <1007336077.24514.49900.m4@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C0B9A83.80B49D56@sun.com>

>   I'm rather suspecting Arwen may end up getting some of Eowyn's 
> schtick as well. Poor Boromir, nobody to settle for him after 
> realizing they'll never get the much cooler Aragorn.

It was Faramir. And he's pretty cool, too. (Boromir wasn't.) I'm all in favor of
Arwen getting more good scenes, but not at the expense of Eowyn. Though I'm not
sure Arwen would be as convincing in Glorfindel's role. There's an awful lot of
history behind Glorfindel that doesn't come out in the trilogy.

(trying hard to wrench this back to HP so the thread doesn't get stomped on...)

I can't decide if we're better or worse off as HP fans or Tolkein fans. On the
one hand, we (HP fans) have the fun of trying to figure out if there are any
clues to future books in the way the author influenced the movie. OTOH, Tolkein
fans have so *much* canon to work with. ;)  (And the odds of the author coming
out with any more major books-- even posthumously -- are pretty darn slim. Just
how many old notes and erased comments can even Christopher dig up?)

Elizabeth



From jferer at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 16:33:13 2001
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:33:13 -0000
Subject: Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
In-Reply-To: <9uem1f+ivcm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ug9g9+5a40@eGroups.com>

Rodeo Danger Queen:"What do you all make of the plunging box office 
receipts for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United 
States?"

The first thing that occurs to me is length. Seeing a 153 minute 
movie the second and third time is more of a commitment than a 100 
minute or so movie. I expect there are less people seeing this movie 
over and over than others. I wonder if anybody polls people leaving 
the theater to find out?




From dpost at home.se  Mon Dec  3 16:39:54 2001
From: dpost at home.se (Daniel Karlsson)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:39:54 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Voldemort going through Harry
Message-ID: <01C17C21.8599D1E0.dpost@home.se>



Wanda Sherratt wrote:

>>And what exactly was Voldemort flying through Harry supposed to mean?
>>
> I thought it was sort of Voldemort "lunging" for Harry as he was freed
> from Quirrel's body.  But as he was now only a ghost, he was unable to
> do anything except pass through him,

Maybe not because he now was a ghost, but because there in the story is a 
difference between Harry and Quierrel. Evil is here percieved in a 
classical way as having no real existance on its own, only as parasite on 
created stuff. In Harry it found no way to attach, thereby just flying 
through.

Daniel Karlsson



 



From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Mon Dec  3 18:36:42 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:36:42 -0000
Subject: Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
In-Reply-To: <9ug9g9+5a40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uggnq+at3t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> Rodeo Danger Queen:"What do you all make of the plunging box office 
> receipts for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United 
> States?"

Further down in the report I read, it was stated that such a plunge is actually 
expected after Thanksgiving weekend. HP still beat out Behind Enemy Lines 
to hold on to the number one spot in the US. They said total boxoffice was 
down over last year, too.

I think Warner Bros should be pleased with how well the film is doing. 
However, I truly think the majority audience for it is children [despite the 
existence of this group & others like it!] and how likely are they [speaking of 
the majority again, not those fortunate enough to have HP fanatics for 
parents] to be able to see it more than once at the cinema? So there will not 
be the vast numbers of teenagers with their own $$ and transportation that 
made Titantic such a hit. [This is probably the source of the tv-screen-sized 
rather than widescreen video/DVD idea--the suits think every kid who bought 
the book will want the video, but they're only KIDS, right, so let's just make it 
pan-and-scan...grrrrrrrr]

Maybe they should produce the video & DVD with the same philosophy as 
that used in the UK that produced different "adult" and "child" covers for the 
books--have a simple video version for little kids, and a DVD with all the bells 
& whistles for grownups who care. Just a thought.

I'm really curious about how LOTR will do. I saw the first Burger King tie-in 
ads on tv and was nearly ill. Those of us who have read and re-read these 
books for over 30 years are in a real love-hate relationship with the whole 
project that makes HP4GU nitpicks seem...minor :)

Difficult as it is to believe, we really are lucky that HP has relatively little 
merchandising in comparison to LOTR or Star Wars--I read something like 90 
firms for HP as opposed to over 200 for Star Wars. The Coke advertising is 
relatively unobtrusive and WB even seems to have improved the truly nasty 
artwork they had out last year. Harry Potter seems "everywhere" now, but 
just wait until the next Star Wars comes out.

Ivis the elderly






From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 18:45:44 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:45:44 -0000
Subject: Question: Plunging Box Office Reports
In-Reply-To: <9uggnq+at3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ugh8o+gl1r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> [This is probably the source of the tv-screen-sized 
> rather than widescreen video/DVD idea--the suits think every kid who  
>bought the book will want the video, but they're only KIDS, right, so let's just 
>make it 
> pan-and-scan...grrrrrrrr]
> 
> Maybe they should produce the video & DVD with the same philosophy as 
> that used in the UK that produced different "adult" and "child" covers for the 
> books--have a simple video version for little kids, and a DVD with all the 
bells 
> & whistles for grownups who care. Just a thought.

The publicity that I've seen indicates that the DVD will be a double one, with 
both versions:

"Harry Potter to DVD: Warner Brothers is currently scheduling an April, 2002 
DVD release for the 2-DVD Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (a 
widescreen version is planned, as well as fullscreen). This is good news on 
two fronts: first, the fact that Warners will be offering a widescreen version 
acknowledges that the "fullscreen-only" decision may have been rescinded, and 
second -- a multidisc set means no snapper case."

http://www.videotropic.com/





From frantyck at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 20:20:09 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:20:09 -0000
Subject: Voldemort going through Harry
In-Reply-To: <01C17C21.8599D1E0.dpost@home.se>
Message-ID: <9ugmpp+g59q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Daniel Karlsson <dpost at h...> wrote:
> Wanda Sherratt wrote:
> 
> >>And what exactly was Voldemort flying through Harry supposed to 
mean?

[snipt]

> Maybe not because he now was a ghost, but because there in the 
story is a 
> difference between Harry and Quierrel. Evil is here percieved in a 
> classical way as having no real existance on its own, only as 
parasite on 
> created stuff. In Harry it found no way to attach, thereby just 
flying 
> through.
> 
> Daniel Karlsson



Yes, but it is Voldemort's ghost/essence/spirit/soul(?) passing 
through Harry that actually knocks him out. So if Voldemort was 
insubstantial and found no purchase in Harry, he nevertheless did 
*take* something from him, which had a violent physical effect on 
Harry. Some form of medical shock?

Convenient way to show Harry's victory, Voldemort's defeat, 
Voldemort's survival and escape to fight again, the strange link 
that connects the two of them, Harry's vulnerability, Harry knocked 
out so that he can wake up in a timely fashion for the hospital 
scene with Dumbledore.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 20:27:02 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:27:02 -0000
Subject: Voldemort & Mirror / Going Through Harry
In-Reply-To: <9ufthg+i4lo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ugn6m+m0ar@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
As I recall, 
> Quirrell *also* at one point was able to use a hand gesture to 
make 
> something happen (gaa! what was it?), where you would expect a 
wizard 
> to have to channel power through a wand.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but perhaps you're thinking of Quirrell-
Voldemort's finger-snap in the final chamber that lights the fires 
around Harry, Quirrell-Vold. and the Mirror, thus preventing Harry's 
escape.

If that's what you mean, it is not actually unusual; in PoA, Tom of 
the Three Broomsticks in Diagon Alley lights the fireplace for Fudge 
and Harry with a snap of his fingers. There are other instances as 
well.




From dpost at home.se  Mon Dec  3 21:10:27 2001
From: dpost at home.se (Daniel Karlsson)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:10:27 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Voldemort going through Harry
Message-ID: <01C17C47.51962080.dpost@home.se>



frantyck at yahoo.com wrote:

> Yes, but it is Voldemort's ghost/essence/spirit/soul(?) passing
> through Harry that actually knocks him out. So if Voldemort was
> insubstantial and found no purchase in Harry, he nevertheless did
> *take* something from him, which had a violent physical effect on
> Harry.

Yes that might be. Or he just passed out from the impression of Voldemort's 
last attack. Actually Harry seems pretty ok afterwards. The physical 
effects on Harry and Quirrel are so different, and that is the point of the 
scene. It is also a nice way of summing up different themes all pointing 
forwards. Dombledore, however, reveals a lot in the very nice hospital 
scene.

JKRs books are more than entertainment. They tell us about reality and 
therefore we can return just as Harry, Hermoine and Ron to the ordinary 
world with something more than we came with.

Daniel





From guretna at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 21:12:49 2001
From: guretna at yahoo.com (guretna at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:12:49 -0000
Subject: The Movie
Message-ID: <9ugpsh+q3iv@eGroups.com>

First, the bad things:

I know it's not easy for anybody to make a Harry Potter movie,
especially since the book provides a story that is so rich in details 
and imaginative. Take the move of setting from Privet Drive to the 
Hut-on-the-Rock for example. The movie doesn't give enough explanation
of that, and therefore only those who have read the book would
understand. Of course there are very few people in Europe and North
America who hasn't read the book(s), but the filmmakers should also
consider other parts of the world where Harry Potter is not quite as
popular. Think about this: in its first week HP has jumped to number
43 in USA's all-time box office, beating even Tomb Raider or Planet of
the Apes 2001. Internationally, though, it hasn't even made it to
position 200 in the box office chart (outside USA). And worldwide
(including USA) it's still outside the top 100.

The difference between the four houses is not explained at all, and 
therefore it causes some wonder why Harry said to the Sorting 
Hat, "Anything but Slytherin". What's wrong with Slytherin? 
the "Muggles" may ask.

Another thing, Hermione cannot seem to make up her mind about what to 
call he-who-must-not-be-named. Even in one scene (when the trio are 
talking near the fireplace) she called him "you-know-who", and 
then "Voldemort". And in the book we know that the reason Harry's 
scar hurt when he first saw Snape was because Snape "looked past 
Quirrell's turban" but this was not showed in the movie.

Now: the good things:
All in all, I should say a very impressive movie and one that 
shouldn't be missed if you're a Potter-mania. The kids don't act very 
well but the grown-up actors and actresses are of top quality. Alan 
Rickman is especially great. Can't wait for the sequel.






From eleri at aracnet.com  Mon Dec  3 16:26:29 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 11:26:29 -0500
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <1007380369.519.31871.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011203112437.00e1f100@mail.aracnet.com>


>
>--- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote:
> > I saw the name McGonagall but not the initials or date. Others have
> > said M. G. McGonagall 1971. JKR said in an interview that McGonagall
> > is 'a spritely 70' and I think it was the same interview that she
> > said Snape was 35 or 36 -- Snape was in school at the same time as
> > the Marauders, therefore McGonagall is old enough to be James'
> > grandmother not classmate. I hope the plaque is a different
> > McGonagall.

Andrea said:

>My take on the plaque is this - I thought it was very odd that the shield
>for James was very large and had his position on it, while the other two
>were quite a bit smaller and only had the names.  I thought that possibly
>McGonagall and King were faculty sponsors or somesuch, and that could
>explain the age problems.

Was McGonagall head of Gryffindor House even back then? And maybe King was 
the head referee.

Eleri




From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 21:34:55 2001
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:34:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.0.20011203112437.00e1f100@mail.aracnet.com>
Message-ID: <20011203213455.27225.qmail@web10904.mail.yahoo.com>

--- CB <eleri at aracnet.com> wrote:
> >My take on the plaque is this - I thought it was very odd that the
> >shield for James was very large and had his position on it, while the >
>other two
> >were quite a bit smaller and only had the names.  I thought that
> possibly McGonagall and King were faculty sponsors or somesuch, and that
> >could explain the age problems.
> 
> Was McGonagall head of Gryffindor House even back then? And maybe King
> was the head referee.

We don't know how long she was head of house...although since she is
around 70 now and Snape is a house head in his mid-thirties, it wouldn't
be unheard of.  And even if she wasn't the head of house, she might've
been something like a faculty coach.  That wouldn't necessarily have to be
head of house.  And yes, referees is also a possibility.


Andrea


=====
"Reality is for people who lack imagination."

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From djtarb at aol.com  Mon Dec  3 22:21:16 2001
From: djtarb at aol.com (djtarb at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:21:16 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] McGonnagal-quidditch 1971?
Message-ID: <b8.1f6af8ec.293d54dd@aol.com>

In a message dated Sat, 1 Dec 2001  9:28:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, dpitzel at mindspring.com writes:

> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but did anyone notice 
> that McGonnagal had a quidditch trophy which was dated 1971?  James 
> Potter's was dated 1972.  I never thought these characters were 
> supposed to be anywhere close to the same age.  Nor did I ever think 
> they went to Hogwarts at the same time which the dates on the 
> trophies imply. We know Harry was the yougest seeker in a century by 
> being a first year quidditch seeker.  If this is the case, the 
> earliest James could have been a seeker was in his second year- 
> 1972.  This would make James' first year 1971, potentially 
> McGonnagal's last year at Hogwarts.  
> 
> I don't know, maybe I just read the dates wrong, afterall they're 
> only shown for a second.
> 
In my not-at-all-humble opinion, this is a different McGonnagal...Minerva's child, possibly, or much younger sibling.  This may serve as a "first clue" to what makes the austere lady tick!

Diane in Philly



From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  3 23:38:01 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 23:38:01 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9ufci2+kuq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uh2cp+adjg@eGroups.com>

I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a sweetheart, 
and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And that 
British accent! Makes me swoon...
Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat, 
tail between my legs, into lurkdom? 

Nancy

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., LivBeatles at a... wrote:
> Hello, I am trying to find a certain HP trailer to download.  It is 
> the one where the narrator says that Hogwarts' is a "school just 
like 
> yours."  I downloaded all three trailers from HP Galleries (which 
> describes the one I'm looking for as being #3), but two of the 
three 
> downloaded were practically the same!  I'm sorry if this message 
> sounds a bit jumbled, but can anyone help?
> 
> Cynthia




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 00:08:27 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 00:08:27 -0000
Subject: My favorite review
Message-ID: <9uh45r+4055@eGroups.com>

OK, folks here's a reminder that we should "(f)orget all the analysis, all =
the 
testimony that Harry Potter can heal the sick and make the blind see. What =
the 
Potter franchise offers is escapism pure and simple, and there's nothing 
wrong with that. We need our escapes. Whatever does it for you?-video games=
, 
vanilla ice cream, hacky sack, pornography, Harry Potter?it's a good thing =
if it 
keeps you sane. There is no need to justify them, or to claim they have mag=
ical 
powers."

My favorite line in this review, comparing various hero stories:  "They are=
 the 
Same Old Story we have been hearing since long before Bilbo was a pup: the =

saga of the Chosen One, the little lost prince with a Destiny, the innocent=
 
brought forth from anonymity to duel with the Dark Lord, who in this instan=
ce 
is named Voldemort (a Saxonization of Wallmart, perhaps?)."

Caution: Curmudgeonly R-rated language.

http://www.electricstory.com/reviews/potter.asp






From Zarleycat at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 01:24:37 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (Zarleycat at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 01:24:37 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uh2cp+adjg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uh8kl+ukue@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a sweetheart, 
> and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And 
that 
> British accent! Makes me swoon...
> Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat, 
> tail between my legs, into lurkdom? 
> 
> Nancy

No, don't retreat or run screaming into lurkdom.  You are definitely 
not alone with the Snape-is-sexy opinion, although I can't agree.  I 
love the book version of Snape because he's so interesting and 
complex, but, he never struck me as sexy.  And film Snape didn't 
change my opinion, although I do love the Rickman voice.  And I 
certainly can't characterize him as a sweetheart, in any way, shape 
or form...but that's just me.  I'm sure there are plenty of others on 
this list who agree with you and think I'm an idiot.  

I would have liked to see Snape with a little more facial animation.  
Rickman was just a bit too expressionless.  But that may be an 
advantage in PoA, when towards the end poor Snape is almost foaming 
at the mouth with rage and frustration.  Guess we'll all have to wait 
and see.

Marianne





From valjean131 at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 01:29:47 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 01:29:47 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uh8kl+ukue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uh8ub+6hdv@eGroups.com>


nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a 
sweetheart, and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays 
him) And that British accent! Makes me swoon... Anyone else out there 
think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat, tail between my legs, 
into lurkdom? >>

You are NOT alone. I'm not sure about the sweetheart part (perhaps),
but he is D-Lish!

Marianne wrote:
> I would have liked to see Snape with a little more facial 
animation.  Rickman was just a bit too expressionless.  But that may 
be an advantage in PoA, when towards the end poor Snape is almost 
foaming at the mouth with rage and frustration.  Guess we'll all have 
to wait and see.?>>

Just goes to show ya... I thought, if anything, he was *too* 
emotional. His expressions revealed perhaps a tad too much. I 
couldn't help but giggle at nearly everything. He was so damn
dramatic. Too much or too little? Dunno. I adored him either way.

-Monique





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 01:45:21 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 01:45:21 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uh8kl+ukue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uh9rh+98pf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Zarleycat at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a 
sweetheart, 
> > and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And 
> that 
> > British accent! Makes me swoon...
> > Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to 
retreat, 
> > tail between my legs, into lurkdom? 
> > 
> > Nancy
> 
> No, don't retreat or run screaming into lurkdom.  You are 
definitely 
> not alone with the Snape-is-sexy opinion, although I can't agree.  
I 
> love the book version of Snape because he's so interesting and 
> complex, but, he never struck me as sexy.  And film Snape didn't 
> change my opinion, although I do love the Rickman voice.  And I 
> certainly can't characterize him as a sweetheart, in any way, shape 
> or form...but that's just me.  I'm sure there are plenty of others 
on 
> this list who agree with you and think I'm an idiot.  
> 
> I would have liked to see Snape with a little more facial 
animation.  
> Rickman was just a bit too expressionless.  But that may be an 
> advantage in PoA, when towards the end poor Snape is almost foaming 
> at the mouth with rage and frustration.  Guess we'll all have to 
wait 
> and see.
> 
> Marianne

 I'm with Marianne.... Sexy isn't everything, anyway.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 01:55:52 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 01:55:52 -0000
Subject: My favorite review
In-Reply-To: <9uh45r+4055@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhaf8+t275@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> OK, folks here's a reminder that we should "(f)orget all the 
analysis, all =
> the 
> testimony that Harry Potter can heal the sick and make the blind 
see. What =
> the 
> Potter franchise offers is escapism pure and simple, and there's 
nothing 
> wrong with that. We need our escapes. Whatever does it for you?-
video games=
> , 
> vanilla ice cream, hacky sack, pornography, Harry Potter?it's a 
good thing =
> if it 
> keeps you sane. There is no need to justify them, or to claim they 
have mag=
> ical 
> powers."
> 
> My favorite line in this review, comparing various hero 
stories:  "They are=
>  the 
> Same Old Story we have been hearing since long before Bilbo was a 
pup: the =
> 
> saga of the Chosen One, the little lost prince with a Destiny, the 
innocent=
>  
> brought forth from anonymity to duel with the Dark Lord, who in 
this instan=
> ce 
> is named Voldemort (a Saxonization of Wallmart, perhaps?)."
> 
> Caution: Curmudgeonly R-rated language.
> 
> http://www.electricstory.com/reviews/potter.asp


 OH, GOD, I do love a cynical rant at all times, and this one is a 
beautiful work of snide art. Before I am packed off to Slytherin 
House, allow me to remind everyone that yes, I love Our Harry all to 
pieces.  And no, I don't entirely agree with this reviewer's 
disdainful dismissal. 

I ALSO - AND THIS IS KEY - DON'T FEEL INSULTED THAT HE SO DISLIKES 
SOMETHING WHICH I SO ENJOY. There is no reason on this or any Earth 
to take these reviews personally.

We may love Our Severus for all his curmudgeonly, defanged, socially-
cold cynicism. And I find that, wife or no, I rather want to do this 
reviewer simply for the sheer sensuality of his snideness. Bravo.




From Dar20 at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 02:22:23 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (Darlene)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 02:22:23 -0000
Subject: The Movie
In-Reply-To: <9ugpsh+q3iv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhc0v+kidu@eGroups.com>

> And in the book we know that the reason Harry's 
> scar hurt when he first saw Snape was because Snape "looked past 
> Quirrell's turban" but this was not showed in the movie.


Actually, in the movie you do see Quirrell's turban.  He is sitting 
to the right of Snape, and appears to be looking backwards.

Dar




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 03:46:09 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:46:09 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uh9rh+98pf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhgu1+jdfg@eGroups.com>

I agree that movie Snape didn't show a whole of facial expression, 
but his voice conveyed everything to me. Okay, maybe he's not a 
sweetheart, but movie Snape is sexy, I say, damn sexy. Delicious! 
Even gave me something to think about as I went to sleep last night. 
<WG> I was intrigued by his character in the books because he is so 
complex. Do you think he'll fall in love one of these days? 

Nancy (who loves all things Alan Rickman--or maybe it's just the 
British accent)


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Zarleycat at a... wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > > I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a 
> sweetheart, 
> > > and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And 
> > that 
> > > British accent! Makes me swoon...
> > > Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to 
> retreat, 
> > > tail between my legs, into lurkdom? 
> > > 
> > > Nancy
> > 
> > No, don't retreat or run screaming into lurkdom.  You are 
> definitely 
> > not alone with the Snape-is-sexy opinion, although I can't 
agree.  
> I 
> > love the book version of Snape because he's so interesting and 
> > complex, but, he never struck me as sexy.  And film Snape didn't 
> > change my opinion, although I do love the Rickman voice.  And I 
> > certainly can't characterize him as a sweetheart, in any way, 
shape 
> > or form...but that's just me.  I'm sure there are plenty of 
others 
> on 
> > this list who agree with you and think I'm an idiot.  
> > 
> > I would have liked to see Snape with a little more facial 
> animation.  
> > Rickman was just a bit too expressionless.  But that may be an 
> > advantage in PoA, when towards the end poor Snape is almost 
foaming 
> > at the mouth with rage and frustration.  Guess we'll all have to 
> wait 
> > and see.
> > 
> > Marianne
> 
>  I'm with Marianne.... Sexy isn't everything, anyway.




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 03:54:54 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:54:54 -0000
Subject: My favorite review
In-Reply-To: <9uhaf8+t275@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhhee+8k84@eGroups.com>

I'm with Heather on this...I, myself, would like to do the reviewer 
as well. Nothing's as sexy to me as a great mind (or Severus Snape) 
but then I'm 37, single, with 4 cats, so my idea of sexy may be a 
little, er, off...though my little voices tell me there's nothing 
wrong with me. 

Nancy 

>  OH, GOD, I do love a cynical rant at all times, and this one is a 
> beautiful work of snide art. Before I am packed off to Slytherin 
> House, allow me to remind everyone that yes, I love Our Harry all 
to 
> pieces.  And no, I don't entirely agree with this reviewer's 
> disdainful dismissal. 
> 
> I ALSO - AND THIS IS KEY - DON'T FEEL INSULTED THAT HE SO DISLIKES 
> SOMETHING WHICH I SO ENJOY. There is no reason on this or any Earth 
> to take these reviews personally.
> 
> We may love Our Severus for all his curmudgeonly, defanged, 
socially-
> cold cynicism. And I find that, wife or no, I rather want to do 
this 
> reviewer simply for the sheer sensuality of his snideness. Bravo.




From idouright2 at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 05:04:57 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:04:57 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Severus Snape
Message-ID: <39.1eba93e4.293db379@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/3/2001 3:40:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com writes:


> I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a sweetheart, 
> and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And that 
> British accent! Makes me swoon...
> Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat, 
> tail between my legs, into lurkdom? 
> 
> Nancy
> 

When I first heard about the movie I didn't want to see it. I thought the 
book covers looked stupid, the movie was going to be a cheap kiddie flick and 
I hated it all. Then I saw the trailer...and it made me thing some. I saw the 
Extra special I beleive it was and they showed Alan Rickman as Snape saying 
"Mr. Potter" and I swooned. I ADORE Alan Rickman and anything he's in he 
plays the arrogant part so well it's mysterious and sexy! Everytime him or 
Maggie Smith filled the screen in the movie I just about jumped out of my 
seat. (I had already read the first book prior to watching the movie) And the 
way they played their characters was fantastic! So keep your tail up and 
proud and march in the Festival of Snapes paradade I'll join in on the 
festivities!

-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dramaticdecision at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 05:23:31 2001
From: dramaticdecision at yahoo.com (mandy cole)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:23:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Snape's facial expressions
In-Reply-To: <1007438097.1881.98451.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011204052331.41847.qmail@web14905.mail.yahoo.com>


Hey -  I figured this out after seeing the movie last time... It looks like Snape is wearing a neck brace through the entire move - that's how little he moves his neck! Anyone else see that? I think this is why his facial expressions come off looking so...different.

*Mandy in MO*



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gypsycaine at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 05:53:26 2001
From: gypsycaine at yahoo.com (Denise)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:53:26 -0500
Subject: Snape, Poll, and odds and ends
References: <1007438097.1881.98451.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <01bc01c17c87$fe86f090$8b546c40@Dee>

Went with my son to see the movie today (he's 4).  We only missed a small
portion, but thankfully I've absorbed the book (can't say read, that's too
mundane, and I've literally bathed almost in the books! grins), and it
wasn't a plot-buster.  After the mirror, Ian looked at me, and said, Mommy,
I really have to go potty.  I did too, so we hurried off.  We got back right
when Norbert was hatching.  There were 5 people in the theatre after us 2,
total 7 (and it was Tinseltown) watching it.  The girls in back told me it
was their second viewing (if that helps with that poll?), and my son's
additional commentary didn't bother them.  As far as following the book, I
think they did rather well.  I understand that there's not every scene in
the book, and I was disappointed that one of my favorite lines was missing
"ARE YOU A WITCH...?"during the Devil's Snare scene.

As for Mr. Rickman.  HOT!  It was a bit weird seeing the man that I drooled
over with RH:PoT without the beard and mustache, and with the hair, but he
was the most perfect Snape.  He's one reason that I went to see the movie,
btw.  I like Snape, he's a wonderful character in the books, so
multifaceted, and that along with Rickman made it a one-two MUST SEE!

I LOVED the movie, and yes, I am planning to see it again.  I was lucky
enough to only pay 3.75 per ticket this time, but the snack bar took 10, so
it was still a great deal of money.  Next time, I told my son we'll be going
to the Jr. Movie theatre (aka the dollar-run) after Christmas, when Mommy
can afford it again!  Too bad there's not an intermission--almost everyone
of the folks in there ran out at least once!  The soundtrack is awesome
(been listening to the CD for ages now), and I think it's the bomb.  My
favorite actors in the movie were Hermoine and Ron.  For first-timers, they
were "bloody brillant."  My son's favorites are Hagrid and Harry himself.  I
think Harry was a perfect fit. :)

Of course, I'm a bit biased, I like Hermoine best in the books too!  (well,
beside Sirius and Lupin, but that's not like, it's lust, and there's a
deeper conversation right there!)

I can't believe the DVD is ready to be distributed already.  That just blows
my mind.  It used to be that you had to wait a year.  I am DEFINITELY
getting that DVD player for my Television now.  Watching Quidditch on the
computer screen just wouldn't be the same. Lol.

I have a viewpoint on the "fly-through."  If you've ever deal with ghosts,
wraiths, or other entities you will notice that there's a chill to them, as
if they are sucking energy out of you.  What if Voldie sucked out enough of
Harry's energy (aka psychic vampire-like) to escape.  He prolly figured that
Dumbledore was returning, and things could get tricky.

:)

Dee



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 06:11:40 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:11:40 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uhgu1+jdfg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhpes+1t2r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> I agree that movie Snape didn't show a whole of facial expression, 
> but his voice conveyed everything to me. Okay, maybe he's not a 
> sweetheart, but movie Snape is sexy, I say, damn sexy. Delicious! 
> Even gave me something to think about as I went to sleep last 
night. 
> <WG> I was intrigued by his character in the books because he is so 
> complex. Do you think he'll fall in love one of these days? 
> 
> Nancy (who loves all things Alan Rickman--or maybe it's just the 
> British accent)
> 
> 


 It's the voice and the swooping and his marvelous hands, Nancy.
 

  -- Heather, Queen Know-it-all of the Universe




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 06:42:08 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:42:08 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uhpes+1t2r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uhr80+j6hl@eGroups.com>

That's exactly it, Heather! I have a thing about men's hands, 
too...but that's OT so we won't go there. That voice...smooth and 
silky...I've been single too long! 
Okay...so help me out here. Snape was threatening Quirrell because he 
knew that Quirrell was up to something bad? <the bit where Harry, 
invisible, comes across them> 

Nancy


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> > I agree that movie Snape didn't show a whole of facial 
expression, 
> > but his voice conveyed everything to me. Okay, maybe he's not a 
> > sweetheart, but movie Snape is sexy, I say, damn sexy. Delicious! 
> > Even gave me something to think about as I went to sleep last 
> night. 
> > <WG> I was intrigued by his character in the books because he is 
so 
> > complex. Do you think he'll fall in love one of these days? 
> > 
> > Nancy (who loves all things Alan Rickman--or maybe it's just the 
> > British accent)
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>  It's the voice and the swooping and his marvelous hands, Nancy.
>  
> 
>   -- Heather, Queen Know-it-all of the Universe




From helanne at start.com.au  Tue Dec  4 07:36:20 2001
From: helanne at start.com.au (~Helen ~)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 15:36:20 +0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Movie
Message-ID: <B1514476088@i01sv4138.ids1.intelonline.com>

>
>
>   From: guretna at yahoo.com
>Subject: The Movie
>
>
>The difference between the four houses is not explained at all, and 
>therefore it causes some wonder why Harry said to the Sorting 
>Hat, "Anything but Slytherin". What's wrong with Slytherin? 
>the "Muggles" may ask.
>

Other people talk about this too, but didn't anyone hear after Draco
was sorted, Ron whispering to Harry something along the lines of
"There hasn't been a single witch or wizard who didn't turn bad who
was in Slytherin." If you ask me, that pretty much describes the
difference between Slytherin and the other houses.


>The kids don't act very well but the grown-up actors >and actresses
are of top quality. 

Again, there must be something wrong with me, because I thought the
kids were outstanding actors, especially Daniel. Daniel was better
than any of the adults, in my opinion. The mirror scene brought tears
to my eyes because of him. And the rest of the kids were better than
any other ensemble of child actors I've seen. I think the adults were
very obviously "acting for kids", if anyone can understand what I
mean. (Probably not, since I seem to stand alone a lot in my
opinions!)

Helen :o)


__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au




From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Tue Dec  4 11:02:27 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 11:02:27 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Casting rumor (Robson Green)
In-Reply-To: <9uep7s+5eb9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uiag3+afib@eGroups.com>

"Heather Moore" wrote on Robson Green

> it bears up the theory that they're making all of the 
> Marauders older in the movies than they are/would be in the books.


He looks about the right age to me but then I've always assumed in 
reading the books thatJames and Lilly didn't start a family right 
after Hogwarts but did some other things in life (that made James at 
least a particular YNWho taget) Hary being born when his parents wer 
ein tehir late 20's early 30's so by the time Harry was 13 the 
surviving Marauderers would be in their 40s ... the suggested 
castings therefore look plasible to me. 

Here's the Official Robson Green site:

http://www.robsongreen.com

Edis





From mediaphen at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  4 14:19:21 2001
From: mediaphen at hotmail.com (Martin Smith)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:19:21 +0100
Subject: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost - casting filk
References: <1007438097.1881.98451.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <DAV55VplvXjv5iqKSrx0001ee0e@hotmail.com>


Hi everybody!

During my second screening I noticed, in the scene near the end where the
trio asks McGonnagal where to find Dumbledore, that McG is sitting in front
of an almost empty classroom, overlooking what seems to be a ghost,
suspiciously looking like The Grey Lady, taking an exam.
Popular beliefs claim that ghosts are ghosts because they have unsettled
business, so here's my theory:
TGL (the Grey Lady) had some serious difficulties passing the final
transfiguration exam in life, and died unhappily without having graduated
from Hogwarts. This is her unsettled business, and until she has passed that
exam, she remains in ghosthood. Every year she gets another shot, and JKR
has in mind that she eventually will succeed (maybe TGL passed the exam at
the end of GoF, who knows?), which maybe is foreshadowed in this scene. When
she does, there will be an opening as Ravenclaw ghost, and I hereby present
my candidate for that position: Moaning Myrtle. IMHO, she has the brains to
be a Ravenclaw alumnus (she did solve the Golden Egg riddle in GoF, for
instance).
Please nitpick any part of this theory. I am a Swede, so I can handle it.

Someone suggested the following casting:
Sir Cadogan - Eric Idle. I agree with whoever suggested him. Hilarious!
http://us.imdb.com/Name?Idle,+Eric
I have to write a spirit-of-the-moment filk!

<minor filk>
Bravely bold sir Cad'gan kept watch on Gryffindor
He was not afraid to die, oh brave Sir Cad'gan
He was not at all afraid to be slashed by Sirius Black
Brave brave brave brave Sir Cad'gan
He was not in the least bit scared to be shred to confetti
Or to have his frame burnt up or his paint all dried out
To have his horsie stealed and his sword deep in the mud
Brave brave brave brave Sir Cad'gan
His armour rusty, his hair a mess, his...
Sir C: That's... that's enough singing for now, Martin!
</minor filk>

Martin, disappointed that Ron's hilarious line "She needs to sort out her
priorities!" in the Swedish translation is something like "Should that be
worse than dying?", founder and president and apparently sole member of
W.E.I.G.H.T.L.E.S.S. (Watson, Emma, *Is* Granger, Hermione. Tell Literally
Everyone She's Super!)





From keegan at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 16:04:04 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 08:04:04 -0800
Subject: fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <9uiag3+afib@eGroups.com>
References: <9uep7s+5eb9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011204080157.00a75ba0@mail.mcn.org>

Too bad Rufus Sewell doesn't seem to be in the running for Black.  Recently 
saw "A Knight's Tale" again (guilty pleasure) and I thought that Sewell 
would make a swell Black (definitely "dead sexy") and the fellow who played 
Chaucer might make either a good Lucius Malfoy or perhaps even 
Lupin.  They're both British - I checked.

Catherine in California



From heidit at netbox.com  Tue Dec  4 17:58:09 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:58:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20011204080157.00a75ba0@mail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <000101c17ced$428943f0$1501010a@HeidiTandySystem>

> Too bad Rufus Sewell doesn't seem to be in the running for 
> Black.  Recently 
> saw "A Knight's Tale" again (guilty pleasure) and I thought 
> that Sewell 
> would make a swell Black (definitely "dead sexy") 

Arabella of SugarQuill and I want to set up a support group for people
who are dejected that Rufus Sewell is not in the running for the part,
as we believe he was born for the role. Ever since I first read PoA
(July, 1999 for those keeping track) I have been convinced that nobody
else could do the role justice. 

Sigh. I am going to go and think resentful thoughts about casting
directors now. 

heidi tandy
follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes&
ships - only 7 sickles an ounce
http://www.fictionalley.org



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From sesyredchoos at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 18:17:45 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:17:45 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost - casting filk
Message-ID: <96.1e481fcf.293e6d49@aol.com>

Martin writes: Popular beliefs claim that ghosts are ghosts because they have 
unsettled
business, so here's my theory:

Ok, maybe it's just my extremely skeptical side doing the writing here, but I 
can't help but wonder if maybe having the Grey Lady in the Transfiguration 
classroom wasn't simply a prop.  Maybe there isn't any inherent or alterior 
motive to why she was there.  It was cool to spot her and it served as a good 
whisper to those who were watching the movie with me, "Hey!  Did you see 
that?  That's the Grey Lady!"  They probably just added her to, yet again, 
show off their CGI effects, or whatever it's called, or merely to heighten 
the Hogwarts feeling that, among mortals, roam  ghosts.  But it would be fun 
if there was more to it than just that!  Your theories could very well be 
true...we'll have to wait and see...

Milly V.  =)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 17:47:06 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:47:06 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oliver Wood (filk)
References: <9u5pqm+3142@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004d01c17ceb$b1238b60$e500a8c0@shasta>

Pippin warbled off a fine filk about Mr. Biggerstaff and his fabulous feats
of broomstickery,

<snip>

Er, I'm just going to assume that *we* aren't the sort of people who would
make questionable jokes about broomsticks ... I'd hate for that fine filk to
get banned ...

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who is feeling very virtuous about *not*
being that sort of person.)
_______________________

"Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, so that may not have been
bravery...."




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Dec  4 19:44:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 19:44:21 -0000
Subject: Snape, Poll, and odds and ends/DVD
In-Reply-To: <01bc01c17c87$fe86f090$8b546c40@Dee>
Message-ID: <9uj92l+9als@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Denise" <gypsycaine at y...> wrote:
> 
> I can't believe the DVD is ready to be distributed already.  That just blows
> my mind.  It used to be that you had to wait a year.  I am DEFINITELY
> getting that DVD player for my Television now.  Watching Quidditch on the
> computer screen just wouldn't be the same. Lol.

Where did you hear that?  I've heard is that it's coming out in the spring.  

Technically, there's no reason to wait a year for the DVD to come out -- it's 
not a matter of whether it's "ready," but of market timing.  Manufacture of the 
DVD's can happen at the same time as the film is being prepared for theatrical 
release.  That really elaborate version of "Shrek" came out much less than a 
year after theater release, after all.




From keegan at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 20:08:51 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 12:08:51 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <000101c17ced$428943f0$1501010a@HeidiTandySystem>
References: <4.2.0.58.20011204080157.00a75ba0@mail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011204120731.00a746d0@mail.mcn.org>

At 12:58 PM 12/4/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Arabella of SugarQuill and I want to set up a support group for people
>who are dejected that Rufus Sewell is not in the running for the part,
>as we believe he was born for the role.

Well, I haven't joined any of the other clubs (CRAB, LOON, etc...) but I'd 
shell out some sickels for this one.

Catherine in California




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 21:05:06 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:05:06 -0000
Subject: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost - casting filk
In-Reply-To: <96.1e481fcf.293e6d49@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9ujdq2+lkvl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., sesyredchoos at a... wrote:
> Martin writes: Popular beliefs claim that ghosts are ghosts because they have 
> unsettled
> business, so here's my theory:
> 
> Ok, maybe it's just my extremely skeptical side doing the writing here, but I 
> can't help but wonder if maybe having the Grey Lady in the Transfiguration 
> classroom wasn't simply a prop.  Maybe there isn't any inherent or alterior 
> motive to why she was there.  It was cool to spot her and it served as a good 
> whisper to those who were watching the movie with me, "Hey!  Did you see 
> that?  That's the Grey Lady!"  They probably just added her to, yet again, 
> show off their CGI effects, or whatever it's called, or merely to heighten 
> the Hogwarts feeling that, among mortals, roam  ghosts.  But it would be fun 
> if there was more to it than just that!  Your theories could very well be 
> true...we'll have to wait and see...


 The simplest canon explanation would be that the Grey Lady has been a friend of Minerva's since Minerva's school days and likes to hang out with her and help her grade papers now that Minerva is a schoolteacher.  I suspect that, like Binns, the Grey Lady had been a Hogwarts teacher in her day. From her dress, she appears to have lived in the mid to late 1600s. 

Hrm.. in fact, just about all of the Hogwarts ghosts except for Myrtle seem to be roughly from the mid to late 1600s. I wonder if most of them died during the witch/wizard persecutions which led to the Secrecy Act. And was there not a Goblin Rebellion around that time, too?




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 21:06:42 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:06:42 -0000
Subject: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost - casting filk
In-Reply-To: <96.1e481fcf.293e6d49@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9ujdt2+34f8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., sesyredchoos at a... wrote:
> Martin writes: Popular beliefs claim that ghosts are ghosts because they have 
> unsettled
> business, so here's my theory:
> 
> Ok, maybe it's just my extremely skeptical side doing the writing here, but I 
> can't help but wonder if maybe having the Grey Lady in the Transfiguration 
> classroom wasn't simply a prop.  Maybe there isn't any inherent or alterior 
> motive to why she was there.  It was cool to spot her and it served as a good 
> whisper to those who were watching the movie with me, "Hey!  Did you see 
> that?  That's the Grey Lady!"  They probably just added her to, yet again, 
> show off their CGI effects, or whatever it's called, or merely to heighten 
> the Hogwarts feeling that, among mortals, roam  ghosts.  But it would be fun 
> if there was more to it than just that!  Your theories could very well be 
> true...we'll have to wait and see...


 The simplest canon explanation would be that the Grey Lady has been a friend of Minerva's since Minerva's school days and likes to hang out with her and help her grade papers now that Minerva is a schoolteacher.  I suspect that, like Binns, the Grey Lady had been a Hogwarts teacher in her day. From her dress, she appears to have lived in the mid to late 1600s. 

Hrm.. in fact, just about all of the Hogwarts ghosts except for Myrtle seem to be roughly from the mid to late 1600s. I wonder if most of them died during the witch/wizard persecutions which led to the Secrecy Act. And was there not a Goblin Rebellion around that time, too?




From kel4 at columbia.edu  Tue Dec  4 21:18:46 2001
From: kel4 at columbia.edu (kel4 at columbia.edu)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:18:46 -0000
Subject: Voldemort in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <20011130.173715.-609613.6.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9ujejm+nmil@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Laura Klotz <laurakay76 at j...> wrote:
>
> You have to remember that the Mirror of Erised works just like an
> ordinary mirror as well as the window into your soul.  You have to 
>be looking *directly* into your own reflection to see your heart's 
>desire; otherwise you'll see just a regular reflection.  (Like when 
>Harry was trying to show Ron his parents -- Ron said "I only see us" 
>and Harry told him to "stand here and look in properly.")  


Yes, of course.  Alas, I re-read the section right after posting.  
Haste makes waste!  




From goldenkey26 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  4 20:06:10 2001
From: goldenkey26 at yahoo.com (goldenkey26 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:06:10 -0000
Subject: Good grief, *finally*!...
Message-ID: <9ujabi+6ul9@eGroups.com>

...I've gotten to see the movie.  I *was* going to watch it 
Thanksgiving weekend as an early birthday present, but then I got the 
flu-shot flu and then I got some other unidentified thing, and I 
don't want to go into it (except it involved the ER, Benadryl, and an 
annoying male nurse), so suffice to say I was very disappointed.  I 
couldn't even answer the poll on OTChatter because there wasn't an 
entry that said "Haven't watched it yet but intend to".  Boo!

*ahem* Anyway.  I loved the movie.  I thought the changes they made 
were the right changes, though if I'd been younger I'd've had the 
same reaction I did to The Black Stallion when it came out.  Which 
was utter abjuration and disgust -- but I've learned better now.  I 
look forward to the director's cut, if and when it is published.

Some of the things delighted me so much I wish they'd actually been 
in the book:  like the glass reappearing and trapping Dudley in the 
snake habitat (!) and Harry doing a flip to catch the Remembrall 
right in front of McGonagall's window (that one's negligible, but it 
was very effective visually), and (also negligible) Wood's reassuring 
Harry before the Quidditch match with the story of *his* first game 
in which he took a Bludger to the head and woke up in hospital a week 
later...  (And did that moment remind you of preludes to bullfighting 
scenes?)

The Quidditch ruled.  I wanted there to be more of it.

Snape ruled too, and I wanted more of him as well.  And yes, Helen, I 
thought it funny when he stormed into the Potions classroom the first 
day -- it gave emphasis to Quirrell's "so useful to have him swooping 
around like an overgrown bat" (too bad that line wasn't in there -- 
or did I miss it?  I'm going back.).  I also liked the moment when 
Ron's broomstick hit him in the face and he said "Shut up, Harry!" 
when Harry laughed.

I found it really curious that they decided to alter the trapdoor 
sequence to remove Hermione's particular heroism in the Potion Logic 
Trap, and rework Devil's Snare to have her save the day there.  Was 
it a time-saving attempt to give each of them a chance to show their 
Gryffindor colors?  Hmmm....  

I watched the CGI stuff with Luke's apposite criticisms in mind, and 
found that I could live with the effects okay (great informative 
stuff, Luke, by the way.).

Well, there's my initial bubbling over.

:)

Lisa




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Dec  4 18:12:10 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:12:10 EST5EDT
Subject: Ah-HA!  Saw Gladiator and understand!
Message-ID: <95C46862A2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I just so happened to be channel surfing the other night 
and caught the part of Gladiator I think IMDb was 
referencing to.  And yes, it does look like the part where 
the Gryffindors are waiting to take the Quidditch field.

Cute.

Wow....you guys were good at catching that.  I was really 
confused!

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

2. His homework ate the dog.
          - Top Ten Signs Your Son's A Wizard
            David Letterman



From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Tue Dec  4 22:07:23 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:07:23 -0500
Subject: Harry Potter Spam
Message-ID: <3C0D491B.9D333301@sun.com>

I am now receiving Harry Potter related spam (unsolicited email advertising) for
the first time. (I've been receiving other spam for years.) The HP spam started
showing up shortly after my first post to the Movie list. I had posted to
HPforGrownups previously, with no spam. This suggests to me that someone on this
list is harvesting digests for the purposes of spamming. Are others receiving
this spam also?

The membership of this list is currently open (as is the book list, for that
matter), which means no attempt is made to screen members. On some lists I'm on,
members have to fill out a short questionnaire, for example, which hopefully
deters spammers at least slightly. (Though I can imagine trying to keep up with
new membership applications on a list the size of either of these is a pain, and
it is, of course, impossible to truly verify each member once you get beyond a
dozen or so.)

For the record, I'd like to make it clear that I will *never* knowingly buy any
service or product from anyone who sends spam advertisements. In the past I have
gone so far as to publically blacklist spammers when asked for vendor
recommendations by others. (Amazon was on my blacklist for a long time, until
they stopped spamming.) I also use spam-trapping software which does report
repeat offenders to their ISPs and I actively campaign for spammers to be denied
access to ISP services. In short, I am not a safe mark. 

Not that I expect any spammers to read this, or care. :(

Elizabeth
(...who puts spammers and Death Eaters in roughly the same equivalence class. Or
couldn't you tell?)



From keegan at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 23:55:45 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 15:55:45 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Spam
In-Reply-To: <3C0D491B.9D333301@sun.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011204155409.00a80670@mail.mcn.org>


>Elizabeth
>(...who puts spammers and Death Eaters in roughly the same equivalence class.

Personally, I think the Death Eaters have more class.

I haven't gotten any HP spam.  I have gotten a bunch of insurance spam, buy 
this stupid thing spam and herbal spams.  I think the HP spam sounds more 
interesting.

Catherine in California



From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Wed Dec  5 00:54:07 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:54:07 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Spam
References: <3C0D491B.9D333301@sun.com>
Message-ID: <008701c17d27$5898f3e0$b23570c2@c5s910j>

Elizabeth Dalton said:

> I am now receiving Harry Potter related spam (unsolicited email
advertising) for
> the first time. (I've been receiving other spam for years.) The HP spam
started
> showing up shortly after my first post to the Movie list. I had posted to
> HPforGrownups previously, with no spam. This suggests to me that someone
on this
> list is harvesting digests for the purposes of spamming. Are others
receiving
> this spam also?

Any spam that gets sent to this list is deleted and the sender email is
banned from all our lists.  If anyone is receiving offlist HP spam that
appears to be related to the list (e.g. from a fellow list member), please
let the moderators know and we'll look into it.

Please don't respond further on list; send the details to:

hpforgrownups-owner AT yahoogroups.com

> The membership of this list is currently open (as is the book list, for
that
> matter), which means no attempt is made to screen members. On some lists
I'm on,
> members have to fill out a short questionnaire, for example, which
hopefully
> deters spammers at least slightly. (Though I can imagine trying to keep up
with
> new membership applications on a list the size of either of these is a
pain, and
> it is, of course, impossible to truly verify each member once you get
beyond a
> dozen or so.)

The Movie list is open, yes, but status on the main (book discussion) list
was changed recently.  All new members there are now placed on moderated
status, and we have a team of people reviewing first posts to the list.
That system also serves to pick up spam, trolls and flamers before they
reach the list, although it doesn't prevent them from joining up.

Naturally, behind the scenes, we discuss the problems of administrating the
HPFGU lists and we have more than once considered and rejected such options
as screening quizzes and closing or restricting membership.  These ideas are
revisited from time to time, but, rest assured, we have not overlooked them
in our discussions.

If anyone has suggestions or comments, we're always happy to receive these
offlist; it's great to get input from everyone, but please don't post to the
lists themselves.

Thanks

Neil
HPfGU Moderator Team





From john at walton.vu  Wed Dec  5 00:56:33 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 00:56:33 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: Warning: new virus: "Goner"
Message-ID: <B8332141.6786%john@walton.vu>

Hi all.

Got a Windows-running PC? Use Outlook Express? ICQ? IRC? Read on!

Since a few members of the HPFGU community have recently been hit by
viruses, the Moderator Team bring you some advice, courtesy of McAfee.com:

Re: The Goner Virus.

============================================

This is a HIGH RISK virus that spread via Microsoft Outlook and can be
spread via ICQ. This is a mass mailing worm that attempts to send itself to
all entries in the Outlook Address book. The virus will arrive with the
following email message:

Subject: Hi 
Body: 
How are you ? 
When I saw this screen saver, I immediately thought about you
I am in a harry, I promise you will love it!

Attachment: GONE.SCR

============================================

Folks, as always, do NOT, repeat, DO NOT download any file from email unless
you are absolutely positive what it is. This virus uses the .scr file format
(Windows Screensaver), which is apparently very popular among Windows users.

At any rate, you MUST update your virus software. If not, this worm WILL get
through -- and delete your virus software (nasty, isn't it?) and various
bits of your system. Remember, if you are infected, do not use your email
program, IRC or ICQ until you are cleared, otherwise you risk spreading the
virus.

For more information:

www.mcafee.com
www.cert.org
www.symantec.com

Regards,

--John, your Mac-using-yet-antivirus-program-loving Moderator With Rock #47

____________________________________________

There will be an answer, let it be.
        in Memoriam George Harrison.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________





From editor at texas.net  Wed Dec  5 03:11:21 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:11:21 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Severus Snape
References: <9uh2cp+adjg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C0D9058.E5F1BBB0@texas.net>

nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com wrote:

> I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a sweetheart,
> and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And that
> British accent! Makes me swoon...
> Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat,
> tail between my legs, into lurkdom?

No, you need to get yourself over to the Snapefans list, where lurid and
lascivious fanfics and R-rated posts abound, despite the allure of the
complexity of his *character* (sigh). No question he's attractive, but
for me it's not as, um, visceral as for some of you other gals. Even as
Rickman plays him, which only goes to show again how good an actor
Rickman is.

--Amanda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From teeravec at fas.harvard.edu  Wed Dec  5 04:16:19 2001
From: teeravec at fas.harvard.edu (Samaporn Teeravechyan)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:16:19 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost
In-Reply-To: <9ujdq2+lkvl@eGroups.com>
References: <96.1e481fcf.293e6d49@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.20011204231619.009ff4bc@pop.fas.harvard.edu>

At 09:05 PM 12/4/01 -0000, you wrote:

>  I suspect that, like Binns, the Grey Lady had been a Hogwarts teacher in
>her day. From her dress, she appears to have lived in the mid to late 1600s. 
> 
> Hrm.. in fact, just about all of the Hogwarts ghosts except for Myrtle
>seem to be roughly from the mid to late 1600s. I wonder if most of them
>died during the witch/wizard persecutions which led to the Secrecy Act. And
>was there not a Goblin Rebellion around that time, too?    

Secrecy Act? You've lost me there. I think it's possibly because, despite
the number of times I've read through all the books, my eyelids droop when
I get to Prof. Binn's lectures and my eyes tend to gloss over his words ...
I think I'd fit right in at Hogwarts =P.

The thing is, however, that practically everyone in the Leaky Cauldron is
dressed in the same style. 

> I, too, am one of the ones that think Snape is really a sweetheart,
> and sexy as hell! (At least the way Alan Rickman plays him) And that
> British accent! Makes me swoon...
> Anyone else out there think Snape is sexy? Or do I need to retreat,
> tail between my legs, into lurkdom?

Heh ... personally, I find the canon-Snape a rather despicable character,
and yet I arrive at the list and find myself seemingly outnumbered by Snape
fans =P.

Samaporn



From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 05:37:55 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 05:37:55 -0000
Subject: Voldemort going through Harry
In-Reply-To: <01C17C21.8599D1E0.dpost@home.se>
Message-ID: <9ukbrj+q2s4@eGroups.com>

I saw Voldemort flying through Harry as a last ditch effort by 
Voldemort to attach himself to a human with the Stone. Quirrel was 
gone. Harry picked up the stone. At that moment that is what
Voldemort required most: a human with the Stone in his hand. Only his 
attempt at inhabiting Harry, however temporarily to use the Stone, 
failed since Harry did not want to use the Stone or give it to him.
It was, in effect, a Wizard's duel without the wands. Hence, the 
intense duel of wills knocked Harry completely unconscious, Voldemort 
was weakened yet again, and Harry woke up much later in hospital.
With wands we would have had a similar scene, but much closer in
effect to that which takes place near the end of 'Goblet of Fire' 
where Voldemort is back full force and both wizards are strong 
enough to concentrate their will down through their arms and out
their wands. 




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 05:49:42 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 05:49:42 -0000
Subject: Ah-HA!  Saw Gladiator and understand!
In-Reply-To: <95C46862A2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9ukchm+42qn@eGroups.com>

I was totally amazed that I'd missed it entirely as I had seen 
'Gladiator' at least 20 times in the theater. So of course, I had to 
trot off to the movie again and the Quidditch holding area is 
IDENTICAL to 'Gladiator.' Same staging, same set. What a hoot. 

> Wow....you guys were good at catching that.  I was really 
> confused!
> 
> Rachel Bray





From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 06:13:09 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 06:13:09 -0000
Subject: Daniel's Interpretation of Harry (was "The Movie")
In-Reply-To: <B1514476088@i01sv4138.ids1.intelonline.com>
Message-ID: <9ukdtl+bvd2@eGroups.com>

Having seen Daniel in 'David Copperfield' I was especially impressed 
at how low-key he played Harry in comparison. In the BBC Interview he 
says Harry is slower to react than Ron and Hermione to everything 
because it is all new to him. Ron grew up in the wizard world and 
Hermione knows more than Ron.

I've been trying to think which scene in 'David Copperfield' caught 
Columbus' eye the most. The one that moved me most was when Bob 
Hoskins and family say goodbye when leaving London and David (Daniel) 
is lovingly saying goodbye to them while in the throes of being 
abandoned. I can't watch that scene without a box of kleenex at hand. 
Reminds me a lot of how he did the Mirror of Erised (desirE). Don't 
get me started. 

> ...I thought the
> kids were outstanding actors, especially Daniel. Daniel was better
> than any of the adults, in my opinion. The mirror scene brought 
> tears to my eyes because of him. 




From lake4fam at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  5 08:28:23 2001
From: lake4fam at earthlink.net (dittanymorgan)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 08:28:23 -0000
Subject: fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20011204120731.00a746d0@mail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <9uklr7+7cou@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Catherine Keegan <keegan at m...> wrote:
> At 12:58 PM 12/4/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >Arabella of SugarQuill and I want to set up a support group for 
people
> >who are dejected that Rufus Sewell is not in the running for the 
part,
> >as we believe he was born for the role.
> 
> Well, I haven't joined any of the other clubs (CRAB, LOON, etc...) 
but I'd 
> shell out some sickels for this one.
> 
> Catherine in California

Sorry I don't have any idea who R. Sewell is, or what he looks like.
If you have seen the portrait photo of Jim Dale on the audio 
cassettes/CD's, that is the face that I see when I hear the name 
Sirius.  Robson Green, an alternative suggestion, is totally wrong.
I am now the president, entire slate of officers, and membership of 
JD4SB:  Jim Dale for Sirius Black.

The above is opinion, and bears not the slightest resemblance to fact.

dittany/custodienne, JD4SB





From heidit at netbox.com  Wed Dec  5 11:52:56 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:52:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <9uklr7+7cou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001001c17d83$8125a400$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dittanymorgan [mailto:lake4fam at earthlink.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:28 AM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: fantasy casting
> 
> 
> Real-To:  "dittanymorgan" <lake4fam at earthlink.net>
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Catherine Keegan <keegan at m...> wrote:
> > At 12:58 PM 12/4/01 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Arabella of SugarQuill and I want to set up a support group for
> people
> > >who are dejected that Rufus Sewell is not in the running for the
> part,
> > >as we believe he was born for the role.
> > 
> > Well, I haven't joined any of the other clubs (CRAB, LOON, etc...)
> but I'd 
> > shell out some sickels for this one.
> > 
> > Catherine in California
> 
> Sorry I don't have any idea who R. Sewell is, or what he 
> looks like. 

Here's a picture of him, from A Knight's Tale -
http://us.imdb.com/EGallery?source=ss&group=0183790&photo=kt_CT5788.jpg&
path=pgallery&path_key=Sewell,+Rufus - his eyes, in case you can't tell
from the pic, are clear light blue - like the description of the eyes
that Sirius has in animagus form. Someone set up a fansite for him at
http://www.geocities.com/vue2sewell/ as well - the pics from Cold
Comfort Farm were the ones that originally convinced me that he was
perfect for the role. Only problem is, he's about 35 - he'd be able to
look similar in age to Alan Rickman, allowing for the argument that
after 12 years in Azkaban, one has had less sun exposure and thus less
sun-wrinkles, than ordinary people of the same age. 

heidi tandy
follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes&
ships - only 7 sickles an ounce
http://www.fictionalley.org



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 13:40:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 13:40:21 -0000
Subject: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.20011204231619.009ff4bc@pop.fas.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <9ul845+ek9b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Samaporn Teeravechyan <teeravec at f...> wrote:
> At 09:05 PM 12/4/01 -0000, you wrote:
> 
> >  I suspect that, like Binns, the Grey Lady had been a Hogwarts teacher in
> >her day. From her dress, she appears to have lived in the mid to late 1600s. 
> > 
> > Hrm.. in fact, just about all of the Hogwarts ghosts except for Myrtle
> >seem to be roughly from the mid to late 1600s. I wonder if most of them
> >died during the witch/wizard persecutions which led to the Secrecy Act. 
And
> >was there not a Goblin Rebellion around that time, too?    
> 
> Secrecy Act? You've lost me there. 

The International Code of Wizarding Secrecy was the result of an International 
Confederation of Wizards summit meeting held in 1692 (the year of the Salem 
witch trials) in response to incrasingly gruesome persecution by fearful 
muggles.  If you don't have access to Bagshot's "A History of Magic," you can 
check "Fantastic Beats and Whre to Find Them," page xv.

Another Hogwarts ghost who's not from the 1600s is Nick, who died in 1492.




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Wed Dec  5 14:11:37 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:11:37 +1100
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
Message-ID: <007d01c17d96$c1dae880$0590aecb@price>

Yes, after weeks of whingeing and sulking, I am pleased to say that I have now seen the movie twice!  Now, I hope I'm not going to rehash well-trodden ground here (I've been off-list for a week or so due to a trip to Adelaide), but here, for what they're worth, are my thoughts.

And the verdict is a resounding...

...not bad.  Some bits good, some could have been better.

On the soundtrack, I didn't mind the actual music (Hedwig's Theme has a certain majesty to it, and I rather liked the medieval luting that popped up in one part), but I wish John had restrained himself a little in the volume and vim department.  Less is more, John.  IMO, you would have done your score more favours if you'd played it a little less loud and continuously.  I also wondered whereabouts in Hogwarts the infamous "land under the trapdoor" is, because if it were anywhere near anyone in the school, the extremely loud racket from the chess set would surely have had them wrapping their heads in pillows.

Robbie Coltrane did a fine Hagrid (I can well believe that JKR had him in mind when writing the character), but I have to agree with the waves of protest about Richard Harris.  He really annoyed me.  Since when is Dumbledore droopy and slack-mouthed?  He seemed to be playing the wheezy, distant, vague old man he parodies himself as in the book, and the script is no excuse in my view.  He could have used the lines he had a lot better.  Surgically insert a twinkle in the man!  I also found Maggie Smith a tough insipid and finicky as McGonagall - I see her as having rather more oomph than that.

Rupert did well as Ron, both in comic moments and his moment of nobility astride the horse, but alas, I'm inclined to agree that Emma was a bit over the top.  The general Hermione style is there, but it needed toning down.  Not that I blame Emma for this - surely this was CC's job.  I have unworthy suspicions that he's so used to encouraging gross overacting from children that he couldn't restrain himself from having one stompy shouter.  Though my personal Golden Cowpat for worst actor in the movie was whatshisname as Quirrell.  Terrible.  Neither funny nor convincing as the tremulous stutterer, and that fainting scene was a veritable shocker.

I have been preparing carefully for my next comment.  Not only have I donned my bullet-proof vest and suit of armour, I have also erected a electrified barbed wire fence around my concrete bunker and hidden inside it bearing a can of Mace.  Because... I didn't find Alan Rickman particularly sexy!  (gasps of horror and fury and cries of vengeance from all and sundry Snape fans).  Before I reinforced my fence with a pack of three headed dogs, let me hastily say that his *acting* was good, and his *voice* is gorgeously deep and melodious.  However, he didn't do it for me physically at all.  Too old, too chunky, too stiff around the neck (I agree with the high collar comment).  Neither did he fit my mental image of Snape.  Snape is younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and greasy.  Plus I didn't go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while striding briskly into the classroom.  Feels all wrong to me.  If I were CC, I'd have had him pause silkily, one eyebrow raised, in the doorway, while the students fell silent, and then make his way slowly and deliberately to the front of the room and *then* quietly, coolly begin his speech.  I know the film was long and they had to hurry along what they could, but CC's version lost a lot of Snape's gravitas IMO.

(Tabouli adds a couple of Norwegian Ridgebacks to the roof of her concrete bunker)

I'm really going to make myself unpopular here, but Sean Biggerstaff, though he had a lovely accent, didn't really grab me either.  Not bad, but not incredible (for those of you who wade through my OT posts, you'll know I rarely take to actors anyway - I need a holistic feel for someone to find him attractive).

To my mind, the most attractive (or potentially attractive) male character in the film was actually Daniel Radcliffe.  OK, OK, don't set the pedophile police on me, I know he's only 12, but he's a lovely little boy: give him 8 years or so, and he will be gorgeous.  I don't usually go for the dark hair, blue eyes combo, but he had such a beautiful, haunted presence, and such an endearingly cheeky grin.  In my holistic rating scale, the philosophical/introspective yet playful and warm wins a lot of points.  My throat veritably swelled in the Mirror of Erised scene, both times I saw it.

I didn't mind Harry's parents, and even the centaur, after bracing myself for the worst after comments on this list.  The centaur had a bit of Pan about him, that slightly rough around the edges, bearded, rustic look.  Not the conventional centaur, but plausible enough for me.  The Invisibility Cloak was great, Quidditch good but a bit excessively violent (presumably for dramatic effect, but I thought it a bit gratuitous), and what was with Voldemort in the Forest?  Wasn't the hooded figure meant to be Quirrel with V's head on him, not some amorphous slithering cloak with nothing apparently in it??

Looking over what I've written, I seem to be pretty negative.  Erm.  Erm, for all the above, I *did* enjoy the movie...

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 14:28:06 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:28:06 -0000
Subject: Possible opening as Ravenclaw ghost
In-Reply-To: <9ul845+ek9b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ulatm+ptmv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Samaporn Teeravechyan <teeravec at f...> wrote:
> > At 09:05 PM 12/4/01 -0000, you wrote:
> > 
> > >  I suspect that, like Binns, the Grey Lady had been a Hogwarts teacher in
> > >her day. From her dress, she appears to have lived in the mid to late 1600s. 
> > > 
> > > Hrm.. in fact, just about all of the Hogwarts ghosts except for Myrtle
> > >seem to be roughly from the mid to late 1600s. I wonder if most of them
> > >died during the witch/wizard persecutions which led to the Secrecy Act. 
> And
> > >was there not a Goblin Rebellion around that time, too?    
> > 
> > Secrecy Act? You've lost me there. 
> 
> The International Code of Wizarding Secrecy was the result of an International 
> Confederation of Wizards summit meeting held in 1692 (the year of the Salem 
> witch trials) in response to incrasingly gruesome persecution by fearful 
> muggles.  If you don't have access to Bagshot's "A History of Magic," you can 
> check "Fantastic Beats and Whre to Find Them," page xv.
> 
> Another Hogwarts ghost who's not from the 1600s is Nick, who died in 1492. 

  And probably the Fat Friar, come to think of it.... Maybe I'm just remembering more Elizabethan/Cavalier ghosts than there were.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 14:55:41 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:55:41 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <007d01c17d96$c1dae880$0590aecb@price>
Message-ID: <9ulchd+ofka@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
> I didn't find Alan Rickman particularly sexy!  . . .  his *acting* was good, and 
> his *voice* is gorgeously deep and melodious.  However, he didn't do it for 
> me physically at all.  Too old, too chunky, too stiff around the neck (I agree
> with the high collar comment).  Neither did he fit my mental image of Snape.  
> Snape is younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and greasy. 

Tabouli, ITA!  May I join you in that bunker?  But please don't laugh at my Sean 
Biggerstaff poster.

  --  Joanne, old enough to know better

::::  donning her invisibility cloak ::::




From Dar20 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 15:42:53 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (darlenebuell)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 15:42:53 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <007d01c17d96$c1dae880$0590aecb@price>
Message-ID: <9ulf9t+o9qa@eGroups.com>

> To my mind, the most attractive (or potentially attractive) male 
character in the film was actually Daniel Radcliffe.  OK, OK, don't 
set the pedophile police on me, I know he's only 12, but he's a 
lovely little boy: give him 8 years or so, and he will be gorgeous.  

Tabouli, they can send the pedophile police after both of us.  I 
think all the kids are terribly cute, Daniel in particular.  He is 
going to grow up to be a gorgeous young man.. who says Harry can't 
be?  ;)  As I said before, if only I had a 12 yo daughter to live 
vicariously through.  :)

> Looking over what I've written, I seem to be pretty negative.  
Erm.  Erm, for all the above, I *did* enjoy the movie...

Glad to see you are totally honest, though.  Very well thought out 
review, and I appreciated it!

Dar




From guretna at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 17:07:00 2001
From: guretna at yahoo.com (guretna)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:07:00 -0000
Subject: Professor Lupin McGregor?
Message-ID: <9ulk7k+faal@eGroups.com>

Forgive me if I take anyone by surprise here, but I think unless you
are a Muggle, you must have heard the rumour that Ewan McGregor is
considered for the part of Professor Lupin in the third movie. I
cannot say I'm very happy with this decision, not because Ewan is a
bad actor, but because he's a young actor. I mean Lupin is supposed to
be about the age of James Potter or Snape, so unless you put some
heavy make-up on him (which I find unnatural and as such should be
prevented), you cannot make people believe that he (born 1971) is in
his mid-thirties or early forties. If James has a boy of thirteen then
he must be at least 35 (by general standards) and so should Lupin (and
Snape and Pettigrew).

I do, though, have a rather controversial nomination too for Lupin:
Rowan Atkinson! Some people would perhaps find him too comical to be
Lupin, but as I'm sure he's a great actor, he should be able to change
his air according to the role. What d'ya think?




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  5 17:15:10 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:15:10 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <007d01c17d96$c1dae880$0590aecb@price>
Message-ID: <9ulkmu+od0v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
> 
> I'm really going to make myself unpopular here, but Sean 
Biggerstaff, though he had a lovely accent, didn't really grab me 
either.  Not bad, but not incredible (for those of you who wade 
through my OT posts, you'll know I rarely take to actors anyway - I 
need a holistic feel for someone to find him attractive).
> 

Well Tabouli, maybe we can make our own little fringe club, because 
I can't see what all the fuss over Mr. Biggerstaff is either. I was 
not impressed with his "Mime 101" struggling with the bludgers. It 
gave me flashbacks to first year acting class. (NOOOOOOO!!!!!) 
I just wanted to let you know that however marginalized we may be, 
we should not be afraid to be a vocal minority. Let us not be afraid 
to stand up and declare "BIG BROWN EYES AND A DREAMY ACCENT DO NOT 
AN ACTOR MAKE!" ;)

Cheers!

- Cornflower O'Shea

*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*

"Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore

*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  5 17:19:17 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:19:17 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape
In-Reply-To: <3C0D9058.E5F1BBB0@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9ulkul+aj6b@eGroups.com>

> No, you need to get yourself over to the Snapefans list, where
> lurid and lascivious fanfics and R-rated posts abound, despite 
> the allure of the complexity of his *character* (sigh). No 
> question he's attractive, but for me it's not as, um, visceral as 
> for some of you other gals. Even as Rickman plays him, which only
> goes to show again how good an actor Rickman is.
> 
> --Amanda

<lol> my viewing buddy last night commented that rickman's portrayal 
holds a decidedly...um..."camp" appeal. but i, for one, 
wholeheartedly agree with amanda and the original poster - both in 
terms of his acting abilities, and those other qualities...

kt




From prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Dec  5 17:27:27 2001
From: prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk (prima_donna_23)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:27:27 -0000
Subject: fantasy casting
In-Reply-To: <001001c17d83$8125a400$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem>
Message-ID: <9ulldv+m2at@eGroups.com>

> Here's a picture of him, from A Knight's Tale -
> http://us.imdb.com/EGallery?
source=ss&group=0183790&photo=kt_CT5788.jpg&
> path=pgallery&path_key=Sewell,+Rufus - his eyes, in case you can't 
tell
> from the pic, are clear light blue - like the description of the 
eyes
> that Sirius has in animagus form.

Oh wow! He's so right!

*Must calm down*

I must say that Sirius having pale blue eyes never occured to me, but 
actually I can really imagine that now.

He's just become my number one choice for Sirius. Well, that's number 
one plausible choice, it's such a shame that my actual exact picture 
of Sirius looks exactly like a friend of mine who can't act at all 
(but can sing wonderfully and *does* have blue eyes).

Kim




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  5 18:08:51 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (davisaacs)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:08:51 -0000
Subject: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
In-Reply-To: <9ulk7k+faal@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ulnrj+j7nc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "guretna" <guretna at y...> wrote:
> Forgive me if I take anyone by surprise here, but I think unless you
> are a Muggle, you must have heard the rumour that Ewan McGregor is
> considered for the part of Professor Lupin in the third movie. I
> cannot say I'm very happy with this decision, not because Ewan is a
> bad actor, but because he's a young actor. I mean Lupin is supposed 
to
> be about the age of James Potter or Snape, so unless you put some
> heavy make-up on him (which I find unnatural and as such should be
> prevented), you cannot make people believe that he (born 1971) is in
> his mid-thirties or early forties. If James has a boy of thirteen 
then
> he must be at least 35 (by general standards) and so should Lupin 
(and
> Snape and Pettigrew).

I don't think Ewan would be right as Lupin either, he's a great actor 
and everything, but too...I don't know...for want of a better word: 
wet. I always thought Lupin was meant to be quite gruff, with a 
hoarse voice...

> I do, though, have a rather controversial nomination too for Lupin:
> Rowan Atkinson! Some people would perhaps find him too comical to be
> Lupin, but as I'm sure he's a great actor, he should be able to 
change
> his air according to the role. What d'ya think?

I don't think he'd be that good as Lupin, but I think her would be 
completely perfect as Peter Petigrew...I think he could nail him down 
to a T. But that's just how I imagined him of course:o)

Dave




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 18:40:38 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:40:38 -0000
Subject: Lupin: Anthony Stewart Head
In-Reply-To: <9ulk7k+faal@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ulpn6+rhu2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "guretna" <guretna at y...> wrote:
> Forgive me if I take anyone by surprise here, but I think unless you
> are a Muggle, you must have heard the rumour that Ewan McGregor is
> considered for the part of Professor Lupin in the third movie. I
> cannot say I'm very happy with this decision, not because Ewan is a
> bad actor, but because he's a young actor. I mean Lupin is supposed 
to
> be about the age of James Potter or Snape, so unless you put some
> heavy make-up on him (which I find unnatural and as such should be
> prevented), you cannot make people believe that he (born 1971) is in
> his mid-thirties or early forties. If James has a boy of thirteen 
then
> he must be at least 35 (by general standards) and so should Lupin 
(and
> Snape and Pettigrew).
> 
> I do, though, have a rather controversial nomination too for Lupin:
> Rowan Atkinson! Some people would perhaps find him too comical to be
> Lupin, but as I'm sure he's a great actor, he should be able to 
change
> his air according to the role. What d'ya think?

  Although I previously vetted Anthony Stewart Head for Amos Diggory, 
now I've changed my mind and would love to see him as Remus Lupin. 
He's the right age to fit in with Alan Rickman and Robson Green. He's 
rather quietly attractive and not aggressively sexy or pretty. He can 
do that hangdog, persecuted vulnerability well and we've all seen him 
perfect the sadly secretive, affectionate Mentor shtick as Giles on 
BTVS.  Considering that by the time the movie is made, his Giles-back-
in-England show should be well-established, he may well be prominent 
enough to the casting staff to start getting the calls next year.





From chattie27million at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 18:36:36 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:36:36 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Professor Lupin McGregor?
Message-ID: <121.849b540.293fc334@aol.com>

In a message dated 05/12/01 17:08:41 GMT Standard Time, guretna at yahoo.com 
writes:


> not because Ewan is a
> bad actor, but because he's a young actor. 

Actually, Ewan McGregor is 30/31 at the moment, so by the time they do the 
third film, he will almost be mid thirties......Just thought I'd say:)
hugs
Rach *who is trying to keep her exitment of Ewan being asked to a bare 
minimun as no-one else seems to be too happy about it!*:):)

"But the fact is, Harry Potter pisses all over Star Wars"

'The Face' magazine article 2001


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From absinthe at mad.scientist.com  Wed Dec  5 19:18:30 2001
From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (milztoday)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:18:30 -0000
Subject: Movie Bloopers.....
Message-ID: <9ulru6+acmp@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone, an acquaintance just e-mailed me this list of 
bloopers...What do you think?

HP Movie Bloopers

1. At the start of term feast, Harry sits down on the right side of 
the dinner table next to Ron. But when the food appears he is on the 
other side of the table next to Hermione
2. When the three sneak past Fluffy, the hound wakes up and slobbers 
on Ron['s shoulder. But when they fall down the trapdoor, Ron is 
slobber free.
3. While shopping in Diagon Alley, Harry walks past a store with 
three witches outside twice, without backtracking
4. When Harry takes off the invisibility cloak in front of the Mirror 
of Erised, it disappears even though it's supposed to be visible when 
he's not wearing it.
5. After Harry's battle with Voldemort, he has a large scratch on his 
chin. In the hospital wing, the scratch is healed, but comes back 
bigger in a later scene.
6. A snapshot of Harry with his parents is shown in a photo album. 
But the kid in the picture is obviously older than 1 year old, the 
age Harry was when Voldemort killed his parents.
7. Harry walks through a door  to find the Mirror of Erised. Later 
the door disappears, replaced by a solid wall.
8. Harry's seen reading by lantern light in the library, but his 
shadow's on the wrong wall.
9. During the Quidditch match, a player falls from his broomstick 
into a pile of sand. But in previous scenes the field is all grass.

Milz




From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 19:23:24 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:23:24 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The movie hits Australia!
Message-ID: <a4.1d699924.293fce2c@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/5/2001 6:07:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
tabouli at unite.com.au writes:


> I have been preparing carefully for my next comment.  Not only have I donned 
> my bullet-proof vest and suit of armour, I have also erected a electrified 
> barbed wire fence around my concrete bunker and hidden inside it bearing a 
> can of Mace.  Because... I didn't find Alan Rickman particularly sexy!  
> (gasps of horror and fury and cries of vengeance from all and sundry Snape 
> fans).  Before I reinforced my fence with a pack of three headed dogs, let 
> me hastily say that his *acting* was good, and his *voice* is gorgeously 
> deep and melodious.  However, he didn't do it for me physically at all.  
> Too old, too chunky, too stiff around the neck (I agree with the high 
> collar comment).  Neither did he fit my mental image of Snape.  Snape is 
> younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and greasy.  Plus I didn't 
> go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while striding briskly into the 
> classroom.  Feels all wrong to me.  If I were CC, I'd have had him pause 
> silkily, one eyebrow raised, in the doorway, while the students fell 
> silent, and then make his way slowly and deliberately to the front of the 
> room and *then* quietly, coolly begin his speech.  I know the film was long 
> and they had to hurry along what they could, but CC's version lost a lot of 
> Snape's gravitas IMO.
> 

*points his wand in outrage* No I'm just kidding. Though I think Alan Rickman 
is a virtual God he did my Snape filling I totally agree though that due to 
the script writing alot of the Snapeness was lost. The good luck scene made 
me want to GAG and not once do we see "5 points from Griffindor" or threats 
that are so common with Snape that did make me sad. In no time do we see that 
Snape was actually a BAD character he's just that annoying teacher that you 
get every year. But Rickman is my baby's daddy. :)
-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 19:36:16 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:36:16 -0000
Subject: Movie Bloopers.....
In-Reply-To: <9ulru6+acmp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ulsvg+82sl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "milztoday" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
> Hi everyone, an acquaintance just e-mailed me this list of 
> bloopers...What do you think?

I think it's an early version of the list from 

http://www.movie-mistakes.com/film.php?filmid=1654

which is now up to 42 errors, though some have been rescinded, including nos. 
7 and 9 from the previous post. 




From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 19:52:27 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:52:27 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lupin: Anthony Stewart Head
Message-ID: <f6.1361bfcb.293fd4fb@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/5/2001 11:02:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
heathernmoore at yahoo.com writes:


> Considering that by the time the movie is made, his Giles-back-
> in-England show should be well-established, he may well be prominent 
> enough to the casting staff to start getting the calls next year.
> 

I mentioned this a while back don't know if it was on this list though. I 
personally being a slave to the Buffy-verse. And I adore ASH and would love 
to see him as Lupin and I think he'd be up to it "The Watcher" is going to be 
a mini-series so won't span that long. And he said he wanted to find work in 
England not America because he wanted to be close to his family and not away. 
So what better than Harry Potter? I always pictured him as my Lupin because I 
see Lupin as nice looking with a kind of stuttering and not so demanding 
demeanor. But we all have  our own views on him...but I wouldn't mind Ewan 
McGreggor...any chance to drool is a good one!
-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From john at walton.vu  Wed Dec  5 19:51:35 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:51:35 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: Yahoo is being weird; welcome to new members!
Message-ID: <B8342B47.689F%john@walton.vu>

Hi from your friendly, extra-soft, 100% Grade A Fancy Magical Moderator Team
:)

Just a quick note that Yahoo has implemented some bugs (oops, I mean
Exciting New Features), which means that anyone posting via the website now
has only their YahooID in the "From" section of messages. Grr to Yahoo, this
is a horrible change and the Moderators are very grumpy about it. Yahoo has
also been a bit screwy in general, it seems -- please bear with us and
Yahoo, and if the group emails are not coming through properly, read them on
the group site -- http://www.hpfgu.org.uk has links to all of the lists.

A big HPFGU welcome to the new folks who have arrived -- the Main List has
over 3200 members! This is very exciting! I'd just like to remind new folks
that you're on our special introductory membership, which means that one of
the Moderators and Elves takes the time to check over your post before it's
sent out to the list. Since there are so many folks on the list, and because
we have quite a few rules, it sometimes takes folks a while to adjust, so
instead of making possibly embarrassing errors, we'll just take a quick look
over it and either approve it or drop you a quick line asking you to make a
quick change. After a brief period of this, we'll turn you into a bona fide
full-fledged member of HPFGU :D

Anyway, if you have any questions, feel free to email the Mods. We love
getting mail! Send it to hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.

Cheers!

--John, HPFGU Moderator With Rock #47


__________________________________
The HPforGrownups Moderator Team
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Please read our Admin Files, particularly the VFAQ and Netiquette files!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/




From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 19:59:44 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:59:44 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Bloopers.....
Message-ID: <87.142a87be.293fd6b0@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/5/2001 11:20:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
absinthe at mad.scientist.com writes:

Wow! Someone had a sharp eye! Next time I go watch it I'll keep my eyes open 
another one is in the Classroom scene (Transfiguration) McGonagall turns 
human and has no glasses on. Then a split second later her glasses are on her 
face. At first I attributed this to then just transfuguring slower but I 
figured that would be impossible since the rest of her clothes transfigured 
with her...any opinions?
-step

> Hi everyone, an acquaintance just e-mailed me this list of 
> bloopers...What do you think?
> 
> HP Movie Bloopers
> 
> 1. At the start of term feast, Harry sits down on the right side of 
> the dinner table next to Ron. But when the food appears he is on the 
> other side of the table next to Hermione
> 2. When the three sneak past Fluffy, the hound wakes up and slobbers 
> on Ron['s shoulder. But when they fall down the trapdoor, Ron is 
> slobber free.
> 3. While shopping in Diagon Alley, Harry walks past a store with 
> three witches outside twice, without backtracking
> 4. When Harry takes off the invisibility cloak in front of the Mirror 
> of Erised, it disappears even though it's supposed to be visible when 
> he's not wearing it.
> 5. After Harry's battle with Voldemort, he has a large scratch on his 
> chin. In the hospital wing, the scratch is healed, but comes back 
> bigger in a later scene.
> 6. A snapshot of Harry with his parents is shown in a photo album. 
> But the kid in the picture is obviously older than 1 year old, the 
> age Harry was when Voldemort killed his parents.
> 7. Harry walks through a door  to find the Mirror of Erised. Later 
> the door disappears, replaced by a solid wall.
> 8. Harry's seen reading by lantern light in the library, but his 
> shadow's on the wrong wall.
> 9. During the Quidditch match, a player falls from his broomstick 
> into a pile of sand. But in previous scenes the field is all grass.
> 
> Milz
> 


-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 19:55:49 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:55:49 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Professor Lupin McGregor?
Message-ID: <59.1428583b.293fd5c5@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/5/2001 11:13:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
chattie27million at aol.com writes:


> Actually, Ewan McGregor is 30/31 at the moment, so by the time they do the 
> third film, he will almost be mid thirties......Just thought I'd say:)
> hugs
> Rach *who is trying to keep her exitment of Ewan being asked to a bare 
> minimun as no-one else seems to be too happy about it!*:):)
> 
> "But the fact is, Harry Potter pisses all over Star Wars"
> 
> 'The Face' magazine article 2001

I'm all with you for having Ewan around :)! Who said that quote by the way? 
Was it Ewan? I personally think Harry Potter slays Star Wars (and this coming 
from someone who's father has a room devoted to his star wars memorabilia 
including an original Yoda and C3-PO and DV costumes.) But the Harry Potter 
stories are all surprising Star Wars should of stayed as an epic original 3 
parter instead of a of a money sucking sell out. I wish I was British so I 
could get a role in the movie even if it was just as an extra. But oh well 
I'm with Ewan Fans For Lupin! :) So don't feel alone
-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From LivBeatles at aol.com  Wed Dec  5 20:27:50 2001
From: LivBeatles at aol.com (livbeatles)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:27:50 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <9ulf9t+o9qa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9um006+kun2@eGroups.com>

>> To my mind, the most attractive (or potentially attractive) male 
character in the film was actually Daniel Radcliffe. OK, OK, don't 
set the pedophile police on me, I know he's only 12, but he's a 
lovely little boy: give him 8 years or so, and he will be gorgeous. 

>Tabouli, they can send the pedophile police after both of us. I 
think all the kids are terribly cute, Daniel in particular. He is 
going to grow up to be a gorgeous young man.. who says Harry can't 
be? ;) As I said before, if only I had a 12 yo daughter to live 
vicariously through. :)

Might as well send them after me too ;)  It may sound silly, but no 
matter what your age, you can tell when someone is nice looking.  And 
looking at the pictures from the premiere, it seems that Daniel is 
definitely going to be a gorgeous young man.  (He sure seems better 
looking than any of the guys I liked when I was 12--which was only 6 
years ago however).  

Add to it his great acting skills (I think he was wonderful as 
Harry), and I think has a good future :)

Cynthia




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Wed Dec  5 20:41:38 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (wanda02481)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:41:38 -0000
Subject: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
In-Reply-To: <9ulnrj+j7nc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9um0q2+hu3f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "davisaacs" <davisaacs at h...> wrote:

> > I do, though, have a rather controversial nomination too for 
Lupin:
> > Rowan Atkinson! Some people would perhaps find him too comical to 
be
> > Lupin, but as I'm sure he's a great actor, he should be able to 
> change
> > his air according to the role. What d'ya think?
> 
> I don't think he'd be that good as Lupin, but I think her would be 
> completely perfect as Peter Petigrew...I think he could nail him 
down 
> to a T. But that's just how I imagined him of course:o)
> 

I think Rowan Atkinson would have been good as Quirrel - the perfect 
person no one would ever take seriously, only to have him turn out to 
be the villain!  But yeah, he'd be a good Pettigrew, I never thought 
of that before.

Wanda





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  5 22:13:34 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:13:34 -0000
Subject: FLUFF: Food at Welcoming Feast
Message-ID: <9um66e+daoo@eGroups.com>


  Did anyone else notice that just about every third or fourth 
platter at the Welcoming Feast seemed to be piled high with buffalo 
wings? Ron tucked into 'em pretty good, too.

 Then at the Halloween Dessert, my mouth was watering at the Rice 
Krispie Witch Hats. Yum!






From srae at mindspring.com  Wed Dec  5 23:51:36 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:51:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Professor Lupin McGregor?
In-Reply-To: <121.849b540.293fc334@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011205185136.00aa5dd0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 01:36 PM 12/5/2001 EST, you wrote:
>In a message dated 05/12/01 17:08:41 GMT Standard Time, guretna at yahoo.com 
>writes:
>
>
>> not because Ewan is a
>> bad actor, but because he's a young actor. 
>
>Actually, Ewan McGregor is 30/31 at the moment, so by the time they do the 
>third film, he will almost be mid thirties......Just thought I'd say:)
>hugs
>Rach *who is trying to keep her exitment of Ewan being asked to a bare 
>minimun as no-one else seems to be too happy about it!*:):)
>

Well, *I* am excited about it, and hope feverishly that it comes to pass.
He's a wonderful actor who can truly pull a chameleon and *be* his
character, if he has a good enough script to work with.  The age difference
isn't going to be that big of a deal. He will be around 32 when the filming
for PoA is likely to begin, and it's really not that hard to age someone 5
years or so. As far as the visual age difference between Lupin and Snape
were Ewan McGregor to get the role, I don't really see that as a big deal
either. Lots of people look much older than they are...and oddly enough I
find this especially true amongst unpleasant people. I guess they frown too
much.

So yes, I'm rooting hard for Ewan!

Shannon




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 01:30:30 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:30:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Daniel's interpretation of harry (and copperfield)
In-Reply-To: <1007560996.515.72168.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011206013030.43589.qmail@web11505.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello!

The bit that always gets me is that look on his
face when Mr. Murdstone comes down to him that
one night and tells him that he (david) should
have been the one to of died.  Breaks my heart. 
And Columbus was right, he does have a haunted
look in his eyes that is surprising for someone
so young.

Tara


From: "windyroselane" 
<windyroselane at yahoo.com>
Subject: Daniel's Interpretation of Harry (was 
"The Movie")

>I've been trying to think which scene in 'David 
>Copperfield' caught 
>Columbus' eye the most. The one that moved me 
>most was when Bob 
>Hoskins and family say goodbye when leaving 
>London and David (Daniel) 
>is lovingly saying goodbye to them while in the 
>throes of being 
>abandoned. 

