From adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au  Thu Nov  1 06:30:30 2001
From: adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au (adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 06:30:30 -0000
Subject: SPOILER Time article: missing stuff
In-Reply-To: <9rpd0v+ckm9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rqq66+8f09@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
>> > > Spoilers ahoy!
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
> > > *
>> 
> On the Peeves front, while I am not a poltergeist fan, does this 
mean 
> that he will be introduced for the first time in CoS? 


The Times review (I think) says that Peeves will indeed be introduced 
in CoS.

Anna




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  1 07:04:11 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 07:04:11 -0000
Subject: Ridiculous reviews
In-Reply-To: <9rptlq+iquh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rqs5b+k8l4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., jonathandupont at h... wrote:
> I hate it when hype gets this big... this movie is so going to be a 
> disappointment,
> Jon

I understand how you feel-- I've been telling myself that, being an 
incurable pessimist.

But in all fairness, I think it is better to get ecstatic reviews 
than people telling us it's gonna suck.  Bad reviews won't get the 
uninitiated into cineams, for one.  Second, believe it or not, good 
movies do get good reviews and so far, the reviews have been good.  
The good thing about these early reviews are that they don't sound 
like they are written by studio hack writers but truly enthusiastic 
audience.

And if you really need people to put the movie and HP down, just 
visit ain't-it-cool.com.  Those LOTR fans there have been telling 
everyone this is a 'kiddie' film with 1-d characters, stupid plot 
twists, idiotic dialogues, bad special effects, bad actings and is 
going to suck big time.  All without seeing the movie!  How kewl is 
that!  Your expectation would be so low after that you won't even 
want to see the movie.

MMM-- who has discovered the power of bad advice




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  1 07:10:24 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 07:10:24 -0000
Subject: couple thoughts
In-Reply-To: <47901B6155@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9rqsh0+odit@eGroups.com>


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> Has anyone read, seen or heard ANY reference as to if Bane, 
> Firenze and...whathisname are going to be in the movie at 
> all?  You'd think we'd see something about them by now.

No, but the unicorn blood drinking scene is definitely in because 
we've seen it in the second trailer and several reviews mention that 
scene as 'scary for younger children'.  I guess Bane and Firenze are 
in to explain to Harry what that scene was.




From shanerichmond at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  1 13:19:41 2001
From: shanerichmond at hotmail.com (shanerichmond at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 13:19:41 -0000
Subject: SPOILER Time article: missing stuff
In-Reply-To: <9rqq66+8f09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rri5d+4e9m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., adadi000 at s... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> 
> > On the Peeves front, while I am not a poltergeist fan, does this 
> mean 
> > that he will be introduced for the first time in CoS? 
> 
> 
> The Times review (I think) says that Peeves will indeed be 
introduced 
> in CoS.
> 
> Anna

I for one am pleased that Peeves has gone. Purely because he was 
being played by Rik Mayall - an awful actor IMO with only one type of 
character in his repertoire. Hopefully they'll re-cast the role 
before CoS.




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  1 13:22:42 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 08:22:42 -0500
Subject: final UK poster
Message-ID: <F262PJXc7mB5jOPKyVL0001af9d@hotmail.com>

Gripe, gripe, gripe.  I love the poster, but WHY, tell me, WHY can't artists 
get something as simple and obvious as the color of Harry's eyes right?  It 
is very easy to alter this kind of thing on a photograph.

http://www.hpgalleries.com/hires28.htm

Amy Z
who hopes this means there won't prove to be something magical about Harry's 
eyes, but doubts it

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




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  1 13:28:35 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 08:28:35 -0500
Subject: what happened to Ook?
Message-ID: <F1361iv6r12XPKO1MMF0000f530@hotmail.com>

The Radio Times article

http://hpgalleries.topcities.com/vaults/c140.htm

says there are two owls playing Hedwig, named Gizmo and Sprout.  Don't tell 
me Ook has gone to the great Owlery in the sky.

Simon, any inside info?

Amy Z

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




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  1 14:09:21 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 06:09:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] final UK poster
In-Reply-To: <F262PJXc7mB5jOPKyVL0001af9d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20011101140921.63480.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>

A big thank you! Eyes maynot be green, but I printed
this poster out for my boys room and naturally for
me!!!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Merry
Band of Muggles 100%, who will be in for a surprise
with this!
--- Amy Z <aiz24 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Gripe, gripe, gripe.  I love the poster, but WHY,
> tell me, WHY can't artists 
> get something as simple and obvious as the color of
> Harry's eyes right?  It 
> is very easy to alter this kind of thing on a
> photograph.
> 
> http://www.hpgalleries.com/hires28.htm
> 
> Amy Z
> who hopes this means there won't prove to be
> something magical about Harry's 
> eyes, but doubts it
> 
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com



From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Thu Nov  1 14:54:50 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:54:50 -0000
Subject: Dan's voice broke before the first film was finished (news story)
Message-ID: <9rrnnq+2u78@eGroups.com>

Um, I don't think a spoiler is needed on this...

The news report below reveals that Daniel Radcliffe's voice broke 
before the end of filming the first HP film.  A boy called Joe 
Sowerbutts - who is actually  a bit older than Daniel - provided the 
boyish voice for two scenes, and has been hired to voiceover some 
film-related merchandise.

I guess Joe will also be dubbing Dan's voice for the whole of Chamber 
of Secrets... unless *his* voice breaks, that is.

Full story:-

http://www.thisislondon.com/dynamic/news/top_story.html?
in_review_id=470665&in_review_text_id=424657

Neil, who can do a great falsetto 






From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Thu Nov  1 15:23:53 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:23:53 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] couple thoughts
In-Reply-To: <47901B6155@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
References: <47901B6155@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <ok2GBZRJkW47Ewy0@dickson.demon.co.uk>

In message <47901B6155 at lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>, Rachel Bray 
<bray.262 at osu.edu> writes
>Well, I myself will be bummed not hearing Peeves cackle
>"ooh...ickle firsties."  But, oh well.

It must be more likely than not that the eventual DVD release will 
feature deleted scenes like this. (Mmm... can you say "director's cut"?) 
At least we have reports that the Peeves scenes were filmed, rather than 
the film script deviating from the book story. It's not clear whether 
the Norbert-up-the-tower scenes weren't filmed due to a deliberate 
storyline decision or whether they weren't filmed due to CGI cost 
considerations. I would hope it's the former - I have vague fears about 
(eg) Quidditch scenes being cut out of (or cut down within) future 
movies as a money-saving measure.

There seems to be logic and inspiration behind casting Rik Mayall as 
Peeves. Mayall fans may care to see "Drop Dead Fred" in which Rik plays 
a child's former imaginary friend come back to haunt her in later life, 
a role with some similarities to that of a poltergeist. The movie isn't 
a classic, but in some ways, it was ahead of its time - there are 
parallels to the gross-out comedies of the last few years.

Cheers!
Chris

PS Got to brag: my ticket to the Scottish Gala Charity Screening of the 
movie on November 6th arrived yesterday. *bounce*  *bounce* Drinks at 
6pm, movie starts at 8pm. JKR will be attending as she is patron of the 
MS Society Scotland, one of the two charities which the event is 
supporting.You don't just have my word that I'm not making this up - I 
got the ticket in an auction that was listed in The Leaky Cauldron and 
you can see my name listed as a winning bidder on 
<URL:http://www.qxl.com/cgi-bin/qxlhome.cgi/EN/QXL/PR/U1008986871/_20290685> 
. Will anyone else from this mailing list be at the same event?

-- 
Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, England.      chris at dickson.demon.co.uk

My brush with greatness - November 6th: 122.6 hours and counting
( http://www.qxl.com/cgi-bin/qxlhome.cgi/EN/QXL/PR/U1008986871/_20290685 )



From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  1 15:51:10 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 15:51:10 -0000
Subject: Sountrack review/Dan's voice/Chris' brush with greatness
In-Reply-To: <ok2GBZRJkW47Ewy0@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9rrr1e+avep@eGroups.com>

For those who are tired already of the gushy reviews, go to this url:

http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/11/01/magazine/HARRY01.htm

This is Peter Dobrin's review of the soundtrack, which I just read in 
my morning paper.  While it is a largely favorable review, he does 
take issue with Williams on the "Harry's Wondrous World" theme (I'd 
like to take issue with the theme's title myself).  Dobrin shows 
every sign of being a Potter fan; he discusses the book(s) 
knowledgeably at the end of the review and doesn't make any glaring 
mistakes that other reviewers of the film have made.  

Speaking as someone who performs/attends classical music concerts in 
Philadelphia, I can say unequivocally that Dobrin is NOT a soft 
touch; when you get a good review from him, you've earned it.  I'm 
thrilled that they didn't muck the soundtrack up by adding a pop song 
to the end of the film; as someone who largely stopped listening to 
pop music 19 years ago (I was an old fogey at the age of 18) I look 
forward to the film soundtrack turning young people onto symphonic 
music as much as the books have turned kids onto reading.

_____

As far as Daniel Radcliffe's voice change is concerned...while I 
understand the need to dub some lines in the first film, there's no 
reason the character of Harry couldn't also have a slightly deepened 
voice in Chamber of Secrets.  Does JKR say anywhere in the second 
book that Harry is still unmistakably a soprano or alto?  Wouldn't he 
seem slightly more threatening and like an heir of Slytherin with a 
sort of tenor voice?  After all, even twelve and thirteen-year-old 
boys with changed voices seldom sound like basses.  He should be fine.

_____

Chris, have I mentioned that I looked up our family genealogy and 
discovered that we're long lost Scottish cousins, so you have to 
invite me to this shindig on the 6th?  Not buying it, huh?  Oh well, 
it was worth a shot...Now I know what your "brush with greatness" sig 
is all about...(I should have looked into it before and didn't).  Did 
I mention that I'm green with envy?

--Barb







From heidit at netbox.com  Thu Nov  1 15:46:14 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:46:14 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sountrack review/Dan's voice/Chris' brush with 
	greatness
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C31FF@MIAEXCH1>

> 
> As far as Daniel Radcliffe's voice change is concerned...while I 
> understand the need to dub some lines in the first film, there's no 
> reason the character of Harry couldn't also have a slightly deepened 
> voice in Chamber of Secrets.  Does JKR say anywhere in the second 
> book that Harry is still unmistakably a soprano or alto?  Wouldn't he 
> seem slightly more threatening and like an heir of Slytherin with a 
> sort of tenor voice?  After all, even twelve and thirteen-year-old 
> boys with changed voices seldom sound like basses.  He should be fine.
> 

There's been a denial from Warner Brothers on this
-http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_438871.html?menu=

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1631000/1631669.s
tm 



From prefectmarcus at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  1 17:52:09 2001
From: prefectmarcus at yahoo.com (Marcus )
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 17:52:09 -0000
Subject: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
Message-ID: <9rs249+5n4i@eGroups.com>

Check out the BBS interview of Dan Radcliffe.  He has the same voice 
as the trailers.  So unless the BBC was dubbing all his answers, I 
suspect "The Sun" was dead wrong and using extremely sloppy 
journelism.

Marcus





From dkgrubb at earthlink.net  Thu Nov  1 19:02:32 2001
From: dkgrubb at earthlink.net (dkgrubb at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 19:02:32 -0000
Subject: opening day tickets
In-Reply-To: <9rs249+5n4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rs688+791j@eGroups.com>

I got tickets for Nov 16 today to a small local theatre on-line at 
moviefone.com.

Debra





From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  1 22:26:13 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 22:26:13 -0000
Subject: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9rs249+5n4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rsi65+5vh1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Marcus " <prefectmarcus at y...> wrote:
> Check out the BBS interview of Dan Radcliffe.  He has the 
same voice 
> as the trailers.  So unless the BBC was dubbing all his 
answers, I 
> suspect "The Sun" was dead wrong and using extremely 
sloppy 
> journelism.
> 

Isn't the sun a tabloid? When I saw that, I just said "oh lord, here 
htey go with the Harry Potter scandals, give that damn kid a 
break..."

m.
-who is sure there'll be more of these idiotic things.




From john at walton.vu  Fri Nov  2 00:15:40 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 00:15:40 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9rs249+5n4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B807962C.40D5%john@walton.vu>

Marcus wrote:

> Check out the BBS interview of Dan Radcliffe.  He has the same voice
> as the trailers.  So unless the BBC was dubbing all his answers, I
> suspect "The Sun" was dead wrong and using extremely sloppy
> journelism.

Sorry, did you use "The Sun" and "journalism" in the same sentence?

::snorts:: Rag.

--John

____________________________________________

"A program is a spell cast over a computer, turning input into error
messages." --Anon

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________





From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov  2 03:39:59 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:39:59 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] couple thoughts
Message-ID: <37.1d35e99b.29136f8f@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/1/2001 10:26:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
chris at dickson.demon.co.uk writes:

<< PS Got to brag: my ticket to the Scottish Gala Charity Screening of the 
 movie on November 6th arrived yesterday. *bounce*  *bounce* Drinks at 
 6pm, movie starts at 8pm. JKR will be attending as she is patron of the 
 MS Society Scotland, one of the two charities which the event is 
 supporting.You don't just have my word that I'm not making this up - I 
 got the ticket in an auction that was listed in The Leaky Cauldron and 
 you can see my name listed as a winning bidder on  >>

Oh, I am TOTALLY JEALOUS..I may have to kill you....



From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 05:36:40 2001
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (Jennifer Piersol)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 05:36:40 -0000
Subject: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
Message-ID: <9rtbd8+boq3@eGroups.com>

As movie discussion has been "banned" on the main list, I 
reconsidered my automatic reply there and decided to reply to *this* 
list.  Aren't I a good girl?

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Mike Schubert" <mschub at y...> wrote:

> Now, if Hermione and Harry never take Norbert to be "carted away", 
> how do they get the detention that lands them in the Forbidden 
> Forest where they meet the centaurs and the unicorn?
> -m

Here's another point to ponder... along with their Forbidden Forest 
detention, Harry, Hermione, and Neville all lose 50pts each for 
Gryffindor.  Is that going to be taken out, too?  It seems to me that 
it would be fairly important, as it would be the reason for Slytherin 
to be the original winners of the house cup at the end of the year.

What would be the point of the crowd (and esp. Neville) earning their 
bravery/logic/chess points if they weren't behind to begin with?

Jen (who is hoping that there is another instance where they can lose 
their points and get detention that's *plausible*)




From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Nov  2 06:33:58 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 06:33:58 -0000
Subject: Dan's voice broke before the first film was finished (news story)
In-Reply-To: <9rrnnq+2u78@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rteom+10531@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Neil Ward" <neilward at d...> wrote:
> A boy called Joe Sowerbutts - who is actually  a bit older than 
> Daniel - provided the  boyish voice for two scenes,

Joe Sour Butts! What a name!




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Fri Nov  2 07:14:29 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 07:14:29 -0000
Subject: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
In-Reply-To: <9rtbd8+boq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rth4l+58n3@eGroups.com>



I found this link which shows all the alternation in the movie

http://darkmark.com/c.c?l=moviemistakes

the link contains LOTS of spoiler, so don't go there if you don't 
wanna know. 
seems like they change ALOT of stuffs!!!  Including some of my most 
favorite parts involving Draco!! urgh...
feeling very disappointing right now..

jo





From magpie1112 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 12:36:08 2001
From: magpie1112 at yahoo.com (Magpie)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 12:36:08 -0000
Subject: Regal Cinemas selling advanced tickets in US 
Message-ID: <9ru3vo+u83q@eGroups.com>

Hello All!

A friend of mine bought Harry Potter tickets yesterday at a Regal 
Cinema right near my house.  She was able to purchase tics for the 
16th, 17th & 18th (woo hoo!)  Couldn't have asked for a nicer 
birthday present!

The cashier said that *all* US Regal Cinemas should be selling 
advanced HP tics now - so if you have one in your area, you should be 
able to just head on over & snap some up.

I guess stadium seating will have to stand in for the thrill of 
having a Ford Anglia in a pink smock as an usherette.  We can't have 
it all....

- Denise

P.S. - Still no sign of tickets at www.Fandango.com




From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Fri Nov  2 14:26:21 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:26:21 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] use extreme fortehought before checking "mistake link"
Message-ID: <47.134a4aa7.2914070d@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/2/2001 2:15:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
dkewpie at pacbell.net writes:


> the link contains LOTS of spoiler, so don't go there if you don't 
> wanna know. 
> 

I mentioned earlier that I'd heard from a person who'd seen the movie and had 
a negative reaction. Because I know this person quite well, I did go to this 
site. I suspected it would be his post. How I wish I could take back this 
last few minutes and I'll spend from now till the sixteenth trying to forget.

This post on the Dark Mark is very detailed and extremely depressing. Unless 
you want to really have the wind and excitement taken from you, please don't 
go there. I mean this more than I can say. While these things are going to 
make a diference, we still have to be able to experience the overall feel of 
the movie for ourselves. 

I'm dead serious about this. If anyone reading this knows me, and if you've 
read any of my ficss, you'll know I'm not extremely a serious type. I'm 
saying it loud and clear though..... read at your own risk or wait and decide 
for yourself.

Ashleigh   a.k.a. Circe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011102/9e639af4/attachment.html>

From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Fri Nov  2 14:34:33 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 14:34:33 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9rth4l+58n3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ruatq+eas4@eGroups.com>

Well I have had a look at this list of differences...

"Kewpie" <dkewpie at p...> wrote:
> I found this link which shows all the alternation in the movie
> http://darkmark.com/c.c?l=moviemistakes
> the link contains LOTS of spoiler, so don't go there if you don't 
> wanna know. 

and they fall into a lot of different categories.  Some analysis 
below (protected by spoiler space) Basically though I think many are 
justified by cinematic factors and looks quite OK in theory Not 
mistakes in the throw up your hands sense. 

Not going into all the Dark Marks list in detail but here are some 
reclassified under three headings added by me.

A Frankly My Dear I don't give a damn
B Using Cinematic Resources and taking essence of storyline ? in 
effect inconsequential changes.
C Serious Plot Transfigurations

Edis

FORMAT
 Dark marks Listing 
My comment on preceeding DM item(s).
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
P
A
C
E

Category A Frankly MD I don't give a damn

 No Piers Polkien. 
Can live with that without blinking.
23; They never introduce Crabbe and Goyle, matter of fact they don't 
introduce 3/4 of the characters
C+G not so important here they will be needed in CoS of course but 
for this film we are already loading in enough introductions.
 Vernon to Grunnings scenes deleted. 
 No Television Report.
Live with those if the film can cover the emotional and plot issues 
in some other way.

 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). 

Category B  Use of cinematic resources  and taking essence of 
storyline


 They never even get in the car (when running away from the letters=
).
 No Railview Hotel.
 The 1st years meeting ghosts scene never happens. They have a lot =

more ghosts in the movie then there should be.

All points the essence of which can be covered by use of cinematic 
time and suggestion. 

 Movie starts with Dumbledore actually summoning the light of the 
posts with the Light Putter Outer

Arma Virumque Cano. Getting started in the middle of action is a good 
way of gripping viewers. Jo has a wonderful literary trick for 
opening the book but it wouldn't  work on film. This sounds 
effective, uses material from the book and exploits strengths of 
cinema. If we were  doing an epic poem we could start like Virgil did 
in the Aenaead (Of Arms and the Man I Sing) but we aren't.

 They set Harry down on the front porch when he is a baby, light 
starts to come from his scar, flashes, and the flash recedes back 
into an 11 year old Harry Potter waking up.

This is a mistake? Sounds good cinematic treatment of what is 
narrated in words. On this evidence I am going to suspend judgement 
on (and not re-list here) all the notes in Dark Mark on `XYZ scene 
messed up' ? looks like someone out to label anything different as 
bad per se.
.
 Meets Malfoy right before sorting, instead of at Madam Malkins 
Robes For All Occasions.

I would have recommended this myself. Good Cinematic concentration. 
We will get the central dialogue (Malfoys offer of alliance and 
warning against getting involved with dubious Wizards). 

 Chocolate Frogs are actually real in a sense. 
Develops visual strengths of cinema. Depends how its handled but 
could be a plus.

 Harry and Hagrid don't sleep over on the House on the Rock. After =

telling him he is a wizard, the scenes merges into them walking in 
London. 

Again Id have recommended this glide if Id been on the editing team. 
Looks more and more like intelligent selection and cinematic 
development of our story.

 They delete Herbology, DADA, and History of Magic classes.
 Qurriel and Snape Forest conversation never occurs, it actually 
happens in the school.

Look like defensible time savers. We will get big doses of Hogwarts 
atmosphere and attitudes from cinematic features (Visuals music etc) 
so some of the minor lesson scenes aren't needed to develop these in 
words. And telescoping the dialogue could work OK ? no plot core 
issues in it being in the forest after all, its the conversation that 
counts.

Category C Serious Plot transfigurations  
(Ive cut the DM  notes on most of these as I have comments on most 
except we will need to see how it actually handles. But from what Ive 
seen and commented in category B points above I still live in hope 
that these will enhance the experience as a film linking together and 
not betray the spirit of the book.)
Two DM  points I will comment on: 

 They delete the Potions Challenge, Hermione actually leaves with 
Ron from the Chess game.  

I wondered how they would do the potions and logic scene. This loses 
a lot of Hermione's development and contribution so here's one I am 
sad  about.  Still, here's hoping  lots of kids go on to read the 
book, as the question `how does this logic work out' and maybe find 
that maths is fun after all
 Well one can dream.

 Flashback to the Killing of the Potter's scene added, they show 
Lily getting killed but they don't show James getting killed?

The Serious Addition! Tenterhooks on this
maybe in effect we get a 
little GoF right at the start???

Edis




From hfakhro at nyc.rr.com  Fri Nov  2 14:54:56 2001
From: hfakhro at nyc.rr.com (Hella)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 14:54:56 -0000
Subject: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9rs249+5n4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ruc40+lu4g@eGroups.com>

The dubbing story is probably sloppy journalism, as you say Marcus, 
but Dan's voice has broken. I listened to the interview on newsround 
and it is clear his voice is not the same as it is in the trailers. 
It is a little bit sad though; I always imagined Harry's voice 
breaking in book 3 for some reason. I also listened to the interviews 
with Rupert Grint and Tom Felton. It looks like Rupert's voice is on 
the verge of breaking as well.

-Hella




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Fri Nov  2 15:16:20 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (cynthiaanncoe at home.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 15:16:20 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9ruatq+eas4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rudc4+thrp@eGroups.com>

I, too, had a look at the list of so-called "movie mistakes."  (For 
what it is worth, I plan to only see the film once, so it was helpful 
to have a list of things to look for so that I can focus on it, but 
to each his own.)  Anyway, I'll duck down below the spoiler space and 
rant a bit:
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> P
> R
> O
> T
> E
> C
> T
> I
> O
> N
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
> 

First, I want to nominate Edis for an honorary, advance membership in 
S.A.D.[Society of Apologists for the Director.]  I agree that most of 
the changes listed are at worst small potatoes and at best brilliant 
efforts to shorten the book to make the movie a manageable length.

Edis wrote:

> Category A Frankly MD I don't give a damn
> 
>  They never introduce Crabbe and Goyle, matter of fact they 
don't 
> introduce 3/4 of the characters

I'm glad they don't introduce huge numbers of categories.  If they 
did, we'd be left with scores of characters wandering through the 
film who do not become important until later.  Good call by the 
director, I think.

> 
Edis again:

>  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.


> 
Edis again:

> Category B  Use of cinematic resources  and taking essence of 
> storyline
>  
>  They never even get in the car (when running away from the 
letters=
> ).
>  No Railview Hotel.
>  The 1st years meeting ghosts scene never happens. They 
have a lot more ghosts in the movie then there should be.
> 


I'm bummed about the increased use of ghosts, as I don't really care 
for the ghosts much.  But they axed Peeves, and he was one of the 
more juvenile characters, so it's a fair trade.  (Am I the only 
person on the planet who didn't care for Peeves?)

> 
Edis again:

>  Movie starts with Dumbledore actually summoning the light 
of the 
> posts with the Light Putter Outer
> 
> Arma Virumque Cano. Getting started in the middle of action is a 
good 
> way of gripping viewers. Jo has a wonderful literary trick for 
> opening the book but it wouldn't  work on film. This sounds 
> effective, uses material from the book and exploits strengths of 
> cinema. 

I agree.  I also think we all need to go back on the main list and 
figure out the deal with the Put Outer, because they sure are 
emphasizing it when they could have easily omitted it.  I don't think 
the L.O.O.N.s have agreed on a satisfactory explanation yet.


 Edis again:

>  Meets Malfoy right before sorting, instead of at Madam 
Malkins 
> Robes For All Occasions.
> 
> I would have recommended this myself. Good Cinematic concentration. 
> We will get the central dialogue (Malfoys offer of alliance and 
> warning against getting involved with dubious Wizards). 

Frankly, having Draco and Harry meet at the sorting actually makes 
more sense than having them meet in a robe shop.  The central thing 
about Draco that Harry should learn is his prejudice, preference for 
Slytherin, disdain for those with less money, and background about 
the houses.  It makes sense that they would discuss this before 
sorting, not at a robe shop.  Good call by the director.

> 
Edis again:

>  Harry and Hagrid don't sleep over on the House on the 
Rock. After =
> 
> telling him he is a wizard, the scenes merges into them walking in 
> London. 
> 

Now that you mention it, why would Harry and Hagrid want to sleep 
over with the Dursleys, in this cold place with hostile Vernon and 
Petunia and their son who has just been given a pig's tale.  Good 
call by the director.

>
Edis again:

>  They delete Herbology, DADA, and History of Magic classes.
>  Qurriel and Snape Forest conversation never occurs, it 
actually 
> happens in the school.
> 

I agree, and I'll add that I can't even remember what happens in 
these classes, so it must not be very important.

> Category C Serious Plot transfigurations  
<snip> Two DM  points I will comment on: 
> 
>  They delete the Potions Challenge, Hermione actually 
leaves with 
> Ron from the Chess game.  
>  

I think dropping the Potions Challenge is a plus.  How exciting could 
this be compared with the chess challenge?  By this point, we know 
Hermione is really smart and logical.  No need to see it again.

>  Flashback to the Killing of the Potter's scene added, they 
show 
> Lily getting killed but they don't show James getting killed?
> 
> The Serious Addition! Tenterhooks on this
maybe in effect we get a 
> little GoF right at the start???
> 
Oh, I can't wait to see this!

Cindy (who just declined the opportunity to see the film on Nov. 10 
because she'd have to drive 30 minutes farther away and pay $4 more)




From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov  2 15:29:20 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:29:20 +0000
Subject: Win tickets to Scottish Gala Premier on November 6th
Message-ID: <PNAfroDQvr47EwFH@dickson.demon.co.uk>

http://www.s1play.com/query/s1play/htdocs/stn_id_1/index.jsp?edl_id=10456


"The first Harry Potter film is expected to be one of the most 
successful movies of all time and opens around the country on November 
16.

But a couple of lucky s1play.com users will be beating the rush by going 
to the charity premiere on November 6th as winners of our great Potter 
giveaway.

The first Scottish showing will be held at the 12-screen Ster Century 
cinema in Leith's Ocean Terminal complex in Edinburgh and will be 
attended by stars of stage and screen.

The event will benefit two Scottish charities, The MS Society Scotland 
and Maggie's Centre Cancer Caring Centres, both were nominated at the 
request of JK Rowling, the book's author.

She said: "I'm delighted that Warner Bros. have granted the premiere to 
these charities, as they are all close to my heart, and deserve a higher 
profile."

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is the first adaptation of the 
hugely successful children's books and will see young Harry come to 
life, alongwith pals Hermione, Ron, Hagrid and his pet owl Hedwig.

We have an exclusive pair of tickets for the event to give away. You 
must be able to attend the event on November 6 and be part of the movie 
event of the year.

Just answer these two questions and send us your name, phone number and 
address by using the highlighted link below.

1. How many screens has Ster Century got in Edinburgh?

2. What's the name of Harry's owl?

Click here to enter.

Normal competition rules apply and the editor's decision is final."

Comments:
1) The "Click here to enter" link is a mailto: to 
brian.mciver at smg.plc.uk so I guess that you just send your answers to 
him.
2) You don't have to be British to enter, but they won't pay for your 
transport there if you aren't British and win.
3) No closing date is listed :-/ The competition might have closed 
already, just we don't know about it!
4) You can find the very standard-looking competition rules online at
http://www.s1play.com/query/s1play/list_editorial.xsql?stn_id=1&edl_id=98
30

Tell your friends, but don't tell your acquaintances
Chris

-- 
Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, England.      chris at dickson.demon.co.uk

My brush with greatness - November 6th: 98.5 hours and counting
( http://www.qxl.com/cgi-bin/qxlhome.cgi/EN/QXL/PR/U1008986871/_20290685 )



From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 16:44:50 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:44:50 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] final UK poster
References: <F159JJCuJSpKXJsNx3m000182fc@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <002b01c163bd$b26644a0$5e9707d5@oemcomputer>

AAaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!! *shriekes with delight*

It has Sev on it! I'm in heaven - and I need to get my hands on the poster
<G>

That's the best one I've seen yet, though the artsy-poster that's also on
the Soundtrack cover comes in 2nd.

 ~ Dinah ~


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




From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 16:57:19 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:57:19 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
References: <9rth4l+58n3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006801c163bf$702a2c80$5e9707d5@oemcomputer>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

Quote from the darkmark article:
"Qurriel and Snape Forest conversation never occurs, it actually happens in
the school."

But it was in the third trailer. You can hear Hagrid saying something like
"Remember that not all wizards are good, Harry." and they show a scene of
Severus questioning Quirrell and it looks definitely like the forrest.

 ~ Dinah ~    (who hopes she didn't get it completely wrong)



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




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 17:08:50 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:08:50 -0000
Subject: Newsround interview, was Re: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9ruc40+lu4g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rujv2+9v3h@eGroups.com>

It could be the difference between my computer speaker and the one on 
my (ancient) TV, but Dan's voice seemed a bit *higher* pitched than 
in the last TV spot I saw- then again, "I think we're going to need 
another feather" did call for a deadpan delivery.
 Also, I was looking at the old accent thread (on OTC I think); there 
were comments that Dan's accent was "too posh", but to my Yank ears, 
it seems that he played Harry with a "posher" accent than he uses in 
real life; any Brits have an opinion? Or are his in/out of character 
accents identical and streaming audio slurred his voice a bit?

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Hella" <hfakhro at n...> wrote:
> The dubbing story is probably sloppy journalism, as you say Marcus, 
> but Dan's voice has broken. I listened to the interview on 
newsround 
> and it is clear his voice is not the same as it is in the trailers. 
> It is a little bit sad though; I always imagined Harry's voice 
> breaking in book 3 for some reason. I also listened to the 
interviews 
> with Rupert Grint and Tom Felton. It looks like Rupert's voice is 
on 
> the verge of breaking as well.
> 
> -Hella




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Fri Nov  2 17:15:38 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:15:38 -0000
Subject: final UK poster
In-Reply-To: <002b01c163bd$b26644a0$5e9707d5@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9rukbq+f638@eGroups.com>

Yes, does anyone know where one can get a copy of this poster?  I 
think it's great too, and I'd like to get one for my daughter's room 
(well, I'd look at it too, now that it has Alan Rickman glowering on 
it).

Wanda


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dinah" <bludger_witch at y...> wrote:
> AAaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!! *shriekes with delight*
> 
> It has Sev on it! I'm in heaven - and I need to get my hands on the 
poster
> <G>
> 
> That's the best one I've seen yet, though the artsy-poster that's 
also on
> the Soundtrack cover comes in 2nd.
> 
>  ~ Dinah ~
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




From SALeathem at aol.com  Fri Nov  2 17:48:51 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:48:51 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Newsround interview, was Re: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denou...
Message-ID: <11e.6bf1f76.29143683@aol.com>

In a message dated 02/11/2001 17:10:41 GMT Standard Time, nlpnt at yahoo.com 
writes:

<< Also, I was looking at the old accent thread (on OTC I think); there 
 were comments that Dan's accent was "too posh", but to my Yank ears, 
 it seems that he played Harry with a "posher" accent than he uses in 
 real life; any Brits have an opinion? Or are his in/out of character 
 accents identical and streaming audio slurred his voice a bit? >>

I watched the newsround interviews on tele and he seemed to have a voice that 
was in the middle of breaking - ie, a bit gravelly, but had it's high 
moments... bless... He actually did sound a bit deeper than the film to me, 
but like I said it cracked in places sometimes, but so did Ruperts I think 
(who sounds fairly unposh to me, and if anything deeper as Ron than Rupert) 

As for how posh Dan sounded... never paid it any attention really. I suppose 
he sounds a bit posh when he's reading the letter from Hogwarts (particularly 
on the Witahcraft & Wizardry bit), but apart from that, he sounded about the 
same both as Harry and himself. 

JKR was on briefly today, I'd imagine that's on the website now as well.

Sara



From mindyatime at juno.com  Fri Nov  2 17:48:18 2001
From: mindyatime at juno.com (Mindy C.L.)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:48:18 -0500
Subject: List of mistakes
Message-ID: <20011102.125133.-400763.8.MindyAtime@juno.com>

Cindy:

I agree, and I'll add that I can't even remember what happens in 
these classes, so it must not be very important.


In the  DADA, don't we get Snape's marvelous speech about the delicacy of
the potions, and isn't he so nasty to Harry? Isn't this necessary to
establish the Snape-Harry animosity?



From SALeathem at aol.com  Fri Nov  2 18:07:05 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 13:07:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Newsround interview, was Re: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denou...
Message-ID: <d0.1d37c9f5.29143ac9@aol.com>

Oh I thought of something else.

I've seen a few pronounciation guides about and some of them say that you say 
Voldemort with a silent T. When Dan said it during his interview however, he 
said it with a T (Vol Deh MorT).

So umm... I guess that's how you say it then, unless he forgot during the 
interview.

Sara



From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Fri Nov  2 19:18:58 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 19:18:58 -0000
Subject: List of mistakes
In-Reply-To: <20011102.125133.-400763.8.MindyAtime@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9rurj2+ndjn@eGroups.com>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
U
N
T
I
L
N
O
V
E
M
B
E
R
1
6

Mindy wrote:

> 
> 
> In the  DADA, don't we get Snape's marvelous speech about the 
delicacy of
> the potions, and isn't he so nasty to Harry? Isn't this necessary to
> establish the Snape-Harry animosity?

The deletions (allegedly) are History of Magic, DADA and Herbology.  
Potions (hopefully) stays.

Cindy (who will have to consciously remember not to move her lips 
during Snape's Potions speech)




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 19:29:07 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 19:29:07 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9rudc4+thrp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rus63+k2lh@eGroups.com>

I'm stealing other people's spoiler space...

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., cynthiaanncoe at h... wrote:
> > S
> > P
> > O
> > I
> > L
> > E
> > R
> > P
> > R
> > O
> > T
> > E
> > C
> > T
> > I
> > O
> > N
> > S
> > P
> > A
> > C
> > E
> > 
> 
> Edis wrote:
> > They never introduce Crabbe and Goyle, matter of fact they don't 
> > introduce 3/4 of the characters

Cindy: 
> I'm glad they don't introduce huge numbers of categories.  If they 
> did, we'd be left with scores of characters wandering through the 
> film who do not become important until later.  Good call by the 
> director, I think.

I agree about the good call.  Re: Crabbe and Goyle specifically: I'm 
not clear what "don't introduce" means exactly.  Does this mean they 
are not specifically named?  To judge by many of the photos released 
(including pictures in Vanity Fair and the poster book) Crabbe and 
Goyle ARE in evidence in the first film.  They never really talk (in 
the book) and are basically goon accessories to Malfoy.  How much 
introduction COULD be done in reference to these characters?  They're 
stereotypes anyway.  I giggle when I see folks do fanfics that "flesh 
out" Crabbe and Goyle.  Aren't they already pretty fleshy? ;)
 
Cindy: 
> 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.

You already said what I was thinking... 
  
> Edis again:
> > The 1st years meeting ghosts scene never happens. They have a lot 
> > more ghosts in the movie then there should be.

Cindy:
> I'm bummed about the increased use of ghosts, as I don't really 
> care for the ghosts much.  But they axed Peeves, and he was one of 
> the more juvenile characters [snip]
  
On this I have to disagree, Cindy.  (Not about Peeves--about 
the "increased use of ghosts.")  I'm a bit confused by the DM remarks 
about the ghosts.  Right before the first years go into the Great 
Hall to be Sorted, the book says that HUGE numbers of ghosts start 
wafting through the entrance hall; it sounds like it puts Nick's 
Deathday Party to shame.  The only named ghosts in the first book are 
Nick, the Friar, the Baron and Peeves.  But there are many more 
ghosts than these.  There are only scattered mentions of the ghosts 
in any of the four books except for this scene and Nick's party, but 
from this scene alone one gets the impression that the place is 
positively reeking with ghosts.  On this score DM is definitely out 
in left field; there SHOULD be scads of ghosts.

>  Edis again:
> > Meets Malfoy right before sorting, instead of at Madam Malkins 
> > Robes For All Occasions.

Cindy: 
> > I would have recommended this myself. Good Cinematic 
> > concentration. We will get the central dialogue  [snip]
 
Actually, this makes sense for another reason: If Harry and Ron are 
able to bond during the entire train trip without being interrupted 
by Malfoy, Harry will be even less likely to heed anything Malfoy has 
to say when he encounters him for the first time just before the 
Sorting.  In the book, Harry knows Ron for a relatively short time 
when they are accosted by Malfoy; while Harry would not just take 
someone at his word and get up and abandon a new acquaintance who had 
been nothing but utterly friendly (how dumb is Malfoy, anyway?) it 
still makes more sense that Harry and Ron become friends in 5-6 hours 
instead of 5-6 minutes.

> Edis again:
> > They delete Herbology, DADA, and History of Magic classes.
> > Qurriel and Snape Forest conversation never occurs, it 
> > actually happens in the school.
 
Cindy: 
> I agree, and I'll add that I can't even remember what happens in 
> these classes, so it must not be very important.

Nothing of interest happens in these classes in the first book.  This 
would be following the Astronomy trend, IMO.  This course is 
mentioned in passing, but we never SEE one of these classes in the 
books.  Herbology becomes important in CoS because Harry meets Justin 
and discovers he's a Muggle-born, and they grow the mandrakes that 
will be used to revive the petrified students. (Although it's less 
necessary for this to be shown in a film, the comment about the 
mandrakes moving into each other's pots is good comic relief that 
adults will appreciate and which will probably fly over kids' heads). 
Quirrell does nothin of interest in class, nor Binns, and it doesn't 
matter where the Snape/Quirrell conversation takes place as long as 
Harry can hear it.  (My guess is they didn't want to go to the 
trouble of rigging up a broomstick just for Harry to hover about 
eavesdropping.)

Edis:
> > They delete the Potions Challenge, Hermione actually leaves with 
> > Ron from the Chess game.  
  
Cindy:
> I think dropping the Potions Challenge is a plus.  How exciting 
> could this be compared with the chess challenge?  By this point, we 
> know Hermione is really smart and logical.  No need to see it again.

I'm torn about this one; I want Hermione to have her moment.  OTOH, I 
believe I've read somewhere that there isn't actually enough info 
given in the book to definitively recreate the potions logic problem, 
and the screenwriter might have decided not to bother.  Most viewers 
probably wouldn't have been able to follow along anyway.

Edis:
> > Flashback to the Killing of the Potter's scene added, they show 
> > Lily getting killed but they don't show James getting killed?
> > 
Cindy: 
> Oh, I can't wait to see this!

Actually this is the one bit of news I found really disappointing!  I 
don't want this to be seen so early; this sort of thing should only 
ever be HEARD, by Harry, in his third year when the dementor gets 
near him on the train (and again later when he falls off his 
broomstick during the Quidditch game against Hufflepuff).  This, IMO, 
is pandering, to assume that this HAS to be seen.

Oh well.  There were going to be differences, that was inevitable.  I 
just ordered tickets online anyway. I wind up doing the grin-and-bear-
it anytime I go to a movie based on a book I enjoyed; if this is the 
worst thing about the movie, it will still have mucho stars in my 
book and I'll be doing a lot more grinning than bearing...

--Barb





From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  2 19:44:22 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 19:44:22 -0000
Subject: List of mistakes
In-Reply-To: <9rurj2+ndjn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rut2m+h26v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> wrote:
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
> U
> N
> T
> I
> L
> N
> O
> V
> E
> M
> B
> E
> R
> 1
> 6
> 
> Mindy wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > In the  DADA, don't we get Snape's marvelous speech about the 
> delicacy of
> > the potions, and isn't he so nasty to Harry? Isn't this necessary 
to
> > establish the Snape-Harry animosity?

Speaking of Potion ... there is one omission that gets to me ...

I can't believe they deleted the Potions challenge all together!  It 
was quite a cool challenge for Hermione to play and for Snape to set 
it up.  It actually tells you quite a lot about Hermione and Snape.  
I was actually looking forward to that riddle.

Now, how do they explain Snape's knowledge of the stone if he doesn't 
have a part to protect it?

And didn't we see Snape and Quirrel talk in the forest in the 
trailer?  May be they have cut it out ...

I hope all of these in the DVD deleted scenes ...




From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 20:45:07 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:45:07 -0000
Subject: List of mistakes
In-Reply-To: <9rut2m+h26v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rv0kj+lcmf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., MMMfanfic at h... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> 
wrote:
> > S
> > P
> > O
> > I
> > L
> > E
> > R
> > S
> > P
> > A
> > C
> > E
> > U
> > N
> > T
> > I
> > L
> > N
> > O
> > V
> > E
> > M
> > B
> > E
> > R
> > 1
> > 6
> 
> And didn't we see Snape and Quirrel talk in the forest in the 
> trailer?  May be they have cut it out ...

I think what we saw in the trailer was them talking in the castle - 
it looked like the forest because of the weird lines, which could 
very well be the invisibility cloak from an inside perspective. I was 
wondering why H would be wearing that in the forest after a 
quidd match - makes much more sense if it's when he's in the 
castle, out on one of his nighttime wanderings with the cloak. 
Plus, they deleted the quidditch match after which harry sees this 
scene, so it makes sense that he woudln't be in the forest 
afterwards.

 
> I hope all of these in the DVD deleted scenes ...

hear hear and a big HIP HIP hooray.

m.





From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Fri Nov  2 21:53:20 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 21:53:20 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9rudc4+thrp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rv4kg+5kjd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., cynthiaanncoe at h... wrote:
> I think dropping the Potions Challenge is a plus.  How exciting 
could 
> this be compared with the chess challenge?  By this point, we know 
> Hermione is really smart and logical.  No need to see it again.

I think you have a point -- Actually it *is* a bit anti-climatic
after the chess game, and it probably wouldn't make good cinema.
Maybe as a tradeoff, they'll have Hermione not lose her head
in the Devil's Snare.


                        -- Dave






From john at walton.vu  Fri Nov  2 22:01:05 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 22:01:05 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Newsround interview, was Re: Dan's Dubbing
	Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9rujv2+9v3h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B808C820.41B7%john@walton.vu>

nlpnt at yahoo.com wrote:

> Also, I was looking at the old accent thread (on OTC I think); there
> were comments that Dan's accent was "too posh", but to my Yank ears,
> it seems that he played Harry with a "posher" accent than he uses in
> real life; any Brits have an opinion? Or are his in/out of character
> accents identical and streaming audio slurred his voice a bit?

IMO (as someone considered "posh" by his flatmates), Dan's accent is
perfect. Harry does live in Surrey with the ultra-pretentious Dursleys --
they will sound posher-than-posh simply because the accent is a mark of the
class to which they aspire. Harry doesn't really have a peer group to shift
his accent to "Young South-Eastern" (which is what Ron sounds like,
sometimes but not always replacing "t" with "glottal stop", as in "She
really needs to sor' ou' her priorities").

Then again, I maintain that Dan is just perfect for Harry, but there we go
:)

--John

____________________________________________

-"You are drunk, Sir Winston, you are disgustingly drunk."
-Yes, Mrs Braddock, I am drunk.?But you, Mrs Braddock, are ugly, and
disgustingly fat. But tomorrow morning I, Winston Churchill, will be sober.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Fri Nov  2 22:09:42 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 22:09:42 -0000
Subject: Dan's Dubbing Definitive Denouement
In-Reply-To: <9rsi65+5vh1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rv5j6+a7gf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., mellienel2 at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Marcus " <prefectmarcus at y...> wrote:
> Isn't the sun a tabloid? When I saw that, I just said "oh lord, 
here 
> htey go with the Harry Potter scandals, give that damn kid a 
> break..."

This is drifting toward the OT, but whenever someone mentions
_The Sun_, I can't help thinking of the comments from the British
sitcom _Yes, Prime Minister_ about UK newspapers and who reads 
them:

_The Times_: Read by people who run the country.
_The Daily Mirror_: Read by people who *think* they run the country.
_The Guardian_: Read by people who think they *ought* to run the 
country.

And last but not least...

_The Sun_: Read by people who don't care who runs the country, as 
long as she has big breasts.

:)

                          -- Dave






From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Fri Nov  2 22:11:57 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 22:11:57 -0000
Subject: No Centaurs?
Message-ID: <9rv5nd+6834@eGroups.com>

Looking at the cast list on the Internet Movie DB, I notice that
there's no listing for Ronan, Bane, or Firenze...  Is anyone
else wondering if the centaurs have been omitted?


                      -- Dave






From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Fri Nov  2 22:52:30 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 22:52:30 -0000
Subject: No Centaurs?
In-Reply-To: <9rv5nd+6834@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rv83e+g2sp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dave Hardenbrook" <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
> Looking at the cast list on the Internet Movie DB, I notice that
> there's no listing for Ronan, Bane, or Firenze...  Is anyone
> else wondering if the centaurs have been omitted?
> 
> 
>                     

I haven't seen them in any trailers, either.  That seems really odd 
to me; they only take up a few pages of the book, and it is neat that 
Harry escapes on a centaur.  I'm not at all shy about cutting things 
for the movie, but this decision baffles me.

Could this be one of those situations in which the special effects 
needed to have an actor ride a fictional beast could be too difficult 
to pull off?  If that's the problem, then I'm very worried about how 
they'll do Buckbeak in PoA.

Cindy




From john at walton.vu  Fri Nov  2 22:57:02 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 22:57:02 +0000
Subject: United Artists Cinemas listing for HP
In-Reply-To: <9rv83e+g2sp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B808D53E.41CE%john@walton.vu>

> Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone (Warner Bros.) Opening November 16
> Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint & Richard Griffiths. A boy
> learns that he is the orphaned son of two powerful wizards and that he
> possesses unique magical powers of his own. Fantasy Adventure. Rated PG
> for some scary moments and mild language. 152 Minutes

"scary moments and mild language"? Surely if the language were mild, they
wouldn't need to worry about it? >:)

--John
____________________________________________

There are some things you can't share without ending up liking each other,
and knocking out a twelve-foot mountain troll is one of them.
--'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' by JK Rowling

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  2 23:55:12 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:55:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: List of mistakes
In-Reply-To: <9rut2m+h26v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011102235512.53292.qmail@web11507.mail.yahoo.com>


--- MMMfanfic at hotmail.com wrote:
> > S
> > P
> > O
> > I
> > L
> > E
> > R
> > S
> > P
> > A
> > C
> > E
> > U
> > N
> > T
> > I
> > L
> > N
> > O
> > V
> > E
> > M
> > B
> > E
> > R
> > 1
> > 6
> > 
> And didn't we see Snape and Quirrel talk in the
> forest in the 
> trailer?  May be they have cut it out ...

I believe that what we're seeing is Harry's view
from inside the invisibility cloak.  I know it
appears that Snape looks directly at him (camera,
whatever), but I think it's just another instance
of Snape sensing that someone else is nearby.  

Also, is anyone else disappointed in the review
of Daniel Radcliffe?  I absolutely adored him in
David Copperfield.  I'm hoping this will just be
an instance of personal taste.

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  3 00:00:58 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:00:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Centaurs?
In-Reply-To: <9rv83e+g2sp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011103000058.98518.qmail@web11508.mail.yahoo.com>


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dave Hardenbrook"
> <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
> > Looking at the cast list on the Internet
> Movie DB, I notice that
> > there's no listing for Ronan, Bane, or
> Firenze...  Is anyone
> > else wondering if the centaurs have been
> omitted?


According to the review over at DM (and what I'm
about to mention isn't a spoiler as far as I'm
concerned) they're apparently all computer
generated.  I figured as much.

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 00:33:06 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 19:33:06 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Centaurs?
Message-ID: <b4.114ce30.29149542@aol.com>

Again from The Dark Mark, not the list of mistakes, from the review:
S

P

o

I

L

E

R:
The Dark Mark review,also very negative, mentions "a" centaur, and compares 
it to the Scorpion King, in the Mummy Returns.We are not treated to other 
information about the appearance
~Ashleigh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011102/7591629c/attachment.html>

From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Sat Nov  3 00:54:35 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 00:54:35 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9rv4kg+5kjd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rvf8b+on4p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dave Hardenbrook" <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., cynthiaanncoe at h... wrote:
> > I think dropping the Potions Challenge is a plus.  How exciting 
> could 
> > this be compared with the chess challenge?  By this point, we 
know 
> > Hermione is really smart and logical.  No need to see it again.
> 
> I think you have a point -- Actually it *is* a bit anti-climatic
> after the chess game, and it probably wouldn't make good cinema.
> Maybe as a tradeoff, they'll have Hermione not lose her head
> in the Devil's Snare.
> 

Respectfully disagree here.  That's Hermione's moment but is also 
Snape's moment.  (I want Rickman to read the riddle, I confess.)

May be they should change the order of the challenges such as moving 
the Potion Challenge forward and before the Chess.  It should be 
perserved in some form because all four Heads of House played some 
role in the book and now, without the Potion Challenge, Snape seems 
like the odd one out in the movie.

And then you gotta ask why Dumbledore didn't ask him and how did he 
know about the stone if he's not part of the team protecting it?





From amy at pressroom.com  Sat Nov  3 02:39:11 2001
From: amy at pressroom.com (amy at pressroom.com)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 02:39:11 -0000
Subject: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
In-Reply-To: <9ruatq+eas4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rvlcf+q7f5@eGroups.com>

 I wasn't going to read the list but just read what was posted to the 
list. I haven't found anything too upsetting though. I have comments 
on a few things below.
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> P
> R
> O
> T
> E
> C
> T
> I
> O
> N
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
>The 1st years meeting ghosts scene never happens. They have a lot  
> more ghosts in the movie then there should be.

Does it say specifically in the book how many ghosts Hogwarts has? I 
imagine there are more than just the House ghosts

> Movie starts with Dumbledore actually summoning the light of the 
> posts with the Light Putter Outer

I am confused-is this from the book? I don't remember this scene or 
what it relates to.

>They delete Herbology, DADA, and History of Magic classes.

I saw a movie still at hpgalleries.com that supposedly shows Quirell 
in class-I assumed the stills are actually scenes in the movie and 
not deleted ones but who knows.

Most of these changes don't seem that big to me. The only one I'm 
disappointed about is no Peeves.

Amy





From tabouli at unite.com.au  Sat Nov  3 02:31:10 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 13:31:10 +1100
Subject: Rik Mayall, Harry's eyes, breaking voices.
Message-ID: <008501c16411$b4aad240$0691aecb@price>

shanerichmond:
> I for one am pleased that Peeves has gone. Purely because he was 
being played by Rik Mayall - an awful actor IMO with only one type of 
character in his repertoire. Hopefully they'll re-cast the role 
before CoS.<

Chris:
> There seems to be logic and inspiration behind casting Rik Mayall as 
Peeves. Mayall fans may care to see "Drop Dead Fred" in which Rik plays 
a child's former imaginary friend come back to haunt her in later life, 
a role with some similarities to that of a poltergeist.<

Mm.  I've seen "Drop Dead Fred", and it was OK, but it was obvious that the director had told Rik to "just do The Young Ones thing, right, mate?  Cheers".  I can tolerate Rik as Peeves, who is an annoying character by definition, but I really hope we can make a little progress beyond the Young Ones this time.  After all, Rik must be in his mid to late forties by now - rehashing his role as a loud, wild-eyed student in a dodgy sharehouse again would really be too much.

Amy Z:
> Gripe, gripe, gripe.  I love the poster, but WHY, tell me, WHY can't artists 
get something as simple and obvious as the color of Harry's eyes right?  It 
is very easy to alter this kind of thing on a photograph.<

You tell 'em, Amy Z.  I'm one of the few people who seems to notice eye colour.  Honestly, some people don't even know the eye colour of their partner of five years!  And when JKR has gone out of her way to tell us again and again that Harry has his mother's bright green eyes, not whipping out the computer for five minutes to fix this is just not good enough!

Neil:
> A boy called Joe Sowerbutts - who is actually  a bit older than Daniel - provided the 
boyish voice for two scenes, and has been hired to voiceover some 
film-related merchandise.  I guess Joe will also be dubbing Dan's voice for the whole of Chamber 
of Secrets... unless *his* voice breaks, that is.<

Hella:
> The dubbing story is probably sloppy journalism, as you say Marcus, 
but Dan's voice has broken. I listened to the interview on newsround 
and it is clear his voice is not the same as it is in the trailers. 
It is a little bit sad though; I always imagined Harry's voice 
breaking in book 3 for some reason. I also listened to the interviews 
with Rupert Grint and Tom Felton. It looks like Rupert's voice is on 
the verge of breaking as well< 

Is anyone else deeply worried about this dubbing, be it rumour or fact?  I'm sure Warner Bros will do a very careful job with it (unlike a lot of hastily non-lip synched efforts I've seen across languages), but for me it just takes away from the whole part if the voice we hear isn't the voice that was recorded at the same time as the visuals (or even the voice of the person on screen).  Hmmm.

Another thing - I could be wrong, but don't most boys' voices break later than 11-12?  Chris Columbus has lucked out seriously here with his cast if all the boys are breaking.  I always thought this was a mid-puberty thing in most boys, not the first thing to happen.  I though first the growth spurt begins, *then* things like sprouting whiskers and voice breaking happen at 14-ish.  From what I've seen (admittedly not much, and I'm sure make-up artists played a role) the three lead boys still look like young, downy-cheeked boys, not teenagers (though Tom is 13).  Though I'm also worried about Dan on this score, as his face does seem to be taking on more adolescent proportions, even compared with pictures from six months ago.  And didn't some article say that he's already starting to shoot up, and may be towering over Rupert before long?  He might need to be replaced for PoA which would be sad, seeing everyone seems to agree he's good in the role, and it's always a bit clunky to change the actor for a central role.  I always thought Harry's voice would be wavering in GoF, but looks like in movie terms it's not to be.

As for using a 13yo boy's voice to dub Daniel, um, isn't this a bit unwise, Warner Bros?  Why not get a 10 year old with a family history of late breakage, so you have a reasonable guarantee of an unbroken voice for at least two or three years??

Tabouli.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011103/8ea173e1/attachment.html>

From conshydot at email.com  Sat Nov  3 03:20:30 2001
From: conshydot at email.com (conshydot at email.com)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 03:20:30 -0000
Subject: Regal Cinemas selling advanced tickets in US
In-Reply-To: <9ru3vo+u83q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9rvnpu+tiiq@eGroups.com>

> 
> P.S. - Still no sign of tickets at www.Fandango.com

 I bought my tickets to a General Cinema Corp theatre yesterday on 
Fandango.




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sat Nov  3 04:16:00 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:16:00 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: List of 'Mistakes' according to Dark Mark
References: <9rvlcf+q7f5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008a01c1641e$3f4ea640$b54e28d1@oemcomputer>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

F
O
R

A

N
O
N

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

P
O
S
T

< Movie starts with Dumbledore actually summoning the light of the
 posts with the Light Putter Outer

I am confused-is this from the book? I don't remember this scene or
what it relates to.>

The Dumbledore with the put outer scene is when he first arrives at Privet
Drive.  When he sees McGonnagal the Cat


Saitaina
*****
Also Doing: Reading fanfiction/Role-playing
Last Movie Seen: In all honesty..can't remember..could have been Shreik...or
Tomb Raider...or Atlantis...saw em all on the same day
Last TV Show Seen: "People's Court"
Current Book-Nancy Drew Mysteries




From prefectmarcus at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  3 06:15:38 2001
From: prefectmarcus at yahoo.com (Marcus )
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 06:15:38 -0000
Subject: Breaking voices
Message-ID: <9s022a+debf@eGroups.com>

There's breaking and there's broken.  Dan's voice in the interviews 
could be deeper than the trailers (I am not convinced, but it is 
subjective), but I certainly wouldn't call it broken -- Not yet 
anyway.  What I hear is a typical 12-13 year-old boy's voice.  There 
might be a bit more resonance than an 11 year-old, but the pitch is 
nearly the same.  

If I recall, it takes a few months to settle into your adult voice.  
>From my own experience and with my two boys, the process took four 
maybe six months.  

Well, we shall see soon enough.  If it is happening, they will be 
hard pressed to hide it in the second movie.  They can hardly loop 
all of their main hero's lines.  That would be akin to "Plan Nine 
from Outer Space," where the main star died half-way through the 
filming.  That is considered by many to be the worst of the worst.

Marcus






From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 06:42:24 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 01:42:24 EST
Subject: bought tickets
Message-ID: <95.12c84d17.2914ebd0@aol.com>

I just bought four tickets ahead of time at the web site 
http://www.movietickets.com

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 07:34:43 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 02:34:43 EST
Subject: third trailer
Message-ID: <149.4005e07.2914f813@aol.com>

has anyone found a site that has a good download of the third trailer?



From SoSilently at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 08:11:48 2001
From: SoSilently at aol.com (SoSilently at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 03:11:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] third trailer
Message-ID: <167.34e3d88.291500c4@aol.com>

Well, the high-res Quicktime version on the official site is pretty sweet. 
Large, though - 29 megabytes, I think! The URL for it is:

http://qt.stream.aol.com/qt/harrypotter/hp_ver3hi.mov

What I personally did was make a small web page - like this one:

http://www.geocities.com/hpfanonemillion/linky.html

Then right-clicked on the link and hit "save target as." Downloaded the whole 
thing from the AOL stream. The file is occasionally unavailable, though - it 
seems to be up right now.

And I can't be alone in adoring this trailer, right? Ron's final "Eugh!" just 
kills me. ;)

--chloe



From SoSilently at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 08:30:13 2001
From: SoSilently at aol.com (SoSilently at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 03:30:13 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] third trailer
Message-ID: <89.e5fc409.29150515@aol.com>

Aw, see, The HP Galleries already beat me to it:

http://www.hpgalleries.com/moviegallery-trailer.htm

Choices of different sizes and resolutions, too.

--chloe



From heidit at netbox.com  Sat Nov  3 15:53:45 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 10:53:45 -0500 
Subject: Fw: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Buying HP tickets online in advance?
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C323D@MIAEXCH1>

I like http:// movies.yahoo.com or http://www.moviefone.com
Some are having luck at fandango.com too
All of the aove are US specific sites, I think

-----Original Message-----
From: rainy_lilac at yahoo.com <rainy_lilac at yahoo.com>
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat Nov 03 10:56:03 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Buying HP tickets online in advance?

Real-To:  rainy_lilac at yahoo.com



Can someone tell me how to go about this? I know people are buying 
the tickets in advance, but for the life of me I cannot figure out 
how.

Also how does one find out where the film will be showing in one's 
hometown?

Thanks....


Feeling Blonde,

Suzanne


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  3 18:12:03 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 18:12:03 -0000
Subject: third trailer (AKA Luke whines about special effects)
In-Reply-To: <167.34e3d88.291500c4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9s1c1j+11drq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., SoSilently at a... wrote:
> And I can't be alone in adoring this trailer, right? Ron's
> final "Eugh!" just kills me. ;)

I did enjoy the third trailer (especially the new footage of both 
chess scenes), but it also cemented for me the very fair-to-middling 
special effects.  I have already been unimpressed by some of the 
special effects choices like the CGI motion blur used in fast-moving 
(flying) scenes, but the thing that really finally got to me on this 
third trailer was when Harry was on top of the troll being flung 
around.  I know the limits of CGI and nowhere among them is the 
inability to create propotionately-accurate humans (even if they are 
wildly unrealistic, they can still have proper proportions).  CGI 
Harry in these scenes is disproportionately skinny like one of those 
marionettes.  This is easy enough to tell when played at normal 
speed, but became glaring when I looked at it in frame-by-frame/slow 
motion.  And unlike some of the special effects shown in the 
trailers, which were simply unfinished and eventually got better 
(like the texture mapping for Fluffy), this sort of disproportion is 
unlikely to have been improved upon for the final product.

But ultimately I suppose it doesn't matter, because I do not come 
from the school of thought that puts much stock in special effects as 
the *reason* we go to see films.  So long as the story is there, 
well, that's the key, even in movies that are very heavy on effects.  
Special effects need only be sufficient to support said story and the 
suspension of disbelief.  The 'wow' factor is not only unnecessary, 
but sometimes undesireable because it calls attention to movie-making 
technique, which ruins suspension of disbelief.

Other than that though, and several other minor qualms I have, things 
look pretty good, and it certainly appears more faithful than a lot 
of other book-to-movie adaptations I can think of.  I reserve final 
judgment on everything until Nov. 16.

-Luke




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  3 18:44:16 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 10:44:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Got mine!
Message-ID: <20011103184416.40161.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>

Revere Showcase has it now! About time! Bought our
tickets for Friday Nov. 16 for the very first showung,
10:30am! My muggles will be enthralled that morning!
Now, if the 16th can get here fast enough!

Wanda and Her mery Band of Muggles

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Sat Nov  3 20:52:29 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:52:29 +0000
Subject: How would you dance to Hedwig's Theme?
Message-ID: <WwWJEhONkF57EwNy@dickson.demon.co.uk>

Not sure if soundtrack discussion is strictly on-topic for a movie 
mailing list, but it seems about a passable match... :-/ (Whisper it, 
but I've just dilligently checked the Admin files and couldn't really 
find definite pronouncement here.)

Idly thinking about a hypothetical Yule Ball, how would you dance to 
Hedwig's Theme? It starts off as a fairly clear Viennese Waltz and it 
ends as a fairly clear Viennese Waltz, but to my not-especially-tutored 
ear it seems to turn into a time-signature-shifting horror in between 
which would make dancing to it a lot more difficult.

www.musicnotes.com is selling the soundtrack sheet music already 
(published by Warner Bros. Publications, Inc. so it's official stuff) 
but I'm guessing that the five pages they're selling as Hedwig's Theme 
for $4.95 probably only cover the first minute and a half or so. Has 
anyone bought this sheet music? Can they confirm how much of the 
soundtrack you get for your money?

Incidentally, you can see the first page online for free at 
musicnotes.com, which is certainly enough for what will come to be known 
in the future as The Famous Bit and confirms that it's in 3/8 time, 58 
bars per minute. In short, uptempo Viennese Waltz territory.

If Warner Bros. have published Hedwig's Theme sheet music and it only 
goes so far, is there any realistically feasible way in which we're 
going to get fuller sheet music of the piece?

Or, cutting to the chase, has anyone got over the time-signature thing 
and worked out how to dance to Hedwig's Theme already?

Warm wishes for the weekend,
Chris

-- 
Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, England.      chris at dickson.demon.co.uk

My brush with greatness - November 6th: 69.1 hours and counting
( http://www.qxl.com/cgi-bin/qxlhome.cgi/EN/QXL/PR/U1008986871/_20290685 )



From jsteinb103 at aol.com  Sat Nov  3 21:13:35 2001
From: jsteinb103 at aol.com (jsteinb103 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 21:13:35 -0000
Subject: Got mine!
In-Reply-To: <20011103184416.40161.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9s1mlv+vrbu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Wanda Mallett <witchwanda2002 at y...> wrote:
> Revere Showcase has it now! About time! Bought our
> tickets for Friday Nov. 16 for the very first showung,
> 10:30am! 

The Senator Theater in Baltimore (Maryland, USA) has a first showing 
at 12:01am on November 16.  The theater recording reminds people that 
this is actually one minute past midnight Thursday night.  This is a 
large independently-owned single-screen (non-multiplex) theater. Do 
other places have an early showing like this or is this something 
that the theater owner thought up?

I'm not sufficiently obsessed to do this and bought my tickets today 
for 8:00pm on the 16th.

Julia     




From athene at hang-ten.com  Sat Nov  3 21:19:13 2001
From: athene at hang-ten.com (Athene)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 21:19:13 -0000
Subject: HP article in my local paper
Message-ID: <9s1n0h+d3j7@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone,

There was an article in my local paper today about the HP movie - 
apparently the relatives of Sean Biggerstaff (Oliver Wood) live in my 
city! :) My friend's mom knows his mom... anyway, long unrelated 
story. Alan Rickman recommended him for the part, after directing him 
in 'The Winter Guest'.

I can't provide a link to the article because this newspaper doesn't 
have its full contents online. It's too bad, since we could all use a 
laugh and the article was a bit of a disgrace. I'm fairly sure the 
author usually writes the senior column - I think it's on senior 
health issues - so I'm not sure why he was writing about the HP movie.

Here's a quote, which just about made me fall out of my chair 
laughing:

"...In 'Harry Potter and the Philospher's Stone' (which will have a 
slightly different title in the U.S., industry sources say) 
Biggerstaff will play Gryffindor Captain Oliver Wood, the literary 
significance of which required a call to [the local library] 
children's department: at the Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and 
Wizardry attended by orphan Potter, Gryffindor is one of the houses 
or sub-units..."

*snerk*  "sub-units" 

"I'm in sub-unit Gryffindor" sounds more appropriate for the 
Borg, doesn't it? :) 

- Athene




From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Nov  3 22:27:46 2001
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 22:27:46 -0000
Subject: what happened to Ook?
In-Reply-To: <F1361iv6r12XPKO1MMF0000f530@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9s1r12+u0f9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Amy Z" <aiz24 at h...> wrote:
> The Radio Times article
> 
> http://hpgalleries.topcities.com/vaults/c140.htm
> 
> says there are two owls playing Hedwig, named Gizmo and Sprout.  
Don't tell 
> me Ook has gone to the great Owlery in the sky.
> 
> Simon, any inside info?
> 
> Amy Z
> 
Thank you, Amy!  I read my copy of Radio Times yesterday, and the 
names of the owls playing Hedwig struck me as odd.  Now I know why! 
(In case you haven't noticed already, I'm rather thick at the best of 
times).  A mistake, or did Ook have to be replaced for some reason?

Mary Ann :)




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Sun Nov  4 10:41:51 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:41:51 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: what happened to Ook?
References: <9s1r12+u0f9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00d001c1651d$50edc020$7e3670c2@c5s910j>

Mary Ann said, re the apparent recasting of Hedwig:

> Thank you, Amy!  I read my copy of Radio Times yesterday, and the
> names of the owls playing Hedwig struck me as odd.  Now I know why!
> (In case you haven't noticed already, I'm rather thick at the best of
> times).  A mistake, or did Ook have to be replaced for some reason?

Sources close to the third camerawoman's milkman inform us that Ook's hoot
broke* during the early filming and rather than dub in an animal
impersonator, they decided to recast.

Two owls had to replace Ook, due to a new law on Avian Working Times, Order
14III, subsection 4(c), which stipulates that owls be allowed at least a
five hour break each day to practice random swooping, 360 degree head
rotation and the dismembering of small rodents.

* Yes, I know Hedwig is a girl.  Don't get picky!

Neil

Okay, my real guess is that Ook was used for pre-film publicity shots only
and perhaps proved untrainable for some of the acting scenes




From jonathandupont at hotmail.com  Sun Nov  4 21:30:57 2001
From: jonathandupont at hotmail.com (jonathandupont at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 21:30:57 -0000
Subject: Movie Previews in US
Message-ID: <9s4c2h+jf78@eGroups.com>

Question for people in the US here:

Do you have movie previews? Is it going to be shown at cinemas 
everywhere this weekend like in the UK?

I'm just curious as I haven't heard anyone mention it,

Jon,
who has his tickets booked for 7:20 GMT this Sunday





From inviziblegirl at hotmail.com  Sun Nov  4 21:40:34 2001
From: inviziblegirl at hotmail.com (Amber)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 21:40:34 -0000
Subject: Premiere Webcast
Message-ID: <9s4cki+t5l7@eGroups.com>

Hey all! Was wondering if anyone else caught the Premiere webcast and 
what they thought of it?

I know I loved hearing all the British accents. I found Rupert and 
Emma to be absolutely adorable, they were so wide-eyed about 
everything. Daniel was adorable too but look positively frightened in 
the few glimpses we saw. Very jittery, with a wild look in his eyes. 
I wanted to swoop in and say to the press "Stop scaring the kid! Back 
off!". JKR just looked tired. As much as I would like her to get book 
5 out already, it looks like she needs a relaxing vacation.

I was disappointed that we didn't see the Weasley clan except for 
Rupert and the woman who is playing Mrs. Weasley. No Alan Rickman 
either, although I think he wasn't planning on attending.

Oddly enough, I was surprised to see what everyone wore. I guess I 
thought that the actors and attendees would be all glammed up but it 
wasn't the case. I guess "Hollywood" has influenced me too much.

What is with the people they were interviewing? Golly, I wish I had 
been there when they asked people who their favorite character was. I 
could've talked forever. And I wanted to smack the people who 
admitted that they haven't read the books yet. Bah!

*sighs* How much longer until I get to see the movie? Approximately 
11 days, 7 hours, 25 minutes, and 5 seconds? Far too long to wait...

~Amber
(Who's got the list on webview and is only skimming subject headers 
so that she doesn't find out too much about the movie as she doesn't 
want to know everything that will happen but wanted to talk about the 
webcast anyways and thought it fit here better than on OT-Chat and 
has just realized that she has written quite a long run-on 
sentence...)




From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Sun Nov  4 22:16:16 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 22:16:16 -0000
Subject: Dans Voice
Message-ID: <9s4eng+hp9p@eGroups.com>

I just caught a BBC news report on the premier, the news crew caught 
Dan and he said a few words.

His voice has definately broken.

What will they do?


Dai




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 00:08:15 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 00:08:15 -0000
Subject: How would you dance to Hedwig's Theme?/Trailer in a Theatre
In-Reply-To: <WwWJEhONkF57EwNy@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9s4l9f+acej@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Chris M. Dickson" <chris at d...> wrote:
> Or, cutting to the chase, has anyone got over the time-signature 
> thing and worked out how to dance to Hedwig's Theme already?

My seven-year-old daughter does charming pirouettes and plies (PLEE-
AZE) she learned in ballet class when one of the Harry Potter ads 
with Hedwig's Theme comes on television. ;)  

We went to see Monsters, Inc. this afternoon and so I FINALLY GOT TO 
SEE A TRAILER IN A THEATRE!  Although I can watch the one at the 
beginning of my son's video of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory 
as many times as I want, our largest television is a mere 19".  It 
was fabulous to see it on a big screen!  And there were scenes I've 
never seen before!  

That said, my favorite thing of all is still Ron saying, "She has to 
sort out her priorities..."  All three kids appear to be great actors 
(and Dan was great in "David Copperfield") but I think Rupert is 
already my favorite of the trio.  (I also saw the "bloody brilliant 
line" and I have to agree with some folks on the OT list that most 
teachers would probably think this was disrespectful in the extreme; 
McGonagall is supposed to be around 75, and I'm certain that would 
have warranted a severe punishment when she was in school.)

On a special effects note that ties in with Monsters, Inc.--in that 
film there's a monster sushi-bar named "Harry Hausen's."  This joke 
will clearly go over kids' heads.  (My kids didn't bat an eye.)  I 
don't suppose some of the cheesier HP special effects are an homage 
to Ray Harryhausen? ;)  

--Barb
(wanting to give the benefit of the doubt)





From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 00:13:57 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 00:13:57 -0000
Subject: Premiere Webcast
In-Reply-To: <9s4cki+t5l7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s4lk5+7p4l@eGroups.com>

I loved the web cast - EXCEPT for the annoying reporter, who kept 
asking people who had queued up for hours ridiculous questions 
like "So, are you a fan of the books?" No, they're just attracted to 
bright colors.

> I know I loved hearing all the British accents. I found Rupert and 
> Emma to be absolutely adorable, they were so wide-eyed about 
> everything. Daniel was adorable too but look positively frightened 
in 
> the few glimpses we saw. Very jittery, with a wild look in his 
eyes. 

Didn't he! At first, he looked fine, but then there was a moment when 
I think it all sank in, what his life is going to be like from here 
on out - he looked like he'd collapse at any moment!


Oddly enough, I was surprised to see what everyone wore. I guess I 
> thought that the actors and attendees would be all glammed up but 
it 
> wasn't the case. I guess "Hollywood" has influenced me too much.

I was surprised too - must be the Hollywood thing. I liked it, 
actually. I liked that Rupert wore fashionable sweats; that seems 
very casual, very Ron. Emma looked cute and elegant in her little 
boa, as Hermione would look elegant. And it looked like Dan wore what 
he thought would be appropriate for the event...and I guess you can 
say that's Harry. They're so cute, all of them.


Tell me you didn't melt when Ginny told Harry "Good luck"...

And I was cursing when it went off - because we saw that huge screen, 
and knew the movie would be playing, and I was so jealous...

m.





From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 00:15:47 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 00:15:47 -0000
Subject: Dans Voice
In-Reply-To: <9s4eng+hp9p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s4lnj+9jb2@eGroups.com>


> 
> His voice has definately broken.
> 
> What will they do?

Eh, film the movie and get on with it. He can have hit puberty early; 
just look at the early photos of him when he got the part, and what 
he looks like now - we're all going to watch this kid grow up. And 
after all, he has a case of feelings toward Cho in the 3rd book, so 
his puberty starting in CoS will be OK. After all, he's exactly the 
same age as Harry was in these books, and it could very well have 
happened to Harry too. 

m.
(who really hopes JK won't go into how Harry's voice breaks...)




From gypsycaine at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 00:50:01 2001
From: gypsycaine at yahoo.com (Dee (Denise) R)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:50:01 -0500
Subject: For our Snape/Rickman fans!
References: <9s4lnj+9jb2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <068701c16593$d142d320$10ccfea9@ameritech.net>

http://movies.citysearch.com/feature/38303/snape.html?brand=msn




*****************************************************************************************
New website! http://www.geocities.com/gypsycaine/
****************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011104/5a448101/attachment.html>

From genevieve373 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 01:41:31 2001
From: genevieve373 at yahoo.com (genevieve373 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 01:41:31 -0000
Subject: Premiere Webcast Problems
Message-ID: <9s4qob+88jm@eGroups.com>

Hi all.  I was just wondering if anyone else was having problems with 
the reception of the Webcast.  I tried to watch it live, and have 
been trying a few times since to watch it again, but the picture 
freezes, and eventually kicks me off all together.  Also, if anyone 
knows of another place to view the webcast, I'd be very grateful to 
find out!

Thanks!

Jen (who is eagerly waiting to see the film, but can't buy tickets 
early :-(




From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov  5 02:55:25 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (alexp at alltel.net)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 02:55:25 -0000
Subject: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
In-Reply-To: <9rth4l+58n3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s4v2t+ukuq@eGroups.com>

I have a hard time believing some of that. "Herbology, DADA, and Hist 
of Mag deleted" HUH!!!! WHAT ABOUT QUIRREL???
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kewpie" <dkewpie at p...> wrote:
> 
> 
> I found this link which shows all the alternation in the movie
> 
> http://darkmark.com/c.c?l=moviemistakes
> 
> the link contains LOTS of spoiler, so don't go there if you don't 
> wanna know. 
> seems like they change ALOT of stuffs!!!  Including some of my most 
> favorite parts involving Draco!! urgh...
> feeling very disappointing right now..
> 
> jo




From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov  5 02:56:41 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (alexp at alltel.net)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 02:56:41 -0000
Subject: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
In-Reply-To: <9rth4l+58n3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s4v59+jp12@eGroups.com>

I have a hard time believing some of that. "Herbology, DADA, and Hist 
of Mag deleted" HUH!!!! WHAT ABOUT QUIRREL???
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kewpie" <dkewpie at p...> wrote:
> 
> 
> I found this link which shows all the alternation in the movie
> 
> http://darkmark.com/c.c?l=moviemistakes
> 
> the link contains LOTS of spoiler, so don't go there if you don't 
> wanna know. 
> seems like they change ALOT of stuffs!!!  Including some of my most 
> favorite parts involving Draco!! urgh...
> feeling very disappointing right now..
> 
> jo




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov  5 03:20:38 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:20:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
Message-ID: <11f.6b065d8.29175f86@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/4/2001 9:56:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
alexp at alltel.net writes:

I'm certainly disappointed that Hermione doesn't participate in the 
unraveling the riddle...that's not good



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov  5 03:32:46 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:32:46 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Premiere Webcast
Message-ID: <95.12d94356.2917625e@aol.com>

where can I find it?



From genevieve373 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 03:57:27 2001
From: genevieve373 at yahoo.com (genevieve373 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 03:57:27 -0000
Subject: Premiere Webcast
In-Reply-To: <95.12d94356.2917625e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9s52n7+e70p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Schlobin1 at a... wrote:
> where can I find it?

It's at the official Warner Bros. Harry Potter movie site (I don't 
have the actual address on hand right now, though - sorry).  But, as 
I'd mentioned before, I was having some trouble keeping it up...I 
think I've seen the first half hour about 4 times, now!!!  I hope you 
have better luck than I did!




From pennylin at swbell.net  Mon Nov  5 04:24:30 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 22:24:30 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Previews in US & Some Recent Articles
References: <9s4c2h+jf78@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BE6147E.4090404@swbell.net>

Hi --

jonathandupont at hotmail.com wrote:

> Question for people in the US here:
> 
> Do you have movie previews? Is it going to be shown at cinemas
> everywhere this weekend like in the UK?

The Houston Chronicle is having a special showing next weekend, but you 
have to win the passes.  I've entered the contest once a day as allowed 
(and gotten family & friends to do the same).  :::crosses fingers:::

FYI, I bought a few magazines at Border's today that I've not seen 
mentioned yet:

Starburst (Premier Magazine of Sci-Fi Entertainment) [not a magazine I 
would have ever looked at but for the very cool picture of Radcliffe on 
the cover] -- great interviews with Klove, Columbus & Heyman & lots of 
great still photos

16 Harry Potter -- appears to be geared to kids/young teens but is 
nothing but HP Movie-related stuff, including a nice interview with each 
of Dan, Rupert & Emma (free posters too)

Interesting tidbit from the Rupert & Emma interviews for you R/H 
shippers: when asked whether Ron & Hermione will marry, Rupert answered 
that he didn't know if they'd marry but he thought they'd get together. 
  Emma's response?  "No way!  Ewwww! I think it's weird because I'm 
thinking of myself in the part."  I guess Emma is not R/H (or she's 
icked out at the thought of kissing Rupert).  <g>

Oh, and the NY Times has a front-page article on the HP "Cash Cow" 
(today -- Sunday Nov 4th).

Penny




From dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Nov  5 12:07:50 2001
From: dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk (dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 12:07:50 -0000
Subject: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main list)
In-Reply-To: <9s4v59+jp12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s5vem+r9kg@eGroups.com>

"... I have a hard time believing some of that. "Herbology, DADA, and 
Hist of Mag deleted" HUH!!!! WHAT ABOUT QUIRREL???"

Have just come from reading the list.  That's bloody awful.  And 
wasn't I saying from the start that they should've given it to the 
BBC to make into a 3 or 4 part miniseries?  Wasn't I?  Grr.

-Actually, no, I was saying they should have given it to *me* to make 
into a 3 or 4 part miniseries - but the concept is the same.

Al
--
Angrily walks off to nail JKR and Steve Kloves to something - that's 
absolute bloody butchery - how could she agree to *that*?
--





From becky at mackenab.com  Mon Nov  5 12:07:05 2001
From: becky at mackenab.com (becky at mackenab.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 12:07:05 -0000
Subject: Movie Previews in US & Some Recent Articles
In-Reply-To: <3BE6147E.4090404@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9s5vd9+n8b7@eGroups.com>

>   Emma's response?  "No way!  Ewwww! I think it's weird because I'm 
> thinking of myself in the part."  I guess Emma is not R/H (or she's 
> icked out at the thought of kissing Rupert).  <g>
> 
I think I would go with Emma being icked out.  I remember thinking, 
at that age, that if a boy tried to french me I would bite his tounge 
off.  
I have been wondering if WB will have any trouble with romance on the 
set since these children are growing up quickly and will be spending 
immense amounts of time together.




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov  5 12:21:31 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 07:21:31 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: movie question that's kinda confusing (from
	 main list)
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3249@MIAEXCH1>

I have no issues with not including any class scenes from those classes, as
they're just described in the book- only transfig, potions and charms have
dialogue-scenes. 
*however* they should be roundly chastised for dropping Hermione's potions
task - although if they moved it so they could leave harry together it
wouldn't've been horrible. 
Likewise, having *only* the robe shop scene and not the train interaction
would've given the same end result -or should I say begining?- for draco and
harry's relationship...but eliminating both was a Bad Bad Thing, imho

-----Original Message-----
From: dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk <dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon Nov 05 07:07:50 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: movie question that's kinda confusing (from main
list)

Real-To:  dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk

"... I have a hard time believing some of that. "Herbology, DADA, and 
Hist of Mag deleted" HUH!!!! WHAT ABOUT QUIRREL???"

Have just come from reading the list.  That's bloody awful.  And 
wasn't I saying from the start that they should've given it to the 
BBC to make into a 3 or 4 part miniseries?  Wasn't I?  Grr.

-Actually, no, I was saying they should have given it to *me* to make 
into a 3 or 4 part miniseries - but the concept is the same.

Al
--
Angrily walks off to nail JKR and Steve Kloves to something - that's 
absolute bloody butchery - how could she agree to *that*?
--




Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/ 




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 12:43:37 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 12:43:37 -0000
Subject: the UK preview?
Message-ID: <9s61hp+m2st@eGroups.com>

Hullo all,

Lovely morning... did anyone actually go see the UK preview of the 
movie? Or stand outside and scream at the cast? Just read the semi-
enthusiastic review of the movie in the Washington Post; now i'm 
waiting to hear from someone who was there. Please!

Rrishi




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov  5 13:29:16 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:29:16 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the UK preview?
Message-ID: <a6.1c33d856.2917ee2c@aol.com>

yes, the Post sounds very blase, THEY say that Columbus adhered SLAVISHLY to 
the books - HUH -- little do they know...! Here's an excerpt

As is almost obligatory for hit movies, "Harry Potter" has a soundtrack by 
John Williams ("Star Wars," "E.T.," etc.), a brassy score that the director 
plays ever louder to rachet up the tension. 

The adult actors perform admirably -- particularly the oversized Robbie 
Coltrane as the giant Hogwarts groundskeeper, Hagrid. But the 12-year-old 
actor Daniel Radcliffe -- who looks almost exactly like "The Weakest Link" 
hostess Anne Robinson -- brings a disappointing minimalism to the plum role 
of Harry. Faced with stuff that would thoroughly gross out most kids -- from 
vomit-flavored candy to a splat of dragon saliva in his eye -- Radcliffe 
routinely responds with the mildest of shrugs. 

The movie also raises the old question of whether there can be too much of a 
good thing. For all its dazzle, this first Potter film carries on for more 
than 2 1/2 hours; at a screening in London this weekend, some young Potter 
fans dozed off just over two hours into the movie.




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov  5 13:29:38 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:29:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Previews in US & Some Recent Articles
Message-ID: <31.1d2fc3d3.2917ee42@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/4/2001 11:24:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
pennylin at swbell.net writes:

<< I guess Emma is not R/H >>

Smart girl playing smart girl



From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Mon Nov  5 13:52:48 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 13:52:48 -0000
Subject: Handwringing about Radcliffe ( WAS AKA Luke whines about special effects)
In-Reply-To: <9s1c1j+11drq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s65jg+5rfs@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

I have already been unimpressed by some of the 
> special effects choices like the CGI motion blur used in fast-
moving 
> (flying) scenes, but the thing that really finally got to me on 
this 
> third trailer was when Harry was on top of the troll being flung 
> around.  

Today's Washington Post has a front-page article about the HP premier 
in London.  They say little that would surprise this group, but they 
don't say nice things about Radcliffe:  


"The adult actors perform admirably -- particularly the oversized 
Robbie Coltrane as the giant Hogwarts groundskeeper, Hagrid. But the 
12-year-old actor Daniel Radcliffe -- who looks almost exactly 
like "The Weakest Link" hostess Anne Robinson -- brings a 
disappointing minimalism to the plum role of Harry. Faced with stuff 
that would thoroughly gross out most kids -- from vomit-flavored 
candy to a splat of dragon saliva in his eye -- Radcliffe routinely 
responds with the mildest of shrugs."

Well, I'm willing to reserve judgment.  Indeed, I think I can still 
offer up a feeble defense of the director on the theory that it is 
MUCH better to have the Harry character be understated than have him 
chewing the scenery.  I must say that I am wringing my hands, though, 
just a little bit.

Oh, and what's the deal with comparing Radcliffe with that Weakest 
Link lady?  Honestly.  I think Radcliffe is a hunk-to-be.

Cindy (apparently the only person on the whole list who does not have 
advance tickets)




From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 15:57:20 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 16:57:20 +0100
Subject: Hmmm... premiere photos
Message-ID: <010101c16612$8ec1e200$c62d07d5@oemcomputer>

I'm staring at the premiere photographs and have to say: Daniel, *that* is dishelved black hair... Somehow it looks much better than on all the movie pics I've seen. Weird.

 ~ Dinah ~    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011105/d0623ce7/attachment.html>

From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Mon Nov  5 16:56:10 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 16:56:10 -0000
Subject: FIRST REACTIONS (links to UK Premier reviews, spolier protected)
Message-ID: <9s6gba+v5bp@eGroups.com>

Well OK this message is NOT for all of you with the blankets over 
your heads trying to avoid the news items on the Previews on TV or 
whatever


Links to preview reactions. Spoilerspaced to help avoid
temptation


Edis

M
  I
   N
     O
       R
S
 P
  O
   I
    L
     E
      R

Collection of first impressions of The Film are on  

http://film.guardian.co.uk/harrypotter/storynav/0,10608,587952,00.html

A great recommendation from most Except  Andrew Lloyd Weber
didn't 
like it. So we know who isn't  going to try to set up a musical 
version.  Great News!

This from a nine year old (who liked it)

http://film.guardian.co.uk/harrypotter/storynav/0,10608,587952,00.html

And this from a 12 year old (Ditto, with perceptive comment on 
difference between film and books as media))

http://film.guardian.co.uk/harrypotter/storynav/0,10608,588038,00.html


 This in the Times (London).

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2001230004-2001383284,00.html

And this from the Telegraph

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2001/11/05/npot105.xml

An interview by JKR has been released in the states
 no URL. 
Sightings?

E.





From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov  5 18:43:43 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (alexp at alltel.net)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 18:43:43 -0000
Subject: Handwringing about Radcliffe ( WAS AKA Luke whines about special effects)
In-Reply-To: <9s65jg+5rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s6mkv+u2sg@eGroups.com>

.
> 
> Cindy (apparently the only person on the whole list who does not 
have 
> advance tickets)
I don't eaither, but i will friday.
Alex




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  5 18:50:26 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 18:50:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm... premiere photos
In-Reply-To: <010101c16612$8ec1e200$c62d07d5@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9s6n1i+mvt7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dinah" <bludger_witch at y...> wrote:
> I'm staring at the premiere photographs 


Where? I only have 56k so the webcast's no good-where'd you find 
stills?





From SALeathem at aol.com  Mon Nov  5 18:50:40 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:50:40 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lots of stuff about Radcliffe, and a bit on Felton.
Message-ID: <5b.1e2bc9c6.29183980@aol.com>

In a message dated 05/11/2001 13:55:41 GMT Standard Time, 
cynthiaanncoe at home.com writes:

<< Oh, and what's the deal with comparing Radcliffe with that Weakest 
 Link lady?  Honestly.  I think Radcliffe is a hunk-to-be.
 
 Cindy (apparently the only person on the whole list who does not have 
 advance tickets) >>

I don't have advance tickets yet either (Hoping to win some from the Daily 
Express). Was looking through all the paper reports at work, and noticed 
something about Dan. 
Anyone else think he bears a striking resemblance to a young Elijah Wood? The 
possibly spooky thing about this being, that Wood stars in Lord Of The Rings 
(Frodo isn't it?)... and err...yeah. I think that's kinda ... I dunno. weird 
maybe. That they look alike I mean, and are both starring in very eagerly 
awaited no doubt box office smashing films. That are released in the next 
month.

Am also confused as to why I'm finding a 12 year old boy attractive (in other 
words, ditto on the hunk to be comment :o)) 

As for his voice. Yes, it's broken, but isn't a problem. Report in the 
Telegraph (I think it was the telegraph, might have been the times) has a few 
comments from Chris Colombus on the subject. He quashed the rumours about Dan 
having his voice dubbed in some scenes and he also said that if Dan's or 
anyone elses voice breaks during the making of the films that's fantastic cos 
that's what teenage boys do and Harry is a teenage boy, who gets older in 
every film.
He's also still just a bit shorter than Rupert, unless they had Rupert 
standing on a box all the time.

Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy), I think he looks like Michael Schumacher. 

Um, that's all of my bizarre ramblings for tonight.

Sara



From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov  5 18:43:45 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:43:45 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Hmmm... premiere photos
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3256@MIAEXCH1>

You can always find links to, well, everything - at
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org. In this case, scroll down until you find
a link to the picture collection on Yahoo and take a peek!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nlpnt at yahoo.com [mailto:nlpnt at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 1:50 PM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Hmmm... premiere photos
> 
> 
> Real-To:  nlpnt at yahoo.com
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dinah" <bludger_witch at y...> wrote:
> > I'm staring at the premiere photographs 
> 
> 
> Where? I only have 56k so the webcast's no good-where'd you find 
> stills?
> 



From pennylin at swbell.net  Mon Nov  5 20:22:11 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 14:22:11 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lots of stuff about Radcliffe, and a bit on Felton.
References: <5b.1e2bc9c6.29183980@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3BE6F4F3.4050804@swbell.net>

Hi --

SALeathem at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 05/11/2001 13:55:41 GMT Standard Time,
> cynthiaanncoe at home.com writes:
> 
> << Oh, and what's the deal with comparing Radcliffe with that Weakest
> Link lady?  Honestly.  I think Radcliffe is a hunk-to-be.
> 
Sara added: > Am also confused as to why I'm finding a 12 year old boy attractive (in 
> other words, ditto on the hunk to be comment :o))

Uh ... yeah.  I don't get the comparison to the Weakest Link lady at 
all.  He's definitely a hunk to be.  If I was a pre-teen girl, I'd 
definitely be crushing on Dan.  :--)

I agree with the assessment re: his voice.  He's the same exact age as 
Harry so if Dan's voice broke, it's likely that *could* have been when 
Harry's did also.  There's fortunately nothing in canon to say that 
Harry's voice doesn't break until the summer before GoF or anything. 
Jim Dale gave Harry & Ron deeper voices in GoF but there's nothing canon 
about that.

Penny





From adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au  Tue Nov  6 00:48:17 2001
From: adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au (adadi000 at student.mq.edu.au)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 00:48:17 -0000
Subject: Lots of stuff about Radcliffe/new scenes
In-Reply-To: <3BE6F4F3.4050804@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9s7c0h+kdsv@eGroups.com>

> Sara added: > Am also confused as to why I'm finding a 12 year old 
boy attractive (in 
> > other words, ditto on the hunk to be comment :o))
> 
> Uh ... yeah.  I don't get the comparison to the Weakest Link lady 
at 
> all.  He's definitely a hunk to be.  If I was a pre-teen girl, I'd 
> definitely be crushing on Dan.  :--)
>> 
> Penny

I totally agree. I was wondering why I was staring at a 12 year old 
and thinking that, but it's good to know I'm not the only one! ;)

What did everyone think about the two scenes from the movie we got to 
see? 

Anna




From athene at hang-ten.com  Tue Nov  6 03:29:32 2001
From: athene at hang-ten.com (Athene)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 03:29:32 -0000
Subject: Dan Radcliffe, new trailer
In-Reply-To: <9s65jg+5rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s7les+va4b@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:
> Honestly.  I think Radcliffe is a hunk-to-be.

I agree Cindy! I'm almost 10 years older than him, but I think 
he's a little cutie right now, who will likely grow up to be quite an 
attractive guy. But... does he ever look tired in the premiere shots! 
Look at the bags under his eyes - poor kid!

http://hpgalleries.topcities.com/mgallery106.htm

I saw the new trailer! I was eating supper and half-watching Fox when 
I heard a distinctly-Snape-like voice say "I can teach you to..." I 
think I pulled a muscle in my neck raising my head that fast :) Then 
I let out a little yelp which caused my family to cast odd looks in 
my direction. This is not helping my excitement level...

And, I don't have tickets yet either. I'm still trying to convince my 
friend (who hasn't read the books yet) to go with me, but I think 
she's worried about how I'll act while I'm watching... I think she 
might be embarrassed to be seen in public with me, what with the 
yelping and all :) 

- Athene (who is becoming more excited about the movie with each 
passing day, and has been making far too many odd noises whenever 
someone mentions HP!)




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov  6 04:49:36 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:49:36 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan Radcliffe, new trailer
Message-ID: <153.393428f.2918c5e0@aol.com>

Time Magazine..which has annoyed me with its treatment of recent events in 
the U.S. -- actually has a good story


Excerpt
Rowling also had a hand in choosing most of the adult cast members. She 
specifically requested Coltrane. Others, like Richard Harris as Dumbledore, 
Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall and Alan Rickman as Professor Snape came 
straight from a wish list of actors that Rowling provided the producers. She 
gave Rickman and Coltrane precious bits of information about their 
characters' futures. "There's an awful lot revealed about Hagrid in book 
five," says Coltrane, "and Jo thought it was important for me to know." Like 
what? "I could tell you," says Coltrane, "but then you'd have to die."


And another

The PG-rated Sorcerer's Stone is designed for kids ages six and older, but 
Rowling's books do get scarier. They also get longer. Columbus has already 
come up with a strategy for the very thick Goblet of Fire, which could hit 
screens in 2004. "I think it has to be two movies," he says. "We could shoot 
a four- or five-hour version, release part one at Thanksgiving and part two 
at Christmas." Otherwise, Columbus is keeping mum on his Potter plans, and a 
veil of secrecy is descending on the second movie. On Columbus' office wall 
at Leavesden, he has tacked up renderings and scene sketches from Chamber of 
Secrets. He kindly asks the visiting journalist to ignore them. Too late. 
It's a car--a drawing of the magically souped-up Ford Anglia that carries 
Harry and Ron to their second year at Hogwarts. It's turquoise, just as 
Rowling described it, and already in flight.



From gypsycaine at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  6 05:06:08 2001
From: gypsycaine at yahoo.com (Dee (Denise) R)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 00:06:08 -0500
Subject: No tickets for me....
References: <153.393428f.2918c5e0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <022801c16680$bf0f9100$10ccfea9@ameritech.net>


After re-evaluating my expenses this month, alas something has to go. 

It's either gas, or Harry.  Sighs.

I can't afford both, so I will have to wait until the first of December to see the movie.

*****************************************************************************************

New website! http://www.geocities.com/gypsycaine/

*****************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011106/423c733a/attachment.html>

From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  6 11:59:15 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 03:59:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] No tickets for me....
In-Reply-To: <022801c16680$bf0f9100$10ccfea9@ameritech.net>
Message-ID: <20011106115915.37268.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>

You still get to see the trailers! And before you
know, after 90 days, it should be in either vhs or
dvd! My husband has figured that out! We did get to
see The Mummy or The Mummy Returns. Sure enough, 90
days later they were available for sale! So, you know
what we will be buying! But the only exception were
Spielburg movies and George Lucas' Episode One, which
run longer. Hopefully the 90 day stands for this, but
you never know! It just worked out that we were able
to get tickets! Other wise, we would also be waiting.
Look for the bright side of this, you'll get there!
Who knows, something  might work out sooner for you
and go to a matinee price showing! That's why we are
going to the 10:30am showing! $28 is cheaper for 4
tickets than paying $42 for evening prices! Waiting
till December, well, it isn't to far off, and you can
read the reviews! Only the good ones! What does a
critic know anyway, think of Rita Skeeter!

Wanda and Her Merry Muggles, won't be because they
have to get up for School!


--- "Dee (Denise) R" <gypsycaine at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> After re-evaluating my expenses this month, alas
> something has to go. 
> 
> It's either gas, or Harry.  Sighs.
> 
> I can't afford both, so I will have to wait until
> the first of December to see the movie.
> 
>
*****************************************************************************************
> 
> New website! http://www.geocities.com/gypsycaine/
> 
>
*****************************************************************************************
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From gypsycaine at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  6 14:11:30 2001
From: gypsycaine at yahoo.com (Dee (Denise) R)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 09:11:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] No tickets for me....
References: <20011106115915.37268.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <038301c166cc$ef0183e0$10ccfea9@ameritech.net>

Thanks Wanda for making me feel better. :)

There are times I wish I had a real job, but then I wouldn't have the fun of going to school while things are in place to help me get my behind through it (like assisted daycare) for the next two years.  It would have been harder if I had waited--and possibility impossible to finish that BS.  I have my Associate's (graduated in May), but in the computer field here in town, I was beating-feet against the 4-year-ers.

There are trade-offs to be made, and I made them.  It doesn't always make it easy, though.

Dee




***************************************************************************************
I stopped at a florist shop after work to pick up roses for my wife. As the clerk was putting the finishing touches on the bouquet, a young man burst through the door, breathlessly requesting a dozen red roses.

"I'm sorry," the clerk said. "This man just ordered our last bunch." The desperate customer turned to me and begged, "May I please have those roses?"

"What happened?" I asked. "Did you forget your wedding anniversary?"

"It's even worse than that," he confided. "I crashed my wife's hard drive!"

***************************************************************************************
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Wanda Mallett 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 6:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] No tickets for me....


  You still get to see the trailers! And before you
  know, after 90 days, it should be in either vhs or
  dvd! My husband has figured that out! We did get to
  see The Mummy or The Mummy Returns. Sure enough, 90
  days later they were available for sale! So, you know
  what we will be buying! But the only exception were
  Spielburg movies and George Lucas' Episode One, which
  run longer. Hopefully the 90 day stands for this, but
  you never know! It just worked out that we were able
  to get tickets! Other wise, we would also be waiting.
  Look for the bright side of this, you'll get there!
  Who knows, something  might work out sooner for you
  and go to a matinee price showing! That's why we are
  going to the 10:30am showing! $28 is cheaper for 4
  tickets than paying $42 for evening prices! Waiting
  till December, well, it isn't to far off, and you can
  read the reviews! Only the good ones! What does a
  critic know anyway, think of Rita Skeeter!

  Wanda and Her Merry Muggles, won't be because they
  have to get up for School!


  --- "Dee (Denise) R" <gypsycaine at yahoo.com> wrote:
  > 
  > After re-evaluating my expenses this month, alas
  > something has to go. 
  > 
  > It's either gas, or Harry.  Sighs.
  > 
  > I can't afford both, so I will have to wait until
  > the first of December to see the movie.
  > 
  >
  *****************************************************************************************
  > 
  > New website! http://www.geocities.com/gypsycaine/
  > 
  >
  *****************************************************************************************
  > 


  __________________________________________________
  Do You Yahoo!?
  Find a job, post your resume.
  http://careers.yahoo.com

  Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

  Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

  Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.

  Unsubscribing? Email hpfgu-movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011106/50dbad48/attachment.html>

From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov  6 10:31:33 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 10:31:33 EST5EDT
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw!
Message-ID: <D4FF192C7F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

The countdown is in single digits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Waa-hooooo!!!

Unbelievable.  It seems like just a month ago it was still 
in the 200's!!!  :-)

I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and really REALLY 
liking it.  Especially tracks 2 and 18.  My only bit of 
criticism (and I sure as hell am in no position to be 
criticizing the great John Williams except as a fan) is 
that some of it sounds like the Hook soundtrack.  But, in 
the scheme of things.....who cares!  :-)

Anyone else taking half a day off from work next Friday? 
I've got to run a Winter quarter transfer student 
orientation but....after that...my boss and I are taking a 
reeeeaaaaally long lunch and seeing it on the earliest 
matinee and then I'm seeing it again that night with my 
mother and group of friends.

I'm as giddy as an 8 year old on Christmas Eve!!!!!!!!!  
Thank goodness I have a lot happening in the next week or 
so to keep me busy.  Jimmy Buffett concert, OSU football 
game, brother coming home from being stationed in Kosovo 
for the last year, flu shot (ick), three day weekend for 
Veteran's Day (and you all know how fast three day weekends 
go!)....*sigh*

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  6 15:37:26 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 15:37:26 -0000
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw!
In-Reply-To: <D4FF192C7F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9s903m+hnmv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> The countdown is in single digits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very much single digits, if you try to book with Odeon Bridgend, 
South Wales; as they are selling tickets for this saturday.

My mum phoned up to book a couple of tickets for herself and my 
sister for the 16th, but they offered her the 10th as well, so she 
took them. Naturally I rang up straight after and booked another for 
myself.

I'm guessing that they have a computer glitch, but still, I have a 
ticket for this saturday.


Dai




From chl0525 at hotmail.com  Tue Nov  6 17:06:53 2001
From: chl0525 at hotmail.com (chl0525 at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 17:06:53 -0000
Subject: Handwringing about Radcliffe ( WAS AKA Luke whines about special effects)
In-Reply-To: <9s65jg+5rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s95bd+i4u8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> wrote:
> 
> Cindy (apparently the only person on the whole list who does not 
have 
> advance tickets)


No, I don't have them either. The theater that I want to see HP in 
doesn't seel it's tickets online so I have to wait untill the 15th to 
buy them (shame on you Cinamark). But my husband and I are both 
taking off from work so taht we can take our son (7) to the first 
showing after school.




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Tue Nov  6 20:34:58 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 20:34:58 -0000
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw!
In-Reply-To: <D4FF192C7F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9s9hhi+8k6d@eGroups.com>

Rachel wrote:

> 
> I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and really REALLY 
> liking it.  

Rachel, maybe you can help me out.  I heard a HP trailer come on TV, 
and it sounded new, so I went to have a look.  The "theme" of the 
trailer was something like "It's finally here!"  The music wasn't the 
usual trailer music, though.  Frankly, it sounded like a piece of 
classical music I've heard before, but I can't place it.  Appalachian 
Spring by Copeland or something?

Is all of the music on all of the trailers definitely original John 
Williams music, or am I losing my mind?

Cindy




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov  6 16:09:21 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:09:21 EST5EDT
Subject: The trailer music question answered
Message-ID: <DA9FFA3219@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

What you were hearing was the theme song from Dragon:The 
Bruce Lee Story.  It's a very common thing for WB Studios 
to use that music for several movie trailers.  They must 
really like it.  :-)  I love it.  It's an excellent piece 
of music.

It's not John Williams.  It's written by Randy Edleman (I 
believe...I might be wrong).

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov  6 16:18:46 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:18:46 EST5EDT
Subject: (Fwd) The trailer music question answered
Message-ID: <DAC80F416F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

It's actually the "love" song from Dragon...not the title 
theme.  But if you watch the closing credits, it's smooshed 
into the theme song, too.

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Tue Nov  6 21:16:14 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:16:14 -0000
Subject: Handwringing about Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <9s65jg+5rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9s9juu+b755@eGroups.com>

I've been staying away from this list 'til the movie comes out, but I 
ran out of ways to procrastinate so I had to drop by.  Uh, I do need 
spoiler space before the 16th, right?

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

O
F

T
H
R
E
E

S
C
E
N
E
S

Cindy quoted the Washington Post:
 
> "The adult actors perform admirably -- particularly the oversized 
> Robbie Coltrane as the giant Hogwarts groundskeeper, Hagrid. But 
the 
> 12-year-old actor Daniel Radcliffe -- who looks almost exactly 
> like "The Weakest Link" hostess Anne Robinson -- brings a 
> disappointing minimalism to the plum role of Harry. Faced with 
stuff 
> that would thoroughly gross out most kids -- from vomit-flavored 
> candy to a splat of dragon saliva in his eye -- Radcliffe routinely 
> responds with the mildest of shrugs."

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  The American standard for child actors is 
Shameless Mugging.  I bet the Post thought Macaulay Culkin's 
screaming thing was really cute.  The two little bits I've seen (the 
letters scene and the Getting onto Platform 9 3/4) were really well 
acted (love the twinge when the first letter hits Vernon).  Subtle, I 
calls it.  Movie reviews, good or bad, are a load of crapola in my 
ONAAHO (obviously not at all humble opinion).

Amy
who wants to know what's all this about dragon saliva?




From bricken at tenbit.pl  Tue Nov  6 21:24:19 2001
From: bricken at tenbit.pl (Ev vy)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:24:19 +0100
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw! - a question
References: <9s903m+hnmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000301c1670c$323531e0$500063d9@OSLII>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> > The countdown is in single digits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Very much single digits, if you try to book with Odeon Bridgend,
> South Wales; as they are selling tickets for this saturday.
>
> My mum phoned up to book a couple of tickets for herself and my
> sister for the 16th, but they offered her the 10th as well, so she
> took them. Naturally I rang up straight after and booked another for
> myself.
>
> Dai

*delurking*
Hi!
I'm one of the fans from Europe who's technically forced to wait for the
movie until January 18 2002. But I'm going to be in London by the end of
November to see "Private Lives" and "HP & PS".
And I need some information on the booking process. Could anyone from UK,
preferably from London, give me info if I have to pay by credit cerd when
booking for HP movie on the phone? I don't have a card thet's valid for UK,
that's why I have this question. And I want to be on the safe side, to come
to London without worrying about the tickets.

Ev vy




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov  6 21:50:57 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:50:57 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Yeeee-haaaaaw!
Message-ID: <13d.40e18ab.2919b541@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/6/2001 10:35:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
bray.262 at osu.edu writes:

<< Anyone else taking half a day off from work next Friday?  >>

You bet! Me! Then I'm going again on Saturday, taking my four year 
old......who can't wait to see Harry Powder...

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov  6 21:53:38 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:53:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Handwringing about Radcliffe
Message-ID: <112.73a1eab.2919b5e2@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/6/2001 4:22:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
aiz24 at hotmail.com writes:

<< I've been staying away from this list 'til the movie comes out, but I 
 ran out of ways to procrastinate so I had to drop by.  Uh, I do need 
 spoiler space before the 16th, right?
 
 S
 P
 O
 I
 L
 E
 R
 
 O
 F
 
 T
 H
 R
 E
 E
 
 S
 C
 E
 N
 E
 S
 
 Cindy quoted the Washington Post:
  
 > "The adult actors perform admirably -- particularly the oversized 
 > Robbie Coltrane as the giant Hogwarts groundskeeper, Hagrid. But 
 the 
 > 12-year-old actor Daniel Radcliffe -- who looks almost exactly 
 > like "The Weakest Link" hostess Anne Robinson -- brings a 
 > disappointing minimalism to the plum role of Harry. Faced with 
 stuff 
 > that would thoroughly gross out most kids -- from vomit-flavored 
 > candy to a splat of dragon saliva in his eye -- Radcliffe routinely 
 > responds with the mildest of shrugs."
 
 Yeah, yeah, yeah.  The American standard for child actors is 
 Shameless Mugging.  I bet the Post thought Macaulay Culkin's 
 screaming thing was really cute.  The two little bits I've seen (the 
 letters scene and the Getting onto Platform 9 3/4) were really well 
 acted (love the twinge when the first letter hits Vernon).  Subtle, I 
 calls it.  Movie reviews, good or bad, are a load of crapola in my 
 ONAAHO (obviously not at all humble opinion).
 
 Amy
 who wants to know what's all this about dragon saliva?
 
  >>

In fact, Christopher Potter in the Ann Arbor News is SO bad that if he 
doesn't like a movie, I immediately go see it.

Susan



From pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Nov  7 00:21:18 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 18:21:18 -0600
Subject: Review of Movie from Chris Dickson (SPOILERS!)
Message-ID: <3BE87E7E.40207@swbell.net>

Hi everyone --

Chris Dickson just posted a review of the Movie from a payphone in 
Scotland to the Magical Mods address.  Payphones don't allow for spoiler 
space, so he posted it in 4 parts to the Mods for us to reformat.  From 
a payphone, the text came through a bit garbled in places, but I've 
tried to reconstruct.  Chris can correct anything I mis-edited later. 
So, here's your spoiler space:

C
H
R
I
S

I
S

S
O

L
U
C
K
Y

T
O

S
E
E

T
H
E

F
I
L
M

A
L
R
E
A
D
Y

*************** That should be enough *****************

The film is about as close to human perfection as is possible to 
achieve, given the decisions about the overall effects.  It is much 
better than the stills, trailers & soundtrack have conveyed so far.
It has clearly been thought through long & hard by real fans, and they 
have captured the spirit of the book better than I had thought possible.

The script is definitely an accelerated version of the book & so 
inherently not as good.  However, it makes sense on its own terms.  The 
dialogue is very very good indeed -- not strictly true to the original 
but it feels right & realistic.  The cuts that were made don't matter 
much in the context.

The voice acting is excellent throughout.  Possible weak link here is 
Richard Harris as Dumbledore.  He is good but still a little flat to be 
great.  There are a few instances where Radcliffe was asked to do too 
much as Harry in a shot angle, but apart from this, a class job.  I know 
this is unfair because there is a mental image to live up to that actors 
in non-book adapted films don't need to match.  Rupert Grint has the 
best comic timing of any 13 yr old actor.

The standout surprise is the actor playing Oliver Wood.  He has a 
limited role but hits it perfectly.  Hagrid is definitely a bit 
different in the movie by necessity -- not as time spent on one aspect 
of his character [from Penny: I'm not sure what Chris meant here].  It's 
different but works well in context.

Special effects are top notch but the script calls for some extremely 
inhuman human animation.  This isn't possible yet.  The movie succeeds 
at least as well as any I've seen but is clearly imperfect in this 
regard.  The quidditch sequence is very ambitious.

The professors are all very good indeed -- wouldn't change a thing. 
None of the characters irritate at all, which is a big achievement.
Other kids are well acted.  Neville doesn't get enough screen time for 
his character.  Ginny has 2 words!  The animal characters are really 
great but used rather less than in the book by necessity.  This is not a 
problem.

No belly laughs but many smiles.  Warm fuzzies from the happy bits too, 
which is key.  It all bodes very well for the CoS movie.  The changes 
from book to film have been well thought out.  Really satisfactory film!

Will say more later -- forgive the scattery nature of this (editor is 
hopeless).

Chris

[Note from Penny: I hope I haven't entirely butchered this -- it came 
through very garbled in places]




From becky at mackenab.com  Wed Nov  7 01:30:25 2001
From: becky at mackenab.com (becky at mackenab.com)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 01:30:25 -0000
Subject: No more Dan?
Message-ID: <9sa2rh+gc3i@eGroups.com>

So, this is a bit early but...
All of the interviews that I've come across have blatently mentioned 
both physical changes and the fact that the actors have only signed 
on for 2 movies.  I have several questions a- after watching the 
movie do any of us think we could really accept another actor in the 
lead roles and b- would any parent let their children work the long 
hours inherent with a making a movie for multiple years? c- would any 
child be willing to put up with hours for 7 years (assuming all the 
books are done) and finally d- will these kids ever be able to break 
out of these roles once they stop playing Harry, Ron, etc?




From editor at texas.net  Wed Nov  7 02:15:59 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 02:15:59 -0000
Subject: I'm here! And the soundtrack
Message-ID: <9sa5gv+8l5q@eGroups.com>

I bought the soundtrack, and it came today, and having the little ones 
to feed and bed down, it was playing in the background. I correctly 
named, by sound alone, Diagon Alley and the Quidditch game, and the 
rest of it was very good. Distinct moods illustrated in music.

Track 2, the music for the letters arriving, and a recurring theme 
elsewhere, is distinctly reminiscent of "Batman," but that also 
required a swoopy, dive-y, fantasy, hint-of-dark feel, so that makes 
sense. A couple of the opening bars to this theme persistently take me 
back to a theme from "Schindler's List," but not obtrusively so.

I could have told you, without knowing it, that John Williams wrote 
it, but I think he did a good job.

--Amanda, now taking off Soundtrack Critic's hat




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  7 04:25:30 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 04:25:30 -0000
Subject: No more Dan?
In-Reply-To: <9sa2rh+gc3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sad3q+kiu1@eGroups.com>


  Columbus has repeatedly said that Dan is exactly the same age as 
Harry. Emma's actually *younger* than Herm, and Rupert's not that 
much older than Ron, by Hollywood standards (especially since he's 
supposed to be taller than Harry...)

My opinion; the kids have the jobs for as long as they want 'em- if 
they're replaced it'll be because either they want out or their 
parents want them out. Columbus and WB aren't going to mess with 
success.


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., becky at m... wrote:
> So, this is a bit early but...
> All of the interviews that I've come across have blatently 
mentioned 
> both physical changes and the fact that the actors have only signed 
> on for 2 movies.  I have several questions a- after watching the 
> movie do any of us think we could really accept another actor in 
the 
> lead roles and b- would any parent let their children work the long 
> hours inherent with a making a movie for multiple years? c- would 
any 
> child be willing to put up with hours for 7 years (assuming all the 
> books are done) and finally d- will these kids ever be able to 
break 
> out of these roles once they stop playing Harry, Ron, etc?




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Wed Nov  7 12:06:31 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:06:31 -0000
Subject: ISO Scary!Trailer, etc.
Message-ID: <9sb847+rhee@eGroups.com>

Hi all,

I've read lots on The Leaky Cauldron about a TV trailer that seems to 
play up the horror side:  flash of green light, final confrontation, 
stuff like that.  If anyone finds a site where we can see it, will you 
post it here please?  The same with the "lesson #1, lesson #2" 
one.  And--this is probably ridiculous to hope for--any 
possibility that the Simpsons HP thing has been uploaded?  (I 
doubt it would last long if it were--who wants Rupert Murdoch 
coming after their website with a copyright attorney in each 
hand?--but it's worth a shot.)  Or, better yet, if you know of 
a time it's being rebroadcast . . . Thanks!

Amy Z






From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Wed Nov  7 14:04:59 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 14:04:59 -0000
Subject: Marketing of HP Movie
Message-ID: <9sbf2b+tcso@eGroups.com>

Because I am interested in the movie, I keep my eyes and ears open 
for all HP movie information, trailers, product tie-ins, etc. (don't 
we all?)  I also have kids in what I would expect to be a big part of 
the target demographic group (under 12)

Nevertheless, I only see a TV ad for the movie or Coke/HP ad when I 
deliberately sprint into the room to watch it.  I have never seen a 
60-second ad.  I have seen no cereal boxes, ToysRUs promotions, 
McDonalds tie-in, HP-specific Halloween candy, HP slapped all over 
everything in the supermarket.  No billboards, nothing but something 
in a pack of Minute Maid juice boxes.  A few extra HP-related 
articles of clothing in the displays at Target (yes, I shop at 
Target), but nothing special.

It seems that I have seen a lot more promotion for other movies in 
which I am much less interested (e.g. Shrek, Princess Diaries, 
Legally Blonde), even if I tried to actively avoid it.

Has anyone else noticed the HP marketing is a bit subdued?  It's not 
a bad thing, I suppose, but it struck me as unusual.  Maybe they 
spent the marketing budget on special effects.

Cindy 




From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Wed Nov  7 15:55:01 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:55:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Marketing of HP Movie
Message-ID: <94.1c8c6a50.291ab355@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/7/01 9:06:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cynthiaanncoe at home.com writes:


> .  I have seen no cereal boxes, ToysRUs promotions, 
> McDonalds tie-in, HP-specific Halloween candy, HP slapped all over 
> everything in the supermarket.  

There has been an ad in my area for ToysRUs, for a potions kit. It was a 
pretty cheesy ad, and I only saw it a few times. Back in August, there were a 
few school supplies ads, but those too seem to have subsided. There is a 
display in the grocery stores fo the Coke contest. Those Coke commercials 
could be a lot worse than they are. I do like the way they attempt to focus 
on books and the joys of reading. And i assume they have tried to find a kid 
who had at least some similarities to Harry, the dark haired kid who looks 
up, wiht sort of a bemused look.
We have the power network show coming up Sunday night, ABC I think, on "The 
Making of..." thing. Wonder if that'll set off a whirlwind of intense 
marketing?Or, perhaps they know the books have such a following, they don't 
want to turn off the true devotees, and even more ,those who have been 
hovering between avoiding and seeing the movie..

~Ashleigh, who won a big 5 dollars in Coke "movie cash".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011107/dbffb40a/attachment.html>

From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  7 17:19:53 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 18:19:53 +0100
Subject: DR (was premiere photos)
References: <9s6n1i+mvt7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003201c167b0$6e235980$8d7e06d5@oemcomputer>

> > I'm staring at the premiere photographs
> Where? I only have 56k so the webcast's no good-where'd you find
> stills?

Actually I just did a search in Yahoo which had the photographs listed with
other premiere articles.

Oh, and I managed to grab avout 20 minutes of snippets on different
TV-channels - and I think Daniel is sooo gorgeous! He should really look out
cause he's going to have teen-girls flodding after him in no time.

And I love his voice - I really hope they'll just stick to it in CoS beacuse
it would be a real shame to dub him.

D**


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




From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  7 17:24:15 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 18:24:15 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lots of stuff about Radcliffe, and a bit on Felton.
References: <5b.1e2bc9c6.29183980@aol.com>
Message-ID: <003801c167b1$0784caa0$8d7e06d5@oemcomputer>

Sara wrote (respectfully snipped):
> Anyone else think he bears a striking resemblance to a young Elijah Wood?
(...)
> Am also confused as to why I'm finding a 12 year old boy attractive (in
other
> words, ditto on the hunk to be comment :o))

Isn't it awkward? I mean, I turned 20 last month and I sit on my couch,
finding a 12 year old very attractive and thinking to myself: "If they stick
to him I'm never going to last through Prisoner of Azkaban without a
hormone-shock" <g> Let's just not think about the movies for books 6&7

And he did remind me of Elijah Wood, who I found very sexy in all the
trailers and interviews I saw him do for LOTR - which made me freak out
cause I never found him *that* good. (Wasn't he in one of the "Neverending
Story" Sequels? Apart from the movie being horrendous he didn't really
strike a cord with me, either).

D**



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




From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Wed Nov  7 18:29:30 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 18:29:30 +0000
Subject: [SPOILERS!] Rather less rushed movie review
Message-ID: <qXU2tZYK2X67EwwM@dickson.demon.co.uk>

I'm back from the Scottish Charity Gala Premiere now. Many, many thanks
to all the Magical Mods for dealing valiantly with my very rushed notes
last night; the backstory there is that I typed them out on a draughty
payphone with primitive e-mail facilities relying on a tiny little metal
keyboard and the most rudimentary of editing facilities. The screen had
been deliberately chipped and partially shattered by vandals, so it was
difficult in places to tell what you had actually typed.

Another problem is that your 20p got you just seven minutes of e-mail
typing time, so I ended up sending four separate short messages. (In
fact, on one message I overstepped the seven-minute limit and it
discarded everything I had typed. Sigh...) Definitely conducive to
typing in a mad rush and aiming for quantity rather than quality. Penny,
did all four sections arrive properly?

However, I'm now back at a proper computer and so can take my time over
a fuller review of the movie, from a fan's eye view . I'll send thoughts
upon the event, rather than the movie, in a separate message. (Mods,
would it be OK if I uploaded some photos to the Photos area of the
Yahoogroup?)