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...people meeting in secret all over the world 
were holding up their glasses and saying in hushed 
voices:" To Harry Potter - the boy who lived!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 01:40:41 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:40:41 -0000
Subject: Lupin: Anthony Stewart Head
In-Reply-To: <f6.1361bfcb.293fd4fb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9umiap+uqqt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 12/5/2001 11:02:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> heathernmoore at y... writes:
> 
> 
> > Considering that by the time the movie is made, his Giles-back-
> > in-England show should be well-established, he may well be 
prominent 
> > enough to the casting staff to start getting the calls next year.
> > 
> 
> 

This is probably the best idea I've heard in a long while.

Wow, he would be just, wow.






From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 01:44:43 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:44:43 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <9ulchd+ofka@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9umiib+jhit@eGroups.com>

It's okay, Tabouli, no need to rush out for more Norwegian Ridgebacks 
just yet. I really, really like your suggestion about having Snape 
pause in the doorway to the classroom, one eyebrow raised, and having 
him kinda "slink" (that isn't the word I want but I can't think of 
another one) to the front of the room. The thing that I find sexiest 
about AR as Snape is the voice. Voices really do it for me, 
especially voices with an accent. 
And yes, I think Daniel Radcliffe, given 8 years or so, will be a 
heartbreaker. He's a doll already. 


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
> > I didn't find Alan Rickman particularly sexy!  . . .  his 
*acting* was good, and 
> > his *voice* is gorgeously deep and melodious.  However, he didn't 
do it for 
> > me physically at all.  Too old, too chunky, too stiff around the 
neck (I agree
> > with the high collar comment).  Neither did he fit my mental 
image of Snape.  
> > Snape is younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and 
greasy. 
> 
> Tabouli, ITA!  May I join you in that bunker?  But please don't 
laugh at my Sean 
> Biggerstaff poster.
> 
>   --  Joanne, old enough to know better
> 
> ::::  donning her invisibility cloak ::::




From newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 01:59:34 2001
From: newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com (Alexander W. Hertzog)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:59:34 -0600
Subject: Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
Message-ID: <E5680420-E9EC-11D5-838D-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>

Perhaps this is a dumb question, but am I the only guy on this list? 
With all this talk about Snape's sexiness and Radcliffe's potential 
sexiness, I feel like I accidentally walked into the ladies' room but 
didn't realize it until I had just washed my hands and was walking out 
the door.

Someone suggested a while back that Helena Bonham Carter should be in 
one of the next HP movies. I heartedly support this, as I feel left out 
having no one to lust over right now, even if she is a good deal older 
than I.

Guess I'll pop in my Twelfth Night video and hope for the best. :)

Alex


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From beck_rulz at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  6 02:26:54 2001
From: beck_rulz at hotmail.com (fifteen_inch_maple_wand)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 02:26:54 -0000
Subject: Movie Bloopers.....
In-Reply-To: <87.142a87be.293fd6b0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9uml1e+orpn@eGroups.com>

I might have imagined this, but was the Slytherin keeper also the 
same girl who was standing around waiting to be sorted? 
Yeah, I probably imagined it......





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 02:34:24 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 02:34:24 -0000
Subject: Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
In-Reply-To: <E5680420-E9EC-11D5-838D-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9umlfg+qojd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Alexander W. Hertzog <newton_nicodemus at y...> wrote:
> Perhaps this is a dumb question, but am I the only guy on this list? 
> With all this talk about Snape's sexiness and Radcliffe's potential 
> sexiness, 

And don't forget my favorite, Sean Biggerstaff.  

Unfortunately, HPSS has a severe shortage of female characters for the guys 
to comment on.  Who would it be?  McGonagall? Hooch? Granger? The Grey Lady 
ghost?  Really not much to go on there.  Wait til the Veelas show up!




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 03:03:25 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 03:03:25 -0000
Subject: Y chromosomes, and -- where are the women?
In-Reply-To: <E5680420-E9EC-11D5-838D-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9umn5t+nspl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Alexander W. Hertzog wrote:
> Perhaps this is a dumb question, but am I the only guy on this 
list? 

Oi! Put those chromosomes away where nobody can see them! 'Tain't 
safe for the likes of us here...

:^)


> Someone suggested a while back that Helena Bonham Carter should be 
in > one of the next HP movies.

Helena B. Carter? As Amanita Lestrange, perhaps?

Alex, just wait for GoF and whoever will play Fleur. XX chromosomes 
will shrivel up and hide in dark corners.

Which brings this to mind: what are the HP moviemakers going to do 
for strong, visible female characters? Rowling hasn't yet provided 
very many. Petunia, McGonagall, Hermione, Molly Weasley, Trelawney 
and Madame Maxime just about exhaust the list of prominent females. 
We don't see much of McGonagall, and Olympe Maxime's a bit of a joke, 
really, whether or not Dumbledore respects her as a headmistress and 
a dancer. Molly Weasley: she's been growing in each book, and the end 
of GoF suggests something much larger to come, for reasons which were 
explored on the main list a couple months ago.

Does Winky count?

Kloves/Columbus might pick one of the female classmates for passing 
focus... but there's little evidence in canon that Padma, Parvati, 
Parkinson or Chang really carry much weight.

The war against Voldemort hasn't started yet, obviously, but I don't 
see even McGonagall as playing a great role there. Nothing specific 
occurs in the books to suggest that McGonagall is an especially 
powerful witch. Perhaps the subdued part she has played so far means 
that we should *expect* substantial revelations about her past, in 
the way that Neville was suddenly given depth by what Harry heard 
about the Longbottoms in the Pensieve.

Lestrange, on the other hand, might be a nice and scary role. Given 
what little we see of her in GoF, I'm *really* looking forward to 
more. She's icier than Snape, and she's female, too.

So, here's something that might change between book and film: more, 
and more prominent women.




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 04:54:07 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 04:54:07 -0000
Subject: Movie Bloopers.....
In-Reply-To: <9ulru6+acmp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9umtlf+dp1p@eGroups.com>

Don't know if this qualifies as a blooper or not, since it was 
probably done deliberately by her father, but we're sure we saw 
Eleanor Columbus as a Gryffindor member a couple times after she's 
sorted as Susan Bones into Hufflepuff (at the Gryffindor table, with 
the Gryffindors at the Quidditch match, etc.) Columbus said his kids 
have cameos in the film, and Eleanor got credit for Susan Bones, 
although she doesn't have any lines. Eleanor, who begged him to read 
the book, seems to have gotten the lion's share of cameos as a
result. She even outstages Hermione in the boat: the lamplight is on 
Susan (Eleanor), not Hermione.






From SCMoulinRouge at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 07:25:34 2001
From: SCMoulinRouge at aol.com (SCMoulinRouge at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:25:34 EST
Subject: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
Message-ID: <a3.20115f44.2940776e@aol.com>


In a message dated 12/5/01 5:48:52 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

>I don't think Ewan would be right as Lupin either, he's a great actor 
>and everything, but too...I don't know...for want of a better word: 
>wet. I always thought Lupin was meant to be quite gruff, with a 
>hoarse voice...

First of all: 'Wet' *snickers* Good way to put it...

Now, I am a card carrying member of the Psychotically Obsessed Ewan Freaks 
(TM), however, *I* don't even think he's right. First of all, he's too young 
to play Lupin (but so is Christian Bale and I have the problem with Christian 
Bale stemming from Velvet Goldmine where I can't watch him in any other role 
without snickering. I love Lupin so that would suck) and he's just not quite 
right. 

And more importantly, I would eat a pile of those Sardine flavored Bertie 
Bott's Every Flavor Beans (the real ones that you can go buy) if he *agreed* 
to do it. From what I've heard, CC just asked his agent. And those in the 
Ewan loop know how much he really doesn't like "Hollywood" movies (so why is 
he doing Ridley Scott movies? The world may never know. But I'm not 
complaining *is counting the days until Black Hawk Down*!). But anyway, 
especially to us Ewan fans (we Ewan fans?) does this strike you as something 
he'd do? You may point to Star Wars but that has some other issues (like his 
uncle being in the original, blah, blah, blah) and as he's said, "How do you 
say no to Star Wars?"

The only way I'd seem him accepting it (ignoring the not quite right and age 
thing) is if he loves the books. Now I would be surprised but not overly so 
if he did. I obviously don't know the man personally - he does have a younger 
daughter (and an even younger one now!) so who knows? But that would be the 
only reason I could see him accepting the role. But who knows? Maybe two of 
my biggest obsessions will collide. *shrugs*

I just don't see it happening at all. Of course, I maybe the only one 
thinking this. I don't know, am I?

And to the Rowan Atkinson thing...um...I totally don't see that. At all. I 
see Ewan more than I see this. Though it's true that I'm pretty sure I've 
never seen him do anything serious....

~Angela



From SCMoulinRouge at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 07:30:58 2001
From: SCMoulinRouge at aol.com (SCMoulinRouge at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:30:58 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 71
Message-ID: <104.d695446.294078b2@aol.com>


In a message dated 12/5/01 5:48:52 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

>Actually, Ewan McGregor is 30/31 at the moment, so by the time they do
>the third film, he will almost be mid thirties......Just thought I'd say:) 
hugs
>Rach *who is trying to keep her exitment of Ewan being asked to a bare
>minimun as no-one else seems to be too happy about it!*:):)

He's still 30. March 31. *realizes how sad it is that she knows that off the 
top of her head*

And lol, Rach. Though... if Ewan agrees to do it...I'll be singing in the 
streets I tell ya...

*is starting to really ponder this and match up pics of Harry and Ewan* 
Y'know...it could work. Especially if he was a bit older...which he'd 
be...and we all know he can act so that's not really an issue...

But still, it's all on Ewan himself. So, I'm not going to really put too much 
hope into it. 

~Angela



From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 11:08:51 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:08:51 -0000
Subject: Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
In-Reply-To: <E5680420-E9EC-11D5-838D-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9unjk3+n3a7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Alexander W. Hertzog <newton_nicodemus at y...> 
wrote:
> Perhaps this is a dumb question, but am I the only guy on this 
list? 

No way!  BTW, I pictured McGonagall as being a LOT younger (say, 40 
ish), but then again I pictured Dawn French as Molly Weasley....

Some other women...
Prof. Trelawney- Miss Cleo from the TV ads
Rita Skeeter- Jennifer Saunders

Hmm, that's it.




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 11:22:23 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:22:23 -0000
Subject: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
In-Reply-To: <9ulnrj+j7nc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9unkdf+t7mi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "davisaacs" <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> I don't think he (Rowan Atkinson)'d be that good as Lupin, but I 
think her would be 
> completely perfect as Peter Petigrew...I think he could nail him 
down 
> to a T. But that's just how I imagined him of course:o)
> 
> Dave

Yes, yes, YES!!! Except it'd turn a scary scene into a funny one- 
Atkinson and Rupert Grint would be a great comedy team- they'd seem 
to be perfect foils for each other.

-Noel
Wishing Blackadder 3 was only just being made so RG could play Pitt 
the Younger.




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  6 11:52:39 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (professor_monkshood)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:52:39 -0000
Subject: The movie hits Australia!
In-Reply-To: <007d01c17d96$c1dae880$0590aecb@price>
Message-ID: <9unm67+a90d@eGroups.com>

It's MMM here and her weird YahooID that no one has seen.
First, a me too -- finally got to see it twice over here in New 
Zealand.

The soundtrack -- my mother said JW has stolen from Swan Lake.  There 
were several instances of soundtrack invasion when we were just 
supposed to marvel at the imagery on screen but nothing major.  I was 
humming the Hedwig theme when I came out of the theatre.

> but I have to agree with the waves of protest about Richard 
Harris.  He really annoyed me.
Richard Harris wasn't as bad as I feared but I think only he could 
have screwed up the comical line 'Alas, earwax.'  Give someone else 
the job.
 
I quite like Emma -- surely some overacting but otherwise fine.  
Hermione, afterall, was supposed to be a bit hysterical in the first 
book.
 
> I have been preparing carefully for my next comment.  Not only have 
I donned my bullet-proof vest and suit of armour, I have also erected 
a electrified barbed wire fence around my concrete bunker and hidden 
inside it bearing a can of Mace.  Because... I didn't find Alan 
Rickman particularly sexy!  (gasps of horror and fury and cries of 
vengeance from all and sundry Snape fans).

I'm joining you and Amanda in the bunker.  Snape is not supposed to 
be the subject of fantasy and Rickman did well enough here to hide 
his 'sexiness'.

>However, he didn't do it for me physically at all.  Too old, too 
chunky, too stiff around the neck (I agree with the high collar 
comment).  Neither did he fit my mental image of Snape.  Snape is 
younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and greasy.  Plus I 
didn't go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while striding 
briskly into the classroom.  Feels all wrong to me.  If I were CC, 
I'd have had him pause silkily, one eyebrow raised, in the doorway, 
while the students fell silent, and then make his way slowly and 
deliberately to the front of the room and *then* quietly, coolly 
begin his speech.  I know the film was long and they had to hurry 
along what they could, but CC's version lost a lot of Snape's 
gravitas IMO.

The first reaction after the movie was -- what on earth was Snape 
doing, wishing Harry luck?  What was Steve Kloves doing and has he 
really read the book?  Or does he skip the part with Snape in it?  
The scene was jarring and Snape was acting totally OOC.  Snape would 
never, ever under any circumstances, wish Harry Potter luck.  Would 
anyone care to defend that scene?

Physically, Rickman fits my mental image of Snape.  Not perfectly -- 
the robes are too aristocratic and elaborate.  I have always imagined 
Snape to wear plainest possible robes.  Snape is the type that 
are 'young but not youthful looking' so Rickman's age did not bother 
me.  Anyway, Snape was never, never described as 'young' anywhere in 
the book.  Go ahead and check it.

When they first talked about the movie, I pitied the actor that's 
going to play Snape.  You have to appreciate how tough the job is -- 
Snape is a different character to different people, ranging from the 
Sexy!Snape to the Evil!Snape and some group is bound to be 
disappointed.  He has to play the hidden side and whatever tragic 
history without being too revealing, play the red herring when 
majority of the audience knew the plot twist.  Then Steve Kloves and 
CC cut half of his scenes in the book and inserted a baffling scene 
instead ... Considering all that, Rickman still pulls it off.

Next question: Is the life debt thing important?  It seems to be an 
obsession in PoA.  But why wasn't it mentioned at all in the movie?  
Did Steve Kloves make the cut or did JKR make it herself?  Snape 
seems to have undergone a transformation in the movie -- he wasn't 
nasty or spiteful, just sad and sarcastic.  




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 12:01:10 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:01:10 -0000
Subject: What one piece of information...
In-Reply-To: <9udos8+o822@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9unmm6+db48@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> would you put in the movie that was left out? I really enjoyed that
> list of "positive changes" from book to film--and agreed with all of
> them--but there were some changes--things that were left out that I 
think 
> were VITAL.
> 
Dumbledore! Chamber music and tenpin bowling, "Nitwit, blubber, 
oddment, tweak", and seeing socks in the Mirror of Erised are *major* 
clues to Dumble's character- playful to the point of being percieved 
as off his rocker when everything's running smoothly, but a seriously 
powerful wizard when need be.


<<snip-BTW, you MUST get this month's Mad Magazine! The sendup of how 
that final scene played in the movie is bloody brilliant!>>
> 
> Finally, though, I think it is too bad they have practically every
> character bandying about Voldemort's name as if it were no big 
deal. I don't 
> understand this change at all. To me it's really important that we
> understand, as Harry learns, exactly how evil Voldemort is. I most 
especially
> missed Harry's speech that begins : "Don't you understand? If Snape 
gets
> hold of the Stone, Voldemort's coming back!...There won't be any 
Hogwarts to 
> get expelled from!...etc" when he's persuading Hermione and Ron 
that he's 
> got to get the Stone himself. [or am I having an old-timer's moment 
and he 
> _does_ give that speech?...]
> 

He doesn't- I had my second viewing today, and he doesn't. Harry 
calls Malfoy "Draco", Herm calls Voldy by name, Ron doesn't get to 
say, "Will you stop saying the name!" and Harry doen't get to 
say, "VOLDEMORT! I've met him and I'm calling him by name!"

(sings) Which leads us back to Dum-ble-do-ore (who doesn't correct 
Harry's one attempt at saying "you-know-who")
 

> PS: department of "huh?" changes: why Dark Forest instead of
> Forbidden Forest????

Some other things that made me go hmm....
- The Dursley's car- license number ends in "CY" indicating it was 
first registered in south Wales, not Surrey. I can't see them buying 
used (but then again I never pictured them with a wagon/estate car. 
SUV, maybe, but not a wagon)
-Kids in green school uniforms in establishing shot of Reptile House-
were those snakes on their badges?
-"Oculum Reparo" spell- Nice touch.





From sherratt at mediaone.net  Thu Dec  6 12:39:18 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (wanda02481)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:39:18 -0000
Subject: FLUFF: Food at Welcoming Feast
In-Reply-To: <9um66e+daoo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9unotm+989l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> 
>   Did anyone else notice that just about every third or fourth 
> platter at the Welcoming Feast seemed to be piled high with buffalo 
> wings? Ron tucked into 'em pretty good, too.
> 
>  Then at the Halloween Dessert, my mouth was watering at the Rice 
> Krispie Witch Hats. Yum!

Oh, I know!  I don't know when I've ever seen such wonderful food in a 
movie!  I was just grinning throughout those scenes, thinking how 
wonderful it would be for a starved orphan like Harry or a poor boy 
like Ron to suddenly be sitting at a feast like that, and just able to 
have anything they liked.

Wanda





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 13:11:08 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 13:11:08 -0000
Subject: Dursley car error?  / Columbus as Susan Bones
In-Reply-To: <9unmm6+db48@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9unqpc+pp40@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "nlpnt" <nlpnt at y...> wrote:
.
> - The Dursley's car- license number ends in "CY" indicating it was 
> first registered in south Wales, not Surrey. I can't see them buying 
> used (but then again I never pictured them with a wagon/estate car. 
> SUV, maybe, but not a wagon)

In one of the later books, Dursley gets a company car.  If this car is one, too, 
the company could have bought it new in Wales (as I understand British 
registrations), especially if that's where Grunnings' head office is.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "windyroselane" <windyroselane at y...> wrote:
> Don't know if this qualifies as a blooper or not, since it was 
> probably done deliberately by her father, but we're sure we saw 
> Eleanor Columbus as a Gryffindor member a couple times after she's 
> sorted as Susan Bones into Hufflepuff (at the Gryffindor table, with 
> the Gryffindors at the Quidditch match, etc.) Columbus said his kids 
> have cameos in the film, and Eleanor got credit for Susan Bones, 
> although she doesn't have any lines. Eleanor, who begged him to read 
> the book, seems to have gotten the lion's share of cameos as a
> result. She even outstages Hermione in the boat: the lamplight is on 
> Susan (Eleanor), not Hermione.

Considering how much worse things would have been without Eleanor's input, I 
say give the girl anything she wants.






From moorequests at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 13:23:26 2001
From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 13:23:26 -0000
Subject: New to the list... and about "Oliver"
Message-ID: <9unrge+ac4o@eGroups.com>


  Hi, I'm new to the list... not new to the HP for Grownups thing, 
I've been on the book side of it all for awhile now, but am finally 
leaping over here to see what's going on on this half. 

  Just thought I'd mention the connection my husband and I find 
strange and funny (in an immature way, of course) between "Oliver 
Wood's" name and the actor who plays him, Sean Biggerstaff. 
C'mon! "Oliver Wood" in itself sounds like the end of a bad joke, 
but "Biggerstaff!" That's the guy's REAL NAME?! No wonder all the 
girls find him so irresistable.....   ;)

 -Molly Denton







From farris5 at swbell.net  Thu Dec  6 13:54:40 2001
From: farris5 at swbell.net (Russ & Wanda)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 07:54:40 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
References: <a3.20115f44.2940776e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c17e5d$8d4a4e40$c0fcbed0@hppav>

Oh, please, don't let Mr. Bean be Lupin! Please, Please, Please! Maybe Mad-Eye Moody would be better for him. LOL Actually, I can't think of any part in the Harry Potter series for him. Obviously, I am not a fan though, so I could be mistaken on his acting abilities.
I think Ewan could do Lupin if he was 'scruffed' up enough. Not with his Star Wars hair-do I hope though.
Have a great day today,
Wanda
  >I don't think Ewan would be right as Lupin either, he's a great actor 
  >and everything, but too...I don't know...for want of a better word: 
  And to the Rowan Atkinson thing...um...I totally don't see that. At all. I 
  see Ewan more than I see this. Though it's true that I'm pretty sure I've 
  never seen him do anything serious....>>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From idouright2 at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 14:16:22 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:16:22 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: What one piece of information...
Message-ID: <3d.15a44512.2940d7b6@aol.com>

I would of left ALL the twins parts. I would of established Harry's relationship with Hagrid better. I was dying to see Snape take countless points away from Griffindor :( but alas...and I really think the dream sequence with Quirell's turban should have been left in it would of made the audience go "hmmmm" and not just "how's he the villan there are no clues!" and the shame of not naming Hedwig :( The Bloody Baron would NOT of even smiled...and did anyone else notice Dumbledore never tells Harry he gave him the invisibility cloak? That really frustrated me cause for people who haven't read the books tons of loose ends...

-step



From AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 14:21:45 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (agentirish)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:21:45 -0000
Subject: Lupin: Anthony Stewart Head
In-Reply-To: <9ulpn6+rhu2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9unutp+65ia@eGroups.com>

Giles would be PERFECT for Lupin.  I have adored him since he did 
those coffee commericals!  

 
>   Although I previously vetted Anthony Stewart Head for Amos 
Diggory, 
> now I've changed my mind and would love to see him as Remus Lupin. 
> He's the right age to fit in with Alan Rickman and Robson Green. 
He's 
> rather quietly attractive and not aggressively sexy or pretty. He 
can 
> do that hangdog, persecuted vulnerability well and we've all seen 
him 
> perfect the sadly secretive, affectionate Mentor shtick as Giles on 
> BTVS.  Considering that by the time the movie is made, his Giles-
back-
> in-England show should be well-established, he may well be 
prominent 
> enough to the casting staff to start getting the calls next year.




From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu  Thu Dec  6 15:04:16 2001
From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:04:16 -0500 
Subject: Ewan/Lupin's ages; Atkinson; Snape's OOC scene
Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B05677@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>

Hey, all, it's Gwen, who really should be working on her thesis, but is
writing this quickly instead...

Regarding Ewan as Lupin: Personally, I picture the Marauder group to have
been born in 1958-59 range, making them 35-36 at the book 3/book 4 time
period. So even if principle photography on PoA begins in 2003 (more likely
2002), Ewan would still be a scosh young for the role.

HOWEVER, I also believe that none of the guys--Snape, Lupin, Black, or
Pettigrew--are looking too young these days. They've all had hard lives.
Lupin's described as being prematurely grey and looking very tired and
frail. I wouldn't be surprised if he also looked more like a man ten years
his senior. And that may also be a reason behind choosing Rickman--to go
with an "older" look to show that none of these folks have had an easy time
of it.

As for Rowan as either Lupin or Pettigrew, I honestly don't see it. Not
because I doubt Rowan's ability to play it straight, but because he has
neither the look I picture for Lupin (sort of soft, but at the same time
no-nonsense, and with a mild humour lurking underneath) nor the sad
desperation of Pettigrew. Peter's described as a man who looked like he
might have been fat, but had lost lots of weight. Atkinson is a bean pole
and always has been. He can do the crawling on his knees bit, but I  think
there's the danger there that he might seem more silly than pathetic.

MMM Fanfic asked:
 
> Snape would 
> never, ever under any circumstances, wish Harry Potter luck.  Would 
> anyone care to defend that scene?
> 

Well, I can only defend it up to a point. I agree it was overall out of
place and awkward. I have two things to offer that *might* mitigate it,
mostly because I had to find some way to justify it to myself to avoid
hurling the second time. Note that neither one has to do with the script;
it's all Alan's wonderful delivery.

First point is, the look he has on his face just before he says those two
awful little words, "Good luck." It's like there's this moment of, "I can't
*believe* I'm going to say this." Like his brain and his mouth got
temporarily disconnected.

Second is, because of that, he puts the little dig in at the end, which
makes me think maybe, just possibly, he's performing a little service for
Slytherin here, trying to psych Harry out before the big game. The problem
with it is that Snape is still way too nice about it and his attempt to make
Harry feel uncomfortable, if that's what it was, was much too incompetent
for our potions master.

But whaddaya gonna do? As an actor, I can vouch for the fact that many,
many, too many times to count, scripts force characters to do things that
don't make sense. The only thing we can do is try to reconcile it somehow.

> Physically, Rickman fits my mental image of Snape.  Not perfectly -- 
> the robes are too aristocratic and elaborate.  I have always imagined 
> Snape to wear plainest possible robes.  

Actually, I loved the palate for his costumes. The robe really was a simple
"choir robe" type, it had been slit and embellished with the arm slits and
the bifurcated train/hem (heh!). I thought his mufti at the Quidditch game
was actually kinda old-fashioned, but not particularly aristocratic. Those
little fingerless gloves and the buttons on his trouser cuffs. Dickensian.
But that fits with my view of the character--I do not think he came from an
old weathy family, so I think he is always careful to make sure he has the
'right' clothes--not flashy, or vain, like Dumbledore, but 'appropriate.'

The undertunic effect reminded me of clothing from the 12th century. Again,
very proper, very imposing.

Did anyone else find themselves in a love/hate relationship with the
confused looks he gives the kids, especially after the troll scene? I loved
that he was looking at them like he was sure they were lying/trying to
figure out wtf, but at the same time, I hated the looks 'cause they were
slightly goofy.

Oh, well. Even he can't do everything with just a few seconds of screen
time.

Oh, and Tabouli, yes. I agree that the ideal staging would have been a
little slower for his speech, a little less Boom! you're there, but what I
_did_ like was that he made it sound like wand-waving wasn't just absent, it
was a no-no!

Anyway, I have _got_ to go write thesis now.

Cheers,

Gwen



From newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 15:11:36 2001
From: newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com (Alexander W. Hertzog)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:11:36 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
In-Reply-To: <9unjk3+n3a7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8A8369BE-EA5B-11D5-BF38-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>

> Rita Skeeter- Jennifer Saunders
>

Weird. I always pictured Rita Skeeter as that 'Dame Edna' character. 
It's a curse, really. I read the part about the pink robes and the 
glasses, and the image popped up and has stuck with me since.

Thank you for giving me a replacement image!

Alex


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  6 15:18:24 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (davisaacs)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:18:24 -0000
Subject: Ewan McGregor/ Rowan Atkinson
In-Reply-To: <002c01c17e5d$8d4a4e40$c0fcbed0@hppav>
Message-ID: <9uo280+mioe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Russ & Wanda <farris5 at s...> wrote:
> Oh, please, don't let Mr. Bean be Lupin! Please, Please, Please! 
Maybe Mad-Eye Moody would be better for him. LOL Actually, I can't 
think of any part in the Harry Potter series for him. Obviously, I am 
not a fan though, so I could be mistaken on his acting abilities.

Sorry, I meant Rowan Atkinson should be Peter Pettigrew, I think he'd 
make a terrible Lupin...but if Mr Bean's all you've seen him in, then 
you won't know that he actually *is* a good straight actor:o)

Dave




From mollymc2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 15:38:24 2001
From: mollymc2000 at yahoo.com (Sylvia Petrella)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:38:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
In-Reply-To: <E5680420-E9EC-11D5-838D-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011206153824.343.qmail@web20805.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Alexander W. Hertzog"  > 
> Someone suggested a while back that Helena Bonham
> Carter should be in 
> one of the next HP movies.  > 
> Alex
 
I'm right with you there! I'd drool over her more than
Ewan McGregor...and I'm female! (of course, I guess it
really depends on which side your bread is buttered
on, though!) <dodging tomatoes>
-Syl

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Thu Dec  6 17:56:07 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:56:07 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wondering if there are any Y chromosomes out there
References: <9unjk3+n3a7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <018101c17e7f$483d2e40$53af1e3e@stephen>

>--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Alexander W. Hertzog <newton_nicodemus at y...> 
wrote:
>> Perhaps this is a dumb question, but am I the only guy on this 
list? 

>No way!  BTW, I pictured McGonagall as being a LOT younger (say, 40 
ish), but then again I pictured Dawn French as Molly Weasley....

>Some other women...
Prof. Trelawney- Miss Cleo from the TV ads
Rita Skeeter- Jennifer Saunders

>Hmm, that's it.

I'm a woman too, but that's not really why I posted!

PLEASE can't people find links to these suggestions to give us pictures? Am I the ONLY person on this entire list who doesn't automatically know who everyone looks like?? The internet's very clever, and I'm sure you could paste in a link with just a minute's work, and then I'd enjoy reading all these posts with suggestions, instead of just deleting them because I can't connect the names with faces!! At least could people say what famous roles their suggested actors have played, if they can't make a link????

Thanks!

Lucy, getting quite desperate and frustrated about this now!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From chattie27million at aol.com  Thu Dec  6 18:57:39 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:57:39 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Professor Lupin McGregor?
Message-ID: <8f.13844150.294119a3@aol.com>

In a message dated 05/12/01 20:05:25 GMT Standard Time, idouright2 at aol.com 
writes:


> :)! Who said that quote by the way? 
> Was it Ewan? 

It was just out of an article in 'The Face' magaine:D I thought it was funny 
*grin*
Hugs
Rach
xxx
********
'The floor?' Harry suggested. 'I wasn't looking at it's feet, I was too busy 
with its heads.'




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pandrea13 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 20:09:14 2001
From: pandrea13 at yahoo.com (pandrea13)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 20:09:14 -0000
Subject: Lupin: Anthony Stewart Head
In-Reply-To: <9ulpn6+rhu2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uoj9a+b8hc@eGroups.com>

I am so glad someone made this suggestion! Being a big Buffy 
fan, I was sad to see Giles go and I do think he is perfect for the 
part of Lupin!!






From maryblue67 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 20:41:52 2001
From: maryblue67 at yahoo.com (Maria)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:41:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Cool flash animation
In-Reply-To: <1007647250.326.16759.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011206204152.4601.qmail@web11107.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all!! the movie has just invaded my home country, Spain.
i plan to go see it for the third time when i go there:
it's such a good excuse to have young cousins!!

Anyway, i just saw a very cool nimation in flash in one of
the Spanish newspapers online.

Go to http://www.elpais.es

It's in spanish, but you can see the link at the top, with
the recognizable picture of Hogwarts. It takes you through
the introduction of the story, from Privet Drive to
arriving at Hogwarts, with cool maps and explanations as
you go. 
Hope you enjoy it!!

Maria


=====
Maryblue
----------------------------------------------------------
"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling
in love" - Eistein

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From BJMBriggs at zianet.com  Thu Dec  6 20:58:39 2001
From: BJMBriggs at zianet.com (stockw_98)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 20:58:39 -0000
Subject: Anthony Stewart Head as Lupin
Message-ID: <9uom5v+k3l4@eGroups.com>

I also agree.  Ewan McGregor would be alright, but I think he has too 
much on his plate right now.  Anthony would be perfect!




From moorequests at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 22:36:30 2001
From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 22:36:30 -0000
Subject: Cool flash animation
In-Reply-To: <20011206204152.4601.qmail@web11107.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9uortf+kr5q@eGroups.com>


Maria,

  What part of Spain are you from? I lived in Madrid for awhile. I 
visited the El Pais site but my computer froze up on me! Don't know 
if it was the site's fault or my computer's, but yes, that was a 
pretty cool flash animation. 

 -Molly Denton


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Maria <maryblue67 at y...> wrote:
> Hi all!! the movie has just invaded my home country, Spain.
> i plan to go see it for the third time when i go there:
> it's such a good excuse to have young cousins!!
> 
> Anyway, i just saw a very cool nimation in flash in one of
> the Spanish newspapers online.
> 
> Go to http://www.elpais.es
> 
> It's in spanish, but you can see the link at the top, with
> the recognizable picture of Hogwarts. It takes you through
> the introduction of the story, from Privet Drive to
> arriving at Hogwarts, with cool maps and explanations as
> you go. 
> Hope you enjoy it!!
> 
> Maria
> 
> 
> =====
> Maryblue
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling
> in love" - Eistein
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
> http://greetings.yahoo.com




From islefrank at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  7 01:20:59 2001
From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:20:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Snape costuming- other costumes
In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B05677@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>
Message-ID: <20011207012059.45051.qmail@web20305.mail.yahoo.com>

> Actually, I loved the palate for his costumes. The
> robe really was a simple
> "choir robe" type, it had been slit and embellished
> with the arm slits and
> the bifurcated train/hem (heh!). 

   After a brief period of really liking Snape's
costumes, I am now officially Opposed. There were
details I approved of (white undertunic, the winter
outerwear) but overall, it just felt all wrong. If the
neck of his jacket is as uncomfortable as it looks,
for instance, or the train as hard to handle, then I
can't see Snape wearing either voluntarily (he likes
drama in his clothing, yes, formality, yes- masochism,
no). The fact that he's wearing nothing more wizardly
than a suit and a cape bothers me too- it doesn't
really have the flow and swish, nor does it make it
easy for him to look very dramatic or batlike. 
   The whole costume also seemed specifically designed
to make Alan Rickman look as old and as heavy as
humanly possible. 
   It's not really an isolated thing, either...just
the most annoying example to me. The combination
medieval/Dickensian/modern look of the movie was very
nice to look at, but it didn't feel like an authentic
world in the same way that the books do. The fashion
isn't consistent enough. We have Dumbledore in his
long, ornate robes; Snape, in his suit straight off of
some nineteenth-century planet; the kids in their
downtime, wearing ordinary Muggle clothing. If you
can't *force* yourself to just put them all in robes
and cloaks, at least pick an era and style and stay
with it. It seems to me that to go all
random-eras-everywhere is excellent design but pretty
poor world-building.
-Rachel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From islefrank at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  7 01:25:23 2001
From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:25:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Snape costuming- other costumes
In-Reply-To: <20011207012059.45051.qmail@web20305.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011207012523.30040.qmail@web20306.mail.yahoo.com>

> medireview/Dickensian/modern look of the movie was

That, of course, should be "medieval" and I fully
blame my spell checker.

-Rachel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From islefrank at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  7 01:30:43 2001
From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:30:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Snape costuming- other costumes
In-Reply-To: <20011207012523.30040.qmail@web20306.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011207013043.27428.qmail@web20310.mail.yahoo.com>

> > medireview/Dickensian/modern look of the movie was
> 
> That, of course, should be "medireview" and I fully
> blame my spell checker.

   For crying out loud! The word should be the one
that sounds like "mid-evil" and denotes the Middle
Ages, and my spell checker is turning on me!
   Back to our regularly scheculed program.

-Rachel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From keegan at mcn.org  Fri Dec  7 02:23:12 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:23:12 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Snape costuming- other costumes
In-Reply-To: <20011207013043.27428.qmail@web20310.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20011207012523.30040.qmail@web20306.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011206181406.00ac9e50@mail.mcn.org>

I wish that the costumer had put all of the teachers into robes.  What they 
did with McGonagall and Dumbledore was great.  I also liked several things 
that were in the background at the sorting ceremony.

I understand putting the kids into muggle clothes.  It would probably be 
easier all the way around - especially if the kids came from any kind of 
"mixed" family.

Snape's costume made him look heavy.  Of course, shooting him from below 
didn't  help much as it accented the double chin.  He could have looked so 
great in dark, flowing robes.  I always had a black on black thing in my 
head.

Diagon Alley looked like a Dickens Faire.  I got a real kick out of it but 
I couldn't help wondering why a) more folks weren't in robes and b) why 
wizard fashion stopped at the middle of the 19th century.  I could have 
seen the aesthetic movement.

She didn't do a bad job, she just didn't do a great one.  I did love the 
over robe/caftan things they stuck the kids into.  Hated the traffic cone 
hats.  No wonder no one ever wears them except when required.

I look forward to seeing next year's film and a younger Dumbledore striding 
about.  Gilderoy Lockhart's costumes ought to be a hoot.  I just hope the 
costumer in charge bothers to read the books.

(And I'm dying to see what they do with the ever-so-rich Lucius Malfoy.  I 
just hope they don't cut the scenes in Flourish and Blott)

Catherine in California



From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  7 04:38:46 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 04:38:46 -0000
Subject: We Should Have "Line Parties" Next Year
Message-ID: <9uph4m+6v09@eGroups.com>

Harry Potter fans should set up "Line Parties" for premiere next 
year.  "The Lord of the Rings" fans from all over the world are 
setting up line parties via webspace to organize, plan and meet other 
Tolkien fans in their area for the release of "Fellowship of the 
Ring" movie.  I remember attending the premiere of Star Wars: Phantom 
Menance in Hollywood; the movie turned out to be a let-down but the 
people (i.e., Star Wars fans in makeups and costumes) were crazy and 
the party was great!  Next year, we should do the same for "Harry 
Potter and the Chamber of Secrets".  It'll be fun.

Anyway, if anyone is interested in getting together with Tolkien fans 
to attend the Lord of the Rings movie premiere at 12:01AM December 
18th (okay, it's really December 19th,) go over to the following 
website and find a location and register:

http://www.theonering.net/movie/lineparty/  




From idouright2 at aol.com  Fri Dec  7 06:00:06 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:00:06 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] We Should Have "Line Parties" Next Year
Message-ID: <111.9ad1da8.2941b4e6@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/6/2001 8:41:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
ktchong73 at yahoo.com writes:


> Next year, we should do the same for "Harry 
> Potter and the Chamber of Secrets".  It'll be fun.
> 

I think so! I got sorted into Griffindor on the WB site and I have my scarf 
and cloak so I'm ready to dress up! I totally remember going to the midnight 
showing of the Phantom Menace and I do dare say it was amazing and the 
atmosphere was great. Great idea! I wouldn't mind using my webspace to get 
these things together!
-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From idouright2 at aol.com  Fri Dec  7 06:04:32 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:04:32 EST
Subject: Movie Ratings
Message-ID: <165.52eca59.2941b5f0@aol.com>

Having just finished reading GoF a couple of days ago and being tantalized by 
the way some things happen in the book I was wondering how they would 
transition to the screen and if eventually by the time we get to the seventh 
book/movie it will be rated R.

Such as in the Goblet of Fire the scene with the Death Eaters at the 
Quidditch World cup...seeing the bodies of the Muggles just flinging, etc and 
I'm sure the Dementors will be more than some of the younger children can 
handle...just a thought. Has anyone else considered this a possibility too?
-step


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Fri Dec  7 11:27:19 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (wanda02481)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 11:27:19 -0000
Subject: Ewan/Lupin's ages; Atkinson; Snape's OOC scene
In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B05677@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>
Message-ID: <9uq92n+9ld6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Hillman, Lee" <lee_hillman at u...> wrote:

> Actually, I loved the palate for his costumes. The robe really was a 
simple
> "choir robe" type, it had been slit and embellished with the arm 
slits and
> the bifurcated train/hem (heh!). I thought his mufti at the 
Quidditch game
> was actually kinda old-fashioned, but not particularly aristocratic. 
Those
> little fingerless gloves and the buttons on his trouser cuffs. 
Dickensian.
> But that fits with my view of the character--I do not think he came 
from an
> old weathy family, so I think he is always careful to make sure he 
has the
> 'right' clothes--not flashy, or vain, like Dumbledore, but 
'appropriate.'
> 
> The undertunic effect reminded me of clothing from the 12th century. 
Again,
> very proper, very imposing.
>
I quite liked Snape's costume, though it was so dark, I couldn't 
easily see all the details you observed. Was he wearing trousers?  I 
thought he was wearing something like a cassock, with all those nice 
covered buttons going down the front - of course, you can wear 
trousers under a cassock, too.  Anyway, I thought it was suitably 
severe for Snape - I wouldn't have done anything different.

Wanda




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Dec  7 13:16:44 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:16:44 -0000
Subject: Snape'spants
In-Reply-To: <9uq92n+9ld6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uqffs+e7l1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "wanda02481" <sherratt at m...> wrote:

> I quite liked Snape's costume, though it was so dark, I couldn't 
> easily see all the details you observed. Was he wearing trousers?  I 
> thought he was wearing something like a cassock, with all those nice 
> covered buttons going down the front - of course, you can wear 
> trousers under a cassock, too.  Anyway, I thought it was suitably 
> severe for Snape - I wouldn't have done anything different.
> 
We get a good closeup of Snape's ankle in the quidditch scene when Hermione 
ignites his cloak.  His trousers have buttons on the ankles, which feels 
Victorian to me, though I'm not sure why.




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Fri Dec  7 16:31:39 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:31:39 +1100
Subject: Ageing, Lupin's looks, Beanless, Snape's costume 
Message-ID: <008701c17f43$9378fa00$7d2adccb@price>

Gwen:
> HOWEVER, I also believe that none of the guys--Snape, Lupin, Black, or
Pettigrew--are looking too young these days. They've all had hard lives.
Lupin's described as being prematurely grey and looking very tired and
frail. I wouldn't be surprised if he also looked more like a man ten years
his senior. And that may also be a reason behind choosing Rickman--to go
with an "older" look to show that none of these folks have had an easy time of it.<

Possibly.  Though we have conflicting evidence on our hands here.  If wizards live until they're 150 or so, and McGonagall is still dark at 70, surely wizards age slower, at least after reaching adulthood.  There's also the 13yo Ron ogling Madame Rosmerta, who must be over 40 if she knew MWPP when they were in school.  Now, it's of course not impossible that a boy might fancy an attractive, voluptuous woman in her 40s, but it's still quite a stretch for the pubescent Ron at 13 (unless, of course, wizards age slower and the perception of age is different, and she is in Muggle terms maybe early to mid thirties in appearance).

I see Lupin as slight and small to medium height, yet conveying strength.  Boyish slenderness of face and body, and a full head of hair, but lined and greying, conveying the odd impression of a young man from a distance who looks increasingly older as the viewer approaches.  My main objection to Ewan is that he's too broad and muscly by far for my mental Lupin (not that the casting crew are likely to ask for my advice, but O well), unless he could waste back to Trainspotting thinness again.  Actually, with my own tastes for slim men, I thought he was at his most fanciable then: in Moulin Rouge (she says, digging a moat around her fenced bunker and putting a Giant Squid in it) he didn't do much for me.  Nicole was looking lovely though... she seemed warmer than I've seen her in other films.

As for Rowan Atkinson, AAAAAAG!  The Mr Bean series had its moments, and I'm told Blackadder was amusing, but I can't *stand* his cameos in all the British comedy films of the last 8 years!  How has he managed to convince otherwise intelligent moviemakers that playing Mr Bean (bumbling and contorted facial expressions) in a random role (priest, doctor, etc.) in a Britcom will automatically make it the cutting edge of comedy?  His "Holy Goat" lines as priest in Four Weddings, for example, were about as funny as your average Knock Knock joke.  Surely they couldn't inflict him on Harry, in *any* role.

Rachel:
> The whole costume also seemed specifically designed
to make Alan Rickman look as old and as heavy as
humanly possible

Catherine:
> Snape's costume made him look heavy.  Of course, shooting him from below 
didn't  help much as it accented the double chin.

My thoughts exactly.  Snape should be GAUNT and PASTY and fortyish at the most, not double chinned and heavy and mid fifties, or whatever Rickman is.  High collars, turtlenecks, cheongsam collars and co  are *not* becoming to the round/broad face or the double chin, because they shorten and broaden further.

Tabouli (who tries to avoid such clothing herself, as her face is broadish, but finds that attractive warm jumpers almost invariably have turtlenecks)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Fri Dec  7 17:40:44 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (wanda02481)
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:40:44 -0000
Subject: Snape'spants
In-Reply-To: <9uqffs+e7l1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uquus+nhko@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> We get a good closeup of Snape's ankle in the quidditch scene when 
Hermione 
> ignites his cloak.  His trousers have buttons on the ankles, which 
feels 
> Victorian to me, though I'm not sure why.

I'll watch for that next time.  I like all the buttons on Snape - they 
have overtones of someone closed-up, secretive and tightly fastened.  
Besides, I just don't see him as a zipper man.

Wanda





From maryblue67 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  7 18:04:51 2001
From: maryblue67 at yahoo.com (Maria)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: cool flash animation
In-Reply-To: <1007735462.375.71853.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011207180451.70560.qmail@web11104.mail.yahoo.com>

Molly wrote:

Maria,

  What part of Spain are you from? I lived in Madrid for
awhile. I 
visited the El Pais site but my computer froze up on me!
Don't know 
if it was the site's fault or my computer's, but yes, that
was a 
pretty cool flash animation. 

 -Molly Denton

>>> I'm from Valencia, in the Mediterranean coast, but i'm
living in Maryland now, where i'm doing a Ph.D. Can't wait
t see the movie when i get there again!!
The animation worked fine with me... i would try again.
Hope you liked my country! I lived in Madrid four almost
two years before coming to the States

Maria

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Maria <maryblue67 at y...> wrote:
> Hi all!! the movie has just invaded my home country,
Spain.
> i plan to go see it for the third time when i go there:
> it's such a good excuse to have young cousins!!
> 
> Anyway, i just saw a very cool nimation in flash in one
of
> the Spanish newspapers online.
> 
> Go to http://www.elpais.es




=====
Maryblue
----------------------------------------------------------
"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling
in love" - Eistein

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From helanne at start.com.au  Sat Dec  8 04:25:16 2001
From: helanne at start.com.au (~Helen ~)
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 12:25:16 +0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] good luck bit...
Message-ID: <B1514554307@i01sv4138.ids1.intelonline.com>

> 
>> Snape would 
>> never, ever under any circumstances, wish Harry Potter luck.  Would
>> anyone care to defend that scene?


Yes, I would. Actually, since it's been so long since I read #1, I
didn't know that this wasn't in the book. Anyway, it is incredibly
obvious (well, it was to me) that Snape was NOT particularly genuine
when he said good luck. As someone else said, he was trying to psyche
out Harry. I thought everyone else would have thought this too. I
mean, he's not exactly saying it in an incredibly friendly or
well-wishing way, is he?


On another note, I'm getting sick of reading newspaper and magazine
reviews that keep saying how much better Rupert and Emma were compared
to Dan. I mean, they were still very good, but I can't imagine either
of them inducing smiles and (almost) tears from me the way my little
man Dan did. He's a wonderful actor, and when I was reading GoF the
other day, I could really really "see and hear" him (well, a slightly
older version of him) as I read. I hope the movies end up going that
far, and that they can keep the same kids. 


Cheers,
Helen :o)


"She knows more about you than you do."
"Who doesn't?"
Ron and Harry, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone.

__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au




From vheggie at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  8 12:26:11 2001
From: vheggie at yahoo.com (vheggie)
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 12:26:11 -0000
Subject: Casting of Madam Pince for CoS
Message-ID: <9ut0t3+ulja@eGroups.com>

Just posting to point out that we've discovered who will be playing 
Mme Pince in CoS.  I saw the report in the local paper, and 
immediately thought she'd make a fantastic, all-be-it stereotypical, 
school librarian.  

The Leaky Cauldron blurb is here:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/
& the original article is here (with pic)
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/entertainment/theatre/news/content.c
fm?story=156656

I never thought, as someone who regularly fails to keep up with the 
volume of this and all the other HP4GU groups, that I'd *ever* spot 
anything before the rest of you eagle eyed HP fans.....


*proud* Vanessa




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  8 17:39:22 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 17:39:22 -0000
Subject: Ageing, Lupin's looks, Beanless, Snape's costume
In-Reply-To: <008701c17f43$9378fa00$7d2adccb@price>
Message-ID: <9utj8a+p8b9@eGroups.com>

Most glaring to me about Rickman as Snape was the cheesy makeup.
Heavy black eyeliner and was that his own over-dyed hair or a
horribly black-dyed synthetic wig? Both accentuated his aging face 
instead of making him look sinister, i.e., made him look phony, like 
he was wearing a Halloween costume or a bad attempt at making Snape a 
drag queen. In either event, more laughable than believable. I adore 
Alan Rickman and he and the film deserved better than this.




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  8 19:16:17 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 19:16:17 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe
Message-ID: <9utou1+nac7@eGroups.com>

I joined this list the day after I saw the movie opening night, and 
you guys just keep talking and talking... over 1000 messages have 
posted since opening night and it is near impossible for me to keep 
up.  Today was the first day I actually had time to sit down and read 
some posts.  Ideally, I'd love to go back to message #300 and start 
from the beginning, but I just don't have the time.

I have a bunch of stuff I want to post, but I don't want to bring up 
stuff that's been hashed and rehashed already (unless any of you is 
willing to revisit them).  I'll have to read some more and see what's 
been said of these things.  Hopefully my posts won't repeat 
anything.  Well... here's the first one anyway:

Helen wrote:
>>> On another note, I'm getting sick of reading newspaper and 
magazine reviews that keep saying how much better Rupert and Emma 
were compared to Dan. I mean, they were still very good, but I can't 
imagine either of them inducing smiles and (almost) tears from me the 
way my little man Dan did. He's a wonderful actor, and when I was 
reading GoF the other day, I could really really "see and hear" him 
(well, a slightly older version of him) as I read. I hope the movies 
end up going that far, and that they can keep the same kids. <<<

Personally, the first time I watched the movie, I wasn't at all 
impressed with Dan's performance.  I posted the following to another 
list after I had first seen the movie:

>>> Well, I wasn't too impressed with Dan Radcliff.  But perhaps 
that's because he didn't have much to work with.  I LOVED Ron 
though.  He was so adorable and had the best lines.  I though 
Hermione was good.  Although I missed this hilarious exchange at the 
end of the book when she figures out that the devil's snare likes the 
dark and Harry tells her to make a fire and she says, "But there 
isn't any wood."  Ron screams, "Are you a witch or aren't you!"  But 
more funny was after they got out and he says, "'There isn't any 
wood.' Honestly!"  Hahaha. <<<

But, after seeing the movie two more times, I revised my thoughts:

>>> I've now seen HP 3 times and I enjoy it more each time.  Also, I 
find that I like Daniel Radcliffe more each time, too.  He's really 
growing on me.  Of course, top slot still goes to Rupert Grint, but 
Dan's not doing too shabby.  He's got gorgeous eyes!  I've been 
picking up on a lot more of his expressions.  You know, Rupert's 
expressions are so animated, that I think almost ANYone else's would 
dim in comparison.  So, I think that's why I wasn't too thrilled with 
Dan's performance the first time around.  But, like I said, he's been 
looking better each time.  And I think we CAN expect great things 
from him (hee hee) in the future movies. <<<

So, yes, I'm like Dan's performance.

I just read this at the Leaky Cauldron:

>>> Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe has won his first Hollywood 
award.  Radcliffe won the Male Youth Discovery of the Year Award from 
the Hollywood Women's Press Club. <<<

Hmm... I don't know that I'd give the award to Dan over Rupert, but 
you know, they both did very well.

Dawn

 





From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Dec  8 19:41:00 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 8 Dec 2001 19:41:00 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1007840460.819.96774.w39@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

If you saw the PS/SS movie multiple 
times, how did your opinions of the 
actors change? Check all that apply.  

  o I liked Daniel Radcliffe more. 
  o I liked Daniel Radcliffe less. 
  o Rupert Grint, more. 
  o Rupert Grint, less. 
  o Emma Watson, more. 
  o Emma Watson, less. 
  o Alan Rickman, more. 
  o Alan Rickman, less. 
  o Richard Harris, more. 
  o Richard Harris, less. 
  o Ian Hart, more. 
  o Ian Hart, less. 
  o Dame Maggie Smith, more. 
  o Dame Maggie Smith, less. 
  o No opinion changes at all. 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Sat Dec  8 21:42:11 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:42:11 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: House lights up for a run through the list rules...
Message-ID: <003601c18031$55557020$933570c2@c5s910j>

Hi everyone,

It's your mechanimagus moderator here...with the handbrake off.

I've dropped in with a humungous reminder to check that you're posting to
the correct HPfGU list and to observe our list rules before posting.  If
you're not familiar with the rules we've set on the book discussion list
(some of you may not be members there), please have a read of the highlights
below.

Cheers!

Neil/Flying Ford Anglia
HPfGU Magical Moderators

**********
A FEW BASIC RULES...

Firstly, please note that we have separate club areas for off topic posts
and Announcements:

**If you want to discuss things other than the Harry Potter movies, please
go to OT Chatter where you will receive a warm welcome:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter

**If you're posting something that's purely information on something new
(news items, websites, merchandise etc), it might be better posted (or
copied) to our Announcements list.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Announcements

If you are posting/commenting on news, please don't include the full text,
and do include a link and source if you have it.

Okay, now some posting tips that I just dug out of the filing cabinet ...

KEEP THE SUBJECT LINE RELEVANT TO THE CONTENT OF THE POST

Message board conversations, like "real life" ones, will often drift from
one subject to another.
If the subject line does not change to fit the direction of the
conversation, it can frustrate
the reader.

When replying to a message, please take the time to check the subject line
and make sure it
still matches your post.  It isn't very helpful if your post is headed, for
example, "Digest #345" or "A question."


KEEP YOUR POSTS ON TOPIC

In such a large and active group, it's easy for discussions to go off on a
tangent. If a couple
of you find something in common other than the Harry Potter movies,
wonderful! Getting to know people is, perhaps, the best thing about clubs.
But if you find your discussion getting away from the main
point of the club, please continue it off-list.


TRY TO AVOID ONE-LINE AND ULTRA-SHORT POSTS

-- Consider combining your shorter points/responses with a few others in a
multi-topic post, making
sure the topic line indicates this. However, if your point is substantive
(or just plain lengthy),
it is best to give it space on its own to make the thread easier to follow.

-- Avoid "me too!" and "LOL!" posts that have absolutely no other content.
Agreeing that "Sean Biggerstaff is seriously hot" would also qualify.  We
know this now.


TAKE CARE WHEN RESPONDING TO POSTS

If you are replying to a message, please indicate the name of the person who
wrote the original
and include any relevant segments of their post, or a brief summary of their
point(s). At the
same time, please try to delete any parts of the original post that are not
relevant to your
point(s), especially if the original was really long!

Please avoid putting your reply at the end of a very long quoted segment
unless absolutely necessary. In most cases, it will be easy enough to delete
some or all of the quoted material.


PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS!

Even if you are pretending to be someone called Snapejowls, please put a
signature of some sort at the end of your post.


TAKE THE TIME TO PROOFREAD YOUR POSTS

If you're used to forums where speed is important (chat rooms, role playing
games, etc.), it's
easy to fall out of the habit of proofreading. Here, however, your post will
be as relevant in
five minutes (or, usually, even in five hours) as it is now.

Before hitting the 'send' button, please take a few minutes to look over
your post and correct any
typos, spelling/punctuation errors, or problems with sentence structure or
capitalization. This
will make it much easier to read and help in getting across your point.

Please avoid using all lower case letters or, worse still, all CAPITAL
LETTERS.


BE CONSIDERATE OF OTHER MEMBERS' FEELINGS

If you disagree with someone's message, no matter how strongly, remember to
respect the other
person's right to his or her own opinion. If you do wish to refute the post,
do so gently, by
building up your own case, rather than just knocking down the other
person's. And never attack
your fellow club members (name calling, personal remarks, etc).

Thanks!!

>From your Magical Moderators
HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com







From eberte at vaeye.com  Sun Dec  9 04:29:00 2001
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 04:29:00 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9utou1+nac7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com>

>Dawn said: 
> 
> >>> I've now seen HP 3 times and I enjoy it more each time.  Also, 
>I find that I like Daniel Radcliffe more each time, too.  He's 
>really growing on me.  Of course, top slot still goes to Rupert 
>Grint, but Dan's not doing too shabby. <<< 

I have seen the movie three times now as well, and I also have 
enjoyed Daniel Radcliffe's performance more with each viewing.  His 
acting is much more subtle than Rupert or Emma's style--especially on 
the repeat viewings, I catch the other two over-acting a bit on 
occasion (Ron's exaggerated jaw dropping reaction on the train when 
he learns Harry's name for example, and Emma's clunky delivery of 
the "You're a great wizard, Harry" speech.) (I guess that I should 
say IMHO with that one so that I do not get attacked by the Rupert 
and Emma fan clubs.) I loved watching Daniel (as Harry) squirm under 
Snape's initial interrogation in Potions--quietly and beautifully 
acted, I thought. With that said, I think that all the kids were 
darling and did wonderful jobs, especially considering that they are 
only 11 or 12 year olds.  
I find that with repeat viewings of the movie that the movie actors 
are starting to replace my former mental images of the characters, 
especially when I am listening to the stories on tape. I am not sure 
if that is a good thing or a bad thing.  Elle 




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Dec  9 09:41:24 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 09:41:24 -0000
Subject: Hermione's speech (was: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uvbk4+7i34@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:

> I catch the other two over-acting a bit on occasion (Ron's 
> exaggerated jaw dropping reaction on the train when he learns 
> Harry's name for example, and Emma's clunky delivery of the 
> "You're a great wizard, Harry" speech.) 

I doubt that anyone could deliver that speech naturalistically: it's 
chunky even when read in the book.




From andrewty at i-manila.com.ph  Sun Dec  9 12:14:46 2001
From: andrewty at i-manila.com.ph (Andrew Albert J. Ty)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:14:46 +0800
Subject: apologies for cross-posting: "scholarly" writings on HP
References: <1007872705.2320.37247.m8@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <005101c180ab$ca26fc00$1503000a@Ty>

Hi everyone,

I haven't really participated much--this may be my first post
actually--because I've yet to read GOF. Still, after watching the film, I
became such a fan that I decided to read the books and am now thoroughly
enjoying myself. I don't have time to give a more extensive background of
myself, though I'd like to do so soon because there are some interesting
questions I want to raise with regards to that.

What I would like to do with this post is to point members to Lee Siegel's
review-essay of the first three books, which may be found at
http://www.thenewrepublic.com/magazines/tnr/112299/siegel112299.html. I need
to reread it again, but I'd like to ask the other members if they know of
other similar essays, especially those that have to do with the film (I
teach film theory for a living). Stuff on the books, like the Siegel, are
very much welcome, too, but please feel free to warn me since, as I've said,
I haven't read GOF yet.

Thanks,
Andrew

-----
"A Klee painting named 'Angelus Novus' shows an angel looking as though he
is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes
are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one
pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we
perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps
piling wreckage upon wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel
would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed.
But a storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with
such violence that the angel can no longer close them. This storm
irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while
the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call
progress." - Walter Benjamin, "Theses on the Philosophy of History"





From kierjcs at hotmail.com  Sun Dec  9 12:52:43 2001
From: kierjcs at hotmail.com (massiveroadtrauma)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 12:52:43 -0000
Subject: Hermione's speech (was: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9uvbk4+7i34@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uvmqr+h4og@eGroups.com>

> > I catch the other two over-acting a bit on occasion (Ron's 
> > exaggerated jaw dropping reaction on the train when he learns 
> > Harry's name for example, and Emma's clunky delivery of the 
> > "You're a great wizard, Harry" speech.) 
> 
> I doubt that anyone could deliver that speech naturalistically: 
it's 
> chunky even when read in the book.

I really didn't like what the movie did to that speech.  It sounded 
ridiculous and overly sentimental to my ears.

Also to Dumbledore's chunk of text in the sickbay.  "It's called 
love, Harry." - please...Hollywoodised or what?  I remember it being 
much less crap in print.

Kieran.




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec  9 14:16:21 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 14:16:21 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe/David Copperfield
Message-ID: <9uvrnl+105o9@eGroups.com>

In my area, the local PBS station is broadcasting the BBC David Copperfield, in 
which our Dan first caught the eye of Chris Columbus. It's on at 9pm 
tomorrow [Monday].

This may be old news, as it might already be out on video in the US, but since 
I haven't been to the video store in about six months...

I plan to watch!

Ivis the elderly

PS count me in the Daniel Radcliffe fan club. I think he was terrific! and as a 
friend of mine said when she saw the Star Wars trailer before HP, "those kids 
in Harry Potter are better actors than the teens in Star Wars--The Soap 
Opera."




From clio at unicum.de  Sun Dec  9 15:24:05 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 15:24:05 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9unm67+a90d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9uvvml+imqh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "professor_monkshood" <MMMfanfic at h...> wrote:
>  
> > I have been preparing carefully for my next comment.  Not only 
have 
> I donned my bullet-proof vest and suit of armour, I have also 
erected 
> a electrified barbed wire fence around my concrete bunker and 
hidden 
> inside it bearing a can of Mace.  Because... I didn't find Alan 
> Rickman particularly sexy!  (gasps of horror and fury and cries of 
> vengeance from all and sundry Snape fans).
> 
> I'm joining you and Amanda in the bunker.  Snape is not supposed to 
> be the subject of fantasy and Rickman did well enough here to hide 
> his 'sexiness'.
> 
> >However, he didn't do it for me physically at all.  Too old, too 
> chunky, too stiff around the neck (I agree with the high collar 
> comment).  Neither did he fit my mental image of Snape.  Snape is 
> younger, more gaunt, his hair is shoulder length and greasy.  

*Clio raises her hand* Do you guys have some more room in your 
bunker? (BTW, you're from New Zealand MMM? Cool.)
I sure am a big fan of the sarcastic, cruel Snape in the books, but I 
cannot see why I should drool over Rickman (or Snape)in the movie. 
Movie-Snape is light years away from my personal picture of Snape. 
That man should be more ascetic looking, with hollow eyes and an air 
of obsession (obsessed with potions, rule breaking students, 
childhood grudeges etc.)I have to agree with with Catherine here.

Catherine Keegan wrote:
>Snape's costume made him look heavy. Of course, shooting him from 
>below didn't help much as it accented the double chin. He could have 
>looked so great in dark, flowing robes.

That whole Rickman as Snape thing was a waste. There was so much 
potential in having a great charismatic actor play the most complex 
and enigmatic character of the HP universe. They gave this 
opportunity away, and Snape turned out as a bogeyman stumbling across 
the scenes with a slightly confused look on his face. To rehabilitate 
Rickman I must say that the scene in the library when Snape reaches 
out to the invisible cloak and the scene at the Quidditch pitch are 
really intense. Although I didn't like that flinging the hair-out-of 
the-face-movement. 

MMM wrote:
>Plus I 
> didn't go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while striding 
> briskly into the classroom.  Feels all wrong to me.  If I were CC, 
> I'd have had him pause silkily, one eyebrow raised, in the doorway, 
> while the students fell silent, and then make his way slowly and 
> deliberately to the front of the room and *then* quietly, coolly 
> begin his speech.  I know the film was long and they had to hurry 
> along what they could, but CC's version lost a lot of Snape's 
> gravitas IMO.
> 

I fully agree with you here. I don't know how those lines are 
delivered in the original version by Rickman, but in the German 
dubbed movie the actor for Snape's voice is slightly huffing (from 
rushing into the room)when starting the potion speach. So from this 
and from shooting Snape from below you get the impression there is 
this slightly overweight guy rushing into the room, because he is 
late, and he hasn't time to wait with his lesson to begin, so he 
starts to speak while still out of breath. It's devastating and it 
actually made me cringe in my seat.
I'm stopping my rant here. The amazing thing is, that the guy (a non-
HP-reader)who saw the movie with me was still impressed by 
the "villain with the weird costume". 

MMM wrote:
> The first reaction after the movie was -- what on earth was Snape 
> doing, wishing Harry luck?  What was Steve Kloves doing and has he 
> really read the book?  Or does he skip the part with Snape in it?  
> The scene was jarring and Snape was acting totally OOC.  Snape 
would 
> never, ever under any circumstances, wish Harry Potter luck.  Would 
> anyone care to defend that scene?

I think they had to put it in because they cut out the scene when 
Harry surprises Snape and Filch in the staffrooom. In the movie Harry 
sees Snape's bleeding leg already in the girl's bathroom. So they had 
no scene where the kids saw Snape actually limping. I guess they came 
up with the Good-Luck-scene when they figured that the stretch 
from 'Snape's pants are ripped' to 'Hey, he is after the stone' was 
too much. So IMHO the purpose of that additional scene was not to 
show Snape was nice to the kids, but to have a close up how he was 
limping away. Why he had to have this ridiculous good luck line I 
don't know.

I, too, wonder a lot about the cuts and additions in the movie. After 
all Steve Kloves and Chris Columbus put much emphasize on how close 
they were working with JKR. And there was this interview where Kloves 
said he was intruiged how you could tell from Rickman's acting that 
he knows all his character's background. Huh?

Clio
















  






From keegan at mcn.org  Sun Dec  9 15:32:25 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 07:32:25 -0800
Subject: Backgrounds
In-Reply-To: <9uvvml+imqh@eGroups.com>
References: <9unm67+a90d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011209072643.00b0a770@mail.mcn.org>

In an interview (and I have to admit I can't recall which one so don't 
shoot me), it was said that JKR spent a bunch of time with Robbie Coltrane 
and Alan Rickman.  She gave them all the background information she could 
on their characters and what was supposed to happen to them in the 
future.  I got the impression that they were the only two adult actors who 
were interested.  sigh.

I wish that Richard Harris had taken the time to read the books or at least 
the first book to get a clue that Dumbledore isn't all seriousness.

I'm currently listening to CoS (the American version) and I certainly hope 
that Dobby doesn't become a great irritant in the next movie.  So much 
potential there...  Lockhart has to become one but at least Brannagh can 
act.  Who knows what a (probably) CGI critter will be like?

Does anyone know if there's a company somewhere that's issued the house 
patches?  Too lazy to want to embroider one and we're thinking about going 
to Worldcon next year.  Could be fun...

Catherine in California



From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Sun Dec  9 16:23:50 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:23:50 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uvvml+imqh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011209162350.11686.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  clio44a <clio at unicum.de> wrote: 
MMM wrote:
>>Plus I 
>> didn't go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while >striding 
>> briskly into the classroom.  Feels all wrong to me.  If I >were CC, 
>> I'd have had him pause silkily, one eyebrow raised, in the >doorway, 
>> while the students fell silent, and then make his way >slowly and 
>> deliberately to the front of the room and *then* quietly, >coolly 
>> begin his speech.  I know the film was long and they had to >hurry 
>> along what they could, but CC's version lost a lot of >Snape's 
>> gravitas IMO.
> 

>I fully agree with you here. I don't know how those lines are 
>delivered in the original version by Rickman, but in the >German 
>dubbed movie the actor for Snape's voice is slightly huffing >(from 
>rushing into the room)when starting the potion speach. So >from this 
>and from shooting Snape from below you get the impression >there is 
>this slightly overweight guy rushing into the room, because >he is 
>late, and he hasn't time to wait with his lesson to begin, so >he 
>starts to speak while still out of breath. It's devastating >and it 
>actually made me cringe in my seat.


Aaaaah, finally there are people who agree with me about the "Potions Speech" scene- I think it was one of the scenes they botched most thoroughly. Snape of all persons, who takes points away for being late, seems to be late for his own lesson. That's preposterous! He should already have been waiting in the classroom, watching the students enter, waiting until they have all settled down, until there's not a single noise and you could hear a needle drop, waiting a little more until they become really uneasy, and then start his speech. 

I didn't even consider the German version, as I had seen some short clips of it in a TV "making of"- special and was so horrified that I even managed to persuade my mother to see the original version. 

As for Rickman as Snape, he certainly doesn't correspond to the idea I had formed of him in my imagination (that would be a young Jeremy Irons), but I think the voice makes up at least for part of it. The only problem is that a Snape of Rickman's age would merely be a bitter old man, whereas a 35 YO Snape who behaves as he does becomes far more intriguing. Pity they couldn't get Daniel Day-Lewis, I think he would have made a very good Snape.

 

>MMM wrote:
>> The first reaction after the movie was -- what on earth was >Snape 
>> doing, wishing Harry luck?  What was Steve Kloves doing and >has he 
>> really read the book?  Or does he skip the part with Snape >in it?  
>> The scene was jarring and Snape was acting totally OOC.  >>Snape 
>>would 
>> never, ever under any circumstances, wish Harry Potter >>luck.  Would 
>>anyone care to defend that scene?

>I think they had to put it in because they cut out the scene >when 
>Harry surprises Snape and Filch in the staffrooom. In the >movie Harry 
>sees Snape's bleeding leg already in the girl's bathroom. So >they had 
>no scene where the kids saw Snape actually limping. I guess >they came 
>up with the Good-Luck-scene when they figured that the >stretch 
>from 'Snape's pants are ripped' to 'Hey, he is after the >stone' was 
>too much. So IMHO the purpose of that additional scene was >not to 
>show Snape was nice to the kids, but to have a close up how >he was 
>limping away. Why he had to have this ridiculous good luck >line I 
>don't know.


I think it was added to make him more credible as the one who jinxed Harry's broom. Had it been to show he was limping, he could simply have limped out of the girls' bathroom, that would have been sufficient. Anyway, it was a *stupid* line, topped only by the clich?-ed "Quidditch is in your blood" by Hermione.


>I, too, wonder a lot about the cuts and additions in the >movie. After 
>all Steve Kloves and Chris Columbus put much emphasize on how >close 
>they were working with JKR. And there was this interview >where Kloves 
>said he was intruiged how you could tell from Rickman's >acting that 
>he knows all his character's background. Huh?

Sorry to be cynical, but I didn't buy all this "we're working so close together"- stuff for a single minute. I think I already mentioned it in a previous post, so it seems to become my ceterum censeo: When a (desperate) author sells his/her first book, they don't give a damn about the film rights, because they simply don't believe that their book will ever make it to the big screen. I suppose that, after the success of the first books, JKR's contracts and in particular the clause concerning film rights will have dramatically changed. But I'm 100% convinced that she didn't have much to say about the PS/SS film- that demonstration of harmony was mostly for publicity.

Susanna/pigwidgeon37


















  





Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



"And how come those portraits seem to be alive?"

"What'ya mean? All paintings move."

"No, they don't. We have lots of paintings in our villa, among them a real Chagall, and none of them..."

"And d'ya expect that something painted by a jackal will move? Now really..."



---------------------------------
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Discover and win it! The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Bubbles0z0 at aol.com  Sun Dec  9 17:04:52 2001
From: Bubbles0z0 at aol.com (Bubbles0z0 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:04:52 EST
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe live Pic for sale!
Message-ID: <163.54e5f56.2944f3b4@aol.com>

Hey everyone!
I have a nice pic of Daniel Radcliffe who plays the one and only Harry 
Potter! This picture was taken in NYC when he appeared on the Letterman show. 
 If anyone is interested in buying this pic please email or im me back at 
bubbles0z0 at aol.com. I only have a few copies of this pic so please let me 
know as soon as possible if you are interested in the pic! thanks : )


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From srae at mindspring.com  Sun Dec  9 18:42:43 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 13:42:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9uvvml+imqh@eGroups.com>
References: <9unm67+a90d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011209134243.00a96058@pop.mindspring.com>

Clio wrote:

>MMM wrote:
>>Plus I 
>> didn't go for the "no foolish wand waving" speech while striding 
>> briskly into the classroom.  

<snip>

>I fully agree with you here. I don't know how those lines are 
>delivered in the original version by Rickman, but in the German 
>dubbed movie the actor for Snape's voice is slightly huffing (from 
>rushing into the room)when starting the potion speach. So from this 
>and from shooting Snape from below you get the impression there is 
>this slightly overweight guy rushing into the room, because he is 
>late, and he hasn't time to wait with his lesson to begin, so he 
>starts to speak while still out of breath. It's devastating and it 
>actually made me cringe in my seat.

In the original, there's not a huff-or-puff <g>  to be heard. I thought
that scene was excellent.  I can see how having a puffing overdubbed voice
might give the impression that he was rushing late into class, but that's
not the way it struck me at all.  Just because the students are there
doesn't mean he's late. I loved it because he starts talking before he's
barely inside the door, and in his normal tone of voice.  It's as if he's
saying, "I'm here, class starts NOW, and woe be to the student who isn't
ready NOW."  :)  I can't imagine Snape waiting for the class to settle
down, even if he's doing it whilst glowering at them.

Shannon






From mirzamblack at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  9 19:28:48 2001
From: mirzamblack at yahoo.com (mirzamblack)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 19:28:48 -0000
Subject: First names, HP tourist map of UK etc.
Message-ID: <9v0e1g+oemk@eGroups.com>


Do you believe those first names, which IMDB.com gave to prof. 
Quirrell and Flitwick and madame Hooch? I just want to know, if they 
are right..

prof. Slatero Quirrell
prof. Filius Flitwick
madame Xiomara Hooch

Filius and Xiomara are very good indeed, and I believe in them 'cause 
they have a great meaning like all other names in HP, but this 
Slatero..

And what about the HP tourist map of UK, is there a map or is it just 
a dream of mine?

//mirzam




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Dec  9 19:53:12 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:53:12 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] First names, HP tourist map of UK etc.
Message-ID: <d0.1f3b1567.29451b28@aol.com>

In a message dated 09/12/2001 19:30:39 GMT Standard Time, 
mirzamblack at yahoo.com writes:

<< And what about the HP tourist map of UK, is there a map or is it just 
 a dream of mine? >>

I remember just before the release of the movie several UK papers published 
'maps' of the locations used (pictures of the real places and info about 
where they are, how to get there, how much it costs to get in and look around 
etc..). I remembered a few locations -

Alnwick castle in Northumberland - parts of Hogwarts castle (pronounced 
An-ick). 
The Australian High Commission on The Strand in London - Gringotts Bank.
Parts of Hogwarts express railway line - The Bluebell Railway in Sussex - 
(which my old riding stables backs onto! Heh.. :o))
Quidditch pitch/surrounding serenery for Hogwarts - Ben Nevis/surrounding 
area to Ben Nevis in Scotland. 
And of course platform 9 & 3/4 is Kings Cross station in London. 

I think there was mention of an actual tourist map being published by the 
tourist folks over here, but I've never seen one (although, to be honest, 
living here, I haven't really looked...)

Sara



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  9 20:32:36 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:32:36 -0000
Subject: First names
In-Reply-To: <9v0e1g+oemk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v0hp4+j2kb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mirzamblack" <mirzamblack at y...> wrote:
> 
> Do you believe those first names, which IMDB.com gave to prof. 
> Quirrell and Flitwick and madame Hooch? I just want to know, if 
they 
> are right..
> 
> prof. Slatero Quirrell
> prof. Filius Flitwick
> madame Xiomara Hooch
> 
> Filius and Xiomara are very good indeed, and I believe in 
them 'cause 
> they have a great meaning like all other names in HP, but this 
> Slatero..

This actually muddies the water more than anything. The name Filius 
first appeared on a card from the Trading Card Game. But if we're to 
believe that source, then we should be able to believe the first 
name they gave to Hooch, which was Rolanda. In other words, there is 
no way we can know for sure at this point. We'll have to wait for 
JKR to tell us officially.

What meaning do you get from Xiomara? I know that "filius" 
means "brother," but I've never heard of "xiomara."

Steve Vander Ark
The Harry Potter Lexicon





From mirzamblack at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  9 20:51:49 2001
From: mirzamblack at yahoo.com (mirzamblack)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:51:49 -0000
Subject: First names
In-Reply-To: <9v0hp4+j2kb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v0it5+k5b7@eGroups.com>

> What meaning do you get from Xiomara? I know that "filius" 
> means "brother," but I've never heard of "xiomara."
> 

Filius also means "son", but Xiomara may be delivered from Guiomar 
which means "famous in battle". And Rolanda, feminine from Roland 
means "famous land".

I haven't bought one single card, so if there is other first names, 
which are not mentioned in books, could you please tell me? And if 
there is some new things to the timeline too.. 

//mirzam




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Dec  9 21:06:30 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 21:06:30 -0000
Subject: First names, HP tourist map of UK etc.
In-Reply-To: <9v0e1g+oemk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v0jom+cvjj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mirzamblack" <mirzamblack at y...> wrote:
> 
> Filius and Xiomara are very good indeed, and I believe in them 
> 'cause  they have a great meaning like all other names in HP, but 
> this Slatero..

I know that 'filius' means 'son', and I would rather his name was 
Filibert, which is supposed to mean 'much bright' and sounds 
fluttery. Altho' there would be much to say for 'Fiametto' : as 
'little fire', it would mean sparks, which are bright and fluttery. 

What is so great about 'Xiomara', other than alliterating and being 
better than *yuck* Rolanda? It sounds Peruvian, but 
http://www.behindthename.com/ says: "XIOMARA (f) Possibly a Spanish 
form of GUIOMAR" and "GUIOMAR (m,f) Possibly "famous in battle" 
(Germanic). In Arthurian legend he was the cousin of Guinevere who 
became a lover of Morgan le Fey and was later banished for it." (I 
never heard of any such thing in Arthurian legend, but I am not an 
expert.)   
 
> And what about the HP tourist map of UK, is there a map or is it 
> just a dream of mine?

For a year, I have been hearing occasionally on the news (as a silly 
news item) that Tourism UK is publishing a Harry Potter guidebook in 
hope of luring American tourists who were scared off by the triple 
whammy of mad cow, hoof and mouth, and September 11. I have never 
been able to find it on the Web. G'rrr





From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  9 22:14:43 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (megrose_13)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:14:43 -0000
Subject: First names
In-Reply-To: <9v0hp4+j2kb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v0noj+p5mk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "hp_lexicon" <hp_lexicon at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mirzamblack" <mirzamblack at y...> wrote:
> > 
> What meaning do you get from Xiomara? I know that "filius" 
> means "brother," but I've never heard of "xiomara."


Actually, filius means son.  But how does that fit in with anything?

Meg Rose




From clio at unicum.de  Sun Dec  9 23:17:37 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 23:17:37 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <20011209162350.11686.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9v0reh+o2p4@eGroups.com>

Of course you are not alone with your impression that they botcherd 
the Potion Speech. *pats Susannas arm*
I for one know a lot of people who didn't like that scene. One of my 
favourites, too, btw. I actually can put a finger on a little detail 
that bothers me a lot (anyone interested?): Snape leaves open the 
door when he storms into the room. As if that would ever happen!


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Susanne Schmid <pigwidgeon37 at y...> wrote:
> As for Rickman as Snape, he certainly doesn't correspond to the 
idea I had formed of him in my imagination (that would be a young 
Jeremy Irons), but I think the voice makes up at least for part of 
it. The only problem is that a Snape of Rickman's age would merely be 
a bitter old man, whereas a 35 YO Snape who behaves as he does 
becomes far more intriguing. Pity they couldn't get Daniel Day-Lewis, 
I think he would have made a very good Snape.


Yes, a young Jeremy Irons (like when played in House of Spirits, you 
know, when the young Lord Trueba or whatever his name is chases after 
the girl on the horse?) would have been perfect. Well, a younger Alan 
Rickman would have been great, too. But D. Day-Lewis? C'mon, Snape 
has to look repulsive! 
As far as I know Rickman was the first choice for the character. JKR 
requested him, because she said this was how she always imagined 
Snape to be. As I have learned from the posts here and on other 
boards, for the most American and English Rickman stands for a 
certain archetype of character. Dark, brooding etc., but with a lot 
of emotion and deep romantic feelings below the surface. Correct me 
if I'm wrong, I didn't even know his name before the HPmovie, only 
his face from 'Dogma'. Now, if people associate those traits with a 
character Rickman is playing, and JKR still wanted him to play Snape, 
you must wonder about where that character is heading.
 

> Sorry to be cynical, but I didn't buy all this "we're working so 
close together"- stuff for a single minute. I think I already 
mentioned it in a previous post, so it seems to become my ceterum 
censeo: When a (desperate) author sells his/her first book, they 
don't give a damn about the film rights, because they simply don't 
believe that their book will ever make it to the big screen. I 
suppose that, after the success of the first books, JKR's contracts 
and in particular the clause concerning film rights will have 
dramatically changed. But I'm 100% convinced that she didn't have 
much to say about the PS/SS film- that demonstration of harmony was 
mostly for publicity.
> 
> Susanna/pigwidgeon37


I fear you are right. So let it be you ceterum censeo. Cato was 
proven right in the end as well, wasn't he?
If it wasn't so much fun I'd say we should leave the movie alone and 
concentrate on the books for speculations and interpratations. After 
all there we can be sure that no big company had had its fingers in 
the plot.

Clio 




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Sun Dec  9 23:30:16 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:30:16 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9v0reh+o2p4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011209233016.56197.qmail@web14708.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  clio44a <clio at unicum.de> wrote: 
>Yes, a young Jeremy Irons (like when played in House of Spirits, you 
>know, when the young Lord Trueba or whatever his name is chases after 
>the girl on the horse?) would have been perfect. Well, a younger Alan 
>Rickman would have been great, too. But D. Day-Lewis? C'mon, Snape 
>has to look repulsive!

Uh, sorry, but I don't think Jeremy Irons looks repulsive... (Clears her throat and gets serious again) I thought Day-Lewis just because he can manage that ascetic look and *is* dark-haired and black-eyed without wigs, contact lenses etc.

 
>As far as I know Rickman was the first choice for the character. JKR 
>requested him, because she said this was how she always imagined 
>Snape to be. As I have learned from the posts here and on other 
>boards, for the most American and English Rickman stands for a 
>certain archetype of character. Dark, brooding etc., but with a lot 
>of emotion and deep romantic feelings below the surface. Correct me 
>if I'm wrong, I didn't even know his name before the HPmovie, only 
>his face from 'Dogma'. Now, if people associate those traits with a 
>character Rickman is playing, and JKR still wanted him to play Snape, 
>you must wonder about where that character is heading.

I'd say that, instead of Dogma's Metatron, she might have had in mind Colonel Brandon from "Sense and Sensibility"- just a wild guess though, becuase Brandon is *the*  romantic type, disillusioned, a little bitter, but ready to let himself convince by a lovingly devoted little woman (eurgh!)

BTW, are you German? (I guessed from the .de in your e-mail address)

susanna/pigwidgeon37


________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 




"And how come those portraits seem to be alive?"

"What'ya mean? All paintings move."

"No, they don't. We have lots of paintings in our villa, among them a real Chagall, and none of them..."

"And d'ya expect that something painted by a jackal will move? Now really..."



---------------------------------
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Discover and win it! The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  9 23:32:30 2001
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 23:32:30 -0000
Subject: Hermione's speech (was: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9uvbk4+7i34@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v0sae+m7k9@eGroups.com>

> 
> > I catch the other two over-acting a bit on occasion (Ron's 
> > exaggerated jaw dropping reaction on the train when he learns 
> > Harry's name for example, and Emma's clunky delivery of the 
> > "You're a great wizard, Harry" speech.) 
> 
> I doubt that anyone could deliver that speech naturalistically: 
it's 
> chunky even when read in the book.

I agree about that speech. More and more of the lines bothered me 
with my third viewing. I mean, I really DO like the movie. And I 
like all the kids. But, I've found the only one I CONSISTANTLY like 
throughout the entire movie is Daniel Radcliff. He just does NOTHING 
to annoy me! :-)

 Now, at the risk of insulting someone, I was 
starting to get really tired of Rupert Grint's "Uh-oh" expression. I 
teach acting to kids for a living, and I can tell just by looking 
at him that he is kind of impressed with himself and that look. Do 
you know what I mean? Like it's going to be his trademark or 
something. When I saw him making that face in pictures I thought it 
was really cute and he would be great (and he WAS good). The first 
time I saw the movie I still thought his expressions were good. But, 
now, I'm kind of hoping Chris Columbus tones that down a bit. 

And, after reading all the posts here about Emma and her overacting, 
I do see the point. But, for some reason, it didn't get on my nerves 
as much. 

Well, I hate to just complain. I mean, the movie was great. And, 
after hearing some of the loony ideas some of the potential 
directors had (moving it to Hollywood High?! and an ANIMATED 
version?!) I am really grateful it turned out like it did! I just 
love Daniel Radcliff. I feel like he's not trying to impress anyone, 
not trying to make a name for himself, he's just showing up and 
being Harry. :-) 

Back to lurking!




From clio at unicum.de  Mon Dec 10 00:50:48 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:50:48 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <20011209233016.56197.qmail@web14708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9v10t8+4oa6@eGroups.com>

Wow, quick response. 
I think I need to clarify some thinks here.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Susanne Schmid <pigwidgeon37 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Uh, sorry, but I don't think Jeremy Irons looks repulsive... 
(Clears her throat and gets serious again) I thought Day-Lewis just 
because he can manage that ascetic look and *is* dark-haired and 
black-eyed without wigs, contact lenses etc.
> 
Of course Irons doesn't look repulsive in general!! He is one of my 
favourite actors. He can look repulsive when he sneers, he quite well 
manages to have an evil glint in his eyes and he also can play very 
well those passionate and obsessed-to-almost-insanity guys.
Regarding D.Day-Lewis, he sure looks ascetic, but can you imagine how 
people would drool over him as Snape when there already a lot of 
people are fantasizing about Rickman, who is about 50?

  

> I'd say that, instead of Dogma's Metatron, she might have had in 
mind Colonel Brandon from "Sense and Sensibility"- just a wild guess 
though, becuase Brandon is *the*  romantic type, disillusioned, a 
little bitter, but ready to let himself convince by a lovingly 
devoted little woman (eurgh!)

I'm actually sure that JKR had Colonal Brandon in mind when writing 
Snape. Why? Well she said she always wanted Rickman to play Snape, 
even before she had that movie contract + she always names J.Austen 
as her favorite author + Sense and Sensibilty came out as a movie 
around the same time JKR wrote her first Potter book.
I must say I don't like the thought. That's why I'm happy about that 
little eurgh you squeezed into your message. :)

So I wait for the next books to come out and brace for the worst. You 
know, it always happens that my favorite villains get messed up in 
the end. Anyone remember how they turned Gul Dukat from DS9 from a 
perfect sardonic ambivalent guy into a fireball-throwing red-eyed 
cartoon bad boy? (little bit OT here, sorry)


> BTW, are you German? (I guessed from the .de in your e-mail address)

Yes, I am.
 
Clio




From theodore_harvey at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 10 00:54:38 2001
From: theodore_harvey at hotmail.com (theodore_harvey)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:54:38 -0000
Subject: Quirrell and Harry in the movie
Message-ID: <9v114e+lmha@eGroups.com>

Why is it that when Quirrell grips Harry by the throat, nothing 
happens to him; it isn't until Harry touches him with his hands that 
he starts disintegrating.  Do the effects of Lily's sacrifice reside 
only in Harry's hands?  Is the scene different in the book (I don't 
have it with me and don't remember)?




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Dec 10 01:37:09 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:37:09 -0000
Subject: HP tourist map of UK etc.
In-Reply-To: <9v0jom+cvjj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v13k5+nf07@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "catlady_de_los_angeles" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> For a year, I have been hearing occasionally on the news (as a silly 
> news item) that Tourism UK is publishing a Harry Potter guidebook in 
> hope of luring American tourists who were scared off by the triple 
> whammy of mad cow, hoof and mouth, and September 11. I have never 
> been able to find it on the Web. G'rrr

Here's the link to the map, put out by Visit Britain.  It was released a few days 
after the movie.  My son, daughter, and I visited many of the sites last 
summer, having pieced together our own itinerary based on press coverage of 
the filming. It was great fun.

http://www.visitbritain.com/harry_potter/index.htm

BTW, the Scottish tourist bureau is upset because the map an dbrochure don't  
include any sites in Scotalnd.  After al, Rowling wrote the books in a coffee 
shop in Edinburgh, and Hogwarts is apparently in Scotland.  But since the 
brochure is about the film, and  not much of the film was made in Scotland, 
apparently it was overlooked.