If you'd care to enter the potential spoiler zone, I'll see you down
below:

Y
O
U

O
N
L
Y

L
I
V
E

O
N
C
E

S
O

M
A
K
E

T
H
E

M
O
S
T

O
F

I
T

We live in a world where economics is hard. This forces practical
limitations when making a movie. The "infinite time" and "infinite
money" cheat modes don't exist, cinema owners need to be pleased as well
as existing Potter fans and computer animation ain't perfect. Given
these limitations, this film is about as close to human perfection as it
is possible to achieve. However, seeing the film makes it extremely
clear what an immense challenge it is to turn Philosopher's Stone from
book to film and why JKR was so reluctant about the propspect in the
first place.

Two and a half hours is not a lot of time to get through a wealth of
highlights. On top of the story, the directors have bowed to the
inevitable temptation to show us more of the Potterverse that cannot be
communicated so effectively in a book. (Don't panic - this isn't a bad
thing!) The consequence is the feeling of a slightly breathless sprint
in places.

It also means that the movie has to stay true to the spirit of the book
rather than to the letter of it. There are omissions and there are
changes. (The list at The Dark Mark looked pretty accurate, though the
value judgements therein are a matter of taste.) To have played the
entire story out, scene for scene and exchange for exchange, could
comfortably have filled five or six hours. (But, hey, what hours they
would have been!)

The changes that were made capture and maintain the spirit of the book
better than I had thought possible; indeed, there are places where the
story is more clearly and straightforwardly told in the movie than in
the book. Some aspects of the story are fleshed out on screen and the
additions are delightful, completely in keeping with the flavour of the
world. Maybe there may be more deleted JKR scenes in the script than at
first we thought?

The humour of the movie is inevitably more visual than that of the book.
There aren't any "belly laugh" lines, but you'll get a lot of smiles.
Some of the punchlines have changed, but the reasons why the jokes are
funny remain the same. Not knowing exactly what's coming next is a good
thing! It's all kept tasteful, classy and above the belt; there's
nothing to cringe about, which is a huge commendation in itself.

The voice acting is almost uniformly first class. There are a few
occasions where some of the actors are required to convey high emotions
and are only given a second or two of face shot, or head-and-shoulders
shot, to do so. This isn't as much freedom as they need and they fall a
little short, which jerks your suspension of disbelief. The blame here
must fall on the decision to give the actors too much to do in too
little screen time, not on the actors themselves. It reminds you of the
difference between watching people act and watching people pretend.

Other than these rare jarring instances, the physical acting is
frequently excellent and seldom less than completely adequate - and
adequacy here is set against the highest of targets, given that we know
what emotions are intended and required from the book. This must always
be a problem with conversions from book to screen.

Dan Radcliffe has the look, the mannerisms and the charm of Harry down
pat. His strongest expresisons are the bemusement that must be inherent
at entering a world where science does not rule alone and the bravery
that Harry shows to achieve all he does. In a sense, the movie Harry is
a more realistic bundle of emotions than the book Harry. However, more
is asked of him than any other actor and so there are more occasions
where he is required to do the impossible in a single brief shot than
for anyone else.

Emma Watson possibly errs slightly on the side of overplaying Hermione,
but does so in a fully endearing fashion. She can't fully express the
panic required in her predicament in the mountain troll scene but
otherwise there isn't a single thing that needs to be changed about her
performance.

Among Harry's year, Rupert Grint has comic timing way beyond his years;
he hits his lines perfectly. Tom Felton does everything that is required
of the book's Draco with style and aplomb. Matt Lewis is asked to show
the bumbling side of Neville frequently and the brave side only once at
the end; the Neville character really isn't developed as strongly in the
film as it is in the book, so the finale does come as a bit of a
characterisation shock.

The Phelps brothers' Fred and George are distinctively cheeky rather
than proactive pranksters - there's definitely a lot more to come there.
Chris Rankin really gets into the character of Percy with genuine
authority. Sean Biggerstaff stands out positively; the movie's Oliver
Wood is likeable, the sort of person you really would like to captain
your Quidditch team.

Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid (incidentally, we learn that the first syllable
rhymes with flag; did anyone else use to pronounce his name "Hay-grid"?
OK, just me) is the single dominant adult character; Robbie extracts
maximum laughs with every step. The movie changes strongly exaggerate
one side of Hagrid's nature, though, which is probably inevitable
considering how much plot exposition his character has.

David Bradley's Argus Filch makes a bigger impact in the movie than he
did in the book, but the acting is really appropriately vicious. John
Hurt's Ollivander is an eccentric treat - a wonderful introduction as
the first really powerful (that is, not Hagrid) wizard we see.

The professors are uniformly excellent, though Richard Harris'
Dumbledore comes off as disappointingly flat until he gets his chance to
shine at the end. What a pleasant surprise his character will be for
people who see the film first and then get to enjoy the book later!

The most ambitious point of the movie is the computer generated imagery.
The still items are wonderful, the animation of fast-moving ones is only
as good as the technology of today will permit. There are a lot of
stringent demands made of the CGI by the book; sometimes their overall
effect in the movie is merely good rather than insanely great. Some of
the magic spells and effects look awesome; others don't capture the
imagination nearly so much. However, they do look better than they have
done in the trailers.

The world cannot yet completely convincingly animate human beings doing
inhuman things, which serves as a clear reminder that the magic required
to make the impossible possible is restricted to fiction alone. The
Quidditch scene is the most demanding of them all; while the sequence is
action-packed and good-looking, disappointingly, I can't find it a total
success. Perhaps some of the scenes would have been better with more
conventional special effects? (For instance, the Sorting Hat scene looks
very low-tech but is one of the most delightful of them all.)

The set looks gorgeous - more convincing than it has appeared on the
production stills we've seen so far. However, it may not stand up to
detailed analysis. For instance, if you've ever been to Alnwick Castle
then a lot of scenes will have you thinking "Oh, there they are outside
Alnwick Castle" rather than having you pondering about where they are in
relation to the 142 staircases of Hogwarts. (The solution is simple:
don't visit Alnwick Castle. Really!) It's fairly obvious that things are
shot in many disparate locations, rather than one big Hogwarts School,
Hogsmeade.

The score is absolutely wonderful. It's possible to criticise the
soundtrack that it relies too heavily on The Famous Bit over and over
again, but it's clear that the balance and mixture of things in the
finished movie are exactly right. The overall effect is beautiful to
listen to. It may even be worth staying until the end of the credits -
not because there are any out-takes, crazy credits, cryptic messages or
the like, but just to get to listen to the soundtrack's last two tracks
played on the big speakers.

Animals play a smaller role in the movie than in the book, by obvious
necessity. However, their selection has been ideal as the overall effect
is to create just the right feel.

Indeed, the feel of the whole movie is everything we could have hoped
for. The dialogue is intensely measured, the colouring is suitably epic,
the selection of what to leave in is really tightly considered. You get
chills in your spine at the right places, you feel the triumphs in their
full glory as swelling, all-encompassing endorphin highs. It's clear
that the people who've made the decisions have thought long, hard and
lovingly. They are true fans of the story, they are the right people for
the job, they are worth putting your hope and trust in for the second
film.

So it could never have been the film that the hyper-literalists were
hoping for, then, but it is as good as the practicalities of the real
world could possibly permit. Don't expect miracles and you'll come out
with a huge smile over your face. I look forward to coming out of the
Philosopher's Stone cinema with a huge smile on my face again and again.

Eight and a half out of ten. A really satisfactory film!




All the best,
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Nov  7 13:50:00 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:50:00 EST5EDT
Subject: trailers on Harry Potter
Message-ID: <F04DD7664F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I just read that the trailer for Scooby-Doo will be with 
the Harry movie.  That and Star Wars (Woo-hoo!  Ewan 
McGregor and Harry in one night!).

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu  Wed Nov  7 20:35:12 2001
From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 20:35:12 -0000
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw!
In-Reply-To: <D4FF192C7F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9sc5u0+k0a8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and really REALLY
> liking it.  Especially tracks 2 and 18.  My only bit of
> criticism (and I sure as hell am in no position to be
> criticizing the great John Williams except as a fan) is
> that some of it sounds like the Hook soundtrack.  But, in
> the scheme of things.....who cares!  :-)
>

I'm so glad someone else drew that parallel. The first time I heard
Hedwig's theme I thought it sounded a lot like Tinkerbell's in Hook!

I continually point out to friends in movies when trailers use music
that isn't original, and usually what it's from. Glad to hear I'm not
alone!

Gwen
 (who is going to a midnight show on opening day because that's the
earliest her boyfriend can join her, and she promised he could see it
when she sees it the first time)




From SALeathem at aol.com  Wed Nov  7 21:19:00 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:19:00 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] No more Dan?
Message-ID: <47.1385d256.291aff44@aol.com>

In a message dated 07/11/2001 01:32:22 GMT Standard Time, becky at mackenab.com 
writes:

<< So, this is a bit early but...
 All of the interviews that I've come across have blatently mentioned 
 both physical changes and the fact that the actors have only signed 
 on for 2 movies.  I have several questions a- after watching the 
 movie do any of us think we could really accept another actor in the 
 lead roles>>  

That worries me the most. To me, even though I've not seen the full movie 
yet, Dan *is* Harry. No one else imo could be Harry. I think Chris Colombus 
feels the same going by how many boys he saw yet he still wanted the kid he 
saw in David Copperfield and wouldn't stop till he'd persuaded his parents. 
Also JKR she's said that she'd like to adopt Dan, it was like meeting her 
long lost son etc.. It just all works. 

Re: physical changes. I really dont see why this is a problem, a bit like the 
whole voice breaking thing. In the books HRH & everyone else ages naturally 
each year. While there's no specific reference to when and how and what 
exactly happens to them as they go through puberty, it's pretty safe to 
assume they don't remain entirely the same as they did when they were 11. I 
also see no reason to any of the details of their adolescents (I mean the 
whole biology side of it) to be in the books. These aren't high school sex 
ed. novels after all.

<< and b- would any parent let their children work the long 
 hours inherent with a making a movie for multiple years? >>

Who knows. They're in the Independent again today and boy do they all look 
knackered. Dan's got a smile reminiscent of an 18 month old, but his eyes 
have huge bags under them, while Emma & Rupert look like they're nodding off.

<<c- would any 
 child be willing to put up with hours for 7 years (assuming all the 
 books are done) and finally >> 

Chris Colombus has said that he has the layouts reading for the next 3 films 
- CoS & 2 for GoF. So it'll be 8 years in total, assuming they rattle on at 
the pace they have been. If they have to replace actors etc. it's gonna take 
longer. Which raises a new question - will we as the fans be able to sustain 
our Harry mania for another 8 years? Yeah we're all *really* into him now, 
but how do we know we'll feel exactly the same in 8 years? And what if the 
book has a really sad ending? It might be too traumatic for us all to go and 
see the film versions. 

<<d- will these kids ever be able to break 
 out of these roles once they stop playing Harry, Ron, etc? >>

Hmm... In theory they should be able to. It's not so much could they go and 
play someone else, I think it's more will we/the public & press let them go 
and play someone else, or will they forever be HRH? Also, whose to say after 
8 years as the same people (if they all keep their roles) they'll want to 
act. In one magazine it says the running joke on set is "wants Dan going to 
be today?" in reference to his ever changing list of future jobs - stunt man, 
director, scriptwriter, make up artist/sfx person, director of photography, 
agents, editors, etc etc. At the moment he doesn't see hell bent on always 
being an actor. As for Emma & Rupert, they've never acted before, so again, 
they might not want to stay and do that. 

Sara



From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  7 22:04:26 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 22:04:26 -0000
Subject: No more Dan?
In-Reply-To: <9sad3q+kiu1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9scb5a+9qee@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nlpnt at y... wrote:

> My opinion; the kids have the jobs for as long as they want 'em- if 
> they're replaced it'll be because either they want out or their 
> parents want them out. Columbus and WB aren't going to mess with 
> success.
 
While I want this to be true, I think it's a good idea for us all to 
ask ourselves this question:  When's the last time Michael Keaton 
made a Batman movie?

That said, it could work to find other actors if it were ABSOLUTELY 
NECESSARY.  My greatest disappointment would be if Rupert were 
replaced; what I've seen in the trailers already gives me great hope 
that he'll do a wonderful job.  (And I've peeked at Chris' review.)

--Barb





From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Wed Nov  7 22:40:12 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 17:40:12 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] [SPOILERS!] Rather less rushed movie review
Message-ID: <13d.41f1121.291b124c@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/7/2001 1:37:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
chris at dickson.demon.co.uk writes:

<< . For instance, if you've ever been to Alnwick Castle
 then a lot of scenes will have you thinking "Oh, there they are outside
 Alnwick Castle" rather than having you pondering about where they are in
 relation to the 142 staircases of Hogwarts. ( >>

the only moment I've been glad that I've never been to Alnwick Castle!

Susan



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Nov  7 17:42:48 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 17:42:48 EST5EDT
Subject: Yay!
Message-ID: <F42F8E644A@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I just ordered my tickets for the 16th.  I had to get 9:45 
for the evening shows because the early evening is already 
sold out.  But I also got tickets for the noon show. GAH!  
I'm so excited that I keep giggling out of the blue. 

Wish I had thought about getting even later than 
9:45....less kids.  Then again, when we went to see The 
Lion King the weekend it opened we went really late (after 
11:00) and the place was CRAWLING with kids.  I just looked 
around in awe and said "When I was your age, I was already 
in bed asleep at this time of night!"  :-)

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  7 22:48:54 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 22:48:54 -0000
Subject: I'm here! And the soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9sa5gv+8l5q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9scdom+6bo0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:
Soundtrack analysis snipped

> I think he did a good job.

I disagree.
I found the soundtrack to be run of the mill. It totally lacked the 
distinctive character of Schindlers list, and frankly sounded like 
a "just another day at the office" job for JW.

It had fast moving music, slow moving music and had spooky bits, and 
exciting bits. But it lacked any originality. I could have been any 
of a hundred movie soundtracks.


Dai




From djtarb at aol.com  Wed Nov  7 23:38:58 2001
From: djtarb at aol.com (djtarb at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 18:38:58 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Yeeee-haaaaaw!
Message-ID: <b8.1dfb0b33.291b2013@aol.com>

In a message dated Tue, 6 Nov 2001  4:54:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, Schlobin1 at aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 11/6/2001 10:35:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> bray.262 at osu.edu writes:
> 
> << Anyone else taking half a day off from work next Friday?  >>
> 
> You bet! Me! Then I'm going again on Saturday, taking my four year 
> old......who can't wait to see Harry Powder...
> 
> Susan
> 
So am I, to go with my best friend and her 16-year-old daughter (who is in a play that evening).  Lizzie was so disappointed that she couldn't go to see the film "with Diane" that I decided to take the afternoon off and go with them.  It made me feel great that she wanted to do this with middle-aged me!  So I'm seeing it in the afternoon with them and in the evening with all my other friends.  Then, on Sunday, we're taking our church's middle school youth group.  It's going to be a great week-end!

Diane in Philly



From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  8 03:22:51 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 03:22:51 -0000
Subject: Willpower!
Message-ID: <9sctqb+ugn1@eGroups.com>

Well, I have my tickets for the 16th--I'll be going to the 7:50 p.m. 
show at the Star Fairlane theaters (in the shadow of Ford World 
Headquarters) with my two sisters, a couple of teachers, one of the 
teachers' families, and a growing number of my students.

I am SO tempted to call in that day, but I have a test scheduled 
on "The Two Great Gods of Earth" (we're reading Edith Hamilton's 
*Mythology* before we delve into Shaw's *Pygmalion*) and come hell or 
high water, my freshmen *will* have their test.  I never trust subs 
to administer exams--my classroom has the same bolted-down desks that 
have been there since 1919 (seriously) and they're bolterd in pairs.

So alas, no daytime Friday Harry for me.  While you guys are all 
watching the movie during the quiet afternoon shows, I'll be 
dictating multiple-choice questions.  And THEN we'll be at the 7:50 
show... the absolute worst show to go to at ANY Detroit-area theatre 
on ANY opening night.  I can only pray that people leave their babies 
at home... but they won't.  Now, no one loves little kids more than 
me, but this must be said.  Babies and tiny tots ruined *The Prince 
of Egypt*, *The Road To Eldorado* and *Tarzan* for me by crying and 
running up and down the aisles during the movie screaming and 
laughing and playing.  I don't blame the kids; I blame inconsiderate 
parents.  Some pre-preschool aged kids can sit through features and 
plays well (winks at Heidi) but others ought to be left home.

What I'll most likely do is drag baby sis to either the earliest 
Saturday afternoon show or the latest Saturday night show.  I want to 
take notes the second time around in a more peaceful environment.  ;-)

--Eb (counting down--8 days!  Whee!)




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Thu Nov  8 03:46:04 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 22:46:04 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Marketing of HP Movie
Message-ID: <103.bc13742.291b59fc@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/7/2001 9:06:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cynthiaanncoe at home.com writes:

<< Has anyone else noticed the HP marketing is a bit subdued?  It's not 
 a bad thing, I suppose, but it struck me as unusual.  Maybe they 
 spent the marketing budget on special effects.
 
 Cindy  >>

All praise to HP and JKR if the marketing is subdued! Enough junk!



From potterlovingash at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  8 04:55:21 2001
From: potterlovingash at hotmail.com (Ashley Kelly)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 04:55:21 -0000
Subject: I'm here! And the soundtrack
In-Reply-To: <9scdom+6bo0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sd37p+e9m2@eGroups.com>

Dai said:
> It had fast moving music, slow moving music and had spooky bits, 
and 
> exciting bits. But it lacked any originality. I could have been any 
> of a hundred movie soundtracks.


I completely disagree. I love the soundtrack, I have been listening 
non-stop. The brilliance of film scores is that you can hear the 
story in the music, and I can do that with this score. Before I saw 
the film this evening, I had already pinpointed where the theme for 
the Mirror of Erised comes in (I love it)
Now I can also hear other details of the story in the music, for 
instance, the flourish every time the Invisibility Cloak is taken 
off. It's like watching the film blindfolded and with no dialogue. 
Ah, music.

Also, I have been collecting JW movie scores since I was a little 
kid. They are always my backround music to writing my papers and 
inspired me to play the cello.

Have a good evening all,

Ashley (potterlovingash)




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 06:41:04 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 06:41:04 -0000
Subject: Stills from CoS movie...
Message-ID: <9sd9e0+ol5j@eGroups.com>

http://www.hpgalleries.com/mgallery2-3.htm

The flying Anglia outside Hagrid's hut- interestingly (to me!) , it's 
a top-of-the-line 1200cc Super (note the two-tone paint) while most 
of the illustrations that featured it show a plainer Deluxe.

Ron and Harry in the Forbidden Forest- yup, Dan's taller than 
Rupert...




From aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Nov  8 15:15:05 2001
From: aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk (Aleks)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 15:15:05 -0000
Subject: Yeeee-haaaaaw!
In-Reply-To: <b8.1dfb0b33.291b2013@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9se7hp+cb8s@eGroups.com>

> > In a message dated 11/6/2001 10:35:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> > bray.262 at o... writes:
> > 
> > << Anyone else taking half a day off from work next Friday?  >>
> > 

Nope, I've got tickets to see the advance preview this Saturday at 
7.15pm. Jealous anyone?  And then I'm going in costume after the 
official release with other members from my 'Sci-fi and Fantasy 
Society.'

Aleks




From MmeBurgess at msn.com  Thu Nov  8 15:32:59 2001
From: MmeBurgess at msn.com (Angela Burgess)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:32:59 -0500
Subject: Tickets
Message-ID: <OE112vjkO22ZhCl8aii0002951f@hotmail.com>

I have tickets right now to a 10:10PM showing Friday with my husband and then again for Saturday afternoon with a group of my students that keeps growing...but I'm seriously considering calling in on Friday and going to see it by myself at the 10AM showing.  My husband would KILL me if he ever found out, but I'm really worried about seeing it the first time with people who have read the books.  I think that there is a *very* strong possibility that I'll talk the entire time.

On the flip side of that, I could be more inclined to talk after getting over the excitement of seeing the WW on screen for the first time.   

I don't know...it's such a tough decision!

AngelaGet more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011108/b0099e93/attachment.html>

From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 18:37:45 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 18:37:45 -0000
Subject: New Brains Trust article...
Message-ID: <9sejdp+kjv1@eGroups.com>

http://www.thebrainstrust.co.uk/article.20.2053.html




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Thu Nov  8 21:45:14 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 21:45:14 -0000
Subject: Tickets
In-Reply-To: <OE112vjkO22ZhCl8aii0002951f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9seuda+10cat@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Angela Burgess" <MmeBurgess at m...> wrote:
> I have tickets right now to a 10:10PM showing Friday with my 
husband and then again for Saturday afternoon with a group of my 
students that keeps growing...but I'm seriously considering calling 
in on Friday and going to see it by myself at the 10AM showing.  My 
husband would KILL me if he ever found out, but I'm really worried 
about seeing it the first time with people who have read the books.  
I think that there is a *very* strong possibility that I'll talk the 
entire time.

Oh, resist the temptation!  I know exactly how you feel, but your 
students need you!

You know, I'm not so sure that I want to see the movie on the 16th 
anymore.  And I haven't entered any of the 1001 contests around here 
for the previews.  (Yes, I am slightly insane.)  There's no time like 
the first time IMHO--once you've seen the movie, you can't unsee it 
and go through the awe and wonder of seeing it for the first time.  
In nearly two years of fandom, there's been nothing quite like 
discovering the books all in one winter's weekend and *certainly* 
nothing like that enchanted July 2000 week I spent reading GoF and at 
the end of it finding grownups online who loved HP as much as I did.  
Yes, fandom is fun, but there is nothing quite like innocence and 
discovery.  (Hmm--guess that's why I teach, huh?  ;-))  

Eight days and three hours from now I'll be sitting in the theatre 
anyway.  Nine days from now I'll be wanting Book 5 more than ever... 
because it'll be the Next Big Thing to look forward to.  Know what I 
mean?

--Ebony AKA AngieJ




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Thu Nov  8 22:02:06 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:02:06 EST
Subject: disappointed
Message-ID: <c6.163ba0a.291c5ade@aol.com>

well, I am terribly disappointed about the fact that Richard Harris is 
reported to be lacklustre as Dumbledore, because of course, Albus Dumbledore 
is my favorite character, although I dream of playing Arabella Figg in a 
movie.

MY own five year old big beautiful gold cat became suddenly ill (from a 
genetic heart defect) last Friday night and we had to help him die on 
Saturday. I am totally depressed, and can't even get very excited about the 
movie.

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Thu Nov  8 22:03:13 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:03:13 EST
Subject: kids
Message-ID: <b9.166bed2d.291c5b21@aol.com>

But why does everyone persist in saying kids of all ages? Do they think these 
books/movies are for children? I don't get it.....

Susan



From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 23:17:26 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 23:17:26 -0000
Subject: No more Dan?
In-Reply-To: <9sa2rh+gc3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sf3q6+e5on@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., becky at m... wrote:
> So, this is a bit early but...
> All of the interviews that I've come across have blatently 
mentioned 
> both physical changes and the fact that the actors have only signed 
> on for 2 movies.  I have several questions a- after watching the 
> movie do any of us think we could really accept another actor in 
the 
> lead roles and b- would any parent let their children work the long 
> hours inherent with a making a movie for multiple years? c- would 
any 
> child be willing to put up with hours for 7 years (assuming all the 
> books are done) and finally d- will these kids ever be able to 
break 
> out of these roles once they stop playing Harry, Ron, etc?

----

When I interviewed the producers they said they have "no intention of 
keeping the same cast past movie three." Make of that what you will; 
possibly it means nothing.

CC




From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 23:23:25 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 23:23:25 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
Message-ID: <9sf45d+dpi6@eGroups.com>


This is an almost scene - by -scene commentary on the film, so if you 
don't want to know...don't read it. I saw it yesterday in NYC at a 
press screening, so...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E

It is very hard to judge this movie objectively. As a passionate fan 
of the books, every detail and every word are ingrained into my 
memory, and simply seeing them brought to life in a film is such a 
thrilling feeling that it's hard to look past the initial giddiness 
to really ascertain whether the movie is a good one or not. My 
initial opinion: It is a good movie, but not a great one. Scenes and 
subplots have been cut from the books, resulting in scenes that are 
unexplained, or plots that seem to go nowhere. The following is a 
mixture of review and flat-out spoilage. Read ahead at your own risk.

The film opens with a tracking shot that brings us to a sign 
reading "Privet Drive." We see Albus Dumbledore walking through a 
grove of trees and meeting McGonagall in front of the Dursleys' 
house. It is honestly rather odd to see these two robed and hatted 
individuals standing in the middle of a suburban Surrey street. 
Hagrid arrives on the good old flying motorcycle, although mention of 
Sirius Black is omitted. He delivers baby Harry, who Dumbledore lays 
at the Dursleys front door wrapped in a plaid blanket with a letter 
addressed the the Dursleys laid across him. We get a brief shot of 
the baby's sleeping face and the nasty, vicious cut along the side of 
his forehead.

Fast-forward ten years, and Petunia is waking Harry up for their trip 
to the zoo. Dudley apparently has a habit of jumping up and down on 
the stairs to wake up Harry. Thefilmmakers have wisely chosen to give 
us only a very little bit of the Dursleys, rightly reckoning that a 
little Dursley goes a long way. The zoo trip is perfectly fine -- 
Harry is adorable in Dudley's huge clothes, and his bonding moment 
with the snake is actually charming. No, we do not get to hear what 
Parselmouth sounds like. Harry appears to be speaking English, and so 
does the snake. When the glass vanishes, Dudley falls into the snake 
cage, only to have the glass seal up behind him, trapping him inside. 
Amusing, if non-canonical, moment.

A shout out of appreciation to Fiona Shaw and Richard Griffiths who 
play Petunia and Vernon. (Harry Mellings plays Dudley off as a 
caricature, which I suppose he is.) Shaw especially has a fine moment 
once Hagrid arrives at the Hut on the Rock and Harry accuses his aunt 
and uncle of concealing the truth about his parents from him. 
Petunia's evident loathing of her sister and her "abnormality" is 
fierce and even a mite creepy.

>From the hut, the film moves on to its first big set piece: Diagon 
Alley. (a passing mention of the Leaky Cauldron scene -- the moment 
where Hagrid announces that this is little Harry Potter he has with 
him and the whole tavern goes dead quiet sent shivers up my spine.) 
Diagon Alley, I am happy to say, has a distinctly dark, Dickensian 
feel. Bats hang from rafters, the Daily Prophet sign swings in the 
wind, Ollivander's wand shop proclaims that they are fine 
wandmakers "since 320 BC." The busy, chaotic, dusty street feels just 
right: when Harry passed a shop around which a bunch of children had 
gathered to ooh the new Nimbus 2000, Ashley and I bounced in glee.

The scene in Ollivander's shop is another hero-moment for Harry. The 
first two wands he selects wreak havoc on the little shop; we switch 
briefly to Ollivander's POV while he hunts for the "right" wand. When 
he tells Harry that the brother of the wand he's chosen "gave you 
that scar," Harry touches his forehead -- it is one of a very few 
glimpses of the scar we get during the film.

Of course, this leads Harry to the conversation with Hagrid in which 
Hagrid tells Harry about his parents. Interestingly, the death of 
Harry's parents is done as a flashback. We SEE Voldemort walking up 
the stairs of the Potters' home. We see Lily, a pretty redhead in 
jeans and a sweater, putting baby Harry down in his crib before she 
walks out of the room and is rapidly Avada Kedavrad to death by 
Voldie, who then trains his wand right between baby Harry's eyes.

Cut back to Hagrid, who finishes his tale. There is an odd lack of 
emotion in this scene. When Hagrid tells Harry "You're the Boy 
Who...Lived!" Harry just looks poleaxed. Ah well. I suppose anyone 
would.

We cut to King's Cross station, where Hagrid hands Harry a ticket for 
the Hogwarts Express. (That's right...a ticket.) King's Cross is a 
big moment because of course, here we meet...The Weasleys! George and 
Fred toss off their one-liners with flair (Woman, you call yourself 
our mother?) Ginny looks more like seven years old than ten to me, 
but H/G shippers will be pleased to know she speaks to Harry. She 
says, "Good luck." They may not be so pleased by Harry's reaction: he 
ignores her. We get brief glimpses of Percy in this scene (he's the 
first through the barrier) and Ashley claims she saw Neville and his 
grandma, although I missed that. 

The train scene was the first scene that really made me squeak in 
glee. The Hogarts Express is a gorgous train --we've all seen it, it 
looks like a red jellybean. Ron comes to sit with Harry since all the 
other seats "are taken" and his bug-eyed stare on being told who his 
compartment companion actually is made me warm up to Rupert. Harry 
buys out the candy cart and the boys are soon knee-deep in chocolate 
frogs (Harry's hops out the window) and Scabbers is soon wearing a 
candy box hat. Hermione arrives looking for Neville's toad, takes one 
look at Harry, and exclaims, "Harry Potter! So it's true!" She plonks 
herself down across from Harry, takes off his glasses, and repairs 
them with a handy spell (Oculus reparus!) She introduces herself to 
Harry. Hermione then observes Ron as if he were a dung beetle. 
H: "And who are YOU?"
R: Ron Weasley.
H: A pleasure, I'm sure. (Heavy on the sarcasm.) Hermione then 
flounces to the door, turns, and tells Ron: You have dirt on your 
nose. Right...there!

My inner H/H shipper was charmed by the glasses business.  

As reported, Draco's scene with Harry in the robe shop and the "train 
scene" are cruelly excised. He is left to introduce himself to Harry 
right before the Sorting Ceremony. "Malfoy. Draco Malfoy." Ron quite 
rightly laughs at this, and Draco shoots him a death glare, pulled 
off very well by Tom Felton, who carries off the Malfoy smirk with 
panache. Tom is a gorgous little boy, with huge blue-gray eyes and a 
snub nose, and if he grows up as cute as he currently is, they are 
going to have big problems trying to get people to keep hating Draco. 
But I digress.

The Sorting Ceremony left something to be desired. Only five students 
are sorted: Susan Bones, Hermione, Ron, Harry, and Draco. There is no 
indication that things are done in alphabetical order and it is 
unclear while Harry has the hat on his head whether everyone can hear 
what it is saying to him, or if only Harry can. Also, no Sorting Hat 
song. This is the first time we see Snape, who looks very much the 
part. Ron is also given Hagrid's line, "There was never a wizard went 
bad who wasn't in Slytherin." 

Side note: I've heard complaints about Daniel's acting, but I don't 
see it. Little Dan has the perfect face to be Harry -- transparent as 
a window pane, showing everything he feels, somehow managing to 
express both momentary joy and the everpresent knowledge of a wounded 
and sorrowful past. My personal problem is that, while Daniel is a 
beautiful little boy, and has lovely eyes, they are a stunning shade 
of...BLUE. Hello? Ashley and I surmised that we might be seeing an 
early print without the green CGI'd in.






From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 23:24:59 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 23:24:59 -0000
Subject: Movie part 2
Message-ID: <9sf48b+anul@eGroups.com>


S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E







Ah, almost forgot. As Hermione heads up the stairs to the Sorting 
Hat, she mutters to herself under her breath to kleep herself from 
being frightened. Ron shakes his head at Harry. "Mental, that one 
is!" Once sorted, Hermione races to sit beside Percy.

After the sorting, we follow Percy (I have forever been cured of any 
inclinations towards Percy/Neville by this film...they look revolting 
together) and the Gryffindors through Hogwarts to the Gryffindor 
Tower. Hogwarts is .. huge. There's an overhead tracking shot of 
staircases that seem to spin up into infinity. The potraits do move, 
and there are dozens of them. The Gryffindor Common Room looks just 
right: all dark deep reds and golds, a fire in the grate, and 
decorated with the Unicorn Hunt tapestries. The password is "Corpus 
Draconis."

We then have a shot of Harry alone in the moonlight, sitting in the 
window of his dormitory. He looks wistful, even cautiously happy. 
(The keen eyed will notice a Chudley Cannons poster on the wall.) 
John Williams' "Harry Theme" plays under this scene which is, all in 
all, very moving.

The next day Harry and Ron are late for class, and McGonagall 
threatens to transfigure them into pocket watches so that they'll be 
on time. Draco looks pleased, and Hermione looks disgusted.

Cut to Potions Class. Snape has an excellent entrance -- the door 
slams open and he strides in at top speed, swishing black robes 
behind him. He gives his Potions speech and he and Draco make some 
meaningful eye contact. His ribbing of Harry is pretty excellent; too 
bad that's just about all we see of it for the whole film.

Seamus' character is never quite fleshed out. He seems to be terrible 
at spells -- he tries to turn his water (water?) into rum at the 
table at lunch, but blows off his eyebrows instead. Questions: 
alcohol? At his age? And water? What about pumpkin juice? Seamus 
seems to be around for comic relief, since he keeps blowing things 
up, but as Ashley pointed out, it wasn't very funny. Alas. In the 
same scene, Neville gets his remembrall, which looks like a clear 
Magic 8 ball with red mist inside.

And next we have flying lessons. The kids line up in rows facing each 
other while Madam Hooch gives orders. Her eyes are bright yellow with 
slitted cat pupils -- what's up with that? When she instructs them 
all to say "Up!" Harry's broom flies into his hands. So does Draco's. 
Everyone else is not so lucky. Hermione's does nothing, and Ron's 
flies up and cracks him a good one across the face. Harry laughs at 
Ron, who snaps "Shut UP, Harry!"

The midair fight between Harry and Draco is brilliant and I don't 
just say that because they're my favorite characters. When Draco 
rockets up into the air and Harry shoots up after him, you get a 
sense of the scope and power of flying. Draco does fly well, *very* 
well -- when Harry lunges at him he executes a spinning 360 around 
his broom, I was pleased to see. I always suspected he flew well in 
canon.  Harry's mad dash after the Remembrall is also fantastic. 
Hermione's pronouncement on Harry's antics: "What an idiot."

It's nice to see Oliver Wood in this scene, when McGonagall fetches 
him. Turns out he's Scottish. Sean Biggerstaff is quite cute, too. My 
notes say "gorgeous." Well well.

This is followed by a very interesting scene in the Hogwarts 
courtyard, in which Harry expressed to Ron his fear that he will not 
be a good seeker and will "make a fool of myself." Hermione, 
overhearing, comes bounding over. "Harry, you won't make a fool of 
yourself. You'll be great - it's in your blood." She leads him over 
to a glass trophy case, in which is a brass plaque engraved with 
JAMES POTTER GRYFFINDOR SEEKER 1972.

Seeker???????

I think this proves it is a big waste of time paying a lot of 
attention to chat scripts.

I was amused that Hermione seems to know this about Harry's dad. Must 
have been in Hogwarts A History. 








From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  8 23:26:12 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 23:26:12 -0000
Subject: Part 3
Message-ID: <9sf4ak+p732@eGroups.com>

s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e








The scene in which Oliver teaches Harry about Quidditch is notable 
mainly for closeup looks at the Snitch and the Quidditch pitch, which 
is a little hard to make out exactly. You can see the hoops in the 
air and the obviously CGI'd tall, candy-colored towers that have 
replaced stadium seats. Harry also gives a Bludger a fair whack, and 
Oliver tells him that he would have made a good Beater.

In Flitwick's class, Seamus blows his feather up during 
the "wingardium leviosa" spell. Sigh. A nice moment for Emma Watson 
who shows off her levitating abilities in front of Ron, who later 
makes his "she's a nightmare" speech outside class. Hermione runs off 
in tears.

The scene in which Quirrel runs in to announce the troll attack is 
actually fairly funny. The troll fight follows canon fairly closely --
 Harry is the one to remind Ron that "Hermione doesn't know!" about 
the troll, and the boys go bolting back to engage in what is actually 
a pretty stirring battle sequence with a fairly unrealistic-looking 
troll. McGonagall has a very funny moment where she awards the boys 
100 points for "sheer, dumb luck."

When Harry's Nimbus 2000 arrives in the mail, McGonagall winks at 
him, making it clear that she is the one who gave it to him. 

And then we have Quidditch. I've heard the complaint that the 
Quidditch scenes seem CGI'd and they do, but given the state of 
current effects technology I doubt they could have done much better. 
The notable thing about the game is that it is *FAST*. The players 
whip past each other at unbelievable-looking speeds and the sound is 
*loud.* Maybe a little too loud; it's distracting. The Slytherin team 
seems to win by simply pounding the other team into unconsciousness --
 both Oliver and Angelina Johnson get knocked off their brooms and 
land on the sand-covered pitch. It leaves one to wonder why the 
refereers are not interfering. Lee Jordan's commentary is good, as is 
Hermione's little scene where she sets Snape's robes on fire. Marcus 
Flint has apparently never been to a dentist, although there is one 
cute Slytherin boy. And there is a girl on the Slytherin team -- I 
always thought it was all boys? 

Best of all is the moment where Harry catches the Snitch and wins the 
game - Daniel is excellent at looking insanely determined while he 
rides that broomstick for all it's worth. At the end, he actually 
stands up and SURFS his broomstick to victory! This will either annoy 
you or make you laugh; it made me laugh. When they win, Daniel 
manages to pull off excited delight without looking smug. Aw.

Christmas comes, and the castle is covered in snow. A nod to the 
location -- the castle makes a perfect Hogwarts. We have a Hermione 
POV shot as she walks into the Great Hall all packed for the holidays 
and sees Harry and Ron playing wizard chess, which involves the 
pieces smashing each other to dust. In case anyone is still wondering 
what the kids wear under their school robes, they are all very 
clearly clad almost full-time in Muggle clothes, unless they are in 
class in which case it's robes over Muggle clothes. The wizards' 
confusion at the Quidditch World Cup over how to wear Muggle outfits 
seems odd given that Ron spends most of his onscreen time in jeans, 
Harry in cords and a variety of dark-green and dark-red sweaters. 
Hermione tells them that they need to be looking up Nicholas Flamel 
over the holidays (Hagrid spilled the Flamel beans in an early, short 
scene with Ron and Harry) and she stomps off; Ron observes that he 
and Harry have "had a bad influence on her."

The Christmas Presents scene is actually very sweet. Harry looks 
delighted to have recieved any gifts at all, and Ron's maroon jumper 
is truly horrible -- it has a big red R across the front. The 
Invisibility Cloak looks like burnout velvet, multicolored. The cloak 
effect is well pulled off -- there's a slight shimmer when Harry 
pulls it on, then he vanishes. His excursion to the Restricted 
Section does bring us another Snape scene. Alan Rickman is a truly 
great Snape; alas, he is sadly underused in the film. We also have 
the Mirror of Erised scene, which is as charming as you might expect. 
Harry sees James and Lily in the mirror, but no other family members, 
just his parents. Rumors that Ron's mirror-gazing scene was cut are 
false. "It's me! I'm Head Boy! I look GOOD!"

As Ashley pointed out earlier, Dumbledore's scenes seem oddly 
lacking. The scene in which he explains to Harry what the Mirror does 
is full of Dumbledore's gravitas, but lacking any of his humor. 

The Norbert plotline is cut down to almost nothing, which in my 
opinion was no tragedy, but I suppose Hagrid and/or dragon fans might 
miss it. Draco turns Harry, Hermione and Ron in for being in Hagrid's 
hut (ie away from school) at night, and gets detention himself as a 
result. Hermione apparently has no idea who he is, when Harry and Ron 
moan that Malfoy's seen them, she says, "Oh, is that bad?" All the 
duelling business is gone. Worst of all, while points are taken from 
Gryffindor for H R and H's indescretion, we never see any of the 
other students react to this. Lacking the knowledge that Harry, Ron 
and Hermione are devastated over having failed their House, their 
later victory lacks resonance.

Nice work was done on the Forbidden Forest. It's dark and spooky and 
I personally loved the bit where Hagrid split them up and sent Harry 
and Draco off alone. We got Draco being Draco "This is servants' 
work! My father will be outraged when he hears about this! And this 
forest is full of werewolves!" (Remus!) One note: they call each 
other "Harry" and "Draco." Shouldn't they be calling each other 
Potter and Malfoy? Not that it matters all that much.

Was not impressed by the unicorn scene. The hooded figure is 
appropriately sinister but the unicorn looks like...well, nothing 
very impressive. The centaur is a truly terrible CGI creation. It is 
completely unconvincing. The scene is also chopped in such a way as 
to give the impression that Draco ran for help as opposed to running 
for his life. As a Draco fan I like this, but in the interests of 
character accuracy I felt it wasn't quite clear that he probably 
would have happily left Harry there to die. 

Kudos to Daniel for pulling off lines like, "But who would choose 
such a cursed life?"

Some discussion of Nicholas Flamel later (Hermione realizes that they 
have been looking in the wrong section of the library all this time; 
Ron tells her she is "Scary, brilliant but scary") and we have the 
movie's biggest set piece: the obstacles blocking the way to the 
Stone. Fluffy of course is first, and while he was pretty obviously 
CGI'd, it wasn't badly pulled off.

The Devil's Snare *looked* good. Apparently the secret here is that 
if you relax, the plant will let you go. Hermione and Harry are able 
to relax, but Ron has to be rescued by Hermione with a sunlight spell 
which is impressive looking, but lacks the humor of the original 
scene. "Are you a witch or not?" is gone; instead we have Ron 
saying, "Well, good thing I was relaxed!" Harry shoots him a 
glare. "No, good thing HERMIONE pays attention in Herbology class!"

The winged keys are a great effect, although in this version they've 
been turned into flying missiles that practically take Harry's head 
off while he's trying to catch the key.

Ron fans will love the chess scene. Heck, I liked it and I don't even 
care about Ron all that much. The chess set itself is a marvel of set 
design and the huge pieces are terrifying. Rupert chews up the 
scenery like there's no tomorrow. "Pawn to E5! Knight to C6!" while 
perched on the back of a stone knight's piece. He does need to work 
on his comic delivery a little but nobody's perfect. The scene where 
he sacrifices himself to win the game is great -- the Queen swings 
her stone arm down, smashing Ron's chess piece into smithereens and 
sending him crashing to the ground in a shower of stone splinters, 
looking very dead indeed. Harry shouts Ron's name but when Hermione 
almost steps off her square, he stops her. Unlike in canon, she does 
not scream.

Harry walks forward and makes the checkmate, which means a huge stone 
sword topples at his feet in a King Arthur moment. Then he bolts over 
to Ron and tells Hermione to see to Ron while he goes on alone. H/H 
fans will be glum at the fact that the hug is omitted; still, 
Hermione does deliver her entire "You're a great wizard, Harry...be 
careful!" speech over Ron's inert body. Well, one cannot have 
everything.  Hermione fans will be disappointed that her "logic 
puzzle" task is cut. It does make the later award of 50 points to 
Hermione for cool logic in the face of danger somewhat mysterious.

Harry's showdown with Voldemort is all that remains. Ian Hart is 
great at Quirrell, considering that he has to spend of a lot of time 
leering at Harry like he can't wait to choke him to death. Poor Harry 
is at this point covered in cuts and bruises, one of his hands is 
slashed up and drenched in blood. Makes Starling's "beat up Harry the 
hero" picture seem prescient. 

The CGI ing of Voldemort's face onto the back of Quirrel's head -- 
well, it looks unreal but then it's supposed to be magic so it works. 
Voldemort is one funny-looking guy. Again kudos to Daniel for lines 
like "I will never join you! Never!" Not everyone can pull off that 
kind of Stars Wars hooey. Daniel has charisma to burn, which is a 
good thing -- he'll be needing it.

In this version of events, Dumbledore does not save Harry. I will 
actually not spoiler this part since it is mildly surprising. Suffice 
it to say that it works well, and the scene ends with Harry toppling 
unconscious to the ground, the stone in his hand.

The Infirmary scene was shot at Oxford's Divinity School, IIRC, and 
it provides a great interior. This scene, however, is in my opinion 
the one that canon fans will have the hardest time with. Lily's 
sacrifice is inadequately explained, and there is *no mention of 
Snape at ALL* -- no mention of his connection with James, or why he 
might want to save Harry's life. If I were Alan Rickman I'd be 
annoyed about the fact that Snape's interestingness as a character is 
being sadly diluted.

When Harry emerges from the infirmary he sees Ron and Hermione in 
coversation at the top of the stairs. R/H fans will like this, since 
they actually seem to be liking talking to each other for a change. 

We are left with the Gryffindor-wins-the-House-Cup scene, which is 
notably close to canon and very cute. Daniel, Rupert and Emma are all 
adorable in this scene. Actually, so is Tom, who pulls off a pretty 
good shocked-and-devastated Draco. It'd be easier not to like him if 
he didn't resemble one of those Keane kids with the big eyes.

In the final scene, Hagrid gives Harry the photo album with his 
parents' pictures in it as the Hogwarts Express is leaving the 
station. The last shot is of Harry leaning out the train window, 
waving goodbye.


Cassie





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Fri Nov  9 00:13:42 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:13:42 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Part 3
References: <9sf4ak+p732@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <023701c168b3$64d1f2c0$114e28d1@oemcomputer>

Takes a long moment to glare evilly at Cassie.

Right then, now that the official glaring time is over, *Hugs Cassie till
she turns purple* THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!  I know am prepared for missing
scenes!

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From MindyCL at juno.com  Fri Nov  9 01:26:44 2001
From: MindyCL at juno.com (Mindy C.L.)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:26:44 -0500
Subject: Email at pay phones
Message-ID: <20011108.203426.-468601.7.MindyCL@juno.com>

I am amazed at the payphone emails. I have not seen them in the US. Is
there such a phenomenon in the US, or only in the UK?
________________________________________________________________
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 djtarb at aol.com  Fri Nov  9 01:39:51 2001
From: djtarb at aol.com (djtarb at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 20:39:51 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:disappointed
Message-ID: <112.75a3b3e.291c8de8@aol.com>

In a message dated Thu, 8 Nov 2001  5:05:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, Schlobin1 at aol.com writes:

> well, I am terribly disappointed about the fact that Richard Harris is 
> reported to be lacklustre as Dumbledore, because of course, Albus Dumbledore 
> is my favorite character, although I dream of playing Arabella Figg in a 
> movie.
> 
> MY own five year old big beautiful gold cat became suddenly ill (from a 
> genetic heart defect) last Friday night and we had to help him die on 
> Saturday. I am totally depressed, and can't even get very excited about the 
> movie.
> 
> Susan
> 
I'm really looking forward to the movie... possible lackluster performances and all.  I've learned from experience that critics, at best, express their own opinions and at worst, feel their calling is to pick every nit they can find.  I suspect that I'll enjoy the experience, and if something bothers me well that's part of life.  Those who want movies to mirror their view of books exactly should know enough to avoid the movies and their inevitable disappointment.  So don't despair!

Fellow feeling:  My 16-year-old Maine Coon cat has bone cancer in his jaw and is dying slowly.  No pain, or he wouldn't still be with me, but lots of distressing changes.  I know how hard it is to do what you had to do, and don't look forward to having to do the inevitable with respect to my own beloved pet.

Diane in Philly



From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov  9 01:59:56 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 01:59:56 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
In-Reply-To: <9sf45d+dpi6@eGroups.com>
References: <9sf45d+dpi6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <xShg8kcciz67Ewyt@dickson.demon.co.uk>

In message <9sf45d+dpi6 at eGroups.com>, cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com writes
>This is an almost scene - by -scene commentary on the film, so if you
>don't want to know...don't read it. I saw it yesterday in NYC at a
>press screening, so...

Yay! I've been waiting for this - someone else who's seen the movie to
discuss it with ;-) The spoilers below are really very precise and
explicit in places, explaining some of the highlights in quite a lot of
detail, so proceed at your own risk. Seriously. Think about it. Hard.

Please might I borrow your

>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E

? Thank you, how kind. I have combined all three parts of your message
into one, for reference.

Loved the review, by the way!

>It is very hard to judge this movie objectively. As a passionate fan
>of the books, every detail and every word are ingrained into my
>memory, and simply seeing them brought to life in a film is such a
>thrilling feeling that it's hard to look past the initial giddiness
>to really ascertain whether the movie is a good one or not.

Agreed. My opinion of the movie the next morning was a little less
favourable than it was the night before - there's a real reluctance
because you don't want to accept that the film is anything less than
perfect.

>It is honestly rather odd to see these two robed and hatted
>individuals standing in the middle of a suburban Surrey street.

Yes; this was very effective.

>When the glass vanishes, Dudley falls into the snake
>cage, only to have the glass seal up behind him, trapping him inside.
>Amusing, if non-canonical, moment.

Agreed, but it was at least as satisfying a way of communicating the
Parseltongue and "makes magic happen without control" themes that of the
book. The CGI was weak here, though.

>Harry touches his forehead -- it is one of a very few
>glimpses of the scar we get during the film.

Mmm - at this point, there seemed to be a hair-position continuity
issue. We didn't see Harry move it from the relaxed, covering-the-scar
position  to the visible position. (Could well be confusing this scene
with one of the others, though?)

>We cut to King's Cross station, where Hagrid hands Harry a ticket for
>the Hogwarts Express.

Aside: the public aren't habitually allowed to use the overhead bridge
which we see. Lucky old Harry and Hagrid!

>Ashley claims she saw Neville and his
>grandma, although I missed that.

So did I. There's something to look out for next time...

Also interesting that there seemed to be no mention of GNER (Great North
Eastern Railways) in the credits. Their blue-and-red-stripe livery was
very clear on both the trains in the background and the guard. (Or was
there? Again, another thing to look out for next time.)

>The train scene was the first scene that really made me squeak in
>glee. The Hogarts Express is a gorgous train --we've all seen it, it
>looks like a red jellybean.

Yes. I thought it looked rather unexceptional in the stills and trailer,
but it's really, really nice in action.

>My inner H/H shipper was charmed by the glasses business.

Yes :-) It communicated Hermione's character well, not making it clear
whether she was doing it as a gesture of benevolence or as a gesture of
showing off. It makes up, in part, for the lack of a big "Thanks" scene
after the mountain troll, which I thought was one of the book's smaller
but definitely positive highlights.

>The Sorting Ceremony left something to be desired. Only five students
>are sorted: Susan Bones, Hermione, Ron, Harry, and Draco.

Yes - Susan to Hufflepuff but nobody to Ravenclaw. Strange!

>There is no
>indication that things are done in alphabetical order and it is
>unclear while Harry has the hat on his head whether everyone can hear
>what it is saying to him, or if only Harry can.

I interpreted this as that the first years and the people at the
staff-table end of the hall would be able to hear what was going on very
faintly, but the majority would only be able to hear the shouted final
word. Does it make much difference?

The Sorting Hat on Draco was a particular delight, too!

>Ah, almost forgot. As Hermione heads up the stairs to the Sorting
>Hat, she mutters to herself under her breath to kleep herself from
>being frightened.

Yeah - this was just one of the beautiful little things that she got
right.

>I have forever been cured of any
>inclinations towards Percy/Neville by this film...they look revolting
>together

Heh heh heh :-)

>The next day Harry and Ron are late for class, and McGonagall
>threatens to transfigure them into pocket watches so that they'll be
>on time. Draco looks pleased, and Hermione looks disgusted.

Another very nice scene - and you've left the reasons why as an
extremely pleasant surprise... :-)

>His ribbing of Harry is pretty excellent; too
>bad that's just about all we see of it for the whole film.

Agreed, but this is a pretty direct consequence of it being a
two-and-a-half hour film. At least we can have a LOT of fun imagining
all the rest!

>Seamus
>seems to be around for comic relief, since he keeps blowing things
>up, but as Ashley pointed out, it wasn't very funny.

I thought it was a nice little scene. It reinforces that the kids are,
well, kids and that kids like messing about. It was also quick, neat and
provided Ron with an opportunity for a cute line.

>The kids line up in rows facing each
>other while Madam Hooch gives orders. Her eyes are bright yellow with
>slitted cat pupils -- what's up with that?

Probably an allusion to "yellow eyes like a hawk". Looked great to me.

>Hermione,
>overhearing, comes bounding over. "Harry, you won't make a fool of
>yourself. You'll be great - it's in your blood." She leads him over
>to a glass trophy case, in which is a brass plaque engraved with
>JAMES POTTER GRYFFINDOR SEEKER 1972.

Mmm, yes, very interesting. Also pay attention to which other names we
see on that plaque, more food for thought. Furthermore, it was a good
indication of the continuing increasing friendship between the three.
(Maybe that's why the "thanks" scene after the mountain troll was deemed
irrelevant?)

>the boys go bolting back to engage in what is actually
>a pretty stirring battle sequence with a fairly unrealistic-looking
>troll.

Oh, agreed.

>McGonagall has a very funny moment where she awards the boys
>100 points for "sheer, dumb luck."

For reference, that's a typo - 10 points (two fives) as per the book.
Yes, it's very funny.

>When Harry's Nimbus 2000 arrives in the mail, McGonagall winks at
>him, making it clear that she is the one who gave it to him.

Again, a pretty direct consequence of a time-limited film. It also makes
the storytelling a lot easier.

>And then we have Quidditch. I've heard the complaint that the
>Quidditch scenes seem CGI'd and they do, but given the state of
>current effects technology I doubt they could have done much better.

Agreed, but it also follows that the scenes are not quite as good as
they really need to be.

>This will either annoy
>you or make you laugh; it made me laugh.

Colour me pretty damn PO'd :-(

>The Christmas Presents scene is actually very sweet.

Agreed - and also with the plaudits for the invisibility cloak. Just two
more nice little touches.

>Lacking the knowledge that Harry, Ron
>and Hermione are devastated over having failed their House, their
>later victory lacks resonance.

Mmm - not sure I agree, but it's a good point and I'd love to know what
someone who wasn't familiar with the books thought about it. There are
relatively few references to house points in the film, but this is such
a big loss compared to the smaller gains we see that it may well get the
desired effect across?

>The winged keys are a great effect, although in this version they've
>been turned into flying missiles that practically take Harry's head
>off while he's trying to catch the key.

It's also actually Hermione who catches the key (isn't it?) though it's
clear that Harry has done the hard work by identification and selection.
More recompense for the absent potion scene, perhaps, though it tends to
imply Hermione has better physical skills than we give her credit for?

>Harry shouts Ron's name but when Hermione
>almost steps off her square, he stops her.

Yes, this was really good.

>It does make the later award of 50 points to
>Hermione for cool logic in the face of danger somewhat mysterious.

Ah - I heard "cool intellect in the face of danger", not logic. This is
a lot more convincing, though maybe not 50 points more convincing.

>Voldemort is one funny-looking guy.

Yes, funny (funny peculiar, not funny ha ha) rather than horrific. Not
scary enough for the Biggest Bad In The Universe. Still, there's scope
for improvement as we go through the movies and he gets closer to power.

>In the final scene, Hagrid gives Harry the photo album with his
>parents' pictures in it as the Hogwarts Express is leaving the
>station.

This isn't quite explained in proper detail, either. It shouldn't matter
to us because we know the story and the reasons, but... ohh, what might
have been! (Arguably, if it doesn't stick in the craw of people who
don't know the story, then maybe it isn't such a big thing after all and
we shouldn't be worrying about it.)

Looking through these comments, there's quite a lot of concentration on
the disappointing elements. However, I stand by what I said about the
movie's many qualities and highlights - a hyper-literal PS movie would
have been both practically impossible and somehow strangely redundant.

Wanna see it again!
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 02:03:26 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:03:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:disappointed
In-Reply-To: <112.75a3b3e.291c8de8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20011109020326.55800.qmail@web13701.mail.yahoo.com>

I know how you feel. My Freeway passed away in 1995.
She was 19 years old and she died in my arms. She
wasn't ill just old. I never really prepared myself
for her ever dying. I miss her all the time. Never got
another cat, because there was only one of her. She
never tried to get the birds. They are one of your own
children and it is even harder to lose them with a
disease. Just look at your cat's pictures to remember
how she was. I have Freeway's in the kitchen, that's
where most of the activity is in our house. I think
about all the crazy antics she did. We laugh about how
she gave my son Dan a blackeye! He was 5 and playing
peek-a-boo in a large cardboard box with windows anda
door. She timed him opening and closing the window.
She wacked him on his left eyelid and he had a paw
size bruise! Dan was 5 and he is 27 now! So think of
the fun things. The saddness will always be there, but
the humorous things of animals will be a comfort.

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Merry
Band of Muggles

--- djtarb at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated Thu, 8 Nov 2001  5:05:14 PM
> Eastern Standard Time, Schlobin1 at aol.com writes:
> 
>> 
> > MY own five year old big beautiful gold cat became
> suddenly ill (from a 
> > genetic heart defect) last Friday night and we had
> to help him die on 
> > Saturday. 
> > 
> > Susan
> > 
> I'm really looking forward to the movie... possible
> lackluster performances and all.  I've learned from
> experience that critics, at best, express their own
> opinions and at worst, feel their calling is to pick
> every nit they can find.  I suspect that I'll enjoy
> the experience, and if something bothers me well
> that's part of life.  Those who want movies to
> mirror their view of books exactly should know
> enough to avoid the movies and their inevitable
> disappointment.  So don't despair!
> 
> Fellow feeling:  My 16-year-old Maine Coon cat has
> bone cancer in his jaw and is dying slowly.  No
> pain, or he wouldn't still be with me, but lots of
> distressing changes.  I know how hard it is to do
> what you had to do, and don't look forward to having
> to do the inevitable with respect to my own beloved
> pet.
> 
> Diane in Philly
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov  9 03:16:47 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:16:47 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Email at pay phones
In-Reply-To: <20011108.203426.-468601.7.MindyCL@juno.com>
References: <20011108.203426.-468601.7.MindyCL@juno.com>
Message-ID: <qlRWxodfq067EwDR@dickson.demon.co.uk>

Warning: this is almost entirely off-topic, except for the fact that I
used one of these to mail my first notes to the Magical Mods and hence
here. Would it be appropriate to redirect this to OT-Chatter or
elsewhere?

In message <20011108.203426.-468601.7.MindyCL at juno.com>, Mindy C.L.
<MindyCL at juno.com> writes
>I am amazed at the payphone emails. I have not seen them in the US. Is
>there such a phenomenon in the US, or only in the UK?

It's not that common in the UK. I had to look at over a dozen payphones
before I found one which offered e-mail facilities - and even that was
just one out of eight (four on each side of the road) on one of the most
important shopping streets in Leith, a suburb of Edinburgh. To be
honest, that may have been the first one I've seen which wasn't in a bus
station, train station, shopping centre or the like (ie indoors).

Public access web terminals are also not unknown; it would have been
easy enough to use one of those, if I had encountered one, to bash out
an e-mail from some webmail service.

I can't recall seeing any of these in the USA, though, er, I'm not
American. (I've spent about three weeks Stateside in the last 20 months,
though.)

They must exist, though!
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From taradiane at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 04:19:56 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:19:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
In-Reply-To: <xShg8kcciz67Ewyt@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20011109041956.59026.qmail@web11503.mail.yahoo.com>


> cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com writes
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E

regarding harry "surfing" on his broomstick...

> >This will either annoy
> >you or make you laugh; it made me laugh.

good god, just the thought alone is making my
eyes bleed......this may be an unforgivable
moment in my book.....

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov  9 05:43:29 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:43:29 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:disappointed
Message-ID: <152.3bb738d.291cc701@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/8/2001 8:42:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, djtarb at aol.com 
writes:

<< Fellow feeling:  My 16-year-old Maine Coon cat has bone cancer in his jaw 
and is dying slowly.  No pain, or he wouldn't still be with me, but lots of 
distressing changes.  I know how hard it is to do what you had to do, and 
don't look forward to having to do the inevitable with respect to my own 
beloved pet.
 
 Diane in Philly >>

thanks to everyone who is expressing sympathy for me about my cat..it really 
does make a difference. It's hard to keep talking to everyone about how 
depressed you are about losing a cat, because many people are not very 
focused on animal bonding, and think you're overreacting.....or maybe I just 
think that.....Diane, we had a Maine Coon, too, they are the sweetest 
things...I think we will be getting a Maine Coon kitten..

Susan



From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 05:46:16 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 05:46:16 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
In-Reply-To: <xShg8kcciz67Ewyt@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9sfqj8+41dt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Chris M. Dickson" <chris at d...> wrote:
> 
" Yay! I've been waiting for this - someone else who's seen the movie 
to discuss it with ;-)" 

Yay back! *bounces*

The spoilers below are really very precise and explicit in places, 
explaining some of the highlights in quite a lot of detail, so 
proceed at your own risk. Seriously. Think about it. Hard.
> 
> Please might I borrow your
> 
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> 
> Agreed. My opinion of the movie the next morning was a little less
> favourable than it was the night before - there's a real reluctance
> because you don't want to accept that the film is anything less than
> perfect.

Absolutely, and the excitement of seeing it for the first time is 
pretty overwhelming. I was at such a high pitch of excitement that 
both I and my friend Ashley were depressed after it was over!


> 
> Agreed, but it was at least as satisfying a way of communicating the
> Parseltongue and "makes magic happen without control" themes that 
of the  book. The CGI was weak here, though.

Mmm. Did you notice the snake was from Burma, not Brazil as it was in 
the books?

"Mmm - at this point, there seemed to be a hair-position continuity
> issue. We didn't see Harry move it from the relaxed, covering-the-
scar position  to the visible position. (Could well be confusing this 
scene with one of the others, though?)"

You know, I checked my notes and you might be right there -- I am not 
sure Harry moved his hair. It sort of blows to the side so we can see 
his scar. It is true that we don't see the scar very often though.

"Yes :-) It communicated Hermione's character well, not making it 
clear  whether she was doing it as a gesture of benevolence or as a 
gesture of  showing off. It makes up, in part, for the lack of a 
big "Thanks" scene  after the mountain troll, which I thought was one 
of the book's smaller  but definitely positive highlights."

Yes, I missed that scene as well. It would have more smoothly 
transitioned us into their friendship.

"Yes - Susan to Hufflepuff but nobody to Ravenclaw. Strange!"

Yes, very. Also missed seeing Neville sorted.

"I interpreted this as that the first years and the people at the
> staff-table end of the hall would be able to hear what was going on 
very faintly, but the majority would only be able to hear the shouted 
final word. Does it make much difference?"

To me, yes, because the fact that he was nearly sorted into Slytherin 
is such a secret sore point with Harry. IMHO it would be weird if 
others knew about it.
> 
"The Sorting Hat on Draco was a particular delight, too!"

Oh! The way it just barked "Slytherin!" when his hands touched it! 
Priceless!

"Another very nice scene - and you've left the reasons why as an
> extremely pleasant surprise... :-)"

;)

 > >His ribbing of Harry is pretty excellent; too
> >bad that's just about all we see of it for the whole film.
> 
"Agreed, but this is a pretty direct consequence of it being a
> two-and-a-half hour film. At least we can have a LOT of fun 
imagining all the rest!"

There'll be a heck of a DVD someday. I really did miss more Snape 
though. And the lack of his interaction with Harry made him even 
weaker as the putative villain. IMHO. Also as Ashley pointed out to 
me, he does a lot of just...staring at Harry, looking pained. 

"I thought it was a nice little scene. It reinforces that the kids 
are, well, kids and that kids like messing about. It was also quick, 
neat and  provided Ron with an opportunity for a cute line."

True. I suppose it's just that I like Seamus and there's no canon 
indication that he's lousy at spells. Also...can they DO magic at the 
table? I suppose they can.
> 
"Probably an allusion to "yellow eyes like a hawk". Looked great to 
me."

Oooh, good point, well spotted and remembered from canon!
> 
"Mmm, yes, very interesting. Also pay attention to which other names 
we see on that plaque, more food for thought."

O_O I've asked Ash and neither of us can remember any other names on 
the plaque in the version we saw. Were there in yours? If so, what?

"Furthermore, it was a good indication of the continuing increasing 
friendship between the three."

Oddly placed then since it was before the troll incident...?

"For reference, that's a typo - 10 points (two fives) as per the book.
> Yes, it's very funny."

Ooops. *blush*
> 
> >When Harry's Nimbus 2000 arrives in the mail, McGonagall winks at
> >him, making it clear that she is the one who gave it to him.
> 
> Again, a pretty direct consequence of a time-limited film. It also 
makes the storytelling a lot easier.

I liked that bit actually. I like McGonagall. Random trivia: that 
scene where the owl delivers the broom to Harry was a real stunt with 
no effects -- they built a special broom that weighed only 150 grams 
so the owl, Gizmo, could carry it.
> 
"Agreed, but it also follows that the scenes are not quite as good as
> they really need to be."

Alas, true.
> 
> >This will either annoy
> >you or make you laugh; it made me laugh.
> 
> Colour me pretty damn PO'd :-("

Oh, did you hate the "Harry surfs"? If so why?
> 
> "Mmm - not sure I agree, but it's a good point and I'd love to know 
what someone who wasn't familiar with the books thought about it. 
There are  relatively few references to house points in the film, but 
this is such  a big loss compared to the smaller gains we see that it 
may well get the desired effect across?"

>From what I got from talking to people who saw the film but haven't 
read the books -- they totally missed that. They didn't even get that 
that was why Gryffindor was down so many points at the end. I just 
think the points business was not well established and a little anger 
from the other Gryffs at this point could have gone a long way.
 

"It's also actually Hermione who catches the key (isn't it?)"

Doesn't Harry catch it and throw it to her?


"Yes, funny (funny peculiar, not funny ha ha) rather than horrific. 
Not scary enough for the Biggest Bad In The Universe. Still, there's 
scope for improvement as we go through the movies and he gets closer 
to power."

In the next movie we have Tom Riddle. THAT I want to see.

"This isn't quite explained in proper detail, either. It shouldn't 
matter to us because we know the story and the reasons, but... ohh, 
what might  have been! (Arguably, if it doesn't stick in the craw of 
people who don't know the story, then maybe it isn't such a big thing 
after all and we shouldn't be worrying about it.)"

It could have been better though and that's what hurts isn't it...

"a hyper-literal PS movie would have been both practically impossible 
and somehow strangely redundant."

Agreed, really. I loved it!

Cassie





From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov  9 05:46:37 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:46:37 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
Message-ID: <17.1e3a5cf9.291cc7bd@aol.com>

I am reading all the spoilers..because it's not like we don't know the story, 
right?
Also, how many people will see this movie who haven't read all the books? I 
suppose some parents taking their kids...but...

Susan



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Fri Nov  9 13:31:12 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:31:12 EST5EDT
Subject: My boss ROCKS!
Message-ID: <11FFF0570E7@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Late birthday present from my boss....

She just came by and plopped two tickets on my desk for the 
midnight showing of Harry Potter next Thursday.

Yay!  So I'm seeing it at midnight, 12 hours later with my 
office and then later that night with my friends and 
mother!!!

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 18:56:41 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (Maggie Connolly)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:56:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Harry Potter movie preview on Sunday
In-Reply-To: <11FFF0570E7@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <20011109185641.33472.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com>

I am so jealous, a co-worker has tickets to see a
sneak preview of the movie on Sunday (the 11th) at the
Uptown in Washington, DC.  I wish I could go! :)

=====
Cheers, Maggie

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  9 19:08:13 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 19:08:13 -0000
Subject: Shift in canon?
In-Reply-To: <9sf48b+anul@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sh9it+j2kb@eGroups.com>

Yeesh, I swore I wasn't going to even read this 'til after I saw the 
movie, and here I am commenting on it.  I haven't *exactly* read 
it--I've kind of skimmed over it with one eye shut, so to speak.

But being endlessly fascinated by what-is-canon questions the way some 
people are fascinated by Hermione's age <g>, I seized on this:

> Hermione, 
> overhearing, comes bounding over. "Harry, you won't make a fool of 
> yourself. You'll be great - it's in your blood." She leads him over 
> to a glass trophy case, in which is a brass plaque engraved with 
> JAMES POTTER GRYFFINDOR SEEKER 1972.
> 
> Seeker???????
> 
> I think this proves it is a big waste of time paying a lot of 
> attention to chat scripts.
> 
> I was amused that Hermione seems to know this about Harry's dad. 
Must 
> have been in Hogwarts A History.

She wouldn't have to know it from Hogwarts, A History; all she'd have 
to know is James's name (which she does, from The Rise and Fall of the 
Dark Arts etc. etc.).  Then she saw the trophy since arriving at 
Hogwarts--it's natural enough to notice it.

Anyway, the canon thing.  I accept JKR's personal comments made in 
chats and interviews over anything in the movies.  I know she approved 
lots in the movie, and probably approved this, but given a 
contradiction I go with the interview every time, unless it is very 
obviously a typo or misstatement, and she said in no uncertain terms 
that he was a Chaser.  James is no more a Seeker than Riddle was 
spelled Riddell (or did they fix that?).

> Draco does fly well, *very* 
> well -- when Harry lunges at him he executes a spinning 360 around 
> his broom, I was pleased to see. I always suspected he flew well in 
> canon. 

Yeah, this is in canon.  "He hadn't been lying, he *could* fly well" 
(PS/SS 9).  Plus he has a good Quidditch record, 2-1 in both CoS and 
PoA.  His daddy may have bought him a spot on the team, but he's still 
pretty damn good.

Amy Z




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  9 19:11:00 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 19:11:00 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
In-Reply-To: <17.1e3a5cf9.291cc7bd@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9sh9o4+9grc@eGroups.com>

Susan wrote:

> Also, how many people will see this movie who haven't read all the 
books? 

Oh, lots of people.  I know plenty of people who see every major movie 
that comes out, or at least every one with decent reviews.  They don't 
bother to read the books first, even with Shakespeare and other such 
writers that merit this respect even more than JKR <bg>.

Amy




From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 20:01:55 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 20:01:55 -0000
Subject: Shift in canon?
In-Reply-To: <9sh9it+j2kb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9shcnj+lq24@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Amy Z" <aiz24 at h...> wrote:
> Anyway, the canon thing.  I accept JKR's personal comments made in 
> chats and interviews over anything in the movies.  I know she 
approved   lots in the movie, and probably approved this, but given a 
> contradiction I go with the interview every time, unless it is very 
> obviously a typo or misstatement, and she said in no uncertain 
terms   that he was a Chaser.  James is no more a Seeker than Riddle 
was   spelled Riddell (or did they fix that?).

-----

Yes, that was noted and fixed early on. It deos not appear in the 
final cut of the film. As for what position James was...I did make 
some calls to the Powers That Be that I interviewed for my articles, 
and was told that JKR approved that James was a Seeker in the script, 
and that the chat thing must have been a 'mistake.' I accept that 
they may be lying to me and that there is no way to know for sure 
until someone asks her, but I do think it was interesting.

CC





From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov  9 20:03:49 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 20:03:49 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPOILERS (point by point movie review)
In-Reply-To: <9sfqj8+41dt@eGroups.com>
References: <xShg8kcciz67Ewyt@dickson.demon.co.uk> <9sfqj8+41dt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <50uCFnHlaD77Ew52@dickson.demon.co.uk>

Spoilers of doom below the third-hand...

In message <9sfqj8+41dt at eGroups.com>, cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com writes
>> >S
>> >P
>> >O
>> >I
>> >L
>> >E
>> >R
>> >S
>> >P
>> >A
>> >C
>> >E
>> >S
>> >P
>> >O
>> >I
>> >L
>> >E
>> >R
>> >S
>> >P
>> >A
>> >C
>> >E

...and here we go!

>Absolutely, and the excitement of seeing it for the first time is
>pretty overwhelming. I was at such a high pitch of excitement that
>both I and my friend Ashley were depressed after it was over!

Oh yes - and, unlike the book, you can't go back and have another look 
whenever you want. So here's to the sixteenth...

>Mmm. Did you notice the snake was from Burma, not Brazil as it was in
>the books?

Yep. Also note how little the snake spoke.

>Yes, very. Also missed seeing Neville sorted.

Oh, well true, how spotted. It would have been another way to emphasise 
Neville's brave side as well. The movie also doesn't distinguish much 
between the other three houses - there's Slytherin and the rest. A 
couple of derogatory Hufflepuff references remain, but that's about the 
extent of it.

>To me, yes, because the fact that he was nearly sorted into Slytherin
>is such a secret sore point with Harry. IMHO it would be weird if
>others knew about it.

OK, that makes a lot of sense.

>Oh! The way it just barked "Slytherin!" when his hands touched it!
>Priceless!

"...the hat had barely touched his head when it screamed, 'SLYTHERIN!' "
Indeed!

>There'll be a heck of a DVD someday.

Ooohhh, yes!

>"Mmm, yes, very interesting. Also pay attention to which other names
>we see on that plaque, more food for thought."
>
>O_O I've asked Ash and neither of us can remember any other names on
>the plaque in the version we saw. Were there in yours? If so, what?

I might be misremembering, but take a look for something which either 
is, or looks very much like, a famous Potter character name. Something 
to look out for next time!

>"Furthermore, it was a good indication of the continuing increasing
>friendship between the three."
>
>Oddly placed then since it was before the troll incident...?

Mmm, but it probably wouldn't be worth rearranging the scenes just for 
this effect. The kids were fairly clearly becoming friendlier, even if 
not yet bosom buddies, by that point anyway.

>I liked that bit actually. I like McGonagall. Random trivia: that
>scene where the owl delivers the broom to Harry was a real stunt with
>no effects -- they built a special broom that weighed only 150 grams
>so the owl, Gizmo, could carry it.

Cool!

>Oh, did you hate the "Harry surfs"? If so why?

I did - it seemed to be taking the capabilities of what people can do on 
a broomstick rather too far. Now maybe if he was hanging ten and 
grabbing onto the broomstick REALLY hard with his toes then it might 
make sense, but it presupposes praeternatural (praetermagical, even?) 
levels of balance in any case. Now Harry's obviously a very good flyer, 
but THAT good...?

>I just
>think the points business was not well established and a little anger
>from the other Gryffs at this point could have gone a long way.

Good point, well made - would have been a very effective use of what 
could have been just a short use of time.

>Doesn't Harry catch it and throw it to her?

That'd make more sense. Something else to check!

>In the next movie we have Tom Riddle. THAT I want to see.

Ooh, yes... :-)

>It could have been better though and that's what hurts isn't it...

I guess, but nothing's perfect. The books could all have been better 
themselves. Not much point in worrying about it, though maybe there's 
some mileage in the idea of producing a fan Philosopher's Stone play by 
starting from the movie and expanding from there, rather than trying to 
contract the books?

>Agreed, really. I loved it!

Ohh yes. Despite the impossibilities, there were so many things done 
right that the film has got to be regarded as a huge success overall.

Hasn't it?
Chris

-- 
   Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
   Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
   Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
    MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Fri Nov  9 20:04:40 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:04:40 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Shift in canon?
References: <9shcnj+lq24@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <011c01c16959$c536e700$494e28d1@oemcomputer>

I say they messed up the positions and are trying to cover it as best they
can without coming out and saying "oops"  Though I do like this better,
James as Seeker makes more sense then James as Beater in terms of Harry'
skill...


Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Fri Nov  9 22:22:17 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 22:22:17 -0000
Subject: Shift in canon?
In-Reply-To: <011c01c16959$c536e700$494e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9shkup+r55j@eGroups.com>

Saitaina wrote:

Though I do like this better,
> James as Seeker makes more sense then James as Beater in terms of 
Harry'
> skill...

I agree, and I'll add that James as Seeker makes Snape's apparent 
jealousy more logical.  The Seeker is the star, so if James was 
strutting around with friends and admirers, he probably was a Seeker.

Cindy (wondering how Steve will handle this in the Lexicon)




From kabuki_darling at hotmail.com  Fri Nov  9 22:30:17 2001
From: kabuki_darling at hotmail.com (Sylph ~*~)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 17:30:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dans Voice
Message-ID: <F95IClmpcQABZTW5k1E0002522c@hotmail.com>

THere's been a lot of discussion about Dan's broken voice, and I havne't 
read all the emails about it, but I have a suggestion for the movie people.
Why dont' they just add a few lines in the movie where Emma makes fun of 
Dan's voice? Unless he's really hard to understand with his broken voice and 
it's really bad, then I dont' see why he shouldn't just have a broken voice. 
It's not un-normal or anything, just in the movies...

Sylph


>From: "Dai Evans" <dai_evans at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dans Voice
>Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 22:16:16 -0000
>
>I just caught a BBC news report on the premier, the news crew caught
>Dan and he said a few words.
>
>His voice has definately broken.
>
>What will they do?
>
>
>Dai
>


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




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 23:03:00 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 23:03:00 -0000
Subject: James' position / press kit
Message-ID: <9shnb4+a9vb@eGroups.com>

I'm not quite sure yet how to handle a LOT of things. For example, 
the names of new shops on Diagon Alley...do I include them? As for 
James' postition, I might put it on there that it was identified as 
Seeker in the film. The date is more important, actually. If he 
received the award in 1972, that means our date figuring is more or 
less correct. So do I accept that but not the Seeker part? *sigh*

I have been poring over the electronic press kit. I have now 
analyzed all the movie scenes on my VCR, including the platform 9 
3/4 scene, but I didn't notice Neville...I'll go back and check. I 
haven't watched the behind-the-scenes video from the end. I'll go 
over that this evening. 

Steve




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  9 23:05:21 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:05:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dans Voice
In-Reply-To: <F95IClmpcQABZTW5k1E0002522c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20011109230521.58342.qmail@web13708.mail.yahoo.com>

Seeing on the Today Show this morning with Katie
Couric, she interviewed Dan and his voice sounded like
his voice in the movie clips. Will know more when her
Special is aired Sunday night on NBC 7pm EST. But he
was a little nervous but he sounded great! Who knows,
he might have had a dub over. Can't wait for the
movie! 

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Merry
Band of Muggles 100%

--- Sylph ~*~ <kabuki_darling at hotmail.com> wrote:
> THere's been a lot of discussion about Dan's broken
> voice, and I havne't 
> read all the emails about it, but I have a
> suggestion for the movie people.
> Why dont' they just add a few lines in the movie
> where Emma makes fun of 
> Dan's voice? Unless he's really hard to understand
> with his broken voice and 
> it's really bad, then I dont' see why he shouldn't
> just have a broken voice. 
> It's not un-normal or anything, just in the
> movies...
> 
> Sylph
> 
> 
> >From: "Dai Evans" <dai_evans at yahoo.com>
> >Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> >To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dans Voice
> >Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 22:16:16 -0000
> >
> >I just caught a BBC news report on the premier, the
> news crew caught
> >Dan and he said a few words.
> >
> >His voice has definately broken.
> >
> >What will they do?
> >
> >
> >Dai
> >
> 
> 
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 06:21:12 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 06:21:12 -0000
Subject: new scene
Message-ID: <9sih0o+4788@eGroups.com>

Okay, those of you who have seen the movie, please tell us what new 
information we learn about the attack on Harry's parents in the 
film. Supposedly there's a new scene that JKR herself wrote that's 
supposed to give us new insight. Please tell!

Steve




From potterlovingash at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 10 07:32:09 2001
From: potterlovingash at hotmail.com (Ashley Kelly)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 07:32:09 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sih0o+4788@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sil5p+p29p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> Okay, those of you who have seen the movie, please tell us what new 
> information we learn about the attack on Harry's parents in the 
> film. Supposedly there's a new scene that JKR herself wrote that's 
> supposed to give us new insight. Please tell!

*Spoiler in order to answer the question*



Well Steve, 
     There really is not much detail in the scene. The home of our 
dear Potter family is a rather boring two-story home. A cloaked 
figure uses his wand to open the door. We see Lily running and 
putting Harry down in a crib and then being shot with green light. 
Then we get a shot of Harry in the crib... and he has his scar. Hmm, 
details are failing me. But we never see James and we never see the 
cloaked figure's face. I'm not sure this scene really reveals 
anything we didn't practically know already.

~Ashley~




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 15:05:35 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 15:05:35 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sil5p+p29p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sjfnv+topi@eGroups.com>

YAHOO SPOILER SPACE HERE EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE YET
REGULAR SPOILER SPACE BELOW...

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

 

S

P

A

C

E


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ashley Kelly" <potterlovingash at h...> wrote:
 
>      There really is not much detail in the scene. The home of our 
> dear Potter family is a rather boring two-story home. A cloaked 
> figure uses his wand to open the door. We see Lily running and 
> putting Harry down in a crib and then being shot with green light. 
> Then we get a shot of Harry in the crib... and he has his scar. H
> Hmm, details are failing me. But we never see James and we never 
> see the cloaked figure's face. I'm not sure this scene really 
> reveals anything we didn't practically know already.

Actually, having just reread the bits in PoA where Harry was hearing 
his parents' voices in his head because of the dementors, I have to 
say that this scene contradicts canon.  Why is Lily putting Harry in 
his crib?  James tells her to take him and run.  Lily just walks out 
of the room and is killed?  She's supposed to plead with Voldemort 
to kill her instead of Harry.  I'm starting to get the impression 
that the movies are going to depart from the books a great deal.  I 
mean, stuff she's said in interviews (like James' Quidditch 
position) is different; as far as I'm concerned, until she puts it 
in a book, it's not canon.  But this directly contradicts the only 
canonical information we have about what happened on October 31, 
1981.  And you say JKR wrote this scene?

--Barb 






From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Sat Nov 10 15:22:42 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 15:22:42 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sjfnv+topi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sjgo2+ogcn@eGroups.com>

Borrowing Barb's spoiler space:

> 
> S
> 
> P
> 
> O
> 
> I
> 
> L
> 
> E
> 
> R
> 
>  
> 
> S
> 
> P
> 
> A
> 
> C
> 
> E
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ashley Kelly" <potterlovingash at h...> 
wrote:
>  
We see Lily running and 
> > putting Harry down in a crib and then being shot with green 
light. 
> > Then we get a shot of Harry in the crib... and he has his scar. H


Barb wrote:

>  Why is Lily putting Harry in 
> his crib?  James tells her to take him and run.  Lily just walks 
out 
> of the room and is killed?  

I haven't seen the movie either, but that won't stop me from agreeing 
that this is peculiar.  "Run" means run into the bedroom? Was she 
rummaging through the dresser looking for the invisibility cloak or 
something?  Was she pulling her broom out of the closet?  Was she 
looking for a can of floo powder?

Anyway, it sounds like there will be lots of contradiction between 
the movie and books.  Maybe the Lexicon could just include both 
references to the book and to the movie, with the movie references in 
special green print or something, so indicate our collective general 
disdain for them.  

Cindy




From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 16:05:52 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:05:52 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sil5p+p29p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sjj90+10b44@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ashley Kelly" <potterlovingash at h...> wrote:
> Well Steve, 
>      There really is not much detail in the scene. The home of our 
> dear Potter family is a rather boring two-story home. A cloaked 
> figure uses his wand to open the door. We see Lily running and 
> putting Harry down in a crib and then being shot with green light. 
> Then we get a shot of Harry in the crib... and he has his scar. 

This is wrong. Harry does not have his scar when we see him in the 
crib. It is only present on his forehead when we see him in the 
bundle on the Dursleys doorstep.

The scene displays very very little. We don't see who kills Lilly, 
only a person in a cloak. We don't see James.

We do see that Lilly is totally surprised by her attacker turning up. 
She does not run into the bedroom, she is just coming out of it, like 
any normal day, and meets her attacker on the landing. He then kills 
her.



Dai




From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 16:21:45 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:21:45 -0000
Subject: Just saw it
Message-ID: <9sjk6p+rb72@eGroups.com>

OK, spoiler space
I

L
O
V
E
 
S
I
N
E
A
D
.

O
K
.

I
S
 
T
H
I
S
 
E
N
O
U
G
H
?

This was really good. I was laughing, and crying and oohing in all 
the right places. The kids were great. I thought Hermione was a 
little too posh to begin with, but she grew on me. I though 
Dumbledore was too serious, but it was a small part, so didn't matter 
much.

I also thought that this was a very scary film. There were several 
kids in the cinema in tears. I think this should have been a 12, 
rather than a PG, not least for the bad language.

The soundtrack was awful, and the only real badpoint of the film. JW 
should not be asked to return for the second film. 

I missed the potion puzzle, and the "Are you a witch or not?"lines, 
but I guess that they can be overlooked. Cassie mentioned that after 
cutting the potions puzzle, Dumbledores awarding of Hermiones 
points "Cool logic etc." was misplaced. I disagree, I thought it 
fitted well with her solution to the devils snare.

The dialogue has been changed considerably in details, but I feel it 
has been more realised than corrupted.

Quidditch was really cool.



Dai




From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Sat Nov 10 17:30:39 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:30:39 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New Scene
Message-ID: <f.1d9ed7e8.291ebe3f@aol.com>



YAHOO SPOILER SPACE HERE EVEN THOUGH I HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE YET
REGULAR SPOILER SPACE BELOW...

S

P

O

I

L

E

R



S

P

A

C

E

In a message dated 11/10/2001 11:23:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
dai_evans at yahoo.com writes:

>  I though Dumbledore was too serious, but it was a small part, so didn't 
> matter 
> much.
> 
  Can someone who's seen the movie shed some light here? Specifically, since 
you say it's a small part, does this mean he doesn't have the talk with Harry 
at the end? That was very important , it always semed to me.
In fact, the part about there being a new scene- I was for some reason 
thinking it was more that we were to learn some thing that had been left out 
of the book, and wondered whether, in the post Quirrell? Voldie scene, there 
might have been some  previously undisclosed information.

All along, i have had this little nagging worry about Richard Harris as 
Dumbledore, and that he would see it as a kiddie movie and not do the role 
justice. We've all heard the stories by now about him doing it because of his 
grandchild.And other things. Dumbledore isn't constantly beeing seen in the 
books, but he and his "twinkle" are  constantly "there"

Kind of worried now, but have tickets for 12:05 AM, November 11. And dragon, 
lethifolds and manticores couldn't keep me away!

~Ashleigh

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011110/b290acaa/attachment.html>

From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 10 18:33:00 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:33:00 -0000
Subject: how to handle contradictions
In-Reply-To: <9shnb4+a9vb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sjrss+5flj@eGroups.com>

Steve wrote:

> I'm not quite sure yet how to handle a LOT of things. For example, 
> the names of new shops on Diagon Alley...do I include them? As for 
> James' postition, I might put it on there that it was identified as 
> Seeker in the film. The date is more important, actually. If he 
> received the award in 1972, that means our date figuring is more or 
> less correct. So do I accept that but not the Seeker part? *sigh*

To me it is frustrating but simple:  whatever is in the books is 
canon.  Whatever JKR says with her own lips or pen is the truth.  She 
will sometimes contradict herself, of course, being human, and we'll 
argue about those bits 'til we're blue in the face (e.g. has Nick 
been dead 400 years or 500?).  For the most part, though, the world 
within the books is consistent, and I will enjoy the movies as a 
particularly sophisticated form of fanfiction:  HP-related and I hope 
faithful, but not canon.

It's like the thousands of directors of stage and film who have done 
what they pleased with Shakespeare.  That's fine and creative, but 
Shakespeare wrote what he wrote, and if someone decides the play is 
depressing enough and cuts out Ophelia's suicide (whoops, sorry, 
spoiler for Hamlet there <g>), we don't revise the canon.  We just 
say, "Well, that's THEIR opinion" and turn back to the plays.

I know it's not the same, because unlike Shakespeare, JKR is alive 
and well and had input into the film.  But the fact is that she is 
not the author nor the director and does not have final authority 
over what happens in the films; she has sold the rights to WB and if 
they decide to make Sprout and Snape do a tapdancing routine on the 
roof, all she can do is say she doesn't like the movie.  The only 
pure JKR creations are the books and whatever she says in interviews.

Well, I'm a purist in most things, so take that into account.

Amy
who also believes the designated hitter should be outlawed by an act 
of Congress




From prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Nov 10 19:39:32 2001
From: prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk (prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:39:32 -0000
Subject: Just saw it
In-Reply-To: <9sjk6p+rb72@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sjvpk+he9b@eGroups.com>

Me too! So this calls for some spoiler space.

I
 
*
A
M
*
 
H
E
R
M
I
O
N
E
 
G
R
A
N
G
E
R

!
!
!
!

I *loved* it! And (surprisingly for me) I'm not going to complain 
about it too much. But I do have lots of points to make...

- Lily and James were just right IMHO, but the whole Lily's death 
scene was just plain wrong. This is the only thing I can say off the 
top of my head was totally screwed up by the film. Oh yeah, and did 
anyone else cry during the mirror of erised scene?

- I don't even have an inner H/H shipper (I'm R/H through & through) 
but I thought the scene with his glasses was adorable.

- Am I the only person who pronounced Draco as Dra-co, not Dray-co 
until today? It's definitely Dray-co in the film.

- Is it just me or were the Ravenclaws' ties wrong? Gryffindor had 
gold and red, Slytherin had silver and green, Hufflepuff had yellow 
and black, but I'm sure the Ravenclaws had blue and silver when I'm 
sure they should be blue and copper

- Absolutely no complaints about Quidditch. Simply brilliant!

- The centaur was awful! I always imagined him as being entirely 
human from the waist up, but he was blatently computer generated and 
rather disappointing. The unicorn on the other hand was great.

- Richard Harris was very wooden, but Robbie Coltrane was perfect and 
all the kids were adorable! This is getting scary, I'm only about 4 
years older than them myself.

- Alan Rickman! *swoons* Even if I didn't already love chemistry, his 
speech would have easily inspired me to sign up for potions.

- Quidditch playing McGonnagal? Hmmm. And I think I spotted the 
initials R.J.L. on the plaque next to hers. Could this be who i think 
it is?

Kim

P.S. The one downside of dragging my Dad along to the film in the 
hope of converting him (I'va already got my Mum obsessed) is that he 
now insists on calling me Hermione, because I apparently *am* her! 
(Hence the form my spoiler space took) Like I don't get enough of 
that at school! I get the feeling that people don't mean it as a 
compliment.




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 19:56:06 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:56:06 -0000
Subject: comments on comments on the film
In-Reply-To: <9sjvpk+he9b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sk0om+1kpn@eGroups.com>

A few comments on your comments...still haven't seen the film, though

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., prima_donna_23 at y... wrote:

> 
> I
>  
> *
> A
> M
> *
>  
> H
> E
> R
> M
> I
> O
> N
> E
>  
> G
> R
> A
> N
> G
> E
> R
> 
> !
> !
> !
> !

> 
> - Lily and James were just right IMHO, but the whole Lily's death 
> scene was just plain wrong. This is the only thing I can say off 
the 
> top of my head was totally screwed up by the film.

Maybe we're going at this thing all wrong. Maybe this IS the way it 
actually happened. Remember that we are all assuming a lot from what 
Harry hears. Lupin was very surprised when Harry said he heard 
James' voice. JKR did write that additional scene herself and she 
said it would throw people for a loop. I think we need to reconsider 
what Harry was hearing. He only ASSUMES that the voices he heard 
were his parents, remember.


> 
> - Am I the only person who pronounced Draco as Dra-co, not Dray-co 
> until today? It's definitely Dray-co in the film.

JKR pronounced it DRAY-co in interviews. She also didn't pronounce 
the final 't' in Voldemort. So it's definitely DRAY-co and VOL-de-
more.



> - Richard Harris was very wooden, 

I saw Richard Harris in Camelot about twenty years ago. I thought he 
was boring. I suspected from his delivery that he might even have 
been slightly drunk. Judging by everything else I've seen of his, 
that's actually his usual style. I wouldn't have chosen him for 
Dumbledore. Also, having seen a number of interviews with him, I 
don't think he has a very high regard for the movie or the part. He 
literally did it because his granddaughter wanted him to, not 
because HE had any passion for it.

> 
> - Alan Rickman! *swoons* Even if I didn't already love chemistry, 
his 
> speech would have easily inspired me to sign up for potions.

Notice the way he moves his hands when he's saying the "Our new 
celebrity" line. The body language is brilliant. I have a tape of 
them filming a scene in the corridor where he tells the trio to go 
outside or "someone will think you're..." <<delicious pause>> "...UP 
to something..." which is just wonderful. There are a couple of 
takes on that tape and each one is slightly different and equally 
delightful.


> 
> - Quidditch playing McGonnagal? Hmmm. And I think I spotted the 
> initials R.J.L. on the plaque next to hers. Could this be who i 
think 
> it is?

Whoa, what's this? Tell me about the other plaques? There's one with 
McGonagall on it? And which house was the RJL plaque for? 

Steve




From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Sat Nov 10 20:32:01 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:32:01 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Just saw it
In-Reply-To: <9sjvpk+he9b@eGroups.com>
References: <9sjk6p+rb72@eGroups.com> <9sjvpk+he9b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <SuXoTNDB7Y77EwsU@dickson.demon.co.uk>

In message <9sjvpk+he9b at eGroups.com>, prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk writes
>Me too! So this calls for some spoiler space.

...which I shall borrow...

(A couple of small but detailed spoilers below.)

>I
>
>*
>A
>M
>*
>
>H
>E
>R
>M
>I
>O
>N
>E
>
>G
>R
>A
>N
>G
>E
>R
>
>!
>!
>!
>!
>
>I *loved* it!

Great! Despite the nitpicks, I did too. Most fans will.

>- Am I the only person who pronounced Draco as Dra-co

No! It's been a lesson in pronunciations, in part.

>- Quidditch playing McGonnagal? Hmmm.

Ahh, so I *wasn't* making it up. :-) Maybe this is why she has such a
good idea why Harry is a natural Seeker. It's likely that she'd have
been a Hogwarts student herself and likely that she'd have played at the
time, but good enough to get her name on the trophy? That's another
matter!

>And I think I spotted the
>initials R.J.L. on the plaque next to hers. Could this be who i think
>it is?

Ooh, didn't spot that... something else to look at next time. Another
thought is that I vaguely recall some numbers being listed on there as
well. Some more entries for the timeline, perhaps?

>P.S. The one downside of dragging my Dad along to the film in the
>hope of converting him (I'va already got my Mum obsessed) is that he
>now insists on calling me Hermione, because I apparently *am* her!

Heh heh heh - there are plenty of far worse people (and things!) to be.
Did you always think of yourself as a Gryffindor? ;-)

>I get the feeling that people don't mean it as a
>compliment.

Take it as one, though!
Chris
(watching Rik Mayall's proto-Peeves in "Drop Dead Fred" as I type)

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From genevieve373 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 10 21:16:15 2001
From: genevieve373 at yahoo.com (genevieve373 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:16:15 -0000
Subject: Bill and Charlie?
Message-ID: <9sk5ev+tnvj@eGroups.com>

I know that several reviews have mentioned the shortening of the 
Norbert plotline.  However, I was still wondering if Bill and Charlie 
make an appearance at all.  Anyone know if they do?

Thanks,
Jenny




From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Sat Nov 10 22:44:41 2001
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (Catherine Coleman)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:44:41 +0000
Subject: First impressions of the film (following Casssie's analysis
In-Reply-To: <1005314109.512.44373.m12@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1005314109.512.44373.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <f63CTAAZ3a77IwVY@cator-manor.demon.co.uk>

OK - saw the film today - adding/commenting on Cassie's very detailed
review, rather than posting one of my own (lazy, I know).
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E
>
>It is very hard to judge this movie objectively. As a passionate fan 
>of the books, every detail and every word are ingrained into my 
>memory, and simply seeing them brought to life in a film is such a 
>thrilling feeling that it's hard to look past the initial giddiness 
>to really ascertain whether the movie is a good one or not. My 
>initial opinion: It is a good movie, but not a great one. Scenes and 
>subplots have been cut from the books, resulting in scenes that are 
>unexplained, or plots that seem to go nowhere. The following is a 
>mixture of review and flat-out spoilage. Read ahead at your own risk.

I totally agree with this.  I spent the whole film looking forward to
certain scenes/pieces of dialogue, and therefore spent much of it
feeling let down because what I wanted to happen, didn't.  I think I'll
enjoy it more on a second viewing, because my expectations won't be
quite so high.  I particularly agree with the sketchiness of the plot -
I think that if I were seeing this film without having read the book
first, I would be very confused and frustrated by the lack of detail.
What is also apparent is that the time constraints have meant that many
major characters have the screen time seriously limited if not totally
omitted, which means that many of them come across as very one-
dimensional, and that the relationships aren't developed properly.  

> Harry appears to be speaking English, and so 
>does the snake. When the glass vanishes, Dudley falls into the snake 
>cage, only to have the glass seal up behind him, trapping him inside. 
>Amusing, if non-canonical, moment.

LOON moment (and this review will be full of them) - what purpose did it
serve having the snake's origin being Burma, not Brazil?  I do not
understand why something so trivial should be changed.  Great scene
otherwise though - thought DR interacted very well with the snake, and
it was a good idea to trap Dudley behind the glass.

>From the hut, the film moves on to its first big set piece: Diagon 
>Alley. (a passing mention of the Leaky Cauldron scene -- the moment 
>where Hagrid announces that this is little Harry Potter he has with 
>him and the whole tavern goes dead quiet sent shivers up my spine.) 

I don't know whether I agree with this.  I do think that the Leaky
Cauldron and Diagon Alley were delightfully Dickensian, but the scene in
the Leaky Cauldron was a bit of a let down.  Apart from Quirrel wearing
his turban, I really didn't get the sense of Harry's fame in the
wizarding world.  Rather than having a whole crowd round him, only
Dedalus Diggle and Doris Crockford seemed to speak to him - the others
only afforded him with a momentary silence.  Not what I was expecting,
and it somehow diminished Harry's status in the wizarding world -
especially as his situation at the Dursleys' wasn't really developed
properly on film, and the contrast wasn't drawn as strongly as I would
have liked.

>Diagon Alley, I am happy to say, has a distinctly dark, Dickensian 
>feel. Bats hang from rafters, the Daily Prophet sign swings in the 
>wind, Ollivander's wand shop proclaims that they are fine 
>wandmakers "since 320 BC." The busy, chaotic, dusty street feels just 
>right: when Harry passed a shop around which a bunch of children had 
>gathered to ooh the new Nimbus 2000, Ashley and I bounced in glee.
>

Agree, loved it.  Nothing more to say. 

>The scene in Ollivander's shop is another hero-moment for Harry. 

This was an excellent scene.  Slightly disappointed about lack of
measuring tape and endless trying of wands, but I thought that John Hurt
was superb and really made the most of this cameo.

>The Weasleys! George and 
>Fred toss off their one-liners with flair (Woman, you call yourself 
>our mother?) Ginny looks more like seven years old than ten to me, 
>but H/G shippers will be pleased to know she speaks to Harry. She 
>says, "Good luck." They may not be so pleased by Harry's reaction: he 
>ignores her. We get brief glimpses of Percy in this scene (he's the 
>first through the barrier) and Ashley claims she saw Neville and his 
>grandma, although I missed that. 


My biggest disappointment in the film, here.  I was so excited when
Harry saw the Weasleys and ran through the barrier.  Alas, my favourite
scene in the entire book was omitted - ie. Fred and George helping Harry
onto the train, finding out who he is, teasing Percy about being a
prefect - Mrs Weasley telling them not to bother Harry and ask about
Voldemort.  I have to say, when it cut from Harry's view of the platform
immediately to the train merrily puffing along the track deep in the
countryside, my heart sank, because I knew what had been cut, and I was
very sad about it.


>As reported, Draco's scene with Harry in the robe shop and the "train 
>scene" are cruelly excised. 

I thought this was very effective.  In this scene the whole of the first
year see Harry snub Draco - making his embarrassment more acute than it
would have been on the train.  Tom Felton is too cute though - just
can't look evil enough to save his life.

>The Sorting Ceremony left something to be desired. O

Yes - the whole thing was a mess.  Absolutely ridiculous.  Why on earth
did they have all the first years standing there while Dumbledore gives
his speech about the Forest and the 3rd Floor Corridor, then be sorted,
then give another speech?  Doesn't make sense.  And it is very unclear
if everyone in the hall can here the Sorting Hat's ruminations or not
before it declares the house.  At least Hermione gets her Hogwarts: A
History line in - practically the only time in the film she does say
something canonical.

>Side note: I've heard complaints about Daniel's acting, but I don't 
>see it. Little Dan has the perfect face to be Harry -- transparent as 
>a window pane, showing everything he feels, somehow managing to 
>express both momentary joy and the everpresent knowledge of a wounded 
>and sorrowful past. My personal problem is that, while Daniel is a 
>beautiful little boy, and has lovely eyes, they are a stunning shade 
>of...BLUE. Hello? Ashley and I surmised that we might be seeing an 
>early print without the green CGI'd in.
>
Agree.  I think that he was perfect.  Couldn't fault him.  I don't think
you saw an early print, though - his eyes were blue at the screening we
saw, as well.

>Cut to Potions Class. Snape has an excellent entrance -- the door 
>slams open and he strides in at top speed, swishing black robes 
>behind him. He gives his Potions speech and he and Draco make some 
>meaningful eye contact. His ribbing of Harry is pretty excellent; too 
>bad that's just about all we see of it for the whole film.

Very good speech, but for me, by this point everything was moving too
fast, and there was absolutely no build up in atmosphere to it.  He
rushes in and starts talking - I always imagined him gliding in, looking
round, capturing everyone's attention, and then talking very slowly,
clearly and softly - there was no sense of this.  Hermione was
excellent, trying to answer the questions, but I do wish that Harry got
his "Ask Hermione, she seems to know" line in.

>This is followed by a very interesting scene in the Hogwarts 
>courtyard, in which Harry expressed to Ron his fear that he will not 
>be a good seeker and will "make a fool of myself." Hermione, 
>overhearing, comes bounding over. "Harry, you won't make a fool of 
>yourself. You'll be great - it's in your blood." She leads him over 
>to a glass trophy case, in which is a brass plaque engraved with 
>JAMES POTTER GRYFFINDOR SEEKER 1972.
>
>Seeker???????
>
>I think this proves it is a big waste of time paying a lot of 
>attention to chat scripts.
>
>I was amused that Hermione seems to know this about Harry's dad. Must 
>have been in Hogwarts A History. 
>
This scene totally confounded me.  For one thing, it showed what I had
already started to suspect - that there wasn't any real enmity/bad
feeling between Hermione and Ron and Harry at this point, and that they
seemed to be quite friendly - not the case at all, in canon.  It makes
the later scene when Ron makes Hermione cry quite unbelievable, or at
least, unexpected.  

Also - she has said Chaser, not Seeker!  Where did this come
from?????!!!
>


>The scene in which Oliver teaches Harry about Quidditch is notable 
>mainly for closeup looks at the Snitch and the Quidditch pitch, which 
>is a little hard to make out exactly. You can see the hoops in the 
>air and the obviously CGI'd tall, candy-colored towers that have 
>replaced stadium seats. Harry also gives a Bludger a fair whack, and 
>Oliver tells him that he would have made a good Beater.

I think that Sean Biggestaff is a very good actor.  He plays this scene
beautifully, IMO.

>The scene in which Quirrel runs in to announce the troll attack is 
>actually fairly funny. The troll fight follows canon fairly closely --
> Harry is the one to remind Ron that "Hermione doesn't know!" about 
>the troll, and the boys go bolting back to engage in what is actually 
>a pretty stirring battle sequence with a fairly unrealistic-looking 
>troll. McGonagall has a very funny moment where she awards the boys 
>100 points for "sheer, dumb luck."

Erm, it was 10 points between them.  I thought the troll was quite
realistic.  Great scene.  Quirrel's line before he fainted as well, was
good.  Did anyone else find the screaming in the Great Hall a bit much?

>When Harry's Nimbus 2000 arrives in the mail, McGonagall winks at 
>him, making it clear that she is the one who gave it to him. 

Why?  Are we supposed to believe that she bought him the broom?  I don't
get it.  And I also don't get why he gets the broom the day of his first
match, as well.  I also don't understand why they get Snape to go up to
Harry in the Great Hall and wish him good luck in the match.  What was
that about?  A devise to focus on his limp?
>
>And then we have Quidditch. 

Superb.  Interesting how the film goes from being very Dickensian (in
Diagon Alley) to Medieval - Quidditch feels like a magical relic from
the Middle Ages - very reminiscent of jousting.   Loved how fast it was
- shame there wasn't any interplay between Lee Jordan and Prof M.  Also
wanted Dean's Red Card line - not forthcoming (unless I missed it).

The Slytherins looked almost caricatures of your typical ugly oaf.
Scary.

>
>Best of all is the moment where Harry catches the Snitch and wins the 
>game - Daniel is excellent at looking insanely determined while he 
>rides that broomstick for all it's worth. At the end, he actually 
>stands up and SURFS his broomstick to victory! This will either annoy 
>you or make you laugh; it made me laugh. When they win, Daniel 
>manages to pull off excited delight without looking smug. Aw.

Fraid it annoyed me.  They could make the flying exciting enough without
resorting to something quite so unbelievable!

>Christmas comes, and the castle is covered in snow. A nod to the 
>location -- the castle makes a perfect Hogwarts. We have a Hermione 
>POV shot as she walks into the Great Hall all packed for the holidays 
>and sees Harry and Ron playing wizard chess;  Hermione tells them that
they need to be looking up Nicholas Flamel 
>over the holidays  and she stomps off; Ron observes that he 
>and Harry have "had a bad influence on her."

Second big disappointment for me, because I love the "Very safe, seeing
as they're dentists" line.  Why is it that in this film it is Ron who
always gets the line - not Hermione?    Not fair.  Much better than his
irritating line about priorities - which didn't seem in context at all,
to me - and this one.

>The Christmas Presents scene is actually very sweet. Harry looks 
>delighted to have recieved any gifts at all, and Ron's maroon jumper 
>is truly horrible -- it has a big red R across the front. The 
>Invisibility Cloak looks like burnout velvet, multicolored. The cloak 
>effect is well pulled off -- there's a slight shimmer when Harry 
>pulls it on, then he vanishes. His excursion to the Restricted 
>Section does bring us another Snape scene. Alan Rickman is a truly 
>great Snape; alas, he is sadly underused in the film. We also have 
>the Mirror of Erised scene, which is as charming as you might expect. 
>Harry sees James and Lily in the mirror, but no other family members, 
>just his parents. Rumors that Ron's mirror-gazing scene was cut are 
>false. "It's me! I'm Head Boy! I look GOOD!"

The cloak is terrific - much better utilised than I'd imagined.  Agree
that AR is very under utilised.  The Mirror of Erised - did not like
James Potter.  Was much older than he should have been and didn't look
anything like (IMO, of course).

>
>As Ashley pointed out earlier, Dumbledore's scenes seem oddly 
>lacking. The scene in which he explains to Harry what the Mirror does 
>is full of Dumbledore's gravitas, but lacking any of his humor. 

Yes, and this is the case all the way through.  Dumbledore comes across
as being extremely one-dimensional (as do many of the characters).
There is absolutely no hint of the eccentricity and the humour we know
he possesses.


> Lacking the knowledge that Harry, Ron 
>and Hermione are devastated over having failed their House, their 
>later victory lacks resonance.

Yes  - it's pretty meaningless, I agree.  Also, because Ravenclaw and
Hufflepuff are so unimportant in the film, their pleasure over
Slytherin's defeat isn't really shown properly either.

>Was not impressed by the unicorn scene. The hooded figure is 
>appropriately sinister but the unicorn looks like...well, nothing 
>very impressive. The centaur is a truly terrible CGI creation. It is 
>completely unconvincing. 

Absolutely terrible, I agree.  The dialogue was appalling too -
particularly when he says "I'll leave you here" or some such - it was a
line I think that was lifted from the book, but was totally
inappropriate, because they hadn't moved anywhere in the first place.
An awful scene.

>The Devil's Snare *looked* good. Apparently the secret here is that 
>if you relax, the plant will let you go. Hermione and Harry are able 
>to relax, but Ron has to be rescued by Hermione with a sunlight spell 
>which is impressive looking, but lacks the humor of the original 
>scene. "Are you a witch or not?" is gone; instead we have Ron 
>saying, "Well, good thing I was relaxed!" Harry shoots him a 
>glare. "No, good thing HERMIONE pays attention in Herbology class!"
>
My third big disappointment.  In fact, most of the problems I had with
the film was that very good, humorous, original dialogue was replaced
with dialogue which was infinitely inferior.  This scene is a case in
point - I love the "Are you a witch or not" line.  However, I think that
they did this because the Potions task was being omitted - and they
needed Hermione to solve one the tasks without help from the other two -
especially as Ron takes the kudos for the chess task.

>Ron fans will love the chess scene. 

So did I, and everyone knows that I'm no Ron fan.  Superb.  I actually
found this quite scary - the anticipation, knowing that Ron's knight is
going to get smashed was very well done indeed.  

> H/H 
>fans will be glum at the fact that the hug is omitted; still, 
>Hermione does deliver her entire "You're a great wizard, Harry...be 
>careful!" speech over Ron's inert body. Well, one cannot have 
>everything.  Hermione fans will be disappointed that her "logic 
>puzzle" task is cut. It does make the later award of 50 points to 
>Hermione for cool logic in the face of danger somewhat mysterious.

I hate that speech - sounds so sentimental.  I may have misheard, but I
thought that this was changed.  I thought that it was originally "in the
face of fire" - I remember Dumbledore saying intellect - there was no
direct reference to the Potions - could just have easily have applied to
the Devil's Snare.

>The Infirmary scene was shot at Oxford's Divinity School, IIRC, and 
>it provides a great interior. This scene, however, is in my opinion 
>the one that canon fans will have the hardest time with. Lily's 
>sacrifice is inadequately explained, and there is *no mention of 
>Snape at ALL* -- no mention of his connection with James, or why he 
>might want to save Harry's life. If I were Alan Rickman I'd be 
>annoyed about the fact that Snape's interestingness as a character is 
>being sadly diluted.

Yep.  IMO, the dialogue between Dumbledore and Harry was completely
bastardised and cut to pieces.  Sounded sentimental, without actually
making much sense.  Harry ends the film knowing much less about himself
and his history than the Harry in the book.  Richard Harris was very
disappointing as Dumbledore.  There was no "twinkle" and he was too
sober - wanted slightly more humour. 

>We are left with the Gryffindor-wins-the-House-Cup scene, which is 
>notably close to canon and very cute. Daniel, Rupert and Emma are all 
>adorable in this scene. Actually, so is Tom, who pulls off a pretty 
>good shocked-and-devastated Draco. It'd be easier not to like him if 
>he didn't resemble one of those Keane kids with the big eyes.

Yes - shame the scene doesn't work properly, because of comments made
above.  
>
>In the final scene, Hagrid gives Harry the photo album with his 
>parents' pictures in it as the Hogwarts Express is leaving the 
>station. The last shot is of Harry leaning out the train window, 
>waving goodbye.

A very good way to end the film. 
>
>Cassie


So, although I did enjoy the film, I did come away feeling a little
disappointed.  I felt that there was no reason to change dialogue, when
the original was infinitely superior.  I also thought it was a shame
that so many characters had so little screen time - particularly the
twins and Snape.  I won't even get started on everyone/ everything which
was completely missed out.  I know it is difficult to translate a book
such as this into a feature film - but what really worries me is that if
this one had to be condensed to the extent that the whole plot and
character development is very sketchy, how on earth are they going to
manage with the others - the books get progressively longer and more
complicated, and I don't think that a film of this nature is really
going to do them justice.

Catherine




From dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Nov 10 23:15:27 2001
From: dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk (dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:15:27 -0000
Subject: Al's LONG Review w. multiple SPOILERS!
Message-ID: <9skcef+bajk@eGroups.com>

J
U
S
T

I
N

C
A
S
E

-
-
-

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

!

1) How to Approach Harry Potter & The Philosopher's Stone.

Go in *not* expecting a miracle.  This is a substantial and 
complicated children's novel boiled down into barely 2 and a 1/2 
hours, which is simply *not* enough time to do the original creation 
any kind of justice.  As such, expect the bare bones of the bare 
bones of the actual plot, expect keynote scenes to have been changed 
and moved around - expect it to be, essentially, very different from 
the book.  Go in with an open mind like this, and you will *enjoy* it 
much more than if you go in expecting a blow-by-blow rendition of the 
original text, because that is what you won't get.

2) Get the hint!

Above all ... go ... this is easily the most stunning movie I have 
seen all year.

3) Two Bits That Sucked In My Opinion.

My really big bad points before the mix of good, not so good and 
blatant obsessive compulsive nitpicks.  There were two major points 
at which the movie jarred for me.  The opening of the film moved very 
quickly, and you need your wits about you simply to keep up.  One 
minute we're in the cupboard with Harry - the very next in the zoo 
with a boa constrictor (from Burma for some weird reason, but let's 
not get too LOONY here) the very next we're getting stuff in Diagon 
Alley (the Ollivander cameo is one of the best scenes in the flick, 
btw) and the next Harry's off to Hogwarts.  Columbus and Kloves have 
somehow contrived to make it very difficult to tell that time is 
indeed passing as it does in the books.  If one hadn't read the book, 
one could be forgiven for thinking that Harry found out he was a 
wizard, got his books and was off to Hogwarts on the same day, which 
we know to be a falsehood.  Equally there was no sense that the 
school year was passing us by, other than 'marker' scenes, such as 
Halloween, Christmas, and the exams.  It could so easily have taken 
place over a week or so.

The other major thing that stood out for me was the dialogue between 
Harry and Firenze the centaur in the Forbidden Forest.  This was 
quite simply the most *appalling* piece of screenplay I have ever 
witnessed - it was contrived and above all, badly acted.

4) The Adults.

Ollivander (John Hurt?, or Ian, I can never remember - anyhow) was 
incredibly good.  John Cleese was rubbish.  Maggie Smith was 
everything I expected her to be (i.e - she was f**king amazing) and 
Zoe Wannamaker stole her scene.  Robbie Coltrane naturally served to 
hold the entire film together (despite his slightly confused accent 
which seemed to drift from Scottish to Devon by way of the USA) - and 
Hagrid had some killer running gags along the way which were not 
served up in the books - an unexpected and pleasant bonus for me.  I 
came away with more respect for Hagrid than the books have instilled 
in me - I freely admit I don't like Hagrid in canon or fanon.

Both Dursleys were incredibly well done (Richard Griffith and Fiona 
Shaw) and I was left wanting to see more of them.  Griffith's Vernon 
especially was just camp enough without being ridiculous.  Fiona Shaw 
is a great actress anyway, and came into her own during the Hut on 
the Rock scene.  Quirrell was likewise good, and also got a few good 
lines, Verne Troyer and Warwick Davis were both in fine fettle ... 

Alan Rickman ... oh dear me ... yes, Alan ... dear old Snapey.  He 
was abso-bloody-lutely wonderful!  Rickman played his part a la 
Sheriff of Nottingham in Prince of Thieves - with the knob turned up 
until it fell off - superb hamminess (is that a word) and perfect 
delivery.  Such a shame then, that Snape didn't figure very highly at 
all.

There was more of Filch than I expected there to be, but that's 
okay.  Whoever played James and Lily Potter were also fine, even 
though their role consisted principally of looking affectionately at 
Harry - the actors look right, in my opinion, and this bodes well for 
future installments when we see more of them.

Julie Walters as Molly Weasley didn't work at all.  She looked wrong 
in the role, she sounded wrong in the role - I was getting very, very 
strong Mrs O from Acorn Antiques vibes from her ... (for those not in 
the know, Acorn Antiques was a spoof soap opera on a 1980's comedy 
show fronted by Julie Walters, Celia Imrie and Victoria Wood) ... as 
we discussed post-pelicula, Pam Ferris would've been soooooooo much 
better.

Also, Richard Harris' Dumbledore didn't quite gel.  I don't feel he 
approached the part with anything touching the conviction that he 
should've done.  Dumbledore is supposed to come across to Harry at 
this stage as a wise, benevolent protector, strong and so on but a 
little eccentric.  Harris came across as a bit of a weakling in the 
role.  Much as I wanted to, I couldn't extract Dumbledore-vibes from 
him.  A shame.  Hopefully they will do better next time round (and 
cast Brian Blessed in the role, as I have been arguing all along)

5) The Kids.

What we went to see, really.  I'll start with Rupert, because he 
absolutely stole the entire show.  Dan may be sweet and Emma may be 
Hermione, but Rupert was just incredible.  You could scarcely believe 
the kid has never acted before - if you're anything like me you 
despair at most child actors - I find Haley Joel Osment particularly 
irksome, and I cannot watch ET without cringing at Henry Thomas and 
Drew Barrymore as Elliot and Gertie.  However, I was getting none of 
this with Rupert.  Sure, he sounded a little too estuarine for a kid 
who we understand is meant to be a west-country lad, but he had the 
pick of the lines, and was genuinely superb.  The film indubitably 
belongs to Ron.

Dan was likewise good, although even with the dubbing, one can detect 
his voice veering quite wildly and randomly between high and husky - 
poor ickle woobiekins.  However, as Harry is the keynote role in the 
whole shebang, the casting was naturally the best it could be (though 
I still maintain they should've cast *me*) and Dan didn't 
disappoint.  The boy's a natural, an absolute natural and he carried 
off a difficult part with wit and great flair.  Brilliant.  If I can 
fault him at all, I have to say that as he was required to look 
bemused and amazed pretty much all the time, he tended to ham it up a 
bit, and there were times when the old gaping mouth routine wore a 
little thin.  Baby Harry was cute, but resembled Pubert from The 
Addams Family Values (1993).

I think I have fallen in love with Oliver Wood.  Mmmm.  Maybe in a 
couple of years time.

Hermione - grated a little, to be frank.  Just a bit too prim, but 
very, very Hermionic, and Emma's a gifted wee lassie, without a 
doubt.  I can't really fault the part.  Occasionally she verged on 
the cringe-making - and she sadly lost a few of her good lines and 
sequences (the potion bottles test to find the stone was discarded 
completely, and the Devil's Snare changed - although the exchange 
between her and Dan, with Rupert screaming in the background, was 
absolutely priceless - typical trio stuff).  I like Hermione, I've 
decided.

The other Weasleys - Gred n' Forge barely figured.  I was so 
disappointed!  Ginny was perfectly sweet for her single line, and 
Percy was Percy, really.  I have ranted before about how I think he 
was mis-cast - the actor is wooden and his delivery is worse than 
Ikea.  He should stick to Gilbert & Sullivan am-dram in the local 
village hall.

The Gryffindors - Neville had a Yorkshire accent - I wasn't expecting 
it but it actually added something to the part.  Devon Murray's 
Seamus Finnegan was the subject of a rather amusing running gag which 
I won't spoil here - suffice to say it was funny.  Lee Jordan we saw 
once, but I can't really comment.  The Patils were nowhere to be seen.

The Slytherins - Crabbe and Goyle looked menacing and therefore 
served their purpose perfectly adequately.  Not a shining 
performance, but then I didn't expect one.  But Tom Felton ... ooh.  
Too cute and far too much gel in his hair.  But nice delivery, he had 
a menacing air about him and a fair bash at a bit of upper class 
snobbery.  I liked him a lot.  The scene in the Forest in which, as 
Harry backs away from the Quirrell/Voldemort creature-thing, the 
eagle-eyed viewer will spot Draco running across the back of the set, 
waving his lantern and screaming.  Absolutely priceless!  I want more 
Tom next time round.

6) Scenes.

Like I already said, this isn't the book, so as long as you go in 
knowing that, the scene changes won't jar you too much.  People have 
made much of the fact that Draco didn't threaten Harry on the train.  
This sequence was shifted to the point at which the kids are waiting 
to be called into the Great Hall for the Sorting, and as such, 
actually works *better* - Draco's humiliation as Harry turns down 
what I believe (through my Draco-obsession) to be a genuine attempt 
at establishing a friendship, is plain for all to see, and as such 
his motivation for his hatred of and obsession with Harry is made all 
the more convincing.

Other notable changes were the shortening of the Norbert sequence - 
no sign of Charlie Weasley - in the movie Dumbledore arranged for 
Norbert to be sent to Romania, and the scene in which Harry, Hermione 
and Neville (or Ron, in the movie) are caught by McGonagall was 
changed radically, for the worse, I feel, although it by no means 
detracted.

I was disappointed to lose Piers Polkiss at the beginning, as I 
would've liked to have seen Columbus establish just how miserable 
Harry's life really was.

Equally, I was sorry to see Snape's potion challenge to find the 
stone vanish into a puff of smoke.  Christmas scenes lost out due to 
the omission of the Weasleys and Percy.  One sensed that Kloves only 
paid half attention to the book as he scripted the film.  Hence Ron's 
line to Harry about how it looks as if Harry has been sent a Weasley 
jumper too - we don't see Harry wearing it or being thankful for the 
thoughtfulness - we merely cut to the unwrapping of the Invisibility 
Cloak.

And another thing.  Hermione was far too friendly with the boys 
before the troll attack.  In one sequence they seem to be getting 
along fine - the next moment, Ron is delivering the 'no wonder nobody 
can stand her' line with little or no motivation based on what the 
audience has just seen.  Oh, and James Potter played Chaser for 
Gryffindor, not Seeker.

7) Product Placement.

Oh dear me.  Did they honestly think we wouldn't notice that every 
single car parked in the driveways of every single house on Privet 
Drive was a Vauxhall?  To their credit, the models were updated 
between the baby Harry and 11 y/o Harry scenes (from old style Astras 
to Omega estates, if anybody cares) ... but the uniformity of it all 
served to remind me that I was watching a movie, which is not what I 
want to happen.  Big, big rap over the knuckles for that, I fear.

8) Sets & Visuals.

Simply the best I have seen in a long time.  I was as awe-inspired as 
I was at 11 watching Jurassic Park for the first time.  The Quidditch 
scene was superbly done - edge of the seat stuff with a rollicking 
good score to go with it.  Loads of action and illegal fouls by the 
Slytherins.  The suspension of my belief (and the loss of credibility 
for the movie) was sadly incurred as Harry 'surfed' along the handle 
of the Nimbus 2000 in order to catch the snitch, but that was okay.  
I loved the Quidditch to bits.  

Likewise, the enchanted ceiling was nicely done, the floating candles 
were a lovely touch, and the changing of the banners at the end was 
very cool.  I was also impressed with the flashback scene in Godric's 
Hollow, as well as the shot of the owls perched all over number 4, 
Privet Drive at the start.

Superb use of slight, shooting and locations that really made you 
believe in the film.  The closing shot of Hogwarts Castle rising 
above Hogsmeade Station as the train puffs away is especially moving 
(I had tears in my eyes at that point anyway - the Leaving Hogwarts 
theme that was being played is a beautiful piece of music).

The Castle itself.  Stunning visually for what was, after all, a 
set.  The moving staircases were executed originally and nicely.  The 
portraits, which we could occasionally spot gesturing in the 
background, were good too.  The whole design and look of the place 
was very much how I had expected it to be.  Simply beautiful.

Privet Drive - the Dursleys home *is* my Uncle's!  It's incredible.  
He and my Aunt and Cousins live in a house like that on a new estate 
in Southend in appalling, chintzy taste!  That kitchen was hideous!  
The decor was foul!  The Dursleys' fashion sense was sickening!  All 
in all, it was a very British stereotype, but an enormously fun one, 
all the same!  Excellent stuff!

9) To Sum It Up.

This movie is without any shadow of a doubt, one of the best I have 
ever seen in my life.  I wanted to go in again as soon as I came out, 
and was shooting jealous glares at the lucky, lucky bastards queuing 
to get in - and that to me is the mark of a premier league picture.  
The fact that I have waited a year and more for this, and that I feel 
in some way I have been on board since its inception (as I think many 
of us do) makes me feel especially close to the work (I'm therefore 
horribly biased) ... I had a couple of tearful moments, I laughed 
along with everyone else, and I could've taken a gun to the head of 
that idiot usher who kept walking up and down in front of me.  Best 
of all, I couldn't get up at the end.  It was somehow very important 
to sit through the credits and to see out this masterpiece.  There is 
no way on earth you cannot fail to be bowled over by it.  Sure, 
there's things missing, there's dodgy bits, there's a bit of awkward 
characterisation, but at the end of the day, Philosopher's Stone 
stands well out for what it is - a damn good fable for our times.  It 
was everything I had expected it to be and more besides.  The music 
married the pictures exquisitely well, the sweeping, booming bits of 
the score, the miltaristic tattoo of the chessboard scene, the 
sadness of the closing sequence, the tinkly parts of Hedwig's Theme, 
the sense of bustle and purpose and pomposity and wonder.  Some would 
say the music makes or breaks a film.  In this case, it made it, and 
then some.  In the limited time available to them, Columbus and 
Williams and Kloves somehow created a startlingly true rendition of 
JKR's world with great skill.  It was amazing for me to be able to 
see the places and people and things that I have thought about 
(dreamed, on occasion) come to life so very vividly.  For me, it was 
the culmination of a dream I've had since I first heard they were 
making a film.  I take my hat off to it.

Ladies and Gentlemen ... I rather think we have a new canon to enjoy 
and explore ...

And I think it is clear, that we can expect great things from it.

Al
---
Who is now going to stick his head in a bucket of cold water and work 
himself into another frenzy in time for Friday ... yippeee!
---





From NicMitUK at aol.com  Sat Nov 10 23:44:20 2001
From: NicMitUK at aol.com (NicMitUK at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:44:20 EST
Subject: The Movie
Message-ID: <87.12d5af54.291f15d4@aol.com>

Hi all

Just a quick message to say... I've seen it now!  

It was certainly better than I thought it would be.  I'm not ready to pass 
full judgement on it yet though... so roll on the 16th - got to see it a few 
more times.

Nick

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011110/2e3e8113/attachment.html>

From fuelchic at edsamail.com.ph  Sun Nov 11 01:08:36 2001
From: fuelchic at edsamail.com.ph (Reese)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:08:36 +0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: new scene
Message-ID: <mailman.0.1576047986.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

Hello! This is the first time that I'll post here. Just a comment on this...


>S
>
>P
>O
>
>I
>
>L
>
>E
>
>R
>
> 
>
>S
>
>P
>
>A
>
>C
>
>E
>

Barb wrote:

Actually, having just reread the bits in PoA where Harry was hearing his parents' voices in his head because of the dementors, I have to say that this scene contradicts canon.  Why is Lily putting Harry in his crib?  James tells her to take him and run.  Lily just walks out of the room and is killed?  She's supposed to plead with Voldemort to kill her instead of Harry.  I'm starting to get the impression that the movies are going to depart from the books a great deal.  I mean, stuff she's said in interviews (like James' Quidditch position) is different; as far as I'm concerned, until she puts it in a book, it's not canon.  But this directly contradicts the only canonical information we have about what happened on October 31, 1981.  And you say JKR wrote this scene?



******
I haven't watched the movie yet. And it's still going to open here on November 21 in the Philippines (that's 10 days away). Arg. And I don't think I can wait that long. Anyway, I agree that the new scene wherein Lily is killed by Voldie totally contradicts the canon. I was expecting that Lily would be running for her life or at least look panicked, carrying the baby Harry in her arms protectively. But then I read something about the flashback happening when Hagrid is telling Harry about his parents. And then I thought that it could be possible that the *flashback* was just Harry imagining or speculating in his head what had happened to his parents that fateful night. We must understand that neither Hagrid or anyone else for that matter (well, maybe except for Wormtail), would know what *really* happened at the Potter's house except for those present: Voldie, James, Lily and baby Harry(?). And this is still Harry's first year. He doesn't know yet anything about dementors and hasn't yet heard his parent's voices. So, he could not know at that time how the murder took place. He could just have pictured the scene in his head from what he could surmise, and from what he heard from Hagrid. Because,if this is how it *really* happened,  then whatever happened to Lily pleading to Voldemort not to kill Harry? Where was James?  




Reese 
(who has classes on Nov. 21, but is still going to watch the showing that day, *somehow*.)

__________________________________
www.edsamail.com



From aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Nov 11 01:15:04 2001
From: aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk (Aleks)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:15:04 -0000
Subject: Another Review (SPOILERS)
Message-ID: <9skjeo+4ep8@eGroups.com>

*
b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e
*

Hope that's enough space! I've just seen the film (well, okay it 
finished two hours ago, but I needed time to come down off my high!) 
and now I can't wait 'til Friday to go see it again. Becuase I have 
so much to say, and I'm not sure it would be coherent if I tried to 
work through the film chronologically I'm dividing this review into 
three sections:


1) THE GOOD

The children playing the Trio were all great, especially Ron. I'm not 
a huge Ron fan in canon but every time he shared a glance with Harry 
it made me grin. Dan IS incredibly good as Harry (and despite was 
others have said I couldn't detect any signs of his voice breaking).

Other people (mainly Cassie, I think) have mentioned scenes which 
appealled to their inner H/Hm or R/Hm shipper, despite having a 
preference for neither there were several points which made me smile 
and note the possibilities. Judging by the ratio I'd guess that 
either CC's a H/Hm shipper or else JKR is intending to follow that 
line at some point and told him to put it in.

Also adored Draco - fans of fanon Draco (ie/ not Keith Fraser :D )
should love him too. Very cute, but manages appropriately evil grins 
when necessary - such as when stealing Neville's Remembrall. I wanted 
to hug him when I saw the disappointed look on his face as Gryffindor 
ended up winning the House Cup.

Quidditch - bloody brilliant :)  Although you could tell that it had 
been CGI'd if you looked, it was very easy to disregard that. As 
someone else commented it is VERY fast, even moreso than I had 
expected. The Slytherins were great - pulled every dirty trick in the 
book, just as you'd expect, and got away with it.

Some people on the main list complained on seeing the stills that 
Quirrell was wearing his turban in the scene at the Leaky Cauldron - 
I held my breath to see if he shook Harry's hand but he managed to 
avoid it without it being obvious (unless you're obsessed, of 
course). Don't understand why they did it but it got a clue in early 
on.

Alan Rickman - the man's amazing. Even though many of Snape's scenes 
were cruelly cut he still managed to bring an air of menace every 
time he appeared. I especially liked him threatening Quirrell in the 
corridor. Hoping for more in the next film <g>

Chocolate frogs - oh my god! They were real! Okay, so as Ron 
said, "It's only a spell," but Harry's first one managed to escape 
out of the train window.

Invisibility Cloak - loved the look of it, interested to see that you 
could see through it from the inside - I had wondered about that from 
the books.

Filch and Mrs.Norris - Filch looked like a refugee from a Dickens 
novel but it suited him perfectly, Mrs. Norris is clearly no ordinary 
cat as she had red eyes. Whether you like him or not, the actor 
playing him was perfect and he got one of the best lines, IMHO; when 
talking about the detention and the old punishments he says, "I miss 
the screaming" LOL

Finally, kudos to CC for making me back Gryffindor during both the 
Quidditch match and the awarding of the House Cup. My inner Slytherin 
cringed in disgust but I couldn't help myself.


2) THE BAD

Despite everything Dan still had BLUE eyes in the version I saw. Does 
anyone know what WB is doing about this? Are we still all seeing an 
early version? Don't these movie people realise how important it is 
that Harry should have his mother's eyes?

On the subject on his parents, I didn't like James in the Mirror of 
Erised scenes. He looked too old, unless we've got our dates very 
muddled up shouldn't he have been in his mid-20's when he got killed? 
The man in the mirror looked to me to be in his 40's. Possibly he is 
supposed to show what James would have looked like if he had lived - 
any other ideas?

Still on the Mirror of Erised, was anyone else disappointed that they 
cut the part where Dumbledore tells Harry that he sees himself 
holding (a) pair(s) of socks? I felt that the omission made D seem 
less friendly and less likeable.

Sorting Ceremony - even if they had to cut show most of the students 
being Sorted they could at least have done those they did show in 
alphabetical order with the crowd getting smaller each time the 
camera looked back to indicate that the others were bring Sorted too. 
Nobody else (or not that I've noticed) has mentioned that the Hat was 
supposed to cover the students' eyes not just sit on their head - 
surely the budget wasn't that tight that they couldn't have made it a 
little bigger?

Quidditch - yes, I know that above I said I loved it BUT a couple of 
minor niggles. Firstly, I'm sure I remember the scene where Harry 
catches the snitch in his mouth being in COS, am I remembering wrong? 
I'm convinced that it happened in a Gryffindor/ Slytherin game when 
Draco was Slytherin seeker. Unfortunately I've lent all my books out 
so can't check. Secondly, I missed Lee Jordan's commentating - where 
were all his jokes? (And didn't he look too young? I'm sure he 
shouldn't be 13 at this point).

Some of the little clues that make reading the books so much fun were 
omitted, okay, time constraints I know, but how much time would it 
have taken for Hagrid to say he'd 'borrowed Sirius Black's bike and 
had to return it'? or for Uncle Vernon to say 'you're coming to the 
zoo because Mrs. Figg has broken her leg'?

Also, where Harry and Dumbledore's chat at the end is cut we don't 
find out why Snape tried to stop Quirrell from cursing Harry and 
therefore that James had saved Snape's life - surely this is 
important for the 3rd film?

Finally for this part - the new scene between Harry and Quirrell/ 
Voldemort. It didn't make much sense, why change it to this, IMHO, 
much scarier fight when a straight playing of the text would make 
more sense and save having several things different to canon. For 
example/ if the PS wasn't destroyed in the struggle, why destroy it 
at all? Why did Dumbledore need to come back at all? It wasn't as if 
he were needed here to save Harry's life.


3) THE VARIOUS

Talking about pronounciations - I had both Draco and Hagrid right but 
FlaMEL? I had been pronouncing it as if it rhymed with flannel.

I caught the name "..KING" on the trophy, along with McGonagall. The 
rest will be something to look out for next time. (Along with Neville 
at King's Cross).

I'm guessing they changed the snake to coming from Burma because of 
the limitations of London Zoo - perhaps they don't have any snakes 
from Brazil, or perhaps the Burmese one just looked better?

The new scene that supposedly shows Lily's murder - in case it 
matters to you Steve, the Potter's house was a semi-detached, it made 
me wonder if they had wizards or Muggles living next-door, just think 
of what they could hear through the partition wall! Also, I don't 
know if this was only me, but I thought I saw a flash of white light 
befoe and seperate from the green flash from Avada Kedavra.


Okay, well I think that's everything covered :D

Aleks






From aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Nov 11 01:20:45 2001
From: aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk (Aleks)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:20:45 -0000
Subject: Another Review (SPOILERS)
Message-ID: <9skjpd+rae1@eGroups.com>

*
b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e

b
o
u
n
c
e
*

Hope that's enough space! I've just seen the film (well, okay it 
finished two hours ago, but I needed time to come down off my high!) 
and now I can't wait 'til Friday to go see it again. Becuase I have 
so much to say, and I'm not sure it would be coherent if I tried to 
work through the film chronologically I'm dividing this review into 
three sections:


1) THE GOOD

The children playing the Trio were all great, especially Ron. I'm not 
a huge Ron fan in canon but every time he shared a glance with Harry 
it made me grin. Dan IS incredibly good as Harry (and despite was 
others have said I couldn't detect any signs of his voice breaking).

Other people (mainly Cassie, I think) have mentioned scenes which 
appealled to their inner H/Hm or R/Hm shipper, despite having a 
preference for neither there were several points which made me smile 
and note the possibilities. Judging by the ratio I'd guess that 
either CC's a H/Hm shipper or else JKR is intending to follow that 
line at some point and told him to put it in.

Also adored Draco - fans of fanon Draco (ie/ not Keith Fraser :D )
should love him too. Very cute, but manages appropriately evil grins 
when necessary - such as when stealing Neville's Remembrall. I wanted 
to hug him when I saw the disappointed look on his face as Gryffindor 
ended up winning the House Cup.

Quidditch - bloody brilliant :)  Although you could tell that it had 
been CGI'd if you looked, it was very easy to disregard that. As 
someone else commented it is VERY fast, even moreso than I had 
expected. The Slytherins were great - pulled every dirty trick in the 
book, just as you'd expect, and got away with it.

Some people on the main list complained on seeing the stills that 
Quirrell was wearing his turban in the scene at the Leaky Cauldron - 
I held my breath to see if he shook Harry's hand but he managed to 
avoid it without it being obvious (unless you're obsessed, of 
course). Don't understand why they did it but it got a clue in early 
on.

Alan Rickman - the man's amazing. Even though many of Snape's scenes 
were cruelly cut he still managed to bring an air of menace every 
time he appeared. I especially liked him threatening Quirrell in the 
corridor. Hoping for more in the next film <g>

Chocolate frogs - oh my god! They were real! Okay, so as Ron 
said, "It's only a spell," but Harry's first one managed to escape 
out of the train window.

Invisibility Cloak - loved the look of it, interested to see that you 
could see through it from the inside - I had wondered about that from 
the books.

Filch and Mrs.Norris - Filch looked like a refugee from a Dickens 
novel but it suited him perfectly, Mrs. Norris is clearly no ordinary 
cat as she had red eyes. Whether you like him or not, the actor 
playing him was perfect and he got one of the best lines, IMHO; when 
talking about the detention and the old punishments he says, "I miss 
the screaming" LOL

Finally, kudos to CC for making me back Gryffindor during both the 
Quidditch match and the awarding of the House Cup. My inner Slytherin 
cringed in disgust but I couldn't help myself.


2) THE BAD

Despite everything Dan still had BLUE eyes in the version I saw. Does 
anyone know what WB is doing about this? Are we still all seeing an 
early version? Don't these movie people realise how important it is 
that Harry should have his mother's eyes?

On the subject on his parents, I didn't like James in the Mirror of 
Erised scenes. He looked too old, unless we've got our dates very 
muddled up shouldn't he have been in his mid-20's when he got killed? 
The man in the mirror looked to me to be in his 40's. Possibly he is 
supposed to show what James would have looked like if he had lived - 
any other ideas?

Still on the Mirror of Erised, was anyone else disappointed that they 
cut the part where Dumbledore tells Harry that he sees himself 
holding (a) pair(s) of socks? I felt that the omission made D seem 
less friendly and less likeable.

Sorting Ceremony - even if they had to cut show most of the students 
being Sorted they could at least have done those they did show in 
alphabetical order with the crowd getting smaller each time the 
camera looked back to indicate that the others were bring Sorted too. 
Nobody else (or not that I've noticed) has mentioned that the Hat was 
supposed to cover the students' eyes not just sit on their head - 
surely the budget wasn't that tight that they couldn't have made it a 
little bigger?

Quidditch - yes, I know that above I said I loved it BUT a couple of 
minor niggles. Firstly, I'm sure I remember the scene where Harry 
catches the snitch in his mouth being in COS, am I remembering wrong? 
I'm convinced that it happened in a Gryffindor/ Slytherin game when 
Draco was Slytherin seeker. Unfortunately I've lent all my books out 
so can't check. Secondly, I missed Lee Jordan's commentating - where 
were all his jokes? (And didn't he look too young? I'm sure he 
shouldn't be 13 at this point).

Some of the little clues that make reading the books so much fun were 
omitted, okay, time constraints I know, but how much time would it 
have taken for Hagrid to say he'd 'borrowed Sirius Black's bike and 
had to return it'? or for Uncle Vernon to say 'you're coming to the 
zoo because Mrs. Figg has broken her leg'?

Also, where Harry and Dumbledore's chat at the end is cut we don't 
find out why Snape tried to stop Quirrell from cursing Harry and 
therefore that James had saved Snape's life - surely this is 
important for the 3rd film?

Finally for this part - the new scene between Harry and Quirrell/ 
Voldemort. It didn't make much sense, why change it to this, IMHO, 
much scarier fight when a straight playing of the text would make 
more sense and save having several things different to canon. For 
example/ if the PS wasn't destroyed in the struggle, why destroy it 
at all? Why did Dumbledore need to come back at all? It wasn't as if 
he were needed here to save Harry's life.


3) THE VARIOUS

Talking about pronounciations - I had both Draco and Hagrid right but 
FlaMEL? I had been pronouncing it as if it rhymed with flannel.

I caught the name "..KING" on the trophy, along with McGonagall. The 
rest will be something to look out for next time. (Along with Neville 
at King's Cross).

I'm guessing they changed the snake to coming from Burma because of 
the limitations of London Zoo - perhaps they don't have any snakes 
from Brazil, or perhaps the Burmese one just looked better?

The new scene that supposedly shows Lily's murder - in case it 
matters to you Steve, the Potter's house was a semi-detached, it made 
me wonder if they had wizards or Muggles living next-door, just think 
of what they could hear through the partition wall! Also, I don't 
know if this was only me, but I thought I saw a flash of white light 
befoe and seperate from the green flash from Avada Kedavra.


Okay, well I think that's everything covered :D

Aleks






From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 11 03:35:00 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 03:35:00 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
Message-ID: <9skrl4+mcr1@eGroups.com>

[Responding to several complaints about Richard Harris' performance 
as Dumbledore...]

Well, now you've done it.  I'd been promising and promising myself 
that I was going to reserve final judgment until I see the film, but 
it seems I will be breaking that promise . . .  now.

>From the moment I heard about Richard Harris being cast as Dumbledore 
I have thought it was a mistake.  At first my opinion was largely 
based on the fact that I can assure you that Richard Attenborough

(http://us.imdb.com/Name?Attenborough,+Richard)

would be far more apt for the role than Richard Harris would be.  
Attenborough has the cheerful eccentricity, the paternal sensibility, 
and the *twinkle*.  In addition to this he is frankly a damn fine 
actor, and his name carries at least as much prestige with it in 
Hollywood as Harris's does, if we're going to play the "Big Name" 
game.

Of course this fact alone is not what has slowly biased me against 
Richard Harris as Dumbledore.  That only meant there was a *better* 
choice out there, in my opinion, not that Harris was a bad choice.  
But there has been a steady downward progression of my expectations 
as I read interviews with Harris.  The man clearly has a sharp, 
sardonic wit and I suspect we might even get along well, but quite 
frankly he takes such a *jaded* view of the role that he is pretty 
near doomed to failure.

When asked why he wanted to take on the role of Dumbledore, he 
responded, "Who knows?  It's a job."  In later interviews he has gone 
on to tell the story of how he only took the role because his 
granddaughter threatened him.  It's a cute story, I guess.  And I do 
entirely appreciate that there is a great deal of a professional 
aspect to acting.  Not everyone is going to feel passionate about 
every role they play; and sometimes one can turn in fine performances 
despite this on the basis of pure skill.  But it does put a distinct 
dent in my impression of Harris as Dumbledore, because he can't seem 
to muster up any enthusiasm at all, and that's often a bad sign.

Then he goes on, to my extreme dismay, to explain how he saw no value 
whatsoever in reading the books or talking to JKR about his 
character.  He claims this is because the script makes Dumbledore's 
personality clear enough.  Far be it from me to gainsay that 
statement, but I do have to wonder if it's because he simply doesn't 
care enough to bother.  He has given the impression in some 
interviews that he holds the HP books in a sort of mild disdain.

If that's the case, then that's fine with me, but I have to wonder 
why on earth he is hanging around since he apparently doesn't wish to.

I expect his performance to be quite suitable, because he posesses 
enough professionalism, I think, to make it so.  But I also expect it 
to lack heart, and that's a poor thing to lack indeed.

So much for my reserving final judgment.  I will not totally discount 
any possibility until I've seen the film (and probably several times 
before really feeling confirmed), but I must admit I do not hold out 
much hope.  Harris is going to find *this* audience rather difficult 
to play to.

Still, I realy do hope he surprises me and wins me over or, at the 
least, improves his disposition for the filming of the sequel(s).

Either that or they replace him with Richard Attenborough. :-D

-Luke




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 11 03:39:31 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:39:31 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Richard Harris rant
References: <9skrl4+mcr1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BEDF2F2.8001C569@texas.net>

caliburncy at yahoo.com wrote:

> Either that or they replace him with Richard Attenborough. :-D

Peter O'Toole. No question.

--Amanda
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011110/45cad765/attachment.html>

From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Sun Nov 11 04:53:38 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 04:53:38 -0000
Subject: First impressions of the film 
In-Reply-To: <f63CTAAZ3a77IwVY@cator-manor.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9sl08i+oifk@eGroups.com>

A quick idea about the snake:

> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> >
> LOON moment (and this review will be full of them) - what purpose 
did it
> serve having the snake's origin being Burma, not Brazil?  I do not
> understand why something so trivial should be changed.  

I have a thought about why they may have changed Brazil to Burma.  
Perhaps the species of snake they are using (or computer generating) 
is not native to Brazil.  If they went with Brazil anyway, the snake-
heads would point out the "error."  Better to just say Burma.

Just an idea.

Cindy




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Sun Nov 11 04:57:33 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 04:57:33 -0000
Subject: Uh Oh.  Just How Scary Is The Movie, Anyway?
Message-ID: <9sl0ft+qssg@eGroups.com>

I heard a few people who have seen the movie mention that it is 
scary, and that it should have received a PG-13.  Just how scary is 
it, how long do these parts last, and how did the children (say, 4-5 
years old) in the theatre react?  Were parents sprinting up the 
aisles to take their traumatized offspring outside, were the kids 
crying, or what?

I'm seeing the film with my three kids on opening morning in the 
U.S., but I can leave the youngest with relatives if the film will 
really be more than he can handle.

Thanks.

Cindy







From frances at forever.u-net.com  Sun Nov 11 06:25:50 2001
From: frances at forever.u-net.com (frances at forever.u-net.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:25:50 -0000
Subject: Uh Oh.  Just How Scary Is The Movie, Anyway?
In-Reply-To: <9sl0ft+qssg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sl5le+qaou@eGroups.com>

I didn't notice children crying or being upset and there were certainly 
some very young children in the cinema.

The Voldemort/Harry scene at the end was a big surprise however and 
shocked me a little (second time I saw it was even worse and then I was 
expecting it!). This is the only scene I think children might be upset 
about. The rest of the film is fine.

Frances

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> wrote:
> I heard a few people who have seen the movie mention that it is 
> scary, and that it should have received a PG-13.  Just how scary is 
> it, how long do these parts last, and how did the children (say, 4-5 
> years old) in the theatre react?  Were parents sprinting up the 
> aisles to take their traumatized offspring outside, were the kids 
> crying, or what?
> 
> I'm seeing the film with my three kids on opening morning in the 
> U.S., but I can leave the youngest with relatives if the film will 
> really be more than he can handle.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Cindy





From frances at forever.u-net.com  Sun Nov 11 07:59:20 2001
From: frances at forever.u-net.com (frances at forever.u-net.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 07:59:20 -0000
Subject: Review
Message-ID: <9slb4o+5ul2@eGroups.com>

Here follows my few comments on the film.















I was exhausted afterwards, having seen it twice!! Can't believe I did 
that and haven't done anything like that since Star Wars. At two and a 
half hours, I was surprised that all the young children managed to sit 
through it without creating, so it must have kept them occupied. 

First time round, I wasn't sure about the first half of the film, it 
seemed a little stilted, but the second half was excellent. Second time 
of watching, was much better and it all seemed to flow better too. I 
thought the film kept quite true to the book, and it wasn't too badly 
edited considering how long the film would have run if they'd included 
everything. I would be interested to talk to someone who hasn't read 
the book (and there were some in the cinema) to see if they understood 
the plot without the background we have from almost knowing the book 
off by heart! A professional reviewer I heard hadn't read the book and 
one of his comments was there were bits of plot that didn't go 
anywhere, such as the Norbert storyline. There was no collecting of the 
dragon by Charlie and co. 

On the cast. I can see why they picked Dan to play Harry; he does have 
a very strange sort of screen presence. I found him very easy to relate 
to. BUT there is something about him I'm not sure of. I remember 
reading a threat on one of the posts describing Harry as being a blank 
canvas that children could project themselves onto and it is very easy 
to put yourself into his shoes. Sometimes I felt I just wanted to shake 
him because he took everything in his stride without seeming shocked at 
all. It's difficult to explain. I think they have done something to his 
eyes, but the colour isn't green - more green/blue and isn't really 
right. I have seen stills where they are green, but too green. His eyes 
are striking however and really do have that 'mirror of the soul' 
quality. He carries off the scenes very well and does hold the film 
together, especially when you consider the whole film is from his point 
of view and he is in every scene. There is a quick little moment when 
the Harry in the mirror winks at the real Harry ? a lot of emotion in 
the MirrorHarry in that one expression. There is also a little sad 
scene (well I thought it was) when Vernon is blocking up the letter 
book, and we see a brief little glimpse of Harry playing with a toy 
knight on a horse. He is in his cupboard on his own and you get this 
impression of him being so on his own all the time. James and Lily are 
shown in the mirror, and Lily is also shown in a little flashback scene 
showing Voldemort's attack. Lily was fine, but I thought James was much 
too old and too tidy-haired! In several of the reviews I have read, it 
is commented that the house shown in the flashback was a semi-detatched 
one. I didn't think it was, but will have to look again. I thought it 
was a large house out in the wilds.

Hermione is a little over the top, but I think she works well and I 
warmed to her as the film when on. Ron gets lots of the funny lines but 
is just excellent in the chess scene. He spents most of the film with 
that look we've seen in all the publicity pictures, but in the chess 
scene he genuinely looked worried and the actor showed what he is 
really capable of. 

Alan Rickman is just lovely as Snape, really nasty without being evil, 
but sadly underused. There were a lot of his scenes removed. Snape does 
lots of 'looks', watching Harry out of the corner of his eye etc. 
Interesting part, when he first sweeps into the potions class (all 
flowing robes and slamming doors!), he tells the students what potions 
are all about. He comments that some people are natural at potions and 
several knowing looks pass between him and Draco. This certainly sets 
up Draco being his favourite student AND also that Snape knows Draco 
already

The problem here, with a lot of plot lines is that there are things in 
the first book, which actually don't matter until later in the series. 
(eg. it is not until PoA that you realise why Snape was trying to save 
Harry on the Quidditch pitch). Any reference not required for this film 
has been taken out, so they might have their work cut out in later 
films making up for what was lost here. 

Hagrid got loads of laughs and has a running thing of saying things he 
shouldn't and then saying to him "I shouldn't have said that". He 
really is a huge gentle person and I'd love to know how they managed to 
make him look like a giant - it was very convincing.

Draco is better than I expected. There is no robe shop scene and they 
have moved the bit from the train where he holds out his hand to Harry, 
and put it just before the Sorting ceremony. He manages to carry of the 
nasty looks very well. When Ron laughs at the name Draco Malfoy, the 
look he gives is classic canon-Malfoy. His hair is too yellow blond 
though, but his blue/grey eyes are just fine. An additional little 
scene has been added in the detention in the forbidden forest (which 
they keep calling the Dark Forest) scene. We now have Harry and Draco 
together (had to check my book when I got home to find out if this was 
in it or not). It's a nice little touch with Draco complaining about 
having to do servants work and just wait until his father finds out. 
Harry asks him if he is scared. BUT Harry calls him Draco! Draco is 
also shown as an excellent flyer. During the flying lesson, when he 
takes Neville's Remembrall, he almost leans onto the broomstick in a 
very show-off way before getting on properly while in the air. 
Unfortunately the other students do block this, so you have to be quick 
to catch it. Oh, and he had a nice dress sense. When he shops Harry, 
Hermione and Ron to McGonagall he is wearing a dark green high-necked 
sweater and slacks ? no Muggle jeans here! 

Quidditch is excellent even though we only have one game. It is just so 
fast that it is hard to really take it all in seeing it the first time. 
I know this was computer generated and some have said you could see 
this, I couldn't and it certainly didn't spoil things for me. The 
Slytherin team where as nasty as we would expect and seem to win by 
basically beating everyone up rather than by skill. They did have girls 
on their team, however, whereas in the book Slytherin was an all-male 
team.

Most of the effects are fine, but I didn't like the Centaur very much. 
The movie score works very well, and the use of the "Harry's theme" 
throughout leads to a magical feel. The sets are good. We don't get to 
see much of the dorms, but the Gryffindor common room is good, although 
I expected a much bigger room. Of course, it could be that we only get 
to see part of it. The Great Hall is `great'. Interesting extra is that 
we see the students using it at other times than just for meals. There 
is a scene where clearly the students are doing homework etc. and Harry 
and Ron play chess there rather than in the common room. I like the 
idea of the Hall being a general gathering place.

The climax scene between Harry and Voldemort is actually quite scary. I 
need to reread the book to find out what happens and how to compare it, 
however.

I'd give it 8 out of 10 at the moment. But I can't wait to go and see 
it again. I am sure the debates over it will continue for months and 
months (first being was James really a seeker, second just what is now 
acceptable as canon!). My advice is to go and simply enjoy it for what 
it is a great way to spend two and a half hours!






From frances at forever.u-net.com  Sun Nov 11 10:21:09 2001
From: frances at forever.u-net.com (frances at forever.u-net.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:21:09 -0000
Subject: new scene
Message-ID: <9sljel+uutf@eGroups.com>





















>Why is Lily putting Harry in his crib?  

I think I will have to see the film again. 

Both times I have seen it so far, I wasn't aware Lily was putting Harry 
in a crib. If anything, I thought she was taking him from somewhere. I 
also thought that when he was attacked, Harry was actually on the floor 
as if he'd been in Lily's arms when she fall.

Frances





From prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Nov 11 10:48:16 2001
From: prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk (prima_donna_23 at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:48:16 -0000
Subject: comments on comments on the film
In-Reply-To: <9sk0om+1kpn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sll1g+beq1@eGroups.com>

In message <9sjvpk+he9b at e...>, prima_donna_23 at y... writes
>Me too! So this calls for some spoiler space.

...which I shall borrow...

Well, I'm borrowing it back now!

>I
>
>*
>A
>M
>*
>
>H
>E
>R
>M
>I
>O
>N
>E
>
>G
>R
>A
>N
>G
>E
>R
>
>!
>!
>!
>!
>

Quidditch plaque - OK, large dark wood shield with large gold shield 
in the centre bearing the inscription 'James Potter, Gryffindor 
Seeker, 1972' with a smaller gold shield up and to the right 
definitely saying 'McGonnagal' and one to the left which I'm pretty 
sure said 'RJL'
 
Me as Hermione - Actually I'm a Slytherin or possibly a Ravenclaw, I 
never thought of myself as a Gryffindor! Strangely enough, most 
people who know me agree that I am a Slytherin *and* Hermione, which 
I swear is a contradiction!

James and Lily - Hmmm, maybe Harry did just hear what he wanted to 
hear (ie James being brave and selfless, Lily trying desperately to 
save him).

Snape - I'm still smiling. My favourite Snape part was definitely him 
wishing Harry good luck. I got very strange looks from my paretns 
when we see the cut on his leg and I mentioned that I felt sorry for 
him

Kim
(who has a GCSE on Tuesday and should really be concentrating on that 
*not* Harry Potter - oh well!)




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 11 15:21:17 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:21:17 -0000
Subject: HP4GU Great Lakes Movie Opening Info
Message-ID: <9sm51d+a3vn@eGroups.com>

Attention all HP4GUers who live or will be in Southeastern Michigan 
or Southern Ontario next weekend:

Please check out our last-minute plans on the HP4GU-GreatLakes list:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-GreatLakes

and e-mail me if you wish to join us.  The Star Fairlane theatre in 
Dearborn (across M-39 from Ford Motor Company World Headquarters) is 
convenient to most points in the five-county Motor City area... you 
can travel there from just about anywhere in Oakland or Wayne 
counties in 15 min. or less.  It's is only 15-20 minutes outside of 
Ann Arbor and 10 min. from downtown and the border.

Let us know if you wish to join us.  I am also planning to attend a 
Saturday afternoon show with some students, so if that would be more 
amenable--speak up!

Thanks!

--Eb




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Sun Nov 11 16:13:39 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:13:39 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
In-Reply-To: <9skrl4+mcr1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sm83j+6ep2@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

> From the moment I heard about Richard Harris being cast as 
Dumbledore 
> I have thought it was a mistake.  <snip comments about the other 
Richard>
> But there has been a steady downward progression of my expectations 
> as I read interviews with Harris.  The man clearly has a sharp, 
> sardonic wit and I suspect we might even get along well, but quite 
> frankly he takes such a *jaded* view of the role that he is pretty 
> near doomed to failure.


As another person who has not seen the film and had pledged to remain 
neutral, I do have a few reactions.  Not disagreement, really, just 
reactions.

On balance, it does not surprise me that Harris is not over the moon 
about playing Dumbledore.  I would think it would be a fairly 
mechanical supporting role for an experienced actor, with very few 
(if any) challenges, little up-side, and plenty of risk.  First, 
playing Dumbledore puts Harris in a situation in which he plays 
opposite everything conventional wisdom tell you to avoid as an 
actor:  children, animals, and overwhelming special effects.  If the 
film bombed, he would look completely ridiculous, with his long beard 
and velvet hat perched jauntily on his head.  If the film were great, 
he would get none of the credit.  He probably had misgivings, and who 
can blame him?

So if you are Harris, why do the film at all?  Probably the same 
reason I take assignments over which I'm not entirely enthusiastic -- 
it pays the rent.  As for him feeling that he doesn't have to read 
the books to do the role, well, I think I understand his point of 
view.  Dumbledore really isn't a paricularly deep or complex 
character in the first book, IMHO.  I guess if you've been acting for 
50 years, you have a pretty good idea of when you can get the 
character on your own, and when you need help.  The rest of it (his 
refusal to read the book, his disdain for the books) is, I think, 
just a matter of being crotchety and unwilling to abide by the 
talking points provided by the marketing department.  I actually find 
that just a little tiny bit refreshing.  


Also, I'm not troubled by hearing that Harris' performance is not 
stellar.  There are only a few actors in the film who have to be 
stellar:  the trio, Hagrid and Snape.  The others don't matter nearly 
as much.  In any film, someone must turn in the least compelling 
performance.  If it has to be Harris, I can live with it.


While I'm on the subject, I'd love to know why John Cleese bothered 
with the film.  He is a Big Star in Britain and in the U.S., and I 
understand he only has a few lines.  That is more of a puzzle to me 
than Harris' decision to participate.

Anyway, although I share your handwringing about Dumbledore in the 
film, Luke, I think it will all work out in the end.  

Cindy (hoping we haven't lost Luke as a potential member of S.A.D.)




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 11 17:17:11 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:17:11 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
In-Reply-To: <9sm83j+6ep2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9smbqn+o49d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> wrote:
> While I'm on the subject, I'd love to know why John Cleese bothered 
> with the film.  He is a Big Star in Britain and in the U.S., and I 
> understand he only has a few lines.  That is more of a puzzle to me 
> than Harris' decision to participate.

I've read on IGN filmforce last year that it was because he is a fan 
and wants to be in the movie but I can't find the actual article as 
usual.  I however find the article about him wanting to be in the 
second as well since Nick gets more lines in CoS.

RE Harris:  I am reserving judgement until I get to see the movie 
(Nov. 29th  at Down Under) but early signs from the trailer are 
unpromising.

The thing about Harris is that while he's good, there are better 
choices out there.  The casting of this film has been inspiring e.g.  
Robbie Contrane as Hagrid and Alan Rickman as Snape.  The actors in 
this movie are the best fit for the characters for virtually every 
role, down to people who has only a few lines like John Cleese.

In my fantasy casting, Ian McKellen is Dumbledore.  The twinkling 
blue eyes, the mystery behind the smiles, the sense of humour, the 
feeling that he isn't telling you everything and one of the best 
actors ever.

He is Dumbledore if he isn't Gandalf already. :sigh:  May be we can 
have him after all LOTR movies are screened.

My casting puzzle is why Alan Rickman want to play Snape.  He doesn't 
do many big productions; he has an aversion to villain in black ever 
since Robin Hood.  He hasn't read the books prior to filming so he 
couldn't have known the complexity of the character.(Kudo to him, he 
actually read PS/SS after he landed the role.)  In fact, Columbus 
said in an interview that they actually wanted Rickman but thought he 
would say no and so the casting people went to Roth instead.  




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 11 19:59:06 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 19:59:06 -0000
Subject: film stuff in the Lexicon
Message-ID: <9smlaa+2uvo@eGroups.com>

I have started adding a few odds and ends from the film into the 
Lexicon. I've decided just to give them a reference tag of (SS/f). 
Since it has been discussed on this board a little, I thought I'd 
pass that along. So far there isn't much, but I did add that 
Alohomora is found in chapter seven of the Standard Book of Spells 
and that bit about James as Seeker. I'm sure there will be much, 
much more to come.

Now if I could just get JKR to send me an advance copy of OP so I 
could have things updated in the Lexicon when the book comes out. 
Think she'll do it? Naw, me either.

Steve




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 11 21:10:03 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 21:10:03 -0000
Subject: Shift in canon?
In-Reply-To: <011c01c16959$c536e700$494e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9smpfb+rocb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> wrote:
> I say they messed up the positions and are trying to cover it as 
> best they can without coming out and saying "oops"  Though I do
> like this better, James as Seeker makes more sense then James as 
> Beater in terms of Harry' skill...

I *wanted* James to have been a Seeker, and was annoyed at JKR for 
saying he had been a Chaser, and I guess know I can change the scene 
in my fanfic that referred to him as Seeker and had to be changed 
after that JKR interview back to the way I wrote it, but I believe 
that one totally outstanding Chaser on the team could thereby become 
a celebrity: Ludo Bagman had been 'the best Beater the Wimbourne 
Wasps ever had'. 




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 11 21:29:42 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 21:29:42 -0000
Subject: cats, OT to movie (was: disappointed)
In-Reply-To: <152.3bb738d.291cc701@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9smqk6+9r8b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Schlobin1 at a... wrote:

> thanks to everyone who is expressing sympathy for me about my 
> cat..it really  does make a difference. It's hard to keep talking
> to everyone about how  depressed you are about losing a cat, 
> because many people are not very  focused on animal bonding, and 
> think you're overreacting.....or maybe I just think that.....Diane,
> we had a Maine Coon, too, they are the sweetest things...I think 
> we will be getting a Maine Coon kitten..

I just got back last night from my holiday, and today I am trying to 
get caught up on my mlists (instead of being in chat) and Susan's 
sad news was the FIRST THING, I mean I almost replied before I
finished reading the archive! Anyone who thinks you're overreacting 
is an asshole. I still get tears in my eyes missing Nan, even tho' 
she died in 1998 and was almost 17, elderly. Five years old is young 
and strong, the 'prime' of (adult) life, you must have been shocked 
by sudden surprise as well as loss. 

A cat whom I firmly believe to have been a Maine Coon Cat came into 
my life when my landlady's friend lost her nursing (!) job in the 
1990-1 recession (the one that at the time was the deepest downtown 
in CA since the Great Depression and the first time CA resorted to 
'warrants' to pay state vendors since then, but now is considered not 
to have happened as people speak of an unbroken economic boom from 
1982 to end of 2000) and therefore had to move to a cheaper apartment 
that didn't allow cats and therefore needed a new home for her very 
beloved 'Sarah'. 

I could not bear to call a male cat Sarah so I changed it to 'Sasha'. 
Big strong furry cat, king of all he surveyed. He actually BELIEVED 
that he was boss over everyone EVEN HUMANS (all other cats in my life 
have only pretended to believe that, figuring they could get away 
with the pretense because they're so cute). For example, he liked to 
drink out of the faucet of the bathroom sink. One morning when I was 
brushing my teeth, he jumped up on the sink and PUSHED ME ASIDE to 
get at the faucet. I was so shocked that I put up no resistance, but I 
immediately moved back to my place, pushing him aside, and shouting: 
"Wait your turn! This is MY turn!"  

He liked to sit in the window, look out at the world, and sing. 
Loudly. He clearly thought that he had a beautiful singing voice 
and the neighbors were lucky to be privileged to hear him. He had 
the MOST HIDEOUS singing voice, similar to the cliched Siamese cat 
("raucous") but WORSE and MUCH LOUDER and all the human neighbors 
complained constantly. Nothing we tried was able to stop him. I admit 
it was kind of funny to listen to him tune up his voice before 
starting. He would start with a nice conversational Yow and then say 
it a few more times increasing the ugliness and then get loud.

He also made a particular point of jumping up on my desk, lying down 
on the middle of it (so far no problem) and DELIBERATELY stretching 
and spreading his legs to PUSH EVERYTHING OFF!!!

I thought he was probably 16 when he died, based on an estimate that 
he was 12 when we got him, based on a vet had said he was 'at least 
ten' when he walked into my landlady's friend's apartment two years 
before. Our vet, when we took him for the merciful needle, said he 
seemed to be older than 16, probably AT LEAST 18.  




From dpitzel at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 12 01:22:47 2001
From: dpitzel at mindspring.com (dpitzel at mindspring.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 01:22:47 -0000
Subject: saw it Sunday
Message-ID: <9sn897+3h5d@eGroups.com>

spoiler space


















I was lucky to see the movie today.  My 6-year old son and his 7-year 
old friend loved it.  Not too scary they said.  I also went with my 
husband who's read all but the first book and my friend who's read 
none of the books.  They were both able to follow the storyline/ 
characters for the most part.  Bottom line: we all enjoyed the movie 
and would go again.  

I am glad I had read some other posters' reviews because I did not go 
to the movie expecting the book verbatum.  This change in 
expectations helped me to enjoy the movie even though many of the 
lines were changed or left out.  Considering the way many book to 
movie projects turn out, this one fared very well.  I think the 
makers took care to maintain the heart of the characters and 
storyline for the most part.

There were only a handful of things which bothered me.  The first was 
the pacing of the movie.  I really felt like the first part of the 
movie was too slow and disjointed.  There was a lot of expostion 
material.  We meet Harry as a baby, we meet Harry and the Dursley's 
at age 11, We meet Hagrid, Harry buys school supplies, Harry meets 
students, Harry at Hogwats and Harry meets his teachers.  I enjoyed 
these scenes because I wanted to see Harry's world come to life, but 
something was off. It was like in their effort to introduce all the 
background in the alloted time, they only did a little of each 
without much flow to the story. We really don't even get to the stone 
part of the story until well into the second half of the movie and 
then it really gets moving.  

A few highlights and lowlights:
My son's favorite part: Fluffy
My favortie part: the chess game
My husband and my least favorite part: the centaur
Norbert's storyline seemd to be left hanging.
Harry's protection from Voldemort's touch and Lily's sacrifice were 
not explained as well as they could have been. 
There was no explaination of why Snape was protecting Harry.
Alan Rickman was very good as Snape.  The kids were all very good, 
especially Rupert Grint as Ron.  
I thought Richard Harris was fine as Dumbledore.

One final thing.  The flashback scene with Voldemort and Lily was 
very brief and didn't really seem to contradict anything mentioned in 
the books. We see a figure (Voldemort) enter the house, there is a 
bright flash of light.  We see a a couple shots of a worried Lily 
holding Harry in the nursery.  We see another flash of light.  Then 
we see Harry alone with an unseen figure advancing.  There is no 
sound in this flashback, and the full scene isn't shown.  There just 
isn't a lot of information here to figure out what happened. 

All in all, a good movie which I would see again.  I'm looking 
forward to COS.






From pennylin at swbell.net  Mon Nov 12 04:09:49 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 22:09:49 -0600
Subject: Richard Harris & other musings from the Reviews posted so far
 (SHIPping in the Movie)
References: <9sm83j+6ep2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BEF4B8D.6050607@swbell.net>

Hi all --

I'm so jealous of all of you who have already seen the movie once or
more (mostly the Brits it appears).  I'm also still bummed that I didn't
win tickets to the advance screening here in Houston here today.  Oh
well.  I do have tickets to 1:00 p.m. & 7:00 p.m. on Friday & a noon
matinee on Saturday.

I will use some spoiler space since I intend to talk about things from
reviews people have posted ...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

I
F

Y
O
U

N
E
E
D

I
T

Okay ...

Richard Harris: He certainly *looks* the part, but I'm with Luke, I grow
more & more disturbed by the reviews panning his performance.  I also
think it's one thing for him to admit that he hasn't read the books, but 
I'm a bit incensed at some of his comments that imply quite strongly
that he believes the books are beneath him.  I think his performance
will suffer in the later films for certain if he doesn't take a more
active interest in the role (and the films will suffer accordingly).
Dumbledore is an important role overall IMO.  Perhaps less so in this
first book; Cindy's right about that.  Although the 2 Dumbledore scenes
from PS that come to mind would require AD's twinkle, perceptiveness,
emotional warmth and sense of humor IMO.  I'm thinking of course of the
Mirror of Erised & the hospital wing scene with Harry.

I wonder if they can get out of any contracts with him for the later
films & just replace him?  I haven't even seen it yet and I hope so.
Dumbledore deserves an actor who at least cares enough about the
character to read the books. Lacking "heart" as Luke describes it is
very bad indeed in my book.

MARKETING -- Cindy asked earlier about the marketing being so low-key. 
I agree, and I think I read somewhere that this was how JKR & WB wanted 
it.  I have *yet* to see the TV trailer.  Clearly I don't watch enough 
TV.  :)

CHAT vs MOVIE -- It is hard to say whether either chats or the movie 
should be regarded as canonical (or whether chats should be regarded as 
superior to the Movie).  We *hear* that JKR has been very involved in 
the movie & consulted at every turn.  But, this is hearsay.  The chats 
do flow from her mouth/pen ... but I think Cassie's right to point out 
that it does seem some chat responses are rather contradictory (amongst 
themselves or when compared against canon).  They are also often a 
function of time pressure I would think.

The student numbers debate is a perfect example.  JKR said in a chat 
that Hogwarts has 1000 students.  Many of us (including Lexicon Steve) 
strongly disagree with this, based on the evidence in the books 
themselves.  Premier magazine says Hogwarts has 400 students, and I 
heard on the Katie Couric special tonight that the set included 300 
students.  Being a proponent of the 280-320 students school of thought, 
do I go with the chat script or the Movie evidence?  I've always thought 
that chat answer was glib or just a mistake.

LOONY POINTS -- While I take Cindy's point that perhaps the boa used in
the film was actually from Burma, aren't there likely to be alot more
Potter-philes upset at the change from Brazil to Burma (which seems on
the whole completely unnecessary) than herpetologists pointing out that
the actual snake in the film is native to Burma?  <g>  Like Catherine, I 
think this seems to be a very trivial & weird thing to change.

BTW, many thanks to everyone who is leaving very detailed reviews.  I'm 
thoroughly enjoying them.  It seems like, LOONY nitpicks aside, most of 
us are coming down on the side of this being a spectacular film that 
accomplishes alot (if not everything) that the fans could have wanted. 
I'm happy to hear that.

Al said: > One sensed that Kloves only paid half attention to the book as he scripted the film.

This is strange since all the interviews & stories have, all along, 
emphasized this notion that they were incredibly faithful in adapting 
the book, had input from JKR all along, approached the book as a 
non-fiction text, etc.  Yet, we (the truly obsessed LOONY fans) seem to 
disagree already.  Perhaps they should hire us as consultants!

Catherine commented:

> In fact, most of the problems I had with
> the film was that very good, humorous, original dialogue was replaced
> with dialogue which was infinitely inferior.

I have a feeling that this will be a big disappointment to me.  I must 
confess that I don't understand this at all.  What would be the 
motivation to change perfectly great dialogue if you're not streamlining 
per se?  Hmm.... maybe this will make more sense once I've seen the 
movie, but I doubt it.

Catherine again:

> I know it is difficult to translate a book
> such as this into a feature film - but what really worries me is that if
> this one had to be condensed to the extent that the whole plot and
> character development is very sketchy, how on earth are they going to
> manage with the others - the books get progressively longer and more
> complicated, and I don't think that a film of this nature is really
> going to do them justice.

Yes, this is very worrisome.  If SS is 2.5 hrs, one would imagine they 
can probably make CoS about the same length.  But, PoA may need to be a 
fair bit longer and goodness knows how they handle GoF (I know there's 
been discussion of 2 movies or an intermission).

Finally -- SHIPping in the Movie:

> Judging by the ratio I'd guess that
> either CC's a H/Hm shipper or else JKR is intending to follow that
> line at some point and told him to put it in.

Hee, hee.  I've had the suspicion that Kloves is H/H.  If we add 
Columbus to that mix, I'm even happier. Perhaps the word is from JKR ... 
yeah.  I'll go with that.  :)

*Loved* Cassie's notations of the H/G interaction (He ignores her!) and 
the H/H'iness going on.  Very happy indeed.

Penny
(who cannot wait to see the Movie on Friday!)









From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Mon Nov 12 11:27:21 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:27:21 -0000
Subject: Richard Harris
In-Reply-To: <3BEF4B8D.6050607@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9sobmp+koea@eGroups.com>

Hello

Richard Harris was on a late night chat show in Britain that I dont 
watch regularly - only caught the last 2/3 of the imterview as I was 
skipping channels and landed right ibn the midlde of a clip from the 
film. Comments from interview below spoliers


> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> 
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E

The scene was the explenation of the Morror of Erised and I thought 
the Harry/Dumbledore chemistry was pretty good.

Harris made several very positive comments about the books and said 
Dumbledore was a part which he didnt have to create from the script 
as Jo Rowling had made the part so clear he just had to embody what 
the author presented. 

This is different spin to what he was quoted on in previous 
interviews?

Maybe he is trying to make sure he gets the part in future films.

Edis




From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Mon Nov 12 11:46:58 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:46:58 -0000
Subject: Another review - loved film.  semi-disses the books
Message-ID: <9socri+5lf0@eGroups.com>

Another review 
 with a twist.

Basically this one says the film is better than the book, and hints 
at the old 'truism' that mediocre books can make great films while 
great books tend to make mediocre films.

The URL for this one is 

Julie Myerson
Observer 11 November 2001   

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4296437,00.html

Access on your own spolier responsibility.

One extract below the spoilerspace

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E


Wild about Harry, the movie 
J.K. Rowling's genius lies in taking the best bits from all the 
children's classics to make the Potter books, but the real magic's in 
the film

Julie Myerson
Observer 11 November 2001   


TEXT INCLUDES
>>>
But J.K. Rowling has proved them wrong. She has simply taken every 
single book you ever read as a child and rolled them into one big 
multicoloured whole. Yet, for me, it took Chris Columbus's 
brilliantly engaging film to point this out. And yes, the film is 
wonderful - a lavish riot of magic and adventure. All of J.K. 
Rowling's quirky ideas - staircases that suddenly swing in different 
directions, oil paintings whose subjects move and speak - are 
realised with heart-stopping, million-dollar effect. Everything is 
done on a big scale and it works. The film has pace, beauty and a 
grandiose John Williams score reminiscent of every adventure movie 
you've ever seen. A clutch of famous names (Cleese, Rickman, Walters, 
Hurt) appear in crunchy character roles and the young newcomers 
playing the three kids - Harry, Ron and Hermione - make them glow 
with real warmth and genuine humour, something I found lacking in the 
books. 

I have to confess that as far as I know, with the noble exception of 
Mr Davies (my daughter's Year 6 teacher), I am the only human on the 
planet who does not really rate the Harry Potter books. I've really 
tried to like them, but I'm constantly underwhelmed. I find the 
writing terminally unsatisfying - stiff, old-fashioned and utterly 
lacking in charm or elegance. The plots alarmingly jump from one 
scene to another without proper motivation. There's practically no 
characterisation. I try to concentrate yet find I'm glazing over. 

But my kids, like everyone else's, adore them. Now at last I 
understand why. 
<<<





From jwh at comp.leeds.ac.uk  Mon Nov 12 13:26:19 2001
From: jwh at comp.leeds.ac.uk (jwh at comp.leeds.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:26:19 -0000
Subject: Film thoughts/review
Message-ID: <9soilr+ed4u@eGroups.com>

Saw the film on Saturday night...

*
*
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
*
*
*
*
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
*
*
*
*
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
*
*

Hope that's enough!

I really loved the film - thought that overall the acting and 
direction were both excellent.
I think it's a great help to have read the book before seeing the 
film, as I'm sure you'd be able to follow everything that was 
happening just from the film...

The casting was perfect - with the only exception of Richard Harris, 
who was fairly life-less and lacked many dumbledore-esque qualities. 
As someone said, plenty of gravtias, zero twinkle. :(

A couple of little bug-bears.. You get very little sense of the 
animosity Snape has for Harry, and the whole life-debt thing has been 
dropped altogether.
And I'm *sure* I got a glimpse of Dumbledore watching the Quidditch 
game (where Snape/Quirrel spell-cast on Harry)?!?!?!?!

That aside it's generally faithful to the book, and very enjoyable. 
The special effects are almost seemless (ie you don't notice them), 
with a couple of exceptions, but very well executed.

Good film! :)






From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 12 13:43:07 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 05:43:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Critics Ebert and Rouper pov's
Message-ID: <20011112134307.25062.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>

Sunday morning 'Ebert & Rouper' Harry Potter review.

Two thumbs up! They believe that this is going to be
this generation's 'Wizard of Oz'! Clearly, they both 
read the book to focus on all that Chris Columbus and
JKRowling, making sure, it kept true to the book for
all the fans out there! They really liked the movie!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band
of Mery Muggles 100%

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com



From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Mon Nov 12 16:47:41 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:47:41 EST
Subject: Dialogue Changes
Message-ID: <da.ed92d3f.2921572d@aol.com>

Borrowing from Penny:
I will use some spoiler space since I intend to talk about things from
reviews people have posted ...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

I
F

Y
O
U

N
E
E
D

I
T

Catherine commented:

> In fact, most of the problems I had with > th film was that very good, 
humorous, original dialogue was replaced  with dialogue which was infinitely 
inferior.>

Penny said:
I have a feeling that this will be a big disappointment to me.? I must 
confess that I don't understand this at all.? What would be the 
motivation to change perfectly great dialogue if you're not streamlining 
per se?? Hmm.... maybe this will make more sense once I've seen the 
movie, but I doubt it."

My comment:
I have a feeling this has been done partly because the younger readers of the 
books and younger viewers of the movie haven't been given enough credit as to 
what they'll understand/enjoy. I suppose this was a monumental task, making 
the movie in a way that would be faithful to the book, would enable non 
readers to understand/enjoy it, and appeal to so many ages.
This isn't meant to be a defense of the dialogue changes, some of my 
favourite  parts have been omitted or changed. Columbus and Kloves may have 
read the books, but even having made the movie, they probably don't have the 
"feel" for it that so many of us do. After all, we do it for love, they do it 
for money. Let's just hope they catch the passsion. 
I may just be hoping extra hard but I think Daniel Radcliffe may have it, to 
some extent, and if so, that'll make up for a lot of omissions. It would be 
nice if he had a worthy Dumbledore though, IMO.
~Ashleigh.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011112/561233d2/attachment.html>

From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov 12 18:52:16 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:52:16 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
Message-ID: <9sp5p0+dms0@eGroups.com>

Does anyone know what kind of snake it actually was? You say it was 
from Burma, was it a Burmese python? Or a Boa Constrictor thats cage 
said from Burma?
Alex
92% obsessed Potter
45832994885% obsessed, Herpetology




From absinthe at mad.scientist.com  Mon Nov 12 19:26:59 2001
From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:26:59 -0000
Subject: Platform Question
Message-ID: <9sp7q3+pona@eGroups.com>

Early in the production there was talk that King's Cross Platform 9 
3/4 would be changed to Platform 9 1/2 for the American version. Did 
they end up doing that or did they stick with 9 3/4?

Milz




From absinthe at mad.scientist.com  Mon Nov 12 19:54:17 2001
From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:54:17 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
In-Reply-To: <9sp5p0+dms0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sp9d9+m662@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Alex" <alexp at a...> wrote:
> Does anyone know what kind of snake it actually was? You say it was 
> from Burma, was it a Burmese python? Or a Boa Constrictor thats 
cage 
> said from Burma?
> Alex

IIRC in the book, the snake at the zoo was a boa constrictor from 
Brazil. It says "adios amigo" to Harry as it slithered away.

Milz




From suki_willoughby at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 12 20:15:12 2001
From: suki_willoughby at yahoo.com (suki_willoughby at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:15:12 -0000
Subject: Platform Question
In-Reply-To: <9sp7q3+pona@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9spakg+htjg@eGroups.com>

They stayed with Platform 9 3/4. I thought the scene was very nicely 
done.

Suki

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Milz" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
> Early in the production there was talk that King's Cross Platform 9 
> 3/4 would be changed to Platform 9 1/2 for the American version. 
Did 
> they end up doing that or did they stick with 9 3/4?
> 
> Milz




From jonathandupont at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 12 20:52:24 2001
From: jonathandupont at hotmail.com (jonathandupont at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:52:24 -0000
Subject: Review (Non spoilers and Spoilers) - Re: Shipping, Dumbledore, etc.
Message-ID: <9spcq8+al3q@eGroups.com>

Hi all. Very interesting to read all the reviews and comments so far -
 especially the talk about what is to be accepted as canon or not. I 
would suggest that new facts should at least be taken as 'half-
canon' - as Steve has done.


Non spoiler bit...
Well, I saw the film yesterday and I mostly loved it. Very, very 
faithful - as much as we could have hoped for really - and great 
acting. Rupert, as everyone says, was absolutely brilliant (add 
another b word for alliteration before that if you like) and so were 
Emma, and Daniel. 
However, obviously its best to go in with low expectations - not 
everything is perfect after all. Just enjoy it.

Enough of this. On with the 



S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

A
L
R
E
A
D
Y

First things first to get it over and done with. Shipping - or the 
H/G moment. I hope Penny doesn't mind if I steal her quote as it was 
the nearest one availible:-

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> *Loved* Cassie's notations of the H/G interaction (He ignores her!) 
and 
> the H/H'iness going on.  Very happy indeed.
> Penny
> (who cannot wait to see the Movie on Friday!)

He didn't quite ignore her - and he had a lot on his mind at the 
moment. What I was a bit surprised at was that Ginny does not learn 
who Harry is - and she still seems immediately taken with him. I'd 
always pictured her being overawed at first because of the celebrity 
thing. Maybe she's just being friendly.

On a related note - I'm hoping that the chess match may dilute some 
of the anti-Ron feeling... It shows him in his best, and a lot of 
noble sacrifice. Tell me - does he look then as if he's likely to 
betray Harry lately?

Because I'm completely unorganised - some more random thoughts that 
the movie inspired in me, going chronologically:-

- The Snake scene - very nice idea of the added bit with Dudley - 
almost caused as big a laugh as the bit with the Ron and the 
broomstick, or Hagrid's running joke. I liked the change a lot - the 
look on Dudley's face was priceless.

- The Letters scene - I thought the bit where they were flying 
everyone was great - the hundreds of owls also caused a laugh.

- The Hut scene - I didn't like the changes they made to this. By 
splitting up the explanation of Hagrid's past, we lost a lot of the 
impact of Hagrid getting mad at the Dursleys. Also I don't think it 
was made explicitly clear why Harry Potter was famous. Did they 
actually did state clearly that the spell rebounded, Voldy was half 
killed and thus the dark reign ended?

- The flashback - You can tell you're too devoted to fanfic when one 
of the first thoughts in my mind was, "Right, that's messed up the 
back story to Barb's Time of Good Intentions then" - of course, this 
is semi canon, but still... I also always pictured it happening at 
night

- The station scene - Nice introduction of the Weasleys, although I'd 
preffered it to be a bit longer.

- The meeting of the trio - Did anyone else get a shiver down their 
spine when the trio met for the first time? Bit like R2/3PO from Star 
Wars Ep 1, or whatever. It might have been just me deliberately 
looking for it but I thought the music changed just slightly when we 
saw Scabbers for the first time. Then again I think it was my mind 
just implanting it - as there's no way John Williams would probably 
know or be able to play that, is there? Still, I can't quite look at 
the rat innocently.

- The Sorting Hat Scene - Ahem - way too contrived the order they 
sorted the students in... except maybe [insert drum roll]... they 
were doing them by age. It seems to me that if you're not going 
alphabetically, by age would be the next logical one. And who was 
first? Why Hermione, who we know has a September birthday. Yes... I 
really did sit in a cinema and think "Aha! Crucial evidence for the 
1979 theory". Also note that Ron goes before Harry - which fits in 
with the age thing. I'm assuming that there were other students we 
didn't see in between the stars and Susan Bones - who I assume we saw 
to show us that other houses existed, but so that they didn't have 
the trouble of casting someone important for a later movie.

- Early section of the movie - I understand why they did it, but I 
didn't really like the way they replaced Hermione with Neville 
basically in the early scenes. Kind of undid the whole point of the 
Troll incident.

- Invisibility cloak - just wanted to add that I loved the effect.

- Quidditch - I enjoyed it a lot, and it certainly was very brutal. 
Harry did seem to sit still for the first half of the match though. I 
actually enjoyed the surfing bit <shrug>. Don't know how they're 
going to handle this in future - one match a film, and what about POA?

- Mirror of Erised - Very well done scene IMO. Would have been nice 
to see Ron's POV though. Still, I found it the most emotional scene 
in the film.

- Dumbledore - He appeared in the above scene - that's my link ...  - 
I agree, Richard Harris had the worstly done character in the film. 
There was none of the lightheartedness or kidness of the books. He 
NEEDED to have read the books - I think he just assumed automatically 
that D was a typical Merlin-like figure.

- Norbert - or wherever he appeared. I think he was unnecessary, and 
a waste of time to be honest.

- The End - Devil's Snare scene was, well, different. I miss very 
much the "Are you a witch?" line, but I know why they did it. Keys 
was an interesting variant - Harry definitely throws it to Hermione 
by the way - and the Chess was very well done, although not that much 
of a good finale. So onto, the Voldemort scene ie. where they changed 
everything. 

BIG(GER) SPOILERS FROM HERE ON IN.

What they did was interesting I suppose. Personally I'd have played 
it as canon, but showed Dumbledore running in and battling with Voldy 
while Harry was still screaming. The crumbling effect of Quirrel was 
interesting but ... I don't know, a bit too violent for me. And a bit 
too easy. Harry didn't seem in as much pain either. On the plus side -
 well fanfic wise, Voldy offering to bring Harry's parents back will 
add creditability to a few fanfics. Though it kinda causes problems 
with the magic cannot bring people back from the dead rule, doesn't 
it? Maybe the dark lord was just lying.

The very end I think they played wrong - if you see Harry Knowles 
review on www.aintitcool.com (he's saving the books for a depressed 
time) he absolutely hated it. We, who've read the books can justify 
it, but I can see why an outsider wouldn't like it. The 'LOVE' thing 
(it sounded in capitals) came off wrong for one thing, and they 
should have explained it more. Where was the "Snape saved your 
father" thing, as well? The big problem Harry had was that he felt 
Gryffindor winning the House Cup was contrived - and silly, in giving 
the hero everything. I can see why it would seem so in the movie - 
because the movie focused so much on the stone (BTW notice how they 
cleverly only refer to it as Philosopher's / Sorcerer's (I presume) 
once - very neat). We saw nothing of Harry's school life, and so why 
Gryffindor earned the cup.

I think they needed an extra ten minutes to focus on the normal 
school year. This should have included:-

- Most importantly Harry and co. getting in trouble for all the 
points they lost. That really undercut the bravery of them going 
after the Stone.

- Fred and George. They were badly missed in the jokes department - 
and what about setting up for the Marauder's Map?

- Introduction to classes and subsequent scenes - I'm talking about 
20 second sequences here where we introduce classes or remind the 
audience of Snape's hatred. Stuff to show time passing. How do you 
that quickly? Well - a few montages would have been nice.

I think that honestly would have been worth the extra time. Besides, 
COS and POA are going to have to be longer anyway so you might as 
well do a more complete look at this book...
 
So, overall, good work people, and keep it up. I look forward highly 
to Chamber, and are considering seeing this one again. I was not 
dissappointed.

Now let's hope Lord of the Rings is good,

Jon








From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Mon Nov 12 21:40:12 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:40:12 -0000
Subject: HP Dateline Special
Message-ID: <9spfju+8mga@eGroups.com>

Well, I can't see the film until Friday, so I had to go with the next 
best thing:  Katie Couric's HP special in the U.S.

The main HP related thing I noticed from the special is that the 
marketing people seem highly concerned about making sure adults who 
have not read the books come to see the movie.  They seemed to spend 
a great deal of time explaining basic HP concepts.  They spent almost 
no time explaining how particular effects were done, which is what I 
expected to see.

Dan's voice seems a bit deep, but not out of the ordinary for a child 
of his age.  I think he'll sound fine in CoS.

Richard Harris is the most boring person I have seen give a 
promotional interview in a long time.  Maybe he felt silly in his 
costume.  Who knows?  I think Luke and Penny may be right -- his 
heart is definitely not in this role.  They should have used the 
interview time on someone else -- the animal trainer, the special 
effects guy -- anyone else.

Dan has been well-coached about how to give interviews.  His answer 
to the "worst thing about being Harry" is -- nothing, it is all 
great.  He was right on message.

Emma needs a little more coaching.  She described Hermione as "awful."

Rupert is an old pro.  Self-effacing yet confident, with a good sense 
of humor.  And how can skin that soft be on anyone but an infant?  
Has he ever been out in the sun?  :-)

Jo was not in the special.  Maybe she is working on OoP.  Let's hope 
so.

Anyway, that will have to do until Friday.

Cindy (who has decided that the snake is a Burmese Python, like Alex 
suggested)




From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 12 22:34:40 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:34:40 -0000
Subject: Review comments/press notes
In-Reply-To: <9spcq8+al3q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9spiq0+4e0a@eGroups.com>


*chortles with evil glee* I'm still on a high from going to the NY 
premiere and shaking Dan Radcliffe's hand. Yes, I know he's twelve. 
But he's Harry! I'm not weird. Not very weird anyway.

I uploaded the press notes Warner Bros sent me into the Files 
section. They are very boring but if we ever need them for reference, 
they have a lot of information about the cast and crew.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU/Movie/files/FINALAPPROVEDPotterNOT
ES.htm

Random comments:

 > S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> 
> A
> L
> R
> E
> A
> D
> Y
> 
> First things first to get it over and done with. Shipping - or the 
> H/G moment.  > He didn't quite ignore her - and he had a lot on his 
mind at the 
> moment. What I was a bit surprised at was that Ginny does not learn 
> who Harry is - and she still seems immediately taken with him. I'd 
> always pictured her being overawed at first because of the 
celebrity 
> thing. Maybe she's just being friendly."

Oh, pfft, he completely ignores her -- I've now seen it twice, and he 
does not even LOOK at her or register that she wished him good luck. 
As for Ginny -- when she first sees him her eyes widen -- I had this 
odd feeling she guessed who he was -- but then again how would she?
> 
" On a related note - I'm hoping that the chess match may dilute some 
> of the anti-Ron feeling... It shows him in his best, and a lot of 
> noble sacrifice. Tell me - does he look then as if he's likely to 
> betray Harry lately?"

*eg* Hey, most of us RISS'ers quite liked Ron up until GoF. I've 
always said that chess scene was his finest moment. Then again, look 
at all the fine moments Anakin Skywalker had.


It might have been just me deliberately 
> looking for it but I thought the music changed just slightly when 
we 
> saw Scabbers for the first time. Then again I think it was my mind 
> just implanting it - as there's no way John Williams would probably 
> know or be able to play that, is there? 

No, he doesn't know about Scabbers being Peter. He has read only the 
first book and that with reluctance. He told me he has "no intention 
whatever of reading the others." Whatever to him, IMHO.

"On the plus side -  well fanfic wise, Voldy offering to bring 
Harry's parents back will  add creditability to a few fanfics."

*laughs* Oy. I thought that too.

Cassie




From jonathandupont at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 12 23:13:53 2001
From: jonathandupont at hotmail.com (jonathandupont at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:13:53 -0000
Subject: Review comments/press notes
In-Reply-To: <9spiq0+4e0a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9spl3h+bf2e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., cassandraclaire73 at y... wrote:
> 
> *chortles with evil glee* I'm still on a high from going to the NY 
> premiere and shaking Dan Radcliffe's hand. Yes, I know he's twelve. 
> But he's Harry! I'm not weird. Not very weird anyway.

I'd be on a high. I'm still on a kind of high from seeing it 
yesterday. 

> I uploaded the press notes Warner Bros sent me into the Files 
> section. They are very boring but if we ever need them for 
reference, 
> they have a lot of information about the cast and crew.
> 
> 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU/Movie/files/FINALAPPROVEDPotterNOT
> ES.htm

Thanks for them - I still find it a bit stupid that ... (carried on 
under Spoiler Warning) - 

> Random comments:
> 
>  > S
> > P
> > O
> > I
> > L
> > E
> > R
> > S
> > 
> > A
> > L
> > R
> > E
> > A
> > D
> > Y

... they include John Cleese in the main credits though. At the 
cinema it amazed me that he got first credit till I realised they 
were going alphabetically. Still, he had more of a cameo than 
anything else.

> > First things first to get it over and done with. Shipping - or 
the 
> > H/G moment.  > He didn't quite ignore her - and he had a lot on 
his 
> mind at the 
> > moment. What I was a bit surprised at was that Ginny does not 
learn 
> > who Harry is - and she still seems immediately taken with him. 
I'd 
> > always pictured her being overawed at first because of the 
> celebrity 
> > thing. Maybe she's just being friendly."
> 
> Oh, pfft, he completely ignores her -- I've now seen it twice, and 
he 
> does not even LOOK at her or register that she wished him good 
luck. 
> As for Ginny -- when she first sees him her eyes widen -- I had 
this 
> odd feeling she guessed who he was -- but then again how would she?

Well - lets put it this way, he doesn't look like he deliberately 
ignores her, which is how seemed to come out from some people. He 
pays about the same amount of attention to her that he does to 
everyone else. The poor boy is a bit overwhelmed at the moment - I'd 
personally be wearing a glazed look for ... well, the whole year 
actually.

Still you've got the advantage of seeing it twice, and to have an 
equally valid opinion, I'll have to go see it again... What a pity.

I'm guessing she might learn who he is the scene on the platform - 
which I reckon was probably just taken out of the final cut. It could 
fit into there anyway.


> " On a related note - I'm hoping that the chess match may dilute 
some 
> > of the anti-Ron feeling... It shows him in his best, and a lot of 
> > noble sacrifice. Tell me - does he look then as if he's likely to 
> > betray Harry lately?"
> 
> *eg* Hey, most of us RISS'ers quite liked Ron up until GoF. I've 
> always said that chess scene was his finest moment. Then again, 
look 
> at all the fine moments Anakin Skywalker had.

What, the moments when you wanted to strangle him for 
shouting "Yippee!" for the hundredth time? 

The chess scene was his finest moment. And the potions / devil's 
snare was probably Hermione's. That was the last time the two of them 
got really tested after all.

 
> No, [John Williams] doesn't know about Scabbers being Peter. He has 
read only the 
> first book and that with reluctance. He told me he has "no 
intention 
> whatever of reading the others." Whatever to him, IMHO.
> Cassie

Ah well, just my mind implanting it then. Still, good on him for at 
least trying to read it unlike a certian unsuitable actor with the 
initials RH...

(I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to criticise JW too much. Being a 
Star Wars fan and all, and you know, the soundtrack and all).

Jon





From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov 12 23:17:44 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:17:44 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
In-Reply-To: <9sp9d9+m662@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9splao+7qu6@eGroups.com>

I meant in the movie (With an exasperated Hermione air ;-))
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Milz" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Alex" <alexp at a...> wrote:
> > Does anyone know what kind of snake it actually was? You say it 
was 
> > from Burma, was it a Burmese python? Or a Boa Constrictor thats 
> cage 
> > said from Burma?
> > Alex
> 
> IIRC in the book, the snake at the zoo was a boa constrictor from 
> Brazil. It says "adios amigo" to Harry as it slithered away.
> 
> Milz




From alexp at alltel.net  Mon Nov 12 23:31:55 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:31:55 -0000
Subject: The snake.
Message-ID: <9spm5b+jsb@eGroups.com>

Definitve Answers!!! I saw a pic. The snake in the movie is a burmese 
python. Python molurus bittivatus. I know this will come as a great 
relief to those of you sitting with bated breath, waiting to find out 
about the snake ;) 
Alex
92% obsessed Potter
9395969969696969696958737398595908733% obsessed, Herpetology





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 13 13:52:44 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:52:44 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
In-Reply-To: <9skrl4+mcr1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sr8jc+rh55@eGroups.com>

But there has been a steady downward progression of my expectations 
> as I read interviews with Harris.  The man clearly has a sharp, 
> sardonic wit and I suspect we might even get along well, but quite 
> frankly he takes such a *jaded* view of the role that he is pretty 
> near doomed to failure.

As further indication of Harris' disdain for the books and the Dumbledore part, 
he has now been quoted on the "original" HP boards (message 29138) as saying 
that Dumbledore is 2000 years old.  

So he appears to have done his own, imaginary, character development rather 
than pay attention to the content of the book(s).    Even if the only reason he 
took the role was because of his grand-d's alleged "blackmail," he still should 
have done the part properly, if he's as professional as he claims to be.  

What a shame, if indeed he is signed for all the films, though I can't believe 
the rumor that he has signed for all seven, considering that none of the other 
actors has been signed for that long, and indeed the key players such as 
director haven't been decided!

Here's a link from message 29138, which is supposed to go to the source of 
the Dumbledore-is-a-2000--year-old-man quote, though it didn't work for me.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1651000/165




From bkdelong at pobox.com  Tue Nov 13 14:13:52 2001
From: bkdelong at pobox.com (B.K. DeLong)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:13:52 -0500
Subject: 15 Minutes worth of film clips online
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20011113091254.05be0010@pop.earthlink.net>

Hey all -

CountingDown has just put a full 15 minutes worth of clips from the film 
online - and not those annoying trailer cuts either - real clips what we've 
been seeing on the TV shows.

Definite spoilers and good stuff:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2001_11_11_archive.html#7086884

--
B.K. DeLong

The Harry Potter Galleries
http://www.hpgalleries.com/

Editor-in-Chief
The Leaky Cauldron News section
bkdelong at the-leaky-cauldron.org
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/
+1.617.877.3271






From mike.aldridge at freeuk.com  Tue Nov 13 15:19:19 2001
From: mike.aldridge at freeuk.com (Mike Aldridge)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:19:19 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My Richard Harris rant
References: <9sr8jc+rh55@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OE54GyUbvH4KQ7IPNHp00015f6a@hotmail.com>

----- Original Message -----
From: <Joanne0012 at aol.com>
> What a shame, if indeed he is signed for all the films, though I can't
believe
> the rumor that he has signed for all seven, considering that none of the
other
> actors has been signed for that long, and indeed the key players such as
> director haven't been decided!
>
> Here's a link from message 29138, which is supposed to go to the source of
> the Dumbledore-is-a-2000--year-old-man quote, though it didn't work for
me.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1651000/165

The correct link is
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1651000/1651390.s
tm.  Hope that gets through OK.  According to this article, Harris along
with the rest of the British cast were asked to sign for the
seven-movie-deal.

Regards,
Mike Aldridge



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 13 15:37:59 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:37:59 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
In-Reply-To: <OE54GyUbvH4KQ7IPNHp00015f6a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9sreon+m0bv@eGroups.com>

> 
> The correct link is
> 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1651000/1651
390.s
> tm.  Hope that gets through OK.  According to this article, Harris along
> with the rest of the British cast were asked to sign for the
> seven-movie-deal.
> 
> Regards,
> Mike Aldridge

Thanks for the fix, Mike!  BUT . . .  that article says the cast were ASKED to 
sign a 7-movie deal.  Apparently Zoe Wanamaker and some others didnt:  
another link from BBC, quotes her as saying:

"Some actors signed three-film deals, but the money was so poor I was 
insulted so I just signed for one. 

"If they want me for a second, they'll have to up their rates." 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/film/newsid_1651000/1651
552.stm




From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Nov 13 16:12:05 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:12:05 -0600
Subject: Ron  & the Chess Scene
References: <9spl3h+bf2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF14655.6020503@swbell.net>

Hi --

jonathandupont at hotmail.com wrote:

 
>  > " On a related note - I'm hoping that the chess match may dilute
> some
>  > > of the anti-Ron feeling... It shows him in his best, and a lot of
>  > > noble sacrifice. Tell me - does he look then as if he's likely to
>  > > betray Harry lately?"
>  >

Cassie replied:

>  > *eg* Hey, most of us RISS'ers quite liked Ron up until GoF. I've
>  > always said that chess scene was his finest moment. Then again,
> look
>  > at all the fine moments Anakin Skywalker had.

Exactly.  I liked Ron just fine until GoF.  He was never my favorite, 
but I certainly didn't dislike him.  I can still *love* him in the chess 
scene in PS/SS (and the movie) but not be taken with where I see his 
character trending.  Of course, with benefit of GoF, it's possible to go 
back to the first 3 books & see things about his character that one 
wouldn't necessarily pick up on the first read.  But, I still like PS/SS 
Ron.

Anyone else think it was rather interesting that Rupert's take on Ron is 
that he is a wuss at heart?  I wonder if the Sorting Hat had trouble 
with Ronnie-kins too?


Jonathan:

> 
> The chess scene was his finest moment. And the potions / devil's
> snare was probably Hermione's. That was the last time the two of them
> got really tested after all.

Oh, I don't think so.  Ron conquers his fears to stay by Harry's side in 
the Forbidden Forest (Aragog incident) in CoS.  Hermione & Harry have 
the adventure with the Time Turner & saving Buckbeak & Sirius.  Hermione 
must conquer her fears of flying on Buckbeak.

Cassie:

> 
 No, [John Williams] doesn't know about Scabbers being Peter. He has
> read only the
>  > first book and that with reluctance. He told me he has "no
> intention
>  > whatever of reading the others." Whatever to him, IMHO.

Ditto.  *Whatever* to anyone intimately involved with the film who 
doesn't want to read the books.  Their loss.  Possibly our loss too in 
the case of someone like Richard Harris though.

Penny
(who loves the soundtrack but is seriously miffed about this attitude 
Williams has about the books)




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov 13 11:30:11 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:30:11 EST5EDT
Subject: gotta smile at that....
Message-ID: <5A951631B2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

On IMDB, Harry is finally under the Opening This Week 
category....Been waiting a long time for that one!

It amazes me the difference of opinions on these lists.  
For example....the people who hate the soundtrack.  That 
blows my mind!  How can someone dislike the music?  John 
Williams is and always will be one of the top two composers 
in film.  Look at all he's done.  He is a truly remarkable 
person with an amazing talent that never ceases to blow 
away his peers' work.  Who would you have picked?  I guess 
if it couldn't have been John Williams, I'd would have 
picked Danny Elfman.  No one else could have done this 
movie.

Let's all be grateful that there isn't a potential Top 40 
hit, like....oh, I don't know....a sappy something by 
Celine Dion titled "The Boy Who Lived" or "Chocolate Frogs 
and Every Flavor Beans of My Heart" or "Our Souls Are Bound 
Together By More Than Spellotape".  

And all this nit-picking on the scenes left out.....there's 
going to be DVD of it, I'm sure.  We'll just have to wait 
and see what pops up on that.

And for all you purists who have seen (are going to see) 
the movie, what exactly were you wanting to see?  Has there 
ever been a true Hollywood adaption of a book?  I'm not 
being critical at all, I'm really wanting to know.  I've 
said it before, the movie version of Harriet the Spy was 
terrible.  But from what I've seen in clips and the such, 
it looks like Harry is as close to the book as they can 
get.  And seeing that Jo Rowling was there and she seems 
very happy with it, what more could we want?

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov 13 11:36:14 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:36:14 EST5EDT
Subject: Dark Horizons
Message-ID: <5AAE69586F@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

For those of you who like movie sites, one of my favorites 
is Dark Horizons.  Garth is great at getting bits and 
pieces of info on his news site.  But it looks like he's a 
big Harry Potter movie fan now!  He's changed the look of 
his site.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news.htm

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

For America means a bit more than tall towers, 
It means more than wealth or political powers, 
It's more than our enemies ever could guess, 
So may God bless America! Bless us! God bless! 



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 13 17:09:40 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:09:40 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
In-Reply-To: <9splao+7qu6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9srk4k+sbv7@eGroups.com>

Please, let's not get TOO Loony about the snake scene.  There ARE boa 
constrictors from southeast asia (including one called a "rainbow boa"), so it 
doesn't need to be a python to be from Burma.  Maybe somebody with more 
ambition than I can search out some boa photos?

I would be much more concerned about herpetologists pointing out that snakes 
have no eyelids (for winking), or linguists pointing out that people in Brazil do 
not speak Spanish ("Adios, amigo.").




From maryblue67 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 13 17:12:26 2001
From: maryblue67 at yahoo.com (Maria)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:12:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: movie DVD
In-Reply-To: <1005477555.612.65933.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011113171226.84336.qmail@web11108.mail.yahoo.com>


I saw the other day on tv that the DVD for Shriek (sp?)
contains 11 hours of movie, extra scenes, games, etc.

So i thought: i read somewhere that up to 4 hours of film
had been shot, but they had to reduce it to 2 and a
half,for obvious reasons. Couldn't we start a petition or
something to get a cool DVD, with all the additional scenes
(Peeves, Norbert etc..., even if they are not in order, but
i think for us it wouldn't matter, everyone knows where
they go!! ), if not more stuff? I understand that they
can't make a movie last 4 hours in the theater, however,
why not put the rest in a dvd?

How would one organise sucha petition? Who should it be
sent to?

Any ideas/comments?
 

=====
Maryblue
----------------------------------------------------------
"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling
in love" - Eistein

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 13 17:16:04 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:16:04 -0000
Subject: gotta smile at that....
In-Reply-To: <5A951631B2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9srkgk+j6uk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> For example....the people who hate the soundtrack.  That 
> blows my mind!  How can someone dislike the music?  John 
> Williams is and always will be one of the top two composers 
> in film.  Look at all he's done.  

But that's exactly why he should NOT have done the film.  IMHO, just as they 
sought out new faces for the trio, they should've found a fresh composer for 
the sound track.  I was SO disappointed when I heard that Williams was 
selected to do the score.  All his stuff sounds the same to me, overblown and 
formulaic.  Whenever I see a film he's done, I'm always very aware of the 
sound track and Williams's "sound" and style.  IMHO, the sound track should 
complement the action, not overwhelm it.  I would have preferred a more 
subtle scoring.




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 13 17:43:47 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:43:47 -0000
Subject: movie DVD
In-Reply-To: <20011113171226.84336.qmail@web11108.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9srm4j+3ocr@eGroups.com>

Not much time to interact at the moment, sadly, but I did want to add 
this:

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Maria <maryblue67 at y...> wrote:
> So i thought: i read somewhere that up to 4 hours of film
> had been shot, but they had to reduce it to 2 and a
> half,for obvious reasons. Couldn't we start a petition or
> something to get a cool DVD, with all the additional scenes
> (Peeves, Norbert etc...)

There are two issues here:

1) Columbus confirmed in an interview that there never was a four 
hour version; that was just a rumor.  And another interview seemed to 
imply that the two and a half hour final version was barely cut at 
all for length, so there may not be as much extra footage as we think 
(except the usual alternate (canned) takes and that kind of thing).

2) Presumably they never filmed the additional scenes for Norbert, 
because the script itself would've had that scene taken out.  As for 
the scene with Peeves, Columbus said the reason he cut it was not 
because of length but because he wasn't happy with the special 
effects--so he may not want to put that in the DVD either.

Of course, the standards of journalism surrounding the HP movie are 
not exactly at their highest, so any of the things I've said above 
may be proved wrong tomorrow.  :-)

On the bright side, I do expect they will put in as many extras on 
the DVD release as is humanly possible, because that has definitely 
been the trend the industry is moving toward.  So I think we can 
expect some new stuff of one sort or another.

-Luke




From john at walton.vu  Tue Nov 13 18:26:26 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:26:26 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] movie DVD
In-Reply-To: <20011113171226.84336.qmail@web11108.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <B8171652.4840%john@walton.vu>

Maria wrote:

> I saw the other day on tv that the DVD for Shrek
> contains 11 hours of movie, extra scenes, games, etc.

Yeah -- but only because the film 2 1/4 hours long, times 5 for 4 alternate
dubs plus one "commentary track" by the crew, plus some (admittedly funny)
short special features -- a funny bit as if the animated characters were
real, a karaoke session with all the characters, etc.

Almost certain is a crew commentary (where the soundtrack has not only the
cast acting, but the crew commenting...i.e. "do you remember when I goofed
that shot?" "Yeah, and I fell off that truck!"). I'd LOVE a cast
commentary...possibly with JKR as well.

Warners, if you're listening...

--John

____________________________________________

"It's our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our
abilities." --Albus Dumbledore

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From alexp at alltel.net  Tue Nov 13 19:30:04 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:30:04 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
In-Reply-To: <9srk4k+sbv7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9srsbs+fgad@eGroups.com>

There are no boas in southeast asia. The rainbow boa you refer to is 
of the genus epicrates, and occurs in brazil, columbia, and argentina.
Boas are a different subfamily, and are strictly new world phenomena. 
Pythons are old world phenomena with one exception, the calabar 
burrowing python of mexico. Sorry about the L.O.O.N - iness, just 
wanted to clarify the point. I have no problem with a burmese python 
from burma in the snake scne, though. I am a herpetologist, and was 
going to point out that snakes have no eyelids, too :)
Please don't take anyhting personally, or too seriously, it's just 
something that I care about immensel
Alex
92% obsessed
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> Please, let's not get TOO Loony about the snake scene.  There ARE 
boa 
> constrictors from southeast asia (including one called a "rainbow 
boa"), so it 
> doesn't need to be a python to be from Burma.  Maybe somebody with 
more 
> ambition than I can search out some boa photos?
> 
> I would be much more concerned about herpetologists pointing out 
that snakes 
> have no eyelids (for winking), or linguists pointing out that 
people in Brazil do 
> not speak Spanish ("Adios, amigo.").




From dai_evans at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 13 22:00:16 2001
From: dai_evans at yahoo.com (Dai Evans)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:00:16 -0000
Subject: gotta smile at that....
In-Reply-To: <5A951631B2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9ss55g+61qn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> It amazes me the difference of opinions on these lists.  
> For example....the people who hate the soundtrack.  That 
> blows my mind!  How can someone dislike the music?  John 
> Williams is and always will be one of the top two composers 
> in film.  Look at all he's done.  He is a truly remarkable 
> person with an amazing talent that never ceases to blow 
> away his peers' work.  Who would you have picked?  I guess 
> if it couldn't have been John Williams, I'd would have 
> picked Danny Elfman.  No one else could have done this 
> movie.

He is a remarkable composer with amazing talent. However, if he puts 
no effort in and has no enthusiasm for the project, as with the PS 
soundtrack, then the result is still going to be substandard.

A composers good predigree does not guarantee good music. It has 
already been said on list (although I havn't read the source 
interview myself) that JW carried some disdain for the movie, as if 
he felt it beneath him; I find this clearly reflected in the music.

I wonder if he is in some way trying to support his old buddy Steven 
Spielburg.

When listening to the soundtrack, as I did several times when forming 
my opinion, I found many echoings of of his previous work, 
particularly ET and Jurassic Park (also some people have mentioned 
Hook, but I don't know that one), as if he just rehashed some old 
scores and added a few new bits here and there.

Taking ET as a particular example, this has one of the most memorable 
soundtracks in a movie. I don't know many people who couldn't hum the 
famous tune in the background as Elliot flies in front of the full 
moon. Conversely I very much doubt if many people could remember the 
more memorable parts of the PS soundtrack (beyond us devotees of  
course).

There is very little about this soundtrack that makes it good. 
Admittedly, there's very little that acually makes it bad, but good 
it is not. Personally I expect better than a mediocre score to be in 
the background of a great movie. I expect people like JW (and, of 
course, Richard Harris) whos fans have put them where they are, to 
treat their fans with more respect than to churn out shoddy goods 
just because they feel a particular project is beneath their celebrity


Dai.




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 13 22:05:45 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:05:45 -0000
Subject: gotta smile at that....
In-Reply-To: <9ss55g+61qn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ss5fp+vsvs@eGroups.com>

I totally agree with you. The sound track is awesome. I normally hate 
classical music, but I can't stop listening to the HP soundtrack. I 
can hear bits of Hook and Jurssic park in it, but it is an origional 
creation in itse




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 13 23:01:44 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:01:44 -0000
Subject: JW complaints (was: gotta smile at that....)
In-Reply-To: <9srkgk+j6uk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ss8oo+5v2c@eGroups.com>

Joanne wrote:

> I was SO disappointed when I heard that Williams was 
> selected to do the score.  All his stuff sounds the same to me, 
overblown and 
> formulaic.  

That's my complaint too.  Naturally it's going to be recognizable--if 
you know someone's style you can identify his/her work instantly.  
But to me JW's music is very bombastic, and I also get the sense he's 
turning out the same old thing over and over instead of paying 
attention to the unique attributes of the movie in question and 
responding to it.  Ennio Morricone comes to mind as a soundtrack 
composer whose style is instantly recognizable but who seems to me to 
bring something different to each film I've heard him score, and 
that's one reason I like him so much.

Anyway, to address Rachel's point, there's no arguing matters of 
taste.  I'm glad others have enjoyed the soundtrack so much.  I hope 
I will do the same, but knowing how JW usually strikes me, I'm not 
overly optimistic.

Amy Z




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 03:19:47 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:19:47 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] gotta smile at that....
Message-ID: <73.15faf949.29233cd3@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/13/2001 11:33:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
bray.262 at osu.edu writes:

<<   Has there 
 ever been a true Hollywood adaption of a book?  I >>

Gone With the Wind?
The Godfather?

Those are certainly two extraordinary films

Susan



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 03:22:35 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:22:35 -0000
Subject: What kind of snake?
In-Reply-To: <9srsbs+fgad@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sso1r+o3ql@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Alex" <alexp at a...> wrote:
> There are no boas in southeast asia. The rainbow boa you refer to is 
> of the genus epicrates, and occurs in brazil, columbia, and argentina.
> Please don't take anyhting personally, or too seriously, it's just 
> something that I care about immensel
> Alex

Goodness, Alex, I'm so sorry, I think I must have read my reference resource 
too quickly.  You're right, of course, no boas in Burma. 




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 03:24:08 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:24:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: gotta smile at that....
Message-ID: <5b.1e9e2ec8.29233dd8@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/13/2001 5:02:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
dai_evans at yahoo.com writes:

<<  Conversely I very much doubt if many people could remember the 
 more memorable parts of the PS soundtrack (beyond us devotees of  
 course). >>

I don't know..my four year old can hum the theme, and often does.....



From acolby at home.com  Wed Nov 14 03:39:02 2001
From: acolby at home.com (acolby at home.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:39:02 -0000
Subject: My Richard Harris rant
In-Reply-To: <9smbqn+o49d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ssp0m+fnd0@eGroups.com>

This relates to my own disappointment on the Dumbledore 
casting. In my head (since the first time I picked up the book) 
Dumbledore has been Micheal Palin (John Cleese's Monty 
Python and Fish called Wanda co-star). Put a fake beard and 
some big eyebrows and you've got (well mine at least) 
Dumbledore.

It's alarming to me that Harris wouldn't even read the books. The 
character is wonderfully deep and evolves throughout the books.

My $.02.

acolby at home.com

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., MMMfanfic at h... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> 
wrote:
> > While I'm on the subject, I'd love to know why John Cleese 
bothered 
> > with the film.  He is a Big Star in Britain and in the U.S., and I 
> > understand he only has a few lines.  That is more of a puzzle 
to me 
> > than Harris' decision to participate.
> 
> I've read on IGN filmforce last year that it was because he is a 
fan 
> and wants to be in the movie but I can't find the actual article as 
> usual.  I however find the article about him wanting to be in the 
> second as well since Nick gets more lines in CoS.
> 
> RE Harris:  I am reserving judgement until I get to see the 
movie 
> (Nov. 29th  at Down Under) but early signs from the trailer are 
> unpromising.
> 
> The thing about Harris is that while he's good, there are better 
> choices out there.  The casting of this film has been inspiring 
e.g.  
> Robbie Contrane as Hagrid and Alan Rickman as Snape.  The 
actors in 
> this movie are the best fit for the characters for virtually every 
> role, down to people who has only a few lines like John 
Cleese.
> 
> In my fantasy casting, Ian McKellen is Dumbledore.  The 
twinkling 
> blue eyes, the mystery behind the smiles, the sense of 
humour, the 
> feeling that he isn't telling you everything and one of the best 
> actors ever.
> 
> He is Dumbledore if he isn't Gandalf already. :sigh:  May be we 
can 
> have him after all LOTR movies are screened.
> 
> My casting puzzle is why Alan Rickman want to play Snape.  He 
doesn't 
> do many big productions; he has an aversion to villain in black 
ever 
> since Robin Hood.  He hasn't read the books prior to filming 
so he 
> couldn't have known the complexity of the character.(Kudo to 
him, he 
> actually read PS/SS after he landed the role.)  In fact, 
Columbus 
> said in an interview that they actually wanted Rickman but 
thought he 
> would say no and so the casting people went to Roth instead.




From khafara at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 04:36:40 2001
From: khafara at aol.com (khafara at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:36:40 -0000
Subject: HP Dateline Special
In-Reply-To: <9spfju+8mga@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sssco+221o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cynthiaanncoe at h...> wrote:
> Well, I can't see the film until Friday, so I had to go with the 
next 
> best thing:  Katie Couric's HP special in the U.S.
> 

Katie Couric is a Dementor whose relentless perkiness sucks all the 
joy out of those who watch her, but even she couldn't ruin this show.

Emma Watson is a very, very dangerous young lady who is just starting 
to realize the enormity of her powers.  She probably already has 
broken a number of young boys' hearts without even knowing it.

Rupert Grint is quick and on the make, much like Ron Weasley 
himself.  A very good choice!

And young Daniel Radcliffe... perfection.  He has this aura of mature 
sadness about him, the same Stoic aura Harry carries with him.  He 
looks like a young John Lennon, something that I notice David 
Letterman has picked up on (teasers from the DR interview on DL show 
Dave saying "so where's George and Ringo?").

Catherine Cook




From khafara at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 04:42:47 2001
From: khafara at aol.com (khafara at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:42:47 -0000
Subject: Ron  & the Chess Scene
In-Reply-To: <3BF14655.6020503@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9ssso7+1tet@eGroups.com>

Actually, Ron won't turn (for one thing, he's got decent dress robes 
now).   Not after the third test and all that.  Put yourself in Ron's 
shoes, and see if you all would do as well.

Besides, the most likely Weasley to turn bad would be Percy, whose 
blind devotion to The Rules almost certainly means that he's going to 
go down with Fudge's ship and break with the rest of the family.




From khafara at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 04:50:09 2001
From: khafara at aol.com (khafara at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:50:09 -0000
Subject: movie DVD
In-Reply-To: <20011113171226.84336.qmail@web11108.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9sst61+hfj0@eGroups.com>

I think the thing to do is to tell WB directly!

Thing is, the one biggest complaint I've heard about the film is that 
it wasn't long enough!  The little kids that can barely sit still for 
typical 'kid fare' movies were glued to their seats for this one!

WB will, if they have ANY brains at all, do a "Director's Cut" 
version.  For once, it won't be gratuituous.

Catherine Cook

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Maria <maryblue67 at y...> wrote:
> 
> I saw the other day on tv that the DVD for Shriek (sp?)
> contains 11 hours of movie, extra scenes, games, etc.
> 
> So i thought: i read somewhere that up to 4 hours of film
> had been shot, but they had to reduce it to 2 and a
> half,for obvious reasons. Couldn't we start a petition or
> something to get a cool DVD, with all the additional scenes
> (Peeves, Norbert etc..., even if they are not in order, but
> i think for us it wouldn't matter, everyone knows where
> they go!! ), if not more stuff? I understand that they
> can't make a movie last 4 hours in the theater, however,
> why not put the rest in a dvd?
> 
> How would one organise sucha petition? Who should it be
> sent to?
> 
> Any ideas/comments?
>  
> 
> =====
> Maryblue
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling
> in love" - Eistein
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
> http://personals.yahoo.com




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Wed Nov 14 07:37:44 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 07:37:44 -0000
Subject: gotta smile at that....
In-Reply-To: <9ss55g+61qn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9st709+hn4n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Dai Evans" <dai_evans at y...> wrote:

> When listening to the soundtrack, as I did several times when 
forming my opinion, I found many echoings of of his previous work, 
> particularly ET and Jurassic Park (also some people have mentioned 
> Hook, but I don't know that one), as if he just rehashed some old 
> scores and added a few new bits here and there.
> 

I do love John Williams and think he is a wonderful composer. I 
thought maybe it was just me, when I listen to the soundtrack, that 
it sounds a bit like E.T.. I thought maybe because both movies have a 
whimsical quality about them that it made me think of E.T. and that 
soundtrack. I hadn't thought about Hook or Jurassic Park, I did 
however think it had a bit of a Star Wars quality to it as well. 

It may just be the way he writes for what might be called
"blockbuster fluff" type movies, the soundtracks all have similar 
aspects. Jaws, SW, Close Encounters, Indy, E.T., JP, HP, and probably 
Hook. It seems that the more "serious" movies like Schindler's List, 
Saving Private Ryan, and Angela's Ashes don't have that cookie cutter 
feel about them. Just my obsevartions on the whole soundtrack thing.

Cheers,

Kristin
     




From aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org  Wed Nov 14 15:28:20 2001
From: aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org (Meredith Wilson)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 07:28:20 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: gotta smile at that....
Message-ID: <D8085AFE4BC7D4119EA00090271EDF1503C5B5@mailsrv.seattle.nmof.org>


**I do love John Williams and think he is a wonderful composer. I 
**thought maybe it was just me, when I listen to the soundtrack, that 
**it sounds a bit like E.T.. I thought maybe because both movies have a 
**whimsical quality about them that it made me think of E.T. and that 
**soundtrack. I hadn't thought about Hook or Jurassic Park, I did 
**however think it had a bit of a Star Wars quality to it as well. 

I noticed an E.T. and a Star Wars quality, too, but I think that's true of
any composer, especially someone who's written so many soundtracks to some
of the most well-known movies of all time.  I know I can pick a James Horner
score or a Danny Elfman score (who I adore) from a mile away.  I like this
soundtrack immensely, especially the Diagon Alley song, the Fluffy song, the
Quidditch tournament and Hedwig's theme.  I think it has the proper magical
feel and a wonderful feeling of excitement.

Meredith



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Nov 14 13:15:47 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:15:47 EST5EDT
Subject: Did anyone see...
Message-ID: <7457DE054B@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

TRL yesterday?  I was wondering how that went.  From what I 
understand from watching Dan on Letterman there was a girl 
that showed up in a towel and a sign that said "Nothing 
gets between me and Harry Potter".  Thought that 
was....odd.  Dan seemed amused, though.

Oh well.  Just curious how it went.  I've got the VCR set 
to tape Rosie (grrrrr....I can't believe I'm going to have 
that woman on a video in my house.....can't stand her) so 
I'm eager to see that tonight when I get home.

Wonder if the cast will be doing Larry King Live?

Just kidding.

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 heiditandy at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 14 20:06:45 2001
From: heiditandy at yahoo.com (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:06:45 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Did anyone see...
In-Reply-To: <7457DE054B@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <001d01c16d47$e6be95c0$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem>

Rachel asked:
> From: Rachel Bray [mailto:bray.262 at osu.edu] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 8:16 AM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Did anyone see...
> 
> 
> TRL yesterday?  I was wondering how that went.  From what I 
> understand from watching Dan on Letterman there was a girl 
> that showed up in a towel and a sign that said "Nothing 
> gets between me and Harry Potter".  Thought that 
> was....odd.  Dan seemed amused, though.

Cassie and Ashley were at TRL and lurked outside Letterman's stage door
as well - they posted their experiences at
http://pub51.ezboard.com/fhpparadisefrm17.showMessage?topicID=90.topic
and
http://pub51.ezboard.com/fhpparadisefrm17.showMessage?topicID=92.topic -
and Towel Girl, whose name is Candice, did too! She has a very cleverly
made Personal Pic of clips from her meeting with Dan on TRL.



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




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Nov 14 15:40:14 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:40:14 EST5EDT
Subject: Did anyone see...
Message-ID: <76C0487D23@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Ah.  Thank you very much for the links!

I had a giggle fit when Dan was talking about the towel 
girl on Dave last night.  I thought, he must have loved it 
but I bet his parents were thinking "And so it starts...."

:-)

Brave girl to be showing up at TRL in towel.  I'm rather 
tickled about it.  That was quite nervie!


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 pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Nov 14 20:54:24 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:54:24 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] gotta smile at that....
References: <73.15faf949.29233cd3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3BF2DA00.2000808@swbell.net>

Hi --

Schlobin1 at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/13/2001 11:33:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> bray.262 at osu.edu writes:
> 
> <<   Has there
> ever been a true Hollywood adaption of a book?  I >>
> 
> Gone With the Wind?

The book GWTW is quite different from the film actually.  Extraordinary 
film but it departs from the book in some big ways (naturally ... the 
book is over 1000 pages long & even with close to 4 hours of film time 
... it differs in some material ways).

Penny





From alexp at alltel.net  Wed Nov 14 21:07:07 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:07:07 -0000
Subject: Who's got tickets? Alex Has tickets!!
Message-ID: <9sumdr+o377@eGroups.com>

7:30 friday Night!!! (Snake scene and all:))
Alex





From taradiane at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 14 22:03:57 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:03:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Did anyone see...
In-Reply-To: <7457DE054B@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <20011114220357.35308.qmail@web11502.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Rachel Bray <bray.262 at osu.edu> wrote:
> TRL yesterday?  
snip 
> I've got
> the VCR set 
> to tape Rosie (grrrrr....I can't believe I'm
> going to have 
> that woman on a video in my house.....can't
> stand her) 

I taped it....it was, um, embarrassing.  Leave it
to Carson Daly to try and corrupt the poor lad. 
She wasn't just wearing your average towel
however, it was a HP towel.  The minute he caught
glimpse of her at the window he backed away and
started laughing.  Then Carson brought her in to
meet him (Daniel was very gracious however, most
boys of 12 would of still been giggling like
mad).  The funny part was that on Letterman later
that night, when Letterman brought up TRL you
could tell by the look on Daniel's face that the
mere mention of TRL makes him think "girl in
towel".  By the way, did you catch the funny he
made about the windows?  Could he be any more
adorable??

Ditto on the Rosie sentiments...

Tara, who got giddy with glee when she saw Ron's
CHUDLEY CANNONS banner in his dorm on the Katie
Couric special

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From keegan at mcn.org  Wed Nov 14 22:49:41 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:49:41 -0800
Subject: Newsweek
In-Reply-To: <20011114220357.35308.qmail@web11502.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <7457DE054B@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011114144816.00a746a0@mail.mcn.org>

Newsweek has an odd review of the movie.  Overall, they liked it but they 
also noticed a few problems.

The Trouble with Harry
The ingredients are right - but where's the alchemy?

Any way, check it out and see what you dis/agree with.

Catherine in California



From sarahlinks14 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 14 22:53:32 2001
From: sarahlinks14 at yahoo.com (sarahlinks14 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:53:32 -0000
Subject: Rosie spoilers?
Message-ID: <9suslc+a8mm@eGroups.com>


I watched the Rosie O'Donnell Harry Potter Hour which I thought was 
pretty well done.  She's obviously a fan and did a good job putting 
the three kids at ease.  They all came across as very natural, 
regular kids.

Anyways, during Richard Harris' interview he mentioned that if he did 
one movie, he'd have to do them all.  He gave the impression that 
that's part of his contract.  If this is true then it's a clear sign 
Dumbledore will be around through book 7.  Definate spoiler in my 
opinion.  So if Richard Harris has been contracted through movie 7, 
then we can count on Dumbledore through book seven.  Unless JKR does 
a Ben-Kanobi and brings him in as a ghost.

Any other takes on his disclosure?

Sarah




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Wed Nov 14 22:57:11 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:57:11 -0000
Subject: Richar Harris in Seven Movies (WAS Rosie spoilers?)
In-Reply-To: <9suslc+a8mm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9suss7+r8g3@eGroups.com>

Sarah wrote:

 
> Anyways, during Richard Harris' interview he mentioned that if he 
did 
> one movie, he'd have to do them all.  He gave the impression that 
> that's part of his contract.  If this is true then it's a clear 
sign 
> Dumbledore will be around through book 7.  

I wouldn't be too worried.  They probably have negotiated something 
like he commits to do all 7 movies, but they make him no guarantees 
and they reserve the right to boot him and buy out his contract.

If JKR doesn't like his performance, I suspect he won't be around 
long.

Cindy




From pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Nov 14 23:40:12 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:40:12 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Richard Harris in Seven Movies (WAS Rosie
 spoilers?)
References: <9suss7+r8g3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF300DC.7030106@swbell.net>

Hi ---

Cindy C. wrote:

> Sarah wrote:
> 
> 
>  > Anyways, during Richard Harris' interview he mentioned that if he
> did
>  > one movie, he'd have to do them all.  He gave the impression that
>  > that's part of his contract.  If this is true then it's a clear
> sign
>  > Dumbledore will be around through book 7. 
> 
> I wouldn't be too worried.  They probably have negotiated something
> like he commits to do all 7 movies, but they make him no guarantees
> and they reserve the right to boot him and buy out his contract.
> 
> If JKR doesn't like his performance, I suspect he won't be around
> long.

Spoken like a true lawyer!  This lawyer agrees.  His contract is no 
doubt full of outs if they want to exercise them.  His contract may also 
be to play Dumbledore in upcoming movies -- that does not mean that 
Dumbledore will be around in the 7th movie.  :--)

Penny





From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 15 00:17:51 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:17:51 -0000
Subject: Ron's broom
Message-ID: <9sv1jf+ulbk@eGroups.com>

*vaguely wondering if anyone else laughs out loud every time they see
the scene where Ron's broom smacks him in the face*

Hey--I love Ron, don't get me wrong, but that is SO perfect for his
character, I laugh every single time I see the clip (just wait until I
see the real thing, <bg>).

-Megan (2.5 more days until she sees HP!)




From cynthiaanncoe at home.com  Thu Nov 15 02:01:15 2001
From: cynthiaanncoe at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 02:01:15 -0000
Subject: Ron's broom
In-Reply-To: <9sv1jf+ulbk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9sv7lb+b904@eGroups.com>

Megan wrote:

> *vaguely wondering if anyone else laughs out loud every time they 
see
> the scene where Ron's broom smacks him in the face*
> 
> Hey--I love Ron, don't get me wrong, but that is SO perfect for his
> character, I laugh every single time I see the clip (just wait 
until I
> see the real thing, <bg>).


I, too, already like that scene very much.

I'm trying to reserve judgment, but based on what I've seen and read, 
there is some possibility that the movie could actually, just maybe, 
possibly be better than the book.  It seems they've added some clever 
things, like the broom smacking Ron, they've stayed true to the 
story, and they've cut things that don't matter much.  Since PS/SS is 
only my third favorite book out of the four, maybe Columbus has 
achieved the near-impossible:  making the movie better than the book.

Cindy (letting her expectations get completely out of control)




From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Thu Nov 15 02:28:08 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 02:28:08 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Ron's broom
In-Reply-To: <9sv7lb+b904@eGroups.com>
References: <9sv1jf+ulbk@eGroups.com> <9sv7lb+b904@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aUeKNDC4gy87EwWg@dickson.demon.co.uk>

(No spoilers.)

In message <9sv7lb+b904 at eGroups.com>, Cindy C. <cynthiaanncoe at home.com>
writes
>I'm trying to reserve judgment, but based on what I've seen and read,
>there is some possibility that the movie could actually, just maybe,
>possibly be better than the book.

There have been reviews where people have said that they liked the movie
better than the book, but they tended to be from people who didn't
particularly enjoy the book. Furthermore, I can't remember any HPFGU
fans of the book going on record as saying they preferred the movie -
indeed, there is a definite sentiment of "don't get your expectations
*too* high" running through many fan reviews. (Easier said than done!)

Happily, there are areas in which consensus (at least, to the limited
extent to which consensus exists) does regard the movie more highly than
the book; most of the inserted scenes to flesh out Ron and Hermione's
characterisation seem to be broadly well appreciated.

Oh, heck - just enjoy it for what it is! :-)
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Thu Nov 15 05:09:59 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 05:09:59 +0000
Subject: Review of the Scottish premiere last Tuesday [tiny spoiler, clearly spaced)
Message-ID: <2gZBwSJn4087EwwY@dickson.demon.co.uk>

(Oh, go and read about Cassie shaking Dan Radcliffe's hand instead.
http://pub51.ezboard.com/fhpparadisefrm17.showMessage?topicID=80.topic
It's much more interesting than this!)

My tale begins on October 17th, when John Walton posts a message to
HPFGU-London asking "who wants to go to the Edinburgh premiere?" -
later, The Leaky Cauldron confirms this with an Empire Online posting; a
dozen tickets are on auction at qxl.com, with the MS Society in Scotland
to benefit. The minimum bid is GBP 25, with a payment of GBP 250
sufficient to purchase a ticket outright without any of the stresses of
the auction procedure.

Some humming, ha'ing and budget-balancing later, a bad thing happens to
a good credit card and I purchase the second ticket of the twelve. Over
the coming six days, six single tickets are bought this way; the other
six are sold as three pairs (two pairs at twice GBP 175, one at twice
GBP 185). A phone call to a nice lady at the charity confirms and
organises the payment and I start to hint, darkly but knowingly, about a
brush with greatness in my signature.

A few days later, the ticket arrives, itself a miniature of the
evocative image of one of the movie posters. The premiere is taking
place as the official grand opening of the new Ster Century cinema,
itself one attraction in a brand new shopping mall called "Ocean
Terminal". It's situated in Leith, a dockside district of Edinburgh, a
few minutes north of the centre of Scotland's capital. I book a room in
a cheap B&B ("Bed and Breakfast" - a guest house, or downmarket
family-owned hotel) in Leith and happily daydream about what I might see
for a week in advance.

Tuesday comes, as does a trim at the barber's shop and the three trains
required for Middlesbrough to Edinburgh (all habitually late). After
reading Philosopher's Stone once more, I catch a bus from outside
Edinburgh Waverley to the Ocean Terminal mall. The red carpet has
already been laid outside the main entrance; event organisers were
preparing for fans to appear, collecting autographs and the like.

A quick look around the mall reveals that perhaps a third or a quarter
of the units have active shops - the rest are either for sale or in
development. A large open-plan cafe dominates one side of the second
floor, with ocean views; this "Ocean Kitchen" is where the receiption
will be held later. Almost all of one side of the (tallest) top floor is
given over to the Ster Century cinema, where the HP posters and banners
are going up already. There's also an exhibit concerning the Royal Yacht
Britannia and its branded merchandise; apparently there's some ownership
connection between Britannia and the Ocean Terminal mall, with some of
the Ocean Terminal design supposedly reflecting a cruise liner.

Half-finished shopping centres are only so interesting, so I make my way
on foot through Leith to the B&B, looking for e-mail payphones as I go.
Interesting shops passed on route include some blacked-out offices
called "Mindsearch" (presumably a recruitment agency with a fancy
name?), a hardware store called Dobbies, a small but interesting
second-hand bookshop and a massage parlour (ehhh). At the twelfth
attempt, I encounter a payphone with e-mail facilities in the middle of
Leith; it's no more than twenty yards out of my route, so I mentally
mark it as a stop for my return journey after the show.

The rest of the journey to the B&B passes without incident. I check in,
collect my room key, have a lie down, have a shave, a shower and change
into my clothes for the big event. The dress code was specified as
"smart casual", which covers a multitude of possibilities; style gurus
counselled "your best suit which doesn't look like you'd wear it to
work, a non-white shirt and no tie". Happily, my green-grey jacket and
complementary shirt turn out reasonably well, eventually placing me at
about the median point of smartness among the audience. A blessed
relief!

The published timetable for the evening is as follows:

5:30pm - Doors open
6:00pm - Reception starts
7:15pm - Progress to movie screens
7:45pm - Screen introductions
8:00pm - Show begins

I wander back to Ocean Terminal, aiming to arrive a little after six.
It's getting colder, but at least it's set to be a dry evening. In my
hand is a little bag with the ticket, camera, umbrella, maps and my copy
of Philosopher's Stone. I check that the ticket is there six times en
route.

Here's the strange bit.

At the penultimate road junction before Ocean Terminal, the road I'm on
merges with another, from the right. A couple join from this road,
walking perhaps three or four metres ahead of me. They are heavily laden
with bags from clothes shops and are walking arm in arm. We're all
walking in the same direction and it dawns on me that it might, might,
possibly maybe just be JKR and the gentleman who accompanied her to the
World Premiere in London. Yes, I had looked at the photos just in case

My heart starts to race and I walk a little faster. (I even walk very
slightly down a junction so I can get a look at their faces from the
side. This is not at all subtle on my part - they notice me doing this
but don't react to it.) The man looks about accurate, but the lady
doesn't look like the JKR we've seen on the photos. This lady is shorter
and younger-looking than JKR's photos. Furthermore, she speaks with a
Scottish accent. I therefore decide that they *aren't* JKR and
companion, but merely a moderate facsimile. I hang back a little.

The couple cross the road to the cinema; I walk a little further forward
to take photos of the occasion. (Huge floodlights are illuminating the
sky; there are little open fires decorating the road; there are at least
fifty or a hundred fans waiting at the sides of the red-carpeted channel
that ticketholders walk down into the venue.) A couple of photos later,
I cross the road, get my ticket out and show it to a bouncer. He
inspects closely, then, to my great relief, waves me down the red
carpet.

Nearly at the end of the red carpet, a stationary family block
everyone's path. Some event staff ask us all to stop for a moment as TV
cameras are taking some shots. We are told that on our left - two yards
away, but with her back turned to us, talking to some people (it's not
clear whether they're fans or other event staff) - is J. K. Rowling.

More emotions than I can handle collide and confuse. First, I decide
that the lady in the couple who I followed *was* JKR after all. Then I
decide that it would probably be best not to interrupt her. Then I
decide that I will go inside the shopping mall and wait for her to come
in and tackle her then. Then I decide I've missed my chance once and for
all. Then I decide that I have made far too many decisions far too
quickly.

In confusion, I go into the shopping mall. Inside, there are fans at the
other side of the railings, almost all with copies of some book or
other, waiting for autographs. It's clear that there wouldn't be a good
place to wait to try to get an autograph. All the same, I hang around
for a short while. JKR doesn't come inside. I decide it would probably
be obvious and incorrect to hang around here for too long.

So I go up to the Ocean Kitchen where the reception is being held,
reflecting over what has happened and what I have missed. The reception
has, I guess, perhaps five hundred people milling aound a forty-yard
square, with staff handing out nibbles (vegetable spring rolls, smoked
salmon on French bread slices, tiny burgers of unspecified meat - and
later some very good garlic bread) and drinks. Sadly, the drinks are
generic: wine, orange juice and mineral water, no attempt at butterbeer.

For the next 45 minutes I wander around the reception, recognising
absolutely nobody, seeing lots of women who look a bit like JKR. They
haven't got hordes cornering them, though, so they can't be her. I see
one person signing an autograph, but can't recognise him. I see one
group getting lots of photographs taken of them, but can't recognise any
of them. The crowds overflow the designated reception area. I think
everyone is looking for JKR - or just someone they recognise. About
3%-5% are in full costume; mostly kids, but also some adult ladies.
There are quite a few Harrys and Hermiones, but no obvious Rons. Another
3%-5% are wearing partial costume, usually a cape or a hat. About one in
three people are obviously carrying a book, hoping for an autograph.

Later reports suggest Sean Biggerstaff (playing Oliver Wood) was there,
but I don't recognise him. Nor do I recognise Chris Columbus or David
Heyman. Nor do I recognise any other celebrities (of which there are
apparently very few - C-list TV host Carol Smilie, crime writer Ian
Rankin and some local comedians whose fame does not extend out of
Scotland.

Finally I see someone with a name badge - they are a director of the MS
Society in Scotland, so I thank him for putting tickets up for auction
online and letting me get there to the venue. I struggle to make small
talk for a while. Shortly after seven, the crowds leave for the cinema
screens. The cinema has twelve screens, and at least the three biggest
(300+ seats each), possibly four, are showing the film. I get a seat in
cinema seven, in the second furthest back row, a single seat at the
aisle end of a half-row of four, next to a party of three who got
tickets from a MS Society employee.