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Mon Dec 10 02:31:37 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:31:37 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9v10t8+4oa6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v16q9+mn70@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "clio44a" <clio at u...> wrote:
> 
>I thought Day-Lewis just 
> because he can manage that ascetic look and *is* dark-haired and 
> black-eyed without wigs, contact lenses etc.

>Regarding D.Day-Lewis, he sure looks ascetic, but can you imagine 
>how people would drool over him as Snape when there already a lot of 
> people are fantasizing about Rickman, who is about 50?

Which is why there is a small herd of us holding out the probably 
vain hope of Daniel Day-Lewis being cast as Sirius...

To continue the Rickman discussion, I stated earlier that I had a 
problem with his character.  However, I didn't mind him bursting into 
that Potions class.  I didn't see it as an indication that Snape was 
late.  I felt that the film-makers wanted to show him doing something 
loud and physical to grab everyone's attention.  I saw it as a way of 
getting across the message physically rather than verbally of "I am 
not someone to trifle with."  But the criticisms of others on the 
list that this is not canon-Snape is well-founded.  In the book Harry 
notes that Snape, like McGonagal, is one of those teachers who has 
the ability to hold the attention of a class without effort.

Marianne


 





From adanaleigh at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 10 04:30:52 2001
From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:30:52 
Subject: Future casting opinions, nitpickiness
Message-ID: <F85kWHZqYW8BYXifWoq0000299c@hotmail.com>


Hi!  I'm a newbie here.  I've been enjoying the HPforGrownups list, so I 
thought I'd check over here too.

I really enjoyed the movie, strictly on a movie basis judgement.  Not to be 
compared with the books, of course.  As an adaptation, it was closer to the 
book than I thought it would be, but from necessity it reminded me of a 
description of the Platte river I read once: "A mile wide and an inch deep."

The mirror of Erised scene is an example, and the one I had the most problem 
with.  In the book, Harry went back more than once, over several nights.  He 
lost interest in his schoolwork and even in his friends.  It was clear that 
the mirror had a hold on him.

In the movie, it seems to be a one-night deal, and Dumbledore shows up 
almost immediately to give his pep talk.  The dialogue is almost the same as 
in the book, but the scene and mood are not nearly as strong. It's almost a 
footnote, just a set-up for the end fight with Quirrell.

And where was Hagrid's outrage that the Dursleys hadn't told Harry anything 
at all?

(I apologize if I'm mentioning things already discussed here.)

I'm following the Snape/Rickman discussion with interest.  That wasn't how I 
pictured him at all, but I'm still undecided as to who I'd pick instead.  
I'll give that some thought.  Rickman doesn't *do* anything for me, but then 
neither does Snape.  However, don't ask me about Sirius Black.  :)

I'm firmly in the "Colin Firth for Sirius" category.  Can I vote somewhere?  
Anybody have any contacts in the film industry?  In A&E's Pride & Prejudice, 
and in Bridget Jones's Diary (the same movie, for those who haven't seen 
them), he played an at-first-glance total jerk, only to be revealed as the 
true hero.  Shouldn't be much of a stretch to play an at-first-glance 
murderous thug, only to be revealed etc.  He can project the edge that 
suggests that it wouldn't take much for him to slip right off reality.  
After 12 years in Azkaban, I think Sirius is hanging on by a thread.  Plus 
Colin Firth is *really, really* nice to look at.

Has anybody mentioned Jeremy Northam for Lupin?  (Mr. Knightley, in Emma, 
with Gwyneth Paltrow.)  He's got the slight uncertainty and self-effacing 
quietness, but with underlying strength, for the role.  Some might say that 
we are supposed to think that he's a bit dangerous--a quality I haven't seen 
from Mr. Northam--but I didn't think anything of the sort about Lupin, even 
after it was revealed that he was a werewolf.  I just couldn't be scared of 
him.

And then, of course, there's Leslie Nielsen for Mad-Eye Moody.

Just kidding!

Adana

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 10 05:20:26 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:20:26 -0000
Subject: First names
In-Reply-To: <9v0noj+p5mk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v1gmq+i8mi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "megrose_13" <megrose_13 at y...> wrote:

> 
> Actually, filius means son. 

Argh, yes, of course. Sorry, don't know where my brain was. Anyone 
who has learned to cuss in a Romance language has learned that one. 
With me, it was Portuguese and Spanish. Never learned that kind of 
thing in my Latin classes, for some reason. I did, however, learn 
that you can't impress the chicks by taking Latin. Playing the 
guitar worked much better.

So what do we do with these first names? Does anyone have any idea 
where IMDb would get that kind of information? Do they get some sort 
of official list from Warner that the rest of us don't see? If I 
understand what I read on the site correctly, they accept 
submissions of information from just about anyone, so I'm really not 
so sure this is in any way official. It may just be some twelve-year-
old who wants to feel important, repeating something he heard on one 
of the silly rumor sites.

I sent an email to IMDb asking where they got the information. We'll 
see if I get any response.

Steve




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 10 05:40:44 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:40:44 -0000
Subject: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9v10t8+4oa6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v1hss+faov@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "clio44a" <clio at u...> wrote:
> 
> So I wait for the next books to come out and brace for the worst. You 
> know, it always happens that my favorite villains get messed up in 
> the end. 


 Uhm... Snape isn't a villain in the HP stories, though. He's an antagonist; that's not automatically the same thing.




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Mon Dec 10 08:58:29 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:58:29 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Snape
In-Reply-To: <9v16q9+mn70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011210085829.33197.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  kiricat2001 <Zarleycat at aol.com> wrote: 
>>Regarding D.Day-Lewis, he sure looks ascetic, but can you >imagine 
>>how people would drool over him as Snape when there already a >lot of 
>> people are fantasizing about Rickman, who is about 50?


True, but then most members of this group *are* already drooling about Snape- including myself. Regarding it from a more distant POV, I wonder whether this is a typically female reaction: Are we unable to just accept that he's oily-haired, sallow-skinned, yellow-teethed, sardonic, sadistic, probably more uptight than a Victorian duchess? Evidently we are. As I already said, what made me believe there's more to him was essentially his age. If he's about 35/36 in GoF, that means he was not even in his mid-twenties when he turned away from Voldemort and probably barely twenty when he became a DE. Which kind of makes you think about his motivations to join the Dark Side. Oooh, I could go on for hours and hours with my Snape Defence...


>Which is why there is a small herd of us holding out the >probably 
>vain hope of Daniel Day-Lewis being cast as Sirius...

>To continue the Rickman discussion, I stated earlier that I had >a 
>problem with his character.  However, I didn't mind him bursting >into 
>that Potions class.  I didn't see it as an indication that Snape >was 
>late.  I felt that the film-makers wanted to show him doing >something 
>loud and physical to grab everyone's attention.  I saw it as a >way of 
>getting across the message physically rather than verbally of "I >am 
>not someone to trifle with."  But the criticisms of others on >the 
>list that this is not canon-Snape is well-founded.  In the book >Harry 
>notes that Snape, like McGonagal, is one of those teachers who >has 
>the ability to hold the attention of a class without effort.

Exactly. And more than once, our attention is drawn to the fact that he moves noiselessly, which IMO is a lot more frightening for his students. And fits way better with canon. BTW, what does everybody think of the make-up? I felt that they overdid it, above all in contrast with his black wig (grrrr! how I hate that wig)

Susanna/pigwidgeon37







Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



"And how come those portraits seem to be alive?"

"What'ya mean? All paintings move."

"No, they don't. We have lots of paintings in our villa, among them a real Chagall, and none of them..."

"And d'ya expect that something painted by a jackal will move? Now really..."



---------------------------------
Nokia 5510 looks weird sounds great.
Discover and win it! The competition ends 16 th of December 2001.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pandrea13 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 10 12:48:03 2001
From: pandrea13 at yahoo.com (pandrea13)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:48:03 -0000
Subject: Future casting opinions, nitpickiness
In-Reply-To: <F85kWHZqYW8BYXifWoq0000299c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v2au3+m9ll@eGroups.com>

-I also thought of Colin Firth for Sirius after watching Bridget 
Jones last night for the 10th time! He is perfect. I had also heard 
of Daniel Day Lewis who could also do a nice job.  As for 
Lupin-Jeremy Northam would do well as well.  What about 
Anthony Hopkins for Mad-Eye Moody. He does those crazy 
characters pretty well.
> 
> 
__________________________________________________
_______________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From pandrea13 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 10 13:00:07 2001
From: pandrea13 at yahoo.com (pandrea13)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:00:07 -0000
Subject: Future casting opinions, nitpickiness
In-Reply-To: <F85kWHZqYW8BYXifWoq0000299c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v2bkn+tnbf@eGroups.com>

-I also thought of Colin Firth for Sirius after watching Bridget 
Jones last night for the 10th time! He is perfect. I had also heard 
of Daniel Day Lewis who could also do a nice job.  As for 
Lupin-Jeremy Northam would do well as well.  What about 
Anthony Hopkins for Mad-Eye Moody. He does those crazy 
characters pretty well.
> 
> 
__________________________________________________
_______________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Mon Dec 10 14:11:56 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:11:56 -0500
Subject: an ANIMATED version?!
References: <1007988486.2265.43878.m2@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C14C2AC.17E8FFD5@sun.com>

Scully931 delurked and wrote:

> And, after hearing some of the loony ideas some of the potential 
> directors had (moving it to Hollywood High?! and an ANIMATED 
> version?!)

Ok, granted an animated version, done by Hollywood, would have been hideous. But
what if it had been a Studio Ghibli film, directed by Hayao Miyazaki? Of his
works, you're most likely to have seen "Princess Mononoke." Previously, I would
have thought this unlikely, as Studio Ghibli usually does original works, not
adaptations, but apparently they're planning an animated version of "Howl's
Moving Castle", by Diana Wynne Jones. (Reported on http://www.nausicaa.net.)
Jones is the writer I personally consider to be most like Rowling (of those I've
read). Based on "Mononoke" and Miyazaki's other films, I would feel quite
comfortable with a Studio Ghibli adaptation of either author's works.

And just think: you could then have Alan Rickman do the voice of Snape, without
worrying about the fact that he's really to old to fit the role, visually.
(Dodges rotten tomatoes.)

I would trust Studio Ghibli to do even a serial TV show of HP. The Japanese
don't mind serialized stories, in which a chapter is given each week, and plot
lines are not necessarily completed in every show. (If you don't believe me,
watch "Ranma 1/2", in which one episode ends with two characters jumping out of
a third-story window-- and it's not a season-ending "cliffhanger," either. The
action just picks up next episode, and things continue along at the usual
Takahashi breakneck pace.)

Well, that's my controversial statement for the day.

Elizabeth
(Who might as well join the others in the "Rickman-Snape wasn't sexy" bunker.
Should I bring my DVD player and a stack of anime? We may be in here for a
while. "Utena," anyone?)



From bethyellen at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 10 18:33:08 2001
From: bethyellen at hotmail.com (bethyellen2)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:33:08 -0000
Subject: Put Nov 15th in you diaries....
Message-ID: <9v2v54+aiev@eGroups.com>

Saw this, and thought of you lot :).....

The release date for Harry Potter And The Chamber of Secrets has been 
announced.

The film will hit cinemas on November 15 2002, almost exactly a year 
after the first film's release.

The cast are currently making the film about Harry's second year at 
Hogwarts school.

According to www.variety.com, the third Harry Potter film may be 
pushed back to 2004 to make way for both Matrix sequels to be 
released in 2003.

Thanks to those lovely guys at NTL world...

bethyellen




From harry_hermione20012002 at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Dec 10 18:53:01 2001
From: harry_hermione20012002 at yahoo.co.uk (harry_hermione20012002)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:53:01 -0000
Subject: Hermione/Robby Williams
Message-ID: <9v30ad+j6qn@eGroups.com>

Does anyone think the young actress who plays Hermione looks a bitlike the singer Robbie Williams? 




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 10 19:48:28 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:48:28 -0000
Subject: First names - newbie contribution
In-Reply-To: <9v1gmq+i8mi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v33ic+46pe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "hp_lexicon" <hp_lexicon at y...> wrote:

> So what do we do with these first names? Does anyone have any idea 
> where IMDb would get that kind of information? 

aha! at last something that this particular newbie can contribute 
usefully to.

it is highly possible that imdb picks up its information from the 
complete cast and credits list that often appear in the press kits 
released in advance of movies. if first names have been created for 
characters, they would surely be in these. hp is no exception:

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1673752750

<kt sits back and chuckles as hpfgu movie members crash the ebay 
servers with enquiries>

in addition, the british magazine "sight and sound" also carries 
complete credit lists when reviewing movies, even down to the 
uncredited mel gibson cameo at the end of Fairytale: A True Story 
(although rats, i've just found that on imdb too!)

hope that helps.

kt in seattle





From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 10 21:01:47 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:01:47 -0000
Subject: CGI characters (was "Backgrounds")
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20011209072643.00b0a770@mail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <9v37rr+no8a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Catherine Keegan <keegan at m...> wrote:
> I'm currently listening to CoS (the American version) and I 
> certainly hope that Dobby doesn't become a great irritant in the 
> next movie <snip> Who knows what a (probably) CGI critter will be 
> like?

<groan> you're so right. hopefully dobby and winky will be nothing 
like the jar jar binks monstrosity in "the phantom menace." the 
potential exists for jkr's endearing house elf speech to be 
absolutely massacred...

kt in seattle




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Dec 11 01:36:02 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:36:02 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: an ANIMATED version?!
Message-ID: <178.8da91d.2946bd02@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/10/2001 9:16:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM writes:

<< Based on "Mononoke" and Miyazaki's other films, I would feel quite
 comfortable with a Studio Ghibli adaptation of either author's works. >>

And Miyazaki has an amazing track record for kids' films. Totoro and Kiki's 
Delivery Service are both excellent...Totoro is amazing....

Susan



From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Dec 11 03:58:56 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:58:56 -0600
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe -- Seeing Actors/Actresses while re-reading
References: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C158480.3000006@swbell.net>

Hi --

I've now seen the movie 7 times, so it goes without saying that I love 
it quite alot.  There are things that drive me crazy each time (*why* 
would they change the seller of Fluffy from a Greek chappie to an Irish 
chappie?  Why?  Why, why, why?).  But, on the whole I love it.  Just 
love it.

I was completely wowed by Radcliffe's performance from the beginning, 
and I wouldn't have thought it possible, but I do think he gets better & 
better with each viewing.  In short, I can find no complaint at all with 
him; he was clearly the star.  He is a very expressive actor, and he's 
quite subtle.  But, that is *GOOD* IMO.  I just saw the BBC production 
of David Copperfield, and it's easy to see why CC was so taken with 
casting DR in the role of Harry.  He's got a bright future.  Tabouli, I 
agree completely: it's very cool that Dan's birthday is July 31st 
(although some site has it listed as July 23rd ... did anyone ever 
figure out which date is real?).

Rupert is very good, as is Emma.  But, they do both over-act in some 
instances.  I find that I'm liking Emma more & more with each viewing, 
although I certainly never did dislike her take on Hermione.

The person who has improved in my mind the most is probably Richard 
Harris.  Maybe because my expectations going in were incredibly low, and 
I think he gave a very good performance, considering the Dumbledore they 
gave him to work with.

ellejir wrote:


> I find that with repeat viewings of the movie that the movie actors
> are starting to replace my former mental images of the characters,
> especially when I am listening to the stories on tape. I am not sure
> if that is a good thing or a bad thing.  

I'm seeing many of the actors & actresses when I re-read.  I believe I'm 
seeing the ones who match up with what my mental image of the character 
*was* before the movie.  Movie Seamus, for example, doesn't fit with 
what I pictured at all (and not just all that Neville-like exploding 
stuff either ... physically he's not what I pictured either).  So, I 
haven't replaced book Seamus with that actor.  I *do* picture Radcliffe 
as Harry, Rupert, Emma, Robbie, Maggie Smith, Rickman & probably Richard 
Harris.  Oh, and Tom Felton works for me.

Penny





From newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 04:22:15 2001
From: newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com (Alexander W. Hertzog)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:22:15 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Snape's speech, clunky lines, dubious Snape/Draco moment
In-Reply-To: <003c01c181f5$9af1e800$e231c2cb@price>
Message-ID: <A861362B-EDEE-11D5-BC99-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>

On Monday, December 10, 2001, at 09:38 PM, Tabouli wrote:

>> topped only by the clich?-ed "Quidditch is in your blood" by Hermione.
>
> Again, I feel unworthy suspicions about CC on the sentimental cliche 
> front.  He's been told that this is a low-key, English-style 
> production, with all all-British cast, emotional restraint instead of 
> emotional expressiveness, etc.etc.  and most of the time he's kept his 
> Mrs Doubtfire instincts under control, but every now and then the 
> schmaltz and overacting peeps through.
>
> Daniel is strikingly low-key and subtle (too much so for many, it 
> seems), but Emma seems to have been instructed to act in a way better 
> suited to the school stage productions they nabbed her from (eNUNciate 
> children, proJECT your voices now, dears...).  In the context of the 
> Hermione they've created, though, I can tolerate this line: it conveys 
> a sense of great self-importance in the sort of way an 11 year old girl 
> well might.

Perhaps this is simply because I'm American, and perhaps it's simply 
because I'm inundated with such schmaltz and deprived of a sense of 
subtlety, but to me this is overreaction in the extreme. The "blood" 
line *is* low-key. It makes sense, and it's so inconspicuous I did a 
double take reading this email to make sure I understood what was being 
picked on. I would entirely expect a friend to tell me that computer 
programming was in my blood (most of the men in my family are engineers 
of some kind). Does this line really bother you that much? It certainly 
didn't seem self-important to me. Just a friend showing a friend the 
most encouraging thing she can, especially considering the fact that 
Harry's parents are such a mystery to him.


> Emma Watson: You're a great wizard, Harry.  (suddenly straining to 
> shift from school stage production self-importance to warm, sincere and 
> admiring, accompanied by the most twee of glowing gazes and camera 
> shots)(BLEE!)

The kids have received what I would consider some scathing criticisms 
from several people on this group, and I really don't understand why. 
Sure, they're smart, talented kids, and we can expect great things from 
them ("Terrible, yes, but great..." ;-) ), but they're still *kids*. 
They're relatively inexperienced at doing *anything*, especially acting 
as masterfully as many seem to demand.
Besides, we have to keep in mind, it could be much, much, MUCH worse. 
Any time you find yourself disappointed with the kids in Harry Potter, 
just think back to Jake Lloyd in Star Wars.


> Both straight out of Hollywood family movies with moral messages.

I find this an odd criticism. Are the Harry Potter books not 
family-oriented, with moral messages?


> Ian Hart (who IMO was truly terrible): Trooooolll!  Trooooll in the 
> dungeons! (in ringingly unconvincing poky tones followed by one of the 
> most ludicrously hammy faints I've ever seen.  Yes, I know he is, in 
> fact, meant to be pretending in that scene, but please.)(URR!)

Again, I just don't see what the fuss is about. Just my saturation with 
ostentatious, sugar-coated movies, I guess. Although I will say I 
thought Hart played the final confrontation scene a bit too much like 
the quintessential James Bond villain as he took time out of his evil 
plan to connect the dots for Harry. Then again, this is how the book is 
written, so I guess I shouldn't judge Hart too harshly.

Alex





_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From syrena at angelfire.com  Tue Dec 11 04:29:19 2001
From: syrena at angelfire.com (slayer_syrena)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:29:19 -0000
Subject: New Snape Photos
Message-ID: <9v422v+imjt@eGroups.com>


There are 27 new photos of Snape in the Snape's Society Movie 
Gallery. 

Quick link: http://jareth.com/movie.html

There's some pretty slick portrait shots amongst them. I love it when 
Snape's hair gets all tangled in his face. Looks very striking!

Cheers,

-Syrena
Severus Snape's Slytherin Society
http://jareth.com/severus.html




From jmmears at prodigy.net  Tue Dec 11 04:55:21 2001
From: jmmears at prodigy.net (serenadust)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:55:21 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe's birthday
Message-ID: <9v43jp+l87g@eGroups.com>

Hello,
I see that there are still a lot of people under the impression that 
Daniel's birthday is on July 31 (same as Harry and JKR), which would 
have been a really cool coincidence.
However, in the Today Show interview, Katie Couric asked him when his 
birthday was, he replied "July 23" to which she responded "oh, that's 
my daughter's birthday".  I happened to have taped that particular 
interview, and double checked it just to be sure.
I was kind of surprised and a bit disappointed that it wasn't really 
on July 31, but I suppose that would have been too good to be true.  
Still, the 23rd is pretty close.

Returning to lurkdom (and pretty excited that I finally found 
something to contribute to the list)

Jo




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 05:08:46 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:08:46 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe and Alan Rickman
In-Reply-To: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v44cu+bli8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> I loved watching Daniel (as Harry) squirm under 
> Snape's initial interrogation in Potions--quietly
> and beautifully acted, I thought. 

Yes, I liked how he played that bit too.  I quite liked the greater 
portion of that whole scene.  I wasn't too keen on Snape speaking as 
he entered the class.  He could just as well have walked to the front 
and started from there.  But I liked the added touch of him picking 
on Harry for not paying attention when indeed he was.  What bothered 
me, though, was that we never heard Harry say, "I don't know, but I 
think Hermione does."  I would have liked to have seen Snape put her 
down too in that scene.  Guess there wasn't time.

So instead, they put in the good luck scene.  Whatever!

My favorite Snape scene, however, was when he grabbed for the 
invisibility cloak.  I thought that was well done.

I could have done without the hair flip, as someone else mentioned.

And although I loved Dan's acting in the scene where Snape tells them 
to be careful b'c people might think they're "up to something," I 
thought Alan's was terrible.  Harry stood up to Snape and Snape was 
shaken by it!  That bothered me because I just don't picture Snape 
backing off, yet that's what it looked like to me in the movie.

Dawn




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 05:21:22 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:21:22 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe and Alan Rickman
In-Reply-To: <9v44cu+bli8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v454i+8676@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> > I loved watching Daniel (as Harry) squirm under 
> > Snape's initial interrogation in Potions--quietly
> > and beautifully acted, I thought. 
> 
> Yes, I liked how he played that bit too.  I quite liked the greater 
> portion of that whole scene.  I wasn't too keen on Snape speaking 
as 
> he entered the class.  He could just as well have walked to the 
front 
> and started from there. 

 My take on it was that his entry reminded me too much of Old Wilkie 
from the "Jennings" books- good thing his desk wasn't by the door, he 
might spill an ink bottle!.....anyway, Snape moves as imperceptibly 
as possible in my mental image of him.

 But I liked the added touch of him picking 
> on Harry for not paying attention when indeed he was.  What 
bothered 
> me, though, was that we never heard Harry say, "I don't know, but I 
> think Hermione does."  I would have liked to have seen Snape put 
her 
> down too in that scene

-Noel,
now wondering if he's the only American who's ever read Jennings.







From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 05:21:25 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:21:25 -0000
Subject: Snape costuming- other costumes
In-Reply-To: <20011207012059.45051.qmail@web20305.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9v454l+ju1t@eGroups.com>

I rather liked Snape's clothes.  JKR uses the word "billowing" to 
describe his robes, and I just loved the way they billowed in the 
movie as he walked away from Harry, Ron, and Hermione (after telling 
them to be careful, "People might think you're up to something.")  

As for makeup, I must agree that it was way too pastey. 
I think the greasy hair was just right, though.

While I'm on the topics of costumes...

Did anyone else hate the ridiculous hat that Prof. McGonagal wore to 
the quidditch match?  It made her look as quirky as Dumbledore SHOULD 
have looked.  It certainly wasn't anything I pictured her wearing.

Catherine wrote:
> I did love the over robe/caftan things they
> stuck the kids into. Hated the traffic cone 
> hats. No wonder no one ever wears them except
> when required.

LOL!!  I know!  I too thought those hats were ridiculous.  You know, 
when I read the books, I never pictured anyone (except Dumbledore and 
McGonagal) even wearing hats.  So, when I would see kids wearing 
witches hats for the release of GoF, it was weird.  I guess I never 
really connected Harry Potter with traditional notions of witchcraft 
garb, even though McGonagal obviously wore a pointed hat.  But, in 
the movie, the students aren't usually wearing the hats anyway, so 
that just fits in with my expectations.

The costumes I like best were the quidditch uniforms.  They were so 
colorful, and well, I just thought they were cool.  Probably not the 
most game-efficient clothing in the world (who wants to wear huge 
capes that will only slow them down?), but very cool!

Dawn






From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 05:51:53 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:51:53 -0000
Subject: other costumes (leaving Snape by the wayside)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20011206181406.00ac9e50@mail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <9v46tp+u9a0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Catherine Keegan <keegan at m...> wrote:
> 
> I understand putting the kids into muggle clothes.  It would 
probably be 
> easier all the way around - especially if the kids came from any 
kind of 
> "mixed" family.
> 
> She didn't do a bad job, she just didn't do a great one.  I did 
love the 
> over robe/caftan things they stuck the kids into.  Hated the 
traffic cone 
> hats.  No wonder no one ever wears them except when required.
> 
> I look forward to seeing next year's film and a younger Dumbledore 
striding 
> about.  


Some of the kids are seen in the traffic cones in almost every Great 
Hall scene- but nowhere else and never any of the majors.

 Other costume-related things I noticed;

-Hufflepuffs and Slytherins are very hard to tell apart- the 
green/gray and blue/white house colors look very similar from a 
distance.

-Very few Ravenclaws can be seen milling around in the background- I 
was looking for non red- or blue/green (see above) scarves in every 
crowd scene last time, and saw none.

-What happens to the black ties and all-gray sweaters? Are they worn 
once and done away with or are they magically turned into house 
colors? (They missed a potentially cool special effect here, imho)

-All the boys wear long trousers with their uniforms. This points to 
the muggle-uniform-under-open-robes policy having been adopted well 
after Riddle and Hagrid's time- had they done so in the 1950s or 
earlier the younger boys would be in shorts and kneesocks. Since 
wizards seem to adopt a Muggle practice once, fix it's shortcomings 
(sorry) magically, and leave it at that, they probably still would 
be.  
 





From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Tue Dec 11 06:29:38 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (pigwidgeon37)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:29:38 -0000
Subject: Book dialogue vs. script dialogue, soundtrack
Message-ID: <9v494i+21jn@eGroups.com>

Alexander W. Hertzog wrote:

>Perhaps this is simply because I'm American, and perhaps it's simply 
>because I'm inundated with such schmaltz and deprived of a sense of 
>subtlety, but to me this is overreaction in the extreme. The "blood" 
>line *is* low-key. It makes sense, and it's so inconspicuous I did a 
>double take reading this email to make sure I understood what was 
>being 
>picked on. I would entirely expect a friend to tell me that computer 
>programming was in my blood (most of the men in my family are 
>engineers 
>of some kind). Does this line really bother you that much? It 
>certainly 
>didn't seem self-important to me. Just a friend showing a friend the 
>most encouraging thing she can, especially considering the fact that 
>Harry's parents are such a mystery to him.

The last thing I wanted to create here was some kind 
of "sophisticated European vs. Simplistic American" situation- I 
don't believe in it, it's stereotyped and, above all, useless.
As for being flooded with bad movies, it's a pity that probably none 
of you except for the few members from Germany, Austria and 
Switzerland have seen any of the German and Austrian post-war movie 
production, or else you would know what schmaltzy *really* means (I 
sometimes watch them on TV for fun).
Whta bothers me about most of the dialogue in the HP movie is that 
there's such an awful lot of really brilliant dialogue in the book 
which the script writer simply didn't use, but instead created lines 
of his own. Had he done a good job, I'd readily forgive him, but 
the "It's in your blood"- thing *is* awful. 
I also agree with Tabouli (was that you?) about Hermione's 
line "You're a great wizard, Harry etc.etc.". Now this is something 
taken from the book, but then a good script writer should know that 
something that sounds good when you read it for yourself, does not 
necessarily sound good when pronounced by an actor and accompanied by 
background music. Call me nitpicky, but if somebody pretends to be a 
top-of-the-range script writer, he should at least master the basics 
of his profession.
Same goes for Dumbledore's "It's love, Harry": In the book, it 
creates this wonderful, dense and intimate atmosphere between Harry 
and Dumbledore, in the film it sounds slightly kitchy.

May I say something else that will probably cause an invasion of 
howlers? I didn't really like Williams' music, at least not all of it 
(to say nothing of the fact that he shamelessly copied 
Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake"). Oh, and there was something interesting 
about the music which I only caught seeing the movie for the third 
time: There is such a thing like a "Leitmotiv" for Voldemort (you 
hear it when Hagrid tells about the death of Harry's parents). And, 
strangely, in one scene- I can't tell which one right now, have to go 
and do a 4th viewing- *Snape's* appearance is accompanied by the same 
Leitmotiv, I think it's when he catches the trio after they 
desperately wanted to see Dumbledore and tells them to go outside 
like the others. Now that would be a subtle hint at Snape being the 
bad guy! 

Susanna/pigwidgeon37





From newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 06:58:41 2001
From: newton_nicodemus at yahoo.com (Alexander W. Hertzog)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:58:41 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Book dialogue vs. script dialogue, soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9v494i+21jn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <82CA15D7-EE04-11D5-9DC8-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>

> Oh, and there was something interesting
> about the music which I only caught seeing the movie for the third
> time: There is such a thing like a "Leitmotiv" for Voldemort (you
> hear it when Hagrid tells about the death of Harry's parents). And,
> strangely, in one scene- I can't tell which one right now, have to go
> and do a 4th viewing- *Snape's* appearance is accompanied by the same
> Leitmotiv, I think it's when he catches the trio after they
> desperately wanted to see Dumbledore and tells them to go outside
> like the others. Now that would be a subtle hint at Snape being the
> bad guy!


Oh, I'm so, so glad you brought that up. Considering this is intended to 
be a lengthy series of movies, I was hoping that nearly every major 
character would have his or her own (Leitmotif? Leitmotiv? Theme?) theme 
as is done in Star Wars. Sadly this doesn't seem to be the case, unless 
this is something intended to mature as more movies are made (as it 
happened in Star Wars, and I'm sure there are other examples that I 
can't think of at the moment).

On a slightly different note, I've been a huge fan of Williams for as 
long as I can remember (literally), but lately I take issue with the way 
he produces his albums. Most notably with the Phantom Menace and Harry 
Potter, there are a few great pieces he left completely off the original 
album. In the case of TPM, he later came out with the 2 CD set which 
included all of the music in the entire film (and in proper order too! 
what a great idea!) I'm hoping something similar happens with the Harry 
Potter soundtrack, and I'm bravely fighting the voice in my head that 
says he's doing this setup to rake in more dough. Might just be the 
nature of the movie business, of course, but somehow I doubt it.
The piece that I most want is the entirety of the Diagon alley entrance 
music. You hear snatches of it later (entering the great hall etc) but 
it doesn't quite sound the same, and I'm picky about what music I want, 
darn it. :)

I suppose I'm just being slightly fanatical about all this Williams 
music stuff, though. After all, I own fourteen CD's of Star Wars music 
alone. (2 discs for each special edition soundtrack * 3 + 4 discs for 
the box set + 1 concert collection cd + 1 original phantom menace + 2 
discs of special edition phantom menace. whew!)


Alex   (wishing there were such a thing as Dumbledore's theme I could 
whistle right now.... I guess Yoda's theme will do ;)





_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Dec 11 07:18:48 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:18:48 -0000
Subject: dubious Snape/Draco moment
In-Reply-To: <003c01c181f5$9af1e800$e231c2cb@price>
Message-ID: <9v4c0o+ldq8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
> 
> The romantic gazes exchanged between doting Snape and simpering 
> Draco in the first Potions class.  Now that was creepy. (snip)
> Presumably CC was trying to imply a sort of mentorly/fatherly bond,
> (snip) as a result the bestowing of fond gazes with his menacing, 
> cool face makes him look like a child molester.

**I** saw it as being lead-up to a mentoring type relationship, not 
as sexual at all -- and **I** write Snape/Draco slash! (Admittedly 
when Draco is over age of consent.) I think I would have been pleased 
to have seen it as sexual!




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 14:32:16 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:32:16 -0000
Subject: Snape's speech, clunky lines, dubious Snape/Draco moment
In-Reply-To: <003c01c181f5$9af1e800$e231c2cb@price>
Message-ID: <9v55dg+pftr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:

  Wow... my interpretation of the scenes which irritated you so were about 165 degrees off yours. 

I never thought Snape seemed *flustered* except possibly for the few seconds he realizes Harry has noticed his injured leg in the bathroom.




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 15:48:26 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:48:26 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <82CA15D7-EE04-11D5-9DC8-0003934C55A2@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9v59sa+ce9f@eGroups.com>

> Oh, I'm so, so glad you brought that up. Considering this is
> intended to be a lengthy series of movies, I was hoping that
> nearly every major character would have his or her own theme 

I was hoping that too.  I actually really enjoy listening to the 
soundtrack.  I've been listening to it nonstop in my car for weeks and 
I even have it playing in the background at work.

But I wonder what on earth will happen with the other movies.  The 
main theme on the soundtrack is repeated quite often that it will be 
major overkill (if it isn't already) to have to listen to it that much 
in the other movies.  I do hope that Williams develops songs for more 
of the characters, most notably Snape, Dumbledore, and Hagrid.

> Harry Potter, there are a few great pieces he
> left completely off the original album...
> The piece that I most want is the entirety of
> the Diagon alley entrance music.

I really like the Diagon Alley music on the soundtrack and am kind of 
annoyed that it got totally changed on the film.  But what other music 
was left out?

I wish they had called the "Library Scene" the "Mirror of Erised" 
instead b'c that's more what it focuses on, don't you think?

Oh, and in a reverse omission, my favorite part of the soundtrack is 
around 4:15 of Hedwig's Theme.  It's taken from the trailer and is 
played when Quirrell runs into the Hall screaming "Troll in the 
dungeon."  I just love the music at that part b'c it is so powerful.  
To watch that scene in silence was so weird the first time b'c I think 
I must have watched the trailers 100 times before I saw the movie.

Dawn




From dairyspice at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 11 16:57:09 2001
From: dairyspice at hotmail.com (Barb Dickson)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:57:09 
Subject: Mirror of Erised scene
Message-ID: <F31dI4zy3Kw4y5KxuS200009312@hotmail.com>

Adana wrote:

"The mirror of Erised scene is an example, and the one I had the most 
problem with.  In the book, Harry went back more than once, over several 
nights. He lost interest in his schoolwork and even in his friends.  It was 
clear that the mirror had a hold on him.

In the movie, it seems to be a one-night deal, and Dumbledore shows up 
almost immediately to give his pep talk. The dialogue is almost the same as 
in the book, but the scene and mood are not nearly as strong. It's almost a 
footnote, just a set-up for the end fight with Quirrell."

I didn't get that impression at all from the movie. In fact, it was probably 
the most powerful scene in the movie for me. I think Daniel Radcliffe did an 
excellent job. In the scene with Dumbledore, I got the impression that Harry 
had been going to the mirror for quite some time. I could picture him 
spending all night, every night in front of it, entranced.

                   -BarbL

____________________________________________________________
"So, you're like a good demon? Bringing the fun in?"
                      -Dawn, in Buffy the Vampire Slayer

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 18:10:40 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:10:40 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe -- Seeing Actors/Actresses while re-reading
In-Reply-To: <3C158480.3000006@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9v5i70+vprk@eGroups.com>

Hi, newbieish here.

> I've now seen the movie 7 times, so it goes without saying that I 
love 
> it quite alot.  

You know, the last time I had such enthusiasm for a movie that I not 
only made it a point to see it in the theater, but saw it more than 
once on purpose...hmm, I think I was in grade school.

I'm 27 years old, mother of one.  And I've seen HP *4 TIMES* in the 
theater.  My husband thinks I'm nuts.  Oy.  And also, wheee!!

> I was completely wowed by Radcliffe's performance from the 
beginning, 
> and I wouldn't have thought it possible, but I do think he gets 
better & 
> better with each viewing.  

Do you know, I thought he was kind of horrible the first time I saw 
it.  Second time I saw it, I realized my complaints were more 
script/direction-related ~ the thing about Harry shooting all these 
knowing grins at people, gargh.

On the other hand, Radcliffe, wow.  Very.  Very.  Good.  I, too, have 
liked him better with each viewing.

>In short, I can find no complaint at all with 
> him; he was clearly the star.  He is a very expressive actor, and 
he's 
> quite subtle.  But, that is *GOOD* IMO.  

Yes!  He *must* be subtle, imho, because at least in the first book 
(and thus movie) Harry is still feeling his way around this new 
world.  

The wonderful aspect of his version of 'subtle,' I thought, is that 
he gives the impression that regardles off what Harry is *not* saying 
or noticeably emoting, there is a great deal going on inside his 
head.  

Also, I loved Radcliffe's mannerisms, especially (and this seems like 
a wierd, small thing, but on I go) the way that he rarely looks his 
elders straight in the eye.  He keeps his face down, and turns his 
eyes up; but while that mannerism is suggestive of trying to be as 
small and submissive as possible, his eyes always tell the underlying 
emotion ~ for example, a little fear, and a lot of awe when he first 
meets Hagrid; or a bit of fear and a lot of uncertainty when he first 
meets Snape; and in later interactions with Snape, anger and bottled-
up rebelliousness.  

The mannerism followed so well from his interactions with the 
Dursley's, and to me, at least, drew that past experience forward.  
In contrast, regardless of how afraid they are, Hermione and Ron, 
sans the past mistreatment, will look Snape (for example) straight in 
the face.  I wonder how much of that was unconcious on the part of 
the actor(s), and how much was direction?

>I just saw the BBC production 
> of David Copperfield, and it's easy to see why CC was so taken with 
> casting DR in the role of Harry.  He's got a bright future. 

LOL; I had seen the first half of that production so long ago, and I 
remember thinking of the child who played young David, "Lord, that 
kid plays orphaned and 'whipped' well."  I had no idea it was the 
future Harry Potter until recently, but the impression rather stands.

> Rupert is very good, as is Emma.  But, they do both over-act in 
some 
> instances.  I find that I'm liking Emma more & more with each 
viewing, 
> although I certainly never did dislike her take on Hermione.

I adored Rupert as Ron.  I immediately felt he *was* Ron in first 
viewing, and still feel that way.  Emma, I felt, overacted the most, 
but I still get a pretty solid Hermione vibe off of her.

Actually, I just felt that everything in the movie was perfect.  It 
was the book come alive, to me, and that's exactly what I wanted of 
it.  I didn't mind the not-100% special effects, nor the overacting 
(which I thought that Watson & Felton were most guilty of), nor that 
I kept thinking that as Snape-y as Rickman seemed he also struck me 
as too old to be Snape....  I just don't mind.  Regardless of any 
gripes I have, after 4 viewings it still gets me all gleeful!

Mahoney




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Tue Dec 11 18:37:47 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 05:37:47 +1100
Subject: Smoothing ruffled feathers
Message-ID: <002f01c18272$ef02b820$f10adccb@price>

O dear, I seem to have got a bit strident in my last post - ruffled feathers flying everywhere.  Hang on, let me try to smooth a few.

Alex:
> Does this line really bother you that much? It certainly 
didn't seem self-important to me. Just a friend showing a friend the 
most encouraging thing she can, especially considering the fact that 
Harry's parents are such a mystery to him.<

Er, I don't think I can have been quite clear enough here.  What I meant was that the "it's in your blood" line was, in fact, quite fitting in the context.  I was defending it, not savaging it: I thought that Emma's Hermione would quite likely have said such a thing, being a shade young to be cliche-conscious.  It was the following comments I was savaging.

More Alex:
> The kids have received what I would consider some scathing criticisms 
from several people on this group, and I really don't understand why. 
Sure, they're smart, talented kids, and we can expect great things from 
them ("Terrible, yes, but great..." ;-) ), but they're still *kids*. 
They're relatively inexperienced at doing *anything*, especially acting 
as masterfully as many seem to demand.<

Hang on a minute, let me clarify.  I know perfectly well they're kids, and I myself have in fact been nothing but complimentary about the performances of Dan *and* Rupert.  My only gripes have been with Hermione, and a couple of posts back I made it clear that I think the sort of "school stage production" overacting she's doing is more CC's fault than hers.  Her style would be quite appropriate on a stage, where voice projection, clear enunciation and to some extent more strenuous "acting" is necessary to ensure her lines are heard and understood.  Her problem is not so much that she can't act, it's that she hasn't taught her how to tone things down for the movie cameras, making the change in mood she has to do near the end look very clunky.  She's a kid, but she's a bright, 10-11-year-old kid who's acted a little before, not a five year old.  Surely that's old enough to understand a quick rundown a la "now that you're acting in front of cameras, instead of on stage, there are a few new things you need to keep in mind - you don't need to pronounce your syllables and project your voice as much, because we have mikes everywhere" etc., and try to apply them, with guidance and fine-tuning from the director.

Perhaps the real problem here is the problem which could be said to apply to practically all our whinges on this list - the tastes of the film-makers are different from ours, and we don't like it.  Obviously there isn't much we can do about this, but isn't complaining about it one of the main functions of this list?

Tabouli.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 18:37:07 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:37:07 -0000
Subject: Future casting opinions
In-Reply-To: <F85kWHZqYW8BYXifWoq0000299c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v5joj+3jqr@eGroups.com>

> I'm firmly in the "Colin Firth for Sirius" category.  Can I vote 
somewhere?  
> Anybody have any contacts in the film industry?  

You know, I had a passing thought way back that he'd be grand as 
Lupin, but...Sirius!  Wow!  Now there's a tantalizing thought!  

And speaking of "Pride & Prejudice" actors, how's about the fellow 
who plays Mr. Collins as Peter Pettigrew?  He certainly has 
obsequious nailed, and imho kind of looks the part.

As for Lupin, I know that Richard E. Grant was/is rumored to be in 
the running as Lucius Malfoy, but on the other side of the coin, I 
also think that he'd make a very good Lupin.  And, I think, would be 
an excellent foil for Rickman as Snape ~ I guess I just think, for 
some reason, that they'd be able to tell the untold story of their 
history with each other just by *vibes*.  If that makes any sense.

> And then, of course, there's Leslie Nielsen for Mad-Eye Moody.

LMAO

Mahoney




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 18:46:25 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:46:25 -0000
Subject: Hermione (was Smoothing ruffled feathers)
In-Reply-To: <002f01c18272$ef02b820$f10adccb@price>
Message-ID: <9v5ka1+qm7d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
>Her style would be quite appropriate on a stage, where voice 
projection, clear enunciation and to some extent more 
strenuous "acting" is necessary to ensure her lines are heard and 
understood.  Her problem is not so much that she can't act, it's that 
she hasn't taught her how to tone things down for the movie cameras, 
making the change in mood she has to do near the end look very 
clunky.  >

May I comment on Emma's Hermione?  

I also thought that Emma overacted quite a bit, but at the same time, 
I thought it was also a very Hermione characteristic ~ the 
enunciation, the overly pompous attitude, and even the clunky changes 
of mood.  In the first book, for all Hermione's apparent confidence, 
I think her only source of self-confidence is her book-smarts, but 
that she does, in fact, have a very grating manner due to an actual 
general *lack* of confidence (being, as she is, the daughter of two 
dentists suddenly transplanted into a wizard world).  Throughout the 
first book, Hermione is very annoying (as Ron calls in in the movie, 
during the Sorting, "mental").

So I guess the way I see it, Emma might be unschooled in film acting, 
might be overacting and overenunciating and all that, but to me it 
fits right in with how I would imagine Hermione being in the first 
book.  She mellows a bit as the books wear on, but so, I suppose, 
could Emma, as the movies wear on.

Just mho.

Mahoney




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Tue Dec 11 18:17:44 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:17:44 -0000
Subject: Dan's birthday (WAS Daniel Radcliffe -- Seeing Actors/Actresses while re-reading)
References: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com> <3C158480.3000006@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <014201c18270$26421ea0$a63a073e@j0dhe>

Penny Wrote:
> Tabouli, I aggree completely: it's very cool that Dan's birthday is  
> July 31st (although some site has it listed as July 23rd ... did
> anyone ever figure out which date is real?).
The reason it is listed as the 23rd is because Dan himself said that it was a rumour that his birthday was 31st of July and that it is actually the 23rd. He said this on some American chat show, which is why the dates of his birthdya have been changed on lists such as the Leaky Cauldron.
Hope that helps.

HOLLYDAZE!!!




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Mon Dec 10 20:59:16 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:59:16 -0000
Subject: First names, HP tourist map of UK etc.
References: <9v0e1g+oemk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00ad01c181be$01768b40$5d5e7ad5@j0dhe>

mirzam wrote:
> Do you believe those first names, which IMDB.com gave to prof. 
> Quirrell and Flitwick and madame Hooch? I just want to know, if they 
> are right..
> prof. Slatero Quirrell
> prof. Filius Flitwick
> madame Xiomara Hooch
I know that Filius Flitwick is correct because JK has said it in an interview and also it is the name given to him on the Harry Potter trading cards. I'm not sure about the other two but I like Hooch's name.

<SNIP>
> And what about the HP tourist map of UK, is there a map or is it just
> a dream of mine?


Yes there is a mapIt's been produced by the British tourist board and it has actually caused quite a stir because they *forgot* to include Scotland. This means that Scotland is going to loose millions of pounds of income from tourism because people who don't know where things were filmed etc, won't go to Scotland. It is quite a major problem being discussed at the moment becuase the maps have already been out so long that it might be pointless in changing them.

HOLLYDAZE!!!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Dec 11 19:55:27 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:55:27 -0000
Subject: Snape's speech, clunky lines, dubious Snape/Draco moment
In-Reply-To: <003c01c181f5$9af1e800$e231c2cb@price>
Message-ID: <9v5obf+71ua@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
 
> Actually, speaking of the cute Daniel, is anyone else enchanted that his 
birthday really is the 31st of July, like both Harry and JKR?  I think this is 
wonderful!  Appeals to my sense of occasion and magical coincidence.

Unfortunately, that birthday was a bit of wishful thinking on the part of some 
press agent.  Radcliffe revealed during an interview with the "Today" show 
that his birthday is actually July 23.




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 20:04:50 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:04:50 -0000
Subject: Mirror of Erised scene
In-Reply-To: <F31dI4zy3Kw4y5KxuS200009312@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v5ot2+b3sh@eGroups.com>

Adana wrote:
> The mirror of Erised scene is an example, and the one
> I had the most problem with.  In the book, Harry went
> back more than once, over several nights. He lost
> interest in his schoolwork and even in his friends. 
> It was clear that the mirror had a hold on him.
> In the movie, it seems to be a one-night deal, and
> Dumbledore shows up almost immediately to give his
> pep talk. The dialogue is almost the same as in the
> book, but the scene and mood are not nearly as strong.
> It's almost a footnote, just a set-up for the end
> fight with Quirrell.

Frankly, I think it would be hard to convey on film the fact that 
Harry keeps returning to the mirror any better than Columbus does.  
Dumbledore's saying, "Back again," sends the message that he's been 
going back at least a few times.  Time constraints on the film being 
what they were, it would be impossible to add more to it.  And if 
there were more time, there are numerous other things I'd rather see 
added.  (More on that later.)

Barb responded:
> I didn't get that impression at all from the movie.
> In fact, it was probably the most powerful scene in
> the movie for me. 

Well, I don't know about most powerful, but it is one of my two 
visually favorite scene... and the music just completes it.  The 
other scene I really like is the one when we see Harry sitting at his 
window the first night at Hogwarts and just looking out, thinking of 
all the stuff that has happened to him of late.  I really like that.

Dawn




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 20:26:32 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:26:32 -0000
Subject: Wasted time in a tight movie
Message-ID: <9v5q5o+u5mk@eGroups.com>

Obviously, there were major time constraints on the movie.  As a 
result, many things were cut that we all wanted to see.  Hmmm... I 
think I shall post a poll to see which scenes we are most disgruntled 
over seeing deleted.  But first...

Okay, there are two scenes that I thought were a waste of time in a 
movie where time is EVERYTHING.  

1) Dumbledore using the Put-Outer in the opening sequence.  What an 
idiotic waste of time!  Even when I read the book I thought to 
myself, well that's something that could be deleted for the movie.  
And what bothers me furthermore, is the fact that even after he uses 
the stupid thing, there are still lights on in the street (on houses, 
granted, but light nonetheless)!  When I read the book, I totally got 
the impression that it got completely dark, and it was akin to 
stopping time.  But in the movie, it has no effect whatsoever.  
Grrr.  And to think of all the scenes that could have been added in 
place of that one!!

2) And I know most of you will disagree: the scene where Harry takes 
Hedwig out to the courtyard and sets her loose.  I know, it's a nice 
scene, a pretty scene, and some even say that it shows Harry "letting 
go" after the Mirror of Erised scene, but really, nothing was 
established.  I suppose you can argue that we see Harry bonding with 
Hedwig, but we saw that in the night scene the first night at 
Hogwarts.  And granted, I like the bird's eye view of Hogwarts and 
all, but there are scene's I'd rather have seen.

Okay, so what scenes could have been added in those short time 
spans?  Well how about....

1) Hagrid blowing up at the Dursleys for not telling Harry about his 
parents being wizards and all.  I know someone else mentioned wanting 
to see that scene.  And it is just me, or does it seem like that was 
originally IN the movie?  I don't know, it just seems really choppy 
the way Harry says, "Learned what all?" and then Hagrid says, "You're 
a wizard, Harry."  It just seems to me like there were lines deleted 
there.

2) The sorting hat song.

3) Dumbledore's nonsensical words at the first feast: "Nitwit! 
Blubber! Oddment!  Tweak!"  Haha.. I loved that part in the book 
because it just really conveyed what kind of a man Dumbledore is.  
>From the movie, I so did not get any vibe that Dumbledore was nice, 
quirky, funny guy, even if he is the most powerful wizard ever.

4) Dumbledore telling Harry that his father once saved Snape's life 
(although I assume that will come out in the third movie).

There are tons of other scenes I'd loved to have scene (Harry's first 
meeting with Malfoy, the second quidditch match, Peeves, more of 
Norbert, Hermione solving the potions riddle, the students angry at H 
H & R for losing 150 points for Gryffindor, etc), but they'd be much 
longer sequences than the few minutes afforded by the two useless 
scenes I mentioned.  

Just my opinion.

Dawn





From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Tue Dec 11 20:32:25 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 11 Dec 2001 20:32:25 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008102745.5792.13955.w113@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Many scenes from the book were cut in 
making the movie fit into 2.5 hours.  
Which are you most annoyed they cut? 

  o Hermione solving the potions riddle 
  o Harry's first meeting with Malfoy 
  o The second quidditch match 
  o Some scenes with Peeves 
  o Harry et. al. defending Quirrell 
  o More of Norbert, including the real send-off 
  o The sorting hat song 
  o Hagrid's outrage at the Dursleys 
  o Other students hating Harry, Ron, and Hermione for losing 150 pts for Gryffindor 
  o The rest of the dialog between Dumbledore and Harry in the hospital (end) 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From adanaleigh at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 11 20:51:04 2001
From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:51:04 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Mirror of Erised scene, more opinions
Message-ID: <F33BZTW5k1Ed28kIN4M00017b83@hotmail.com>




>From: "norsecode" <norsecode at yahoo.com>
>>
>Adana wrote:
> > The mirror of Erised scene is an example, and the one
> > I had the most problem with.  In the book, Harry went
> > back more than once, over several nights. He lost
> > interest in his schoolwork and even in his friends.
> > It was clear that the mirror had a hold on him.
> > In the movie, it seems to be a one-night deal, and
> > Dumbledore shows up almost immediately to give his
> > pep talk. The dialogue is almost the same as in the
> > book, but the scene and mood are not nearly as strong.
> > It's almost a footnote, just a set-up for the end
> > fight with Quirrell.
>
>Frankly, I think it would be hard to convey on film the fact that
>Harry keeps returning to the mirror any better than Columbus does.
>Dumbledore's saying, "Back again," sends the message that he's been
>going back at least a few times.
>
>Barb responded:
> > I didn't get that impression at all from the movie.
> > In fact, it was probably the most powerful scene in
> > the movie for me.
>

Keeping in mind that I've only seen the movie once (so far!), the way I 
remember it, Dumbledore said "Back again" after Harry had collected Ron and 
they'd both looked into it, and Ron had gone back to bed.  Harry was back 
again, and it seemed like he'd been there some time, maybe all night long, 
maybe, but it seemed to be the same night.

I think the scene was done very well, and reminded me again of why I like 
Dumbledore so much--some people never do learn that you can't live in the 
past--but I was trying to look at it from a perspective of a person who 
hadn't read the book (and it's hard to get into that mindset!)and I didn't 
think it would come across as strongly to the non-initiated.  I have friends 
and family members who will *never* read the books, but I have hopes of 
dragging them to the movie, and since I think that this is one of the 
strongest scenes in the book, I wanted it extremely clear in the movie what 
this was doing to Harry.

I know, I know--nitpicky!

I also couldn't stand the cheesy body-squashing special effects in the 
Quidditch scenes.

I did think Daniel Radcliffe made an excellent Harry--exactly as I'd 
pictured him--and Rupert and Emma were great too.  I have loved Maggie Smith 
in everything I've ever seen her in.  The guy who played Quirrell was a bit 
of a disaster.

I was disappointed in Draco (runs for cover--knocks on door of 
"Snape/Rickman's-not-sexy" bunker from other list, seeking admittance).  
>From the books, my imagination had pictured him as taller, a bit 
older-seeming, with more menace behind his arrogance.  This pipsqueak kid 
("Blondie") reminded me more than anything else of a whiny, wanna-be evil 
Macauley Culkin.

Adana--awaiting howlers

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 20:51:06 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:51:06 -0000
Subject: Wasted time in a tight movie
In-Reply-To: <9v5q5o+u5mk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v5rjq+2f8k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> 2) And I know most of you will disagree: the scene where Harry 
takes 
> Hedwig out to the courtyard and sets her loose.  I know, it's a 
nice 
> scene, a pretty scene, and some even say that it shows 
Harry "letting 
> go" after the Mirror of Erised scene, but really, nothing was 
> established.  

I beg to differ!  :-)  Passage of time was established.  As Hedwig 
flew over the roof out of the courtyard, the scenery changed from 
winter (snowy) to spring (no snow).  Actually, I think that's exactly 
why the scene is there.

Granted, passage of time could have been shown differently and in a 
matter of a few seconds rather than, well, lots of seconds.  But this 
way, only a few moments were expended, but they were packed with not 
only time passage, but also a beautiful view of the grounds, the 'boy 
and his owl' thing, as well as (imho) a rare moment of quiet peace 
and contentment for Harry before (as it were) the cataclysmic finale.

Which is why I, at least, liked it.  :*)

Mahoney




From adanaleigh at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 11 20:58:32 2001
From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:58:32 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future casting opinions
Message-ID: <F1170P20MPC1sqWSNrN0000e69c@hotmail.com>




>From: "ftah3" <ftah3 at yahoo.com>
>>
>You know, I had a passing thought way back that he'd be grand as
>Lupin, but...Sirius!  Wow!  Now there's a tantalizing thought!

I completely agree!


>And speaking of "Pride & Prejudice" actors, how's about the fellow
>who plays Mr. Collins as Peter Pettigrew?  He certainly has
>obsequious nailed, and imho kind of looks the part.

I didn't even think of him!  He was so repulsive, I wiped him from my 
memory!  Now there is an excellent actor (I don't know his name).  He 
created in Mr. Collins a character for whom the term "odious" was invented.

Would anybody else kinda have liked Michael Caine for Dumbledore?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From valjean131 at aol.com  Tue Dec 11 22:09:20 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (valjean131)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:09:20 -0000
Subject: Future casting opinions
In-Reply-To: <F1170P20MPC1sqWSNrN0000e69c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v606g+vjfi@eGroups.com>


> 
> >And speaking of "Pride & Prejudice" actors, how's about the fellow
> >who plays Mr. Collins as Peter Pettigrew?  He certainly has
> >obsequious nailed, and imho kind of looks the part.

He was ookie.

> > 
> Would anybody else kinda have liked Michael Caine for Dumbledore?
> 

Hmmm. Don't know if this has been mentioned, but I would have
loved to have seen Nicol Williamson (Merlin in Excalibur) as
Dumbledore.

-Monique




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 11 23:11:15 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:11:15 -0000
Subject: Mirror of Erised scene, more opinions
In-Reply-To: <F33BZTW5k1Ed28kIN4M00017b83@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v63qk+fksn@eGroups.com>

Adana wrote:
> Keeping in mind that I've only seen the movie once
> (so far!), the way I remember it, Dumbledore said
> "Back again" after Harry had collected Ron and 
> they'd both looked into it, and Ron had gone back
> to bed.  Harry was back again, and it seemed like
> he'd been there some time, maybe all night long, 
> maybe, but it seemed to be the same night.

Actually, from what I can remember, when he first goes there and then 
comes back with Ron, Harry is wearing regular clothes.  At the time 
when he meets Dumbledore, Harry is wearing pajamas.

Dawn




From eberte at vaeye.com  Tue Dec 11 23:38:10 2001
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:38:10 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe -- Seeing Actors/Actresses while re-reading
In-Reply-To: <3C158480.3000006@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9v65d2+4ul3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny wrote:
> I'm seeing many of the actors & actresses when I re-read.  I 
believe I'm seeing the ones who match up with what my mental image of 
the character *was* before the movie.  Movie Seamus, for example, 
doesn't fit with what I pictured at all (and not just all that 
Neville-like exploding stuff either ... physically he's not what I 
pictured either).  So, I haven't replaced book Seamus with that 
actor.< 

I agree.  Why *did* they have Seamus doing all that Neville-like 
stuff anyhow??  That is not how I think of Seamus and the character 
of Neville was crying out for development (so that his win of 10 
points for Gryffindor to secure the House Cup would be seen as the 
amazing victory that it is for him!) I think that my husband who is 
*not* an obsessed fan--never read the books, listens to books-on-tape 
when he is in the car with me, saw the movie once (and liked it)--
thought that Neville and Seamus were the same character.

Penny also wrote:
> I *do* picture Radcliffe as Harry, Rupert, Emma, Robbie, Maggie 
Smith, Rickman & probably Richard Harris.  Oh, and Tom Felton works 
for me.> 

Tom Felton did a very good job with the role but I do not see him as 
Draco. I think that is because his face is too sweet, especially 
around the mouth.  I cannot put those rounded cheeks and lips 
together with Jim Dale's sneering, drawling Malfoy voice (and 
*that's* the Malfoy I love to hate!)    Elle




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 02:17:28 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:17:28 -0000
Subject: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than HP
Message-ID: <9v6eno+1j6k@eGroups.com>

First round of premiere reviews is here.

''Lord'' runs rings around ``Potter'' - critics
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011211/en/film-ringscritics_1.html

Rings: 'Hotter Than Potter'
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/011211/140/cl9lm.html 

Newsweek: Rings Above Potter
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1688000/168
8945.stm 




From minke13 at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 12 03:01:23 2001
From: minke13 at earthlink.net (Tam Nesbit)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:01:23 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wasted time in a tight movie
References: <9v5q5o+u5mk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C16C883.CF2D2421@earthlink.net>

Well, I was hoping my first post here would be a cheery, agreeing sort
of post, but.... :)  

I was very glad to see they began the movie with that scene!  I remember
how I felt when I first read that first HP book.  And remember, there
are people who are seeing the movie who haven't read any of the books. 
I think, I hope!, it makes them feel the way I did when I first read
it.  An ordinary street in an ordinary neighbourhood.... then.... what's
this?!?!  The world of magic appears in the workaday muggle world... for
the reader... for the movie-goer...

Tam, who also liked the Hedwig scene, but I'm big on scenery and even
bigger on owls, so you can't go by me....

norsecode wrote:
> 1) Dumbledore using the Put-Outer in the opening sequence.  What an
> idiotic waste of time!  Even when I read the book I thought to
> myself, well that's something that could be deleted for the movie.
> And what bothers me furthermore, is the fact that even after he uses
> the stupid thing, there are still lights on in the street (on houses,
> granted, but light nonetheless)!  When I read the book, I totally got
> the impression that it got completely dark, and it was akin to
> stopping time.  But in the movie, it has no effect whatsoever.
> Grrr.  And to think of all the scenes that could have been added in
> place of that one!!
> 
> 2) And I know most of you will disagree: the scene where Harry takes
> Hedwig out to the courtyard and sets her loose.  I know, it's a nice
> scene, a pretty scene, and some even say that it shows Harry "letting
> go" after the Mirror of Erised scene, but really, nothing was
> established.  I suppose you can argue that we see Harry bonding with
> Hedwig, but we saw that in the night scene the first night at
> Hogwarts.  And granted, I like the bird's eye view of Hogwarts and
> all, but there are scene's I'd rather have seen.



From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Dec 12 03:46:48 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 03:46:48 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
Message-ID: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>

Chris Columbus is directing CoS.  So far as I know, he has not signed 
on officially to direct PoA or GoF.  So it is still an open question.

And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?

My own answer is that I would probably give Columbus his walking 
papers and hire someone else, although I think it is a close 
question.   My reasons are:

1.  I'm not fond of the idea of splitting GoF into two movies.  I 
just don't think it can work.

2.  I think he made far too many mistakes in PS/SS.  We've beaten 
this to death of course, but for me, the glaring blunders include the 
coaching of Emma Watson, Snape's sprint to the front of the class for 
his potions speech, the boring opening sequence, having all of the 
kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and again 
when they confront Fluffy.

3.  I think he showed an inability to combine scenes to save time 
that could be spent better elsewhere.  For instance, do we need 
several Mirror of Erised scenes, or could all of it have been 
accomplished in one scene?  Can't we combine the hut on the rock with 
Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?

4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut, 
which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and 
the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were deleted.  
If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a director 
who can be a bit more persuasive.

5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for that.

6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  When 
a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but 
because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to 
take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.

7.  My biggest overall gripe about the movie was the lack of 
continuity.  Since PoA and GoF are much bigger books, I would think 
the continuity problems will be much more pronounced if Columbus also 
brings them to the screen.  In other words, if he can't do PS/SS as a 
movie that stands up on its own merits without knowledge of the 
books, then how can he possibly do it with books that are hundreds of 
pages longer?

That said, it is still definitely a close question.  The movie could 
have been badly botched, and it wasn't.  It was, after all, a smash 
success.  But given that for PoA and GoF, we are starting with good 
stories, a proven cast (for the ones who return), and established set 
design and costume design, I think we need someone who is more adept 
at telling a story with continuity.  So Mr. Columbus gets a gold 
watch and free tickets to PoA and GoF from me, but not the directing 
nod.

Cindy (who doesn't mean to be overly harsh, but it is always harsh 
when you fire someone)




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 04:01:56 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 04:01:56 -0000
Subject: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing
Message-ID: <9v6krk+eghq@eGroups.com>

Nice touch, Vernon receives a postcard from Marge complaining about her vacation on the day the first Hogwarts letter arrives.

That's Susan Bones standing with her cousins at the window of Quality Quiddich Supplies, isn't it? And I think I also saw Katie Bell (or is it Alicia Spinnet? The long-haired Gryffindor Chaser who double-teamed with Angelina on their second goal) with her sister(?) strolling in Diagon Alley.

Good GOD, how old is the current Ollivander? He made Tom Riddle's wand!! 
Ginny Weasley's a cutie for a ten year old. Did this girl sign for the next movie?

The Hogwarts Express departs at 11 am; should it really be pitch black already at 7pm when they arrive in Hogsmeade?

Does Emma have clear braces? I would swear Hermione was wearing those fancy-schmancy clear braces on the train. It would be a nice "daughter of dentists" detail.

There are nineteen or twenty places at the Hogwarts staff table, based on a count of nine teachers sitting on Dumbledore's right.

Snape *already* looks irritated by Quirrell at this Welcome Feast.

I saw a girl who was probably Padma Patil among the Ravenclaw FYs when they part company with the GFYs on the staircase.

Is that the original portrait of Anne Boleyn? Anne never moves. Do the muggle owners know they have a cheap copy?

There are *at least* 15 GFYs in the movie: I lost count at 12 and there were *at least* 3 more to the side when the scene in the Common Room shifted and I couldn't count them anymore. It seemed apparent that Percy was the only Prefect who took them to the Tower.

Where do all the other students go while the Prefects are giving the FYs their orientation??  

Draco seems intrigued by Snape's description of the powers of Potions. And anyway, his dad must have told him Snape's "one of our kind." Didn't see anything untoward here to creep me out. One wonders if the Malfoys are known for potion work?

I think that's Pansy Parkinson we see over Harry's shoulder in Potions Class. She's rather pug-faced. 

There are absolutely, no objections, Ravenclaw students in Potions, Flying, and Charms. Their blue trim is unmistakeable. 

Filch sits with Slytherin at the Quiddich match; Hagrid sits with Gryffindor. Staffers apparently don't have reserved seating in the teachers' skybox.

Hey, Slytherin's Seeker is kinda cute! He mostly seems to play fair, too.

Why are some of the books in the restricted section chained to the stacks, but most aren't? Why is the chained section right in the middle of an aisle?

Things that make you go "Hmm": on the final day of exams, McGonagall's chalkboard seems to be covered with random scribbles when the kids come to talk to her. One very prominent scribble consists of the words "meddling man."

Nice touch: Neville's teddy-bear PJs. How mortifying! He should have pink fuzzy bunny slippers, too. Pook kid!

Am I the only one who noticed that the obstacle course to get to the Stone feels remarkably like a generic Zork game? Leather Goddesses of Phobos would have been more amusing, though. ;>  (Free cheering charms for everyone who actally gets that bit.)

Nice touches:  Ron's "As for me, I'll be a knight."  Visual symbolism / foreshadowing of the king's sword falling at Harry's feet.

Anyone wanna hazard a guess who LV's face is intended to resemble? It looked a little Jeremy Ironsish to me.

Looking at the teachers' table, the house tables run this way: (on the audience's left, the wall with the outside windows, through the audience's right, the internal wall)

  Ravenclaw
        Gryffindor
             Hufflepuff
                  Slytherin


Gotta agree with whoever: try as I could, I never made a definitive Hufflepuff sighting aside from Susan Bones being in Charms class.




From minke13 at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 12 04:19:00 2001
From: minke13 at earthlink.net (Tam Nesbit)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:19:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Referendum on the Director
References: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C16DAB4.C08FD422@earthlink.net>

cindysphynx wrote:
> And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF,
> and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS,
> would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?

I'd hire him for both.  I loved what he did with PS/SS.

> 1.  I'm not fond of the idea of splitting GoF into two movies.  I
> just don't think it can work.

Okay, I'm iffy on this one...

> 2.  I think he made far too many mistakes in PS/SS.  We've beaten
> this to death of course, but for me, the glaring blunders include the
> coaching of Emma Watson, Snape's sprint to the front of the class for
> his potions speech, the boring opening sequence, having all of the
> kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and again
> when they confront Fluffy.

I'm new here, so I've missed the beatings :), but I thought Emma was
perfect (I knew kids like that, with the exaggerated enunciation and
manner, when I was growing up... and while we're there, I thought Rupert
was a perfect Ron... when you grow up in a house full of boisterous
siblings, those Big Expressions can develop, just so someone notices
you!), I liked Snape's "sprint" (and you *know* he began talking the
*second* class was to begin), I already addressed the opening... I'll
give you the scream scenes, though.  :))

> 3.  I think he showed an inability to combine scenes to save time
> that could be spent better elsewhere.  For instance, do we need
> several Mirror of Erised scenes, or could all of it have been
> accomplished in one scene?  Can't we combine the hut on the rock with
> Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?

I think we needed those Erised scenes to reiterate how deeply Harry
feels that big hole in his heart that comes from never knowing his
parents.  And I think we needed Privet Drive alone, as a base for The
Dursley Years!

> 4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut,
> which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and
> the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were deleted.
> If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a director
> who can be a bit more persuasive.

I know there's a difference between what works in a book and what works
in a movie, but if we're going to err on one side or another, I'll bow
to the creator of the story....

> 5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for that.

Yikes.  Just a tad, yes...  

> 6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  When
> a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but
> because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to
> take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.

Ouch.  Yeah, Firenze was awkward... but I liked the rest of it!

> 7.  My biggest overall gripe about the movie was the lack of
> continuity.  Since PoA and GoF are much bigger books, I would think
> the continuity problems will be much more pronounced if Columbus also
> brings them to the screen.  In other words, if he can't do PS/SS as a
> movie that stands up on its own merits without knowledge of the
> books, then how can he possibly do it with books that are hundreds of
> pages longer?

Well, most of my co-workers who saw the movie never read any of the
books, and still thought it wonderful, and from that and the comments of
fellow viewers who also hadn't read them (hey, I like to eavesdrop when
I'm in line!), it does seems to stand alone.
 
> That said, it is still definitely a close question.  The movie could
> have been badly botched, and it wasn't.  It was, after all, a smash
> success.  But given that for PoA and GoF, we are starting with good
> stories, a proven cast (for the ones who return), and established set
> design and costume design, I think we need someone who is more adept
> at telling a story with continuity.  So Mr. Columbus gets a gold
> watch and free tickets to PoA and GoF from me, but not the directing
> nod.

It could have been a train wreck!  No, I'll stick with Columbus on
this.  :)

Tam, glad to have found this list and listening to the soundtrack for
maybe thirtieth time since Saturday...



From editor at texas.net  Wed Dec 12 04:39:00 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:39:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gleanings from 3rd Viewing
References: <9v6krk+eghq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C16DF63.69375BC5@texas.net>

heathernmoore wrote:
various observations, which I've randomly answered or added to as it
occurred to me.

>  Nice touch, Vernon receives a postcard from Marge complaining about
> her vacation on the day the first Hogwarts letter arrives.

That's in canon, as is the content of what he says, that she ate a funny
whelk.

> Good GOD, how old is the current Ollivander? He made Tom Riddle's
> wand!!

I think something's up with Ollivander. I think he's way more than meets
the eye.

> The Hogwarts Express departs at 11 am; should it really be pitch black
> already at 7pm when they arrive in Hogsmeade?

What latitude do you live in, dear? Sure it could be that dark at 7pm in
Scotland. Or so this Texan believes; any of you UK-ites out there ready
to confirm this?

> There are nineteen or twenty places at the Hogwarts staff table, based
> on a count of nine teachers sitting on Dumbledore's right.

And after four or so counts, there are twenty first-year Gryffindors who
file into the common room after Percy. Hm.

> Snape *already* looks irritated by Quirrell at this Welcome Feast.

Snape *always* looks irritated   <g>.

> I think that's Pansy Parkinson we see over Harry's shoulder in Potions
> Class. She's rather pug-faced.

Penny caught, when she and Sheryll and I were there, that the notes in
front of Harry when we see him from the front (rather than looking over
his shoulder at them) are not what he was writing; they're different.

> Why are some of the books in the restricted section chained to the
> stacks, but most aren't? Why is the chained section right in the
> middle of an aisle?

Because the chained ones are dangerous to the others. They are in the
middle so they can't reach the rest. Witness the Monster Book of
Monsters, which needs rather more than a chain.....

> Looking at the teachers' table, the house tables run this way: (on the
> audience's left, the wall with the outside windows, through the
> audience's right, the internal wall)
>
>   Ravenclaw
>         Gryffindor
>              Hufflepuff
>                   Slytherin

Also, the creatures bearing the braziers along the walls of the Great
Hall are winged versions of the House animals.

It is NOT a Blue's Clues romper on the baby Harry. It is a blue dog, but
(a) the ears are not long enough; (b) the face shape is not quite right,
and (c) there are no darker blue spots on the dog. I've spent many long
hours looking at Blue, and had to make a Blue cake for my son, and so
have studied her. You can trust me on this one.

Snape is walking down the hall, away from Harry, Hermione, and Ron, when
they come into the hallway after talking to McGonagall. You see him look
over his shoulder at them, then he comes back to them, and then
continues on his way. He goes out of his way to have this confrontation,
it's not that he just happened to walk up from behind them.

It looks to me like Snape was limping as he left the hall by the back
doorway, during the exodus after Quirrell announced the troll. He didn't
get wounded when he went up to head Quirrell off, then. Hmm.

--Amanda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From srae at mindspring.com  Wed Dec 12 05:20:21 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:20:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011212002021.00ab30e0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 03:46 AM 12/12/2001 -0000, Cindy wrote:

>
>And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
>and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
>would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?

Absolutely, I'd hire him for both, and I'd hope I could keep him for the
whole series.


>1.  I'm not fond of the idea of splitting GoF into two movies.  I 
>just don't think it can work.

Even considering the amount of things that could be cut, I can't imagine
how else this movie could be made any other way. There are a lot of things
that could be cut, yes, but there are also so many things that simply
couldn't be cut at all.  There is so much in the details.

>2.  I think he made far too many mistakes in PS/SS.  We've beaten 
>this to death of course, but for me, the glaring blunders include the 
>coaching of Emma Watson, Snape's sprint to the front of the class for 
>his potions speech, the boring opening sequence, having all of the 
>kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and again 
>when they confront Fluffy.

Oh dear, I disagree with all of those things!  Emma was wonderful as a
snotty/insecure little girl, and I've already gone over my reasons for
liking the Snape scene.  I didn't think the opening sequence was boring at
all.  Certainly no moreso than in the book.  And, really, if you saw a
giant three headed dog about to bite you in two, you'd probably scream too.
:)  

>3.  I think he showed an inability to combine scenes to save time 
>that could be spent better elsewhere.  For instance, do we need 
>several Mirror of Erised scenes, or could all of it have been 
>accomplished in one scene?  Can't we combine the hut on the rock with 
>Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?

I think this is funny, considering the thread elsewhere about whether the
Mirror scenes properly conveyed the passage of time.  I confess though, I
don't see how combining Privet drive and the hut would enhance continuity.
It's one of my favorite scenes, with Harry drawing himself a birthday cake
in the dirt, and Hagrid bursting in.

>4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut, 
>which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and 
>the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were deleted.  
>If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a director 
>who can be a bit more persuasive.

I can almost see cutting out Norbert, but if they had then they'd have had
to write a whole new reason for our Heroes to be out at night and get
detention. And it was also an important key in how they worked out the
whole mystery about the Stone.  The Troll definitely needed to be in there.
 It's a turning point in the relationship between Harry, Ron and Hermione,
not to mention setting in motion the Snape misdirection.


>6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  When 
>a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but 
>because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to 
>take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.

Well, they just made kind of a bad choice in their effects company.  I've
heard they switched to ILM for CoS.  The effects didn't bother me, except
for the centaur.  He was really kind of bad.  But you notice, they barely
show him. It's really hard to get a good look at him...I tried at my last
viewing.  I have a feeling someone knew the effects weren't quite up to
par, hence the switch for the next movie.

>design and costume design, I think we need someone who is more adept 
>at telling a story with continuity.  So Mr. Columbus gets a gold 
>watch and free tickets to PoA and GoF from me, but not the directing 
>nod.

Personally, I'm tickled with how he handled it.  I like a lot of Chris
Columbus' movies. He also did Young Sherlock Holmes, which is easily one of
my favorite movies from my youth.  I think he handled the necessary
trimming and rearranging with remarkable grace. I have a very few quibbles,
but only a few, and they are fairly minor. Actually, the level of general
disappointment and outright dislike I've seen on this list is startling.
Until I joined, I hadn't heard of one single person who didn't love it,
readers and non-readers alike.  Oh well, I guess that thing about varying
mileage is true after all!

Shannon




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Wed Dec 12 05:55:01 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 05:55:01 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011212055501.44198.qmail@web14707.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  cindysphynx <cindysphynx at home.com> wrote: 
>Chris Columbus is directing CoS.  So far as I know, he has not signed 
>on officially to direct PoA or GoF.  So it is still an open question.

>And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
>and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
>would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?


Tricky question,because I don't know how exactly things work in that business. Who is responsible for hiring the script writer? I don't think it's the director, or is it? The person I would fire immediately anyway is the scriptwriter who did a very poor job. Maybe I'd keep Columbus for the CoS movie, but then I'd certainly hire somebody else.

<snip>
>4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut, 
>which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and 
>the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were deleted.  
>If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a director 
>who can be a bit more persuasive.


This is definitely true: Why keep e.g. the chocolate frogs? Their only purpose was to  provide the cards, but HRH discovered Flamel's identity in a different way, so the frogs could have been completely cut. Same goes for the Every flavour Beans. (Unless, of course, JKR disclosed to Columbus that Voldemort is going to die in book 7 because he chokes on a chocolate frog) 


<snip>
>7.  My biggest overall gripe about the movie was the lack of 
>continuity.  Since PoA and GoF are much bigger books, I would think 
>the continuity problems will be much more pronounced if Columbus also 
>brings them to the screen.  In other words, if he can't do PS/SS as a 
>movie that stands up on its own merits without knowledge of the 
>books, then how can he possibly do it with books that are hundreds of 
>pages longer?


Which again suggests that we should fire him together with the script writer. Given the success of movie 1, maybe a lot more directors would be willing to jump on that winning train (d'you think Ford Coppola would do Poa and GoF- thinking of his amazing "Dracula", not to mentnion other dark, angsty films???)

<snip>

Susanna/pigwidgeon37


________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 




"And how come those portraits seem to be alive?"

"What'ya mean? All paintings move."

"No, they don't. We have lots of paintings in our villa, among them a real Chagall, and none of them..."

"And d'ya expect that something painted by a jackal will move? Now really..."



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalised at My Yahoo!.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 06:30:05 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (remusjlupin1980)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 06:30:05 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v6thd+bfea@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Chris Columbus is directing CoS.  So far as I know, he has not 
signed 
> on officially to direct PoA or GoF.  So it is still an open 
question.
> 
> And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
> and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
> would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?
> 
> My own answer is that I would probably give Columbus his walking 
> papers and hire someone else, although I think it is a close 
> question.   My reasons are:
> 
> 1.  I'm not fond of the idea of splitting GoF into two movies.  I 
> just don't think it can work.
> 
> 2.  I think he made far too many mistakes in PS/SS.  We've beaten 
> this to death of course, but for me, the glaring blunders include 
the 
> coaching of Emma Watson, Snape's sprint to the front of the class 
for 
> his potions speech, the boring opening sequence, having all of the 
> kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and 
again 
> when they confront Fluffy.
> 
> 3.  I think he showed an inability to combine scenes to save time 
> that could be spent better elsewhere.  For instance, do we need 
> several Mirror of Erised scenes, or could all of it have been 
> accomplished in one scene?  Can't we combine the hut on the rock 
with 
> Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?
> 
> 4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut, 
> which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and 
> the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were 
deleted.  
> If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a 
director 
> who can be a bit more persuasive.
> 
> 5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for 
that.
> 
> 6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  
When 
> a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but 
> because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to 
> take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.
> 
> 7.  My biggest overall gripe about the movie was the lack of 
> continuity.  Since PoA and GoF are much bigger books, I would think 
> the continuity problems will be much more pronounced if Columbus 
also 
> brings them to the screen.  In other words, if he can't do PS/SS as 
a 
> movie that stands up on its own merits without knowledge of the 
> books, then how can he possibly do it with books that are hundreds 
of 
> pages longer?
> 
> That said, it is still definitely a close question.  The movie 
could 
> have been badly botched, and it wasn't.  It was, after all, a smash 
> success.  But given that for PoA and GoF, we are starting with good 
> stories, a proven cast (for the ones who return), and established 
set 
> design and costume design, I think we need someone who is more 
adept 
> at telling a story with continuity.  So Mr. Columbus gets a gold 
> watch and free tickets to PoA and GoF from me, but not the 
directing 
> nod.
> 
> Cindy (who doesn't mean to be overly harsh, but it is always harsh 
> when you fire someone)




From bricken at tenbit.pl  Wed Dec 12 07:51:14 2001
From: bricken at tenbit.pl (Ev vy)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:51:14 +0100
Subject: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing
References: <9v6krk+eghq@eGroups.com> <3C16DF63.69375BC5@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00bc01c182e1$c95492a0$2a08f1d5@OSLII>

From: "Amanda Lewanski:
> > There are nineteen or twenty places at the Hogwarts staff table, based
> > on a count of nine teachers sitting on Dumbledore's right.
> 
> And after four or so counts, there are twenty first-year Gryffindors who
> file into the common room after Percy. Hm.


Yup, but during the flying lesson with Madam Hooch, in each of two rows of students (assuming one are Slytherins and the other Gryffindors) there are exactly thirteen students.


> Penny caught, when she and Sheryll and I were there, that the notes in
> front of Harry when we see him from the front (rather than looking over
> his shoulder at them) are not what he was writing; they're different.


Yup, it's much different. What he writes down when Snape's making his speech is written neatly in small letters, and what they show later looks like he used not a quill but a very thick felt-tip pen. And it takes more space on the page.


Ev vy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There's nothing level in our cursed natures
But direct villainy.
      William Shakespeare "Timon of Athens"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover,
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determined to prove a villain
     William Shakespeare "Richard III"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kiary91 at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 12 09:56:02 2001
From: kiary91 at hotmail.com (Cait Hunter)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:56:02 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] (assorted combined replies...)
Message-ID: <F109nkB4ltFlmmlQ08000000b3d@hotmail.com>


>May I comment on Emma's Hermione?
>
>I also thought that Emma overacted quite a bit, but at the same time,
>I thought it was also a very Hermione characteristic ~ the
<snipped>

I didn't like her much the first time, but she's kind of grown on me (I'm 
now on viewing five now *waves to Drea & Indi, yes, I've seen it twice more 
since T-day).



>Penny Wrote:
> > Tabouli, I aggree completely: it's very cool that Dan's birthday is
> > July 31st (although some site has it listed as July 23rd ... did
> > anyone ever figure out which date is real?).
>The reason it is listed as the 23rd is because Dan himself said that it was 
>a rumour that his birthday was 31st of July and that it is actually the 
>23rd. He said this on some American chat show, which is why the dates of 
>his birthdya have been changed on lists such as the Leaky Cauldron.

Darnnit, he can't have the 23rd, that's MY birthday.... On the other hand, 
now I actually have someone *cool* to share my birthday with... hmm.



>Adana wrote:
> > The mirror of Erised scene is an example, and the one
> > I had the most problem with.  In the book, Harry went
> > back more than once, over several nights. He lost
> > interest in his schoolwork and even in his friends.
> > It was clear that the mirror had a hold on him.
> > In the movie, it seems to be a one-night deal, and
> > Dumbledore shows up almost immediately to give his
> > pep talk. The dialogue is almost the same as in the
> > book, but the scene and mood are not nearly as strong.
> > It's almost a footnote, just a set-up for the end
> > fight with Quirrell.
>
>Frankly, I think it would be hard to convey on film the fact that
>Harry keeps returning to the mirror any better than Columbus does.
>Dumbledore's saying, "Back again," sends the message that he's been
>going back at least a few times.  Time constraints on the film being
>what they were, it would be impossible to add more to it.  And if
>there were more time, there are numerous other things I'd rather see
>added.  (More on that later.)

I also felt like they did a decent (but not fantastic) way of showing that 
he's been back several times - between the different clothes, the fact that 
Ron's *not* with him, Dumbledore's lines, it seems very obvious that he's 
been doing this for a while.
Re; CC directing future movies:

>5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for that.
Actually (I usually think they're too loud, I didn't have any trouble with 
this one. Either my hearing's gone, or it wasn't as bad as most of the 
movies I see, which are, granted, mostly sci fi and involve space ships and 
other loud objects...

>
>6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  When
>a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but
>because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to
>take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.

I'd rather have seen them cut Peeves than see a dumb looking effect that 
spend more time going "that's stupid, that's not how he should look!". Or, 
god forbid, end up with a speciel effect who dogs the main characters 
thruought the movie and provides a sad excuse for comic relief 
*coughJarJarcough*
Re: third viewing

>Nice touches:  Ron's "As for me, I'll be a knight."  Visual symbolism / 
>foreshadowing of the king's sword falling at Harry's feet.

I *loved* that- especially the expression on Rupert's face- it was very well 
played.




Cait (relurking)

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com




From mediaphen at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 12 12:51:50 2001
From: mediaphen at hotmail.com (Martin Smith)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:51:50 +0100
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
References: <1008131991.1476.51592.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <DAV76OHrdZ6VzvdrEb600000671@hotmail.com>

Hi everybody!


Heather Moore, the girl with the coolest name on this list, wrote:
> > The Hogwarts Express departs at 11 am; should it really be pitch black
> > already at 7pm when they arrive in Hogsmeade?
>

Amanda, the Texan, replied:
> What latitude do you live in, dear? Sure it could be that dark at 7pm in
> Scotland. Or so this Texan believes; any of you UK-ites out there ready
> to confirm this?
>

And I, not UK-ite, but Swede, pick up the sunlit thread:


I assume that Hogwarts is in Scotland, quite near Edingburgh, and the
positon for Edinburgh is 56' N, 4' W. At those coordinates the sun sets at
19.12, thus not pitch black at 19.00.
As we know that the six months around midsummer (in which period September
1:st is) means later sunsets the more north you get, we must assume that
Hogwarts is south of Edinburgh. Assuming the latitude is 55' N, which is
close to as south as you can get in Scotland, the sun sets at 19.08.
That means that Hogwarts must be east of Edinburgh (further east meaning
earlier sunsets in the same timezone). Let's assume that the longitude is 2'
W instead of Edinburghs 4'. Keeping the southernmost latitude possible, 55'
N, the sun would set at 19.00. Problem is, that's in Northumberland in
northern England and *not* in Scotland.
A map of Scotland shows that the Scottish mainland doesn't go east of 2'W,
so nowhere in Scotland is there a place where the sun has set by 19.00. Even
the southernmost tip of Shetland Islands (60'N, 1,6'W) is too far west to
have a sunset earlier than 19.00 (sunset at 19.10).

Conclusions:

Hogwarts is *not* in Scotland
OR
The Hogwarts Express actually arrives *later than* 19.00.

I tend to lean on the second one (it is stated in FB that the Forbidden
Forest is in Scotland), as my experience with trains, magical or not, is
that they are more often delayed than not.

Sources:
Maps: http://thedeejays.com/atlas/
Sunsets/sunrises: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/RS_OneYear.html


Martin, who believes Tim Burton should helm PoA and Guy Ritchie should do
GoF.


Join W.E.I.G.H.T.L.E.S.S. now, before anyone bashes Emma's acting further!
We (I) need members!




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 13:07:42 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (findmeabargain)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:07:42 -0000
Subject: W.E.I.G.H.T.L.E.S.S.  (was "Pitch Black...")
In-Reply-To: <DAV76OHrdZ6VzvdrEb600000671@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v7kqu+fukf@eGroups.com>

Hej sa lange, Martin Smith!, who wrote,

> Join W.E.I.G.H.T.L.E.S.S. now, before anyone bashes Emma's acting 
further!
> We (I) need members!

I'm not sure my psyche can bear membership in one more group, but at 
least let me weigh (!) in to say that I thought Emma's acting was 
wonderful! Have been away from the list for several days, but am 
amazed to think that it could have drawn any substantial criticism. 
That little girl *is* Hermione (and as a grown-up Hermione type, I 
know 'em)!

Now, back to "pitch black at 7 p.m.," I bow before your conscientious 
calculations and confess that unlike my friends in Norrtalje and 
Fairbanks, I have never lived north of the 40th parallel, but there 
are times when even *here,* it is extremely dark at 7 p.m. in the 
winter. Add a cloud cover, and it's headlights-on time for sure. 

Well, FWIW. So much fun, this list!






From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 13:30:38 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:30:38 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <DAV76OHrdZ6VzvdrEb600000671@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9v7m5u+jsqr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Martin Smith" <mediaphen at h...> wrote:
> Heather Moore, the girl with the coolest name on this list, wrote:
> > > The Hogwarts Express departs at 11 am; should it really be pitch black
> > > already at 7pm when they arrive in Hogsmeade?
> >
> 
> Amanda, the Texan, replied:
> > What latitude do you live in, dear? Sure it could be that dark at 7pm in
> > Scotland. Or so this Texan believes; any of you UK-ites out there ready
> > to confirm this?
> >
> 
> And I, not UK-ite, but Swede, pick up the sunlit thread:
> 
> 
> I assume that Hogwarts is in Scotland, quite near Edingburgh, and the
> positon for Edinburgh is 56' N, 4' W. At those coordinates the sun sets at
> 19.12, thus not pitch black at 19.00.

Here's yet another source, that lets us pick the date and city, which says that 
on 1 September it gets dark in Edinburgh at 8:07 PM.  So no way could it be 
dark at 7 PM in any part of Scotland! (I suspect that Martin's site doesn't allow 
for daylight savings time.)  

This same source also gives sunrise as 5:20 AM in London in late July, when 
Harry allegedly tripped over Uncle Vernon in the dark at 6 AM while trying to 
intercept the postman.  Apparently JKR is better-informed about literary stuff 
than about meteorology, LOL.

http://www.onlineweather.com/v4/uk/sun/September/Edinburgh.html




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 13:36:07 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:36:07 -0000
Subject: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing
In-Reply-To: <00bc01c182e1$c95492a0$2a08f1d5@OSLII>
Message-ID: <9v7mg7+rifi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ev vy" <bricken at t...> wrote:
> From: "Amanda Lewanski:
> > > There are nineteen or twenty places at the Hogwarts staff table, based
> > > on a count of nine teachers sitting on Dumbledore's right.
> > 
> > And after four or so counts, there are twenty first-year Gryffindors who
> > file into the common room after Percy. Hm.
> 
> 
> Yup, but during the flying lesson with Madam Hooch, in each of two rows of students (assuming one are Slytherins and the other Gryffindors) there are exactly thirteen students.
> 


It gets even more complicated! In movie Hogwarts, there were at least two RFYs in that Flying class, judging from blue trim among the kids milling about. 

Maybe we can surmise that for movie Hogwarts: 1) most FY classes have two class sections (possibly three for DADA, as Our Kids seem to be the only House in their DADA classes, and possibly also extra sessions for Flying) and 2) the timetabler integrates the Houses in their classes much more than book Hogwarts, so that *roommates* attend class tracks together, but not all the kids in a particular House/Year. Most class sessions under this schedule would integrate Rooms from at least three Houses.

Thus Our Boys (H/R/D/S/N) and Our Girls (H/L/P/2 others) get Gryffindor Schedule A (GSA), and the Lost GFY boys and girls have a different schedule (B). 

The Slytherin Dorm Room With DCG and The Slytherin Dorm Room With Pansy and Millicent have ended up with a Slytherin Schedule A throwing them much in company with GSA, and any amorphous "other" SFYs get Slytherin Schedule B.

Padma Patil would seem to be among those Ravenclaws who have a Schedule that doesn't intersect with GSA at all.

Perhaps Hufflepuff is a somewhat smaller house in Harry's year, and their schedule is worked to that their FYs are most absorbed into class sections exclusive to Our Kids. 






From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 13:38:56 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:38:56 -0000
Subject: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing
In-Reply-To: <9v6krk+eghq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7mlg+qc6v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:

> Good GOD, how old is the current Ollivander? He made Tom Riddle's wand!! 

Well, we know that Tom was about 50 years ahead of Harry, and we also know 
that Dumbledore is 150 (and JKR said that wizards live longer than muggles), 
so this really doesn't seem so remarkable that Ollivander has been making 
wands for 50 years or more. 

> The Hogwarts Express departs at 11 am; should it really be pitch black 
already at 7pm when they arrive in Hogsmeade?

I've posted separately on the thread that addresses this specifically.  In short: 
No.
 
> Snape *already* looks irritated by Quirrell at this Welcome Feast.

Not sure why the "*already*; Quirrell was aparently back from  leave, he 
wasn't a completely new teacher.

> Is that the original portrait of Anne Boleyn? Anne never moves. Do the 
muggle owners know they have a cheap copy?

My Tudor-obsessed dd spotted Anne during her first viewing, I'm so proud.  She 
says it looks like the original. 




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 13:48:15 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:48:15 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7n6v+nsfa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
> and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
> would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?

Neither.  I think his work is kust plain clunky. As JKR's books get darker and 
mor complicated, he'll be even less adequate to the task. I want Terry Gilliam!
 
>  having all of the 
> kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and again 
> when they confront Fluffy.

For this alone, I'd gladly boil him in oil.  I do forgive him the "Home 
Alone"-style scream that Draco delivered in the Dark Forest, though: making 
him look even more like Macaulay Culkin certainly enhanced his evilness for 
me!

> Can't we combine the hut on the rock with 
> Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?

Now, that I agreed with: Having the Dursleys on the run from magic, and the 
storminess and isolation of the hut on the rock, enhanced Hagrid's entrance 
and the contrast between Harry's old life and his new one.  

> 5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for that.

I agree completely, and would be glad to see Williams depart along with 
Columbus.
> 
> 6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable. 

I think this was more a result of time constraints and technical obstacles, 
rather than the director's fault.

>  So Mr. Columbus gets a gold 
> watch and free tickets to PoA and GoF from me, but not the directing 
> nod.

I'll chip in towards the watch.




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 13:59:18 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:59:18 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <3C16DAB4.C08FD422@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <9v7nrm+6dko@eGroups.com>

Tam wrote:
>I liked Snape's "sprint" (and you *know* he began talking the
> *second* class was to begin)

Gol, I'm glad I'm not the only one.  I thought that bit *embodied* 
Snape.  I mean, lacking the wider expository boundaries of text, a 
film has to describe a character visually, and preferably in one very 
telling moment.  His entrance into the classroom had me at "wow, that 
is *Snape*" quicker than Hermione could tell me where to find a 
bezoar. :-P

Cindy said
> > 3.  I think he showed an inability to combine scenes to save time
> > that could be spent better elsewhere.  For instance, do we need
> > several Mirror of Erised scenes, or could all of it have been
> > accomplished in one scene?  Can't we combine the hut on the rock 
with
> > Privet Drive, both to save time and to enhance continuity?

And Tam replied:
> I think we needed those Erised scenes to reiterate how deeply Harry
> feels that big hole in his heart that comes from never knowing his
> parents.  And I think we needed Privet Drive alone, as a base for 
The
> Dursley Years!

Ditto Tam.  I really don't think Columbus went wrong in deciding what 
to keep and what to cut.  He left out some people's 'pet' scenes, 
sure, but he had to use scenes which would do three jobs: further the 
plot of *this* movie; set up certain things for following movies; and 
explain the wizard world and Harry's place in it in as simple a 
visual way as possible to make the movie accessible to both readers 
and non-readers.  Obviously, he's not going to be perfect about it, 
but imho, I think he did a fab job.  Of course, to-may-to, to-mah-to.

Cindy wrote: 
> > 4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut,
> > which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and
> > the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were 
deleted.
> > If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a 
director
> > who can be a bit more persuasive.

On the other hand, JKR was the only one who could tell him, "If you 
*don't* leave this in, or if you change *this*, something that 
happens later will make *no* sense" ~ and I think I did read 
somewhere that she gave that particular brand of input.  And as Tam 
said in his/her reply, what works in a book doesn't necessariy work 
in a movie (for example, imho, Snape's longer speech during the first 
potions class wouldn't have worked in the movie, while his dramatic 
entrance and shortened monologue did).  On the other hand, what do I 
know?  %-)

Cindy wrote:
> > 5.  He made the soundtrack too loud.  There's just no excuse for 
that.

Hmm, I guess I didn't notice.

> > 6.  His mastery of special effects techniques is questionable.  
When
> > a character (Peeves) is cut not because the story requires it but
> > because the special effects were poor, I think the director has to
> > take responsibility.  I'm not even going to mention the centaur.

Imho, the special effects were as good as any of that brand of CGI 
animation today, *especially* considering that this movie (unlike, 
say, Shrek, where the animation was admittedly more sophisticated) 
wasn't CGI based.  Firenze was not as natural as the human actors, 
but his movements, to my eyes, were as natural as, for example again, 
the princess in Shrek.  On the other hand, her moments of herky-
jerkiness were much less noticiable, since she wasn't walking 
alongside human actors.  (For the record, I base this opinion on 
comparing HP with my multiple viewings of both Toy Story movies, 
Disney's Dinosaur, Shrek, and that goofy new Saturday morning cartoon 
here in the US called Cubix.  LOL.  This would all be thanks to my 3-
year-old....)

At any rate, I'm actually glad Peeves was cut.  Imho, he would have 
been unecessary and too cutesy.  He works in the book, but he would 
have been just a jarring clown on the screen, imho.

Cindy:
> > 7.  My biggest overall gripe about the movie was the lack of
> > continuity.  

I don't really know what you're referring to here, so I can't address 
it. 

Tam:
> Well, most of my co-workers who saw the movie never read any of the
> books, and still thought it wonderful, and from that and the 
comments of
> fellow viewers who also hadn't read them (hey, I like to eavesdrop 
when
> I'm in line!), it does seems to stand alone.

Ditto this.

> Tam, glad to have found this list and listening to the soundtrack 
for
> maybe thirtieth time since Saturday...

So the soundtrack is good?  I've thought about buying it, but wasn't 
sure it would be worthwhile for stand-alone listening....

Mahoney
also glad to have joined up on this list!




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 15:13:18 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:13:18 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20011212002021.00ab30e0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <9v7s6e+8v0b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Shannon Compton <srae at m...> wrote:
> At 03:46 AM 12/12/2001 -0000, Cindy wrote:

> >And that is my question.  If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
> >and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
> >would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?
> 
> Absolutely, I'd hire him for both, and I'd hope I could keep him
>for the whole series.

I think it would be strange if a different director took over.  The 
movies wouldn't "mesh" right.

 
> >1.  I'm not fond of the idea of splitting GoF into two movies.  I 
> >just don't think it can work.
> 
> Even considering the amount of things that could be cut, I can't 
>imagine how else this movie could be made any other way. There are a 
>lot of things that could be cut, yes, but there are also so many 
>things that simply couldn't be cut at all.  There is so much in the 
>details.


I am all for splitting the movie into 2 if it means keeping more of 
the book content.  Heck, I'd even be willing to go to a 3 parter (1
at Thanksgiving, 1 at Christmas and 1 right after the New Year).  At
2 1/2 hours each, that would make for a total of 7 1/2 hours worth of 
HP movie.  What a DVD that would make! <wipes the drool form the 
keyboard> (Just got a DVD player and am currently in love with the 
'extras' on them)


> >2.  I think he made far too many mistakes in PS/SS.  We've beaten 
> >this to death of course, but for me, the glaring blunders include 
>the coaching of Emma Watson, Snape's sprint to the front of the
class 
>for his potions speech, the boring opening sequence, having all of 
>the kids do a "Home Alone" scream in the troll Great Hall scene and 
again when they confront Fluffy.
> 
> Oh dear, I disagree with all of those things!  Emma was wonderful
>as a snotty/insecure little girl, and I've already gone over my 
>reasons for liking the Snape scene.  I didn't think the opening 
>sequence was boring at all.  Certainly no moreso than in the book.  
>And, really, if you saw a giant three headed dog about to bite you
in 
>two, you'd probably scream too. :) 

I absolutley LOVED Emma.  She was so spot on for the Hermione I've
had in my head for the last year or so that it was spooky.  And I 
agree, if faced with a 3 headed dog, I'd probably let out a good old 
Home Alone scream too.  (quickly shoos the dogs away from the screen
before they see this and give me a severe tongue lashing or licking).
I personally liked the opening sequence .  It clearly introduces the 
element of magic into what we first see as a perfectly oridinary 
street.

 
> >4.  He is not very good at deciding what to keep and what to cut, 
> >which will be critical in the next two films.  Keeping Norbert and 
> >the Troll wasn't wise given the important things that were
> >deleted. 
 
> >If JKR "wouldn't let him" cut certain things, then we need a 
> >director who can be a bit more persuasive.
> 
> I can almost see cutting out Norbert, but if they had then they'd 
>have had to write a whole new reason for our Heroes to be out at 
>night and get detention. And it was also an important key in how
they 
>worked out the whole mystery about the Stone.  The Troll definitely 
>needed to be in  there.  It's a turning point in the relationship 
>between Harry, Ron and Hermione, not to mention setting in motion
the 
>Snape misdirection.
 
Can you imagine the schreeching that would be going on if they had
cut Norbert and the Troll?  Good grief!  My ears ring at the very
thought. I think, given the choice of cutting, Peeves, the Troll or 
Norbert, I'd have ousted Peeves too.  He served no purpose in the 
first book (or any really) other than to draw attention to the Trio 
when they were out of bed and to drop the cabinet over Filch's office 
in CoS.  BTW, did anyone catch that Ron mentioned Peeves' name in the 
movie?  When they are going to the common room after Quirrel faints
in the Great Hall (LOVED THAT SCENE!), they are talking about how a
troll would get in, and Ron says something to the effect of "Probably 
just Peeves playing a joke."
As for getting a director who's more persuasive (in getting JK to let 
him cut out certain things), I don't see how anyone _could_ persuade
her to cut anything she thinks is a must.  After all, we only have the 
first 4 books.  What if Norbert is important in a future book?  What 
if the Troll scene is important in alater book?  (Not that I think it 
will be, but you never know).  JK is the ONLY person who knows right 
now what's REALLY important and what's not.
 

> Personally, I'm tickled with how he handled it.  I like a lot of 
>Chris Columbus' movies. He also did Young Sherlock Holmes, which is
>easily one of my favorite movies from my youth.  I think he handled 
>the necessary trimming and rearranging with remarkable grace.

And here I thoguht I was the only person in the world who had ever 
seen Young Sherlock Holmes!  One of my FAVORITE movies from my youth 
as well!  

> I have a very few quibbles, but only a few, and they are fairly 
>minor. 

Very few quibbles here , except I WANTED the Sorting hat song, and
why did they show the Choc Frog cards if they didn't use that to find 
Flammel, and I didn't like that everyone in the Great Hall could hear 
everything the Sorting Hat said.  Other than that, Dandy.  Seen it 3 
times, will probably go again. 


>Actually, the level of general disappointment and outright dislike 
>I've seen on this list is 
>startling. Until I joined, I hadn't heard of one single person who 
>didn't love it, readers and non-readers alike.  

I'm not surprised by the outright dislike, as I figured it would be a 
love it or hate it movie.  Those who hate it, generally seem to hate 
in comparison to the books (I'm being GENERAL here from the varying 
post I've read-please no howlers or undiluted bubotuber puss for 
this).  The ones who like it, seem to like it on it's own merits, not 
in comparison to the books.  We went with a friend who had not read 
the books and he loved it.  He had no preconcieved notions about what 
it should be though.  He did borrow my books though after seeing it, 
and has become a huge fan of them (smart boy he is!).  His main 
comment about the characters in the books vs. the characters in the 
movie is the fact that Neville's role in the movie was too small.  As 
a major Neveille fan, I strongly agree!  
I have (mostly on hpgalleries-main board and HOL) seen tons of people 
griping about the movie and the reasons they dislike it, and honestly, 
what I've read here is really rather minor in comparison to some of 
those rants.  I think it's important to remember that the 
movie is a film adaptation of the book, not the book on film. 
There's a huge difference.  I mainly feel that if JK is okay with it, 
I have very little room to gripe.  It's her baby not mine, so if
she's good with it, I can be.

So that's my sickle and 2 knuts worth.




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 15:28:46 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (findmeabargain)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:28:46 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v7m5u+jsqr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7t3e+hg06@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> This same source also gives sunrise as 5:20 AM in London in late 
July, when Harry allegedly tripped over Uncle Vernon in the dark at 6 
AM while trying to intercept the postman.  

Yah, but didn't Vernon have all the windows nailed shut? Stands to 
reason he and 'Tunia had drawn the drapes, closed the blinds, 
whatever...!

;)
W/D




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 15:28:56 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:28:56 -0000
Subject: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than HP
In-Reply-To: <9v6eno+1j6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7t3o+2t90@eGroups.com>

"luminary_extraordinaire" wrote:
> First round of premiere reviews is here.
<snip>

Indeed, it *is* rather more fashionable to effuse about a 'grown-up,' 
pseudo-art-house flick than an engaging, wonderful, but 'kiddie' 
flick, isn't it?

You know, I wonder if 'critics' approach the books expecting the same 
kind of fare, as they seem already to be doing to the movies.  
Because, hi, apples v. bananas, here.  Both fruit (or rather, 
containing magic and magical quests), but that's *all* that is 
essentially the same.

And I hope this is not inappropriate to say here, but I am not a 
movie snob.  I will enjoy a movie because I enjoy it, and attend a 
movie because it catches my fancy, and not because it is critically 
acclaimed or not, or more or less 'important' than another.  Thanks 
to time constraints as well as other interests, I don't go to movies 
in the theater very often.  I've made repeated trips to see HP, and I 
enjoyed the heck out of it; but I'll wait for Lord of the Rings to 
come out on DVD, though I'm sure it will be a nice movie, too.  I'd 
rather save that movie time to see, for example, Billy Bob Thornton 
et al in Monster's Ball (which looks like a killer, emotionally; wow) 
when it comes out in the US next February, and in the meantime 
cultivate very contented and thrilled memories of HP.  So go my 
preferences.  

I do, though, hope that JKR and all the rest involved in the HP film 
take the LotR movie snobbery in stride, and recognize that what 
they've made is *different* and fantastic on it's own merits, 
regardless of what the poncy critics et al say.

No more blithering.  And I do hope I haven't offended anyone; LotR 
fans here, good on you, and I'm sure you'll adore the film!  I just 
had a bit of snippy fit to get off my chest, esp. in regards critics 
and some movie snobs I have the misfortune of working with.  I'll 
shut up now.

Mahoney




From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Dec 12 15:29:00 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:29:00 -0000
Subject: Seeking Common Ground
Message-ID: <9v7t3s+e572@eGroups.com>

After seeing everyone's reactions to the film, I was wondering 
whether it is possible to reach consensus on anything.  To my 
surprise, I think there are a few areas in which no one has 
complained or fussed, and so there might be things upon which we can 
all agree.  Here's my very conservative list of things everyone on 
the list can agree on (in no particular order):

1.  Ron was great; Hagrid was great.
2.  Seamus' scenes should have gone to Neville.
3.  The Hogwarts and Diagon Alley sets looked just right.
4.  The centaur was, um, somewhat lacking.
5.  Having Dudley eat the birthday cake worked well as a motivation 
for Hagrid to give him a pig's tail.

That's all I can think of (but the nomination process has not 
concluded <bg>).  Would anyone like to make a nomination?

There are other candidates for unanimity, but I think I have heard 
enough murmurs of dissent that they can't be considered unanimous:

A.  Sean Biggerstaff was great (although there seems to be consensus 
among those who are interested that he is seriously hot).
B.  The Chocolate Frogs were a nice addition.
C.  Oliver Wood's pre-Quiddich speech was much improved.
D.  Richard Harris did the best that could be expected under the 
    circumstances.
E.  Emma's chess match speech was clunky.

As usual, dissent and contrary opinions are more than welcome.  :-)

Cindy 




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 15:49:20 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:49:20 -0000
Subject: Seeking Common Ground
In-Reply-To: <9v7t3s+e572@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7ua0+qn7i@eGroups.com>

cindy wrote:
> After seeing everyone's reactions to the film, I was wondering 
> whether it is possible to reach consensus on anything.  

I agree with all of your list, except (and no doubt I'm in the 
minority):

> 2.  Seamus' scenes should have gone to Neville.

I didn't mind this.  I was actually rather glad that Neville didn't 
get all the blowing things up scenes, because I like Neville and I 
don't think he's as much of a nincompoop as I fear that would have 
made him out.  Meaning, if all he did was loose his frog and look 
perplexed, *plus* blow everything up...with only the bit where he 
stands up to the Trio to redeem him...he'd have seemed like just 
comic relief to me.  I felt that spreading the awkwardness between he 
and Seamus was in character for both of them (because Seamus *did* at 
least light up that feather in the book), made them both marginally 
more real (because there's never just *one* goofy kid in a class), 
and gave Neville a chance to be a more rounded character within the 
constraints of his screen time.

Other than that, thumbs up!  I'm very agreeable to your speculations 
on common ground!

Mahoney




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 15:52:44 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:52:44 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v7t3e+hg06@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7ugc+hh0j@eGroups.com>


Joanne wrote:
> > This same source also gives sunrise as 5:20 AM in London in late 
> July, when Harry allegedly tripped over Uncle Vernon in the dark at 
6 
> AM while trying to intercept the postman.  

W/D wrote
> Yah, but didn't Vernon have all the windows nailed shut? Stands to 
> reason he and 'Tunia had drawn the drapes, closed the blinds, 
> whatever...!

Actually, that's a really good point!  I've awoken at 11 am on a 
sunny day in a hotel room with light-blocking drapery over the 
windows, and tripped over suitcases in the quite-near-darkness.  :-P  
And I wouldn't be surprised to find that the Dursley's are so against 
the idea that people could be looking at them through the windows at 
night that they have heavy duty window coverings.  

;-)  Could be, could be....

Mahoney




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 16:01:42 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:01:42 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? 6 AM, Vernon, birthday
In-Reply-To: <9v7t3e+hg06@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v7v16+433u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "findmeabargain" <findmeabargain at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> > This same source also gives sunrise as 5:20 AM in London in late 
> July, when Harry allegedly tripped over Uncle Vernon in the dark at 6 
> AM while trying to intercept the postman.  
> 
> Yah, but didn't Vernon have all the windows nailed shut? Stands to 
> reason he and 'Tunia had drawn the drapes, closed the blinds, 
> whatever...!

No, Vernon was sleeping in the hall waiting for the mail to come in through 
the regular mail slot.  He doesn't even nail up the mail slot until after the 
above incident, and the day after *that*, he nails up the doors because the 
letters came in through the door cracks.  But on Saturday, the letters arrive in 
eggs that are passed through the living room window, so apparently the 
windows are never nailed shut, much less boarded over.  It would have to be 
awfully dark to overlook something as large as Vernon!

BTW,  Richard Griffiths, who plays Vernon, has a birthday on . . . July 31!  
(according to IMDb, anyway)




From klaatu at primenet.com  Wed Dec 12 16:37:56 2001
From: klaatu at primenet.com (Sister Mary Lunatic)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:37:56 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v7ugc+hh0j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBJPGEHBDBAKHGIBPOEEBEENAA.klaatu@primenet.com>

The real reason it was dark at Hogwarts, in Scotland in September at 7:00
pm, is that it was magically-induced to increase the spooky atmosphere for
the arrival of the students.  If Hogwarts is invisible to non-magic people,
then surely a little artificial darkness would be child's play to
Dumbledore, just for the fun of it.

Besides, it's literarily atmospheric, and the author wants it that way.
Same reason that the full moons in Chamber of Secrets do not correspond with
the actual dates of the full moons in  1992 (or whenever).  You're dealing
with an artificial world created by Ms. Rowling, where things ARE AS THEY
ARE WRITTEN, because it's convenient to the plot!

SML




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 16:52:54 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:52:54 -0000
Subject: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v6jv8+36pn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v8216+j4h5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
If you were the producer of PoA and GoF, 
> and the only information you had to go on was his work in PS/SS, 
> would you hire Columbus for PoA, GoF, both, or neither?


Dump him, not only because he wasn't perfect, but because someone 
else will get a chance to refashion the series. While you're about 
it, lose Kloves as well.

Movies are film (!), books are books. They're different media, and I 
hope another director will be able to do a more interpretive job 
than Columbus did.

What I found particularly irksome in the movie, apart from the 
patchy acting and characterisation, was that the sets were *too* 
good. What kind of dim praise for a film is it if the finest 
comments refer to the sets?

I don't want someone to micro-imagine sets for me, I'd rather be 
given a sense of the developing relationships, shown as more than 
neat symbolic moments "worth a thousand words." No thanks. Too easy. 
Spend time on the actors and their interaction, not on deciding the 
colour of the wrapping paper inside a wand box. Or that jarring 
scene in Hogwarts when they see the vertiginous entrance hall for 
the first time, with those staircases going upward into infinity 
like some Escher lithograph. There's a limit to willing surrender to 
unreality, and it is called reality. How can actors do their best in 
overwhelming surroundings?

You need a slightly megalomaniacal director to impose his vision and 
be ruthless in holding the film together. Forget whether it sticks 
absolutely to the books.

If the director is a nice, tortured soul, so much the better. The HP 
books are not good-natured and happy. We know that. Happy moments 
are almost stolen, as it were, from the looming threat of Voldemort 
and other horrors, and just the sheer harshness and loneliness of a 
world in which Hogwarts is a fragile safe haven, and in which you 
can't expect much help from other than your closest partners.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 16:56:27 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:56:27 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <MABBJPGEHBDBAKHGIBPOEEBEENAA.klaatu@primenet.com>
Message-ID: <9v827s+bno1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Sister Mary Lunatic" <klaatu at p...> wrote:
> 
> Besides, it's literarily atmospheric, and the author wants it that way.
> Same reason that the full moons in Chamber of Secrets do not correspond 
with
> the actual dates of the full moons in  1992 (or whenever).  You're dealing
> with an artificial world created by Ms. Rowling, where things ARE AS THEY
> ARE WRITTEN, because it's convenient to the plot!

Hmph, I can see the need to let JKR mess around with moon phases, but if she 
wanted the kids to arrive at Hogsmeade in the dark, they could have just left 
King's Cross later and saved all that troublesome spell-making.

Remember, the reason we get so picky and LOON-y about these things is that 
JKR herself has put in lots of hints in the stories, inviting close examination.  
But we are slowly learning that things that are related to science and 
numbers, whether it's moon phases or the number of students at Hogwarts, are 
not quite as well-thought-out as her references to history and mythical tales.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 17:09:04 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:09:04 -0000
Subject: Muggle Art & Artifacts at Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <9v7mlg+qc6v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v82vg+9npn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> 
> > Is that the original portrait of Anne Boleyn? Anne never moves. Do the 
> muggle owners know they have a cheap copy?
> 
> My Tudor-obsessed dd spotted Anne during her first viewing, I'm so proud.  She 
> says it looks like the original. 

 As much as I loved the Anne Boleyn portrait (appropriate, given the witchcraft allegations at her trial), I though Ron's Isle of Lewis chess set was even *better!*




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 17:21:55 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:21:55 -0000
Subject: Seeking Common Ground
In-Reply-To: <9v7ua0+qn7i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v83nj+t9c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ftah3" <ftah3 at y...> wrote:
> cindy wrote:
> > After seeing everyone's reactions to the film, I was wondering 
> > whether it is possible to reach consensus on anything.  
> 
> I agree with all of your list, except (and no doubt I'm in the 
> minority):
> 
> > 2.  Seamus' scenes should have gone to Neville.
> 
> I didn't mind this.  I was actually rather glad that Neville didn't 
> get all the blowing things up scenes, because I like Neville and I 
> don't think he's as much of a nincompoop as I fear that would have 
> made him out.  Meaning, if all he did was loose his frog and look 
> perplexed, *plus* blow everything up...with only the bit where he 
> stands up to the Trio to redeem him...he'd have seemed like just 
> comic relief to me.  I felt that spreading the awkwardness between he 
> and Seamus was in character for both of them (because Seamus *did* at 
> least light up that feather in the book), made them both marginally 
> more real (because there's never just *one* goofy kid in a class), 
> and gave Neville a chance to be a more rounded character within the 
> constraints of his screen time.
> 
> Other than that, thumbs up!  I'm very agreeable to your speculations 
> on common ground!
> 
> Mahoney 


 I loved Neville's unmitigated SHOCK at being praised and singled out during the Leaving Feast. He didn't beam out like Herm and Harry, nor go through a "who me?" phase like Ron; he looked as if this was completely out of his zone of experience. I got the impression that although he appreciated getting the points, he might not have quite enjoyed being made such a public spectacle.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 17:38:43 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:38:43 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <MABBJPGEHBDBAKHGIBPOEEBEENAA.klaatu@primenet.com>
Message-ID: <9v84n3+ln78@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Sister Mary Lunatic" <klaatu at p...> wrote:
> The real reason it was dark at Hogwarts, in Scotland in September at 7:00
> pm, is that it was magically-induced to increase the spooky atmosphere for
> the arrival of the students.  If Hogwarts is invisible to non-magic people,
> then surely a little artificial darkness would be child's play to
> Dumbledore, just for the fun of it.
> 
> Besides, it's literarily atmospheric, and the author wants it that way.
> Same reason that the full moons in Chamber of Secrets do not correspond with
> the actual dates of the full moons in  1992 (or whenever).  You're dealing
> with an artificial world created by Ms. Rowling, where things ARE AS THEY
> ARE WRITTEN, because it's convenient to the plot!
> 
> SML


 Just for yuks, I did a little web research on the National Rail Network website.  

Elgin & Gordonstoun are roughly in the same countryside as Hogsmeade and Hogwarts. In reality, it takes FIFTEEN HOURS to journey from London's Kings Cross Station to the rail station in Elgin, Scotland.  On the real rail system, you have to make at least one change - which I'm sure adds some time at least.  

But London direct to Inverness, where you'd most likely transfer to the Inverness-Aberdeen line which services Elgin, is itself eight and a half hours.

 We can assume that the Express is a Magical Train on a magical line, and thus can go directly to Hogsmeade without needing a transfer or stops at several stations along the way -- implied by "Express," although we're never actually told this. (Although there ought to be at least one unused depot along the way where the Dementors boarded the train -- did LV wipe out any magical villages which once sistered Hogsmeade?) 

Even so, I may well just have underestimated an 8 hour travel time between London and Hogsmeade. If they get to Hogsmeade at around 8:30pm (well after dark no matter what time of the year), and don't start eating until probably 9:30p or so, it would make sense that those First Years aren't getting up into their dorm rooms until rounding on 11p to 11:30p. No wonder they go straight to bed without a proper orientation.
 




From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Dec 12 18:59:17 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:59:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v7m5u+jsqr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011212185917.26358.qmail@web14909.mail.yahoo.com>

About the whole sunset thing, I live in Milton Keynes (60 miles NW of
London) and on a cloudy September day it can get noticeably dark down
here at 6:30-7pm. Apply those weather conditions to Scotland and you
have a very dark, stormy night.

Nicky the newbie

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Dec 12 19:13:24 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:13:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Peeves' Part
In-Reply-To: <9v7s6e+8v0b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011212191324.37691.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com>

Have none of you heard? Peeves IS in the movie, because the original
editor's cut is 4 hours long! But then they used their common sense and
realised that no 6 year old is going to sit still through 4 hours of a
movie, whether they love it or not (they had trouble in the recut
version). To save extra time they cut 1 1/2 hours extra footage, which
we're all hoping will be released on DVD as part of the movie again.

Nicky again (Sorry about now combining the posts!)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Dec 12 19:25:51 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:25:51 -0000
Subject: Business Implications of a Two-Part GoF Movie
Message-ID: <9v8avv+6e09@eGroups.com>

As we've all heard, they are thinking of doing a two-part GoF movie.  
I was wondering what the business implications of doing this might 
be.  So far as I know, there has never been a major motion picture 
that was released in two parts, four weeks apart.  

Setting aside whether the fans on the list would like to see as much 
HP as we can get, I wonder how the folks at Warner Brothers are 
sorting this out.  On the one hand, Hollywood seems to like to 
stretch things out as much as possible, figuring it is easier to 
wring profits from the product if there is more of the product to 
squeeze.  

On the other hand, there are definite risks involved.  Is it too 
risky because if the first movie is panned or bombs, it might tank 
the second one?  Would it saturate the market and dampen enthusiasm
(which is one reason I think they are trying to stagger the book and 
movie releases)?  What portion of the movie-going public would pick 
one movie or the other, but not both?  How would you sustain the 
marketing buzz over such a long period?  How would movie theatre 
operators feel about tying up their screens for double the normal 
amount of time for a first release?  

Any thoughts?

Cindy (who would love to see the internal Warner Brothers memos 
analyzing these issues)




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 12 19:56:15 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:56:15 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <20011212185917.26358.qmail@web14909.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9v8cov+f1um@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nicky <azingam at y...> wrote:
> About the whole sunset thing, I live in Milton Keynes (60 miles NW of
> London) and on a cloudy September day it can get noticeably dark down
> here at 6:30-7pm. Apply those weather conditions to Scotland and you
> have a very dark, stormy night.

But those weren't the conditions when the kids arrived at Hogwarts, at least 
in SS.  When they first looked up at the ceiling of the Great Hall, it was dotted 
with stars.  Also, since they're considerably north of Milton Keynes, the sun 
will be setting later in the summer (and earlier in the winter).  The difference 
is over 20 minutes on Sept. 1, when the sun sets at 8:07 in Edinburgh and 7:45 
in London.

But perhaps this whole conversation is made moot by the fact that we don't 
know how long it takes the Hogwarts Express to cover this (also unknown!) 
distance.  Whatever, those kids are having a really late supper!

>  If they get to Hogsmeade at around 8:30pm (well after
> dark no matter what time of the year),

On June 21 in Edinburgh, the sun sets at 10:05 PM.






From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 21:12:34 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:12:34 -0000
Subject: Robbie Coltrane, & Hagrid's future
Message-ID: <9v8h82+73a6@eGroups.com>

I ran across something that Robbie Coltrane said about Hagrid which 
called up a question in my mind about future books.  

I recall reading that JKR, in her capacity as consultant on the film, 
gave certain actors some details about their characters and what 
happens to them in later books.  I know Rickman (Snape) was named, 
and I *think* Coltrane (Hagrid) was as well.  At any rate, even not 
knowing who exactly she tipped off, nor how far in the future (up to 
or past book 4) she drew information for the actors, the fact that 
she did at least tip off some people to future events made me read 
the following statement by Coltrane in a new light:

""He [Hagrid] is a nurturing creature," says Coltrane. "He's got 
Norbert, his baby dragon, and he's not afraid of Fluffy (a huge, 
three-headed dog). 

"But I didn't want to undermine the dark side of him, because he is a 
giant, and giants are unpredictable, as you know." " (from BBC News 
online, URL: 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1652000/165
2393.stm)

So far, imho, we've seen very little of Hagrid's 'dark side' 
or 'unpredictable' nature in the books (other than, for example, 
roaring at people for saying mean things about Dumbledore, Harry, et 
al, and popping up with dragon eggs and illegally bred skrewts).  And 
his being a giant, with all the attendent explication of the nature 
of your usual giant (mean! scary! etc.) only just came up in Book 4.

Sooooo...I wonder why Coltrane had the giant side of Hagrid on his 
mind?  In other words, why he felt the need to point out, contrary to 
anything we saw in the film, not to mention in the books so far, that 
Hagrid has an ominously unpredictable nature and 'dark side'?

I wonder what all might have I missed, in the books, that implies 
this 'dark side' of Hagrid.  In retrospect, Ron seemed to understand 
the implications of Hagrid's giant genetics; but still it never hit 
me, until Coltrane's comment, that I maybe I ought to be thinking 
along broader lines than a blustering temper and penchant for 
dangerous pets.

And also, I really *do* hope that Coltrane was speaking from secret 
information about future books ~ because Hagrid is a great character, 
but I think he'd be even more fabulous if he was to undergo such 
fascinating development.  

Opinions?  Enlightenment?  Thoughts, moos, squawks, squeaks or other 
relevant noises?  :)

Mahoney





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 21:18:49 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:18:49 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v8cov+f1um@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v8hjp+5qr8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> 
> >  If they get to Hogsmeade at around 8:30pm (well after
> > dark no matter what time of the year),
> 
> On June 21 in Edinburgh, the sun sets at 10:05 PM. 

  Good *LORD.* I recall it staying light that late when I lived in Sweden for a year, but it never occurred to me that conditions would be quite so similar in Scotland.




From pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Dec 12 21:58:00 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:58:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Seeking Common Ground
References: <9v7t3s+e572@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C17D2E8.2010306@swbell.net>

Hi --

No time at the moment ... although I do want to comment more fully on 
Cindy's post on the Director choice for later films.

cindysphynx wrote:


> E.  Emma's chess match speech was clunky.

Nope; there can be no unanimity here.  I *liked* the speech in the book, 
and I liked it even better in the Movie.  No clunkiness in my view.  :--D

Penny





From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Wed Dec 12 22:25:08 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:25:08 -0500
Subject: poll, quidditch, Hermione, LotR, Hagrid's "dark side"
References: <1008131991.1476.51592.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C17D944.1256A558@sun.com>

I voted for the ending dialogue with Dumbledore, but only because you left out
the scene I really wanted: when Harry rants at Ron and Hermione about why he's
going after the Stone.

The business about losing 150 points is a close third. Most of the other items
didn't matter nearly as much to me. Much as I love Hermione, I don't think the
Potions puzzle would have worked on screen.

Generally, I wanted more Dumbledore twinkle, more Snape nastiness, and more
Neville cowering. (Skip Seamus.) And for everyone to avoid Voldemort's name who
should. Some of this could have been done in a couple of very short scenes or
scene modifications, as I've posted previously. That being said, I did enjoy the
film, and I hope to see it a second time soon.

Adana wrote:
> I also couldn't stand the cheesy body-squashing special effects in the 
> Quidditch scenes.

I think they should have saved that for later movies. I don't think the game got
that violent until Malfoy joined the Slytherin team, at least. I'd rather have
had some of Lee Jordan's commentary. But I suppose they wanted action.

Emma's Hermione: I remember that after reading only the first two books, I
really didn't like what Rowling had done with Hermione's character in the first
book. I thought she was really grating, and it bugged me that a female author
had succumbed to the "bright, obnoxious token female" cliche. (Never mind that I
was one!) So I can't really complain about Emma Watson's portrayal of Hermione
in the first movie. But I hope to see better in future films, just as Hermione
improved in the books.

Mahoney wrote:
> Indeed, it *is* rather more fashionable to effuse about a 'grown-up,' 
> pseudo-art-house flick than an engaging, wonderful, but 'kiddie' 
> flick, isn't it?

Err... "pseudo-art-house flick"? Granted your point about "grown-up" vs.
"kiddie", but LotR is a fantasy film, and I would think probably will still be
ineligible for all the same awards the SS/PS is. Are the critics actually
treating this as a "serious" film??

I'm going to see it, mind, and I've taken the trouble to re-read the trilogy and
most of the Silmarillion while waiting, but it's hard to believe this film is
really going to flatten SS/PS. Then again, what do I know? I rarely even bother
going to see movies in the theatre, and I don't watch that many more of them at
home. (Except anime.) And I almost never read movie reviews.

Later, Mahoney also wrote:
> "But I didn't want to undermine the dark side of him, because he is a 
> giant, and giants are unpredictable, as you know."
...

> So far, imho, we've seen very little of Hagrid's 'dark side' 
> or 'unpredictable' nature in the books...

Well, it might be due to some secret info that Rowling gave Coltrane, but I
think his behavior toward the Dursleys would count for enough. They're clearly
terrified of him (and rightly so-- not that they don't deserve it.)

Elizabeth



From srae at mindspring.com  Wed Dec 12 22:33:59 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:33:59 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Referendum on the Director
In-Reply-To: <9v7s6e+8v0b@eGroups.com>
References: <3.0.1.32.20011212002021.00ab30e0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011212173359.00aaa4a0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 03:13 PM 12/12/2001 -0000, oz-widgeon wrote:

>thought. I think, given the choice of cutting, Peeves, the Troll or 
>Norbert, I'd have ousted Peeves too.  He served no purpose in the 
>first book (or any really) other than to draw attention to the Trio 
>when they were out of bed and to drop the cabinet over Filch's office 
>in CoS.  BTW, did anyone catch that Ron mentioned Peeves' name in the 
>movie?  When they are going to the common room after Quirrel faints
>in the Great Hall (LOVED THAT SCENE!), they are talking about how a
>troll would get in, and Ron says something to the effect of "Probably 
>just Peeves playing a joke."

As much as it pains me to do so, I agree. I love Peeves, but he's mostly
been comic relief so far.  Still...Rik Mayall was playing Peeves! RIK
MAYALL! :)  I had visions of Peeves swooping around screeching bad poetry
and calling himself "The People's Poet."  I still hold out hope for his
scenes in the DVD though.

>> I have a very few quibbles, but only a few, and they are fairly 
>>minor. 
>
>Very few quibbles here , except I WANTED the Sorting hat song, and
>why did they show the Choc Frog cards if they didn't use that to find 
>Flammel, and I didn't like that everyone in the Great Hall could hear 
>everything the Sorting Hat said.  Other than that, Dandy.  Seen it 3 
>times, will probably go again. 

My aunt, cousins and I discussed the Sorting Hat after our first viewing.
The song was pretty lengthy, though it could have been shortened I guess,
and still get the gist of the houses across. But we decided that probably,
the hat wasn't audible to *everyone* in the Great Hall, probably just
whoever was wearing it and *maybe* Professor McGonagall since she was so
close.  Its voice got noticeably louder when it would shout out the house
name.  I'm trying to remember now, did we actually hear it say anything to
Ron or Hermione, or anyone else? I'm trying to remember if we could hear it
talking when, say, Ron was talking about how all the witches gone bad had
come from Slytherin.  

Shannon






From john at walton.vu  Wed Dec 12 22:27:32 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:27:32 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from
	3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <9v8cov+f1um@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B83D8A54.71D7%john@walton.vu>

joanne0012 wrote:

> But perhaps this whole conversation is made moot by the fact that we don't
> know how long it takes the Hogwarts Express to cover this (also unknown!)
> distance.  Whatever, those kids are having a really late supper!

We do know roughly how long it takes -- it definitely leaves at 11am. If it
gets there after dark (if sunset is just after 8, dark will be 8:45 or so)
it will have taken the poor bairns about 10 hours on the train. Actually,
considering the current state of the British railway system, that ain't
bad...they MUST be using magic!
 
>> If they get to Hogsmeade at around 8:30pm (well after
>> dark no matter what time of the year),
> 
> On June 21 in Edinburgh, the sun sets at 10:05 PM.

*gritted teeth* And, in winter, it gets dark at about 3.30. No wonder people
have S.A.D....

--John

____________________________________________

*"Quidditch Through The Ages" by Kennilworthy Whisp: 14 Sickles 3 Knuts
*New Firebolt Broom: just over 100 Galleons
*Watching Draco Malfoy being bounced up and down
after being turned into a ferret: Priceless

The best things in life are free. For everything else, there's Harry Potter.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From srae at mindspring.com  Wed Dec 12 22:39:52 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than
  HP
In-Reply-To: <9v7t3o+2t90@eGroups.com>
References: <9v6eno+1j6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011212173952.00aaa4a0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 03:28 PM 12/12/2001 -0000, Mahoney wrote:
>
>I do, though, hope that JKR and all the rest involved in the HP film 
>take the LotR movie snobbery in stride, and recognize that what 
>they've made is *different* and fantastic on it's own merits, 
>regardless of what the poncy critics et al say.

It was inevitable, really. I was disappointed to see it but not surprised.
Lord of the Rings is 50 years old, probably 2/3 of the critics read it when
it was the cool thing to read in college.  Some of them bound to be snotty
about it, especially when the HP hype has been so overwhelming recently.
The people who are inclined to be snotty about it are the same people who
are inclined to dismiss something that is so hugely popular (LOTR doesn't
count, even though it is hugely popular, because they were 'in on it' from
the beginning, of course!).  I don't let it bother me.  I am looking
forward to seeing it, even though I didn't care much for the books.

Shannon




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 12 22:52:50 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:52:50 -0000
Subject: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than HP
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20011212173952.00aaa4a0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <9v8n42+bi49@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Shannon Compton <srae at m...> wrote:
> At 03:28 PM 12/12/2001 -0000, Mahoney wrote:
> >
> >I do, though, hope that JKR and all the rest involved in the HP film 
> >take the LotR movie snobbery in stride, and recognize that what 
> >they've made is *different* and fantastic on it's own merits, 
> >regardless of what the poncy critics et al say.
> 
> It was inevitable, really. I was disappointed to see it but not surprised.
> Lord of the Rings is 50 years old, probably 2/3 of the critics read it when
> it was the cool thing to read in college.  Some of them bound to be snotty
> about it, especially when the HP hype has been so overwhelming recently.
> The people who are inclined to be snotty about it are the same people who
> are inclined to dismiss something that is so hugely popular (LOTR doesn't
> count, even though it is hugely popular, because they were 'in on it' from
> the beginning, of course!).  I don't let it bother me.  I am looking
> forward to seeing it, even though I didn't care much for the books.
> 
> Shannon 


 Don't forget, too, that LoTR has been welcomed into the hallowed halls of "Accepted Literature" by now in ways that HP is not yet, and possibly will never be. LoTR has CLIFFS NOTES.




From teeravec at fas.harvard.edu  Thu Dec 13 03:07:03 2001
From: teeravec at fas.harvard.edu (Samaporn Teeravechyan)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:07:03 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: an ANIMATED version?!
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.20011212220703.00a30f50@pop.fas.harvard.edu>


<<And Miyazaki has an amazing track record for kids' films. Totoro and Kiki's 
Delivery Service are both excellent...Totoro is amazing....>>

I have to agree ... Totoro is a fantastical romp through the lushly
imaginative world of childhood. It's a kid's movie, but I find myself
playing the tape when I need something to light a little spark of magic
back into my life. I love all the little cultural details as well, and the
way he pays attention to the small details that make children children and
the characters human overall. Miyazaki could put the magic back into Harry
Potter better than anyone else. It would be a fair partnership - one reason
why I am so fond of the Harry Potter series is that there are so many
details - actions and words - that so aptly encapsulate the personalities
of the characters. My favourite exchange (from PS/SS):

	"Now you two - this year, you behave yourselves. If I get one more owl
telling me you've - you've blown up a toilet or -" 
	"Blown up a toilet? We've never blown up a toilet."
	"Great idea though, thanks, Mum."

I laughed so hard at that ... it just sounds so much like my own mother and
brother!

Anyway, my only gripe about Miyazaki: all the characters have the same
'look' about them =(.

<<(Who might as well join the others in the "Rickman-Snape wasn't sexy"
bunker.
Should I bring my DVD player and a stack of anime? We may be in here for a
while. "Utena," anyone?)>>

I'll join you ... Rickman just isn't the way I pictured Snape (*dodges a
barrel of tomatoes as she makes a dive for the bunker*). Unfortunately, I'm
not a big fan of wispy and starry-eyed anime characters; I'll bring my VHS
player and Rurouni Kenshin tapes. Oh, and my new Studio Ghibli DVD
collection (yes!) for the Miyazaki fans.

Samaporn


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les
yeux." - le renard, "Le Petit Prince"

"Knowing others is wisdom;
 Knowing the self is enlightenment.
 Mastering others requires force;
 Mastering the self needs strength."  - Lao Tzu, "Tao te Ching"




From banjoken at optonline.net  Thu Dec 13 08:02:25 2001
From: banjoken at optonline.net (banjo_ken)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:02:25 -0000
Subject: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than HP
In-Reply-To: <9v8n42+bi49@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9v9nah+l6bm@eGroups.com>

One thing that has been bothering me for a while is the fact that 
everybody seems to think that LotR and HP are in direct competition. 
Yes, they're both fantasy films based on popular books, but there's 
no reason for them to be opposed. I'm a great fan of both series, 
have seen HP several times, will most likely see LotR several times. 
I'm willing to bet there are many people out there who will do the 
same. So why the competition?

Ken




From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 08:19:45 2001
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:19:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rings Movie Premiere - Seems Better than HP
In-Reply-To: <9v9nah+l6bm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011213081945.11747.qmail@web14601.mail.yahoo.com>


--- banjo_ken <banjoken at optonline.net> wrote:
> One thing that has been bothering me for a while is
> the fact that 
> everybody seems to think that LotR and HP are in
> direct competition. 
> 
I agree. I love both series and I plan on seeing LOTR
when it comes out. There's plenty of room out there
for more than one great movie or book, Life would be
very boring otherwise;). I feel that the books/movies
are quite different and should not be compared. They
are both great in their own ways. Enough of my
senseless babble(I should really be sleep!)for the
evening.

Laila

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 08:59:10 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:59:10 -0000
Subject: Pitch black at 7 pm? (Was: Re: Gleanings from 3rd Viewing)
In-Reply-To: <B83D8A54.71D7%john@walton.vu>
Message-ID: <9v9qku+q3e1@eGroups.com>



> > On June 21 in Edinburgh, the sun sets at 10:05 PM.

Yes, but on Sept 1, the day the train ride takes place, the sun sets 
at 8:09 PM (Sept 1, 1991 is the date I looked up) so if it takes, say 
10-11 hours on the train (really not an inconceivable amount of
time), 
they would be arriving after dark.

> *gritted teeth* And, in winter, it gets dark at about 3.30. No 
wonder people
> have S.A.D....
> 
> --John

Ah, poor John!  Alas, it gets quite dark here (Germany) very early in 
the winter as well.  Currently around 4:15, but soon, we too will be 
dark at 3:30 and not see the sunrise until around 9 am the next day.  
Not conductive to golfing (not to mention the cold), but happily we 
have hours and hours and hours of sunlight in the summer 5 am-almost 
midnight, so I can golf until my heart is content or my boss decideds 
I really DO have to come to work.


> *"Quidditch Through The Ages" by Kennilworthy Whisp: 14 Sickles 3 
Knuts
> *New Firebolt Broom: just over 100 Galleons
> *Watching Draco Malfoy being bounced up and down
> after being turned into a ferret: Priceless
> 
> The best things in life are free. For everything else, there's
Harry 
Potter.
 
Hee Hee!  I knew I liked you!  Still in the bedroom that used to be a 
sitting room?


>Don't forget, too, that LoTR has been welcomed into the hallowed 
>halls of "Accepted Literature" by now in ways that HP is not yet,
and 
>possibly will never be. LoTR has CLIFFS NOTES.

Remember though, LoTR has been around a lot longer than HP.  It's 
stature in 'literary circles' has grown with time (though I'm 
personally not a huge fan of them), in a way I'm hoping HP will do, 
once people get over their snobbery of it.  "Oh, you're reading HP?  
How very 'trendy' of you."  Argh! <grumbles to self about the 
ignorance of 'the cultured ones'>   Anyway, could you imagine a 
student wanting to read HP Cliffs Notes instead of the book itself?  
It makes me want to giggle, but then the boss might get suspicious 
about why I'm giggling at my computer instead of looking all serious 
and productive (which I really am, but right now I'm taking a break, 
albeit in secret).  HP Cliffs Notes would be quite a joke.  Okay,
back 
to work.  Don't tell Ron-I'm an accountant! 
Cheers all!
Slon




From vheggie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 13:43:57 2001
From: vheggie at yahoo.com (vheggie)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 13:43:57 -0000
Subject: Train Journeys in the UK
Message-ID: <9vabat+2eho@eGroups.com>

According to the latest timetables, it can take upwards of 4.5 hours 
to get from London KX to Edinburgh, 7.5 hours to get to Aberdeen, and 
up to 11.5 hours to reach Inverness.  A train journey of 10 hours is 
not entirely unreasonable, especially if the train has to take 
an 'unusual' route - especially over the mountains...

http://www.railtrack.co.uk/

for those who want to check....




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 14:00:21 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:00:21 -0000
Subject: Train Journeys in the UK
In-Reply-To: <9vabat+2eho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vac9l+h07n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "vheggie" <vheggie at y...> wrote:
> According to the latest timetables, it can take upwards of 4.5 hours 
> to get from London KX to Edinburgh, 7.5 hours to get to Aberdeen, 
and 
> up to 11.5 hours to reach Inverness.  A train journey of 10 hours is 
> not entirely unreasonable, especially if the train has to take 
> an 'unusual' route - especially over the mountains...
> 
> http://www.railtrack.co.uk/
> 
> for those who want to check....

Great minds think alike.  I was at that sight earlier today!  I was 
thinking that it could take Hogwarts Express longer than a modern 
train to get anywhere, as it seems to be still run on something other 
than modern means (coal or steam perhaps?).  Magic aside, they seem to 
use rather archaic means of doing many things (candles, ink pots, 
quills, etc), so it makes sense to me that their train system would be 
out of date and slow as well.




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Thu Dec 13 15:38:02 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (wanda02481)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:38:02 -0000
Subject: Seeking Common Ground
In-Reply-To: <3C17D2E8.2010306@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9vai0q+h4ih@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> cindysphynx wrote:
> 
> > E.  Emma's chess match speech was clunky.
> 
> Nope; there can be no unanimity here.  I *liked* the speech in the 
book, 
> and I liked it even better in the Movie.  No clunkiness in my view. 
 :--D
> 
I agree, I thought it was one of the best Hermione moments in the 
movie. She seemed very natural there, not trying to impress anyone, 
just saying the truth.  And I think it's an important truth:  Harry IS 
a great wizard, and she's the first to acknowledge it.  Mr. Ollivander 
could foresee it, but Hermione is the first witness.  Not best in the 
class, not the smartest, not the most accomplished, but GREAT, a 
person with a destiny to change the world.  Hermione is the best 
person to realize it, because she has all the other abilities, and she 
knows that it will take you far, but greatness is a completely 
different thing.  I think by the end of the series, we'll all know 
what the nature of Harry's greatness is.

Wanda





From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Thu Dec 13 17:10:34 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:10:34 -0000
Subject: Train Journeys in the UK
In-Reply-To: <9vabat+2eho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vanea+2mg5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "vheggie" <vheggie at y...> wrote:
> According to the latest timetables, it can take upwards of 4.5
> hours to get from London KX to Edinburgh, 7.5 hours to get to 
> Aberdeen, and up to 11.5 hours to reach Inverness.  A train journey 
> of 10 hours is not entirely unreasonable, especially if the train 
> has to take an 'unusual' route - especially over the mountains...

and let's not discount the great british weather... a good storm can
easily add several hours to your trip, then there's "leaves on the 
line" and "the wrong kind of snow". that's one thing i *don't* miss  
about the uk 8-)

kt in seattle - who due to a previous train derailment and incredibly 
bad rain, once took 12 hours to get from edinburgh to london.




From onbroadway2001 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 22:49:34 2001
From: onbroadway2001 at yahoo.com (OnBroadway2001)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 22:49:34 -0000
Subject: Mirror of Erised scene, more opinions
In-Reply-To: <9v63qk+fksn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vbb9u+krgl@eGroups.com>

Hmmm...after seeing the movie three times (so far...) and making a 
point to look at Harry's clothes in the Mirror scenes, I think he's 
wearing his pajamas throughout. If I remember right, he's wearing a 
red sweater (the Weasley sweater, maybe?) over his striped PJs from 
the Christmas morning scene. If I had never read the books, I would 
have thought that he had been at the Mirror all night, and 
Dumbledore's "Back again?" referred to the number of times he had 
visited the Mirror that night (which I counted as three--twice on 
his own and once with Ron). Being intimitely familiar with the 
books, however, I knew that the Mirror visits were spread out over a 
number of nights.

Jennifer
...who wonders if someone who is 3 days away from graduating college 
is a little too old for Harry Potter...nah!

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> Adana wrote:
> > Keeping in mind that I've only seen the movie once
> > (so far!), the way I remember it, Dumbledore said
> > "Back again" after Harry had collected Ron and 
> > they'd both looked into it, and Ron had gone back
> > to bed.  Harry was back again, and it seemed like
> > he'd been there some time, maybe all night long, 
> > maybe, but it seemed to be the same night.
> 
> Actually, from what I can remember, when he first goes there and 
then 
> comes back with Ron, Harry is wearing regular clothes.  At the 
time 
> when he meets Dumbledore, Harry is wearing pajamas.
> 
> Dawn




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Dec 14 01:18:20 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:18:20 -0000
Subject: Mirror of Erised scene, more opinions
In-Reply-To: <9vbb9u+krgl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vbk0s+icvt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "OnBroadway2001" <onbroadway2001 at y...> wrote:
> Hmmm...after seeing the movie three times (so far...) and making a 
> point to look at Harry's clothes in the Mirror scenes, I think he's 
> wearing his pajamas throughout. If I remember right, he's wearing a 
> red sweater (the Weasley sweater, maybe?) over his striped PJs from 
> the Christmas morning scene. 

That red sweater looks store-bought to me; isn't it the same one that he 
wears during the final showdown with Voldemort?

During the Katie Couric TV special, Dan Radcliffe showed Katie his "Weasley 
sweater," which was blue (to match his eyes) and had a big "H" knitted into it.  
Since this sweater didn't make it into the movie, I have high hopes that more 
Christmas morning was filmed, and will appear in the DVD.  




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 14 06:30:31 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 06:30:31 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
Message-ID: <9vc6a7+hic1@eGroups.com>

This wasn't something I picked up on in the movie at all, but on my 
second viewing I dragged my non-obsessed spousal unit along. He 
thought the Gringott's Goblins seemed to be based on old cultural 
sterotypes of Jews, a la Merchant of Venice - hooked nosed, yellow-
skinned, cold, calculating, unfeeling money-counters. Did anyone 
else feel this? I looked for previous discussions, but nothing came 
up in my search. Comments?

-Cornflower O'Shea




From helanne at start.com.au  Fri Dec 14 09:56:21 2001
From: helanne at start.com.au (~Helen ~)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:56:21 +0800
Subject: Lac des Cygnes...
Message-ID: <B1514674460@i01sv4138.ids1.intelonline.com>

Hi all,

Earlier I noticed that several people were accusing John Williams of
"directly copying" Swan Lake in his Harry Potter score. WHAT THE????

I'm a rather big fan of ballet, ballet music and particularly
Tchaikovsky's ballets. I have also listened to the Harry Potter score
over and over again, and even when I'm listening out for it, I cannot
hear any musical phrase that sounds (to me) like it is reminiscent of
any part of Swan Lake.

Please, can someone explain to me how people are making this
connection by telling me which part of the HP soundtrack this is, and
which piece from Swan Lake. I'm totally stumped (and excuse my
ignorance if it's really obvious. I must admit it's been a while since
I've listened to my Tchaikovsky CDs).

BTW, I have no complaints about the soundtrack. I think it is
melodious and atmospheric in all the right places. And it is not John
Williams' fault if it was too loud; that is something that is handled
in post-production. I actually found the whole movie a little too
loud, but I didn't complain about it. I love the recurring theme
throughout (very eerie), and I'm hoping that each film in the future
has its own little individual theme. 

"Da daaa da-da-daaa da-daa daaaa, daaaa da-da-daaa da-daaaa......" lol

Cheers,
Helen :o)


"She knows more about you than you do."
"Who doesn't?"
Ron and Harry, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone.

__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Fri Dec 14 10:55:04 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:55:04 -0000
Subject: Lac des Cygnes...
In-Reply-To: <B1514674460@i01sv4138.ids1.intelonline.com>
Message-ID: <9vclq8+8oe9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., ~Helen ~ <helanne at s...> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Earlier I noticed that several people were accusing John Williams of
> "directly copying" Swan Lake in his Harry Potter score. WHAT THE????


Ah, at last...someone I can agree with. I too have been living with the 
soundtrack for a few weeks--I love it--and consider myself pretty familiar with 
the classics. I don't hear Swan Lake anywhere.

What I did hear was a little tiny shout-out to The Sorcerer's Apprentice during 
the Quidditch match music. Which is appropriate I think.  

On the whole, I really love this soundtrack, especially the "Harry's Wondrous 
World" suite [although I hate the title], the Hedwig music, the Change of 
Season music, the Hogwarts Forever horn thing, the short theme during the 
Mirror of Erised that comes back twisted during the final confrontation with 
Voldemort...

What I didn't care that much for were the Diagon Alley music [sorry guys--too 
Ren Faire for me] and most of the underscore during Platform 9-3/4 and 
elsewhere that sounded exactly like Phantom Menace. And I really, really 
HATE that the Voldemort music is just a variation on Darth Vader's theme. 
That is inexcusable.

The first time I saw the film, the music was waaaay too loud for me. It was 
not as obnoxious as the music in Phantom Menace [which, as music, I liked--I 
had that soundtrack too], but the HP music was just too loud.

On a second viewing in a different theater, however, the music didn't seem as 
loud.  I thought music and voices were on the same track, but with the exotic 
sound systems now available in cinemas who knows?

And I will admit that I am known among my friends as the movie music nut. 
After seeing Phantom Menace with them and complaining that the music was 
too loud and unnecessarily omnipresent in every scene, their response 
was--what music? :)

Ivis the elderly




From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 11:30:56 2001
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:30:56 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
In-Reply-To: <9vc6a7+hic1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vcntg+epmi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cornflower_o_shea" <tenpinkpiggies at h...> 
wrote:
> This wasn't something I picked up on in the movie at all, but on my 
> second viewing I dragged my non-obsessed spousal unit along. He 
> thought the Gringott's Goblins seemed to be based on old cultural 
> sterotypes of Jews, a la Merchant of Venice - hooked nosed, yellow-
> skinned, cold, calculating, unfeeling money-counters. Did anyone 
> else feel this? I looked for previous discussions, but nothing came 
> up in my search. Comments?

Well, my comment would be it's a double-edged sword to accuse 
Columbus of using stereotype of Jews for the Goblins. Because the 
answer to that is "they look and behave like Jews only if *you* think 
the Jews look and behave like that".

Irene




From frithar at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 11:33:41 2001
From: frithar at yahoo.com (frithar)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:33:41 -0000
Subject: OUCH!
Message-ID: <9vco2l+m897@eGroups.com>

<snip>
Well, my comment would be it's a double-edged sword to accuse 
Columbus of using stereotype of Jews for the Goblins. Because the 
answer to that is "they look and behave like Jews only if *you* think 
the Jews look and behave like that".

Frith adds: Unless you're Jewish yourself, and you're used to BEING 
stereotyped like that!  Then it's more likely to jump to the front of 
your mind when you see it...

Yes?

Frith




From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 11:47:20 2001
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:47:20 -0000
Subject: OUCH!
In-Reply-To: <9vco2l+m897@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vcos9+s3oe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "frithar" <frithar at y...> wrote:
> <snip>
> Well, my comment would be it's a double-edged sword to accuse 
> Columbus of using stereotype of Jews for the Goblins. Because the 
> answer to that is "they look and behave like Jews only if *you* 
think 
> the Jews look and behave like that".

Ouch indeed. When I reread my comment, I thought it might be 
interpreted as attacking? My apologies, I didn't intend it to be that 
way.

> 
> Frith adds: Unless you're Jewish yourself, and you're used to BEING 
> stereotyped like that!  Then it's more likely to jump to the front 
of 
> your mind when you see it...
> 
> Yes?

Yes to what question? :-) I am Jewish myself, so yes to that. But no 
to the second part.  The only thing that jumped to the front of my 
mind when I saw Gringotts was "God, I hope the media does not start 
that stupidity about racist stereotypes that surrounded certain 
flying creature with big nose in the Phantom Menace". And mercifully, 
it did not. :-)

Irene




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Fri Dec 14 12:13:51 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:13:51 -0000
Subject: Harry's Weasley jumper/sweater
In-Reply-To: <9vbk0s+icvt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vcqdv+bd2v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> During the Katie Couric TV special, Dan Radcliffe showed Katie his "Weasley 
> sweater," which was blue (to match his eyes) and had a big "H" knitted into 
it.  
> Since this sweater didn't make it into the movie, I have high hopes that 
more 
> Christmas morning was filmed, and will appear in the DVD.


The Leaky Cauldron had this link to a story with a lovely pic of Harry in the 
Weasley sweater:

http://www.budapestsun.com/full_story.asp?ArticleId={7C5134D1D4FF48EFA
E0E482D87452E51}&From=

I don't know if the link will work, I just pasted it in. You can also get there 
from www.the-leaky-cauldron.org.

I too am hoping for lots of DVD extras--but when will Chris Columbus have 
time to work on them? :)

Ivis the elderly




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 14:21:19 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:21:19 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
In-Reply-To: <9vc6a7+hic1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vd1sv+b22a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cornflower_o_shea" <tenpinkpiggies at h...> 
wrote:
> This wasn't something I picked up on in the movie at all, but on my 
> second viewing I dragged my non-obsessed spousal unit along. He 
> thought the Gringott's Goblins seemed to be based on old cultural 
> sterotypes of Jews, a la Merchant of Venice - hooked nosed, yellow-
> skinned, cold, calculating, unfeeling money-counters. Did anyone 
> else feel this? I looked for previous discussions, but nothing came 
> up in my search. Comments?

Well, even though that's the Merchant-ish stereotype, I think the 
Goblin look was designed based more on the stereotypical movie 
goblin/small-distasteful-critter, as well as on descriptions from the 
book.  The fact that they also happen to be bankers, cold and 
calculating, with little regard for fuzzy feelings, is also the way 
they're written.  I guess, imho, if a comparison is going to be made 
between the Gringott's Goblins and the Merchant-ish Jew, it ought to 
start w/ the book, because all the details are there already.

And just for yuks, I'll give my opinion on that:  natch.  Rowling's 
goblins are also typical of fairy tale goblins, except taken to the 
next logical level in terms of becoming civilized.  As uncivilized 
brutes in fairy tales, they're generally cold, cruel, extremely money-
hungry and highly protective of their treasure troves.  Slap a little 
civilization on them, and what do you get?  Bankers!  :-P

Mahoney




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 14:32:14 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:32:14 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
In-Reply-To: <9vcntg+epmi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vd2he+h2bl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "irene_mikhlin" <irene_mikhlin at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cornflower_o_shea" <tenpinkpiggies at h...> 
> wrote:
> > This wasn't something I picked up on in the movie at all, but on my 
> > second viewing I dragged my non-obsessed spousal unit along. He 
> > thought the Gringott's Goblins seemed to be based on old cultural 
> > sterotypes of Jews, a la Merchant of Venice - hooked nosed, yellow-
> > skinned, cold, calculating, unfeeling money-counters. Did anyone 
> > else feel this? I looked for previous discussions, but nothing came 
> > up in my search. Comments?
> 
> Well, my comment would be it's a double-edged sword to accuse 
> Columbus of using stereotype of Jews for the Goblins. Because the 
> answer to that is "they look and behave like Jews only if *you* think 
> the Jews look and behave like that".
> 
> Irene 


  Hrm... I think it's fair enough to say the movie goblins are modeled on Shylock, though, and many people dislike that character because they take it as a slur on Jews. Just as many people take the "Mammy" image as a slur on blacks; I recall a fascinating old episode of A DIFFERENT WORLD in which one of the characters came to understand that visual stereotypes like those can be transcended. I do think that for the most part, the automatic equation of Shylock with "Jew" has itself been mostly transcended.

By that token, you could accuse Snape of being Shylock, too: sallow-skinned, longish dark hair and eyes, hooked nose, something of a bean counter both with points and grudges, indulging his prejudices. Even his costuming in the film looks a little Renaissance at first glance, when he isn't wearing his robe open.  




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 15:48:15 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:48:15 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
In-Reply-To: <9vd2he+h2bl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vd6vv+hmpi@eGroups.com>

Heather wrote:
>   Hrm... I think it's fair enough to say the movie goblins are 
modeled on Shylock, though, and many people dislike that character 
because they take it as a slur on Jews. <snip> 
> By that token, you could accuse Snape of being Shylock, too <snip>

Right ~ and isn't it just possible that we don't trace the stereotype 
back far enough, to the idea that Shakespeare's description of 
Shylock is based on a stereotype that has nothing to do with Jews?  

Because the fact is that the whole sallow faced, hook-nosed, etc. 
etc. description is not relegated to Shylockian (i.e. cold money-
grubbing Jew) characters ~ rather, it's a combination of physical 
traits used to make a quick sketch of your basic detestable creep 
type character, and it's a descriptive stereotype that pre-dates 
Shakespeare and his Shylock.

On the other hand (let me talk myself in circles for just a moment, 
please, thanks) removing the *visual* stereotype does leave a 
relevent goblin-Jew stereotype comparison.  I.e., the whole money-
grub substandard human = Jew stereotype is something that shows up in 
Western literature partly as a result of the Christian literary 
tradition (wherein the money-lenders et al are nasty folks and also 
Jews in some of the parables etc).  And I suppose it's arguable that 
giving the same non-physical stereotypical attributes to the goblins 
shows a parallel prejudice.  

On yet the other hand (I need more hands), miserly non-
humans show up in a lot of ancient pagan literary traditions, too ~ 
in the form of, for example, dragons, demons, faeries, and even 
goblin-types who hoard treasure and guard it fiercely, coldly, and 
cruelly.  And the fact that JKR takes the Gringott's goblins and 
gives them a dragon to help guard their vaults (or so the rumor 
goes in the wizard world) to me indicates she might be following the 
pagan/fairy tale standard, rather than the Biblical/Shylockian 
standard.

Mahoney
off to ponder whether Madame Pomfrey's Skele-Gro could provide me 
with a few extra hands in the event of future tangential ramblings....




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 16:38:39 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:38:39 -0000
Subject: Stereotypes - Goblins are to PS Movie as Jar Jar is to Episode 1?
In-Reply-To: <9vd6vv+hmpi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vd9uf+e2f9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ftah3" <ftah3 at y...> wrote:
> Heather wrote:
> >   Hrm... I think it's fair enough to say the movie goblins are 
> modeled on Shylock, though, and many people dislike that character 
> because they take it as a slur on Jews. <snip> 
> > By that token, you could accuse Snape of being Shylock, too <snip>
> 
> Right ~ and isn't it just possible that we don't trace the stereotype 
> back far enough, to the idea that Shakespeare's description of 
> Shylock is based on a stereotype that has nothing to do with Jews?  
> 
> Because the fact is that the whole sallow faced, hook-nosed, etc. 
> etc. description is not relegated to Shylockian (i.e. cold money-
> grubbing Jew) characters ~ rather, it's a combination of physical 
> traits used to make a quick sketch of your basic detestable creep 
> type character, and it's a descriptive stereotype that pre-dates 
> Shakespeare and his Shylock.
> 
> On the other hand (let me talk myself in circles for just a moment, 
> please, thanks) removing the *visual* stereotype does leave a 
> relevent goblin-Jew stereotype comparison.  I.e., the whole money-
> grub substandard human = Jew stereotype is something that shows up in 
> Western literature partly as a result of the Christian literary 
> tradition (wherein the money-lenders et al are nasty folks and also 
> Jews in some of the parables etc).  And I suppose it's arguable that 
> giving the same non-physical stereotypical attributes to the goblins 
> shows a parallel prejudice.  
> 
> 
> Mahoney
> off to ponder whether Madame Pomfrey's Skele-Gro could provide me 
> with a few extra hands in the event of future tangential ramblings.... 


  This is getting OT, I think, so I'll bow out after this post -- after first making that Snape/Shylock comparison, I've been doing some web research on the Shylock character and I'm actually finding a *lot* of interesting parallels. Usury in Shakespeare makes for a fascinating parallel to Curses/Potions in Rowling. The whole concept that Shakespeare created Shylock to fit the current stereotypes of "evil Jew," but then explored the idea that he actually had quite conventional hurts and motivations and actually got stuck with a raw deal due to everyone else's prejudices, is also strikingly reminiscent of Snape. 




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 14 17:08:05 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:08:05 -0000
Subject: Lac des Cygnes...
In-Reply-To: <9vclq8+8oe9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vdbll+7p7m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "irbohlen" <irbohlen at e...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., ~Helen ~ <helanne at s...> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Earlier I noticed that several people were accusing John Williams 
of
> > "directly copying" Swan Lake in his Harry Potter score. WHAT 
THE????
> 
> 
> What I did hear was a little tiny shout-out to The Sorcerer's 
Apprentice during 
> the Quidditch match music. Which is appropriate I think.  
> 
> > What I didn't care that much for >snip< most of the underscore 
during Platform 9-3/4 and 
> elsewhere that sounded exactly like Phantom Menace. And I really, 
really 
> HATE that the Voldemort music is just a variation on Darth Vader's 
theme. 
> That is inexcusable.
> 

Am I the only one who thought the Leaky Cauldron music sounded like 
the cantina theme from the original SW?

-Noel
Last book read; "Dave Barry Hits Below the Beltway"
Last model built; Tamiya Subaru XT
Last movie seen; HP (3rd time)






From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Fri Dec 14 17:51:27 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:51:27 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Peeves' Part
References: <20011212191324.37691.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00ff01c184c7$f4c69d60$53af1e3e@stephen>

>Nicky said:

>Have none of you heard? Peeves IS in the movie, because the original
editor's cut is 4 hours long! But then they used their common sense and
realised that no 6 year old is going to sit still through 4 hours of a
movie, whether they love it or not (they had trouble in the recut
version). To save extra time they cut 1 1/2 hours extra footage, which
we're all hoping will be released on DVD as part of the movie again.

Much though I'd love to believe in this 4 hour cut, I have been forced lately to develop doubts in its existence. Does anyone have a reliable source quoting that there is that much footage? Surely they knew right from the beginning that it couldn't be more than 2 1/2 or 3 hours long? They wouldn't have shot nearly twice as much footage as was needed, would they?

My pedantic boyfriend would also like to point out that it isn't a 'directors cut' at all - that's what the final version is. If it exists, the 4 hour version isn't any sort of cut - that's why it's so long!!

Lucy, hoping that someone can prove the existence of this 4 hours of Harry Potter


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Dec 14 18:16:08 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:16:08 -0000
Subject: Peeves' Part
In-Reply-To: <00ff01c184c7$f4c69d60$53af1e3e@stephen>
Message-ID: <9vdfl8+hbai@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Lucy Austin" <lucy at l...> wrote:
> >Nicky said:
> 
> >Have none of you heard? Peeves IS in the movie, because the original
> editor's cut is 4 hours long! . . . 
> Much though I'd love to believe in this 4 hour cut, I have been forced lately to 
develop doubts in its existence. Does anyone have a reliable source quoting 
that there is that much footage? 

Here's the Empire Online interview with Chris Columbus in which he denies 
that there ever was a four-hour version.

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/news/news.asp?3454




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 15 01:34:25 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:34:25 -0000
Subject: OUCH!
In-Reply-To: <9vcos9+s3oe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ve9b1+hr83@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "irene_mikhlin" <irene_mikhlin at y...> wrote:

> Yes to what question? :-) I am Jewish myself, so yes to that. But 
no 
> to the second part.  The only thing that jumped to the front of my 
> mind when I saw Gringotts was "God, I hope the media does not 
start 
> that stupidity about racist stereotypes that surrounded certain 
> flying creature with big nose in the Phantom Menace". And 
mercifully, 
> it did not. :-)
> 

But the fact the stereotype was there did cross your mind? I'm just 
curious about where these visual stereotypes come from, and to what 
extent they are still recognized. As I said, I missed it completely, 
but my husband commented to me on the bankers right away. I thought 
more of Ebenezer Scrooge and those Dickensian type bankers, 
barristers-at-law, etc. So my question is, I guess, who thought 
about that stereotype at all? 

-Cornflower O'Shea




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 02:07:14 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:07:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Harry's clothes
In-Reply-To: <1008336456.329.95597.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011215020714.42640.qmail@web11501.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello!

I have a question regarding Harry's wardrobe
throughout the movie.  We all know from canon
that Harry gets stuck with Dudley's oversize
hand-me-downs.  In the movie, however, once he
gets to Hogwarts, he's got some nice fitting
khaki's, jammies, and a red sweater (which I
don't believe is the Weasley sweater).  Um, where
did he get the new threads?  And for that matter,
does it ever state in the book whether or not he
continues to wear Dudley's clothes while at
school?

Tara, who's hoping above hope that the DVD will
include scenes not in the movie, such as the
Weasley sweater we've seen pics of...

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...people meeting in secret all over the world 
were holding up their glasses and saying in hushed 
voices:" To Harry Potter - the boy who lived!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 02:07:40 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:07:40 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9vclq8+8oe9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9veb9c+h9gi@eGroups.com>

Ivis wrote:
> I too have been living with the soundtrack for a few
> weeks--I love it--

I have been listening to it for weeks too and also love it.

I must comment that when I first listened to it, especially track 3 
(Harry's Wondrous World, I think), there were parts that reminded me 
of tons of Williams' previous works.  At the time, I hadn't realized 
that he did the music, but as I heard remnants of Star Wars, E.T., 
and The Cowboys, I knew it just had to be him.

> On the whole, I really love this soundtrack, especially the 
> "Harry's Wondrous World" suite [although I hate the title],
> the Hedwig music, the Change of Season music, 

I really like all those songs too, especially the Change of Season 
part.

> the Hogwarts Forever horn thing, 

I go weak the knees at the sound of a French horn.. and so, although 
I'm not too fond of the melody in that song, I do like listening to 
the horn.  :)

> the short theme during the Mirror of Erised

I like that music too... I only wished they had called it Mirror of 
Erised instead of Library Scene (what kind of a silly title is 
that??).

> that comes back twisted during the final confrontation with 
> Voldemort...

Yes, very eerie sound at that point.  :)

So, do you think the normal Mirror of Erised music will be used in 
future whenever we see Harry's parents together???  Like a (Lily and 
James) Potter theme?

> What I didn't care that much for were the Diagon Alley music
> [sorry guys--too Ren Faire for me]

Oh, but I love the Rennaissance Faire feel to it.  :)

> and most of the underscore during Platform 9-3/4

I find it very cute and could see it being a Ron theme.

So.. is the main theme (da dah da-da-dah da dah dah, dah da-da-dah da 
dah.....) just simply the movie (HPPS/SS) theme, or is it Harry's 
(character) theme, or is it a wizarding world theme??

Dawn
 




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Dec 15 02:21:58 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 15 Dec 2001 02:21:58 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008382918.473.73395.w29@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Which song/s from the soundtrack is/are 
your favorite/s?  

  o Prologue 
  o The Arrival of Baby Harry 
  o Harry's Wondrous World 
  o Visit to the Zoo 
  o Letters from Hogwarts 
  o Diagon Alley 
  o Gringotts Vault 
  o Platform 9 3/4 
  o Journey to Hogwarts 
  o The Banquet 
  o Mr. Longbottom Flies 
  o Hogwarts Forever 
  o The Moving Stairs 
  o The Norwegian Ridgeback 
  o Change of Seasons 
  o The Quidditch Match 
  o Christmas at Hogwarts 
  o The Invisibility Cloak 
  o The Mirror of Erised (end Library Scene) 
  o Fluffy's Harp 
  o Devil's Snare/Flying Keys 
  o The Chess Game 
  o The Face of Voldemort 
  o Leaving Hogwarts  
  o Hedwig's Theme 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sat Dec 15 02:52:38 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:52:38 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9veb9c+h9gi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vedtm+v7f4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:

Dawn said:
> So, do you think the normal Mirror of Erised music will be used in 
> future whenever we see Harry's parents together???  Like a (Lily 
and 
> James) Potter theme?

hmmmmm... That's a good question. Musical themes..how to put 
this..Years ago I was quite the Wagnerian and read up on that master 
of themes [inventor of themes, many would say]. His themes 
[leitmotiven] in the Ring Cycle are so much more complex, by the 
nature of the beast--in opera, the music does everything..so there 
are lots and lots of themes that support the action, that contradict 
the action, that comment on the action, or that have to combine, 
when characters are in the same scene.

Themes in a movie, on the other hand, can I think get too literal. 
The music doesn't need to be explicit because we have larger-than-
life action on the screen, most of the time. I think a rote pasting-
in of a character's "theme" into every scene in which that character 
appears is overkill. Subtlety is the key, for me. However Williams 
decides to use it, I hope we hear more of the Mirror music!

> So.. is the main theme (da dah da-da-dah da dah dah, dah da-da-dah 
da 
> dah.....) just simply the movie (HPPS/SS) theme, or is it Harry's 
> (character) theme, or is it a wizarding world theme??


That's where I think we get into difficulty assigning bits of music 
as themes. That one is actually called Hedwig's theme, but it could 
just as easily be Harry's theme, the "magic" theme, the wizarding 
world theme...

I'm happy thinking of it as a beautifully realized bit of music that 
John Williams found some great things to do with--turning it into a 
huge sort of macabre waltz, for example, or just playing it on the 
celesta.. The odd thing about that bit is that, on the soundtrack 
you could almost get tired of it, but in the film it doesn't seem as 
overworked, or at least it didn't to me.

Ivis the elderly
[currently alternating between the HP soundtrack and the LOTR 
soundtrack--last year's soundtrack? Gladiator!]




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 03:31:36 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 03:31:36 -0000
Subject: Future Soundtracks
In-Reply-To: <9vedtm+v7f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9veg6o+hvoc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "irbohlen" <irbohlen at e...> wrote:

> Ivis the elderly
> [currently alternating between the HP soundtrack and the LOTR 
> soundtrack--last year's soundtrack? Gladiator!] 


 Hoooo doggy. Gladiator!

  I'm actually rather hoping that as the films get darker, the franchise will swap out composers and we'll get Hans Zimmer for the latter films. That man can create some *really* emotionally raw pieces of music.  

 (As much as I adore Danny Elfman, I hope we *never* get him, on the other hand. Or what's-his-face who scored TITANIC. Adore their work, but I just don't think they'd be right for Harry Potter.)




From wassat at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 05:33:08 2001
From: wassat at yahoo.com (WASSAT)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:33:08 -0000
Subject: Anyone else see what I saw?
Message-ID: <9venak+g69d@eGroups.com>

We just took the kids to see the movie,(I saw it opening day with a 
friend to make sure it was okay for my kiddos....that's my story and 
I'm sticking to it! LOL) and in one of the scenes where you can 
clearly view Dumbledors entire face, THERE WAS A SCAR just like 
Harry's! It is on Dumbledors left cheek within his lines and 
wrinkles. My son saw it too and was sooo excited to think maybe the 
story of HOW he got his scar would be written and revealed. This may 
have already been discussed but I missed it. Anyhoo, Cya!

Lisa




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Dec 15 07:28:26 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 07:28:26 -0000
Subject: Harry's clothes
In-Reply-To: <20011215020714.42640.qmail@web11501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9veu2q+8p8f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Tara <taradiane at y...> wrote:

> I have a question regarding Harry's wardrobe throughout the movie. 
> We all know from canon that Harry gets stuck with Dudley's oversize
> hand-me-downs.  In the movie, however, once he gets to Hogwarts, 
> he's got some nice fitting khaki's, jammies, and a red sweater 
> (which I don't believe is the Weasley sweater).  Um, where did he 
> get the new threads?  And for that matter, does it ever state in 
> the book whether or not he continues to wear Dudley's clothes while
> at school?

I'm pretty sure that the new clothes are his school uniform that he 
bought at Diagon Alley with his other school supplies. In the movie, 
we didn't see him buying his uniform, so we can guess that Madam 
Malkin saw the condition of his Muggle clothes and wisely added 
underwear, socks, and jammies to his puchases. 

In the book, the school uniform was the robes that we saw him buy (in 
the scene where he first met Draco) and the uniform robes were a 
complete garment, like a monk's robe or a caftan or such, so no 
Muggle outer clothes were worn at school (except shoes (trainers = 
sneakers) and socks). Now that you mention it, I fear that Harry had 
to wear Dudley's cast-off shoes, socks, underwear, and jammies at 
school! Surely Draco would have said quite horrible things if he had 
witnessed Madam Malkin noticing the condition of the clothes that 
Harry had worn into her shop.
 




From litalex at slashyalex.com  Sat Dec 15 08:57:37 2001
From: litalex at slashyalex.com (Alexandra Y. Kwan)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:57:37 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: OUCH!
In-Reply-To: <9ve9b1+hr83@eGroups.com>
References: <9vcos9+s3oe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011215005555.00a3f870@pop.slashyalex.com>

Hello,

At 05:34 PM 12/14/2001, cornflower_o_shea wrote:
>barristers-at-law, etc. So my question is, I guess, who thought
>about that stereotype at all?

I didn't, not at all, but I didn't grow up in USA and therefore missed a 
lot of cultural imprinting.  I do know about the stereotype, but from 
history and literature classes more than anything else.

little Alex




From mumpud at aol.com  Sat Dec 15 13:48:42 2001
From: mumpud at aol.com (mumpud)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:48:42 -0000
Subject: Casting - Arthur Weasley
Message-ID: <9vfkbq+96cn@eGroups.com>

Mark Williams was on Jonathon Ross' radio Show this morning and 
mentioned that he was playing Arthur Weasley in 'Chamber of 
Secrets'.Mark is part of 'The Fast Show' team (a British comedy 
sketch show) and he was in the film 'Shakespeare in Love'. Looks like 
a good choice.
Deb.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 15:19:26 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:19:26 -0000
Subject: Harry's clothes
In-Reply-To: <9veu2q+8p8f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vfplu+cpji@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "catlady_de_los_angeles" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Tara <taradiane at y...> wrote:
> 
> > I have a question regarding Harry's wardrobe throughout the movie. 
> > We all know from canon that Harry gets stuck with Dudley's oversize
> > hand-me-downs.  In the movie, however, once he gets to Hogwarts, 
> > he's got some nice fitting khaki's, jammies, and a red sweater 
> > (which I don't believe is the Weasley sweater).  Um, where did he 
> > get the new threads?  And for that matter, does it ever state in 
> > the book whether or not he continues to wear Dudley's clothes while
> > at school?
> 
> I'm pretty sure that the new clothes are his school uniform that he 
> bought at Diagon Alley with his other school supplies. In the movie, 
> we didn't see him buying his uniform, so we can guess that Madam 
> Malkin saw the condition of his Muggle clothes and wisely added 
> underwear, socks, and jammies to his puchases. 
> 
> In the book, the school uniform was the robes that we saw him buy (in 
> the scene where he first met Draco) and the uniform robes were a 
> complete garment, like a monk's robe or a caftan or such, so no 
> Muggle outer clothes were worn at school (except shoes (trainers = 
> sneakers) and socks). Now that you mention it, I fear that Harry had 
> to wear Dudley's cast-off shoes, socks, underwear, and jammies at 
> school! Surely Draco would have said quite horrible things if he had 
> witnessed Madam Malkin noticing the condition of the clothes that 
> Harry had worn into her shop.


 Surely in the month between Harry's shopping trip with Hagrid and his day travelling to school, Harry managed to get some tense, unpleasant school clothes shopping in. Gringott's has the capacity to trade between Wizard and Muggle currency, and Aunt Petunia would probably still have had to take Dudley shopping. He could well have persuaded Mrs. Figg to take him secretly at some point when the Dursleys were all out, alternatively. She would have understood what it was all about, although she wouldn't have admitted that to Harry.  




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 15:31:07 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:31:07 -0000
Subject: Casting - Arthur Weasley
In-Reply-To: <9vfkbq+96cn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vfqbr+67lc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mumpud" <mumpud at a...> wrote:
> Mark Williams was on Jonathon Ross' radio Show this morning and 
> mentioned that he was playing Arthur Weasley in 'Chamber of 
> Secrets'.Mark is part of 'The Fast Show' team (a British comedy 
> sketch show) and he was in the film 'Shakespeare in Love'. Looks like 
> a good choice.
> Deb.