The seats are very nice, made from comfortable leather-effect material,
black, with very good legroom and little cup-holders. Waiting for us on
the seat are a box of Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beans and a bag of
sweet popcorn; there is a half-litre bottle of Coke in the cup-holder as
well.

We sit and wait, listening to the soundtrack, as every single seat in
the cinema is filled up. Eventually, the house lights dim, leaving only
a spotlight at the front of stage. A Ster Century executive climbs up
some stairs located in the far corner, brings a microphone to the
spotlight and introduces producer David Heyman to the briefest of polite
applause. David speaks for a few seconds, hoping we enjoy the film,
bringing on Chris Columbus. A little more polite applause. Chris also
speaks for under thirty seconds, giving huge credit to the one and
only...

...J. K. Rowling. She gets the longest round of applause of the three,
but I'm horrified that it's barely eleven seconds or so long. (And
nobody gives her a standing ovation! I would have tried to start one,
had I been close enough to the front for anyone to see me try.) Joanne
has laryngitis, which she claims is brought on by saying "No, book five
isn't coming out yet and I don't know when it will be" five hundred
times a day... to her daughter. Joanne also reflects on how important
Scotland and Edinburgh are to her; "if you read the books carefully it's
clear that Hogwarts is in Scotland. I can't say exactly where because
the Ministry of Magic has a trained squad of hit wizards...." She pays
tribute to the producer and director. (Apparently she says very slightly
different things to each audience, reportedly going as far as to say
"Thank God it wasn't Spielberg directing!" to one of the other
audiences.) At this point, I change back to my original verdict that the
couple who I followed to the cinema *weren't* JKR and partner - the
accent wasn't quite right. But I can't be sure...

She also gives a tip as to one particular thing to look out for in the
movie. I shall spoiler-protect it and place it at the end.

No adverts, no trailers, straight onto the movie. My review is
elsewhere.

Two and a half hours later, the movie ends. I swell with happiness and
the whole audience bursts into applause. Disappointingly, the round of
applause is quite short - I count it at twelve seconds. (Maybe fourteen
top, but no more.) It becomes clear that the audience isn't quite as
rabidly fanatical about the stories as some. It must be brilliant to
watch this with an audience of wildly appreciative fans; it's a shame
that this somehow isn't quite the right crowd.

I stay through the end credits, listening to more John Williams. Only
three others make it to the end - the rest have made a quick getaway. I
leave, stumbling happily and reflecting on a fine experience. Making my
way out through the cinema, looking for names as I go, it becomes clear
that everyone is taking the signs and posters down from around the
shopping centre as a souvenir. Just before leaving the centre, I see a
sensibly-sized one (perhaps three feet wide, two feet tall) with a small
version of the movie poster's image on a railing; I reach into my pocket
for my B&B key in order to help me cut it free from the railing - but
the key is missing.

So I go back up to the cinema and talk to a staff member, who kindly
escorts me back up to where I was sitting. I feel around underneath my
seat and the key turns up, having fallen directly out of my pocket.
Phew!

However, leaving the cinema the second time, it seems that most of the
smaller posters have been taken. We're onto stripping the canvas banners
that were hanging down above the reception hall now. I'm not the only
person to grab a banner and try to cut it free - in fact, I even check
with staff who happily say "Well, everybody else seems to be doing it,
so..." and help me cut one down. I get a 6'-by-4' of Ron and Hermione.
(There are four in the series: another with Harry, another with Hagrid
and the last with Gringotts'  Goblins - a strange choice.)

But there are no more posters left in the building, so I take my rather
impractical canvas roll back with me through Leith. I stop on the way at
the payphone I identified earlier and feed in coins, madly typing an
e-mail away for this group (via the Magical Mods) with my early
thoughts. The keyboard is tiny and the screen is battered, but it's just
about good enough to get some basic opinions out. Back to the B&B - with
a key! - and off to bed.

Next day, I check the papers. Joanne's now-famous quote about "It?s
still not finished but I am writing very hard, so it shouldn?t be too
long." makes every report. The journey back is uneventful; again I turn
to the Leaky Cauldron for news coverage. There are a couple of amusing
stories about how the fans stripped the centre bare (the Edinburgh
Evening News at http://www.edinburghnews.com/news.cfm?id=EN01187188 and
Ananova at
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_444141.html both courtesy
of TLC) - yep, we did!

I love the canvas banner that I've got, even though it's so huge as to
have been a somewhat impractical struggle to get home on the trains and
to be rather too large to fit on any of my walls. (Furthermore, it's so
long that it can't be sent through the regular post service - and
international parcel post would cost tens of pounds.)

So, overall, well, well, well worth doing once.

PLUSES:

1) I got to see the movie very early and post about it. :-)

2) A very nice, very large poster.

3) The satisfaction of having given quite a lot of money to charity.

4) Some extremely happy memories of a faint brush with greatness. OK,
the lady I followed on the way there wasn't JKR, but I certainly did get
within a couple of yards of her on the red carpet.

MINUSES:

1) No autographs. To be fair, it's entirely reasonable why JKR didn't
make herself public at the reception half of the event - she would have
had the signing session from hell (500 signatures at the very least,
plus photos, plus questions for a painful throat) if the masses had
found her.

2) No other minuses!

A once in a lifetime experience indeed. Now here's to seeing the movie
again in a couple of days' time... and here's to doing it all over again
this time next year... :-)

With the wildest of happy grins,
Chris

PS Oh yes - you were wondering about the tiny spoiler, weren't you?

S
O
M
E
T
H
I
N
G

T
O

L
O
O
K

O
U
T

F
O
R

JKR also said words to the effect of "Look out for the sign on the top
of the door of the Leaky Cauldron - I missed it the first time I saw the
movie, but it's worth looking for." Even with this warning, I missed it
first time too. (Maybe it's inside the pub? Maybe you see it at the back
of the pub, in the yard leading to Diagon Alley? Maybe you see it in
Diagon Alley?) Certainly the only thing I saw was just a couple of
innocuous-looking house numbers. But second time round, I'll be looking
hard for it!

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From deeblite at home.com  Thu Nov 15 05:58:55 2001
From: deeblite at home.com (Deeblite)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:58:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Rosie spoilers?
In-Reply-To: <9suslc+a8mm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011115005757.00bc4850@netmail.home.com>

At 10:53 PM 11/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

>Anyways, during Richard Harris' interview he mentioned that if he did
>one movie, he'd have to do them all.  He gave the impression that
>that's part of his contract.  If this is true then it's a clear sign
>Dumbledore will be around through book 7.  Definate spoiler in my
>opinion.  So if Richard Harris has been contracted through movie 7,
>then we can count on Dumbledore through book seven.  Unless JKR does
>a Ben-Kanobi and brings him in as a ghost.
>
>Any other takes on his disclosure?

We could have things like flashbacks.. or perhaps more time in the 
Pensieve.  Or perhaps they're using him as a red herring, and he WILL die 
before book 7.


-- 
Deeblite
WTF is an acronym?




From SKTHOMPSON_1 at msn.com  Thu Nov 15 08:36:18 2001
From: SKTHOMPSON_1 at msn.com (Kelley Elf)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 08:36:18 -0000
Subject: Virus alert
Message-ID: <9svuq2+tv4g@eGroups.com>

If any group members receive an email with attachment titled 
Happy99.exe, do NOT open it.  This is a worm which can cause serious 
damage.  If you've already been infected, this link gives 
instructions on removing it:  

http://www.e-musicbox.com/happy99virus.htm

Best, 

Kelley




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Thu Nov 15 09:42:15 2001
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:42:15 -0000
Subject: Adaptation (was smile)
In-Reply-To: <5A951631B2@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9t02ln+qrb@eGroups.com>

Rachel:

> And for all you purists who have seen (are going to see) 
> the movie, what exactly were you wanting to see?  Has there 
> ever been a true Hollywood adaption of a book?  

Is this a meaningful question?  True to the spirit, yes.  But I think 
true to the letter is an impossibility.  If, for example, a book has 
two people talking in a room, then the camera must show the room.  If 
the book does not mention the colour of the walls, how is the camera 
to remain true?

David, who never notices the soundtracks of movies




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Thu Nov 15 10:10:31 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 10:10:31 -0000
Subject: Virus alert (update)
In-Reply-To: <9svuq2+tv4g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t04an+lecr@eGroups.com>

Kelley Elf wrote:

<< If any group members receive an email with attachment titled 
Happy99.exe, do NOT open it.  This is a worm which can cause serious 
damage.  If you've already been infected, this link gives 
instructions on removing it:  
 
http://www.e-musicbox.com/happy99virus.htm >>

Although Kelley's advice and cure stand re. the Happy virus, I can 
put your minds at rest a little:  it should not be possible to 
receive this virus via the list, as the system is set to discard 
email attachments.  

The Moderator/Elf team received the attachment offlist in response to 
an infected member signing up.

Neil
______________
Flying Ford Anglia
Mechanimagus Moderator 





From bray.262 at osu.edu  Thu Nov 15 18:01:35 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 18:01:35 EST5EDT
Subject: AAAAH!
Message-ID: <911C4D42CC@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I'M SEEING HARRY IN 6 HOURS!!!!!!!

*gasp...gasp....gasp....looking for inhaler....*

Sorry....I'm sorry....just kinda lost my head there for a 
second.

Since I'll be out of my office until Monday, I just wanted 
to take a moment and wish everyone who is lucky enough to 
see the movie this weekend a great time!  Looking forward 
to discussing what we saw, what we didn't see, etc.

Have a great weekend, everyone!

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 witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 00:40:37 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 16:40:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] AAAAH!
In-Reply-To: <911C4D42CC@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <20011116004037.83973.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>

I'll join you! We will be seeing Harry at the very
first show here in Revere! 10:30am! So, we have longer
to wait but go ahead and loose it! We are! Today has
been dragging all day! Enjoy it!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very
Anxious Band of Happy Merry Muggles 100%

--- Rachel Bray <bray.262 at osu.edu> wrote:
> I'M SEEING HARRY IN 6 HOURS!!!!!!!
> 
> *gasp...gasp....gasp....looking for inhaler....*
> 
> Sorry....I'm sorry....just kinda lost my head there
> for a 
> second.
> 
> Since I'll be out of my office until Monday, I just
> wanted 
> to take a moment and wish everyone who is lucky
> enough to 
> see the movie this weekend a great time!  Looking
> forward 
> to discussing what we saw, what we didn't see, etc.
> 
> Have a great weekend, everyone!
> 
> 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
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From devika at sas.upenn.edu  Fri Nov 16 00:56:09 2001
From: devika at sas.upenn.edu (Devika S. Lal)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 19:56:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Rosie
In-Reply-To: <1005828635.392.87476.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <NFBBJHOIOLIFNDEJKJIFAEIDCAAA.devika@sas.upenn.edu>

I guess it's slightly late, but I wanted to add my comments about the Harry Potter hour on the Rosie show yesterday.  What a nice study break/birthday present that was!  I adore Daniel Radcliffe.  If only he were about 10 years older...oh well <g>.

Anyway, DR was absolutely adorable.  He seemed pretty nervous and quite shy, which was understandable.  His reaction to his fame seems almost like I would imagine Harry's to be--very unassuming, just going with the flow.  Overall, he was just too cute!!

I really like Rupert Grint too.  People have been saying that he's great as Ron, and I can definitely see it.  He seems like a pretty cool kid overall.  Cute, too.

Emma Watson seemed very Hermione-like to me.  She's cute too (I know, I'm totally overusing that word), but she's a little too perky for me.  I think she's going to be great as Hermione, though.

Overall, I loved seeing the three kids together.  You could really tell that they're friends in real life, and that's good to see.  Rosie was pretty good with them too.  It's obvious that she's a big fan (did anyone besides me find Rosie's constant mention of "her" part as Mrs. Weasley just a *bit* annoying?)
Anyway, I loved seeing the stars of the movie.  I can't wait to see it tomorrow!!

Devika    




From mike.aldridge at freeuk.com  Fri Nov 16 12:59:44 2001
From: mike.aldridge at freeuk.com (Mike Aldridge)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 13:59:44 +0100
Subject: New York Times Movie Review
References: <20011116004037.83973.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <OE56Ahb2P9GRDdrg3DV00015168@hotmail.com>

There's a review of the movie by Elvis Mitchell at
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/16/movies/16POTT.html?pagewanted=1&rd=hcmcp?p
=041VKn041VSs4MEaE012000mt1tct1ua.  Read it at your own peril.

Regards,
Mike Aldridge



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 14:04:44 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:04:44 -0000
Subject: midnight showing
Message-ID: <9t36ds+mdf8@eGroups.com>

Well, my wife and I went out and saw the movie at midnight last 
night. I'm taking my kids tonight. It was absolutely 
fantastic...can't wait to see it again. I noticed SO many incredible 
magical details--the Leaky Cauldron sign, what some of the pictures 
were doing in the background, the way the door to vault 713 opened, 
etc--and I know I missed at least as many more. I didn't catch the 
date on the Quidditch trophy or any other names. I'm still now quite 
sure of everything that happened in the Quidditch match, but I loved 
every moment of the game. Ron and Hermione were a delight, Hagrid 
was perfect...

My son asked me this morning what my favorite part was. I couldn't 
even begin to tell him. I hugged him and told him he was just going 
to love it and I was just going to love bringing him to see it. 

Fantastic film, incredible experience...go see it. 

Steve




From rlpenar at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 14:28:18 2001
From: rlpenar at yahoo.com (R. Penar)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:28:18 -0000
Subject: midnight showing
In-Reply-To: <9t36ds+mdf8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t37q2+had3@eGroups.com>

I also saw it at midnight last night (too many previews, didn't get 
home until 3:15am!!!). I'm impressed and happy and excited to see it 
again. Obviously, we all have read the books *several* times, but has 
anyone taken anyone to see it who hasn't read the books. I'd be 
curious to know if it was easy to follow....

Becky, who *was* Hermione as a child


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> Well, my wife and I went out and saw the movie at midnight last 
> night. I'm taking my kids tonight. It was absolutely 
> fantastic...can't wait to see it again. I noticed SO many 
incredible 
> magical details--the Leaky Cauldron sign, what some of the pictures 
> were doing in the background, the way the door to vault 713 opened, 
> etc--and I know I missed at least as many more. I didn't catch the 
> date on the Quidditch trophy or any other names. I'm still now 
quite 
> sure of everything that happened in the Quidditch match, but I 
loved 
> every moment of the game. Ron and Hermione were a delight, Hagrid 
> was perfect...
> 
> My son asked me this morning what my favorite part was. I couldn't 
> even begin to tell him. I hugged him and told him he was just going 
> to love it and I was just going to love bringing him to see it. 
> 
> Fantastic film, incredible experience...go see it. 
> 
> Steve




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 16 14:57:40 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:57:40 -0000
Subject: midnight showing
In-Reply-To: <9t37q2+had3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t39h4+6r1r@eGroups.com>

Becky wrote: > has 
> anyone taken anyone to see it who hasn't read the books. I'd be 
> curious to know if it was easy to follow....

Yes. I went last Sunday with a party of four, 2 of us had read the 
book, 2 of us hadn't. I completely loved it, and can't wait to see it 
again, as did the other person who'd read the book. The other 2 liked 
it, but they didn't really understand it. They understood the 
storyline perfectly (apart from Dumbledore's explanation as to why 
Quirrel/Voldermort couldn't touch Harry and how he survived as a 
baby), but they really didn't get the reltionships between the 
characters, and they found the characters quite 2 dimensional, which 
they're certainly not. They got that Harry Ron and Hermione were 
friends, but they didn't get why. In their eyes, one minute Harry and 
Ron didn't like Hermione, and the next they all got on well together 
(this was before the troll scene). They didn't get that Draco and 
Harry were rivals, and they didn't get the relationship between the 
three children and Hagrid. And, interestingly, both of them gussed 
fairly early on, that Snape was protecting Harry and it was Quirrel 
who wanted to get the stone. This is probably because a lot of the 
character interaction has been cut out, which in my opinion is a 
shame, because those bits (such as potions lessons and common room 
scenes) are the best bits in the book.
Also, neither of them understood Quidditch. But they did both enjoy 
it, not as much as they should have done, and neither of them now 
want to read the books, which is a great shame.
But, as Chris Columbus said, it's not really a film in its own right, 
just a companion to the book.

Btw, I'm new here...:o)

Dave




From rose590 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 15:38:33 2001
From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:38:33 -0000
Subject: The day has finally arrived !!!
Message-ID: <9t3btp+gqft@eGroups.com>

This is my first post to the movie list but I wanted to wish everyone 
a Happy Harry Potter Movie Birthday !!

We've had our tickets for two weeks now and I never thought it would 
get here.

5 hours and 41 minutes to go !!!!

Rose in PA
(who seriously considered calling in sick to work to go to an earlier 
show !!)





From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov 16 17:09:52 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:09:52 +0000
Subject: Reviews at the BBC with an amusing obvious fake
Message-ID: <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5@dickson.demon.co.uk>

The BBC have set up a page for people to post their own HP movie reviews
at the following very long URL:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/reviews/newsid_1655000/165
5934.stm

Pay attention to the fifth review down - the one by the reviewer with
initials I. T. It's an obvious fake (couldn't they tell from the name?)
and they've fallen for it spectacularly hook, line and sinker.

Go and look now before the BBC realise they've been fooled
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From kdemcak at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 16 17:30:30 2001
From: kdemcak at hotmail.com (kdemcak at hotmail.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:30:30 -0000
Subject: Rosie spoilers?
In-Reply-To: <9suslc+a8mm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t3ifm+qrn9@eGroups.com>


> Anyways, during Richard Harris' interview he mentioned that if he 
did 
> one movie, he'd have to do them all.  He gave the impression that 
> that's part of his contract.  If this is true then it's a clear 
sign 
> Dumbledore will be around through book 7.  Definate spoiler in my 
> opinion. 
> Any other takes on his disclosure?

Well, I doubt that J.K. Rowling has disclosed major future plot 
developments to Warner Bros. or even her publishers. My guess is that 
when they were making up the contracts for the actors, Warner Bros. 
just tried to be as broad as possible, assuming that all major 
characters would be around for all seven books.  I doubt that there's 
any real insider knowledge going on there.






From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Fri Nov 16 18:28:40 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:28:40 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews at the BBC with an amusing obvious fake
In-Reply-To: <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5@dickson.demon.co.uk>
References: <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Nzn$UxDYrV97EwP+@dickson.demon.co.uk>

In message <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5 at dickson.demon.co.uk>, Chris M. Dickson
<chris at dickson.demon.co.uk> writes
>Go and look now before the BBC realise they've been fooled

It's gone now, though it was there an hour ago. What you missed:

"I was dragged along to see this by my nephew and was appalled. This
sort of glorification of the occult is a bad influence on society in
general and children in particular."

...posted by Irma Trolling, UK.

(Trolling - the act of posting deliberately false information,
particularly flames, in an attempt to confuse and anger those who know
no better. Full definition at
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/troll.html .)

The funny thing was that the BBC selects some of the comments and
highlights them (and their posters' names) in yellow boxes, and this was
one of them. Now surely they would have spotted the unusual name...?

Amused me briefly,
Chris

PS The vast majority of real reviews on the film are very positive!

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Fri Nov 16 18:31:08 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 13:31:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews at the BBC with an amusing obvious fake
Message-ID: <122.78124c6.2926b56c@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 12:12:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
chris at dickson.demon.co.uk writes:


> Pay attention to the fifth review down - the one by the reviewer with
> initials I. T. It's an obvious fake (couldn't they tell from the name?)
> and they've fallen for it spectacularly hook, line and sinker.
> 
>  before the BBC realise they've been fooled..>>

> 

I think they have realised it, Chris. Unless I missed it, and I went back 
twice,there wasn't a review like this. Would love to hear about it though. 
Can you give us a tidbit?
~Ashleigh


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




From keegan at mcn.org  Fri Nov 16 18:33:57 2001
From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:33:57 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews at the BBC with an amusing obvious
  fake
In-Reply-To: <Nzn$UxDYrV97EwP+@dickson.demon.co.uk>
References: <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5@dickson.demon.co.uk>
 <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011116103242.00ab9340@mail.mcn.org>

But there were also several messages on the review board with all sorts of 
dire warnings of witchcraft and occult.  I'll bet those folks never read 
the books or saw the movie.  But, they get their chance to poison the waters...

Go figure.

Catherine in California
2 and a half hours and counting!

At 06:28 PM 11/16/01 +0000, you wrote:
>In message <5ypi0KAghU97EwZ5 at dickson.demon.co.uk>, Chris M. Dickson
><chris at dickson.demon.co.uk> writes
> >Go and look now before the BBC realise they've been fooled
>
>It's gone now, though it was there an hour ago. What you missed:
>
>"I was dragged along to see this by my nephew and was appalled. This
>sort of glorification of the occult is a bad influence on society in
>general and children in particular."
>
>...posted by Irma Trolling, UK.
>
>(Trolling - the act of posting deliberately false information,
>particularly flames, in an attempt to confuse and anger those who know
>no better. Full definition at
><http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/troll.html>http://www.tuxedo. 
>org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/troll.html .)
>
>The funny thing was that the BBC selects some of the comments and
>highlights them (and their posters' names) in yellow boxes, and this was
>one of them. Now surely they would have spotted the unusual name...?
>
>Amused me briefly,
>Chris
>
>PS The vast majority of real reviews on the film are very positive!
>
>--
>   Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
>   Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: 
> <http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/>http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk 
> /flagship/
>   Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy 
> <http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/>http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
>    MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- 
> <http://www.msoworld.com/>http://www.msoworld.com/
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>ADVERTISEMENT
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin 
>Files! You can find them at 
><http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/>http://www.yahoogroups.com 
>/group/hpforgrownups/
>
>Warning -- this group contains spoilers!
>
>Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at 
>hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.
>
>Unsubscribing? Email hpfgu-movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 20:56:59 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 12:56:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: We Loved it!
Message-ID: <20011116205659.80612.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>

All of us in the Mallett household loved every minute
of this movie! To see it, really brings it home to
you! Enough said! Go see it and enjoy for yourselves
the magic! Saving up to go again and again! Then wait
for the DVD! Probably by spring!!!
Everybody have fun at the movies!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very
Merry Band of Muggles 100%  

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 20:57:18 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:57:18 -0000
Subject: trivial things to look for the second time around
Message-ID: <9t3uje+j1a0@eGroups.com>

I'll be heading back to the theatre this evening to see the movie 
again. Here are a few things I'll be watching for, either because 
they were so cool the first time around or because I partially 
missed them:

-- the sign over the Leaky Cauldron - watch carefully
-- the door on vault 713 - I love the way it opens
-- Neville and his Gran on the platform - I forgot to watch for it, 
but I wonder if they're there?
-- all the paintings on the walls - the one in the hospital wing, 
for example, is very apropo
-- the names and dates on the Quidditch awards - did that say 1979?
-- the difference in the faces of his parents the two different 
times you see them in the mirror - were they "harder" toward the end 
of the film?
-- the invisibility cloak effects, which were stunning
-- where all do the ghosts turn up? I noticed the gray lady in an 
unexpected place at one point
-- reading more signs on Diagon Alley - I saw "Daily Prophet", but 
that was about it, I just missed the rest, so I want to look closer
-- try to pick out who is who at the various tables and in groups of 
students in the Great Hall, the Quidditch crowds, etc.
-- try to understand what all is happening in the Quidditch game. It 
goes by SO fast...

Steve




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov 16 21:33:38 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:33:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] We Loved it!
Message-ID: <20.1f13df64.2926e032@aol.com>

It was STUPENDOUS! I loved it!

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov 16 22:12:45 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:12:45 -0000
Subject: in a warm glow
Message-ID: <9t430t+aj60@eGroups.com>

Well, I DID take time off work today, and went with two of my friends,
and the whole thing put me in a warm glow.

It was an amazing, magical, incredible, lovely wonderful experience.
I loved it.
S
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
I
l
o
v
e
H
a
r
r
y
P
o
t
t
e
r
a
n
d
f
e
e
l
s
o
r
r
y
f
o
r
t
h
o
s
e
So, the nitpicking, processing and analysis begins! Long live the 
internet!

Okay -- I LIKED Dumbledore. He IS my favorite character, and I liked 
Richard Harris in Camelot. I too was annoyed by his comments, but 
expected him to be awful. They did pull some of his best lines -- the 
oddment line..the warm pair of socks line..they didn't GIVE him any 
humorous lines. He WAS really mysterious in the Philosopher's Stone,
he came alive in this movie, and oh, those costumes...his robes were 
just lucious. The scene in the hospital was wonderful, and the Mirror 
of Erised was good.

If I had to say the only thing that REALLY annoyed me is that it's 
NOT CALLED THE Philosopher's Stone....what a sad commentary on 
popular culture here in the U.S....

Molly Weasley did not look like herself. 

I thought the Dudleys were a tad too comic in their portrayal...and 
their house covered with owls didn't quite seem right..

I doubt you could have followed if you had not seen the book.

But I kept doing little gasps and squeaks, I was so excited..Seeing 
Dumbledore and McGonagall at the same time...when Hagrid flew in..

Yes, Robbie Coltrane made Hagrid come alive for me...a wonderful, 
wonderful portrayal...The great hall didn't look right to me, I 
thought the children sat horizontally, not vertically.

Yes, yes, Alan Rickman was brilliant, and I actually like Snape 
more..I'm not sure they made him nasty enough in this film....to be 
true to the book...

John Hurt as Ollivander was great. Yes, James should have been 
younger, and Harry's hair should stick up in the back, and his should 
have stuck up too.

The scenes of Hogwarts were breathtaking..the changes of the seasons, 
wonderful, the Halloween scene terrific....

Diagon Alley was absolutely and totally realistic..I want to go there 
RIGHT NOW

Maggie Smith was wonderful...the young man playing Oliver Wood was 
great, I LOVED NEVILLE! He was PERFECT! Yes, the boy playing Ron is 
an outstanding actor...several people said that they don't like 
Hermione, but she's not too likable in the beginning of the film.

Did Ginny have red hair? Percy was not pompous enough...Fred and 
George were perfect...Draco oozed evil......very well done...

MRS. NORRIS was terrific. A beautiful cat, as was McGonagall's 
alter/ego. 

Tomorrow I'm taking Jesse my four year old and I'm wearing my witch's 
hat and black robe, just for fun.

Susan, who is very, very, very happy here in Ann Arbor, Michigan





From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 16 22:25:29 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:25:29 -0000
Subject: Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
Message-ID: <9t43op+edci@eGroups.com>

I'm still coming down off my movie high.  It's not as high as I 
would have liked, but it's right up there.  The things I loved were 
absolutely fantastic (and I'm not a bit sorry that I'm going to see 
it again tomorrow with my family) and the things I didn't--well, I 
know they're coming the next time I see the film, so I can brace 
myself.  Since I was very uneasy about the flashback scene before 
seeing it, let me say right off that I'm fine with it now.  First, 
it occurred at night (not day).  Second, it seemed to be Hagrid's 
imagined idea of what occurred, not Harry's.  I am no longer worried 
that this contradicts what we learn in PoA when Harry gets too near 
the dementors and hears his parents' voices.  It was pretty clear 
that this was what Hagrid--who's in no position to know for sure--
imagined.

I was a little disturbed at the implication that Harry's birthday 
was followed immediately by his departing for school.  This would 
imply either that Harry's birthday is August 31 or that school 
begins on August 1 (the day after Harry's canon birthday).  Perhaps 
the exact date of his birthday won't be of importance in the films; 
I find this odd as JKR gave Harry HER birthday.  The scene where he 
was accessing platform 9 3/4 was very good, but I can't see the 
point of Percy not having glasses.  Was someone afraid that folks 
would confuse him with Harry?  Ginny did not look 10; more like 8 or 
at the most 9.  I just hope that this little girl (or whatever 
little girl they use for CoS, if they get someone else) turns out to 
be a better actor than Emma Watson by the time CoS rolls around.

I'm afraid I have to gripe about Watson's scenery chewing.  Was 
there no other child in all of Great Britain who could be found for 
the role?  It was abundantly clear any time she had to string 
together more than five words that she had no acting experience, and 
that she probably will not have an acting career as an adult.  She 
did fine in the troll scene (one of the best scenes in the movie, 
IMO) while she was screaming and running about, but when she was 
trying to convince McGonagall it was all her fault, all I could 
think was, "Did they bother to do more than one take?  Is that the 
best one they could get?"  

I know that there was a very concerted effort to keep it a UK 
production, but I'm afraid that looking in England, Scotland, 
Ireland and Wales did not produce a satisfactory Hermione Granger in 
my book.  Lindsay Lohan was eleven or twelve when she did the remake 
of The Parent Trap and she did a very good English accent and was a 
far better actor besides.  There are 270 million people in the US 
and if you take Canada and other commonwealth nations into account 
too, the next time they're casting Hermione (assuming Watson's 
signed for the first three films) I think they should extend their 
search to the entire English-speaking world (the UK, North America, 
Australia and New Zealand).  There must be SOMEONE more 
appropriate.  At least Hermione spends much of CoS lying petrified 
in the infirmary.  Maybe by the time PoA is made Watson will have 
had a chance to take some acting classes.  I'm rather worried now 
about that long set piece where she and Harry have to travel back 
through time to rescue Buckbeak and Sirius; it's just the two of 
them for quite a while, and if she doesn't improve, I'm not sure 
I'll want to see it (especially since that sequence and the one in 
the Shrieking Shack--which also includes Hermione--are the PoA high 
points).

Other than Watson, I was completely satisfied by the film and then 
some.  Beginning with the star, Daniel Radcliffe was perfect, 
absolutely perfect.  The python scene was very well done, and the 
bit when Hagrid arrives at the hut on the rock.  We didn't really 
get an explanation for his baggy clothes, but I suppose if you 
hadn't read the book you could just assume that the Dursleys already 
made him sleep under the stairs; why should they care whether he had 
clothes that fit him?  My favorite part was when he 
said, "Checkmate," and the sword fell at his feet.  Very King 
Arthur!  Great movie moment.  And he was very subtle (Emma Watson, 
take note) when he realized that the stone was in his pocket; we 
knew what was going on but he didn't telegraph it to Quirrell with 
eyes that were too wide or anything.  I did miss his line in Potions 
about Snape perhaps asking Hermione the questions; if there was one 
thing the script could have used, it was more funny lines, which 
were in great abundance in the book.  I'm looking forward to seeing 
Radcliffe in every movie; I hope he stays on and lets us watch him 
grow up as Harry.

That said, in my opinion Rupert Grint stole the move from 
Radcliffe.  This kid has got a hell of a future ahead of him.  From 
the moment he says, "Wicked!" upon seeing Harry's scar to the nerve-
wracking wait for the queen to knock this brave boy off his horse, 
he was the perfect Ron, the perfect knight, jester and knave rolled 
into one.  One thing Kloves got wrong was when Ron and Harry were in 
the common room opening their Christmas gifts and Ron didn't recoil 
when Harry said "Voldemort" (which in the film was pronounced with 
the "t" interestingly enough) and demand that he say "You-Know-
Who."  Ron's reactions to Harry saying the "V" word are some of the 
funnier bits in the books, IMO. Humor was in general sadly lacking 
in the script.  Happily, most of the few funny lines that were left 
were Grint's, and he made the most of each one.  I will be very, 
very disappointed if anyone other than Grint plays Ron in future 
films.  He IS Ron, through and through.

Tom Felton was all right as Draco Malfoy.  He was neither as hammy 
as Watson nor as fully realized as Radcliffe or Grint.  On the 
whole, I believed he was a spoiled rich brat, and his only over-the-
top bit was the look on his face when he was screaming in fear upon 
hearing of the troll.  He actually underplayed the scene right 
before the sorting when Harry rejected him; he could have done a bit 
more with his face to show that this was going to have major future 
ramifications.  Felton didn't really have a lot to do in this film 
(other than run scared), so I'll have to reserve judgment on him as 
an actor for CoS, in which Malfoy has more to do.

The running gag about Seamus blowing everything up was not funny, 
IMO, and it would have been more appropriate to have Neville 
experiencing these mishaps; it would have placed his later bravery 
in a different light.  I did love the look on Neville's face when he 
received his 10 points at the end; this kid had a very small role, 
and he made far more of it than Watson made of hers.  He was 
understated and effective and you never doubted for a moment that he 
was Neville, despite his limited screen time.  In the film, Seamus 
was expendable as far as I'm concerned.

The twins were good for what we saw of them; looking forward to more 
of that in CoS.  The other student who stood out was Oliver Wood, 
played by  Sean Biggerstaff, who could give acting classes to most 
of the other kids, IMO.  Every line was perfect, especially when, 
right before Harry's first Quidditch match, he tells him about his 
own first match.  The offhanded delivery was beautiful, and set us 
up for the violent confrontation between Gryffindor and Slytherin.  
I'm glad to see him again after having enjoyed the Winter Guest 
(directed by Alan Rickman) and I see every sign that he can make a 
living as an actor for years to come, if he chooses.  It's too bad 
Oliver doesn't appear in the books after PoA; maybe eventually JKR 
will bring his character back in some way.  (Wishful thinking, 
probably, but there are still three books to go, so anything's 
possible.)

The adults didn't have much to do, but I'm not as dissatisfied with 
Richard Harris as many people seem to be.  He wasn't as twinkly and 
droll as Dumbledore might have been, but I fault the script for 
that.  The Dumbldore-ness was leeched out of the character and I 
believe Harris performed admirably with what he was given.  Maggie 
Smith was, of course, perfection.  She didn't give away a thing when 
she saw Harry fly past her office window; you really could believe 
Harry was in deep trouble (if you didn't read the book).  I hope we 
never have to accept anyone else in the role of McGonagall for any 
reason.  Robbie Coltrane was all right as Hagrid, best during 
Norbert's birth scene.  Lily was fine, but I agree with others that 
James Potter was far too old.  How on earth is Harry supposed to 
mistake himself for his dad when he's not quite fourteen?  (PoA, 
when he conjures the Patronus.)  Will Harry have a receding hairline 
by then?  The lack of attention to details like this was sometimes 
jarring.

Alan Rickman WAS Severus Snape.  Every line was a jewel, carefully 
cut and polished.  Even though he was in the same film as Maggie 
Smith, he made me think of an old film I saw from the thirties 
called "As You Desire Me."  Greta Garbo starred, and it was 
fascinating to see how she really ACTED, while the rest of the cast 
recited lines and made faces and plodded about from place to place.  
Spencer Tracy in "Captains Courageous" also comes to mind, or any 
film where one actor is just head-and-shoulders above the rest, so 
that they seem to be a different species altogether.  That was 
Rickman in this film, and it's too bad there wasn't more of him.  

Unfortunately, I was left hoping that someone else pens future 
films, as Steve Kloves' repeated use of the Hagrid line, "I 
shouldn't have said that," was starting to get on my nerves.  
Granted, the audience laughed each time (one of the only times 
people in the audience laughed, which just should not be) but 
relying on this kind of repetition is not how JKR gets laughs, and 
it was disappointing that Kloves didn't see fit to use her funny 
lines instead of trying to write his own (which weren't anywhere 
near as good).

I had no problem with the overall structure of the script.  I didn't 
miss the things that were left out.  The potions/logic puzzle really 
would have been deadly dull on screen (and it would have meant 
putting up with more of Watson).  Likewise the Dursleys' trek 
between Privet Drive and the hut on the rock, as well as the rescue 
of Norbert.  Some bits which were without dialogue (i.e. the trip 
across the lake, the letters cascading into the living room, Harry 
sitting by his window looking out at the night, Harry walking across 
the courtyard in the snow with Hedwig on his arm) felt like they 
could have been shorter.  All of these scenes (and some others) 
seemed to have the cart before the horse.  It felt like their length 
was dictated by John Williams' score, so they had to last long 
enough for a certain number of bars to play (the crossing-the-lake 
motif, the it's-raining-letters motif, etc.).  I'd have been happier 
if I felt Williams had created his score to fit the film instead of 
the other way around.

I loved the look of Hogwarts; the shifting stairs were well done, 
and this was a plausible explanation for how the kids wound up in 
the wrong corridor (if a bit coincidental).  A change from the books 
I loved, for its warmth and coziness, was the fact that on Christmas 
morning Ron and Harry went downstairs to the common room to open 
their presents by the fire, and the presents were under a lovely 
Christmas tree.  Getting the presents in the dorm always seemed a 
bit cold to me.  I also liked that you can look down on the common 
room from the upstairs.  Just the architecture student in me coming 
out. 

The special effects were by and large well done.  Quidditch was 
fabulous!  I loved that when the Slytherin Seeker was banging into 
Harry, Harry was giving as good as he was getting.  I'm not sure of 
the purpose of his catching the Snitch in his mouth, which jarred 
me, while the surfing part didn't, although I expected it to.  Since 
he subsequently fell, I didn't look on it as bravado, but a 
desperate attempt to do whatever was necessary to get the Snitch.

I wasn't as disturbed by the centaur as others; it could have been 
better done, but it was brief and inconsequential (I don't remember 
him talking about Mars being bright, either).  Fluffy was fine, as 
was the devil's snare.  The flying keys were FAST and EVIL.  The 
chess game was the best scene, especially since this gave Ron a 
chance to shine.  (It's not a special effect, but I didn't miss the 
Harry/Hermione hug here.  I'm sorry, but eleven-year-olds just don't 
do that.)  The part where Voldmort sort of goes through Harry at the 
end was unexpected but well done and appropriately scary.

Overall, I'd say it's one of the most successful screen adaptations 
of a book I've seen, and certainly one of the most enjoyable films 
I've seen in a while.  It didn't have quite the resonance of the 
book for me, but then it wasn't my favorite of the four extant 
books.  I look forward to seeing Ginny (assuming they find someone 
good) and the rest of the kids (assuming Watson improves) in CoS.  
Perhaps if Harris gets better lines next time he'll be a more 
convincing Dumbledore.  I also hope they get a good Tom Riddle, as 
that will make or break the climax in the Chamber.  The basilisk 
will be hard to do; that's another concern.  Other the other hand, 
Kenneth Branagh as Lockhart is definitely something to look forward 
to, especially his interaction with Rickman as Snape!    

--Barb
(who wishes she could watch CoS tomorrow but is happy to see the 
first film again)




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov 16 22:50:34 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:50:34 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
Message-ID: <9e.1d6c2cef.2926f23a@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 5:27:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
blpurdom at yahoo.com writes:

<< 'm afraid I have to gripe about Watson's scenery chewing.  Was 
 there no other child in all of Great Britain who could be found for 
 the role?  It was abundantly clear any time she had to string 
 together more than five words that she had no acting experience, and 
 that she probably will not have an acting career as an adult.  She 
 did fine in the troll scene (one of the best scenes in the movie, 
 IMO) while she was screaming and running about, but when she was 
 trying to convince McGonagall it was all her fault, all I could 
 think was, "Did they bother to do more than one take?  Is that the 
 best one they could get?"  
  >>

Fascinating..she didn't really grate on me at all...



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov 16 22:51:40 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:51:40 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
Message-ID: <7a.1de5fdf1.2926f27c@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 5:27:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
blpurdom at yahoo.com writes:

<<  I did miss his line in Potions 
 about Snape perhaps asking Hermione the questions; if there was one 
 thing the script could have used, it was more funny lines, which 
 were in great abundance in the book.   >>

I, too, missed the great lines they deleted. Why? And probably my real major 
criticism is why replace great lines with mediocre ones?



From heidit at netbox.com  Fri Nov 16 23:02:59 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:02:59 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] from the theater
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C337F@MIAEXCH1>

This is the last you will hear from me, carole and amber until the movie is
over. It starts in 10 minutes. Woo hoo



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 00:13:00 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:13:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] We Loved it!
In-Reply-To: <20.1f13df64.2926e032@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20011117001300.75476.qmail@web13701.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Schlobin1 at aol.com wrote:
> It was STUPENDOUS! I loved it!
> 
> Susan
> 
All right, Susan! We are not alone! My husabnd, who
only listened while we other 3 read out loud, love it
and was just as bad as the rest of us clapping and
yelling with the kids in the movie!
Saving to go again!

Wanda the Witch and Her Very Merry Muggles 100%

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 00:19:55 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:19:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Owls around the house
Message-ID: <20011117001955.71110.qmail@web13703.mail.yahoo.com>

The owls around the house caught my husband off guard!
He just bursted out laughing when he saw them and the
owl posts coming in from everywhere! The more he saw
of the birds, the more he wishes he could have an owl!
Not that we don't have enough now!
Go enjoy the magic!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very
Merry Band of Muggles 100

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Nov 17 00:30:29 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Nov 2001 00:30:29 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1005957029.417.42797.w65@yahoogroups.com>


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

What did you think of the PS/SS movie? 

  o Better than the book 
  o Equal to the book, though obviously different 
  o Good on its own merits, but not as good as the book 
  o Okay on its own merits 
  o Bad on its own merits 
  o Unspeakably disgraceful 


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 HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Nov 17 00:33:41 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Nov 2001 00:33:41 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1005957221.249.43374.w58@yahoogroups.com>


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

Which aspect of the PS/SS movie was 
handled best? 

  o Acting 
  o Special Effects 
  o Art Direction 
  o Costume Design 
  o Cinematography 
  o Music 
  o Script 
  o Other 


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 HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sat Nov 17 00:36:48 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Nov 2001 00:36:48 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1005957408.201.56093.w72@yahoogroups.com>


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

Based on the first movie, do you plan 
to see the sequel? 

  o Woe! Pain! Anguish! If I have to wait just one more second, I fear I shall die of anticipation! 
  o Definitely!  More of a good thing! 
  o Most likely, but with merely average enthusiasm 
  o Only to see if it has improved 
  o Why suffer twice? 


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 taradiane at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 00:49:58 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:49:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
In-Reply-To: <7a.1de5fdf1.2926f27c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20011117004958.45970.qmail@web11502.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Schlobin1 at aol.com wrote:
> I, too, missed the great lines they deleted.
> Why? And probably my real major 
> criticism is why replace great lines with
> mediocre ones?


I, too, was a tad miffed about the lack of humour
- especially on gred&forge's part.  I also
expected to see more pretentious percy.

I loved the movie, but at this early stage, I'm
not sure if it's just because it's HP or if it's
because it was a truly great film.  My mom kept
laughing at me throughout, because everytime a
certain landmark showed up for the first time, I
would tear up and grin.  And I was not the only
one sniffling through the mirror scene.  I wish
they would have made a bigger deal out of the
photo album at the end, flipped through a few
more pages maybe.

I also wanted to see more Oliver Wood (is that
guy gorgeous!), perhaps in the form of quidditch
training.  

Someone had mentioned earlier about some of the
victories seeming rather hollow due to the lack
of backstory provided:  

I didn't feel like the sudden friendship between
Harry&Ron towards Hermione was flushed out
enough.  Also, I didn't feel like their dislike
of her was shown enough to make their eventual
friendship more, well, meaningful.  And on that
same line, I still felt like they didn't want to
be around her that much even after they were
supposed to of become best friends.

I also wasn't that impressed with the way they
represented the animosity between slytherin vs.
all the other houses, especially gryffindor.  I'm
not sure those who haven't read the books would
of understood the importance of the quidditch
match(es) and the winning of the house cup.  Was
it even mentioned in the movie that Slytherin had
won the past 7 years straight?  Again, felt like
a hollow victory.

Another thing I felt wasn't up to canon was
Harry's popularity in the wizarding world,
especially in the scene in The Leaky Cauldron.  I
heard someone behind me ask "what's the big deal
about two people wanting to shake his hand?". 
tsk tsk indeed.

I think it would of also been beneficial to the
final win if they had shown what the loss of 150
points to Gryffindor house had done to the rest
of not only their own peers, but to Hufflepuff
and Ravenclaw as well.  Again, empty victory.

But then, I'd of been more than willing to sit
through a 4 or 5 hour movie provided they gave us
restroom breaks ;-)

Things I loved:

Dudley chowing down on Harry's cake like no one
was going to notice...

Snape, every last flourish of cloak... 

Voldemort passing through Harry in the last
chamber...

Oliver Wood (I was blushing like Ginny
Weasley)...

The Sorting Hat barely touching Draco's head
before announcing "Slytherin!"...

Everything about the Quidditch match...

The mirror scenes (gotta adore Ron - "I look
good!")...

Neville's face when he found out he'd won the
house ten points for bravery....indeed!

I'm sure I've got loads more, but I'll have to
see it again to remember them all properly....


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!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 01:06:38 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 01:06:38 -0000
Subject: Random Movie Observations (LONG, like the movie)
Message-ID: <9t4d6v+vmnh@eGroups.com>

Here's my quick take on the movie, with SPOILERS, of course.  Like 
many other fans, I liked it, as it could have been badly botched and 
wasn't.   I agree with much of the praise heaped on the movie so 
far.   But be warned ? I'm going to step on some toes here, because I 
have a fundamental issue with the way the book was adapted, and I 
hope there are some changes before the third and fourth movies.

All of the reviews say the movie was true to the book.  That's a good 
thing.  But that desire to be faithful went a bit too far, IMHO.  In 
the mad dash to cram as much book plot into the movie, we wound up 
with a "Best Of Harry Potter" highlights reel rather than a movie 
with memorable and compelling scenes.  I would have preferred that 
certain major scenes had been entirely deleted in favor of really 
doing the remaining ones well.

The most compelling example I can give is the potions class.   In the 
book, that scene contains my favorite speech from one of the book's 
most compelling characters, and it is very well-written.  This calls 
for lots of dramatic set-up and tension:  something like Snape 
enters, glowers a bit, gives his speech with the pauses in all the 
right places, harasses Harry, calls them names, etc.  Instead, in the 
movie, Snape literally starts giving a cut-down version of the speech 
while walking up the aisle, and then never even gives answers to the 
questions he poses.   The menacing mood is never properly established.

OK, some things have to be cut.  That's true.  But I can't for the 
life of me figure out why we need the one Transfiguration class 
scene, in which McGonagal changes from a cat (which belongs in PoA 
anyway), then has a brief, rather flat, exchange with Ron and Harry.  
Better, I think, is to skip this entirely and use the time to do 
Snape's scene really well.  Don't even get me started on the Norbert 
scene, which takes time that could have been used better, IMHO.  

That leads me to the other glaring problem for me.  The movie 
suffered from "Villain Interruptus."  The plot is supposed to first 
convince us that Snape is evil and seeking the stone.  Then we're 
supposed to be surprised that it is Quirrell.  But Snape got almost 
no screen time or interaction with the trio, and Quirrell got less.  
Neither had a sufficient chance to be menacing, which was a waste, 
and the viewer got no time to figure out what they were doing.  A few 
minor changes would really have helped.  For instance, Snape, rather 
than Filch could have escorted the trio to the Forbidden Forest.  
Without much effort to flesh out our villains, much of the dramatic 
tension was lost for me.

Finally, there's Quiddich.  I'll admit straight up that Quiddich is 
one of my least favorite plot elements in all of HP.  In light of its 
overall popularity with fans, however, I was surprised that the 
special effects seems somewhat flimsy, and some shots were clearly a 
rubber doll strapped to a broom.  It also didn't seem right that 
Harry spends a great deal of the match just sitting there on his 
broom; he should be slowly circling, like he does in the book.  I 
didn't see the logic of having to pillars for students to crash 
into.  Also, the entire Quiddich plot seemed very out of place and 
inconsequential to the plot.  Something was definitely missing, but 
I'll have to see the film again to zero in on what it was.

There were certainly plenty of bright spots, though.  I actually 
liked most of the dialogue changes ("What are you looking at?"), the 
snake scene was delightful, the owls on the house were amusing, the 
climax with Voldemort was much improved, the devil's snare was 
interesting.  Dumbledore was fine, given his itty bitty role.  There 
were some fine performances from actors who had precious little to 
do, and the movie made me actually like Hagrid, which I didn't think 
was possible.

Anyway, here are some categories and my nominations:

MAKING THE MOST OF A TINY ROLE:  Malfoy, with Wood as runner-up.  
Both are very good actors, but Draco had little to do and a bad dye 
job.  Nevertheless, I liked him very much.  Wood was outstanding in 
the pre-match talk with Harry.

LEAST COMPELLING SPECIAL EFFECT:  Harry on the Troll's back was 
really not up to scratch, which is another argument in favor of 
omitting the troll scene.

BEST SPECIAL EFFECT:  The Invisibility Cloak.  Top notch in all 
respects.  The shots from inside were particularly striking.

MOST INEXPLICABLE DECISION BY THE FILMMAKERS:  The casting of Harry's 
father.  Is there not a single man in Britain who looks anything like 
Dan Radcliffe?  I want to see a paternity test, because there is no 
way that man passes for Harry's dad.  

MOST LOGICAL CHANGE OF A BIG DETAIL:  I liked how they changed the 
wand selection scene.  It makes sense that the right wand wouldn't 
perform unfocused magic, and the right wand would give you a rush.  
The audience seemed to like this scene, so it worked.  Runner-up is 
having the glass re-appear in the snake scene.  I also liked Dudley 
stomping on Harry's cupboard ceiling.

BEST CURE OF A PLOT MYSTERY:  It always bothered me that Hagrid gave 
Dudley, an innocent child, a pig's tail.  If Hagrid is mad at Vernon, 
why does he pick on Dudley?  In the movie, they provided nice 
motivation for this by having Dudley steal the cake.  Nice touch.

Anyway, that's my opinion today.  Maybe reading the reactions of 
others will change my mind.  

Cindy (still not sure she is ready to join S.A.D., and might instead 
form a group to hire a new director for PoA and GoF)





From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 01:53:42 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 01:53:42 -0000
Subject: An interesting conundrum
Message-ID: <9t4fv6+8pj0@eGroups.com>

Rather than give everyone a typical review of the movie (with 
commentary on particular actors and scenes and whatnot), as I'm sure 
there will be plenty of personal takes over the next couple days, I 
am going to discuss one very unique and bizarre phenomenon.

I warn you that my explanation of this is extraordinarily shoddy.  
For some reason I can't seem to explain this properly--although I was 
able to do it just fine in person with someone I saw the film with.  
But anyway, if you find my explanation confusing or vague or just 
plain strange-sounding, it's not you, it's me--and I'm sorry I can't 
get this down in text in a coherent, well-argued fashion.  Perhaps if 
someone writes back for clarification of specific points, we will 
eventually muddle through.

This movie is the only film adaptation that I can think of that seems 
completely incapable of standing on its own two feet.  Don't get me 
wrong--I enjoyed it a great deal . . . but then, I've read the 
books.  And this adaptation seems to have relatively little to offer 
for someone who hasn't.  In the filmmakers' extremely valiant attempt 
to fit in as much of everything as possible, they have made the movie 
not only difficult to follow for non-book-fans, but pretty 
unfulfilling.  It's a strange instance, pretty much without 
precedent, because never before has a movie been so heavily geared 
toward appeasing people that are looking for a faithful adaptation, 
not just a good movie.

So, in other words, the question I have to ask myself here is not how 
faithful they were, but were they actually somehow TOO faithful?  Is 
that even possible?  Perhaps so.

Obviously they changed quite a bit and I approve of most of the 
changes.  But I am beginning to wonder if they actually needed to 
change more (heresy, I know).  Because the entire beginning of the 
film was horrendously underdeveloped.  And I am not talking about the 
scenes at the Dursley's, which were appropriately shortened, in my 
opinion.  I mean all the early scenes at school.  They tried to cover 
so much that they covered nothing *well*.  And this made the film 
feel . . . off-balance.

So what do I mean?  Well, here's an example: Neville.  At the end of 
the film we have all the stuff with Neville trying to stop the trio 
from sneaking out, and then getting petrified, and then as a result 
earning 10 points for Gryffindor.  Quite true to the book.  But made 
meaningless if you haven't read the book.  Why?  Because the movie 
never had the opportunity to fully establish Neville's general 
outward reserve and insecurity, his seeming cowardice.  The toad 
scene with McGonagall is the only scene that makes any effort to show 
this, and it doesn't get all the way there.  I also applaud Matthew 
Lewis' damn-near-heroic effort to convey all this about Neville when 
the script wasn't helping at all.

Or take the scene when Snape looks (past Quirrel's turban) at Harry 
and Harry's scar burns.  It went so fast it was practically glossed-
over and this is a critical scene.  But if you hadn't read the books 
you were quite likely to miss it, I expect.

And they did not provide sufficient impetus to explain Harry's desire 
to not be in Slytherin.  If you read the books, you understand.  If 
you didn't, all you have to go on is Ron's *extremely hurried* 
comment two seconds beforehand that (roughly) "All the dark wizards 
came from Slytherin".

So what is this problem the result of?  Two things: 1) obviously, the 
time factor and 2) ineffective use of the advantages of film as a 
medium

The time factor:

I really, really hate to say this, but Kloves or Columbus or whoever 
completely copped-out on some of the tough decisions about what to 
include.  They got in quite a bit.  But the problem here is that they 
had so many characters to introduce that they never spent long enough 
on several of the characters.  I fully understand this dilemma.  But 
in that event, they should have glossed-over more of them than they 
did.  Seamus Finnigan is a throw-away character in the books, so he 
really did not need an exploding objects gag attached to him.  This 
would have been more appropriate tied to a character that was more 
significant, like Neville.  These scenes could have been altered to 
illustrate how Neville never does anything right, which makes his 
victory at the end more fulfilling.  As it stands, it's hard to care 
unless you've read the book.

Or, if I was going to be even more hard-nosed, much as I love 
Neville, they could easily have written out his role almost entirely 
(as in, he would still be present, but do very little).  And yes, all 
the book fans would complain.  But it would give the movie more focus 
and ultimately make it a better film on its own merits.  The movie as 
it stands feels rambly, with snatches of things that seem very 
irrelevant if you aren't familiar with the book.  There's no 
*tightness*.

These are the tough choices I feel they avoided.  Yes, this part of 
the book is great, but can the primary story function without it?  
They cut the obvious things like the Norbert escapade, and combined 
several scenes together.  All of this I felt was very well handled.  
But some other things needed a bit of "de-emphasis".  There is simply 
not enough time to try and treat everything as important, like it is 
in the book.  Some things needed to be dispensed with for the greater 
good.  Like perhaps not bothering so much with the first flying 
lesson, or even less emphasis on the Harry-Draco rivalry.  Yes, these 
things DO matter in the book.  But they didn't have to matter so much 
in the movie.  Because leaving them in made them feel pretty "lost" 
in the movie, as they ultimately had no bearing on the mystery at 
hand.

Ineffective use of the advantages of film as a medium:

There is a scene immediately following Dumbledore's speech to Harry 
where Harry walks out onto the ground with Hedwig and he allows 
Hedwig to fly off into the sky.  This scene symbolizes how Harry is 
letting go of the dream of being with his parents, so that he can 
continue to live.  It's not in the book, but I wish there was more of 
this sort of thing.  This sort of thing, visual symbology, is one of 
the strengths of film as a medium and I feel it should have been more 
fully exploited in the film, because then you can capture in a couple 
images what it would take all sorts of description on a writer's part 
to achieve.

For example, the growth in Harry, Ron, and Hermione's relationship 
following the defeat of the troll could have been captured thus:

After McGonagall et al leave after chastising the trio, instead of 
wasting time on a totally pointless shot of Quirrel having 
a "disconcertedly frightened" reaction to the unconcious troll on the 
ground, this couple seconds could have instead been used to show 
Harry and Ron starting to leave the bathroom, then stopping and 
turning back to Hermione, and then they all three leave together.  
Boom!  They're now friends.  Simple image and mission accomplished.  
This is how films work.

In fact, this is my biggest concern.  Film and books are a different 
medium.  They do different things well.  And even the things they do 
equally well are still almost always achieved differently.  The movie 
seemed to ignore this reality a bit too often.

So all in all, I think the film functions well as purely ANCILLARY to 
the book, but seems to fall short when left to its own devices.  It's 
a wonderful addition to the Potter universe for those who are already 
fans, but is likely to be fairly unappreciable anyone that isn't.

-Luke






From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 01:57:01 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:57:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Random Movie Observations (LONG, like the movie)
Message-ID: <49.140b780a.29271ded@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 8:10:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cindysphynx at home.com writes:

<< MOST LOGICAL CHANGE OF A BIG DETAIL:  I liked how they changed the 
 wand selection scene.  It makes sense that the right wand wouldn't 
 perform unfocused magic, and the right wand would give you a rush.  
 The audience seemed to like this scene, so it worked.  Runner-up is 
 having the glass re-appear in the snake scene.  I also liked Dudley 
 stomping on Harry's cupboard ceiling. >>

thought that the wrong wand stuff was a waste of time...

the glass re-appearing was a great plot change..and I actually think that 
having Draco
meet Harry on the stairs worked well...why didn't they use a couple of 
Draco's 
nasty lines about Ron from the book?



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 01:57:40 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:57:40 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Random Movie Observations (LONG, like the movie)
Message-ID: <f8.12b9a708.29271e14@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 8:10:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cindysphynx at home.com writes:

<< BEST CURE OF A PLOT MYSTERY:  It always bothered me that Hagrid gave 
 Dudley, an innocent child, a pig's tail.  If Hagrid is mad at Vernon, 
 why does he pick on Dudley?  In the movie, they provided nice 
 motivation for this by having Dudley steal the cake.  Nice touch. >>

They also explain why Hagrid doesn't tell Harry about platform 9 and three 
quarters...
better than in the book



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 02:03:28 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:03:28 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Random Movie Observations (LONG, like the movie)
Message-ID: <23.148b6e89.29271f70@aol.com>

In many ways, the brilliance of the movie was letting us know what stuff 
really looked like..my guess is that this was with JKR's collaboration.. Now 
my fuzzy visualization of the Gryffindor's common room has been fleshed 
out..and gosh I loved Gringotts..
Diagon Alley, the Leaky Cauldron, Hogwarts (thought of you Brits during the 
movie..that it reminded you too much of the castle..we of course don't have 
such amazing edifices here in the States...), the Hogwarts Express, 

Maggie Smith was the perfect McGonagall, and enhanced the role, just as 
Robbie Coltrane enhanced the role of Hagrid (he has MY vote for best 
supporting actor)...
the score was fine..not like the one from the Adventures of Robin Hood with 
Errol Flynn....

I can't believe that we get to see the new LOTR movie, too! Wow...WICKED!



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 02:07:10 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:07:10 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] trivial things to look for the second time around
Message-ID: <166.408e989.2927204e@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 3:58:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hp_lexicon at yahoo.com writes:

<< - the names and dates on the Quidditch awards - did that say 1979? >>

My first reaction when I saw McGonagall's name near James Potter's was "wait! 
they can't be on the same team..she's twice his age!"..then my partner 
pointed out that they could have been from different years....



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 02:10:18 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:10:18 EST
Subject: the Philosopher's Stone
Message-ID: <146.4baf90b.2927210a@aol.com>

I just realized that I might be able (eventually) to get a videotape of the 
PHILOSOPHER'S Stone, and then would not be annoyed by the change to the 
Sorcerer's Stone..particularly when Hermione says "don't you read any 
history?" (I was gritting my teeth-- history? yes, we do read here in the 
U.S., and we know that there is NO SUCH THING as a Sorcerer's Stone, and a 
long history of the PHILOSOPHER'S stone..

Wow, I say again, that Harris got cheated of his lines and characterization..
from the card that said he liked ten pin (is that right?) and chamber music 
and noted his association with Nicholas Flamel..to the omission of the line 
that said that he had never seen a cat be so severe (referring to 
McGonagall's alter ego at the beginning).
Also, no line about to the well ordered mind...death.....

Ah well

Susan



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sat Nov 17 02:15:27 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:15:27 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] trivial things to look for the second time around
References: <166.408e989.2927204e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <012101c16f0d$ba4c38e0$304e28d1@oemcomputer>

Hint to Neville and his grand-look towards the front of the train first time
Harry turns around...think Yellow.

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Sat Nov 17 02:32:31 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 02:32:31 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
In-Reply-To: <9t43op+edci@eGroups.com>
References: <9t43op+edci@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3JORK3N$wc97Ew6i@dickson.demon.co.uk>

We'll probably never agree about Emma Watson!

In message <9t43op+edci at eGroups.com>, Barb <blpurdom at yahoo.com> writes
>I'm not sure of
>the purpose of his catching the Snitch in his mouth, which jarred
>me,

Probably just an over-literal application of the relevant text:

"Harry was speeding towards the ground when the crowd saw him clap his
hand to his mouth as though he was about to be sick - he hit the pitch
on all fours - coughed - and something gold fell into his hand." (PS/SS
Ch. 11; pages 140-141 here.)

Golden Snitches should be bigger than open mouths, shouldn't they? Hard
to see that this wouldn't have resulted in at least a few broken teeth.
:-x

Very interesting review! The points about the origins of the humour in
the script are particularly perceptively expressed.

Any early thoughts about whether/where this would appear in your top 100
movie list at http://www.critpath.org/~purdom/movies.html ? (And is that
list ordered by descending preference or, in some places, by similarity
of subject matter?)

Best wishes for the weekend,
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sat Nov 17 02:47:00 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:47:00 -0800
Subject: Braving Flood and flat tire (and possible car explosion)...
References: <166.408e989.2927204e@aol.com> <012101c16f0d$ba4c38e0$304e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <013501c16f12$229d1960$304e28d1@oemcomputer>

As you can tell by my subject, I had one hell of a time getting to the
theatre for Harry Potter and the SS.  After buying my ticket a week in
advance, going to bed early so that I get up on time...carefully selecting
my outfit to be the most impressive  (I lost to three Harry's who came in
full costume), I suffered a flooded street, a flat tire and my care smelling
like smoke to make it.

And I'm left wondering...was it worth it, all that just to stare at the
screen and wonder where the hell Draco's incisors went?  Yes mother it was
damnit!  The movie (viewed twice, once at close range) was the most
spectacular movie I have seen in a wile  *nose grows a foot*.  Okay, okay,
so I thought it went too fast and cut out WAY too much good stuff...and put
in a lot of rather stupid items...It was, over all...good.

Daniel Radcliffe...what can I say about the boy...besides that I wanted to
can him within the first few minutes of him being on screen.  I'm sorry, the
boy LOOKS like harry...but can't act worth a hell of beans.  He's just...off
for some reason and that drags down some of the scenes.  Now, don't get me
wrong, the kid's cute and adorable and there are some places he shines
(towards the end...you know what I mean), but there are some god awful
moments when I had to bury my head in my hands.

Emma, Rupert, the other few kids I can't put a name to-Emma was a bit..over
the top, but she's decent.  A bit more work and she'll shine like a
pearl...provided they fix her hair a bit :)  Rupert was a very lovely Ron,
believable without overdoing it.  "Neville", "Seamus", "Dean", names we all
know and barley see (and for the life of me I can't remember they're actor's
names) for they're parts and what they were given, I did adore them, though
"Seamus"'s accent is a bit hard to wade through, can't fault the boy.

"Percy"-I have one thing to say...leave him at home!  No wait, two
things...EYE CONTACT!  "Percy" spent more time staring off into space or at
the table then he did looking at who he was talking to.  I understand he may
have been scared out of his mind, and trying NOT to look at the
camera's..but please man, at least look at the actor who's sitting two
inches from your right!

Tom- *giggles madly till she falls over*  Sorry, attack of too much
cuteness.  I must say, He did...well for his role, though he squinted a lot
and really can't do upset.  This was a perfect casting though, right up
there with Hagrid, Ron, Snape and some others.  I have seen Draco Malfoy and
now bow down to the god that is sexy.  Right then, moving on before I drool
all over myself.  (still wondering where his incisors went...

The Adults-  Lumped together they make a wonderful cast that plays off each
other nicely, but singled out there are some shining stars...and some better
left behind.  Robbie Coltraine, Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Richard Harris,
Fiona Shaw (ms), The guy who played Filch, The ghosts, "Vernon Dursley" were
all wonderful in they're parts.  They played them well, (though some
disagree with me on Richard Harris), and brought to life those characters
that I sometimes couldn't picture.  Special mention here is for Richard
Harris.  Some say he was lacking, others say horrible, I say he was quite
good for a man that no one could really measure up to.  He took on a role
that to many, has become the greatest wizard known to man.  He played
Dumbledore with a warmth I had not expected from him, and gave life to
someone I had put on a pedestal.

The Plot-  Well...umm...what can I say about a plot that was minimized and
cut to pieces?  It was enjoyable...though not the book.  That about sums it
up.  Some parts were good, some were bad...some left me wondering what the
hell was going on.

Special Effects-What can I say, I'm a sucker for things like this.  I liked
the Quiddich scenes and adored every moment of it.  I followed it as if I
were reading a long, cheering for each Slytherin goal.  The game was
exciting and wonderful to watch and left me wishing they played all the
games they did in the books.  The troll was another part I enjoyed.  He was
stupidly cute and funny and a bit of lightness in the movie.  There are
other effects in the movie that were equally enjoyable..the chess match, the
Devil's Snare, Voldemort (yes Rita, I concede he's ugly...now if they only
showed the PROPER Voldemort....*sigh*), that I could all elaborate on
but..you saw if for yourself hopefully :)

Over all, not as good as I expected, not as bad as I expected...just
generally good in many ways, bad in many others, and fun for a few viewing.
After all, this is only the first movie based on a book that is a bit
lackluster after reading Goblet of Fire too many times...perhaps Chamber of
Secrets will live up to the dream...but even if it doesn't...it's nice to
watch your favorite character come to life and live out the story we've all
fallen in love with..


Special Correspondent,
Rita Skeeter
(who still wonders WHERE Draco's incisors went!)

Note: The views represented in this are not the views expressed by the Daily
Prophet, it's owners or subsidiaries.




From dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Nov 17 02:51:26 2001
From: dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk (dracos_boyfriend at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 02:51:26 -0000
Subject: Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
In-Reply-To: <3JORK3N$wc97Ew6i@dickson.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <9t4jbe+uhpk@eGroups.com>

Chris ... "Golden Snitches should be bigger than open mouths, 
shouldn't they? Hard to see that this wouldn't have resulted in at 
least a few broken teeth."

But Harry *does* catch the Snitch in his mouth.  It was one canon-
loyal detail I was very impressed to see left in.

Barb, loved the review, dear.  Like an extra chapter of ToGI to see 
us through another few days ;).  I too was unimpressed with Emma, 
although not as unimpressed as you were.  I thought she pulled off a 
difficult job with a certain amount of style - but there were moments 
for me when she grated, especially in the 'if Harry and Ron hadn't 
turned up, I'd be dead now' sequence.  Equally, I think some of Dan's 
acting was equally bad.  The scene with Firenze was one of the worst 
bits of film I have ever seen.  Dan was wooden, the lines were 
contrived, and Firenze was utterly dismal.  I hated that scene the 
first time round, and I hated it the second time ... and on the third 
viewing, I came to loathe it.

By the way.  This may never get off the ground, but I would like to 
have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay based on some of the 
comments here, and would like to gauge the group's interest in such 
an idea.

Al




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 02:58:12 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 02:58:12 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t43op+edci@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

s
p
a
c
e

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

s
p
a
c
e


A few fact-ish points:

# It's VoldemorT, not Voldemore.

# It was RJH King on the Quidditch award in the trophy case, not RJL.

# The house numbers on the tables in the Great Hall seem closer to 
Rowling's one thousand than to a logically-derived 300 or 
thereabouts. Better this way.


Oddities:

# Dan's eye tic, where his left eye often twitches in close-ups of 
his face while he's speaking. It adds something, makes him less 
perfect and more endearing.

# Richard Harris was obviously slightly uncomfortable in his heavy 
robes. In the hospital scene, he twitches his arm to shift the 
weight of the fabric. His robes in the Mirror of Erised scene end 
above his ankles, which makes him look a bit silly. Weird.

# What's with the incongruous medieval wimple on the nurse (Madam 
Pomfrey?) in the hospital scene? A bit jarring.


Pluses and whines:

# Snape is terribly cool. His robes swish so grandly, like some 
agent of Robespierre off on a mission to England to unmask the 
Scarlet Pimpernel. I don't like what they did with the bit 
about "stoppering death" in his introductory speech. He also doesn't 
look menacing enough for a putative villain.

# Rupert Grint has a great face, very plastic and very genuine. Some 
of his lines are too practised, though, it's not so funny if it 
loses its spontaneity. Rupert awaiting the blow of the chess queen 
(I agree with Barb) is wrenchingly effective. Rare stuff.

# Quidditch is *fantastic*, fast, vertiginous, torquey. It's a major 
reason to watch the film again. Broom swishing sounds are too loud, 
though. I would have liked to hear more adrenalin-charged shouts 
back and forth and less sound-effects swishing.

# Hurts to say this, but Dan Radcliffe is really not very good. He 
has the "stillness" which moviemakers seem to look for in child 
actors, and which Harry needs, but otherwise he's a bit wooden. 
Absolutely likeable, but not very interesting or revealing to watch.

# Emma Watson's Hermione is a bit ambiguous. Script should be partly 
faulted here. Her defining scenes are either cut or meddled with. I 
don't know who she is, at the end of the film.

# Almost uniformly convincing sets, props and locations.

# Some of the actors don't seem to believe in their roles, they wear 
them like a costume, and no deeper. Richard Harris is a bit of this 
(and he's not alone), but he's better than I expected. I agree with 
Barb, fault the script.


Big picture:

Very choppy editing. Bits-and-pieces story and uneven performances 
from the three main actors means that what really holds the movie 
together are the overblown and everpresent soundtrack and the lush 
sets and settings.

Somehow, I always thought Rowling's books were visualised in her own 
head as movies. She does say that she thinks visually, and write 
what she sees. They slip from scene to scene, and even in the books, 
the passing of time is not always expertly suggested.

What this movie looks like is a bunch of in some way unconnected 
characters wandering about in an overwhelming set. Almost closer to 
theatre (consider the lighting) than Hollywood film. But theatre 
demands commanding performances, one can't easily mask mediocre 
acting face-to-face with an audience.

Sets are too detailed and too grand. The strength and economy of 
Rowling's writing is that, saying little, she reveals a lot. This 
obsessive concern with detailed and "accurate" sets, which is in 
some ways a recent filmmaking trend, obscures what really makes a 
film worth watching.

Ultimately, is this film independent enough? Is our mental 
Harryworld expanded and fertilised? I don't really think so. It's 
too slavish and too serious and goal-oriented for the spark of 
throwaway irreverence that makes a film a creative event for both 
film creators and audiences.

Last whine: I tentatively dispute the assumption that Columbus is 
great at directing kids. _Mrs Doubtfire_ had basically awful acting 
by the children, except for the younger daughter (who's great in 
Roald Dahl's _Matilda_ as well), for whom I would not give Clumbus 
too much credit. And Robin Williams just had to do his regular thing.

Despite all this whining, I loved bits of the film. Watch it as a 
companion documentary to the books, not as an interpretation or a 
complete story on its own.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 03:01:56 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:01:56 -0000
Subject: Al's rewrite suggestion
In-Reply-To: <9t4jbe+uhpk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4jv4+od3n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dracos_boyfriend at y... wrote:
> By the way.  This may never get off the ground, but I would like 
to 
> have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay based on some of 
the 
> comments here, and would like to gauge the group's interest in 
such 
> an idea.
> 
> Al


This is such an entertaining idea, we must try it! Or, now that 
you've had the idea, why don't we do something toward working out a 
screenplay for one of the other books, such as PoA, which is far 
enough off to give us time and space?

Great!




From WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 03:04:59 2001
From: WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com (WatermelonSugar7 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:04:59 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] An interesting conundrum
Message-ID: <12a.775113d.29272ddb@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/01 8:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
caliburncy at yahoo.com writes:


> So all in all, I think the film functions well as purely ANCILLARY to 
> the book, but seems to fall short when left to its own devices.  It's 
> a wonderful addition to the Potter universe for those who are already 
> fans, but is likely to be fairly unappreciable anyone that isn't.
> 

I think this perfectly illustrates the truth of something I saw posted over 
on the PoU list, by Cassie. Someone had asked what several things were and 
she mentioned that the movie is not canon.
Luke has made so many good points. One in particular that I personally 
noticed was the "after the troll" scene. Now, they couldn't have put in that 
famous line, "There are somethings you can't share without becoming friends, 
and knocking out a mountain trill is one of them." But how much better it 
would have been to have the "Thanks"  and then they go off, instead of the 
Quirrel scene. It would have said so much more about the friendship and that 
you rarely saw the three apart afterwards.
But, you know, I think, and I've said before, they were trying to appeal to 
so many ages, and possily, the younger kids, some anyway, enjoyed the 
Quirrel?troll scene more.

And because the film IS ancilliary, those of us who are older and granted, 
have gone a lot further into fandom, fanfic, analyzing every word and 
gesture... we HAVE all that other stuff to enjoy. The kids who are just 
reading the books, or some who've had the books read to them, may need 
different things from the movie. 
I definitely agree with what you've said but at the same time, can kind of 
see why it was done as it was. 
~Ashleigh, who lives under the Curse of Cbjectivity


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




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 03:14:56 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:14:56 -0000
Subject: as a TV series?
Message-ID: <9t4kng+2irc@eGroups.com>

Since the film seems to have fallen short in its attempt to present 
the book, do you think a more efficient way of filming the story 
would be to make this into a TV series? The books are episodic, and 
they seem to be more fitted to the cadences of a set of hourly 
chunks. What do you think?

Of course, it's not quite as blockbuster as a grand Hollywood 
production.




From genevieve373 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 03:41:06 2001
From: genevieve373 at yahoo.com (genevieve373 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:41:06 -0000
Subject: Daniel as Harry (was Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small)
In-Reply-To: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4m8i+5f95@eGroups.com>

> # Hurts to say this, but Dan Radcliffe is really not very good. He 
> has the "stillness" which moviemakers seem to look for in child 
> actors, and which Harry needs, but otherwise he's a bit wooden. 
> Absolutely likeable, but not very interesting or revealing to watch.


I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily expressive all the time, 
but I think that is more the character than the actor.  I wouldn't 
expect a child who grew up psychologically abused to completely come 
out of his shell all at once in a drastically different environment.  
He used more expression at the appropriate times, and was stoic at 
other times...I guess this is just what I might expect from Harry.  
And, it leaves some opportunity for his personality to "blossom" in 
later movies.  Overall, I was really impressed with what Daniel did, 
especially with such a complex character as Harry Potter.  It may not 
have been perfect, but I don't think anyone else could have done him 
justice, especially considering how much time they took looking for 
the "right" Harry Potter.




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 03:43:35 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:43:35 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Braving Flood and flat tire (and possible car explosion)...
Message-ID: <a9.1e77272c.292736e7@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 9:50:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
saitaina at wizzards.net writes:

<<  Special mention here is for Richard
 Harris.  Some say he was lacking, others say horrible, I say he was quite
 good for a man that no one could really measure up to.  He took on a role
 that to many, has become the greatest wizard known to man.  He played
 Dumbledore with a warmth I had not expected from him, and gave life to
 someone I had put on a pedestal.
  >>

Yup, and I now read the interview where he said that he didn't want to spend 
the last years of his life (he's 71) playing Dumbledore in seven films, but 
that he adores his grandaughter, and she said Papa, play it or I will never 
speak to you again. So he did.
I think that's lovely

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 03:46:41 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:46:41 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Braving Flood and flat tire (and possible car explosion)...
Message-ID: <63.1d37aae.292737a1@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 9:50:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
saitaina at wizzards.net writes:

<< Special Effects-What can I say, I'm a sucker for things like this.  I liked
 the Quiddich scenes and adored every moment of it.  I followed it as if I
 were reading a long, cheering for each Slytherin goal.  The game was
 exciting and wonderful to watch and left me wishing they played all the
 games they did in the books.  The troll was another part I enjoyed.  He was
 stupidly cute and funny and a bit of lightness in the movie.  There are
 other effects in the movie that were equally enjoyable..the chess match, the
 Devil's Snare, Voldemort (yes Rita, I concede he's ugly...now if they only
 showed the PROPER Voldemort....*sigh*), that I could all elaborate on
 but..you saw if for yourself hopefully :) >>

Fascinating..And what are you talking about -- re Draco's incisors? (must be 
a fanfic thing)
I thought the special effects were (in general) terrible....but then I don't 
care about special effects. The most recent Star Wars movie - the Phantom 
Menace -- had wonderful, wonderful special effects, and was a dreadful 
disgusting movie with no soul. The centaur was ridiculous...the troll was 
okay..I really had to work to make any sense of all of the Quidditch match...
THIS movie had spirit and a soul.....with pretty mediocre special 
effects......

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 03:47:48 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:47:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
Message-ID: <17.1eaa942e.292737e4@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 10:00:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
frantyck at yahoo.com writes:

<< # It's VoldemorT, not Voldemore. >>

i don't care..it will always be Voldemore to me



From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 03:48:38 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:48:38 -0000
Subject: An interesting conundrum
In-Reply-To: <9t4fv6+8pj0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4mmm+q3vi@eGroups.com>

Since it seems that Luke also found the movie wanting in some of the 
same areas I did, I hope you'll all indulge me with a few quick 
reactions:

Luke wrote:

> This movie is the only film adaptation that I can think of that 
seems 
> completely incapable of standing on its own two feet.  

I can't think of a film adaptation of a book with the problems you 
identified either, Luke.  But I can think of a film that was based on 
a TV show with a huge fan following in which the film suffered from 
some of the same problems.  Remember the first Star Trek movie?  
Maybe not, because it was dreadful.  The thing that made it dreadful 
was that the filmmakers were so in awe of the franchise that they 
forgot to make a good film.  A bit of that was going on in HP.  I 
sensed a feeling that the original (the book) is so good that all we 
have to do is go through the motions, and all will turn out well.  I 
guess that strategy will get you a base hit, but never a home run.


Luke wrote:

> The time factor:
> 
> I really, really hate to say this, but Kloves or Columbus or 
whoever 
> completely copped-out on some of the tough decisions about what to 
> include.  They got in quite a bit.  But the problem here is that 
they 
> had so many characters to introduce that they never spent long 
enough 
> on several of the characters.  

Yes, the list of cameo appearances (characters who appear and do next 
to nothing) was way too long.  Fred and George.  Percy.  Ginny.  
Seamus.  Neville.  NHN and the other three ghosts (who were 
introduced by name).  Flitwick.  Filch.  Mrs. Norris.  People just 
streaked by.  Characters should have been combined and/or 
eliminated.  I wonder why this wasn't done.  Could it have been 
anything other than JKR's influence?


Luke wrote:

> There is a scene immediately following Dumbledore's speech to Harry 
> where Harry walks out onto the ground with Hedwig and he allows 
> Hedwig to fly off into the sky.  This scene symbolizes how Harry is 
> letting go of the dream of being with his parents, so that he can 
> continue to live.  

Oh, is that what that was supposed to be?  Because I was totally 
lost.  I figured Harry was sending a message to someone, and I 
couldn't figure out who it might be.  

Cindy




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 03:50:34 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:50:34 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] An interesting conundrum
Message-ID: <4f.146e382d.2927388a@aol.com>

and if the film is ancillary to the books? So?
Why not?

Thanks for everyone for posting..this is great fun

Susan



From lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 03:51:04 2001
From: lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:51:04 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4mr8+bfcp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> 
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
> 
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> 
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
 
 
> Despite all this whining, I loved bits of the film. Watch it as a 
> companion documentary to the books, not as an interpretation or a 
> complete story on its own.>

I felt that the movie truly captured the very things that excited me 
about the book.  Harry's dorm room was so perfect, it took my breath 
away.  Diagon Alley made me want to jump right in and walk down the 
street looking into the windows of all the shops.  Quidditch was 
quickening-pulse exciting - and I am not a big fan of Quidditch.  When 
Harry broke through platform 9 3/4, boy, did I get excited!  Damn, I 
want to go to Hogwarts.

My criticisms are more of the nitpicky variety.  Harry's blue eyes 
irritated me to no end.  Why couldn't something have been done with 
them?  I wasn't pleased that Hermione discovered who Nicolas Flamel 
was; it was a shining moment for Harry in the book that shows us he is 
clever, too.  I agree that some of the humor that we love so in the 
books was lacking in the film - "Are you a witch or what?" is one of 
the best lines, and Dumbledore's sock comment is noticeably missing.  
Neville's plight could have expanded on a bit more, as his 10 point 
award is such a treat in the book because we know how hard everything 
is for him.

Really, though, the movie was excellent.  It was darkly creepy in 
appropriate places - much too so for children, IMO (thus proving that 
these are not stories for children once again) and I left just aching 
to be even a muggle in Harry's world instead of a muggle here.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who is already planning her second viewing 
*************************************************




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sat Nov 17 03:57:56 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:57:56 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Braving Flood and flat tire (and possible car explosion)...
References: <63.1d37aae.292737a1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <004e01c16f1c$138c1700$8d4e28d1@oemcomputer>

RE: Draco's incisors-if you look closely at Tom's mouth when he speaks you
can hardly ever see his incisors since they grow beyond the normal
toothline...for most of the first viewing I was wondering where the hell
they went.

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 04:01:40 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 23:01:40 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daniel as Harry (was Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines...
Message-ID: <146.4ba1eae.29273b24@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/16/2001 10:42:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
genevieve373 at yahoo.com writes:

<< but I think that is more the character than the actor.  I wouldn't 
 expect a child who grew up psychologically abused to completely come 
 out of his shell all at once in a drastically different environment.  
 He used more expression at the appropriate times, and was stoic at 
 other times...I guess this is just what I might expect from Harry.  
 And, it leaves some opportunity for his personality to "blossom" in 
 later movies.  Overall, I was really impressed with what Daniel did, 
 especially with such a complex character as Harry Potter.  It may not 
 have been perfect, but I don't think anyone else could have done him 
 justice, especially considering how much time they took looking for 
 the "right" Harry Potter.
 
  >>

I feel as if in many ways HP is the "straight" guy in the first movie.....I 
really resonated with the fact that British child actors are not expected to 
gush and wail...
and yes, Harry was abused by the Dursleys and experiences shock after trauma 
after shock.....I think the Daniel does quite well..

Susan



From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 04:12:35 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:12:35 -0000
Subject: as a TV series?
In-Reply-To: <9t4kng+2irc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4o3j+frak@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> Since the film seems to have fallen short in its attempt to present 
> the book, do you think a more efficient way of filming the story 
> would be to make this into a TV series? The books are episodic, and 
> they seem to be more fitted to the cadences of a set of hourly 
> chunks. What do you think?

Though several people have mused on this, I think I find the 
prospects somewhat doubtful.  Why?  Because unlike what you said, the 
books *aren't* truly episodic.  A truly episodic work is one in which 
every event stands to more or less on its own--meaning it has its 
very own conflict and resolution that is completely seperate from any 
larger plot.  You could do just one scene and have it make a 
*rounded* story by itself.  In episodic works, the overall continuity 
is not one of plot, but of theme.  Beyond theme, the tie between the 
individual episodes is so loose its virtually non-existant.  Take for 
example, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, where every place they 
stop along the Mississippi River is a little story in and of itself.  
The tying thread plotwise is that they are part of the same trip down 
the river--in other words, it's more of a "framework" than a true 
overall plot.  So the true tie between them all comes in the books 
themes, specifically Huck's relationship with Jim.

Other examples of episodically-plotted books that people here may be 
familiar with (under the perhaps false assumption that you read other 
children's fantasy) are Taran Wanderer (Book four of The Prydain 
Chronicles) and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (from The Chronicles 
of Narnia--It's book three in the original production order, but book 
five in the needlessly-revamped chronological order).  Perhaps a 
comparison of the plotting style of these books to the other books in 
the same series will better explain my point than my half-baked 
explanations.

But anyway, the reason the HP books aren't episodic by this 
assessment is that the individual conflicts (i.e. arriving at 
Hogwarts, or the Harry-Draco rivalry, or the searching through the 
library) do not function well on their own--they function as part of 
a grander scheme.  The "one chapter per episode" kind of thing will 
make some episodes vastly more watchable than others, because some 
episodes (such as introductions to the various classes) will appear 
to lack drive and internal relevancy.

Granted, there are some T.V. shows that have a high degree of 
continuity (X-Files, for a quick example).  But in X-Files, the 
grander scheme does not *overshadow* the relevancy of the immediate 
plot in the way that it does in HP.  It would be much more difficult 
to create well-rounded episodes with HP, because each HP book has one 
strongly overriding plot to which everything else is simply auxillary.

Still, it could be done, but only in a way that is very 
unconventional for television.  In fact, the mold that fits HP best 
if you want a "complete" adaptation is, believe it or not, probably 
the miniseries, which (for whatever reason I have never been able to 
understand) is often a less individually-rounded medium, though this 
of course depends on the miniseries at hand.  But I am not 
recommending HP be made into a miniseries.  Not at all.  I personally 
believe it can work just fine and dandy as a standalone film, if 
edited properly.

-Luke




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 04:18:11 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:18:11 -0000
Subject: Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
In-Reply-To: <9t4jbe+uhpk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4oe3+peh5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dracos_boyfriend at y... wrote:
> But Harry *does* catch the Snitch in his mouth.  It was one canon-
> loyal detail I was very impressed to see left in.

Thanks for pointing that out.  I'd forgotten.  Seems like a rather 
nasty thing to have in your mouth, especially with the wings (ouch!).

 
> Barb, loved the review, dear.  Like an extra chapter of ToGI to 
> see us through another few days ;).  

Gee, it was long, but not THAT long.  (wink wink to you too ;)
 
> By the way.  This may never get off the ground, but I would like 
> to have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay based on some of 
> the comments here, and would like to gauge the group's interest in 
> such an idea.

Great idea.  

One thing I forgot in my earlier post was my take on the trio 
friendship in the film.  Some folks thought they were all chummy 
when Hermione pointed out James' Seeker plaque from 1972, then not 
very friendly toward each other again, then they had the troll 
incident and were suddenly friends even though they already seemed 
to be friends.  

I NEVER thought the boys seemed all that friendly toward her, even 
after the troll.  I agree that Luke's way of telegraphing the new 
friendship by having the boys wait for her to come with them when 
leaving the bathroom would have set the tone for the rest of the 
film nicely.  As it was, it was never really clear why the boys 
started including her.  And she should not have just stumbled on the 
Flamel information the way she did.  In the American film, by the 
by, they actually show her pointing at the words "Sorcerer's Stone" 
in a large book.  Does that mean that they filmed this twice in 
order to have a shot of the words "Philosopher's Stone" for the 
British film?  Are Canadians seeing an American or UK version?  It 
should also be interesting to find out what people in non-English-
speaking countries will see, and whether the film will be dubbed or 
subtitled.

--Barb





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 04:55:11 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:55:11 -0000
Subject: Am I imagining things?
Message-ID: <9t4qjf+v85i@eGroups.com>

I saw the movie twice today.  The second time around I noticed a lot 
of detail that I hadn't noticed the first time, of course, and I saw 
something really strange that could just be my imagination.  In the 
hospital scene towards the end of the movie there are a few closeups 
of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks to me like 
Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead that looks like a 
lightening bolt.  Of course, Richard Harris is an old man with lots 
of wrinkles so maybe a few of his wrinkles just happened to be shaped 
like a lightning bolt, but the fact that it is the same size, shape 
and location as Harry's scar is interesting.  Of course, I could 
easily be imagining things, but if I'm not it opens up all sorts of 
interesting plot possibilities.

Joywitch




From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 04:59:22 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:59:22 -0000
Subject: midnight showing
In-Reply-To: <9t36ds+mdf8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4qra+n8hm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> Well, my wife and I went out and saw the movie at midnight last 
> night. I'm taking my kids tonight. It was absolutely 
> fantastic...can't wait to see it again. I noticed SO many 
incredible 
> magical details--the Leaky Cauldron sign, what some of the pictures 
> were doing in the background, the way the door to vault 713 opened, 
> etc--and I know I missed at least as many more. I didn't catch the 
> date on the Quidditch trophy or any other names.

McGonagall is on one trophy.  James Potter is on another and I'm 
pretty sure the date is 1972.  I noticed also that James Potter's 
trophy says he was a Seeker, which directly contradicts JKR's 
statement that he was either a Keeper or a Chaser, I forget which.

--Joywitch




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 05:17:35 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 05:17:35 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4rtf+3sns@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> 
> # It's VoldemorT, not Voldemore.

Let's be clear. It's VoldemorT in the movie. On the other hand, JKR 
herself pronounced it Voldemore in an radio interview, she advised 
Jim Dale in his pronunciations and he said Voldemore, and the 
Scholastic website says Voldemore. The movie version is not 
definitive. In a sense, it's like the scar. Different people 
interpret it differently.

> 
> # It was RJH King on the Quidditch award in the trophy case, not 
RJL.

The McGonagall reference was dated 1971, by the way. It seems 
relatively unlikely that this was our dear Professor, who was 
already on staff at Hogwarts when James was a student in the early 
70s (reference the conversation in the Three Broomsticks in PA).

> 
> # The house numbers on the tables in the Great Hall seem closer to 
> Rowling's one thousand than to a logically-derived 300 or 
> thereabouts. Better this way.

I've done a fairly good estimate of the number of kids in the Great 
Hall scene and it comes out to about 400. That tallies with comments 
from Columbus about the production. There are a total of 18 teachers 
besides Dumbledore (you can count them as the camera pans around 
Daniel in the Sorting Hat scene.) Presumably Trelawney does not 
attend, which brings the total number of teachers, including 
Dumbledore, to 20.

Steve






From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 05:40:48 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 05:40:48 -0000
Subject: Stuff I couldn't help noticing...
In-Reply-To: <9t3uje+j1a0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4t90+c4gt@eGroups.com>


 -Is Dudley going through a preppy phase? The clothes Harry wears at 
fist look somewhat more like what's in style for middle schoolers 
than what Duddy wears to the zoo.

 -Privet Drive must be home to an extremely persuasive Vauxhall 
salesman. Everyone has the exact same GM-ish looking sedan when Baby 
Harry's dropped off. Ten years later, everyone has *new* matching 
wagons- Vauxhall Vectras, I think- in both cases the only variation 
is color!

 -Baby Harry that gets dropped off is much younger looking than Baby 
Harry in the flashback and the photo.

 -Names gave a few problems. Harry calling Malfoy "Draco" in the 
Forbidden Forest was one thing, but later *that same night* Hermione 
says "Voldemort" instead of "You-Know-Who". NOBODY but Harry and 
Dumble are supposed to do that in Book I!






From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 05:54:39 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:54:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: question about the dorms and # of students
In-Reply-To: <9t4rtf+3sns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011117055439.48199.qmail@web11505.mail.yahoo.com>


--- hp_lexicon at yahoo.com wrote:
> I've done a fairly good estimate of the number
> of kids in the Great 
> Hall scene and it comes out to about 400. 

Speaking of student numbers, I have a question. 
We know that in the first year's dorm for
Gryffindor there are 5 four-poster beds.  So can
we assume there is only 1 first years dorm?  The
reason I ask is that it seems like an awfully
small number.  Can we assume that it is a similar
number for the second thru seventh years?  That
only makes it 35 students total in Gryffindor,
give or take a few.  Now, if there are supposed
to be about 400 total, and there's only 4 houses,
why is there a paltry 5 kids in the first years
dorm for Gryffindor?  Is Gryffindor a hard house
to get into?  I always figured there was a fairly
even amount in each house, but if we take the
number of first years in harry's dorm and average
it out among all 4 houses and all 7 years, that's
not even 200 students.  So what gives?  Is my
math off??

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!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 06:15:17 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 06:15:17 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t4v9l+6u72@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> 
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
> 
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> 
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
> 

> # What's with the incongruous medieval wimple on the nurse (Madam 
> Pomfrey?) in the hospital scene? A bit jarring.

Actually, that wasn't M.Pomfrey, it was just a another moving 
painting, no?

-Cornflower O'Shea, who is deeply disappointed she didn't get to 
hear Dumbledore say...
~~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
"NITWIT! BLUBBER! ODDMENT! TWEAK!" - Albus Dumbledore
~~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
>




From karen_r_b at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 07:11:51 2001
From: karen_r_b at hotmail.com (Karen )
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:11:51 -0000
Subject: Wow...
Message-ID: <9t52jn+8sn8@eGroups.com>

All I can say, is wow. Such an amazing movie. Visually stunning - 
Quidditch and Diagon Alley were sooo well done. Everyone cheered at 
the end of the Quidditch match. The actors were spectacular - 
especially Emma Watson, Robbie Coltrain and Rick Harris (think I got 
that right - Hermione, Hagrid and Snape). They had their characters 
spot on. Emma was the perfect little know-it-all at the beginning, 
and Snape is the guy you love to hate. I personally plan on seeing it 
over and over and over again - and not only for Sean Biggerstaff 
either (I have a new Oliver Wood fetish, but who can blame me?)

To repeat myself - Wow. To all those who are doubting the ability of 
the movie to live up to the standards that the book set, go see it. 
You'll be pleasantly surprised. A few bits are left out, or smooshed 
together, but at 2.5 hours, it couldn't have gotten any longer, could 
it?

Go see it! I'm still in shock :-)
Karen




From karen_r_b at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 07:17:57 2001
From: karen_r_b at hotmail.com (Karen )
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:17:57 -0000
Subject: Wow...
In-Reply-To: <9t52jn+8sn8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t52v5+i4vm@eGroups.com>

Ok, so I know that I got some of the actor's names wrong, but in my 
excitement, I just typed without thinking. You can forgive me, can't 
you? Thought so!

Karen
*waiting until she gets to see it again*




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 07:26:55 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:26:55 -0000
Subject: Saw it... very mixed feelings...
Message-ID: <9t53fv+j0ot@eGroups.com>

I am sure that we'll be nitpicking and dissecting at least from now 
until Christmas.  :-D

It's very late-- 2 a.m.--and three and a half hours ago I came out of 
the theater after seeing the movie for the first time.  

And honestly, I am not sure *what* to think.  I have extremely mixed 
feelings, so I am not going to write a scene-by-scene and point-by-
point review until after I see it once more tomorrow (I had Friday 
and Saturday tix).

Lots of general thoughts, but the overarching one was that the pacing 
was way off.  It dragged.  It was disjointed.  The couple next to me 
left.  The movie was so long that my youngest sister, who usually 
likes movies like this, fell asleep. 

I had to spend a great deal of time post-movie explaning to the other 
sister all the connections that were left out... "why did that girl 
(Hermione) go hide in the bathroom?"  "Is there anything Harry can't 
do?  Is anything hard for him?  Does he ever fail, or is he just 
lucky?"  "What was all that stuff they were muttering in the spells?  
What do all the spells do?"  "What was up with that Snape guy?  I 
didn't get him."  "What was up with that boy who kept blowing things 
up?  No, not Neville... yeah, Seamus!  That's the one!  What's up 
with him!"  All in all, she loved the movie and says she wants to get 
the DVD ASAP... and she thought I was being way too nitpicky.  *shrug*

Lots more thoughts, as I've said... but I must say that the kids 
didn't bother me all that much.  I definitely don't agree with Barb's 
Hermione issues.  At all.  I think that Emma Watson, while perhaps 
not the absolute best casting pick for the character, was one of the 
very *least* of this movie's concerns.  And dear ones, I am very 
concerned.

You see, I think that a really good book-movie ought to inspire a 
person to actually go out and read the book.  Case in point:  I found 
my favorite writer at age 2, Lucy Maud Montgomery, through the first 
two Anne of Green Gables miniseries.  But after tonight, I am glad 
that I am already a Harry Potter fan.  I attended the movie with 
another rabid fan and four people who'd never read the books.  The 
other rabid fan loved it.  I've described my sisters' reactions.  The 
other two had similar thoughts afterwards:  cool movie, perhaps a bit 
too long, will get the DVD... but still have no real interest in 
reading the books and don't understand where all the passion and 
rabid fandom comes from.

Oh, well.  There's always CoS.  ;-)

Disclaimer:  This is my reaction right now.  Perhaps tomorrow's 
viewing will make me reverse my opinion completely.  I sincerely hope 
so.

--Eb (who, for the record, did enjoy Quidditch!)

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
Ebony AKA AngieJ
ebonyink at hotmail.com
Come join us in Paradise!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Paradise
Fanfics of All Shapes, Ships, and Sizes:
http://www.fictionalley.org
**********************************




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 07:30:12 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:30:12 -0000
Subject: SPOILER apologies and chat
Message-ID: <9t53m4+jt5l@eGroups.com>

Sorry for the last message... I had no spoiler space there.  I hope I 
didn't ruin things for anyone.  Guess that's what happens when you go 
online instead of going to bed at 2 a.m.

To bring this back to the topic, is anyone interested in a special 
movie chat on Saturday?  I am not sure I can wait until Sunday to 
discuss this!

--Eb

<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
Ebony AKA AngieJ
ebonyink at hotmail.com
Come join us in Paradise!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Paradise
Fanfics of All Shapes, Ships, and Sizes:
http://www.fictionalley.org
**********************************






From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 07:43:29 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:43:29 -0000
Subject: Another random (OT) correction
Message-ID: <9t54f2+2tur@eGroups.com>

"Case in point:  I found my favorite writer at age 2, Lucy Maud 
Montgomery, through the first two Anne of Green Gables miniseries."  

That should be 12, not 2.  I'm good but not *that* good.

Sheesh.  I *really* should have gone to sleep before posting, 
shouldn't I have?  Perhaps all the extreme nitpicking (which is 
really OOC for me) is due to sleep deprivation.  

So tomorrow if you get a glowing five-star review of the movie from 
me, don't think I'm wishy-washy, okay?  :-D

--Eb




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 07:56:17 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:56:17 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t4jo4+1kcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t5571+rqs5@eGroups.com>

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

s
p
a
c
e



A bunch of responses to responses.

Genevieve said:
"I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily expressive all the time, 
but I think that is more the character than the actor."

Yes and no, I'd say. My experience of and reaction to the film is 
subjective, but I didn't really get the sense of Daniel being in 
control of his role. One knows when emotions/reactions are being 
shown honestly, because the actor must imagine himself or herself 
into a state something like that which he/she is trying to portray. 
It rings true when you, as part of the audience, recognise emotion, 
at some level apart from your cerebral cortex. Daniel-Harry is faced 
with some immensely moving and difficult moments, but really, apart 
from rearranging his face, Daniel doesn't convey even suppressed 
emotion very well. Convincing representation goes beyond facial 
expression to the rest of the body -- and then much deeper than 
that. An effective actor seeks to evoke or remind the individual 
members of the audience of some powerful emotion, whose eddies the 
involved audience will feel.

Daniel is a kid, I know. He has the most challenging part in the 
movie: how to show turbulent feelings that even he does not quite 
understand without excessive dramatics. Rupert Grint and the adult, 
more accomplished, actors in the cast have a relatively 
straightforward task. Precisely because Harry has to show so much 
while doing so little, I'm a little disappointed. The movie thus 
focuses on the plot rather than the much tougher and more important 
thread (in the long term) of Harry's conflicting emotions and 
personal growth... high thrill and great sadness.

Take for instance his reactions to pain in his scar. Surely you 
wouldn't look at him and know that Dan-Harry is experiencing 
physical pain beyond any he has experienced so far. And pain is not 
the hardest of sensations to depict.

There are some effective moments, though, such as the chess task, 
when he realises Ron must sacrifice himself, and when he crashes to 
the ground. When Harry leaves the hospital wing and sees his two 
best friends on the staircase, that's moving too. At the end of the 
movie, the departure from the station is not bad, but Dan-Harry's 
reaction to the photo album... where's the hunger?


VoldemorT or Voldemore, Steve sticks with Voldemore:

I wasn't making a Final Case for the T version. Just pointing out in 
some perplexity that the movie chose the apparently non-Rowling 
pronunciation. I was very surprised. I do prefer the T, being an 
Italian speaker myself, but.

Steve cited the Scholastic pronunciations as part-proof of the non-T 
Voldemort. Personally, and not entirely relevantly, I think the 
Scholastic rendering of some words is pretty awful. 'Accio' is 
pronounced AH-see-oh?? Not in Latin it isn't. Ah-VA-da ke-DA-vra? 
Does that possess any punch at all? Sounds like 'Wingardium 
leviosa.' The Beauxbatons pronunciation would make any rudimentary 
French-speaker's nerves stick out two inches and curl at the ends. 
It is for an American readership. Surely it isn't the last word, no 
more than Warner Bros' use of VoldemorT should be.


Cornflower O'Shea on the medieval wimple. It wasn't in the painting, 
actually (thought that painting was a very clever touch). A woman 
does walk across the background briefly, wearing the wimple.


Luke, who wields Caliburn against my use of episodicity:
"Though several people have mused on this, I think I find the 
prospects somewhat doubtful.  Why?  Because unlike what you said, 
the books *aren't* truly episodic.  A truly episodic work is one in 
which every event stands to more or less on its own--meaning it has 
its very own conflict and resolution that is completely seperate 
from any larger plot.  You could do just one scene and have it make 
a *rounded* story by itself.  In episodic works, the overall 
continuity is not one of plot, but of theme.  Beyond theme, the tie 
between the individual episodes is so loose its virtually non-
existant."

This is a bit literal... I used the wrong word there. I did not 
*literally* mean that wholly self-contained episodes should be 
carved out of the HP books. What I mean is that to fill the need for 
a thorough and unhurried exposition of the books in film, one could 
make use of a series rather than an unsatisfactory-in-some-ways two-
and-a-half hour film. One *can* split the books along chapter lines, 
because it seems to me that each chapter is built about one event or 
important stage in the story. Like _I, Claudius_, only better.




From kris403 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 08:13:37 2001
From: kris403 at yahoo.com (kris403 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:13:37 -0000
Subject: Movie Review (long, my apologies)
Message-ID: <9t567h+ro87@eGroups.com>

It's two in the morning, and I'm to giddy to sleep...  For the 
record, I saw it twice in one day, and I loved it even more the 
second time around.  Of course it's not the book, but it helps 
clarify some of the images that were not crisp before.



1.  Absolutely loved quidditch!  Wow!  Fast paced and I finally got 
a good feel for what it was supposed to look like.  I always had a 
hard time imagining it for some reason with the books.

2.  Alan Rickman and the other adult characters :) were fabulous.  I 
was a little disappionted with Dumbledore, not because of the 
acting, but that they cut out all the really great lines that show 
his sense of humor.  I guess they cut those lines for time, but it 
made Dumbledore seem OOC in the end. 

3.  Rupert stole the show.  In one night I became an R/H fan because 
I absolutely loved the way he portrayed Ron.  He also had the best 
lines in the movie.  The chess scene was amazing and the fear in his 
eyes was perfect.  

4.  Emma, I thought was adorable.  Yes, she could be annoying at 
times, but remember, that is supposed to be her character.  I didn't 
like her bathroom troll scene line though.  That one could have been 
more believable.  

5.  Dan was excellent.  At first I didn't think so, but my friend 
and I talked about it and he played his part very well.  We've read 
through Book 4, and most of us are wrapped up in fanfiction.  Book 
4, and most of FF tend to portray Harry as the hero (which he is), 
but he's starting to come into his own.  He feels more secure in the 
wizarding world and what he is supposed to do.  We need to remember 
that PS Harry is a scared little boy who is in a complete new 
world.  I think he did that very well.

6.  Tom Felton was outstanding as Draco.  He was the perfect spoiled 
brat and had great facial expressions to go with it.

Plusses:
1.  Quidditch (but I already said that)

2.  Interesting insights to what MIGHT be going on in JKR's head.  I 
never believed the theory that Petunia was a squib until I saw the 
movie.  The way her lines where worded and delivered makes me a firm 
believer now.  Susan Bones was one of the few chosen to be sorted on 
screen.  I wonder if this will be important (as chat has seemed to 
imply that she will be important later on).  I also noticed how much 
Voldemort emphasized the fact he wanted Harry to JOIN him, and that 
together they could bring back his parents (or something to that 
effect).   I'm curious on if this provides some insights to what may 
come in the future.

3.  Set design, costumes, etc.  It just helps me to picture it more 
in my head.  I absolutely loved checking out all the details the 
second time around.  The pictures in the background (yes, I noticed 
the painting in the hospital wing... and what was up with Madam 
Pomfrey?), the signs in Diagon Alley, all of those things made it 
very fun.

4.  The chess match and the troll were wonderfully done IMO.  

Negatives:
1.  The ending.  Dumbledore didn't seem to clearly explain what had 
happened.  He never explained Snape, and it just didn't clarify the 
plot.  

2.  I didn't mind them having to give the characters different 
lines, but I, too, was bothered when they cut wonderful quotes to 
insert ones that were very weak.  While I loved Hermione's 
response, "That thing has a name!"  Draco Malfoy really needed to 
make the comment about the Weasley's not having money and more 
children than they could afford.  

Along with that.  Did anyone else catch the quotes from the book 
that no longer sounded right?  For example:  When Hagrid goes to the 
hut on the rock and Vernon yells, "I've told you, he's not going!"  
It was great in the book because there was a whole dialog before, 
but in the movie, when did Vernon tell him the first time?  I 
noticed it again at the end when the Centar told Harry, "This is 
where I leave you"  (I know I probably misquoted that), but the 
point is in the movie, they never went anywhere.  That line wasn't a 
big deal but it could have been changed a little to make it flow a 
little better.  Little lines like that made the movie seem jarring 
at times.

3.  I wasn't particularly fond of the centar.  

4.  I don't think that the trio's friendship (or lack of with 
Hermione) was clearly defined.  It all seemed to run together.  The 
same went for Neville's relationship with them and how everyone 
treated them when they lost all those house points.  


hmmm.. I'll stop complaining now.  I will say, while I picked it 
apart, I absolutely loved it, and I'm sure I will go see it a few 
more times.  I wasn't disappionted in the least.  I just wish they 
had more time they could devote to the film.

Kris




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 08:14:30 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:14:30 -0000
Subject: offlist from HP-Movie
In-Reply-To: <9t4jbe+uhpk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t5696+so4l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dracos_boyfriend at y... wrote:
> By the way.  This may never get off the ground, but I would like 
to 
> have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay based on some of 
the 
> comments here, and would like to gauge the group's interest in 
such 
> an idea.
> 
> Al



This is a good idea, Al. If you get this going, let me know. I've 
got major papers due over the next month and a half, but after that 
I have a month to devote to literary recreation! (I hope!)

Rrishi




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 08:16:14 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:16:14 -0000
Subject: offlist from HP-Movie OOPS!
In-Reply-To: <9t5696+so4l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t56ce+asu8@eGroups.com>

Sorry, sorry, sorry. The previous message was due to a silly 
premature click on the 'send' button.

Argh.




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Sat Nov 17 08:42:48 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:42:48 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Spoiler space no longer required
References: <9t53m4+jt5l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008601c16f43$eb9e5a00$9e3570c2@c5s910j>

Hi everyone,

Just flew in to confirm that spoiler space is no longer required on this
list.   HURRAH!  You can throw your hats in the air if you like, but don't
blame me if you can't tell which one's yours when they land.

Magically yours,

Flying Ford Anglia...

... who saw the film twice yesterday, having already seen it in previews
last Saturday, and slept through most of the third session.  Aren't cinema
seats so extremely comfy these days?





From bethyellen at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 09:57:39 2001
From: bethyellen at hotmail.com (bethyellen at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 09:57:39 -0000
Subject: hero of the hour...Rupert Grint
Message-ID: <9t5caj+krr5@eGroups.com>

The cast were all excellent, but Rupert was just fantastic as Ron. I 
thought he really brought out his sarcastic wit! From the momment he 
started eating everything on the train, to when he was playing the 
chess game, I just thought he was outstanding, At first, I wasn't too 
sure about him, he wasn't how I had pictured Ron, but now I'm a big 
fan!!!I know the 3 heroes are only signed up for the first 2 movies. 
but I hope their contracts are exteneded to the rest!

Beth




From jferer at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 12:24:24 2001
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:24:24 -0000
Subject: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
In-Reply-To: <9t4mr8+bfcp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t5kto+61vv@eGroups.com>

Jenny:"I agree that some of the humor that we love so in the 
books was lacking in the film - "Are you a witch or what?" is one of 
the best lines, and Dumbledore's sock comment is noticeably missing.  
Neville's plight could have expanded on a bit more, as his 10 point 
award is such a treat in the book because we know how hard everything 
is for him."

Even at 153 minutes, there wasn't time to develop a lot of things. I
was diappointed how fast things whizzed by - Diagon Alley, the twins,
Neville, classes - and I don't blame Chris Columbus or anybody else.
It was bold enough to make the movie as long as it was. We can't ask
for more. It just shows the limitations of the movie medium when
adapting a book so rich in detail. 

Except for the Trio and perhaps Dumbledore, everybody else in the
movie was a bit player.

Like you, I was hoping for the "Are you a witch or not!?" line from Ron.




From Indyfans at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 14:31:43 2001
From: Indyfans at aol.com (Indyfans at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:31:43 -0000
Subject: What did JKR add to the film? + overall, not long
Message-ID: <9t5scf+2o3d@eGroups.com>

*We saw the movie last night, and I realized as we left that I didn't 
catch the little part that JKR had written especially for the film, 
supposedly shedding a little light on Harry's past.  Did any of you 
far-more-astute observers catch it? 

*Loved the film, could have used an extra hour for deeper character 
development(Neville, the twins, etc). Greatly missed the part where 
Hermione solves the logic problem right b4 Harry meets Quirrel at the 
end... Yes, one more hour or 2 to pad it with all of our beloved 
lines ('are you a witch or what?!')would have been just right!! But 
they did a really good job. 

*PS, my daughter has been using her wand and saying "Wingardium Levio-
SAW" in true Hermione technique! 

*Enjoy your weekend!  From Jen, who is fervently hoping SS surpasses 
Titanic for #1.




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 15:00:01 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:00:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Love it or Hate it
Message-ID: <20011117150001.71798.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com>

Going through some of the posts about the movie, well,
either you love it or hate it!
I think JKR did great putting as much as she could
into this movie! Otherwise it would have been a
butchered job! Think about all the other movies from
books! Atleast we have a visual based on her input!
We loved it and will be going back as often as we can!
My husband we hasn't read the books but was tuned in
while we read them out loud, got into this film! I
think he was the biggest kid in the theater!
You can nitpick all you want, but it is worth seeing!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her VERY
MERRY Band of Muggles 100%

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 15:02:40 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:02:40 -0000
Subject: Gazing Into The Crystal Ball
Message-ID: <9t5u6g+kp7g@eGroups.com>

I'm wondering what things we learned from the movie that might 
reflect what will happen in OoP and beyond.

The thing that struck me as receiving emphasis out of proportion to 
what was in the book was Filch and Mrs. Norris, particularly Mrs. 
Norris.  It was a striking looking cat, wasn't it?  Anyway, people 
have speculated on the main list that Mrs. Norris is more than a cat 
and will be important in future books, and this looks more likely now.

As many people have said, the Hagrid/Norbert movie scene seemed 
unnecessary.  That must be in there for a reason, so I suppose we'll 
meet up with Norbert again soon.  I wonder if Hagrid is going to die 
in OoP, perhaps at the hands (or jaws, I suppose) of Norbert.

Someone already mentioned this, but Susan Bones was one of the few 
students to be sorted.  Her parents were killed by Voldemort, so she 
must be a Big Deal.

People have speculated that Neville's toad is important, and the 
movie seems to confirm this.  We see the toad twice, but it plays no 
role in the movie plot.  Maybe there's something there?

Cindy




From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 15:08:09 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:08:09 -0000
Subject: Love it or Hate it
In-Reply-To: <20011117150001.71798.qmail@web13707.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9t5ugp+vdg6@eGroups.com>

Wanda wrote:

> Going through some of the posts about the movie, well,
> either you love it or hate it!


As a person who has Issues with the film, I wouldn't go so far as to 
say I hated it.  I would just say that certain tough decisions 
weren't made, and the film would have been better had someone made 
them.  As a result, the 2:45 of screen time wasn't divided in the 
most effective way.  But they did show some guts in changing some 
rather fundamental things, and these changes were almost always 
improvements, so the filmmakers deserve credit for that.

OK, I'll stop now.

Cindy  





From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 15:10:36 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:10:36 -0000
Subject: Stuff I couldn't help noticing...
In-Reply-To: <9t4t90+c4gt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t5ulc+pnbm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nlpnt at y... wrote:

> 
>  -Names gave a few problems. Harry calling Malfoy "Draco" in the 
> Forbidden Forest was one thing, but later *that same night* 
Hermione 
> says "Voldemort" instead of "You-Know-Who". NOBODY but Harry and 
> Dumble are supposed to do that in Book I!

Hagrid also says Voldemort's name during the flashback.  This is just 
after he has whispered the name Voldemort to Harry, after several 
unsuccessful tries and telling Harry he can't spell it.  Then, as 
soon as the flashback starts Hagrid's narration starts with Hagrid 
saying Voldemort's name again, which is totally out of character.




From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 15:38:44 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:38:44 -0000
Subject: question about the dorms and # of students
In-Reply-To: <20011117055439.48199.qmail@web11505.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9t60a4+fie7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Tara <taradiane at y...> wrote:
> 
> --- hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> > I've done a fairly good estimate of the number
> > of kids in the Great 
> > Hall scene and it comes out to about 400. 
> 
> Speaking of student numbers, I have a question. 
> We know that in the first year's dorm for
> Gryffindor there are 5 four-poster beds.  So can
> we assume there is only 1 first years dorm?  The
> reason I ask is that it seems like an awfully
> small number.  Can we assume that it is a similar
> number for the second thru seventh years?  That
> only makes it 35 students total in Gryffindor,
> give or take a few.  Now, if there are supposed
> to be about 400 total, and there's only 4 houses,
> why is there a paltry 5 kids in the first years
> dorm for Gryffindor?  Is Gryffindor a hard house
> to get into?  I always figured there was a fairly
> even amount in each house, but if we take the
> number of first years in harry's dorm and average
> it out among all 4 houses and all 7 years, that's
> not even 200 students.  So what gives?  Is my
> math off??
> 
This has been discussed over and over and over again on the main 
HP4GU list.  Tara, and anyone else who is interested, should read the 
HP for Grownups FAQ for a detailed and interested essay on this 
topic.  The FAQ can be found at:

http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/faq/ 

Please keep in mind that this list is for movie discussion.  While 
there is often crossover, I think we should really try to keep the 
discussion on this list focused on things that have a direct 
relationship to the MOVIE, and take discussion that have to do with 
the BOOKS over to the main list.  Thanks, all.

--Joywitch




From joym999 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 15:51:17 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:51:17 -0000
Subject: Gazing Into The Crystal Ball
In-Reply-To: <9t5u6g+kp7g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t611l+upjb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> I'm wondering what things we learned from the movie that might 
> reflect what will happen in OoP and beyond.
> 
> The thing that struck me as receiving emphasis out of proportion to 
> what was in the book was Filch and Mrs. Norris, particularly Mrs. 
> Norris.  It was a striking looking cat, wasn't it?  Anyway, people 
> have speculated on the main list that Mrs. Norris is more than a 
cat 
> and will be important in future books, and this looks more likely 
now.
> 
> As many people have said, the Hagrid/Norbert movie scene seemed 
> unnecessary.  That must be in there for a reason, so I suppose 
we'll 
> meet up with Norbert again soon.  I wonder if Hagrid is going to 
die 
> in OoP, perhaps at the hands (or jaws, I suppose) of Norbert.

Well, maybe.  Or it could just be that Columbus and crew wanted to 
wow us with their cool special effects.  The way the cat was done was 
very spooky, and Norbert was sensational.  Also, leaving half of the 
Norbert subplot in the movie could have been a compromise measure -- 
maybe Columbus' daughter cried when he told her he had to take 
Norbert out.
 
> Someone already mentioned this, but Susan Bones was one of the few 
> students to be sorted.  Her parents were killed by Voldemort, so 
she 
> must be a Big Deal.
> 
Actually, Susan Bones' grandparents, not parents were killed by 
Voldemort.  (This sub-message brought to you by the League of 
Obsessive Nitpickers.)

> People have speculated that Neville's toad is important, and the 
> movie seems to confirm this.  We see the toad twice, but it plays 
no 
> role in the movie plot.  Maybe there's something there?
> 
If that stupid toad turns out to be yet another unregistered animagus 
I, for one, will be very irritated.

--Joywitch




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Sat Nov 17 16:01:31 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:01:31 -0000
Subject: Filch etc/Susan Bones (was Re: Gazing Into The Crystal Ball)
References: <9t5u6g+kp7g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003001c16f81$208d9ae0$2a3570c2@c5s910j>

Cindy said:

<<The thing that struck me as receiving emphasis out of proportion to what
was in the book was Filch and Mrs. Norris, particularly Mrs. Norris.  It was
a striking looking cat, wasn't it?  Anyway, people
have speculated on the main list that Mrs. Norris is more than a cat and
will be important in future books, and this looks more likely now.>>

I agree that Mrs Norris looked wild and weird ("bulging lamp-light eyes"...
yes) and that there must be more to her, if not simply that she's a kneazle.
David Bradley did a great, Faginesque Filch, and was one of several cameos
that seemed rather more prominent than we might have expected from reading
the book (others being Ollivander and perhaps Hooch).  Some of this was due
to the things that got cut.  I'd say that Filch's part benefited from the
absence of Peeves, for example and that the Ollivander scene benefited from
the absence of the scene in Madam Malkin's (probably cut because introducing
Draco later on was deemed more effective).

<< Someone already mentioned this, but Susan Bones was one of the few
students to be sorted.  Her parents were killed by Voldemort, so she must be
a Big Deal.  >>

The significance of Susan Bones being shown in the sorting scene may be that
she was being played by Eleanor Columbus, the daughter of the director.  She
was also shown sitting next to Hermione in the boat, as it takes them across
the lake to Hogwarts.

On the other hand, JKR is very good at placing characters in the background
and pulling them into the foreground later on.  Perhaps Susan Bones will be
the love interest in Book 5?  H/S anyone? (it's okay folks: I really don't
want to receive a list of the 531 ongoing Harry/Susan fanfics)

Neil





From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 16:24:27 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:24:27 -0000
Subject: A Quick Pat On The Back For WB
Message-ID: <9t62vr+qqek@eGroups.com>

I must report that I was *thrilled* that there wasn't a single 
product placement in the film.  Given the amount Coke paid in the 
deal they cut, I was just a little worried that Harry might drink a 
Coke at the zoo or sip a Minute Maid juice box at Privet Drive.  Or 
we'd see Nike swooshes on muggle clothing.  Or there would be a new 
scene in which Hagrid tries his first Quarter Pounder with Cheese.

Thankfully, we got none of that.  Whew!

Cindy




From MalfoyChicka3121 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 17:07:39 2001
From: MalfoyChicka3121 at aol.com (MalfoyChicka3121 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:07:39 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or Hate it
Message-ID: <9.1e9c5b84.2927f35b@aol.com>

personally, i absolutely loved it. ya know, i was prepared for the worst from 
all these things that i've read in reviews how it wasnt that good, or 
something that was taken out should have been there, but i when i went back 
and thought about everything that was taken out, i didnt miss anything. i 
adored practically all the characters. (kudos to daniel, rupert, tom, and 
emma, they were absolutely adorable). all i can say is that if something 
thinks that it's gonna ruin their imagination on what they think the books r 
like, i dont think they'll be dissappointed by the movie. it was great

~Chelse~

"Maybe Longbottom should have used that remembrall to remember not to fall on 
his fat ass." ~Draco (sorry, i got a kick outta it when he swore!)