  For us Americans who wouldn't otherwise know:

   Mark Williams was Wabash, the stuttering tailor in SiL who became the Narrator of the R&J production.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sat Dec 15 16:12:50 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:12:50 -0000
Subject: Harry's clothes
In-Reply-To: <9vfplu+cpji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vfsq2+nja3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "catlady_de_los_angeles" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Tara <taradiane at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > > I have a question regarding Harry's wardrobe throughout the movie. 
> > > We all know from canon that Harry gets stuck with Dudley's oversize
> > > hand-me-downs.  In the movie, however, once he gets to Hogwarts, 
> > > he's got some nice fitting khaki's, jammies, and a red sweater 
> > > (which I don't believe is the Weasley sweater).  Um, where did he 
> > > get the new threads? . . . 
> > In the movie, 
> > we didn't see him buying his uniform, so we can guess that Madam 
> > Malkin saw the condition of his Muggle clothes and wisely added 
> > underwear, socks, and jammies to his puchases. 
> > 
>  Surely in the month between Harry's shopping trip with Hagrid and his day
 > travelling to school, Harry managed to get some tense, unpleasant school 
> clothes shopping in. Gringott's has the capacity to trade between Wizard and 
> Muggle currency, and Aunt Petunia would probably still have had to take 
> Dudley shopping. He could well have persuaded Mrs. Figg to take him secretly 
> at some point when the Dursleys were all out, alternatively. She would have 
> understood what it was all about, although she wouldn't have admitted that 
> to Harry.

I like the Mme. Malkin theory better -- I'm pretty sure that Harry didn't know 
yet that Mrs. Figg/Arabella Figg was a witch whom he could turn to, and surely 
he doesn't want the Dursleys to know that he has cash in his pockets -- they 
probably assume that he got some sort of scholarship to Hogwarts that also 
covered supplies.   

Or perhaps that nice red sweater was a hand-me-down from Dudley after all 
-- something he had worn in the first grade, LOL!

Yet another possibility is that the Dursleys are so intimidated by the 
wizarding world (viz. moving Harry to the upstairs bedroom) that they don't 
dare send him with those awful hand-me-downs and actually provide some 
decent non-uniform clothes for him, for fear of reprisals if the wizards see 
him in his Dudley stuff.

Isn't it strange that the books talk about socks so much, but are so vague 
about other clothing that it's even *possible* (before the movie, at least) to 
wonder what goes on under the robes?




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 16:44:09 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:44:09 -0000
Subject: Harry's clothes
In-Reply-To: <9vfsq2+nja3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vfukp+6mna@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> 
> Isn't it strange that the books talk about socks so much, but are so vague 
> about other clothing that it's even *possible* (before the movie, at least) to 
> wonder what goes on under the robes? 


 Socks are a metaphor for love and family in the books.




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 15 17:37:44 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 17:37:44 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9vedtm+v7f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vg1p8+cj24@eGroups.com>

I wrote:
> > So.. is the main theme (da dah da-da-dah da dah dah,
> > dah da-da-dah da dah.....) just simply the movie
> > (HPPS/SS) theme, or is it Harry's (character) theme,
> > or is it a wizarding world theme??

Ivis responded:
> That's where I think we get into difficulty assigning bits of music 
> as themes. That one is actually called Hedwig's theme, but it could 
> just as easily be Harry's theme, the "magic" theme, the wizarding 
> world theme...

The refrain is in so many of the cuts on the soundtrack that I 
certainly wouldn't call it Hedwig's theme.  Actually, I was partially 
surprised that they didn't call Hedwig's theme "End titles" or 
something like that.  I mean it seems to have a little bit of a few 
of the songs, plus my favorite part at the end.  It's so dramatic, I 
don't connect it with Hedwig.

Anyway, that was a bit of a tangent... :)  

Here's another question, though: Do you think that main line of music 
will be used in the other 6 movies (assuming Williams is kept on the 
job)?  I can definitely see it being used for CoS.. and most probably 
for PoA.. but I wonder if it will be total overkill and then some to 
use it in all 7 movies (assuming all 7 are made).  Kind of like how 
Star Wars had the same theme for episodes 4, 5, and 6.   Now it seems 
that the same lines of music in episode 1 are being used in episode 2 
(I just watched the trailer at the Star Wars site).  I could see the 
music changing with GoF because that book/movie has a much darker 
tone in it.

> The odd thing about that bit is that, on the soundtrack 
> you could almost get tired of it, but in the film it
> doesn't seem as overworked, or at least it didn't to me.

But then, I listen to the soundtrack over and over and over again.  
Actually, the repetitive part doesn't bother me that much.. it's just 
Harry.  It's part of the music... and I love it.

Heathernmoore wrote:
> (As much as I adore Danny Elfman, I hope we *never* get him,
> on the other hand. Or what's-his-face who scored TITANIC.
> Adore their work, but I just don't think they'd be right
> for Harry Potter.)

I hope they stay with Williams.  He does good stuff.  But if they do 
switch, I hope it isn't to James Horner (Titanic).  As much as I 
liked the Titanic music.. sometimes it takes me all of about 1 minute 
to hear that a soundtrack is of his making.  I would HATE for Harry 
Potter music to sound like all of Horner's other work.

Dawn





From ohtoresonate at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 16 00:47:13 2001
From: ohtoresonate at yahoo.com (ohtoresonate)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:47:13 -0000
Subject: Kloves article
Message-ID: <9vgquh+o4jg@eGroups.com>

Headline:

When Steve Met Harry 

Subtitle: 

If the magic works, Steve Kloves writes happily ever-after as Harry 
Potter's sorcerer and J.K. Rowlings' collaborator. 

Lead paragraphs: 

It was the seventh item in the package, the last book synopsis in a 
stack Warner Bros. had sent to Steve Kloves on the unlikely chance 
that he would like one. Having just taken Michael Chabon's Wonder 
Boys to the screen, Kloves wasn't really looking for another novel to 
adapt. He wanted his next project to be an original work, something 
he had written, something he could direct. So it was a bit of a 
miracle that he even opened the package (he often didn't), and it was 
certainly remarkable that he actually read what was inside. 

"I don't have a great history of reading coverage," Kloves says. "I 
have a tendency to throw them away." And indeed, as he flicked 
through the pile he thought, No, no, no, sigh, no.

But seven is an odd number, a charmed number, and when he came to the 
last little write-up, a British book he had never heard of, he was, 
in fact, oddly charmed. He called his agent, who was delighted. The 
book was apparently a bit of a thing in the UK, was becoming quite 
popular in the United States, although the title here was different. 
Philosopher had been replaced by Sorcerer, but everything else was 
essentially the same. He would certainly send Kloves a copy. Don't 
bother, Kloves said, he'd pick one up at the bookstore. And within an 
hour or so, he had.

And this is how Steve Kloves met Harry Potter.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

You can read the rest of the article at

http://www.wga.org/WrittenBy/1101/Kloves/Kloves.html

Or find a copy of the Nov. 2001 issue of the "Written By" magazine.

Happy reading!

:) OTR




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sun Dec 16 02:16:11 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Dec 2001 02:16:11 -0000
Subject: New file uploaded to HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008468971.1069.86103.w12@yahoogroups.com>


Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the HPFGU-Movie 
group.

  File        : /final recap.doc 
  Uploaded by : islefrank <islefrank at yahoo.com> 
  Description : Here we have: a recap of the Harry Potter movie. Its more or less my attempt to match what the folks at www.mightybigtv.com do to television- a semi-detailed account of what happens on the screen, with random asides and jokes and a general running commentary. Half act of admiring tribute, half snark attack. Proportions vary, but Id like to think that this one is 50-50. I hope you get some joy out of it.  

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/files/final%20recap.doc 

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

islefrank <islefrank at yahoo.com>
 







From sunnycouger at lineone.net  Sun Dec 16 02:38:06 2001
From: sunnycouger at lineone.net (sunnycouger)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 02:38:06 -0000
Subject: New Harry Potter Fanfic board!!
Message-ID: <9vh1ee+81i6@eGroups.com>

Hi :)

I just wanted to let you know that there is a new message board that 
has just opened tonight and it is devoted to Harry Potter. It's main 
focus will be to get a large body of fanfic and hopefully some good 
discussions so check it out :) 

http://pub21.ezboard.com/bharrypotterfanfictionforum

Thanks:)




From erin9 at paris.com  Sun Dec 16 09:44:46 2001
From: erin9 at paris.com (missy_lim)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 09:44:46 -0000
Subject: Daniel gets better with each viewing
Message-ID: <9vhqee+5f6t@eGroups.com>

After my third viewing (yesterday) of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's 
Stone, I am definitely inclined to agree with the observations made 
by quite a number of people here that Daniel Radcliffe gets better 
with each viewing!  The first time I watched the movie, my opinion on 
Dan was rather mixed.  He came off a bit wooden at times but he 
acquitted himself in certain wonderfully acted scenes (The Mirror of 
Erised in particular).  Now Dan's acting comes off as excellently 
measured--just perfect for what Harry went through and is now 
experiencing.  He shows just the right amount of emotion at the right 
moment.  Subdued at the Dursleys.  Adorably wide-eyed at Ollivander's-
- I like his facial expressions here when he tries out (with not much 
success) his first couple of wands.  Awed and happy in the staring-
out-the-window-with-Hedwig scene.  Perfectly boyish and delighted in 
the Remembrall Scene.  And of course that Mirror of Erised scene!  

I just hope that Dan has more upbeat scenes in Chamber of Secrets 
becasue I really enjoy seeing him smiling and beaming just as much as 
I enjoy him being emotional...  

-Missy     




From erin9 at paris.com  Sun Dec 16 09:44:52 2001
From: erin9 at paris.com (missy_lim)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 09:44:52 -0000
Subject: Daniel gets better with each viewing
Message-ID: <9vhqek+r3sf@eGroups.com>

After my third viewing (yesterday) of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's 
Stone, I am definitely inclined to agree with the observations made 
by quite a number of people here that Daniel Radcliffe gets better 
with each viewing!  The first time I watched the movie, my opinion on 
Dan was rather mixed.  He came off a bit wooden at times but he 
acquitted himself in certain wonderfully acted scenes (The Mirror of 
Erised in particular).  Now Dan's acting comes off as excellently 
measured--just perfect for what Harry went through and is now 
experiencing.  He shows just the right amount of emotion at the right 
moment.  Subdued at the Dursleys.  Adorably wide-eyed at Ollivander's-
- I like his facial expressions here when he tries out (with not much 
success) his first couple of wands.  Awed and happy in the staring-
out-the-window-with-Hedwig scene.  Perfectly boyish and delighted in 
the Remembrall Scene.  And of course that Mirror of Erised scene!  

I just hope that Dan has more upbeat scenes in Chamber of Secrets 
becasue I really enjoy seeing him smiling and beaming just as much as 
I enjoy him being emotional...  

-Missy




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sun Dec 16 16:31:45 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (davisaacs)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:31:45 -0000
Subject: Future Soundtracks
In-Reply-To: <9veg6o+hvoc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vii9h+hlfl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:

>   I'm actually rather hoping that as the films get darker, the 
>franchise will swap out composers and we'll get Hans Zimmer for the 
>latter films. That man can create some *really* emotionally raw ?
>pieces of music.  

YES! I was so dissapointed when I heard that John Williams was 
writing the music, and not Hans Zimmer. I think Williams is a great 
composer, but I just really didn't think his music was right for the 
books. The first book, perhaps, but not the second, and certainly not 
the 3rd and 4th. He just can't get dark enough, but I suppose he's 
signed a 3 film contract, like most of the rest of the cast and crew. 

I thought the PS score had its moments, but on the whole I found it 
to emotionless and kitsch for Harry Potter. If Hans Zimmer had done 
it, there's no doubt that we *would* have had a better film (IMHO, it 
was his score that made the difference of Gladiator being a very good 
film and a fantastically special film). 

Dave




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Sun Dec 16 17:08:45 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:08:45 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future Soundtracks
References: <9vii9h+hlfl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1CD51D.6E31FE9E@kingwoodcable.com>

davisaacs wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
>
> >   I'm actually rather hoping that as the films get darker, the
> >franchise will swap out composers and we'll get Hans Zimmer for the
> >latter films. That man can create some *really* emotionally raw ?
> >pieces of music.
>
> YES! I was so dissapointed when I heard that John Williams was
> writing the music, and not Hans Zimmer. I think Williams is a great
> composer, but I just really didn't think his music was right for the
> books. The first book, perhaps, but not the second, and certainly not
> the 3rd and 4th. He just can't get dark enough, but I suppose he's
> signed a 3 film contract, like most of the rest of the cast and crew.
>
> I thought the PS score had its moments, but on the whole I found it
> to emotionless and kitsch for Harry Potter. If Hans Zimmer had done
> it, there's no doubt that we *would* have had a better film (IMHO, it
> was his score that made the difference of Gladiator being a very good
> film and a fantastically special film).
>
> Dave

I enjoy the soundtrack actually. I think Williams did a wonderful job. The 1st movie is much ligheter compared to
the other books, so I thought the music fit well. Williams did a good job with the emotion for Saving Private Ryan,
so I think he can invoke emotion if he *wants* to. Though I have to agree that Hans Zimmer would be excellent for
book 4. I'd be willing to suggest James horner as well. He creates such haunting music...though I feel more emotion
with Zimmer.

-Kristin




From rach_sparra at lineone.net  Sun Dec 16 19:03:12 2001
From: rach_sparra at lineone.net (rach_sparra2001)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:03:12 -0000
Subject: Daniel gets better with each viewing
In-Reply-To: <9vhqee+5f6t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vir5g+acn2@eGroups.com>

Hiya!
My name's Rachel, by the way, I'm new in this forum. I thought that 
your message was really interesting, because I saw the film for the 
first time yesterday and am inclined to think more and more now that 
I ought to go and see it again! I observed what many people have 
observed, as you said in your message, that Daniel Radcliffe's acting 
did seem a bit wooden to me at times. Although I also loved the 
mirror of Erised scene! Especially where he was just sitting watching 
it for hours. I think possibly I was being too judgmental and 
critical and comparing it too much to the books, so maybe I need to 
just sit and watch it for entertainment rather than constantly 
measuring it up. I agree that it would be nice to see him looking a 
bit more upbeat, but that grin was so cheesy! Sweet, but cheesy! ;o)

Anyway thanks for the advice to see it again, I will definitely 
consider it if you think his acting improves with every viewing.

Rach






From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Dec 16 19:37:29 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:37:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Zimmer's Emotion
In-Reply-To: <3C1CD51D.6E31FE9E@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011216193729.23645.qmail@web14901.mail.yahoo.com>

Katze wrote:
I enjoy the soundtrack actually. I think Williams did a wonderful job.
The 1st movie is much ligheter compared to<BR>
the other books, so I thought the music fit well. Williams did a good
job with the emotion for Saving Private Ryan,<BR>
so I think he can invoke emotion if he *wants* to. Though I have to
agree that Hans Zimmer would be excellent for<BR>
book 4. I'd be willing to suggest James horner as well. He creates such
haunting music...though I feel more emotion<BR>
with Zimmer


In regards to the Gladiator soundtrack, though the music was
exceptional I thought it was Lisa Gerrard's haunting vocals that made
it a truly marvelous *sp* soundtrack. 

Nicky

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Dec 16 20:00:21 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 12:00:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Thoughts on my first viewing
Message-ID: <20011216200021.37386.qmail@web14910.mail.yahoo.com>

I am one of those people who saw the movie before Id touched the
books, so please allow me to share my thoughts with you from that time.

Re. Radliffes acting: I thought some of his lines were clunky and in
the beginning he was wooden, especially Im a what? But having the
read the book, on hindsight I realise thats a line which would be near
impossible to make smooth and, well.

Re. the passage of time: I got straight away that Harry had been going
to the Mirror of Erised a lot, and not just in one night. Dumbledores
Back again? just clinched it.

Re. The Put-Outer scene: I thought it was a great way of introducing
the whole magical aspect of the scene. It wasnt over-the-top sparks,
or something so subtle you couldnt see it.

Re. Stereotypical Jewish goblins, or something to that effect: maybe
its my nave, ignorant youth, but I didnt pick up on any stereotyping
so.

Re. Seamus and Neville: Truth be told, I didnt notice Seamus during my
first viewing (but I paid special attention second time round). I liked
how he kept blowing things up and having read the books admit that he
did steal Nevilles limelight. I thought the boy who played Neville did
him brilliantly. He looked so troubled when standing up to Harry and
co., and completely bewildered when he won the extra 10 points. You
could tell he wasnt used to such praise and attention.

Re. the loud soundtrack: I reckon it depends whos manning the display
camera thingie. First time I went, it was fine; second time, I came out
with a headache.

Re. Dumbledore: I thought he was a very convincing, kind Headmaster,
but the one in the book is much friendlier. 

Question: what are these circumstances that Richard Harris had to act
through which made his depiction of the character only just acceptable?

Re. Hermione: I thought Watson was extremely nervous on screen, so her
accent was really posh, but she was in all respects the bossy
know-it-all with no friends.

I definitely prefer the onscreen Hagrid to the book Hagrid, because he
was kinder and dumber on screen, but I prefer the book Dumbledore to
the onscreen Dumbledore. But the movie cant be as bad as some of you
make out, because it got me reading the series and I havent willingly
picked up a book in 6 months!

Nicky


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sun Dec 16 20:57:42 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Dec 2001 20:57:42 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008536262.683.27054.w12@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Many changes were made (some major, 
others minor) to certain scenes and 
characters from book to film.  Which 
ones bothered you the most?  (Try not 
to vote for too many.) 

  o Hagrid telling Harry about his parents in Diagon Alley rather than on the island 
  o Selection of the wands scene (bad wand cause things to explode) 
  o Hagrid taking Harry directly to Hogwarts after Diagon Alley 
  o The sorting hat scene (hat speaks out loud, also order) 
  o Snape wishing Harry good luck 
  o The fact that people had no problem hearing (and sometimes even saying) Voldemort's name 
  o Ron's accompanying Harry, Hermione, and Draco to detention ("Dark" Forest) 
  o The Devil's Snare scene 
  o The Flying Keys scene 
  o Voldemort's speech, urging Harry to join him 
  o Only Harry's touch affected Quirrell (as opposed to Quirrell touching Harry's skin) 
  o Quirrell turning to dust 
  o Harry surviving without Dumbledore's intervention 
  o Other (post to list if I left something irksome out) 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Sun Dec 16 21:02:28 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:02:28 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Thoughts on my first viewing
References: <20011216200021.37386.qmail@web14910.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C1D0BE4.73EC80D5@kingwoodcable.com>

I, too, am new to books (and to this group). I saw the movie first, and thought, "That's what these books are
about?" I promplty went home and read all four back to back. I was really taken away with the story.

Nicky wrote:

> I am one of those people who saw the movie before Id touched the
> books, so please allow me to share my thoughts with you from that time.
>
> Re. Radliffes acting: I thought some of his lines were clunky and in
> the beginning he was wooden, especially Im a what? But having the
> read the book, on hindsight I realise thats a line which would be near
> impossible to make smooth and, well.

I've enjoyed Radcliffe more each time I see the movie (3 now). Although he might be slightly wooden in the earlier
scenes, he loosened up a bit. I think he was a nice pick for the character. Daniel has a very hard task though.
Because Harry is a very intricate character. Especially being so young, he's not sure what to make of things. It
would be nice to see Harry with more of the happy moments in the books. (Haha..not sure there are any of Book 4)

> Re. The Put-Outer scene: I thought it was a great way of introducing
> the whole magical aspect of the scene. It wasnt over-the-top sparks,
> or something so subtle you couldnt see it.

Agreed.

> Re. Stereotypical Jewish goblins, or something to that effect: maybe
> its my nave, ignorant youth, but I didnt pick up on any stereotyping
> so.

I didn't pick this up either...

> Re. Seamus and Neville: Truth be told, I didnt notice Seamus during my
> first viewing (but I paid special attention second time round). I liked
> how he kept blowing things up and having read the books admit that he
> did steal Nevilles limelight. I thought the boy who played Neville did
> him brilliantly. He looked so troubled when standing up to Harry and
> co., and completely bewildered when he won the extra 10 points. You
> could tell he wasnt used to such praise and attention.

I think Neville did good job, but he didn't have many parts to begin with. Seamus was fine, but he didn't have that
kind of attention in the book.

> Re. Dumbledore: I thought he was a very convincing, kind Headmaster,
> but the one in the book is much friendlier.
>
> Question: what are these circumstances that Richard Harris had to act
> through which made his depiction of the character only just acceptable?

I much prefer Dumbledore in the books. The circumstance around Richard Harris, in my opinion, is that he refuses to
read the books. He says it's not his type of reading. But I would think you'd need to read the books to understand
the character. He wasn't as warm and inviting as I see Dumbledore in the books. He was good in the hospital scene
though. That scene is what I expected D to be like. Perhaps he'll wamr up a bit in future movies. I'm under the
impression that he signed a 7 movie contract with WB. To get the part, he had to sign.

> Re. Hermione: I thought Watson was extremely nervous on screen, so her
> accent was really posh, but she was in all respects the bossy
> know-it-all with no friends.

She was a bit over the top in the beginning, but mellowed as the movie went on. Was the posh accent really her's,
or was it played up for the movie?

I've been watching Radcliffe and his voice...and there are some parts that, I guess, they filmed last. Example:
when Harry is talking to Hagrid about the dragon and Fluffy, and when he meets up with Quirrell. His voice is
starting to crack. I've been trying to find pictures of him at the beginning of filimg and at the end of filming to
see how much he changed. I did find an interview of him after the premiere of the moive, I guess near the start of
filming CoS, and he has grown *alot*.

I hope that WB does the right thing and stick with the original actors. I think the kids will be ok...espeically
once they reach 14-15.

> I definitely prefer the onscreen Hagrid to the book Hagrid, because he
> was kinder and dumber on screen, but I prefer the book Dumbledore to
> the onscreen Dumbledore. But the movie cant be as bad as some of you
> make out, because it got me reading the series and I havent willingly
> picked up a book in 6 months!

 I enjoyed Hagrid and Ron the most. After reading the books, I think Robbie Coltrane was the most true to
character. Ron was just real. I personally thought Rupert delievered his lines with ease, and did so with the right
amount of emotion.

Take care
-Katze




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sun Dec 16 21:02:21 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Dec 2001 21:02:21 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008536541.366.79564.w53@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

There's been quite a bit of discussion 
about the added scenes that people 
actually liked.  Which ones did YOU 
like best? 

  o Dudley jumping on the stairs 
  o Dudley getting stuck behind the glass 
  o "The Birds" allusion (hundreds of owl on Privet Drive) 
  o Dudley eating Harry's cake (giving Hagrid reason to give him a tail) 
  o The jumping chocolate frog 
  o Hermione fixes Harry's glasses 
  o Seamus' attempts at spells 
  o The trophy case 
  o The staircase moving Harry, Ron, and Hermione to the third floor 
  o Wood's pep talk before the Quidditch match 
  o The flashback (to the night Lily and James were killed) 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From pkerr06 at attglobal.net  Sun Dec 16 22:12:12 2001
From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (bluesox4113)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:12:12 -0000
Subject: Line?
Message-ID: <9vj67s+i2g7@eGroups.com>

I've seen the movie a number of times (ahem, mumble.  Six.)  And 
there's one line I can't catch and it's driving me crazy.  It's in the 
scene in the Gryffindor room when Harry, Ron and Hermione are talking 
in front of the fireplace. Ron asks something to the effect, you don't 
think he [Voldemort] would try to kill Harry.  Harry says something I 
can't catch and then Ron says "To think I've been worried about my 
Potions exam."

What is Daniel's line in that scene?

Cheers,
Peg




From webdis at qx.net  Sun Dec 16 22:14:58 2001
From: webdis at qx.net (babweb)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:14:58 -0000
Subject: Hated it the first time!
Message-ID: <9vj6d2+74sl@eGroups.com>

I love the books!  I love the audio tapes with Jim Dale.  I could not 
wait until the movie released.  I saw the movie and hated it!  

I went and saw the movie a second time.  I went with an open mind and 
watched it without comparing it to the book.  The second time was a 
much more enjoyable experience.  

Long Live Harry Potter!

Stephanie




From antychan at nexgo.de  Sun Dec 16 22:42:15 2001
From: antychan at nexgo.de (antigone1982)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:42:15 -0000
Subject: Line?
In-Reply-To: <9vj67s+i2g7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vj807+6adq@eGroups.com>

>I've seen the movie a number of times (ahem, mumble.  Six.)

*mumbles* Five. =)

>Ron asks something to the effect, you don't think he [Voldemort] 
>would try to kill Harry.  Harry says something I can't catch and 
>then Ron says "To think I've been worried about my Potions exam."
>What is Daniel's line in that scene?

Don't remember what he said exactly, but it was something like "I 
think he would have killed me tonight, if he'd had the chance."


Anty :-)
yet another 19-year-old who has a crush on Daniel





From richasi at azlance.com  Sun Dec 16 23:00:14 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:00:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Line?
References: <9vj67s+i2g7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1D277E.FF85C43A@azlance.com>

> in front of the fireplace. Ron asks something to the effect, you don't
> think he [Voldemort] would try to kill Harry.  Harry says something I
> can't catch and then Ron says "To think I've been worried about my
> Potions exam."

I think it goes something like this:

Ron: "You don't think he would try and kill you, do you?"
Harry: "I think he tried to do it tonight."
Ron: "And to think I've been worried about my Potions final"

I just came back from my... ahem, 6th viewing too... and I wish
I had paid more attention to the exact wording now! :)

Richasi



From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 16 23:19:16 2001
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:19:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Line?
In-Reply-To: <9vj67s+i2g7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011216231916.94556.qmail@web10908.mail.yahoo.com>

--- bluesox4113 <pkerr06 at attglobal.net> wrote:
> I've seen the movie a number of times (ahem, mumble.  Six.)  And 
> there's one line I can't catch and it's driving me crazy.  It's in the 
> scene in the Gryffindor room when Harry, Ron and Hermione are talking 
> in front of the fireplace. Ron asks something to the effect, you don't 
> think he [Voldemort] would try to kill Harry.  Harry says something I 
> can't catch and then Ron says "To think I've been worried about my 
> Potions exam."
> 
> What is Daniel's line in that scene?

The line in question is, "I think he would have tried to kill me tonight,
if he'd had the chance."


Andrea

=====
"Reality is for people who lack imagination."

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec 16 23:22:38 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:22:38 -0000
Subject: Line?
In-Reply-To: <9vj807+6adq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vjabu+699k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "antigone1982" <antychan at n...> wrote:
> Peg Kerr asks:
> 
> >Ron asks something to the effect, you don't think he [Voldemort] 
> >would try to kill Harry.  Harry says something I can't catch and 
> >then Ron says "To think I've been worried about my Potions exam."
> >What is Daniel's line in that scene?

Anty answers:

> Don't remember what he said exactly, but it was something like "I 
> think he would have killed me tonight, if he'd had the chance."

I've only seen it three times and I believe this is exactly right.

Ivis the elderly

PS but I am organizing  a brown-bag lunch at work in which my colleagues  
and I who are "friends of HP" will look at the tapes of the NBC  & MSNBC 
specials...fast forwarding past the condescending hosts, commercials, children 
with cancer, child psychologists, editors at Scholastic--we just want to see Jo 
Rowling and the actors!




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Sun Dec 16 23:36:45 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:36:45 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9vg1p8+cj24@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vjb6d+7bga@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> Here's another question, though: Do you think that main line of music 
> will be used in the other 6 movies (assuming Williams is kept on the 
> job)?  I can definitely see it being used for CoS.. and most probably 
> for PoA.. but I wonder if it will be total overkill and then some to 
> use it in all 7 movies (assuming all 7 are made).  Kind of like how 
> Star Wars had the same theme for episodes 4, 5, and 6.   Now it seems 
> that the same lines of music in episode 1 are being used in episode 2 
> (I just watched the trailer at the Star Wars site).  I could see the 
> music changing with GoF because that book/movie has a much darker 
> tone in it.

I'm guessing that Williams is on board for the next two films only. I'm not sure 
that anything is written in stone for GoF. I have read an article in which 
Columbus says he doesn't want to spend the rest of his professional career 
doing HP movies; and another in which he says he would like to stay with the 
same kids to the end of the books...so who knows? All I think we know for 
sure is that the kids/main actors, writer & director are signed on for the next 
two.

If Williams follows what he did with Star Wars he will probably use some of 
the same themes. I would like to see him do interesting variations along the 
lines of the way he made Annakin Skywalker's theme a neat inversion of 
Darth Vader's theme.

On a reread of the books, I'm struck yet again at what a terrific job JKR did in 
showing the kids' growth...the way they speak, their attitudes to adults, their 
confusion about their friendship for each other...and would like to see this 
expressed somehow, along with the increasing darkness [especially in PoA], 
in the musical language. Prisoner is plenty dark, even if not quite to GoF 
standards!

I think John Williams can do it, but can also imagine them changing director, 
cast, writer, and composer when they get to GoF. 

And I do get it now, the kids are going to grow/age faster than the "year" of 
each book...*sigh* 

Ivis the elderly




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 04:35:48 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:35:48 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
Message-ID: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com>

I keep hearing people say that if the movies aren't filmed one a year 
for the next seven years, that we won't be able to use the same 
actors (i.e. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson).  Some 
even suggest that they'll have to be recast before book 4 or 5 are 
put on film, even if they DO film one a year.

I don't understand this.  Dan was 11 when he played 11-year-old Harry 
last year.  He's 12 now and is currently playing 12-year-old Harry.  
What is the problem here?  Why on earth is it a problem that he is 
going through puberty and his voice is changing??  OBVIOUSLY boys DO 
mature at that age if Dan is doing it.  Who's to say Harry didn't do 
so at age 12 too??

And Rupert Grint is one year older that what he's been playing (he 
was 12 when he played 11-year-old Ron, and is 13 as he now plays 12-
year-old Ron) and Emma Watson is one year younger (she was 10 when he 
played 11-year-old Hermione, and is 11 as he now plays 12-year-old 
Hermione).  Will one year more or less make that much of a 
difference??

Moreover, I fail to understand why people are so worried about these 
actors "aging."  I mean, look at all the actors over 20 out there who 
are playing teenagers.  Prime example: Tom Welington, who plays 13-
year-old (!!!) Clark Kent on "Smallville," is 24 years old!!!  
Granted, he certainly doesn't LOOK 13, but he can get by.  Or, look 
at Scott Wolf who played 15-year-old Bailey on "Party of Five" when 
he was in his late twenties!  At the same time, Matthew Fox, who 
played Bailey's 19-year-old brother was in his mid-twenties.  Look at 
all the actors on just about any teenage laden prime time soap.  
In "Beverly Hills 90210," Gabrielle Cartis was over 30 when she 
played a teenager, and most of the rest of the cast were in their 
20s.  Playing younger than one is has never been a problem in 
Hollywood.

Kids grow up.. it happens in the book just as it will happen in real 
life.   So what if by the time book seven is filmed, instead of being 
17 Dan is 20.. or even 23.. (oh the horror!).  Do we really care?  
Wouldn't we rather see him play Harry Potter in all 7 movies than 
have to deal with changes in cast??

Dawn




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 05:56:23 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:56:23 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vk1e7+2te2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> I keep hearing people say that if the movies aren't filmed one a 
year 
> for the next seven years, that we won't be able to use the same 
> actors (i.e. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson).  
Some 
> even suggest that they'll have to be recast before book 4 or 5 are 
> put on film, even if they DO film one a year.
> 
> I don't understand this.  Dan was 11 when he played 11-year-old 
Harry 
> last year.  He's 12 now and is currently playing 12-year-old 
Harry.  
> What is the problem here?  Why on earth is it a problem that he is 
> going through puberty and his voice is changing??  OBVIOUSLY boys 
DO 
> mature at that age if Dan is doing it.  Who's to say Harry didn't 
do 
> so at age 12 too??
> 
> And Rupert Grint is one year older that what he's been playing (he 
> was 12 when he played 11-year-old Ron, and is 13 as he now plays 12-
> year-old Ron) and Emma Watson is one year younger (she was 10 when 
he 
> played 11-year-old Hermione, and is 11 as he now plays 12-year-old 
> Hermione).  Will one year more or less make that much of a 
> difference??
> 
> Moreover, I fail to understand why people are so worried about 
these 
> actors "aging."  I mean, look at all the actors over 20 out there 
who 
> are playing teenagers.  Prime example: Tom Welington, who plays 13-
> year-old (!!!) Clark Kent on "Smallville," is 24 years old!!!  
> Granted, he certainly doesn't LOOK 13, but he can get by.  Or, look 
> at Scott Wolf who played 15-year-old Bailey on "Party of Five" when 
> he was in his late twenties!  At the same time, Matthew Fox, who 
> played Bailey's 19-year-old brother was in his mid-twenties.  Look 
at 
> all the actors on just about any teenage laden prime time soap.  
> In "Beverly Hills 90210," Gabrielle Cartis was over 30 when she 
> played a teenager, and most of the rest of the cast were in their 
> 20s.  Playing younger than one is has never been a problem in 
> Hollywood.
> 


  Urhm... Clark drives a truck on SMALLVILLE. He's a 16 year old high 
school sophomore.  Yar, yar, I know, it doesn't detract from your 
point -- just being LOONy, I suppose.




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 09:23:51 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:23:51 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vkdj7+7of1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> I keep hearing people say that if the movies aren't filmed one a 
year 
> for the next seven years, that we won't be able to use the same 
> actors (i.e. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson). 
Some 
> even suggest that they'll have to be recast before book 4 or 5 are 
> put on film, even if they DO film one a year.

<SNIP a very nice explantion of the kids ages in the film and other 
actors playing much younger roles>
> 
> Kids grow up.. it happens in the book just as it will happen in
real 
> life.   So what if by the time book seven is filmed, instead of 
being 
> 17 Dan is 20.. or even 23.. (oh the horror!).  Do we really care?  
> Wouldn't we rather see him play Harry Potter in all 7 movies than 
> have to deal with changes in cast??
> 
> Dawn

I whole heartedly agree with you in this.  When I was a young pre-teen 
and teen, I remember the Karate Kid movies (1 & 2), starring a 'much 
older than his character' Ralph Machio (I think that's how you spell 
it).  If I remember correctly, he was in his 30's playing a 15-16 year 
old. My favorite example (because I LOVED him and was sure we were 
going to marry) of this would be Michael J. Fox in his late 20's 
playing Alex P. Keaton on Family Ties, and then Marty McFly in the 
Back to the Future movies (1,2, & 3).  Ah, memories!  No one made a 
big  deal out of this, so why should a big deal be made over the aging 
of the actors in HP.  Don't we WANT them to age?   They were all 
roughly 14 in GoF, and I want them to look 'around' 14 (even if they 
are really 13 or 15 or even older).  Kids age at different rates 
anyway, so who's to say that Harry won't look 16 when he's only 14, or 
that Ron won't still look 12 when he's 15 or that Hermione just might 
'develop' and look all of 18 at 15 or 16?
 
I didn't look my age as a teen, and still don't (I look younger,
which I hated then, but am thoroughly enjoying now!)
I think it would be better to keep the same actors, rather thanswitch 
mid-stream.  It just wouldn't be the characters as we know them 'on 
screen.'  I personally liked the casting of the first movie, though 
Flitwick was not the Flitwick of my book imagination, but I can live 
with that.  Keep them all I say, though I fear Richard Harris might 
not make it to see book 7 (although he does seem to be in remarkable 
shape and looks way younger than his age-one more case in point!).  
Cheers!
Slon




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 17 11:41:50 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (davisaacs)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:41:50 -0000
Subject: Hans Zimmer!  (was Re: Future Soundtracks)
In-Reply-To: <9vj58q+uki9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vkllu+cmf2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "caliburncy" <caliburncy at y...> wrote:

> As someone who seriously considered majoring in film scoring, I 
have 
> always been immensely impressed by Hans Zimmer's work.  He is an 
> extremely *versatile* composer that has proved time and again that 
> whatever style or genre you believe is "beyond" him . . . it 
isn't.  
> I have spent a lot of time imaging what a Zimmer HP score would be 
> like . . . I honestly don't know.  There's no Zimmer precedent for 
> it, and he surprises me often.  But I would love to see what he 
might 
> do with it, because Zimmer knows where to "push" the existing 
> conventions and innovate and where to stick to some of the existing 
> conventions--he strikes a balance that creates a truly effective 
end 
> result. 

Which is exactly why I wanted him to do the score. He always 
surprises me, and you never know what he's going to come up with, but 
it's always perfect (often in a very ironic sort of way). With John 
Williams, I more or less knew exactly what the score was going to 
sound like (I couldn't guess the melodies, obviously, but I guessed 
what style they'd be, what sort of orchestration techniques he was 
going to use etc.) and his score was fine, but IMHO, nothing special.

John Williams desribes the action perfectly and he sort of holds a 
mirror up to the film, but that's all. Hans Zimmer's music is 
actually *part* of the film. He really gets into the soul of the 
film, into the heart, and his music adds to the film, sort of like an 
unseen actor. And, as Ridley Scott says, his music can speak where 
words can't. 

And for these reasons, I think he would have been excellent for Harry 
Potter, and wouldn't have treated it like "just another kids film" 
which I think John Williams did to a certain extent.

Just my opinion, anyway:o)

Dave




From richasi at azlance.com  Mon Dec 17 15:42:39 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 07:42:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011217154239.88400.qmail@web13804.mail.yahoo.com>

> Harris had to sign a 7 movie contract to get the Dumbledore part,
> when the kids (and Hagrid) only signed two. I

And I remember reading somewhere (sorry, can't quote it) where
Dan said he's love to play HP through all seven books. Since 
the actor who plays Ron is a fan, I'm sure he wouldn't mind either :)




=====
Ricky Russo
(Richasi)
richasi at azlance.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk  Mon Dec 17 16:23:08 2001
From: barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk (Barry Hill)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:23:08 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com>
References: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com> <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <69261367456.20011217162308@penrallt.clara.co.uk>

Hi all,


Monday, December 17, 2001, 3:39:17 PM, you wrote:
>> Moreover, I fail to understand why people are so worried about these
>> actors "aging."

I agree. It was hard enough getting used to different James Bonds or
Dr. Who's (8 actors to date), but I guess the prime audience (i.e.
children) will be even less forgiving if the actors are changed.
Besides, if they all age in the books then they can age on the screen!


Best regards,

 Barry

PS: This is my first posting in this group. I've seen the film twice
(first in German, then in english), but not read the books...
 


K> I hope they stick with the actors. When I think of Harry, Hermione,
K> and Ron in the movie, I immediately think of the actors. They
K> simply can't get rid of Hagrid either. Robbie Coltrane was probably
K> the best in the entire movie.  

:-)




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Dec 17 17:00:32 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:00:32 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
References: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com> <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com> <69261367456.20011217162308@penrallt.clara.co.uk>
Message-ID: <005f01c1871c$574d43c0$514e28d1@oemcomputer>

> I keep hearing people say that if the movies aren't filmed one a year
> for the next seven years, that we won't be able to use the same
> actors (i.e. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson).

This is not the only reason they're rushing into back to back productions,
remember, we have more movies then we do books currently, meaning there's
going to be three years of movies more then we have books to keep us
interested, they want to rush them out as soon as is humanly possible,
(while still being good mind you, these people are smart), rather then
letting any of the fever die down.

> Moreover, I fail to understand why people are so worried about these
> actors "aging."  I mean, look at all the actors over 20 out there who
> are playing teenagers.

I don't think they're worried about them 'aging' persay, but looking the age
they need them to.  People age differently and several can look older and
some can look younger  (and there's some like me who can fake it either
way).  But you cannot take giant leaps with age, such as a fifteen year old
cannot play a 45 year old part and a 45 year old cannot be a fresh faced 15
year old teen.

They're speeding along production to keep the kids within the general age
range, such as Tom Felton for Draco and such.  It's hard working on long
term projects with aging kids since they do age so differently but generally
that's not a problem unless the kids look too much older then they're parts.

But right now, as it stands I do not think they will put any thought into
re-casting unless one of the actors backs out of future movies, which is
likely considering they're ages and the years proposed for the movies, or
one gets fired for some reason.  We can look forward to enjoying at least
three movies with our young actors and you never know, we could very well
enjoy any new cast members they bring in just as much as we do the current
gang.

Saitaina
****
Wondering about my life and what is going on inside my head? Visit me at
http://www.deadjournal.com/users/saitaina/




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Mon Dec 17 17:27:07 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:27:07 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
References: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com> <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com> <69261367456.20011217162308@penrallt.clara.co.uk> <005f01c1871c$574d43c0$514e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <3C1E2AEB.92C7613A@kingwoodcable.com>

Saitaina wrote:
 
> They're speeding along production to keep the kids within the general age
> range, such as Tom Felton for Draco and such.  It's hard working on long
> term projects with aging kids since they do age so differently but generally
> that's not a problem unless the kids look too much older then they're parts.

Tom Felton is 14, and he still looks 11 to me. Though, I've seen recent
pictures of Daniel, and he's looking a little older. I haven't scene
pictures of Rupert or Emma though. I think if all the kids look about
the same, there won't be a problem, regardless of their ages.
 
> But right now, as it stands I do not think they will put any thought into
> re-casting unless one of the actors backs out of future movies, which is
> likely considering they're ages and the years proposed for the movies, or
> one gets fired for some reason.  We can look forward to enjoying at least
> three movies with our young actors and you never know, we could very well
> enjoy any new cast members they bring in just as much as we do the current
> gang.

As soon as they're done with CoS, they'll start filming PoA (so aging
might not be a problem at all). They say they'll take the full 18 months
for production on this movie, estimating a 2004 release. WB has two
Matrix sequels that they want to release in 2003.

GoF has not been tackled yet. Chris Columbus stated that he wasn't sure
if he wanted to do more movies, so they may have to find someone else.
That could be a detriment, because the new Director might want different
people. Though, I think they'll stay with the same actors, because they
work well together, and the public will be used to them. Ya never
know...

GoF is going to be hard So much information. I wouldn't surprised if
they broke it into 2 movies (as someone else suggested), and do a back
to back release. Ooooh!!! Can't get my hopes up though, since that will
be at least 4 years away.



From richasi at azlance.com  Mon Dec 17 17:46:54 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:46:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <3C1E2AEB.92C7613A@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011217174654.65174.qmail@web13805.mail.yahoo.com>

> Katze Wrote:

> GoF is going to be hard So much information. I wouldn't surprised if
> they broke it into 2 movies (as someone else suggested), and do a
> back to back release. Ooooh!!! Can't get my hopes up though, since 
> that will be at least 4 years away.

I think I read an article by the person who is doing the scripts for
the movies. And he mentioned the fourth book as a possible 2 movies,
one releasing say October (or November) and the second releasing
November (or December) - or back to back. Yeah, can't drool yet...
that's... *gasp* too long to think about.



=====
Ricky Russo
(Richasi)
richasi at azlance.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Dec 17 17:44:43 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:44:43 -0800
Subject: Actors ages, new directors and GoF musings (was actors ages)
References: <9vjsn4+tn4p@eGroups.com> <3C1E11A5.E0230944@kingwoodcable.com> <69261367456.20011217162308@penrallt.clara.co.uk> <005f01c1871c$574d43c0$514e28d1@oemcomputer> <3C1E2AEB.92C7613A@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <008b01c18722$90704840$514e28d1@oemcomputer>

<GoF is going to be hard So much information. I wouldn't surprised if
they broke it into 2 movies (as someone else suggested), and do a back
to back release. Ooooh!!! Can't get my hopes up though, since that will
be at least 4 years away.>

They most likely will split GoF into two movies and release them not back to
back but in the holiday rush, such as Thanksgiving weekend/Christmas break
week so that they hit the time when kids are off and looking for something
new to watch/do.

I would like to put in my bet that they split it right down the second task.
Thus giving a cliff hanger and dividing it generally in the middle  (Or
maybe I consider the middle because that's where my book cracked,) It would
be the easiest way if they do two movies to get people to go watch the
second, all the kids will want to know what happened to Harry :)

<GoF has not been tackled yet. Chris Columbus stated that he wasn't sure
if he wanted to do more movies, so they may have to find someone else.
That could be a detriment, because the new Director might want different
people.>

It is unusual for a new director to re-cast mid project just because he
wants new people.  Movies and telly shows change directors faster then they
change the production reels and the new directors rarely change much about
the movie besides acting styles in certain scenes.

I think the only reason they'll change actors, is personal wishes on the
actors part or problems with having that one actor continue to work on the
project.  The only thing I worry about is with the popularity the young cast
receives they will receive offers for other projects and we may lose them to
those rather then aging and personal issues.  It's rare for at least one
cast member not to be swept up flurry of offers they receive while tied to a
popular project and I do see us losing at least one cast member to such a
thing though I hope it's not one of the trio (Dan, Rupert, Emma) so that we
do get to enjoy them in the roles they are so well in.

Back to the issues of directors though, I do think we'll have to lose our
current director any way due to his style of movies.  While I'm not usually
one to judge until I see what they have to offer, based on Columbus's past
works I don't think he could handle GoF and later movies with the right
touch of darkness that they deserve.  Sorcer's Stone was easily a light
movie with some dark aspects but overall it wasn't the sort of film I would
expect to be dark, and scary, and one to instill fear in a person and Chris
was a perfect choice for it.  But GoF and future movies are darker, more
fearful in content (the resurrection of Lord Voldemort, Barty Crouch SR.'s
madness, generally Durmstrang.) and I hold reservations that Columbus' could
portray it properly and pass that fear and darkness onto us through the
images he shows us.  But, I could be completely wrong and may re-cant upon
seeing what they give us.  I've been known to be surprised before by a
directors work so we shall see.

Saitaina
****
Wondering about my life and what is going on inside my head? Visit me at
http://www.deadjournal.com/users/saitaina/




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 18:53:04 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:53:04 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <3C1E2AEB.92C7613A@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vleug+cim8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> Saitaina wrote:

> GoF is going to be hard So much information. I wouldn't surprised if
> they broke it into 2 movies (as someone else suggested), and do a 
back
> to back release. Ooooh!!! Can't get my hopes up though, since that 
will
> be at least 4 years away.


  If the back-to-backs on the Matrix work in 2003, WB will be much 
more likely willing to split GoF into two movies instead of 
distilling it down into oblivion. SO, just remember that in 
supporting the MATRIX, you'll also be supporting a worthwhile effort 
on the continued HP films.




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Dec 17 19:29:32 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Dec 2001 19:29:32 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008617372.1346.64244.w46@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Which "One-Liners" from the book (that 
they could have easily retained) do you 
most miss in the movie? 

  o "You mean this boy doesn't know about ANYTHING??" (Hagrid) 
  o "Shut up, Dursley, yer great lump!"  (Hagrid) 
  o "I'm a thinking cap!" (Sorting Hat) 
  o "That is, if you're not as big a bunch of dunderheads as I usually have to teach!" (Snape) 
  o "Nitwit!  Blubber!  Oddment!  Tweak!" (Dumbledore) 
  o "Have you figured out how to get past that beast of Hagrid's yet?" (Snape) 
  o "Your silly hocus-pocus" (Snape) 
  o "I got 115% -- They're not going to expell me after that!" (Hermione) 
  o "Yes, but not to US!" (Ron, on Neville's standing up for himself) 
  o "Call him Voldemort, Harry..." (Dumbledore) 
  o "It's me fault!  I told the evil git how to get past Fluffy!" (Hagrid) 
  o "I'm going to have a lot of fun with Dudley this summer! (Harry) 
  o Other (Specify on list -- Damn, I wish Yahoo! poll suppoted write-in votes!) 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From dominica at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 20:02:22 2001
From: dominica at yahoo.com (dominica)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:02:22 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie
In-Reply-To: <1008617372.1346.64244.w46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vlj0e+flmd@eGroups.com>

I think the one where Ron asks Hermoine if she is a witch or not 
should have been included in the list..that's the one I wanted to 
pick...

But then I guess this scene was redone a bit to make her come off 
looking better..smarter...than in the book...to make up for no 
potions scene...

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., HPFGU-Movie at y... wrote:
> 
> Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
> HPFGU-Movie group:
> 
> Which "One-Liners" from the book (that 
> they could have easily retained) do you 
> most miss in the movie? 
> 
>   o "You mean this boy doesn't know about ANYTHING??" (Hagrid) 
>   o "Shut up, Dursley, yer great lump!"  (Hagrid) 
>   o "I'm a thinking cap!" (Sorting Hat) 
>   o "That is, if you're not as big a bunch of dunderheads as I 
usually have to teach!" (Snape) 
>   o "Nitwit!  Blubber!  Oddment!  Tweak!" (Dumbledore) 
>   o "Have you figured out how to get past that beast of Hagrid's 
yet?" (Snape) 
>   o "Your silly hocus-pocus" (Snape) 
>   o "I got 115% -- They're not going to expell me after that!" 
(Hermione) 
>   o "Yes, but not to US!" (Ron, on Neville's standing up for 
himself) 
>   o "Call him Voldemort, Harry..." (Dumbledore) 
>   o "It's me fault!  I told the evil git how to get past Fluffy!" 
(Hagrid) 
>   o "I'm going to have a lot of fun with Dudley this summer! 
(Harry) 
>   o Other (Specify on list -- Damn, I wish Yahoo! poll suppoted 
write-in votes!) 
> 
> 
> To vote, please visit the following web page:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 
> 
> Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
> not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
> web site listed above.
> 
> Thanks!




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 20:02:21 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:02:21 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie
In-Reply-To: <1008617372.1346.64244.w46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vlj0d+3c58@eGroups.com>

> Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
> not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
> web site listed above.

But then it says before this:
>   o Other (Specify on list -- Damn, I wish Yahoo! poll suppoted 
write-in votes!) 

So...where exactly should I express my "Other"?  Hope it's okay for 
it to go right here, because...

Well, the only line I actually missed was (paraphrase; the book is at 
home)

"ARE YOU A WITCH OR AREN'T YOU!" ~ Ron (which would, of course, 
necessitate the line in which Hermione fretting about not having any 
wood to build a fire to get them out of the Devil's Snare, and thus a 
slight rewrite of that scene in the movie, but the bit I miss is 
Ron's reaction. :)

Mahoney




From william.hause at imckesson.com  Mon Dec 17 20:47:06 2001
From: william.hause at imckesson.com (williamhause2000)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:47:06 -0000
Subject: OUCH!
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011215005555.00a3f870@pop.slashyalex.com>
Message-ID: <9vllka+ku54@eGroups.com>

In what way do the Goblins fit the Jewish stereotype anyway?
Big Pointy Ears? Sharp Teeth?
I think not!
Did they have a Jewish accent or something?
-Billy

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Alexandra Y. Kwan" <litalex at s...> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> At 05:34 PM 12/14/2001, cornflower_o_shea wrote:
> >barristers-at-law, etc. So my question is, I guess, who thought
> >about that stereotype at all?
> 
> I didn't, not at all, but I didn't grow up in USA and therefore 
missed a 
> lot of cultural imprinting.  I do know about the stereotype, but 
from 
> history and literature classes more than anything else.
> 
> little Alex




From william.hause at imckesson.com  Mon Dec 17 21:15:11 2001
From: william.hause at imckesson.com (williamhause2000)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:15:11 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
Message-ID: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>

We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's fight 
with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

I hope pressure is not put on Radcliffe to lose weight as he is only 
a child.  Perhaps special effects can be used instead.  (Or perhaps I 
just don't remember clearly.  I have only seen the movie twice.)

-Billy




From antychan at nexgo.de  Mon Dec 17 21:46:17 2001
From: antychan at nexgo.de (antigone1982)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:46:17 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
In-Reply-To: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vlp39+vulh@eGroups.com>

<<We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's fight 
with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

(Or perhaps I just don't remember clearly.  I have only seen the 
movie twice.)>>


Now, I'm obviously a freaknut, who has seen the movie five times, but 
the thought that Daniel is too 'not-skinny' never, ever crossed my 
mind... In fact, everytime I see Harry rushing down the stairs on 
Christmas morning in those pyjamas, I can't help but think "What a 
nice, petite figure." *swoon*

... /Don't/ look at me like that...


Anty >_<;;;





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Mon Dec 17 22:11:55 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:11:55 -0600
Subject: update on Columbus
References: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1E6DAB.42689C54@kingwoodcable.com>

I just found an article that says Columbus would be interesting in
directing all the movies, and would like to see the movies with the same
cast.

http://www.killermovies.com/harry_potter/articles/1470.html

-Katze



From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 17 22:18:40 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:18:40 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
In-Reply-To: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vlr00+gkv9@eGroups.com>

Billy wrote:
> We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
> much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's 
fight 
> with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
> perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

Eh, well, if the cast has to be *that* point-on, the fact that Daniel 
is sprouting up quickly (almost taller than Rupert/'Ron' instead of 
the other way around) should nix him.  But, for that matter, they 
cast Daniel despite the fact that he has *blue* eyes, and they do 
nothing to change his eye color in the film to green.

Personally, I think Daniel is dead-on as Harry, and I hope they don't 
let little things like height and weight change his casting (as they 
did not, apparently, due to eye color).  Imho, they're not going to 
find an absolute exact physical match, so I hope they stick to a kid 
who can bring out the essence of Harry.

Er. If that makes sense.  Sorry; I'm in a hurry!

Mahoney




From srae1971 at iglou.com  Mon Dec 17 22:36:10 2001
From: srae1971 at iglou.com (Shannon)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:36:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
In-Reply-To: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011217173610.00a8c110@pop.iglou.com>

At 09:15 PM 12/17/2001 -0000, you wrote:
>We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
>much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's fight 
>with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
>perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

When he was on the Regis show awhile back, I remember thinking my god,
someone FEED that boy!  I'm thinking he put on a bit of a growth spurt and
he's really quite thin, more now than ever.  He wasn't "skinny" in the
movie, he was just a normal kid.

Shannon




From therealmarajade at jedi.com.br  Tue Dec 18 01:30:31 2001
From: therealmarajade at jedi.com.br (therealmarajade)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:30:31 -0000
Subject: The future of the HP movies (was Re: Why on earth...)
In-Reply-To: <3C1E5E6E.E1576C23@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vm67n+kuqi@eGroups.com>

Okay, this is my first post in this group, but when I read this 
particular discussion, I just had to add my two cents (or knuts ;)).

BTW, my name is Debora, a.k.a. TheRealMaraJade or TRMJ, and besides 
being a HP fan, I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan too. =)

About the actors' ages and the possibility of them being replaced in 
future movies. I don't think that will happen because of their age, 
but it could possible happen if they are offered other jobs 
(especially if the money is better), as someone already said. I do 
hope that they continue to work in all seven HP movies, but it might 
not happen. But I don't think that their aging will interfere with 
they being cast (all the examples you guys used apply here). It's up 
to them, really. Their age isn't really a problem. And I was sure 
that all the actors (including Richard Harris) only signed for the 
first 2 movies, but I may be wrong.

And I'm sure that you heard that PoA is going to be released in 2004. 
That would give us a hiatus of two years between the screening of the 
movies, and perhaps between the actual filming too. And that could be 
a good thing. First, the actors wouldn't age too much (if 12 years 
old Draco can be played by 14 years old Tom Felton, why can't 14 
years old Ron be played by 16 years old Rupert?), and then not only 
the actors but also the director Chris Columbus could have a break 
from the HP movies. I read somewhere that Columbus wanted to direct 
all movies, but that he wouldn't be able to unless he had a break 
between movies. He said he needed that break to spend some time with 
his family in America, which is completely understandable. 

As for me, I hope Chris Columbus directs all the movies. I know he 
directed some bad movies, like `Bicentennial Man'. But he did some 
amazing work too. I mean, he did the scripts for `Gremlins' and that 
young Sherlock Holmes movie, and those were pretty good! They were 
fun and they had also some kind of darkness around them. Therefore I 
think Chris could handle the growing darkness of HP pretty nicely. 
And we already know that he is as faithful to the books as possible. 
Imagine if Steven Spielberg directs the third movie. As much as I 
like Spielberg, and IMHO he is a great director, his talent can only 
be truly shown and appreciated in his own movies. Look at A.I for an 
example. He wanted to do it as close to Stanley Kubrick's work as 
possible, but he failed. The end of the movie had too much of 
Spielberg in it. If it were a Spielberg movie from the start, it 
could have had a different impact upon me. But it was a Kubrick 
project. And I felt disappointed. Besides, Spielberg probably 
wouldn't accept Rowling's interference as well as Columbus.

Besides, during this two years hiatus, Daniel, Rupert, Emma and the 
rest of the cast could make other movies. That way it would become 
less likely that they would leave the HP movies franchise.

And, at last, about GoF. They have to do it in two parts. It's 
completely impossible to make a 2.5 hours movie and tell everything 
that happens in the book. I was considering where they could cut the 
book in two parts, and I think they could do it after the First Task. 
It's the exact middle of the GoF British edition, and it would not 
only have a very exciting end with the dragons but also a happy end. 
After all, it's after the First Task that Ron and Harry talk to each 
other again. =)

Well, just some random thoughts. I hope my grammar was okay. English 
isn't my first language, but I made an effort to write it correctly. 
=)

Debora

"That was bloody brilliant!" 
-- Ron Weasley, `Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' --





From ivyblossom at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 18 02:25:03 2001
From: ivyblossom at hotmail.com (Ivy Blossom)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:25:03 +0000
Subject: Actors ages, etc
Message-ID: <F1114QBijlJPsoY6LZw00005de9@hotmail.com>

>It's rare for at least one
>cast member not to be swept up flurry of offers they receive while tied to 
>a
>popular project and I do see us losing at least one cast member to such a
>thing though I hope it's not one of the trio (Dan, Rupert, Emma) so that we
>do get to enjoy them in the roles they are so well in.

They can't replace Dan Radcliffe, because he IS Harry. They can't replace 
Ron, they can't replace Hermione. If they replace Tom Felton, I'm not sure I 
could bring myself to see the film. I might have to put up a hate-site if 
they get rid of Tom Felton. Without Tom Felton, none of it makes sense. :)

Prepared to defend my favourite character,

Ivy


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Dec 18 02:30:41 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:30:41 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'/Book 5 publication date
In-Reply-To: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vm9oh+jg6f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "williamhause2000" <william.hause at i...> wrote:
> We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
> much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's fight 
> with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
> perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

It's true, Daniel didn't look *skinny*, just regular.   BUT: was Harry described 
as skinny throught the book(s) or just at the beginning of SS?  The Dursleys 
had somewhat underfed him and he was excited at the prospect of having all 
he wanted to eat at Hogwarts.  Once he started eating those big meals, he'd 
fill out just fine and not be skinny anymore by the time he confronts 
Quirrelmort.  Plus, at that age, lots of kids put on a little weight in 
preparation for growth spurts.

All this stuff about green eyes, lanky Ron, skinny Harry, or bushy hair and big 
teeth on Hermione just aren't essential to the story.  The important thing is to 
get fine child actors, which they did do.  (They can give Lily blue eyes if it's so  
important that Harry's eyes match hers.)

Going back to message 31756:

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "rth_adidas" <rth_adidas at h...> wrote:
> Does anybody have any idea on when the fifth Harry Potter book will 
> be out?

The Guardian has recently reported that JKR has given the publisher no 
indication when she'll be done with the first draft of the manuscript, and the 
soonest likely publication date is September 2002.

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,619138,00.html





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 02:38:36 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:38:36 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The future of the HP movies (was Re: Why on earth...)
References: <9vm67n+kuqi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1EAC2C.DE4D61F7@kingwoodcable.com>

therealmarajade wrote:
> 
> Okay, this is my first post in this group, but when I read this
> particular discussion, I just had to add my two cents (or knuts ;)).
> 
> BTW, my name is Debora, a.k.a. TheRealMaraJade or TRMJ, and besides
> being a HP fan, I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan too. =)

I'm constantly trying the jedi hand wave, but it doesn't work 8-(

> About the actors' ages and the possibility of them being replaced in
> future movies. I don't think that will happen because of their age,
> but it could possible happen if they are offered other jobs
> (especially if the money is better), as someone already said. I do
> hope that they continue to work in all seven HP movies, but it might
> not happen. But I don't think that their aging will interfere with
> they being cast (all the examples you guys used apply here). It's up
> to them, really. Their age isn't really a problem. And I was sure
> that all the actors (including Richard Harris) only signed for the
> first 2 movies, but I may be wrong.

Richard Harris stated on the Rosie O'Donnell show that he signed a 7
movie contract to get the part. Hagrid and Snape are signed on for two
(I think), but Rowling has clued them in on the future of the story to
help the character development.

> And I'm sure that you heard that PoA is going to be released in 2004.
> That would give us a hiatus of two years between the screening of the
> movies, and perhaps between the actual filming too. And that could be
> a good thing. First, the actors wouldn't age too much (if 12 years
> old Draco can be played by 14 years old Tom Felton, why can't 14
> years old Ron be played by 16 years old Rupert?), and then not only
> the actors but also the director Chris Columbus could have a break
> from the HP movies. I read somewhere that Columbus wanted to direct
> all movies, but that he wouldn't be able to unless he had a break
> between movies. He said he needed that break to spend some time with
> his family in America, which is completely understandable.

The Leaky Cauldron reported that the first 3 are being filmed back to
back, regardless of the it's release date.

Here's the link for the info:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2001_12_09_archive.html#7853360

> As for me, I hope Chris Columbus directs all the movies. I know he
> directed some bad movies, like `Bicentennial Man'. But he did some
> amazing work too. I mean, he did the scripts for `Gremlins' and that
> young Sherlock Holmes movie, and those were pretty good! They were
> fun and they had also some kind of darkness around them. Therefore I
> think Chris could handle the growing darkness of HP pretty nicely.
> And we already know that he is as faithful to the books as possible.

I agree...

> Imagine if Steven Spielberg directs the third movie. As much as I
> like Spielberg, and IMHO he is a great director, his talent can only
> be truly shown and appreciated in his own movies. Look at A.I for an
> example. He wanted to do it as close to Stanley Kubrick's work as
> possible, but he failed. The end of the movie had too much of
> Spielberg in it. If it were a Spielberg movie from the start, it
> could have had a different impact upon me. But it was a Kubrick
> project. And I felt disappointed. Besides, Spielberg probably
> wouldn't accept Rowling's interference as well as Columbus.

I think the younger Speilberg would be great...not the A.I. Spielberg.
But consider some of his other movies (onces that I enjoy): Saving
Private Ryan, Mask of Zorro, Deep Impact(!fav!), Men in Black
(excellent!), The Money Pit, The Color Purple, and others...

I think Spielberg is versatile, but I fear it's gone to his head
recently. I actually think Ron Howard would do well with this type of
movie. Haha...I think Tim Burton would make it a bit to dark ;-)

> 
> Besides, during this two years hiatus, Daniel, Rupert, Emma and the
> rest of the cast could make other movies. That way it would become
> less likely that they would leave the HP movies franchise.

I believe Daniel was interested in doing all 7 movies. I'm not sure
about Emma and Ron, but I think they'd go for it too. But that might be
wishful thinking.

> And, at last, about GoF. They have to do it in two parts. It's
> completely impossible to make a 2.5 hours movie and tell everything
> that happens in the book. I was considering where they could cut the
> book in two parts, and I think they could do it after the First Task.
> It's the exact middle of the GoF British edition, and it would not
> only have a very exciting end with the dragons but also a happy end.
> After all, it's after the First Task that Ron and Harry talk to each
> other again. =)

I think this would be a great breaking point. You are correct that it
would end on an upbeat, which is something that book needs! I was an
emotional wreck at the end of the book. I had to go back and read 1 and
3 again, because those end on an upbeat. $ was crushing at the end.
Especially in the hospital when everything hits Harry...ARGH...to sad
8-(

> 
> Well, just some random thoughts. I hope my grammar was okay. English
> isn't my first language, but I made an effort to write it correctly.
> =)

You english seems fine to me! I never would've noticed.

Take care
-Katze



From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 03:03:19 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:03:19 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts Location (was "Re: HP tourist map of UK etc.")
In-Reply-To: <9v13k5+nf07@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vmbln+npn7@eGroups.com>

Granted, the tour is about where the movie was filmed (to the immense 
relief of the Ministry of Magic), but for nitpickers like me, Rowling 
has confirmed in writing that Hogwarts is in Scotland. If anyone 
wants to quote her, it appears in her Hogwarts textbook 
"'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,' by Newt Scamander." The 
entry for "Acromantula" ends with the sentence:

"Rumours that a colony of Acromantula has been established in
Scotland are unconfirmed."

Rowling has Harry crossing out the word "...unconfirmed" and writing 
over it so that the final sentence reads:

"Rumours that a colony of Acromantula has been established in
Scotland are confirmed by Harry Potter and Ron Weasley." 

The foregoing is no doubt referring to Harry and Ron's close call
with the colony in Book 2.

So the search for Hogwarts narrows, but its exact location remains 
hidden from us Muggles. The Office of Misinformation at the Ministry 
of Magic is no doubt working overtime on this and sending us all over 
England and as far away as possible from Scotland as a result. 
Official maps and news items have been distributed to this effect and 
a debate is no doubt raging at this moment as to how to address the 
frustration of the Muggle Scottish tourist bureau so that the current 
plan of misinformation doesn't somehow backfire. 

> BTW, the Scottish tourist bureau is upset because the 
> map and brochure don't include any sites in Scotalnd.  
> After all, Rowling wrote the books in a coffee shop in 
> Edinburgh, and Hogwarts is apparently in Scotland.  But 
> since the brochure is about the film, and not much of 
> the film was made in Scotland, apparently it was 
> overlooked.





From litalex at slashyalex.com  Tue Dec 18 03:19:17 2001
From: litalex at slashyalex.com (Alexandra Y. Kwan)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:19:17 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: OUCH!
In-Reply-To: <9vllka+ku54@eGroups.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011215005555.00a3f870@pop.slashyalex.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20011217191415.00a24540@pop.slashyalex.com>

Hello,

At 12:47 PM 12/17/2001, williamhause2000 wrote:
>In what way do the Goblins fit the Jewish stereotype anyway?
>Big Pointy Ears? Sharp Teeth?
>I think not!
>Did they have a Jewish accent or something?

Many Jewish people were bankers and/or money lenders back in the days and 
some are also very wealthy.  They're also a close-knitted group who don't 
like outsiders (but that's because the outsiders had done pretty horrible 
things to them).  They're also supposed to be stingy and very mean (e.g. 
Shylock from Merchant of Venice).  And they're supposed to be sly and 
dishonorable (e.g., what's his name in Oliver Twist).  All of which are 
traits of the goblins.  And oh, don't forget the nose <g>.

little Alex




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 03:24:54 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:24:54 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.20011217173610.00a8c110@pop.iglou.com>
Message-ID: <9vmcu6+g35h@eGroups.com>

What interests me after seeing the movie a couple times is how Daniel 
changes from slightly baby fatty to extremely skinny (the lanky Harry 
running down the stairs in those PJs at Christmas caused me to wonder 
why no one was feeding him also). You can tell Daniel really started 
to sprout during the film and that the movie was NOT filmed in 
sequence. Once you notice how he changes from scene to scene and 
BACK again you notice it forever. Where Daniel is right now entering 
movie 2 is dead on.

See post-premiere BBC Jonathan Ross interview with Daniel at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/harrypotter/




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 04:08:00 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:08:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
References: <9vmcu6+g35h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1EC120.2173529F@kingwoodcable.com>

windyroselane wrote:
 
> See post-premiere BBC Jonathan Ross interview with Daniel at:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/harrypotter/

I completely agree..he's right where he needs to be. I'd like to catch
an interview with Rupert, but I'm not sure they've done any with him
recently.

-Katze



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 04:31:32 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:31:32 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vk1e7+2te2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vmgr4+df8c@eGroups.com>

Wow, thanks for all the replies.  I've only heard people lament the 
future loss of these wonderful actors, so it was really nice to read 
that a lot of you feel as I do.

And someone asked if I posted the question after something they said 
about Zimmer... no, not at all.  It's something I've been planning to 
post about for a while after seeing the topic pop up here and there 
for a while.  I just chose yesterday to actually sit down and compose 
the post.

Anyway... a few things I wanted to say.

> Urhm... Clark drives a truck on SMALLVILLE. He's a 16 year old
> high school sophomore.  Yar, yar, I know, it doesn't detract
> from your point -- just being LOONy, I suppose.

Actually, Clark IS a freshman.. that's why he was chosen for the 
scarecrow prank.  And, freshman are either 13 or 14.  Okay, so I'll 
retract my 13 and grant that he is 14.  The driving age (at least to 
get a permit) in some states in the midwest IS 14.. so it works fine.

But anyway.. that was just minor.

Let's see... a few of you mentioned the actors not continuing because 
of wanting to do other things.  Well, as some stated, having a year 
off would grant them that opportunity.  But... even if not.. is it 
just me... or does anyone else get annoyed when people abandon the 
projects that made them big stars?  Like David Duchovny.  If it 
wasn't for "The X-Files," most people still wouldn't know who he 
was.. yet he got borred with the series.  There are quite a number of 
actors who do things like this... look at ER and NYPD Blue.  Then 
they leave the show and don't really do much anyway.

I would just really be annoyed if these kids got such big heads that 
they would forsake the HP movies to go do other stuff.  I don't know, 
maybe it's just me.

Of course 7-10 years IS quite a bit of time to devote to all this.  
But I'm sure there will be breaks to do other stuff.  And even if 
there isn't, they will still be quite young (early 20s) when they 
finish.

Did anyone else read that Daniel Radcliffe would like to study 
autism?  I thought that was so great..  It seems he's contemplated 
the idea of working with kids with autism... if the acting thing 
isn't for him.

Something else I keep thinking about: with how on earth long it's 
taking JKR to write the 5th book, how long will it be before book 6 
and 7 come out?  All actors may have to take an extended break just 
to wait for the BOOKS to come out... let alone the movies!

Dawn




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 04:32:28 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:32:28 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vk1e7+2te2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vmgss+sgp0@eGroups.com>

Wow, thanks for all the replies.  I've only heard people lament the 
future loss of these wonderful actors, so it was really nice to read 
that a lot of you feel as I do.

And someone asked if I posted the question after something they said 
about Zimmer... no, not at all.  It's something I've been planning to 
post about for a while after seeing the topic pop up here and there 
for a while.  I just chose yesterday to actually sit down and compose 
the post.

Anyway... a few things I wanted to say.

> Urhm... Clark drives a truck on SMALLVILLE. He's a 16 year old
> high school sophomore.  Yar, yar, I know, it doesn't detract
> from your point -- just being LOONy, I suppose.

Actually, Clark IS a freshman.. that's why he was chosen for the 
scarecrow prank.  And, freshman are either 13 or 14.  Okay, so I'll 
retract my 13 and grant that he is 14.  The driving age (at least to 
get a permit) in some states in the midwest IS 14.. so it works fine.

But anyway.. that was just minor.

Let's see... a few of you mentioned the actors not continuing because 
of wanting to do other things.  Well, as some stated, having a year 
off would grant them that opportunity.  But... even if not.. is it 
just me... or does anyone else get annoyed when people abandon the 
projects that made them big stars?  Like David Duchovny.  If it 
wasn't for "The X-Files," most people still wouldn't know who he 
was.. yet he got borred with the series.  There are quite a number of 
actors who do things like this... look at ER and NYPD Blue.  Then 
they leave the show and don't really do much anyway.

I would just really be annoyed if these kids got such big heads that 
they would forsake the HP movies to go do other stuff.  I don't know, 
maybe it's just me.

Of course 7-10 years IS quite a bit of time to devote to all this.  
But I'm sure there will be breaks to do other stuff.  And even if 
there isn't, they will still be quite young (early 20s) when they 
finish.

Did anyone else read that Daniel Radcliffe would like to study 
autism?  I thought that was so great..  It seems he's contemplated 
the idea of working with kids with autism... if the acting thing 
isn't for him.

Something else I keep thinking about: with how on earth long it's 
taking JKR to write the 5th book, how long will it be before book 6 
and 7 come out?  All actors may have to take an extended break just 
to wait for the BOOKS to come out... let alone the movies!

Dawn




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 04:37:13 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:37:13 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie  --  Ron
In-Reply-To: <9vlj0e+flmd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vmh5p+ehqf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "dominica" <dominica at y...> wrote:
> I think the one where Ron asks Hermoine if she is a witch or not 
> should have been included in the list..that's the one I wanted to 
> pick...

Me too!  I couldn't wait to read that option and smile to myself... 
only, that never happened as that line wasn't there.  It's the 
funniest line in the whole book and I really wished they'd kept it in.

As for modifying the poll... you can do that.  Granted, you'll lose 
all the votes, but if you realized right away before many/any had 
voted, it could have been changed.  I did that myself yesterday: 
added another choice before someone voted... and added one after only 
one person had voted (I hope that person noticed and went back).  
Anyway, that's just a not for future reference when anyone starts a 
poll.

So.. I voted for "Other," thinking of Ron's line.

Speaking of Ron.  I loved him so much in the movie.  But it bothered 
me a little that he came off as a total sidekick.  I didn't like that 
b'c when someone is a sidekick, they're not really their own person.  
I never got the impression that Ron was a sidekick from reading the 
books.  Did any of you?

Dawn




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 04:54:10 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:54:10 -0600
Subject: favorite lines (was [HPFGU-Movie] New poll for HPFGU-Movie)
References: <9vlj0e+flmd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1ECBF2.DC8484C1@kingwoodcable.com>

dominica wrote:
> 
> I think the one where Ron asks Hermoine if she is a witch or not
> should have been included in the list..that's the one I wanted to
> pick...
> 

I heard why that part of the movie was change. In the book, after the
chess game, Hermione and Harry leave Ron to go to he next puzzle. Ron
has just been hit upside the head, and Harry says, "He'll be fine", and
they move on. Columbus felt this was not so compassionate, and took that
scene out. 

But that baffles me...because in the book Harry doesn't kill Quirrell,
where as in the movie he does. Granted Quirrell is bad, but Harry has
just killed someone! So...I guess it was a trade. 

Anyway...that's what I heard.

I do love that part though...Are you a witch or not? Haha...her muggle
upbringing took over for a minute.

I also love the part where Harry realizes he has presents, and Ron says
something like, "What did you expect, turnips?"

I love Ron's character..he really brings a lot of light to the books.

-Katze



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 04:53:21 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:53:21 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'
In-Reply-To: <9vln8v+l84b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vmi41+jl0e@eGroups.com>

Billy wrote:
> We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe
> puts on much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny. 
> After Harry's fight with 'you know who' Daniel is shown
> lying on his back.  From that perspective you can see
> that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.

No offense, Billy, but I think that was just a horrible thing to 
say.  No wonder kids grow up and develop eating disorders.  Comments 
like this are enough to plant the seeds of anorexia (and yes, boys 
are anorexics, too).

Daniel Radcliffe is fine and looks fine.  He appears to be a healthy 
boy.  And to suggest that someone else be found to play Harry just 
because he's not skinny enough is ridiculous!  

> I hope pressure is not put on Radcliffe to lose weight
> as he is only a child.  Perhaps special effects can be
> used instead.  (Or perhaps I just don't remember clearly.
> I have only seen the movie twice.)

Special effects?  You can't be serious...  How about focusing on the 
personality he portrays instead of looking at the poor boy's 
stomach?  Sheesh!  I mean, LOOK at the wonderful emotions he brings 
to the table!  By all counts, I think he makes a perfect Harry.

In the books Ron is tall.  Rupert Grint isn't tall, but I don't think 
I could imagine anyone else playing him.  Should we put him in 
platform shoes and use special effects to make him appeart taller??  
Please, no.  I love him just the way he is.

Joanne0012 wrote:
> All this stuff about green eyes, lanky Ron, skinny Harry,
> or bushy hair and big teeth on Hermione just aren't
> essential to the story. The important thing is to get
> fine child actors, which they did do. 

Thank you!  Well said.

> (They can give Lily blue eyes if it's so
> important that Harry's eyes match hers.)

Have you guys flipped through the poster books they sell in the book 
stores?  They color in Dan's eyes so they are green... and not just a 
tint of green... I mean like glowing green.  I'm surprised they 
bothered.  

Dawn





From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Tue Dec 18 05:20:42 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 18 Dec 2001 05:20:42 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008652842.453.4300.w1@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Of the Big Five in movie scoring, who would you like to have score the "dark" movies, beginning with Goblet of Fire?   

  o John Williams 
  o Hans Zimmer 
  o James Horner 
  o Danny Elfman 
  o Ryuichi Sakamoto 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 14:04:40 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:04:40 -0000
Subject: Ron
In-Reply-To: <9vmh5p+ehqf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vnido+dre3@eGroups.com>

Dawn wrote:
> Speaking of Ron.  I loved him so much in the movie.  But it 
bothered 
> me a little that he came off as a total sidekick.  I didn't like 
that 
> b'c when someone is a sidekick, they're not really their own 
person.  
> I never got the impression that Ron was a sidekick from reading the 
> books.  Did any of you?

Well, I did, except that in the books he was quite a more fleshed-out 
sidekick.  Harry is always the hero; while Ron, and Hermione for that 
matter, do heroic things, still Harry is the hero of the story ~ 
i.e., in the end he has to conquer the bad guy(s) alone.

On the other hand, I do see what you mean, because in the movie, so 
many of his wonderful lines, actions and reactions had to be cut, 
that he necessarily remained "Ron, Harry's friend and sidekick," 
instead of being able to fill out into "Ron, witty interesting kid 
who is friends with Harry and is under it all a sidekick."  Er.  So 
to speak.  I'm looking forward to future films to watch characters 
like Ron and Hermione flesh out!

Mahoney




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 16:35:49 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:35:49 -0600
Subject: Quidditch commentators
References: <9vnido+dre3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1F7065.A52FFD77@kingwoodcable.com>

I was thinking about the Quidditch scene in the movie, and I'm actually
slightly disappointed that they didn't leave the book commentary in the
movie. That would've been funny as all get out. If I remember correctly,
it was also a guy doing the commentating, and there was bickering
between the commentator and McGonagall. 

I think McG has a funny wit about her, but we don't see much of it in
the movie.

Just thinking...
-Katze



From doliesl at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 17:36:53 2001
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:36:53 -0000
Subject: Quidditch commentators
In-Reply-To: <3C1F7065.A52FFD77@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vnurl+chu0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> I was thinking about the Quidditch scene in the movie, and I'm actually
> slightly disappointed that they didn't leave the book commentary in the
> movie. That would've been funny as all get out. If I remember correctly,
> it was also a guy doing the commentating, and there was bickering
> between the commentator and McGonagall. 

The commentator is Lee Jordan, who did appeared in the movie, except his 
"comments" were reduce into merely annoucing score and introducing
the teams. Sounds like you might've been mistaken, but the Lee Jordan in 
the movie is indeed a "guy" (just that he has girly voice).
 





From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 18:36:34 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:36:34 -0000
Subject: Actor's ages HA!
Message-ID: <9vo2bi+cigk@eGroups.com>

This is from CBBC Newsround (big thanks to the hpgalleries.com and 
the-leaky-cauldron.org), and just goes to PROVE you don't have to be 
the same age as the character you're playing.

A mysterious Myrtle 

There's a interesting piece of casting for Moaning Myrtle, the ghost 
who haunts the girls' toilets. 

She'll be played by Shirley Henderson who's 35 years old (yes 35!!!). 
She was last seen in Bridget Jones's Diary as Bridget's best mate 
Jude. 

In the books, Myrtle is a miserable teenager. It'll be fascinating to 
see how she manages to play such a character. 


So HA! to all the people who think they'll need to recast because of 
age.  I absolutley LOVED Shirley Hendersen in BJD and she has the 
greatest miserable voice you've ever heard!  She even called Bridge 
from-ta ta ta-THE TOILET in BJD!  




From rach_sparra at lineone.net  Tue Dec 18 18:40:29 2001
From: rach_sparra at lineone.net (rach_sparra2001)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:40:29 -0000
Subject: Quidditch commentators
In-Reply-To: <9vnurl+chu0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vo2it+jou4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "doliesl" <doliesl at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> > I was thinking about the Quidditch scene in the movie, and I'm 
actually
> > slightly disappointed that they didn't leave the book commentary 
in the
> > movie. That would've been funny as all get out. If I remember 
correctly,
> > it was also a guy doing the commentating, and there was bickering
> > between the commentator and McGonagall. 
> 
> The commentator is Lee Jordan, who did appeared in the movie, 
except his 
> "comments" were reduce into merely annoucing score and introducing
> the teams. Sounds like you might've been mistaken, but the Lee 
Jordan in 
> the movie is indeed a "guy" (just that he has girly voice).

Is it just me, or did anyone else think that the guy who plays Lee 
Jordan in the film is a bit too young? I think he's meant to be in 
Fred and George's year, ie the third year, yet he seemed more like 
first-year age. I also think that they cut out too much of the 
commentary he did during the quidditch match (much as I enjoyed it!), 
I think that some more of his funny comments would have added to the 
scene and also would have added to the humour of the film. What does 
everyone else think?

Rach / Sparra ('v')




From rach_sparra at lineone.net  Tue Dec 18 18:45:51 2001
From: rach_sparra at lineone.net (rach_sparra2001)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:45:51 -0000
Subject: Ron
In-Reply-To: <9vnido+dre3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vo2sv+fdnv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ftah3" <ftah3 at y...> wrote:
> Dawn wrote:
> > Speaking of Ron.  I loved him so much in the movie.  But it 
> bothered 
> > me a little that he came off as a total sidekick.  I didn't like 
> that 
> > b'c when someone is a sidekick, they're not really their own 
> person.  
> > I never got the impression that Ron was a sidekick from reading 
the 
> > books.  Did any of you?
> 
> Well, I did, except that in the books he was quite a more fleshed-
out 
> sidekick.  Harry is always the hero; while Ron, and Hermione for 
that 
> matter, do heroic things, still Harry is the hero of the story ~ 
> i.e., in the end he has to conquer the bad guy(s) alone.
> 
> On the other hand, I do see what you mean, because in the movie, so 
> many of his wonderful lines, actions and reactions had to be cut, 
> that he necessarily remained "Ron, Harry's friend and sidekick," 
> instead of being able to fill out into "Ron, witty interesting kid 
> who is friends with Harry and is under it all a sidekick."  Er.  So 
> to speak.  I'm looking forward to future films to watch characters 
> like Ron and Hermione flesh out!
> 
> Mahoney

I agree with both of you - Ron's character should have been given 
much more of a chance to develop, but then so should many of the 
characters in the film. For example, I was quite disappointed with 
Fred and George in the film - in the book they are so funny but we 
hardly got to see any of that. Obviously, time is the main 
restriction here, and it would be almost impossible to tackle that 
problem. However, I am hoping that in future films, especially when 
we visit the Weasley's house in the second year, we will see all the 
Weasley characters acheiving more significance in the storyline! 
After all, in many of the scenarios, without Ron and Hermione, Harry 
would be completely stuck. I think that that alone moves them up 
from 'sidekick status'! ;o)

Rach / Sparra ('v')




From rach_sparra at lineone.net  Tue Dec 18 18:48:42 2001
From: rach_sparra at lineone.net (rach_sparra2001)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:48:42 -0000
Subject: soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <3C1EC9F5.93AF8E03@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vo32a+bbef@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> I received my soundtrack in the mail two days ago, and have been
> listening to it non stop.This soundtrack has really sucked me in. I
> think other people would do fine with the music, if they changed
> composers, but Williams has set the stage for the movies, and I 
think it
> would be a shame to change it. Even if the music is different, a few
> elements need to remain, like Hedwig's theme. Kind of like Star 
Wars and
> Star Trek, even though they have different composers, they keep the 
same
> key elements.
> 
> Okee...that's all...
> -Katze

I am now REALLY looking forward to hearing my soundtrack, when I 
hopefully buy a copy after Christmas! I agree that even if the 
composer is changed, the main themes should be kept. However, I did 
feel that the music was slightly too overwhelming in certain parts of 
the film. I think it was needed to add to the mood, but at times it 
was a bit much! 

Rach / Sparra ('v')




From therealmarajade at jedi.com.br  Tue Dec 18 19:32:21 2001
From: therealmarajade at jedi.com.br (therealmarajade)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:21 -0000
Subject: The future of the HP movies (was Re: Why on earth...)
In-Reply-To: <3C1EAC2C.DE4D61F7@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vo5k5+6och@eGroups.com>

> I'm constantly trying the jedi hand wave, but it doesn't work 8-(

Yeah, that happens with me too...*sigh* ;)

> The Leaky Cauldron reported that the first 3 are being filmed back 
> to back, regardless of the it's release date.

I know. I saw that (The Leaky Cauldron is one of the pages I visit 
everyday). But maybe I wasn't too clear in my post. =) The 2 years 
hiatus would happen between the screening of movies 2 and 3, and 
between the filming of movies 3 and 4. In other words, the third 
movie would be filmed at the end of 2002 and only released at the end 
of 2004, while the fourth movie would be filmed at the end of 2004 
and released at the end of 2005. =) I thought that was clear when I 
said that 14 years old Ron could be played by 16 years old Rupert, 
since Ron is 14 years old in GoF. =)

I just hope we get to keep at least Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, 
Rupert Grint, Tom Felton, Robbie Coltrane, Maggie Smith and Alan 
Rickman. =)
Yeah, I know it's pratically the whole cast, but I loved the kids, 
Hagrid and McGonagall were great, and Mr. Rickman is one of my 
favorite actors! =)

> I think the younger Speilberg would be great...not the A.I. 
> Spielberg.
> But consider some of his other movies (onces that I enjoy): Saving
> Private Ryan, Mask of Zorro, Deep Impact(!fav!), Men in Black
> (excellent!), The Money Pit, The Color Purple, and others...

Okay...Spielberg did not direct Mask of Zorro, Deep Impact, Men in 
Black and The Money Pit. He was only an executive producer in these 
movies. But we are considering him as a director for the third HP 
movie. And as a director, I have to say that I LOVED Schindler's 
List, Close Encouters of the Third Kind, Jurassic Park 1 & 2, E.T., 
and the Indiana Jones series! =)

> I believe Daniel was interested in doing all 7 movies. I'm not sure
> about Emma and Ron, but I think they'd go for it too. But that 
might be
> wishful thinking.

I had the impression that Emma and Rupert wanted to do all the 
movies, especially because they are big fans of the HP books. I think 
they were only afraid if they would age well enough for the 
characters. But I'm not sure. =)

And weren't Daniel's parents worried about him doing the HP movie? Do 
you think that that will be a problem in the future?

> You english seems fine to me! I never would've noticed.

Thank you! *does happy Snoopy dance* =)

Debora





From therealmarajade at jedi.com.br  Tue Dec 18 19:38:57 2001
From: therealmarajade at jedi.com.br (therealmarajade)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:38:57 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vmgr4+df8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vo60h+jqbi@eGroups.com>

> Of course 7-10 years IS quite a bit of time to devote to all this.  
> But I'm sure there will be breaks to do other stuff.  And even if 
> there isn't, they will still be quite young (early 20s) when they 
> finish.

Well, the original Star Wars trilogy was filmed and released during a 
period of more than 6 years. And the sequels are also taking that 
long (Episode 1 came out in 1999, Episode 2 is coming out in 2002, 
and Episode 3 will only be released in 2005).

I know they had 3 years in-between to do the actual filming and pre- 
and pos-production, but the actors had to commit themselves to 
something that would expand into a rather large period of time. 

And even with all the success that Harrison Ford had during the 
original trilogy and with the Indiana Jones' movies, he worked in all 
the movies. Sure, they had to pay him more to do the other 2 movies, 
but he did them. Why shouldn't Daniel, Rupert and Emma do the next HP 
movies?

> Something else I keep thinking about: with how on earth long it's 
> taking JKR to write the 5th book, how long will it be before book 6 
> and 7 come out?  All actors may have to take an extended break just 
> to wait for the BOOKS to come out... let alone the movies!

I was wondering the same thing...but if books 6 is published in 2004 
and book 7 in 2006 (therefore with intervals of 2 years between the 
books) that won't be a problem. Well, at least I hope so. =)

Debora




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 18 19:43:34 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:43:34 -0000
Subject: CoS casting (was Actors' Ages HA!)
Message-ID: <9vo696+inqe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "oz_widgeon" <littlered32773 at y...> wrote:
> This is from CBBC Newsround (big thanks to the hpgalleries.com and 
> the-leaky-cauldron.org), and just goes to PROVE you don't have to 
> be the same age as the character you're playing.
> 
> A mysterious Myrtle 
> 
> There's a interesting piece of casting for Moaning Myrtle, the 
> ghost who haunts the girls' toilets. 
> 
> She'll be played by Shirley Henderson who's 35 years old (yes 
> 35!!!). 
> She was last seen in Bridget Jones's Diary as Bridget's best mate 
> Jude. 

ooh! what a scoop 8-) i loved shirley henderson too. bbc news gives 
more casting news at the link below, on colin creevey, armando dippet 
and aragog - i'm not familiar with any of the actors.

interesting to note that they call henderson's character "miserable 
myrtle" not "moaning myrtle." the first book-to-film change for CoS 
perhaps? <g>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1718000/171
8325.stm

kt in seattle





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 21:40:29 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:40:29 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Quidditch commentators
References: <9vnurl+chu0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1FB7CD.2639EE5F@kingwoodcable.com>

doliesl wrote:

> 
> The commentator is Lee Jordan, who did appeared in the movie, except his
> "comments" were reduce into merely annoucing score and introducing
> the teams. Sounds like you might've been mistaken, but the Lee Jordan in
> the movie is indeed a "guy" (just that he has girly voice).

Girlie voice and longer hair. I swear it was a girl...I'll have to look
harder next time I see the movie.

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Tue Dec 18 22:06:13 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:06:13 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The future of the HP movies (was Re: Why on earth...)
References: <9vo5k5+6och@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C1FBDD5.D2F6384D@kingwoodcable.com>

therealmarajade wrote:

> 
> > I think the younger Speilberg would be great...not the A.I.
> > Spielberg.
> > But consider some of his other movies (onces that I enjoy): Saving
> > Private Ryan, Mask of Zorro, Deep Impact(!fav!), Men in Black
> > (excellent!), The Money Pit, The Color Purple, and others...
> 
> Okay...Spielberg did not direct Mask of Zorro, Deep Impact, Men in
> Black and The Money Pit. He was only an executive producer in these
> movies. But we are considering him as a director for the third HP
> movie. And as a director, I have to say that I LOVED Schindler's
> List, Close Encouters of the Third Kind, Jurassic Park 1 & 2, E.T.,
> and the Indiana Jones series! =)

Ok...I see I got my list mixed up...here are movies that he *did* direct
that I enjoyed: 

The indiana Jones stories, Close Encounters, Jurassic Park, Amistad,
Hook, etc.

Is Spielberg good about keeping the same actors? I think the only chain
movies he's done re the Indiana Jones, and he insisted on Keeping Ford.
Same with his production of Men and Black. No one has tried to insert
person x for Will Smith, or Tommy Lee Jones.

My worry is that the director would want to change. But I think WB might
make a big enough stink (especially with some petition action), to keep
the same actors.

So...that's my opinion for the day ;-)
-Katze



From scully931 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 23:20:11 2001
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:20:11 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vmgr4+df8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9voivb+p6e4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., " But... even if not.. is it 
> just me... or does anyone else get annoyed when people abandon the 
> projects that made them big stars?  Like David Duchovny.  If it 
> wasn't for "The X-Files," most people still wouldn't know who he 
> was.. yet he got borred with the series.  There are quite a number 
of 
> actors who do things like this... look at ER and NYPD Blue.  Then 
> they leave the show and don't really do much anyway.
> 
> I would just really be annoyed if these kids got such big heads 
that 
> they would forsake the HP movies to go do other stuff.  I don't 
know, 
> maybe it's just me.
> 
> 
> Did anyone else read that Daniel Radcliffe would like to study 
> autism?  I thought that was so great..  It seems he's contemplated 
> the idea of working with kids with autism... if the acting thing 
> isn't for him.
> 

> 
> Dawn

I agree with SO much of what you said, Dawn! The X-Files is a prime 
example. David isn't doing much and the show has become a disaster. 
I know Rupert Grint is a huge fan of the books, but to me, he seems 
the most likely to get wrapped up in the Hollywood scene and take 
off to do other stuff. Isn't he the one they weren't happy with 
because he did "Thunderpants" or something? And Emma looked SO 
grownup at the premiers. I mean like a little girl playing grownup. 
I wanted to see her in overalls or something. As soon as I saw the 
kids, I just thought, "Oh, don't let Hollywood get ahold of them! 
Bad! NO!" I mean, they are all so cute - especially Daniel. I just 
don't want them to get big heads and cut out on the movies. It IS 
their decision. But, so often when actor's make the decsion to leave 
a successful show/movie it is for the wrong reasons and turns out 
badly. I just want to watch the movies and know they are nice kids. 
I can't STAND "Hollywood" kids! I want them to stay as innocent as 
possible. Hopefully their parents will try to keep them that way. 




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 18 23:27:24 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:27:24 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9voivb+p6e4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vojcs+gss6@eGroups.com>

> I agree with SO much of what you said, Dawn! 

GMTA!  :)

> I can't STAND "Hollywood" kids! I want them to stay as innocent as 
> possible. Hopefully their parents will try to keep them that way.

I get every impression that Mr. Radcliffe will work hard to keep his 
son in check.  He didn't even want Dan to do the movie at first, I 
think, for that reason.  And Dan seems sincerely determined not to 
let anything change either.  So, I do have strong hopes where he is 
concerned, which is good since he's THE most important character.

As for Emma Watson and Rupert Grint.  I really don't know.  Rupert 
feels he was BORN to play this role, but perhaps he may get too into 
the Hollywood scene.

One other good thing though, is that although WB (ie. Hollywood) 
funded the movie, it seemed to be strongly grounded in English 
workings.  People in the entertainment industry in Britain never seem 
as (collectively) shallow and fame-obsessed as their American 
counterparts.

Dawn




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Dec 18 23:28:32 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:28:32 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9voivb+p6e4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vojf1+6unl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Scully931" <scully931 at y...> wrote:
> As soon as I saw the 
> kids, I just thought, "Oh, don't let Hollywood get ahold of them! 
> Bad! NO!" I mean, they are all so cute - especially Daniel. I just 
> don't want them to get big heads and cut out on the movies. It IS 
> their decision. But, so often when actor's make the decsion to leave 
> a successful show/movie it is for the wrong reasons and turns out 
> badly. I just want to watch the movies and know they are nice kids. 
> I can't STAND "Hollywood" kids! I want them to stay as innocent as 
> possible. Hopefully their parents will try to keep them that way.

Don't worry too much.  Columbus seems to have learned his lessons from the 
"Home Alone" films.  He has explained that  he was careful to recruit kids with 
level-headed parents.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 00:50:10 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:50:10 -0000
Subject: Why on earth do we need new actors in the future???
In-Reply-To: <9vojcs+gss6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9voo82+9c8f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> > I agree with SO much of what you said, Dawn! 
> 
> GMTA!  :)
> 
> > I can't STAND "Hollywood" kids! I want them to stay as innocent as 
> > possible. Hopefully their parents will try to keep them that way.
> 
> I get every impression that Mr. Radcliffe will work hard to keep his 
> son in check.  He didn't even want Dan to do the movie at first, I 
> think, for that reason.  And Dan seems sincerely determined not to 
> let anything change either.  So, I do have strong hopes where he is 
> concerned, which is good since he's THE most important character.
> 
> As for Emma Watson and Rupert Grint.  I really don't know.  Rupert 
> feels he was BORN to play this role, but perhaps he may get too into 
> the Hollywood scene.
> 
> One other good thing though, is that although WB (ie. Hollywood) 
> funded the movie, it seemed to be strongly grounded in English 
> workings.  People in the entertainment industry in Britain never seem 
> as (collectively) shallow and fame-obsessed as their American 
> counterparts.
> 
> Dawn 



  I've always heard it said by friends who work in the film industry that in Britain, the standard actor attitude is that acting is their bread-and-butter job and occupation, and they relate to it in the same way that, say, a computer programmer relates to his job.  Whereas once American actors become Names, no matter how down-to-earth they remain in their likes and dislikes, they have a tendency to think of acting as a birthright and artistic lifestyle.  




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 01:41:26 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:41:26 -0000
Subject: What?
Message-ID: <9vor86+7pge@eGroups.com>

This doesn't have much to do with Harry potter, but what exactly 
happened to the kid in the home alone movies? were his parents like 
super-obssesed with his movie career or something? Someone please 
explain this to me




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 01:43:29 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:43:29 -0000
Subject: Viktor Krum!!
Message-ID: <9vorc1+jn9q@eGroups.com>

Who would you all like to see cast as Viktor Krum in GoF?? Personally, 
I picture him as a younger Gavin Rossdale, but thats obvioulsy 
impossible! ^_^
xxx,
Witchgr




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 01:46:27 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:46:27 -0000
Subject: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'/Book 5 publication date
In-Reply-To: <9vm9oh+jg6f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vorhj+7pgc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "williamhause2000" <william.hause at i...> 
wrote:
> > We may need a new actor to play Harry if Daniel Radcliffe puts on 
> > much more weight!  In the book Harry is scrawny.  After Harry's 
fight 
> > with 'you know who' Daniel is shown lying on his back.  From that 
> > perspective you can see that Daniel Radcliffe is not skinny.
> 
> It's true, Daniel didn't look *skinny*, just regular.   BUT: was 
Harry described 
> as skinny throught the book(s) or just at the beginning of SS?  The 
Dursleys 
> had somewhat underfed him and he was excited at the prospect of 
having all 
> he wanted to eat at Hogwarts.  Once he started eating those big 
meals, he'd 
> fill out just fine and not be skinny anymore by the time he 
confronts 
> Quirrelmort.  Plus, at that age, lots of kids put on a little weight 
in 
> preparation for growth spurts.
> 
> All this stuff about green eyes, lanky Ron, skinny Harry, or bushy 
hair and big 
> teeth on Hermione just aren't essential to the story.  The important 
thing is to 
> get fine child actors, which they did do.  (They can give Lily blue 
eyes if it's so  
> important that Harry's eyes match hers.)
> 
> Going back to message 31756:
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "rth_adidas" <rth_adidas at h...> wrote:
> > Does anybody have any idea on when the fifth Harry Potter book 
will 
> > be out?
> 
> The Guardian has recently reported that JKR has given the publisher 
no 
> indication when she'll be done with the first draft of the 
manuscript, and the 
> soonest likely publication date is September 2002.
> 
> http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,619138,00.html



That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard!!! Dan Radcliffe, 
CHUBBY!?!?!?! That boy is a stick!!! ALL kids who haven't gone through 
puberty have a sticky-out belly, it's their baby fat. Look at Emma and  
Rupert, they have one too! As soon as they all get a little older, 
it'll go away, but by no means are any 




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 02:06:09 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (megrose_13)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:06:09 -0000
Subject: Issues with Actors' ages
Message-ID: <9vosmh+fv3r@eGroups.com>

The only real problem I have with actors' ages are Dean Tomas and 
(sadly) Sean Biggerstaff.  Isn't Wood supposed to be about 15?  16?  
He looks far too old to be 16!  But yet, he is so cute!  Ok, enough 
of that.  Did anyon else notice this or am I just wierd?  LOL




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 02:07:29 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (megrose_13)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:07:29 -0000
Subject: Issues with Actors' ages
Message-ID: <9vosp1+8cq6@eGroups.com>

The only real problem I have with actors' ages are Dean Tomas and 
(sadly) Sean Biggerstaff.  Isn't Wood supposed to be about 15?  16?  
He looks far too old to be 16!  But yet, he is so cute!  Ok, enough 
of that.  Did anyon else notice this or am I just wierd?  LOL




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 02:08:51 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:08:51 -0000
Subject: Issues with Actors' ages
In-Reply-To: <9vosmh+fv3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vosrj+b72c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "megrose_13" <megrose_13 at y...> wrote:
> The only real problem I have with actors' ages are Dean Tomas and 
> (sadly) Sean Biggerstaff.  Isn't Wood supposed to be about 15?  16?  
> He looks far too old to be 16!  But yet, he is so cute!  Ok, enough 
> of that.  Did anyon else notice this or am I just wierd?  LOL
**********************************************************************
No, I don't think he looked to old. He WAS cute, though!! ^_^ Me and 
my best friend were going nuts when we saw him!




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 19 02:52:14 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:52:14 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is too 'not-skinny'/Book 
 5 publication date
References: <9vorhj+7pgc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2000DE.D782B8B6@kingwoodcable.com>


> That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard!!! Dan Radcliffe,
> CHUBBY!?!?!?! That boy is a stick!!! ALL kids who haven't gone through
> puberty have a sticky-out belly, it's their baby fat. Look at Emma and
> Rupert, they have one too! As soon as they all get a little older,
> it'll go away, but by no means are any

I agree...I think he's just fine. I saw a picture of during an interview
(wearing his wizard clothes), and he's really grown. His face long now,
and I think he's looks even more like the Harry I imagined.

I can't find that picture though...but the one sent out a few days ago
(yesterday?) on the BBC was great. I think he's progressing just fine!

-Katze



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 07:54:20 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:54:20 -0000
Subject: Business Implications of a Two-Part GoF Movie
In-Reply-To: <9v8avv+6e09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vph3c+73lf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> As we've all heard, they are thinking of doing a two-part GoF movie. 
> 
> I was wondering what the business implications of doing this might 
be.  So far as I know, there has never been a major motion picture  
that was released in two parts, four weeks apart. Setting aside 
whether the fans on the list would like to see as much HP as we can 
get, I wonder how the folks at Warner Brothers are sorting this out.  
>... edited ...

I think they may have learn their lesson from the first movie. To 
Harry Potter fans the movie was incredably short and passed over and 
zoomed through many parts of the story. Most real fan thought the 
movie was too short.

The original cut of the movie was 4 hours long, but I think they 
trimmed it down thinking that most 'kids' couldn't sit still for that 
long. So they trimmed it down to what they considered a tolerable 
length.

I think what they should have done with the first movie and what they 
do with the other up coming movies is leave them full length with an 
intermission about half way through.

I know I could have easily sat through the full 4 hour version.

Also, there is a petition on the internet somewhere, demanding that 
Warner release the full 4 hour version when it is released on DVD.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 08:04:34 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:04:34 -0000
Subject: A Wizard's Wand of Your Own
Message-ID: <9vphmi+psf5@eGroups.com>

I got this idea to make a Wizard's Wand and started looking around the 
building supply stores to see what I could come up with. It's actually 
pretty easy and cheap.

Here is a link to a website that has photos and instruction on how to 
do it.

http://blueMoonMarket.homestead.com/files/wiz/wizwand.htm

There is nothing for sale here, it's just a link to instruction and a 
list of parts that you can get anywhere.




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 10:05:36 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:05:36 -0000
Subject: A Wizard's Wand of Your Own
In-Reply-To: <9vphmi+psf5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vpopg+2tvk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
> I got this idea to make a Wizard's Wand and started looking around 
the 
> building supply stores to see what I could come up with. It's 
actually 
> pretty easy and cheap.
> 
> Here is a link to a website that has photos and instruction on how 
to 
> do it.
> 
> http://blueMoonMarket.homestead.com/files/wiz/wizwand.htm
> 


How intriguing!  There is a site where you can purchase wands (real 
wood ones, not the cheesy plastic kind), but I can't find the link 
right now, and as I'm at work <grumble, grumble, lousy work taking up 
too much of my valuable HP time> I can't to search for it right now.  
What I find the most interesting about the site you listed is that the 
'core' is in the handle, not the wand itself.  Does anyone else have 
an opinion (either way) on this?  In the movie, I was quite surprised 
by the 'chunkiness' of several of the wands (I had pictured them 
slimmer-like the thickness of a pen or drinking straw), though I think 
it would be easier (especially for a child) to keep up with something 
that is a bit more substantial.  I do like that they have handles.  I 
don't know why I like this, it's just aesthetically pleasing to me (I 
especially like that Hermione's wand has a burnished gold colored 
handle).  What did everyone else think of the way they looked in the 
movie?  Were they way you pictured them?  Not at all?  Do you think 
the core is in the length of the wand or the handle?  If it's in the 
length (not the handle), do they have to 'magic' it in? Do you think 
the handle and shaft (for lack of a better word and I'm tired of 
calling it the 'length') are made from the same piece of wood and 
perhaps just 'dipped' if the handle is colored?  Do you think they are 
carved seperately out of the same type of wood and just put together?  
Do you think I can think of more questions? :)

Slon




From foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 11:41:22 2001
From: foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com (foilgirl_82)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:41:22 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
Message-ID: <9vpud2+6sfe@eGroups.com>

Hello everyone,

I've been lurking for a while (no-mail, since I hadn't seen the movie) 
and finally saw the HP movie yesterday. I was pretty eager, having 
read the books, but it took some...er, persuading to get my husband, 
Bryan, to come with me. :) Since I saw it, I've been dying to talk 
about it. This seemed like the perfect place. So, here goes...

The movie was okay, but it all seemed a bit pointless. Don't get me 
wrong, the acting was good, and the effects were wonderful, *and* I 
know they changed a few things around (I was sure Lee Jordan was a 
girl until I read the credits...my bad), but still. I was looking 
forward to the movie so much because I thought it would add something 
that the books didn't. A different interpretation, maybe? I wasn't 
expecting a (nearly) carbon copy of the first book and that was a 
disappointment. I suppose I'm being unreasonable, since I can't think 
of any "movies-based-on-books" that do that very well...I just left 
the theater feeling like we should've seen something else and left HP 
for video. I may do that with the rest of the movies.

On the other hand, Bryan was very entertained. He bugged me with 
Quidditch-related questions for most of the first half ("That part's 
kind of like soccer, but really, the whole thing's more like rugby..." 
"Well, why is he just sitting there? Shouldn't he be flying around 
looking for the snitch thing?" "What are the rules again?") and 
actually clapped at the end, something he doesn't usually do at 
movies. I think he's actually going to read the books, or at least the 
first one. Pretty amazing, considering he used to make fun of me for 
reading them.:)

Respectfully,

Meghan





From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 12:24:34 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:24:34 -0000
Subject: CoS casting (was Actors' Ages HA!)
In-Reply-To: <9vo696+inqe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vq0u2+knv8@eGroups.com>


oz_widgeon wrote:
> > This is from CBBC Newsround (big thanks to the hpgalleries.com 
and 
> > the-leaky-cauldron.org), and just goes to PROVE you don't have to 
> > be the same age as the character you're playing.
> > 
> > A mysterious Myrtle 
> > 
> > There's a interesting piece of casting for Moaning Myrtle, the 
> > ghost who haunts the girls' toilets. 
> > 
> > She'll be played by Shirley Henderson who's 35 years old (yes 
> > 35!!!). 
> > She was last seen in Bridget Jones's Diary as Bridget's best mate 
> > Jude. 

LOL!  Actually, somehow I can see this. She's a very young-looking 
lady, and *could* probably pass for late teens in a pinch.  And she's 
adorable in a vaguely snippy, a bit pinched way .... :-P

What really makes me happy is that the little gal who played Ginny in 
the first movie appears to be reprising her role in the second!  I 
thought she was perfect, just by looks and by the fact that even 
though she had one line and otherwise stood around doing little at 
all, she didn't have that "ooh, I'm a totally untrained actress in a 
really big movie and I have no clue what I'm doing!" look about her.

Also, this is unconfirmed, but Kevin J. O'Connor is rumored to be the 
voice for Dobby.  More perfect!  I'm hearing the vocal inflections he 
used in the Mummy movies, and, so completely Dobby.

La-lala, I'm a happy girl!

Mahoney




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 12:50:22 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:50:22 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vpud2+6sfe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vq2ee+8isk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "foilgirl_82" <foilgirl_82 at y...> wrote:
 I was looking 
> forward to the movie so much because I thought it would add 
something 
> that the books didn't. A different interpretation, maybe? I wasn't 
> expecting a (nearly) carbon copy of the first book and that was a 
> disappointment. 

I think it funny that you say this, as most of the gripes have been 
about the movie not following the book closely enough.  You should 
read some of the gripes on the hpgalleries boards!  I don't think I've 
seen one complaint about it following to book too closely.  Very 
intersting!


> On the other hand, Bryan was very entertained. He bugged me with 
> Quidditch-related questions for most of the first half ("That part's 
> kind of like soccer, but really, the whole thing's more like 
rugby..." 
> "Well, why is he just sitting there? Shouldn't he be flying around 
> looking for the snitch thing?" "What are the rules again?")

I wondered why Harry didn't move so much at first too, but it was his 
first match, and I guess I probably would have wanted to see what was 
going on too!  Also (after my 3rd viewing) I realized that he is much 
higher than the others (during most of the game), so he probably did 
have a good vantage point of the pitch from which to search for the 
snitch.  La la la pitch from which to search for the snitch!  Sounds 
rather musical doesn't it?  :)

>and 
> actually clapped at the end, something he doesn't usually do at 
> movies. 

Brilliant!  I loved it when everyone clapped when we saw it.  Most 
people (sheepishly including myself) clapped when Harry got into 
Gryffindor, when they won the Quiddich match and when Gryffindor won 
the House Cup.  None of these were surprises, but we cheered anyway!


>I think he's actually going to read the books, or at least the 
> first one. Pretty amazing, considering he used to make fun of me for 
> reading them.:)
>

Ah, an excellent chance for you to be all smug, superior and 'I told 
you so-ish'!  :-D

Slon




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Dec 19 13:20:41 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:20:41 -0000
Subject: What?/Macaulay Culkin/Biggerstaff/NO 4-hour version/wands
In-Reply-To: <9vor86+7pge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vq479+hccp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "witchgrrl2004" <witchgrrl2004 at y...> wrote:
> This doesn't have much to do with Harry potter, but what exactly 
> happened to the kid in the home alone movies? were his parents like 
> super-obssesed with his movie career or something? Someone please 
> explain this to me

Macaulary Culkin is the most (in)famous of several photogenic children born to 
stage-obsessed parents who pushed the children into continuous performances 
(Culkin did 14 movies in 8 years), mishandled their money, and then 
incorporated the children into their messy divorce.  Culkin himself was 
married at 17 and divorced recently. Very sad tale.

http://www.blockbuster.com/bb/person/details/0,7124,BIO-P+16081,00.html

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "megrose_13" <megrose_13 at y...> wrote:
> The only real problem I have with actors' ages are Dean Tomas and 
> (sadly) Sean Biggerstaff.  Isn't Wood supposed to be about 15?  16?  
> He looks far too old to be 16!  But yet, he is so cute!  Ok, enough 
> of that.  Did anyon else notice this or am I just wierd?  LOL

Believe me, we ALL noticed, LOL.  Biggerstaff is 18, not too old to play a 
16-year-old IMHO and yet also not jailbait.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> Also, there is a petition on the internet somewhere, demanding that 
> Warner release the full 4 hour version when it is released on DVD.

Columbus has asserted that there never was a 4-hour version.  Although we do 
know that there's footage that was never used (based on interviews and 
preview clips etc.), an entire extra 90 minutes would be a bit of overkill, 
espeically on a film with such a tight production schedule.  Here's the 
Columbus interview:

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/news/news.asp?story=3454&ss=Chris+columb
us&cp=1

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "oz_widgeon" <littlered32773 at y...> wrote:
> What I find the most interesting about the site you listed is that the 
> 'core' is in the handle, not the wand itself.  Does anyone else have 
> an opinion (either way) on this?  In the movie, I was quite surprised 
> by the 'chunkiness' of several of the wands (I had pictured them 
> slimmer-like the thickness of a pen or drinking straw),  

The core must be in the wand itself, not the handle, since when Ron's old wand 
was disintegrating the unicorn hair was sticking out of the tip. I, too, pictured 
the wands as much more slender, probably because of Olivander's comments 
about qualities like "whippy" and "swishy".  The movie wands were definitely 
NOT how I had pictured them when reading the books.








From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 13:25:32 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:32 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vpud2+6sfe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vq4gc+ci7n@eGroups.com>

Hello!

Meghan wrote:
>I was looking 
> forward to the movie so much because I thought it would add 
something 
> that the books didn't. A different interpretation, maybe? I wasn't 
> expecting a (nearly) carbon copy of the first book and that was a 
> disappointment. 

You know, this was what I liked about the movie!  I felt as if all of 
the things I'd loved had sprung up alive and full-fleshed.  Like a 
dream I'd had turned out to be real, so to speak.  It felt as if it 
had JKR's voice, her spirit, and her personality, just like the 
books, and I liked that a lot.  

I don't know what I would have thought about a re-interpretation.  I 
guess I doubt the ability of any director/screen writer to capture 
what I love about JKR's writing and the Harry Potter world, so I'd be 
skeered by any attempt thereby.

But I do understand what you're saying; for example, as excellent a 
work as is Jane Austen's "Pride & Prejudice," I don't think it would 
translate to the screen whole-cloth very well, and I think the 
BBC/A&E version, wherein the script and the actors unfused the 
situations and characters with such wonderful and slight but 
decidedly derivative interpretations, was the perfect way to go.

Mahoney




From heidit at netbox.com  Wed Dec 19 14:05:12 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (heidit at netbox.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:05:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: one missing scene - lee, twins, tarantula
Message-ID: <16600678.326799859@imcingular.com>



----Forwarded Message----

From: heiditandy at imcingular.com (Heidi Tandy)
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: one missing scene - lee, twins, tarantula
I just got, as a prezzie for my son, a set of the HP viewmaster reels, which I recommend to anyone with kids.

The fascinating thing about it is, it has a still from a book scene that wasn't in the film's release version.

It's on Platform 9 3/4 and it involves Lee, Fred and George and a tarantula in a box. It's a still, so I know no dialogue, but it must've been a chance to introduce Lee, pre-match, and give a bit more humortime for the twins.

Now this is something that will hopefully be on the dvd!

Heidi Tandy
Follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes and ships - 7 sickles an ounce
http://www.FictionAlley.org.

Heidit at netbox.com



From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 14:00:56 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:00:56 -0000
Subject: GoF
Message-ID: <9vq6io+j86u@eGroups.com>

I wrote this before, but no one answered me. Who would you like to see 
play Viktor Krum In GoF? How about Moody, and FLeur Delacour? Pleas, 
please, PLEASE answer me!!!!!!!!




From alexpie at aol.com  Wed Dec 19 14:03:56 2001
From: alexpie at aol.com (alexpie at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:03:56 EST
Subject: Actors' Ages
Message-ID: <6b.1fa94185.2951f84c@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/19/01 2:55:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


> There's a interesting piece of casting for Moaning Myrtle, the ghost 
> who haunts the girls' toilets. 
> 
> She'll be played by Shirley Henderson who's 35 years old (yes 35!!!). 
> She was last seen in Bridget Jones's Diary as Bridget's best mate 
> Jude

In addition, I believe that JKR stated that she envisualized Snape (at the 
beginning of the canon) as 35 or 36, and Alan Rickman is, of course, 55.  I 
can see where, in other instances, an age difference might present 
suspension-of-disbelief problems, but certainly AR is the only possible 
Snape. 
Barbara (usually Barb, but I note that the list seems to have one of us 
already)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mspond1 at aol.com  Wed Dec 19 15:54:54 2001
From: mspond1 at aol.com (mspond1)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:54:54 -0000
Subject: GoF
In-Reply-To: <9vq6io+j86u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vqd8e+cki9@eGroups.com>

-I can't think of any 17 year old actors who are tall, skinny, and 
have a big nose...It'll probably have to be someone who is unknown.
The same goes for the other two.
-- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "witchgrrl2004" <witchgrrl2004 at y...> wrote:
> I wrote this before, but no one answered me. Who would you like to 
see 
> play Viktor Krum In GoF? How about Moody, and FLeur Delacour? 
Pleas, 
> please, PLEASE answer me!!!!!!!!




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 18:16:15 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:16:15 -0000
Subject: Peter 'Wormtail' Petigrew
Message-ID: <9vqlhf+d0oi@eGroups.com>

You know who I think might make a good match to play the 
role of the Peter 'Wormtail' Petigrew?

Remember the BBC show called 'Are You Being Served'. It 
took place in a British departments story. There was this 
one character Mr. Humpfreys (probably spelled wrong). He 
was a slightly 'swishy' blonde with a gap in his two front
teeth. It's been a long time since I've seen the show, so 
I don't remember his name. But I think he would make a 
great sneaky whining cowardly Wormtail. 




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 19 18:16:42 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:16:42 -0000
Subject: HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
Message-ID: <9vqlia+v9nv@eGroups.com>

Hot off the press from December's edition of Empire film magazine are 
these snippets:

******
The Potter Jotter
Your cut-out-and-throw-away guide to the latest on Harry.

Sick of all things Potter? Well, filming has begun on Harry Potter 
And The Chamber of Secrets, for which Daniel Radcliffe's salary has 
reportedly hit $3 million. Perhaps this will ease the backlash, which 
Richard Harris has already joined. "I've seen the script for the 
second one," he said, "and there's a lot more Dumbledore. I don't 
like it." Chris Columbus, meanwhile has revealed plans for part four, 
The Goblet Of Fire. "We could do a five-hour version. Release part 
one at Thanksgiving and two at Christmas." That'll quench the public 
thirst then.
*****

kt in seattle - who saw the midnight screening of Lord of the Rings 
last night, and thought it was amazing.




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 19 18:24:40 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:24:40 -0000
Subject: DVD - Director's Cut; online HP movie info
Message-ID: <9vqm18+nfd4@eGroups.com>

Columbus' view:

Rumour 7: There'll be a director's cut version of this on the DVD
Verdict: Undecided. `We'll see how long they let me keep the movie.'

more harry stuff at:

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/news/futurefilms/future_film.asp?
id=10012

kt in seattle




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 18:33:37 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:33:37 -0000
Subject: HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
In-Reply-To: <9vqlia+v9nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vqmi1+flrf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
> Hot off the press from December's edition of Empire film magazine 
are 
> these snippets:
> 
> ******
> The Potter Jotter
> Your cut-out-and-throw-away guide to the latest on Harry.
> 
> Sick of all things Potter? Well, filming has begun on Harry Potter 
> And The Chamber of Secrets, for which Daniel Radcliffe's salary has 
> reportedly hit $3 million. Perhaps this will ease the backlash, 
which 
> Richard Harris has already joined. "I've seen the script for the 
> second one," he said, "and there's a lot more Dumbledore. I don't 
> like it." Chris Columbus, meanwhile has revealed plans for part 
four, 
> The Goblet Of Fire. "We could do a five-hour version. Release part 
> one at Thanksgiving and two at Christmas." That'll quench the 
public 
> thirst then.

> *****
> 
> kt in seattle - who saw the midnight screening of Lord of the Rings 
> last night, and thought it was amazing.


   Lord, Harris is getting geezerish. I wouldn't mind if they'd chuck 
him and get Ian McKellen to take on the role for the latter films; 
he'll be done with the Gandalf franchise by then.  (And all the toy 
companies could just re-issue their leftover Gandalfs in fresh 
packaging, what a bargain!)




From richasi at azlance.com  Wed Dec 19 18:40:32 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:40:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
In-Reply-To: <9vqlia+v9nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011219184032.99554.qmail@web13801.mail.yahoo.com>

> Richard Harris has already joined. I've seen the script for the
> second one, he said, and there's a lot more Dumbledore. I don't like 
> it. Chris Columbus, meanwhile has revealed plans for part 

My goodness.. WHAT is it with him.... :/




=====
Ricky Russo
(Richasi)
richasi at azlance.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 19 18:43:15 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:15 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore/Gandalf
In-Reply-To: <9vqmi1+flrf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vqn43+h9i5@eGroups.com>

> Lord, Harris is getting geezerish. I wouldn't mind if they'd chuck 
> him and get Ian McKellen to take on the role for the latter films; 
> he'll be done with the Gandalf franchise by then.  (And all the toy 
> companies could just re-issue their leftover Gandalfs in fresh 
> packaging, what a bargain!)

You know what? You've totally hit the nail on the head! Ian 
McKellen's Gandalf is *exactly* how I personally interpreted 
Dumbledore in the books. The perfect combination of power, caring, 
scariness and humour. Let's start the petition. McKellen's track 
record of actually *re-reading* (absorbing/analysing/devouring) the 
books before doing the role is well documented in FoTR publicity. He 
even based his accent on Tolkien! Now that's what I call having 
passion for your part - and it shows through in the film.

KT in Seattle




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 19:01:34 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:01:34 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
Message-ID: <9vqo6e+c3ft@eGroups.com>

I know there is some concern about the HP actors changing
 physically to an extent that they deemed no longer suitable
for the roles. I think that's just plain stupid.

Harry growing and changing is written into the book. He gets
taller an has to buy new robes, etc....

So I think they should just let the character grow on screen 
the way kids grow in real life. They all seem like reasonably
normal kids, so I don't foresee anything usuall in their 
development.

Also, keep in mind that most TV and movie teen are played by
people in their 20's. So you are not going to see much 
physical change the way you would with a real teen. Plus, 
fictional characters never age. They are perpetually stuck at
the age they were in the first story.

I think that's a mistake to expect that in the case of Harry 
Potter. I think they should let everything develope naturally
just they way it does in real life.

I think there are some characters that could be replace, like
Dumbledore. With his long hair and beard, you really don't get
that much of a sense of what he really looks like, so another
actor could set in.

But I'm pretty sure they would have an impossible time 
replacing  Daniel Radciffe, and a very difficult time
replacing Rupert or Emma.





From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 19:13:07 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:13:07 -0000
Subject: What?
In-Reply-To: <9vor86+7pge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vqos3+2a79@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "witchgrrl2004" <witchgrrl2004 at y...> wrote:
> This doesn't have much to do with Harry potter, but what 
> exactly happened to the kid in the home alone movies? 
> were his parents like super-obssesed with his movie career 
> or something? Someone please explain this to me

Macaulay Culkin did indeed go through some rough time, and he
had his share of teen hell raising year which is not usual as
most teen do.

I think he finally became emansipated from his parents and got
control of his own life.

In a interview, he said he still has enough money that he could
live modestly for the rest of his life and never have to work.

Right now he is living in London and working on stage in 
theater productions, and is appearently doing well and 
feeling well.

He still looks great and I think at some point he may be back 
in the movie business again, but this time on his own terms.

I always thought he was a pretty cool guy, and would like to
see him on the big screen again.




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 19:29:34 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:29:34 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions--Future Composer poll
In-Reply-To: <9vq2ee+8isk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vqpqu+6i0c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "oz_widgeon" <littlered32773 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "foilgirl_82" <foilgirl_82 at y...> wrote:
> > I was looking forward to the movie so much because I thought it
> > would add something that the books didn't. A different
> > interpretation, maybe? I wasn't expecting a (nearly) carbon copy 
> > of the first book and that was a disappointment. 
> 
> I think it funny that you say this, as most of the gripes have been 
> about the movie not following the book closely enough.  You should 
> read some of the gripes on the hpgalleries boards!  I don't think
> I've seen one complaint about it following to book too closely.
> Very intersting!

Actually, if you check some of the earlier messages to the list, 
there are several members here who hold a similar view as 
foilgirl_82, that the movie was trying too hard to stay close to the 
book, and thereby did not make as effective a film in its own right.  
Basically, it all comes down to what you expect an adaptation to do.  
If you'll forgive the shameless self-plug, I wrote about the 
alternate opinions of adaptations in Message #622.  For background in 
understanding that post, you may want to read my views on the HP film 
in particular, which can be found in other earlier messages (search 
for "caliburn").  But, yes, foilgirl_82 is not alone.  She can join 
the club of people who "liked the movie, but thought it worked better 
as a good visualization of a book than as a film judged on its own 
merits".  Sorry, we never came up with a snazzier club nickname.

***

Re: The poll about who you would like to see compose the HP movies 
starting with GOF

I voted for Hans Zimmer in this, but did so quite reluctantly, 
because as I previously stated, I do not really think it makes any 
sense whatsoever to have Zimmer do a follow up to Williams.  In a 
sense, I voted for Zimmer just because it would be neat to see what 
would happen under that circumstance (since, as I said, he's 
surprised me in the past), not because I'm totally convinced it's the 
wisest course of action.  If Williams left, and I really was in 
charge of the replacement decision, I'm not sure I'd pick Zimmer, 
just because his style and Williams style are not that similar at 
all, and I'd hate to tell Zimmer "you have to write this score a 
little more like John Williams".  So there are times when I feel like 
cancelling that vote altogether, since I don't really entirely agree 
with it, but none of the other options seem obviously better.

See if I was Producer David Heyman, then I would probably just keep 
John Williams for as long as he was willing to stay.  Not because I 
have any great love for Williams (my view on him is "middle of the 
road"--I think he is overrated by his diehard fans and underrated by 
his detractors), but because I believe in consistency, except where 
consistency is blindly followed in such a way that it detracts from 
the final product.  So I would make some attempt to keep the music 
within the films relatively similar, without being redundant (perhaps 
more similar in general style and texture than theme or vice versa, 
but not both).  And I think sticking with one composer makes that 
quite possible.

But in the event that Williams backed out, I think I would go with a 
lesser known that had some potential.  For example, I might write to 
a man named Lennie Moore and tell him that he was under consideration 
to replace Williams as the composer for HP, but we wanted to see what 
he'd do with the score if given the opportunity, so please send us a 
demo tape.  Based on that HP demo tape, I would determine whether or 
not to take him on.  Who's Lennie Moore?  You've never heard of him?  
No, of course, you haven't.  In fact, he's not even a film composer.  
He composed the music for a computer game called Outcast (performed 
by the Moscow Symphony Orchestra and Chorus) which is extremely film 
score-esque (in both style and application) and his style bears some 
definite similarity to Williams except that Moore hits some much 
darker textures, which, it seems to me, is exactly what future HP 
movies will need.  And since Moore hasn't really come into his own, 
he will theoretically be more willing to innovate in some instances, 
but also more willing to stick to the ideas that Williams initiated 
where necessary.  Because his style is already a bit similar to 
Williams, I would encourage him to innovate, innovate, innovate 
because the consistency with Williams will then just come naturally, 
and hence, less formulaic.

Or, if Lennie Moore's HP demo tape was not very promising, I might 
take someone better known, but ask them to branch out a bit.  Perhaps 
Michael Kamen, who can be just as melodic as Williams, and might be 
able to follow up in turn, reinterpreting the material already put 
forth by Williams and expanding upon it heavily to darken it, but 
also using orchestrations that are not so typically Williams.  Or 
it'd be interesting to find out what Don Davis did with the Jurassic 
Park 3 soundtrack in having to follow up to Williams.  I haven't 
heard it, so I can't say if it's incredibly "blah" and repetitious or 
if it might be an indicator that he's a possibility as well.  He 
definitely has the training, if nothing else.

Most likely the best choice is someone I'm forgetting . . . Hmm . . .

But I just get the feeling that replacing Williams with another big 
name like Elfman, Horner, Goldsmith, Zimmer, etc. would suddenly give 
us a strikingly different musical palette for future HP movies that 
just wouldn't make for a very consistent painting overall.

-Luke




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 21:21:53 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:21:53 -0000
Subject: Soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9vqpqu+6i0c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vr0dh+8thl@eGroups.com>

Who all has bought the HP soundtrack? I did, and while I'm no big fan 
of classical music, I must say, John Williams has come thisclose to 
converting me *oh my god, I'm turning into my dad!* I especially like 
hedwig's theme, and the mirror of erised. You know that part in the 
film where harry's in front of the mirror, and the camara pans along 
the edge of it's casing, and you hear n almost mettalic little blip of 
the beggining of Hedwig's theme? Thats the part that just makes me go 
nuts. I l




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 21:25:27 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:25:27 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <9vqo6e+c3ft@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vr0k7+i1ds@eGroups.com>

I agree! What difference will two or three years make? Rupert's 
already 13, and even if he does get taller and his voice gets deeper, 
how will that make a difference? Ron sounds like he is the kind of boy 
who would look a few years older then he really is in the first place, 
so whats the big deal? I hope to god they don't replace any of them, 
because it just wouldn't be the same.
-Witchgrrl
**********************************************************************
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:

> I know there is some concern about the HP actors changing
>  physically to an extent that they deemed no longer suitable
> for the roles. I think that's just plain stupid.
> 
> Harry growing and changing is written into the book. He gets
> taller an has to buy new robes, etc....
> 
> So I think they should just let the character grow on screen 
> the way kids grow in real life. They all seem like reasonably
> normal kids, so I don't foresee anything usuall in their 
> development.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that most TV and movie teen are played by
> people in their 20's. So you are not going to see much 
> physical change the way you would with a real teen. Plus, 
> fictional characters never age. They are perpetually stuck at
> the age they were in the first story.
> 
> I think that's a mistake to expect that in the case of Harry 
> Potter. I think they should let everything develope naturally
> just they way it does in real life.
> 
> I think there are some characters that could be replace, like
> Dumbledore. With his long hair and beard, you really don't get
> that much of a sense of what he really looks like, so another
> actor could set in.
> 
> But I'm pretty sure they would have an impossible time 
> replacing  Daniel Radciffe, and a very difficult time
> replacing Rupert or 




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 19 21:39:40 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:39:40 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
References: <9vqlia+v9nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C21091C.3B8304D1@kingwoodcable.com>

katrionabowman wrote:
> 
> Hot off the press from December's edition of Empire film magazine are
> these snippets:
> 
> ******
> The Potter Jotter
> Your cut-out-and-throw-away guide to the latest on Harry.
> 
> Sick of all things Potter? Well, filming has begun on Harry Potter
> And The Chamber of Secrets, for which Daniel Radcliffe's salary has
> reportedly hit $3 million. Perhaps this will ease the backlash, which
> Richard Harris has already joined. "I've seen the script for the
> second one," he said, "and there's a lot more Dumbledore. I don't
> like it." Chris Columbus, meanwhile has revealed plans for part four,
> The Goblet Of Fire. "We could do a five-hour version. Release part
> one at Thanksgiving and two at Christmas." That'll quench the public
> thirst then.
> *****
> 
> kt in seattle - who saw the midnight screening of Lord of the Rings
> last night, and thought it was amazing.


What exactly is the backlash? That Daniel's pay went up (from 30,000
lbs), or that the actors (Harris) are going to do more?

And...since Chris is commenting on GoF...does this mean he's going to
direct? 

Really confused,
-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 19 21:41:02 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:41:02 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
References: <9vqlia+v9nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C21096E.CDFDA970@kingwoodcable.com>

katrionabowman wrote:
> 
> Hot off the press from December's edition of Empire film magazine are
> these snippets:
> 
> ******
> The Potter Jotter
> Your cut-out-and-throw-away guide to the latest on Harry.
> 
> Sick of all things Potter? Well, filming has begun on Harry Potter
> And The Chamber of Secrets, for which Daniel Radcliffe's salary has
> reportedly hit $3 million. Perhaps this will ease the backlash, which
> Richard Harris has already joined. "I've seen the script for the
> second one," he said, "and there's a lot more Dumbledore. I don't
> like it." Chris Columbus, meanwhile has revealed plans for part four,
> The Goblet Of Fire. "We could do a five-hour version. Release part
> one at Thanksgiving and two at Christmas." That'll quench the public
> thirst then.
> *****
> 
> kt in seattle - who saw the midnight screening of Lord of the Rings
> last night, and thought it was amazing.

Darnnit...I forgot to ask...where do we sign up for the Potter Jotter?

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 19 21:58:40 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:58:40 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dumbledore/Gandalf
References: <9vqn43+h9i5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C210D90.8F2E5584@kingwoodcable.com>

katrionabowman wrote:
> You know what? You've totally hit the nail on the head! Ian
> McKellen's Gandalf is *exactly* how I personally interpreted
> Dumbledore in the books. The perfect combination of power, caring,
> scariness and humour. Let's start the petition. McKellen's track
> record of actually *re-reading* (absorbing/analysing/devouring) the
> books before doing the role is well documented in FoTR publicity. He
> even based his accent on Tolkien! Now that's what I call having
> passion for your part - and it shows through in the film.
> 
> KT in Seattle
> 

Great idea! I love the idea of McKellen as Dumbledore. I wasn't
impressed with Harris. He seemed a bit cold to me. D is supposed to be
warm and inviting. We also know he (McKellen) can be very serious (which
is required in GoF), from his part on X-Men! I wonder if he'd consider
reading the book to learn the character?

Oooh...I like this idea....

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 19 22:11:21 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:11:21 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
References: <9vr0k7+i1ds@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C211089.3CC353C6@kingwoodcable.com>

witchgrrl2004 wrote:
> 
> I agree! What difference will two or three years make? Rupert's
> already 13, and even if he does get taller and his voice gets deeper,
> how will that make a difference? Ron sounds like he is the kind of boy
> who would look a few years older then he really is in the first place,
> so whats the big deal? I hope to god they don't replace any of them,
> because it just wouldn't be the same.


My worry is actually for Tom Felton. He doesn't seem to have hit puberty
yet. He's now 14, and I'm wondering if he's the one who's going to look
off from the others? I haven' seen recent pictures of Rupert or Emma,
but I figure they are right in line with Daniel who has grown
significantly since that last film. Not to mention his voice breaking
(happened right after that 1st movie).

-Katze



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 19 22:48:32 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:48:32 -0000
Subject: What's the deal with Word Wrap????
Message-ID: <9vr5g0+7ont@eGroups.com>

Anybody figured out how to stop post from being word wrap so the lines 
are all uneven. It's really a mess to read. 

I don't seem to matter if I have the Word Wrap box checked or not it 
still comes out messed up.

Must be some way to fix that.




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 19 23:09:25 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:09:25 -0000
Subject: HP movie scoop: Dan's salary, Richard Harris, GoF
In-Reply-To: <3C21091C.3B8304D1@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vr6n5+nj9d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> katrionabowman wrote:
>> Hot off the press from December's edition of Empire film magazine 
>> are these snippets:
>> 
>> ******
>> The Potter Jotter
>> Your cut-out-and-throw-away guide to the latest on Harry.
>> 
>> Sick of all things Potter? Well, filming has begun on Harry Potter
>> And The Chamber of Secrets, for which Daniel Radcliffe's salary 
>> has reportedly hit $3 million. Perhaps this will ease the 
>> backlash, which Richard Harris has already joined. "I've seen the 
>> script for the second one," he said, "and there's a lot more 
>> Dumbledore. I don't like it." Chris Columbus, meanwhile has 
>> revealed plans for part four, The Goblet Of Fire. "We could do a 
>> five-hour version. Release part one at Thanksgiving and two at 
>> Christmas." That'll quench the public thirst then.
 
> What exactly is the backlash? That Daniel's pay went up (from 30,000
> lbs), or that the actors (Harris) are going to do more?

katze, empire is a cheeky/tongue-in-cheek, although very well 
respected, film magazine in britain. hence i suspect that "the 
backlash" is probably a)against the success of the movie and b) 
probably not all that existent out in the big wide world. their 
comment of "cut-out-and-throw-away-guide" as opposed to "cut-out-and-
keep" kinda sums up their attitude. their fact quoting and scoops are 
very reputable though.

"the potter jotter" appears to be a regular column updating readers 
on the production of the latest movies each month. as such it's 
something which you probably can't sign up for online, although you 
could take out an international subscription to empire if you wish. 
go here to check it out (as well as to see the cover of their 
december harry potter issue): 
http://www.emapmagazines.co.uk/entertainment.shtml

> And...since Chris is commenting on GoF...does this mean he's going
> to direct? 

well, the way he's quoted indicates his interest - as do other quotes 
of his elsewhere - but note the "could." that sounds like things are 
far from settled...

kt in seattle




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 02:44:46 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:44:46 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore/Gandalf
In-Reply-To: <3C210D90.8F2E5584@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <9vrjau+vavo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> katrionabowman wrote:
> > You know what? You've totally hit the nail on the head! Ian
> > McKellen's Gandalf is *exactly* how I personally interpreted
> > Dumbledore in the books. The perfect combination of power, caring,
> > scariness and humour. Let's start the petition. McKellen's track
> > record of actually *re-reading* (absorbing/analysing/devouring) 
the
> > books before doing the role is well documented in FoTR publicity. 
He
> > even based his accent on Tolkien! Now that's what I call having
> > passion for your part - and it shows through in the film.
> > 
> > KT in Seattle
> > 

McKellen does an EXCELLENT job of playing Gandalf.  He definitely 
deserves an Oscar nomination if not the award.

However, I do NOT think McKellen will ever play Dumbledore.  Knowing 
his reputation and background, he has already played a Wizard (the 
best played Wizard in my memory,) so he would not want to ever play 
the same type of role again. 




From jrmicek at hotmail.com  Thu Dec 20 05:01:15 2001
From: jrmicek at hotmail.com (jaerae33)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:01:15 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <9vqo6e+c3ft@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vrrar+i2pg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
> I know there is some concern about the HP actors changing
>  physically to an extent that they deemed no longer suitable
> for the roles. I think that's just plain stupid.
> 
> Harry growing and changing is written into the book. He gets
> taller an has to buy new robes, etc....
> 
> So I think they should just let the character grow on screen 
> the way kids grow in real life. They all seem like reasonably
> normal kids, so I don't foresee anything usuall in their 
> development.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that most TV and movie teen are played by
> people in their 20's. So you are not going to see much 
> physical change the way you would with a real teen. Plus, 
> fictional characters never age. They are perpetually stuck at
> the age they were in the first story.
> 
> I think that's a mistake to expect that in the case of Harry 
> Potter. I think they should let everything develope naturally
> just they way it does in real life.
> 
> I think there are some characters that could be replace, like
> Dumbledore. With his long hair and beard, you really don't get
> that much of a sense of what he really looks like, so another
> actor could set in.
> 
> But I'm pretty sure they would have an impossible time 
> replacing  Daniel Radciffe, and a very difficult time
> replacing Rupert or Emma.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
True, as it would be great for the main cast members to continue on 
through the rest of the movies, is that really feasible?  I mean, in 
order for the kids to age along with the characters, they'd have to 
do a movie per year.  If they lose even one year, the actor's 
physical and mental appearance may have changed too much from the 
character's.  Now take into consideration the amount of time that GoF 
is going to take to film.  That would hardly leave enough time for 
rest before having to film the fifth book, which from what I've heard 
(possible rumor) is also around 700 pages, so could take just as long 
as the fourth to make.  The last thing we would want is to see the 
kids become burnt out on filming by the 6th or 7th film.  Let's face 
it, seven years of continual filming, with little break, could tire 
one out. 

Though it would be tough to replace Daniel, Emma or Rupert, as well 
as many of the others, I could definately see it happening in some 
cases.

-Jillian





From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 08:06:35 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:06:35 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions--Future Composer poll
In-Reply-To: <9vqpqu+6i0c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vs66b+polg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "caliburncy" <caliburncy at y...> wrote:
 
> Actually, if you check some of the earlier messages to the list, 
> there are several members here who hold a similar view as 
> foilgirl_82, that the movie was trying too hard to stay close to the 
> book, and thereby did not make as effective a film in its own right. 
 


Ah, I came to the movie group late as US Army Europe theaters didn't 
get the movie until 30 Nov, so I missed all those posts.  I will go 
back and check them out though.  However, from my own experience _off_ 
HPFGU-Movies, I have not heard any complaints about the movie being 
_too_ close to the book.

> Basically, it all comes down to what you expect an adaptation to do. 
 
Agreed.  I wanted it to stick to the book, and I'm glad they did so as 
much as possible.  


> If you'll forgive the shameless self-plug, I wrote about the 
> alternate opinions of adaptations in Message #622.  For background 
in 
> understanding that post, you may want to read my views on the HP 
film 
> in particular, which can be found in other earlier messages (search 
> for "caliburn"). 

Plug away, and be proud.  I will go read them.


 But, yes, foilgirl_82 is not alone.  She can join 
> the club of people who "liked the movie, but thought it worked 
better 
> as a good visualization of a book than as a film judged on its own 
> merits".  Sorry, we never came up with a snazzier club nickname.

Hmmmm...where's Tabouli?

Slon-sincerely wishing Yahoo allowed italics




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Dec 20 12:40:14 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:40:14 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <9vrrar+i2pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vsm7e+2htp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "jaerae33" <jrmicek at h...> wrote:
>  Now take into consideration the amount of time that GoF 
> is going to take to film.  That would hardly leave enough time for 
> rest before having to film the fifth book, which from what I've heard 
> (possible rumor) is also around 700 pages, so could take just as long 
> as the fourth to make.  

Here's a quote from a JKR interview from October 2000:

The first four books have been getting longer, but number 4 was huge! Is number 
five likely to be shorter than number 4?
jkrowling_bn: Yes, five is going to be shorter than four
jkrowling_bn: I always knew four would be the longest so far
jkrowling_bn: but even I didn't expect it to be that long

http://www.yahooligans.com/content/chat/jkrowlingchat.html






From ivyblossom at hotmail.com  Thu Dec 20 18:58:04 2001
From: ivyblossom at hotmail.com (Ivy Blossom)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:58:04 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
Message-ID: <F159DBfH8X0jZ4hgR9y00008999@hotmail.com>

>The last thing we would want is to see the
>kids become burnt out on filming by the 6th or 7th film.  Let's face
>it, seven years of continual filming, with little break, could tire
>one out.

Well, they're not exactly filming continually, actually. The filming for 
Philosopher's Stone took 6 months for Dan Radcliffe, who was in pretty much 
every single scene, and we know they filmed a LOT more than they actually 
used, which was a lot. They were also dealing with a very young and 
inexperienced cast. It might take a year to make a film, but it doesn't take 
a year to FILM a film. The kids will probably be the least burned out. Seems 
to me it's the director who'll need to change before the kids will, on that 
score.

Ivy

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 19:07:56 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:07:56 -0000
Subject: What kinda Dumbledore (was Dumbledore/Gandalf)
In-Reply-To: <9vrjau+vavo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vtcuc+tueq@eGroups.com>


katrionabowman wrote:
> > > You know what? You've totally hit the nail on the head! Ian
> > > McKellen's Gandalf is *exactly* how I personally interpreted
> > > Dumbledore in the books. The perfect combination of power, 
caring,
> > > scariness and humour. 

You know, having seen McKlellan in other things (Gods & Monsters, X-
Men, and in regards the case in point, trailers for LOTR), I agree 
with your observation that he manages to exude a wonderful 
combination of power, caring, scariness & humor.

On the other hand, that's not how I've interpreted Dumbledore in the 
books.  

The Dumbledore that I have in mind from reading the books exudes 
power, but a power that is not enormously indistinguishable from 
other wizards of competant power (no moreso than, for example, 
McGonnagall, Snape, Flitwick, or his other peers at Hogwarts).  In 
terms of power, he seems to me to not exude the true magnitude of his 
power, but to rather...hm, how to say...contain it.  Like Pandora's 
box ~ the power is legendary, but it's just a plain ol' box until you 
crack it open.  To me, that's Dumbledore's power.  Imho, Richard 
Harris got that spot on.  

Another aspect of Dumbledore that always strikes me (and sometimes 
annoys the heck out of me) is that he acts, at times, like a 
doddering old fool.  Like, he left his brain in another pointy hat 
that day.  Or possibly, as if he simply doesn't take things as 
seriously as everyone else does, whether because of some deeper 
knowledge/understanding, or exquisite emotional restraint, or as an 
enormous and overdone put-on.  I got that from Richard Harris's 
performance as well ~ he had a vague sort of way of speaking that 
embodied that aspect of Dumbledore, and occasionally of moving and of 
observing his surroundings.

On the other hand, I, like Harry, recognize that his presence is 
greatly comforting.  It's not so much that he cares, it's rather more 
that he seems wise, and is open and compassionate.  He doesn't butt 
in on others' lives in general, but when he has knowledge, even the 
difficult kind, that he thinks you should be privy to, he doesn't 
hold it back.  I guess, he respects all who deserve his respect, 
whether young or old, ill-tempered or kind, powerful or weak.  And 
sometimes, he grants respect even to those who do not deserve it.  

Dumbledore just has (in my mind) an overwhelmingly peaceful way about 
him.  He's very at ease with himself, with his fate, with the world.  
That's the one thing that I went to the movie expecting of Harris's 
performance, and Harris fulfilled it.  

I guess all of the above is why I *don't* think McKlellan would be my 
image of Dumbledore.  He's a fantastic actor, and I've been awed by 
him in most everything I've seen him in, but he is also extremely 
vibrant.  He sort of glimmers; it's almost as if he's in motion even 
when he's standing still.  That's obviously great for so many roles; 
but for my vision of Dumbledore, it would be jarring.  

So, er, rah rah for Richard Harris?  %-P

Mahoney




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 19:21:43 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:21:43 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <F159DBfH8X0jZ4hgR9y00008999@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9vtdo7+roi8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ivy Blossom" <ivyblossom at h...> wrote:
> >The last thing we would want is to see the
> >kids become burnt out on filming by the 6th or 7th film. 
> >Let's face it, seven years of continual filming, with
> >little break, could tire one out.
> 
> Well, they're not exactly filming continually, actually.
> The filming for Philosopher's Stone took 6 months for Dan
> Radcliffe, who was in pretty much every single scene, and
> we know they filmed a LOT more than they actually used,
> which was a lot. They were also dealing with a very young and 
> inexperienced cast. It might take a year to make a film, but
> it doesn't take a year to FILM a film. The kids will probably
> be the least burned out. Seems to me it's the director who'll
> need to change before the kids will, on that score.

Yes... and from what I understand... it is the special effects that 
take a lot of time to generate and perfect.  That's why these movies 
will take a while to be made.

Dawn




From foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 20:23:18 2001
From: foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com (foilgirl_82)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:23:18 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vq2ee+8isk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vthbm+fitp@eGroups.com>

Hello,

> I wondered why Harry didn't move so much at first too, but it was 
his 
> first match, and I guess I probably would have wanted to see what 
was 
> going on too!  Also (after my 3rd viewing) I realized that he is 
much 
> higher than the others (during most of the game), so he probably did 
> have a good vantage point of the pitch from which to search for the 
> snitch.  La la la pitch from which to search for the snitch!  Sounds 
> rather musical doesn't it?  :)

See, now that's something I hadn't thought of. I told Bryan it 
probably just "worked" cinematically, since in the book(I think), JKR 
mentions Harry actually flying around, dodging Bludgers and looking 
for the snitch. Then again, I've only seen the movie once.:)

> Ah, an excellent chance for you to be all smug, superior and 'I told 
> you so-ish'!  :-D

Yes, I've been taking full advantage.:)

-Meghan




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 20:41:15 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:41:15 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vthbm+fitp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vtidb+dnja@eGroups.com>

> See, now that's something I hadn't thought of. I told Bryan it 
> probably just "worked" cinematically, since in the book(I think),
> JKR mentions Harry actually flying around, dodging Bludgers and
> looking for the snitch. Then again, I've only seen the movie once.
> :)

I was quite disappointed with that whole bit b'c it didn't even look 
like he was looking for the snitch.  Yes, I guess he'd be taken with 
watching the game, but he also has to do his JOB.  And I was also a 
bit disappointed that we never see him dodge a bludger.  Maybe next 
time.

PS: Where in the books does it happen that Wood gets knocked to the 
ground?  I couldn't find it.  It certainly wasn't in the first game.

Dawn




From ftah3 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 20:51:48 2001
From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:51:48 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vtidb+dnja@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vtj14+fjeq@eGroups.com>

Dawn wrote:
>And I was also a 
> bit disappointed that we never see him dodge a bludger.  Maybe next 
> time.

Yes we did!  After Gryffindor either scores or keeps Slytherin from 
scoring, we see Harry sitting on his broom cheering ~ he's either 
clapping or waving his hands (well, gol, it's been two weeks since I 
saw it last! ;-P) ~ but anyway a bludger screams past him going 
*very* fast (it's literally a blur), and he jerks himself out of the 
way at the last moment and has to grab onto his broomstick to keep 
from falling off.  I *think* it's shortly before his broomstick 
starts going nuts.
 
I liked it ~ the fact that the bludger moved so quickly got across to 
me how much those balls heighten the challenge of the game.

Mahoney




From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Dec 20 20:58:38 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:58:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Intro/Movie impressions
In-Reply-To: <9vtidb+dnja@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011220205838.33652.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com>

Dawn wrote:
PS: Where in the books does it happen that Wood gets knocked to the
<BR>
ground? I couldn't find it. It certainly wasn't in the
first game.<BR>

I vaguely remember that bit, but I don't think it was in the first
book. I remember it because Marcus Flint knocks it into Wood and Madam
Hooch comes flying up to him, screaming. It might have been the second
Quidditch match in Book One.

Nicky

=====
SECRET SANTA 2001 will be starting soon on 4_BA_Fans! Witness the magic in action on the list!

The Hyperion Tales and Secret Santa can both be found at their archives on http://www.shotokankarate.org.uk/Nikkie/Stepping%20Stone/main.htm and no where else. 

Come visit Another World at http://uk.geocities.com/azingam

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Dec 20 20:59:50 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:59:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Richard Harris is a great actor
Message-ID: <20011220205950.62980.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>

Well, he is! Okay, so Dumbeldore wasn't EXACTLY the way I pictured him
in the book personality-wise (I thought he'd be much kinder) but if
Harris is only going by the script, and not reading the books, then we
can't expect much. Even so, we all know that Harris is a bitter old sod
(excuse my French) which just goes to show how good an actor he is! In
Gladiator he makes Marcus Aurelius seem soft and world-weary, and
Dumbeldore is just kind enough, and very wise. In an interview with
Empire Online (I've been reading ALL the HP related articles) he said 

'When asked if he was enjoying doing the film, he replied "I'm actually
not. I'm in it, so is Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane,
but we're there sort of as special appearances. We come along and we do
it and we get off and we go home."'

He had some good words about Dan but on the whole, Richard Harris is a
nasty piece of work in my opinion (my opinion may not be worth much,
mind you), but as he can portray a wonderful character fairly well then
obviously he is a good actor. I have his face in my head for
Dumbeldore, but I wouldn't mind seeing Gandalf (forgotten his name) as
Dumbeldore. He seems to have a better attitude to learn the character
at least.

Nicky (who has never really liked Harris as a person, from what she has
seen in interviews)


=====
SECRET SANTA 2001 will be starting soon on 4_BA_Fans! Witness the magic in action on the list!

The Hyperion Tales and Secret Santa can both be found at their archives on http://www.shotokankarate.org.uk/Nikkie/Stepping%20Stone/main.htm and no where else. 

Come visit Another World at http://uk.geocities.com/azingam

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com



From foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 21:00:21 2001
From: foilgirl_82 at yahoo.com (foilgirl_82)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:00:21 -0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions--Future Composer poll
In-Reply-To: <9vqpqu+6i0c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vtjh5+q9bk@eGroups.com>

Hi,
 

> But, yes, foilgirl_82 is not alone.  She can join 
> the club of people who "liked the movie, but thought it worked 
> better 
> as a good visualization of a book than as a film judged on its own 
> merits".  Sorry, we never came up with a snazzier club nickname.

Hmmm...LtMBTIWBaaGVoaBTaaFJOIOM? It may not be a snazzy nickname, but 
it's fun to try to pronounce.:) I'm not sure what else you could call 
it. Interpretive Enthusiasts? The "It was okay" Club? 

-Meghan, who really shouldn't post when she's got a head cold




From richasi at azlance.com  Thu Dec 20 21:08:36 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:08:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Intro/Movie impressions
References: <9vtj14+fjeq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C225354.4E2E0A83@azlance.com>

ftah3 wrote:
> Yes we did!  After Gryffindor either scores or keeps Slytherin from
> scoring, we see Harry sitting on his broom cheering ~ he's either
> clapping or waving his hands (well, gol, it's been two weeks since I
> saw it last! ;-P) ~ but anyway a bludger screams past him going
> *very* fast (it's literally a blur), and he jerks himself out of the
> way at the last moment and has to grab onto his broomstick to keep
> from falling off.  I *think* it's shortly before his broomstick
> starts going nuts.

Yes, you're right. I'm not sure of the exact sequence of events,
but he does dodge a Bludger as he's hanging there. In fact,
right after he holds on to his broom after getting "buzzed" by
the Bludger, the Snitch swooshes around his head (or nearby him)
and he goes chasing after it. That leads into the Jinxed-Broom
bit.

Richasi



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Dec 20 21:20:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:20:21 -0000
Subject: Richard Harris is a great actor
In-Reply-To: <20011220205950.62980.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nicky <azingam at y...> wrote:
> Well, he is! Okay, so Dumbeldore wasn't EXACTLY the way I pictured him
> in the book personality-wise (I thought he'd be much kinder) but if
> Harris is only going by the script, and not reading the books, then we
> can't expect much. 

But that's exactly why Harris is NOT a great actor -- if he were, he would've 
taken the trouble to research his character, especially with not only people 
practically begging him to read the books but also the character's creator 
offering to talk to him and offer insights.  What a lazy snob he must be, to turn 
that down!




From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Thu Dec 20 22:39:44 2001
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:39:44 -0000
Subject: HP: Golden Snitch, Yes, Golden Globes, No
Message-ID: <9vtpbg+4o3m@eGroups.com>

Harry Potter was shut out in today's Golden Globe nomimations. 

http://www.globenglobes.org

Despite the well-deserved cheesiness of the Hollywood Foreign Press 
Association, they often prove an accurate percursor of the Oscars 
(they lack categories for things like art direction, costumes, 
special effects, where HP is more liklely to garner nominations).

LOTR/FOTR, however, got four nominations (Best Drama, Best Director, 
Best Musical Score and Best Song)

  - CMC




From bricken at tenbit.pl  Thu Dec 20 22:46:37 2001
From: bricken at tenbit.pl (Ev vy)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:46:37 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Richard Harris is a great actor
References: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c189a8$302dbf20$c108f1d5@OSLII>

From: "joanne0012" <Joanne0012 at aol.com>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nicky <azingam at y...> wrote:
> > Well, he is! Okay, so Dumbeldore wasn't EXACTLY the way I pictured him
> > in the book personality-wise (I thought he'd be much kinder) but if
> > Harris is only going by the script, and not reading the books, then we
> > can't expect much. 
> 
> But that's exactly why Harris is NOT a great actor -- if he were, he would've 
> taken the trouble to research his character, especially with not only people 
> practically begging him to read the books but also the character's creator > offering to talk to him and offer insights.  What a lazy snob he must be, to turn 
> that down!

Well, he seems lazy. I like R. Harris for his earlier movies, he's a very good actor technically. But I've watched an interview with him and he told the interviewer that he enjoys doing nothing. And he dreams of having one day when he'd be able to do absolutely nothing. Then (as he said) he could answer to such a question: "What have you achieved today?" with: "Nothing. I have achieved nothing."

Ev vy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There's nothing level in our cursed natures
But direct villainy.
      William Shakespeare "Timon of Athens"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover,
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determined to prove a villain
     William Shakespeare "Richard III"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 23:16:44 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:16:44 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <F159DBfH8X0jZ4hgR9y00008999@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9vtrgs+fv37@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ivy Blossom" <ivyblossom at h...> wrote:
> ...edited...
> It might take a year to make a film, but it 
> doesn't take  a year to FILM a film. 

Good point. Keep in mind that the screened THOUSANDS of actors
 to make the first movie, plus they had to find and secure 
locations and build all the sets. So a lot of that is already
done, that shortens the process.

Plus most kids have their growth spurt between 13 and 16, so 
if they get the first couple of movies out of the way, the 
almost have to stop to let the actors growth stablize. Most 
people know that movies are filmed out of order. All the 
filming for one location is done at one time, regardless of
whether the scenes occur at the beginning of the movie or 
the end. So there really is a great deal of difficulty shoot
a movie with a kid that is in his growth spurt. In a matter 
of months, a kid can go from 4'8" to 5'8".

So my point is that they will get the first two in the can,
then give them a little growing time and then once they 
stablize they'll start filmingagain. Once they get past 
that growth spurt they can continue to play teenages until
they are 30.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 20 23:18:42 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:18:42 -0000
Subject: FLUFF: Hugo Weaving as Snape?
Message-ID: <9vtrki+gdho@eGroups.com>


 After seeing Hugo Weaving's performance as Elrond in 
LOTR, I came away with the impression that he would 
have been quite an acceptable subsititute as Snape, were
Alan Rickman not cast in the role.  Based on THE MATRIX's
Agent Smith, he could certainly manage the cold, mean
personality, and although Elrond is naturally a bit fancied
up, that role convinced me that Weaving could pull off the
look as well.  I proposed the matching to the other people
who had seen LOTR with me, and they all agreed he could
have done justice to Snape.

 Anyone else? Yeh? Nope? Go soak your head you loser?

 -- heather (uma)




From ivyblossom at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 21 00:18:40 2001
From: ivyblossom at hotmail.com (Ivy Blossom)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:18:40 +0000
Subject: Intro/Movie impressions
Message-ID: <F181s0GUWtraCVRTHeW00008e0f@hotmail.com>

>From: Nicky <azingam at yahoo.co.uk>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>I vaguely remember that bit, but I don't think it was in the first
>book. I remember it because Marcus Flint knocks it into Wood and Madam
>Hooch comes flying up to him, screaming. It might have been the second
>Quidditch match in Book One.


Oy....I was wondering why there was no refereeing in the movie quidditch 
game. Ouch. Poor Wood.

Ivy

_________________________________________________________________
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 02:58:07 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 02:58:07 -0000
Subject: Hans Zimmer!  (was Re: Future Soundtracks)
In-Reply-To: <9vj58q+uki9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vu8fv+2i38@eGroups.com>

I would also mention Hans Zimmer here for his work on "Gladiator." He 
and Lisa Gerard created an epic sound poem that stands alone by 
itself, yet integrated seamlessly into the film. 

John Williams' "Potter" score didn't integrate enough for me. Stood 
too much alone and apart from the film for me, and from day one I 
found myself thinking over and over that Zimmer would have integrated 
the score into the film so it would fly, sort of a wind beneath its 
wings in a very gutwrenching sort of way. Hard to describe, but as 
the films get darker, definitely what will be needed more and more.






From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 03:15:44 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:15:44 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
Message-ID: <9vu9h0+lgbd@eGroups.com>

Has anyone in here seen the Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the 
Ring?  How does the movie compared to Harry Potter and the 
Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone?  Positively?  Negatively?  Let start 
some heated discussions and debates in here!




From ShelaghC at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 03:18:44 2001
From: ShelaghC at aol.com (shelaghcol)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:18:44 -0000
Subject: A newbie signing on
Message-ID: <9vu9mk+8oi5@eGroups.com>

Just being neighborly and introducing myself to the group.

My name is Shelagh and I'm a Harry Potter-holic...

Oh, wait...... I don't think they have 12-step programs yet for movie-
lovers. ;->

As the list-owner(s) recommend, I'm going to peruse the posts for a 
bit before joining in discussions. But I thought I'd tell my silly 
little story of finding Harry Potter just as an intro.

I was on my way home one afternoon and thought I'd stop and see a 
movie - hadn't gone to one since "What Women Want" months and months 
ago (worth it just to see Mel in those pantyhose!). The car steered 
itself to a nearby multiplex and, having been an amateur Ripper-
ologist in high school (what *were* they teaching us in those days! 
<g>), I thought I'd treat myself to a showing of "From Hell."

But for some reason, when I got to the theatre, I began to feel a bit 
whimsical. My eyes fell on the poster for Harry Potter (it had just 
opened that week.) It was playing on six screens at the time and on 
impulse, I asked the folks at the box office if any of the shows had 
seats. 

It was a matinee less than an hour from starting. I was advised to 
come early to make sure I got a decent seat.

I looked at the ticket I'd purchased and wondered what had possessed 
me. I had never read the books. Hadn't even ruminated on seeing the 
movie. Had even stated I had no interest in those kids' books.

And a matinee for crying out loud! There would be noisy kids 
everywhere throwing jujubees and popcorn, shouting at the screen, 
crying to their mothers and fathers, running up and down the aisles! 
I knew I'd made a mistake and would most likely regret it.

But I had my ticket in hand and staunchly stood by my decision.
After a quick trip for a salad, I returned to the theatre, found a 
seat and waited.
The room filled steadily, the lights dimmed, and.....
Gasp! And sudden inhalation! 
The kids were quiet! The kids were attentive! The kids laughed at all 
the right places!
And the movie? I was transfixed! I was amazed! I was agog! In short, 
I liked it. ;->

I went out to buy the book right after it was over, btw. And I've 
seen it three more times since.

Oh, as for "From Hell?" It has since left theatres and I never did go 
to see it......

Okay, so it *wasn't* exactly a little story. (I've never been known 
for my brevity.)

To close, I'm looking forward to the discussion here and even more to 
the next movie next year!

Shelagh





From ShelaghC at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 03:25:47 2001
From: ShelaghC at aol.com (shelaghcol)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:25:47 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vu9h0+lgbd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>

Okay, I lied. I'm posting a reply already. <g>

I saw LOR-FOTR on opening night and loved it!

At the risk of stalling heated discussions, I'd actually suggest 
*not* comparing them at all.

They're two entirely different kinds of movies. Harry Potter is far 
more whimsical in its nature (even with the Voldemort factor) than 
LOR.

About the only things these two movies have in common is:

They have wizards
They have small heroes
They have a lot of special effects
They're about battles of good and evil

Even the style of the books is vastly different (without going into a 
book discussion).

LOR is absolutely not a children's movie and your kids would probably 
be pretty scared if you took them to see it. 

For me, honestly, there's just no comparing the two movies. 

IMHO, of course.

Shelagh


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
> Has anyone in here seen the Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of 
the 
> Ring?  How does the movie compared to Harry Potter and the 
> Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone?  Positively?  Negatively?  Let 
start 
> some heated discussions and debates in here!




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 03:57:50 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:57:50 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
References: <9vu9h0+lgbd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C22B33E.D1AB8E4C@kingwoodcable.com>

luminary_extraordinaire wrote:
> 
> Has anyone in here seen the Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the
> Ring?  How does the movie compared to Harry Potter and the
> Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone?  Positively?  Negatively?  Let start
> some heated discussions and debates in here!
> 

LotR is truly incredible. I saw it this morning. The effects are pretty
much seamless. 

HP and LotR both have a great stories...which is absolutely necessary
for a film to work. After that, you can add the extras...like the
special effects and music... LotR  and HP are on par with each other
story wise (in my opinion), but Harry has a ways to go to catch up with
LotR in the special effects arena. 

The music is hauntingly beautiful. Enya composed two songs for this
movie as well, and they are nothing less than what you would expect from
her.

Really amazing...absolutely breathtaking.

I'll let you know what I think of the characters once I've actually read
the books ;-)  However, my husband said it was a great rendition of the
book.



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 05:02:29 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:02:29 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
Message-ID: <144.6b6e43d.29541c65@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/20/2001 10:56:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jdumas at kingwoodcable.com writes:


> LotR is truly incredible. I saw it this morning. The effects are pretty
> much seamless. 
> 
> HP and LotR both have a great stories...which is absolutely necessary
> for a film to work. After that, you can add the extras...like the
> special effects and music... LotR  and HP are on par with each other
> story wise (in my opinion), but Harry has a ways to go to catch up with
> LotR in the special effects arena. 
> 
> The music is hauntingly beautiful. Enya composed two songs for this
> movie as well, and they are nothing less than what you would expect from
> her.
> 
> Really amazing...absolutely breathtaking.
> 
> I'll let you know what I think of the characters once I've actually read
> the books ;-)  However, my husband said it was a great rendition of the
> book.

I saw Lord of the Rings yesterday.
Remember, that I took my four year old son to HP, and he did very well, but I 
told him (much to his regret) that he could not go see LOTR. 'Way too violent 
and terrifying.

The violence is not gratuitous. It is very much a warrior movie -- warrior in 
the truest and most positive sense of the word. 

I loved HP, but there is no comparison. LOTR was a far, far better movie. Ian 
McKellan deserves an academy award for his portrayal of Gandalf. He was 
breathtaking in the depths and range he brought to the character. 

I have read the LOTR books many times, and the movie was true to the book (3 
hours worth!), but obviously had to cut parts...

Susan








"In response to an unusually intelligent question about whether the sudden 
resurgence of the fantasy genre, with the wizardry and witchcraft, represents 
a growing interest in pagan spiritual traditions, Ian McKellen (who plays 
Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings) replied:
'I certainly hope so. The great religions have destroyed something essential 
about
humanity., which is the fact that we belong to the eartht. I wish I knew more 
about pagan traditions, because I suspect I would like to sign up."'


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 05:45:33 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:45:33 -0000
Subject: Quidditch match
In-Reply-To: <9vtj14+fjeq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vui9t+auhd@eGroups.com>

Mahoney wrote:
> Dawn wrote:
> > And I was also a bit disappointed that we never see
> > him dodge a bludger.  Maybe next time.
> 
> Yes we did!  After Gryffindor either scores or keeps Slytherin from 
> scoring, we see Harry sitting on his broom cheering ~ he's either 
> clapping or waving his hands (well, gol, it's been two weeks since
> I saw it last! ;-P) ~ but anyway a bludger screams past him going 
> *very* fast (it's literally a blur), and he jerks himself out of 
the 
> way at the last moment and has to grab onto his broomstick to keep 
> from falling off.  I *think* it's shortly before his broomstick 
> starts going nuts.
>  

Sorry.. I stand corrected.  I guess I meant to say that we don't see 
him do it that often.  From reading the books, I get the impression 
that he's always having to move out of the way, but in the movie we 
don't see it happening to him that often... we really don't see it 
happening to most of the characters... they're too busy trying to 
avoid each other.

Hmm, here's a question:  Do you think the Quidditch match in the 
movie was less violent, more violent, or about equally violent to the 
way you imagined it when reading the books?  

I thought it was less violent.  I mean, it was definitely something 
else to acutally SEE the violence in form, rather than in an 
imaginary blur (as I see most books as I read them)... but I really 
was expecting more with the bludgers and all.

Oh, and again.. if anyone can give me the book/page of when Wood is 
knocked from his broom, do post it.  Thanks.

Dawn




From wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 06:04:04 2001
From: wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com (Wicked Kitty)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:04:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011221060404.52027.qmail@web20103.mail.yahoo.com>


I agree, they're two completely different types of movies that happen to have some similarities.  I loved both (I saw LOR-FOTR opening day too) but for completely different reasons.  Although I wish Harry Potter could have been as long as LOR, lol.Kitty--- shelaghcol  wrote:> Okay, I lied. I'm posting a reply already. > > I saw LOR-FOTR on opening night and loved it!> > At the risk of stalling heated discussions, I'd> actually suggest > *not* comparing them at all.> > They're two entirely different kinds of movies.> Harry Potter is far > more whimsical in its nature (even with the> Voldemort factor) than > LOR.> > About the only things these two movies have in> common is:> > They have wizards> They have small heroes> They have a lot of special effects> They're about battles of good and evil> > Even the style of the books is vastly different> (without going into a > book discussion).> > LOR is absolutely not a children's movie and your> kids would probably > be pretty scared if you took them to see it. > > For me, honestly, there's just no comparing the two> movies. > > IMHO, of course.> > Shelagh> > > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire">  > wrote:> > Has anyone in here seen the Lord of the Rings: The> Fellowship of > the > > Ring?  How does the movie compared to Harry Potter> and the > > Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone?  Positively? > Negatively?  Let > start > > some heated discussions and debates in here!> > 



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctionsfor all of your holiday gifts!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 07:38:55 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 07:38:55 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vu9h0+lgbd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vuouf+mpg5@eGroups.com>

The Lord of the Rings has been nominated for Best Picture and Best 
Director for the 59th annual Golden Globe Awards.

The other four nominations are:
A Beautiful Mind
In the Bedroom
The Man Who Wasn't There
Mulholland Drive

Harry Potter didn't receive any nomination.

The Lord of the Rings has also been nominated for Best Pictures for 
AFI (American Film Institute) Awards.  Harry Potter has been only 
nominated for Best Digital Effects, but I think the Lord of the Rings 
will win that award over Harry Potter.  





From barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk  Fri Dec 21 09:55:51 2001
From: barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk (Barry Hill)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:55:51 +0000
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
In-Reply-To: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com>
References: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <63167274588.20011221095551@penrallt.clara.co.uk>

Hi folks,


All this talk about Harris not playing his role as authentically as he
could makes me wonder what influence the "general public" has on
the choice of actors in sequels.

Usually, it's not an issue for movies, because they are frequently
one-offs, but AFAIK in this case Dumbledore plays a larger role in
future books (see PS: below), so a correct portrayal is more important!

Assuming we were talking about a politician, it would in theory at
least be possible to get him to step down and be replaced.

Would a petition be enough to do the trick? We'd probably need 50-100k
signatures to even get anyone to take it seriously though ... Assuming
each of the 3k subscribers on this list knew 20 people who would sign, and
popular HP homepages and other mailing lists participated, we'd be
going in the right direction.

Of course, there are many other issues to be considered: settlement
payouts; Harris sueing for breach of contract; Alternative actors
(e.g. McKellen)'s availability, etc.

What do you others think about the feasability of the idea?

Does anyone know of instances where a petition has worked in the past?

How about starting a poll to gauge the general feeling towards Harris:
- Happy
- Satisfied
- Unsatisfied
- Unsatisfied (would sign petition)

Regards,

 Barry
 
PS: A couple of words about my HP background: I saw the film
(twice) and have now read CoS. The other 2 are in the post from amazon
right now! This evening I'm going to see LoTR for the 1st time, and
I read LoTR, Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, Silmar. etc. a few years ago).
So I have yet to see McKellen's performance!!




From muj at hem.utfors.se  Fri Dec 21 12:09:09 2001
From: muj at hem.utfors.se (MariaJ)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:09:09 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Quidditch match
In-Reply-To: <9vui9t+auhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B848E4F5.49A2%muj@hem.utfors.se>

Dawn wrote:

> Hmm, here's a question:  Do you think the Quidditch match in the
> movie was less violent, more violent, or about equally violent to the
> way you imagined it when reading the books?

The game itself, less violent. Not enough Bludgers. I've only seen the film
twice, so maybe someone else can answer if the twins actually do something
in the match?

> Oh, and again.. if anyone can give me the book/page of when Wood is
> knocked from his broom, do post it.  Thanks.

After skimming the Quidditch matches in PS/SS, CoS and PoA, the closest I
could find in the books is in PoA, in the last match against the Slytherins
when "Bole and Derrick took advantage of Fred and George's absence to aim
both Bludgers at Wood; they caught him in the stomach, one after the other,
and he rolled over in the air, clutching his broom, completely winded."
(Ch15) Not the same thing though. Harry is knocked off his broom in CoS when
he's hit by the Rogue Bludger, and in PoA because of the Dementors, but no
one else that I could find.

When it comes to the violence between the players, this was definitely more
violent than I imagined. Especially as Madam Hooch says she wants a 'nice,
clean game' - were we supposed to think that this *was* a nice, clean game
or did they just cut a lot from this scene, including all the penalties?

As for Harry not doing much at first, that's actually in the book: "Way up
above them, Harry was gliding over the game, squinting about for some sign
of the Snitch. This was part of his and Wood's game plan. 'Keep out of the
way until you catch sight of the Snitch,' Wood had said. 'We don't want you
attacked before you have to be.'" (Ch11)

Maria (who hates sport in RL, but finds Quidditch quite fascinating)




From clio at unicum.de  Fri Dec 21 13:39:14 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:39:14 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vve22+7c9f@eGroups.com>

I saw the LOTR movie in the opening night and I have to take back 
everything bad I sad about the HP movie (and I criticized a lot).
If compared directly I must say that I liked the HP movie better. But 
that might be just due to the general differences between the 
atmospheres of the books. HP is much more light-hearted and funny, 
LOTR is veeeery serious about heroship and such. You can't compare 
the 2 books or the movies for that matter. 
HP can be much better compared to The Hobbit instead of LOTR.

So liking LOTR is a matter of personal taste. It's like a Wagnerian 
opera, either you love bombastic music or not. I prefer HP over LOTR 
and Mozart over Wagner.
Nevermind, LOTR is a great movie. I just thought all the time: That's 
not Gandalf, that's Dumbledore. Switch the wizards, I`d say!

Clio,
who loves posts that don't really make sense





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 14:04:16 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:04:16 -0000
Subject: Quidditch match
In-Reply-To: <B848E4F5.49A2%muj@hem.utfors.se>
Message-ID: <9vvfh0+aqla@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., MariaJ <muj at h...> wrote:


>  
> When it comes to the violence between the players, this was definitely more
> violent than I imagined. Especially as Madam Hooch says she wants a 'nice,
> clean game' - were we supposed to think that this *was* a nice, clean game
> or did they just cut a lot from this scene, including all the penalties?
> 

> Maria (who hates sport in RL, but finds Quidditch quite fascinating)


  I believe we're probably supposed to get from Hooch's remark that Slytherin and
Gryffindor already have a reputation from previous years of playing especially hard
and loose against each other.  She has to make a point to verbally disapprove of it
before the game starts.  Her statement actually gives us another clue about the
rivalry between Oliver and Marcus.




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Fri Dec 21 14:05:20 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:05:20 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Richard Harris is NOT a great actor
References: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com> <002c01c189a8$302dbf20$c108f1d5@OSLII>
Message-ID: <036901c18a28$89033be0$11ae1e3e@stephen>

>> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nicky <azingam at y...> wrote:
>> > Well, he is! Okay, so Dumbeldore wasn't EXACTLY the way I pictured him
>> > in the book personality-wise (I thought he'd be much kinder) but if
>> > Harris is only going by the script, and not reading the books, then we
>> > can't expect much. 
>> 
>> But that's exactly why Harris is NOT a great actor -- if he were, he would've 
>> taken the trouble to research his character, especially with not only people 
>> practically begging him to read the books but also the character's creator > offering to talk to him and >>offer insights.  What a lazy snob he must be, to turn 
>> that down!

>Well, he seems lazy. I like R. Harris for his earlier movies, he's a very good actor technically. But I've >watched an interview with him and he told the interviewer that he enjoys doing nothing. And he dreams of >having one day when he'd be able to do absolutely nothing. Then (as he said) he could answer to such a >question: "What have you achieved today?" with: "Nothing. I have achieved nothing."

>Ev vy

I agree - even if he couldn't be bothered to read the book, he should have agreed to let JKR tell him what Dumbledore was supposed to be like - he shows no sign of the quirkiness we all love. I just hope that somehow the feelings of the fans will get back to him and make him do a bit of work before he messes up the second film as well!

Lucy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 14:47:51 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 08:47:51 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to 
 HP?
References: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C234B97.1E699174@kingwoodcable.com>

shelaghcol wrote:
> 
> Okay, I lied. I'm posting a reply already. <g>
> 
> I saw LOR-FOTR on opening night and loved it!
> 
> At the risk of stalling heated discussions, I'd actually suggest
> *not* comparing them at all.
> 
> They're two entirely different kinds of movies. Harry Potter is far
> more whimsical in its nature (even with the Voldemort factor) than
> LOR.
> 
> ...
> 
> LOR is absolutely not a children's movie and your kids would probably
> be pretty scared if you took them to see it.