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




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Nov 17 18:03:31 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:03:31 -0000
Subject: It's great
Message-ID: <9t68pj+buco@eGroups.com>

    Okay, put me in the "loved it" category. Rupert was great: I fell 
in love with Ron all over again. (My husband's reaction: Where'd 
they get Mickey Rooney?" ) Snape is the reason I can't wait for 
the DVD. I loved the castle and all the sets. I was terribly afraid 
they were going to look stagy or overproduced (think Hook!) and 
they didn't.  I thought Dan and Emma were just fine in their parts, 
along with the rest of the cast
the only character I didn't buy was 
the centaur. I'm not sure whether it was the make up or the 
effects, but it just didn't work.
     Yeah, there was some stuff that didn't work. The unicorn 
looked wrong
like a stuffed animal. Things got choppy between 
the visit to Hagrid's cabin and the chess match. But I don't think 
leaving out Norbert would be the answer. The lady beside me 
said "No Peeves!" in a wounded sort of voice, so I can imagine 
how everyone would have screamed if they'd left out Norbert (not 
to mention WB missing a chance to sell cute stuffed dragons) 
Besides, Hagrid's beard catching fire was a nice touch. I don't 
object to the "Should'n't've told yeh that" running gag at all. For 
one thing it made Hagrid's blabbing about Fluffy more credible.         
Thinking it over, most of the stuff that wasn't there I didn't notice 
until after the movie was over, which to me is a sign that they got 
it right.
   It's too soon to tell whether the movie will be a classic in its 
own right, like The Wizard of Oz. It's certainly one of the better 
adaptations of a literary fantasy to the screen I've seen. 

Pippin





From dawdydonkey at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 18:50:52 2001
From: dawdydonkey at yahoo.com (dawdydonkey at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:50:52 -0000
Subject: Am I imagining things?
In-Reply-To: <9t4qjf+v85i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6bic+qbru@eGroups.com>

Sorry for jumping in, but that's interesting to me, because my friend 
Matt said, right after the movie, "My prediction -- Harry and 
Dumbledore are the same guy!"

I personally thought he was WAY off, but now that you say this, it 
gives his seemingly random prediction a bit more weight. 

Oh well, I stopped trying to figure out what was really going to 
happen in the books a long time ago -- whatever she writes, I'll love 
it, I'm sure.

Matt (no I am not speaking in the 3rd person -- my best friend's name 
is Matt, too)



--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> 
wrote:

> of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks to me like 
> Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead that looks like a 
> lightening bolt.  Of course, Richard Harris is an old man with lots 





From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 18:53:56 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:53:56 -0000
Subject: Am I imagining things?
In-Reply-To: <9t4qjf+v85i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6bo4+9kpi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> 
wrote:
> I saw the movie twice today.  The second time around I noticed a 
lot 
> of detail that I hadn't noticed the first time, of course, and I 
saw 
> something really strange that could just be my imagination.  In the 
> hospital scene towards the end of the movie there are a few 
closeups 
> of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks to me like 
> Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead that looks like a 
> lightening bolt.  Of course, Richard Harris is an old man with lots 
> of wrinkles so maybe a few of his wrinkles just happened to be 
shaped 
> like a lightning bolt, but the fact that it is the same size, shape 
> and location as Harry's scar is interesting.  Of course, I could 
> easily be imagining things, but if I'm not it opens up all sorts of 
> interesting plot possibilities.

On the back of the English edition of PoS, there's a picture of 
Dumbledore, and he does have something odd on his forhead, where 
Harry's scar is, although it's quite blurred.

You know, it seems like a stupid suggestion, but maybe Dumbledore 
*is* Harry. Maybe he travelled back in time when he was an old man so 
he could meet his parents, but then got trapped or something? It 
would explain quite a bit (where he got the invisibility cloak from, 
perhaps why he had that triumphant look in his eye, why he's so fond 
of Hagrid, how he knows so much about Harry, all sorts of other 
things). It's quite unlikely, but it just occured to me today, I'm re-
reading PoS at the moment, and if you read it with that in mind, it 
actually does make a lot of sense. But I could weel be barking up the 
wrong tree completely...just a thought. And hey, it's fun coming up 
with these radical theoris;o)

Dave




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 18:55:49 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:55:49 -0000
Subject: Am I imagining things?
In-Reply-To: <9t6bic+qbru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6brl+qolc@eGroups.com>

Sorry, Matt, I got there at exactly the same time as you:o)

Dave

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dawdydonkey at y... wrote:
> Sorry for jumping in, but that's interesting to me, because my 
friend 
> Matt said, right after the movie, "My prediction -- Harry and 
> Dumbledore are the same guy!"
> 
> I personally thought he was WAY off, but now that you say this, it 
> gives his seemingly random prediction a bit more weight. 
> 
> Oh well, I stopped trying to figure out what was really going to 
> happen in the books a long time ago -- whatever she writes, I'll 
love 
> it, I'm sure.
> 
> Matt (no I am not speaking in the 3rd person -- my best friend's 
name 
> is Matt, too)
> 
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks to me like 
> > Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead that looks like 
a 
> > lightening bolt.  Of course, Richard Harris is an old man with 
lots




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:11:26 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:11:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
Message-ID: <83.1313eded.2928105e@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 1:17:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com writes:

<< > # What's with the incongruous medieval wimple on the nurse (Madam 
 > Pomfrey?) in the hospital scene? A bit jarring.
 
 Actually, that wasn't M.Pomfrey, it was just a another moving 
 painting, no? >>

No, she was in the painting..and THEN a nurse in a medieval wimple came into 
Harry's room, almost as if she walked out of the picture...

Saw the grey lady (ghost) in the scene where the three come in to see 
McGonagall asking to see Dumbledore



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:08:46 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:08:46 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
Message-ID: <41.1402f1ec.29280fbe@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 12:19:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hp_lexicon at yahoo.com writes:

<< The McGonagall reference was dated 1971, by the way. It seems 
 relatively unlikely that this was our dear Professor, who was 
 already on staff at Hogwarts when James was a student in the early 
 70s (reference the conversation in the Three Broomsticks in PA). >>

Right..maybe the head of house gets mentioned?
When I saw it for the second time, I too, checked the date



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:09:25 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:09:25 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small
Message-ID: <107.8c190ec.29280fe5@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 12:19:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hp_lexicon at yahoo.com writes:

<< There are a total of 18 teachers 
 besides Dumbledore (you can count them as the camera pans around 
 Daniel in the Sorting Hat scene.) Presumably Trelawney does not 
 attend, which brings the total number of teachers, including 
 Dumbledore, to 20. >>

Who was the other guy with the short grey hair - professor?

Who was the woman with dark skin?

Flitwick, btw, was terrific



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:14:26 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:14:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie Review (long, my apologies)
Message-ID: <99.1dcdfaec.29281112@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 3:14:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
kris403 at yahoo.com writes:

<< .  Emma, I thought was adorable.  Yes, she could be annoying at 
 times, but remember, that is supposed to be her character.  I didn't 
 like her bathroom troll scene line though.  That one could have been 
 more believable.   >>

My response (after seeing the film for the second time) is that Emma in the 
scene where she is telling McGonagall the lie about the troll

is playing an extremely rigorous, bossy, pre teen who ALWAYS obeys the rules, 
never lies, and suddenly is LYING to a teacher --- her own head of house with 
Snape watching..so in a sense she's not SUPPOSED to be believable..



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:21:46 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:21:46 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or Hate it
Message-ID: <b6.1d40c6e.292812ca@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 10:05:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com writes:

<< You can nitpick all you want, but it is worth seeing!
 
 Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her VERY
 MERRY Band of Muggles 100% >>

I think it's a temperamental thing, Wanda..some people like to experience the 
warm cosy glow (like me)..others enjoy tearing it apart....I just had the 
best time watching it..took my four year old this morning...he behaved almost 
perfectly...we hid his eyes at the scariest parts....and someone followed us 
out of the theatre to say that our son was the most adorable child they have 
seen in a long time, that he was really smart (based on his comments), and 
very well behaved..
I, by the way, went in a black robe with silver and the traditional witch's 
hat, and our son was in his HP robe...purple with silver stars...

My best friend went -- had never read the books -- loved the movie, and said 
"well, now I'll HAVE to read the book"...

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:22:14 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:22:14 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gazing Into The Crystal Ball
Message-ID: <a3.1f05686b.292812e6@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 10:05:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
cindysphynx at home.com writes:

<< t was a striking looking cat, wasn't it? >>

Beautiful...McGonagall was good looking too



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:26:04 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:26:04 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] It's great
Message-ID: <d3.1d421ee.292813cc@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 1:04:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
foxmoth at qnet.com writes:

<< Besides, Hagrid's beard catching fire was a nice touch. I don't 
 object to the "Should'n't've told yeh that" running gag at all. For 
 one thing it made Hagrid's blabbing about Fluffy more credible.          >>

It really made the character make sense...I think Robbie Coltrane improved 
Hagrid...



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 19:27:30 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:27:30 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Am I imagining things?
Message-ID: <ae.1de7e4ef.29281422@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/17/2001 1:56:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
davisaacs at hotmail.com writes:

<< You know, it seems like a stupid suggestion, but maybe Dumbledore 
 *is* Harry. Maybe he travelled back in tim >>

No! Not stupid, just a little unlikely.

I would guess that he got hit by a curse, too....didn't Hagrid say that a 
curse leaves a particular kind of scar?

Susan



From heidit at netbox.com  Sat Nov 17 19:23:33 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:23:33 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: ADMIN-ish
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3388@MIAEXCH1>

Penny is in the movie right now, and the mods had asked for the List Elves
to step in if necessary so...
Can people remember that Main List netiquette still "controls" here which
means hat snipping and combining posts are Good Things. 
Am off to the movie again now :}



From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 19:34:19 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:34:19 -0000
Subject: Am I imagining things?
In-Reply-To: <ae.1de7e4ef.29281422@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t6e3r+c1b3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Schlobin1 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 11/17/2001 1:56:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> davisaacs at h... writes:
> 
> << You know, it seems like a stupid suggestion, but maybe 
Dumbledore 
>  *is* Harry. Maybe he travelled back in tim >>
> 
> No! Not stupid, just a little unlikely.
> 
> I would guess that he got hit by a curse, too....didn't Hagrid say 
that a 
> curse leaves a particular kind of scar?

That's a much better theory:o) And there is Dumbledore's comment at 
the begginning ot PoS when he says that scars can come in useful, or 
something. Then he says something about the London Underground, but I 
imagine that's another one of his "socks" lines...

Ah well, it's certainly intriguing!

Dave




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 20:27:57 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:27:57 -0000
Subject: Perhaps I need to clarify...
Message-ID: <9t6h8d+s2uf@eGroups.com>

I haven't seen anyone thus far who claims to "hate" the movie, and 
the poll thus far seems to support that, so I think it is a teensy 
bit unfair to qualify anyone who thinks certain aspects of the film 
could have been handled better as a "hater" of the movie.

Personally, I loved the movie as a fan, liked it well enough as a 
casual moviegoer, and found it lacking as a critic.

I have already explained the main thing that bothered me about it as 
a critic (in "An interesting conundrum").  Like Cindy, Ebony, et al, 
I harbor some concerns that the vast majority of the people who see 
the movie without having read the books will be totally unable to 
fathom why anyone likes the books, because the movie sort of holds 
the novel as "prerequisite knowledge" in order to understand the full 
fleshing out of the characters and plot.  This is why it doesn't 
stand on its own, to my mind.  From the perspective of a non-book-
fan, the movie is likely to feel a bit transient and irrelevant in 
spots.  Book-fans, by contrast, are less likely to notice this 
because they can fill in the gaps with their own existing knowledge.  
We fans can appreciate the subtlety of what is going on, but for 
someone unfamiliar with the books, far too much of that will go over 
their heads, because the filmmakers were clearly too focused on 
covering everything, rather than covering only what's most important.

But by contrast, I'm not sure that it could've been done much 
differently.  Like I said, this instance is pretty much 
unprecedented.  Never before, to my knowledge, has there been a film 
where such a large percentage of the moviegoers are already fans of 
the books.  Most successful book-to-film adaptations do not have to 
play to fans quite so much.  I have also long maintained that PS/SS 
would be the most difficult of the books so far to adapt, despite its 
being the shortest.  PS/SS has a LOT of "introductory" material that 
in one sense *can't* be skipped for the movie and in another sense 
*has to be* if the movie is going to have any focus.  Giving an 
adaptation like this focus is a much more difficult task than, say, 
shortening the events of GOF to movie length.  I give the filmmakers 
a lot of credit for doing the best job they probably could have done 
under fairly adverse conditions.  I therefore anticipate that the COS 
movie will not suffer as heavily from these kinds of editing and 
continuity issues in the screenplay, because it will not need the 
same introductory stuff.

Now then, what I liked about the movie (doubling back on my original 
decision not to do a straight-up review):

As I already knew from seeing the stills and trailers and whatnot, 
the art direction was simply phenomenal and, for me, one of the best 
things about the movie.  It is dead-on pretty much all the time and 
having the opportunity to see the various locales so expertly 
realized was a definite treat in its own right.

The costume design was also inspired.  Many people will be quick to 
point out its canonical inaccuracy in several instances, but I really 
think it looks fantastic and would prefer an inaccurate but excellent 
costume to an accurate but dull one.  My favorite costume, for sheer 
inventiveness, is Hooch's referee costume which is just hilarious and 
looks great.  Makeup was okay, but overdone (i.e. Flitwick and the 
goblins at Gringotts).  Still I'd rather have the ridiculous goblins 
we got than the even more ridiculous computer-generated goblins we 
might have gotten.

The special effects were a mixed bag.  The best special effects 
tended to be the most understated ones, like the invisibility cloak 
(easy winner of best effect) and the sorting hat and the (simple but 
effective) letters hurtling through the air.  The computer graphics 
were typical with all the typical problems (and even a couple not so 
typical, like my continued inability to understand what is so 
difficult about making a proportionately-accurate CG Harry).  But the 
most noticeable thing with the computer graphics is that you can 
*tell* they were handled by different companies: there's such a vast 
disparity of quality.  Fluffy was well done (particularly the shot of 
his paw), the centaur was atrocious, the troll was somewhere in-
between (not so much a CG issue as simply the general visual 
conception, which is a hair too cartoonish).  Norbert I'd have to see 
again to make any judgments, but if memory serves, he looked pretty 
good.

Quidditch deserves its own section of commentary rather than lumping 
it in as a special effect, because I had problems with this scene 
that ultimately have nothing to do with the effects themselves (I 
have already talked about the fake CG motion blur, so I won't 
again).  It looks exactly like Quidditch probably would look, but, 
strangely . . . there's no drama whatsoever.  The scene is well-
choreographed, but very little time is spent on developing a viewable 
interplay.  The only drama comes out of watching the scoreboard rack 
points: the actual activity that results in these points is too 
strangely unraveled--we can follow that there is a fast-paced game 
going on, but only rarely do we catch more detailed elements than 
this.  So we can't get truly invested in the events of the match, 
except for Harry's eventual involvement, at which point the events 
become easier to follow and that's when things really get good.  
Quite possibly this was intentional--because, in a way, the book 
unfolds similarly.  But even if it wasn't intentional, I do view this 
as something of a necessary evil just because of the way Quidditch is 
conceived.  So I can't really fault the film for this.  And if you 
can follow it, it must be one heck of a roller-coaster ride: blink 
and you'll miss it, but while you're on it's quite a rush.  
Personally the Quidditch didn't affect me much, because I'm not the 
hugest fan of Quidditch anyway--for me the matches are an enjoyable 
diversion in the books that frequently have important 
ramifications . . . but that still makes them just a diversion.

The acting is of course a case-by-case thing, but on the whole it was 
quite good.

Daniel Radcliffe makes a fine Harry.  I secretly suspect that there's 
a better Harry out there somewhere, but not much.  Daniel underacts, 
which in my opinion is vastly preferable to overacting, but this is 
totally in keeping with Harry's very internal character.  The only 
problem here is that Harry is therefore a less dynamic protagonist 
when you are not inside his head--he's just *inherently* less 
compelling in the movie than in the book.  But Radcliffe can bear no 
fault for this, and I think given the difficulty he performs quite 
admirably.  He is very believable as Harry.

Emma Watson definitely overacts, but I was able to deal with it.  
I've seen worse.  She has highs and lows--sometimes the overacting 
works well to comic effect, often it does not.  But the main thing, 
in my opinion, is that she does manage to make the character fairly 
endearing despite the "know-it-all" obnoxiousness.  This is of course 
the central goal with Hermione's character in PS/SS and Watson does 
pull it off for the most part.  One thing that struck me as odd in 
Hermione's characterization for the film is that she always seems 
exasperated.  I do not get the impression that the Hermione of the 
books is quite this frequently impatient and condescending.  That was 
rather overdone.  Perhaps it is just the result of not having much of 
the maternal balancing (i.e. with helping Neville).

I must say that Rupert Grint *totally* exceeded my expectations, and 
I'm not even much of a Ron fan.  I was very undecided about him from 
the trailers . . . on the one hand his line delivery had seemed good, 
but on the other hand some of his facial expressions had seemed over 
the top and silly.  After seeing the film though, the facial 
expressions thing does not seem at all jarring in context somehow.  
And Grint has an onscreen presence that simply does not fully convey 
until you see the film.  He, in fact, outshines the rest of the trio 
to a considerable degree, which actually causes some interesting 
balance issues.  Because Harry is so internal and therefore Radcliffe 
so accordingly understated, Grint's more outward-directed character 
of Ron tends to steal away the scenes he's in.  But who am I to get 
in his way?  Go, Rupert, go!

Also, the trio really did work well together.  Particularly Daniel 
and Rupert had a certain charisma between them.  I have just said 
that Rupert outshines Daniel a bit in their shared scenes, but it is 
nevertheless true that Rupert brings out something in Daniel that 
isn't there otherwise--I'm not sure what it is exactly.  This is 
especially noticeable on the Hogwarts express, which was just a 
lovely scene, I might add.

Alan Rickman is marvelous as Snape, oozing his way around every 
sarcasm-oiled line.  He was unfairly robbed of screentime in the lack 
of balance that the rather rambly editing issues caused.  Also, his 
Snape actually oozes a bit more than canon Snape apparently does, but 
it works wonderfully and that's the biggest test, now isn't it?  On 
an unrelated note, I am puzzled by the change from "stopper death" 
to "put a stopper in death".  The former sounds like poison or 
somesuch (as it should); the latter sounds too much like it might 
mean some kind of immortality, which, as we all know, is *not* what 
that line refers to.

Maggie Smith is perfect as McGonagall . . . although there's nothing 
really new here.  Maggie Smith is basically playing the classic 
character that Maggie Smith *always* plays and it just so happens 
that this coincides extremely well with McGonagall's character.  
Still, if the typecasting works you can hardly fault them for doing 
it, so I give Smith props, although it is ultimately a triumph for 
the casting not the acting.

Robbie Coltrane made about the best Hagrid that seems possible.  The 
Hagrid of the books is pretty much impossible to translate directly 
into a live actor because some of his antics are simply too 
cartoonish for that, in my opinion.  Coltrane therefore captures the 
maximum amount of Hagrid's personality that I think it was possible 
to portray, and does so with great prowess.

Richard Harris--Ah, Richard Harris.  After my rant, many of your are 
going to expect me to say not very nice things.  But after seeing the 
film, my take has been altered slightly.  It is clear from watching 
the film that the ultimate fault for Harris not understanding the 
full extent of his character lies with the script, not Harris.  The 
script itself gives so little attention to the cheerfully-eccentric 
aspect of Dumbledore's character that it is hardly surprising that 
Harris was under the impression he was achieving the full picture.  
Based on the script alone he *has* captured one possible 
interpretation of the character presented there.  It just so happens 
that there's more to Dumbledore than was actually provided in the 
script.  Harris, having never read the books, would be unaware of 
this--so I'm not surprised he plays the role so limitedly.  For what 
he was working with he seems to have done quite well.

However, the casting choice of Richard Harris is *still* somewhat 
flawed, in my opinion, because Harris simply lacks that other side of 
Dumbledore anyway.  Even if that side had been fully presented in the 
script, I am unconvinced that Harris would have pulled it off.  I 
simply cannot picture Harris beaming at the students, hard though I 
may try to do so.  And that's a fundamental problem, because the 
Dumbledore of the books smiles and twinkles a heck of a lot--it's 
central to his personality.  You might say that he is not just 
Merlin, but a combination of Merlin and Santa Claus.  And I know 
Harris, and he's not about to play Santa Claus.  He doesn't have the 
twinkle for it.

Ian Hart was reasonably good as Quirrel, though far from inspiring.  
He gives a solid performance, but nothing exceptional.

Tom Felton makes a pretty good Draco, though I would've loved a 
little bit more nastiness at times.  Still the only thing I can 
really fault him for is the absolutely stupid expression on his face 
when Quirrel announces the troll in the dungeon.

Matthew Lewis deserves a hell of a lot of credit, in my opinion, for 
making the best out of Neville's character when the script was making 
it very hard for him to do so.  Neville's character is underdeveloped 
in the movie, but the subtle brilliance of Lewis' facial expressions 
(i.e. at the end when he earns the 10 points) almost succeeds in 
totally compensating.  He makes an excellent Neville for people who 
have read the book, but because of being undermined by the script, 
people who may not have read the book are likely to deem his 
character flat.

Sean Biggerstaff does a stand-out acting job, but did not quite 
capture Oliver Wood's character for me, though I am not sure why.  I 
suspect Biggerstaff would have shone through had there actually been 
a Quidditch practice during which he could bring out the demanding, 
relentless drive that Wood possesses.  As it is he still does a fine 
job and his delivery of lines is exceptional among the younger 
actors.  In other words, he had a lot of stong presence and good 
technique, but I just couldn't help thinking, hmm, that's not quite 
the Wood I know.  On a personal note, the accent surprised me, but 
that's a personal observation, not a complaint.

Best cameo appearance is John Hurt as Ollivander, bar none.  He 
totally captures his all-too-brief moment, with a lot of charisma.  
His Ollivander is a little spooky, a little genius, perhaps a little 
mad--very much like the book, there's this hint of a lot under the 
surface if we just could get to know him better.

Other cameo roles are mostly unworthy of note.  Neither distractingly 
bad, nor exceptionally good.  Julie Walters is a terrific actress and 
puts in a very fine performance, but I get this nagging feeling that 
she's just not Mrs. Weasley--I suspect that's just a personal thing.  
Fiona Shaw and Richard Griffiths ham it up admirably as the 
Dursleys.  John Cleese as Nearly-Headless Nick was fine, but I 
couldn't really muster up any enthusiasm.

So in brief, they got all the ingredients right.  The movie's 
ultimate problem is that is simply far less likely to appeal to non-
book-fans.  Is that really a problem?  I don't know.  I'm inclined to 
say 'yes'.  It would be nice if I could take people I know who 
haven't read the books, show them the movie, and then have them feel 
inspired to seek out and read the books.  But the movie is unlikely 
to achieve that.

But beyond that purpose, will it appeal to those who are already fans 
(like myself)?  Yes, I'm sure it will.

-Luke




From joyw at gwu.edu  Sat Nov 17 20:52:01 2001
From: joyw at gwu.edu (- Joy -)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:52:01 -0500
Subject: Leaky Cauldron - Seamus
References: <a3.1f05686b.292812e6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <005e01c16fa9$b89df3c0$d644fc18@mtgmry1.md.home.com>

I have two questions based on things I've read on the list.  Sorry that I
don't have the exact quotes and authors, but these messages have been piling
up so fast and furious that I forgot to save them.

First, has anyone caught what's so special about the sign above the Leaky
Cauldron?  Someone mentioned that JKR said to pay attention to it.  I've
seen the movie twice, but it went by too quickly both times for me to notice
anything.

Also, did anyone catch the spell that Seamus is doing in the Great Hall?
It's something like Eye of rabbit ... turn this water, into rum.  There's
another line where the ellipses is that I couldn't make out either time.

Thanks!

~Joy~
http://diluted.org/joy




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 21:19:08 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg Rose for short!!)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:19:08 -0000
Subject: Random ranting about the movie...
Message-ID: <9t6k8c+s5am@eGroups.com>

Ok, #1,  I just have to say that this was a GREAT Movie - Chris 
Columbus did a GREAT job!!  The only thing that really purturbed me 
was the fact that they had left out so many scenes that really could 
have been done in 5 min - like the potion bottle task on the way to 
the stone, and maybe showing more of FrednGeorge's tricks... Oh, d 
the encounter w/ Voldy in the forest was a little awkward... Also, 
more classes!  But besides that, it was great!  OMG HOW CUTE WAS 
WOOD?!?!?!?  OMG I never really liked his character until now, and 
now I am in love!  His accent, his sexiness, LOL...  I need a full-
sized poster or something!!!  So, yeah...  I've seen it twice so far, 
and I love it!  I plan on going a few more times!!  

Meg - Who is seeing hearts floating around her head.




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 21:27:57 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:27:57 -0000
Subject: JKR addition--Neville's toad--Harrydore?--Caliburn!--Vauxhaulls on PD
Message-ID: <9t6kot+q3qk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Indyfans at a... wrote:
> We saw the movie last night, and I realized as we left that I
> didn't catch the little part that JKR had written especially for
> the film, supposedly shedding a little light on Harry's past.  Did
> any of you far-more-astute observers catch it?

I assume this is simply the scene where Hagrid describes the fateful 
events at Godric's Hollow to Harry.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> People have speculated that Neville's toad is important, and the 
> movie seems to confirm this.  We see the toad twice, but it plays
> no role in the movie plot.  Maybe there's something there?

Not necessarily (though it's certainly possible).  The inclusion of 
the toad seemed to serve two purposes in the film: First, mention of 
the toad is a convenient device to introduce Hermione on the train, 
just like in the book.  Second, in the scene with McGonagall, this 
was clearly intended to establish Neville's seeming cowardice (I 
would not say it is entirely successful in this attempt, but that 
does appear to be the purpose).

The toad's second appearance (on the chair where Neville is sitting) 
simply foreshadows (for a whopping fraction of a second) the eventual 
revelation that Neville is sitting in the chair.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David" <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch" <joym999 at a...> wrote:
> > In the hospital scene towards the end of the movie there are a few
> > closeups of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks to 
> > me like Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead that
> > looks like a lightening bolt.
>
> On the back of the English edition of PoS, there's a picture of 
> Dumbledore, and he does have something odd on his forhead, where 
> Harry's scar is, although it's quite blurred.
> 
> You know, it seems like a stupid suggestion, but maybe Dumbledore 
> *is* Harry. Maybe he travelled back in time when he was an old man 
> so he could meet his parents, but then got trapped or something?

Well, further speculation on this in general (as in not regarding the 
movie evidence specifically) should probably go to the main list, but 
if this theory is true than Dumbledore must be wearing colored (or 
magic!) contacts . . . as his eyes are blue in canon.

Also, someone mentioned the London Underground map scar: this scar is 
above Dumbledore's left knee, assuming Dumbledore is serious.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> Luke, who wields Caliburn against my use of episodicity:

I am so temporarily enamored by Rrishi's understanding my Yahoo! ID 
without being told that I am quite willing to forgive his implication 
that I am being over-literal.  ;-)

Seriously though, I was mostly being semantic, but I am still not 
100% convinced that a T.V. series would work better.  Really, I don't 
think there is anything wrong with the medium they chose--it's the 
execution, and the fact that they didn't fully avail themselves of 
all of that medium's particular advantages.  But anyway, I reiterate 
that I *DO* like the film and think they did the best they were 
capable of, and that the task of adapting PS/SS in particular is more 
difficult than any of the other HP books, so the sequels are less 
likely to suffer from the same "focus" problems.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nlpnt at y... wrote:
>  -Privet Drive must be home to an extremely persuasive Vauxhall 
> salesman. Everyone has the exact same GM-ish looking sedan when
> Baby Harry's dropped off. Ten years later, everyone has *new*
> matching wagons- Vauxhall Vectras, I think- in both cases the only
> variation is color!

I assume this is intentional--done to emphasize the conformist nature 
of the suburbs, and the Dursleys in particular, to whom individuality 
and "standing out" is anathema.  Very nicely done, I think.

-Luke




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Sat Nov 17 21:41:10 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:41:10 -0000
Subject: HUGE problem with the casting of James Potter
Message-ID: <9t6lhm+p1ie@eGroups.com>

sorry I haven't read all of the opinions and comments yet, but the biggest 
problem I have with the movie version is the casting of James Potter!  I 
wonder if anyone has the same feeling as I because that was the biggest 
topic in my group of friends when we saw it last night.  He looks really bad 
and doesn't look like Harry at all (doesn't Jame suppose to have messy hair 
just like his son? in the movie he looks bald and barely has any hair at all!), 
he looks like a really normal average Joe, like a random business man/car 
dealer or something (no offense to anyone who's a business man or car 
dealer)!  too normal and average looking, and he was suppose to be 
charismatic and popular back then while Alan Rickman Snape was supposed 
to be unpopular and "ugly"  when they were young?!?!? how unconvincing!  
poor Lily, she was so pretty!!  

anyways, I think the movie definitely is far from perfect, but I truly enjoy it very 
much and will go see it couple more times before the DVD comes out.








From saitaina at wizzards.net  Sat Nov 17 21:41:45 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:41:45 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HUGE problem with the casting of James Potter
References: <9t6lhm+p1ie@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00e001c16fb0$a84c8980$4d4e28d1@oemcomputer>

My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late twenties
early thirties when he died...and this guys late thirties very early
forties.  Him and dan do look a bit alike at the very end though when you
see Dan looking down into the album just after seeing 'James'.

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 21:50:10 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:50:10 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HUGE problem with the casting of James Potter
Message-ID: <a0.1d86960f.29283592@aol.com>

In a message dated 17/11/2001 21:45:16 GMT Standard Time, 
saitaina at wizzards.net writes:

<< My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late twenties
 early thirties when he died...and this guys late thirties very early
 forties.  Him and dan do look a bit alike at the very end though when you
 see Dan looking down into the album just after seeing 'James'. >>

There was a pic of Dan and his real dad Alan in the paper the other day, and 
to me James looks remarkably like Alan. Just who was James in the film?? Cos 
I'm thinking they may have taken the easy route and casted Daniel's real 
father (he even wears the glasses normally). I was going to sit through the 
credits and try and see, but our showing didn't finish till 11:30pm and I had 
an early start for work the next day, didn't get home till around 12:15am.

But I agree, whoever he was, he was too old. That was one thing I was looking 
forward too - seeing Lily & James and also possibly Sirius (in the books 
Sirius is there in the wedding photos), some other members of Harry's family. 
But all we got were Lily & James and even then... 

Sara



From TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET  Sat Nov 17 21:55:00 2001
From: TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET (Diana Wisniewski)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:55:00 -0500
Subject: Love it or Hate it
Message-ID: <006401c16fb2$8468b140$6486c640@oemcomputer>

I took my gang to see PS last night. We had had our tickets for two weeks and my 10 year old daughter and her best friend were counting the days, then hours and minutes til they saw it. They loved it. But my daughter was mildly upset over the cut parts. This comes from a child who has read the books 3 or 4 times each and listened to the tapes more than a dozen times, she started PS again when she got up this morning and I haven't seen her except at lunch today! My 15 year old son and his girlfriend had both read the book and loved the movie.I kept hearing "wicked" "cool" and "bad" through the whole movie. Great praise from a 15 year old. My 17 year old and his girlfriend had not read the books, but they both loved the movie and said it made since to them. I thought it was fantastic, not totally like I had the book pictured in my head, but wonderful none-the-less. The kids are begging me to go back today, but I think we'll wait a bit, like until tomorrow!
    Hope everyone else has enjoyed themselves.
Diana


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




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 21:57:49 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg Rose for short!!)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:57:49 -0000
Subject: HUGE problem with the casting of James Potter
In-Reply-To: <00e001c16fb0$a84c8980$4d4e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9t6mgt+7k24@eGroups.com>

yes, I have to agree that this James is horrible!  I mean, why not 
even get Dan's father, throw a messy wig on and glasses!  all he has 
to do is smile and nod and stuff...  No biggy...  Anyone could do it, 
even if that guy has to speak lines in #4 (Even if he;s not an actor, 
it's not difficult) Ok, I don't think I am making sense anymore, so I 
will shut up, for now.

I didn't even notice the differences about finding out who Flamel 
was - now that I realize it, it is really really strange!  Also, I 
thought I saw McGonnagal's name in that trophy case...  After reading 
posts, I now know my suspisions are confirmed...  Wonder what that's 
all about...  And who is the 3rd medal for?

On the plus side, I had brought some non-potterists with me to the 
movies w/ me and they saw how great it was and promise to read the 
books now!  Yeah - new converts!  Wait till they see how much better 
the books are!  hehe!

Oh, and yes, it really pissed me off that Neville didn't come to see 
Fluffy, ect, and that we never learn hedwig's name!!  Did anyone else 
notice that?!?!?




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 21:59:40 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg Rose for short!!)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:59:40 -0000
Subject: HUGE problem with the casting of James Potter
In-Reply-To: <a0.1d86960f.29283592@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t6mkc+jei7@eGroups.com>

I'm thinking they may have taken the easy route and casted Daniel's 
real 
father (he even wears the glasses normally). 
__________

Awwww man, there goes my brilliant plot decison....




From ckiihr at msn.com  Sat Nov 17 22:01:44 2001
From: ckiihr at msn.com (ckiihr at msn.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:01:44 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sil5p+p29p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6mo8+q0dr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ashley Kelly" <potterlovingash at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> > Okay, those of you who have seen the movie, please tell us what 
new 
> > information we learn about the attack on Harry's parents in the 
> > film. Supposedly there's a new scene that JKR herself wrote 
that's 
> > supposed to give us new insight. Please tell!
> 
> *Spoiler in order to answer the question*
> 
> 
> 
> Well Steve, 
>      There really is not much detail in the scene. The home of our 
> dear Potter family is a rather boring two-story home. A cloaked 
> figure uses his wand to open the door. We see Lily running and 
> putting Harry down in a crib and then being shot with green light. 
> Then we get a shot of Harry in the crib... and he has his scar. 
Hmm, 
> details are failing me. But we never see James and we never see the 
> cloaked figure's face. I'm not sure this scene really reveals 
> anything we didn't practically know already.
> 
> ~Ashley~

I am not 100% convinced that this is the new information.  At the end 
Volemort tells Harry that he could bring Harry's parents back with 
the stone. Also, in the trophy case there are 2 other names on the 
trophy that James' name is on-- on the right I think it referred to a 
person with the last name "McGonagall", I did not see the one on the 
left...it was too quick.  Any other possibilities?




From natabat at barrysworld.com  Sat Nov 17 22:02:34 2001
From: natabat at barrysworld.com (Natalie)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:02:34 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Leaky Cauldron - Seamus
References: <a3.1f05686b.292812e6@aol.com> <005e01c16fa9$b89df3c0$d644fc18@mtgmry1.md.home.com>
Message-ID: <005b01c16fb3$902d46c0$829e3680@ucsd.edu>

Joy wrote: .

> First, has anyone caught what's so special about the sign above the Leaky
> Cauldron?  Someone mentioned that JKR said to pay attention to it.  I've
> seen the movie twice, but it went by too quickly both times for me to
notice
> anything.

The only thing I noticed (course, I've only seen it once) is that it kind of
does a holographic thing as they walk towards it. At first, it appears to be
totally black, but as they get closer the background fades out and a sort of
cup/goblet appears. It was kind of a neat effect actually, showing that here
was something Muggles weren't supposed to see.

Natalie
natabat at barrysworld.com
http://hosted.barrysworld.net/natabat
-----
"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary
Cooper."
- Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With The
Wind"





From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 22:05:17 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:05:17 -0000
Subject: Leaky Cauldron 
In-Reply-To: <005b01c16fb3$902d46c0$829e3680@ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <9t6mut+9460@eGroups.com>

It was kind of a neat effect actually, showing that here
> was something Muggles weren't supposed to see.
> 
> Natalie


Yeah - I notice that too - very cool.  The whole "appearing" thing 
was a good subtle way of showing that not everything is as it seems 
on the 1st look...




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 22:05:55 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:05:55 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: new scene
Message-ID: <15c.439a911.29283943@aol.com>

In a message dated 17/11/2001 22:02:38 GMT Standard Time, ckiihr at msn.com 
writes:

<<  Also, in the trophy case there are 2 other names on the 
 trophy that James' name is on-- on the right I think it referred to a 
 person with the last name "McGonagall", I did not see the one on the 
 left...it was too quick.  Any other possibilities? >>


Somebody else mentioned that it may have been Lupin before I saw the film and 
when I watched it I tried to catch it and I'm sure I saw the initials RJH. 
Didn't catch the surname. I was desperate for a rewind function so I could go 
back and see it again! I think there may have even been an audible "oh no, 
bu---!" before I remembered I was in a cinema! Heh. Apologies to anyone who 
may have been there and also on this list :o)

Sara



From kabuki_darling at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 22:15:45 2001
From: kabuki_darling at hotmail.com (kabuki_darling at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:15:45 -0000
Subject: rewrite suggestion
In-Reply-To: <9t4jv4+od3n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6nii+u9v4@eGroups.com>

Oh gods, yes! I was just thinking about it friday night...I have to 
say I didn't really like the movie at all...left me empty and 
disappointed. I was thinking about which scenes I wouldl elongate, 
which relationships I would develop, etc...fun!
Who wants to?

Sylph




--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dracos_boyfriend at y... wrote:
> > By the way.  This may never get off the ground, but I would like 
> to 
> > have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay based on some of 
> the 
> > comments here, and would like to gauge the group's interest in 
> such 
> > an idea.
> > 
> > Al
> 
> 
> This is such an entertaining idea, we must try it! Or, now that 
> you've had the idea, why don't we do something toward working out a 
> screenplay for one of the other books, such as PoA, which is far 
> enough off to give us time and space?
> 
> Great!




From cindysphynx at home.com  Sat Nov 17 23:18:39 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:18:39 -0000
Subject: What Could Have Been Done Differently? (WAS Perhaps I need to clarify...)
In-Reply-To: <9t6h8d+s2uf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6r8f+81dp@eGroups.com>

Once again, Luke's interesting comments have provoked another reply 
from me.  Sorry about that.  I promise that I won't make the same 
points I've made before.  Instead, I am wondering about the ways some 
of the problems could be fixed, and how some of this will impact 
future films.

              *****************************

Luke wrote:

>Most successful book-to-film adaptations do not have to 
> play to fans quite so much.  I have also long maintained that PS/SS 
> would be the most difficult of the books so far to adapt, despite 
its 
> being the shortest.  

<snip reasons that adapting PS/SS is a challenge>  

I therefore anticipate that the COS 
> movie will not suffer as heavily from these kinds of editing and 
> continuity issues in the screenplay, because it will not need the 
> same introductory stuff.


I think I'm a little more worried about future films.  I believe we 
have the exact same crew doing CoS (which is a slightly longer book), 
so if PS/SS rakes in lots of money, I doubt they'll feel compelled to 
do anything differently with continuity, editing, etc.  Indeed, I 
felt that PS/SS is somewhat unusual in the series because I think it 
can be "picked apart" more easily.  By that, I mean only that the 
various subplots are more compartmentalized such that a subplot can 
be removed without causing trauma to the story.  For instance, if you 
tossed Norbert out of PS/SS completely, the book still works.  If you 
toss dementors (or boggarts, or the Grim, or the time-turner) out of 
PoA, though, you really have a problem.

As for PoA and GoF, I am desperately concerned now.  If the 
filmmakers on PS/SS couldn't tell an entirely compelling story with 
2:30 minutes of time on a 300+ page book, I shudder to think about 
what will happen with a 500+ page PoA.  Then when I hear that they 
want a two-part GoF . . . uh, oh.  Part of what is worrisome to me is 
that PoA is very tightly knitted, so I would think it would be even 
more difficult to make the right decision about what stays and what 
goes.  


Luke wrote:


> The special effects were a mixed bag.  <snip>  The computer 
graphics 
> were typical with all the typical problems (and even a couple not 
so 
> typical, like my continued inability to understand what is so 
> difficult about making a proportionately-accurate CG Harry).  


Could anyone expound on this a bit?  Are we talking about the "rubber 
Harry doll" on the broom and the one on the troll's back?  Is it 
something else?  I'd like to understand a bit more about what the 
actual limits of special effects are, if anyone on the list knows.  
In other words, did the filmmakers just cut corners, or is it just 
impossible to get this sort of thing to be convincing?  

Don't crucify me for saying this, but I really have to wonder if 
these problems would have occurred with a director more experienced 
with special effects.  Like James Cameron or (gasp!) Steven 
Spielberg.  Perhaps the trick is to look at the concept drawings or 
prototypes and spot early on (based on experience) that something is 
amiss, and perhaps these more experienced directors would have caught 
these things.  The fact that Peeves was eliminated because the 
special effect wasn't up to scratch makes me wonder.


Luke again:

>the centaur was atrocious.

I'd like to know what happened here.  What went wrong?  I couldn't 
really put my finger on it.  It seemed that the proportions were off 
or something, maybe.  Like there was a man standing there with a 
horse body attached to his back, perhaps.  I was just wondering if 
anyone on the list knows what the "fix" for this is.  

Luke again:

> Quidditch deserves its own section of commentary rather than 
lumping 
> it in as a special effect, because I had problems with this scene 
> that ultimately have nothing to do with the effects themselves (I 
> have already talked about the fake CG motion blur, so I won't 
> again).  It looks exactly like Quidditch probably would look, but, 
> strangely . . . there's no drama whatsoever.  

I wonder if the Quiddich scene would have been helped along if it had 
come at the end of the film.  As it stands and in the book, the 
Quiddich scene integrates into the mystery because of the "Quirrell 
tries to make Harry fall" bit.  I think this wasn't sufficiently 
developed for anyone who hadn't read the book.  So maybe you drop 
that angle entirely, and you use the match as the climax instead.  
After Harry vanquishes Voldemort, he receives points, but not enough 
to take the house championship.  So they have to win Quiddich, and 
that's the climax.  I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud here.  
But it felt weird to have this rush of exhilaration from the 
Gryffindor Quiddich win right in the middle of the mystery.  

Cindy (annoyed to learn that Susan Bones is Columbus' daughter, and 
now suspicious that Harry's father might be Columbus' brother)




From deborah at thevine.net  Sat Nov 17 23:24:21 2001
From: deborah at thevine.net (deborah at thevine.net)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:24:21 -0000
Subject: My take on the movie
Message-ID: <9t6rj5+coem@eGroups.com>

Well, I saw the movie yesterday. I had been looking so forward to 
seeing it, hoping against hope it would be perfect.

It wasn't. I think the disappointment I feel (although I liked the 
movie) is because my expectations were so high. It sounds as if I'm 
sorry I went. I'm *not*.

I've read lots of the comments that have been made so far. I think 
many of the criticisms are valid, especially the ones about why the 
scriptwriter replaced excellent lines with mediocre ones, and how 
Harris just didn't "twinkle" as Dumbledore.

Apart from the fact that Harry's eyes were the wrong color (what's up 
with that?), the other thing that really bothered me was the 
pronunciation of Voldemort's name. Where did that "t" come from?

I loved Diagon Alley...it looked like what I imagined. The castle was 
wonderful. What I thought was kinda funny was that they used the 
Great Hall to study, play chess, etc. I thought that all went on in 
the House Common Room. I've been listening again to the books on 
tape/cd...and you get the most marvelous sense of how much the 
members of the House mean to each other because they do most 
everything together. 

I just realized...Hagrid's house was wrong. It is supposed to be a 
wooden house (which gets commented on by ?Hermione?) when Hagrid is 
trying to raise Norbert. I think it was a stone house.

I think that no matter who made the movie, it wouldn't have pleased 
those who are, shall we say, obsessed!

Just MHO.

Deb in Newhall




From triner918 at aol.com  Sat Nov 17 23:32:08 2001
From: triner918 at aol.com (Trina)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:32:08 -0000
Subject: Time for my 2 knuts
Message-ID: <9t6s1o+6ofl@eGroups.com>

Overall, I enjoyed the film.   The did mangage to stuff in a lot of  
information in the 2+ hours, but I felt if you hadn't read the book, 
you might be a little lost. 

Things that bugged me:

The Devil's Snare scene!  Hermione panicking, "There isn't any wood!" 
and Ron's retort "Have you gone mad!  Are you a witch or not!"  is my 
favorite R & H interactions.  The loss of this scene made me pout 
throughout the last of the film.

Harry's eyes.  I thought that I'd read that they had gone in during 
post-production and changed his eyes to the required green, but 
apparantly they did not.  

Argus Filch.  He looked too much like my inner picture of Mad-Eye 
Moody than how I imagined Filch to be--a small, slightly stooped,  
balding man who resents the fact that he has to clean up after these 
kids who are able to do what he cannot--Magic.

Mrs. Norris.  Yes, the Maine Coon who played her was gorgeous, but 
Maine Coon cats cannot *ever* be described as scrawny!  They are 
known for their largeness!

Quidditch.  Where was Lee Jordan's brilliant color commentary?  It 
would have helped immensely in figuring out exactly what was going on.
Also, there are no girls on the Slytherin team.  What purpose do the 
pillars serve?  I have envisioned something like a football field, 
with the only structures on the Quidditch pitch being the goal posts.

Seamus over Neville.  Neville is more important to the overall plot 
of the books and this film than is Seamus.  Instead of having Seamus 
explain that he was half & half, they could have easily had Neville 
tell about his Uncle Algie dropping him out of the bedroom window.

Things I liked:

The kids.  I think they all did a good job with their parts.  And 
Rupert Grint totally stole the scenes!  Kudos also to Ginny--she 
looks exactly like this 3rd grader at my school whom I have mentally 
named Ginny since last year <vbg>.  

Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane. Wonderful.  'Nuff said.
Richard Harris did a good job considering the script cut all of 
Dumbledore's best lines.  Nitwit, blubber, oddment, tweak!

The art direction and costumes.  Beautiful.

I took along my Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans, although I had 
refilled the bag with plain old Jelly Bellys.  This didn't prevent me 
from finding a leftover black pepper when Snape wished Harry good 
luck before the Quidditch match or a sardine bean little later!  Ack!

I may have to go see it again to get more impressions. Gee, now 
that'll be rough!

Trina 


 




From rcraigharman at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 17 23:33:12 2001
From: rcraigharman at hotmail.com (rcraigharman at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:33:12 -0000
Subject: Possible ship foreshadowing (was Re: Movie Review (long, my apologies))
In-Reply-To: <9t567h+ro87@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6s3o+2qlp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., kris403 at y... wrote:
> Susan Bones was one of the few chosen to be sorted on screen.  I
> wonder if this will be important (as chat has seemed to imply that
> she will be important later on).

Thwonk!  (Slaps self in forehead.)

Why didn't I think of that?  That might turn out to be one of the
more insightful observations.  Let me add to the thought process.

Consider how Jo likes to play with names.  And consider just how
plain and ordinary a name like Susan Bones appears to be.  Heck,
it doesn't even get a mention in "What's in a Name?"

Susan and its variants ultimately come from the Hebrew name,
Shoshana.  The name appears in the biblical Apocrypha in one of the
additions to the Book of Daniel, viz. Susannah and the Elders.

Now, consider this....the name Susan/Susannah/Shoshana means....

.
.
.
.
[drumroll]
.
.
.
.

Lily!

Man, would that be long distance foreshadowing or what?

As the film's Ron would say: "Wicked!"

....Craig




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 23:37:49 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:37:49 -0000
Subject: Impressions
Message-ID: <9t6scd+t4l5@eGroups.com>

...let me simply add to the forray with my own comments.

To start, I found the Dursleys quite amusing in the Dursley-sort of
way.  Their scenes were cut shorter than they should have been to
establish Harry's misery, but for the time constraint, it wasn't
anything bad.  Harry as pitiful in Dudley's clothes was very nice, but
I really didn't like his acting when Hagrid tells him he's a wizard. 
That was quite weak.  The very first scene was also weak...didn't feel
it held the pizzaz that the book gave us.  It's supposed to grab us &
bring us into Harry's story, but it did not do that.  Voldemort was
very VERY poorly explained--if you hadn't read the books, you'd be
awfully confused as to WHY WHY WHY is everyone so afraid of him??

Diagon Alley is brill & Ollivander's is absolutely fabulous.  What is
everyone talking about the sign over The Leaky Cauldron?  It was blank
in the movie I saw...Quirrel wasn't all that hot (IMO), but he passed
for good enough.

I HATE Mrs. Weasley...she's all wrong.  Everything up until Hermione
is well played.  Ron's poverty is a bit brushed off, but that's okay
in this movie.  Rupert Grint is the MOST MARVELOUS actor (of the
children) in this film!  He IS Ron!  Dan's acting is a bit slim in
spots, as is Emma's, but Rupert's never fails.  He's got Ron's role
down to a T, I'm really really excited to see him in future spots.

The Sorting Ceremony leaves something to be desired.  Didn't like the
hat.  Weasley weren't properly introduced.  Percy was well played in
his dimished capacity.  The pictures on the wall were nice touches. 
At the end of the day when Harry is looking out the window while
everyone's sleeping is GREAT.  It's an awesome touch.  *bows to Chris*

Classes are good.  Love Snape in Potions--never established he's Head
of Slytherin--never explains WHY he's fond of Draco!  Bad touch there.
 *memory fading fast* Ummm...The flying lesson was, erm, okay.  I
didn't really like it how they didn't establish Malfoy as a good flyer
before he took off & they never really had that shocked of
"Ohmigoodness, Harry can really fly!"  My mom disagrees about this. 
Missed the though process as Harry was going up with McGonagall to see
Wood.  Didn't look like he was scared for his life as he ought to have
been.  OLIVER WOOD IS AN ABSOLUTE HOTTIE!  Watch out girls for this
Scottish chap!

Didn't like how Hermione knew all about James, but Ron's line stuck in
there about it WAS funny.  Of course, Seeker all wrong.  Oh well. 
Wood's explanation of Quidditch was feeble, but WE all knew, didn't
we, :-D?

The arrival of the broom.  "What could it be?"  Well, DUH!  That was
dumb.  Quidditch was good good good, though obviously fake.  I forgive
of course because it was...well, QUIDDITCH!  Again, Snape as
villian..hmmm, more thoughts later.

Okay, this is getting long, so onto things that bothered me. 
Invisibility Cloak was AWESOME AWESOME!  Flamel story was weird...it
seemed to jump to me.  The Mirror was BLOODY BRILLIANT (hehe).  I
didn't really like it in the book, but now I'm a fan.  Harris as
Dumbldore was eh...oh well.

Centaur completely sucked, but everyone's said this.  Malfoy's scream
made ME laugh with glee.  The snot.  Tom was great at Malfoy.

Wish the had left Devil's Snare as the fire, witch, wood thing. 
Wizard's Chess was brill--again Rupert as Ron couldn't have been more
perfect.  Did anyone notice he TWITCHED after he "passed out".  Silly
Columbus should have shot that scene again!  There was also something
WEIRD with the cameras when HHR were confronting Hagrid about Fluffy
towards the end.  Detracted from scene.

The ending was good (with Quirrel) /I/ liked the change.  Voldemort's
image left something to be desired again, but that's something that
was EXTREMELY hard to do.

Dumbledore should have explained Snape.  VERY confusing if you hadn't
read the book.  Definite mistake of Kloves'.  Hated how H&R were just
"waiting" on the stairs when Harry got out of the hospital wing! 
Loved how the movie ended...perfect Harry material.

Overall...you bet I'm going to see it again!

*takes a deep breath*

-Megan (who knows she's forgotten half of what she set out to say)




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 23:42:31 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:42:31 -0000
Subject: Second timer
Message-ID: <9t6sl7+gp87@eGroups.com>

Just got back from seeing the movie with my husband and kids.  My 
husband loved it completely.  He was just grinning from ear to ear 
the whole time.  And this is someone who technically has not read 
the books.  He's read large parts of the books, since each of our 
kids is reading one of the books at any given time, and we take 
turns reading chapters to them every night.  So, for instance, I 
read chapter 14 of GoF to my daughter last night, while my husband 
read chapter 16 of PoA to our son.  Which means tonight he'll read 
chapter 15 of Gof to our daughter...So he's gotten rather a strange 
impression of the books, never having actually sat down and read one 
himself, cover to cover.  He's been getting strange out-of-sequence 
snippets of the four books for the last ten months.  I think he was 
happy to be able to go through the entire story in one sitting, and 
he especially loved Hagrid's "I shouldn't've said that..." schtick.  
I bit my tongue. ;)

The kids are very, very happy, but one of the first things my 
daughter noticed was that Hermione's potion/logic problem didn't 
make the cut, and she's the only one I've heard mention that 
Quirrell's stone defense wasn't in the movie either.  (His was a 
troll, interestingly enough; in the book, when the trio find the 
troll, the DADA teacher has already knocked him out.)  My daughter 
is a very observant 7-year-old!  She also missed Peeves.

On a second viewing I have to say that I like it even more than I 
did yesterday and that Emma Watson grates less on me now, but her 
line to Harry near the end about his being a great wizard is either 
badly written, badly delivered, or both.  Also, because we don't see 
him in class (except for when he's being upbraided by McGonagall and 
Snape) we don't know what the basis for this declaration is.  We 
just have to take her word for it.

I felt that the scene where he sees them on the balcony after he 
gets out of the hospital wing was superfluous; they could easily 
have had the same exchange in the Great Hall before the announcement 
of the House Cup, and it could have been done quicker in that 
setting.  

Speaking of the Great Hall, going back to the welcoming feast, there 
was a bit of discontinuity.  Just after Hermione's sorted, she goes 
to sit next to Percy.  Ron sits across from the two of them after 
he's sorted.  Harry then sits next to Ron after HE'S sorted.  Switch 
to Dumbledore, saying unnecessarily, "Let the feast begin!" and 
suddenly, Harry's sitting on the other side of the table BETWEEN 
PERCY AND HERMIONE.  Ron is still on the opposite side.  I suppose 
Harry COULD have walked around the table and changed seats, but what 
would be the point?

Something I really appreciated this time that I hadn't noticed 
before was Sean Biggerstaff's physical performance as Oliver Wood.  
(Stop chuckling.)  I'm referring specifically to the way he wrestles 
the bludger back into the trunk when he's introducing Harry to the 
game of Quidditch.  When you think about it, OF COURSE that metal 
ball isn't really trying to keep from being strapped back in the 
case, but Biggerstaff convinced us that it was a dangerous magical 
object without overdoing it or looking like a hack.  Not an easy 
thing to do.

Next Friday we're taking our son and two of his friends as a 
birthday celebration, and our daughter will probably be bringing one 
of her friends along as well.  It goes by so fast, I'm sure I'll 
notice more when I see it for the third time!  (Unless I fall 
asleep, like Neil...Nah!)

--Barb
(who agrees with Cindy C. that no product placement is a definite 
plus!)




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 17 23:55:27 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:55:27 -0000
Subject: What did JKR add to the film? + overall, not long
In-Reply-To: <9t5scf+2o3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6tdf+86fq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Indyfans at a... wrote:
> *We saw the movie last night, and I realized as we left that I 
didn't 
> catch the little part that JKR had written especially for the film, 
> supposedly shedding a little light on Harry's past.  Did any of you 
> far-more-astute observers catch it? 

Hmmm....I think it was the flashback to his parents being killed
> 
> *Loved the film, could have used an extra hour for deeper character 
> development(Neville, the twins, etc). Greatly missed the part where 
> Hermione solves the logic problem right b4 Harry meets Quirrel at 
the 
> end... Yes, one more hour or 2 to pad it with all of our beloved 
> lines ('are you a witch or what?!')would have been just right!! But 
> they did a really good job. 

I think so too. And it could have used another hour or six.


PS, my daughter has been using her wand and saying "Wingardium Levio-
> SAW" in true Hermione technique! 

Dont forget, Emma manages to squeeze about four vowels into that "o" 
so that it comes out "...Levioaeu-SAH"

> 
> *Enjoy your weekend!  From Jen, who is fervently hoping SS 
surpasses 
> Titanic for #1.

- Noel, who agrees with you completely on that count, and hopes that 
the next "Star Wars" is less touchy-feely and more Star Wars-y than 
the preview he saw led him to think!




From Indyfans at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 00:10:28 2001
From: Indyfans at aol.com (Indyfans at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:10:28 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JKR addition-
Message-ID: <a9.1e7f7b42.29285674@aol.com>

>where Hagrid describes the fateful scene at Godric's Hollow to Harry.<
         Yes, I did wonder about that, but is that really new information?  
We pretty much know that backwards and forwards.  I guess I was thinking 
JKR's new piece in the film would be something totally new that we had never 
read b4.   
The spot at the end where Voldy tells Harry he can be with his parents might 
be it, but that's really short!  Can anyone help with this puzzle?



From rainy_lilac at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 00:12:06 2001
From: rainy_lilac at yahoo.com (rainy_lilac at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:12:06 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9t6mo8+q0dr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6ucn+3a27@eGroups.com>

Two possibilities that come to my mind:

1.)   When Hagrid is telling Harry about the days of Voldermort 
(pronounced with the "t", mind you) he says that V. gathered about 
him a group of Dark wizards. Those who refused to join him, he 
killed. We then see Lily being killed.

Does this suggest that he in fact wanted Lily to be a deatheater, 
maybe even expected her to be, but got furious with James for taking 
her away to the good side? Remember that he originally does not seek 
to kill her-- he tells her to stand aside so that he can kill Harry, 
then killls her when she refuses to do so.


2.)   The there is the bit in the end about V. telling Harry that he 
can bring back his parents.


What do you think?


My first thoughts about the movie: Although I loved parts of it, such 
as the visial detail, I was overall kind of disappointed. I realize 
that so much HAD to be cut just to keep the movie at a reasonable 
length, but it still seemed extreme. If someone saw this movie 
without having first read the book, I don't think they would get it 
at all.

I guess most of my gripes fall into the "I wanted to see more of..." 
category. 


More later....



Suzanne




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 00:32:22 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:32:22 -0000
Subject: Random Movie Observations (LONG, like the movie)
In-Reply-To: <9t4d6v+vmnh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t6vim+oj55@eGroups.com>

<Cindy wrote:>

MAKING THE MOST OF A TINY ROLE:  Sean Biggerstaff as Oliver Wood. 
He's very talented, not to mention absolutely hottie.  His acting
skills are absolutuely SUPERB compared to the piitiful time they gave
him to play his role.  If he had been allowed to actually HAVE a
practice, I think he would definitely have been some spectacular.  The
kid did magnificent considering what he had to work with.  I really
really hope they do his role right in COS.

LEAST COMPELLING SPECIAL EFFECT:  Centaur.  As for human effects,
Neville falling from broom and a some Quidditch shots.

BEST SPECIAL EFFECT:  The Invisibility Cloak.  **Agreed*.*

MOST INEXPLICABLE DECISION BY THE FILMMAKERS:  (Practical) omission of
Neville's role & Harry's dad-casting.  Both were obviously botched. 
Continuity of Flamel-Fluffy-Stone plotline is also very confusing.

MOST LOGICAL CHANGE OF A BIG DETAIL:  Malfoy's meeting Harry on the
stairs.  Could have added a few more Weasley cracks, but it worked out
much better this way.

BEST CURE OF A PLOT MYSTERY:  It always bothered me that Hagrid gave 
Dudley, an innocent child, a pig's tail.  If Hagrid is mad at Vernon,
 why does he pick on Dudley?  In the movie, they provided nice 
motivation for this by having Dudley steal the cake.  Nice touch.
**Agreed**

MOST ANNOYING ASPECT: Harry's blue eyes.  How much trouble would THAT
have been to change?

MOST POTENTIALLY CONFUSING ELEMENT TO NON-READERS: Voldemort's
evilness & the fact that he was after Harry, this most-feared wizard
of all times.  I felt that this was not established well enough to
those who wouldn't know othewise by reading the books.  Runner-up:
Quidditch.  Never explained as a sport before Harry even got his
broom!  Also in the game anyone who hadn't read would be completely lost.

MOST CONFUSING TO ANYONE: The scene after the Mirror where Harry is
releasing Hedwig in the snow.  I understand now that I read what Luke
said about "letting go", but sitting in the theatre, that COMPLETELY
lost me.  Beautiful scene, but held absolutely no meaning to ME, and
probably not any kid until explained by someone else.

BETTER IN MOVIE THAN IN BOOK: The Mirror of Erised.  Didn't really
like it in the book; LOVED it in the movie.  Runner-up: Wizard's
chess-challenge.  Good in books, but it's just so much better visualized.

-Megan (trying to figure when she can go back to see it again!)




From Indyfans at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 00:38:28 2001
From: Indyfans at aol.com (Indyfans at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:38:28 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JKR's new addition and centaur
Message-ID: <55.1dd6c2c7.29285d04@aol.com>

...I'm thinking that until someone connected with the movie actually 
pinpoints what that new scene is, we won't know for sure.   As you know, of 
course, things were changed or added frequently throughout the film...( for 
instance, Hermione dicovering the facts on Flamel)...  so at this point, I 
guess we could take our pick.
P.S.,  regarding the centaur...Yuk!  I had pictured a beautiful male with 
long hair...  this one was so, well not any of that!  Well, I'm sure his 
mommy loves him!  

 



From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 01:02:46 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 01:02:46 -0000
Subject: JKR's new addition and centaur
In-Reply-To: <55.1dd6c2c7.29285d04@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t71bm+d9i5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Indyfans at a... wrote:
P.S.,  regarding the centaur...Yuk!  I had pictured a beautiful male 
with 
> long hair...  this one was so, well not any of that!  Well, I'm 
sure his 
> mommy loves him!

OMG That made me laugh!  Yes, I agree - he should be a hansome 
guy...  Instead, he's a...  Klingon?

Meg




From heidit at netbox.com  Sun Nov 18 01:54:15 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:54:15 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Random Movie Observations after viewing num
	ber two
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C338B@MIAEXCH1>

First I want to apologize to Amber, who was subjected to many arm grabs, and
to the people of Orlando, Florida, who were discombobulated by my post-film
chair-kicking and foot-stomping frenzy at friday's showing. 
I like it much better after viewing #2. I have read a few random posts here
but not all, so foregive repetition. And ask Amber to post her notes from
tonight's showing, from which the only 2 numbers I recall were 15 and 30. 15
is the number of students following Percy on the stairs and 30 is the number
of annoying seconds of blue-gloved harry walking with hedwig in the snow and
her subsequent flight. It's a bloody boarding school film. Show the passage
of time with a 75 second classroom montage, not with a pointless and
noncanonical snow scene. 
Overall, I was less discomforted by the things that were cut {quidditch
practice, the meeting with Draco on the train} than I was by things that
were flat out Bad, like Dean knowing what a rememberall was {and not having
the sign at the quidditch match} and Ron's sandwich on the train mimicking
Laura Palmer and being wrapped in plastic. No. Just, no. 
I loved Dan, I thought Tom was wonderful and I think Emma suffered from
being directed by a director who is just not good at working with girls-
mara wilson in mrs doubtfire and hallie eisenberg are just not good training
for someone to Understand Hermione. But the h/h moments were lovely although
I noted one bit for the r/h shippers- her hair gets in his face at one point
and he does not react badly. Weird things that surprised me: the size of the
cauldrons {when harry was described as dumpong his books into Ginny's I
presumed they were a mite larger} and sean biggerstaff's utter
wonderfulness. Can Oliver be the dada teacher in Book 5?
A special note of dislike for the casting of James, and a further note that
it was my impression that the "flashback, if written in netspeak, would be
the equivilent of IHHO-in Hagrid's humble opinion. But then again, I do a
bit f an overfocus on her use of perspective in canon.-tbc



From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 02:20:37 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:20:37 -0000
Subject: My experience and Roger Ebert review
Message-ID: <9t75tl+6314@eGroups.com>

Hi, I finally find this group from Yahoo club...

First, I like to share rather interesting experience of mine. I don't 
know what happened. But when I saw it for the 2nd time it was much 
better than first time.
I think I was paying too much attention to the difference between the 
book and the movie for its own value. I also have seen too many HP 
specials and stuff. My friend and my husband really like the movie 
since the every thing was new to them. ( They read the book though. )

I was listening to a movie critic review on Friday morning. It was a 
strangest review I'have heard ever. He basiclly gave a mixed review. 
And then he said he saw it twice so that he can enjoy the movie 
without being a critic when he saw the second time.

Someone already made a great summary about how unique the situation 
surrounding the production of this movie. I am very sure that most of 
HP fun would have hated the movie if any other big name director had 
directed it. Yes, we could have get a better FX and may be even 
better movie. However, I don't think that movie would have anything 
to do with HP. You know they did the audition for directors. And 
clearly this is the movie JKR can live with.

BTW, did you read the review by Roger Ebert? He is aware of flaws of 
the movie from today's moving making standards. He still gave it 4 
star out of 4 star!! He has rather specific perspective when he 
reviewed the movie.
http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-potter16f.html

I also realized that it is rather unfair to talk about charactor 
development or the lack of. We know them so well. We read all 4 of 
them. But the movie is of the volume I. For example, Fred and George 
were not that important in SS/PS. I am so happy with the casting. 

Honestly, I like what we have so far. I am looking forward to see COS 
which has my favorite climax of four. ( Though, I am pretty sure they 
will cut my favorite side track for sure... Do you remeber 
degnorming? ) 

It is a very unique movie. It makes me feel like going to Hogwatt. 
There are so many small charms and beauties in the movie that the 
director successfully transfered from the book!! And I think that is 
the most important thing for the very first production of possible 7.

BTW, I have something to say about Hermione. I really liked her and I 
thought she was just right Hermione. In fact, she was one of a few 
things that positively stood out when I first saw the movie. 
She is typical type A person. I can completely relate to her. The way 
she rose her voice...Oh, she is always very tense. She is also a 
muggle born. She is typical overachiever. She is actually very 
vulnerable and lonely. Oh well, I just love Hermione. 

Therefore, I was very disappointed when I realized they cut portion 
scene. However;after thinking about it for a while,I have to admit 
that it is very logical part to cut out. One, it would be rather 
unclimactic and not very visually strong scene, and two, therefore it 
would let the movie lose momentum towards the final confrontation.

I really recommend you guys to see the movie at least twice. Relax 
and enjoy for the 2nd time. Unless your mind is set for hating this 
movie so much, you are presantly surprised. 

BTW, did you guys know there is a petition for a long directors'cut 
version for DVD? Go to www.petitiononline.com

I will go to see the movie with my husband again for next weekend.




From kris403 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 02:42:03 2001
From: kris403 at yahoo.com (kris403 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:42:03 -0000
Subject: Things I forgot
Message-ID: <9t775r+6k0e@eGroups.com>

It was so late when I wrote my first review that I knew there would 
be things I forgot (plus I didn't want to make everyone suffer 
through too long of a message)

Best effect: definetely went to the invisibility cloak, but I forgot 
it at first.  That's how you know it's a really good effect... when 
you can't even tell it was CGIed.  

Thing I missed the most:  Hearing Harry's thoughts.  Harry's 
thoughts have some of the best lines in the book.  His character is 
not defined through what he says in the book, but more of his 
reactions in his mind.  I think that is one of the reasons that Dan 
doesn't come across as an amazing actor.  The details of Harry are 
not as clear.

Biggest question yet to be discussed here:  (maybe it's too early 
yet) First, I always pronounced it with a T.  Why's the T there if 
it's not to be pronounced?  :)  Anyway, I am really curious on 
Voldemort's lines at the end.  They were very specific and I'm 
curious on if it is major forshadowing for the next three books.  
Anyone else have any idea... or was it just me?


Kris (who is trying to figure out when I can see it a third time)




From heidit at netbox.com  Sun Nov 18 02:54:56 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:54:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: characters and actors part 2
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C338C@MIAEXCH1>

My blackberry only allows a certain amount of characters in a post, so the
other was unexpectedly truncated...
I want them to keep the same cast for as many films as possible, not just
because I think the casting was spot on but because I think they all are
growing together in many ways - the filming experience is a lot like
Hogwarts - and I think that will show in later films in a way that replacing
any of the actors would damage. I did like the forebidden forrest scene- the
bit before, at Hagrid's hut- I thought the 4 of them look so good together-
a perfect team! Is it too much to ask for Draco to be a part of it later on?
Yeah, thought so. : {
What was never explained was why Draco followed them there- or had he been
in the library when they were talking and overheard? Could have been more
clear- otherwise I will be forced to presume he's stalking Harry. :: winks
at various listies::

One terrifying thought did cross my mind- what if they did the sorting in
birth date order? It would give credence to that misery-inducing 1979
argument for Hermione's birthday as she was sorted first. But there can't be
that many students younger than Harry. So maybe not. 

Question: why was Filch among the slytherins at the game? We know he wasn't
in any house, don't we?

And I thought that they presented a convincing showing of how badly the
Dursleys treated Harry, even in the abbreviated time frame. 
And Alex, I want to be on the rewrite team for the script! I truly think
that the line after Harry read the bit from the DP {why did it go to Ron
anyway?} shouldve been Ron asking, "My oldest brother is a curse breaker for
Gringotts-should I ask him?

One last note before I send this and realize that I forgot something- we
took my 27 month old to see it last night. He loved it and cannot stop
talking about it. It was his first movie and especially in the quidditch
scenes, he was so worried about "Haddy Podder"!



From cindysphynx at home.com  Sun Nov 18 03:09:17 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:09:17 -0000
Subject: James Casting and New Scene  (WAS HUGE problem with the casting)
In-Reply-To: <00e001c16fb0$a84c8980$4d4e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9t78ot+m975@eGroups.com>

Saitana wrote:

> My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late 
twenties
> early thirties when he died...

I had an idea.  Is there anything in canon that says that a person in 
the Mirror of Erised doesn't age with real time?  So maybe Lily and 
James died when they were in their 20s, so they are in their late 30s 
when Harry is standing before the mirror.  

Also, maybe the reason we don't see Ron's reflection in the mirror is 
an aging problem.  He would have to be 17 to be head boy/Quiddich 
captain, etc., and they couldn't do that credibly for the film.

Anyway, the theory about people in the mirror aging doesn't work for 
why James is so old in the photo album pictures, though.  People in 
pictures definitely don't age with real time, because Harry is still 
a baby in the family photo at the end of the film.  Unless only dead 
people continue to age but live people do not, which doesn't make a 
whole lot of sense.

I think the "new scene" could be the Voldemort confrontation.  I only 
saw the film once, but I thought the dialogue was quite different and 
much improved.  In the book, Voldemort chats Harry up a bit and then 
says basically "So how about you give me the stone?"  In the movie, 
he provides Harry with a plausible reason to surrender the stone:  
having his parents back.  I think I recall that the scene Jo wrote 
contained dialogue.  Maybe Jo wrote this new ending, and that is 
the "new scene".

Cindy (looking for a way to bail out poor Chris Columbus)




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 03:13:05 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:13:05 EST
Subject: Lines I missed/McGonagall's jewelry
Message-ID: <ab.12735853.29288141@aol.com>


Lines I missed in the movie that were in the book..

"How did you know it was me?" she (McGonagall asked)
"My dear Professor, I've never seen a cat sit so stiffly" (Dumbledore)

Would you care for a sherbert lemon?  (Dumbledore) Also the scar as the map, 
too

It's lucky it's dark. I haven't blushed so much since Madam Pomfrey told me 
she liked my new earmuffs" (Dumbledore's reply to McGonagall's commentary on 
how he was too noble to use the powers that Voldemort used).

"Oh are you a PREfect Percy? Said one of the twins with an air of great 
surprise..You should have told us we had no idea (not exact quote), but this 
banter really sets up Percy's character.
 
So  we've just got to try on the hat! Ron whispered to Harry "I'll kill Fred, 
he was going on about wrestling a troll." (much more fun  than Hermione's 
line about the ceiling in the great hall being betwitched to resemble the 
night sky)

Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment Tweak (Dumbledore)
And
"Is he - a bit mad?" he (Harry) asked Percy uncertainly
"Mad" said Percy airily. "He's a genius. Best wizard in the world! But he is 
a bit mad, yes. Potatoes, Harry?"

"Your father would have been proud. He was an excellent Quidditch player 
himself" (McGonagall to Harry, we could have dispensed with the trophy)

I? I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks (Dumbledore's response 
to Harry's question about how Dumbledore would see himself in the mirror)

I did not like Hagrid's house either..it seemed too close to the castle 
(although that might just be a problem with my visualization). It did help 
that I had seen pictures before and knew it would be stone.  It necessitated 
not using Hermione's line (another good one) Hagrid you live in a wooden 
house! (meaning that it would be a problem with dragons spouting flame)

I believe your friends Misters  Fred and George Weasley were responsible for 
trying to send you a lavatory seat. (Would have to reinstate the line from 
Molly when putting Fred and George on the Hogwarts express) - Dumbledore

Interesting..so many whimsical lines relating to Dumbledore were cut


?   McGonagall was wearing a jeweled circlet on her robes..it looked 
Celtic..anyone know?

Susan McGee
Ann Arbor, Michigan



From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 18 03:22:21 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:22:21 -0600
Subject: Movie thoughts (yeah, Snape, so sue me)
Message-ID: <3BF7296C.ED3B413C@texas.net>

Sorry about the dual post, but this deals both with the movie in general
and Snape in particular.

Best summation of my lasting "take" on the movie: I wish I'd had eight
pairs of eyes. For slightly more detail, little things and (of course)
Alan Rickman observations, read on.

A
L
A
N

R
I
C
K
M
A
N

I
S

P
E
R
F
E
C
T

Overall, I think they did well. With all the detail they put in, that
only one thing truly sucked (Firenze) is a miracle. And the atmospherics
were perfect.

Quibbles and observations on the first viewing:

1.     McGonagall was James' *teacher*, why is an "M. McGonagall" also
on the plaque (as a chaser, I think, didn't catch the position) which
shows James as Seeker?

2.    Did anyone else spot Filch in the Slytherin stands during the
Quidditch match?

3.    I await long, sincere, written retractions from everyone who said
    (a) Alan Rickman was too old to play Snape
    (b) anyone else could have done it

Snape thoughts (get comfy, it's long):

(1) I was watching Alan Rickman pretty closely (my husband snorts when I
say this, that "what else is new" type thing). Seriously, though,
mention has been made in several of the articles I read on the movie and
its making, that JKR gave insider information, post-book-4 stuff, to
Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rickman, to help them with characterization. So
I was watching Rickman because I felt we could trust his
characterization, since he knows things we don't. And I saw one thing
which surprised me.

When reading the books, it did not begin to occur to me until PoA that
while Snape was nasty, mean, and cruel, the end result of much of what
he did was protective of Harry. Book 1's whole "debt owed to James"
motivation always came across to me as a discharging of duty, an
obligation. But. But.

In the movie, when Snape is chanting the countercurse and keeping his
eyes on Harry, he looks concerned, almost afraid. He is clearly working
at what he's doing, putting more into it than I had realized, but there
is far more emotion than I'd expected. It looks like he's frightened for
Harry. I didn't expect that. My mind's eye has put many expressions on
Snape's face, but fear in any form was not one of them.

Rickman being the "facial" actor par excellence that he is, this
expression could be read simply as intensity. And it may be. I suspect
it is meant to be an expression that would allow for the dual
interpretation of the scene---it will be valid both for those who think
Snape's trying to kill Harry, and for those who already know he's not.
But I think Rickman is still expressing something real to Snape, here.

By this I mean that Alan Rickman is a good enough actor to put Severus
Snape's genuine feelings on his face, while still making it possible for
a first-time viewer to be misdirected as to his motivation. I've watched
a fair amount of Alan Rickman's face, and I read it as alarm, on a more
emotional level than I'd expected.

Did anyone else have this take on it? Am I spouting codswallop?

(2) I was also intrigued that they left the whole James/Snape life-debt
out. Unfortunately, that can be explained in a couple of ways--if it's
very plot-important, it'll come back in subsequent movies, like Peeves;
or, mayhap it is a red herring, has nothing to do with Snape's
motivation after all (I *am* a torch-for-Lily advocate, after all) and
was discarded.

(3) I thought the scene where Harry overhears Snape and Quirrell was
potentially significant in Snape's reaction. It struck me that his
reaching out, on a suspicion, means that he has had experience with
being invisibly spied upon before, to the point where he'd reach out to
make sure. It didn't seem to me too standard a reaction, to think, Hey,
maybe something invisible is over there, unless once upon a time
something invisible was. If that was coherent.

--Amanda




From cindysphynx at home.com  Sun Nov 18 03:29:13 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:29:13 -0000
Subject: Movie thoughts (yeah, Snape, so sue me)
In-Reply-To: <3BF7296C.ED3B413C@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9t79u9+deeh@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:

> (3) I thought the scene where Harry overhears Snape and Quirrell was
> potentially significant in Snape's reaction. It struck me that his
> reaching out, on a suspicion, means that he has had experience with
> being invisibly spied upon before, to the point where he'd reach 
out to
> make sure. It didn't seem to me too standard a reaction, to think, 
Hey,
> maybe something invisible is over there, unless once upon a time
> something invisible was. If that was coherent.

Oh, I think you're on to something, Amanda.  The cloak used to belong 
to James.  We know from PoA that MWPP played at least one joke on 
Snape, and they probably played a lot more than one.  Some of these 
undoubtedly involved the cloak.  Also, when Snape find the cloak 
outside the Willow in PoA, he instantly connects it with Harry.

So after all these years, Snape is still paranoid and thinks he's 
still being spied upon, like the old days.  I like it!

Cindy




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 18 03:34:53 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:34:53 -0600
Subject: One more thing
Message-ID: <3BF72C5C.1500A74A@texas.net>

I forgot one thing. Has nothing to do with Snape (no, Hell didn't just
freeze over, that happened yesterday when I got to go out with my
husband with NO KIDS, for the first time since we went to Les Mis on
October 19, 2000).

B
U
T

R
I
C
K
M
A
N

I
S

S
T
I
L
L

P
E
R
F
E
C
T

I really, really liked what they did with the flying keys. In the book,
it was the flying keys where things began to seem a bit silly to me--the
challenges started to feel as if they weren't intended to be barriers.
Those brooms sitting there waiting to help you catch the key? Get real.

Oooh, but the keys turning into a swarm of little pointy things that
come after you, once the broom is touched! Yes! Here is a dangerous
barrier indeed. I loved the way they stabbed into the door. Great job. I
like this much better.

Again, thoughts?

--Amanda




From kris403 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 03:38:41 2001
From: kris403 at yahoo.com (kris403 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:38:41 -0000
Subject: Movie thoughts (yeah, Snape, so sue me)
In-Reply-To: <3BF7296C.ED3B413C@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9t7ag1+ven7@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:> 
> Quibbles and observations on the first viewing:
> 
> 1.     McGonagall was James' *teacher*, why is an "M. McGonagall" 
also on the plaque (as a chaser, I think, didn't catch the position) 
which shows James as Seeker?


Here's my take on this.  It's definetely not Minerva McGonagall.  
She is too old to play for the house team  :).  But remember a very 
long time ago when discussion on the main group turned to professors 
and their families?  Maybe she was married at some point and has a 
son (Mark, Mike, Murray?) or a daughter (Mary, Maggie, etc)?  Maybe 
this was a clue that JKR is going to clue us in on some of the 
professors' histories.  

JMHO,
Kris





From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 03:42:29 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:42:29 -0000
Subject: James Casting and New Scene  (WAS HUGE problem with the casting)
In-Reply-To: <9t78ot+m975@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7an5+u19s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Saitana wrote:
> 
> > My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late 
> twenties
> > early thirties when he died...

James and Lily were in their EARLY twenties when they died, if we 
are to believe JKR when she identified Snape as being about 35. 
Snape was a contemporary of James and Lily, which means that if they 
were still alive they would also be about 35, and this is well over 
ten years later. We don't know if Snape was in the same year as 
James et al., but he must have been fairly near to them in age to be 
such a big part of their school lives, I would think. 

Steve Vander Ark
The Harry Potter Lexicon





From triner918 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 03:44:37 2001
From: triner918 at aol.com (Trina)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:44:37 -0000
Subject: Another thought has just come to me...
Message-ID: <9t7ar5+8k0u@eGroups.com>

Did it bother anyone else that 11 yo Ron said "Bloody hell,<snip>"?

Bothered me a great deal. Ron's swearing in the books is one thing as 
it is always alluded to, except for GoF when he says, "Damn it, we're 
still with the Slytherins..." I didn't mind that--he's 14 then, such 
language is somewhat age-appropriate. But "bloody hell" at 11, yeah, 
that did.   Any thoughts?

Trina




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 04:02:41 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:02:41 -0000
Subject: Second Time Around...
Message-ID: <9t7bt1+b5b9@eGroups.com>

...and I *loved* it!  It was SO much better than my first viewing... 
and best of all, I saw one of the kids I'd introduced to the books in 
the theatre.

Everything I've wanted to say has already been said... Heidi in 
particular echoed my thoughts exactly.

I thought all of the kids were cool.  I'm with Heidi; no casting 
changes unless there's a RL issue that prevents that particular 
little actor from continuing.  Rupert was PHENOMENAL--I utterly and 
totally fell in love with Ron all over again--he reminded me of all 
the reasons that endeared me to the character at the beginning of the 
series.  Tom was GREAT as Draco and I kept getting nudged--"Ms. 
Thomas, you're not supposed to be giggling!  Malfoy's an evil brat!"  
Yeah, but an evil brat with the face of an angel.

Emma's major fault IMO wasn't her acting at all; it's just that she's 
far too adorable of a kid to play Hermione.  As a huge Hermione fan 
(well, most of you guys know that!) I found it distracting when all 
the first years were about to be Sorted and she was by far the cutest 
little girl in her year.  As I told someone after my second viewing, 
it'll render the Yule Ball CinderHermione issue quite irrelevant.  
Which, since they'll have to cut down GoF substantially may be a Good 
Thing.

Dan was very good too.  As so many have said, the impossible was 
asked of a 12 year old kid and I think he pulled it off as well as 
anyone could.  I certainly bought him as Harry... it never jarred for 
me.  And now I am looking forward to CoS, most of our least favorite 
of the books... after the first viewing yesterday, I stayed up most 
of the nigh and re-read the whole thing.  I do think that it'll be as 
good and probably better than this one for two reasons:  1) a more 
cinematic plot, if quite a bit darker, and 2) Dan has repeatedly said 
this is his favorite book, so I think he'll put a lot into the 
performance.

Loved Maggie Smith and Robbie Coltrane.  And all you Alan Rickman 
fans were SO right... he is Snape and his performance made me see the 
character in a completely different light.  I look forward to re-
reading canon and seeing where I began to really get uncomfortable 
with him.

My favorite CGI was Quidditch.  Absolutely stunning.  I loved the 
teams' uniforms.  I loved the unique stands.  I loved the pillars.  
It was so much more than I'd imagined... and I winced when Angelina 
and Oliver hit the ground.  And I kept thinking, "I *so* want to be a 
pro Quidditch player... why isn't this a real game?"

More later... thanks to that marathon CoS read, I'm getting sleepy!  

--Ebony AKA AngieJ





From aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca  Sun Nov 18 04:19:26 2001
From: aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca (Angela Boyko)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:19:26 -0400
Subject: Throwing off the blanket
Message-ID: <3BF736CD.13B1EE81@nb.sympatico.ca>

Most of you probably don't remember me - I went nomail on the other
HP4Gu lists a couple of months back - nothing personal to the groups,
just a lot happening personally with me.

I subscribed to this list when it was created but have been nomail until
tonight, because I really do like to hide under a blanket when it comes
to a movie I'm highly anticipating (got my ears firmly plugged for Star
Wars II)

*Anyways*, I saw the film tonight, with my almost six year old nephew. I
just cemented myself as Favourite Auntie for life. I had no idea the
movie was two and a half hours long and got him home long after his
bedtime. So not only did Nick get to see a movie in the theatre and not
from a VCR for the first time, he also got to stay up way late. (But he
couldn't wheedle a bedtime story from me. The movie was his bedtime
story!)

I've been dipping in out and of the posts, but decided it was too
masochistic to read all 422 posts in the archive. :-)


L
E

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E


L
A

L
A

L
A

Okay. I was prepared to love this movie. And, in the beginning, I did
not love this movie.

It skimmed way too much in the beginning. I missed the richness of
Joanne's words, creating this wonderful universe. But I also realize
that things had to be skimmed, or it would have been at least a 4 part
movie to do the book justice.

Loved Dan as Harry. Absolutely spot on. BUT - what was with the eye
colour? I could not love a movie that has a blue-eyed Harry. If they
could have such spectacular effects such as the invisibility cloak,
would it have been so hard to change his eye colour?

Loved Rupert too. I overlooked the fact that he was the wrong height. At
least he had the red hair and the cheeky attitude. 

Emma? I have mixed feelings. Her hair was all wrong. It was too
conditioned and cared for. Not that canon Hermione has greasy hair like
Snape, but canon Hermione does not include crimping part of her wild
mane as part of her morning routine. It was like the hairdresser was
told to make Emma's hair (or Emma's wig) bushy, but not unattractively
bushy.

But now that I'm done with the hair, I think Emma did okay. Maybe as the
movie Hermione grows and matures, Emma will be able to bring more depth
to the role.

Far be it for me to say anything against Alan Rickman. I've always
respected him as an actor, I just don't idolize him. :-) He was perfect
as Snape.

I'm also one who really liked how Oliver Wood turned out. I loved the
accent, so musical and wonderful. And the acting was good too. I look
forward to PoA and Oliver getting the cup.

I was disappointed in Richard Harris. Where was the twinkle? The humour?
The warm socks? That was not Albus Dumbledore at all.

I'm disappointed that they cut the whole "YOU'RE A WITCH, AREN'T YOU?"
line from the Devil's Snare sequence, and the whole potions sequence. I
know, I know, timewise it made sense. But in canon, Hermione earned
those 50 points, and she didn't in the movie.

The Quirrell/Voledemort sequence was absolutely brilliant, and was when
I stopped comparing the movie to the book in my head. How absolutely
clever for Voldemort to summon the images of Lily and James to tempt
Harry with. My nephew had watched most of the scarier sequences peeking
from behind his fingers. Strangely, this was the one scene where he sat
rapt with attention, and I was the scared one, as Quirrell burned and
cracked right before my eyes. He was delighted that the bad guy
crumbled, and I was riveted by how well it was portrayed, watching
Quirrell be destroyed. And the part where Voldemort's essence/spirit/?
passed through Harry and knocked him down was a brilliant touch.

And then the hospital scene was a let down. Harry woke up like he was
waking from a refreshing nap. Albus wasn't canon Albus at all. The part
about Lily's love protecting Harry is something that always makes me cry
when I read it. It wasn't that moving at all.

But I did cry when Hagrid gave Harry the photo album and he saw the
picture of him with his parents, Lily kissing his little hand with such
love and affection, and James holding him with such pride and adoration.
:-)

So I'm really mixed. There were parts that I loved and that could not
have been portrayed so effectively in the books, such as the Quidditch
game and the photo with James and Lily. The HP universe was just not as
rich onscreen as it is in the books - I thought that anybody who has not
read the books may be wondering what all the fuss is about. And so many
good lines were missing. And that was not Albus Dumbledore.

I guess I need to see it again. ;-)

Angela "I'm moving to Calgary in two weeks, how are all of you?" Boyko
-- 
Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
  "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
      through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 04:16:42 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:16:42 -0000
Subject: The Winged Keys (was Re: One more thing)
In-Reply-To: <3BF72C5C.1500A74A@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9t7cna+8nrl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> I really, really liked what they did with the flying keys.

Agreed.  I always felt that the winged keys was the weakest of the 
protective challenges in the book, but it was very wise of the 
filmmakers to expand upon its role in the film, because its something 
that could be made very visual . . . which they did, and I think it 
worked out marvelously.

Also, leaving out the 'pre-knocked-out-courtesy-of-Quirrel' troll was 
fine, in my opinion, as it adds very little to the actual development 
of the challenges.  It's purpose in the book was to give Quirrel an 
ironic and suggestive challenge.  But you'll notice that in the movie 
that they were very pointed about *not* assigning particular teachers 
to particular trials . . . which was wise because it would not have 
worked with what they had cut out.  So this also helped justify their 
leaving out the potions challenge, without it conflicting with the 
notion that "Snape is one of the teachers protecting the stone".

-Luke




From AspiringWriter6 at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 05:11:25 2001
From: AspiringWriter6 at hotmail.com (Britt Walter)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:11:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: new scene
Message-ID: <F91uOgQ0lMMSGEl8HKO00015356@hotmail.com>

>
>Sara  Sarah wrote: Somebody else mentioned that it may have been Lupin 
>before I saw the film and when I watched it I tried to catch it and I'm 
>sure I saw the initials RJH. Didn't catch the surname. I was desperate for 
>a rewind function so I could go back and see it again! I think there may 
>have even been an audible "oh no, bu---!" before I remembered I was in a 
>cinema! Heh. Apologies to anyone who may have been there and also on this 
>list :o)
>
>Sara

Sara-

I just came back from the movie about 15 minutes ago and I actually 
remembered to look at the plaque VERY closely. I saw that the sur name was 
KING. I don't remember a "KING" ever being mentioned in the book. Hope that 
helps...

Just a couple things that bugged me:
-They called the Forbidden Forest the Dark Forest.
-Harry's eyebrows kept changing. One time it was a uni-brow. Then, they 
looked like they ere penciled in. Then just regular ordinary eyebrows. Why 
was I looking at his eyebrows? I have no idea...
-Dracos eyes weren't gray
-Harry had all his classes with Slytherin

Yes I know they're stupid little things but I just had to get those off my 
chest. I feel much better now. ::breathes deeply::

Thanks for actually reading ::g::,
-Britt
Aspiringwriter6 at hotmail.com

AIM: AspiringWriter6

"Does not everything start with indifference?"

                                   -Victor Hugo ('Les Miserables')






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




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 05:24:36 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 05:24:36 -0000
Subject: Special Effects 101 (was Re: What Could Have...)
In-Reply-To: <9t6r8f+81dp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7gmk+bfog@eGroups.com>

I have only a very layman's understanding of special effects but I 
will do my best to clarify as Cindy requests.

A quick note that because Cindy asked about most of the "poor" 
effects, those are what I am addressing.  There are *several* well 
done effects in HP that deserve note, and like I said, they are 
mostly the more subtle ones.  A good effect is ultimately not a "wow" 
effect, but one that is seamless enough to continue suspension of 
disbelief and that supports the story.  This is true even in highly 
special effects-dependant films.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> ---Luke wrote:
> > The computer graphics were typical with all the typical problems
> > (and even a couple not so typical, like my continued inability to
> > understand what is so difficult about making a proportionately-
> > accurate CG Harry).  
> 
> Could anyone expound on this a bit?  Are we talking about
> the "rubber Harry doll" on the broom and the one on the troll's
> back?  Is it something else?  I'd like to understand a bit more
> about what the actual limits of special effects are, if anyone on
> the list knows.  In other words, did the filmmakers just cut
> corners, or is it just impossible to get this sort of thing to be
> convincing?

Yes, I am talking about the Harry that is being flung around on the 
troll's back.  Because I was not involved in the making of the movie, 
I do not know for certain, but I am 90% positive that this Harry was 
created with computer graphics imaging (heretofore CGI), not using a 
rubber doll.  Had it been the latter the technique used for filming 
would have been stop motion.

Why not use stop motion?

Four reasons.  One, since the troll is CGI, it is much easier to make 
Harry CGI too; rather than making one CGI and the other stop motion 
and then trying to digitally edit the two together.  Two, Harry is 
flung about in a matter that is physically impossible for a real 
human being (unless they had pure cartilage running through their 
body instead of bones) and therefore could not have been achieved by 
a stop motion action figure either, as they are similarly 
inflexible.  Three, stop motion animation is by necessity more jerky 
than regular filming and therefore does not work as well for really 
high-speed, flinging back and forth movements like this.  Four, stop 
motion is ultimately *extremely* time consuming, because you have to 
position the figure for each frame, snap that single frame, and 
continue similarly for the entire sequence.  If you mess up a single 
frame, you have to start the entire sequence over (unless you film it 
digitally, which I assume is a possibility now, yes?).

So why does the result they achieved with CGI look so awful?  
Computer animation can be done either manually or through motion 
capture.  Obviously motion capture was not a possibility here, 
because to be able to film a stunt Harry being flung around like this 
(without breaking his spine in the process) would eliminate the need 
for the special effect altogether.  :-)  So the animation has to be 
done manually.  Often when computer animation is done manually it has 
the opposite result of stop motion--it's too fluid rather than too 
jerky.  Darned if I know why, but that's generally the case.  So the 
animation itself often looks a little unrealistic: like it's not 
weighted properly or its defying the laws of physics.

All this is pretty much an inherent problem, so I don't really fault 
them for that.  The only thing they could have done was dedicate even 
more manhours to it in the hope that they could touch it up a bit.  
(I also think they should have avoided adding fake motion blur with 
CGI to create the illusion of things moving faster than they actually 
were, but some of this is simply a framerate issue.)

But what is, in my opinion, less excusable is that CGI Harry is 
disproportionately skinny.  This, ultimately, is just the fault of 
whoever made the digital wireframe.  CGI has a lot of limitations 
currently, but nowhere in that list is the inability to make things 
proportionately accurate.  That's just a drawing problem.

> Don't crucify me for saying this, but I really have to wonder if 
> these problems would have occurred with a director more experienced 
> with special effects.

Most likely, yes, they still would have, I think, but let's take the 
two cases you presented.

> Like James Cameron or (gasp!) Steven Spielberg.

Okay, I admit that if James Cameron were in charge, the special 
effects would have been better.  The movie would have been worse, 
most likely (though I do like Cameron's work--especially the 
original, much longer (and improved) version of The Abyss), but the 
effects would have been better.  But that's really a special case.  
Cameron is an uncharacteristically technical director.  He knows the 
technical end of the business down cold and often gets directly 
involved with the effects himself.  So he really knows what he wants 
*and* a high degree of how to get it, not just the former.  Most 
directors are simply not able to do this--nor do they really need to 
be able to, in my opinion.

With Spielburg, though, I expect the effects would have been about 
the same or only negligibly improved (and again I think the movie 
would have been worse).  With my fairly minimal understanding of how 
Spielburg works, I don't think he is as *directly* involved in 
special effects as Cameron is, so it would ultimately come down to 
who he hired out to handle the effects, and for all we know it might 
have been the same people that did the effects under Chris Columbus.  
Can't say that for certain, but it's a hunch, since for all we know 
the recommendation of those companies came not from the director, but 
from Producer David Heyman or someone else entirely.  The only other 
people he might have hired instead are Dreamworks and Industrial 
Light and Magic.  Those two studios are rather talented, though, so 
who knows?  Particularly Industrial Light and Magic might have helped 
because they are more inclined to go with tried-and-true techniques 
instead of immediately assuming that everything *must* be CGI.

> Perhaps the trick is to look at the concept drawings or prototypes
> and spot early on (based on experience) that something is amiss,
> and perhaps these more experienced directors would have caught
> these things.

Well, the only effects that I really felt were *conceived* wrong were 
the troll and the centaur.  All other special effects issues seemed 
to be matters of execution, not conception.  The problem with the 
conception of the troll was that, at least in my opinion, he should 
not have been so cartoony in his design, especially around the face.  
Admittedly the scene is supposed to be a bit comic, but it stretched 
the suspension of disbelief.  I'm coming to the centaur next, so I 
won't mention it here. 

> ---Luke again:
> > the centaur was atrocious.
> 
> I'd like to know what happened here.  What went wrong?  I couldn't 
> really put my finger on it.  It seemed that the proportions were
> off or something, maybe.  Like there was a man standing there with
> a horse body attached to his back, perhaps.  I was just wondering
> if anyone on the list knows what the "fix" for this is.

Well, in my opinion, it was again a conception issue because they 
made the *entire* centaur CGI.  If I were on the special 
effects "advisory board" :-), I would have recommeded that they film 
an actual human for the upper body and combine it with a CGI lower 
(horse) body.  It is simply not currently within the realm of CGI to 
make a very good human face for *numerous* reasons (limitations on 
numbers of polygons and anti-aliasing, textures, textures, and 
especially textures).  We're close, but not there yet.  So the look 
of the centaur's face reminded me of something from the claymation 
days of "Clash of the Titans".  No, no, it would have been much wiser 
to use a real human for the upper body.  This is in fact pretty easy 
to do (it's accomplished in the same way that they made "floating 
body parts" with the invisibilty cloak, I think), so I have *no idea* 
why they didn't.

> I wonder if the Quiddich scene would have been helped along if it
> had come at the end of the film.

I'd have to say no.  That takes too much focus away from the 
Sorcerer's Stone as the primary conflict.  Once you have passed the 
primary conflict, any other conflicts are, by necessity, anti-
climactic.  The reason the interhouse cup in all the HP books manage 
to avoid this issue is that they are more resolution than conflict: 
at the time of the awarding, there is nothing else that can be done.  
But to have a Quidditch match *after* the primary conflict is already 
solved would have people wondering: Eh?  Why isn't the movie in the 
resolution stage now?  Why is it still going?

-Luke




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 05:34:22 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 05:34:22 -0000
Subject: Confusing typos from yours truly (was Re: What Could Have...)
In-Reply-To: <9t7gmk+bfog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7h8u+1arl@eGroups.com>

In my last special effects post, I wrote:

"Harry is flung about in a matter that is physically impossible for a 
real human being."

That should of course say 'manner', not 'matter'.

***

I also said:

"The only other people he might have hired instead are Dreamworks and 
Industrial Light and Magic."

The 'he' that I was referring to is Steven Spielburg.  This is an 
editing issue from when I added in the part about David Heyman--so it 
looks like I'm referring to Heyman, but I'm not, I'm referring to 
Spielburg.

Apologies,
-Luke




From pkerr06 at attglobal.net  Sun Nov 18 06:03:53 2001
From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (pkerr06 at attglobal.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 06:03:53 -0000
Subject: Second Time Around...
In-Reply-To: <9t7bt1+b5b9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7j09+qoqj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ebony" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:
> ...and I *loved* it!  It was SO much better than my first
viewing... 
>
> 
> Everything I've wanted to say has already been said . . .

Exactly.  I adored it.  And it was even better the second time around.

Part of this was because I went with my family the first time, but 
went alone the second time, and so was able to concentrate on the 
screen with my entire attention, rather than my five year old in the 
seat next to me: "Cover your eyes here, sweetie--remember, I told
you, 
they get away from the troll, really they do.  What do you mean, you 
have to go to the bathroom again???"  (She may have really been too 
young for it; she was really frightened by the movie's ending, even 
though we've read the book to her.  We really limit her movies, and 
she watches no television at all, so this had a high impact on her; 
we'll be watching her closely for signs of nightmares in the next 
week.  I hope it wasn't a mistake to bring her.)

Yes, there were some things that I thought, "they coulda done it 
better."  The centaur.  The troll.  I'm in the camp that was totally 
happy with the Quidditch match, though. 

Some things were done beautifully--the Great Hall (I had forgotten 
that detail about the floating candles--lovely)  The invisibility 
cloak.  The mirror of Erised.  (Brought tears to my eyes the second 
time around.) The photo book that Hagrid gives Harry.

AND there were touches that were added that I really liked: like the 
pathos of Harry  drawing a picture of a birthday cake in the dirt 
floor and "blowing out his candles," and Dudley getting trapped
inside 
the reptile case by the glass reappearing.  And that Dudley tried to 
steal Harry's cake--makes Hagrid hitting him with the pig tail spell 
more motivated.

Loved the casting.  I knew, of course, that Rickman would do a great 
job with Snape.  I hope that Richard Harris and Maggie Smith don't
die 
before the series ends--I'd like to keep them.  Yeah, James looked a 
little gone to seed, but I could buy it.  Loved the twins, all the 
Weasleys, Oliver Wood, Lee Jordan, Neville, Draco.

And yes, I bought the trio, and loved them all the second time even 
more.  I think this movie has made me fall even more deeply in love 
with these books, which I didn't even think was possible.

When you come down to it, I have only one real regret (well, aside 
from the fact that my daughter may have been too young to see it; I'm 
a little worried about her.)  My regret is that I wasn't able to go 
and see it with you all, my dear friends that I've come to know over 
the past year: Amanda and Heidi and Ebony and Penny and Crazy John 
Ivan and Caius and Pippin and Steve V. and Mike Aberforth's goat, and 
Neil Ward and Simon and oh, all of you, sensible and funny and 
thoughtful and smart and kind and wonderful people.  What fun it
would 
have been if we could have all been there together cheering
Gryffindor 
winning the House Cup!

Love to you all, and three cheers for Gryffindor!

Peg




From pennylin at swbell.net  Sun Nov 18 06:10:15 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:10:15 -0600
Subject: My Review (Quite long)
Message-ID: <3BF750C7.8020401@swbell.net>

Hi --

Well, I've now seen the movie 3 times in something like 36 hours. 
Considering, I have a 6 mth old daughter, I'm quite pleased with this. 
I'm also quite indebted to my husband.  :--)

I don't even know where to start.

I have all the things other people have said swimming in my brain. 
Okay, well ... here goes.

DAN -- I think I have to start here.  I *LOVED* him!  I thought he was 
superb.  He conveys *so* much with his eyes, and I don't give a damn 
what color they are.  I know ... I know.  I was the one who, for the 
last year, has been insistent that he had to have green eyes & how hard 
could that be.  Well, we learned recently that the green contacts hurt 
his eyes.  My guess is that the green eyes done with computer touch-up 
didn't look very natural, and so they scrapped it.  Fine by me.  He has 
gorgeous, expressive eyes just as they are, thank you very much.

I was always very insistent on cosmetic things that seemed easy to me 
... green contacts (or computer touch-up) & dyed hair.  Now, my feeling 
is that he was perfect as he was, and I could care less about cosmetics. 
  As for the hair color ... his hair looked quite dark in some lighting, 
very med brown in sunlight.  Fine.  They did dye Felton's hair & the 
hair of the Weasley twins was dyed from their natural brown.   So ... if 
Dan's hair wasn't dyed, my guess would be that he or his parents vetoed 
the idea for whatever reason.

He was perfect.  Absolutely positively perfect.  I assume his accent is 
a very posh upscale London accent?

[ACCENTS -- I'd like to see if our British friends would like to 
identify the various accents for us.  Rupert's for example ... I can't 
place it.  Emma is from Oxford, yes?  Neville sounds Irish (and of 
course Seamus).  *loved* Biggerstaff's Scottish accent.]

I loved Rupert in the chess scene (see below), but I thought Dan 
actually had the shining moment in that scene with the "Don't move! 
We're still playing," followed by "Checkmate," which was just absolutely 
perfectly done.  :--)  Suffice to say, I loved Dan's performance.  He 
*is* Harry.  They made the perfect choice.

moving on ...

RUPERT - This kid was fantastic.  Very, very, very good.  I thought his 
comic delivery was very good in almost all cases.  Ahem.  I didn't think 
he *stole* the scenes though.  Maybe because I'm a huge Harry fan (and 
*not* a Ron fan).  But, he did a phenomenal job & was at his best in the 
chess scene without doubt.  I also liked "Good thing we didn't panic" 
(which seemed to me, given his delivery style, a more than adequate 
substitute for the much-missed "Are you a witch or not?" line).  He 
comes off much better in film than in stills or interviews.

EMMA -- Sorry, Barb, but I have to disagree strongly.  I liked her.  We 
have to remember that PS/SS Hermione is bossy & a know-it-all.  She's 
supposed to be grating.  She grates on the boys on the train in the book 
after all.  I thought her rendition in the train scene was very good for 
that reason.  She was considerably more exasperated in the movie than in 
the book as someone else pointed out.  And, she is, I concede, the 
weakest of the 3 main kids.  She overplays some bits ... definitely. 
But, part of it is the script.  Her line about going to bed before they 
come up with some other thing that may get them all killed or worse, 
expelled doesn't work in the context of where it was given [anyone else 
notice we went from clearly mid-day flying lessons to some other class 
where Harry & Ron are discussing Quidditch to Hermione dragging the boys 
off to see the Quidditch awards to Fluffy to "I'm going to bed ...."? 
Hello ... how did it get to be *bedtime* there?]

SHIPPY STUFF -- Just briefly (really!) ... my inner H/H shipper (to 
borrow Cassie's phrase) is quite pleased.  Quite, quite pleased.  Yes. 
Hug or no hug ...there was some nice interaction over Ron's inert body 
in the chess aftermath.  *grins at Cassie*

And, yes, I agree with Cassie.  Harry completely ignored Ginny at the 
train station.  Didn't even look at her or register her presence in any 
way.  As an aside, yes, Ginny looked about 7 or 8 to me.

OTHER PERFORMANCES -- Alan Rickman was superb!  (hi Amanda!).  I never 
doubted that he would be ... but he surpassed my wildest expectations. 
And, yes, I very much agree with Amanda's assessment of his emotions 
while muttering that counter-curse.

McGonagall was nothing short of perfect.  The friend I saw all 3 
showings with was a bit leery of Smith, not sure she'd bring the 
requisite warmth to the role.  I was confident she would, and she 
certainly delivered.

Harris ... not nearly as bad as I expected based on preliminary reports. 
  I think the problem was the script.  His best lines were cut or 
mangled in some way.  My husband is *still* muttering about how they 
could possibly do this movie & *NOT* include the "to the well-organized 
mind, death is but the next great adventure" line.  He sorely missed 
that line.  I think Harris did bring some warmth & heart to the role ... 
much more than I expected as I said.  He doesn't have the twinkle & the 
humor that we all love & like Luke said, even if the script called for 
it, I'm not sure he could deliver.  But, I didn't hate this as much as I 
was prepared to do.

Coltrane was very good.  Not much to say there ... pretty much what I 
expected.

John Hurt!!!!!!!!!  Wow.  *That* scene was very, very well-done.  I 
pictured Ollivander being a mite creepy.  Hurt made him so much better; 
he's still a mystery but he's not creepy & slightly sinister.  I loved 
this scene alot.

Sean Biggerstaff -- Oh man.  Not much to add here other than I agree 
with all assessments so far.  Um.............*more* Oliver Wood in CoS!

Tom Felton -- a very good Draco, although way too cute.  He is, I will 
note, a very, very good Draco to be part of Cassie's Draco fanfic 
series.  I turned to my husband after the credits started to roll last 
night & asked him what his favorite part of the movie was, and he, 
without hesitation, grinned & said: "Draco."  This from the man who 
uniformly tests out as a Slytherin in all those personality type tests & 
who looks disturbingly like an adult Draco.  Gah.

THE SCENES

I thought the first 1/3 or 1/2 of the movie was entirely too choppy.  It 
really doesn't hang together too well until the last parts IMO.  The 
editing was simply terrible.  My husband & I both think if they'd simply 
bit the bullet & made it a full 3 hours they might have been able to 
save some of those horrible segues.  They need to listen to the fans: 
the length is not a problem.  Just do what needs to be done so that we 
don't have more of the horrible jumps like from the Dursley's with 
swirling letters to raging storm on Hut on the Rock.

I think they did an adequate job of conveying the miserableness of 
Harry's life with the Dursleys without giving us too much Dursley.  My 
husband would have liked to see the Dursleys developed more.  I think we 
had enough Dursleys.  We were talking over dinner tonight about how 
perfect the Dursley house was.

Diagon Alley was splendid!  My husband declared that to be the best 
sequence & best set.  I liked it alot too.  I missed Madame Malkin's & I 
think the Draco scene would have worked better there.

The purist in me did hate that Harry went to Hogwarts on August 1st 
apparently.  :--)

Some of the best lines from the twins got cut.  I missed the whole scene 
at the train station.  On a cosmetic note, Percy *should* have had glasses.

Yes Barb -- I too noticed the very strange re-alignment of seats at the 
Welcome Feast.   Why would Harry move?  Especially in between Percy & 
Hermione?  Esp. since in canon Hermione is talking to Percy during that 
meal.  I do note, however, that they did seem to seat Harry next to 
Hermione & on that side of the table for all scenes in the Great Hall 
(anything H/H there?).  :--)

The flying lesson scene -- loved the Harry & Draco interaction.  They 
did a great job of showing visually what Harry tells us in the book: his 
exuberance at finding something he could do well naturally.

I disliked that we have the sense that Hermione is on good enough terms 
with the boys prior to the Wingardium Leviosa lesson; it weakens the 
Troll scene.

The rearrangement of things, on the whole, does not work particularly 
well or is downright confusing or horrible.

The Troll was okay.  I love the "sheer dumb luck" line by McGonagall. 
You will all be pleased that I will refrain from noting what my inner 
H/H shipper observed in this scene.

Quidditch was superb!  It was fast.  It was hard to keep up, and it was 
slightly blurry (probably intentionally, eh?).  I kept trying to focus 
my contacts to no avail.  I would have liked more Lee Jordan commentary. 
  I liked this alot overall.  The stands were not as I pictured in my 
head, but I like this image better.  :--)  I think Daniel did a simply 
wonderful job of conveying how much that victory meant to Harry.  That 
grin on his face at the end says it all.  I smiled at the "surfing" scene.

Mirror of Erised -- I like the book version better.  This was less 
emotional, which is strange.  Perhaps it was because James Potter was 
absolutely wrong.  Too old; didn't have the right look.  Lily didn't 
exactly look young either though.  The Dumbledore warmth was left out of 
the script so we didn't even get that.  Trina -- the "bloody hell" line 
actually didn't bother me at all -- seemed in character for Ron at that 
moment.  I don't think that is a particularly strong expletive in the UK 
though either.

Christmas morning -- I missed the twins & Percy & the snowball fight & 
the feast.  Sigh.

The invisibility cloak was just wonderful -- not quite what I pictured 
but better.  Really, really well done.

Forbidden Forest -- What's with the "Dark Forest?"  Why change that? 
This was a pretty weak sequence overall.  I liked the foursome though 
... yes, Heidi, Draco can join in.  :--)  I didn't like the centaur.  I 
think they could have scrapped the ghosts altogether & allocated that 
special effects money to making the centaur better.  The dialogue here 
was not as bad as others seem to find it.  It wasn't great ... but not 
horrible.

The transition from the exam discussion to Harry confronting Hagrid 
about Fluffy was atrocious.  Absolutely horrific.  We get no sense of 
what made Harry suddenly think about this.

The tasks -- Great!  All of them were just wonderful.  They really 
expanded Devil's snare nicely.  As I said, the "Good thing we didn't 
panic" line more than compensated for the omission of the "Are you a 
witch or not?" line.  Okay, here goes my inner H/H shipper again. 
Anyone else notice that Hermione says "Trust me," and Harry immediately 
falls through to safety whereas Ron gets even more entangled?  ::wicked 
laughter:::

The winged keys scene was improved.  The chess scene was nothing short 
of amazing.  Loved all of it!  I'm running out of steam if you can't 
tell .... you'll all be relieved (if anyone is still reading that is...)

The final confrontation scene was great too.  Interesting that they 
showed Quirrel disintegrating.  It was okay ... but an obvious Columbus 
touch IMO.

Hospital scene -- better from Harris than I was expecting.  Would have 
liked more but this was pretty good.

Pre-dinner scene between the Trio: heh, heh, heh.  That is *all* my 
inner H/H shipper will say on this score.  :::sweet smile:::

Leaving Feast -- My husband thought this was far less dramatic than in 
the book, and I have to agree.  They should have spent a bit more 
screen-time on this one.

My final thoughts for tonight: a big thumbs-up overall!  It's not the 
book ... it can't convey the richness of detail & complexity to the 
extent we might all like.  But, it's a very, very good movie overall.

Penny










From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Sun Nov 18 06:24:59 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 06:24:59 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Impressions
References: <9t6scd+t4l5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003201c16ff9$bfab50e0$53af1e3e@stephen>

Hi everyone (de lurks)

I wanted to say I loved the film - a few bits left out and of course not long enough, but a very faithful adaptation. We went with several mad HP fans, and a couple of people who hadn't read the books, and these two said it made sense and they enjoyed it.

Did anyone else hate the part where Ron swears? Maybe I'm out of touch with 11 year olds, but I just CAN'T see a fairly middle / upper class school (as per calling people by surnames, having Houses etc) having a brand new pupil who says 'bloody brilliant' directly to a teacher standing right in front of them. We were rude about the teachers behind their backs of course, but we'd never have sworn at them like that - what do you all think?

I too missed the 'are you a witch or not' scene - even if they had to cut the potions task and make Hermione the heroine of the Devil's Snare by figuring out the escape, they still could have had that line! I also missed the bit on the train where Gred & Forge meet Harry - but I loved their teasing of Molly on the platform, and I nearly cried when he got through to platform 9 3/4 and saw the Express!

I've also fallen in love with Wood - had no idea he was Scottish before hand, but IMG he is gorgeous!!

Why didn't they have more of a build up to 'Harry, you're a wizard'?

Why didn't Hagrid tell him about his parents before they got to the Leaky Cauldron - if they were tired of being in the hut with the D's, they could have had a shot on the train with him explaining things (Hagrid could have got stuck in the Underground then) instead of the pointless meal afterwards, with (though I wouldn't have like the advertising) I seem to recall was in fact a burger in the book.

Enough waffling though! 

Lucy, who can't wait to see it again and get the DVD, hopefully which will have the original 4 hour long directors cut!



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




From eliza_morwen_black at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 06:39:43 2001
From: eliza_morwen_black at hotmail.com (Eliza Morwen Black )
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 06:39:43 -0000
Subject: Movie Review (very long--you've been warned)
In-Reply-To: <9t43op+edci@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7l3f+7t7f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:

  <I'm afraid I have to gripe about Watson's scenery chewing.  Was 
 there no other child in all of Great Britain who could be found for 
 the role?  It was abundantly clear any time she had to string 
 together more than five words that she had no acting experience, and 
 that she probably will not have an acting career as an adult.  She 
 did fine in the troll scene (one of the best scenes in the movie, 
 IMO) while she was screaming and running about, but when she was 
 trying to convince McGonagall it was all her fault, all I could 
 think was, "Did they bother to do more than one take?  Is that the 
 best one they could get?">


  BAH!!!! *looks innocent* *attempts to hide flaming stick behind 
back* *fails terribly* *goes into flaming mode* SHE'S AN 11 YEAR OLD 
GIRL FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! YOU CAN'T EXPECT HER TO BE UP TO EVERYONES 
EXPECTATIONS! SHE'S KNEW AT THIS AND A BLOODY BRIILLIANT ACTRESS AT 
THAT! NEVER..INSULT..EMMA..IN..FRONT..OF..ME! *pig tail pushes out of 
Barb's pants* *looks around innocently* WHAT!? DON'T LOOK AT ME! 
*COUGH*  




From SHENmagic at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 07:03:54 2001
From: SHENmagic at aol.com (SHENmagic at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:03:54 EST
Subject: What's the "new " scene?
Message-ID: <dc.f13b510.2928b75a@aol.com>


In a message dated 11/17/01 4:34:01 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< Message: 22
   Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:55:27 -0000
   From: nlpnt at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: What did JKR add to the film? + overall, not long >>
<< > catch the little part that JKR had written especially for the film, 
> supposedly shedding a little light on Harry's past.  Did any of you 
> far-more-astute observers catch it? 
 >>
<< From: Indyfans at aol.com writes:>>We pretty much know that backwards and 
forwards.  I guess I was thinking 
JKR's new piece in the film would be something totally new that we had never 
read b4.   
The spot at the end where Voldy tells Harry he can be with his parents might 
be it, but that's really short!  Can anyone help with this puzzle?

It's probably the revelation that James was a seeker...

Aylihael, guessing, but that tidbit WAS new, and didn't appear in a book, 
IMSM (If Memory Serves Me,  and there is doubt on my memory's accurancy, as 
I'm guessing at the acronym)



From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 07:13:27 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat / Mike Gray)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 07:13:27 -0000
Subject: Second Time Around...
In-Reply-To: <9t7j09+qoqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7n2n+u0t0@eGroups.com>

Peg said,

> When you come down to it, I have only one real regret ....
> that I wasn't able to go 
> and see it with you all, my dear friends that I've come to know 
over 
> the past year: Amanda and Heidi and Ebony and Penny and Crazy John 
> Ivan and Caius and Pippin and Steve V. and Mike Aberforth's goat, 
and 
> Neil Ward and Simon and oh, all of you, sensible and funny and 
> thoughtful and smart and kind and wonderful people.  What fun it
> would 
> have been if we could have all been there together cheering
> Gryffindor 
> winning the House Cup!

You've got a point there. I just got back from seeing the movie in 
London with Cathrine, Neil, Dai, Al, Simon, Michelle and Nick. What 
an experience! <waves to all concerned> The movie would have been 
great anyway, but seeing it with a bunch crazy, sweet, sensible, 
obsessively LOONy and remarkably sane people you've never actually 
seen before is incredible.

And now ... back to work - it's Sunday!

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________
 
"Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, so that may not have 
been bravery...."
 




From heidit at netbox.com  Sun Nov 18 07:14:39 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:14:39 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C338D@MIAEXCH1>

I also think that given what we know about Flitwick and duelibg from CoS,
seeing something with the potential for violence from him is less
surprising. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Amanda Lewanski <editor at texas.net>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat Nov 17 22:34:53 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing

Real-To:  Amanda Lewanski <editor at texas.net>

I forgot one thing. Has nothing to do with Snape (no, Hell didn't just
freeze over, that happened yesterday when I got to go out with my
husband with NO KIDS, for the first time since we went to Les Mis on
October 19, 2000).

B
U
T

R
I
C
K
M
A
N

I
S

S
T
I
L
L

P
E
R
F
E
C
T

I really, really liked what they did with the flying keys. In the book,
it was the flying keys where things began to seem a bit silly to me--the
challenges started to feel as if they weren't intended to be barriers.
Those brooms sitting there waiting to help you catch the key? Get real.

Oooh, but the keys turning into a swarm of little pointy things that
come after you, once the broom is touched! Yes! Here is a dangerous
barrier indeed. I loved the way they stabbed into the door. Great job. I
like this much better.

Again, thoughts?

--Amanda



_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/ 




From nethilia at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 07:54:56 2001
From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Tasha--Nethilia)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:54:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Nethie's take on HP movie
In-Reply-To: <1006001421.322.64225.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011118075456.14701.qmail@web14610.mail.yahoo.com>

Well, I went to go see HP tonight after work--went to
a 10pm showing and just now got home. -_- Damn, I'm so
buying the DVD. Me and my friend Kim held on to each
other the whole time, making comments. 

First of all, lemme say that this movie rocked. I
can't wait to see it again with my sister and then
again with my boyfriend. I love that Diagon Alley had
all those angles and jarring walls--not straight up
and down. I think Baby Harry was damn cute ^_^. I love
the way Quirrel died--though that one scene has
convinced a friend of mine not to take her 6 year old
daughter to the movie. And I love that the first pic
that Harry sees in the album is him, with his mother
and father. ^___^ 

Overall, this movie rocked. Sure, some things were
off, but you have to sacrifice plot for visibility.
Much like in my game. They cut my fave line, (ARE YOU
A WITCH?) but that's okay with me. 

--Neth, who will elaborate later when she's not as
sleepy. 


=====
--Nethilia de Lobo--
79% obsessed with Harry Potter
Wand: Dragon Heartstring, Ash, 7 inches
**Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.**

http://www.geocities.com/spenecial
Spenecial.com. Two girls. One Website. Total Chaos.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From nethilia at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 07:58:25 2001
From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Tasha--Nethilia)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Nethie
In-Reply-To: <1006001421.322.64225.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011118075825.1090.qmail@web14607.mail.yahoo.com>


--- HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote:
>
_________________________________________________________________
>   
> 
> Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you
> MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/
> 
> Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 
> 
> Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
> hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.
> 
> Unsubscribing? Email
> hpfgu-movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> There are 18 messages in this issue.
> 
> Topics in this digest:
> 
>       1. Am I imagining things?
>            From: "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon"
> <joym999 at aol.com>
>       2. Re: midnight showing
>            From: "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon"
> <joym999 at aol.com>
>       3. Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
>            From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com
>       4. Stuff I couldn't help noticing...
>            From: nlpnt at yahoo.com
>       5. question about the dorms and # of students
>            From: Tara <taradiane at yahoo.com>
>       6. Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
>            From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com
>       7. Wow...
>            From: "Karen " <karen_r_b at hotmail.com>
>       8. Re: Wow...
>            From: "Karen " <karen_r_b at hotmail.com>
>       9. Saw it... very mixed feelings...
>            From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
>      10. SPOILER apologies and chat
>            From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
>      11. Another random (OT) correction
>            From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
>      12. Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
>            From: frantyck at yahoo.com
>      13. Movie Review (long, my apologies)
>            From: kris403 at yahoo.com
>      14. offlist from HP-Movie
>            From: frantyck at yahoo.com
>      15. Re: offlist from HP-Movie OOPS!
>            From: frantyck at yahoo.com
>      16. ADMIN: Spoiler space no longer required
>            From: "Neil Ward" <neilward at dircon.co.uk>
>      17. hero of the hour...Rupert Grint
>            From: bethyellen at hotmail.com
>      18. Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
>            From: "Jim Ferer" <jferer at yahoo.com>
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 1
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:55:11 -0000
>    From: "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at aol.com>
> Subject: Am I imagining things?
> 
> I saw the movie twice today.  The second time around
> I noticed a lot 
> of detail that I hadn't noticed the first time, of
> course, and I saw 
> something really strange that could just be my
> imagination.  In the 
> hospital scene towards the end of the movie there
> are a few closeups 
> of Dumbledore as he's talking to Harry, and it looks
> to me like 
> Dumbledore has a very faint scar on his forehead
> that looks like a 
> lightening bolt.  Of course, Richard Harris is an
> old man with lots 
> of wrinkles so maybe a few of his wrinkles just
> happened to be shaped 
> like a lightning bolt, but the fact that it is the
> same size, shape 
> and location as Harry's scar is interesting.  Of
> course, I could 
> easily be imagining things, but if I'm not it opens
> up all sorts of 
> interesting plot possibilities.
> 
> Joywitch
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 2
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:59:22 -0000
>    From: "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at aol.com>
> Subject: Re: midnight showing
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> > Well, my wife and I went out and saw the movie at
> midnight last 
> > night. I'm taking my kids tonight. It was
> absolutely 
> > fantastic...can't wait to see it again. I noticed
> SO many 
> incredible 
> > magical details--the Leaky Cauldron sign, what
> some of the pictures 
> > were doing in the background, the way the door to
> vault 713 opened, 
> > etc--and I know I missed at least as many more. I
> didn't catch the 
> > date on the Quidditch trophy or any other names.
> 
> McGonagall is on one trophy.  James Potter is on
> another and I'm 
> pretty sure the date is 1972.  I noticed also that
> James Potter's 
> trophy says he was a Seeker, which directly
> contradicts JKR's 
> statement that he was either a Keeper or a Chaser, I
> forget which.
> 
> --Joywitch
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 3
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 05:17:35 -0000
>    From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> > 
> > # It's VoldemorT, not Voldemore.
> 
> Let's be clear. It's VoldemorT in the movie. On the
> other hand, JKR 
> herself pronounced it Voldemore in an radio
> interview, she advised 
> Jim Dale in his pronunciations and he said
> Voldemore, and the 
> Scholastic website says Voldemore. The movie version
> is not 
> definitive. In a sense, it's like the scar.
> Different people 
> interpret it differently.
> 
> > 
> > # It was RJH King on the Quidditch award in the
> trophy case, not 
> RJL.
> 
> The McGonagall reference was dated 1971, by the way.
> It seems 
> relatively unlikely that this was our dear
> Professor, who was 
> already on staff at Hogwarts when James was a
> student in the early 
> 70s (reference the conversation in the Three
> Broomsticks in PA).
> 
> > 
> > # The house numbers on the tables in the Great
> Hall seem closer to 
> > Rowling's one thousand than to a logically-derived
> 300 or 
> > thereabouts. Better this way.
> 
> I've done a fairly good estimate of the number of
> kids in the Great 
> Hall scene and it comes out to about 400. That
> tallies with comments 
> from Columbus about the production. There are a
> total of 18 teachers 
> besides Dumbledore (you can count them as the camera
> pans around 
> Daniel in the Sorting Hat scene.) Presumably
> Trelawney does not 
> attend, which brings the total number of teachers,
> including 
> Dumbledore, to 20.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 4
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 05:40:48 -0000
>    From: nlpnt at yahoo.com
> Subject: Stuff I couldn't help noticing...
> 
> 
>  -Is Dudley going through a preppy phase? The
> clothes Harry wears at 
> fist look somewhat more like what's in style for
> middle schoolers 
> than what Duddy wears to the zoo.
> 
>  -Privet Drive must be home to an extremely
> persuasive Vauxhall 
> salesman. Everyone has the exact same GM-ish looking
> sedan when Baby 
> Harry's dropped off. Ten years later, everyone has
> *new* matching 
> wagons- Vauxhall Vectras, I think- in both cases the
> only variation 
> is color!
> 
>  -Baby Harry that gets dropped off is much younger
> looking than Baby 
> Harry in the flashback and the photo.
> 
>  -Names gave a few problems. Harry calling Malfoy
> "Draco" in the 
> Forbidden Forest was one thing, but later *that same
> night* Hermione 
> says "Voldemort" instead of "You-Know-Who". NOBODY
> but Harry and 
> Dumble are supposed to do that in Book I!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 5
>    Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:54:39 -0800 (PST)
>    From: Tara <taradiane at yahoo.com>
> Subject: question about the dorms and # of students
> 
> 
> --- hp_lexicon at yahoo.com wrote:
> > I've done a fairly good estimate of the number
> > of kids in the Great 
> > Hall scene and it comes out to about 400. 
> 
> Speaking of student numbers, I have a question. 
> We know that in the first year's dorm for
> Gryffindor there are 5 four-poster beds.  So can
> we assume there is only 1 first years dorm?  The
> reason I ask is that it seems like an awfully
> small number.  Can we assume that it is a similar
> number for the second thru seventh years?  That
> only makes it 35 students total in Gryffindor,
> give or take a few.  Now, if there are supposed
> to be about 400 total, and there's only 4 houses,
> why is there a paltry 5 kids in the first years
> dorm for Gryffindor?  Is Gryffindor a hard house
> to get into?  I always figured there was a fairly
> even amount in each house, but if we take the
> number of first years in harry's dorm and average
> it out among all 4 houses and all 7 years, that's
> not even 200 students.  So what gives?  Is my
> math off??
> 
> 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!?
> Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
> http://personals.yahoo.com
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 6
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 06:15:17 -0000
>    From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:
> > s
> > p
> > o
> > i
> > l
> > e
> > r
> > 
> > s
> > p
> > a
> > c
> > e
> > 
> > s
> > p
> > o
> > i
> > l
> > e
> > r
> > 
> > s
> > p
> > a
> > c
> > e
> > 
> 
> > # What's with the incongruous medieval wimple on
> the nurse (Madam 
> > Pomfrey?) in the hospital scene? A bit jarring.
> 
> Actually, that wasn't M.Pomfrey, it was just a
> another moving 
> painting, no?
> 
> -Cornflower O'Shea, who is deeply disappointed she
> didn't get to 
> hear Dumbledore say...
>
~~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
> "NITWIT! BLUBBER! ODDMENT! TWEAK!" - Albus
> Dumbledore
>
~~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
> >
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 7
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:11:51 -0000
>    From: "Karen " <karen_r_b at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Wow...
> 
> All I can say, is wow. Such an amazing movie.
> Visually stunning - 
> Quidditch and Diagon Alley were sooo well done.
> Everyone cheered at 
> the end of the Quidditch match. The actors were
> spectacular - 
> especially Emma Watson, Robbie Coltrain and Rick
> Harris (think I got 
> that right - Hermione, Hagrid and Snape). They had
> their characters 
> spot on. Emma was the perfect little know-it-all at
> the beginning, 
> and Snape is the guy you love to hate. I personally
> plan on seeing it 
> over and over and over again - and not only for Sean
> Biggerstaff 
> either (I have a new Oliver Wood fetish, but who can
> blame me?)
> 
> To repeat myself - Wow. To all those who are
> doubting the ability of 
> the movie to live up to the standards that the book
> set, go see it. 
> You'll be pleasantly surprised. A few bits are left
> out, or smooshed 
> together, but at 2.5 hours, it couldn't have gotten
> any longer, could 
> it?
> 
> Go see it! I'm still in shock :-)
> Karen
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 8
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:17:57 -0000
>    From: "Karen " <karen_r_b at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Wow...
> 
> Ok, so I know that I got some of the actor's names
> wrong, but in my 
> excitement, I just typed without thinking. You can
> forgive me, can't 
> you? Thought so!
> 
> Karen
> *waiting until she gets to see it again*
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 9
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:26:55 -0000
>    From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Saw it... very mixed feelings...
> 
> I am sure that we'll be nitpicking and dissecting at
> least from now 
> until Christmas.  :-D
> 
> It's very late-- 2 a.m.--and three and a half hours
> ago I came out of 
> the theater after seeing the movie for the first
> time.  
> 
> And honestly, I am not sure *what* to think.  I have
> extremely mixed 
> feelings, so I am not going to write a
> scene-by-scene and point-by-
> point review until after I see it once more tomorrow
> (I had Friday 
> and Saturday tix).
> 
> Lots of general thoughts, but the overarching one
> was that the pacing 
> was way off.  It dragged.  It was disjointed.  The
> couple next to me 
> left.  The movie was so long that my youngest
> sister, who usually 
> likes movies like this, fell asleep. 
> 
> I had to spend a great deal of time post-movie
> explaning to the other 
> sister all the connections that were left out...
> "why did that girl 
> (Hermione) go hide in the bathroom?"  "Is there
> anything Harry can't 
> do?  Is anything hard for him?  Does he ever fail,
> or is he just 
> lucky?"  "What was all that stuff they were
> muttering in the spells?  
> What do all the spells do?"  "What was up with that
> Snape guy?  I 
> didn't get him."  "What was up with that boy who
> kept blowing things 
> up?  No, not Neville... yeah, Seamus!  That's the
> one!  What's up 
> with him!"  All in all, she loved the movie and says
> she wants to get 
> the DVD ASAP... and she thought I was being way too
> nitpicky.  *shrug*
> 
> Lots more thoughts, as I've said... but I must say
> that the kids 
> didn't bother me all that much.  I definitely don't
> agree with Barb's 
> Hermione issues.  At all.  I think that Emma Watson,
> while perhaps 
> not the absolute best casting pick for the
> character, was one of the 
> very *least* of this movie's concerns.  And dear
> ones, I am very 
> concerned.
> 
> You see, I think that a really good book-movie ought
> to inspire a 
> person to actually go out and read the book.  Case
> in point:  I found 
> my favorite writer at age 2, Lucy Maud Montgomery,
> through the first 
> two Anne of Green Gables miniseries.  But after
> tonight, I am glad 
> that I am already a Harry Potter fan.  I attended
> the movie with 
> another rabid fan and four people who'd never read
> the books.  The 
> other rabid fan loved it.  I've described my
> sisters' reactions.  The 
> other two had similar thoughts afterwards:  cool
> movie, perhaps a bit 
> too long, will get the DVD... but still have no real
> interest in 
> reading the books and don't understand where all the
> passion and 
> rabid fandom comes from.
> 
> Oh, well.  There's always CoS.  ;-)
> 
> Disclaimer:  This is my reaction right now.  Perhaps
> tomorrow's 
> viewing will make me reverse my opinion completely. 
> I sincerely hope 
> so.
> 
> --Eb (who, for the record, did enjoy Quidditch!)
> 
> <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
> <>< <><
> Ebony AKA AngieJ
> ebonyink at hotmail.com
> Come join us in Paradise!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Paradise
> Fanfics of All Shapes, Ships, and Sizes:
> http://www.fictionalley.org
> **********************************
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 10
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:30:12 -0000
>    From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
> Subject: SPOILER apologies and chat
> 
> Sorry for the last message... I had no spoiler space
> there.  I hope I 
> didn't ruin things for anyone.  Guess that's what
> happens when you go 
> online instead of going to bed at 2 a.m.
> 
> To bring this back to the topic, is anyone
> interested in a special 
> movie chat on Saturday?  I am not sure I can wait
> until Sunday to 
> discuss this!
> 
> --Eb
> 
> <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
> <>< <><
> Ebony AKA AngieJ
> ebonyink at hotmail.com
> Come join us in Paradise!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Paradise
> Fanfics of All Shapes, Ships, and Sizes:
> http://www.fictionalley.org
> **********************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 11
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:43:29 -0000
>    From: "Ebony" <ebonyink at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Another random (OT) correction
> 
> "Case in point:  I found my favorite writer at age
> 2, Lucy Maud 
> Montgomery, through the first two Anne of Green
> Gables miniseries."  
> 
> That should be 12, not 2.  I'm good but not *that*
> good.
> 
> Sheesh.  I *really* should have gone to sleep before
> posting, 
> shouldn't I have?  Perhaps all the extreme
> nitpicking (which is 
> really OOC for me) is due to sleep deprivation.  
> 
> So tomorrow if you get a glowing five-star review of
> the movie from 
> me, don't think I'm wishy-washy, okay?  :-D
> 
> --Eb
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 12
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:56:17 -0000
>    From: frantyck at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
> 
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> 
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
> 
> 
> 
> A bunch of responses to responses.
> 
> Genevieve said:
> "I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily
> expressive all the time, 
> but I think that is more the character than the
> actor."
> 
> Yes and no, I'd say. My experience of and reaction
> to the film is 
> subjective, but I didn't really get the sense of
> Daniel being in 
> control of his role. One knows when
> emotions/reactions are being 
> shown honestly, because the actor must imagine
> himself or herself 
> into a state something like that which he/she is
> trying to portray. 
> It rings true when you, as part of the audience,
> recognise emotion, 
> at some level apart from your cerebral cortex.
> Daniel-Harry is faced 
> with some immensely moving and difficult moments,
> but really, apart 
> from rearranging his face, Daniel doesn't convey
> even suppressed 
> emotion very well. Convincing representation goes
> beyond facial 
> expression to the rest of the body -- and then much
> deeper than 
> that. An effective actor seeks to evoke or remind
> the individual 
> members of the audience of some powerful emotion,
> whose eddies the 
> involved audience will feel.
> 
> Daniel is a kid, I know. He has the most challenging
> part in the 
> movie: how to show turbulent feelings that even he
> does not quite 
> understand without excessive dramatics. Rupert Grint
> and the adult, 
> more accomplished, actors in the cast have a
> relatively 
> straightforward task. Precisely because Harry has to
> show so much 
> while doing so little, I'm a little disappointed.
> The movie thus 
> focuses on the plot rather than the much tougher and
> more important 
> thread (in the long term) of Harry's conflicting
> emotions and 
> personal growth... high thrill and great sadness.
> 
> Take for instance his reactions to pain in his scar.
> Surely you 
> wouldn't look at him and know that Dan-Harry is
> experiencing 
> physical pain beyond any he has experienced so far.
> And pain is not 
> the hardest of sensations to depict.
> 
> There are some effective moments, though, such as
> the chess task, 
> when he realises Ron must sacrifice himself, and
> when he crashes to 
> the ground. When Harry leaves the hospital wing and
> sees his two 
> best friends on the staircase, that's moving too. At
> the end of the 
> movie, the departure from the station is not bad,
> but Dan-Harry's 
> reaction to the photo album... where's the hunger?
> 
> 
> VoldemorT or Voldemore, Steve sticks with Voldemore:
> 
> I wasn't making a Final Case for the T version. Just
> pointing out in 
> some perplexity that the movie chose the apparently
> non-Rowling 
> pronunciation. I was very surprised. I do prefer the
> T, being an 
> Italian speaker myself, but.
> 
> Steve cited the Scholastic pronunciations as
> part-proof of the non-T 
> Voldemort. Personally, and not entirely relevantly,
> I think the 
> Scholastic rendering of some words is pretty awful.
> 'Accio' is 
> pronounced AH-see-oh?? Not in Latin it isn't.
> Ah-VA-da ke-DA-vra? 
> Does that possess any punch at all? Sounds like
> 'Wingardium 
> leviosa.' The Beauxbatons pronunciation would make
> any rudimentary 
> French-speaker's nerves stick out two inches and
> curl at the ends. 
> It is for an American readership. Surely it isn't
> the last word, no 
> more than Warner Bros' use of VoldemorT should be.
> 
> 
> Cornflower O'Shea on the medieval wimple. It wasn't
> in the painting, 
> actually (thought that painting was a very clever
> touch). A woman 
> does walk across the background briefly, wearing the
> wimple.
> 
> 
> Luke, who wields Caliburn against my use of
> episodicity:
> "Though several people have mused on this, I think I
> find the 
> prospects somewhat doubtful.  Why?  Because unlike
> what you said, 
> the books *aren't* truly episodic.  A truly episodic
> work is one in 
> which every event stands to more or less on its
> own--meaning it has 
> its very own conflict and resolution that is
> completely seperate 
> from any larger plot.  You could do just one scene
> and have it make 
> a *rounded* story by itself.  In episodic works, the
> overall 
> continuity is not one of plot, but of theme.  Beyond
> theme, the tie 
> between the individual episodes is so loose its
> virtually non-
> existant."
> 
> This is a bit literal... I used the wrong word
> there. I did not 
> *literally* mean that wholly self-contained episodes
> should be 
> carved out of the HP books. What I mean is that to
> fill the need for 
> a thorough and unhurried exposition of the books in
> film, one could 
> make use of a series rather than an
> unsatisfactory-in-some-ways two-
> and-a-half hour film. One *can* split the books
> along chapter lines, 
> because it seems to me that each chapter is built
> about one event or 
> important stage in the story. Like _I, Claudius_,
> only better.
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 13
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:13:37 -0000
>    From: kris403 at yahoo.com
> Subject: Movie Review (long, my apologies)
> 
> It's two in the morning, and I'm to giddy to
> sleep...  For the 
> record, I saw it twice in one day, and I loved it
> even more the 
> second time around.  Of course it's not the book,
> but it helps 
> clarify some of the images that were not crisp
> before.
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  Absolutely loved quidditch!  Wow!  Fast paced
> and I finally got 
> a good feel for what it was supposed to look like. 
> I always had a 
> hard time imagining it for some reason with the
> books.
> 
> 2.  Alan Rickman and the other adult characters :)
> were fabulous.  I 
> was a little disappionted with Dumbledore, not
> because of the 
> acting, but that they cut out all the really great
> lines that show 
> his sense of humor.  I guess they cut those lines
> for time, but it 
> made Dumbledore seem OOC in the end. 
> 
> 3.  Rupert stole the show.  In one night I became an
> R/H fan because 
> I absolutely loved the way he portrayed Ron.  He
> also had the best 
> lines in the movie.  The chess scene was amazing and
> the fear in his 
> eyes was perfect.  
> 
> 4.  Emma, I thought was adorable.  Yes, she could be
> annoying at 
> times, but remember, that is supposed to be her
> character.  I didn't 
> like her bathroom troll scene line though.  That one
> could have been 
> more believable.  
> 
> 5.  Dan was excellent.  At first I didn't think so,
> but my friend 
> and I talked about it and he played his part very
> well.  We've read 
> through Book 4, and most of us are wrapped up in
> fanfiction.  Book 
> 4, and most of FF tend to portray Harry as the hero
> (which he is), 
> but he's starting to come into his own.  He feels
> more secure in the 
> wizarding world and what he is supposed to do.  We
> need to remember 
> that PS Harry is a scared little boy who is in a
> complete new 
> world.  I think he did that very well.
> 
> 6.  Tom Felton was outstanding as Draco.  He was the
> perfect spoiled 
> brat and had great facial expressions to go with it.
> 
> Plusses:
> 1.  Quidditch (but I already said that)
> 
> 2.  Interesting insights to what MIGHT be going on
> in JKR's head.  I 
> never believed the theory that Petunia was a squib
> until I saw the 
> movie.  The way her lines where worded and delivered
> makes me a firm 
> believer now.  Susan Bones was one of the few chosen
> to be sorted on 
> screen.  I wonder if this will be important (as chat
> has seemed to 
> imply that she will be important later on).  I also
> noticed how much 
> Voldemort emphasized the fact he wanted Harry to
> JOIN him, and that 
> together they could bring back his parents (or
> something to that 
> effect).   I'm curious on if this provides some
> insights to what may 
> come in the future.
> 
> 3.  Set design, costumes, etc.  It just helps me to
> picture it more 
> in my head.  I absolutely loved checking out all the
> details the 
> second time around.  The pictures in the background
> (yes, I noticed 
> the painting in the hospital wing... and what was up
> with Madam 
> Pomfrey?), the signs in Diagon Alley, all of those
> things made it 
> very fun.
> 
> 4.  The chess match and the troll were wonderfully
> done IMO.  
> 
> Negatives:
> 1.  The ending.  Dumbledore didn't seem to clearly
> explain what had 
> happened.  He never explained Snape, and it just
> didn't clarify the 
> plot.  
> 
> 2.  I didn't mind them having to give the characters
> different 
> lines, but I, too, was bothered when they cut
> wonderful quotes to 
> insert ones that were very weak.  While I loved
> Hermione's 
> response, "That thing has a name!"  Draco Malfoy
> really needed to 
> make the comment about the Weasley's not having
> money and more 
> children than they could afford.  
> 
> Along with that.  Did anyone else catch the quotes
> from the book 
> that no longer sounded right?  For example:  When
> Hagrid goes to the 
> hut on the rock and Vernon yells, "I've told you,
> he's not going!"  
> It was great in the book because there was a whole
> dialog before, 
> but in the movie, when did Vernon tell him the first
> time?  I 
> noticed it again at the end when the Centar told
> Harry, "This is 
> where I leave you"  (I know I probably misquoted
> that), but the 
> point is in the movie, they never went anywhere. 
> That line wasn't a 
> big deal but it could have been changed a little to
> make it flow a 
> little better.  Little lines like that made the
> movie seem jarring 
> at times.
> 
> 3.  I wasn't particularly fond of the centar.  
> 
> 4.  I don't think that the trio's friendship (or
> lack of with 
> Hermione) was clearly defined.  It all seemed to run
> together.  The 
> same went for Neville's relationship with them and
> how everyone 
> treated them when they lost all those house points. 
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm.. I'll stop complaining now.  I will say, while
> I picked it 
> apart, I absolutely loved it, and I'm sure I will go
> see it a few 
> more times.  I wasn't disappionted in the least.  I
> just wish they 
> had more time they could devote to the film.
> 
> Kris
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 14
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:14:30 -0000
>    From: frantyck at yahoo.com
> Subject: offlist from HP-Movie
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dracos_boyfriend at y...
> wrote:
> > By the way.  This may never get off the ground,
> but I would like 
> to 
> > have a go at re-writing a 'perfect' screenplay
> based on some of 
> the 
> > comments here, and would like to gauge the group's
> interest in 
> such 
> > an idea.
> > 
> > Al
> 
> 
> 
> This is a good idea, Al. If you get this going, let
> me know. I've 
> got major papers due over the next month and a half,
> but after that 
> I have a month to devote to literary recreation! (I
> hope!)
> 
> Rrishi
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 15
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:16:14 -0000
>    From: frantyck at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: offlist from HP-Movie OOPS!
> 
> Sorry, sorry, sorry. The previous message was due to
> a silly 
> premature click on the 'send' button.
> 
> Argh.
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 16
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:42:48 -0000
>    From: "Neil Ward" <neilward at dircon.co.uk>
> Subject: ADMIN: Spoiler space no longer required
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Just flew in to confirm that spoiler space is no
> longer required on this
> list.   HURRAH!  You can throw your hats in the air
> if you like, but don't
> blame me if you can't tell which one's yours when
> they land.
> 
> Magically yours,
> 
> Flying Ford Anglia...
> 
> ... who saw the film twice yesterday, having already
> seen it in previews
> last Saturday, and slept through most of the third
> session.  Aren't cinema
> seats so extremely comfy these days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 17
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 09:57:39 -0000
>    From: bethyellen at hotmail.com
> Subject: hero of the hour...Rupert Grint
> 
> The cast were all excellent, but Rupert was just
> fantastic as Ron. I 
> thought he really brought out his sarcastic wit!
> From the momment he 
> started eating everything on the train, to when he
> was playing the 
> chess game, I just thought he was outstanding, At
> first, I wasn't too 
> sure about him, he wasn't how I had pictured Ron,
> but now I'm a big 
> fan!!!I know the 3 heroes are only signed up for the
> first 2 movies. 
> but I hope their contracts are exteneded to the
> rest!
> 
> Beth
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 18
>    Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:24:24 -0000
>    From: "Jim Ferer" <jferer at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big
> and small
> 
> Jenny:"I agree that some of the humor that we love
> so in the 
> books was lacking in the film - "Are you a witch or
> what?" is one of 
> the best lines, and Dumbledore's sock comment is
> noticeably missing.  
> Neville's plight could have expanded on a bit more,
> as his 10 point 
> award is such a treat in the book because we know
> how hard everything 
> is for him."
> 
> Even at 153 minutes, there wasn't time to develop a
> lot of things. I
> was diappointed how fast things whizzed by - Diagon
> Alley, the twins,
> Neville, classes - and I don't blame Chris Columbus
> or anybody else.
> It was bold enough to make the movie as long as it
> was. We can't ask
> for more. It just shows the limitations of the movie
> medium when
> adapting a book so rich in detail. 
> 
> Except for the Trio and perhaps Dumbledore,
> everybody else in the
> movie was a bit player.
> 
> Like you, I was hoping for the "Are you a witch or
> not!?" line from Ron.
> 
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


=====
--Nethilia de Lobo--
79% obsessed with Harry Potter
Wand: Dragon Heartstring, Ash, 7 inches
**Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.**

http://www.geocities.com/spenecial
Spenecial.com. Two girls. One Website. Total Chaos.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From nethilia at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 08:00:30 2001
From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Tasha--Nethilia)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:00:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Nethie's Take, Part Deux
In-Reply-To: <1006001421.322.64225.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011118080030.14953.qmail@web14610.mail.yahoo.com>

OH! God, I loved Quidditch! Simply brilliant! Me and
Kim leaned forward and perched on our seats the whole
time, and cheered. And we are not sports fans, let me
tell you. 

We also loved Hagrid's saying, "I shouldn't have told
you that. Nope, I shouldn't have told you that." 

--Neth

=====
--Nethilia de Lobo--
79% obsessed with Harry Potter
Wand: Dragon Heartstring, Ash, 7 inches
**Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.**

http://www.geocities.com/spenecial
Spenecial.com. Two girls. One Website. Total Chaos.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 08:05:12 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 08:05:12 -0000
Subject: 1st  Impressions 
Message-ID: <9t7q3o+qg2n@eGroups.com>

I actually got to see it last night instead of having to wait until 
Monday, Yay!!!


So overall I liked it. The Quidditch scene was wonderful and just 
about how I pictured the game in my head. I didn't miss any cut or 
truncated scenes from the book too much. I thought it was pretty 
faithful to the book as well. 

I thought everyone did a wonderful job and I just adore Robbie 
Coltrane as Hagrid. I wasn't sure I was going to like Richard Harris 
just from what I had seen in the clips but in the whole context of 
the film I though he made a great Dumbledore. I do hope they keep the 
whole cast together for all the films, at least the kids anyway, they 
can only get better from here.

A few minor things I noticed it did drag a little bit in some spots, 
especially around the Mirror of Erised sequence. But then so did the 
book IMHO. I also didn't like the casting of James Potter. He is 
supposed to be in his early 20's not 30 something. The editing was a 
bit disjointed in places, but I'm not 100% sure this wasn't the 
particular print I saw that had the issue. (While waiting in line to 
be seated the manager was talking about having projector problems.)

I'll be seeing it again on Tuesday afternoon (when it's quieter and 
less zooish at the theater) so maybe after my second viewing I'll 
have a different viewpoint of things. 

Cheers,
Kristin
::who was sad they didn't show the SW trailer in this screening but 
loved the Monsters,Inc. trailer::





From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 08:48:11 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 08:48:11 -0000
Subject: Perhaps I need to clarify...
In-Reply-To: <9t6h8d+s2uf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t7skb+pl52@eGroups.com>

> Alan Rickman is marvelous as Snape, oozing his way around every 
> sarcasm-oiled line.  He was unfairly robbed of screentime in the 
lack 
> of balance that the rather rambly editing issues caused.  Also, his 
> Snape actually oozes a bit more than canon Snape apparently does, 
but 
> it works wonderfully and that's the biggest test, now isn't it?  On 
> an unrelated note, I am puzzled by the change from "stopper death" 
> to "put a stopper in death".  The former sounds like poison or 
> somesuch (as it should); the latter sounds too much like it might 
> mean some kind of immortality, which, as we all know, is *not* what 
> that line refers to.
> 

Actually, I see that the exact opposite way. A stopper is a noun, to 
stopper is a verb of that noun (to put a stopper in something), 
so 'to stopper death' is to put a little rubber cap in a bottle that 
holds death. And put a stopper in death seems basically the same 
thing. It might just sound too much like "to stop death" instead 
of "to stopper death" when said out loud as opposed to being read, so 
they changed it. Also, remember his lines: "brew fame, bottle glory, 
put a stopper in death" - they're all about the physical bottling of 
a potion, just in different ways of saying it. 

m.




From jonathandupont at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 12:11:57 2001
From: jonathandupont at hotmail.com (jonathandupont at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 12:11:57 -0000
Subject: Heidi's terror & Susan Bones; Emma Watson; 2nd viewing; Rewriting
In-Reply-To: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C338C@MIAEXCH1>
Message-ID: <9t88id+itkl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tandy, Heidi" <heidit at n...> wrote:
> One terrifying thought did cross my mind- what if they did the 
sorting in
> birth date order? It would give credence to that misery-inducing 
1979
> argument for Hermione's birthday as she was sorted first. But there 
can't be
> that many students younger than Harry. So maybe not. 

Yeah - I suggested this earlier, although I think it is rather 
grasping at straws. But you've completely lost me - WHY is it "misery-
inducing" that Hermione was born in 1979? And here was me thinking 
that it was just a technicality.

While I'm on sorting, I'll repeat a thing I said earlier. I actually 
think Susan Bone's appearance is a sign she isn't important ... as is 
her casting as Columbus's daughter. I'm fairly sure she was a 
character to show other houses than G&S exist (not that canon gives 
that impression), but who they didn't need to bother casting 
carefully. For example, Justin they would have had to book for two 
books etc.

RE: Barb's initial hate of Emma Watson's acting - I saw it for the 
second time yesterday, and despite watching it carefully, I saw no 
problems with her. Then again I had no problems with the centaur 
scene. I actually thought she was marginally better than Dan.

This is definitely a subjective thing - the reviewer at 
http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/316273p1.html actually thinks that 
Emma Watson, well, I'll quote him:-

"I haven't said nearly enough about Emma Watson. From Hermione 
Granger's perfect introduction to her final scene, Watson is better 
than I could've possibly imagined.  She steals the show."

To be honest at my second viewing I thought that the movie dragged a 
tiny bit - maybe it was just the people beside who wouldn't stop 
talking... - especially around the Mirror of Erised scene - even 
though I love that scene. As soon as they start going through the 
challenges though, I was totally back into it.

RE: Writing a perfect(er) script

Good idea... Were you planning to edit Steve Kloves script (which 
will surely be up on the web before long) or start afresh?

I've come to the conclusion that in order to add in ten minutes worth 
of Fred/George (realising how that could be misinterpreted - as in 
jokes, not shipping), Gryffindors being mad with HHR for losing 150 
points, a few class montages, I'd make the following changes:-

- Seamus - what really was the point of him? Cut out all his scenes 
and give them to Neville.

- Add Neville in to a lot of earlier scenes instead of Hermione. 
There's no real reason why he couldn't see James's trophy. 

- Cut out Norbert completely, and the detention. Have Draco challenge 
Harry to a duel instead (shows his character better as well IMO), but 
in the Forbidden Forest. Draco obviously never plans to show up, but 
Harry like the fool he is does, somehow gets separated from Ron, and 
walks into Voldemort and the unicorn.

And a few short things I'd add to clarify stuff:- 

- "And then, your father did something Snape could never forgive... 
etc."

- An explanation of why Harry is famous ... it is not made clear in 
the film that Harry did anything else than lived. Hagrid should have 
mentioned that the spell rebounded, and stopped Voldemort's reign. 
Harry then asks if he's dead, and Hagrid says he doesn't think he 
could ever die. Thus setting up Harry's otherwise amazing guess at 
the unicorn.

- "Be warned, Potter -- any more nighttime wanderings and I will 
personally make sure you are expelled. Good day to you." 

                      - followed by -

"Don't you understand? If Snape gets hold of the Stone, Voldemort's 
coming back! Haven't you heard what it was like when he was trying to 
take over? There won't be any Hogwarts to get expelled from!..." 
Thus setting up Harry's bravey (you might add the lines 

""I'll use the invisibility cloak," said Harry. "It's just lucky I 
got it back." 

"But will it cover all three of us?" said Ron"

as well).

I would re-estbalish "Are you a witch or not?", except I agree with 
their decision to take out the potions, and to be honest, the movie 
wouldn't be balanced if Hermione lost her moment of glory.

Jon,
who needs to now read PS again to clarify his mind with the rightful 
canon
 





From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Sun Nov 18 13:44:31 2001
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:44:31 -0000
Subject: A few things...
Message-ID: <9t8dvv+q0v7@eGroups.com>

Hi all,

Having now seen the movie three times (once a week ago, then twice on 
Friday), I feel more qualified to be as critical as initially wanted 
to be.  There are several things about it that I am not happy with - 
as follows:

Mainly, how one-dimensional most of the characters were.  Richard 
Harris was a very unsatisfactory Dumbledore - particularly when 
contrasted with Ian McEllen as Gandalf in the LOTR trilogy.  Rupert 
Grint was, I grant you, a great child actor, and had brilliant comic 
timing - but he was, again, a very one-dimensional Ron - I didn't get 
any sense at all of the real Ron, and I thought the swearing, 
although mild, was very unsubtle, and that his original lines in the 
book were much more effective.

I thought Emma Watson was superb - a little over the top, but that 
was to be expected, and Hermione was very over the top in PS as well. 
I agree with Penny that the whole "killed, if not worse, expelled" 
line and Ron's "She needs to sort out her priorities" really didn't 
work - made absolutely no contextual sense whatsoever.  I also didn't 
like the fact that the film didn't really show how they weren't 
really friends before the troll escapade.  Why couldn't they have had 
Ron hoping  that she wouldn't be in Gryffindor, instead of saying 
that she's mental?  Why include that ridiculous trophy scene AND get 
the details wrong?  I don't understand that at all.

Sean Biggerstaff.  Excellent - I agree.  Lovely voice, good 
expression, nice bit of physical acting.  However, as much as I 
thought he was good, he didn't really portray Oliver in all his 
intense, agonised desperation - he was far too laid back.

I have moaned before about the replacement of good lines from the 
book with less funny ones - including the Devil's Snare, Hermione's 
dentist scene etc.  What rankled more on repeat viewings was how the 
screenplay had obvioulsy done a hatchett job on some of the original 
dialogue.  Certain scenes smacked of lack of understanding of what 
was going on in the book.  In particular:  (Warning, when I mentioned 
this to Neil and Co on Friday, they looked at me as though had gone 
mad and taken the meaning of LOONiness to new heights)

Dumbledore's speech about areas being out of bounds.  He covers the 
Forbidden Forest (now the Dark Forest), then goes on to say that he 
has been asked by Filch to "remind" everyone, that the 3rd Floor 
corridor is out of bounds.  Why remind?  This is the first time it 
has been out of bounds, because of the stone.  I then realised that 
they wanted to introduce Filch, but wanted to cut the part about no 
magic in the corrridors (time?) so cut two lines in half and stuck 
them together, thereby losing the sense of it and creating something 
which I found very annoying.

This is done again during Dumbledore's hospital scene with Harry - 
that scene really doesn't work at all.  Again, with the centaur 
scene.  He says something along the lines of "This is where I leave 
you"  Where?  Why?  They haven't gone anywhere?  Surely they could 
have changed it to reflect that he is leaving him because Hagrid has 
turned up.  Another very annoying and badly done scene.

It's a shame that this film, which has so much going for it, is 
spoilt in part by sloppiness -even things such as Harry calling Draco 
Malfoy Draco, instead of Malfoy rankle.  Quidditch was spoiled for me 
the second time round because I realised how truly awful Lee Jordan's 
commentary was.  Heidi also noticed that Dean knew what a Remembrall 
was - I know it was probably to get him a line - but surely anyone 
would have known that he was Muggle born.  I missed his red card line 
as well.

OK, will stop moaning now. 

Catherine




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 13:51:16 2001
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 05:51:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Short review/Barb's version question
In-Reply-To: <9t4oe3+peh5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011118135116.11308.qmail@web14606.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Barb <blpurdom at yahoo.com> wrote:
Are Canadians seeing an American or UK version?  

We're seeing the UK version. And some of us are, of
course, seeing it many times. :D

Quick review:

I did see the movie twice on Friday, at noon (courtesy
of Nyssa who was off school because of the G20 summit)
and at 9:45 with Andy.

Seeing it with Andy drove home the notion the this is
not meant as a stand alone film. He hasn't read the
book and was pretty clueless about what was happening
in parts of the movie. I did catch him smiling and
giggling, though, so there's hope that I can now get
him to read the book.

Overall I thought the acting was well done. Rupert
stole the show, of course and Alan Rickman was
brilliant (not that I ever disagreed with Amanda!). I
think Richard Harris did what he could with what they
gave him as a script, but it will be interesting to
see how it plays out in future films. The young man
who played Neville was great. Okay, I liked pretty
much everyone :)

Like most of you, I have some nitpicks. I did find the
movie rather choppy and can see how someone who hasn't
read the book would have difficulty following the
story. The forest scene was awful (and what's with the
'Dark Forest'), as was the way the made the troll
look. On the other hand, the winged keys scene was
wonderful and I thoroughly enjoyed the Quidditch
match, though I could have done without Harry standing
on the broom.

I could make this long and drawn out, but I must
finish packing (waves at Amanda, Penny and Ebony!!)

Sheryll

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 13:55:45 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:55:45 -0000
Subject: My Review (Quite long)
In-Reply-To: <3BF750C7.8020401@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9t8el1+46m0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
  
> EMMA -- Sorry, Barb, but I have to disagree strongly.  I liked 
> her.  We have to remember that PS/SS Hermione is bossy & a know-it-
> all.  She's supposed to be grating.  

It's not that she's grating so much as chewing the scenery.  She has 
no subtlety.  It seems as though she's trying too hard to convince 
us that she's Hermione.  The boys are really living in Ron's and 
Harry's skins; she's playing make-believe and mouthing words.  I've 
seen scads of young actresses do far better jobs.  (Just watch "The 
Piano" again--I'm so sad that Anna Paquin is too old for the role of 
Hermione now!)

> SHIPPY STUFF -- Just briefly (really!) ... my inner H/H shipper 
> (to borrow Cassie's phrase) is quite pleased.  Quite, quite 
> pleased.  Yes. Hug or no hug ...there was some nice interaction 
> over Ron's inert body in the chess aftermath.  *grins at Cassie*

I snipped a bunch of your comments about H/H because they frankly 
baffled me.  I only noticed one fairly clear H/H moment, which I'll 
get to.  The chess scene struck me as inarguably R/H, especially 
since Hermione's first impulse was to run to Ron as soon as he fell. 
In a way, the book was far more H/H in that the two of them left Ron 
and continued on after that (since she was needed to solve the 
potions problem).  Her speech to Harry about being a great wizard 
made my teeth hurt, it was so bad.

> Yes Barb -- I too noticed the very strange re-alignment of seats 
> at the Welcome Feast.   Why would Harry move?  Especially in 
> between Percy & Hermione?  Esp. since in canon Hermione is talking 
> to Percy during that meal.  I do note, however, that they did seem 
> to seat Harry next to Hermione & on that side of the table for all 
> scenes in the Great Hall (anything H/H there?).  :--)

Doubtful.  I think it was just a continuity problem.

> The Troll was okay.  I love the "sheer dumb luck" line by 
> McGonagall. You will all be pleased that I will refrain from 
> noting what my inner H/H shipper observed in this scene.

The beginning of the scene was where I did see the one clear 
possible (note the word POSSIBLE) H/H moment: Upon realizing that 
Hermione didn't know about the troll, it was Harry who was concerned 
about her safety.  But I doubt he would have reacted differently if 
it were some other student.  He's just being Hero Harry here, more 
concerned about others than himself.  It just happens to be Hermione 
who's in peril.  And remember, it's actually Ron who saves her (and 
Harry) by levitating the troll's club using the charm that Hermione 
was coaching him on (he was sitting next to her in Charms, too, or 
is did that escape your notice, Penny?).

> Okay, here goes my inner H/H shipper again. 
> Anyone else notice that Hermione says "Trust me," and Harry 
> immediately falls through to safety whereas Ron gets even more 
> entangled?  ::wicked laughter:::

I think this is just indicative of Harry's personality again.  He's 
very much my mind-over-matter Harry in the movie. <g>
 
> Pre-dinner scene between the Trio: heh, heh, heh.  That is *all* 
> my inner H/H shipper will say on this score.  :::sweet smile:::
 
Now you've really lost me.  Did you not notice that Ron and Hermione 
were hanging out alone together?  Hmm?  I thought this scene was 
unnecessary anyway, but maybe that's just me.

Oddly enough, although I perceived far more R/H moments than H/H, I 
have to say that the R/H ship that this film really put in my mind 
was Ron/Harry, not Ron/Hermione.  The two boys had such a wonderful 
rapport and a clear, deep bond that it oddly made me think that 
Ron/Harry slash fics are probably much more spot on than 
Draco/Harry.  (And I read a bunch of those.)

Probably a strange reaction, I know, but perhaps it was due to the 
fact that Emma turned in the weakest performance of the three and 
that I liked both Rupert and Dan so much.  Did anyone else notice 
how tight they already were on Christmas morning?  Okay, I'll stop 
now...

--Barb
(who is still probably not going to start writing a Ron/Harry slash 
fic...)
 




From lyyved at earthlink.net  Sun Nov 18 13:56:51 2001
From: lyyved at earthlink.net (lyyved at earthlink.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:56:51 -0000
Subject: Sorting Order, etc.
Message-ID: <9t8en3+bmtn@eGroups.com>

I think I have figured out why the childred  were sorted in that 
order in the movie, as it's obviously not alphabetically or by 
birthday (as there so many after Harry)

Could it be that the list McGonagall has is the order of those who 
wrote back accepting their admission.

Hermione is first and I can definitely see her insisting that her 
parents send the answer back the very day she got it .

Ron's mum, since she's done this so often before, didn't rush to 
reply.

Of course Harry never sent a written answer but Hagrid "hand 
carried" his answer back.

The other parents were even slower than the Weasley's. Was 
Ron pestering Molly to answer promptly?

I've seen the movie once so far and am going again tonight. The 
friend I went with leaned over to me early on and said, "You are 
so Hermione!"  And she does have a point. I read as much as 
she does and all sorts of trivia sticks in my mind.

Did anyone else notice that Firenze was pronounced differently 
in the movie (as compared to the Jim Dale CDs) Dale 
pronounces the final e but the movie left it out.

Lynn




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 14:04:27 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:04:27 -0000
Subject: Ron's reflection/Sorting order
Message-ID: <9t8f5b+rmi0@eGroups.com>

Cindy:
Also, maybe the reason we don't see Ron's reflection in the mirror 
is an aging problem.  He would have to be 17 to be head boy/Quiddich 
captain, etc., and they couldn't do that credibly for the film.

Actually, they have excellent morphing software for this now.  When 
children have been missing for a number of years and the authorities 
still want people to be looking for them, they can age photos taken 
at an earlier age and make a child who disappeared at age 8 look 
15.  I think they didn't show Ron because Harry never saw Ron, and 
this is still mostly his PoV.

Heidi:
One terrifying thought did cross my mind- what if they did the 
sorting in birth date order? It would give credence to that misery-
inducing 1979 argument for Hermione's birthday as she was sorted 
first. But there can't be that many students younger than Harry. So 
maybe not.

This thought doesn't terrify me, but it's extremely unlikely that 
Harry is among the five oldest students, especially with a July 31 
birthday.  This was clearly just for cinematic expedience.  
(Although the revelation that Susan Bones is a Columbus is somewhat 
irksome.)

A few people mentioned Filch being in the Slytherin stands.  He has 
to sit somewhere, and for that matter, Quirrell was sitting just a 
bit behind Snape (who was never clearly established as head of 
Slytherin House).

--Barb





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 14:53:15 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:53:15 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
Message-ID: <9t8i0r+8h61@eGroups.com>

(Before I join the discussion properly, I feel compelled to shout this from the rooftops:

  Chamber of Secrets -- Alan Rickman and Kenneth Branagh in the same film! Double the buttery goodness!)

(Now returning you to your *relevant* discussion.)

 (Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are Australian wizards.)




From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 15:04:06 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:04:06 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sorting Order, etc.
References: <9t8en3+bmtn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003101c17042$453d4400$e500a8c0@shasta>

Lynn wrote,

> I think I have figured out why the children  were sorted in that
> order in the movie, as it's obviously not alphabetically or by
> birthday (as there so many after Harry)
>
> Could it be that the list McGonagall has is the order of those who
> wrote back accepting their admission.

I think we need to see this more in terms of plot and the exigencies of
movie making. First, they couldn't have used the book's alphabetical order
because it would either have taken forever or have forced them to fast
forward through a whole bunch of names. A book can vary the flow of time
easily; film's much more limited. And the last thing this film needed was an
even choppier feel than it already has.

Second, Harry's "trail by sorting hat" requires that the reader understand
the difference between Slytherin and Gryffindor. In the book, this
information is already in place; in the film, it is supplied to a great
degree by associating Slytherin with Draco, Gryffindor with Ron. If Ron had
followed Harry, this would not have been as clear.

Further, it makes cinematic sense to finish the scene with Harry's sorting:
it builds up to a climax and allows a nice shift into the next scene.
Book!Ron's place at the end of the alphabetical sorting highlights his
issues - but since film!Ron doesn't have any issues to highlight, sorting
him last would be a trifle boring.

For the most part, I think the Columbus and Kloves were just doing what they
had to do. They had to simplify, and they did, which particularly meant
spotlighting Harry's stuff and backgrounding everyone else's.

Which leads to Catherine's question:

> Why couldn't they have had
> Ron hoping  that she wouldn't be in Gryffindor, instead of saying
> that she's mental?

The film hadn't given us reason to suppose Ron would give a rip what house
he or anyone else might be in. But he had to say *something* derogatory.

* * * * * * * *

Or am I forgetting something? - I've only seen the film twice and wasn't
exactly lucid the second time through. (Though I didn't - ahem! - fall
asleep like the gentleman next to me, whose name, make and license plate
number shall forever remain a mystery.)

Next time, I'll have to take notes.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who does feel cheated that we missed the
twins yelling "'We got Potter! We got Potter!'" C'mon, Chris - it would've
taken, what, five seconds?, and the line's priceless!)
_______________________

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




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 15:20:27 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:20:27 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
Message-ID: <9t8jjr+3l0h@eGroups.com>

(Before I join the discussion properly, I feel compelled to shout this from the rooftops:

  Chamber of Secrets -- Alan Rickman and Kenneth Branagh in the same film! Double the buttery goodness!)

(Now returning you to your *relevant* discussion.)

 (Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are Australian wizards.)




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 15:35:49 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:35:49 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Second Time Around...
Message-ID: <b8.1e8859ba.29292f55@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 2:13:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com writes:

<< London with Cathrine, Neil, Dai, Al, Simon, Michelle and Nick. What 
 an experience! <waves to all concerned> The movie would have been 
 great anyway, but seeing it with a bunch crazy, sweet, sensible, 
 obsessively LOONy and remarkably sane people you've never actually 
 seen before is incredible.
 
 And now ... back to work - it's Sunday!
 
 Baaaaaa!
 
 Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
 _______________________ >>


Wow....what a wonderful experience for you all.....

However, I felt that we were all together in spirit......

Susan



From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 15:37:01 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:37:01 -0000
Subject: product placement, Quidditch wasps
Message-ID: <9t8kit+sdj7@eGroups.com>

Someone mentioned being pleased about the absence of product 
placement in the film. Someone else mentioned, a while ago, that all 
the cars on Privet Drive are Vauxhalls. Not sure who it was noticed 
that, and I don't know what Vauxhalls look like.

Is this true? The cars *were* made extra-obvious in the Privet Drive 
scenes, specially highlighted and so forth. A little distracting, 
but forgivable.

And: during the Quidditch match, all that buzzing and the particular 
way in which humans seem to hang and sway on the broomsticks 
reminded me strongly of the way *wasps* fly, swaying and with their 
legs dangling beneath. They also seem to keep what pass for "hands" 
up close in front, like the Quidditch players.

Perhaps the spesh-effects people used wasp-flight to visualise 
broomstick flight?

The use of insect flight is also strikingly recalled in the flying 
keys scene. It's a stream of hornets, with the spiky wings. The way 
they thudded into the door... I also appreciated the way the keys 
became 'activated' and deadly as soon as Dan-Harry touched the 
broomstick.

Rrishi




From kirstyanne.wright at btinternet.com  Sun Nov 18 15:42:06 2001
From: kirstyanne.wright at btinternet.com (Kirsty Anne Wright)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:42:06 -0000
Subject: We got Potter was re Sorting Order etc
References: <9t8en3+bmtn@eGroups.com> <003101c17042$453d4400$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <000f01c17047$957a6560$de51893e@r4i2e0>

> Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who does feel cheated that we missed
the
> twins yelling "'We got Potter! We got Potter!'" C'mon, Chris - it would've
> taken, what, five seconds?, and the line's priceless!)

Hi

I'm just a lurker popping up to say that I'm fairly sure that if you look at
twins when Harry sits down they are saying this but you can't hear it due to
the noise level, I've seen the film three times and noticed this on the
second and am kind of annoyed that you can't hear it, seeing as it there
anyway.

Bye for Now

Kirsty




From supergirl1024 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 16:27:42 2001
From: supergirl1024 at yahoo.com (T)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:27:42 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
Message-ID: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>

I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?

T




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 16:35:29 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:35:29 -0000
Subject: New York Times Movie Review
In-Reply-To: <OE56Ahb2P9GRDdrg3DV00015168@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9t8o0h+ut34@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Mike Aldridge" <mike.aldridge at f...> wrote:
> There's a review of the movie by Elvis Mitchell at
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/16/movies/16POTT.html?
pagewanted=1&rd=hcmcp?p
> =041VKn041VSs4MEaE012000mt1tct1ua.  Read it at your own peril.
> 
> Regards,
> Mike Aldridge

I preferred this one, from the same thoughtful folks at NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/11/movies/11CLEM.html

Happy Watching All!
Cheers!

- Cornflower O'Shea

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

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

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






From rainy_lilac at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 16:52:55 2001
From: rainy_lilac at yahoo.com (rainy_lilac at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:52:55 -0000
Subject: James Casting and New Scene  (WAS HUGE problem with the casting)
In-Reply-To: <9t7an5+u19s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8p17+6h8o@eGroups.com>



It would make sense to me if James and Lily appeared to be thiry-five 
in the mirror, since that would match Harry's desires-- to have 
parents who are still around and with him.

But James also looks rather old in the photo. It is, I think, really 
important that there be a strong resembelnce between Harry and James 
since part of the POA plot depends upon it. So, I have to agree this 
was a poor casting choice.


--Suzanne


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> > Saitana wrote:
> > 
> > > My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late 
> > twenties
> > > early thirties when he died...
> 
> James and Lily were in their EARLY twenties when they died, if we 
> are to believe JKR when she identified Snape as being about 35. 
> Snape was a contemporary of James and Lily, which means that if 
they 
> were still alive they would also be about 35, and this is well over 
> ten years later. We don't know if Snape was in the same year as 
> James et al., but he must have been fairly near to them in age to 
be 
> such a big part of their school lives, I would think. 
> 
> Steve Vander Ark
> The Harry Potter Lexicon




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 17:02:45 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:02:45 -0000
Subject: More on the sorting hat
Message-ID: <9t8pjl+6hn5@eGroups.com>

I have to say I was disappointed that the sorting hat seemed to be 
speaking to all the students. People who have seen it more that 
once, please correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it/his 
mouth/brim/whatever moving as he spoke to Harry? Considering that 
the fact the hat almost put him in Slytherin is one of Harry's 
darkest secrets (his confession to Dumbledore is a profound 
statement on trust and Dumby's "substitute" parent role), don't you 
think that scene was misleading for those who haven't read the book?

Cheers!

- Cornflower O'Shea

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

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

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

ps. I totally agree that Dumbledore lacked the sparkle he needs, but 
since I adore him, I may not be the fairest judge.

pps. The sorting hat seemed so serious too. I always imagined it 
singing (a la British Music Hall tradition) not chanting. 
Sigh...Well, of course the film can't fulfill our perfect 
imaginings...that's why books still exist. ;)




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 17:12:42 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:12:42 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8q6a+9or6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "T" <supergirl1024 at y...> wrote:
> I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
> having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?
> 
> T

Yes, I absolutely agree with you. I was going to post this exact 
point myself, especially in terms of his sparing of Peter. 
Considering that someone (Dumbledore?) says that Harry sparing Peter 
was what his father would have wanted, do you think that James would 
have wanted Harry to kill Quirrell? It is also significant that 
Voldie just leaves Quirrell to die after all the sacrifices Q. makes 
for him. It shows a profound contrast between the value Harry puts 
on a life and the value Voldie does. It is also important in the 
continuing theme of loyalty to those one loves. The main reason for 
the shift seems simply to end with a spectacular special effect. 
Could we really not expect Hollywood to "Mummy"-ize Harry? 

Still, all in all I did enjoy the movie...
Cheers!

-Cornflower O'Shea

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

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

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







From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 17:17:02 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:17:02 -0000
Subject: Another thought has just come to me...
In-Reply-To: <9t7ar5+8k0u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8qee+s63o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Trina" <triner918 at a...> wrote:
> Did it bother anyone else that 11 yo Ron said "Bloody hell,<snip>"?
> 
> Bothered me a great deal. Ron's swearing in the books is one thing as 
> it is always alluded to, except for GoF when he says, "Damn it, we're 
> still with the Slytherins..." I didn't mind that--he's 14 then, such 
> language is somewhat age-appropriate. But "bloody hell" at 11, yeah, 
> that did.   Any thoughts?
> 
> Trina

Someone (Malfoy?) also used "arse".

-Megan




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 17:17:57 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 12:17:57 EST
Subject: Accents (was: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] My Review (Quite long))
Message-ID: <88.f73ec04.29294745@aol.com>

In a message dated 18/11/2001 06:11:31 GMT Standard Time, pennylin at swbell.net 
writes:

<< [ACCENTS -- I'd like to see if our British friends would like to 
 identify the various accents for us.  Rupert's for example ... I can't 
 place it.  Emma is from Oxford, yes?  Neville sounds Irish (and of 
 course Seamus).  *loved* Biggerstaff's Scottish accent.] >>

Daniel - Slight leanings towards Posh London accent, but mostly just a 
southern/london one. 
Rupert - Your ordinary kid brought up down south. Kent, Sussex, Surrey, parts 
of London, the Home Counties etc. 
Emma - Posh. Not confined to any one area of the country - I know people from 
Devon who *should* sound something like Hagrid, but who sound like Emma and 
live in a house the size of Hogwarts castle... But I think she is from 
Oxford, went to school in France at some point as well, as opposed to her 
voice being from Oxford. If that makes any sense.
Neville - Yorkshire/Lancashire, it's been a week since I saw the film and off 
the top of my head I can't remember exactly which, but I think he was more 
Yorkshire than Lancashire. Sounded very Leeds-like actually.
Tom Felton - As Tom he's somewhere between Rupert & Dan, closer to Rupert, 
but as Draco he sounded Posher.

Sara



From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 17:19:35 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0000
Subject: James Casting and New Scene  (WAS HUGE problem with the casting)
In-Reply-To: <9t7an5+u19s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8qj7+84e4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> > Saitana wrote:
> > 
> > > My problem with James is..he's too old.  James was in his late 
> > twenties
> > > early thirties when he died...
> 
> James and Lily were in their EARLY twenties when they died, if we 
> are to believe JKR when she identified Snape as being about 35. 
> Snape was a contemporary of James and Lily, which means that if 
they 
> were still alive they would also be about 35, and this is well over 
> ten years later. We don't know if Snape was in the same year as 
> James et al., but he must have been fairly near to them in age to 
be 
> such a big part of their school lives, I would think. 

Actually, we DO know that Snape was in the same year as James et al., 
at least he was in the same year as Lupin.  From PoA18:

"Severus was very interested in where I went every month." Lupin told 
Harry, Ron, and Hermione.  "We were in the same year, you, know, and 
we - er - didn't like each other very much."

There was some speculation that the actor playing James Potter is 
actually Daniel Radcliffe's father.  Does anyone know for sure?  Do 
the credits indicate anything about this?

Amanda (or was it Cindy, or both?) speculated that it makes sense for 
the Mirror of Erised James and Lily to look about 35 years old, since 
Harry is imagining what it would be like if he had a family.  But the 
photograph James and Lily definitely should have looked 11 years 
younger.  However, it's hard to get actors to look both 25 and 35 -- 
but not impossible, and it seems like they didn't even try with James.

--Joywitch, who rarely gets to correct Lexicon Steve and is enjoying 
it greatly




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 17:24:34 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:24:34 -0000
Subject: Throwing off the blanket
In-Reply-To: <3BF736CD.13B1EE81@nb.sympatico.ca>
Message-ID: <9t8qsi+9hf4@eGroups.com>

<Angela wrote:>

> The Quirrell/Voledemort sequence was absolutely brilliant, and was when
> I stopped comparing the movie to the book in my head. How absolutely
> clever for Voldemort to summon the images of Lily and James to tempt
> Harry with. My nephew had watched most of the scarier sequences peeking
> from behind his fingers. Strangely, this was the one scene where he sat
> rapt with attention, and I was the scared one, as Quirrell burned and
> cracked right before my eyes. He was delighted that the bad guy
> crumbled, and I was riveted by how well it was portrayed, watching
> Quirrell be destroyed. And the part where Voldemort's essence/spirit/?
> passed through Harry and knocked him down was a brilliant touch.

I think /I/ sat with more bated breath & expressions of shock during
this scene than half the kids in the theatre!  I have to agree that
this was one of the better-than-in-book scenes of this movie.  It also
just seems to work better with the storyline.  Even though I didn't
like how they did the face of Voldemort, this has definitely become
one of the stand-out scenes of the movie.  Towards the end I was
wondering how they were going to make Harry pass out since Quirrel was
exploding (while I was sitting there thinking, "This is a kids' movie!
 I didn't know this could happen in a kids' movie!") into tiny shards.
 The visual affect of Voldemort's "spirit" moving on with no host-body
was more stunning than the written words of JKR in this scene.

-Megan (who is trying to sort out a time to see it again!)




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 18 17:28:31 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:28:31 -0600
Subject: Uneducated question
References: <9t7l3f+7t7f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF7EFBE.3E586E68@texas.net>

Excuse me, this is a *totally* stupid question, but can someone define
for me just what "scenery chewing" is? I'd never heard the usage before,
and I'm missing out on the overtones of some of the critiques.

Thanks,
Amanda




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 18 17:32:35 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:32:35 -0600
Subject: Trailers (was 1st  Impressions)
References: <9t7q3o+qg2n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF7F0B3.68095EA3@texas.net>

Kristin wrote:

> Kristin
> ::who was sad they didn't show the SW trailer in this screening but
> loved the Monsters,Inc. trailer::

Was that the one with the charades? My god, that was so *funny*! I
nearly died. I've never, ever seen a trailer that hypes another studio's
film before--way to go, Disney!

We got the LoTR trailer too--gave me chills.

--Amanda


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




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 17:34:30 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:34:30 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8rf6+nl3t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "T" <supergirl1024 at y...> wrote:
> I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
> having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?
> 
> T

I don't view the incident a murder. A human will not die like Quirrel 
did. The setting was necessary to make Voldermort's spirit appear.

I always think the ending of PS/SS the weakest of 4 books. I think 
the movie version improve it without losing the credibility.
Harry Potter is like a first level wizard.( Yes, I play D&D.) He 
cannot possibly fight against a full-grown wizard in a normal way.

Hertopos




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 17:36:26 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:36:26 -0000
Subject: Director's cut petition
Message-ID: <9t8riq+c8ud@eGroups.com>

There is a online petition site for 'Director's cut DVD'.

www.petitiononline.com

I signed for it.

Hertopos




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 17:42:57 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:42:57 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8rv1+o0m2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "T" <supergirl1024 at y...> wrote:
> I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
> having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?
> 
> T

As I was watching Harry walk down the stairs to the mirror, the kid
beside me said, "Wow!  Harry's all bloody!"
Thinking...isn't his makeup-blood a BIT overdone?  Ron and Hermione
are just rather dirty & I would imagine Ron having at least a few
scratches from the chess game; after all, that's where Harry got most
of his.  This is comparing his makeup from before the game & after. 
He did get a few in the keys challenge as I imagine those things are
sharp, but somehow his cuts managed to look deeper and more serious at
every progressive camera shot.  These were nasty cuts, too, with
basically no looks of pain on Harry's part.  I thought these were
rather overdone by the crew to excentuate Harry's "courage"...didn't
work for me (well that and the fact that some of the facial lacs
looked obviously phoney).

-Megan (being picky)




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 18 17:43:52 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:43:52 -0600
Subject: Naaah (was Harry...a murderer)
References: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF7F358.B0FAFA79@texas.net>

T wrote:

> I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than
> having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave
> Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats just
> OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?

I think the book was far from clear in specifying what happened to
Quirrell. Harry did indeed go for his face, to keep him from getting to
his wand when it appeared Quirrell was about to curse him. And
Dumbledore tells Harry something like, "You were doing quite well on
your own." I don't think the movie took too many liberties, here. At
least Quirrell is definitively dead, a point the book never make in so
many words, and given JKR's input, I think we can trust that. I don't
see that defending yourself makes you a murderer, in any case.

--Amanda


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




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 17:54:45 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:54:45 -0000
Subject: Star Wars fanatic loves HP movie?!
Message-ID: <9t8sl5+47ug@eGroups.com>

Ok, my husband is Star Wars fanatic. He collects lots and lots of 
action figures. 

I forced him to read the first book before hand.
When we went see the movie, which was second time for me and first 
time for him, he was looking forwards to see EPII trailer.

Well, the theater chain we went happened to be rival to Fox and there 
were no EP II trailer.

However, he forgot about that by the time the movie was over. I could 
tell he was very much into the movie. He also likes Dan a lot.

BTW, Dan is not a bad actor. I saw him in 'David Copperfield'.

According to my husband, there were actually positive buzz about HP 
at Star Wars fun site.

Funny




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 18:08:53 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:08:53 -0000
Subject: Defending Chris Columbus
Message-ID: <9t8tfl+jvr2@eGroups.com>

Did anyone read 'JKR unoffical biograph'? It is ok and it has some 
interesting infos.

One of them is about the movie. JKR and S.Spirberg did not agree on 
how the movie should be made. He wanted to transfer everything to 
America.

I also wonder if everyone knew about the audition for the director.
Columbus got it because he wanted to shoot the movie as close as 
possible to the book. Chiris was chosen because his vision agreed 
with JKR's idea of movie version should be.

I wrote before this. I really think if some other big name director 
had done it, they might have had a better CGI and stuff but it would 
have been no longer our HP movie.

Everyone like to complain here and there. That's fine. However, when 
I heard some people saying that they could have wrote a better script 
or some other major director should have done the movie, I really 
start wondering.

Hertopos



I want him to shoot at least next two. 

Only things worries me is when the production let them go to the 
level of PG13. I personally belive COS should be PG-13. In fact, this 
movie was one of the scariest for PG.




From cindysphynx at home.com  Sun Nov 18 18:11:56 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:11:56 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8rv1+o0m2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8tlc+r9r6@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "T" <supergirl1024 at y...> wrote:
> > I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather 
than 
> > having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> > Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> > just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?

I think of it as self-defense.  Quirrel was trying to kill Harry, and 
Harry was justified in "touching" Quirrel and defending himself.  
There was no self-defense justification re Pettigrew, though, so 
Harry would have been implicated in murder had he not spared 
Pettigrew.


Megan wrote:

> As I was watching Harry walk down the stairs to the mirror, the kid
> beside me said, "Wow!  Harry's all bloody!"
> Thinking...isn't his makeup-blood a BIT overdone?  Ron and Hermione
> are just rather dirty & I would imagine Ron having at least a few
> scratches from the chess game; after all, that's where Harry got 
most
> of his.  

Actually, I thought Harry got his injuries from the flying keys.

Cindy




From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 18:27:16 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:27:16 -0000
Subject: Penny & Barb's comments
In-Reply-To: <9t8el1+46m0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t8ui4+7iic@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
>   
> > EMMA -- Sorry, Barb, but I have to disagree strongly.  I liked 
> > her.  We have to remember that PS/SS Hermione is bossy & a know-
it- all.  She's supposed to be grating.  

*nods* I liked Emma, too. I didn't think she was overacting any more 
than Rupert was.
> 
> I snipped a bunch of your comments about H/H because they frankly 
> baffled me.  I only noticed one fairly clear H/H moment, which I'll 
> get to.  The chess scene struck me as inarguably R/H, especially 
> since Hermione's first impulse was to run to Ron as soon as he 
fell.  n a way, the book was far more H/H in that the two of them 
left Ron  nd continued on after that (since she was needed to solve 
the  ptions problem).  Her speech to Harry about being a great wizard 
> made my teeth hurt, it was so bad.

Well, I'm equally baffled about that R/H chess scene argument. The 
fact that Hermione wanted to run towards Ron after a huge chessman 
smashed him to the ground indicates nothing to me beyond normal 
horror and concern. Harry's the one who screamed "RON!" and I don't 
think that means much either. The fact that Hermione took the time to 
to deliver the whole "great wizard" speech to Harry over Ron's inert 
and slighly twitching body was IMHO more significant, insomuch as any 
of it was significant. I happened to see the movie first with a bunch 
of press people and on Friday with a bunch of people who had read no 
further than book 1 -- every single one that I spoke to thought that 
the chess scene meant that they were setting up a future H/H pairing. 
My friend Karen pointed out how Hermione looks at Harry throughout 
the entire great wizard speech, then follows him out of the room with 
her eyes without looking back at the wounded Ron even once. She 
thought it was in fact rather heartless; I had to explain that in 
canon, the speech is delivered in another room without Ron actually 
present. 

 "The beginning of the scene was where I did see the one clear 
> possible (note the word POSSIBLE) H/H moment: Upon realizing that 
> Hermione didn't know about the troll, it was Harry who was 
concerned  about her safety.  But I doubt he would have reacted 
differently if   it were some other student.  He's just being Hero 
Harry here, more  concerned about others than himself."

When they sit down to dinner before the troll incident, it is HARRY 
who asks Neville "Where is Hermione?" Ron has not even noticed that 
Hermione is not there. This is not Harry being heroic, IMHO. When 
Neville tells Harry that Parvati reported that Hermione has been 
crying in the bathroom all day, Harry looks at Ron with a stricken 
expression. Ron shrugs, which to me looked like an "Oh well, 
whatever" shrug. Harry is concerned about Hermione before the troll 
business; Ron isn't.

"It just happens to be Hermione  who's in peril.  And remember, it's 
actually Ron who saves her (and  Harry) by levitating the troll's 
club using the charm that Hermione   was coaching him on (he was 
sitting next to her in Charms, too, or   is did that escape your 
notice, Penny?)."

And Harry was sitting next to Hermione in Potions. Does seating 
arrangement mean anything? When Hermione is under the sink and 
screams "Help me!" for the first time, it is HARRY who pulls out his 
wand and throws himself at the troll to try to save her. It isn't 
until Harry himself is in danger that Ron actually pulls off his 
Wingardium Leviosa spell. Maybe you're right about the Ron/Harry 
shippiness, cos that's all I'm seeing here.
"

"Now you've really lost me.  Did you not notice that Ron and Hermione 
> were hanging out alone together?"

Well, neither of them have any other friends....Penny is referring to 
the way Hermione beams at Harry and says, "Never better!" My non-HP 
friends noticed that too, BTW, although as far as H/H moments go that 
didn't do much of anything for me. 

 
Cassandra




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 18:27:18 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:27:18 -0000
Subject: Is this movie going to be a classic ?
Message-ID: <9t8ui6+om4k@eGroups.com>

Here is a question for everyone.

Do you think this movie is going to be a classic ?

Roger Ebert said so. And his review defines what he means by a 
classic.

He is not saying the movie is a perfect movie.
He said the movie is going to be the one people keep enjoying for 
quite some time. His other examples are "E T', " Wizard of OZ',
'Star Wars'.

I agree with him. Not because the movie is flawless but it has the 
richness that let you enjoy again and again and again.
This is a kind of the movie you end-up resiting lines from.

Hertopos

'Pleasure!' Hermione to Ron




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 18:32:11 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:32:11 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: James Casting
Message-ID: <26.1e827e8e.292958ab@aol.com>

Hi
Hmm just had a look on the IMDB to see if I could find out for sure just who 
played James Potter. But there isn't a listing. 

They have Lily Evans Potter (Geraldine Somerville), but no mention of a 
James...

:o/

I think I'm gonna study that newspaper article which had the photo of Dan & 
his Dad Alan Radcliffe before I go to see the movie again. Unless anyone did 
manage to catch the name of the actor/person who played James at the end of 
the film?

Oh there's also a producer called Mark Radcliffe. Anyone know if he's any 
relation?

Sara



From inviziblegirl at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 18:44:27 2001
From: inviziblegirl at hotmail.com (Amber)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:44:27 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
Message-ID: <9t8vib+net5@eGroups.com>

Yes, I am back home now. After spending about two days in 
Orlando/Disney, I'm rather sad to be back at my apartment in Tampa. I 
guess you can't live in magic 24 hours a day, can you?

Heidi, no need to apologize for the arm grabbing, I actually enjoyed 
it a bit. It really hit home to me that I was seeing the movie with 
FANS!

I've seen the movie three times now and I can only say that it gets 
better for me with each showing. I can't wait to see it for the 
fourth time next week with my father and brother. First time I saw 
it, reaction was shock and disappointment. I guess my view of "stayed 
very close to the book" and Chris Columbus' view of "stayed very 
close to the book" are vastly different. The first viewing, for me, 
was the most tense and exhausting. I walked out thinking that it was 
a good movie, but a not-so-good book adaption movie. Second time 
viewing was much better and third time was pure pleasure. I was able 
to take it all in stride and just dismiss the thought that some plot 
execution was wrong and just enjoy it.

During the second movie, I brought in my notebook with me and made 
some notes as I watched so that I could remember what I loved, hated, 
and found intriguing. I'll provide them for you all here. Heidi also 
contributed quite a bit as well, being the "Eagle Eyes" person that 
she is. I've also added some clarifying notes to expand upon what I 
was thinking.

Actual: owl at privet drive
Translation: Privet Drive! Owl! It's starting! Augh!

Actual: Dumbledore out of mist
Translation: I wish he had just appeared instead of slowly appearing 
but I suppose it was easier to have him slowly appear out of the mist.

Actual: Hagrid tearing up
Translation: Awwww! Hagrid's all emotional! I love Robbie Coltrane...

Actual: Dudley jumping on stairs
Translation: That is just so perfect and absolutely Dudley-ish, I 
giggled all three times I saw it.

Actual: why burma and not brazil
Translation: Is there a reason to have the snake be from Burma and 
not Brazil?

Actual: Dudley pushes Harry to side, falls in exhibit
Translation: Again, another absolutely beautiful Dudley moment. I 
couldn't stop laughing when Dudley gets up out of the pond to leave 
and finds the glass still there. Petunia's reaction is just as 
priceless.

Actual: No "Amigo"
Translation: The snake doesn't say "Thanksssss Amigo"! What, they 
couldn't spend the half a second to have it say Amigo? Hmph.

Actual: doing uniform in background
Translation: My only "Eagle Eyes" catch. On the day where Harry 
receives the first letter, when he walks into the kitchen with the 
mail, Petunia is dying Dudley's clothes grey in the background for 
Harry's uniform. You can clearly see her poking something in a basin 
with some tongs. Nice little bit for the fans.

Actual: don't move him to bedroom
Translation: Heidi caught this. The Dursley's never move Harry from 
the cupboard to Dudley's second bedroom. I guess this is another time 
constraint issue...

Actual: excellent entrance by Hagrid
Translation: Dear lord! The shaking! The light! The rumbling! 
Perfect, perfect, perfect! The first time I saw it, I actually jumped 
when the door rattled the first time and I knew what was coming!

Actual: Doesn't tie gun in knot
Translation: Nitpick. I understand why they didn't have Hagrid do 
that though.

Actual: great Pertunia Dursley speech
Translation: Who cares that the woman's hair isn't blonde, that 
speech was brilliant! That *was* Petunia Dursley and I loved it to 
pieces each time she said it!

Actual: Leave that night don't go to sleep then go to Diagon Alley
Translation: Nitpick, they don't wait overnight to leave. Again, 
problem done for time issues and I don't mind much.

Actual: another wand store something "Wonderful Wands"
Translation: I think me and Heidi caught this at about the same time. 
When they show the shot of Gringotts, off the right of the screen 
there is a sign for another wand shop. When I saw the movie the third 
time, I tried to read what it said above "Wonderful Wands" but 
couldn't make it out for the life of me. Can anybody else?

Actual: Ginny's eye color is wrong
Translation: Heidi caught this, not me. I never even noticed Ginny's 
eye color.

Actual: Ron has smudge on nose
Translation: Yay! He has the smudge the whole time!

Actual: Plastic around sandwiches
Translation: What's up with that?

Actual: no breathless speech boo!
Translation: I so wanted to hear Hermione's "Nobody in my family's 
magic at all, it was ever such a surprise when I got my letter..." 
speech. Dangitall, they killed it! Boo! Double boo!

Actual: Hermione isn't in Harry's boat, Dean is
Translation: Why couldn't she be in his boat? It says that in the 
book! Grrrr. And the point of that change is...?

Actual: Trevor The Toad!
Translation: Yay Trevor! Yay Neville! *giggles and hugs Neville*

Actual: Hogwarts, a history!
Translation: Woohoo! You rock Hermione!

Actual: D's speech is at wrong place
Translation: Yeah, I know, another nitpick, done probably for time 
constraints.

Actual: granger, malfoy, bones, weasley, potter
Translation: What is UP with the order? Hello?

Actual: hat doesn't fall over eyes
Translation: Nitpick, I guess they wanted us to see the expression on 
the kids' eyes.

Actual: switching sides Harry
Translation: Heidi caught this first when we saw it the first time. 
When Harry first sits down at the Gryffindor table, he's on the right 
side. In the scene where they start eating the Feast, he's on the 
left. Er, yeah, editing problem...

Actual: not nitwit blubber oddment tweak
Translation: It's four words! They had to cut those four words? 
Blasphemy!

Actual: no glasses for percy
Translation: I know I saw that in the trailers but it still bugs me. 
The glasses are important to Percy's character IMO and I don't 
understand why they didn't have Chris Rankin wear them. Maybe they 
thought people would confuse him and Harry? Like, whatever...

Actual: 15 new gryffindors (20?)
Translation: On the stairs, there are about 15 (due to Heidi's 
frantic counting). When the first years go into the Common Room and 
there is that nice overhead shot, I counted again and came up with 
about 18 - 20. So, which is it? Mistake the second time since there 
are about 14 Griffs in the flying lesson?

Actual: slyths in Transfiguration
Translation: Another nitpick. Slyths are in every class with the 
Griffs. But I don't mind so much, it was to show Draco's wonderful 
smirking looks towards Harry and company.

Actual: excellent entrance by Snape!
Translation: We have about a second to realize that the Potions 
lesson is going to happen next when BOOM! the door crashes open and 
Snape strides in with his delicious opening lines. Absolutely 
beautiful!

Actual: Dean knows about Remembrall?
Translation: I believe Heidi mentioned this before but why do they 
have Dean, a Muggle-born, recognize the Remembrall? Bah!

Actual: Hooch blows whistle! not supposed to
Translation: Big nitpick, Neville is supposed to shoot upwards before 
Hooch blows the whistle. The scene doesn't make SENSE the way it is.

Actual: 14 Griffs in flying lessons
Translation: Heidi's keen eyes again. I imagine there were about the 
same number of Slyths.

Actual: everyone knows that Harry is Seeker right away
Translation: Another nitpick but I don't mind due to time constraints.

Actual: McGonagall name on Quidditch plaque
Translation: When Hermione shows the boys the awards case, James' 
name is on it (as a Seeker, not Chaser, bah!) but also is McGonagall. 
Hmmmm.

Actual: excellent Wood and Bludger scene
Translation: Yummy, Oliver Wood! I have fallen in love with the 
accent. He is just so adorable.

Actual: good silence by Dumbledore
Translation: In the Troll scene, I LOVED Dumbledore's 
deafening "SILENCE!". Wonderful.

Actual: get Nimbus right before game
Translation: Nitpick. On the morning of the game, Harry receives the 
broom. Grrr...

Actual: no Wood speech
Translation: I so wanted to see his pep-talk. The one that they 
replaced it with was okay but I'm not entirely satisfied.

Actual: girl on Slytherin team
Translation: There is a girl on the Slytherin Quidditch team! What?

Actual: 30 seconds of stupid winter scene
Translation: Heidi started counting and I joined her. That stupid 
winter scene where Harry walks out with Hedwig and she takes off 
flying takes 30 seconds! It's the most useless scene in the movie! 
All it does is show passage of time! They could've done that some 
other way...

Actual: how did Malfoy know they were going to visit Hagrid?
Translation: So, how did he know? I looked in the scene beforehand, 
the library one, to see if maybe he was lurking in the corner or 
something. Nope, couldn't see him. Maybe the other black-haired kid 
at the table overhead and told Draco? Or maybe Draco has been 
stalking the Trio all this time? I'm sure that notion will send 
slashers and Draco/Hermione shippers into shivers of ecstasy...

Actual: Harry says Draco's name in forbidden forest
Translation: Another Heidi catch. Harry clearly says Draco instead of 
Malfoy when asking him if he is scared.

Actual: big problems with Snare
Translation: Heidi didn't mind this scene but I really did. I hated 
its execution, I don't think it makes that much sense the way it is. 
Truthfully, I'd rather they had cut it out and had the Potions task 
if they were going to butcher the Devil's Snare scene that much.

Actual: Voldemort IS Voldemort
Translation: He looks and sounds EXACTLY how I thought he would. I 
was worried when I heard that the action figure had a green face but 
I shouldn't have bothered. Voldemort is simply perfect.

Actual: Quirrel lost right hand first
Translation: ANOTHER Heidi capture. Hm, correlations between Quirrel 
and Wormtail, anyone?

Actual: Pomfrey in hospital wing?
Translation: That lady who enters the hospital scene towards the end, 
think she is Pomfrey? Probably as we don't *know* if Pomfrey has 
helpers in the hospital wing...

Actual: no cheering?
Translation: No insane cheering, jumping up and down, wild enthusiasm 
while the last-minute points are being handed out. Bah, that ruined 
the mood of the scene for me...

Actual: messed up magic line
Translation: Like whatever. I wanted Harry to say "But they don't 
know that" with regards to the threatening the Dursley's to do magic 
over the holiday break. But I guess you can't win them all.

And that, my friends, is it. The scenes that were the best for me 
were the Harry finds out he's a wizard scene, Halloween and Troll 
scene, Quidditch, Christmas break scene, and getting the 
Philosopher's stone scene (EXCEPT for the Devil's Snare!). I think 
the casting was absolutely brilliant, I don't have any qualms 
whatsoever.

So when is the next book coming out? *sighs*

~Amber





From lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 18:56:30 2001
From: lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:56:30 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8tlc+r9r6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t908u+1281@eGroups.com>

T wrote:
>I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats just 
OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?>

and Cindy responded:
I think of it as self-defense.  Quirrel was trying to kill Harry, and 
> Harry was justified in "touching" Quirrel and defending himself.  
> There was no self-defense justification re Pettigrew, though, so 
> Harry would have been implicated in murder had he not spared 
> Pettigrew.>

Cindy, I knew you'd use the same argument I had before I even read 
your post.  :-)  I agree that Harry was simply defending himself here, 
but I do think a good point was made about Harry being the one 
responsible for Quirrel's death.  The fact that Harry lets Pettigrew 
go in PoA is monumentally significant.  I guess we'll just have to 
chalk it up to Harry using his instincts for survival here.  I would 
have done the same to save my life.

I was more bothered by the fact that when Quirrel snarled at Harry to 
come and stand in front of the mirror, Harry did, without any 
resistance.  He looked a little wimpy there - but only for a second.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who feels that movie has brought some fresh 
and fun discussions to HPFGU - it's great to see people like Amanda 
posting again.  I've missed your comments! 
********************************************************




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 18:58:56 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:58:56 -0000
Subject: Penny & Barb's comments
In-Reply-To: <9t8ui4+7iic@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t90dg+5v8e@eGroups.com>

<Cassandra wrote:>

Maybe you're right about the Ron/Harry 
> shippiness, cos that's all I'm seeing here.

I understand where you're coming from in saying this (other people's
POVs) but why can't two people simply be best friends without everyone
jumping up and shouting, "slash couple!" (I was going to say "gay",
but I figured that sounded a little much)?  [Replies directed to OT,
please] No one would do that if it were two girls as best friends. 
Just my thought.  I thought the movie portrayed Harry & Ron's
developing close friendship very very nicely (though there's much to
be said about how it portrayed Hermione's role as a friend).  I also
think it's in Hermione's natural disposition to be nice, kind, etc. 
Though the speech delivered over Ron's possibly-seriously injured body
was in bad taste!  I mean, he was knocked out cold & here they are
wasting time when for all they know he could be dying?  Bad Columbus...

-Megan





From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 19:02:42 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:02:42 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Various Notes...
Message-ID: <23.149c8814.29295fd2@aol.com>

I'm sure someones mentioned it, but another one to the list - harry's 
constant changing eye colour. When he was a baby in the house scene when 
Lily's screaming he has blue eyes. Then throughout the film they're either 
blue or green, it seems to change each time we see him. Even in the movie 
poster book, in the centre fold of HRH he has green eyes, in the other pics 
he has Blue. Also, Alan Rickman appears to have designer sideburns in that 
book. Nice touch Alan ;o)

<< Actual: Plastic around sandwiches
Translation: What's up with that? >>

Heh, do you mean the Clingfilm? Clear plasticy thing that Ron's sarnies are 
wrapped & squashed in? That's there cos that's what us English people wrap 
our lunches in... Annoying stuff as if it so much as folds it sticks together 
and is a pain to get apart & the more you try the more it sticks and you end 
up with a big lump of plastic unfit to wrap anything in. Grrrrrr....

Sara



From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 19:17:46 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:17:46 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <23.149c8814.29295fd2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t91gq+htss@eGroups.com>


> 
> << Actual: Plastic around sandwiches
> Translation: What's up with that? >>
> 
> Heh, do you mean the Clingfilm? Clear plasticy thing that Ron's
sarnies are 
> wrapped & squashed in? That's there cos that's what us English
people wrap 
> our lunches in... Annoying stuff as if it so much as folds it sticks
together 
> and is a pain to get apart & the more you try the more it sticks and
you end 
> up with a big lump of plastic unfit to wrap anything in. Grrrrrr....
> 
> Sara

We use that, too (SaranWrap--like you said, only fit to use once & a
pain to unwrap!).  Maybe she means in contrast to the sandwiches being
in paper bags?  Well, then we wouldn't see what was inside, silly! :-D
Dunno.

-Megan (who thinks the thing with the sandwiches was rather pointless
as there were no other references to the Weasley's poverty so it was
kinda awkwardly executed)




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 19:21:41 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:21:41 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9t91gq+htss@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t91o5+2uq2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Megan" <virtualworldofhp at y...> wrote:
>  -Megan (who thinks the thing with the sandwiches was rather pointless
> as there were no other references to the Weasley's poverty so it was
> kinda awkwardly executed)

When Draco commented on Ron's hand-me-down robes, that (plus the 
sandwiches and evident lack of pocket money) was more than enough.




From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 19:26:21 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:26:21 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various Notes...
Message-ID: <42.1d97c898.2929655d@aol.com>

In a message dated 18/11/2001 19:19:09 GMT Standard Time, 
virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com writes:

<< Megan (who thinks the thing with the sandwiches was rather pointless
 as there were no other references to the Weasley's poverty so it was
 kinda awkwardly executed) >>

It is mentioned in the books.... I actually thought it might have been used 
as a bonding scene between Harry & Ron, beacuse before that theyre not really 
overly familier with each other, but then Harry sees Ron only has his 
sarnies, Harry has all the money, doesn't know any other wizards, the 
Weasley's helped him get the train and Ron seems nice, so why not get a load 
of stuff for them to share? So the Sandwiches come in to help you get to that 
point. Sorta.

Sara 



From genevieve373 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 19:32:10 2001
From: genevieve373 at yahoo.com (genevieve373 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:32:10 -0000
Subject: James Not Dan's Dad (was Re: James Casting)
In-Reply-To: <26.1e827e8e.292958ab@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t92bq+5o85@eGroups.com>

I went to see the movie for the second time last night (I enjoyed it 
much more the second time :) , and I specifically stayed to watch the 
credits.  The man who played James was Adrien *something*...I can't 
remember exactly what it was, but it Wasn't Radcliffe.  I was kind of 
hoping it was his father, just to explain the poor age judgement.  
But, no such luck.

Jenny

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., SALeathem at a... wrote:
> Hi
> Hmm just had a look on the IMDB to see if I could find out for sure 
just who 
> played James Potter. But there isn't a listing. 
> 
> They have Lily Evans Potter (Geraldine Somerville), but no mention 
of a 
> James...
> 
> :o/
> 
> I think I'm gonna study that newspaper article which had the photo 
of Dan & 
> his Dad Alan Radcliffe before I go to see the movie again. Unless 
anyone did 
> manage to catch the name of the actor/person who played James at 
the end of 
> the film?
> 
> Oh there's also a producer called Mark Radcliffe. Anyone know if 
he's any 
> relation?
> 
> Sara




From lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 19:35:54 2001
From: lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:35:54 -0000
Subject: The Screaming Book
Message-ID: <9t92iq+q3lu@eGroups.com>

Did anyone else jump when Harry was in the restricted section of the 
library and he opened the book and the face jumped out at him?  I 
loved that part in the book when the book screamed - it always gives 
me goosebumps.  In the movie, I definitely did not expect a face to 
accompany the scream.  I loved it.

--jenny from ravenclaw ****************************************




From rainy_lilac at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 19:43:51 2001
From: rainy_lilac at yahoo.com (rainy_lilac at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:43:51 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Motorcycle is... a Triumph (in the movie, at least...)
Message-ID: <9t931n+dq74@eGroups.com>



Just thought you would all like to know that I saw this film with two 
small children and their father who is a British motorcycle 
afficionado. He immediately recognized the motorcycle as a Triumph, a 
classic British bike.

Considering how much the film differs from the book, I realize that 
this is not exactly canon, but I thought you would all like to know 
anyway.


--Suzanne




From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu  Sun Nov 18 20:02:08 2001
From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:02:08 -0500
Subject: My review on first viewing
Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B05614@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>

Hi, everyone!
 
Well, I've seen the movie once, and am about to go again, but wanted to jot
down my initial thoughts/reactions before the second round muddies up my
first assessment. This is going to be long and rambly, but I hope I'll get
to all the important bits.
 
Okay. To start with, I agree with everyone who said that Richard Harris's
problems with Dumbledore are to be blamed on the script. Where there was
humour written in the scene, he did manage to play it reasonably well. It
was very disjointed to have him stand twice--they should have proceeded
straight to Sorting and then had him say all his bit at once (and I agree
that the "reminder" struck me as odd, as well.
 
I really liked the Dursley sequences, and I thought they did establish
Harry's abusive situation. Particularly after the zoo, when Vernon grabs his
hair and locks him in the cupboard. I also didn't at all mind the seque to
the hut on the rock--I think it worked just fine and made sense to cut the
material in between for time.
 
I have to second the idea that the film script sets up the possibility that
the Evans's were Squibs, though it could easily still be that there was
rampant favouritism in the family (or at least Petunia perceived it so) such
that if it was Lily it was a Good Thing; if it was Petunia it was a Bad
Thing. Jury's still out on that, but Fiona Shaw was chillingly good there.
Only minor quibble: Vernon calls Harry Harry on Sunday.
 
Diagon Alley--I saw the Leaky Cauldron sign, but I think I misinterpreted
Rowling's hint and was looking above it, so I didn't detect anything
special. Yes, a few more wizards thronging around him would have been nice.
 
Did anyone else notice the little Hogwarts banners outside certain shops? I
think it's so funny but yet completely consistent that stores on DA would
advertise "Buy Official Hogwarts Gear Here." Also, there was another wand
shop--but I don't remember the name.
 
Ollivander's: I missed Hagrid not being there, though it makes sense to get
him the owl in that amount of time. I LOVED John Hurt, but I also missed his
nattering on about what's in each wand. There was no soundtrack in this
scene--they were saving the music for the phoenix feather wand--and I was
somehow really conscious of the lack of dialogue and the silences that
stretched while Harry took each wand and tried it out. I felt that the
silence should have been filled with Ollivander talking about the wands.
 
The flashback, etc. - I think this could be either Hagrid's imagination or
Harry's. I don't think it's inconsistent with what Harry hears. Lily never
puts him in the crib; it looks more to me like she's trying to figure out
where to run. The f/b is sketchy, so it would be reasonable that the
dialogue between her and Voldy isn't covered here. It doesn't mean it didn't
happen--but as Hagrid wasn't there and Harry can't remember it yet, it's
reasonably absent.
 
King's Cross - I was also perturbed that Hagrid hands him his ticket and
it's suddenly time to use it. This is one of those times when a simple film
effect could have showed time passing--change Hagrid's line to say "remember
it's first september at 11:00" and then have him disappear. Then cut to a
tight shot of Harry standing in the station, do a fast dissolve around him
and perhaps a voice over or a tight close-up of Vernon laughing at him with
the line, "Nine and Three-Quarters? Barking mad--well, have a good term--if
you can find the platform!" all nasty like. Ta-da. Harry obviously went home
and got dropped off.
 
Weasleys - Percy and Ginny were thrown away, yes. I also would have liked to
see Mrs. Weasley in robes rather than Muggle clothes. Loved the twins.
Didn't particularly miss the rest of the getting on scene, though I was
conscious they skipped it all.
 
Sorting - Like I said, they should have just gone straight to it and kept
D's speech for afterward. I completely agree the order is contrived. I
didn't like the dangly bits on the hat, either. What's up with that? Loved
the special effect of it talking, but they totally blew that it should have
been more private. 
 
Passage of time in general: I think the establishing shots did enough to
show that time was passing, though a few montages would have been nice.
Seeing even snips of other classes and taking exams--maybe just the old
"calendar on the wall" trick, combined with a couple silent shots of them
poring through the library, would have helped.
 
Seamus/Neville: agreed. All of it. Lose Seamus, give it all to Neville. I
did love the look on Nev's face, though, when he told Harry that Hermione
had been crying (he got the gossip from Parvati, did y'all catch that?)--his
face so clearly said, "I've done that myself a fair few times." Poor little
guy. Oh, skipping backward--his broomstick ride! Holy Hanging by a Thread,
Batman! Like I said, poor guy!
 
So getting back to the flying thing--I loved how Draco mounts his broom,
very casually, as if he's done it thousands of times. It reminded me of how
kids frequently push off on the pedal of their bikes and throw their other
leg over after the bike's already in motion. Cool.
 
Sean Biggerstaff! Whoo-hoo! He has so few lines and he really nails (for me)
the way Quidditch is this kid's life. I really liked the details in the
chest that holds the balls, too. One of my fave lines added in the movie was
his about getting hit by a bludger in the head and waking a week later. Hee!
Bless you, Alan Rickman.
 
And speaking of Alan.... heh. hehhehhehheh. Oh, yes. More Alan, more Alan,
more Alan. I came out of the movie saying, "skip CoS--show me PoA NOW!"
Because of all the Snape interaction. I absolutely loved the palate the
costume designer used for his stuff--all very textured, very tactile. The
row of buttons on his trouser cuffs! The slightly purplish tint of his tunic
and the crisp white lines of undertunic. His nubbly wool cloak that catches
fire. And the bifurcated cape! I wanted more scenes of him walking away to
see the way that cape flowed. Yes, it should be "stopper death," but I'll
forgive them that because he's saying it. Interestingly, the way that the
speech was rearranged, and his line reading, makes it sound like, "There
will be no wand waving" is a prohibition, not a comparison. Just like my man
Snape! I really found it interesting that Harry was shown faithfully taking
notes and Snape assumed he was doodling. It does beg the question though of
why Harry didn't show him the pad. It was plain notebook paper, too, though
he was using a quill. 
 
I agree with Amanda about his expressions in the Q match, and the bit about
reaching out for the invisibility cloak. He's got good instincts, this Snape
fellow. And the slightly pained expression when he says good luck to Harry.
Though I have mixed feelings about this (my Snape wouldn't say a kind word
under any circumstances, even with the qualified follow-up comment), it
seems he's also not sure why exactly he's doing it. Great inner conflict.
 
Two Quidditch quibbles: 1. The circling the broom thing bugged me. Given
cushioning charms, etc., I rather imagined they would manoeuver like that,
but that they would take the brooms with them, not leave it stationary like
a gymnast on parallel bars. 2. I wanted more active referree'ing by Hooch.
Seems to me there were a number of fouls that weren't called. It would have
given the audience a better sense of the game--rather than an "anything
goes" kind of thing. 
 
Quidditch good stuff: Loved the speed, the non-stop ness of the action.
Loved Oliver. I really liked that the hoops were at different heights. And
while the stadium is the real Quidditch layout, I have to say the tower
thing worked for Hermione's problem--having to climb down from her stand,
run round to Snape's, and back up all those stairs. Also not having her
knock Quirrell was I thought a good touch. For one thing, it always kind of
bugged me that Qurrell and Snape were evidently standing next to one another
just incanting spells. If Snape's that worried, why doesn't he
surreptitiously just elbow Quirrell in the gut? That they weren't directly
next to one another helped I think.
 
It's nearly 3 and I have to go to my other date for the movie. Really
important stuff: Mirror. I wish we could have seen the script more
clearly--I figured out the first time in the book that it was written
backward. Am I the only person who always got from the books that Ron's a
bit of a potty mouth? He's _always_ saying things in the books that
scandalize Hermione or merit stern looks from others. "Language, Weasley." I
_like_ that about him--I'm sure his older brothers are a poor influence!
 
Agree with Heidi--some of the longer no-dialogue sequences could have been
shortened to make room for more other stuff. 
 
Flitwick: I hate this visual version of Flitwick. Has anyone seen the show
Boston Public? This season there's a chemistry teacher who is what I
visualize as Flitwick. I don't have time to find a picture now, but maybe
tomorrow I can look for one. 
 
I loved the keys in the final challenge. Agree that the Devil's Snare should
have had "are you a witch or not?" I also would have moved Snape's potion
challenge to before the chess set and kept it in, because they've made such
a big deal out of him being a teacher protecting the stone. I would have let
Hermione shine on that one, but had enough potion for all three of them to
get through and still have the chess scene, which was great. Though I did
find myself saying to Ron, 'just dismount, you silly!"
 
Yes, the ending would have been better if we'd had just one indication that
Slytherin's streak had been broken, and yes, we needed better Neville ahead
of time to fix that hollow victory. However, a parting Alan shot: loved the
look on his face, the fixed smile, when Dumbledore starts mucking with
points.
 
Oh, and for those people who mentioned Pomfrey's headgear: It's called a
hennin, and yes, it surprised me, too!
 
Everything else others have said. I'll probably post tomorrow with reactions
from the second time through. I haven't made up my mind yet whether Williams
just knocked off the score without caring or whether he really put in an
effort. More on that later.
 
Gwen



From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 19:54:56 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:54:56 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Various Notes...
References: <9t8vib+net5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009301c1706a$e5bfc880$e500a8c0@shasta>

Amber wondered,

> Actual: why burma and not brazil
> Translation: Is there a reason to have the snake be from Burma and
> not Brazil?

<snip>

> Actual: No "Amigo"
> Translation: The snake doesn't say "Thanksssss Amigo"! What, they
> couldn't spend the half a second to have it say Amigo? Hmph.

I think the people at the zoo must have pointed out that pythons live Burma,
not Brazil, and convinced the film people to correct the habitat. I gather
that boa constrictors live do in South America, though and think that boas
and pythons are related - so I don't see why they had to be so snooty about
it.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who has just run four google searches on
snakes and nows knows about three times as much about snakes as he ever
wanted know, but still doesn't know enough to write this post
authoritatively, and doesn't plan to either, because the topic gives him the
willies.)
_______________________

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





From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 20:05:38 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:05:38 -0000
Subject: Penny & Barb's comments
In-Reply-To: <9t90dg+5v8e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t94ai+skqm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Megan" <virtualworldofhp at y...> wrote:
> <Cassandra wrote:>
> 
> Maybe you're right about the Ron/Harry 
> > shippiness, cos that's all I'm seeing here.
> 
> I understand where you're coming from in saying this (other 
> people's POVs) but why can't two people simply be best friends 
> without everyone jumping up and shouting, "slash couple!" (I was 
> going to say "gay", but I figured that sounded a little much)?  

That was just me being tongue-in-cheek and playing devil's advocate 
by pointing out some equally ambiguous possible Ron/Hermione moments 
without telegraphing it (the tongue-in-cheek/devil's advocate stuff) 
very well.  I'm just slightly baffled by the arguments of this bit 
being R/H, that bit being H/H, everyone pointing out that Harry 
doesn't give Ginny a glance, etc.  

I don't think the film is really shippy at all, and that was 
something I really like about it.  I was mentioning the Ron/Harry 
ship because it's as plausible at this point as the Ron/Hermione or 
Harry/Hermione ships, which is to say not at all.  Looking for signs 
of future Potterverse shipping in this film is futile, I believe.  I 
would say that there is no hidden meaning in Harry being moved to 
the same side of the table as Hermione, Hermione looking at Harry 
over Ron's inert (albeit twitching) body and Harry slipping out of 
the Devil's Snare before Ron.  They are just shy of twelve, for 
heaven's sake.  Look for shippiness when we get to PoA, if you will, 
but it just feels out of place for the first film.

--Barb






From pennylin at swbell.net  Sun Nov 18 20:33:08 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:33:08 -0600
Subject: SHIPpiness in the Movie
References: <9t8el1+46m0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF81B04.8050306@swbell.net>

Hi --

I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree about Emma's performance, 
Barb.  There is apparently room for disagreement since some reviewers 
have really been taken with her, while others have not. I guess I'm 
somewhere in the middle.  I don't think she was stand-out by any means, 
but I liked her performance well enough.  I do hope she'll add more 
depth to Hermione in the coming novels because Hermione does really come 
into her own by PoA.  I hope Emma's statement in the Couric special that 
she "hates" Hermione was not the case (she did lots of other interviews 
where she said she's alot like Hermione ... I hope she was being more 
truthful then).

As for the SHIPpy stuff ... I'll start out by saying I was mainly being 
light-hearted.  Ahem.  But, I can certainly expound more on what I was 
referring to.  Before I do that though, I do want to note that I am not 
totally out in left field on this one.  For one thing, several 
no-shippers have been jumping over to the H/H ship *based on the Movie.* 
  And, while critic Elvis Mitchell didn't have much that he liked about 
the movie overall in his review in the NY Times on Friday, he did notice 
this much:

>  > The other child actors shine, too. Ms. Watson has the sass and
>> smarts to suggest she might cast a spell of her own on Harry in the
>>  coming years 

So, I may be in left field.  But, I'm not out there by myself.  <g>

Barb wrote:


> I snipped a bunch of your comments about H/H because they frankly
> baffled me.  I only noticed one fairly clear H/H moment, which I'll
> get to.  The chess scene struck me as inarguably R/H, especially
> since Hermione's first impulse was to run to Ron as soon as he fell.

Actually, I didn't make many H/H comments in my long review (mostly 
parenthetical asides)... and it seems you didn't snip any of them after 
all.  :--)  That's okay since I don't mind elaborating on what I was 
thinking about.  I see Cassie has already said what I would say re: the 
post-Chess scene.  Hermione & Harry are *both* concerned & worried about 
Ron.  That's natural.  I see no R/H in that at all.  But, my personal 
interpretation of the speech to Harry about being a great wizard was H/H 
(actually, to be technical, it's more FITD in that I see evidence that 
she may have the beginnings of a crush on Harry).  She looks at him 
rather meaningfully & it's that pan back to her face as he's leaving 
that seals the deal as far as I'm concerned. Sorry it made your teeth 
hurt, but I thought her speech was one of her stronger moments.  I think 
the fact that the camera moved back to her face could be significant. 
Just my opinion though.

Me: I do note, however, that they did seem
>  > to seat Harry next to Hermione & on that side of the table for all
>  > scenes in the Great Hall (anything H/H there?).  :--)
> 
Barb: > Doubtful.  I think it was just a continuity problem.

Um .... I was *really* kidding with that one.  I don't think the seating 
means anything either way.  :--D

Re: the Troll incident.  Cassie took the words out of my mouth.  It's 
*Harry* who asks about Hermione.  Ron looks like he could care less. 
It's Harry who (as in the book) grabs Ron's arm & says: "Hermione, she 
doesn't know!"  That's Hero Harry I agree.  But, it is when Hermione 
screams out "Help!" in a very damsel-in-distress moment that Harry gets 
a determined look on his face & rushes the Troll.

> 
 And remember, it's actually Ron who saves her (and
> Harry) by levitating the troll's club using the charm that Hermione
> was coaching him on (he was sitting next to her in Charms, too, or
> is did that escape your notice, Penny?).

I admit to being more than a bit taken aback by the sarcasm.  Like I 
said, I was very much kidding about the seating arrangements.  I only 
mentioned it because you commented on the switch in seats during the 
Welcome Feast.  I had noticed this too, and the 3rd time I saw the movie 
I did make a mental note that they seemed to have always placed Hermione 
to Harry's right & across the table from Ron in all the Great Hall 
scenes.  I don't think this *means* anything -- I just noticed it 
because the switch made no sense to me.

> 
>  > Okay, here goes my inner H/H shipper again.
>  > Anyone else notice that Hermione says "Trust me," and Harry
>  > immediately falls through to safety whereas Ron gets even more
>  > entangled?  ::wicked laughter:::
> 
> I think this is just indicative of Harry's personality again.  He's
> very much my mind-over-matter Harry in the movie. <g>

You could be right.  But, my inner H/H shipper is entitled to be 
delighted all the same.  :--)

> 
>  > Pre-dinner scene between the Trio: heh, heh, heh.  That is *all*
>  > my inner H/H shipper will say on this score.  :::sweet smile:::
> 
> Now you've really lost me.  Did you not notice that Ron and Hermione
> were hanging out alone together?  Hmm?  I thought this scene was
> unnecessary anyway, but maybe that's just me.

Cassie was correct in interpreting what I was referring to.  Hermione 
just gives Harry a rather significant look when she beams "Never 
better."  It just made me smile.

In a later message, Barb said:

> Looking for signs
> of future Potterverse shipping in this film is futile, I believe.

Possibly, although Cassie is under the impression that some people 
associated with the film do know the future direction of canon.  *If* 
that's true, then there is something there.  I think Kloves has a 
definite preference.  I could, of course, be off-base on both counts.

  
> I would say that there is no hidden meaning in Harry being moved to
> the same side of the table as Hermione,

Agreed!


Penny

 




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 20:42:17 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:42:17 -0000
Subject: Stephen Kloves
Message-ID: <9t96f9+79dg@eGroups.com>

I don't post here much, but I just wondered what you think Stephen 
Kloves added to the film, whether you think he did the book justice, 
whether you thought he improved it etc.

Personally, and I hate to say it, I thought he was the weakest link 
in the film. He seemed to take away some of JKR's best lines, and 
replace them with (IMO) not very good ones. He was ok with tweaking 
the storyling (ie. they flying keys etc.) but the dialogue really was 
very mediocre at best. The re-arangement's seemed pretty pointless, 
and while they didn't take anything away from the story, they didn't 
add anything either, and what's more, it's not the PS that we all 
know and love.

Anyway, I just wanted to know what you all thought about that...

Dave 

Random Quote Generator: I shouldn't a' said that!





From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 20:52:29 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:52:29 -0000
Subject: SHIPpiness in the Movie
In-Reply-To: <3BF81B04.8050306@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9t972d+a1sc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:

> I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree about Emma's 
performance, 
> Barb.  There is apparently room for disagreement since some 
reviewers 
> have really been taken with her, while others have not. I guess I'm 
> somewhere in the middle.  I don't think she was stand-out by any 
means, 
> but I liked her performance well enough.  I do hope she'll add more 
> depth to Hermione in the coming novels because Hermione does really 
come 
> into her own by PoA.

I think Emma was really fantastic, just how I'd imagined Hermione 
(except way too good-looking), and I thought she was the best of the 
trio. She added a real depth to her characters that the others didn't 
do (well, she added as much depth as the script allowed her), which 
for a 10 year old I think is pretty amazing. She's got a good career 
ahead of her, if she chooses to go in that direction of course.  
Incidentally, all the people I went with (there were 6 of us) agreed 
that she was the best...I suppose you either love her or you hate 
her. Like marmite:o)

Dave

Random Quote Generator: I've got a scar on my leg that's a perfect 
map of the London Underground.




From pennylin at swbell.net  Sun Nov 18 20:53:01 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:53:01 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Uneducated question
References: <9t7l3f+7t7f@eGroups.com> <3BF7EFBE.3E586E68@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3BF81FAD.90803@swbell.net>

Hi --

Amanda Lewanski wrote:

> Excuse me, this is a *totally* stupid question, but can someone define
> for me just what "scenery chewing" is? I'd never heard the usage before,
> and I'm missing out on the overtones of some of the critiques.

I could stand a definition also.  I've no idea what this means.

Penny





From cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 21:05:46 2001
From: cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com (cassandraclaire73 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:05:46 -0000
Subject: Quick responses
Message-ID: <9t97ra+ag74@eGroups.com>


"I understand where you're coming from in saying this (other people's
POVs) but why can't two people simply be best friends without everyone
jumping up and shouting, "slash couple!"

*blinks.* That was a joke, in response to Barb joking. I never for a 
moment ever meant to suggest that I saw any Ron/Harry shippiness 
there. I hardly think two people joking constitutes "everyone jumping 
up and shouting slash couple!"

"They are just shy of twelve, for 
heaven's sake.  Look for shippiness when we get to PoA, if you will, 
but it just feels out of place for the first film."

I guess I'm with Anthony Lane on this one. (He has, after Pauline 
Kael, always been one of my favorite movie critics.) In his New 
Yorker review he said, "The movie patches Harry together with 
Hermione as a pal, yet, if I were his age, I would already be rolling 
a pencil under her desk and trying to look up her skirt. (Rowling, 
acute as ever, knew this; she had Harry flushing with awkwardness at 
Hermione's embrace.)" Hey, if he's noting shippy canon/movie moments, 
I can too. :D

Cassie




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 18 21:33:31 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:33:31 -0000
Subject: What is Scenery-Chewing
Message-ID: <9t99fb+sjdf@eGroups.com>

"Shewing the scenery" is what used to be said of an actor who was 
really hamming it up and being over-the-top nrealistically 
overdramatic. There was a time (1800s IIRC) when audiences LOVED 
that. Styles change. Maybe the phrase began as a reference to King 
Lear's mad scene and the actor having such fun pretending to 
be a loony that he tried to eat the (fake) shrubbery.




From Court6701 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 21:41:27 2001
From: Court6701 at aol.com (Court6701 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:41:27 -0000
Subject: James' seeker position
Message-ID: <9t99u7+7gt0@eGroups.com>

In the movie we are shown that James Potter was seeker for his house 
(whichever one it is), but i could swear i had read or heard that 
James was Chaser for his house.  Has this ever been mentioned in the 
books or by JK, or am i simply confusing my fanfiction?  Thanks

Courtney




From ebonyink at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 18 21:49:50 2001
From: ebonyink at hotmail.com (Ebony)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:49:50 -0000
Subject: What is Scenery-Chewing (with some SHIP stuff)
In-Reply-To: <9t99fb+sjdf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9adu+8q75@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> "Shewing the scenery" is what used to be said of an actor who was 
> really hamming it up and being over-the-top nrealistically 
> overdramatic. There was a time (1800s IIRC) when audiences LOVED 
> that. Styles change. Maybe the phrase began as a reference to King 
> Lear's mad scene and the actor having such fun pretending to 
> be a loony that he tried to eat the (fake) shrubbery.


Oh, well, Emma certainly didn't do any of that!  I found her simply 
adorable from start to finish.  And for heavens' sake, she is 10.  As 
a former middle school drama teacher, I know from personal experience 
that Anna Paquins are hard to come by.  :-D

Like I said, the only problem I had with the child was something she 
can't help... her looks.  She is *far* too cute for Hermione, and as 
I've said, if they keep this cast until movie 4 I don't think the 
Yule Ball sequence will be necessary.  She doesn't have rabbit 
incisors, her hair is not extremely bushy, and I doubt very much that 
it'll take Ron 3 1/2 years to notice that she's "a girl".  So perhaps 
GoF will be less than two days long after all.

I think all of the kids were darling.  They are, after all, just 
kids.  I was pleasantly surprised by all of the performances.

And as far as the PS/SS section of my H/H manifesto goes, I feel 
vindicated... in the movie I saw *exactly* what I saw in the book, 
that Hermione has the beginnings of a crush on Harry in the first 
book.  Totally one-sided IMO, but then again, so is H/G.  

In response to the age comments--yes, they are indeed eleven.  But 
what's wrong with 11 year olds having crushes?  It's NORMAL!  I am 
more concerned with the idea that because Rowling confirmed there 
will be a bit of romance in the future, this means that the canon 
mains will go beyond innocent kisses.  Not so and totally OOC.

I also think that the way that Draco was portrayed shows he's 
something more than a one-dimensional evil junior Death Eater.  So 
yes, upon second viewing both Eb's Inner Shipper and Character 
Redeemer were happy.  HP as it ought to be.  ;-)

One more thing--get today's USA weekend magazine!  On the cover there 
is the most darling picture of Dan I've ever seen... and his hair is 
messy!  Why couldn't they do that for the movie, I wonder?

--Ebony AKA AngieJ




From pkerr06 at attglobal.net  Sun Nov 18 21:53:06 2001
From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (pkerr06 at attglobal.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:53:06 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t8rf6+nl3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9ak2+34kq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hertopos at h... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "T" <supergirl1024 at y...> wrote:
> > I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
> > having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> > Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> > just OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?
> > 
> > T
> 
> I don't view the incident a murder. 

Me, neither.  Everything was happening so fast, that I doubt Harry 
even had time to think, ah, if I seize Quirrel's face, he'll die.  I 
do think Harry's actions qualify as self-defense (Quirrel seemed 
intent on killing him).  That's not murder.

Peg




From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 22:14:34 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:14:34 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t908u+1281@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9bsa+us19@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Jenny from Ravenclaw" <lilymumu2001 at y...> 
wrote:
> T wrote:
> >I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather than 
> having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
just 
> OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?>
> 

My main problem with this is not that he did it, but how the rest of 
the movie treated it.

In the book, he only thinks he is blistering Quirrel - JUST keeping 
him off him. He didn't know that he would die should Voldemort be 
forced from him, he's told later by Dumbledore.

But in the movie he watches Quirrell's hands break away. He looks at 
his own hands. He has the moment where he realizes what will happen 
when he touches Quirrell with his hands. And he decides to do it. He 
knows he is going to kill him.

While I still think he made the right decision, and that it was self-
defense, this is a TREMENDOUS change in Harry's character. He just 
got a hell of a lot more agressive - understandably so, of course. 
And afterwards he's right back to the same old Harry...it does 
nothing to suggest that he's different having actively killed 
someone...whereas in the book, its "Voldemort left him to die," and 
it's not really clear of H. killed him or V.'s leaving killed him. 

Then again, it could be that Harry's touch forced Voldemort out of 
that part of Quirrell, and departing with Voldemort caused his 
hopeless shell of existence to break away. Could be Voldy anyway. But 
Harry still did make that decision.

M.





From mellienel2 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 22:16:23 2001
From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:16:23 -0000
Subject: 2 probs.
Message-ID: <9t9bvn+3jb8@eGroups.com>

1. Harry never finds out how he got the invisibility cloak. It seems 
so small a detail to throw into other movies, I personally think 
they're going to just forget it.

2. We never see Harry get that Snape hates HIM, not just that he's 
particularly unpleasant. We know he's more unpleasant toward Harry, 
but H. never even wonders about it, and Dumbledore never told him 
that James saved Snape's life...I agree with most cuts from the book, 
but this one I think was important, very important, for setting up 
future emotion.

That's all at the moment.

.m





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 22:18:56 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:18:56 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <009301c1706a$e5bfc880$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <9t9c4g+if82@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> wrote:
> Amber wondered,
> 
> > Actual: why burma and not brazil
> > Translation: Is there a reason to have the snake be from Burma and
> > not Brazil?
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > Actual: No "Amigo"
> > Translation: The snake doesn't say "Thanksssss Amigo"! What, they
> > couldn't spend the half a second to have it say Amigo? Hmph.
> 
> I think the people at the zoo must have pointed out that pythons live Burma,
> not Brazil, and convinced the film people to correct the habitat. 

The book originally said boa constrictor from Brazil.  The film switched to a 
python frm Burma.  Presumably because pythons get much larger than boas.

Naturally, a snake from Burma wouldn't say "Amigo."  For that matter, nor 
would a snake from Brazil, since Brazilians speak Portuguese, not Spanish.




From rose590 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 18 22:48:10 2001
From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:48:10 -0000
Subject: One and only observation
Message-ID: <9t9dra+89pn@eGroups.com>

I've seen the movie twice now and agree with the majority of the 
commentary that I've read so far on this list.

I think I can sum things up quite concisely with a comment made by my 
friend who went with me to see it both times.

"The movie was a Wonderful trailer for the book!!"

Rose in PA
(who wants to be Rita Skeeter in the fourth movie)




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 18 22:54:37 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:54:37 -0000
Subject: James' seeker position
In-Reply-To: <9t99u7+7gt0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9e7d+8f8p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Court6701 at a... wrote:
> In the movie we are shown that James Potter was seeker for his 
> house (whichever one it is), but i could swear i had read or heard
> that James was Chaser for his house.  Has this ever been mentioned 
> in the books or by JK, or am i simply confusing my fanfiction?  

It isn't in the books, but when JKR did online chats to publicize 
GoF, someone asked her what position James played on the Gryffindor 
Quidditch team. She did answer "chaser" and she didn't say "Why are 
you sure it was Gryffindor?" When I read that interview, I was furious 
at her for not saying "seeker" so I'm glad they fixed THAT.

But not glad they pronounced the T in Voldemort and long E in 
Ru-bee-us instead of Ru-bay-us.




From djtarb at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 22:58:07 2001
From: djtarb at aol.com (djtarb at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:58:07 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS movie...
Message-ID: <2f.1de6b088.292996ff@aol.com>

In a message dated Sun, 18 Nov 2001  9:54:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at yahoo.com> writes:

> (Before I join the discussion properly, I feel compelled to shout this from the rooftops:
> 
>   Chamber of Secrets -- Alan Rickman and Kenneth Branagh in the same film! Double the buttery goodness!)
> 
> (Now returning you to your *relevant* discussion.)
> 
>  (Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are Australian wizards.)
> 

Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!

Diane in Philly



From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 18 23:02:53 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:02:53 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t9bsa+us19@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9emt+7i92@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., mellienel2 at y... wrote:

> My main problem with this is not that he did it, but how the rest
> of the movie treated it.
> 
> In the book, he only thinks he is blistering Quirrel - JUST keeping 
> him off him. He didn't know that he would die should Voldemort be 
> forced from him, he's told later by Dumbledore.
> 
> But in the movie he watches Quirrell's hands break away. He looks
> at his own hands. He has the moment where he realizes what will 
> happen when he touches Quirrell with his hands. And he decides to 
> do it. He knows he is going to kill him.

I might just be stupid, but I didn't see Harry realizing what would 
happen. I only saw him realizing that he somehow had a weapon of 
self- (and stone-) defense. I'm glad we saw Quirrell crumble into 
bits: leaving him alive was a loose end. I wish Harry had made the 
book speech about how bad if Voldemort regained power, that would 
make it clearer why he was so desperate to save the stone. I was a 
little shocked that he was So Tempted by V's seductions (which 
reminded me instantly of Barb's fic HP&ToGI). 
 
> And afterwards he's right back to the same old Harry...it does 
> nothing to suggest that he's different having actively killed 
> someone

Yes, he should have said something to Dumbledore about what happened 
to Professor Quirrell, and Dumbledore says He has died, and Harry 
gets weepy about I didn;t mean to kill him, and Dumbledore tells him 
it wasn't him, it was Voldemort.




From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 23:31:02 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:31:02 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9t9c4g+if82@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9gbm+t6a9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> 
wrote:
> > Amber wondered,
> > 
> > > Actual: why burma and not brazil
> > > Translation: Is there a reason to have the snake be from Burma 
and
> > > not Brazil?
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > Actual: No "Amigo"
> > > Translation: The snake doesn't say "Thanksssss Amigo"! What, 
they
> > > couldn't spend the half a second to have it say Amigo? Hmph.
> > 
> > I think the people at the zoo must have pointed out that pythons 
live Burma,
> > not Brazil, and convinced the film people to correct the habitat. 
> 
> The book originally said boa constrictor from Brazil.  The film 
switched to a 
> python frm Burma.  Presumably because pythons get much larger than 
boas.
> 
> Naturally, a snake from Burma wouldn't say "Amigo."  For that 
matter, nor 
> would a snake from Brazil, since Brazilians speak Portuguese, not 
Spanish.

This is unbelievably nitpicky, even for me, but the word for friend 
happens to be the same in both Spanish and Portuguese, so talking 
snakes from Brazil might well use the word amigo, although pronounced 
a little differently (Ah-me-go in Spanish; more like Ah-me-goo in 
Portuguese).  We could be even more nitpicky and ask how a snake 
which was bred in captivity, presumably in England, would know the 
word amigo even if its ancestry was Brazilian, but I think this has 
probably gone far enough.

However, Joanne's point is well taken that a Burmese snake would of 
course not call anyone amigo, and also that most people, at least in 
the US, mistakenly think that people speak Spanish in Brazil.

BTW, did anyone else notice that the zoo in the movie was definitely 
the London Zoo?  (There was a plaque that said so above the snake 
sign.)  In the book, we decided it has to have been another zoo, 
since during the Diagon Alley trip it is said that Harry had never 
been to London before.

--Joywitch




From jsteinb103 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 23:54:56 2001
From: jsteinb103 at aol.com (jsteinb103 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:54:56 EST
Subject: Miscellaneous impressions and a few plot problems
Message-ID: <112.7df292c.2929a450@aol.com>

At the end of the movie a woman sitting behind me said "I never realized how 
much was in the books until I saw how much they took out here."  That 
reflects my feelings very well.  