The technical aspect of the movies certainly can be compared, and LotR
is truly top notch. The stories, however cannot be compared. They are
completely different. HP is lighthearted, with scary moments. LotR is
more scary with light hearted moments.

I wouldn't take any child to LotR. The orcs alone and the Balrog (sp?)
would just be too frightening for a child to see. Though...I'd like to
go see it again.

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 15:08:59 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:08:59 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian 
 McKellen?)??
References: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com> <63167274588.20011221095551@penrallt.clara.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3C23508B.90D6F10B@kingwoodcable.com>

Barry Hill wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> All this talk about Harris not playing his role as authentically as he
> could makes me wonder what influence the "general public" has on
> the choice of actors in sequels.
> 
> Usually, it's not an issue for movies, because they are frequently
> one-offs, but AFAIK in this case Dumbledore plays a larger role in
> future books (see PS: below), so a correct portrayal is more important!

Over all I think that Harris did ok. I think there were some parts that
didn't seem like D at all, but the Mirror scene and the Hospital scene
were right on. The thing that worries me about Harris is that he has
come out and said that he didn't want to sign a 7 movie deal (commitment
problems), and that worries me. While he did sign, I wouldn't be
surprised if he drops at some point.

After seeing LotR, I'm not sure McKellen is right for big D (I used to
think otherwise). I was trying to come up with some other possibilities,
but nothing came to mind. The only ones that came to me were Sean
Connery, and Patrick Stewart...could you imagine...

Albus Dumbledore, played by James Bond

or

Albus Dumbledore, played by Jean-Luc Picard
imagine D swishing and flicking while muttering, "Engage!"

Haha...

To be honest...being in the States, I'm not familiar with the great
wealth of British actors who could be a good match for big D. I can only
take from my personal experience, and unfortunately, I'm not sure James
Bond or Jean-Luc Picard are a good fit ;-)


> 
> Assuming we were talking about a politician, it would in theory at
> least be possible to get him to step down and be replaced.
> 
> Would a petition be enough to do the trick? We'd probably need 50-100k
> signatures to even get anyone to take it seriously though ... Assuming
> each of the 3k subscribers on this list knew 20 people who would sign, and
> popular HP homepages and other mailing lists participated, we'd be
> going in the right direction.
>
> Of course, there are many other issues to be considered: settlement
> payouts; Harris sueing for breach of contract; Alternative actors
> (e.g. McKellen)'s availability, etc.
> 
> What do you others think about the feasability of the idea?
> 
> Does anyone know of instances where a petition has worked in the past?
> 
> How about starting a poll to gauge the general feeling towards Harris:
> - Happy
> - Satisfied
> - Unsatisfied
> - Unsatisfied (would sign petition)
> 

I think Harris will do fine...if Harris is willing to stick it out. I
wouldn't sign a petition trying to get Harris off the set. He didn't
detract from the movie and he did have some good moments. He'll also
have a bigger part on CoS, and he might come into form.

-Katze



From mrsbekkio at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 18:17:05 2001
From: mrsbekkio at yahoo.com (mrsbekkio)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:17:05 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?; Hugo Weaving as Luciu
In-Reply-To: <9vve22+7c9f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9vvub1+hc2n@eGroups.com>

Whoops, ran out of room.

I too have also just seen Lord of the Rings.  It was fantastic!  I 
think comparing the plots of the HP and LoR is unfair.  However, I 
do think it is fair to compare things like special effects and 
quality of acting, including the passion of the actors themselves.


However, regarding the quality of the movie in general, in my 
opinion Lord of the Rings came out on top on two main areas:

Special effects:  While I enjoyed watching quidditch, the CGI 
effects were grainy and blurry.  Perhaps part of the problem was the 
rush to get the movie out in a year - just think, the CGI for Shrek 
took 3 years and they showed what was really possible.  LoR's 
effects looked like much more effort and attention (and probably 
more money) were spent on them.  I've been seeing rumors here that 
Warner Brother is switching CGI companies for CoS.  I hope that this 
is true!

Actors:  I thought the actors performances in LoR were amazing!  
Along with the terrific performances, you get a feeling that the 
actors care about their characters, and have given their all.  I 
will second other posters comments about Ian McKellan - he was 
terrific!  He radiated Gandalf's power and a sense of humor that I 
never picked up in the books.  I also enjoyed the actor that 
Boromir's performance very much.  Now, the logical comparison point 
in HP is Richard Harris.  I was very disappointed in his performance 
in HP (too wooden, not fulled with Dumbledore's sense of humor and 
fun), and even more disappointed with his attitude.  Sure, I can 
understand him letting his granddaughter talking him into a role he 
didn't really want.  But he just seethes with resentment and a "I 
don't give a crap" type of demeanor about it. Dumbledore deserves 
better.


In all fairness, I have seen HP 6 times, LoR once.  I am considering 
going back for one more viewing of HP.  I will probably not go back 
to the theater for Fellowship.  I am definately looking forward to 
seeing the other 2 Rings movies, but I just enjoy the HP stories 
better.  While I loved seeing SS, I think Warner Brothers can do a 
better job with future movies.



Now, about Hugo Weaving.  I agree he was terrific in both the Matrix 
and LoR.  I think he's a bit too old to be playing Snape if Rickman 
didn't have the part.  However, I do think he would make a terrific 
Lucius Malfoy.  Any takers?

Bekki O.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 18:33:53 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:33:53 -0000
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
In-Reply-To: <63167274588.20011221095551@penrallt.clara.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9vvvah+3mdk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Barry Hill <barry at p...> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> All this talk about Harris not playing his role as authentically 
> as hecould makes me wonder what influence the "general public" 
> has on the choice of actors in sequels.
> 
...edited...
> 
> Assuming we were talking about a politician, it would in theory
>  at least be possible to get him to step down and be replaced.
> 
> Would a petition be enough to do the trick? ...edited...
> 
> Of course, there are many other issues to be considered: 
> settlement payouts; Harris sueing for breach of contract; 
> Alternative actors (e.g. McKellen)'s availability, etc.
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> How about starting a poll to gauge the general feeling 
> towards Harris:
> - Happy
> - Satisfied
> - Unsatisfied
> - Unsatisfied (would sign petition)
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  Barry

First, let's remember that Richard Harris is OLD. When you are old
you start to lose the need for diplomacy and stop tip-toeing around
what's on your mind. You just say what you think bluntly. So when 
you hear about any somewhat negative comments he may have made in 
interviews about his role as Dumbldore, you need to consider that 
for someone that old life is too short to care about what other 
people think.

Next, Harris didn't really want the part because he didn't want any 
long term comments hanging over him. Remember, he's old which means 
he wants to live the remander of his life freely without it being 
controlled by other people. When you are OLD you just don't have 
time to put off until tommorrow what you really want to do today. 

I've said before in a different thread that I think they will rush
the first 2 movies, then take a break so they can give the actor 
time to stablize physically or get past their adolesent growth 
spurt. It's very difficult to film a movie when your actors grow 
a 12 inches between the start and the end. Remember movies are 
shot out of sequence, do Harry could be 4'8" in one scene and 5'8"
in the next. POINT is I think after the second movie, they will 
take a break, and that will give Harris time to consider his 
commitment to future movies. 

If he decides to stay in, I think he will do an excellent job.
He has already shown us that he can do the gentle whimsical 
Dumbledore, and given his skill and expreience as an actor, I
think he will be able to portray the angery and powerful 
Dumbledore as well.

I've also said before that because he is so hidden under the make
up, he could easily be replaced with another actor if it becomes
necessary.
he will do an excellent job.




From pandrea13 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 18:50:53 2001
From: pandrea13 at yahoo.com (pandrea13)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:50:53 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vu9h0+lgbd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a000ad+2u97@eGroups.com>

First of all let me say that I am a huge(as all of you are) HP fan. I 
have seen the movie 4 times already and will probably will see it 
again soon when I am not able to actually quote the lines!

Secondly, Lord of the Rings was an excellent movie and far 
better made than HP and the Sorcere'rs stone. The cast was 
fantastic and the story was amazing. I cried the last part of the 
movie not only because it was touching but because it was a 
beautiful story of courage and bravery.   I really don't think that 
there is any way to compare the two since Lord of The Rings has 
a whole mythology and language attached to it. If you have ever 
read any of the books, Tolkien created a whole history. It seems 
that he spent many years working on this and I think that the 
movie reflected the beauty of his work.

The cast was together for two years in New Zealand and you can 
see not only the love for the story but the friendship these actors 
share especially in the fellowship of the ring(which consists of 9 
people).  I love both movies but I feel that they are in completely 
different categories and honestly cannot be compared not only 
because of the nature of the story but also because of the 
writers. Although JK Rowling is a brilliant write,r she is not an 
English scholar as Tolkien was and she has not created a 
whole history and language for us as he did. There is no way to 
truly compare these movies or the books that they are based 
upon.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:01:24 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:01:24 -0000
Subject: Quidditch match
In-Reply-To: <9vvfh0+aqla@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a000u4+hkae@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., MariaJ <muj at h...> wrote:
> 
> 
> >  
> > When it comes to the violence between the players, this 
> > was definitely more violent than I imagined. Especially as 
> > Madam Hooch says she wants a 'nice, clean game' - were we 
> > supposed to think that this *was* a nice, clean game
> > or did they just cut a lot from this scene, including 
> > all the penalties?
> > 
> > Maria (who hates sport in RL, but finds Quidditch quite 
> > fascinating)
> 
> I believe we're probably supposed to get from Hooch's remark
> that Slytherin and Gryffindor already have a reputation from 
> previous years of playing especially hard and loose against 
> each other.  She has to make a point to verbally 
> disapprove of it before the game starts. Her statement 
> actually gives us another clue about the rivalry between 
> Oliver and Marcus.

Let's keep in mind how long the Quiditch match took on the 
screen.I doubt that it took much more than a minute. Just 
enough time togive us some thrills and touch on the key 
elements of the storyplot. I'm pretty sure there are two 
Quidditch matchs in book 1.

I think this is another way that the movie producers cheated 
us by trimming the movie down to what they considered a childs 
attention span. There is some debate as to whether the orginal
cutwas (as rumored) 4hrs. long. But with out question, they 
did some serious trimming of this movie which (it should be 
obvious) I think was a big mistake. I could have very easily 
sat through 10 to 15 minutes of Quidditch and wouldn't have 
minded at all thatthe movie was 15 minutes longer. I think 
this movie should have been minimum 3 hrs.

As far as the violence, given the leveel rivalry between 
Slytherin and Griffendore, it was probably a little tame.
Remeber some of the games in later books are absolutely 
brutal.





From dsslouisville at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:06:12 2001
From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:06:12 -0000
Subject: Hello all - More LOTR/HP movie musings
Message-ID: <a00174+a0ju@eGroups.com>

Have never posted on this board before, but with the release of LOTR 
I feel compelled to weigh in on both movies.

Let me say, I am a huge fan of both Harry Potter and Lord of the 
Rings equally.  I first bought the LOTR series as a birthday present 
for myself at age 13 and have ever since been sucked into fantasy as 
a genre.  I have read, over the years, quite a bit of fantasy fiction 
from Terry Brooks (Shanara) Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman 
(Dragonlance) and recently Terry Goodkind (Sword of Truth whose hero, 
oldly enough reminds me of a grown up Harry Potter!).  They are, for 
the most part, rife with "heros" and "dark lords" and comic sidekicks 
and yes, I like the ones that incorporate some impossible and 
destined romance in the mix! So, as a fan of the genre as a whole and 
an avid reader, the books will always be better than the movies and 
the movies will always serve to make me read the books over again! 

I will say that I thought the LOTR may have been the most perfectly 
cast movie I have seen in recent history and I think they had the 
right idea with filming it all at one time.  I have read reviews that 
critized Columbus' "slavish" adaption of the HP material while 
obviously Jackson took a much looser approach to Tolkien but I think 
it is worth noting that Tolkien is dead and his epic complete for 
many years...it would have to be easier to determine what aspects can 
be edited or significantly changed to hurry the story along and 
provide for cinematic value while still retaining an appropriate 
sense of reverence for the work as a whole.  

Rowlings epic still hangs in the air, unfinished.  (am enjoying the 
anticipation but...damn!)Even though I believe she has them finished 
in her mind, she may want to build on minute details as she is so 
fond of doing. I think the stakes are higher for what goes and what 
stays or what is changed in anyway. 

Anyway, happy holidays to all!

Andrea (who is wishing she was not so book and movie obsessed and 
could actually get some work done!) 




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:22:37 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:22:37 -0000
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
In-Reply-To: <3C23508B.90D6F10B@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <a0025t+on74@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
 
> After seeing LotR, I'm not sure McKellen is right for 
> big D (I used to think otherwise). I was trying to come 
> up with some other possibilities, but nothing came to 
> mind. The only ones that came to me were Sean Connery, 
> and Patrick Stewart...could you imagine...
> 
> Albus Dumbledore, played by James Bond
> 
> or
> 
> Albus Dumbledore, played by Jean-Luc Picard imagine 
> D swishing and flicking while muttering, "Engage!"
> 
> Haha...
> 
...edited...
> 
> -Katze

As I said in another post, I think Harris portrayed the kind 
gentle Dumbledore and I think because of his skill and 
experience as an actor he will be able to portray the angery 
and powerful also.

As far as McKellen, while I haven't seen him in LoR, my 
impression is that he can easily play the powerful and angery 
Dumbledore, but I find it harder to see him as the kind and 
gentle Dumbledore. Not saying he can't do it,he is a great 
actor. I just have a little harder picturing it.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:38:36 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:38:36 -0000
Subject: End PSYCHO Word Wrap
Message-ID: <a0033s+m2rq@eGroups.com>

         1         2         3         4         5         6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890

The word wrap in these Yahoo groups, and the enabling and 
disabling of the word wrap feature REALLY SUCK!! Big time!!

I've discover that whether word wrap is enabled or disabled,
the lines wrap at 60 characters, so I recommend that you 
keep your lines short and force your own line breaks. It 
will make reading posts so much easier.

Just a suggestion.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:51:10 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:51:10 -0000
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
In-Reply-To: <a003f0+q8ke@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a003re+jiog@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
> > As far as McKellen, while I haven't seen him in LoR, my 
> > impression is that he can easily play the powerful and angery 
> > Dumbledore, but I find it harder to see him as the kind and 
> > gentle Dumbledore. Not saying he can't do it,he is a great 
> > actor. I just have a little harder picturing it.
> 
> no offence meant boyblue, but this is exactly why you *need* 
> to see mckellen in fotr. if your opinion of him doesn't change
> after this, i'll gladly eat any sorting hats you care to send 
> my way!
> 
> kt in seattle

- - - - -1 - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - - - - 5 - - - - 6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890

Based on comments someone else made, I think you may be 
right, and I most definitely plan to see LoR. It seems that 
McKellen played both the powerful and the gentle very well.
I always felt that LoR would be a better movie cinematically,
but that in not way diminishes the fact that I loved HP.




From chattie27million at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 19:52:08 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:52:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
Message-ID: <2d.15b83997.2954ece8@aol.com>

In a message dated 21/12/01 03:16:56 GMT Standard Time, ktchong73 at yahoo.com 
writes:


> Has anyone in here seen the Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the 
> Ring?  How does the movie compared to Harry Potter and the 
> Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone?  Positively?  Negatively?  Let start 
> some heated discussions and debates in here!
> 

I've seen it:) It is fantastic, but I have to say (and I really don't mean 
any offence honestly, it's just my opinion!!!) I hate it when people always 
ask how it compares and stuff.......Because they are completely different.  
The books are totally different except for perhaps Gandalf/Dumbledore and the 
fight of good vs evil.

I don't like to compare these two books/films because they are both so 
fantastic but so different.  I just like them both:):)
That's just my lickle thought on the subject.

Hugs and Cuddles
Rach
xxx
********
'The floor?' Harry suggested. 'I wasn't looking at it's feet, I was too busy 
with its heads.'




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:54:36 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:54:36 -0000
Subject: End PSYCHO Word Wrap
In-Reply-To: <a0033s+m2rq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0041s+4btj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
>          1         2         3         4         5         6
> 123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
> 
> The word wrap in these Yahoo groups, and the enabling and 
> disabling of the word wrap feature REALLY SUCK!! Big time!!
> 
> I've discover that whether word wrap is enabled or disabled,
> the lines wrap at 60 characters, so I recommend that you 
> keep your lines short and force your own line breaks. It 
> will make reading posts so much easier.
> 
> Just a suggestion.

Nothing more to add, just wanted to see if my line guide 
would work right this time.

- - - - -1 - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - - - - 5 - - - - 6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 19:58:30 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:58:30 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to 
 HP?; Hugo Weaving as Luciu
References: <9vvub1+hc2n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C239466.F2C782E7@kingwoodcable.com>

mrsbekkio wrote:

> 
> Special effects:  While I enjoyed watching quidditch, the CGI
> effects were grainy and blurry.  Perhaps part of the problem was the
> rush to get the movie out in a year - just think, the CGI for Shrek
> took 3 years and they showed what was really possible.  LoR's
> effects looked like much more effort and attention (and probably
> more money) were spent on them.  I've been seeing rumors here that
> Warner Brother is switching CGI companies for CoS.  I hope that this
> is true!

YAY! They need to change (they used Sony Imageworks). They should go
with ILM, or even WETA (the company who did LotR). Now..I think they
should keep with Henson for the creatures and development, cause they
kick ass. They could even go with Henson, as they do a great job with
graphics...even see Farscape? Perhaps they don't do computer stuff
outside of their own productions.

Anyway...I think they need to find a different special effects company,
cause the movie wasn't up to snuff. That's probably the only part of the
movie that I didn't like. The graphics were fine, but they could've done
better. I agree that it's probably because of the production time. They
are pushing these movies out pretty fast. Though..I think they need to
take full time for GoF.

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 20:04:34 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:04:34 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with 
 Ian McKellen?)??
References: <9vvvah+3mdk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2395D2.32256F7@kingwoodcable.com>

boyblue_mn wrote:
> 
> First, let's remember that Richard Harris is OLD. When you are old
> you start to lose the need for diplomacy and stop tip-toeing around
> what's on your mind. You just say what you think bluntly. So when
> you hear about any somewhat negative comments he may have made in
> interviews about his role as Dumbldore, you need to consider that
> for someone that old life is too short to care about what other
> people think.
> 
> Next, Harris didn't really want the part because he didn't want any
> long term comments hanging over him. Remember, he's old which means
> he wants to live the remander of his life freely without it being
> controlled by other people. When you are OLD you just don't have
> time to put off until tommorrow what you really want to do today.

He actually said that he didn't want to make the commitment because he
doesn't like the 7 movie deal commitment (coming from a BBC interview).

> 
> I've said before in a different thread that I think they will rush
> the first 2 movies, then take a break so they can give the actor
> time to stablize physically or get past their adolesent growth
> spurt. It's very difficult to film a movie when your actors grow
> a 12 inches between the start and the end. Remember movies are
> shot out of sequence, do Harry could be 4'8" in one scene and 5'8"
> in the next. POINT is I think after the second movie, they will
> take a break, and that will give Harris time to consider his
> commitment to future movies.

They will be filming PoA back to back with CoS (Leaky-Cauldron),
regardless of the release date. I suspect they'll take a break after
PoA, before starting on GoF.

> 
> If he decides to stay in, I think he will do an excellent job.
> He has already shown us that he can do the gentle whimsical
> Dumbledore, and given his skill and expreience as an actor, I
> think he will be able to portray the angery and powerful
> Dumbledore as well.

I would hope that he's willing to develop a little more though. The
Hospital scene is what I expected, and hopefully he can continue that
persona.

> 
> I've also said before that because he is so hidden under the make
> up, he could easily be replaced with another actor if it becomes
> necessary.
> he will do an excellent job.

I hope so!
-Katze



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 19:44:28 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:44:28 -0000
Subject: Nothing Here. Ignore this just trying something out.
Message-ID: <a003es+dsrp@eGroups.com>

- - - - -1 - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - - - - 5 - - - - 6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890




From editor at texas.net  Fri Dec 21 20:56:43 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:56:43 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian 
 McKellen?)??
References: <9vtkml+eeir@eGroups.com> <63167274588.20011221095551@penrallt.clara.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3C23A20A.9D9F9A8A@texas.net>

Peter O'Toole. Harris needs to be replaced by Peter O'Toole. Nobody
living has either
(a) such naturally blindingly truly blue eyes, or
(b) such a gift for playing whimsicality.

Anyone out there seen "My Favorite Year"? "Creator"? "The Ruling Class"?

Peter O'Toole.

--Amanda (who was pleased that they confirmed her casting ideas of
Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman, anyway)




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 21:18:33 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:18:33 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to 
 HP?; Hugo Weaving as Luciu
References: <a00613+moqn@eGroups.com> <3C23A6BF.95387F4D@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <3C23A729.4EE99288@kingwoodcable.com>

Katze wrote:
> 
> luminary_extraordinaire wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hugoe Weaver is AMERICAN.  For that he does not qualified to be in a
> > Harry Potter movie.
> 
> Actually, he was born in Nigeria, and was raised in Australia. Perhaps
> that's why he did such a great job in LotR with the accent (to my ear at
> least). So actually...if we're gonna rant about *no Americans*, than
> Weaving can actually be in the film ;-)
> 
> http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Weaving,+Hugo
> 
> -Katze


Let me rephrase...He was born in Nigeria, and finished his schooling in
Australia.



From valjean131 at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 21:16:00 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (valjean131)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:16:00 -0000
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
In-Reply-To: <3C23A20A.9D9F9A8A@texas.net>
Message-ID: <a008qg+9m3t@eGroups.com>

Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> Peter O'Toole. Harris needs to be replaced by Peter O'Toole. Nobody
> living has either
> (a) such naturally blindingly truly blue eyes, or
> (b) such a gift for playing whimsicality.
> 
> Anyone out there seen "My Favorite Year"? "Creator"? "The Ruling 
Class"?
> 
> Peter O'Toole.

I *love* Peter O'Toole, but I think they'd have to pour him
into his robes every morning. ;-)

I still say if you can't get Sir Ian, then how about 
Nicol Williamson?

-Monique




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 21 21:17:11 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:17:11 -0000
Subject: CoS Casting: Miriam Margolyes
Message-ID: <a008sn+gm6s@eGroups.com>

IMDB has Margolyes down as Professor Sprout! I remember her best in 
_The Age of Innocence_ and UK TV's _A Little Princess_. It may take 
me a while to get used to this idea - I'd pictured Prof Sprout as 
quite short and petite.

KT in Seattle




From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 21 21:24:59 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:24:59 -0000
Subject: Hugo Weaving as Lucius (was Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?)
In-Reply-To: <a00613+moqn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a009bb+7g0o@eGroups.com>

> Hugoe Weaver is AMERICAN.  For that he does not qualified to be in 
> a Harry Potter movie.

Hugo Weaving is actually Nigerian but lived in Australia from the age 
of 16. Is it explicitly stated somewhere that anyone of non-British 
descent cannot be cast in an HP movie? Zoe Wanamaker (aka Madame 
Hooch) was actually born in New York after all, to American parents. 
Though you could never tell from her cut-glass accent!

KT in Seattle - who remembers lusting shamelessly after Hugo Weaving 
in his 1989 Australian TV miniseries _Bangkok Hilton_ - also starring 
a then unknown Nicole Kidman.





From titacats at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 21:56:08 2001
From: titacats at yahoo.com (titacats)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:56:08 -0000
Subject: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a00b5o+uehf@eGroups.com>

shelagh wrote:
> At the risk of stalling heated discussions, I'd actually suggest 
> *not* comparing them at all.
> 
> They're two entirely different kinds of movies. Harry Potter is far 
> more whimsical in its nature (even with the Voldemort factor) than 
> LOR.
> 
> About the only things these two movies have in common is:
> 
> They have wizards
> They have small heroes
> They have a lot of special effects
> They're about battles of good and evil
>SNIP> 
> LOR is absolutely not a children's movie and your kids would 
probably 
> be pretty scared if you took them to see it. 
> 


I loved the movie, which is a surprise since I found the books a bit 
tedious at times <g>. I think that while LOTR is something epic and 
on a grander scope, HP would still be the world I would keep 
returning to. I do agree that this movie is not for children. Those 
orcs and uruk-hai are the stuff of nightmares. I just want to know if 
anyone else automatically  thought of Voldemort every time the phrase 
dark lord (as in the dark lord Sauron) came up. LOL 

Cats




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 22:02:56 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:02:56 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares to 
 HP?
References: <a00b5o+uehf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C23B190.67559BF4@kingwoodcable.com>

titacats wrote:

> 
> I loved the movie, which is a surprise since I found the books a bit
> tedious at times <g>. 
> 
> Cats

I haven't read the books yet, but I can certainly understand tedious.
Ever read Dune? It has it's own dictionary! Yikes! Great read though,
once your finished.

-Katze



From SHENmagic at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 22:03:25 2001
From: SHENmagic at aol.com (SHENmagic at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 17:03:25 EST
Subject: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris
Message-ID: <87.1513e27b.29550bad@aol.com>


In a message dated 12/21/01 1:18:26 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< > Of course, there are many other issues to be considered: settlement
> payouts; Harris sueing for breach of contract; Alternative actors
> (e.g. McKellen)'s availability, etc.
> 
> What do you others think about the feasability of the idea?
> >>

Or, we could just trust Chris Columbus and JKR to entrance a more suitable 
Dumbledore out of it. I thought Harris was just right in the Hospital scene.



From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 21 22:10:55 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:10:55 -0000
Subject: HP and LOTR narrative similarities? (was: Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings")
In-Reply-To: <a00b5o+uehf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a00c1f+9d33@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "titacats" <titacats at y...> wrote:
> I just want to know if anyone else automatically thought of 
> Voldemort every time the phrase dark lord (as in the dark lord 
> Sauron) came up. LOL 
> 
> Cats

y'know cats, this is interesting. i know that jkr has said that it's 
been a while since she read lotr and she doesn't consider it an 
influence, but having thought about it, do any of these sound 
familiar?

1. the "dark lord" who loses his physical form in a battle, is 
reduced to a spirit, but comes back to a body and wages a new war 
(voldie and sauron).
2. a sneaky slimy creature buttering up to whoever happens to be in 
charge at the time (peter pettigrew and gollum)
3. the underdogs winning battles by virtue of their wits and innate 
qualities, with a little help from those older, wiser, and more 
magical along the way (hobbits and our hogwarts trio)
4. an unwitting hero who doesn't realise the potential and qualities 
he possesses? (harry and "i-will-take-the-ring-though-i-do-not-know- 
the-way frodo).
5. a preference for words beginning with the letter "h" (hobbits, 
hobbiton, hamfast v. hogwarts, hogsmead, hagrid - ok! maybe that's 
pushing it a little far ;->)

what does everyone else think? is this supposition too far-fetched? 
can you spot any other narrative similarities out there?

kt in seattle - with obviously not a lot to do today 8-)




From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Dec 21 22:15:27 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:15:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Wood, Harris and Dobby
In-Reply-To: <9vui9t+auhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011221221527.75419.qmail@web14913.mail.yahoo.com>

Dawn wrote: 
Sorry.. I stand corrected. I guess I meant to say that we don't see
<BR>
him do it that often. From reading the books, I get the impression
<BR>
that he's always having to move out of the way, but in the movie we
<BR>
don't see it happening to him that often... we really don't see it <BR>
happening to most of the characters... they're too busy trying to <BR>
avoid each other.<BR>

I agree. I thought that they should have dodged the Bludgers more.

And then:
Hmm, here's a question: Do you think the Quidditch match in the <BR>
movie was less violent, more violent, or about equally violent to the
<BR>
way you imagined it when reading the books

I thought that the game was far more violent than in the book. I can
understand why, they wanted to keep the audience entertained with
something akin to a football/soccer match, but in the books I thought
the games weren't that bad until Malfoy got onto the Slytherin team.

>Oh, and again.. if anyone can give me the book/page of when Wood is
<BR>
knocked from his broom, do post it. Thanks.<BR>

Page 228 of Book Three, the Quidditch Final.

Re. Harris: I put in the subject header of my last post 'great actor'
when I meant 'good actor', which would have classed him a tad lower
than McKellen. I thought Harris was good in the Hosptial and Erised
scenes, and I reckon he'll be spot on if they keep in the scene where
Ron and Harry are in Snape's offic, and he comes in.

On the subject of graphics: George Lucas has got the privilege of doing
the graphics for CoS, or so I heard, but I do hope they give Dobby over
to Hensen. For some strange reason, Dobby looks like Yoda in my mind,
even though he's supposed to have a long nose. What d'you all think
Dobby should look like? Another Yoda might be strange...Reckon Frank Oz
will get the vocals?

Nicky

=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks." -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 22:20:59 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:20:59 -0000
Subject: Hugo Weaving as Lucius (was Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?)
In-Reply-To: <a009bb+7g0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a00ckb+3hc4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
> > Hugoe Weaver is AMERICAN.  For that he does not qualified to be in 
> > a Harry Potter movie.
> 
> Hugo Weaving is actually Nigerian but lived in Australia from the age 
> of 16. Is it explicitly stated somewhere that anyone of non-British 
> descent cannot be cast in an HP movie? Zoe Wanamaker (aka Madame 
> Hooch) was actually born in New York after all, to American parents. 
> Though you could never tell from her cut-glass accent!
> 
> KT in Seattle - who remembers lusting shamelessly after Hugo Weaving 
> in his 1989 Australian TV miniseries _Bangkok Hilton_ - also starring 
> a then unknown Nicole Kidman.


 Yummy.. the only Australian miniseries I've ever seen was SWORD OF HONOR,
but that Tony was a hottie!


 What is *not* beside the point, however is that I really doubt the "Brits Only" 
restriction is going to survive all seven films. It might go as far as POA, but 
by the time we get all the way to movie 8 (assuming 2 movies for GoF), we'll
have seen non-Brits cast.





From malia at q7.com  Fri Dec 21 22:30:10 2001
From: malia at q7.com (Malia Kawaguchi)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:30:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?  How Does It Compares
 to HP?
In-Reply-To: <9vua3r+p4q3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112211417480.32116-100000@q7.q7.com>


I'm going to have to chime in here with my first post (hello all - you're 
wonderful from a lurker's perspective, especially one who's wanted 
intelligent Potter conversation for quite a long time now) and agree 
strongly with Shelagh.  The two movies are entirely different creatures.  
I saw LOTR opening ,orning (11 am show) and fell completely in love - it 
was my childhood all over again, as LOTR was to me the way Harry was to my 
sister.  Don't get me wrong, I _ADORE_ HP, but I seem to be too old to 
truly stew in it until it's a part of me, although I'm giving it the old 
post-graduate try (6 movie viewings, 4 complete readthroughs of all 4 
current books, plus 3 times through the audiotapes for SS), but I doubt it 
will ever overwhelm LOTR for me - in middle school my 3 best friends and I 
completely self identified with the hobbits, down to calling each other by 
the names (one still called me Merry when we saw each other a couple years 
ago at a reunion) and getting engraved rings for each other (one gold band 
and the three elven rings, with appropriately colored stones)... 

ANYWAY... :)

What I mean to say is that they (both film and story) are SO different 
that they cannot be compared.  My husband, who has seen SS twice, asked me 
which was better, and I just looked at him in puzzlement.  Then yesterday, 
when in a bad mood, I went to see SS again (my 6th).  When he heard, he 
said "So I guess Harry Potter was better?"  (LOTR was at the same theatre 
and I could have seen it instead)  And again, I was puzzled.  I didn't see 
HP because it was a better film, I saw HP because I needed to have my 
spirits lifted, to laugh, and to feel that Hallmark(tm) glow of happiness 
and fulfillment at the end.  These things LOTR does not offer - even to me, 
an enormously dedicated fan.

One is a children's story.  A fantastic and incredible children's story, 
yes, but children's story it is.  The other . . . is not.  For those who 
have seen them both, compare the two troll scenes in your head to truly 
get what I'm saying.

-Malia (who can't wait to be a more regular part of these discussions)

On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, shelaghcol wrote:

> At the risk of stalling heated discussions, I'd actually suggest 
> *not* comparing them at all.
> 
> They're two entirely different kinds of movies. Harry Potter is far 
> more whimsical in its nature (even with the Voldemort factor) than 
> LOR.
> 
> About the only things these two movies have in common is:
> 
> They have wizards
> They have small heroes
> They have a lot of special effects
> They're about battles of good and evil
> 
> Even the style of the books is vastly different (without going into a 
> book discussion).
> 
> LOR is absolutely not a children's movie and your kids would probably 
> be pretty scared if you took them to see it. 
> 
> For me, honestly, there's just no comparing the two movies. 
> 
> IMHO, of course.
> 
> Shelagh




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 21 22:42:01 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:42:01 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hugo Weaving as Lucius (was Re: Has Anyone Seen 
 "Rings"?)
References: <a00ckb+3hc4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C23BAB9.D4B80F7C@kingwoodcable.com>

heathernmoore wrote:
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
> > > Hugoe Weaver is AMERICAN.  For that he does not qualified to be in
> > > a Harry Potter movie.
> >
> > Hugo Weaving is actually Nigerian but lived in Australia from the age
> > of 16. Is it explicitly stated somewhere that anyone of non-British
> > descent cannot be cast in an HP movie? Zoe Wanamaker (aka Madame
> > Hooch) was actually born in New York after all, to American parents.
> > Though you could never tell from her cut-glass accent!
> >
> > KT in Seattle - who remembers lusting shamelessly after Hugo Weaving
> > in his 1989 Australian TV miniseries _Bangkok Hilton_ - also starring
> > a then unknown Nicole Kidman.
> 
>  Yummy.. the only Australian miniseries I've ever seen was SWORD OF HONOR,
> but that Tony was a hottie!
> 
>  What is *not* beside the point, however is that I really doubt the "Brits Only"
> restriction is going to survive all seven films. It might go as far as POA, but
> by the time we get all the way to movie 8 (assuming 2 movies for GoF), we'll
> have seen non-Brits cast.


As someone mentioned before...we already have seen an American cast in
the film. Madam Hooch. Zoe Wanamaker is a US citizen, though lives in
Britain and speaks with a "flawless" english accent.



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Fri Dec 21 22:38:20 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:38:20 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Our influence in replacing Richard Harris (with Ian McKellen?)??
References: <a008qg+9m3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00de01c18a70$31fcb5e0$164e28d1@oemcomputer>

Just a few small notes to say regarding this topic-

Regarding: a petition to get him replaced- The Warner Brother's company is
famous for ignoring any form of fan petition.  They do things their way and
that's the only way for them.  A petition will do nothing more then be a
waste of time and energy and annoying to all those who do not wish to
participate in it.  Also, the only true petition is a pen and paper
petition.  You know, the ones that get passed around every few years to get
things changed, new laws made (in America at least), and for general causes
that want support.  Electronic petitions are ignored the moment they cross
any desk or computer of the intended.  'Their easy to fake so why bother
taking them seriously when it's probably some lone person with a nice
computer program' is the mentality regarding such electronic petitions.

Regarding: Having him replaced at all-This far into the game I'm sure that
the casting directors as well as Chris Columbus are willing to stick with
their current Dumbledore rather then changing mid ship.  It's hard to get
used to new actors in the middle of a project and you try to hold onto the
same cast you started with for as long as  you can.  I don't think they
would willingly replace Harris as Dumbledore unless for a big reason.  Added
to their un-willingness, he IS signed for 7 movies (well, a movie version of
7 books), it would take a lot to get them to break his contract and cost a
great deal to buy out the rest of his time.  In most cases, to break an
acting contract as the studio, you have to pay out the remaining salaries as
if they worked the full time, that would cost a lot for very little work and
I doubt Warner Brothers would even consider it an option.  They like to
watch their money stay with them.

Regarding: Harris's skill as Dumbledore-Everyone will have differing
opinions on this.  I went to the movie expecting him to be horrible and upon
first viewing, he was.  But when I went back, I tossed away my evil
expectations (having already proved myself right) and found that I was in
fact, wrong.  Of course he wasn't DUMBLEDORE, but then, who is?  No one can
live up to the character they are cast, because that character has a life of
it's own.  Richard Harris did fine trying to put more life into a character
already filled with it and while he could never be Dumbledore in every sense
of the word, he did bring the character to life in such a way that it was
enjoyable for me to watch.

Maybe if you let go of what you expect, good or bad, you will be able to see
the talent he did bring to the role, and realize that while not perfect, he
did give it a good go.  And remember, they did cut out many of the great
lines, sadly keeping his character in one dimension.

I think we should give him time before we judge, giving him at least one
more movie to see if he can offer what we want in the character before we
criticize.
Saitaina
****
Wondering about my life and what is going on inside my head? Visit me at
http://www.deadjournal.com/users/saitaina/




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Dec 21 23:12:49 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 23:12:49 -0000
Subject: Hugo Weaving as Lucius (was Re: Has Anyone Seen "Rings"?)
In-Reply-To: <3C23BAB9.D4B80F7C@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <a00flh+nc7f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> 
> As someone mentioned before...we already have seen an American cast in
> the film. Madam Hooch. Zoe Wanamaker is a US citizen, though lives in
> Britain and speaks with a "flawless" english accent.

And don't forget that Verne Troyer, who played Griphook (the goblin who took 
Harry and Hagrid to the vaults) is just an ordinary all-American boy from  
Michigan.  Rumors in September 2000 had him playing Peeves.

http://us.imdb.com/Name?Troyer,+Verne




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 23:21:38 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 23:21:38 -0000
Subject: Quidditch match
In-Reply-To: <B848E4F5.49A2%muj@hem.utfors.se>
Message-ID: <a00g62+toqp@eGroups.com>

Maria wrote:
> As for Harry not doing much at first, that's actually in the
> book: "Way up above them, Harry was gliding over the game,
> squinting about for some sign of the Snitch. This was part
> of his and Wood's game plan. 'Keep out of the way until you
> catch sight of the Snitch,' Wood had said. 'We don't want you
> attacked before you have to be.'" (Ch11)


But I never even got the impression he was even LOOKING for the 
snitch.  It looked to me like he was watching the game.  Indeed, he 
didn't notice a snitch until it came right by his face.  "Hello!"

I mean, I would think someone looking for a snitch would be squinting 
and really looking hard, instead of watching every movement of the 
game.

Dawn




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Fri Dec 21 23:25:18 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 21 Dec 2001 23:25:18 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1008977118.682.31855.w5@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

How did you feel about Richard Harris' 
portrayal of Dumbledore? 

  o I was very disappointed 
  o I was a little disappointed 
  o Neutral: I'm content 
  o I quite liked his performance 
  o Harris WAS Dumbledore 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/polls 

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From bricken at tenbit.pl  Fri Dec 21 23:54:36 2001
From: bricken at tenbit.pl (Ev vy)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 00:54:36 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP and LOTR narrative similarities?
References: <a00c1f+9d33@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <012501c18a7a$d9a99f60$2d08f1d5@OSLII>

From: "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at hotmail.com>
> 1. the "dark lord" who loses his physical form in a battle, is 
> reduced to a spirit, but comes back to a body and wages a new war 
> (voldie and sauron).
> 2. a sneaky slimy creature buttering up to whoever happens to be in 
> charge at the time (peter pettigrew and gollum)
> 3. the underdogs winning battles by virtue of their wits and innate 
> qualities, with a little help from those older, wiser, and more 
> magical along the way (hobbits and our hogwarts trio)
> 4. an unwitting hero who doesn't realise the potential and qualities 
> he possesses? (harry and "i-will-take-the-ring-though-i-do-not-know- 
> the-way frodo).
> 5. a preference for words beginning with the letter "h" (hobbits, 
> hobbiton, hamfast v. hogwarts, hogsmead, hagrid - ok! maybe that's 
> pushing it a little far ;->)
> 
> what does everyone else think? is this supposition too far-fetched? 
> can you spot any other narrative similarities out there?
> 
> kt in seattle - with obviously not a lot to do today 8-)


These similarities can be easily attributed to both of the stories (apart from the fifth one, lol!) as both those films could be described as quest narratives (so as the books). It's obvious so as to LotR, whereas in HP the quest is more symbolic, there is no long physical journey as such, etc. But still, it's a quest for knowledge and quest against evil. However, LoTR is considered to be an anti-quest and I'd use the same term for HP. They both possess the qualities of the quest but those qualities are in different ways distorted, yet easy to distinguish.

As W.H. Auden put it in his essay on anti-quest:
"To go in Quest means to look for something of which one has, as yet, no experience; one can imagine what it will be like but whether one's picture is true or false will be known only when one has found it."

W. H. Auden distinguishes the characteristic elements of a Quest tale. There are six of them:
"1) A precious object and/or Person to be found and possessed or married.
2) A long journey to find it, for its whereabouts are not originally known by the seekers. (this is more symbolic in HP)
3) A hero. The precious object cannot be found by anybody, but only by the one person who possesses the right qualities of breeding and character.
4) A Test or series of Tests by which the unworthy are screened out and the hero revealed.
5) The guardians of the Object who must be overcome before it can be won. They may be simply a further test of the hero's arete, or they maybe malignant in themselves.
6) The helpers who with their knowledge and magical powers assist the hero and but for whom he would never succeed. They may appear in human or animal form."

Blah, blah, blah. I'm writing my MA thesis on literature for children (or not), to be specific on 'The Hobbit', Narnia Chronicles and HP. And I'm using the anti-quest as a framework for my thesis. So if you'd be interested I could post it somewhere after I'll have finished and defended it. Which won't take place before September next year.

Ev vy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There's nothing level in our cursed natures
But direct villainy.
      William Shakespeare "Timon of Athens"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover,
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determined to prove a villain
     William Shakespeare "Richard III"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 02:11:27 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 02:11:27 -0000
Subject: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
Message-ID: <a00q4f+o1jv@eGroups.com>

Too many of you simply refuse to compare the two movies.  So I have 
to come up with a situation in which you have to make a choice.

For those who have seen both movies, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's 
Stone and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, answer 
the following very difficult question.  Let say a friend of yours, 
who hasn't seen either movie, come to you and ask for your 
recommendation for movies.  She only wants to see a movie, only ONE 
movie, and it has to be good.  What kind of person she is doesn't 
matter. What kind of mood she has doesn't matter.  You can't convince 
her to see both movies.  Her only request if for you to recommend the 
better movie.

Which one would you recommend?

Now you will have to make a choice.  Harry Potter or the Lord of the 
Rings.  Only one movie.  That's all she will see.  Pick one.





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Sat Dec 22 03:52:13 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:52:13 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
References: <a00q4f+o1jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C24036D.9534713C@kingwoodcable.com>

luminary_extraordinaire wrote:
> 
> Too many of you simply refuse to compare the two movies.  So I have
> to come up with a situation in which you have to make a choice.
> 
> For those who have seen both movies, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's
> Stone and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, answer
> the following very difficult question.  Let say a friend of yours,
> who hasn't seen either movie, come to you and ask for your
> recommendation for movies.  She only wants to see a movie, only ONE
> movie, and it has to be good.  What kind of person she is doesn't
> matter. What kind of mood she has doesn't matter.  You can't convince
> her to see both movies.  Her only request if for you to recommend the
> better movie.
> 
> Which one would you recommend?
> 

I would pick Harry Potter actually. One...it has more closure at the end
of the movie. it is not necessary to see any of the sequels to enjoy
this movie. SS/PS is a story in and of itself, even though there is a
greater aspect to the story. LotR:FotR is 1/3 of the greater aspect,
with not much of a smaller story happening in this one movie.

My choice...Harry Potter (this is no way diminishes what I thought about
LotR. I though it was fantastic...but the the other 3 movies are
necessary to the story, whereas you don't *need* the other 6 books of HP
to see/read HP)

-Katze



From malia at q7.com  Sat Dec 22 04:34:12 2001
From: malia at q7.com (Malia Kawaguchi)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 20:34:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <a00q4f+o1jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112212030100.18145-100000@q7.q7.com>

On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, luminary_extraordinaire wrote:

> Too many of you simply refuse to compare the two movies.  So I have 
> to come up with a situation in which you have to make a choice.
> 
> For those who have seen both movies, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's 
> Stone and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, answer 
> the following very difficult question.  Let say a friend of yours, 
> who hasn't seen either movie, come to you and ask for your 
> recommendation for movies.  She only wants to see a movie, only ONE 
> movie, and it has to be good.  What kind of person she is doesn't 
> matter. What kind of mood she has doesn't matter.  You can't convince 
> her to see both movies.  Her only request if for you to recommend the 
> better movie.
> 
> Which one would you recommend?
> 
> Now you will have to make a choice.  Harry Potter or the Lord of the 
> Rings.  Only one movie.  That's all she will see.  Pick one.

Depends entirely on the friend.  What kind of person it is _has_ to 
matter, as it is the only important data.  Since you posit a female 
friend, and my closest friend is a "dark-and-bitter-like-my-coffee," 
depresso-espresso, stories must have deep meanings type person, I would 
definitely recommend LOTR.
Now if your hypothetical had been male, my closest male friend is a 
happy-go-lucky guy who wants entertainment from his entertainment, and I 
would, and in fact, have, strongly recommended Harry to him.

There, I have escaped your trap.  Haahaahaahaa.

-Malia
p.s. For what it's worth, in my view Fellowship is the better movie, Harry 
is more enjoyable.  It doesn't get clearer than that in my head.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 05:56:35 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:56:35 -0000
Subject: Voldemort going through Harry
In-Reply-To: <01C17C21.8599D1E0.dpost@home.se>
Message-ID: <a017aj+s54t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Daniel Karlsson <dpost at h...> wrote:

- - - - -1 - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - - - - 5 - - - - 6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890 
> 
> Wanda Sherratt wrote:
> 
> >>And what exactly was Voldemort flying through Harry 
> >>supposed to mean?
...edited...
> 
> Daniel Karlsson

It was an attack by Voldemort, even though Voldemort knew
he couldn't seriously harm Harry, is was his last insult 
heaped upon injury.

There are several incidences where people for what every 
reason pass through a ghost, even with the very benevolent
ghost at Hogwarts, it is an chill and unpleasant experience.

So to have that extreme spiritual evil pass through your body
has to be a horrible experience. To have that pure essence of 
evil pass through your body with great malice would be 
enough to knock anyone out.




From richasi at azlance.com  Sat Dec 22 06:24:01 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:24:01 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
References: <a00q4f+o1jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C242701.AB3C258B@azlance.com>

> recommendation for movies.  She only wants to see a movie, only ONE
> movie, and it has to be good.  What kind of person she is doesn't
> matter. What kind of mood she has doesn't matter.  You can't convince

Actually, the kind of person my "friend" would be does matter. But,
to stay within your parameters, I would recommend HP anytime.
LOTR is good, but HP is fun. LOTR is serious, HP is not so serious.

My .02 :)

Richasi



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 08:24:32 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 08:24:32 -0000
Subject: My Thoughts on Neville
Message-ID: <a01g00+1qhj@eGroups.com>

If you read Book 4, you find out some very important stuff
about Neville that helps explain why he is the way he is. 

Neville doesn't in any way lack wizarding power, he comes
from a family of powerful and respected wizards. Neville's 
only problem is that he lack self-confidence, actually, it
more like he is frightened easily, and when you read
book 4, you will see why he has every reason to be 
frightened.

In every stituation in the first 4 books, where people 
weren't undermining his confidence, he performed well. 
Harry told Neville that he (Neville) was worth 12 Malfoys.
Later, Neville takes on Crappe and Golye single handed in 
a fight. True he lost, but you don't think it took courage
for Neville to fight those two goons? 

Remember in book one when they have their first flying 
leason? Neville broom took off and was soaring all over 
the place. That is a perfect example of how Neville is
conflicted. It's like he is in a conflict between his head
and his heart. In his heart, he is a great wizard, but in 
his head there are too many thoughts, too many fears
mucking everything up. When, in flying class, his broom 
took of soaring, that was Neville's heart, that was his 
core essence. The natural wizard in him flew without the 
slightest effort. But is mind confused him to the point 
where he fell off and got hurt.

We Prof. Lupin has Neville face the Boggart first in the 
Dark Arts class, Lupin doesn't undermine his confidence, 
instead he encourages him and expresses belief in his
abilities, and Neville faces his darkest fears reflected 
in the Boggart, and performs fantastic. 

I really like Neville, and I think the story is setting us
up to gradually see Neville for who he is in his heart. I
think before the end of the last book, we will see great
things from Neville. 




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 08:49:57 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 08:49:57 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9uupac+gk1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a01hfl+u3hi@eGroups.com>

- - - - -1 - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - - 4 - - - - 5 - - - - 6
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> >Dawn said: 
> > 
> > >>> I've now seen HP 3 times and I enjoy it more 
> > each time.  Also, I find that I like Daniel Radcliffe 
> > more each time, too.  He's really growing on me. Of 
> > course, top slot still goes to Rupert Grint, but Dan's 
> > not doing too shabby. <<< 
> 
> I have seen the movie three times now as well, and I also 
> have enjoyed Daniel Radcliffe's performance more with each
> viewing.  His acting is much more subtle than Rupert or 
> Emma's style--especially on  the repeat viewings, I catch
> the other two over-acting a bit on occasion (Ron's 
> exaggerated jaw dropping reaction on the train when he
> learns Harry's name for example,  ...edited...
...edited...
Elle

I agree that Harry/Daniel gets better with each viewing. We
need to remember Harry's history. He has live a life that
hasn't validated him in anyway, or supported ANY expression
of his thoughts or emotions. He is very repressed. So you 
would not expect big display of emotion either through
speach, facial expressions, or body langauge. He's been 
force to keep all that inside. I also think that explain 
a lot of the decisions that Harry makes. When I read the 
books, I often find myself thinking,'well, why didn't he 
do this instead, that would have solved everything'. But 
then I'm not thinking with the mind of a 12 year old who 
has lived in isolation, without validation, and without 
any indication that he can turn to other people in times 
of need.

Now Ron/Rupert has grown up just the opposite, he's in a
big family that allows people to express themselves, and
represents a resource that he knows he can turn to any 
time he really needs help. Also, Rupert has a very 
expressive face. Many times his facial expression is what
set the mood and emotion of a whole seen.




From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 09:07:53 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 09:07:53 -0000
Subject: harry's broomstick surfing
In-Reply-To: <9u8j7c+h1d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a01ih9+k7s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., deely168 at y... wrote:
> I'm just wondering if anyone else thought that 
> Harry's scene where he's 'surfing' his broomstick
> during the quidditch match was a teeny bit 
> cringeworthy? I personally thought it was a bit too
> much and over-the-top. Otherwise, the rest of the 
> quidditch scenes were excellent.

Did you notice how Harry ended up on his feet on the
broom?

When Harry and the Slythrin seeker are in the fast 
straight down dive, and Harry stays in the dive a lot
longer. Just before he pulls out of the dive, when he 
is nearly at the ground, he jumps up on his broom and
pushes down with his his feet and pull up with his 
hands. He is doing this to give him enough leverage on
the broom to pull out of the dive in time. Once he 
pulls out of the dive and is moving level with the 
ground, the snitch is right in front of him, just out
of his reach. 

So my point is they didn't just show him 'surfing'
because they thought it would be a cool shot, it was
the natual sequence of events.




From lil_mudblood at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 10:31:36 2001
From: lil_mudblood at yahoo.com (lil_mudblood)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:31:36 -0000
Subject: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <a00q4f+o1jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a01ne8+qpk7@eGroups.com>

I've just seen the Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter was good. But THE 
LORD OF THE RINGS WAS SPECTACULAR!!!

In one scene, the fellowship of nine heroes was in an abandoned 
underground dwarven city. The nine heroes were being chased by a 
fierce fire demon (VERY HUGE TOO, even bigger than the HUGE really 
nasty troll the heroes had just killed) and a horde of angry orcs. 
The fellowship came to an huge dark chasm and a narrow stone bridge 
hanging in the middle and over the bottomless abyss. The heroes, one 
or two at a time, had to leap across a gap in the narrow bridge. The 
exciting soundtrack and the drums were rolling in the background. 
Suddenly an arrow came out of the darkness heading straight at the 
heroes! Soon angry arrows were raining down at the heroes from the 
far side of the underground cavern walls! Orc archers were 
mercilessly firing arrows at them! The elf hero of the fellowship (he 
could see very far and in the dark and was very quick and very good 
with a bow) fire back. Arrows were flying back and forth in the open 
dark space!!! Sometimes the camera followed the path of the flying 
arrows back and forth! The arrows barely missing the heroes at every 
turn, and the elf never missing a single shot. Orcs, one by one, were 
falling off the cavern walls. But there were too many of those darn 
orcs! And that's one of the LEAST exciting action scenes from the 
movie!!!

IT'S AN EPIC GODDAMMIT! At the end of the movies two fellowship 
heroes sacrificed their lives to save others, another two were 
captured alive and taken as prisoners, and the fellowship got 
ambushed and separated into two groups!

I would definitely recommend the Lord of the Rings over Harry Potter. 





From lil_mudblood at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 10:35:12 2001
From: lil_mudblood at yahoo.com (lil_mudblood)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:35:12 -0000
Subject: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <a01ne8+qpk7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a01nl0+pco2@eGroups.com>

Also, 10 years from now, the Lord of the Rings will be remembered as 
a part of a CLASSIC TRILOGY like Star Wars, Back to the Future, 
Indiana Jones.

The first Harry Potter movie is just a regular commercial movie. it 
will not become a classic.  Honestly, it will be forgotten a few 
years from now.

IT WILL BE A SHAME FOR MY FRIEND TO MISS OUT A LANDMARK CLASSIC.





From chattie27million at aol.com  Sat Dec 22 10:50:03 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:50:03 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
Message-ID: <65.1fe434b9.2955bf5b@aol.com>

In a message dated 22/12/01 02:13:46 GMT Standard Time, ktchong73 at yahoo.com 
writes:


> 
> Which one would you recommend?
> 
> Now you will have to make a choice.  Harry Potter or the Lord of the 
> Rings.  Only one movie.  That's all she will see.  Pick one.
> 
> 

I have to say I wouls reccomend LOTR simply because it is an epic in a way 
that, unfortunately, Harry is not.  That is in no way saying I like Harry 
Potter *less*.  In fact I hate being asked which I prefer or which is better, 
but on the grand scale of things, LOTR is an epic and a really amazing film 
that I have no doubt, people will still be raving about in 20 years time.

So there's my opinion 
Hugs
Rach *who has to say that it really does matter which friend though!!!!!! I 
have a fair few friends who would much prefer Harry!*
xxxx

******
"Mind you, saying Alexander's a bit camp is like saying Hitler's a bit 
naughty -"

Vince on Alexander to Phil, Queer as Folk UK.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 22 13:49:06 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (professor_monkshood)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 13:49:06 -0000
Subject: LoTR, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
Message-ID: <a0230i+ds2m@eGroups.com>

A little 'I told you so': I have been an advocate of Ian McKellen as 
Dumbledore for a long time.  He is a great actor with range.  He has 
worked with Daniel Radcliff in David Copperfield and was 
instrumental in getting him to reconsider doing HP, which is 
important as the mentor/student relationship between Dumbledore and 
Harry develops later on.  Plus he has blue eyes that twinkled!  

I dislike Richard Harris's peformance not because it was humourless 
but because it was stone cold.  Harris's Dumbledore did not care -- 
a fatal flaw whatever your interpretation of the character.

While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one mention Viggo 
Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of warmth, anger and 
unpredictability that a good Sirius Black would need.  And he's dead 
sexy!

I must say I am one of those who have mixed feelings about LoTR the 
book and find it unreadable and tedious.  The movie, however, is 
brilliant and fast-paced.

May be we should petition for Peter Jackson as Director?

LoTR/HP comparison
The first thing I noticed in LoTR is how effortlessly the script 
summarised the Hobbits and cut down on the part before Riverdell, 
maintaining the continunity, adding more jokes into the story.  
Steve Kloves should take note.  (I'm not signing a petiton to axe 
Kloves yet but if he dared to take out Snape's 'May be he's waiting 
to hear why you two didn't arrive on the school train.' in CoS, I 
will personally make sure that he's expelled :-))




From jazzyjedila at aol.com  Sat Dec 22 14:46:11 2001
From: jazzyjedila at aol.com (jazzyjedila at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 09:46:11 EST
Subject: HP vs LOTR
Message-ID: <38.2074a955.2955f6b3@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/22/01 4:37:12 AM Central Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


> Which one would you recommend?
> 
> Now you will have to make a choice.  Harry Potter or the Lord of the 
> Rings.  Only one movie.  That's all she will see.  Pick one.
> 

If she's that stubborn and hard-headed, I'd tell her to forget both movies 
and rent Casablanca instead, since that type of person wouldn't get pleasure 
from either HP or LOTR.  ;)

Jazzy 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From shieka99 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 16:20:20 2001
From: shieka99 at yahoo.com (Remy)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 08:20:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP vs LOTR
In-Reply-To: <38.2074a955.2955f6b3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20011222162020.854.qmail@web20004.mail.yahoo.com>


--- jazzyjedila at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/22/01 4:37:12 AM Central
> Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> 
> > Which one would you recommend?
> > 
> > Now you will have to make a choice.  Harry Potter
> or the Lord of the 
> > Rings.  Only one movie.  That's all she will see. 
> Pick one.


LoTR DEFINITELY!!!!!!!
I would reccommend this movie to almost everyone
because it was STUNNING! 
Harry Potter left me feeling empty and angry because
it just wasn't as good as it could have been.

In the books, I'd choose Harry any day, I've never
read a book so many times and been so obsessed in my
life!

But in the movies, LoTR was unspeakably great. I read
the book last year and the movie really made the book
come to life.
It also made me mad, cause I wondered why couldn't
have Harry Potter been just as good. The obvious
reason is that they tried to do it in a year, but
still.

The actors were amazing, they REALLY fit their part;
the music fit in soooo well, it was perfect, it just
made evrything sooo much better; the whole story,
everything they kept for the movie, everything they
didn't. Just even little things to make it more
dramatic. 
And I had tears in my eyes for the whole last part of
the movie. It was simply and truly amazing and it will
be a classic.

I hate to admit this, but in my opinion(my opinion, to
make that clear), LoTR made Harry Potter look like
crap. 

And it does depend on the person, by the way. I know
they both have different stories, different everything
except for the fantasy aspect, but I'd still go and
see LoTR over HP anyday. I'm planning on seeing it
many, many more times. 






__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 16:36:07 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 16:36:07 -0000
Subject: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <a01nl0+pco2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a02cpn+v27k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "lil_mudblood" <lil_mudblood at y...> wrote:
> Also, 10 years from now, the Lord of the Rings will be 
> remembered as a part of a CLASSIC TRILOGY like Star Wars, 
. Back to the Future, Indiana Jones.
> 
> The first Harry Potter movie is just a regular commercial movie.
> it will not become a classic.  Honestly, it will be forgotten a
> few years from now.
> 
> IT WILL BE A SHAME FOR MY FRIEND TO MISS OUT A LANDMARK CLASSIC.

I don't know if I would go so far as to say the first HP movie will
be a classic, but I think it will endure far beyond i'st immediate
popularity. 

Also, since the HP movie series of seven, isn't 
finished yet, we can't be sure which direction it will go. Now
that they know it has huge box office appeal they may put more
effort into the quality and appearence of the next movies in the
series. 

I'm told they are going to use a different special effect
company, and I think they have probably had enough feedback to 
know that they made the first movie way too short. It should have
been 3 hrs. minimum. You can put a lot of movie magic into an
additional half hour of movie. I wouldn't have minded it going
over 3 hrs.

As far as the book series, I honestly believe this will be a set
of classic books that will endure like the adventures of Sherlock
Holms (probably spelled wrong but you know who I mean). Certainly,
Lord of the Rings has already been around long enough to establish
that it has the potential to endure over time. I think that kids
reading the HP books today, will end up turning their kids and
grandkids on to the books. It will become a bedtime story classic.

I've read the first 3 books 5 time and have read the 4th book 3 
times. That's very rare for me or for any book. Rowlings has a very 
compact style of writing; lots of stuff happen in not very many
pages, and she still manages to keep the writing very vivid and
captivating. I used to love science fiction, and I've read sci-fi
by some of the best authors in the field, but I rarely read the 
stories more than once. So for me to be so captivated by the books
that I can read them over and over, says that there is something
magical about Rowlings writings. Even when I read them over again,
the story is so vivid that I get caught up in the story and forget
that I already know what is going to happen.

The short version is, I think it's too early to tell what will 
happen with the HP movie series, and I am convinced that the books
will endure for a long time. True the immediate media hype will die
down, but the books themselves will endure.

Of course, I can easily see the LoR series of movies becoming a
classic.




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 22 17:00:01 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (selah_1977)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:00:01 -0000
Subject: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <a00ckb+3hc4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a02e6h+tnre@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "heathernmoore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> What is *not* beside the point, however is that I really doubt 
the "Brits Only" restriction is going to survive all seven films. It 
might go as far as POA, but by the time we get all the way to movie 8 
(assuming 2 movies for GoF), we'll have seen non-Brits cast.

I think that in order to get the best possible actors, they need to 
expand their horizons a bit.  Otherwise, the Harry Potter franchise 
will suffer.  Imagine if LOTR: FOTR had restricted casting in the 
same way.

I am not saying that all the leads and mains should not have been 
British.  They should and I am glad that they are.  But consider 
Thandie Newton, a British actress, who played the title role in Toni 
Morrison's *Beloved*.  Newton, the product of a British dad and 
Zimbabwean mother, admitted that she knew next to nothing about 
American slavery and African-American history... so she did 
research.  Her passion for her craft made her want to learn.

The fact that so many of the LOTR actors immersed themselves in 
Middle-Earth lore SHOWED.  But only imagine if they had restricted 
all casting in the same manner that the HP movies are doing... and 
yes, they very well could have done this.  But they did not.  It 
seems as if they chose actors who respected the story that Tolkien 
had to tell, and good on them.

THIS is what makes a movie great... and that's why LOTR towered over 
Harry Potter in my opinion.  Don't get me wrong; I'm one of those who 
gets bogged down in the middle of Tolkien and I adore JKR's gift and 
the story-world she has created.  

I was a little disappointed the first time I saw HP.  It took three 
viewings before I was comfortable with Columbus' vision.  But LOTR: 
FOTR swept me away the very first time.

I'm one of those annoying emotional people who likes to be "moved".  
The HP movie didn't really do that for me.  There are parts in the 
Harry Potter books where I get goosebumps, where I gasp, where tears 
fall onto the pages.  None of that happened in the movie.  I was 
expecting to cry during the Mirror of Erised scene the first time 
around and instead felt numb.

FOTR did all that and more.  I felt that the acting had heart.  
Nothing felt contrived.  Talk about suspension of disbelief... I was 
in Middle-Earth for three hours and that's all there was to it.  And 
three hours wasn't enough.  Given adequate time for intermission 
(bathroom and water), I think I could have sat through the entire 
trilogy last night after a full day of teaching!

Elijah Wood's Frodo was tremendous, and Sean Astin's Sam *was* the 
ever-faithful Sam.  I cried during the Rivendell scene when the 
Fellowship was established.  And every time I saw Ian McKellen as 
Gandalf, I kept saying to myself "Why couldn't he have been 
Dumbledore?"  I always saw Gandalf as being more like what Richard 
Harris did with Dumbledore in the HP movie.

All of the actors were their roles.  I loved Liv Tyler as Arwen, Cate 
Blanchett did a pretty decent job as Galadriel... and as 
Strider/Aragorn is my favorite character from the books (yes, I admit 
it--I love those classic hero-types!), I think Mortensen did a fine 
job and I hereby demand him for Sirius in the PoA movie.  :-D 

I mean, what can you complain about?  Sets were tremendous, so was 
cinematography, CGI, costuming, makeup... there *were* no major holes 
IMO.

All in all, it was an almost spiritual experience for me.  If it was 
a bit serious at times, I don't fault Jackson--Tolkien's tone *is* 
serious.  FOTR was a lot more lighthearted than I really expected it 
to be.  OTOH, the HP movie should have been funnier than it was.  I 
say that without malice... goodness knows I love the HP series just 
as much as anyone around here does.

I am glad that Christmas vacation is here so I can delve back into 
the trilogy (haven't read it for a decade!  Whoo-hoo!) and perhaps 
even begin the companion volumes and hop onto a listserv or two to 
read what LOTR die-hards had to say.  I also plan to go see it again 
and again.  

Whoever said that this movie trilogy is our generation's Star Wars is 
absolutely correct.  There simply is no comparison to HP:PS/SS.  I am 
not comparing scope, aims, themes, etc., but whether or not each 
movie accomplished its implicit goals.  LOTR: FOTR--yes.  HP:PS/SS--
no.

--Ebony AKA AngieJ




From rach_sparra at lineone.net  Sat Dec 22 20:13:44 2001
From: rach_sparra at lineone.net (rach_sparra2001)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:13:44 -0000
Subject: Wood, Harris and Dobby
In-Reply-To: <20011221221527.75419.qmail@web14913.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a02pho+nhnu@eGroups.com>

> On the subject of graphics: George Lucas has got the privilege of 
doing
> the graphics for CoS, or so I heard, but I do hope they give Dobby 
over
> to Hensen. For some strange reason, Dobby looks like Yoda in my 
mind,
> even though he's supposed to have a long nose. What d'you all think
> Dobby should look like? Another Yoda might be strange...Reckon 
Frank Oz
> will get the vocals?

He he! Yoda as Dobby? Interesting thought! To tell the truth, I think 
that when I first read book 2 I either ignored or skimmed too quickly 
over the description of Dobby - I never realised he was meant to look 
so weird (huge ears/eyes, etc), so I always just pictured him as a 
little person or something! Bit of a shock when I first started 
seeing fan art etc of him on web, and realised I must have missed 
something! But thinking about it now, even with Dobby looking 
different than I thought, I couldn't imagine Yoda doing all the 
panicking and running around bit that Dobby does! Sadly I don't have 
any other ideas of what kind of 'look' Dobby should have, but I'll 
definitely think about it and get back to you!

Rach / Sparra ('v')




From barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk  Sat Dec 22 20:43:53 2001
From: barry at penrallt.clara.co.uk (Barry Hill)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:43:53 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <a02cpn+v27k@eGroups.com>
References: <a02cpn+v27k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <199292556574.20011222204353@penrallt.clara.co.uk>

Hi,


Saturday, December 22, 2001, 4:36:07 PM, boyblue_mn wrote:

>> Also, 10 years from now, the Lord of the Rings will be
>> remembered as a part of a CLASSIC TRILOGY like Star Wars, 

LoTR is already a classic. It already is King of the Castle!


>> The first Harry Potter movie is just a regular commercial movie.

I disagree. A regular movie does not have the following that HP did
before it was made. I can't think of any other "regular commercial
movie" that has such a large reader/viewer base that many web sites
dedicated to it.

What makes HP a force to be reckoned with is that it was written for
children but also appeals to adults. Most commercial films either
stay with one or the other target group.


>> it will not become a classic.  Honestly, it will be forgotten a
>> few years from now.

With a fan base of millions of readers?? I doubt it. LoTR has a
headstart, but there's room for more magic!!


Regards,

Timerider.




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Dec 22 21:14:45 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 22 Dec 2001 21:14:45 -0000
Subject: New file uploaded to HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1009055685.13176.56650.w5@yahoogroups.com>


Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the HPFGU-Movie 
group.

  File        : /Christmas.jpg 
  Uploaded by : saieditor <chspnll at pacific.net.in> 
  Description : Christmas Card 

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/files/Christmas.jpg 

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

saieditor <chspnll at pacific.net.in>
 







From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 22 21:48:04 2001
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 13:48:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wood, Harris and Dobby
In-Reply-To: <a02pho+nhnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011222214804.13499.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>


> For some strange reason, Dobby looks
> like Yoda in my 
> mind,
> > even though he's supposed to have a long nose.
> 
Dobby, in my mind for some reason looks like E.T. with
long ears, but now that you 've mentioned a few things
I'm not sure if that would be right. Although, E.T.
and Yoda aren't too much different in facial
appearance, from the nose down ( or maybe it's just
the wrinkly skin). Whomever handles him, It will be
quite intersting to see what they come up with.

Laila

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 23 01:59:57 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 01:59:57 -0000
Subject: Rosie - Harry Potter Hour Repeat 12/28
Message-ID: <a03dqt+rdm8@eGroups.com>

Rosie's scheduled her Harry Potter hour show to repeat on 12/28. 
Info at her website:

http://rosieo.warnerbros.com/rosieo/show/showstuff.html

Only drawback is her whining not once, not twice, but THREE times 
that she didn't get to play the part of Mrs. Weasley. Make that FOUR 
times if you count her comments after the Platform 9-3/4 movie clip.

However, the rest of the show makes up for it. We get to see her 
telling Richard Harris that her dad will kick his butt (after his 
comment about the rivalry between Cork and Limerick -- her parents 
were from Cork and Tyrone, so she is technically Irish or at least as 
'British' as Richard Harris is). And we get to see Daniel's reaction 
when he eats pop rocks for the first time (Rupert takes a tentative 
lick, Daniel pops the whole thing into his mouth). Oh, and my 
favorite: Daniel's reaction when Rosie says she wants to toss him 
onto a roller coaster.

Guests are Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Robbie 
Coltrane, and Richard Harris. She interviews them all (Daniel, then 
Rupert/Emma, then Robbie, then Richard) and then they all cook up 
Harry Potter 'treats' together.

She also shows long versions of clips from the movie, which are nice 
to have on tape while we wait for the DVD. Also, the full theatrical 
trailer is shown as part of the intro to her show.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Dec 23 02:41:58 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 02:41:58 -0000
Subject: LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <a02e6h+tnre@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a03g9m+a55l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "selah_1977" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:

  It seems as if they chose actors who respected the story that 
Tolkien  had to tell, and good on them.
> 
> THIS is what makes a movie great... and that's why LOTR 
towered over  Harry Potter in my opinion. 
>

Don't let's forget that Peter Jackson had an asset unavailable to  
WB at any price: two generations of actors, artists and 
filmmakers who had grown up with Tolkien from childhood. The 
first 'Rings' movie was a commercial and artistic failure...maybe 
in fifty years HP will get the movie it deserves.

Pippin




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Sun Dec 23 03:25:58 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:25:58 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wood, Harris and Dobby
References: <a02pho+nhnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C254EC6.7BA7D89E@kingwoodcable.com>

rach_sparra2001 wrote:
> 
> > On the subject of graphics: George Lucas has got the privilege of
> doing
> > the graphics for CoS, or so I heard, but I do hope they give Dobby
> over
> > to Hensen. For some strange reason, Dobby looks like Yoda in my
> mind,
> > even though he's supposed to have a long nose. What d'you all think
> > Dobby should look like? Another Yoda might be strange...Reckon
> Frank Oz
> > will get the vocals?
> 
> He he! Yoda as Dobby? Interesting thought! To tell the truth, I think
> that when I first read book 2 I either ignored or skimmed too quickly
> over the description of Dobby - I never realised he was meant to look
> so weird (huge ears/eyes, etc), so I always just pictured him as a
> little person or something! Bit of a shock when I first started
> seeing fan art etc of him on web, and realised I must have missed
> something! But thinking about it now, even with Dobby looking
> different than I thought, I couldn't imagine Yoda doing all the
> panicking and running around bit that Dobby does! Sadly I don't have
> any other ideas of what kind of 'look' Dobby should have, but I'll
> definitely think about it and get back to you!
> 

ILM is the way to go, I hope the rumor is true. I also hope that they do
Dobby as a puppet. If you have ever seen Farscape, then there should be
no reason to believe that Henson couldn't do Dobby. Henson would do a
brilliant job. When I think if a CGI Dobby, I just think Jar-Jar Binks,
and that really makes me want to vomit ;-), though I'm not sure Dobby
would be as annoying as Jar-Jar Binks. I think the actors react in a
more natural way to a puppet, because it's physically there, able to be
part of the filming.

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Sun Dec 23 03:54:02 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:54:02 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
References: <a02cpn+v27k@eGroups.com> <199292556574.20011222204353@penrallt.clara.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3C25555A.9A42E6EF@kingwoodcable.com>

> What makes HP a force to be reckoned with is that it was written for
> children but also appeals to adults.

The Looney Tunes were like this. There were enough elements in the
cartoons that any age group would be able to enjoy. I wonder how many
children and parents have spent more time together, being able to read
the books where both parties find enjoyment.

-Katze



From srae1971 at iglou.com  Sun Dec 23 13:44:36 2001
From: srae1971 at iglou.com (Shannon)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 08:44:36 -0500
Subject: More on Harris as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011223084436.00a74350@pop.iglou.com>

I've been following this thread with some interest, as I thought that
Richard Harris handled the role of Dumbledore nicely.  Upon reading all the
negative comments, I started to really try to think of his parts in the
movie (which I've seen twice) and consider his portrayal more carefully.
The biggest complaint seems to be that he doesn't let enough of
Dumbledore's good humor and 'twinkle' come through.  But, honestly, it's
not that Harris didn't bother with that aspect. Most of the bits that show
that side of him simply are not in the movie. The parts that come to mind
are his speech on the first night at Hogwarts, the bit about the socks in
the Mirror Scene, and parts of the first scene of the movie.  When Harris
*was* called on to show a sense of humor, in the hospital scene at the end,
I think he did so admirably and with a subtlety that made it all the more
believable.  So, in conclusion <g>, I think the blame lies mostly in a lack
of character development left in for Dumbledore (or got left out of the
final cut), rather than in Harris' performance.

Shannon
who's off to see Lord of the Rings now. :)




From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 23 16:55:53 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 16:55:53 -0000
Subject: Different Dumbledore
Message-ID: <a052ap+mual@eGroups.com>

Well, since so many people have been touting their personal favorites 
to replace Harris, I thought I'd chime in too.  It actually came 
about this morning while my husband and I were watching A Muppet 
Christmas Carol (please, cut us some slack here-the Armed Forces 
Network [AFN] Europe gives us very little to choose from, so it was 
either that or WWF.  Dan Radcliff might be into WWF, but I assure 
you, I am not).  Anyway, my husband said (out of nowhere) "He'd make 
a good Dumbledore" meaning old Ebeneezer himself, Michael Caine.  We 
were watching the muppet (ghost) of Christmas present at this point, 
and I was struck by how right he [hubby] was.  Michale Cain _would_ 
make a good Dumbledor.  If you've ever seen A Muppet Christmas Carol, 
you'd know what I'm talking about.  If you haven't, well, you should, 
because it's funny and Michael Caine is really good in it.  Besides, 
you've got Gonzo playing Charles Dickens and Kermit (the Frog) 
playing Bob Cratchett.  Does it get better than that?
So, while we're looking at replacing Harris (the old curgemonger), 
though I'm sure nothing will come of it, I would like to suggest 
Michael Caine.

Cheers!




From srbeers at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 23 20:31:17 2001
From: srbeers at yahoo.com (srbeers)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:31:17 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on GROWING Actors.
In-Reply-To: <3C211089.3CC353C6@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <a05eul+m3ab@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> witchgrrl2004 wrote:
> 
> My worry is actually for Tom Felton. He doesn't seem 
> to have hit puberty yet. He's now 14, and I'm 
> wondering if he's the one who's going to look
> off from the others? ...edited...

Really, I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but you couldn't
know whether Tom Felton has hit puberty unless you've seen
him with his pants down.

There are a lot of processes going on in a guy as he moves
into puberty, and for most guy those processes are pretty
much all happening on the same schedule, but they are
on independant schedules. While Tom F. may not be showing
some of the more obvious external signs of puberty, I
think the 'hidden' signs would indicate he is well on his
way.




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 23 21:40:11 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:40:11 -0000
Subject: Harris Signed On For All SEVEN Films
Message-ID: <a05ivr+54il@eGroups.com>

Warner Bros has already signed Richard Harries for all seven Harry 
Potter movies (while Warner Bros has only signed for FOUR Harry 
Potter movies.)  So Harris will not be replaced.  So stop talking 
about replacing him already.  It's not going to happen. 




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 23 22:48:36 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:48:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Hagrid's fate - Coltrane on O'Donnell
Message-ID: <20011223224836.75686.qmail@web11505.mail.yahoo.com>

> Message: 4
>    Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:51:30 -0600
>    From: Katze <jdumas at kingwoodcable.com>

>  Another
> point in your favor is that Robbie Coltrane
> wasn't quite clear about how
> movies he signed on for when Rosie O'Donnell
> asked him if he'd signed up
> for all 7. His response was "sort of". But I
> don't know if he only
> signed on for 2, like all the kids, or if
> Hagrid isn't around in later
> books. 

The thing that I always thought was peculiar, was
not so much what Coltrane said, but his gesture
when he said it.
If you watch it again, notice he's looking at
Harris and he's got his right hand out with all 5
fingers spread out - and he looks down at his
hand and looks at Harris (this is when Harris was
talking about being forced to do all 7 flicks and
asked Coltrane if his agent had done the same).
Something about the way he did that made me and
my friend think it was him trying to hint to
Harris that it was for 5
movies.  It wasn't your standard hand gesture
that most people make when saying "so-so".  I
dunno, I just thought
there was something definitely up with that....

Tara

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...people meeting in secret all over the world 
were holding up their glasses and saying in hushed 
voices:" To Harry Potter - the boy who lived!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From littlered32773 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 24 12:04:46 2001
From: littlered32773 at yahoo.com (oz_widgeon)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 12:04:46 -0000
Subject: Harris Signed On For All SEVEN Films
In-Reply-To: <a05ivr+54il@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a075ku+pktf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
> Warner Bros has already signed Richard Harries for all seven Harry 
> Potter movies (while Warner Bros has only signed for FOUR Harry 
> Potter movies.)  So Harris will not be replaced.  So stop talking 
> about replacing him already.  It's not going to happen.

Well, we pretty much know that, but we can talk about having a 
different actor if we like.  Many of us didn't like Harris in the 
role, though I did think he was quite good in the hospital scene.  
Besides, contracts get broken all the time.  I actually enjoy hearing 
who other people think would make a good Dumbledore, even if it 
doesn't happen.  It's just like the SHIP posts, some like them, some 
don't.  If you don't, you skip them.  If people don't want to read 
about Harris being replaced, those posts can be skipped.




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Dec 24 15:23:23 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 15:23:23 -0000
Subject: Harris Signed On For All SEVEN Films
In-Reply-To: <a05ivr+54il@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a07h9b+val1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
> Warner Bros has already signed Richard Harries for all seven Harry 
> Potter movies (while Warner Bros has only signed for FOUR Harry 
> Potter movies.)  So Harris will not be replaced.  So stop talking 
> about replacing him already.  It's not going to happen.

I'm not familiar with the exact provisions of Harris' contract, but 
it is probably written to allow WB to buy him out.  Believe me, if WB 
wants Harris gone, he'll be gone.  Personally, I think he was fine, 
he was by no means the biggest problem with the film, and he'll do 
better if they actually give him something to do in future films.

As for discussing on the list about whether he should be replaced, 
there's nothing wrong with that.  Heck, I'd like to replace Columbus, 
although that is unlikely as well.

Cindy




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Dec 24 18:02:03 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 24 Dec 2001 18:02:03 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Christmas 
Message-ID: <1009216923.49.87664.m3@yahoogroups.com>


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Christmas 

Date: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 
Time: 8:00AM CST (GMT+08:00) 

Merry Christmas to everyone! 

 





From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Dec 24 18:35:17 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:35:17 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harris Signed On For All SEVEN Films
Message-ID: <191.42dd00.2958cf65@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/24/2001 10:24:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cindysphynx at home.com writes:


> I'm not familiar with the exact provisions of Harris' contract, but 
> it is probably written to allow WB to buy him out.

You also have to consider that Harris is very old. He may not even live out 
his contract, thus negating all of our speculations.

Lotus


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 24 20:27:37 2001
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 20:27:37 -0000
Subject: Harris Signed On For All SEVEN Films
In-Reply-To: <a05ivr+54il@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0833p+emvd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
> Warner Bros has already signed Richard Harries for all seven Harry 
> Potter movies (while Warner Bros has only signed for FOUR Harry 
> Potter movies.)  So Harris will not be replaced.  So stop talking 
> about replacing him already.  It's not going to happen.

Yep, your right. We probably have no chance in having him replaced. 
But, it's also not anyone's place to dictate what we can and can't 
talk about. No one has to read our posts. I don't even know half the 
actor's the British people are talking about, so I just skip them. 
Also, you have to realize - if people kept quiet about everything 
they did not like in the world, nothing would ever change. Happy 
holidays!




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 25 05:58:15 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 05:58:15 -0000
Subject: Tolkien vs. Rowling
Message-ID: <a094hn+roq8@eGroups.com>

The Lord of the Rings is at its best in imagining Middle Earth--its 
wonderous places and encounters. J.R.R. Tolkien is a master in 
inventing the magnificient epic world, its races and creatures, and 
the histories and languages of its inhabitants. However, 
characterization is NOT a strong point of Tolkien. With very few 
exceptions, Tolkien's characters rarely grow. There is very little 
narrative arc (i.e., character growth and development) in Tolkien's 
books. Of course, the positions and placements of the characters 
change, but they remain essentially the SAME characters with the SAME 
personalities throughout the whole book. For example, Samwise 
started out as a FAITHFUL, LOYAL servant of Frodo, and he ended up as 
a FAITHFUL, LOYAL friend of Frodo. Aragorn started out as a NOBLE 
ranger, and he ended up as a NOBLE king. The Lord of the Rings is not 
about a narrative arc or the growth of the characters, but about a 
long series of episodes in which the essential nature of the 
characters is demonstrated again and again (and again). 

I can see the lack of narrative arc is a reason why Peter Jackson 
(the director of the Rings movies) made changes to the charactes. In 
the Fellowship of the Ring movie, Frodo started out as a scared, weak 
hobbit. However, he will slowly "grow" as a character during the 
course of the next two films. The three movies will gradually 
develop Frodo into a strong and brave hero. Peter Jackson "scale 
back" the character of Frodo to allow Frodo the "room" to grow as a 
character. I'd have to say it's a wise choice on Peter Jackson's 
part. (of course, legions of Tolkien fans are complaining and 
insisting that in the movie Frodo should have faced the Black Riders 
alone and bravely at the fork.) 

Harry Potter books, on the other hand, are better in 
characterization. Rowling's "magical" world and its settings are 
pale in comparison to Tolkien's. However, Rowling is much, much 
better than Tolkien in creating lively, endearing, realistic 
characters who develop and grow over time. Rowling created 
characters that readers, especially teenagers and children, can 
relate to. The main reason readers love Rowling's book is not its 
magic, wizards, witches or Hogwarts. It's the characters--Harry, Ron, 
Hermione, the Weasley, etc. that people fell in love with.

Ironically, while the Lord of the Rings movie develops the 
characters, the Harry Potter movie fails to capture the essense of 
the books--its CHARACTERS. Instead, the Harry Potter movie focuses 
on the "magical" world.




From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 25 05:59:11 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 05:59:11 -0000
Subject: Tolkien vs. Rowling
Message-ID: <a094jf+hg78@eGroups.com>

The Lord of the Rings is at its best in imagining Middle Earth--its 
wonderous places and encounters. J.R.R. Tolkien is a master in 
inventing the magnificient epic world, its races and creatures, and 
the histories and languages of its inhabitants. However, 
characterization is NOT a strong point of Tolkien. With very few 
exceptions, Tolkien's characters rarely grow. There is very little 
narrative arc (i.e., character growth and development) in Tolkien's 
books. Of course, the positions and placements of the characters 
change, but they remain essentially the SAME characters with the SAME 
personalities throughout the whole book. For example, Samwise 
started out as a FAITHFUL, LOYAL servant of Frodo, and he ended up as 
a FAITHFUL, LOYAL friend of Frodo. Aragorn started out as a NOBLE 
ranger, and he ended up as a NOBLE king. The Lord of the Rings is not 
about a narrative arc or the growth of the characters, but about a 
long series of episodes in which the essential nature of the 
characters is demonstrated again and again (and again). 

I can see the lack of narrative arc is a reason why Peter Jackson 
(the director of the Rings movies) made changes to the charactes. In 
the Fellowship of the Ring movie, Frodo started out as a scared, weak 
hobbit. However, he will slowly "grow" as a character during the 
course of the next two films. The three movies will gradually 
develop Frodo into a strong and brave hero. Peter Jackson "scale 
back" the character of Frodo to allow Frodo the "room" to grow as a 
character. I'd have to say it's a wise choice on Peter Jackson's 
part. (of course, legions of Tolkien fans are complaining and 
insisting that in the movie Frodo should have faced the Black Riders 
alone and bravely at the fork.) 

Harry Potter books, on the other hand, are better in 
characterization. Rowling's "magical" world and its settings are 
pale in comparison to Tolkien's. However, Rowling is much, much 
better than Tolkien in creating lively, endearing, realistic 
characters who develop and grow over time. Rowling created 
characters that readers, especially teenagers and children, can 
relate to. The main reason readers love Rowling's book is not its 
magic, wizards, witches or Hogwarts. It's the characters--Harry, Ron, 
Hermione, the Weasley, etc. that people fell in love with.

Ironically, while the Lord of the Rings movie develops the 
characters, the Harry Potter movie fails to capture the essense of 
the books--its CHARACTERS. Instead, the Harry Potter movie focuses 
on the "magical" world.




From legau2k at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 25 23:31:56 2001
From: legau2k at yahoo.com (legau2k)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:31:56 -0000
Subject: HP Soundtrack
Message-ID: <a0b29c+fk4i@eGroups.com>

Hi everybody!!!

This is my first post in your list.. I watched HP&TPS and I loved it 
(i readed the books too) and more recently I won the CD with the 
film's soundtrack. IT'S AMAZING. I was already a HUGE fan of John 
Williams, but with this piece he certainly went over-the-top... I 
recommend it to everyone!!! Tha main theme is remarkable (as all main 
themes of John Williams' soundtracks)..

Well, enuf talking...

Marry Christmas to ya all!!

Felipe




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 02:12:43 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 02:12:43 -0000
Subject: HP vs. LotR - Choose ONE and only ONE
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112212030100.18145-100000@q7.q7.com>
Message-ID: <a0bbmr+ocqm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Malia Kawaguchi <malia at q...> wrote:
> > Which one would you recommend?  Now you will have to make
> > a choice.  Harry Potter or the Lord of the Rings.  Only
> > one movie.  That's all she will see.  Pick one.
> 
> Depends entirely on the friend.  

I agree.  People are so entirely different. 

For example, I would never ever recommend LotR to my sister b'c I 
know she's not a fantasy fan, and she espially hates the slimy 
grotesque.  If there's ever a time in a movie when I say, "Eww, 
gross!" I just know it's not for her.  Well, she did see LotR and 
HATED it.  She's the only person I know who felt that way, but there 
it is.  Mind you, she fell asleep twice during the movie.  How?  I 
have no clue.  When I was watching it, I asked my brother, how on 
earth could she fall asleep during this?

My sister wasn't too fond of HP either, although she liked the books 
well enough.  Her gripe with the movie, though, wasn't that it was 
bad, but that it was too true to the book and was too long.  But 
she'd sit through that (or the horrendous 2.5 hour "Vanilla Sky") 
twice before seeing LotR again.

Haha.

I for one quite liked LotR... more than I think I expected to.  I 
thought it was very well done and I really like the fantastical 
element to it.  But I certainly don't think it's the best movie this 
year.