I really enjoyed the movie.  
The acting seemed fine - I didn't see problems with Daniel or Emma that other 
people on this list have mentioned, and I agree with the folks who have 
pointed out that the script took out some of Dumbledore's best lines, leaving 
Richard Harris with a skewed view of the character. (Although if he had read 
the book he might have tried to compensate for it.)  

I'm not quite sure how to put this: the movie had the right "feel".  Except 
for the one time that Hagrid said "Voldemort" instead of "You-know-who" or 
"He who cannot be named" I didn't feel that any of the lines were out of 
character or that anything was anacronistic.  It felt like JKR's universe.

Most of the changes were positive.  Dudley jumping on the stairs was 
wonderful.  So was the snake scene.  And the owls on Privet Drive.  Loved the 
Chocolate 
Frog jumping out the window.  No problems with Harry first meeting Draco at 
Hogwarts instead of Diagon Alley.  The keys were good.  The changes in the 
Devil's Snare scene and elimination of the potions challenge didn't bother 
me.  And when I realized what was going on in the fight between Harry and 
Quirrell, my reaction was "This solves the deus ex machina problem (discussed 
on the main list) nicely."

Minor quibble:  In the Quiddich match after Wood fell off his broom, we never 
saw him remount and continue playing.  Why didn't Slytherin's score go up 
drastically after that if the Keeper was no longer guarding the goals?

Now for the major problems that jumped out at me:

1)  I don't think it was established that Voldemort was not just a bad guy, 
but had been a major force in the wizarding world prior to his defeat when 
the curse recoiled back on him.  And I don't remember it being mentioned that 
this caused Voldemort's defeat.  If I'm forgetting something here, please 
correct this.
By removing any mention (by either Dumbledore or Vernon) of seeing wizards 
celebrating in the streets, and removing this part from Hagrid's narration, 
Voldemort's attack on the Potters and Harry's survival becomes solely a 
personal story, not one with world-wide impact.  Given this, Harry's status 
as The Boy Who Lived makes him more of a celebrity than a hero.   Based on 
what is said in the film, the headlines in the Daily Prophet would have been 
"House Broken Into; Entire Family Murdered; Baby Miraculously Survives."  
Whereas in the book it would have been "You-Know-Who Defeated by Baby Harry 
Potter."   I didn't realize this while I was watching the movie, because my 
mind automatically filled it in, but after I started thinking about it this 
*really* bothers me.

2) The film never establishes that Dumbledore and Flamel had worked together. 
 The scene was set up as in the book, where Harry gets Dumbledore's card in 
the Chocolate Frog package, but in the movie he doesn't read it.  When 
Hermione finds Flamel in a book, she notes that he discoved the secret of the 
Philospher's (Sorcerer's) Stone and that he is 665 years old.  But again, no 
reference to Dumbledore.  So why does Dumbledore have the stone?  Why is it 
in the Hogwarts' vault at Grigotts?

3) The conversation between that Harry overhears between Snape and Quirrell 
is so truncated that there is no mention of the Fluffy or the third-floor 
corridor or the Stone.  In the book this is what leads Harry to believe that 
Snape is after the Stone.  The movie doesn't give a good reason beyond 
Snape's general nastiness (which isn't developed nearly enough - I want more 
Snape!) why the trio suspects him of trying to get the Stone.

4) The hospital scene.  Other people have commented on this, so I won't say 
more than that it wasn't good as explanation and felt anti-climactic.

I've only seen it once, but hope to go again after Thanksgiving.

Julia


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




From joym999 at aol.com  Sun Nov 18 23:55:34 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:55:34 -0000
Subject: Film Thoughts
Message-ID: <9t9hpm+p2qf@eGroups.com>

I'm not going to review the movie (I hear that collective sigh of 
relief) since you've all done it so well before me, but I would like 
to share some impressions and thoughts.

First, I really enjoyed the movie because it brought back some of the 
magic (no pun intended) of the books for me.  I have been so busy 
dissecting and nitpicking and analyizing the books for the last year 
or so that I think I had lost sight of the sheer plesure of the 
story, and the movie brought that back for me.  Overall, I thought 
that the movie was a wonderful visual depiction of a great book, but 
not a great movie in its own right.

The movie also clarified a few things about the books that to me had 
never made sense, and added to my understanding of others:

1.  The Hogwarts Express ticket.  We've had some discussion on the 
main group about why Harry needs a ticket, since no one ever collects 
them, and can anyone get thru the barrier, or only wizards, etc.  The 
way Hagrid says to Harry  "Hold on to your ticket, that's very 
important" or something like that implied to me that it was the 
ticket that made it so you could get thru the barrier.  That would 
explain why the students need the ticket, and would also explain how 
Dobby prevents Harry from getting onto Platform 9 3/4 in CoS -- he 
simply steals Harry's ticket.  It would not, however, explain how 
Molly and Ginny in SS/PS and Molly and Arthur in PoA get on the 
platform, but maybe if you go at the same time as someone with a 
ticket?

2.  I agree with those who said that the winged keys made a lot more 
sense in the movie, especially having them swarm as soon as the broom 
was touched.

3.  Like Ebony, I now understand what Amanda and her ilk see in 
Snape.  While I am still a card-carrying member of SUAVE (Snape's 
Unquestionably A Vampire Evil)  I will now admit, publically, that 
Snape (at least when portrayed by Rickman) is also very sexy.  The 
way he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes his speech took my 
breath away.

4.  Mirror of Erised.  I never got why this scene was supposed to be 
so emotional in the book, or why JKR said that she put a lot of her 
feelings about her mother's death into that chapter.  Reading it 
never affected me but seeing that scene in the movie made me cry, 
especially when Lily puts her hand on Harry's shoulder and Harry 
touches his shoulder.  (sob!)

5.  The movie made me understand more about Harry and Ron's 
relationship.  There have been times, in the book, when I've wondered 
about how Ron could stand always being Harry's sidekick but in the 
movie the balance between them and the development of their 
relationship makes it clearer exactly how they offer each other 
something special.  I thought there was great chemistry between the 
kid actors and that they were all wonderful, but unlike many others 
on this group I like Emma Watson the best.

6.  The Dursleys were just perfect.  The stuff that was added for the 
film were so good -- as others have pointed out having Dursley steal 
the cake made the pig magic more understandable, and having Dursley 
stuck in the snake cage was a nice touch, as was Dudley's jumping on 
the stairs.

7.  I also loved the little detail, as Peg mentioned, of having Harry 
draw a birthday cake in the dirt at the Hut on the Rock.  It was a 
nice touch in the way it added to the feeling of solitude and 
loneliness that Harry feels with the Dursleys.

8.  I agree with everyone's comments about the terrific job Sean 
Biggerstaff does as Oliver Wood, especially the bit where he's 
putting the Bludger back in the box, but I also think that Catherine 
is correct in pointing out that the movie does not quite capture 
Wood's fanatical devotion to Quidditch.  Did you all catch the little 
noises that the Bludgers make?  Very cool.

Oh, and here's another nitpick to add to the list -- the twins in the 
movie are TALLER than Percy, whereas in the books Ron and Percy are 
tall and the twins and Charlie are more stocky.

--Joywitch




From lyyved at earthlink.net  Sun Nov 18 23:55:40 2001
From: lyyved at earthlink.net (lyyved at earthlink.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:55:40 -0000
Subject: Hermione
Message-ID: <9t9hps+fbhf@eGroups.com>

Did anyone else notice that when Hermione put her wand away 
after using the Full-body bind on Neville, she did it with a neat 
little flourish- like a gunslinger reholstering his gun. Very Cute 
touch!

Lynn




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Sun Nov 18 23:58:41 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 18 Nov 2001 23:58:41 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006127921.238.74029.w42@yahoogroups.com>


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

Which one of the kids did the best 
acting job? 

  o Daniel Radcliffe as Harry 
  o Rupert Grint as Ron 
  o Emma Watson as Hermione 


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 virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 00:35:05 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:35:05 -0000
Subject: Quick responses
In-Reply-To: <9t97ra+ag74@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9k3p+k2r7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., cassandraclaire73 at y... wrote:
> 
> "I understand where you're coming from in saying this (other people's
> POVs) but why can't two people simply be best friends without everyone
> jumping up and shouting, "slash couple!"

I truly didn't mean for this come across as harsh as it sounded.  I
was discussing the issue with a friend & she agreed with me, that
there's not really ANYthing there, but almost any of us can create
something out of nothing, especially when trying to back up a theory
we seriously invest in.  They're kids, they're friends.  Harry does
seem a little friendlier, a little more concerned for Hermione than in
the books, but maybe this is because it is a visual touch whereas the
book's description of his actions simply don't give off (as much,
perhaps) of this impression.

I apologize; I know you guys were simply joking around & having fun
with the whole bit--perhaps Hermione's just glad to have some
excellent friends for once? (I've always wondered how she faired
socially on the Muggle side of life)  Thoughts?




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 00:37:33 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:37:33 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <2f.1de6b088.292996ff@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t9k8d+5oj5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., djtarb at a... wrote:
> In a message dated Sun, 18 Nov 2001  9:54:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> writes:
> 
> > (Before I join the discussion properly, I feel compelled to shout this from the rooftops:
> > 
> >   Chamber of Secrets -- Alan Rickman and Kenneth Branagh in the same film! Double the buttery goodness!)
> > 
> > (Now returning you to your *relevant* discussion.)
> > 
> >  (Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are Australian wizards.)
> > 
> 
> Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!
> 
> Diane in Philly


 Hrmmm.... as if I *needed* to go back and re-read the series again. But here goes.... 

...russell crowe as sirius black.... yup, that works..... yup..... got it.... works there.... 

 Okay. Time to organize a letter-writing campaign to Rowling and Columbus.




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 19 00:40:05 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:40:05 -0000
Subject: Film Thoughts
In-Reply-To: <9t9hpm+p2qf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9kd5+ajs6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> 
wrote:

> implied to me that it was the ticket that made it so you could get 
> thru the barrier.  That would explain why the students need the 
> ticket, (snip) 
> It would not, however, explain how Molly and Ginny in SS/PS and 
> Molly and Arthur in PoA get on the platform, but maybe if you go at
> the same time as someone with a ticket?

EITHER have a ticket OR be a licensed Apparator?

> way he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes his speech took 
> my breath away.

The way he swooped away after (telling the three young Gryffindors 
that people might thing they were Up to Something?) DID look like a 
bat!






From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 00:50:10 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:50:10 -0000
Subject: Explaining the Hedwig Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9t8vib+net5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9l02+8teb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Amber" <inviziblegirl at h...> wrote:
> That stupid winter scene where Harry walks out with Hedwig and she
> takes off flying takes 30 seconds! It's the most useless scene in
> the movie! All it does is show passage of time! They could've done
> that some other way...

I sort of already explained this, but did a rather cursory job of it, 
since I was unaware at that time that there was a lot of confusion 
from several people surrounding this scene.  So, for anyone that 
wants to understand the purpose of this scene, read on:

This scene immediately follows the scene with Dumbledore talking to 
Harry about the Mirror of Erised.  Specifically, his comment that "It 
does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live."  The idea of this 
scene is that Harry is letting go of Hedwig and letting her fly away, 
which is a (somewhat contrived) metaphor for Harry letting go of the 
dream of having his parents back.

The fade from one flight to another at the very end of this scene 
does show the transition of time, but that is not the primary purpose.

This is not me reading too much into it--although I did guess this on 
my own initially.  But I shortly afterward found by accident an 
interview somewhere on the internet where Columbus literally confirms 
this.  I'll go scavenge for it if someone want the URL.

Is it brilliant?  Hardly.  Is it superfluous?  Perhaps.  But since we 
can't change it, at least understanding the intent behind it will 
perhaps make it more watchable for everyone.

-Luke




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 00:54:18 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:54:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Thoughts
In-Reply-To: <9t9kd5+ajs6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011119005418.81953.qmail@web20410.mail.yahoo.com>


Alan Rickman has always had an extremely appealing
grace with his... uhm... "swooping."  Go back and
watch ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES to see how
graceful he is with these exagerrated gestures the
Sheriff was always doing (loping down corridors in a
fury, waving his arms about and grabbing things,
etc.). I should imagine this has to do with Rickman's
long stage experience.
 
Just imagine if he had really been given the John
Malkovich role (which *Rickman* created on the stage)
in the movie version of DANGEROUS LIAISONS, how much
easier it would have been to understand Cecile and
What's-her-name de Tourvel's infatuation, and the
Marquise's obsession, with Valmont.)

One final recommendation to savor Rickman's control is
CLOSET LAND. But a note of warning: this is an Amnesty
International-sponsored movie about the torture
session of a young female writer living during a
fascist coup. Very minimalist and very brutal, and
Rickman plays an unbelievably cruel official. It's
difficult to watch. And yet he still somehow manages
to be disturbingly attractive; it's an amazing
performance.

 -- Heather

--- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
<catlady at wicca.net> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon"
> <joym999 at a...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > implied to me that it was the ticket that made it
> so you could get 
> > thru the barrier.  That would explain why the
> students need the 
> > ticket, (snip) 
> > It would not, however, explain how Molly and Ginny
> in SS/PS and 
> > Molly and Arthur in PoA get on the platform, but
> maybe if you go at
> > the same time as someone with a ticket?
> 
> EITHER have a ticket OR be a licensed Apparator?
> 
> > way he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes
> his speech took 
> > my breath away.
> 
> The way he swooped away after (telling the three
> young Gryffindors 
> that people might thing they were Up to Something?)
> DID look like a 
> bat!
> 
> 
> 
> 
  

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 19 00:55:21 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:55:21 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
Message-ID: <9t9l9p+ksa3@eGroups.com>

I loved the movie, at least I got incredibly high on seeing it. 
It's visually beautiful and I want to go one frame at a time looking 
at all the people and costumes and what is happening in the 
background. People on list have mentioned seeing another wand shop on 
Diagon Alley. I didn't, but on second viewing, it seemed to be that 
the shop with the big scissors for sign had lettering that, as viewed 
between the heads of extra, could have said Madam Malkin's Robes and 
it seemed to me that there was a blond boy inside: Draco??? Among 
other things, I want a good look at the arms painted inside the 
Quidditch balls box and at the teachers at the High Table and certain 
adult male extras in the stands at the Quidditch game.... It's not 
just the kid stars, but children and adults, movie Hogwarts is a 
positive buffet of pulchritude.

One nitpick I squeaked at was that the entrance to Gryffindor House, 
behind the Fat Lady painting, doesn't require climbing or jumping up. 
I wonder if they tried building a porthole entrance like in the books 
and people looked too ridiculous using it? But surely committing to 
these unneccessary physical challenges is part of what being a 
Gryffindor is about?

In Gringotts, Hagrid told Harry that goblins aren't the most friendly 
beasts. I squeaked in protest: goblins are Beings not Beasts!

I don't understand why some people dislike some of the acting. I 
loved all the kids and had no problem with Dumbledore despite all 
those interviews that roused fear of bad acting. The 'Harry, you're a 
great wizard' speech was straight from the book: it was embarrassing 
there, too. Umm, Mrs. Weasley didn't quite look and sound right (she 
looked like her hair was badly dyed) but I got over that. I agree 
that James was too old and didn't look enough like Harry but I wasn't 
bothered by that. I was very much bothered about Lily: I had always 
been certain that Lily was much prettier than THAT, there were 
several young women in the Audience who looked more like Lily than 
that actress did.

Other people who looked wrong: McGonagall was a beautiful silver 
tabby (a blotch tabby, which is more common in UK than here) but I'm 
sure the book said she was an orange cat. Mrs. Norris was a beautiful 
fluffy brown tabby -- she is not supposed to be beautiful, nor 
fluffy, and I know that there are cats colored closer to 'dust 
colored': my little Pixy is one. Also, when the kids were sneaking 
around the castle at night and Mrs Norris appeared and they shouted 
"It's Filch's cat!" it hadn't been established for newbies that she 
reports back to him. One sentence is all they needed to set that up. 
Like one sentence from Percy told Harry and newbies that Snape is 
Head of Slytherin House (when Harry's scar hurt and he asked Percy 
"who's that professor talking to Quirrell?"

I don't understand why some Muggle critics said that the first part 
(until the violence starts) was too slow. I thought it was TOO FAST, 
a mad rush through the events of the book, shorter than a cliff's 
notes summary. I would have been happier if let they'd let me spend 
more time with it. I was really bothered by the destruction caused by 
the wrong wands in Ollivander's shop (which incidentally was not 
dusty enough) but that is probably my personal issue. 

It didn't work quite right when Hagrid jumped from saying: "Didn't 
you ever wonder where your Mum and Dad learned it all?"  and Harry: 
"All what?" to saying "Harry, you're a wizard". They really should 
have found time for Q: "All what?" A: "Their magic. [blank look from 
Harry] You don't even know that your Mum and Dad were a witch and 
wizard, some of the best in this century? [more blank look from 
Harry] Ah, Harry, you're a wizard." 

Speaking of blank looks from Harry, I desperately loved his 
expression of wicked glee when bad things happened to Dudley and 
Vernon. It showed that he hasn't had the spirit knocked out of him, 
which took pages and pages and pages in the book.

I don't understand why some people Like the music. I Hated the music 
at the end, which continued under the end credits -- it made me not 
only wince but grind my teeth. Oh, the pomposity, oh the grandiosity, 
oh the loudness. I also disliked that heavenly choir garbage when 
Harry got the right wand and at the first sight of Hogwarts and IIRC 
one other time. That heavenly choir stuff is annoying enough in 
kissing scenes (where it is a cliche) but it's annoying And 
Embarrassing in these scenes: is someone trying to tell us that wands 
and castles and light shows and magic are all just sex? I didn't 
notice any of the rest of the music, which I suppose is as it should 
be.

I've been telling people I want my frame by frame viewing with the 
Sound OFf, and then I add "except for Rickman". Oh, he was gorgeous, 
he was so hot, he did evil and menacing and hidden deep emotions... 
the stuff in the books about Snape looking hideous and disgusting is 
now obsolete. It's non-operative. I believe that Al will now have to 
stop saying: "Have you read the books? The description of Snape? He's 
disgusting." Not Any More.

The only shippiness *I* saw in the film was Draco/Snape... no, I 
don't mean there was child molesting on screen or even implied! But a 
foundation was being laid for something that takes years to flower.
Snape looked approvingly directly AT Draco when he said something 
about students who have potential (giving me the impression that he
is not merely trying to get Harry's goat or please Lucius, but does 
have reason to believe that Draco does have Potential at Potions, 
presumably either from Snape having seen Draco's primary school 
records or from Snape knowing the Lucius is very good at Potions). 
Draco responded to this look of approval by absolutely *beaming* and 
did all the face and body language of WANTING Snape's good opinion. 
Not just of sucking up to a teacher or even to his Head of House. I 
take it he was impressed either by Snape's reputation or by his 
famous speech praising Potions.  None of that is romantic/sexual YET, 
but it lays the groundship for a friendly relationship such as 
mentorship, and over years the erotic attraction can grow out of the 
mutual liking and respect and very much the mentor/naif dynamic which 
Plato praised in The Symposium.

Yes, I also noticed him reaching out for an invisible person, hand 
poised to clutch the Cloak -- I immediately felt he must have had 
experience with James (et al) under that cloak.

Which brings me back to Petunia's outburst about her "perfect" sister 
and how proud the parents were to have a witch in the family. It did 
make me feel that the Evans parents had some contact with the 
wizarding world, already knew about it. But not that they were a 
wizarding family: if Petunia had been raised in the wizarding world, 
she would have thought *it* was normal and the Muggles were freaks! 
Maybe one or both Evans parents was a Squib. Maybe the Evans parents 
were Muggles and one of them had a witch or wizard sibling who told 
them about it.





From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 00:56:46 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:56:46 -0000
Subject: Miscellaneous impressions and a few plot problems
In-Reply-To: <112.7df292c.2929a450@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9t9lce+m7lb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., jsteinb103 at a... wrote:

> I'm not quite sure how to put this: the movie had the 
> right "feel".  Except for the one time that Hagrid 
> said "Voldemort" instead of "You-know-who" or "He who cannot be 
> named" I didn't feel that any of the lines were out of character 
> or that anything was anacronistic.  It felt like JKR's universe.

IIRC, in the book, only Harry and Dumbledore say Voldemort 
consistently.  Even Muggle-born Hermione doesn't dare do that very 
often, as she's done her research and learned that it's not 
considered polite in wizarding society.  (Why she doesn't know about 
the term "Mudblood" is therefore something of a mystery, but we'll 
get that in CoS.)  In general, there were several lost opportunities 
for both accuracy and humor when people around Harry were appalled 
by his use of Voldemort's name.

> Minor quibble:  In the Quiddich match after Wood fell off his 
> broom, we never saw him remount and continue playing.  Why didn't 
> Slytherin's score go up drastically after that if the Keeper was 
> no longer guarding the goals?

Some of the other players can work at taking the Quaffle from the 
Slytherin Chasers, and Beaters also would become more important at 
this point in the game.  Quidditch Through the Ages says that no 
substitutions are allowed during a game for any reason.  I think 
Wood lying unconscious on the pitch is far more realistic than what 
JKR had in her books; I don't think she originally considered what 
the results of some of the things described during the games would 
be.  It fits better with Fred's and George's description of the 
brutality of the game, not to mention Wood's anecdote about his 
first time playing.  OTOH, I was very sad that that was the last we 
saw of Wood. <g>

> When Hermione finds Flamel in a book, she notes that he discoved 
> the secret of the Philospher's (Sorcerer's) Stone and that he is 
> 665 years old.  But again, no reference to Dumbledore.  So why 
> does Dumbledore have the stone?  Why is it in the Hogwarts' vault 
> at Grigotts?

I don't see why they couldn't have kept Harry's recitation of the 
information on Dumbledore's wizard card from the Chocolate Frog 
package.  IMO, it painted a very succinct picture of Dumbledore 
(Kloves savaged Dumbledore's character) as well as establishing his 
link with Flamel.  The whole point of Harry recalling this was that 
it wasn't something one could just find in a book unless you knew 
specifically to research alchemists.  Hermione stumbling on this was 
very annoying.  Harry was was supposed to pick up on it.
 
I too was alarmed by Harry killing Quirrell, although it was 
technically self-defense.  In the book, Dumbledore implies that 
Quirrell was weakened after playing host to Voldemort for as long as 
he did.  Perhaps that was too complex for a film supposedly aimed at 
children (but really aimed at people of any age who've read the 
books, rather than Potter novices).  I think they wanted to use a 
cool special effect and make it clear that Quirrell was no longer a 
threat.  The other odd thing about Quirrell's character was that it 
was implied that he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for years, rather 
than being new.  Someone had the line, "Snape's been after 
Quirrell's job for years."  Am I just imagining this?

--Barb
  




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 01:10:06 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:10:06 -0000
Subject: Miscellaneous impressions and a few plot problems
In-Reply-To: <9t9lce+m7lb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9m5e+3t3u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:

<snip>

  The other odd thing about Quirrell's character was that it 
> was implied that he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for years, rather 
> than being new.  Someone had the line, "Snape's been after 
> Quirrell's job for years."  Am I just imagining this?
> 
> --Barb 
 
Quirrell's job is "DADA Professor."  Snape has wanted the job "DADA Professor" for years. Written out of context as it is here, I can see where that line can be taken the wrong way, but somehow I either don't recall the idea being expressed in those particular words, or at least not delivered in such a way as to imply the job had been Quirrell's for all the time that Snape wanted it.





From TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET  Mon Nov 19 01:13:56 2001
From: TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET (Diana Wisniewski)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:13:56 -0500
Subject: James not Harrys Dad & Screaming Book
Message-ID: <002c01c17097$77ced1e0$c985c640@oemcomputer>

Hi!
    My kids and I just got back from seeing the movie for the second time. We were trying to look for as much of the things everyone has been mentioning as we could, but there was just so much!
    We did watch for who played James, it was almost at the end of the list. His last name was Rawlings, I believe. I didn't catch the first, but Jenny said in her message this afternoon it was Adrien. So he looks a lot like Harry/Dan but isn't his real dad. And we all agree that this man is too old to be playing Harry's dad.
    And to answer Jenny from Ravenclaw. Yes we all jumped when the book screamed, both times. My 10 year old, Tara, grabbed my arm today as Harry reached for the book and told me she wouldn't jump today, but she did!
    We loved the movie even more today.
Diana


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




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 19 01:15:50 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:15:50 -0000
Subject: Centaur/Unicorn (look, a slash!)
Message-ID: <9t9mg6+bgkl@eGroups.com>

Yes, centaurs should look like the torso and upper body of an 
attractive man growing from the shoulders of an attractive horse 
(some twentieth artists have depicted them with TWO sets of 
genitals). Yes, the centaur in this movie was hideously ugly, 
offensive to the eye. Yes, Hagrid says Fir - enz rather than 
Fi-ren-zi, the first time I thought he said Friends which 
didn't make sense to only one centaur. It was not those things 
which bothered me, it was that the Centaur addressed Harry as Mr. 
Potter in the middle of his droned explanation of unicorn blood & the 
Dark Lord. I am sure centaurs don't know from human honorifics! I 
am sure the centaurs always call Dumbledore "Albus Dumbledore", not 
Professor or Headmaster or Mr!

Yes, the unicorn was disappointing. It didn't look like they even 
TRIED to make it the most beautiful and most pathetic thing Harry 
had ever seen. But the gliding swooping flying Voldemort was quite 
adequately scarey. Do people still think it looked like a 
Lethifold?




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov 19 01:12:43 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:12:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: quirrell-new? 
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3396@MIAEXCH1>

It never says in PS/SS that it's Quirrell's first year teaching, although
Percy's line was changed slightly for no discernable reason. 
I always had the impression that he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for at least
a year before Harry started- probably from Hagrid's description that he's
"scared of the students"-how could he know that if there hadn't been
discussion of how he taught the students?



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Nov 19 01:30:26 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:30:26 -0000
Subject: Some poetic touches 
Message-ID: <9t9nbi+rhp2@eGroups.com>

  I had been diligently avoiding reviews, so now having seen the 
movie a second time, I am trying to catch up with what the critics 
have been saying. I get the impression they're complaining 
about a lack of poetry. On my second viewing, which I grant is a 
luxury most critics don't have, I noticed a couple of things I really 
like.
   The scene in the courtyard where Hedwig takes flight and 
loses herself in the clouds follows directly after the Mirror scene, 
and can be seen as Harry letting go of trying to see his parents 
again.
   In the chess game, when Ron tells Harry that he's the one who 
has to go on, he's not only accepting a nasty end, he's giving up 
the dreams of glory which he saw in the Mirror. That speech  
makes it clear that Ron is a hero in his own right, and  a 
character with as much depth as Harry. 
   

Pippin, stopping before she gets shippy




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 01:57:21 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:57:21 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
In-Reply-To: <002c01c17097$77ced1e0$c985c640@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9t9ou1+nsfp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Diana Wisniewski" <TEAPOT1 at P...> wrote:
> We did watch for who played James, it was almost at the end of the 
> list. His last name was Rawlings, I believe. I didn't catch the
> first, but Jenny said in her message this afternoon it was Adrien.

Adrien Rawlings?  Isn't that the name of the person who was JKR's 
date to the premiere?  I could be remembering wrong, but I thought 
that's what I read.  Interesting.

If that is right though, then I still *must* be going crazy, because 
I could swear that the photos of JKR's date did not make him look as 
old as the person playing James in the film.

***

And now, a question to everyone that is perhaps likely to get me 
pummeled to death with heavy objects.

Several people, myself included, have already praised Sean 
Biggerstaff's performance.  And previously, someone else (Cassie?) 
and I also mentioned that despite his being a very talented actor, 
though, he didn't seem to have the opportunity to really capture 
Wood's character, especially the relentless drive and all that.

So my question is: For all the other people who thought Biggerstaff 
did a particularly good job--is this specifically referring to his 
general merit as an actor, or did he really capture Wood's character 
for you?

Because I could tell from what I saw that his screen presence, line 
delivery, and general acting technique were excellent, and 
particularly outstanding among the child actors in the film.  Also 
his physical acting with wrestling the Bludger was quite believable, 
as Barb mentioned--and this sort of thing is deceptively difficult.  
But in some ways I'm not sure if he really reminded me that much of 
the Oliver Wood in the books.  He was more like another equally 
compelling, but slightly different character.  I would have to see 
the film again to say for sure, but that was my quick, first-time 
impression.  I, of course, fault the script more than Biggerstaff for 
this, since he didn't have a practice scene or pep talk in which to 
portray this.

But the reason I ask this is not to get impressions of Biggerstaff's 
prowess (which I feel is apparent enough).  I'm quite curious if 
other people here did think he really was the embodiment of Oliver 
Wood's character, because if so then I wonder if these means that 
your understanding of Wood's character is somehow fundamentally 
different from mine.

Highly curious,
-Luke




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Nov 19 02:06:33 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 02:06:33 -0000
Subject: James' age, Snape, etc
Message-ID: <9t9pf9+ti0k@eGroups.com>

   James, Lupin, Sirius and Snape all have to appear to be of an 
age or we won't get the idea that they were contemporaries once 
it's presented. I  think the decision not to bring that out in this film 
is understandable. There will be people going to see the 
subsequent movies who haven't seen this one, so that 
information will have to be repeated anyway...why not just save it 
for PoA where it's really relevant? (Drools over possible MWPP 
flashbacks in PoA)
     I think the choice of Rickman as Snape (which I would not 
change for all the galleons in Gringott's) made an older James 
invevitable. James could have been computer "youthened" in the 
photo at the end, but I think that would have made it harder to 
recognize him in such a brief glimpse.
   And yes, Amanda, I did see fear in Snape's eyes...(saluting the 
Snape/Lily torch as it passes)

Pippin




From lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 02:09:20 2001
From: lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 02:09:20 -0000
Subject: Harry...a murderer
In-Reply-To: <9t9bsa+us19@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9pkg+5lp6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., mellienel2 at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Jenny from Ravenclaw" <lilymumu2001 at y...> 
> wrote:
> > T wrote:
> > >I was so upset when Harry killed Quirrel in the movie, rather 
than 
> > having Dumbledore save him at the last minute, and Voldie leave 
> > Quirrel to die.  It makes Harry an 11-yr. old murderer, and thats 
> just 
> > OOC..think Pettigrew.  So what does everyone else think?>

Sorry, I didn't ask the question.  I answered it, disagreeing with the 
person who asked it.

--jenny from ravenclaw *************************************




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 02:19:35 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 02:19:35 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
In-Reply-To: <9t9l9p+ksa3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9q7n+36iv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
> I don't understand why some Muggle critics said that the first part 
> (until the violence starts) was too slow. I thought it was TOO
> FAST, a mad rush through the events of the book, shorter than a
> cliff's notes summary. I would have been happier if let they'd let
> me spend more time with it.

Well, in my attempts to make sense out of all the varying opinions, I 
have a sneaking suspicion that this is what is really going on for 
the critics you mention.

Because of the major time compression necessary, the beginning of the 
movie is very choppily edited, the scenes do not flow in such a way 
that each scene does not always seem like the logical continuation of 
the scene that preceded it.  This tends to make scenes feel a little 
irrelevant and unrelated for anyone that isn't familiar with the 
books--the continuity appears a tad rambling and inconsequential.  
When dramatic events unfold in a way that seems irrelevant, people 
get bored, because they have a difficult time understanding where 
this is all heading.

And then people such as the critics you mention often make a flawed 
logical leap that says, because I am bored (effect), the movie must 
be slow (cause)--even though they are numerous other potential 
causes.  Some professional critics--I'm sure it will come as no 
surprise to many of you here--are just as subject to this kind of 
misidentification of the fundamental problem as anyone else.  So they 
may have correctly registered the effect on them, but not realized 
the real reason it was occuring, which is ultimately a FOCUS issue, 
not a pacing issue.  (I have seen some movie critics misidentify in 
other areas as well, especially regarding film scores, probably 
because most of them have an admittedly limited understanding of the 
function and execution of film music.)

Also certain critics with a high degree of familiarity with the books 
that also identified the beginning as "slow", probably did so meaning 
not literally that the pacing itself was slow, but that they felt it 
should have started up the primary "stealing the Stone" plot sooner.  
Again, it's a slight misidentification, I think, because the issue is 
then still really one of focus, rather than pacing.

You (and others), on the other hand, interpreted the choppy 
discontinuity as meaning that the scenes were going by too fast 
(which is ultimately true . . . but perhaps it does not address the 
issue they were really trying to discuss at all).

I personally maintain though, that the solution to this is not to 
make the movie longer (at least not with specific intent), but simply 
to edit it for better continuity and more emphasis on the elements 
that are the most plot relevant.  Most likely that would still result 
in a *longer* film overall, but the aim is different, see.  Effective 
use of time is more critical than an arbitrary determination of 
length, in my opinion.

-Luke




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 19 02:53:28 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 02:53:28 -0000
Subject: weird ideas
Message-ID: <9t9s78+5cdk@eGroups.com>

Did I already say that the movie gave me an idea? Maybe Hagrid, as 
half giant, is safe from werewolves, who are a danger only to humans, 
so young Remus should have spent his full moons with Hagrid (who is 
big enough to control him and good with dangerous animals!) and then 
he wouldn't have been left alone to go roaming with the Marauders.

The Susan Bones girl looked like Ginny should look. When I saw her 
red hair, I thought that might be a clue, about being related to 
Weasleys or Lily, but then I was told she was the director's 
daughter.

Maybe the extra scene that was added with JKR's input was Snape 
wishing Harry "good luck"!?!

How likely that someone named Rowling would date someone named 
Rawlings?




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 02:53:33 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 02:53:33 -0000
Subject: Correction--Stephen Kloves
In-Reply-To: <9t96f9+79dg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9s7d+e440@eGroups.com>

First off, I would like to make a quick correction from when I wrote:

> And previously, someone else (Cassie?) and I also mentioned that
> despite his being a very talented actor, though, he didn't seem to
> have the opportunity to really capture Wood's character, especially
> the relentless drive and all that.

Actually it was Catherine and Joywitch who were the two other people 
besides myself that commented on this, not Cassie.  "Credit where 
credit's due" and all--and perhaps just as importantly "No credit 
where it isn't desired", since I have no idea if Cassie actually 
*wants* to be associated with the opinion I accidentally attributed 
to her.  Sorry!

*****

Now then . . .

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> I don't post here much, but I just wondered what you think Stephen 
> Kloves added to the film, whether you think he did the book justice,
> whether you thought he improved it etc.

This is a tough question, because it's very hard to separate what is 
ultimately the result of Kloves and what may have been more the 
result of someone else like Columbus or Heyman or the chief editor, 
etc.

But assuming we were to attribute *all* final screenplay decisions to 
Kloves (which is certainly not actually the case) then I would have 
these things to say:

On the whole, a reasonable job for what I do think was a very 
difficult task.  I particularly think he made some good scene 
combinations in a way that might not have occured to me and that 
worked pretty well.  Especially some of the roaming around the school 
scenes were combined in a manner that seemed fairly plausible and 
didn't severely damage the unfolding of the story.  So I must give 
some credit there.

The humor changes and exorcises, though, are a shame.  I was not 
expecting most of the book humor to make it into the movie, but 
really the only character left with hardly any humorous lines that 
were actually from the book is Ron.  Some of the new lines were good 
and some not so good, but ultimately the issue I see here is that a 
lot of the fun in this kind of adaptation (that was clearly designed 
with fans in mind) is to hear some of your favorite lines being 
spoken.  So to replace these with new material is not so much fresh 
and appreciated as it is often a tad disappointing.  Some of the 
changes were done from a kind of created necessity, like the loss of 
the "Are you a witch or not?" line in the Devil's Snare, because they 
had redesigned the Devil's Snare to be Hermione's task (replacing the 
purpose of the potion challenge), characterized by her level-
headedness under pressure.  Obviously, the "Are you a witch or not?" 
situation would have undermined this.  But some other line changes, 
it seemed to me, could have easily stuck more to the original.

Also, the handling of necessary exposition in the beginning (at 
Hogwarts) was rather poor, I thought.  A lot of unnecessary 
exposition was overemphasized, and too much of the necessary 
exposition was glossed-over, making for a lot of "filling in the gaps 
with info from the book" that is simply not possible for anyone that 
hasn't read it.  This is why I feel the movie, strangely enough, does 
not stand on its own well at all.

But I don't know how much of this is truly Kloves fault and how much 
is simply the daunting nature of the task.  Perhaps replacing him 
with someone else would help, but perhaps not; I honestly don't know 
enough to say for sure.

-Luke




From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:13:36 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:13:36 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
In-Reply-To: <9t9l9p+ksa3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9td0+72cl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> I loved the movie, at least I got incredibly high on seeing it. 
> It's visually beautiful and I want to go one frame at a time 
looking 
> at all the people and costumes and what is happening in the 
> background. 

Yup (looks at next week's work schedule and tries to figure out 
when's a good time for a repeat viewing)...

> 
> I don't understand why some people dislike some of the acting. I 
> loved all the kids and had no problem with Dumbledore despite all 
> those interviews that roused fear of bad acting. The 'Harry, you're 
a 
> great wizard' speech was straight from the book: it was 
embarrassing 
> there, too.

 ALL the kids nailed their parts, IMHO. Even Dan, who had the biggest 
challenge of all- because he had so much publicity, it was hard not 
to think, "This is Dan Radcliffe, who gets taken to the theatre by 
his parents as a family treat and who, at age 12, makes Katie Couric 
seem hopelessly immature by comparison". By his fourth second of 
screen time, I was thinking "That's Harry Potter".
 
>Umm, Mrs. Weasley didn't quite look and sound right (she 
> looked like her hair was badly dyed) but I got over that.

Her voice grated on me, too. I didn't stay for the credits- PLEASE 
tell me that wasn't Rosie O'Donnell!
> 
> Other people who looked wrong: McGonagall was a beautiful silver 
> tabby (a blotch tabby, which is more common in UK than here) but 
I'm 
> sure the book said she was an orange cat. 
   I always pictured her as younger in human form, too- in her 40s, 
maybe- Anne Robinson, perhaps?

<<snip about pacing- Luke answered this so well, I can only 
add, "What he said">>

> I was really bothered by the destruction caused by 
> the wrong wands in Ollivander's shop (which incidentally was not 
> dusty enough) but that is probably my personal issue. 
>
I really liked ths part. Maybe the shop was TOO dusty, though- if 
this happens every time, wouldn't they be constantly replacing stuff?
 
> Speaking of blank looks from Harry, I desperately loved his 
> expression of wicked glee when bad things happened to Dudley and 
> Vernon. It showed that he hasn't had the spirit knocked out of him, 
> which took pages and pages and pages in the book.
  
   See above for my opinion on his acting.

> 
> I don't understand why some people Like the music. I Hated the 
music 
> at the end, which continued under the end credits -- it made me not 
> only wince but grind my teeth. Oh, the pomposity, oh the 
grandiosity, 
> oh the loudness. 

  Would a "no soundtrack" option on the DVD be too much to ask? 
Please? I love the movie, but it took me all day Saturday to get "da-
da-de-da-da-de-DAY-da-da, da-da-de-da-da-day-dum" out of my head (and 
now it's back...)

<<Snip of Snape, whose parts I usually skip over when I reread the 
books, and who does NOT come banging into the room like Old Wilkie 
from the "Jennings" books- in my imagination, he doesn't move 
perceptibly at all, he's just in one place...and then he's in another 
(usually right over Harry's shoulder)>>


> Which brings me back to Petunia's outburst about her "perfect" 
sister 
> and how proud the parents were to have a witch in the family. It 
did 
> make me feel that the Evans parents had some contact with the 
> wizarding world....<snip>

Things that make you go hmmm.....

-Noel




From peacockharpy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:16:30 2001
From: peacockharpy at yahoo.com (peacockharpy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:16:30 -0000
Subject: Magic in the Movie
Message-ID: <9t9tie+7d3k@eGroups.com>

Just something I'd like others' opinions on, but...

It didn't occur to me until the next day that magic -- good ol' wands
and spells and charms and such -- is oddly missing from the film.

We see McGonagall transform twice (once in shadow), and Hagrid does a
bit with his umbrella.  Dumbledore does the big change of decorations
at the end.

As for students, we see Hermione use her wand three times:  Wingardium
Leviosa, Alohomora and Petrificus Totalus.  Other than that, we see
see Seamus blowing things up twice, Ron getting everything wrong
except in the case of Troll, and Harry getting his wand has some
magical bits.

I know that Hogwarts itself is a magical place, but it seemed like,
having established that magic was there, the specific use of it
suddenly faded away except when needed for plot purposes.  We hardly
ever see students practicing charms or transfiguration or whatever. 
We rarely see wands out, and in fact, we don't really even see Harry's
wand after he gets it in Ollivander's (and why did they leave out the
detail about holly and yew?  that's symbolic.)  Even potions class was
missing out on eye of newt and such!
Is it just me, or do we need a bit more magic at Hogwarts?  ;)

- Darice





From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Nov 19 03:25:09 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 03:25:09 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006140309.346.23052.w61@yahoogroups.com>


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

What did you feel the film was lacking
in the most? 

  o Characterization 
  o Acting 
  o Plot Holes 
  o Music 
  o Direction 
  o Special Effects 
  o Witty dialogue & cut characters 
  o Continuity and flow 
  o Believeability 
  o Ability to stand alone from book 


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 HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Nov 19 03:27:01 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 03:27:01 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006140421.322.79828.w109@yahoogroups.com>


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

Best adult actor? 

  o Richard Harris 
  o Dame Maggie Smith 
  o Robbie Coltrane 
  o Alan Rickman 
  o Fiona Shaw 
  o Other 


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 blpurdom at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:28:56 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:28:56 -0000
Subject: Magic in the Movie
In-Reply-To: <9t9tie+7d3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9u9o+rb44@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., peacockharpy at y... wrote:
> We rarely see wands out, and in fact, we don't really even see 
> Harry's wand after he gets it in Ollivander's (and why did they 
> leave out the detail about holly and yew?  that's symbolic.)  Even 
> potions class was missing out on eye of newt and such!
> Is it just me, or do we need a bit more magic at Hogwarts?  ;)

They don't show the classes much, so that is probably why we don't 
see much wand action.  They aren't supposed to do magic outside of 
class unless they're practicing for class.  OTOH, why is it I 
remember hearing Dumbledore say in one of the trailers that "no 
magics are to be done in the corridors," but I don't recall him 
saying this in the film either time I saw it (going a third time 
this Friday, so I'll try to pay more attention to his welcoming 
speech, such as it is).  Does anyone else remember him saying it, or 
did it get cut after they released the trailer?

Also, much has often been made of Dumbledore performing wandless 
magic (I love the way the banners change from Slytherin to 
Gryffindor at the end of the film) but Quirrell and Snape also use 
wandless magic during the Quidditch match; Quirrell to jinx Harry 
and Snape to save him.  And when Quirrell flies at Harry near the 
end, how is he doing it?  Is he able to do this because he's sharing 
his body with Voldemort?  

--Barb, asking more questions now than she's answering...





From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:29:29 2001
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:29:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] hero of the hour...Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <9t5caj+krr5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011119032929.12448.qmail@web14610.mail.yahoo.com>


--- bethyellen at hotmail.com wrote:
> The cast were all excellent, but Rupert was just
> fantastic as Ron. I 
> thought he really brought out his sarcastic wit!
> From the momment he 
> started eating everything on the train, to when he
> was playing the 
> chess game, I just thought he was outstanding, 

I so agree with you. I can't stress enough how
wonderful I thought this kid was for the part. He was
absolutely adorable and very believable.

Laila

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From nlpnt at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:29:30 2001
From: nlpnt at yahoo.com (nlpnt at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:29:30 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
In-Reply-To: <9t9ou1+nsfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9uaq+2e31@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Diana Wisniewski" <TEAPOT1 at P...> wrote:
> > We did watch for who played James, it was almost at the end of 
the 
> > list. His last name was Rawlings, I believe. I didn't catch the
> > first, but Jenny said in her message this afternoon it was Adrien.
> 
> Adrien Rawlings?  Isn't that the name of the person who was JKR's 
> date to the premiere?  I could be remembering wrong, but I thought 
> that's what I read.  Interesting.
> 
At first, I wondered if James and Lily were DR's dad and JKR herself. 
I think now I might need new glasses.



> And now, a question to everyone that is perhaps likely to get me 
> pummeled to death with heavy objects.
> 
> Several people, myself included, have already praised Sean 
> Biggerstaff's performance. <<Long snip about SB's Wood versus book 
Wood>>

Uh, Luke, man, have a seat (Gets out wand and pulls up recliner with 
magic). Have a butterbrewski, there's something I need to tell 
you.....the chicks all have the hots for him. :)
   Seriously, though, I had never pictured Wood as Scottish and I 
wonder if that might have influencd you too. BTW, he probably has the 
funniest new line added to the movie, about his first Quidditch match.
  Now....the Cannons are playing the Wasps live on the Magic Sports 
Channel, take-off time's in two minutes and I CAN'T FIND MY REMOTE!! 

-Noel






From peacockharpy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:31:35 2001
From: peacockharpy at yahoo.com (peacockharpy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:31:35 -0000
Subject: Correction--Stephen Kloves
In-Reply-To: <9t9s7d+e440@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9uen+chk3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> This is a tough question, because it's very hard to separate what is 
> ultimately the result of Kloves and what may have been more the 
> result of someone else like Columbus or Heyman or the chief editor, 
> etc.

I got the feeling that Kloves' original script was much longer, and
that much was left on the cutting room floor -- this is just a guess
from the way the film was edited.

I thought I'd give a quickie lesson on writers, scripts and the film
process from a rank amateur who observes this game with interest from
the outside:

What the writer puts on paper is not necessarily what gets into the
film.  Actors may ad lib, and the director finds it appropriate, and
that goes in.  Or the director may look at a scene and think "I could
do this better" and rewrite it (or demand another rewrite from the
writer).

And then there's the cutting room.  We've all heard about scenes that
were supposed to be in the film but weren't included ("Ickle
firsties!").  Sometimes these are filmed and then trimmed away because
the flow of the movie demands it.

Kloves certainly had a difficult task, and I would say he'd done well
- despite the fact that I haven't seen the script.  Hagrid's refrain
"shouldn't have told you that" was an example of niftily taking an
aspect of Hagrid's character and bringing it front and center for a
visual audience.  And Kloves did preserve quite a lot of dialogue
directly from the book, where possible.  I thought that, given the
challenges and SO MUCH to put in a movie, he did a pretty good job --
I might have made some different choices (e.g., take out the Devil's
Snare, keep in the Potions task, since we've met Prof. Snape but not
Prof. Sprout!), but that would be my opinion over his.

For those who are interested, one of the most interesting lessons in
adaptive scriptwriting I've ever experienced is watching Emma Thompson
and Lindsay Doran's commentary on the DVD of _Sense and Sensibility_.
 (Also, reading Thompson's _Sense and Sensibility_ diary is a very
educational experience as well.)  Thompson talks about how difficult
it was to adapt the contents of the book, as well as what happened
when they filmed scenes, put them all together and then found that
some were not only potentially unnecessary, but stopped the natural
flow of the story.  They worked on paper, but not on film, and so were
dropped before the "final version."

Anyway.  My $.02 on scriptwriting vs. the final product, and I hope
someone finds it at least interesting.  :)

- Darice




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 19 03:32:51 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:32:51 -0800
Subject: Many movie comments...
In-Reply-To: <1006043547.1356.23722.m12@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006043547.1356.23722.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <71192746982.20011118193251@mindspring.com>

Hi all!
I saw the film last night, so now I'll respond to some people's
recent comments and make a few geenral remarks of my own...

Trina:
HMyc> The Devil's Snare scene!  Hermione panicking, "There isn't any wood!" 
HMyc> and Ron's retort "Have you gone mad!  Are you a witch or not!"  is my 
HMyc> favorite R & H interactions.  The loss of this scene made me pout 
HMyc> throughout the last of the film.

I didn't object to this so much -- They deleted the potion-puzzle
scene (which IMHO wouldn't have worked too well cinematically), so
they needed something to win Hermione her 50 points, so they made her
the level-headed one in the Devil's snare.

HMyc> Argus Filch.  He looked too much like my inner picture of Mad-Eye 
HMyc> Moody than how I imagined Filch to be--a small, slightly stooped,  
HMyc> balding man who resents the fact that he has to clean up after these 
HMyc> kids who are able to do what he cannot--Magic.

I agree -- Being a guy who would call Felix Unger a slob, Filch should
IMHO himself be immaculately well-kempt.  In thinking of Filch, I always
imagine the evil-but-tidy Mechanicles from Disney's _Aladdin_ series.

HMyc> Mrs. Norris.  Yes, the Maine Coon who played her was gorgeous, but 
HMyc> Maine Coon cats cannot *ever* be described as scrawny!  They are 
HMyc> known for their largeness!

And we never hear her name!

HMyc> Quidditch.  Where was Lee Jordan's brilliant color commentary?  It 
HMyc> would have helped immensely in figuring out exactly what was going on.

You're right... It all went so fast, I kept saying to myself, "Damn
where's my omnioculars so I can slow-mo this!"  Also Wood's
description to Harry of the rules of Quidditch was too rushed.  Last
week I gave a seven-minute speech on the rules of Quidditch to a group
of largely Potter-philistines, and some of them said that even seven
minutes wasn't enough to make the rules clear to them.

HMyc> Also, there are no girls on the Slytherin team.

* Nods * Marcus Flint is a male-chauvanist. :)

What do you think of their making the Slytherin team look like the
main cast of a 1950's B-grade gangster film?  (Is Draco the only
Slytherin who's ever invoked a teeth-straightening charm?)

HMyc> Seamus over Neville.  Neville is more important to the overall plot 
HMyc> of the books and this film than is Seamus.  Instead of having Seamus 
HMyc> explain that he was half & half, they could have easily had Neville 
HMyc> tell about his Uncle Algie dropping him out of the bedroom window.

Yeah, not enough development of Neville.

HMyc> I HATE Mrs. Weasley...she's all wrong.

I don't think she was on long enough to pass judgement.  Granted, it
was a bit of an initial shock to see "Educating Rita" now old and heavy
enough to be Mrs. W!

HMyc> Ron's poverty is a bit brushed off, but that's okay
HMyc> in this movie.  Rupert Grint is the MOST MARVELOUS actor (of the
HMyc> children) in this film!  He IS Ron!  Dan's acting is a bit slim in
HMyc> spots, as is Emma's, but Rupert's never fails.  He's got Ron's role
HMyc> down to a T, I'm really really excited to see him in future spots.

I agree -- Rupert's Ron threatens to steal the show!

HMyc> The Sorting Ceremony leaves something to be desired.  Didn't like the
HMyc> hat.

In the audio books, Jim Dale does the only possible voice the Sorting
Hat could have!

HMyc> Weasley weren't properly introduced.  Percy was well played in
HMyc> his dimished capacity.

What did you think of the lack of glasses on Percy and McGonnegal?

HMyc> Classes are good.  Love Snape in Potions--never established he's Head
HMyc> of Slytherin...

Actually, I think it *was* mentioned...

HMyc> --never explains WHY he's fond of Draco!

Or really why he hates Harry.  I think if there's any real big flaw in
the film overall it's not enough Snape.  After all, he's the "prime
suspect" -- We need to know as much about him as possible.

HMyc> Okay, this is getting long, so onto things that bothered me. 
HMyc> Invisibility Cloak was AWESOME AWESOME!  Flamel story was weird...it
HMyc> seemed to jump to me.  The Mirror was BLOODY BRILLIANT (hehe).  I
HMyc> didn't really like it in the book, but now I'm a fan.  Harris as
HMyc> Dumbldore was eh...oh well.

Harry's parents in the mirror got me bleary-eyed.

HMyc> Wish the had left Devil's Snare as the fire, witch, wood thing. 
HMyc> Wizard's Chess was brill--again Rupert as Ron couldn't have been more
HMyc> perfect.

That scene left me more afraid now than ever that this is a
forshadowing that Ron is ultimately going to sacrifice his life
to help defeat V.  (Please feel free to indignantly refute this.)

HMyc> Dumbledore should have explained Snape.  VERY confusing if you hadn't
HMyc> read the book.

Again, too little Snape.

HMyc> Hated how H&R were just
HMyc> "waiting" on the stairs when Harry got out of the hospital wing! 
HMyc> Loved how the movie ended...perfect Harry material.

My biggest quibble about the ending was it was a typical tear-jerking,
"Oh Scarecrow, I think I'll miss you most of all" parting scene... No
indication at all that he'll be back next year.

Barb:
HMyc> On a second viewing I have to say that I like it even more than I
HMyc> did yesterday and that Emma Watson grates less on me now, but her 
HMyc> line to Harry near the end about his being a great wizard is either 
HMyc> badly written, badly delivered, or both.

I thought this was okay... I just missed the hug. ( First indication
that Hermione is a big sentimental softie. :) )

Indyfans:
HMyc> The spot at the end where Voldy tells Harry he can be with his parents might 
HMyc> be it, but that's really short!  Can anyone help with this puzzle?

Besides, hasn't Dumbledore said (on numerous occasions) that the dead can
never, NEVER be brought back?

HMyc> regarding the centaur...Yuk!  I had pictured a beautiful male with
HMyc> long hair...  this one was so, well not any of that!  Well, I'm sure his 
HMyc> mommy loves him!  

Agreed... The face of the movie centaur belonged on a merperson in my
mind...

BTW, what did you think about the silent-"e" pronouncation of Firenze's
name?


Well, that's enough replies for one day, I guess.  My overall
opinions:

Pros:
-- The kids were all great!  Harry, and Ron are perfect.
Neville is just how I pictured him.  Hermione is perhaps
a little too cute, but still good.  (We guys are going to
have some "eye candy" by the last couple of films!)
And Malfoy looked just like a kid who picked on me in
grammar school, so that rang true!

-- The Dursley sequence wasn't too long.

-- Really nasty goblins!  (No wonder Bagman is terrified
of them -- *I* wouldn't want to owe money to those things!)

-- Coltrane, Smith and Rickman are wonderful!

-- Thought I don't like James in the movie, I do like Lily.
(Does anyone besides me think she looks a little bit like JKR?)

-- The "cartoonishness" of the troll didn't bother me... They're
not exactly the lords of magical creation anyway...

-- The Quidditch scene was great, though I kind of felt the Bludgers
kind of got short shrift.  (More players hitting players tham Bludgers
hitting players or Beaters hitting Bludgers.)

-- I very much liked the new Harry-Quirrell-Voldy confrontation,
including Harry responding "Liar!" to the "There is no good or bad"
speech (so frequently cited by fundies as "proof" the books are
immoral), and Harry himself causing Quirrel's disintegration without
a "Dumbledore ex machina".

-- It didn't end with Harry waking up in Privet Drive, discovering
that it was all a dream, and saying, "Oh Auntie Petunia, there's
no place like home!" as she kicks him back into the cupboard.

-- And many more I'll talk about later... :)


Cons:
-- In my VERY VERY HO, Richard Harris is the worst bit of miscasting
for a fantasy film since Billie Burke as Glinda.  But then, I'm not
sure who would have been better... All the people I can think of who
would have been great as Dumbledore -- Alec Guiness, John Guilgud,
Robert Donat, Edmund Gwenn, Michael Redgrave -- are all dead.  And
in fairness to Harris, I think the omission of all the lines that
reveal D's "quirkiness" may be part of the problem.

-- The explainations of Voldy's evilness and how Harry got the
scar are too muddled.

-- My only problem with the movie James is how is Harry *ever*
going to mistake his future self for that guy in PoA??

-- A few classic one-liners are watered down by "explainations",
e.g. "We'll be killed, or worse expelled"/"She's got to get her
priorities straight"; "I checked it out for some light reading"/
"That's light reading?"; and "How do you know about Fluffy?"/"That
thing has a name?".  We don't need to have these jokes "explained"
to us with an anti-climatic follow-up line.

-- The centaur looked like the Creature from the Black Lagoon
with horse legs.

-- Not enough SNAPE!  (Hopefully we'll get more in the future films)


Unanswered questions:
-- Who are the undentified people at the staff table?  Could the
black woman be Sinistra?

-- What about that scene where Nick is chatting up the Grey Lady...
Are they an item?

-- Did anyone else notice the dragon skeleton?  Its Velociraptor-like
appearence made me wonder what the pedigree of dragons might be
Are dragons dinosaurs?  Or thecodonts?  Or pterosaurs?

-- 
Dave




From eberte at vaeye.com  Mon Nov 19 03:35:50 2001
From: eberte at vaeye.com (eberte at vaeye.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:35:50 -0000
Subject: Harry's ups and downs
Message-ID: <9t9umm+f1an@eGroups.com>

I realize that there were time constraints (believe me, I realize 
this--I saw the movie with my five-year-old son), but did anyone else 
miss the theme of Harry's fall from glory when the trio looses 150 
points from Gryffindor in a single night?  I really liked that part 
of the book--Harry's emotional rollercoaster of a year going from 
neglected nephew to fabulously famous boy-hero to despised classmate 
to hero once again!  It makes the victory of his house that much 
sweeter at the end.
I also loved Dan as Harry and liked Ron more in the movie than I have 
in the books.  Hermione is my girl and I will hear no bad talk about 
her (even the movie Hermione).  I agree with all that James Potter is 
irritatingly wrong.  
The movie was slightly disappointing in that it did not capture all 
the wit and magic of the book; however, it was still very good with 
some excellent moments.  
My five-year-old did think it was scary (lots of whimpering and eye-
covering during troll scene, chess game and showdown with V.)  Of 
course, I asked him if he wanted to leave...and was soooo relieved 
when he said "no" each time.  Hopefully we will not have 
nightmares!    Elle   




From peacockharpy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 03:38:18 2001
From: peacockharpy at yahoo.com (peacockharpy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:38:18 -0000
Subject: Magic in the Movie
In-Reply-To: <9t9u9o+rb44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9ura+8dj8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> OTOH, why is it I remember hearing Dumbledore say in one 
> of the trailers that "no magics are to be done in the 
> corridors," but I don't recall him saying this in the 
> film either time I saw it...

All I remember him saying was no Dark Forest and no third floor
corridor, myself.  I'm seeing it again on Tuesday so I'll let you know.

> Also, much has often been made of Dumbledore performing wandless 
> magic (I love the way the banners change from Slytherin to 
> Gryffindor at the end of the film) but Quirrell and Snape also use 
> wandless magic during the Quidditch match; Quirrell to jinx Harry 
> and Snape to save him.  And when Quirrell flies at Harry near the 
> end, how is he doing it?  Is he able to do this because he's sharing 
> his body with Voldemort?  

Good point, Barb -- I don't think we're told much about wandless magic
by JKR, although it obviously exists (animagus changes, for example,
and Apparation).  Maybe it's more advanced and we'll learn more in a
later book?

I guess I would have liked to see more classroom work, or students
practicing charms in the background, or something.

- Darice




From pennylin at swbell.net  Mon Nov 19 03:41:01 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:41:01 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
References: <9t9ou1+nsfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF87F4D.80608@swbell.net>

Hi --

caliburncy at yahoo.com wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Diana Wisniewski" <TEAPOT1 at P...> wrote:
>  > We did watch for who played James, it was almost at the end of the
>  > list. His last name was Rawlings, I believe. I didn't catch the
>  > first, but Jenny said in her message this afternoon it was Adrien.
> 
> Adrien Rawlings?  Isn't that the name of the person who was JKR's
> date to the premiere?  I could be remembering wrong, but I thought
> that's what I read.  Interesting.

No, her current partner & date to the premier is Dr. Neil Murray.  Neil 
(FFA) swears that it is not him.  :--)

> 
> So my question is: For all the other people who thought Biggerstaff
> did a particularly good job--is this specifically referring to his
> general merit as an actor, or did he really capture Wood's character
> for you?

General merit as an actor & he did a good job of conveying Wood's 
character too I thought.  Listen to how reverently he talks about the 
balls & their function.  "You catch that Potter & we win." (paraphrasing).

I was expecting a different physical apperance as Wood is described as 
"burly" but I've got *no* complaints on that score.  <g>

Penny





From hertopos at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 03:41:41 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:41:41 -0000
Subject: Explaining the Hedwig Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9t9l02+8teb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9t9v1l+9ufr@eGroups.com>

  But I shortly afterward found by accident an 
> interview somewhere on the internet where Columbus literally 
confirms 
> this.  I'll go scavenge for it if someone want the URL.
> 
> Is it brilliant?  Hardly.  Is it superfluous?  Perhaps.  But since 
we 
> can't change it, at least understanding the intent behind it will 
> perhaps make it more watchable for everyone.
> 
> -Luke

Actually, I really love that scene. It was the most beautiful scene 
in the movie. 

Hertopos




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 03:50:18 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:50:18 -0000
Subject: Did anyone read my post?
Message-ID: <9t9vhq+g7c1@eGroups.com>

I am just wondering people here only read posts by the people they 
know. I joined the group two days ago and I post a few. Some of them 
was in a question form.

If I am not welcomed, maybe I should give up posting.

TWo questions I care are:

1. Will this movie become a classic as Roger Ebert said?
2. What do you think of possible 4 hour directors cut. There is an 
online petition at www.petitiononline.com

Hertopos




From aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca  Mon Nov 19 03:57:09 2001
From: aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca (Angela Boyko)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:57:09 -0400
Subject: Links To Adrian Rawlins
Message-ID: <3BF88315.948C912C@nb.sympatico.ca>

I decided to make it my quest to find out who played James in the film.
Here is my first finding:
http://www.thesnitch.co.uk/castlist/castpictures3/page9.html

However, it doesn't look like the pictures match. The one on the right
is from the movie "Breaking the Waves", in which he played the doctor,

http://www.scoops.be/movies/moviedetail.asp?movid=86

and I think the picture is really of Stellan Skarsg?rd instead.

And here is his IMDB page:
http://us.imdb.com/Name?Rawlins,+Adrian

This is the best I've been able to come up with for a picture:
http://www.joblo.com/arrow/blood.htm
What is dismaying is that he appears to be in his '40's and is therefore
wrong wrong wrong for James. IIRC, the doctor in "Breaking the Waves"
wasn't exactly a young man either.

That's the result of tonight's searches, Anyways.

Angela
-- 
Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
  "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
      through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Nov 19 03:55:49 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:55:49 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Did anyone read my post?
References: <9t9vhq+g7c1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a801c170ae$144d1160$e24e28d1@oemcomputer>

1. It already is a classic but no it won't become a movie in the annuals of history.

2. There is no 4 hour version of the movie, it was a rumor that is untrue.

As for not responding to you posts, some people don't see them.  We don't reply to just those we know as you can see and I do think it was a bit rude of you to accuse us of elitism and favoritism.  I myself went un-replied to on my review and several comments but that's the way the groups work, some posts get read, some don't, that's life.

Saitaina
*****
"He shouldn't have done that...that was a bad idea.  I keep a little list of all the people who pat my behind without permission and several of them have died un-natural and un-timely deaths."-Julia, "Designing Women"

"This is what it's all been about. All the hatred and suffering and fighting and dying...over nothing 
more then the colors that can be  found in a child's crayola box."

"Kids Mess you up...you spend the rest of your life yelling at something you don't  understand."




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




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov 19 03:49:58 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:49:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New poll for HPFGU-Movie
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3397@MIAEXCH1>

No, the movie was not lacking in plotholes. Maybe a quick change to Plot
Consistency?

-----Original Message-----
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun Nov 18 22:25:09 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New poll for HPFGU-Movie

Real-To:  HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com


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

What did you feel the film was lacking
in the most? 

  o Characterization 
  o Acting 
  o Plot Holes 
  o Music 
  o Direction 
  o Special Effects 
  o Witty dialogue & cut characters 
  o Continuity and flow 
  o Believeability 
  o Ability to stand alone from book 


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!

 






_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/ 




From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Mon Nov 19 04:00:13 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (Dixie Malfoy)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:00:13 -0000
Subject: My lil review
Message-ID: <9ta04d+fv4h@eGroups.com>


Hey all. :)  I haven't read anyone's reviews yet so bear with me if I 
say the same things as everyone else has. 

We don't need spoiler space here, right? Oh well, you've been 
warned. ;)

--The Dursley's--loved the bit where Dudley was coming down the 
stairs and the decided to go back and jump above Harry's cupboard. It 
really looked like the thought had just struck him to do so. I also 
liked how Vernon looked a bit out of it, almost crazy-like after 
nailing the post slot closed and then talking about how glad he was 
that it was Sunday. Amber I were talking afterwards about how great 
we thought Fiona Shaw did as Petunia, especially her little speech in 
the hut on the rock.
--Was a bit bothered about how they didn't CGI Harry's eyes green. 
Now, I'm no computer expert, but is it really that hard to CGI some 
eyes? Also, up until maybe about the Diagon Alley part, it looked 
like Harry had no glass in his glasses.
--When Harry told Hagrid that he didn't know he was a wizard, etc, 
doesn't Hagrid get really mad at that fact? He didn't seem to be too 
mad about that in the books. 
--I did like how Dudley stole the cake. Made the pig's tail part 
better. :)
--Liked Diagon Alley. What was above the Leaky Cauldron sign that we 
were supposed to look for? I didn't see anything there.
--I don't know why but I didn't really like that beret thing Mrs 
Weasley was wearing.
--Really wished that Fred and George had more lines. The "Honestly, 
mother" part is one of my favorites from the book but they took out 
the part where they talk to Percy about being a Prefect. I guess they 
didn't use it because it wasn't important to the plot? Oh well.
--I saw Neville and his gran at the station. :)
--Loved the scene between Harry and Ron on the train. It was cute how 
sad Ron looked about his lumpy old sandwich.
--Before Hermione told Ron about the dirt on his nose, was it even 
there? I never saw it until she pointed it out.
--Tom Felton is so cute as Draco lol. He didn't have that big a part, 
and with the exception of his funny screaming face, I thought he did 
a great-Malfoy job. :)
--I also loved how the Sorting Hat hadn't even touched his head when 
it screamed out "Skytherin!" hehe
--Liked the subtle moving pictures in the background. They moved but 
they didn't totally draw attention to themselves, except of course 
when the first years notice them but they were supposed too so oh 
well. lol
--I really thought their common room would be bigger. There seemed to 
be more than 10 first years and from the size of the group, it didn't 
look like there was even enough room for them in there, much less all 
of Gryffindor.
--I always imagined their beds to be bigger, but that didn't bother 
me.
--I liked Ron's reaction to Hermione levitating the feather--when he 
sulked and put his head down on his books. That was cute.
--Someone somewhere said that they didn't like Emma Watson at all so 
I kinda went in the theater thinking that she would annoy me too. 
(The scene from the commercials, which, by the way, wasn't in the 
movie, where she says, "He's rather disagreeable, isn't he?" in 
regards to Draco always bothered me. She moved her eyebrows too much 
lol) Anyways, I thought she did a good job.
--Liked the flying lesson and Draco's 360 on his broom. Did anyone 
else think that Harry was totally going to crash into McGonagall's 
window? LoL I know that wasn't supposed to happen, but that was a 
nice quick stop of his.
--Sean Biggerstaff. Scottish Accent. *fans herself* He is The Boy 
That Is Hot. It was funny how he tried to wrestle that bludger. :) I 
can't wait to see the movie again, not just because it's good but 
because of him. Is that too pathetic? Nah...lol
--Quidditch: really cool. Yes, they were zipping around fast, but it 
was still really neat. *sobs* My poor Oliver! *kicks Marcus Flint and 
advises him to get braces*  (the Slyth. Seeker was kinda cute too 
though)
--Ok, the Keeper gets knocked out and so does one of the Chasers. 
Shouldn't Gryffindor get at least a foul? Can they really play 
without a Keeper? Or is Madam Hooch just not paying attention? lol
--Didn't really understand why Harry surfed the broom. Couldn't he 
have just leaned a little bit more forward?
--Does anyone else, besides me, think that Devon Murray (Seamus) is 
adorable? Daniel Radcliffe is short right? Devon only came up to 
about Dan's shoulder lol. I just think he's cute.
--Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith *are* Snape and McGonagall IMO. They 
did a great job, even if they weren't used that much.
--Didn't like the Bloody Baron. Looked a bit too happy lol. Also, was 
it just me or was the Grey Lady, like, everywhere? Did you see her in 
McGonagall's classroom when the Trio ask to see Dumbledore? It looked 
like she was writing or copying something.
--The plaques--saw McGonagall's Quidditch plaque, but who is RJH (or 
was it LJH?) King? Just a made up character?
--Devil's Snare was neat. I never though about them dropping 
underneath it. Maybe I've always read that part wrong, but I always 
thought the plant was already on the ground.
Liked the Keys. Made it a lot harder to catch when they started 
swarming Harry and I liked that. I always pictured them moving like 
they were before he touched the broom and that's a bit too easy.
--Liked the chess game. Don't know if Heidi's posted yet, but I like 
her point that she made (or will make) about this scene.
--Really liked the end. It was interesting how Quirrel turned into 
dust. I always wondered, when they said that Voldie left him there to 
die, what they did with the body. Really thought it was cool how 
Voldie went through Harry. Dan did a great job in that scene.
--Why did Quirrel have really long fingernails? Did that bother 
anyone else a bit?
--Didn't think Dumbledore seemed too upset with getting an earwax 
bean, unless Harris did that to make it seem funny? 
--Cute photo album picture. :)
--Liked the Mirror of Erised scene where Harry's just sitting real 
quiet in front of it. I was like, "Awwww."
--The guy who was James--was too old and unless you count the 
glasses, he and Harry don't look that much alike.

I don't think I forgot anything. :)  On the whole, 4 out of 5 stars.
Liked the movie. Liked the scenery. Loved Sean Biggerstaff. ;)

***Dixie Malfoy***




 




From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Mon Nov 19 04:03:44 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (Dixie Malfoy)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:03:44 -0000
Subject: Oops!
Message-ID: <9ta0b0+no3a@eGroups.com>

--When Harry told Hagrid that he didn't know he was a wizard, etc, 
doesn't Hagrid get really mad at that fact? He didn't seem to be too 
mad about that in the books. >>>

I meant that he didn't seem too mad in the movie, and that I thought 
he got mad at that in the books.

***Dixie Malfoy***




From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Mon Nov 19 04:15:56 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (Dixie Malfoy)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:15:56 -0000
Subject: Biggerstaff as Wood
In-Reply-To: <3BF87F4D.80608@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9ta11s+ilt2@eGroups.com>



While, he is a great actor, he didn't seem *too* fanatical about 
Quidditch, except for maybe the point that Penny made about Harry 
catching the Snitch and they win.

I also loved the little look that he gives Flint right after he saves 
the Quaffle from going through the hoop. It was a real cute, 
but "Haha, I caught it" type look. *resists the urge to swoon again 
especially after seeing that Sean-lookalike at Magic Kingdom today 
and him smiling at her* Can't do it. *swoons*

Heh heh ;)

***Dixie Malfoy***




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 04:24:21 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:24:21 -0000
Subject: Did anyone read my post?
In-Reply-To: <00a801c170ae$144d1160$e24e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9ta1hl+orvc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> wrote:
> 1. It already is a classic but no it won't become a movie in the 
annuals of history.
> 
> 2. There is no 4 hour version of the movie, it was a rumor that is 
untrue.
> 
> Saitaina

Thank you for your reply. 

Why you claim it is already a classic? I like to think that way. 
However, I have not found any thread talking about that way. I did go 
through most of the list. Other than Roger Ebert ( and to certain 
degree Rex Leed ) , I have not found any critic said it is going to 
be classic. Only thing I found was the post about Roger Ebert's 
positive review.

I am not quite sure about 4 hour version. However, that kind of 
petition may influence the final product. Yes, I got this rumor from 
much younger HP site.

Hertopos




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Nov 19 04:28:38 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:28:38 -0000
Subject: Did anyone read my post?
In-Reply-To: <9t9vhq+g7c1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ta1pm+jv69@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hertopos at h... wrote:

> I am just wondering people here only read posts by the people they 
> know. I joined the group two days ago and I post a few. Some of 
them 
> was in a question form.
> 
> If I am not welcomed, maybe I should give up posting.
> 
> TWo questions I care are:
> 
> 1. Will this movie become a classic as Roger Ebert said?

I didn't think you'd like my answer, so I didn't respond at first.  
But if you really want to know:  

I don't think PS/SS will become a classic under my definition of a 
classic.  Classics include "The Wizard of OZ" and "Gone With The 
Wind" -- films that are very popular long after their original 
release, that pretty much everyone has seen, that make Big Stars of 
their stars, and that are brilliantly done in all respects.  Under 
that definition, I think PS/SS will just go down as being a good (and 
highly profitable) film.  See, you have to be careful what you ask 
for.  :-)

> 2. What do you think of possible 4 hour directors cut. There is an 
> online petition at www.petitiononline.com
> 


I don't have a DVD player.  That's why I didn't answer.  Nothing 
personal, you see.

Cindy




From hertopos at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 04:36:20 2001
From: hertopos at hotmail.com (hertopos at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:36:20 -0000
Subject: Did anyone read my post?
In-Reply-To: <9ta1pm+jv69@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ta284+m58q@eGroups.com>

> I didn't think you'd like my answer, so I didn't respond at first.  
> But if you really want to know:  
> 
> I don't think PS/SS will become a classic under my definition of a 
> classic.  Classics include "The Wizard of OZ" and "Gone With The 
> Wind" -- films that are very popular long after their original 
> release, that pretty much everyone has seen, that make Big Stars of 
> their stars, and that are brilliantly done in all respects.  Under 
> that definition, I think PS/SS will just go down as being a good 
(and 
> highly profitable) film.  See, you have to be careful what you ask 
> for.  :-)

Actually, I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I really 
appreciate your reply. I read lots of your posts. And yes, I disagree 
a lot. That does not mean I don't want to hear your opinion.
Now, for the argument, Roger Ebert is the one who said the movie is 
going to be next generation's "The Wizard of OZ". 

At this point, my guts feeling is that it all depends on 'COS'. 
Though I am fairly optimistice at this point.


Hertopos




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Nov 19 04:49:32 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:49:32 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
In-Reply-To: <9t9ou1+nsfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ta30s+o9l2@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

> So my question is: For all the other people who thought Biggerstaff 
> did a particularly good job--is this specifically referring to his 
> general merit as an actor, or did he really capture Wood's 
character 
> for you?
> 

Hmmm.  Well, I'm struggling with this, Luke, because I don't have an 
iron-clad vision of Oliver Wood in my head.  Consequently, I was open 
to pretty much anything.

That said, I was initially a bit critical of the choice of 
Biggerstaff based on the still photos, as Biggerstaff is far 
from "burly."  But once I saw his excellent acting, I was sold.  So 
he isn't quite the same as the Wood in the book (who really isn't 
fleshed out much anyway, BTW), but I was more than happy once I saw 
his talent.

Oh, and whoever said he is hunky is correct, although I am normally 
not permitted to say things like that about youngsters.

Now that you mention it, however, I have been surprised that some of 
us have *very* fixed ideas about how characters are supposed to 
appear in the movie.  I never really cared whether Harry or Ron was 
taller.  Whether Draco's eyes were grey.  Whether Harry's hair was 
messy.  Whether Percy has glasses.  Whether Filch was dirty.  I'm 
just kind of looking for the overall feel of things, and on that 
score, the movie was spot on with every single casting decision 
except Harry's father (and really, who cares about what man is waving 
at us from the inside of a mirror).  If a casting decision is a bit 
off the mark (e.g., Wood not being burly) and not lock-step with the 
book, all is forgiven if the person *can act*.  To me, the farther 
they are away from the physical characteristics of the character, I 
suppose, the better they must be at acting.

So I guess what I'm saying is that (1) I didn't have much of a fixed  
impression of a minor character like Wood; (2) the actor won me over 
in the end with the quality of his performance; and (3) I can't 
readily separate "his general merit as an actor," from whether 
he "really capture[d] Wood's character." 

I don't know if I answered your question, but it was a great 
question, so thanks for posting it.

Cindy




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 19 05:07:46 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:07:46 -0000
Subject: Magic in Movie / Biggerstaff / Dave's Comments /Snowy Owl in Snow / Dixie's 
Message-ID: <9ta432+rm9m@eGroups.com>

Darice wrote:

> As for students, we see Hermione use her wand three times: 
> Wingardium Leviosa, Alohomora and Petrificus Totalus.

And Oculus Reparo to fix Harry's glasses on the train, and something 
Incendario to set Snape's cloak on fire, and something I didn't quite 
hear to blast the Devil's Snare with full spectrum light.

Barb wrote:

> They aren't supposed to do magic outside of class unless they're
> practicing for class.

Um, do you have a book quote for that? I remember 'no magic in the 
corridors' and no magic while on holiday, but I thought they were 
free to do a lot of magics on their own time while at Hogwarts.

Noel wrote:

> Have a butterbrewski, there's something I need to tell 
> you.....the chicks all have the hots for [Biggerstaff] 

1) Not all the chicks. I found in chat that not only us old ladies, 
but two wise young ones prefer Rickman.
2) Not just chicks. The gay men were squabbling over him until 
someone started handing out Biggerstaff clones to everyone who wanted 
one.

> the Magic Sports Channel, take-off time's in two minutes and
> I CAN'T FIND MY REMOTE!! 

I thought one uses one's wand as the remote for Crystal-Clair 
TeleVoyance Balls.

Dave Hardenbrook wrote:

> And we never hear [Mrs Norris's] name!

LOTS of people we never heard their names. Dean Thomas was there and 
even got one line that didn't belong to him, but we never heard his 
name. I don't think we heard Seamus's name even tho' he got more 
lines than Dean. We never heard the names of the Gryffindor Chasers. 
We heard Neville say Parvati Patil's name and I believe I saw her, 
but not at the same time. I need my frame by frame, to list other 
people who were there but just in the background and not mentioned.

> (Is Draco the only Slytherin who's ever invoked a 
> teeth-straightening charm?)

The Slytherin Seeker (we know that the character is named Terence 
Higgs and people in chat said the actor's name is Will Theaking) 
looked reasonably attractive. So did that girl who had no business 
being on the Slytherin team. I need my frame by frame to check if 
there were MORE girls on that team.

> The "cartoonishness" of the troll didn't bother me... They're
> not exactly the lords of magical creation anyway...

When I saw the troll advancing on Hermione, I suddenly understood why 
the girl in my fic whose Boggart was a troll just screamed and ran 
away: I'm just surprised that her classmates didn't do the same!

Speaking of classmates, did the neckties seem to you-uns like all 
first-years were in all classes together, not separated by House, and 
presumably the same for the older years? If there were 400 students, 
as appeared in the Great Hall in the Arrival Feast scene and as said 
in the advance publicity for the movie, that would be 60 kids in each 
class, a big load for professors to handle. Especially as I tried to 
count the kids in the flying class and got either 12 or 13 in one 
line and it looked like the other line was the same number, so that 
would have been only two Houses....

Speaking of the flying lesson, why didn't Madam Hooch wave her wand 
to levitate Neville down safely when he was hanging from the roof 
ornament? Speaking of Madam Hooch, was she the witch in blue at the 
Head Table at the Arrival Feast?

> Who are the undentified people at the staff table?  Could the
> black woman be Sinistra?

I thought so, and perhaps the witch in red was Professor Vector.

> Did anyone else notice the dragon skeleton? 

I don't remember noticing it, but you remind me that I don't know how 
Ron knew that the hatchling dragon was a Norwegian Ridgeback, as it 
didn't have even babystumps of ridges on its back yet? Charlie would 
not have brought any baby dragons home with him on holiday for Ron to 
see; did he give Ron a book about baby dragons?

The baby dragon reminded me of my visit to the American Museum of 
Natural History in NYC the previous week. In a case on the east wall 
of an easterly room in the dinosaur hall, there was an adult and a 
baby of the same species (velociraptor?) and my friend led me 
straight there to show me the little cutiesaurus. Whoever would have 
thought that the naked skeleton of a reptile would be cute and cuddly!

Hertopos wrote:

> Actually, I really love that scene. It was the most beautiful scene
> in the movie. 

I'm one of the people who didn't understand that scene at all. I 
thought Harry must be sending an owl post, but I didn't see any 
scroll tied to her foot. I think that it indicates that that scene 
was defective that so many people on this list didn't understand what 
it was about. This movie is not an art film, so it is up to the 
movie to make itself understood to the audience. If it were an art 
film, it would be the audience's responsibility to understand the 
movie, so the conclusion of this matter would be that the audience 
was defective.

Dixie Malfoy wrote:

> Shouldn't Gryffindor get at least a foul? Can they really play 
> without a Keeper? Or is Madam Hooch just not paying attention? 

The Quidditch rules (no replacements for injured players) mean they 
have to go on without a Keeper, just like they lost by playing 
without a Seeker when Harry was knocked out in PoA.

Almost all I saw of that match was fouls! Not just the [violent] 
physical contact between players and between brooms, but flying out 
past the edges of the Quidditch pitch, and flying into the audience 
crowd. Hoochie should have been constantly blowing her whistle, 
stopping the game, and giving someone a penalty throw. Since she 
ignored all those fouls, it hardly matters whether a Chaser or 
Captain taking a Beater's club is against the rules: I don't recall 
seeing it mentioned in QTTA.

> Didn't like the Bloody Baron. Looked a bit too happy lol. 

Very much agree!

> Also, was it just me or was the Grey Lady, like, everywhere? Did
> you see her in McGonagall's classroom when the Trio ask to see 
> Dumbledore? It looked like she was writing or copying something.

That scene in McGonagall's classroom is the only time I remember 
seeing the Grey Lady without the other ghosts. I wonder what she was 
writing? Helping McGonagall grade homework? Eternally doomed to 
making up missed exams and late homework?

                 




From aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca  Mon Nov 19 05:32:13 2001
From: aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca (Angela Boyko)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:32:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
References: <9ta30s+o9l2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF8995D.24C279B5@nb.sympatico.ca>

You know, I got thinking about Oliver in the movie, and I'm thinking
he's going to have to keep us happy until Bill Weasley makes his
appearance. :-)

He seemed to take on a bit of an older brother role to Harry when
teaching him about Quidditch, and before the game. Too bad he didn't
take on the role off the field.

*Sigh*. First I'm complaining about how the movie just doesn't have what
the book has, and now I'm thinking of how the movie could have been
changed to make the story better! I think I liked the movie more than I
know. :-)

Veering away from the movie, I hope that we see Bill stepping in as
Harry's big brother in the next books. One of my most favouritest scenes
from the series (and it had better be in the movie!) is Molly and Bill
appearing as Harry's family for the Third Task.

Speaking of Weasleys, movie Percy wasn't nearly as insufferable as canon
Percy. I also thought he was supposed to have glasses, and he was more
attractive than I expected Percy to be. Not that's a bad thing. Only
movie Hermione is too attractive. 

Angela

-- 
Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
  "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
      through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



From joym999 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 05:31:09 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:31:09 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
In-Reply-To: <9t9td0+72cl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ta5et+oa6j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nlpnt at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
> <catlady at w...> wrote:
> > I was really bothered by the destruction caused by 
> > the wrong wands in Ollivander's shop (which incidentally was not 
> > dusty enough) but that is probably my personal issue. 
> >
> I really liked ths part. Maybe the shop was TOO dusty, though- if 
> this happens every time, wouldn't they be constantly replacing 
stuff?

Yo, muggles!  We're talkin' wizards here, remember?  Destruction of a 
few boxes and ornaments is not worth worrying about.  A simple wave 
of one of his thousands of wands and a "Returnus Orderus" spell is 
all that's needed to put Ollivander's shop back in order.

--Joywitch




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 05:38:11 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:38:11 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] A few things...
Message-ID: <132.4cca7fd.2929f4c3@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 8:45:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk writes:

<<  particularly when 
 contrasted with Ian McEllen as Gandalf in the LOTR trilogy. >>

Have you seen LOTR? How? I thought it wasn't out until December? It was great 
fun seeing the trailer, AND the Star Wars episode ii trailer (although that 
wasn't very good)

Susan



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 06:24:38 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:24:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Penny & Barb's comments
Message-ID: <a4.1c792502.2929ffa6@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 1:59:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com writes:

<< <Cassandra wrote:>
 
 Maybe you're right about the Ron/Harry 
 > shippiness, cos that's all I'm seeing here.
 
 I understand where you're coming from in saying this (other people's
 POVs) but why can't two people simply be best friends without everyone
 jumping up and shouting, "slash couple!" (I was going to say "gay",
 but I figured that sounded a little much)?  [Replies directed to OT,
 please] No one would do that if it were two girls as best friends. 
 Just my thought.  I thought the movie portrayed Harry & Ron's
 developing close friendship very very nicely (though there's much to
 be said about how it portrayed Hermione's role as a friend).  I also
 think it's in Hermione's natural disposition to be nice, kind, etc. 
 Though the speech delivered over Ron's possibly-seriously injured body
 was in bad taste!  I mean, he was knocked out cold & here they are
 wasting time when for all they know he could be dying?  Bad Columbus...
 
 -Megan
 
  >>

More to the point..why can't 11 year olds just be friends, regardless of 
gender, without us looking for romantic entanglements? goodness! 
I have friends who want to know if my four year old has "crushes" on 
adults....no, that's eroticizing children..and I can't stand it...(rant, 
rant, rant)

However, if we are going to imagine romantic entanglements among 11 year 
olds, then we must include same gender entanglements, as well as mixed gender 
entanglements......

IMHO

Susan



From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 06:26:12 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:26:12 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood
In-Reply-To: <3BF87F4D.80608@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9ta8m4+e08d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> ---caliburncy at y... wrote:
> > Adrien Rawlings?  Isn't that the name of the person who was JKR's
> > date to the premiere?  I could be remembering wrong, but I thought
> > that's what I read.  Interesting.
> 
> No, her current partner & date to the premier is Dr. Neil Murray.

Thanks for setting me straight, Penny.  Well, I guess I was just 
being an idiot, then.  But I wonder then why it is that the 
name "Adrian Rawlings" seems so naggingly familiar to me.  I checked 
out a couple of Angela's links (thanks Angela!), especially the IMDB 
listing, and nothing really struck me.  So perhaps I'm just imagining 
that I recognize it . . .

**********

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> [Regarding Biggerstaff as Wood]
> General merit as an actor & he did a good job of conveying Wood's 
> character too I thought.  Listen to how reverently he talks about
> the balls & their function.  "You catch that Potter & we win."
> (paraphrasing).

Yeah, I did catch the reverance and even some of the dedication and 
pleasure (during the match), so I guess that worked well.  The part 
that seemed curiously absent to me was the outright obsession to 
win . . . and I always thought Wood's dedication came across in the 
books as at least as hyperactively fanatical as coolly reverent, if 
that makes any sense.  Of course, the way I'm describing it sounds 
like I'm now getting really nitpicky about the personality, which I 
don't think I am, but I guess I could be.  It really seemed to me 
like a fundamental aspect of Wood's character was just not there.  A 
tiny bit more on this further below.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Now that you mention it, however, I have been surprised that some
> of us have *very* fixed ideas about how characters are supposed to 
> appear in the movie.  I never really cared whether Harry or Ron was 
> taller.  Whether Draco's eyes were grey.  <snip rest of long list
> of character description discrepancies>

Well, I didn't really mean whether Biggerstaff met Wood's physical 
description.  I don't really care much about discrepancies of 
physical description either, unless they hold some very special 
relevancy.  I especially don't even notice eyes and that sort of 
thing, so I am immensely impressed by people like Heidi who are able 
to point out inconsistencies with minor characters like Ginny's eye 
color.  That's far beyond my L.O.O.N.iness.  For example, my original 
mental image of Snape has always been with much shorter hair than the 
canon descriptions of Snape are. . . . so although I factually record 
canon description, every once in a while my imagination defies it a 
little bit anyway.

But anyway, what I meant was that Oliver Wood is so stereotypically 
hard-core dedicated to "win, win, win" and I didn't really get that 
from Sean Biggerstaff's performance: Biggerstaff was, as Catherine 
put it, more laid-back, I thought.  But (and I keep repeating myself 
here), I don't really think Biggerstaff probably had a script 
opportunity to portray this relentless drive anyway without a 
practice or pep talk.

> So I guess what I'm saying is that (1) I didn't have much of a fixed
> impression of a minor character like Wood; (2) the actor won me
> over in the end with the quality of his performance; and (3) I
> can't readily separate "his general merit as an actor," from
> whether he "really capture[d] Wood's character." 

Actually, this is a more useful answer than you might think, Cindy, 
since it at least explains to me that part of the reason it was easy 
for you personally to accept Biggerstaff as Wood is that you simply 
don't have a strong impression of Wood.  That's a very interesting 
answer to me, since I would have said his character is really quite 
easy to get a feel for (if a little "one-sided", since we only get to 
see his personality as regards Quidditch, and for all we know he 
doesn't even *have* a personality beyond that), but since I respect 
you as a careful and cognisant reader I assume there must be an 
identifiable reason why it is you don't have as strong an impression 
of him.  Hmm . . .

Or was "fixed" the operative word there (see above quote)?  Maybe I 
misinterpreted your reply and you meant that you do have a strong 
enough impression of Wood's personality; you just don't mind if they 
change it a little in the movie?

-Luke




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 06:30:01 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:30:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Screaming Book
Message-ID: <73.1642d000.292a00e9@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 2:36:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com writes:

<< Did anyone else jump when Harry was in the restricted section of the 
 library and he opened the book and the face jumped out at him?  I 
 loved that part in the book when the book screamed - it always gives 
 me goosebumps.  In the movie, I definitely did not expect a face to 
 accompany the scream.  I loved it.
 
 --jenny from ravenclaw ****************************************
 
  >>

yes, I jumped quite a bit..and I was looking for scary parts so I could warn 
my four year old.. I was SCARED when we were about to see Voldemort's 
face...I did not think it would be human..I had imagined a silver scaly 
triangle (snake scales) with slitty green snake eyes...not human...I just 
remember the Old Muggle's reaction (Frank) to Voldemort in GofF..and imagined 
him being disgusting, and vile...when I saw his face I wasn't the least bit 
scared...

Did anyone else have little gasps during the movie? For me, seeing Dumbledore 
for the first time, seeing Hagrid arrive on his motorcycle...
then when Harry walks through the barrier and sees the Hogwart Express...
Then actually seeing Hogwarts...what did the Great Hall look like (did we 
ever see the scene we saw in the trailer with Harry, Ron, and another student 
looking scared?)..
Searching the head table to see all the teachers...then what did the 
Gryffindor Common's Room look like..

I think Darwick Davis was wonderful, and especially liked the moment where he 
was levitating the ornaments on to the Christmas tree..

Susan



From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 06:37:21 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:37:21 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
In-Reply-To: <9t9l9p+ksa3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ta9b1+6tf3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:

>I was really bothered by the destruction caused by the wrong wands 
>in Ollivander's shop (which incidentally was not dusty enough) but 
>that is probably my personal issue. 

I really liked this scene, I thought it was quite funny. What better 
way to show a wand is wrong for that witch or wizard then having 
things break or blow up. I also loved John Hurt's reactions to the 
destruction.


>I also disliked that heavenly choir garbage when Harry got the right 
>wand and at the first sight of Hogwarts and IIRC one other time. 
>That heavenly choir stuff is annoying enough in kissing scenes 
>(where it is a cliche) but it's annoying And Embarrassing in these 
>scenes: is someone trying to tell us that wands  and castles and 
>light shows and magic are all just sex? I didn't notice any of the 
>rest of the music, which I suppose is as it should be.

I see the heavenly choir music as a Raiders of the Lost Arc type 
momment. Like when the Arc is opened. I guess I've never seen or paid 
attention to kissing scenes that had that type of music.  I just felt 
the music was emphasizing "important points" in the film. Such as 
Harry getting the right wand and the first time they see Hogwarts. 


Cheers,
 Kristin




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 06:43:21 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:43:21 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Miscellaneous impressions and a few plot problems
Message-ID: <36.1ee9ee85.292a0409@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 6:56:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jsteinb103 at aol.com writes:

<< ointed out that the script took out some of Dumbledore's best lines, 
leaving 
 Richard Harris with a skewed view of the character. (Although if he had read 
 the book he might have tried to compensate for it.)   >>


But in fact, he did twinkle several times....particularly when he said that 
Harry's experience with Quirrell was secret so therefore the whole school 
knew about it,
and his comment about earwax...

Really, the fault lay in the lines cut (see previous post) rather than in 
Harris'
acting...Dumbledore is my favorite character, and he looked exactly like 
Dumbledore and didn't do ANYthing that was OUT of character..and oh, 
goodness, that red and gold velvet costume was just lovely...

Susan (who is seriously thinking of starting a Harry Potter for Grownups Over 
Forty)..I feel seriously outnumbered......



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 06:45:05 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:45:05 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's changing face
In-Reply-To: <73.1642d000.292a00e9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9ta9ph+6h8i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Schlobin1 at a... wrote:

> 
> yes, I jumped quite a bit..and I was looking for scary parts so I 
could warn 
> my four year old.. I was SCARED when we were about to see 
Voldemort's 
> face...I did not think it would be human..I had imagined a silver 
scaly 
> triangle (snake scales) with slitty green snake eyes...not 
human...I just 
> remember the Old Muggle's reaction (Frank) to Voldemort in 
GofF..and imagined 
> him being disgusting, and vile...when I saw his face I wasn't the 
least bit 
> scared...

The incarnation of Vodemort which Frank saw wasn't the same one as 
in SS. Frank saw the "hideous baby" Voldemort, which was grotesque 
indeed. (On the Voldemort page of the Lexicon there is a drawing of 
the "hideous baby" Voldemort...yech.) The face on Quirrell's head 
was more likely a distorted version of his original, Riddle face. It 
would be somewhat changed by all that Dark Magic, but it might very 
well not have the snake influence yet, since he wasn't drinking 
snake venom until a couple of years later.

Steve




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Nov 19 06:50:37 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 06:50:37 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006152637.312.5732.w86@yahoogroups.com>


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

Which of the adult actors in a minor 
role did the best job? 

  o David Bradley 
  o John Cleese 
  o Richard Bremmer 
  o John Hurt 
  o Zoe Wannamaker 
  o Fiona Shaw 
  o Julie Walters 
  o Darwick Davis 


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 caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 06:50:57 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:50:57 -0000
Subject: Explaining the Hedwig Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9t9v1l+9ufr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9taa4h+hrgk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hertopos at h... wrote:
> --- caliburnCY at yahoo.com wrote:
> > <snip hopefully helpful explanation of the Hedwig Flight Scene>
> > Is it brilliant?  Hardly.  Is it superfluous?  Perhaps.  But
> > since we can't change it, at least understanding the intent
> > behind it will perhaps make it more watchable for everyone.
> 
> Actually, I really love that scene. It was the most beautiful scene 
> in the movie.

Well, personally, I liked it too, though my explanation does not make 
that clear (my first explanation--eons (okay, one day) ago--did, but 
this last one didn't).  I often try and make a very conscious and 
concerted effort (and generally fail, as is inevitable) to separate 
my personal opinions of things from my more objective considerations 
of merit, so it is probably hard to tell at times to what extent I 
personally agree with certain things that I say. :-)

So when I said it was hardly brilliant I meant that it is not exactly 
very original to have flight symbolizing "letting go"; in fact, a 
more "snooty" critic would be likely to consider it a teensy bit 
contrived.  And when I said that understanding the intent might make 
it more "watchable", I really meant more for anyone that was curious 
about what the heck the point was (which is admittedly a little 
vague) then I did for myself.  Personally I thought it was, even 
beyond the metaphor, rather visually striking--but I'm also a sucker 
for a good winter scene.

In fact, it brings up an interesting issue that is peculiar to 
speculative fiction (sci-fi and fantasy), which is the problem of 
literalism.  A couple people--I believe Cindy and Rita--said that 
they thought at first that Harry was sending a letter somewhere.  
This is a quite logical assumption, and exposes an issue that writers 
of speculative fiction can run into, which is that since there are 
all sorts of "implausibilities" in this genre of story, sometimes 
things are meant literally and the metaphors are therefore harder to 
identify.  For a quick and dirty example, in a typical novel, 
describing Mr. Anderson as "a mouse", is likely to be immediately 
understood as a metaphor, but in speculative fiction there is always 
the possibility that he really *is* a mouse.  So in this instance, 
some viewers watched the scene expecting it to serve some more 
literal purpose, and were quite understandably surprised when it 
didn't appear to do so.  So visual metaphors like this become a tad 
trickier to convey than they might be otherwise.

-Luke




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Nov 19 07:30:14 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 07:30:14 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006155014.1174.16651.w56@yahoogroups.com>


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

When you read the books now, after 
seeing the movie, how do you picture 
characters and settings? 

  o As I always have- the movie didn't change my mental images. 
  o I picture them as they were in the movie. 
  o I picture them as they were in the movie, but that's because the movie actors and sets looked exactly like I'd always pictured them. 
  o I picture the settings the same as I did before, but not the characters. 
  o I picture the characters as I did before, but not the settings. 
  o Some combination of the above. 


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 Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 07:46:52 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 08:46:52 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Voldemort's changing face
References: <9ta9ph+6h8i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00cc01c170ce$5ab379d0$e500a8c0@shasta>

Steve wrote,

> The incarnation of Vodemort which Frank saw wasn't the same one as
> in SS. .... The face on Quirrell's head
> was more likely a distorted version of his original, Riddle face. It
> would be somewhat changed by all that Dark Magic, but it might very
> well not have the snake influence yet, since he wasn't drinking
> snake venom until a couple of years later.

I agree with Susan here. While the snake influence probably grows stronger
in GoF, PS does describe Voldemort's face as "chalk white with glaring red
eyes and slits for nostrils, like a snake." So the snake influence *is*
already present!

In any case, the movie face seemed rather big boned, with a thick nose, if I
remember correctly. (Which I may not - my memory of film is blurring badly -
I'll have to find an excuse to see it again this week when it premieres in
CH.) Didn't seem very white either - though with the light coming from
flames, the chalk white color may not have shown up.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

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




From wassat at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 07:59:34 2001
From: wassat at yahoo.com (Lisa)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 07:59:34 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <9tae56+p4il@eGroups.com>

Hi all! I am Lisa, wife to a wonderful hubby Anthony, 2 kiddos- 
Kaitlyn age 5 and TJ age 9. I originally read the 1st HP book because 
2 1/2 yrs ago, my then 7 yr old was to read it in class. I read the 
book in 2 days and knew *my* son was ready for it. I trust he knows 
make believe from reality. To make a VERY loooogn story a little 
shorter, when his 2nd grade teacher was reading the first page of the 
first book, I was already engulfed in the second book! My son has 
little intrest in reading the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or any others in the 
series. Yet, I am hooked. (lil turd) Anyhoo, I MADE my best friend 
read the books and she is hooked as well now! (YAY!) I pre-bought us 
tickets to see the movie at noon Fridaythe 16th.(We left our kids 
where they belong, IN SCHOOL!) We didn't know about the midnight 
showing nor would we have been awake for it! Well, WE LOVED IT!!!!!!! 
Many times before the movie was released, I threghtened to re-read 
the first book and my friend talked me out of it saying the movie 
will never compare if I pictured what the movie was supposed to be 
like. She was SOOOOO right! Movie making is an art. They have to 
build a story that even intrests people who HAVEN'T read the books 
and those of us who have. Chris Columbus and all involved did a great 
job. I was asked, later that day, if the movie was as good as the 
book. I said they were equally grand. It's just that the book had 
more info, more background, and more detail, that's all. The original 
director's cut is 4+ hrs. (I can't wait for the DVD!) Releasing a 
film that length would mean a higher priced ticket, a needed 
intermission for potty/snacks. Can every HP lover afford the 
time/expense? No is the answer. The actors were really good too! It 
was very gratifying to see what I had imagined come to life on 
screen. The common room was EXACTLY how I envisioned it! Of course 
there were things I missed like the before posts written, and I 
truely wanted to see the Fat Lady visiting other portraits, and 
students being blocked from entrance, the whole 1-10 yrs of Harry's 
life, so on and PEEVES!. Think about it, how can you take an entire 
book of information it took DAYS to read and scrunch it into 2 1/2 
hrs of film? What these ppl did was AMAZING! If you read the first 
book in less than 2 1/2 hrs, I apologize...... I felt snape to be a 
miserable jerk that hated Harry for some unseen reason....but I read 
the books and know why.......... Well, I think I do.............(I 
love this actor!!!!!!!) Hey! What about that cat having red eyes just 
LIKE VOLDE'S???????????? Also, Aunt Petunia really LOOKS like a 
witch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Is she keeping it secret from Unkle 
Vernon?) WHEEEEEEEEE this is fun!
Luck, 

Lisa 





From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 08:10:57 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 09:10:57 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Explaining the Hedwig Flight Scene
References: <9taa4h+hrgk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00ea01c170d1$b7d7e620$e500a8c0@shasta>

In an earlier post, Luke wrote,

 > The fade from one flight to another at the very end of this scene
> does show the transition of time, but that is not the primary purpose.

While I don't deny the "letting go" tinge to the scene, I wouldn't write off
its significance as a fast-fowarding device. To show the passage of time,
they had to do something outdoors - and what better device than a beautiful,
flying bird?

One other thought: I think the scene functions a little bit like a _selah_
in the psalms, or stanza break. At that point in the film, I was feeling a
little overwhelmed and needed a rest. For me as a viewer, the flight was a
moment of relaxation before we entered the film's home stretch. It was
certainly one of the few connecting points in the film at which I didn't
feel like I was being rushed from one chapter summary to the next.

* * * * * * * *

I think they needed something similar in between the swirling letters and
the hut on the rock. (Maybe thirty seconds of Dursleys parking at the
seaside and squashing themselves into a boat?)

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

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




From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 08:20:40 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 09:20:40 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hermione as Buffalo Jill
References: <9t9hps+fbhf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00f801c170d3$132d22a0$e500a8c0@shasta>

Lynn wondered,

> Did anyone else notice that when Hermione put her wand away
> after using the Full-body bind on Neville, she did it with a neat
> little flourish- like a gunslinger reholstering his gun. Very Cute
> touch!

<sigh> Yes, I noticed it. And it grated a little. In the book, Hermione's
both reluctant and apologetic about stunning Neville; in the film she almost
seems blood thirsty. In the book, Ron's "you're scary!" comment would have
been out of place; in the film, it was exactly what I was thinking.

But it *was* cute, though. In a macabre sort of way.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

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




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 11:32:01 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:32:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New poll for HPFGU-Movie
In-Reply-To: <1006152637.312.5732.w86@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011119113201.13927.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com>

It is Warwick Davis! Not Darwick! He also played
Wicket in Star Wars and that nasty Leprechaun and
Willow!
--- HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote:
> 
> Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created
> for the 
> HPFGU-Movie group:
> 
> Which of the adult actors in a minor 
> role did the best job? 
> 
>   o David Bradley 
>   o John Cleese 
>   o Richard Bremmer 
>   o John Hurt 
>   o Zoe Wannamaker 
>   o Fiona Shaw 
>   o Julie Walters 
>   o Darwick Davis 
> 
> 
> 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!
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Nov 19 11:38:26 2001
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:38:26 -0000
Subject: Our impressions
Message-ID: <9taqvi+r2f1@eGroups.com>

No, not the Royal we (or the Royal piss, as Rupert Grint might say), 
but we went as a family last night, and I will give their reactions.  
I won't chip in with mine as I have only skimmed this list, and I 
have a nasty case of check-the-archive-itis.

They all liked it a lot - intend to get the video (or even the DVD - 
Ruth is going into aspirational mode over the kit below the telly).

James (13) thought the Dursleys weren't nasty enough - at one point 
Vernon agrees with Harry (why Sunday is good)

Ruth (age withheld) thought that Dumbledore's twinkliness came 
through, especially in the hospital at the end.  (I had ventured that 
he is a bit humourless, and she disagreed)

She had expressed a fear beforehand of not being able to follow it, 
because she can't remember the book very well, but that was fine - 
the early part kept all their attentions.  (Again, I ventured that 
the early bit is more like a documentary for prospective parents -
 "here's a typical flying lesson, buying your child's things is easy, 
etc" - she would have none of it).  She loved Diagon Alley - just as 
she imagined it.  She loved the violent chess game, too.

Ben (9), to whom I'd just read the book, spotted a number of missing 
bits, but in the spirit of "Look what I spotted", not 
disappointment.  All three (Sarah, 11, is the other) noted that some 
of the tests were missing at the end.

Ruth thought Rickman was brilliant.  (OK, one comment from me - he 
did well, but he conveyed, except for that first lesson, a 
misunderstood good guy, not someone who hates Harry - the script's 
fault, not AR's, IMO)

Overall lesson: being a member of a list like this makes us very 
demanding and perfectionist - for them, the movie did the dual job of 
recapturing the book and providing an evening's first class 
entertainment.

Oh, BTW, I went to Starbucks for the first time ever beforehand, as 
part of the entire package (Christmas shopping - coffee - movie - 
Italian restaurant).  I thought the muffin was delicious, but the 
coffee was unpleasant.

David




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Nov 19 13:03:51 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:03:51 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood/Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9ta8m4+e08d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tavvn+bmc6@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

> Maybe I 
> misinterpreted your reply and you meant that you do have a strong 
> enough impression of Wood's personality; you just don't mind if 
they 
> change it a little in the movie?


Luke, I think you hit the nail right on the head.  I have read all of 
the fabulous reviews, impressions and criticisms on the list, and one 
idea keeps surfacing.  To the extent most listies have criticisms of 
the movie, it is that their favorite lines of dialogue or scenes were 
omitted.  "Are you a witch or not" is a frequently cited example.  
This omission doesn't bother me at all, and as I've said, I wish more 
had been cut to focus better on what mattered.

But why do I feel that way, and hardly anyone else does?  Your 
observation provides the answer.  I think deep down, I was hoping for 
more "new material" and changes to the book.  For me, the book 
exists, it is static, and it is what it is, for better or worse.  
Seeing the setting come alive in the movie was new and exciting, 
that's true.  But seeing the actors say the very same dialogue in the 
books isn't very interesting to me (and to the extent they do the 
dialogue in a way inconsistent with my own mental image, it can 
actually be rather jarring, e.g. "VoldemorT").  

When I saw the movie, having the screenwriter add something to the 
book made it more exciting and refreshing for me.  For example, the 
screenwriter added "I shouldn't have told you that."  Aside from the 
fact that it was amusing, it quickly focused the audience on the fact 
that whatever Hagrid had said was important for solving the mystery.  
Another example is the wand selection scene, which gives me another 
way to visualize Harry picking his wand apart from the one in the 
book.  A third example is the vanishing glass -- now I have two ways 
to remember this great scene.  Chocolate frogs are another example of 
being pleasantly surprised in the movie.  My appreciation for the 
story was enriched by these changes.

On the other hand, to the extent the movie stuck to the book, it 
sapped a bit of the excitement out of the experience for me.  There 
was not much excitement or sense of peril in the Voldemort 
confrontation, because we knew everything that was going to happen:  
that Harry would win, how he would win, and that he would be injured 
but would be all right in the end.  There's nothing to be done about 
that -- that is to be expected anytime you go to a movie having read 
the book first.

So, Luke, your comment above (in addition to your observation on 
another post that everyone wants to see their favorite dialogue and 
scenes brought to the screen) was insightful and helpful, because it 
helped me see why I have such different impressions from the rest 
group.  


Luke wrote (about the winter owl flight scene):

>A couple people--I believe Cindy and Rita--said that 
> they thought at first that Harry was sending a letter somewhere.  
> This is a quite logical assumption, and exposes an issue that 
writers 
> of speculative fiction can run into, which is that since there are 
> all sorts of "implausibilities" in this genre of story, sometimes 
> things are meant literally and the metaphors are therefore harder 
to 
> identify.  

I agree that finding a way to convey this message is difficult.  
However, I think the method of using Hedwig was doomed from the 
start.  We are told earlier in the movie that owls deliver letters 
and packages.  We never see them do anything else.  So how are we, 
the innocent audience, supposed to figure out what is going on?  For 
all we know, Harry has decided based on his imprisonment at Privet 
Drive that it is wrong to have Hedwig live in a cage, so he is 
setting her free.

So here's the challenge:  how could the filmmakers have conveyed the 
idea of letting go in the context of the movie such that more than 
one clever viewer would have caught it?

Cindy (typecast in the role of Movie Group Oddball)





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 13:51:28 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:51:28 -0000
Subject: Our impressions
In-Reply-To: <9taqvi+r2f1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb2p0+ghka@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> Ruth thought Rickman was brilliant.  (OK, one comment from me - he 
> did well, but he conveyed, except for that first lesson, a 
> misunderstood good guy, not someone who hates Harry - the script's 
> fault, not AR's, IMO)
> 
IMHO, this was exactly the right way to play Snape.  Remember, Harry THINKS 
Snape hates him, but has no hard evidence.  I  think Snape is hard on Harry for 
the same reason Dumbledore left him with the Dursleys -- so celebrity doesn't 
go to his head.  If he hated him, we wouldn't have that scene where he wishes 
harry good luck in the quidditch game against Slytherin.  Also, he's 
undoubtedly disappointed that Harry's not IN Slyterhin. 




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 14:02:15 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:02:15 -0000
Subject: Magic in the Movie
In-Reply-To: <9t9ura+8dj8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb3d7+2fnt@eGroups.com>


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> > OTOH, why is it I remember hearing Dumbledore say in one 
> > of the trailers that "no magics are to be done in the 
> > corridors," but I don't recall him saying this in the 
> > film either time I saw it...

Not only did they cut out the "no magic in the corridors" statement, they LEFT 
IN the preface, "All students are reminded . . . " and then went straight to the 
ban on the third floor, which was a NEW constraint, not a reminder.  Arrrgh.




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 14:04:21 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:04:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Who played Quirrell?
Message-ID: <20011119140421.94504.qmail@web13703.mail.yahoo.com>

Anybody out there knows who played Professor Qurriell?
Also who played the Fat Lady.
Thank you! A family member wanted to know and could
read the credits fast enough!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band
of Very Happy Merry Muggles 100%

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 14:16:24 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:16:24 -0000
Subject: Our impressions
In-Reply-To: <9taqvi+r2f1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb47o+rv3f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David" <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:

<snip>
 
> Ruth thought Rickman was brilliant.  (OK, one comment from me - he 
> did well, but he conveyed, except for that first lesson, a 
> misunderstood good guy, not someone who hates Harry - the script's 
> fault, not AR's, IMO)
> 

I'd venture here to suggest that, at least as far as we know so far in the books, Snape precisely *is* a "misunderstood good guy." 

Uptight - certainly. 
Bitter - to be sure. 
Markedly poor social skills - hey, we can't all be Ed Sullivan! 
Little to no sense of humor - true dat.
Prejudiced - yup.
Plays favorites - demonstrably.

But all that adds up to "difficult," not to "bad guy." It's important to always bear in mind that Dumbledore counts Snape on the side of the good, and continues to trust him *enough to use him as a spy* in the face of the coming threat. 

In addition -- as I recall, his displaced resentment for Harry jumps up considerably *after* Dumbledore so publicly fixes the House Cup results during the Farewell Banquet. (I always thought this was a rather unattractive way for Dumbledore to do this, frankly.)

And my final commentary is that according to rumor, both Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane were tutored in the *entire* history of their characters, including everything we don't yet know about their past AND what will happen to them through the next three books. So we can assume that Rickman more fully understands what motivates Snape than we do, and that this informs his portrayal.




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 14:27:25 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:27:25 -0000
Subject: Stephen Kloves, and shippiness.
In-Reply-To: <9t9s7d+e440@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb4sd+gd77@eGroups.com>

Yes, I agree. It must have been a fantasticly difficult task writing 
a screenplay for this film, and I thought he tackled that aspect of 
it well. But I really did not like his dialogue. His idea of how us 
Brits speak is completely and utterly wrong, and I think the dialogue 
left a lot to be desired. There were lines like, in Diagon 
Alley, "But Hagrid, how am I to pay for it all, I haven't any money." 
This line made me cringe both times I saw it (and others too, this is 
just an example). People in Britain have never, and will never speak 
like that. If he'd said "But Hagrid, how am I going to pay for it 
all, I haven't got any money?" it would have been much more realitic, 
just because of two words, 'going' and 'got'. The existing versions 
just made it sound like a primary school play.

Is he British? I really doubt it, because his idea of how we speak is 
so unbelievably stereotypical that it almost wrecked the whole film 
for me. But all the other aspects made that up for me:o)

Anyway, I'm glad to have that off my chest...now:

I'm a newcomer to the Harry Potter community, and you all seem to be 
talking about 'shippiness' or something. What does this mean? Is it 
something to do with romance? If someone could explain it, I'd really 
apreciate it:o)

Dave

Random Quote Generator: I show not your face but your heart's desrie.
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:

> This is a tough question, because it's very hard to separate what 
is 
> ultimately the result of Kloves and what may have been more the 
> result of someone else like Columbus or Heyman or the chief editor, 
> etc.
> 
> But assuming we were to attribute *all* final screenplay decisions 
to 
> Kloves (which is certainly not actually the case) then I would have 
> these things to say:
> 
> On the whole, a reasonable job for what I do think was a very 
> difficult task.  I particularly think he made some good scene 
> combinations in a way that might not have occured to me and that 
> worked pretty well.  Especially some of the roaming around the 
school 
> scenes were combined in a manner that seemed fairly plausible and 
> didn't severely damage the unfolding of the story.  So I must give 
> some credit there.
> 
> The humor changes and exorcises, though, are a shame.  I was not 
> expecting most of the book humor to make it into the movie, but 
> really the only character left with hardly any humorous lines that 
> were actually from the book is Ron.  Some of the new lines were 
good 
> and some not so good, but ultimately the issue I see here is that a 
> lot of the fun in this kind of adaptation (that was clearly 
designed 
> with fans in mind) is to hear some of your favorite lines being 
> spoken.  So to replace these with new material is not so much fresh 
> and appreciated as it is often a tad disappointing.  Some of the 
> changes were done from a kind of created necessity, like the loss 
of 
> the "Are you a witch or not?" line in the Devil's Snare, because 
they 
> had redesigned the Devil's Snare to be Hermione's task (replacing 
the 
> purpose of the potion challenge), characterized by her level-
> headedness under pressure.  Obviously, the "Are you a witch or 
not?" 
> situation would have undermined this.  But some other line changes, 
> it seemed to me, could have easily stuck more to the original.
> 
> Also, the handling of necessary exposition in the beginning (at 
> Hogwarts) was rather poor, I thought.  A lot of unnecessary 
> exposition was overemphasized, and too much of the necessary 
> exposition was glossed-over, making for a lot of "filling in the 
gaps 
> with info from the book" that is simply not possible for anyone 
that 
> hasn't read it.  This is why I feel the movie, strangely enough, 
does 
> not stand on its own well at all.
> 
> But I don't know how much of this is truly Kloves fault and how 
much 
> is simply the daunting nature of the task.  Perhaps replacing him 
> with someone else would help, but perhaps not; I honestly don't 
know 
> enough to say for sure.
> 
> -Luke




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 14:29:25 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:29:25 -0000
Subject: Stephen Kloves, and shippiness.
In-Reply-To: <9tb4sd+gd77@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb505+1jeg@eGroups.com>

Sorry to reply to my own post, but it was a little unclear as to what 
I was replying to. I was replying to Luke's comments which are under 
my post.  Sorry about that:o)

Dave




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov 19 14:33:58 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 09:33:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Who played Quirrell?
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C339A@MIAEXCH1>

All the cast information can be found from http://www.imdv.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Wanda Mallett <witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com>
To: HPmovie <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon Nov 19 09:04:21 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Who played Quirrell?

Real-To:  Wanda Mallett <witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com>

Anybody out there knows who played Professor Qurriell?
Also who played the Fat Lady.
Thank you! A family member wanted to know and could
read the credits fast enough!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band
of Very Happy Merry Muggles 100%

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com

_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/ 




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 15:03:37 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:03:37 -0000
Subject: my responses on all points of controversy
In-Reply-To: <9t9l9p+ksa3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb709+fmdt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
>  It didn't work quite right when Hagrid jumped from saying: "Didn't 
> you ever wonder where your Mum and Dad learned it all?"  and Harry: 
> "All what?" to saying "Harry, you're a wizard". They really should 
> have found time for Q: "All what?" A: "Their magic. [blank look from 
> Harry] You don't even know that your Mum and Dad were a witch and 
> wizard, some of the best in this century? [more blank look from 
> Harry] Ah, Harry, you're a wizard." 

Yes, we picked up on that, too.  Definitely, a couple of lines of explanation 
were badly cut out!  Another bad cut was when Dumbledore says that Filch 
wants the students to be "reminded" that they're not to go into the third-floor 
hall.  The camera's on Filch, not on D., as he speaks this  -- clearly , the 
reminder was supposed to be about not doing magic in the halls.  The warning 
about the third floor is new info for everyone.
 





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 15:12:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:12:21 -0000
Subject: What is Scenery-Chewing (with some SHIP stuff)
In-Reply-To: <9t9adu+8q75@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tb7gl+lsjq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Ebony" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:
> 
> One more thing--get today's USA weekend magazine!  On the cover there 
> is the most darling picture of Dan I've ever seen... and his hair is 
> messy!  Why couldn't they do that for the movie, I wonder? 

Messy hair is a continuity nightmare.  Next time you see the movie, check out 
how Ron's hair changes during the Hogwarts Express scene.  Likewise, Harry's 
injuries wax and wane during his confrontations with Quirrel/Voldemort.  Tidy 
is so much easier to maintain/replicate!

I haven't seen the USA Today cover, but when I saw photos of Dan arriving at 
the Engish premiere, his hair was windblown and surely looked more like I had 
pictured Harry's.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 16:00:43 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:00:43 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9t9gbm+t6a9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbabb+qj3o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> wrote:
 BTW, did anyone else notice that the zoo in the movie was definitely 
> the London Zoo?  (There was a plaque that said so above the snake 
> sign.)  In the book, we decided it has to have been another zoo, 
> since during the Diagon Alley trip it is said that Harry had never 
> been to London before.

We've been working on reconciling that one, too!  We decided that going to the 
London Zoo doesn't count as "going to London" the same way a shopping trip, 
walking around the streets,  does.  There is parking right at the zoo, so Harry 
could've gone to the London Zoo and still be awed by the London street scenes.




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 16:30:25 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:30:25 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] re: Magic in Movie / Biggerstaff / Dave's Comments /Snowy O...
Message-ID: <14a.43d5c47.292a8da1@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 05:08:53 GMT Standard Time, catlady at wicca.net 
writes:


> . I don't think we heard Seamus's name even tho' he got more 
> lines than Dean. 

Hiya, I'm new to the list and have just seen the film for the first time 
*grin* at some point I maywell give my oppinions on it!  Anyway, don't know 
if this has been replied to, but we do hear Seamus's name when he's trying to 
turn the water into Rum, Harry turns to Ron and says "Erm....Ron, what's 
Seamus trying to do to his water?" 
Just thought I'd mention it!!