> p.s. For what it's worth, in my view Fellowship is the better
> movie, Harry is more enjoyable.  It doesn't get clearer than
> that in my head.

I completely agree.  LotR was well-done, or better done.  But HP was 
more enjoyable.  And as 99% of my friends would rather see an 
enjoyable film than a "good" one, I'd recommend HP.

Dawn

PS:  I DO think that HP books will become classics.  I don't know 
whether or not the movies will.  Nor do I know whether or not the 
LotR movies will.  I think many of the people going to see LotR are 
LotR fans and I just don't think that's enough to make it the "Star 
Wars" of our generation.  Star Wars was just a totally new type of 
movie at the time, using brand new special effects and all (I for one 
thing the story of the first Star Wars (episode 4) movie was horribly 
boring).  LotR has great effects, but nothing earth-shatteringly 
new.  Although I must say that I loved how they made the Hobbits 
looks smaller than everyone else (even if somewhat inconsitantly).






From norsecode at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 02:14:21 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 02:14:21 -0000
Subject: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <a0230i+ds2m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0bbpt+d5bq@eGroups.com>

> While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one mention Viggo 
> Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of warmth, anger
> and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black would need.  And
> he's dead sexy!

Oh... yes... I think he'd make a great Sirius, despite non-British 
descent.  Definitely the best suggestion I've heard for the casting 
of Sirius!

Dawn





From norsecode at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 02:23:04 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 02:23:04 -0000
Subject: Ron
In-Reply-To: <a01hfl+u3hi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0bca8+juq8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "boyblue_mn" <boyblue_mn at y...> wrote:
> I agree that Harry/Daniel gets better with each viewing. We
> need to remember Harry's history. He has live a life that
> hasn't validated him in anyway, or supported ANY expression
> of his thoughts or emotions. He is very repressed. So you 
> would not expect big display of emotion either through
> speach, facial expressions, or body langauge. He's been 
> force to keep all that inside. I also think that explain 
> a lot of the decisions that Harry makes. When I read the 
> books, I often find myself thinking,'well, why didn't he 
> do this instead, that would have solved everything'. But 
> then I'm not thinking with the mind of a 12 year old who 
> has lived in isolation, without validation, and without 
> any indication that he can turn to other people in times 
> of need.
> 
> Now Ron/Rupert has grown up just the opposite, he's in a
> big family that allows people to express themselves, and
> represents a resource that he knows he can turn to any 
> time he really needs help. 

I might add that in a family like Ron's, one would NEED to express 
themselves to be heard. 

Once, I was out talking with someone and I spoke I guess a little 
louder and a lot faster than what this one person was used to 
hearing.  She asked me if I was from a big family.  I told her I was 
one of five children and then it all made sense to her.  

When people are from big families, they (apparently) need to 
overcompensate sometimes so they can be heard.  In my case (I guess) 
I spoke fast to get my word heard.  

Perhaps Ron also needs to overcompensate somehow, and does this by 
being overly expressive.  He has so much to compete with... head 
boys, prefects, scheming twins, and I bet even Ginny as the youngest 
and only girl gets a lot of attention.

Dawn




From farris5 at swbell.net  Wed Dec 26 03:01:15 2001
From: farris5 at swbell.net (Russ & Wanda)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 21:01:15 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
References: <a0bbpt+d5bq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006b01c18db9$9645af60$2e767b40@hppav>

> While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one mention Viggo 
> Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of warmth, anger
> and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black would need.  And
> he's dead sexy!

I'll second that motion! I didn't know who it was but looked up a pic of him and he is Sirius to a tee! Is he English? I knew for the first one they only cast English actors/actresses.
Merry Christmas, Wanda





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 02:59:28 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 20:59:28 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
References: <a0bbpt+d5bq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C293D10.26CF1D6C@kingwoodcable.com>

norsecode wrote:
> 
> > While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one mention Viggo
> > Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of warmth, anger
> > and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black would need.  And
> > he's dead sexy!
> 
> Oh... yes... I think he'd make a great Sirius, despite non-British
> descent.  Definitely the best suggestion I've heard for the casting
> of Sirius!
> 
> Dawn

But perhaps his accent is good enough to pass as British in the movie.
Though...I'm not British, so I wouldn't know if it is good enough. I
can, however, say that many British people have done well with American
accents, so I don't see why it can't be true in reverse. He would be
excellent as Sirius.

btw...how do you all pronounce Sirius...like sor-eye-us, or serious? 

I was watching 5th element today, and I was trying to figure out which
part Gary Oldman would be good for, and I think he'd be perfect for
Mad-eye Moody.

-Katze



From wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 04:41:16 2001
From: wickedkitty3 at yahoo.com (Wicked Kitty)
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 20:41:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <006b01c18db9$9645af60$2e767b40@hppav>
Message-ID: <20011226044116.29204.qmail@web20109.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Russ & Wanda  wrote:> > While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one> mention Viggo > > Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of> warmth, anger> > and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black> would need.  And> > he's dead sexy!> > I'll second that motion! I didn't know who it was> but looked up a pic of him and he is Sirius to a> tee! Is he English? I knew for the first one they> only cast English actors/actresses.> Merry Christmas, Wanda> > > There was something in the newspaper the other day that said he is Danish, but I don't know if they're right or not.Kitty



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Yahoo! Greetings.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Dec 26 08:21:02 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 26 Dec 2001 08:21:02 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1009354862.62.99293.m2@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: If you saw the PS/SS movie multiple 
times, how did your opinions of the 
actors change? Check all that apply.  

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- I liked Daniel Radcliffe more., 67 votes, 18.36%  
- I liked Daniel Radcliffe less., 4 votes, 1.10%  
- Rupert Grint, more., 50 votes, 13.70%  
- Rupert Grint, less., 4 votes, 1.10%  
- Emma Watson, more., 38 votes, 10.41%  
- Emma Watson, less., 19 votes, 5.21%  
- Alan Rickman, more., 43 votes, 11.78%  
- Alan Rickman, less., 9 votes, 2.47%  
- Richard Harris, more., 21 votes, 5.75%  
- Richard Harris, less., 33 votes, 9.04%  
- Ian Hart, more., 22 votes, 6.03%  
- Ian Hart, less., 17 votes, 4.66%  
- Dame Maggie Smith, more., 33 votes, 9.04%  
- Dame Maggie Smith, less., 5 votes, 1.37%  
- No opinion changes at all., 0 votes, 0.00%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 





From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 11:38:43 2001
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:38:43 -0000
Subject: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <a0bbpt+d5bq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0ccs3+j53u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "norsecode" <norsecode at y...> wrote:
> > While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one mention Viggo 
> > Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of warmth, anger
> > and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black would need.  And
> > he's dead sexy!
> 

And I thought Sean Bean would make a perfect Sirius. What do you 
think? Did he have a black hair part before?

> Oh... yes... I think he'd make a great Sirius, despite non-British 
> descent.  Definitely the best suggestion I've heard for the casting 
> of Sirius!
> 
> Dawn

Irene




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 13:35:00 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 07:35:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Viggo Mortensen as Sirius Black
References: <20011226044116.29204.qmail@web20109.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C29D204.13D394C2@kingwoodcable.com>

Wicked Kitty wrote:
> 
> --- Russ & Wanda  wrote:> > While we are on the topic, I'm surprised no one> mention Viggo > > Mortensen as Sirius Black.  He has the mixture of> warmth, anger> > and unpredictability that a good Sirius Black> would need.  And> > he's dead sexy!> > I'll second that motion! I didn't know who it was> but looked up a pic of him and he is Sirius to a> tee! Is he English? I knew for the first one they> only cast English actors/actresses.> Merry Christmas, Wanda> > > There was something in the newspaper the other day that said he is Danish, but I don't know if they're right or not.Kitty
> 

Here's his profile from IMDB:

Born in New York to a Danish father and an American mother, Mortensen
spent the early part of his childhood in Manhattan. His family traveled
a great deal and he spent several years living in Venezuela, Argentina,
and Denmark. He began acting in New York, studying with Warren
Robertson. He appeared in several plays and movies, and eventually moved
to Los Angeles, where his performance in "Bent" at the Coast Playhouse
earned him a Drama-logue Critic's Award. Mortensen is also an
accomplished poet, photographer, and painter. 

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 14:52:27 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 08:52:27 -0600
Subject: characters and their deaths....
References: <20011226044116.29204.qmail@web20109.mail.yahoo.com> <3C29D204.13D394C2@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <3C29E42B.A5DE2759@kingwoodcable.com>

Well...if youwatched the "Today show" (American morning news show), then
you might have seen an interview with Dame Maggie Smith. They talked a
bit about the Harry Potter movies, and was asked, "Are you in for all
7?". She replied, "If I live that long, yes."

So...McGongall doesn't die at least...

-Katze



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 26 16:18:34 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 16:18:34 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's fate - Coltrane on O'Donnell
In-Reply-To: <20011223224836.75686.qmail@web11505.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a0ct8q+2qdb@eGroups.com>

Katze wrote:
> > Another point in your favor is that Robbie
> > Coltrane wasn't quite clear about how
> > movies he signed on for when Rosie O'Donnell
> > asked him if he'd signed up
> > for all 7. His response was "sort of". But I
> > don't know if he only
> > signed on for 2, like all the kids, or if
> > Hagrid isn't around in later  books. 

Tara wrote: 
> The thing that I always thought was peculiar, was
> not so much what Coltrane said, but his gesture
> when he said it.
> If you watch it again, notice he's looking at
> Harris and he's got his right hand out with all 5
> fingers spread out - and he looks down at his
> hand and looks at Harris (this is when Harris was
> talking about being forced to do all 7 flicks and
> asked Coltrane if his agent had done the same).
> Something about the way he did that made me and
> my friend think it was him trying to hint to
> Harris that it was for 5
> movies.  It wasn't your standard hand gesture
> that most people make when saying "so-so".  I
> dunno, I just thought
> there was something definitely up with that....


Hmmm... very interesting.  I haven't watched the Rosie special yet 
(can't wait to see it on Friday)... but that sounds very intersting.

I was on the phone yesterday with my friend in England and she said 
that in the JKR special, she mentioned something about a major 
character dying in the next few books.  Now, since there are only 3 
more books, and she didn't say that the person would die in the last 
book, it means either book 5 or 6.  Hmm...

When I think majore characters, I immediately think of Harry, Ron, 
and Hermione.  How awful would it be to kill one of them off... 
especially before the end of book 7 (I could see her killing off Ron 
at the end of book 7.. kind of a sacrife/selfless act...  not that 
I'm in any way in FAVOR of it.. but that I could see it and would 
accept it).  

ANYWAY....  Them 3 are the main characters in my book.  But if I were 
the widen the circle a bit, it would include Dumbledore, Hagrid, 
Snape, and McGonagal.  There are no other major characters.  Sure, 
others apear in all books, but none play pivital roles... no one of 
major consequence... except maybe Malfoy.. but I don't see him going 
anywhere (but to the good side, possibly).

Sorry, I keep going off on tangents.  Now, if one of those 7 people 
(Harry, Ron, Hermione, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Snape, and McGonagall) was 
to die, my first instinct would be to say McGonagall b'c she's most 
inconsequential.  She is a teacher who's always there, supports 
Dumbledore, etc... but she doesn't really have much of a role. 

But what if it's HAGRID???  What if Coltane's 5 finger guesture was 
his way of not saying he was only signed for 5 b'c he his character 
would die in the 5th book?

I don't know if I believe that myself.  I mean, he could have just 
said five in a matter-of-fact kind of way and I don't think it would 
have done anything.  Is Harris the ONLY actor that signed for all 7?  
Well, if he did, we know it certainly isn't Dumbledore that's dying...

But what if it is Hagrid?  HOW DEPRESSING!!!

Hmm.. now I really can't wait to watch Rosie and see this for myself.

Dawn




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 17:39:55 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:39:55 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Hagrid's fate - Coltrane on O'Donnell
References: <a0ct8q+2qdb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2A0B6B.BF80A4AD@kingwoodcable.com>

norsecode wrote:

> 
> Sorry, I keep going off on tangents.  Now, if one of those 7 people
> (Harry, Ron, Hermione, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Snape, and McGonagall) was
> to die, my first instinct would be to say McGonagall b'c she's most
> inconsequential.  She is a teacher who's always there, supports
> Dumbledore, etc... but she doesn't really have much of a role.

This morning on the Today show, Maggie Smith stated, "If I live long
enough, yes", when asked if she's doing all 7 Harry Potter movies.

McGongall won't die.

My predictions on the fate of some characters:
Harry: don't know (I hope not...I'm very worried)
Ron: possibly (this is more a no, but there's a possibility)
Hermione: no
Dumbledore: yes
Hagrid: possibly
Snape: no (who else is going to harass Harry?)
McGongall: no
Lupin: possibly (more a yes, cause Lupin is one of her favorite
characters, and she said some of them are going to be difficult to
write)
Sirius: possibly (50-50 split on this one)
Neville: no
Dobby: no
Moody: no
Fudge: no
Weasleys: possibly Percy, but no one else.
Voldemort: yes (well..one can always hope)
Lucious Malfoy: yes
Draco Malfoy: no

Care to add anyone else?

-Katze



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Dec 26 18:51:37 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:51:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <3C2A0B6B.BF80A4AD@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011226185137.24800.qmail@web14914.mail.yahoo.com>

Don't suppose someone, for those of us who won't be able to see Rosie
(ie. me, cos I'm in England), could write us a blow-by-blow account of
what goes on, could you? Huh? Pwease? Pwetty pwease? Pwetty pwease wiv
[insert favourite actor here] on top? Soz, Buffydom phrase...*g*

Also, my thoughts on- 
My predictions on the fate of some characters:
Harry: 50/50, depends where JKR wants to go with this
Ron: sacrificial death, like someone said. Possible
Hermione: can't see her going
Dumbledore: hell yeah, probably defending Harry and then Harry getting
in a tizzy and killing Tom (finally...)
Hagrid: don't want to see him go, but we'll know soon enough (she's
finished writing the last chapter! Now it just needs, proofing, typing
up, editing, reproofing, copywriting, authorising, and printing!)
Snape: can see this happening in a sacrificial way
McGongall: I agree with the 'no', I reckon she'll take over if/when
Dumbeldore dies
Lupin: Ooh! Interesting...not sure
Sirius: I think yeah, another sacrificial death
Neville: Yeah
Dobby: Dobby's a major character...?
Moody: If he sticks around...
Fudge: Yeah, he's such a pillock he might as well get chopped *g*
Weasleys: Hmm, not sure. Fred and George'll stay I reckon (you can't
have one without the other), Percy might do some heroic act and die,
Bill and Charlie we barely know, and we all love Arthur and Molly. I
can see them standing around Ron's/Harry's grave (I have a very dark
and depressingly visual mind)
Voldemort: To finish the series once and for all, she has to chop him
Lucius Malfoy: Probably, he'll be a major player but he might flee when
the battle turns against LV.
Draco Malfoy: Dunno

Others:
Fleur Delacour: Rumours are she's the next DADA teacher, so that's good
practise for a battle against LV! Don't think she's important enough to
die though.


You know what I really hope happens? I hope JKR releases something akin
to The Silmarillion *sp* in that she releases her notes on HP that
she's been making over the five years. I'd love to see her thought
trains on paper, and also a peek into what the surviving characters
might do when it's all over. Maybe that could be another book entirely,
like a build up to a Hogwarts reunion thatr McGonogall organises and
they all meet up in school and...k, I'm done now. *g*

Nicky

=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks." -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 19:12:20 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:12:20 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fate, and Rosie
References: <20011226185137.24800.qmail@web14914.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C2A2114.33923B36@kingwoodcable.com>

Nicky wrote:
> 
> Don't suppose someone, for those of us who won't be able to see Rosie
> (ie. me, cos I'm in England), could write us a blow-by-blow account of
> what goes on, could you? Huh? Pwease? Pwetty pwease? Pwetty pwease wiv
> [insert favourite actor here] on top? Soz, Buffydom phrase...*g*

Haha...cute 8-)

I'd have to have Sirius or Hagrid.

I'm going to tape it, and I'll do my best to do a transcription for
everyone. The show airs again on Friday, so I'll try to get something up
next week.

Now...is anyone in the UK going to be able to see the Rowling interview
on the 28? Will anyone be watching this? Can someone pass on pertinent
(transcription?) info to those who won't be able to see that show? ;-)

Take care
-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 19:20:20 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:20:20 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fate, and Rosie
References: <20011226185137.24800.qmail@web14914.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C2A22F4.693F1AA1@kingwoodcable.com>

Nicky wrote:

> Neville: Yeah

I think Neville will take over Herbology.

> Dobby: Dobby's a major character...?

I wouldn't consider Dobby a major characters, but almost a major
character. He did actually have something to do with the stories (2 and
4), more so than the Creeveys.

> Others:
> Fleur Delacour: Rumours are she's the next DADA teacher, so that's good
> practise for a battle against LV! Don't think she's important enough to
> die though.

I see Fleur as the next Magical Creatures teacher (If Hagrid is off with
the giants). I don't think she'd have any experience with the Dark Arts
to be anything more than a textbook teacher. She may not even be in the
next book, and might show up in book 6 (If Hagrid dies, and if she's the
new MC teachers).

I think Mrs. Figg for DADA or a new character. I wonder if Harry picked
up on the Mrs. Figg, thing. Cause Harry overheard D when he was talking
to Snape and Sirius. IF not, he'll also find out in the next book ;-)

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 19:22:46 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:22:46 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fate, and Rosie
References: <20011226191300.40109.qmail@web14909.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C2A2386.179551F6@kingwoodcable.com>

Nicky wrote:
> 
> Ktaze wrote:
> Now...is anyone in the UK going to be able to see the Rowling
> interview<BR>
> on the 28? Will anyone be watching this? Can someone pass on
> pertinent<BR>
> (transcription?) info to those who won't be able to see that show?
> 
> I'll make a deal with ya. You do the Yank one (no offence y'all) and
> I'll do Limey one (again with the entire lack of offence, I AM English
> myself after all). It all depends on that f-ing VCR of ours; if it
> don't record, I don't write no transcript. What's one of them anyway? I
> don't think I've ever read one *sheepish grin*
> 
> Nicky

It's a Deal!  Hopefully my VCR will work. I know that it won't pick up
the sound for one of our stations (not the one with Rosie thank
goodness!).

-Katze



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Dec 26 19:26:38 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:26:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <3C2A22F4.693F1AA1@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011226192638.641.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com>

I would put quotes in here, but I can never be bothered to delete all
the HTML garbage that comes up when I click reply, so anyway!

I never actually thought of the Creevey brothers in that list, and
you're right in that Dobby is much more important than them. I reckon
Winky might get a bigger part, and Harry might even have to rally round
the Hogwarts elves to fight against LV: they'd do it for him and
Dumbeldore, for sure!

Thanks for agreeing to writing up the transcript Katze (I spelt it
right this time *g*), I'll do the best I can (praying that the VCR
works; I'll set two of them up, just to be sure).

Nicky

=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks. You can never have too many pairs of socks" -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Dec 26 19:46:29 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:29 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fate, and Rosie
References: <20011226192638.641.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C2A2915.A44B06A5@kingwoodcable.com>

Nicky wrote:
> 
> I would put quotes in here, but I can never be bothered to delete all
> the HTML garbage that comes up when I click reply, so anyway!

You can change your settings on your yahoo profile for this group to
send the emails to you in plain text. That might be what's causing your
viewer to bring up the HTML tags. 

Take care
-Katze



From erin9 at paris.com  Thu Dec 27 08:28:13 2001
From: erin9 at paris.com (missy_lim)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:28:13 -0000
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <20011226185137.24800.qmail@web14914.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a0em2t+kg2m@eGroups.com>

My own predictions on what will happen to the characters...

1.Harry: Yes,this can go either way...Of course,I really hope not.    
2. Ron:   Of all the characters, Ron strikes me as one of the more 
likely to die...  A very heroic but very terrible death.       
3. Hermione: No.  
4. Dumbledore: Very possible.  One scenario would be Dumbledore dying 
in Book 6 or 7, leaving Harry to heavily shoulder the fight against 
Voldemort.  In Book 4, there were a lot of allusions to Dumbledore 
seeming older than Harry ever realized that I was so scared it would 
be him...    
5. Hagrid: Another possible charcter.  Especially now with all the 
Robbie Coltrane on Rosie speculations going around ...       
6. Snape: Possible as well... He might die in the midst of him acting 
as spy for Dumbledore...  
7. McGongall: No.    
8. Lupin: I see him being instrumental in later books but don't know 
how he's going to turn out...   
9. Sirius: I don't think so, especially if Harry himself lives.  Is 
it not enough that Harry has already lost his parents but to lose 
Sirius too--that would be too much.    
10. Fudge: Maybe.  
11. Weasleys: No.  There are a lot of speculations re: Percy 
betraying Harry, dumbledore, etc.  though.  Think that'll happen?  
Maybe it will but in the end, he'll come around, contributing greatly 
to Harry's cause but perhaps to his own death as well...  
12. Voldemort: Yes, but at the expense of how many other characters' 
own deaths, we don't know...  
13. Lucius Malfoy: Yes.  I can actually see Draco and Lucius playing 
a major part in what I now see as the "Final Battle"... Don't know 
though if Draco will follow his father's footsteps or break away from 
the family...   
14. Draco Malfoy: No

Read an article where JK rowling was quoted as saying that there will 
be at least one death that would be horrible to write... so I guess 
we can expect a number of really terrible fates befalling the major 
characters... :(

Missy




From mandm at discover-net.net  Thu Dec 27 11:41:49 2001
From: mandm at discover-net.net (marybear82)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:41:49 -0000
Subject: Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <a01hfl+u3hi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0f1dt+ru1a@eGroups.com>

--
> Elle:
> 
> I agree that Harry/Daniel gets better with each viewing. We
> need to remember Harry's history. He has live a life that
> hasn't validated him in anyway, or supported ANY expression
> of his thoughts or emotions. He is very repressed. So you 
> would not expect big display of emotion either through
> speach, facial expressions, or body langauge. He's been 
> force to keep all that inside. I also think that explain 
> a lot of the decisions that Harry makes. When I read the 
> books, I often find myself thinking,'well, why didn't he 
> do this instead, that would have solved everything'. But 
> then I'm not thinking with the mind of a 12 year old who 
> has lived in isolation, without validation, and without 
> any indication that he can turn to other people in times 
> of need.
> 
> 
I, too, agree that Daniel Radcliffe's understated interpretation of 
Harry is right on - in keeping with his history.  If you'll remember, 
in subsequent books, Harry begins to find his voice a bit more as he 
discovers his self-confidence (and as adolescence decends with its 
lack of emotional control.)  He gets into quite a rage at the 
beginning of PoA, and blows up Aunt Marge! Later, he comes close to 
killing Black in blind anger. Beginning as early as the next film 
(with his cheeky exit from the Dursleys in the flying car) I would 
expect Daniel's performance to intensify as the storyline dictates - 
and I believe that this talented young actor is fully up to the 
challenge. What actor wouldn't relish the thought of being able to 
develop such a rich and multi-layered character?  I hope he stays 
through to the end!




From richasi at azlance.com  Thu Dec 27 13:54:15 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 05:54:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Soundtrack -- Missing piece
In-Reply-To: <9vr6n5+nj9d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011227135415.39219.qmail@web13801.mail.yahoo.com>

You know, I've seen the movie now seven times and each time I enjoy it.
I go home and listen to the soundtrack and relive the adventure. But,
you know, I don't think until recently that I missed a certain piece of
music that appears in the movie, but not on CD in any form that I can
find. And, forgive me if this has been previously mentioned. 

But, the piece played as Harry and Hagrid are walking down Diagon alley
for the first time is missing. It also is played (if I recall
correctly) just as the first years enter the Great Hall for the first
time.

I wish I could explain it better... ahh well, I'll go back to lurking
now :)






=====
Ricky Russo
(Richasi)
richasi at azlance.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Thu Dec 27 15:12:31 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:12:31 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Soundtrack -- Missing piece
References: <20011227135415.39219.qmail@web13801.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3C2B3A5F.4EAE3139@kingwoodcable.com>

Richasi wrote:
> 
> You know, I've seen the movie now seven times and each time I enjoy it.
> I go home and listen to the soundtrack and relive the adventure. But,
> you know, I don't think until recently that I missed a certain piece of
> music that appears in the movie, but not on CD in any form that I can
> find. And, forgive me if this has been previously mentioned.
> 
> But, the piece played as Harry and Hagrid are walking down Diagon alley
> for the first time is missing. It also is played (if I recall
> correctly) just as the first years enter the Great Hall for the first
> time.
> 
> I wish I could explain it better... ahh well, I'll go back to lurking
> now :)
> 

If I remember the piece of music correctly, I think you'll find the
snippet in track 6 starting 2:15 minutes. It appears that they snipped
this piece out and used it elsewhere in the movie. This particular piece
I'm pointing out is my favorite, and hopefully what you are looking for.

-Katze



From richasi at azlance.com  Thu Dec 27 15:24:07 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:24:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Soundtrack -- Missing piece
In-Reply-To: <3C2B3A5F.4EAE3139@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011227152407.44594.qmail@web13804.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Katze <jdumas at kingwoodcable.com> wrote:
> If I remember the piece of music correctly, I think you'll find the
> snippet in track 6 starting 2:15 minutes. It appears that they
snipped
> this piece out and used it elsewhere in the movie. This particular 
> piece I'm pointing out is my favorite, and hopefully what you are 
> looking for.

Actually, yes. It is a variation of the theme in track 6 at 2:15. Only,
it seems a little "harder" in the movie; the instrumentation sharper. I
guess I'll have to wait until the DVD comes out to make a recording of
the audio. (I enjoy listening to movies and picturing them as I work,
ride in a car, etc). But yes, that's it. Thanks! :)




=====
Ricky Russo
(Richasi)
richasi at azlance.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From MmeBurgess at msn.com  Thu Dec 27 15:41:38 2001
From: MmeBurgess at msn.com (angela_burgess)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:41:38 -0000
Subject: Who will die and who will live?
Message-ID: <a0fffi+pa4h@eGroups.com>

In response to many people wondering about which characters will live 
and which ones will die, I would like to say that I don't believe we 
can take what the actors say as proof-positive that a charater will 
survive through a certain book.  Remember that WB has not signed on 
to make movies for all 7 books, nor has Chris Colombus.  Therefore it 
seems unlikely that WB would know whether or not certain characters 
need to be around for all 7 books/movies.  

Lastly, as far as Dame Maggie Smith saying that she is up for all 7 
movies assuming she lives that long, why is everyone taking this to 
mean that she is predicting her own death?  I read this as her saying 
that she would like to make all the movies assuming her *character* 
lives that long.  But that's just my opinion.

In any case, this has all been to say that I believe that JKR is 
keeping secrets still and I don't think she is likely to let slip who 
will die and when versus who will live.

Angela




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Thu Dec 27 16:51:00 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:51:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Who will die and who will live?
References: <a0fffi+pa4h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2B5174.B308DC43@kingwoodcable.com>

angela_burgess wrote:
> 
> In response to many people wondering about which characters will live
> and which ones will die, I would like to say that I don't believe we
> can take what the actors say as proof-positive that a charater will
> survive through a certain book.  Remember that WB has not signed on
> to make movies for all 7 books, nor has Chris Colombus.  Therefore it
> seems unlikely that WB would know whether or not certain characters
> need to be around for all 7 books/movies.

Richard Harris said that he had to sign a 7 movie contract to get the
part. So I would think that WB is planning on doing 7 (even if they
haven't signed) if they are asking actors to sign up for 7 movies. Or
perhaps they haven't decided, but want the same actors incase they do
decide in favor of 7 movies.

Here's a quote from Harris during an interview back in November:
---
IT WASNT BECAUSE I didnt like the material or the people involved,
says Harris. I just didnt like the idea that if you said yes and you
did it, then you were committed if they did seven, and I would have to
do seven.

I hate that kind of commitment. I hate the idea that my life in any way
is sort of restricted.

Twice divorced, Harris adds: Thats why my marriages broke up. I hate
commitment, and Im totally unreliable anyway.

In the end, though, Ella held sway.

 She called me and said, If you dont do it, papa, Ill never speak to
you again, and I thought, I cant afford that. I have to do it.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/655323.asp
--- 

Rowling has also given Coltrane and Rickman information regarding their
character, and warned people not to ask questions cause they won't talk.
So...she's giving people privy information.
Though, I don't think this has anything to do with their future, but
maybe more back information on the character. I would love to read a
book that has all the back information for all the characters.
 
Here's a fun interview with Coltrane. Doesn't give anything away, except
that he's only signed for doing 2 movies at the moment.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/657633.asp

> Lastly, as far as Dame Maggie Smith saying that she is up for all 7
> movies assuming she lives that long, why is everyone taking this to
> mean that she is predicting her own death?  I read this as her saying
> that she would like to make all the movies assuming her *character*
> lives that long.  But that's just my opinion.

The actual interview gave a different impression. She did not respond in
any form regarding her "character" living that long. The question was
directed and Dame Maggie Smith, not McGongall. She simply said "If *I*
live that long, yes." So when I watched the interview I took it to mean
that she wasn't sure if she'd live that long. The was my impression
though, and I'm constantly looking for clues because the suspense is
almost unbearable. I do see how she could've been talking about her
character though.

I believe Harris made a similar statement about being 100 years old or
something when the 7th movie shoots (probably off the cuff...but I'll be
able to verify tomorrow after I watch the Rosie repeat show).

> In any case, this has all been to say that I believe that JKR is
> keeping secrets still and I don't think she is likely to let slip who
> will die and when versus who will live.

I do agree with this, but I also believe that Rowling likes to keep our
interest and will throw out tidbits to keep us thinking.

JMHO
-Katze



From boyblue_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 27 18:39:32 2001
From: boyblue_mn at yahoo.com (boyblue_mn)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:39:32 -0000
Subject: Who will die and who will live? (actor's contracts)
In-Reply-To: <a0fffi+pa4h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0fpt4+pjfa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "angela_burgess" <MmeBurgess at m...> wrote:
> In response to many people wondering about which characters 
> will live and which ones will die, I would like to say that 
> I don't believe we can take what the actors say as 
> proof-positive that a charater will survive through a certain 
> book.  Remember that WB has not signed on to make movies for 
> all 7 books, nor has Chris Colombus. Therefore it seems 
> unlikely that WB would know whether or not certain characters 
> need to be around for all 7 books/movies.  
> 
> Lastly, as far as Dame Maggie Smith saying that she is up 
> for all 7 movies assuming she lives that long, ...edited...
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Angela

Just a comment on the continual discussion of the actor's 
contracts. I think there are probably two agreements or 
contracts involved here. One is a signed agreement by all the
actors agreeing to make themselves available for all 7 movies.
Then there are the actual movie agreement that put the actors
under contract to do specific movies. So an actor could have 
a signed agreement to make themselves available for all 7 
movies but not actually be under contract to appear in any
of them. Or more likely, agreeing to be available for all 7,
but only being currently under contract for two.

This deviates from the main topic of this thread, but it does
address issues that you brought up and that have been brought
up before. And of course, this is just my opinion on the 
matter.

steve




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Thu Dec 27 22:06:02 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (alyeskakc)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 22:06:02 -0000
Subject: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <a02e6h+tnre@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0g60a+ol45@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "selah_1977" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:

> The fact that so many of the LOTR actors immersed themselves in 
> Middle-Earth lore SHOWED.  But only imagine if they had restricted 
> all casting in the same manner that the HP movies are doing... and 
> yes, they very well could have done this.  But they did not.  It 
> seems as if they chose actors who respected the story that Tolkien 
> had to tell, and good on them.


Yes! I think it did show enormously how casting can have a effect on 
the overall movie. The LOTR cast was heads above HP. They were some 
good moments in HP and I think certain people like Robbie Coltrane 
and Maggie Smith got into their characters. The kids did quite well, 
although Emma went a little over the top, IMHO.  Richard Harris was 
just very flat and not Dumbledore at all. 


> I was a little disappointed the first time I saw HP.  It took three 
> viewings before I was comfortable with Columbus' vision.  But LOTR: 
> FOTR swept me away the very first time.

Actually I didn't really like SS/PS the first time. I thought it was 
slow and it didn't have the punch I was expecting. I was expecting to 
be blown away. It's agood movie but it could have been so much 
better. LOTR however had that punch, I sat through the movie and at 
the end went "WHAT IT"S OVER!" It did not feel like a 3 hour movie.

>And every time I saw Ian McKellen as Gandalf, I kept saying to 
>myself "Why couldn't he have been Dumbledore?"  I always saw Gandalf 
>as being more like what Richard  Harris did with Dumbledore in the 
>HP movie.


Yes! Yes! The whole time I kept thinking why couldn't they have had 
Ian McKellen play Dumbledore. He had that twinkle in his eye and just 
overall Dumbledoreness. Harris as I said above was flat and I thought 
he was just going through the motions.


Funny I was thinking that Viggo Mortensen would make a great Remus. 
Of course I may just be a little more partial to Remus than Sirius 
and I love Viggo. Either way he'd make a good choice.

I do think that a director change needs to be made at PoA and actor 
restrictions lifted. Get the best person for the job and who can 
embrace the character fully. Not someone who did the movie because 
their grandchild would be cross with them if they didn't do it.

Cheers,
Kristin
 





From ShelaghC at aol.com  Thu Dec 27 22:12:50 2001
From: ShelaghC at aol.com (shelaghcol)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 22:12:50 -0000
Subject: Rosie taping request?
Message-ID: <a0g6d2+irkl@eGroups.com>

I'll be driving between Pittsburgh, PA and Chicago, IL while the 
Rosie O'Donnell Harry Potter show is airing.

Is there someone out there that might either tape this for me or make 
a copy of their own tape?

I'd be more than happy to reimburse for the cost of the tape and 
postage!

Shelagh





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Thu Dec 27 22:16:35 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:16:35 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
References: <a0g60a+ol45@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2B9DC3.4F835E33@kingwoodcable.com>

alyeskakc wrote:

> Yes! I think it did show enormously how casting can have a effect on
> the overall movie. The LOTR cast was heads above HP. They were some
> good moments in HP and I think certain people like Robbie Coltrane
> and Maggie Smith got into their characters. The kids did quite well,
> although Emma went a little over the top, IMHO.  Richard Harris was
> just very flat and not Dumbledore at all.

I think Emma was a little over the top. My favorite part though, which
came off very natural was right before Christmas when she finds Ron and
Harry in the banquet room. I think that moment was Hermione.

I think Harris was actually Dumbledore in the hospital. that was good
scene.

I loved Maggie Smith as McGonagall. Especially the part on the stairs
before the kids are sorted, when Neville picks up his toad. That looks
she gave him was classic!

> Funny I was thinking that Viggo Mortensen would make a great Remus.
> Of course I may just be a little more partial to Remus than Sirius
> and I love Viggo. Either way he'd make a good choice.

I think he'd make a perfect Sirius, but he'd be a good Remus. I think
Remus had blue eyes anyway, where Sirius' are black or brown.

Not related to LotR, I'm thinking Gary Oldman would be a perfect Moody.
 
> I do think that a director change needs to be made at PoA and actor
> restrictions lifted. Get the best person for the job and who can
> embrace the character fully. Not someone who did the movie because
> their grandchild would be cross with them if they didn't do it.

I have to agree...I don't care about the nationality, as long as they
are believable as the character.

-Katze



From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 28 00:04:07 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 00:04:07 -0000
Subject: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <a02e6h+tnre@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0gctn+nf2a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "selah_1977" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:
> I think that in order to get the best possible actors, they need to 
> expand their horizons a bit.  Otherwise, the Harry Potter franchise 
> will suffer.  Imagine if LOTR: FOTR had restricted casting in the 
> same way.

Interesting to note - in an OT fashion - that Peter Jackson was 
adamant he wanted an "unknown English" Frodo and held casting 
sessions in the UK. It was only when Elijah Wood heard of the part 
and sent Jackson a videotape of himself in hobbit get-up from the US 
that Jackson realised he'd found his perfect Frodo.

KT in Seattle.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Dec 28 00:24:46 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 00:24:46 -0000
Subject: Brits Only Restrictions/
In-Reply-To: <a0gctn+nf2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0ge4e+b49o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
>  Peter Jackson was 
> adamant he wanted an "unknown English" Frodo and held casting 
> sessions in the UK. It was only when Elijah Wood heard of the part 
> and sent Jackson a videotape of himself in hobbit get-up from the US 
> that Jackson realised he'd found his perfect Frodo.
> 

Hmmm, doesn't that sound just like Rupert Grint's story about getting his screen 
test afer putting together a video in which he acted out a few of Ron's scenes?  
(As well as dressing up like his female drama teacher and doing a skit like that.)




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 28 00:49:27 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:49:27 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Who will die and who will live?
References: <a0fpt4+pjfa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2BC197.261336CA@kingwoodcable.com>

Apparently Maggie Smith told USA today that McGongall is in all seven
books...

Here's the link:
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_482237.html

Thought I'd pass this on...
-Katze



From blazinshades at edsamail.com.ph  Fri Dec 28 08:33:17 2001
From: blazinshades at edsamail.com.ph (^watermelon^)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:33:17 +0800
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
Message-ID: <mailman.1.1576047996.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

My predictions on the fate of some characters:

Harry: Harry has to live, if he dies I think the death of his parents will mean nothing but there's 12% chance he could die

Ron: Yes he will die for his friends. If Ron lives and Harry dies, I might hate Ron because arrrgh I dunno..

Hermione: Probably not. It would be too tragic if she goes.

Dumbledore: Of course he will die. Because he's the one Harry looks up too and blah blah. If LV sees to it that he's in the grave, Harry might feel weak and so and so.

Hagrid: Hagrid could die because Coltrane said he only signed up for 5 movies. hahaha... what a lame excuse, sorry that thing he did made me think.

Snape: He mustn't! I like to see it as he's the only guy who could help Harry bcoz DD's dead so both him and Harry have to tolerate each other. Buuwahahha.

McGongall: No, she could be the next Headmaster of HW

Lupin: Maybe the people will kill him because he's a werewolf.

Sirius: Yes, to provoke Harry's anger more. He's almost the only family he had.

Neville: No, he has to get revenge for his parents.

Dobby: No, has to stick around to keep Harry confused and irritated. :)

Moody: Yes, couldn't even defend himself against Crouch Jr.

Fudge: No, could be brought to the dark side though

Weasleys: Arthur, if it will be really tragic. The Weasleys will have more of a hard time. One of the twins, we could see a change. Example, George goes what will fred be like? Ginny and Ron are possibilities too. Percy, no - he will be a part of the ministry or take his dad's job when arthur dies.

Voldemort: Yes. Do you guys think LV is Dumbledore? Because I don't remember ANY scene in the books where they face each other and euuuurrrrgh i dunno.. forget it. wrong theory. erase erase.

Lucius Malfoy: Maybe Draco could kill him.

Draco Malfoy: No, he will just be the same old draco teasing harry and co.

Others:
Dennis Creevy - I read someone on the list say [credits to you] that Dennis might be killed and then Colin might blame it on Harry and so and so Colin will get into some bad business to get back.
A Dursley maybe Dudley - can't explain.

Ciao! Peace out.

__________________________________
www.edsamail.com



From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 28 15:08:57 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (findmeabargain)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:08:57 -0000
Subject: Who will die and who will live?
In-Reply-To: <3C2B5174.B308DC43@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <a0i1u9+obfg@eGroups.com>

You know, even if an actor *is* signed up for all 7 movies, it 
doesn't necessarily mean that his character will appear as a living 
entity in each of them, does it?

A character killed off in book x could come back with ghostly advice 
in book x+1, after all!

Apologies if this has already been stated. Don't get to the ole group 
much, anymore.

Wendelin aka Deb




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 28 15:56:44 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:56:44 -0000
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <3C2A2386.179551F6@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <a0i4ns+9h5s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> Nicky wrote:
> > 
> > Ktaze wrote:
> > Now...is anyone in the UK going to be able to see the Rowling
> > interview<BR>
> > on the 28? Will anyone be watching this? Can someone pass on
> > pertinent<BR>
> > (transcription?) info to those who won't be able to see that show?
> > 
> > I'll make a deal with ya. You do the Yank one (no offence y'all) 
and
> > I'll do Limey one (again with the entire lack of offence, I AM 
English
> > myself after all). It all depends on that f-ing VCR of ours; if it
> > don't record, I don't write no transcript. What's one of them 
anyway? I
> > don't think I've ever read one *sheepish grin*
> > 
> > Nicky
> 
> It's a Deal!  Hopefully my VCR will work. I know that it won't
> pick up the sound for one of our stations (not the one with
> Rosie thank goodness!).

And will you guys post it here (or upload it to the files section) so 
we can all see it?  Please, pretty please.  :)

Dawn




From norsecode at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 28 16:15:59 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:15:59 -0000
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <a0em2t+kg2m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0i5rv+jhus@eGroups.com>

1. Harry:  No.  Period.

2. Ron:  Yes.  I don't definitely see it, and I certainly don't WANT 
to see it, but I surely can see it.  A sacrificial death.

3. Hermione:  No.  (Isn't it funny how none of us see her dying?)

4. Dumbledore:  In book 7, yes.

5. Hagrid:  Possible.  I hope not, b'c I really like Hagrid, but I 
can see it happening.  It'd be one of the more depressing deaths.

6. Snape:  Possible.  If yes, it'll be heroic, perhaps in an attempt 
to save Sirius.

7. McGongall:  Possible.  Originally, I would say yes b'c she's a 
dispensible character.  But, then some people mentioned her taking 
over as headmistress when Dumbledore dies and that seems logical.  
So, I guess in that light, I'd say no.
  
8. Lupin:  Yes or no.  I don't think it makes a difference.

9. Sirius:  No.  He IS Harry's only family and I'd like to see them 
openly reunited at the end of book 7.  It'd be a pity for him to die 
after all he's managed to live through.

10. Wormtail:  Yes, heroically (?) saving Harry.

11. Neville:  No.  He'll be instrumental in Voldemort's downfall, I 
believe.

12. Dobby:  Please, yes!  I really can't stand Dobby.

13. Moody:  Yes or no.  He could die.  Or he could go on to lead an 
undistinguished life.  Or perhaps he'll be a great Auror again and 
thereby a hero.

14. Fudge:  No thoughts (i.e. don't care).
 
15. Weasleys:  You know, when I knew someone would die in book 4, I 
totally believed it would be Fred or George.  I could definitely see 
one of them dying.  Why do we need 2 of the same person running 
around?  I know that sounds cruel, and DO like the twins as they are 
so funny, but since they are the same, one is expendable.  ...  As 
for the others, I do believe the parents will survive.  Charlie and 
Bill are so minor (right now anyway) that I don't see them going 
anywhere.  I don't know what I think about Ginny.  Ron I mentioned 
above.  Which leaves Percy.  He's so pigheaded, but I don't see him 
getting in the middle of things.  I kind of see him forever being 
this annoying clueless prat.  But if he were to die (would it be a 
great loss?), I see it being such a stupid death.. like a rock 
falling on him or something he could have easily avoided if he was 
just thinking straight.  I can just see it being something 
ridiculous.  I just don't see Percy getting into things, getting his 
hands dirty, if you know what I mean.

16. Voldemort:  I want to say yes.  But CAN he die?  Isn't he a 
spirit beyond death.  Oh, duh, I just remembered that part of Harry 
is in him now, so on some level that will make him mortal again.  So 
much for his life's quest.

17. Lucius Malfoy:  Hopefully, but I don't know.  Maybe not.

18. Draco Malfoy:  No.  Whatever side he goes to, I think he'll live.


Dawn




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 28 16:46:30 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (davisaacs)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:46:30 -0000
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
In-Reply-To: <a0i5rv+jhus@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0i7l6+8qi2@eGroups.com>

Ok, here's my thoughts...:o)

> 1. Harry:  Yes or no...I don't think she will, but if she does 
it'll be in a sort of Gladiator/Died-after-defeating-nemesis sort of 
way.
> 
> 2. Ron:  Isn't it funny how everyone thinks he's going to die a 
sacrificial death, I know I certainly do.

> 3. Hermione:  Hmmm...I sincerely hope not, and I think that (in a 
very tenuous way, of course) killing her off would be like commiting 
suicide for JKR.

> 4. Dumbledore:  Almost definately!
> 
> 5. Hagrid:  Yes. I think he will die, perhaps in the next book, but 
almost certainly by the end.
> 
> 6. Snape:  Hmmm...not sure about this one. Could go either way, but 
I think if he *does* die, it'll be in a sacrificial way.
 
> 7. McGongall:  No. Don't ask me why, but I really can't see her 
dying. She doesn't seem like the sort of person who *could* die.
>   
> 8. Lupin:  Hmmm...it depends what sort of a role he has in the next 
books. At the moment I don't think so, but you never know.
> 
> 9. Sirius:  No, I see him and Harry living happily ever after.
> 
> 10. Wormtail:  Hmmm...well, Harry *did* save his life, and we know 
that when a wizard saves another's life, there's a sort of a contract 
there, so I think he'll die defending Harry.
> 
> 11. Neville: Erm...no, but I think think he'll have a huge part to 
play in LV's downfall.
> 
> 12. Dobby: If she kills Dobby, I'll sue her!
> 
> 13. Moody:  Hmmm, again, it depends on what sort of role he's going 
to have in the next book.
> 
> 14. Fudge:  I bloody well hope so!
>  
> 15. Weasleys: I can't see what will happen with these characters. I 
think Ginny may die, possible sacrificially, possible the twins, and 
possible Molly.

> 16. Voldemort:  I'm a bit confused as to whether he *can* die, 
since he seems to be immortal, but we'll soon (!) find out.
> 
> 17. Lucius Malfoy:  Hmmm...I see him possibly trying to save Harry, 
or maybe killing Draco by accident, or vice versa.
> 
> 18. Draco Malfoy:  I don't know. If he doesn't go to the dark side, 
I can completely see him killing his father, but I don't know whether 
he'll live.

Well, there we are, thought I'd join in too:o)

Dave





From smholz at paonline.com  Fri Dec 28 17:24:13 2001
From: smholz at paonline.com (sholz888)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:24:13 -0000
Subject: Rosie taping request?
In-Reply-To: <a0g6d2+irkl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0i9rt+o3g9@eGroups.com>

I have my VCR set to tape both the 10AM and 3PM showing in my area.  
Assuming it comes out okay, I could make a copy for you.  Drop me a 
line and let me know.

Steve H.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "shelaghcol" <ShelaghC at a...> wrote:
> I'll be driving between Pittsburgh, PA and Chicago, IL while the 
> Rosie O'Donnell Harry Potter show is airing.
> 
> Is there someone out there that might either tape this for me or 
make 
> a copy of their own tape?
> 
> I'd be more than happy to reimburse for the cost of the tape and 
> postage!
> 
> Shelagh




From mrhjpotter at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Dec 28 18:59:17 2001
From: mrhjpotter at yahoo.co.uk (mrhjpotter)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:59:17 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter on Animal Hospital
Message-ID: <a0ife5+jl55@eGroups.com>

Here I am sitting waiting for the BBC Harry Potter and Me programme 
to start when Animal Hospital does a special behind the scenes 
special on HP 1&2.

Lucky my finger was on the record button!




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 28 19:32:35 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:32:35 -0600
Subject: Coltrane one Rosie
References: <a0i9rt+o3g9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2CC8D3.BFC52845@kingwoodcable.com>

I'm working on a transcription, but it might take a while. When it's
done I'll post it. I can, however, tell you that there were aboslutely
no spoilers.

I watched the part reagrding the movie signing. Harris said he had to
sing on for all 7, and asked Coltrane if he had to do the same. Coltrane
kind of looked down and shook his hand in a way that gave me the
impression of "sort of", but in no way signified that actually number of
movies he has to do. So I don't think we can extrapolate from Coltrane's
gesture to the Hagrid's fate. Sorry folks.

-Katze



From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 28 20:46:56 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:46:56 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter on Animal Hospital
In-Reply-To: <a0ife5+jl55@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0ilo0+nho7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mrhjpotter" <mrhjpotter at y...> wrote: 
> Here I am sitting waiting for the BBC Harry Potter and Me programme 
> to start when Animal Hospital does a special behind the scenes 
> special on HP 1&2.
> 
> Lucky my finger was on the record button!

can you explain further? what does animal hospital - is it the 
rolf harris program on animals requiring emergency treatment that i 
recall? - have to do with hp movies that would mean they would devote 
a special to the subject? unless of course they were planning to 
rescue buckbeak from his sticky situation later on 8-) any juicy 
gossip to report?

kt in seattle







From mrhjpotter at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Dec 28 22:36:02 2001
From: mrhjpotter at yahoo.co.uk (mrhjpotter)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 22:36:02 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter on Animal Hospital
In-Reply-To: <a0ilo0+nho7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0is4i+hkc6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "katrionabowman" <gingerorlando at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "mrhjpotter" <mrhjpotter at y...> wrote: 
> > Here I am sitting waiting for the BBC Harry Potter and Me 
programme 
> > to start when Animal Hospital does a special behind the scenes 
> > special on HP 1&2.
> > 
> > Lucky my finger was on the record button!
> 
> can you explain further? what does animal hospital - is it the 
> rolf harris program on animals requiring emergency treatment that i 
> recall? - have to do with hp movies that would mean they would 
devote 
> a special to the subject? unless of course they were planning to 
> rescue buckbeak from his sticky situation later on 8-) any juicy 
> gossip to report?
> 
> kt in seattle





Yes it is the Rolf Harris animal rescue programme. They have recently 
begun doing segment on animals doing other things. This segment 
lasted about 8 minutes and looked at the animals from the first film, 
primarily~ Hedwig, Fang, Scabbers and Trevor. They also did a bit on 
Mrs. Norris and the cat that was used for McGonagall. 

The bulk of the segment was on how the animals were trained and we 
were shown how Ook the Owl (Hedwig) was trained for the Nimbus 2000 
delivery scene.

The lady that trains Fang said that she had more work involved for 
movie 2 and was currently working on a new scene. She couldn't say 
much but said it involved Fang running away from something big!




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 28 23:08:47 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:08:47 -0600
Subject: Ewan McGregor
References: <a0is4i+hkc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2CFB7F.CD281AF9@kingwoodcable.com>

The Leaky-Cauldron has a couple of reports that Columbus is trying to
get Ewan McGregor for the part of Lupin in PoA. And they are thinking of
Robson Green for Sirius Black.

Here's the Leaky Cauldron:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/

Here's one of the articles:
http://www.peoplenews.com/news/0,3430,8149,00.html

I think Ewan would actually be pretty good as Lupin, but I'm wondering
if he's going to fit the part as a mal-nourished Lupin. He'd certainly
add some eye candy to the movie ;-)

I have no idea who Robson Green is, and I could find any pictures...so
your guess is as good as mine.

-Katze



From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Fri Dec 28 23:10:30 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:10:30 -0600
Subject: Robson Green
References: <a0is4i+hkc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2CFBE6.77B05A65@kingwoodcable.com>

Well...I found some photos...at:
http://www.brh.clara.net/profile/index.htm

he certainly looks the part!

-Katze



From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Sat Dec 29 07:00:33 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (kewpiebb99)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 07:00:33 -0000
Subject: the BBC JK Rowling special
Message-ID: <a0jpmh+t3ps@eGroups.com>

anyone seen it?
I read the transcript on mugglenet at: 
http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrshow.shtml

the bit that's related to this movie group is that the special showed 
JK Rowling personal drawings of the characters and the person who 
wrote the transcript above said they are 99% match with the movie 
version! can anyone who've seen the program confirm this?  I 
personally really like the all the casting (appearance wise) of the 
first movie, they totally match with my own imagination of the 
characters. I know a lot of you here absolutely hate or disagree with 
some of the casting due to their appearnace or age, even complain 
about their costume and hair not being like what you think they 
should be. I know everyone have their own imaginations of the book 
but I think the movie version pretty much is what JK Rowling had in 
mind to a certain degree. 





From adanaleigh at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 29 07:14:15 2001
From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 07:14:15 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] LotR vs HP
Message-ID: <F841EetVoMDrxxnSYe40001161d@hotmail.com>

I just saw LotR and I have to agree with everyone who said: WOW!

I will definitely be going back to see it again.  The acting was excellent, 
except for the sappy love scene between Aragorn and Arwen (where was that in 
the book?).  It served no purpose, except to make me wish for a slimy Orc to 
run through and stab Arwen.  Sadly, that was one of the few scenes in the 
movie that was orc-free.  :(

The screaming noises the Black Riders made got on my nerves about the ninth 
or tenth time it happened.

The music was awesome, perfect for every scene.  It intensified the action 
but at no point overwhelmed it or distracted me, except for the scene where 
they are in the mines of Moria.  Gandalf is fighting/has fought the Balrog, 
and the rest of the fellowship is running on stone stairs that are toppling. 
  There's this African chant going on in the background: ooga-chaka, 
ooga-chaka!  I suddenly had the wild urge to stand up and sing loudly "I 
can't stop this feeling...deep inside of me..."  There was more humor in the 
movie than the book, which helped immensely.

The movie moved quickly enough to keep me interested (and I have a _short_ 
attention span for epic fantasy) and I was sorry when it was over.  I've 
recently re-read "Fellowship of the Ring" (a hard read, BTW, not to be 
compared with HP!) and am wading through "The Two Towers" again, so I knew 
how it was going to end, but my brother, who didn't, was asking for Prozac.  
One fight scene after another, more orcs than you could shake a stick at, 
and Boromir dying--it was a definite downer.

Though I'm a die-hard "Colin Firth for everything" fan, I have to agree with 
everyone who said that the guy who played Aragorn IS Sirius Black.  Can we 
get him?

In short, I'd say that LotR is the better movie, but HP is the better book.  
Tolkien could have benefited from a sharp editor during his travel and 
description scenes, and his characterization lacked depth.  (At least in 
FotR; Two Towers seems to be a lot better; it's been a long time since I 
read them for the first time.)

There really can't be any comparison between the two movies, just like there 
can't really be a comparison between the series of books.  I can't say that 
everyone who likes one will like the other.  But, assuming that everyone on 
this list has seen HP already, I would recommend LotR to anyone (no small 
children).

Adana




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.




From frithar at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 29 12:39:14 2001
From: frithar at yahoo.com (frithar)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:39:14 -0000
Subject: Fate, and Rosie
Message-ID: <a0kdhi+h90i@eGroups.com>

> 
> Lupin: Maybe the people will kill him because he's a werewolf.

I'm thinking wormtail's new silver hand/arm will play a part in this 
(silver and werewolves don't mix).  Plus, ol' wormmy boy likely still 
hates Sirius and Remus, and will not soon forget that they tried to 
kill HIM in the shrieking shack.

Frith, lurker extraordinaire




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sat Dec 29 14:01:19 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:01:19 -0000
Subject: LotR vs HP
In-Reply-To: <F841EetVoMDrxxnSYe40001161d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <a0kibf+tep3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Adana Robinson" <adanaleigh at h...> wrote:
> The screaming noises the Black Riders made got on my nerves about the ninth 
> or tenth time it happened.
> 
> The music was awesome, perfect for every scene.  It intensified the action 
> but at no point overwhelmed it or distracted me, except for the scene where 
> they are in the mines of Moria. . . . 
>  I knew 
> how it was going to end, but my brother, who didn't, was asking for Prozac.  
> One fight scene after another, more orcs than you could shake a stick at, 
> and Boromir dying--it was a definite downer.

I agree with all of the above, and especially with your brother, and so does my 
31-year-old daughter, whom I finally saw it with last night.  They could've saved a 
lot of time and money, and improved the movie tremendously, IMHO, with less 
Orc-ness!




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sat Dec 29 19:18:08 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:18:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the BBC JK Rowling special
Message-ID: <9c.189c9058.295f70f0@aol.com>

In a message dated 29/12/2001 07:02:09 GMT Standard Time, dkewpie at pacbell.net 
writes:

<< the bit that's related to this movie group is that the special showed 
 JK Rowling personal drawings of the characters and the person who 
 wrote the transcript above said they are 99% match with the movie 
 version! can anyone who've seen the program confirm this? >>


The most alike were Dumbledore & Hagrid. It was like seeing pictures of 
Coltrane & Harris. Filch was bald! Snape was very Rickman like, but had a 
moustache. 

JKR also had a drawing of how the entrance to Diagon Alley worked, but she 
lost it when Chris Columbus could have used it, finding it only after they'd 
filmed that bit already. It's close, but in her drawings, the entrance opens 
as a circle that gradually gets larger and turns into an Arch way. Instead of 
the bricks moving to either side.

I can't remember any other character drawings that clearly..

Sara 



From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Sat Dec 29 20:19:52 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:19:52 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dumbledore casting Question again!
References: <a0g60a+ol45@eGroups.com> <3C2B9DC3.4F835E33@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <015f01c190a6$2cad2480$11ae1e3e@stephen>

Hello all,

Just got back from holiday to find a frightening number of emails to look at. I wanted to say this though, having now seen the LOTR movie:

I don't think the Gandalf actor would have worked as Dumbledore - like someone else on this list said, he was a bit too dark and scary for Dumbledore. I was considering it a lot of the time I was watching because several people on the list said he would be good as Dumbledore. I thought he was perfect for Gandalf though! On reflection, I would say that Richard Harris has the right sort of 'look' for Dumbledore, if only someone could force the arrogant so-and-so to read the books so he knows what JKR wants Dumbledore to be like, not just what the scriptwriters think.

Lucy, looking in despair at nearly 300 emails!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Dec 29 21:27:56 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:27:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <3C2B9DC3.4F835E33@kingwoodcable.com>
Message-ID: <20011229212756.12360.qmail@web14912.mail.yahoo.com>

Dawn said: And will you guys post it here (or upload it to the files
section) so 
we can all see it?  Please, pretty please.  :)

Well it turns out someone at The Leaky Cauldron has done it for me, so
that saves me the trouble of fulfilling my promise, which leaves me
more time to start/finish my homework. *sigh*

Robson Green = Sirius: too boyish cute
Ewan McGregor = Lupin: might be busy with Star Wars, and I just can't
see it. Actually, my Lupin looks like Cicero from Gladiator (Max's
Scottish servent) but without the scars.
Gary Oldman = Moody: one word - no! Is no way old enough, and the
make-up he'd need to look all scarred would put him off. I've seen the
perfect actor, but I can't remember what his name is or what he's been
in and it's so frustrating!
Sean Bean = Sirius: he looks the part in LOTR from the ads
Viggo Mortenson = Sirius: definitely not Lupin, but a very convincing
Sirius, but maybe not for anyone who's seen LOTR
Colin Firth = anyone: just no. I can't see him fitting in as Lupin or
Sirius.

Okay, so all the girls (and maybe a few guys) agree that Sean
Biggerstaff aka. Oliver Wood is dead gorgeous, but what about the
Slytherin Seeker? He wasn't half bad either.

Back onto CoS, any casting news regarding Tom Riddle? He'd have to look
like Dan Radcliffe, but still look evil a bit. Hmm...drawing a blank.

I actually went to see HP1 again yesterday (3rd viewing), and I didn't
enjoy it at all. Maybe it was to do with the 30-y/o cow behind who kept
kicking the seat, but still, I laughed at some of the jokes that were
still funny, and I sympathised and empathised in some of the right
places, but y'know what? As soon as Firenze arrived, I busied myself
with me phone (on silent) because that is just the WORST scene of the
entire movie. Voldemort/Quirrell has swept away very creepily, which is
cool, after DR's 'dramatic' pain in the scar (not convincing IMO) and
then Firenze turns up *cringe*. BAD GRAPHICS! I thought they totally
screwed up the Bloody Baron's appearance, but Firenze was taller than
Hagrid! That's just not on! And then Dan stumbled through his lines
about Voldemort (no offence to him, he's great in other scenes, and
maybe it's just the effect of acting against nothing but air). I did
notice Dumbeldore a bit more, and I thought he was absolutely almost
perfect in the hospital scene (as most of you seem to agree) but I
didn't think he was that friendly in the Mirror of Erised scene;
actually, I thought Harris struggled through those lines too!

Ah well, now I must go back to hoping for a brief flash of imagination
like JKR was blessed with. *sigh*

Nicky


=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks. You can never have too many pairs of socks" -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Dec 29 21:34:23 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the BBC JK Rowling special
In-Reply-To: <a0jpmh+t3ps@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011229213423.12029.qmail@web14905.mail.yahoo.com>

'She show's us a book with history of Dementors in it. Now I say book.
It's probably about 150 pages all about the Dementors.' -from the Leaky
Cauldron transcript.

I thought she said it was a history of the Death Eaters? I could've
sworn she said that...Ah well, not like it matters to us.

Nicky

=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks. You can never have too many pairs of socks" -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 30 01:36:51 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 01:36:51 -0000
Subject: Brits Only Restrictions/LOTR raves
In-Reply-To: <20011229212756.12360.qmail@web14912.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a0lr3j+r742@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nicky <azingam at y...> wrote:
> Dawn said: And will you guys post it here (or upload it to the files
> section) so we can all see it?  Please, pretty please.  :)
> 
> Well it turns out someone at The Leaky Cauldron has done it for me,
> so that saves me the trouble of fulfilling my promise, which leaves
> me more time to start/finish my homework. *sigh*

Well, thanks for offering anyway.  :)

> after DR's 'dramatic' pain in the scar (not convincing IMO)

I totally agree!  In the book, JKR does such a great job of 
describing the scene, how he falls to his knees in pain.  It's one of 
the scenes that I actually got a very clear visual on while reading.  
I was so upset to not see it as I had pictured it.  Oh well.  Oh, and 
it bugged me that the scar hurt at the wrong time.  I think in the 
movie it hurt before Voldemort even looked at him, but in the book, 
it was when Voldemort turned to look at him that it really started to 
hurt.  Then he fell to his knees in pain.  I guess it's hard to fall 
on your knees when you're already on your bum.  :)

Dawn





From ktchong73 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 31 00:27:56 2001
From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:27:56 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
Message-ID: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>

Quidditch and Hogwarts are going to prove to be problemsome for the 
Harry Potter franchise. The first time movie goers saw Hogwarts and 
the Quidditch match on the big screen, the school and the game were 
something new and innovative. Movie goers were generally impressed by 
the scenes. 

However, in the movie business, novelty wears off quickly. We will be 
seeing Hogwart and another Quidditch match in the next movie, and 
again in the third movie, and AGAIN in the forth movie.

Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the 
FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and 
Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will 
probably tolerate it, but the general movie goers (who are not fans 
of the books) will be so bored by the same thing over and over again 
that they will skip the movie. So, less and less people will go see 
each new Harry Potter movie. It will be a disaster for the Harry 
Potter movie franchise. 





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Dec 31 02:14:06 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:14:06 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01c001c191a0$d3e3c880$054e28d1@oemcomputer>

<Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the 
FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and 
Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will 
probably tolerate it, but the general movie goers (who are not fans 
of the books) will be so bored by the same thing over and over again 
that they will skip the movie. So, less and less people will go see 
each new Harry Potter movie. It will be a disaster for the Harry 
Potter movie franchise. >

I dont' think so.  It's not Hogwarts and Quiddich that brings in the money, it's the plot.  Yes there are those that go JUST for the special effects but we've got a LONG time worth of movies, and the FX methods change dramaticly every few years.  Hopefully we'll get better computer animators (and get rid of those centurs that look like the scenery, I couldn't see the bloody thing half the time), We'll find better ways to film some of the Quiddich scenes so that the blue screen is NOT so obviously used, and then we'll wow the non readers again.  

Each book brings it's own special magic to the screen.  Plot, character development, general fun stuff, that's what brings in your typical Saterday night movie goer.  Sure we may lose the special effects watchers but those that are just REALLY bored on Saterday night will still come, and of course, every Harry Potter fan known to man will be there.

I do not see this as a disaster, I see it as a projection for sucess.  Sure they'll lose a bit of money and in no way will HP and the CoS top HP and the PS/SS, but they'll still make their money and we'll still get to see Harry without lugging a book around.

Saitaina
*****
"Do you EVER want to have sex again?" Harry asked, cocking an eyebrow in his
direction.

"If I say no can I not go?"

"Nope."

"Then yes I want to have sex again."
-Harry, Draco, "Unawnsered Prayers", Saitaina, FictionAlley.org


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From richasi at azlance.com  Mon Dec 31 02:51:39 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 21:51:39 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2FD2BB.19F570F6@azlance.com>

luminary_extraordinaire wrote:
 
> Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the
> FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and
> Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will

While I would agree that it might become stale for some people,
look at the Star Trek franchise for a great example of the
same thing, different circumstances point of view. For three
seasons, the original Star Trek series ran on the air creating
80 episodes. It was set on the same ship, with the same crew,
doing virtually the same thing. And look, there is a motion
picture franchise with 9 films (almost 10), there are 4 spin-offs
(TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise) and hundreds of books all
set in the same universe, with the same crews doing the same
things.

My point is, while the Enterprise is the Enterprise, we saw
different parts of it. We saw the crew going through different
obstacles. We saw them grow and experience new things. We
saw them seek out new life forms and new civ--

*AHEM*

Okay, so Hogwarts is Hogwarts... but we'll undoubtedly see
different parts of it. New aspects. Things like that. 
Quidditch will be the same. Sure, its a game played on
brooms but its what HAPPENS during the games in each
book that makes it interesting.

In CoS we see Harry and Malfoy go head-to-head, and
Harry get blasted by a bludger. We get to see his "spectacular"
catch of the Snitch (hopefully, on screen too)

In PoA, his bouts with the Dementors while playing Quidditch
and the eventual outcome at the end will certainly be a
highlight of the movie when it comes out.

In GoF, we don't see Harry play Quidditch so there's no comparison.
It seems even JKR saw that the same old Quidditch can be
cumbersome. So on screen we'll see the pro's play... again,
something different.

Again, I guess my point is while that the setting remains
the same (Hogwarts/Enterprise, Quidditch/etc) its what
HAPPENS that makes the scene. THAT'S what fans and non-fans
alike will enjoy.

IMO.



From bethz1 at rcn.com  Mon Dec 31 05:56:51 2001
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in A Bottle)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:56:51 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004301c191bf$f1821620$7d3bfea9@cable.rcn.com>

But if people who saw the movie, but didn't read the books decide to read
the books and like them, they'll be seeing movies 2-4 for the same reason we
would, right?

Beth

*********************************************************************
ICQ #14325562 (rogtay)  AIM nickname - rogsi
*********************************************************************

----- Original Message -----
From: "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 7:27 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run



> Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the
> FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and
> Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will
> probably tolerate it, but the general movie goers (who are not fans
> of the books) will be so bored by the same thing over and over again
> that they will skip the movie. So, less and less people will go see
> each new Harry Potter movie. It will be a disaster for the Harry
> Potter movie franchise.





From Zarleycat at aol.com  Mon Dec 31 12:04:57 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 12:04:57 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
In-Reply-To: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0pk99+6r12@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
 
> Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the 
> FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and 
> Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will 
> probably tolerate it, but the general movie goers (who are not fans 
> of the books) will be so bored by the same thing over and over 
again 
> that they will skip the movie. So, less and less people will go see 
> each new Harry Potter movie. It will be a disaster for the Harry 
> Potter movie franchise.


I'm sure there will be a segment of the population for which the 
above will be true.  I, for one, have seen several James Bond movies 
and hope never to have to see another.  Why?  Because the story is 
essentially the same in each movie, just with different scenery and 
different gadgets that fly or explode or take someone's head off. 
But, that's my opinion.  Obviously there are tons of people who are 
thrilled by this stuff and will faithfully go to each Bond movie.

The Potter books use a lot of the same scenery from book to book, so 
I'm sure that some people will find that tedious.  I recall reading 
in a book review at the time that GoF came out that the reviewer was 
finding the structure of the books too similar, since they are all 
formed around Harry's school year. That doesn't seem to have affected 
the sales of the books at all.

I would hope that the filmmakers will think of a way to make the 
Quidditch matches fresh in the upcoming films.  There are important 
events that happen within the games - Harry breaking his arm and 
being at the tender mercy of Lockheart's medical idiocy, Harry seeing 
Dementors, the Dementor prank pulled by Malfoy and Co,. and the World 
Cup event.  I suppose that C. Columbus could resort not showing the 
actual game(s) and instead create dialog among the characters to let 
us know what happened.  But, I don't think I'll have a problem with 
seeing Quidditch several more times, at least.

Marianne




From CRSunrise at aol.com  Mon Dec 31 12:14:59 2001
From: CRSunrise at aol.com (CRSunrise at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 07:14:59 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run...
Message-ID: <123.96c822b.2961b0c3@aol.com>

I'm going to jump in here.  Hope people don't mind.  


In a message dated 12/30/2001 7:29:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
ktchong73 at yahoo.com writes:


> However, in the movie business, novelty wears off quickly. We will be 
> seeing Hogwart and another Quidditch match in the next movie, and 
> again in the third movie, and AGAIN in the forth movie.
> 

Possible Book Spoiler
.
.
.
.
.
There aren't any Quidditch matches in the 4th book.  Since they're having the 
TriWizard Challenge, the school has cancelled Quidditch for the year.  Unless 
I missed something.

Crystal
AIM/AOL=CRSunrise, OneLastW1sh
Hotmail=CRSunrise_98 at hotmail.com

~~Life's a constant roadway.  There are many twists and turns.  You also have 
to watch out for the potholes~~
~~Take one step at a time or you'll fall flat on your face~~
~~A life lived in chaos is an impossibility...~~Madeleine L'Engle

A League of Their Own -- This is my fanfiction site
http://members.tripod.com/~CRSunrise_98/

Join my Mailing Lists
A League of Their Own Updates-for updates and such on the above site
leagueupdates-subscribe at yahoogroups.com

For the Newsie Lover out there
newsie-lovers-subscribe at yahoogroups.com

Want to gets Cards year round?  Join my card list
Cards_Etc-subscribe at yahoogroups.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mandm at discover-net.net  Mon Dec 31 02:14:59 2001
From: mandm at discover-net.net (Mary Shearer)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 20:14:59 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C2FCA22.C55A8FFA@discover-net.net>



luminary_extraordinaire wrote:

>  Quidditch and Hogwarts are going to prove to be problemsome for the
> Harry Potter franchise. The first time movie goers saw Hogwarts and
> the Quidditch match on the big screen, the school and the game were
> something new and innovative. Movie goers were generally impressed by
> the scenes.
>
> However, in the movie business, novelty wears off quickly. We will be
> seeing Hogwart and another Quidditch match in the next movie, and
> again in the third movie, and AGAIN in the forth movie.
>
> Imagine this: by the time the forth movie comes out, it will be the
> FORTH DAMNED TIME movie goers see the same "STUPID" Hogwarts and
> Quidditch match AGAIN on the big screen. Harry Potter fans will
> probably tolerate it, but the general movie goers (who are not fans
> of the books) will be so bored by the same thing over and over again
> that they will skip the movie. So, less and less people will go see
> each new Harry Potter movie. It will be a disaster for the Harry
> Potter movie franchise.
>

Not necessarily - if they can keep the Quidditch to a minimum...and
focus only on the elements of the matches that advance the story.  The
quidditch match in the first movie was an understandably big deal, with
lots and lots of screen time.  But the upcoming matches in books 2, 3
and 4 will (hopefully) be briefer.  And even if they're not, are you
sure that movie goers will be tired of it?  They sure don't seem to get
tired of the requisite lightsaber duels in the Star Wars franchise!
Here's to hoping that the powers that be in HP Movieland find the
balance.

>
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                        ADVERTISEMENT


>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> WARNING! This group contains spoilers!
>
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin
> Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
> material from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to
> HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
> MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Dec 31 15:46:06 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:46:06 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
In-Reply-To: <a0obec+9890@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0q17u+kkbr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" <ktchong73 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> However, in the movie business, novelty wears off quickly. We will 
be 
> seeing Hogwart and another Quidditch match in the next movie, and 
> again in the third movie, and AGAIN in the forth movie.
> 

I think you make a very good point.  WB hopes to milk 8 movies out of 
7 HP books, and I think they are going to be disappointed with how it 
all turns out in the end.  I'm not sure even I can handle 8 movies 
with the same characters/sets/costumes, etc, especially if these 
movies are 3+ hours in length.  I'm not sure that the trouble is 
necessarily the repetition of things like Quiddich, though.  

I predict we will see a big drop-off in ticket sales for CoS.  That 
is because I will be stunned if Columbus takes any chances at all 
with CoS to keep the HP franchise fresh.  First, he doesn't seem like 
the kind of guy who takes chances.  Second, he will feel he shouldn't 
mess with success.  Third, he probably doesn't have the talent to do 
CoS differently from PS/SS (although there are a few very talented 
directors who probably could show us more than one good style).  
Fourth, CoS is essentially the same type of plot (mystery) as PS/SS, 
so his hands may be tied.

Fifth and most importantly, though, is that there just isn't time to 
make a tremendously good CoS.  They are really rushing CoS too much, 
in my humble lay opinion.  Trying to punch it out in one year is too 
fast for a special effects picture with child actors who can only 
work a few hours a day.  In PS/SS, we got several problems that could 
have been cured had Columbus and crew had more time.  Examples 
include bad centaurs, wobbly child acting scenes that could probably 
have been addressed with a few more takes, and Peeves being dropped 
not because the story required it but because the special effects 
were not up to scratch.  

If I were the producer (Ha!), I would want to add a few months to the 
CoS filming schedule, stretch out CoS post-production until Summer 
2003 or thereafter, and then get myself a new director for PoA and 
GoF to give the films a fresh look.  And as I've said many times, I 
would do GoF as one film to avoid saturating the market with two GoF 
films one month apart.

Cindy (offering her services to produce a solid three-hour screenplay 
for GoF, and proposing as a first step that the QWC be dropped 
entirely for the GoF movie)




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Mon Dec 31 16:02:44 2001
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:02:44 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0q17u+kkbr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C308C24.EEFB19B@kingwoodcable.com>

cindysphynx wrote:

<munch ... munch ... yummy!>
> If I were the producer (Ha!), I would want to add a few months to the
> CoS filming schedule, stretch out CoS post-production until Summer
> 2003 or thereafter, and then get myself a new director for PoA and
> GoF to give the films a fresh look.  And as I've said many times, I
> would do GoF as one film to avoid saturating the market with two GoF
> films one month apart.
> 
> Cindy (offering her services to produce a solid three-hour screenplay
> for GoF, and proposing as a first step that the QWC be dropped
> entirely for the GoF movie)

I'm not sure what's going to happen to the franchise. Will it still be
as strong in 8 years? I dunno...could be. I'd be willing to see the
movies, provided my decision will be based on the previous movie. I
won't pass up PoA or GoF. Actually..I'm not sure I'd pass up any of
them, because I'd like to see them on the big screen. I wonder though,
if my opinion would change had I read the books before I saw the movie. 

My opinion is that they should've done a tv movie mini-series. The
sci-fi channel, here in the states, did a 6 hour mini-series for Dune.
It's the only way that book could've been done appropriately. It was
excellent! Sci-fi has now taken on the task of doing the Dune sequels,
as well as producing a mini-series for Ursula LeGuin's Earthsea trilogy.
They are excellent productions.

I would be in heaven if they did that type of production for Harry
Potter. Especially with Goblet of fire. But I'm not the one who's paying
for it ;-)

-Katze



From norsecode at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 31 17:14:11 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:14:11 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run...
In-Reply-To: <123.96c822b.2961b0c3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <a0q6d3+4gn2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., CRSunrise at a... wrote:
> There aren't any Quidditch matches in the 4th book. 
> Since they're having the TriWizard Challenge, the
> school has cancelled Quidditch for the year. 
> Unless I missed something.

Well, there's the Quidditch World Cup.  Maybe the game itself isn't 
important, although I love the Omnioculars, but the event sure is.

Dawn

(Fun to see you here on this list, Crystal! :)





From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 31 19:33:26 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (virtualworldofhp)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:33:26 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
In-Reply-To: <a0q17u+kkbr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0qei6+l9v5@eGroups.com>

> 
> Cindy (offering her services to produce a solid three-hour screenplay 
> for GoF, and proposing as a first step that the QWC be dropped 
> entirely for the GoF movie)

I'm thinking this would make a really, really great contest somewhere.
 (Ooo, then we could send in the winners and show the producers how
much better fanatics are at this thing then educated screenplay-writers!)

-Megan




From richasi at azlance.com  Mon Dec 31 19:46:32 2001
From: richasi at azlance.com (Richasi)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:46:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run
References: <a0qei6+l9v5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C30C098.1F8EEDE2@azlance.com>

To Cindy:
> for GoF, and proposing as a first step that the QWC be dropped
> entirely for the GoF movie)

I dunno. It sets up the entire Dark Mark stuff. It sets up the
Krum stuff. It sets up Winky. It sets up a lot of things that
we take for granted. You COULD leave all that out and perhaps
have Harry or someone read something in a newspaper that explains
what happened, or some other cop out like that. :)



From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Dec 31 22:17:05 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:17:05 -0000
Subject: GoF screenplay (WAS Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run)
In-Reply-To: <3C30C098.1F8EEDE2@azlance.com>
Message-ID: <a0qo51+ig6k@eGroups.com>

Richasi wrote (about writing a GoF screenplay without the QWC):

> I dunno. It sets up the entire Dark Mark stuff. It sets up the
> Krum stuff. It sets up Winky. It sets up a lot of things that
> we take for granted. You COULD leave all that out and perhaps
> have Harry or someone read something in a newspaper that explains
> what happened, or some other cop out like that. :)

I won't rule out the possibility that it would be cheesy.  :-)  My 
problem with including the QWC is that we'll have seen Quiddich in 
several movies by the time GoF comes out, and it will no longer be 
novel.  Instead, we'll be asked to watch Quiddich involving a number 
of adult strangers (the players) we have never heard of before and 
only one of whom we will ever care about (Krum).  I think it would 
even be less interesting than the Quiddich scenes with Harry and 
Malfoy.  

No, if I were in charge <ignores collective sigh of relief that she 
is not in charge>, the goal would be to tell a simple, exciting 3-
hour suspense story of a kid who is in the Triwizard tournament, gets 
kidnapped, and the Dark Lord gets reborn.  There's no time for all 
the other great stuff that happens in the book.  So I think the 3-
hour screenplay would go something like this:

Initial scene before the credits is the Riddle House scene.  Then, we 
skip straight to Harry waking up with his scar hurting, followed by a 
shot of the Hogwarts express winding toward school while the opening 
credits roll.  Yup, that's right, no Weasley's Wizard Wheezes and all 
the great things that happen before Hogwarts.  The few key facts you 
have to have to make the Moody plot twist happen are Accio, Priori 
Incantantem, Moody's kidnap, Crouch Jr.'s escape from Azkaban (there 
might be others, but I can't think of them right now).  They learn 
Accio in class later, so the early Accio scenes can be cut.  Moody's 
kidnap is a Rita Skeeter story maybe, or a conversation with Hagrid.  
Whatever.  Crouch Jr.'s escape from Azkaban is forshadowed by Sirius 
and the Pensieve.  

Priori Incantantem is the hardest element to establish without "The 
Dark Mark" scene.  Maybe this comes up in the Draco the Bouncing 
Ferret scene.  You combine the Ferret scene with the subsequent scene 
where Harry and Draco duel and Hermione gets big teeth.  Moody comes 
across Harry and Draco dueling, and to find out who hit Hermione, he 
does Priori Incantantem on Draco's wand.  Moody still gets to teach 
all of his DADA classes because we need to get to know him, not to 
mention the Unforgivable Curses.

Then the screenplay picks up with the Harry's name going into the 
Goblet and the Three Tasks.  To save time, the Champions do not 
figure out the Egg's clue; they are told exactly what the Second Task 
is, just as they are told what the Third Task is.  

The Unexpected Task and Yule Ball never happen.  The Bagman gambling 
subplot never happens.  The House Elf Liberation Front never 
happens.  Harry doesn't face the sphynx in the maze.  No Winky.  No 
Dobby (Harry gets the gillyweed by researching it with Hermione and 
Ron).  No Blast-Ended Skrewts.  

Now for some real controversy:  it might be possible to eliminate the 
Second Task entirely, particularly since it might be really hard and 
expensive to film it well.  Maybe they do the first task, which 
determines their start position for the maze, and that's the whole 
tournament.

Even then, we're probably not down to 3 hours, but it's a start.  
There are probably 20 more issues that still need to be addressed, 
but enough already!

Cindy (who would love to try to cut down PoA, too)




From azingam at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Dec 31 22:30:48 2001
From: azingam at yahoo.co.uk (Nicky)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:30:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: What a butcher!
In-Reply-To: <a0qo51+ig6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011231223048.32109.qmail@web14901.mail.yahoo.com>

Wow! If we let you loose on the script it wouldn't be recognisable as
GoF. I agree with most of what you put, but if you cut out too much of
the subplots then the movie is about the Triwizard Tournament only, and
that might be a little boring, and wouldn't convey the passage of time
(not everyone notices the weather in a scene to dictate what season it
is). The thing with cutting down such a story as GoF is that there's so
much in there that is referenced to in later scenes, such as the
PortKey and Krum and even Winky has a part in it. I pity whoever has to
adapt the book.

Nicky

> 
> Initial scene before the credits is the Riddle House scene.  Then, we
> 
> skip straight to Harry waking up with his scar hurting, followed by a
> 
> shot of the Hogwarts express winding toward school while the opening 
> credits roll.  Yup, that's right, no Weasley's Wizard Wheezes and all
> 
> the great things that happen before Hogwarts.  The few key facts you 
> have to have to make the Moody plot twist happen are Accio, Priori 
> Incantantem, Moody's kidnap, Crouch Jr.'s escape from Azkaban (there 
> might be others, but I can't think of them right now).  They learn 
> Accio in class later, so the early Accio scenes can be cut.  Moody's 
> kidnap is a Rita Skeeter story maybe, or a conversation with Hagrid. 
> 
> Whatever.  Crouch Jr.'s escape from Azkaban is forshadowed by Sirius 
> and the Pensieve.  
> 
> Priori Incantantem is the hardest element to establish without "The 
> Dark Mark" scene.  Maybe this comes up in the Draco the Bouncing 
> Ferret scene.  You combine the Ferret scene with the subsequent scene
> 
> where Harry and Draco duel and Hermione gets big teeth.  Moody comes 
> across Harry and Draco dueling, and to find out who hit Hermione, he 
> does Priori Incantantem on Draco's wand.  Moody still gets to teach 
> all of his DADA classes because we need to get to know him, not to 
> mention the Unforgivable Curses.
> 
> Then the screenplay picks up with the Harry's name going into the 
> Goblet and the Three Tasks.  To save time, the Champions do not 
> figure out the Egg's clue; they are told exactly what the Second Task
> 
> is, just as they are told what the Third Task is.  
> 
> The Unexpected Task and Yule Ball never happen.  The Bagman gambling 
> subplot never happens.  The House Elf Liberation Front never 
> happens.  Harry doesn't face the sphynx in the maze.  No Winky.  No 
> Dobby (Harry gets the gillyweed by researching it with Hermione and 
> Ron).  No Blast-Ended Skrewts.  
> 
> Now for some real controversy:  it might be possible to eliminate the
> 
> Second Task entirely, particularly since it might be really hard and 
> expensive to film it well.  Maybe they do the first task, which 
> determines their start position for the maze, and that's the whole 
> tournament.
> 
> Even then, we're probably not down to 3 hours, but it's a start.  
> There are probably 20 more issues that still need to be addressed, 
> but enough already!
> 
> Cindy (who would love to try to cut down PoA, too)
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> 
> WARNING! This group contains spoilers!
> 
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin
> Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
> 
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
> material from posts to which you're replying!
> 
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to
> HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
> MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
> 
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


=====
[When looking into the Mirror of Erised] "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks. You can never have too many pairs of socks" -Dumbeldore, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com



From gingerorlando at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 31 23:22:50 2001
From: gingerorlando at hotmail.com (katrionabowman)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:22:50 -0000
Subject: GoF screenplay (WAS Harry Potter Movies In Trouble In the Long Run)
In-Reply-To: <a0qo51+ig6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0qs0a+9936@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> The Unexpected Task and Yule Ball never happen. The Bagman
> gambling subplot never happens.  The House Elf Liberation Front 
> never happens.  Harry doesn't face the sphynx in the maze.  No 
> Winky.  No Dobby (Harry gets the gillyweed by researching it with 
> Hermione and Ron).  No Blast-Ended Skrewts.  

eek! great imagination cindy, but we couldn't lose the yule ball... 

1) none of the krum-hermione-ron tension, which depending on jkr's 
intentions could play larger parts in later movies.

2) no hermione make-over scene (a must for all us bespectacled, post- 
orthodontic work girls who only just keep their frizzies under 
control).

kt in seattle - the northwest's biggest user of pantene's hydrating 
curls range 8-)




From ShelaghC at aol.com  Mon Dec 31 23:27:06 2001
From: ShelaghC at aol.com (shelaghcol)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:27:06 -0000
Subject: Spoiler request?
Message-ID: <a0qs8a+8d1e@eGroups.com>

I know I've not been a very vocal member of this list, but could I 
make a small request?

I purposely didn't read PS/SS before seeing the movie because I like 
some element of surprise in the visual medium.

I joined this list specifically because it was about the movie and 
not the books because I plan to do the same with the rest of the 
series - reading the book after seeing the movie.

If there's discussion of plot elements for the rest of the books, is 
it possible for the one posting to put something in the subject line 
indicating spoilers for those books so as not to give those plot 
points away?

Thanks

Shelagh





From norsecode at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 31 23:45:59 2001
From: norsecode at yahoo.com (norsecode)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:45:59 -0000
Subject: GoF butchery (GoF Spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <a0qo51+ig6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a0qtbn+96iv@eGroups.com>

Haha, Cindy, boy did you cut lots of stuff.  :) 
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post....

> I won't rule out the possibility that it would be cheesy.  :-)  My 
> problem with including the QWC is that we'll have seen Quiddich in 
> several movies by the time GoF comes out, and it will no longer be 
> novel. 

True.  I can see them cutting out the game itself, but not the 
tournament.  I.e. I can see the event and especially the Dark Mark 
scene... and too the scene with the death eaters using the imperious 
curse on the humans....  They only need to show us a little of the 
game.. maybe Krum coming on and his psych-out dive.  Nothing too long.

> Then the screenplay picks up with the Harry's name going into the 
> Goblet and the Three Tasks.  To save time, the Champions do not 
> figure out the Egg's clue; they are told exactly what the Second
> Task is, just as they are told what the Third Task is.  

Um, I think we need to establish the whole Harry helps Cedric and 
Cedric helps out Harry.  But once Cedric tells Harry to take a bath, 
he goes right away.

> The Unexpected Task and Yule Ball never happen.  

Like someone else said, I think we need the Yule Ball.. that whole 
Hermione IS a girl bit... for we know that romance is definitely 
going to come in the following books.  Whether she winds up with 
Harry or Ron, we have to see the awakening.  As for the Unexpected 
Task, I think they can really shorten that.  Harry is told he needs a 
date.  He mulls it over with Ron.  He askes Cho.  She says no, etc.  
It was a bit drawn out in the books, but can be done quickly in the 
movie.

> The Bagman gambling subplot never happens. 

Unnecessary.

> The House Elf Liberation Front never happens.  

Yay!  Hallelulia!!  (The whole SPEW thing and annoying elf liberation 
thing is one of the reasons I really didn't like book 4).

> No Dobby 

Yay!  But I think we perhaps we should keep Winky in.

Dawn