Great list by the way:)
Hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 16:37:01 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:37:01 -0000
Subject: Hermione
In-Reply-To: <9t9hps+fbhf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbcfd+u66r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., lyyved at e... wrote:
> Did anyone else notice that when Hermione put her wand away 
> after using the Full-body bind on Neville, she did it with a neat 
> little flourish- like a gunslinger reholstering his gun. Very Cute 
> touch!
> 
> Lynn

Yes - I totally noticed that but forgot until you mentioned it.  It 
was very cute - I could actually see Hermione doing something like 
that - LOL




From joym999 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 16:38:43 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:38:43 -0000
Subject: What makes a great movie?, was Re: James--Biggerstaff as Wood/Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9tavvn+bmc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbcij+kune@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Luke wrote:
> > Maybe I 
> > misinterpreted your reply and you meant that you do have a strong 
> > enough impression of Wood's personality; you just don't mind if 
> they 
> > change it a little in the movie?
> 
> Luke, I think you hit the nail right on the head.  I have read all 
of 
> the fabulous reviews, impressions and criticisms on the list, and 
one 
> idea keeps surfacing.  To the extent most listies have criticisms 
of 
> the movie, it is that their favorite lines of dialogue or scenes 
were 
> omitted.  "Are you a witch or not" is a frequently cited example.  
> This omission doesn't bother me at all, and as I've said, I wish 
more 
> had been cut to focus better on what mattered.
> 
> But why do I feel that way, and hardly anyone else does?  Your 
> observation provides the answer.  I think deep down, I was hoping 
for 
> more "new material" and changes to the book.  For me, the book 
> exists, it is static, and it is what it is, for better or worse.  
> Seeing the setting come alive in the movie was new and exciting, 
> that's true.  But seeing the actors say the very same dialogue in 
the 
> books isn't very interesting to me 

I think I know what you mean, Cindy, although I get the feeling that 
you were disappointed in the movie, while I was not.  To me, a great 
movie can be made from a great book only by adding to the vision of 
the author, not by merely repeating it.  Columbus, for the most part, 
translated SS/PS into movie form.  That was fine, for me, and what I 
expected, but as I think I previously said the movie IMO was a good 
visual depiction of a great book, but not a great movie.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the book Little Women, a 
favorite of mine and a great book of its kind, although not really a 
literary masterpiece, I suppose.  Several movies have been made from 
it (including one really horrible one with Elizabeth Taylor), and two 
of them were really great (again IMO).  The first was made in the 
1940s, with Katherine Hepburn, and the second was made in the 1990s 
with Winona Ryder.  These two movies are completely different.  The 
first is a tear-jerking, homey family-oriented story, whereas the 
second is much more of a character study/period piece.  Neither one 
is inaccurate, neither one makes things up that are inconsistant with 
the books.  Both these movies interpret and add to what the author 
created in a way that greatly increased my enjoyment of the book when 
I subsequently reread it.

I think that's why my previous post focused on the things about the 
movie, like the Hogwarts Express ticket, the keys, etc., which 
increased my understanding of the books, and why, to me, the most 
enjoyable parts of the movie where those scenes which, to me, added 
something to my vision of the Potterverse.  That's why I loved all 
the scenes with the Dursleys -- the movie added some great funny 
moments and made them even more disgustingly Dursleyish than JKR 
had.  And both Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rickman were more vividly 
Hagrid and Snape because they were interpreted so well.  These 
aspects of the movie were, to me, great.  But the characters and 
scenes, like Dumbledore, and the hospital scene, that simply wandered 
off the pages of the book and walked around in 3 dimensions for a few 
minutes, were simply good (and really cool when they had good FX) -- 
but not great.

--Joywitch








From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 16:49:22 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:49:22 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Stephen Kloves, and shippiness.
Message-ID: <f.1e145648.292a9212@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 14:29:08 GMT Standard Time, davisaacs at hotmail.com 
writes:


> "But Hagrid, how am I to pay for it all, I haven't any money." 
> This line made me cringe both times I saw it (and others too, this is 
> just an example). People in Britain have never, and will never speak 
> like that. If he'd said "But Hagrid, how am I going to pay for it 
> all, I haven't got any money?" it would have been much more realitic, 
> just because of two words, 'going' and 'got'.

I have to say, I've only seen it once so far, and I have to agree. Really. I 
know I wouldn't say it!! I doubt any of my friends would either.....
Hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca  Mon Nov 19 16:59:24 2001
From: aboyko at nb.sympatico.ca (Angela Boyko)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:59:24 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Our impressions
References: <9tb47o+rv3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF93A6C.B9B8142@nb.sympatico.ca>

Heather Moore wrote:
> 
> In addition -- as I recall, his displaced resentment for Harry jumps up considerably *after* Dumbledore so publicly fixes the House Cup results during the Farewell Banquet. (I always thought this was a rather unattractive way for Dumbledore to do this, frankly.)

I think the point fixing works in the book, because in the book, we saw
the fallout from the kids losing so many points for the House in one
night. We didn't get to see the fallout in the movie, so the point
fixing in the end doesn't carry as much emotional weight.

Angela

-- 
Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
  "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
      through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Mon Nov 19 11:53:04 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:53:04 EST5EDT
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
Message-ID: <1349162D61@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Haven't read my 1000000 posts from the movie list yet but 
wanted to put in my two cents first.....

First off, I LOVED the movie.  Loved it, loved it, loved 
it.  

Secondly.....will I be put in jail if I admit how HOT 
Oliver Wood is?!  :-)  What a cutie!!!!!!  The accent 
doesn't hurt, either.  :-)

When I saw it at the midnight showing, we were a bit too 
close to the screen so the Quidditch match made me a bit 
queasy.  When I saw it the next morning, we still got 
rotten seats because two different schools had their 
students there as a field trip.  So it wasn't until Friday 
night that I got a good viewing of the Quidditch match.  I 
loved it.  I thought Harry standing on his broom and 
"surfing" after the Snitch was adorable, though not 
anything close to the book.  I was rather shocked that no 
one got fouled, though.  And I would have liked to have 
heard Lee's commentary through the whole thing.

I loved the chess scene.  Ron's face as he watched the 
Queen move towards him broke my heart.

Personally, I think Rupert stole the movie.  His facial 
expressions were great.

I wish the twins were in it a bit more.

When Dudley went off about his birthday presents, I leaned 
over to my friend and said "But I want an Oompah Loompah 
NOW."  He was definitely the male version of Veruca Salt.

I wish Harry was a bit more emotional when he saw his 
parents for the first time.

But, I give the movie an 11. ("These go to 11.")

So......when's the DVD coming out?  :-)


Rachel Bray
-wanting to form an Oliver Wood fan club



From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:01:42 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:01:42 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Did anyone read my post?
Message-ID: <145.4d59745.292a94f6@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 10:51:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hertopos at hotmail.com writes:


> 1. Will this movie become a classic as Roger Ebert said?
> 2. What do you think of possible 4 hour directors cut. There is an 
> online petition at www.petitiononline.com
> 

#1 - No. Quite frankly, I don't think this movie stands on it's own. I think 
you really need to be a book fan to enjoy it. But that's MHO. 

#2 - A petition? Egads, you can't force the studio to put out a directors 
cut.  :-) I understand the sentiment, but I think it's misguided.

Lotus


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




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 17:04:56 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:04:56 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <1349162D61@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9tbe3o+dvfk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> Secondly.....will I be put in jail if I admit how HOT 
> Oliver Wood is?!  :-)  What a cutie!!!!!!  The accent 
> doesn't hurt, either.  :-)

OOH I totally agree with you!  He is soooo cute!  Now we can go out 
together and get full-size posters!!

> Personally, I think Rupert stole the movie.  His facial 
> expressions were great.

I totally agree here, as well.  He and Hermione and their 
interactions were great!  "She needs to sort out her 
priorities." "That's light reading?!?"  Scenes like that made me want 
to kiss him!

> 
> I wish the twins were in it a bit more.

Yes, definitely, although they aren't very important in book 1.  

> 
> When Dudley went off about his birthday presents, I leaned 
> over to my friend and said "But I want an Oompah Loompah 
> NOW."  He was definitely the male version of Veruca Salt.

OMG I never thought of that - good analogy!!

Meg Rose




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:06:51 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:06:51 EST
Subject: my thoughts
Message-ID: <16.158fa4cc.292a962b@aol.com>

Well, i've been a BIG Harry fan for about 18months now and have been waiting 
for the movie with a cross between complete elation and utter dread.  I 
needn't have worried:)

I have to say i loved it and, for the most part, I think they plucked people 
and places right out of my head and put them on the cinema screen:)  

I think most people have agreed that Rupert and Ron was fantastic and, along 
with Hagrid, made me laugh out loud on may occasions! Though i was a bit 
miffed that they gave him the line that follows Hermione asking if they saw 
what Fluffly was standing on ("It's feet?! I was too busy with it's heads!") 
as in the book that is one of my favourite Harry lines!!  I agree with 
whoever it was that says Rupert Grint has fantastic comic timing for a 12 
year old:)

I thought Hermione was great, a little over the top at times, but still great 
all the same:) If I had one compaint about her, it would be that she is too 
pretty, no big teeth!!

Dan played Harry greatly I thought....he was very understated, and I think 
this stays true to the book, I feel that as Harry grows in the next books, so 
will Dan's portrayal of him.  How much did you say "awwww!" when he said 
"I've got presents?!" *another great facial expression from Rupert here which 
appears to says "Poor bugger! of course you have!"*

All other actors and supporting actors were great *who's that Rach, Sean 
Biggerstaff? What, i never mentioned him.....honest *ahem*!  And although 
oliver Wood was not as desperate and fanatical as I imagined him, I thought 
it was a great performance and you could see the hunger bubbling a little 
inside him:)

I did find myself saying "Oooh! they cut that bit out!!" a fair few times, 
but at the end of the day, it's a film and there is no way they could fit all 
my favourite bits in without killing


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




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 17:07:42 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:07:42 -0000
Subject: Did anyone read my post?
In-Reply-To: <145.4d59745.292a94f6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9tbe8u+f09t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., lotusmoondragon at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 11/18/2001 10:51:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> hertopos at h... writes:
> 
> 
> > 1. Will this movie become a classic as Roger Ebert said?
> > 2. What do you think of possible 4 hour directors cut. There is 
an 
> > online petition at www.petitiononline.com
> > 


I just have to say, that i did indeed read your post, I just had 
nothing to say at the time...  So I didn't reply.  After reading what 
other people have written, I say that it won't become a classic.  It 
was an excellant movie, but you need the book to accompany it for it 
to be underdstandable.  I really have no comment on #2...




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:15:08 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:15:08 EST
Subject: my thoughts *part two!!*
Message-ID: <102.c300e4d.292a981c@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 17:10:22 GMT Standard Time, 
chattie27million at aol.com writes:


> I did find myself saying "Oooh! they cut that bit out!!" a fair few times, 
> but at the end of the day, it's a film and there is no way they could fit 
> all 
> my favourite bits in without killing
> 

Ooops! Didn't mean to send that then!! So I'll try from the end of this 
pararaph!!

No way they could fit it all in without killing some of the audience's 
enthusiasm along the way *by this, I mean people who are either much much 
younger, or who are not avid fans of the books, or haven't read them at all.* 
 So I tried to make myself be less picky and found myself enjoying it an 
awful lot.  Although I di feel they should have put in some explanation 
somewhere between them being at the Dursley's and the hut on the rock.....

On the whole though, I loved it. Really and truly did!  I am seeing it again 
as soon as possible:)
I could go into huge lists of scenes etc, but i feel it's all been covered on 
this list in great detail already and I don't want to bore you all as it's my 
first proper post here!!!
thanks for listening to my ramblings:)
Hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:23:20 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:23:20 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New poll for HPFGU-Movie
Message-ID: <d5.f2f7f4f.292a9a08@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 1:51:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


>   o Darwick Davis 

Not to nitpick, but his name is Warwick Davis.

Thanks,
Lotus


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




From lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 17:24:37 2001
From: lilymumu2001 at yahoo.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:24:37 -0000
Subject: More Snape! and Harry defending himself (was: impressions)
In-Reply-To: <9tb2p0+ghka@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbf8l+pd7a@eGroups.com>

Joanne wrote, in regards to Snape:
 
<Also, he's undoubtedly disappointed that Harry's not IN Slyterhin.>

What?  Why would Snape be disappointed that Harry of all people is not 
in Slytherin?  Based on what we know, I always felt that Snape was 
bitterly disappointed when he found out that Harry would be attending 
Hogwarts ("So soon? These 10 years just flew, didn't they?") at all.  
To have to look at the face that so reminds Snape of his own 
unpleasant days as a Hogwarts student when James and friends ruled the 
school...

Something else that bothered me about Snape is that I felt his screen 
time was based on his mystique and popularity among the readers, not 
on the development of his character in the film.  I would have liked 
to have seen more of Snape's apparent disdain of Harry.  It wasn't 
clear enough to me.  *We* know he is misunderstood, but he does not 
come off that way; he is obnoxious, cold, and rather unfair to his 
students.  Rickman can handle that - give it to him to work with!

Here's an example of the growing tensions between Harry and Snape that 
was lost in the film:  In Harry's first Potions class (the note taking 
I appreciated, btw), Hermione is raising her hand, desperate to prove 
herself.  In the book, Harry advises Snape to call on Hermione.  I 
loved that moment, as it showed us the spunk that Harry always has.  
He is never the pushover.  Snape hates that about Harry.  The extra 
minute it would have added for Harry to defend himself in the film 
would have been worth it.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who for some reason, always thinks of Amanda 
when Snape is mentioned **************************




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Mon Nov 19 17:25:38 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:25:38 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] re: Magic in Movie / Biggerstaff / Dave's Comments /Snowy Owl in Snow / Dixie's
References: <9ta432+rm9m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005401c1711f$35218a80$53af1e3e@stephen>

>Noel wrote:

>> Have a butterbrewski, there's something I need to tell 
>> you.....the chicks all have the hots for [Biggerstaff] 

>1) Not all the chicks. I found in chat that not only us old ladies, 
but two wise young ones prefer Rickman.
>2) Not just chicks. The gay men were squabbling over him until 
someone started handing out Biggerstaff clones to everyone who wanted 
one.

Hi there (delurks again)

Do we have to choose between the two of them? Can't I have both???

:-)

lucy, now rereading the books for the millionth time.


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




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Mon Nov 19 17:30:34 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:30:34 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Impressions
Message-ID: <008501c1711f$e564d500$53af1e3e@stephen>

I never saw this one appear, it might have got lost during the posting problems. If this is a duplicate, I'm really really sorry.

Lucy
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lucy Austin 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 6:24 AM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Impressions


  Hi everyone (de lurks)

  I wanted to say I loved the film - a few bits left out and of course not long enough, but a very faithful adaptation. We went with several mad HP fans, and a couple of people who hadn't read the books, and these two said it made sense and they enjoyed it.

  Did anyone else hate the part where Ron swears? Maybe I'm out of touch with 11 year olds, but I just CAN'T see a fairly middle / upper class school (as per calling people by surnames, having Houses etc) having a brand new pupil who says 'bloody brilliant' directly to a teacher standing right in front of them. We were rude about the teachers behind their backs of course, but we'd never have sworn at them like that - what do you all think?

  I too missed the 'are you a witch or not' scene - even if they had to cut the potions task and make Hermione the heroine of the Devil's Snare by figuring out the escape, they still could have had that line! I also missed the bit on the train where Gred & Forge meet Harry - but I loved their teasing of Molly on the platform, and I nearly cried when he got through to platform 9 3/4 and saw the Express!

  I've also fallen in love with Wood - had no idea he was Scottish before hand, but IMG he is gorgeous!!

  Why didn't they have more of a build up to 'Harry, you're a wizard'?

  Why didn't Hagrid tell him about his parents before they got to the Leaky Cauldron - if they were tired of being in the hut with the D's, they could have had a shot on the train with him explaining things (Hagrid could have got stuck in the Underground then) instead of the pointless meal afterwards, with (though I wouldn't have like the advertising) I seem to recall was in fact a burger in the book.

  Enough waffling though! 

  Lucy, who can't wait to see it again and get the DVD, hopefully which will have the original 4 hour long directors cut! 



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




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Nov 19 17:32:07 2001
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:32:07 -0000
Subject: What matters (was James--Biggerstaff as Wood/Flight Scene)
In-Reply-To: <9tavvn+bmc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbfmn+rf77@eGroups.com>

Cindy the sphynx animagus wrote:
> I think deep down, I was hoping for 
> more "new material" and changes to the book.  For me, the book 
> exists, it is static, and it is what it is, for better or worse.  
> Seeing the setting come alive in the movie was new and exciting, 
> that's true.  But seeing the actors say the very same dialogue in 
the 
> books isn't very interesting to me.
> When I saw the movie, having the screenwriter add something to the 
> book made it more exciting and refreshing for me.  
*good examples snipped*
> On the other hand, to the extent the movie stuck to the book, it 
> sapped a bit of the excitement out of the experience for me

> Cindy (typecast in the role of Movie Group Oddball)

Well, Cindy, perhaps we can be oddballs together, because that's more 
or less how I feel, too.

When I go to a movie, I want to see something that works well *as a 
movie*.  If it happens to be an adaptation of a book I like, that's a 
guide, not an infallible one, but a guide nonetheless to whether I 
will like it.

Furthermore, I realised this morning that all the characters 
had 'snapped back' to the mental images I had from the books.  To me 
Hermione is the breathless bushy haired girl with the big teeth I 
have aways known.  The one on the screen is a good representation, 
but that's all she is, just as fanfic Hermione (in the limited 
reading I have done) is a different person who happens to share some 
history with her.

I think possibly what this means is that, for me, there is little or 
no *interpretation* in the film.  I think because the actors were 
given little opportunity to interpret by the need to be faithful to 
the book, and indeed in most cases little opportunity to do 
anything.  How many seconds did John Cleese get in toto?

Perhaps I'm being unfair, wanting the film to interpret the book and 
then complaining when the interpretation is not what I expect (like 
Snape not hating Harry, not just a Harry POV issue, IMO) - perhaps 
the book does not, after all, have sufficient depth to carry 
interpretations other than faithful reproduction?

Not really sure what I'm saying, here.  I did like it, though.

David




From AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 17:46:06 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (AgentIrish at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:46:06 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <1349162D61@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9tbggu+6sq8@eGroups.com>

 
> 
> Secondly.....will I be put in jail if I admit how HOT 
> Oliver Wood is?!  :-)  What a cutie!!!!!!  The accent 
> doesn't hurt, either.  :-)
> 
> Rachel Bray
> -wanting to form an Oliver Wood fan club

Rachel, I am up for an Oliver Wood fan club, too!  He is 18 by the 
way :)

Loved the movie - only one thing was missing (for me personally) - 
the Howler!!  I was dying to see that!

:) Maggie




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:52:40 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:52:40 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....
Message-ID: <125.79e3d5d.292aa0e8@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 12:06:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
megrose_13 at yahoo.com writes:


> > I wish the twins were in it a bit more.
> 
> Yes, definitely, although they aren't very important in book 1.  
> 

Yes, but they cut out that great scene on Christmas morning when they come in 
with their Weasly sweaters on, and they put Percy's on him as well. And the 
whole interaction with the Weasly kids at Platform 9 3/4 was cut, and it's a 
GREAT scene! Oh well, I guess you can't have it all.  :-)

Lotus


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




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:55:54 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:55:54 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <125.79e3d5d.292aa0e8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9tbh3a+7soi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., lotusmoondragon at a... wrote:
 they cut out that great scene on Christmas morning when they come in 
> with their Weasly sweaters on, and they put Percy's on him as well. And the 
> whole interaction with the Weasly kids at Platform 9 3/4 was cut, and it's a 
> GREAT scene! Oh well, I guess you can't have it all.  :-)
> 

On Katie Couric's special last Sunday, Dan Radcliffe showed off some props, 
which included a nice blue Weasley sweater, complete with a big "H".  Perhaps 
more footage of Christmas was filmed, but had to be cut to save time, and 
we'll see it on th DVD.




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 17:59:01 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:59:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....
Message-ID: <fb.1d12ff50.292aa265@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 17:57:38 GMT Standard Time, Joanne0012 at aol.com 
writes:


> On Katie Couric's special last Sunday, Dan Radcliffe showed off some props, 
> which included a nice blue Weasley sweater, complete with a big "H".  
> Perhaps 
> more footage of Christmas was filmed, but had to be cut to save time, and 
> we'll see it on th DVD.
> 

Oh I hope so!!! I can't wait to see a bit more Weasley interaction....Should 
be a load more in COS:):)
Hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 18:01:30 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:01:30 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....
Message-ID: <21.1469f0e2.292aa2fa@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 12:57:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Joanne0012 at aol.com writes:


> On Katie Couric's special last Sunday, Dan Radcliffe showed off some props, 
> which included a nice blue Weasley sweater, complete with a big "H".  
> Perhaps 
> more footage of Christmas was filmed, but had to be cut to save time, and 
> we'll see it on th DVD.
> 

I hope so! That's one thing I love so much about DVD - the extras.  :-) I 
love watching a movie on DVD with the commentary on. It adds so much to the 
film.

Lotus


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




From jfenne at uwalumni.com  Mon Nov 19 18:20:49 2001
From: jfenne at uwalumni.com (Jennifer Fenne)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 10:20:49 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry...a murderer? and Christmas morning
Message-ID: <20011119182049.4627.cpmta@c014.snv.cp.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011119/132c4b92/attachment.ksh>

From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 18:27:06 2001
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:27:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
In-Reply-To: <9tbggu+6sq8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011119182706.53510.qmail@web10905.mail.yahoo.com>

--- AgentIrish at yahoo.com wrote:
> > Secondly.....will I be put in jail if I admit how
> HOT 
> > Oliver Wood is?!  :-)  What a cutie!!!!!!  The
> accent 
> > doesn't hurt, either.  :-)
> > 
> > Rachel Bray
> > -wanting to form an Oliver Wood fan club
> 
> Rachel, I am up for an Oliver Wood fan club, too! 
> He is 18 by the 
> way :)

I am totally in support of both you you guys.  I have
a name suggestion - OWWIE (in tribute of his most
memorable line about the Bludger to the head).  Oliver
Wood's Words Induce Ecstacy.  I'm sorry, but that
accent is just to DIE for!!

Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little
badge, an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean
reading the phonebook. ;)


Andrea

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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com



From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 18:43:20 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:43:20 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
In-Reply-To: <20011119182706.53510.qmail@web10905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tbjs8+okll@eGroups.com>

> I am totally in support of both you you guys.  I have
> a name suggestion - OWWIE (in tribute of his most
> memorable line about the Bludger to the head).  Oliver
> Wood's Words Induce Ecstacy.  I'm sorry, but that
> accent is just to DIE for!!
> 
> Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little
> badge, an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean
> reading the phonebook. ;)
> 
> 
> Andrea


OMG Two memberships for me please!!!

Meg




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Mon Nov 19 13:42:40 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:42:40 EST5EDT
Subject: OWWIE
Message-ID: <151C130D79@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

>Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little badge, 
>an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean reading the 
>phonebook. ;) 
Thank you for making me spray my Diet Coke all over my 
monitor and choke!  :-)

Sounds good to me!  I'll make up t-shirts that say OWWIE 
and get right to work on the proper paperwork.  :-)

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 Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 18:53:54 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:53:54 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
In-Reply-To: <9tbjs8+okll@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbkg2+9mj9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I 
LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!" <megrose_13 at y...> wrote:
> OMG Two memberships for me please!!!
> 

Two more for me and my 15-year-old daughter, please!  We were discussing 
His Cuteness in the car on the way home from the film, when suddenly my 
14-yo son piped up from the back seat, "Could you two please talk about this 
some other time not in front of me?"




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Mon Nov 19 19:01:23 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 19 Nov 2001 19:01:23 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006196483.388.33536.w4@yahoogroups.com>


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

Ok, this is it, everyone!  Who is 
better? 

  o Alan Rickman 
  o Sean Biggerstaff 


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 DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 19 19:26:12 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:26:12 -0800
Subject: Music and the Parseltongue for "Amigo"
Message-ID: <125249956548.20011119112612@mindspring.com>

Joywitch wrote:
> We could be even more nitpicky and ask how a snake
> which was bred in captivity, presumably in England, would know the 
> word amigo even if its ancestry was Brazilian

Or what is the distinction between "friend" and "amigo" in
Parseltongue...? :)

Rita/CatLady:
> I don't understand why some people Like the music. I Hated the music
> at the end, which continued under the end credits -- it made me not 
> only wince but grind my teeth. Oh, the pomposity, oh the grandiosity, 
> oh the loudness.

Oh the John Williamsness.  :)

The problem I have with Williams is that all too often he tries to use
music to manipulate the emotions, to kindly inform us that: "This is a sad
scene!", or "This is an awesome special effect!".  Music should set a
tone, but it should not be condescending to the audience.

-- 
Dave (who thinks Vangelis should have done the score)




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 19:35:24 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:35:24 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
Message-ID: <9tbmts+1obq@eGroups.com>

Although I still have other issues with this scene a thought occured 
to me late last night.  

Harry has never seen his parents in photographs and the Dursley's 
certainly didn't talk about them. The only thing he does know up to 
this point is what he's been told by people in the wizarding world: 
he has his mother's eyes and that he looks like his dad.  So maybe 
what he sees in the Mirror is what he imagines his parents to look 
like if they were still alive. This could explain the age difference, 
they would be in their 30's then. Just a thought. 

Cheers,

Kristin




From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Nov 19 19:59:40 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:59:40 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various Notes...
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF86F8@MIAEXCH1>

> > 
> > << Actual: Plastic around sandwiches
> > Translation: What's up with that? >>
> > 
> > Heh, do you mean the Clingfilm? Clear plasticy thing that Ron's
> sarnies are 
> > wrapped & squashed in? That's there cos that's what us English
> people wrap 
> > our lunches in... Annoying stuff as if it so much as folds it sticks
> together 
> > and is a pain to get apart & the more you try the more it sticks and
> you end 
> > up with a big lump of plastic unfit to wrap anything in. Grrrrrr....
> > 
> > Sara
> 
> We use that, too (SaranWrap--like you said, only fit to use once & a
> pain to unwrap!).  Maybe she means in contrast to the sandwiches being
> in paper bags?  Well, then we wouldn't see what was inside, silly! :-D
> Dunno.

I agree with Megan that there were too few references to Weasley poverty,
but that will fit into CoS sensibly. No, what Amber means about "what's up
with that" is the complete lack-of-sensibleness in having wizards use
plastic wrap. It's a Muggle thing, and it just doesn't seem reasonable that
Molly would have a roll of the stuff in her kitchen. Wondering what else
we'll see there next year...



From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Mon Nov 19 20:14:15 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (Dixie Malfoy)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:14:15 -0000
Subject: Hagrid question
Message-ID: <9tbp6q+mb3p@eGroups.com>


When the trio went to ask Hagrid about who gave him Norbert, Hagrid 
was playing his flute. Was I imagining things or was Hagrid playing 
Hedwig's Theme? It sounded like the frist few notes of it.

***Dixie Malfoy***




From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Mon Nov 19 20:17:02 2001
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:17:02 -0000
Subject: Box-Office Records (an Asterisk Reqiuired)
Message-ID: <9tbpbu+611c@eGroups.com>

The following may be of interest regarding HP-The Movie's boxoffice 
numbers

http://www.forbes.com/2001/11/19/1119topnews.html

  - CMC




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Mon Nov 19 15:38:41 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:38:41 EST5EDT
Subject: Oh..and by the way...
Message-ID: <170B506668@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I loved the Monsters Inc. tribute.  That was hilarious.  It 
was almost like they were saying "Yeah, Harry is going to 
kick our asses but that's OK because we love him, too!"


Rachel Bray
.....Mike - "When Harry Met Sully!"



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 chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 20:50:01 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:50:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OWWIE
Message-ID: <ab.12846fdc.292aca79@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 18:48:43 GMT Standard Time, bray.262 at osu.edu 
writes:


> 
> >Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little badge, 
> >an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean reading the 
> >phonebook. ;) 
> Thank you for making me spray my Diet Coke all over my 
> monitor and choke!  :-)
> 
> Sounds good to me!  I'll make up t-shirts that say OWWIE 
> and get right to work on the proper paperwork.  :-)
> 
> 

Me too please;) *grin*
hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 20:51:39 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:51:39 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oh..and by the way...
Message-ID: <74.1362a65c.292acadb@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 20:45:16 GMT Standard Time, bray.262 at osu.edu 
writes:


> I loved the Monsters Inc. tribute.  That was hilarious.  It 
> was almost like they were saying "Yeah, Harry is going to 
> kick our asses but that's OK because we love him, too!"
> 
> 
> Rachel Bray
> .....Mike - "When Harry Met Sully!"

Totally agree!!! Thought that trailer thing was hillarious actually;
"Two words"
"Star Wars!"
"How DO you do that!?"
lol
hugs
Rach
xxx


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




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 20:53:27 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:53:27 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
Message-ID: <2b.1e80cf50.292acb47@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 1:29:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
ra_1013 at yahoo.com writes:


> Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little
> badge, an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean
> reading the phonebook. ;)
> 

LOL! Well count me in for OWWIE, too!  :-) During the scene where he's 
explaining Quidditch to Harry, I looked at my husband and said, "That is one 
hot young man." I felt bad for saying it at the time, but don't feel so bad 
now that I've heard he's 18.  :-)

Lotus


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




From chattie27million at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 20:57:33 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:57:33 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
Message-ID: <fe.f3f265e.292acc3d@aol.com>

In a message dated 19/11/01 20:56:24 GMT Standard Time, 
lotusmoondragon at aol.com writes:


> I felt bad for saying it at the time, but don't feel so bad 
> now that I've heard he's 18.  :-)
> 

Oooh, 18? Just a year off then *wicked 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 female_jedis at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 21:03:13 2001
From: female_jedis at yahoo.com (female_jedis at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:03:13 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's changing face
In-Reply-To: <00cc01c170ce$5ab379d0$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <9tbs2h+7aaj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> 
wrote:
Steve wrote,
"In any case, the movie face seemed rather big boned, with a thick 
nose, "

I was expecting a snake-like face as well.  When the turban was 
removed and we could see Voldemort's face, my friend turned to me and 
said, "Hey, is that Jack Palance??"

After seeing it the second time, I think she was right.  It really 
does look like Jack Palance.

Holley




From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Mon Nov 19 21:10:58 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (UcfRentLuvr at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:10:58 -0500
Subject: *whew!*  OK....(Oliver Wood)
Message-ID: <036034CB.02504659.52A758FC@cs.com>

Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little badge, an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean reading the phonebook. ;) >>

Yes! Definitely count me in. I'll even throw in the extra Sickle to hear him reading the phone book--anything to hear his voice again. ;)

***Dixie Malfoy***




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 19 21:10:45 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:10:45 -0000
Subject: More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9tavvn+bmc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbsgl+vekn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Luke, I think you hit the nail right on the head.  I have read all 
> of the fabulous reviews, impressions and criticisms on the list,
> and one idea keeps surfacing.  To the extent most listies have
> criticisms of the movie, it is that their favorite lines of
> dialogue or scenes were omitted.  "Are you a witch or not" is a
> frequently cited example.  This omission doesn't bother me at all,
> and as I've said, I wish more had been cut to focus better on what
> mattered.

Actually, although your reply seems to have been written in contrast 
to my comments, I actually agree almost entirely with what you, 
David, Jowitch, et al have said on this topic.  (And even anyone I 
disagree with I, of course, always *love* to have the opinions of, or 
else I would not be here.)  So count me in the "Oddball" camp, if you 
wish.  You see, though I can be a definite L.O.O.N., my L.O.O.N.iness 
simply does not express itself in this fashion, since I expect movies 
to be true to the spirit of the book, even at the blatant expense of 
the letter.

The only level on which I disagree is that I am not entirely sure 
that, as David suggests, reinterpreting the source is *necessary* for 
a good adaptation, at least not on a large scale.  I think that's 
true the vast *majority* of the time, but I have seen one or two 
counter examples that keep me from making it a hard-and-fast rule of 
inherency (probably a hard-and-fast rule was not David's intent 
anyway).  More on this to come.

So here's my new question for ponderance.  What is the ultimate goal 
of an adaptation?  (In one sense, I am referring especially to book-
to-film adaptations, for obvious reasons, but I think most of this 
applies to adaptations of any sort.)  See for me, the *ideal* 
adaptation accomplishes the following:

* Captures the spirit of the source
* Fully avails itself of the advantages and peculiarities of the 
adaptation's medium (otherwise, why adapt at all?)
* Increases appreciation of the source, for those who are already 
familiar with it
* Inspires those who are not already familiar with the source to seek 
it out
* Stands on its own merit, exterior to the source entirely, and does 
not hold appreciation of the source as a prerequisite for 
appreciation of the adaptation

Most people are likely to agree more or less with these criteria, 
though the weight they give to each one is likely to differ heavily.  
But the interesting point that comes out of this is not those 
criteria themselves, but how much disparity this can nevertheless 
cause in the ways an adaptation is approached or understood.  I think 
it depends heavily on the source.

For example, some adaptations may be extremely direct and still 
achieve those criteria to an impressive extent (and these are the 
counter examples to the hard-and-fast rule of reinterpretation).  For 
example, the BBC cartoon production of The Lion, the Witch and the 
Wardrobe is practically identical in letter to the source C.S. Lewis 
book, and I do not feel that this strict adherency was in any way to 
its detriment.  So I can't really say to what extent this adaptation 
reinterpreted anything--even the visuals are about as straight a book 
interpretation as one can get.

By contrast, some adaptation (such as anything that visionaries like 
Stanley Kubric put their hand to) veer heavily from the source to the 
point they may even stretch recognizability, but they often do make 
adaptations that fulfill a great number of the aforementioned 
criteria to a high degree.

And VERY rarely, an adaptation comes along that sticks to the source 
material well enough, but also *improves* on it in such a way that 
the adaptation is in many ways superior to the original.  Needless to 
say this is extraordinarily rare, but the best example that comes to 
mind is The Shawshank Redemption, which, at least in my opinion, was 
in almost every sense better than the Stephen King novella that was 
its source.  Some may say that this means you can only make a great 
adaptation from a mediocre source, but I'm not sure if I'm convinced.

The Harry Potter movie, of course, had an issue that was not present 
for any of these cases, which is that it is one of those fairly rare 
instances where viewers of the adaptation were expected to be largely 
comprised of ardent fans of the source.  It also had a source 
material that is more "dense" than some of the aforementioned 
sources.  In my opinion, JKR would have been wise to tell Kloves and 
Columbus more about the outline for future books than she apparently 
did, because then they might have had more to go on to make some 
tough decisions.  For example, we all assume Percy is going to be 
important in future books, and we're probably right, but we don't 
know for sure.  Neither do the filmmakers, it seems.

But if JKR had said, "This is what happens in Book Five, Six, and 
Seven, at least as it is currently planned" rather than simply 
letting let them know whether they were "Hot or Cold", then perhaps 
they would have discovered something like, "Ooh, we could write Percy 
out of this entirely, if we did . . ."  I'm just using this as a 
possible example, of course; I am NOT specifically recommending it.  
But the point is that such as it is, he has to show up in the first 
movie, even though he serves no plot function in the first movie, 
simply on the faith that he might be important in the future and to 
leave him out entirely would make people wonder where he came from 
all of a sudden in the later movies.  This is what I meant about 
PS/SS being the hardest book to adapt.


So, is a successful adaptation one that:

* Most directly reflects the source in every sense (letter and spirit)
---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that is the most 
literal transferrance from one medium to another

* Improves upon the source, even at the expense of resemblance to the 
source
---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that does the most to 
reinterpret the source in a positive fashion

* Adds something fresh and new to the source, without conflicting 
with the original spirit of the source
---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that gives people 
already familiar with the source some new insight into the source 
(like fanfiction does for some people)

* Makes the best example of that adaptation's medium, completely 
ignoring comparison to the source altogether
---Meaning that the best film adaptation, for example, is also the 
best film, period

Anyone have any other options?

I certainly don't claim to know the right answer, nor do I think 
there necessarily is one.  It seems to me adaptations are something 
of a case-by-case basis.

-Luke




From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu  Mon Nov 19 21:27:53 2001
From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:27:53 -0500
Subject: Quirrell's nails
Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0561C@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu>

Someone else asked what's up with Quirrell's nails and I remembered that I
wanted to mention them in my first post about the movie.
 
In the final mirror scene, as he reaches out to Harry, you can see that
Quirrell's nails are long and filed to rather sharp points, sort of. I
noticed way back in the Vanity Fair layout that Ian Hart had one hand (the
left) with such a manicure and the other with clipped, more masculine
looking nails. 
 
But in the movie, both hands have the manicure. I remember thinking (and
asking) at the time of the VF article, "What's up with that?" and wondering
if they were going to do anything with it.
 
When I saw the movie the first time, and noticed this about his hands, I
flashed the following thoughts:
 
"Oh yeah! His hand had that funky manicure in the Vanity Fair! I wondered if
that would mean anything!" 
 
Then he crumbled, and I thought, "Gee, I guess not."
 
Gwen



From chl0525 at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 21:39:29 2001
From: chl0525 at hotmail.com (chl0525 at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:39:29 -0000
Subject: Special Effects 101 (was Re: What Could Have...)
In-Reply-To: <9t7gmk+bfog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tbu6h+eiqn@eGroups.com>

I would also like to add to Luke's wonderful post that not all CGI is 
the same. I thought the CGI in Monsters, Inc and even Final Fantasy 
were much better that what we see in SS. IMO someone cut the budget. I 
may be wrong here but the "people" in Monsters and FF were MUCH more 
realistic than in SS. Also, I think that if Pixar can make Sully's fur 
look feathery soft in Monster's Inc, someone could have done a better 
job on that centaur.

My 2 knuts
re-lurking...
Michelle





From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Mon Nov 19 21:41:49 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:41:49 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hagrid question
References: <9tbp6q+mb3p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002e01c17143$7e8cf8c0$53af1e3e@stephen>

>When the trio went to ask Hagrid about who gave him Norbert, Hagrid 
was playing his flute. Was I imagining things or was Hagrid playing 
Hedwig's Theme? It sounded like the frist few notes of it.

***Dixie Malfoy***

Ten points to Slytherin (presumably that is your House with that surname?) I noticed that too - a very cute touch, I thought!

Lucy (back to lurking)


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




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Mon Nov 19 21:44:30 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:44:30 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OWWIE
References: <ab.12846fdc.292aca79@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c17143$7ec6f480$53af1e3e@stephen>

>In a message dated 19/11/01 18:48:43 GMT Standard Time, bray.262 at osu.edu 
writes:


> 
> >Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little badge, 
> >an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean reading the 
> >phonebook. ;) 
> Thank you for making me spray my Diet Coke all over my 
> monitor and choke!  :-)
> 
> Sounds good to me!  I'll make up t-shirts that say OWWIE 
> and get right to work on the proper paperwork.  :-)
> 
> 

>Me too please;) *grin*
hugs
Rach
xxx


Me too, he's Gorgeous!!! My other half is already sick of me talking about him!!

Lucy the lurker


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




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 22:17:19 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:17:19 -0000
Subject: Special Effects 101 (was Re: What Could Have...)
In-Reply-To: <9tbu6h+eiqn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc0df+109vo@eGroups.com>

I was disappointed in some of the special effects also. Afterall ILM 
did the CG for SS/PS and they're one of the best(if not THE best) in 
the business. Neville falling off his broom and Harry fighting the 
troll looked extremely fakey to me. The Quidditch match was one of 
the best sequences by far. 

Maybe they didn't want it too look too real or it was budget 
constraints, but I felt it could have been better. I think even stop 
animation would have looked better in those scenes. 

Cheers,

Kristin




From chl0525 at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 19 22:44:25 2001
From: chl0525 at hotmail.com (chl0525 at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:44:25 -0000
Subject: Throwing off the blanket
In-Reply-To: <9t8qsi+9hf4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc209+4ho5@eGroups.com>

Did anyone else think that the Voldie Face looked some what like Jack 
Pallance?

OMG! 2 posts in one day! must re-lurk
Michelle





From joym999 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 22:59:27 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:59:27 -0000
Subject: More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9tbsgl+vekn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc2sf+dmg1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:

> And VERY rarely, an adaptation comes along that sticks to the 
source 
> material well enough, but also *improves* on it in such a way that 
> the adaptation is in many ways superior to the original.

I don't think that this is at all rare.  Seems to me that a lot, 
probably most movies are taken from books, and its not that unusual 
that the movie is a lot better.  Off the top of my head I can think 
of several great movies made from less-than-great books, starting 
with The Godfather, a fantastic movie made from a very mediocre piece 
of pulp fiction, The Wizard of Oz, The Shining, Gone With the Wind, 
and well, I'm sure I'll think of six more as soon as I send this.

> So, is a successful adaptation one that:
> 
> * Most directly reflects the source in every sense (letter and 
spirit)
> ---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that is the most 
> literal transferrance from one medium to another
> 
> * Improves upon the source, even at the expense of resemblance to 
the 
> source
> ---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that does the most 
to 
> reinterpret the source in a positive fashion
> 
> * Adds something fresh and new to the source, without conflicting 
> with the original spirit of the source
> ---Meaning that the best adaptation is the one that gives people 
> already familiar with the source some new insight into the source 
> (like fanfiction does for some people)
> 
> * Makes the best example of that adaptation's medium, completely 
> ignoring comparison to the source altogether
> ---Meaning that the best film adaptation, for example, is also the 
> best film, period

Yes, all of these.  I don't say this to be obnoxious, but all of 
these types of adaptations serve a purpose and will be preferable to 
different people.  Personally I prefer the films that involve some 
combination of the last 2 alternatives, but not everyone is looking 
for a movie which stands on its own merits.  Many people prefer the 
exact translation of a book to another media, with no changes.  There 
is no way to determine which type of adaption is "best."  However, I 
think we can say that -- well, at least I can say -- that only when 
the adaptation does more than simply "adapt" will a truly great movie 
result.

--Joywitch




From Griffindorlion at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 23:05:27 2001
From: Griffindorlion at aol.com (Tracey)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:05:27 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9tbabb+qj3o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc37n+isn9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> 
wrote:
>  BTW, did anyone else notice that the zoo in the movie was 
definitely 
> > the London Zoo?  (There was a plaque that said so above the snake 
> > sign.)  In the book, we decided it has to have been another zoo, 
> > since during the Diagon Alley trip it is said that Harry had 
never 
> > been to London before.

May be it is said that Harry hasn't gone to London before because 
London Zoo is not in central London (is near the top end of the 
Northen line (underground)).  It doesn't look anything like central 
London, so to a child it would appear a completely different place.

Just a thought...




From rosewoof at earthlink.net  Mon Nov 19 23:04:20 2001
From: rosewoof at earthlink.net (Rose Woofenden)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:04:20 -0800
Subject: Lack of pain in Harry's scar
In-Reply-To: <9t8q6a+9or6@eGroups.com>
References: <9t8nhu+10bsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011119145757.03736750@earthlink.net>


>One thing that I noticed in the movie, that I don't think has been brought 
>up yet is how when Harry was down with Quirrel/Volde that his scar really 
>didn't seem to hurt. I kept expecting Harry to collapse and not be able to 
>do anything because of the pain. It really didn't seem to effect him at 
>all.  In the book it says "... A needle-sharp pain seared across Harry's 
>scar; his head felt as though it was about to split in two..." and 
>"Harry's scar was almost blinding him with pain...." I didn't see any of 
>that in the movie.

Did that bother anyone else? I think the way his scar acts is an important 
thing, and should be played up more.



-Rose


Current book:  HP and the Sorcerer's Stone
Current Song playing:  Stan Rogers- Working Joe
Last Words Spoken by me: Nothing worth mentioning










From joym999 at aol.com  Mon Nov 19 23:16:38 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:16:38 -0000
Subject: ADMIN -- HP for Grownups rules apply here
Message-ID: <9tc3sm+g8as@eGroups.com>

Please, folks, the message volume on this list will soon spiral out 
of control if we all don't abide by the rules.  Remember, all the 
rules which are in effect at the main group are also in effect here 
on the movie list.  

This means several things:

1.  NO  "me too!" posts.  I know everyone's hormones are oozing out 
of control over Sean Biggerstaff and others, but please.  If all 
you're going to do is say that you, also, are in love with him, you 
are not adding anything to the discussion.

2.  Please combine posts.  You can cut and paste relevant passages 
from email, digest or webviewed posts into a wordprocessing file if 
you want to respond to several different messages.  Please do not 
send a series of posts, each of which contains a 2 or 3 line response 
to a single message.

3.  Before you hit that send button -- ask yourself:
*Did I reread this message to make sure it is written in 
comprehensible English?
*Does this message say something that someone else might want to hear?
*If I disagreed with someone in my message, did I do it in a way that 
is constructive and respectful?


Please pop on over to the main group if you're not familiar with our 
main group, HP for grownups:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups

In particular, if you are new to this group you should be sure to 
read our Netiquette file, which can be found at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%
20Files/netiquette2.txt

And, if you have any questions, just drop the moderators a line at

HPfGU-Mod-owner at yahoogroups.com 

--Joywitch






From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 19 23:46:38 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:46:38 -0000
Subject: Dragons, Dinosaurs, and Grey Ladies
In-Reply-To: <9ta432+rm9m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc5ku+l2h7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> The baby dragon reminded me of my visit to the American Museum of 
> Natural History in NYC the previous week. In a case on the east 
wall 
> of an easterly room in the dinosaur hall, there was an adult and a 
> baby of the same species (velociraptor?) and my friend led me 
> straight there to show me the little cutiesaurus. Whoever would 
have 
> thought that the naked skeleton of a reptile would be cute and 
cuddly!

It might have been _Maiasaura_ -- There are dozens of baby specimens
of that genus, and they *are* cute (How big was the adult, and was 
it a biped or quadroped?) ... As an aside, you may 
perhaps have heard that many experts now believe that many 
baby dinosaurs (and even some adults) had a "cute" downy 
covering -- "Protofeathers" or "Dinofluff".

The dragon skeleton is in Quirrel's classroom, and actually it's
also (and more clearly) shown in the _Vanity Fair_ article.
The openings in the back of the skull and snout indicate that
dragons are definitely members of the Archosauria (Greek term
"Archosaur" = "ruling reptile".  This is the group that includes
dinosaurs, crocodiles, pterodactyls, and birds).  :)
 
> > Also, was it just me or was the Grey Lady, like, everywhere? Did
> > you see her in McGonagall's classroom when the Trio ask to see 
> > Dumbledore? It looked like she was writing or copying something.
> 
> That scene in McGonagall's classroom is the only time I remember 
> seeing the Grey Lady without the other ghosts. I wonder what she 
was 
> writing? Helping McGonagall grade homework? Eternally doomed to 
> making up missed exams and late homework?

I'm not complaining -- The Grey Lady was the only "eye candy"
the *guys* get in this film!  :)

--
Dave (Can't wait to ogle Madam Rosmerta and Fleur in movies 3 & 4!) :)





From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 19 23:48:15 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:48:15 -0800
Subject: Quirrell's short career and JKR's "James-seque" beau
In-Reply-To: <1006142101.2038.65206.m11@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006142101.2038.65206.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <182265682089.20011119154815@mindspring.com>


Heidi:
HMyc> It never says in PS/SS that it's Quirrell's first year teaching, although
HMyc> Percy's line was changed slightly for no discernable reason. 
HMyc> I always had the impression that he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for at least
HMyc> a year before Harry started- probably from Hagrid's description that he's
HMyc> "scared of the students"-how could he know that if there hadn't been
HMyc> discussion of how he taught the students?

Also in the Graveyard V says, "[Quirrell] was a teacher at
Dumbledore's school", not "would be".  So I think he had been
there the previous year, but I still don't think he had been
there "for years".

CatLady:
HMyc> How likely that someone named Rowling would date someone named
HMyc> Rawlings?

I saw the pic in _People_ -- His name is Dr. Neil Murray ... And frankly
I think that he would have made a much better James than the guy they got...
(He has black and somewhat mussy hair, as well as glasses!)

-- 
Dave




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 00:00:32 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:00:32 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tbmts+1obq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc6f0+nvr7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kristin" <Alyeskakc at a...> wrote:
maybe 
> what he sees in the Mirror is what he imagines his parents to look 
> like if they were still alive. This could explain the age difference, 
> they would be in their 30's then. Just a thought. 
> 

But when he saw himself with the stone, he saw the actual stone without 
knowing what it looked like.  So I think the mirror must know what things look 
like and show the real things.




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 00:18:09 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:18:09 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tc6f0+nvr7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc7g1+58ub@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kristin" <Alyeskakc at a...> wrote:
> > maybe what he sees in the Mirror is what he imagines his parents 
> > to look like if they were still alive. This could explain the age 
> > difference, they would be in their 30's then. Just a thought.  
> 
> But when he saw himself with the stone, he saw the actual stone
> without knowing what it looked like.  So I think the mirror must
> know what things look like and show the real things.

A more direct argument would be the fact that the James and Lily who 
appear in the photo album are identical to the James and Lily shown 
in the Mirror, so they're appearance is clearly not supposed to be 
just a manifestation of Harry's wishful thinking.

Sadly, for anyone that chooses to accept the movie as partial canon, 
this fact puts some holes in the theory that several people have 
espoused on the main list that Harry may see his family as he desires 
them, not as they are.  Given acceptance of this movie evidence, the 
theory will now have to be altered to something hopelessly obtuse and 
far-fetched, like:

Harry saw his parents as they really were, because he wished to see 
them as they really are, but in the event of all those other people 
in the mirror, he (for unknown reasons) treated them separately and 
wanted them all to look a particular way, denying them their real 
appearances.

-OR-

Harry saw his parents as they really were, because he has vague, 
basically inaccessible (but still present) memories of seeing them as 
an infant, but without this guide all the other members of his family 
are imaginary constructions looking as he wanted them to.

-OR-

When in doubt, "Magic!"

:-D

-Luke




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 00:24:34 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:24:34 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tc7g1+58ub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc7s2+f6d0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> Sadly, for anyone that chooses to accept the movie as partial canon, 
> this fact puts some holes in the theory that several people have 
> espoused on the main list that Harry may see his family as he desires 
> them, not as they are.  

I guess I missed that discussion.  Doesn't the book provide sufficient info for 
that -- wouldn't Harry have noticed and commented, if the pictures  from 
Hagrid showed his parents looking different from the mirror?




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Nov 20 00:25:01 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:25:01 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tbmts+1obq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc7st+idhh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kristin" <Alyeskakc at a...> wrote:
.  So maybe 
> what he sees in the Mirror is what he imagines his parents to 
look 
> like if they were still alive. This could explain the age difference, 
> they would be in their 30's then. Just a thought. 

I agree, it would have looked very odd to see twenty year old 
parents standing behind an eleven year old kid.  
      Additionally, it has to be plausible that  James, Lupin, Sirius 
and Snape were  contemporaries   The decision to make 
James and Lily look older must have been conditioned by the 
choice of Alan Rickman as Snape (which I wouldn't change for a 
sack of  galleons.) 
   James could have been made to look obviously younger in the 
photo at the end, but that might have made him difficult to 
recognize in such a brief glimpse.
   I  think the relationship between Snape and James was wisely 
left out of this movie. We're going to learn about it in PoA anyway. 
It also saves Dumbledore from having to give two life debt 
explanations. I hope there's MWPP flashbacks on PoA.That 
would  solve the problem of what Harry is going to see across 
the lake. He can see the flashback James he's been imagining.

Pippin




From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 00:46:56 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:46:56 -0000
Subject: James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tc7s2+f6d0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tc960+vu3e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> > Sadly, for anyone that chooses to accept the movie as partial
> > canon, this fact puts some holes in the theory that several
> > people have espoused on the main list that Harry may see his
> > family as he desires them, not as they are.  
> 
> I guess I missed that discussion.

It's never been an *isolated* discussion, that I know of--just a 
theory that comes up from time to time on the main (not movie) list, 
usually to make some notion of blood relation more credible.  Such as 
people saying just because Dumbledore doesn't show up in the Mirror 
with the rest of the "Potters" in the book, doesn't mean he isn't 
really related to Harry, since the Mirror could show an idealized, 
rather than accurate impression of Harry's relatives.  Or that kind 
of thing.

> Doesn't the book provide sufficient info for that -- wouldn't Harry
> have noticed and commented, if the pictures  from Hagrid showed his
> parents looking different from the mirror?

By my guess, yes, it does, but since that's more suggestive evidence 
then strictly conclusive, people could still get around it.  Even 
now, people still can, especially since we have no reason to accept 
everything in the movie as canon.


Further discussion of this (in terms of the books) would of course 
have to go to the main list.

***

Anyway, that post of mine was kind of, umm, pointless anyway, so I 
recommend everyone just ignore it in deference to Pippin's much more 
insightful comments on the subject.

-Luke, who wouldn't mind seeing an MWPP flashback during the 
Shrieking Shack sequence of the POA movie, but is scared that it will 
cause another hormone surge on this list should such a scene ever 
materialize ;-)




From shieka99 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 01:13:13 2001
From: shieka99 at yahoo.com (shieka99 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:13:13 -0000
Subject: My movie review
Message-ID: <9tcan9+qbqc@eGroups.com>

I never got this sent before, so here it is now. Everyone's said 
everything, but I didn't think it would matter.

Okay, this is basically a messed up scene by scene things that I 
liked, the actual review and what other people I know thought about it 
will be sent in a new message. 


I went twice for starters and I have to admit, the first time until 
the Quidditch match, I didn't think it was going to be a good movie, 
but at the end I had turned that into excitement for my second 
viewing. First, I wanted to state that I had went 6 hours early before 
I could get tickets, which is at 6am. I went with 3 other friends! 
Anyway, after 3 hours other Potter fans started to show up. This was 
great and we were talking all about Harry Potter. One lady bought a 
huge thing of fries and offered some to everyone in line. Which wasn't 
tooooo many people at that time. Anyway, by the time they let us in, 
there was a HUGE crowd. Luckily for the rest of them  the theaters was 
playing so many times in so many theaters. I might also mention that I 
left in such a haste to get our group seats, I forgot my wallet at the 
desk. Luckily the girls who were right besides us gave it back to me.



****Anyway, on to the Scene by scenes-What I thought:********

-Dumbledore with the adorable baby Harry was pretty good, though I 
have to admit I didn't like the Put-outer because it looked bad for 
some reason. Hagrid crying was soooo sad. :( 

-Dudley's stomping on the stairs was great! It showed a little of how 
Harry has to put up with his family. I wanted to HUG poor little Harry 
in the closet. ;) It was so touching and I dunno why. 

-I liked the changes to the zoo scene, though they could have dragged 
it on a bit further. Dudley pushing Harry down and Harry shooting him 
death glares was great. I find Daniel has a good evil look, or angry.
Sad that the 'Burma' snake didn't say Amiga!! ;)

-I think it helped a lot when Vernon grabbed Harry by the hair and 
shoved him in the closet. It was a great touch to Vernon's part and it 
showed violence that you hardly think of in the book. 

-Harry trying to get his letters was adorable, though I think it could 
have been done differently and they could have spent more time on it.
(That is, if they could have more time without making the movie so 
long)...

-Fiona is GREAT! I loved her speech, it was sooo good and had a lot of 
emotion. If only Dan could have reacted a little more.

-Diagonally is WONDERFUL! Anyone else notice the absence of the 
FANTASTIC Diagonally music from the soundtrack? That upset me because 
I thought it fit Diagonally perfectly. I loved all the shops and 
everything. I wish they could have spent more time there.

-Gringotts... it was okay...

-I didn't really mind the changes to Ollivander's because it wasn't 
that bad. Although I disliked the corny music and lights when Harry 
recieved his wand. 

-The Flashback was disturbing, I think, especially for the little 
kids. I did enjoy the snippet but it looked disturbing.

-I think Molly was okay, not a perfect and Ginny was so cute besides 
the fact that she looked pretty young. And did anyone notice that when 
Molly shows Harry Ron, Harry looks at Ron not too friendly? 
Hehehe! ;) 

- Draco is perfect. I LOVE him sooo much!!!! He is adorable and he 
looks all snobbish. It's so cute! I especially like his accent, as a 
matter of fact, I love all their accents.
 
-The Sorting hat should have went over Harry's eyes and those weird 
things hanging from it looked silly. :p

-The portraits were really cool and I liked the ghosts. I thought 
Nick's head rolling slightly off was disturbing. ;) One of the things 
I especially liked was the portraits, I really, really liked them and 
I wished more of them had moved. 

-The common room looked SOOOOOO cosy! I want to be there right now and 
snuggle up in front of the fire....

-The little Harry scene all alone sitting in the moonlight was 
emotional. You had to smile for him!

-Tranfiguration, I was dissapointed... All we see is Maggie telling 
them off. (Maggie IS a great actor!!!)

-Nice little potions scene. Alan is perect as Snape, just a little off 
in how I pictured him, but that doesn't matter. "Our. New... 
Celebrity.." *shivers*

-I don't like Seamus at all... cute but eh.

-The flying lesson was okay...  But Neville looked bad, it was a bad 
CGI. >.< But Harry and Draco on the otherhand were WONDERFUL! H/D 
shippers... YUM! I loved Harry's little 360!!!!

- Fluffy is one of the best CGI'd! It was SO CUTE!!I want one of my 
own now.

-Ack, haven't mentioned Hermione even though I thought she was one of 
the best actors... I think she is great!!!

-I LOVE SEAN BIGGERSTAFF!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! HE IS GORGEOUS!!!!! And 
I'm alowed to love him, afterall, he IS almost my age.
I love his accent, I love his acting, I love the way he looks, talks 
and everything!!! Oh yeah, the briefing on Quiditch was good too cause 
SEAN WAS IN IT!

-Charms, I can't get: 'It's Wingardium levioosa, not wingardium 
leviosaa' (Or something like that) out of my head! It'ssoo perfect!

-The troll scene was pretty good besides the bad CGI of Harry flailing 
around. Little Daniel is SOOOO cute!

-Quidditch is my Favorite scene of all. I loved the music for it and 
am addicted to listening to it. Harry is very good. I love the whole 
setup how they all go in a circle with the 2 seekers above and Sean 
was there to. I just loved everything about this, defintely one of the 
better parts of the movie!

-Harry getting presents was... emotional and it was so SHORT. Ugh! Oh 
well, I love the invisibilty effect, it looks really good. "My body's 
gone" Hehehe!  

-Mirrior of Erised... That brought tears to my eyes. It was so sad for 
poor little Harry. Especially when he touched his shoulder. 
Even though James looked all wrong, it was still good.

-Norbert was cute, but as some people have said, it's good they cut 
out the other parts of that.

-The Dark forest. DARK forest?? Ugh! Anyway, the centaur looks so bad. 
(as most of us think so), but this was great H/D interaction! YUMMMY! 
The unicorn looked bad, liked  a stuffed toy. (As someone else 
mentioned)...

-Devil's Snare, was okay, lacked something though...

-Chess game- I actually didn't like this very much. It looked corny 
and Ron looked pretty bad. I know a lot of people thought this was 
great but I did not. It didn't look right and the music was bad.

-Forgot the flying keys: Loved this new version. It made it more 
interesting, and better besides the fact that if Harry was flying any 
longer, he could have gotten all bloodied. >.<

-The last scene. I liked it even though it was different. It was 
almost as good as the book, maybe as good. Voldemort's face was 
creepy, but I thought it was more like a snake? I found Quirrel good 
in this scene, very good! Poor Harry... :( And then the addition of 
Voldemort flying through Harry, weird! But it was okay and an okay 
excuse for Harry ending up in the hospital wing.
__Anyone else notcie that Quirrel chokes Harry and nothing happens 
to his hand? Yet when Harry puts his hand on Quirrel it smokes?__ 

-Dumbledore's spirirt seems to come back a little in this scene. I 
liked that they included the every flavored beans thing and the moving 
pictures! 

-It's so sad to see Harry go... and the photo album was a nice touch.

******If you haven't noticed, it was rushed because I had sooo much to 
cover. I missed out on a lot. However, if you want something better 
and it all summed up about what I thought, then please read the review 
I will be sending in soon.*******      




From cindysphynx at home.com  Tue Nov 20 01:15:16 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:15:16 -0000
Subject: More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9tbsgl+vekn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tcar4+o0av@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

> So here's my new question for ponderance.  What is the ultimate 
goal 
> of an adaptation?  <snip criteria> 
> 
> * Inspires those who are not already familiar with the source to 
seek 
> it out

Hmmm.  I don't know about this one.  I rarely see a movie and then go 
back and read the book.  I tried this with "Silence of the Lambs."  
The book was very much like the movie, so much so that I recognized 
all of the dialogue and stopped reading it before finishing it.  
Maybe this criterion ought to be "Inspires those who are not familiar 
with the source to conclude that the source must be excellent."  I 
don't know.

>In my opinion, JKR would have been wise to tell Kloves and 
> Columbus more about the outline for future books than she 
apparently 
> did, because then they might have had more to go on to make some 
> tough decisions.  <snip example about Percy>    
> But the point is that such as it is, he has to show up in the first 
> movie, even though he serves no plot function in the first movie, 
> simply on the faith that he might be important in the future and to 
> leave him out entirely would make people wonder where he came from 
> all of a sudden in the later movies.  This is what I meant about 
> PS/SS being the hardest book to adapt.
> 

I'm not so sure that characters who are important in successive 
movies have to be introduced in the first movie.  The screenwriter 
apparently thought so, but I don't.  I think each movie should be 
self-contained.  Or maybe the way to phrase it is that each movie 
ought to be free to be self-contained if doing something else will 
crowd out scenes needed to move the movie plot along.  So let's say 
NHN just turned up for the Deathday Party in CoS, or became really 
important in Book 6, but hadn't been mentioned in PS/SS.  I wouldn't 
have a problem with that.  


Maybe the difficulty in adapting PS/SS stems largely from the fact 
that it is a fantasy.  In "Shawshank Redemption" (a great film, BTW), 
they didn't have to spend the first 50 minutes introducing us to the 
setting.  I glanced at the time when Harry settled into his dorm in 
PS/SS, and 50 minutes had elapsed.  So we used almost an hour to set 
the stage for the next 90-minutes of establishing and solving the 
mystery.  I don't know if it would have been possible to skip some of 
the pre-Hogwarts scenes to allocate the time differently.  The only 
candidate for elimination is Diagon Alley but . . . I really liked 
Diagon Alley.  

So maybe it is really difficult to do a top-notch fantasy novel 
adaptation?  The "Wizard of Oz" movie was done well, of course, but 
my husband tells me that the "Watership Down" movie was a disaster, 
even though we both loved the book.

Cindy (scurrying off to write a middling novel that someone can turn 
into a blockbuster film)




From editor at texas.net  Tue Nov 20 02:24:00 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:24:00 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 2 probs.
References: <9t9bvn+3jb8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF9BEBF.EB696602@texas.net>

mellienel2 at yahoo.com wrote:

> 2. We never see Harry get that Snape hates HIM, not just that he's
> particularly unpleasant. We know he's more unpleasant toward Harry,
> but H. never even wonders about it, and Dumbledore never told him that
> James saved Snape's life...I agree with most cuts from the book, but
> this one I think was important, very important, for setting up
> future emotion.

I've wondered if the life-debt to James was deleted because it was a red
herring for motivation in book 1, or because they can put it in later,
like Peeves.

I suspect a lot of Snape/Harry interaction got left on the cutting room
floor--my second time, I noticed that when Harry, Ron, and Hermione come
out of the room after talking to McGonagall about the Stone and finding
out Dumbledore's gone, Snape doesn't just come walking up from behind.
He's passed them, stops suddenly, looks over his shoulder, turns around
and comes back to them. You can see him look around, in the background,
over the heads of the kids. This is such a pointed thing, him stopping
where he was going to come back and harass them, that I suspect there
was more of this before editing.

--Amanda


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




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 02:24:52 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:24:52 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: What's the "new " scene?
Message-ID: <127.75d1253.292b18f4@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/18/2001 2:04:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
SHENmagic at aol.com writes:

<< It's probably the revelation that James was a seeker...
  >>


Is there any reason why James couldn't have switched jobs sometime in his 
Quidditch career? That is, been a chaser one year and a seeker the next?

Susan



From editor at texas.net  Tue Nov 20 02:35:18 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:35:18 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Film Thoughts
References: <9t9hpm+p2qf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF9C166.F1B89B3@texas.net>

"Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" wrote:

> 1.  The Hogwarts Express ticket.  We've had some discussion on the
> main group about why Harry needs a ticket, since no one ever collects
> them, and can anyone get thru the barrier, or only wizards, etc.

He needs a ticket because Hagrid gave him one in the book. In the book,
of course, Harry went back to the Dursleys before going to the station,
but still, there was a ticket.

> 2.  I agree with those who said that the winged keys made a lot more
> sense in the movie, especially having them swarm as soon as the broom
> was touched.

And on subsequent viewings, I agree with whoever said the cuts on
Harry's face came from the keys.

> 3.  Like Ebony, I now understand what Amanda and her ilk see in
> Snape.  While I am still a card-carrying member of SUAVE (Snape's
> Unquestionably A Vampire Evil)  I will now admit, publically, that
> Snape (at least when portrayed by Rickman) is also very sexy.  The way
> he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes his speech took my
> breath away.

It's not that he's sexy. I can't explain this, but he is compelling. I
want to talk to him for hours, and have him care that I exist, far more
than I want to give him a shampoo. The ambivalence in him, and the
complexity, is just alluring.

But welcome! We always knew you had good taste--anyone who eats children
can't fail to appreciate Snape on some level.

--Amanda


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




From editor at texas.net  Tue Nov 20 02:40:46 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:40:46 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: quirrell-new?
References: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D022C3396@MIAEXCH1>
Message-ID: <3BF9C2AD.551BA79E@texas.net>

"Tandy, Heidi" wrote:

> It never says in PS/SS that it's Quirrell's first year teaching,
> although Percy's line was changed slightly for no discernable reason.
> I always had the impression that he'd been teaching at Hogwarts for at
> least a year before Harry started- probably from Hagrid's description
> that he's "scared of the students"-how could he know that if there
> hadn't been
> discussion of how he taught the students?

Hagrid says, "He was fine while he was studyin' outta books but then he
took a year off to get some firsthand experience.......never been the
same since."
This clearly implies to me that Quirrell's been teaching there for at
least two years--he had to have been there a bit to have taken a year
off, eh?

--Amanda


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




From editor at texas.net  Tue Nov 20 03:02:48 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:02:48 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....
References: <9tbggu+6sq8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BF9C7D8.D3B31216@texas.net>

AgentIrish at yahoo.com wrote:

> Loved the movie - only one thing was missing (for me personally) - the
> Howler!!  I was dying to see that!

Who got a howler in book 1? Am I forgetting something? My kids are
responsible for the untimely death of thousands of brain cells a day, it
wouldn't surprise me.

--Amanda


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




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Nov 20 03:12:12 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 03:12:12 -0000
Subject: hormone surge was James & Lily in the Mirror of Erised
In-Reply-To: <9tc960+vu3e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tchmc+4ha8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:

> -Luke, who wouldn't mind seeing an MWPP flashback during 
the  Shrieking Shack sequence of the POA movie, but is scared 
that it will  cause another hormone surge on this list should such 
a scene ever  materialize ;-)

LOL! I thought the same thing. Maybe, should the fine day come, 
we could ask the mods to set up a separate list for people who 
just want to gush over their favorite hottie. I'd call them 
S.W.O.O.N. s but I can't think of an acronym...;-)

Pippin




From amy at pressroom.com  Tue Nov 20 03:26:34 2001
From: amy at pressroom.com (Amy Gourley)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:26:34 -0500
Subject: Movie comments
Message-ID: <02d701c17173$281495e0$b17ba8c0@amy>

First of all, I thought the movie was great. My favorite of the trio was
Rupert Grint and I think Maggie Smith and Robbie Coltrane also did awesome
jobs!

I am happy that my husband liked it. He hasn't read the books yet but now he
promises to read at least SS. :) He now loves the name Hermione. He did
think Snape was the villian. He also didn't know if it was Draco Malfoy or
Malfoy Draco since he was called both.

Disappointments: I missed seeing all the other addresses for Harry on the
letters; the sorting hat scene; not much time at Platform 9 3/4

I loved the Quidditch scene! I am not much into Quidditch in the books but
it was great in the movie! I know it was CGI but it looked real enough to
me.Some of myother favorite scenes are the tasks, the zoo, and the Mirror of
Erised.

A reviewer in the Washington Post wrote about Ginny not having red hair; I
thought she did, didn't she?

I can't wait to see it again and see more details! And I can't believe my
husband is also considering seeing it again!

Amy






From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 03:47:32 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:47:32 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Musing on Adaptations
Message-ID: <110.8a73c6c.292b2c54@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 4:15:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
caliburncy at yahoo.com writes:

<<  In my opinion, JKR would have been wise to tell Kloves and 
 Columbus more about the outline for future books than she apparently 
 did, because then they might have had more to go on to make some 
 tough decisions.  For example, we all assume Percy is going to be 
 important in future books, and we're probably right, but we don't 
 know for sure.   >>

Did I hear someone say that Columbus had not read all the books? That's 
weird...
so what happened..did he cut the rat and JKR, said "No, No...just trust me, 
you can't cut Scabbers."?

hmmmm

Susan     



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 03:54:29 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 03:54:29 -0000
Subject: Film Thoughts
In-Reply-To: <3BF9C166.F1B89B3@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9tck5l+ee61@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" wrote:
> 
> > 3.  Like Ebony, I now understand what Amanda and her ilk see in
> > Snape.  While I am still a card-carrying member of SUAVE (Snape's
> > Unquestionably A Vampire Evil)  I will now admit, publically, that
> > Snape (at least when portrayed by Rickman) is also very sexy.  The way
> > he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes his speech took my
> > breath away.
> 
> It's not that he's sexy. I can't explain this, but he is compelling. I
> want to talk to him for hours, and have him care that I exist, far more
> than I want to give him a shampoo. The ambivalence in him, and the
> complexity, is just alluring.
> 
> But welcome! We always knew you had good taste--anyone who eats children
> can't fail to appreciate Snape on some level.
> 
> --Amanda
 

  Oh, pshaw. It *is* that he's sexy in the movie - admit it.  It's the Alan Rickman Effect. Previous examples:

1) German terrorists: not sexy. Alan Rickman as what's-his-face in Die Hard: sexy.

2) Filthy, cartoonish, devil-worshipping 13th Century usurpers: not sexy.  Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Nottingham: sexy. 

3) Dead cello-playing corpses: not sexy. Alan Rickman as Jamie (Truly, Madly, Deeply): sexy.

4) Fascist propaganda-collecting torturers: way not sexy. Alan Rickman as The Official (Closet Land): sexy (WHY? WHY? But even Madeleine Stowe starts exhibiting signs of Helsinki Syndrome in this amazing, difficult film.)

5) Morose, over-the-hill, naive-trophy-wife-seeking retired 19thC Army officers: not sexy. Alan Rickman as Colonel Brandon (Sense & Sensibility): yowza. 

Somehow, he has the knack for bringing out a bizarre attractiveness in some very unpromising characters. I think it's his voice and his mastery over gestures.

 So.... Snape in the books, *decidedly* unsexy; not even close. Alan Rickman as Severus Snape == hey, they're going to have to work some sort of miracle outdo him in casting Sirius Black. 




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 04:00:54 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:00:54 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: *whew!*  OK....
Message-ID: <26.1e91396c.292b2f76@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/19/2001 10:04:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
editor at texas.net writes:

<< Who got a howler in book 1? Am I forgetting something? My kids are
 responsible for the untimely death of thousands of brain cells a day, it
 wouldn't surprise me.
 
 --Amanda >>

Neville gets one from his grandmother at some point..right? or it's alluded 
to.....but not in book i
Ron gets one in the CoS.....




From pkerr06 at attglobal.net  Tue Nov 20 04:28:57 2001
From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (pkerr06 at attglobal.net)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:28:57 -0000
Subject: Lily and Petunia
Message-ID: <9tcm69+il6m@eGroups.com>

Ya know, one thing I haven't seen anyone commenting upon, amidst all 
the griping that James looks too old, is that they found actresses to 
play Lily and Petunia who really do look as though they could be 
sisters.

Just thought I'd throw that in.

Cheers,
Peg




From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Nov 20 04:32:12 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:32:12 -0000
Subject: Kloves/Britspeak --- SWOON 
Message-ID: <9tcmcc+auod@eGroups.com>

"David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:

> "But Hagrid, how am I to pay for it all, I haven't any money." 
> This line made me cringe both times I saw it (and others too, this
> is just an example). People in Britain have never, and will never 
> speak like that. If he'd said "But Hagrid, how am I going to pay
> for it all, I haven't got any money?" it would have been much more
> realistic, just because of two words, 'going' and 'got'. 

I'm not doubting you, but I am amused by the contradiction between 
your statement and the ferocious tongue-lashing that some Oxford boy 
gave my friend for a story that she had written that he was checking 
for removal of Americanisms. He went on and on about no one in 
Britain ever says "going to"! Now I wonder if he was deliberately 
deceiving her...

btw, "have never, and will never" is a long time.

Heather wrote:

> Oh, pshaw. It *is* that he's sexy in the movie - admit it.  It's
> the Alan Rickman Effect. Previous examples:

ROTFL over the way you phrased the examples!

> So.... Snape in the books, *decidedly* unsexy; not even close.
> Alan Rickman as Severus Snape == hey, they're going to have to work
> some sort of miracle to outdo him in casting Sirius Black. 

I can't agree with you about Snape in the books. His blatantly 
displayed intellect, his knack with words (both to praise Potions and 
to cut down Harry), his control over students and even some of his 
colleagues, even his dangerousness itself... ooooohh! You're surely 
thinking merely of the description of his physical appearance, the 
greasy hair (which I have been known not to mind) and rotted teeth 
(which I do have a problem with). 





From rosewoof at earthlink.net  Tue Nov 20 04:54:55 2001
From: rosewoof at earthlink.net (Rose Woofenden)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:54:55 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Screaming Book/Volde's face
In-Reply-To: <73.1642d000.292a00e9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011119205210.009ea710@earthlink.net>

Susan wrote:
>yes, I jumped quite a bit..and I was looking for scary parts so I could warn
>my four year old.. I was SCARED when we were about to see Voldemort's
>face...I did not think it would be human..I had imagined a silver scaly
>triangle (snake scales) with slitty green snake eyes...not human...I just
>remember the Old Muggle's reaction (Frank) to Voldemort in GofF..and imagined
>him being disgusting, and vile...when I saw his face I wasn't the least bit
>scared...


I was expecting Voldemort's face to scare me when Quirrel unwrapped the 
turban, but I really didn't find it scary or disturbing at all. It wasn't 
nasty enough to make me really see Voldemort as the evil character that he 
is. Did anyone else think that they underplayed his looks a bit? I think he 
was just a bit too normal-human-looking.



-Rose


Current book:  A Ring Of Endless Light- Madaline L' Engle
Current Song playing: The Coats- Keep it Simple
Last Words Spoken by me: Nothing worth mentioning








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




From klaatu at primenet.com  Tue Nov 20 05:19:52 2001
From: klaatu at primenet.com (Sister Mary Lunatic)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:19:52 -0700
Subject: GOF Syndrome?
Message-ID: <MABBJPGEHBDBAKHGIBPOMEFAELAA.klaatu@primenet.com>

In reading all the comments on the movie so far, I wonder if the film is not
suffering from "Goblet-of-Fire Syndrome"... meaning that it was rushed into
production with a Set-In-Stone release date.  The director and editors did
all they could in the time they were allowed, but eventually came the moment
when they HAD to hand the master print over to be duplicated in time to be
shipped to theaters all over the planet.  Perhaps they just didn't have
enough time to polish all the special effects and re-shoot awkward mistakes
or re-edit the choppy bits.

Kinda like when JKR HAD to turn over the HUGE manuscript for Goblet of Fire
in time for it to be edited, printed, and distributed to meet the release
date -- fans would have screamed bloody murder if the publication had been
delayed even by a few weeks.  Thus it paved the way for the granddaddy of
all HP canon mistakes : James coming out of Voldy's wand before Lily,
touching off the Great Wand Order Debate that kept us all so delightfully
and creatively amused for so many months until the moment we found out (by
stealth) that it was indeed just a writing/editing boo-boo.

The next film (CoS) will probably suffer from the same short deadline
syndrome, since they do want to get at least the first three films in the
can quickly before the kids grow up beyond their roles.

SML

=================================================
If God had wanted us to run around naked,
we would have been born without any clothes on.
=================================================




From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 05:32:03 2001
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:32:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Kloves/Britspeak --- SWOON
In-Reply-To: <9tcmcc+auod@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011120053203.49481.qmail@web14610.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
<catlady at wicca.net> wrote:
> > Heather wrote:
> 
> > 
> ooooohh! You're surely 
> thinking merely of the description of his physical
> appearance, the 
> greasy hair (which I have been known not to mind)
> and rotted teeth 
> (which I do have a problem with). 
> 
> I don't remember mention of his teeth being rotten,
although I do remember the greasy hair bit.

Laila
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 05:38:01 2001
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:38:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Thoughts
In-Reply-To: <9tck5l+ee61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011120053801.95646.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Heather Moore <heathernmoore at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski
> <editor at t...> wrote:
> > "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" wrote:
> > 
  While I am still a card-carrying member
> of SUAVE (Snape's
> > > Unquestionably A Vampire Evil)  I will now
> admit, publically, that
> > > Snape (at least when portrayed by Rickman) is
> also very sexy.  The way
> > > he swoops into the Potions classroom and makes
> his speech took my
> > > breath away.
> > 
> I thought this was cool also, the way he kicked in
the door and then made his speech. Later on in the
movie, when he told them they looked like they might
be up to something and then swooped away, I
immediately thought of Quirrels little speech about
him swooping about like an overgrown bat(it's a pity
they took that line out of the movie).

Laila

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From tabouli at unite.com.au  Tue Nov 20 05:30:30 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:30:30 +1100
Subject: (peeks out of hiding)
Message-ID: <007f01c17190$43cb22a0$cc856fcb@price>

OK, OK, I admit it, I've been reading everyone's spoilers even though I haven't seen the film (and can't for another 9 days (reprise of OT sulk)).  Sometimes, like when I read about the face screaming out of the book or the flying keys, I regret this, but when it comes to the acting and characterisation, I don't mind at all.  In fact, I find it interesting, gives me things to look out for when the movie finally deigns to grace Australia's shores.

Come to think of it, what I just said could be linked in to everyone's comments about making an adaptation from a book.  The things that I regret knowing about are the creative touches the director and screenwriter have *added* to the film, which might otherwise have been an interesting surprise.  The characterisation is something that has already been established in the book, so any surprises you get will by definition be a "misinterpretation" of your own ideas (e.g. Percy wasn't meant to be like that!)

Curious.  I always prefer to read reviews for movies I've already seen - it's the cross-cultural psychologist in me, I love seeing a range of different people's perspectives on something.  It's one of the most appealing characteristics for me about HP fandom.  All the same, knowing PS/SS as well as I do, I decided to bend the rules a bit so I didn't end up with a mailbox bulging with a billion unread movie list digests.  I maintain that this delayed international release date thing is cruel and nasty to people who miss the initial rush of first impressions posts.  By the time *I* get to voice my opinion on Sean and Alan and the flight of Hedwig and so on, you'll all have done them to death and be dissecting the prospective script of CoS.  My sympathies to those in Europe and so on who have to wait even *longer* than me...

Hmph.

One more thing, before I sneak back to my cave for further No Movie Yet In Australia broodings, what's this apparent agreement that the film of "Gone with the Wind" was better than the book?  What??  What book did you people read???  I have many, many gripes with that film.  OTOH, I thought the animated version of "Watership Down" was great.  I see that as a long involved book which was effectively transferred to the screen.  It helps that I loved the song "Bright Eyes"...

Anyway, the much I have to say on these two films will go off to OT-Chatter, where it belongs.  Enjoy your movie musings, you foully fortunate people...

Tabouli.

P.S. By the way, on the subject of Sean-as-Wood, I can't help a slightly childish giggle every time I read off his swoon-factor on this list and connect it with those phallic surnames of his (both on and off screen)...


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




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 07:16:03 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 07:16:03 -0000
Subject: (peeks out of hiding) and script changes
In-Reply-To: <007f01c17190$43cb22a0$cc856fcb@price>
Message-ID: <9tcvvj+43c7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
>In fact, I find it interesting, gives me things to look out for when 
>the movie finally deigns to grace Australia's shores.

Here's another one from down under (New Zealand) who's been reading 
every single spoiler available.

I mainly look for what scenes they cut out to avoid disappointment 
when I finally get to see the movie.  For example, I would be really 
depressed if I found out that the Potion obstacle has been cut out  
or there's no mention of the life debt.  Better to find out now, 
anticipate the cuts.

Well, at least we get LOTR on opening day.

Script changes

If I were to be Steve ...

I would emphasis the main story line i.e. the Snape vs Harry conflict 
in the book. which seems to be lacking in the movie.  As for the 
Norbert line, I would exorcise it completely unless it is important 
in Bk 5,6,7.  You can easily get the trio to the Forest by some other 
method.

The Scene important to the later book
Remember that Steve Kloves has said that there was a scene he wanted 
to change and JKR said he can't do that because of what would happen 
in Book 6?  Now, which scene would that be?





From katzefan at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 09:32:23 2001
From: katzefan at yahoo.com (katzefan at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:32:23 -0000
Subject: Wow...
In-Reply-To: <9t52jn+8sn8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9td7v7+uk5l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Karen " <karen_r_b at h...> wrote:
> All I can say, is wow. Such an amazing movie. Visually 
stunning -  Quidditch and Diagon Alley were sooo well done. 
...The actors were spectacular -  especially Emma Watson, 
Robbie Coltrain and Rick Harris (think I got  that right - 
Hermione, Hagrid and Snape). They had their characters spot 
on. Emma was the perfect little know-it-all at the beginning,  and 
Snape is the guy you love to hate. I personally plan on seeing it 
over and over and over again - and not only for Sean Biggerstaff  
either (I have a new Oliver Wood fetish, but who can blame me?)
> 
... A few bits are left out, or smooshed together, but at 2.5 hours, 
it couldn't have gotten any longer, could  it?
> 
> Go see it! I'm still in shock :-)
> Karen

Karen: I'll second that. I stood in line for nearly an hour - ate 
nearly all my popcorn before I sat down - but it was worth it. The 
actors were just perfect for the characters they were playing (in 
the one scene, as Snape is walking away from the camera with 
his cloak billowing, he really *does* look like an overgrown bat, 
as Quirrell describes him in the book, doesn't he?) Just a note: 
Richard Harris was Dumbledore; Alan Rickman was Snape.

The Quidditch match was enough to make you seasick, as was 
Neville Longbottom's attempt at flying.

I was sorry to lose a few scenes in particular: in the book, after 
they dispatch the troll, when Ron and Harry return to the common 
room, Hermione is waiting by the door. They all mutter 'Thanks,' 
apparently to no one in particular, and go off to eat. It was a 
throwaway scene but it really was the pivotal point at which their 
attitudes towards each other began to change.

And the scene near the end of the book, in which Hagrid visits 
Harry in the hospital, distraught because he realizes what his 
talkativeness (spelling?) could have done. In the movie, Hagrid 
seems totally oblivious to what he nearly did (no fault of Robbie 
Coltrane, who brought Hagrid to life). I really did like the 'I
should *not* have said that' running gag; it did emphasize 
Hagrid's tendency to yak on without thinking.

There's one or two others - can't think; it's 4:21 a.m. here - but 
this is just quibbling. They couldn't possibly have made a movie 
that pleased everyone. Like you, I expect that I'll be seeing it 
repeatedly. I've already got plans to go see it again this Friday 
with a classmate - then there's a few co-workers who want to 
see it.... It really was fantastic.






From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 09:54:41 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:54:41 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GOF Syndrome?
References: <MABBJPGEHBDBAKHGIBPOMEFAELAA.klaatu@primenet.com>
Message-ID: <001101c171a9$5ff52e80$e500a8c0@shasta>

Sister Mary:

> In reading all the comments on the movie so far, I wonder if the film is
not
> suffering from "Goblet-of-Fire Syndrome"... meaning that it was rushed
into
> production with a Set-In-Stone release date.  The director and editors did
> all they could in the time they were allowed, but eventually came the
moment
> when they HAD to hand the master print over to be duplicated in time to be
> shipped to theaters all over the planet.  Perhaps they just didn't have
> enough time to polish all the special effects and re-shoot awkward
mistakes
> or re-edit the choppy bits.

Good thought! I think that could explain some of the chopy work in the first
half of the film: the scenes are fine in and of themselves but don't hold
together. Of course, they did have a pretty lavish budget, but if they'd had
more time as well, I suppose they could have made further improvements ...

OTOH, don't film crews *always* work with pretty draconian deadlines? Even
if they don't have to ship the film by day X, they still have only so much
time with their actors, film crews, equipment, etc. I should think that the
creative process involved in mustering and marching a whole army through a
film shooting is a very different from the sort involved in giving birth to
a book.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who finds the metaphor of birthing much
more attractive to that of war, particularly because the former activity
never involved much pain on his part ... )
_______________________

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




From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Tue Nov 20 11:25:41 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:25:41 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9tc37n+isn9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tdejl+g93b@eGroups.com>

London Zoo and 'not in London before'.

"Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" wrote:
> >  BTW, did anyone else notice that the zoo in the movie was 
definitely the London Zoo?  
Tracey wrote:
> May be it is said that Harry hasn't gone to London before because 
> London Zoo is not in central London..

First point is that this is a mix of 'continuity' problems between 
the written and filmed versions.. They used London Zoo because, well 
getting a Zoo as a location is cheaper than building a set. Dont know 
of any Zoos in Surrey...   

We can rationalise this perfectly well though with a mixture of 
Harrys POV and psychological factors on one hand and the reality of 
what a visit to London Zoo could be like coming from Surrey. 

The Zoo is in the centre of Greater London (In Regents Park)  but not 
in the Central part of London. In New York terms think of someone 
visiting Brooklyn from eastern Long island. They havent this trip 
been 'Downtown' in Manhatten... Translate 'Being in London before' 
as 'being Downtown' and it may make more sense in US terminology?  To 
get to the zoo from Surrey a quick way is to take the motorways past 
the airport then take the Westway into central London ( multi-lane 
part- elevated highway). This decants you near the south of Regents 
Park. So the visit would have been a blur of highways then a green 
oasis. Harry wouldnt have set foot in the streets of London. Does 
this preserve the sense of Canon?

Edis










From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Tue Nov 20 11:25:44 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:25:44 -0000
Subject: Various Notes...
In-Reply-To: <9tc37n+isn9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tdejo+4fr3@eGroups.com>

London Zoo and 'not in London before'.

"Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" wrote:
> >  BTW, did anyone else notice that the zoo in the movie was 
definitely the London Zoo?  
Tracey wrote:
> May be it is said that Harry hasn't gone to London before because 
> London Zoo is not in central London..

First point is that this is a mix of 'continuity' problems between 
the written and filmed versions.. They used London Zoo because, well 
getting a Zoo as a location is cheaper than building a set. Dont know 
of any Zoos in Surrey...   

We can rationalise this perfectly well though with a mixture of 
Harrys POV and psychological factors on one hand and the reality of 
what a visit to London Zoo could be like coming from Surrey. 

The Zoo is in the centre of Greater London (In Regents Park)  but not 
in the Central part of London. In New York terms think of someone 
visiting Brooklyn from eastern Long island. They havent this trip 
been 'Downtown' in Manhatten... Translate 'Being in London before' 
as 'being Downtown' and it may make more sense in US terminology?  To 
get to the zoo from Surrey a quick way is to take the motorways past 
the airport then take the Westway into central London ( multi-lane 
part- elevated highway). This decants you near the south of Regents 
Park. So the visit would have been a blur of highways then a green 
oasis. Harry wouldnt have set foot in the streets of London. Does 
this preserve the sense of Canon?

Edis










From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Tue Nov 20 12:07:07 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:07:07 -0000
Subject: Lily and Petunia
In-Reply-To: <9tcm69+il6m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tdh1b+g1h3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., pkerr06 at a... wrote:
> Ya know, one thing I haven't seen anyone commenting upon, amidst all 
> the griping that James looks too old, is that they found actresses to 
> play Lily and Petunia who really do look as though they could be 
> sisters.

And I have to agree with someone's comment--didn't you think that Lily 
looked like a glamourised JK Rowling? I thought that was a very sweet tip of 
the hat..

Adding my final two knuts, I didn't think James looked too old, and I did think 
he looked like Harry. This is probably the same syndrome that has me 
thinking all the "experts" on television look like college students...:)

Ivis the apparently elderly




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 13:21:00 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:21:00 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <3BF9C7D8.D3B31216@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9tdlbs+g9ek@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> Who got a howler in book 1? Am I forgetting something? My kids are
> responsible for the untimely death of thousands of brain cells a day, it
> wouldn't surprise me.

Nobody got a howler in Book 1.  The first appearance is the one Ron gets from 
his mom at the beginnig of Book 2.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 13:38:00 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:38:00 -0000
Subject: GOF Syndrome?
In-Reply-To: <001101c171a9$5ff52e80$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <9tdmbo+g2ta@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> wrote:
I think that could explain some of the chopy work in the first
> half of the film: the scenes are fine in and of themselves but don't hold
> together. 

Some of the scenes aren't fine in and of themselves, even.  There are irrational 
pieces chopped out of the dialogue:  When Dumbledore is addressing the dining 
hall, he ways that Filch wants the kids to be reminded not to go to the third 
floor.  Well, they obviously cut out a sentence: The reminder is supposed to be 
about not doing magic in the halls (presumably because it makes messes for 
Filch to clean up).  Since the third-floor ban is new, that warning isn't a 
reminder.  (The camera isn't on Dumbledore as he says all this.)  Also, in the 
hut when Hargrid is explaining Harry's background, there's a key piece of 
explanation, a sentence or two, missing between "Did ye never wonder where 
they learned it all" and "You're a wizard, Harry."
 
>  don't film crews *always* work with pretty draconian deadlines? Even
> if they don't have to ship the film by day X, they still have only so much
> time with their actors, film crews, equipment, etc. 

But the editing process doesn't involve all those staff, it's a more personal 
artistic process. Sure, it has its own deadlines, but continuity thru cuts is 
crucial.




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov 20 09:06:49 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:06:49 EST5EDT
Subject: We've been heard!!!  :-)
Message-ID: <2883893451@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

HAHAHAHAHAAA!  Seems our swooning hasn't been ignored!  Go, 
Go, Gryffin-...er...I mean....Go, Go, OWWIE!

The Leaky Cauldron set up a link to The Snitch that has a 
picture page dedicated to Biggerstaff.  :-)

My boss took her sons to see it a couple times this 
weekend.  She said when she saw Oliver and then heard him 
speak, she immediately thought "Well....there went Rachel's 
heart, I'm sure."  :-)


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 feycat at feycat.net  Tue Nov 20 14:33:43 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:33:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Throwing off the blanket
References: <9tc209+4ho5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003001c171d0$5af311a0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Did anyone else think that the Voldie Face looked some what like Jack 
Pallance?<<

I thought there were moments when he looked like Christopher Walken. He certainly didn't look snake-like, though.

-Gabriel


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




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Nov 20 10:01:03 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:01:03 EST5EDT
Subject: IMDB
Message-ID: <296B9A74C5@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Harry is #250 on their Top 250 Movies list.  If you loved 
the movie, go vote for it.  You have to register (it's 
free) but you also get to submit quotes, trivia, goofs, 
etc.

I voted for Moulin Rouge so many times I lost count.  It's 
now #99 on their Top 250.  :-)

http://us.imdb.com/

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 diagonalley_ at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 15:06:34 2001
From: diagonalley_ at hotmail.com (Ali Wildgoose)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:06:34 -0500
Subject: S.W.O.O.N.ing and production scheduals
Message-ID: <F1386Xl3MgU4qJA1JsK000167d2@hotmail.com>

Hi...been a while ^_^

Pippin wrote:
>LOL! I thought the same thing. Maybe, should the fine day come,
>we could ask the mods to set up a separate list for people who
>just want to gush over their favorite hottie. I'd call them
>S.W.O.O.N. s but I can't think of an acronym...;-)

Silly With Oogling Onscreen Nummies?  *evil grin*

Mr. Goat wrote:
>OTOH, don't film crews *always* work with pretty draconian deadlines? Even
>if they don't have to ship the film by day X, they still have only so much
>time with their actors, film crews, equipment, etc. I should think that the
>creative process involved in mustering and marching a whole army through a
>film shooting is a very different from the sort involved in giving birth to
>a book.

Ho-kay....as the resident film student, I feel somewhat obligated to comment 
on this one.  ;}

There are three stages of production - pre-production, production, and 
post-production.  Normally, the first of those is the longest, sometimes 
lasting as long as a decade while the filmmaker tries to find someone to 
finance their movie.  This stage encompasses everything that needs to happen 
before they actually start shooting - development, script, casting, 
storyboards, that sort of thing.  A good producer or director will try and 
make sure that all the kinks are ironed out of their story BEFORE production 
begins, particularly on big-budget movies where reshoots are prohibitively 
expensive.

So the first problem with the SS movie was that this stage was rushed.  
Though the rights were bought and the script commissioned before Harry had 
really hit it big here in the States, once the whole thing was green-lighted 
everything moved at lightning speed.  Had there been more time, the story 
and structure problems we're all complaining about now probably wouldn't 
have been as much of an issue.

Then there's the actual production....which is nearly always hecti by 
necessity.  It costs phenomenal ammounts of money per day do shoot a film 
even in the best of circumstances, and the added complication of child 
actors and massive use of special effects couldn't have helped any.  I don't 
think the time they spent at this stage was all that unusual....any problems 
with how the film looks probably have more to do with lack of planning time 
than anything else.  (I don't really like how it was directed, visually, but 
that's just how Columbus decided to do things)

The second BIG problem has to do with Post.  They had NO TIME to finish this 
film.  Even a run-o-the-mill romantic comedy usually involves months and 
months of post-production.  Aside from just EDITING the thing, there's the 
score, sound design, titles, ADR (replacing dialogue that can't be heard 
properly,) the occational reshoot....just LOADS and loads of stuff.  And 
that's for a normal film.

Harry Potter's post-production involved all of that, as well as a phenominal 
number of visual effects.  We're not just talking about Quidditch and Fluffy 
and cgi stunt-doubles, either....remember all that scene where Harry and 
Hermione were talking to Hagrid outside his hut, and you could see the 
castle in the background?  Remember how wonky it looked?  That's because it 
was a composite shot - the castle wasn't REALLY in back of them, they had to 
be added in - that was obviously rushed.  There are loads and loads of these 
kinds of shots in the film....practically every outdoor shot on the Hogwarts 
grouds involved some kind of composite or other visual effect.  And then 
there are the moving portraits and the enchanted ceiling and the staircases 
and...well...jeez, just a LOT.  Some of this could have been started while 
the film was still being shot, but not much.....

So...yes.  Film shoots are always crazy, even at the student level.  But the 
degree to which this production was rushed is absolutely insane.  A 
big-budget, effects-laden, 2 1/2 hour movie in under a year?  GAH!  I 
tremble at the very thought! O_o

Ali
(who apologises if there are any typos....she just doesn't have time to look 
back over all that rambling nonsense again ;)

http://home.nyu.edu/~amw243 :: Diagon Alley
Harry Potter for Slightly Older Folk


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




From cindysphynx at home.com  Tue Nov 20 15:19:14 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 15:19:14 -0000
Subject: production scheduals
In-Reply-To: <F1386Xl3MgU4qJA1JsK000167d2@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9tds9i+2drm@eGroups.com>

Ali wrote:

> Ho-kay....as the resident film student, I feel somewhat obligated 
to comment 
> on this one.  ;}
> 


What's this?  We have a film student in our ranks?  Ali, I'd love to 
hear your thoughts about Mr. Columbus' direction and the adaptation 
of the book and how a "Wildgoose" production might have been 
different, if you have time.  

Now that you mention it, I do recall one rather "wonky" thing that 
must have come from spotty planning.  When Harry's letters start to 
arrive, Dudley is wearing his Smeltings uniform.  I don't believe 
there was any mention of Smeltings, so the viewer is left with the 
strange costuming decision to have Dudley wearing a straw hat to the 
breakfast table.  I assume they filmed the "Smeltings" discussion, 
but cut it out later, leaving the "wonky" costume in because they had 
to.

Cindy




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Tue Nov 20 15:39:32 2001
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:39:32 +1100
Subject: SWOON, Snape's teeth, LOTR in the underworld
Message-ID: <005d01c171da$bad33e60$bf93aecb@price>

Me and my sleeping patterns (it's 1:48am)...

Pippin:
> LOL! I thought the same thing. Maybe, should the fine day come, 
we could ask the mods to set up a separate list for people who 
just want to gush over their favorite hottie. I'd call them 
S.W.O.O.N. s but I can't think of an acronym...;-)

I seem to have been appointed official acronym generator, so I'll give it a shot, but aargh, those Os!  You can hardly do *anything* with an O!  OK (!), let me see...

Society Worshipping and Objectifying Ogleworthy Notables?

Hmm.  I'll keep musing.

Rita:
> I can't agree with you about Snape in the books. His blatantly 
displayed intellect, his knack with words (both to praise Potions and 
to cut down Harry), his control over students and even some of his 
colleagues, even his dangerousness itself... ooooohh! You're surely 
thinking merely of the description of his physical appearance, the 
greasy hair (which I have been known not to mind) and rotted teeth 
(which I do have a problem with). 

Hang on, hang on, "yellow" and "rotten" are not the same thing.  Teeth can be yellow for all sorts of reasons - rotten teeth are greyish, surely.  Could Snape be a closet pack-a-day smoker?  A ten cups a day coffee drinker?  Might he have a secret banana confectionary habit?  Or is he just someone whose teeth are naturally yellow, or have gone that way as he grew older in a man who shuns the wizard equivalent of capping the teeth (which I'm sure Lockhart could have introduced to him...)?


MMMfanfic:
> Well, at least we get LOTR on opening day.

What's the opening day on the other side of *our* pond? (the Tasman).

Tabouli.


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




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 15:43:32 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 15:43:32 -0000
Subject: Ian Hart's credits
Message-ID: <9tdtn4+k8fv@eGroups.com>

I was looking up various members of the cast in a movie database, 
and when I came to Ian Hart's screen and TV credits, I had to laugh 
because one of them is a 1998 film called Snitch!  Since he's listed 
second in the cast, after Denis Leary, he seems to have had a rather 
large part.  Most of the other cast members are not familiar to me, 
other than Famke Janssen and Colm Meany.  I just found this to be a 
funny almost-Harry-Potter connection before Hart made the Harry 
Potter film.

This url will take you to his film/TV credits:

http://us.imdb.com/Name?Hart,+Ian

In the upper left-hand corner of the screen is a field where you can 
enter any film title or actor to do a search (for the Sean 
Biggerstaff fans, he's done very little so far).  If you're looking 
for info about the film or the actors in it, this site is a 
wonderful resource.

--Barb





From Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 15:58:18 2001
From: Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com (Lino Padrun)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 07:58:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Special Effects 101 (was Re: What Could Have...)
In-Reply-To: <1006224126.56535.50762.m6@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011120155818.32795.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey all,

I'm a new member of the list. 

>>Maybe they didn't want it too look too real or it
was budget constraints,<<

My theories on why the special effects looked the way
they did are: 1) they wanted to keep the monsters
(Fluffy and the troll) on the cartoonish side so as
not to scare younger viewers too much (I think the
movie was watered down a bit for younger viewsers); 2)
to make it easier to create merchandise of the of the
CG characters. To support the former, even Voldermort
was a little on the cartoonish side, while Norbert was
fairly detailed.

I also thought the Hedwig flight looked incredibly
fake (does anyone know if an owl can even take off
backwards like that?).

Michael

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Nov 20 16:08:13 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:08:13 -0600
Subject: HP4GU Rules -- Adaptations (GWTW in particular) -- Film Student Views
 -- British Dialogue -- and More Misc Comments
Message-ID: <3BFA7FED.4000505@swbell.net>

Hi

Many thanks to Joywitch for taking the initiative & stating the obvious. 
The rules of HP4GU do indeed apply on this list. If you're not familiar 
with the main group, please at least read the Netiquette, list rules, 
VFAQs & other ADMIN files at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups

ADAPTATIONS -- People keep mentioning Gone with the Wind as an example 
of a movie adaptation that is better than the book. I must disagree. The 
movie is excellent & classic (it's one of my all-time favorites in 
fact). But, it is a fair bit different than the novel (which stands 
among my all-time favorite novels). I think probably that the adaptation 
of GWTW is, however, more successful than HP & SS because they did 
deviate from the novel so much. Incidentally, Joywitch, I've always 
thought the novel GWTW was superior to the movie, although I like them 
both.  Ah, I see Tabouli agrees with me.  :--)

> What's this?  We have a film student in our ranks?  Ali, I'd love to
> hear your thoughts about Mr. Columbus' direction and the adaptation
> of the book and how a "Wildgoose" production might have been
> different, if you have time. 

I second this!  Great thoughts, Ali!  I really enjoyed reading your 
explanations about why some of the film's problems came to be.  More, 
more...

BRITISH DIALOGUE -- Dave mentioned that he disliked the British dialogue 
that Kloves et al employed at various points.  Is this just Dave, or do 
other Brits agree?  Wouldn't the all British cast have made this clear 
to Kloves, Columbus or whoever was around that the dialogue was all 
wrong?  Wouldn't they have perhaps instinctively (ad lib) changed it 
while filming if nothing else?  Just curious.

THE MUSIC -- I gather from comments that people either loved it or hated 
it, with little middle ground.  I loved it.  Bryce hated it.

Catlady said:

> I don't understand why some people Like the music. I Hated the music
> at the end, which continued under the end credits -- it made me not
> only wince but grind my teeth. Oh, the pomposity, oh the grandiosity,
> oh the loudness.

I *wanted* grandiose, bombastic & loud (soaring french horns at just the 
right moment).  I loved it, loved it, loved it (thank God since it was 
the only CD in my car yesterday when I was stuck in gridlock traffic for 
the better part of an hour).

MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS --

BTW, I agree with the Goat about the Hedwig flight scene.  It was a nice 
segue IMO.

Barb said:

> I don't see why they couldn't have kept Harry's recitation of the
> information on Dumbledore's wizard card from the Chocolate Frog
> package.  IMO, it painted a very succinct picture of Dumbledore
> (Kloves savaged Dumbledore's character) as well as establishing his
> link with Flamel.  The whole point of Harry recalling this was that
> it wasn't something one could just find in a book unless you knew
> specifically to research alchemists.  Hermione stumbling on this was
> very annoying.  Harry was was supposed to pick up on it.

:::nods::: Yes, I agree completely.  That's one of Harry's big moments 
in PS/SS, *and* it would definitely have given us more about 
Dumbledore's character in a fairly small amount of screen time.

Penny







From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 16:13:21 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:13:21 -0000
Subject: First Bookmark
Message-ID: <9tdvf1+tavt@eGroups.com>

Of course, after I sent through the Ian Hart post, it occurred to me 
that the sensible thing to do would be to put the link for the movie 
entry in the move database in the bookmarks section of the website.  
Click below to access the bookmarks:

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

Since a lot of people have been asking which actors played which 
roles and what the actors' other roles have been, etc., this should 
answer most of those questions.

--Barb





From Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 16:33:15 2001
From: Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com (Lino Padrun)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 08:33:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <1006224126.56535.50762.m6@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011120163315.26685.qmail@web9106.mail.yahoo.com>

I had little to no problem with the way the film was
adapted for film. I do think some important premises
were either lost or did not come across strongly
enough. 

I also think that while some of the changes made in
the name of adaptation may have sounded great on
paper, they would have worked just as well if left as
is in the book -- most of these issues have to do with
minor changes in the order of events (i.e., Hagrid
telling Harry about his parents in the Leakey Coldren
instead of "on the rock" -- it's half dozen one and
six the other and works either way).

The thing that does bug me are all of the details that
were changed, seemingly -- to me anyway-- for no other
reason than a lack of attention to detail. The snake
is one example that has been brought up here. In fact
the very first thing we see in the film is the
Put-Outer working in reverse (from furthest lamp to
closest, instead of closest to furtherest). Snape's
class not being in a dungeon, the color of some
people's hair, Hargid saying he got fluffy from a
Irishmen instead of a Greek, etc. There are tons of
small things like this that were either needless
changes or just plain lack of attention to detail --
at least, that's my opinion.

There is only one part of the whole movie though that
sticks out in my mind as being just out and out wrong.
On the rock, after Hagrid tells Harry who he is, Harry
starts yelling at the Dursleys. As we all know those
should have been Hagrid's lines, but my real problem
with this scene is that it's totally out of character
for Harry to be yelling at his Aunt and Uncle like
that (yes, even after being told what he was told).

All and all, I think most of the changes not directly
related to "editing down" the book to fit into movie
format were superfluous, if not a bit annoying.

Oh, but I did like the movie and I will be seeing it
again.

Michael

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From jenni_stern at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 16:33:23 2001
From: jenni_stern at yahoo.com (jenni_stern at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:33:23 -0000
Subject: Some observations and comments
Message-ID: <9te0kj+oi52@eGroups.com>

Okay, I finally saw the movie.  Although parts of it were sloppy and 
cheesy - I still loved it.  Especially the kids.  Rupertt was 
excellent conveying Ron's emotions by facial features.

Just a quick observation.  Did anyone else notice that Mrs. Norris 
and Voldemort had the exact same color of eyes?  I don't know if this 
was intentional or not, but it might provide some sort of spoiler for 
future books.  (Mrs. N is way too intelligent for a normal cat, and 
its been said that she isn't a Kneazle.)

Also... I'm definaltly pulling for Cary Elwes to win the part of 
Lupin for Azkaban.



Jenni




From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 16:02:31 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:02:31 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GOF Syndrome?
References: <9tdmbo+g2ta@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c171dc$c305b700$e500a8c0@shasta>

Joanne mentioned that

> Some of the scenes aren't fine in and of themselves, even.  There are
irrational
> pieces chopped out of the dialogue:  [and points out Filch's "reminder"
and
> Hagrid's daring leaps of logic.]

Agreed!

BTW, I'm not much of a movie buff, so I'm just curious: are these problems -
particularly Hagrid's speech (which is both obvious and crucial to the
plot!) - connected more to editing or to script-writing? Do things like this
happen (a) because Kloves' script was illogical to begin with, (b) because
the director told the actors to drop a couple lines to save time or (c)
because the editing people snipped a few seconds out of dialogue that had
originally been filmed?

> But the editing process doesn't involve all those staff, it's a more
personal
> artistic process. Sure, it has its own deadlines, but continuity thru cuts
is
> crucial.

Also agreed. But as a writer, you can go back and "re-shoot" scenes as often
as you want to. (Unless you're under pressure to get the !#$% thing
written.) Once a director has committed to a script, shot it, and discovered
that he has to remove a lot of material, he can't necessarily go back and
redo pieces that depended on shots he cut.

Still, I suppose that being able to plan and shoot a movie so that this
doesn't happen is the mark of a gifted director. They say Mozart could hear
a whole orchestra play a whole concerto in his head; perhaps some directors
can watch a whole film .... And perhaps, Chris (or Steve?) isn't quite in
the Mozart league.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who, carping aside, thinks the film is
blast!)
_______________________

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




From feycat at feycat.net  Tue Nov 20 16:19:56 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:19:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Snape not shown long-term
References: <9t9bvn+3jb8@eGroups.com> <3BF9BEBF.EB696602@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00cf01c171e1$b7c66f60$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

> 2. We never see Harry get that Snape hates HIM, not just that he's
> particularly unpleasant. We know he's more unpleasant toward Harry,
> but H. never even wonders about it, and Dumbledore never told him that
> James saved Snape's life...I agree with most cuts from the book, but
> this one I think was important, very important, for setting up
> future emotion.

I too was REALLY bothered by that. Because they cut out so much, you never get a real sense of time. You don't see that this was a long-term, ongoing thing that made Harry miserable every time he knew he was going to Potions class. You didn't get to see Snape single him out and pick at him EVERY DAY. Also, they cut out Snape picking points away from Griffindor daily for no real reason. ("Potter! Why didn't you tell him not to add the porcupine quills? Thought it would make you look better?" etc) 

In my mind, cutting out Snape essentially cheating against Griffindor made the final scene where Dumbledore hands out all those points to Griffindor look terrible. The Slytherins may be jerks, but they are still children and students at Hogwarts. It looks like Dumbledore just took his favorites and gave them enough points to yank the cup out of Slytherin's hands at the last minute. It seemed a cruel thing to do to the whole other table of children. Granted, Harry and the others did really cool things, but it still looks like favoritism until you know that Slytherin has been essentially cheating points out during the whole year.

-Gabriel


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




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 16:43:25 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:43:25 -0000
Subject: HP4GU Rules -- Adaptations (GWTW in particular) -- Film Student Views -- British Dialogue -- and More Misc Comments
In-Reply-To: <3BFA7FED.4000505@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9te17d+f5jl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> BRITISH DIALOGUE -- Dave mentioned that he disliked the British 
dialogue 
> that Kloves et al employed at various points.  Is this just Dave, 
or do 
> other Brits agree?  Wouldn't the all British cast have made this 
clear 
> to Kloves, Columbus or whoever was around that the dialogue was all 
> wrong?  Wouldn't they have perhaps instinctively (ad lib) changed 
it 
> while filming if nothing else?  Just curious.

Well yes, I'm sure the adults did that. All the adult's dialogue 
seemed very natural. But it's the kids that at times have unrealistic 
dialogue, particularly Daniel Radcliffe. It's not his fault that is't 
unrealistic, but he was 11 when he filmed it, and must have been 
incredibly nervous about it and it was his first acting role (well, 
there was David Copperfield, but you can't really change Dickens 
dialogue to make it realistic as it's not set nowadays, if that makes 
sense), and I'm sure he didn't think he could really change anything, 
and nor would the other kids.

I could be completely wrong, but a lot of the dialogue did annoy me a 
lot, and the people I was with.

But I did completely love it, I'm just nit-picking:o)

Dave




From cindysphynx at home.com  Tue Nov 20 16:50:47 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:50:47 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <20011120163315.26685.qmail@web9106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9te1l7+1j4n@eGroups.com>

Lino wrote:

> The thing that does bug me are all of the details that
> were changed, seemingly -- to me anyway-- for no other
> reason than a lack of attention to detail. The snake
> is one example that has been brought up here. In fact
> the very first thing we see in the film is the
> Put-Outer working in reverse (from furthest lamp to
> closest, instead of closest to furtherest). Snape's
> class not being in a dungeon, the color of some
> people's hair, Hargid saying he got fluffy from a
> Irishmen instead of a Greek, etc. 

I'm not sure I'd chalk these thing up to sloppiness and inattention 
to detail.  For instance, the snake scene makes more sense in the 
movie than the book, IMHO.  As Alex, our resident snake enthusiast 
explained, the movie snake is a (fake) Burmese Python.  Why?  Movies 
are visual, so perhaps they wanted a large, colorful snake, and maybe 
Brazilian Boas don't fit the bill.  Failing to change the snake's 
origin would have led to claims that the filmmakers made an error and 
don't understand snakes.  So they change the dialogue to be accurate 
and avoid an avalanche of nit-picky letters.  I doubt it was a slip-
up, and I would have made the same decision, as the snake's origin is 
unimportant to the story.

As for the Put-Outer, I'll have to take your word that the movie 
order is backward (and bestow upon you a special citation for L.O.O.N-
iness for spotting this).  But perhaps they are setting up the shot, 
and they observe that having Dumbledore extinguish the closest lamp 
first fouls the lighting or obscures him or something.  So they fix 
it on the spot, not out of ignorance of the book, but because of the 
practical issues in filming a movie.

As for Irish vs. Greek, I have no idea.  It could be that they felt 
it was more logical for Hagrid to believe the man to be Irish if it 
is supposed to be a cloaked Quirrell.

Cindy (sounding like a member of S.A.D. again)




From rhysenn at singnet.com.sg  Tue Nov 20 16:55:05 2001
From: rhysenn at singnet.com.sg (Rhysenn)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 00:55:05 +0800
Subject: Harry and Draco movie collage
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20011121005435.00ab8100@singnet.com.sg>


Here's a movie collage that I made with an assortment of pictures and some 
Photoshop magic. It's a Harry and Draco themed collage, since they're my 
favourite characters. :) I shrunk it down to wallpaper size.

http://rhysenn.morethanart.org/harrydraco-moviecollage1.jpg


Enjoy!

Rhysenn



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

"I'm beginning to see what's so great about poisoning yourself for fun."
-Trance Gemini, Andromeda.

Love Potion shots, on the house! @
~ Magical Intrigue ~
http://rhysenn.morethanart.org

Cassie and Rhysenn's mailing list
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cassie_and_rhysenn

*  ^  *  ^  *  ^  *  ^  *  ^  *  ^  *  ^  *  ^






From feycat at feycat.net  Tue Nov 20 17:14:11 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:14:11 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Some observations and comments
References: <9te0kj+oi52@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <014801c171e6$c5eaca00$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Okay, I finally saw the movie.  Although parts of it were sloppy and 
cheesy - I still loved it.  Especially the kids.  Rupertt was 
excellent conveying Ron's emotions by facial features.<<

LOL! Didn't he look just dismayed by almost everything? He always had a kind of wincing-ready-for-this-to-go-wrong look on his face. Suppose that comes from growing up with Fred and George!

>>Also... I'm definaltly pulling for Cary Elwes to win the part of 
Lupin for Azkaban.<<

No way! We need a lot of subtlety for Lupin. I'm personally pulling for a talented unknown who won't overshadow the part with previous performances. :-)

-Gabriel


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




From april at syclo.com  Tue Nov 20 17:23:05 2001
From: april at syclo.com (Dave April)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:23:05 -0000
Subject: A Quick Pat On The Back For WB
In-Reply-To: <9t62vr+qqek@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9te3hp+hj27@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> I must report that I was *thrilled* that there wasn't a single 
> product placement in the film.  Given the amount Coke paid in the 
> deal they cut, I was just a little worried that Harry might drink a 
> Coke at the zoo or sip a Minute Maid juice box at Privet Drive.  Or 
> we'd see Nike swooshes on muggle clothing.  Or there would be a new 
> scene in which Hagrid tries his first Quarter Pounder with Cheese.
> 
> Thankfully, we got none of that.  Whew!
> 
> Cindy

How can you say that Cindy? Bertie Botts was all over the place! And 
the Nimbus Broom Company, I mean, come on! You'd think they could 
have used just some generic broom rather than splashing that tacky 
Nimbus logo all over the place! <grin>

Dave




From jenni_stern at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 17:26:06 2001
From: jenni_stern at yahoo.com (jenni_stern at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:26:06 -0000
Subject: Speaking of the Nimbus 2000
Message-ID: <9te3ne+79ld@eGroups.com>

Has anyone else seen the toy version of Harry's broomstick?  I about 
died laughing when I first saw it.  Why?  Because they had to put a 
warning sticker on the box.  It said "Broom Does Not Actually Fly."

Tis a pity that such things need to be spelled out.


Jenni




From Jayne.D.Harsley at btinternet.com  Tue Nov 20 17:30:24 2001
From: Jayne.D.Harsley at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:30:24 -0000
Subject: HELLO - I'M NEW HERE
Message-ID: <9te3vg+oaiq@eGroups.com>

Hi - I've just joined this group.  I also belong to another HP group 
and was given a great website address of the Leaky Cauldron and found 
a link for THIS club.  As it's for grown-ups into HP I just had to 
join!!! 

How grown-up is grown-up????  That is, I'm 39 - are you all THAT 
grown-up???  (Although I sometimes wonder whether I actually grew up 
at all LOL!!!!)

Jayne




From heidit at netbox.com  Tue Nov 20 17:38:58 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:38:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various Notes about zoos
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF8700@MIAEXCH1>

On the London Zoo issue... There is a zoo in Surrey- I looked it up online,
I think on Surreynet, but certainly through yahoo.co.uk. 
I don't know why they moved it for the film but maybe they didn't have the
reptile house configuration they needed in Surrey. 
But in the film Harry never says he'd never been to London before. 



From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 17:45:58 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:45:58 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Volde's face
Message-ID: <32.1e2de2ca.292bf0d7@aol.com>

Rose wrote:

>I think he was just a bit too normal-human-looking.

You mean it's normal for humans to have glowing red eyes that are narrow slits on their face?

I don't want to sound sarcastic, but I have to disagree with some of the things I'm hearing about Voldemort's face. I think it was pretty accurate. Keep in mind, too, that he'll look different when he has his own head. Sharing head space with someone else has to distort your looks somewhat.

Lotus




From TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET  Tue Nov 20 18:07:05 2001
From: TEAPOT1 at PRODIGY.NET (Diana Wisniewski)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:07:05 -0500
Subject: Movie #2
Message-ID: <008f01c171ee$2b4b6100$cd85c640@oemcomputer>

Warner Bros., which hopes to turn Harry into a lucrative franchise like "Star Wars" and the James Bond movies, has scheduled the second installment for release on Nov. 15, 2002, and plans to produce as many as seven films based on Rowling's novels. 
http://www.intelligentx.com/newsletters/entertainment/articles/story_ent1_112001.html

Can this be true? We can only hope. Something new to countdown to. In the Entertainment IntelligentX newsletter ( a rag, I know) they had this to say today. So can we count on a new book and a movie next year? Won't 2002 be wonderful?
Diana



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




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 18:11:22 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:11:22 -0000
Subject: Movie #2
In-Reply-To: <008f01c171ee$2b4b6100$cd85c640@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <9te6ca+l961@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Diana Wisniewski" <TEAPOT1 at P...> wrote:
> Warner Bros., which hopes to turn Harry into a lucrative franchise 
like "Star Wars" and the James Bond movies, has scheduled the second 
installment for release on Nov. 15, 2002, and plans to produce as 
many as seven films based on Rowling's novels. 

Nov. 15th...is this long enough? The book's longer, therfore the film 
might be (although they won't have to set up the character's and 
Hogwart's etc. so it may be shorter), but the PS seemed a bit rushed.

Then again, I suppose if they want to do the 3rd film with the same 
cast they'll have to get onto that one before they grow up too much.  
It must be very difficult!

Dave




From titacats at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 18:13:05 2001
From: titacats at yahoo.com (titacats at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:13:05 -0000
Subject: new scene
In-Reply-To: <9sjj90+10b44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9te6fh+9s28@eGroups.com>

"Dai Evans" <dai_evans at y...> wrote:
 <SNIP>

> We do see that Lilly is totally surprised by her attacker turning 
up. 
> She does not run into the bedroom, she is just coming out of it, 
like 
> any normal day, and meets her attacker on the landing. He then 
kills 
> her.
>  
> Dai



I'm new to the group, but I believe that in the books Dumbledore said 
that no one knows what exactly happened that night. Only that the 
Potters were killed by Voldemort and that somehow Harry survived and 
the spell backfires. It is only in the third book that anyone 
realizes how it happened. Remus was pretty shook up by Harry's 
admitting that he heard his parents voices as well as Voldemort when 
Dementors got near him. I would assume that this is how they handle 
it in the film as well. The flashback scene is what they assume 
happened until Harry regains some memory of it. Just my two cents. 
That would be the only explanation that would make the scene 
plausible.

Cats




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 18:13:18 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:13:18 -0000
Subject: production scheduals
In-Reply-To: <9tds9i+2drm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9te6fu+9vt7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:

one rather "wonky" thing that 
> must have come from spotty planning.  When Harry's letters start to 
> arrive, Dudley is wearing his Smeltings uniform.  I don't believe 
> there was any mention of Smeltings, so the viewer is left with the 
> strange costuming decision to have Dudley wearing a straw hat to the 
> breakfast table.  I assume they filmed the "Smeltings" discussion, 
> but cut it out later, leaving the "wonky" costume in because they had 
> to.

I think you're probably right.  In one interview, the young actor who plays 
Dudley was asked which scene was his favorite and he mentioned that it was 
the one with his Smeltings uniform.  No way could the scene WE saw be his 
favorite, so there must have been more to it at one time.




From aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org  Tue Nov 20 18:29:09 2001
From: aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org (Meredith Wilson)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:29:09 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Volde's face
Message-ID: <D8085AFE4BC7D4119EA00090271EDF1503C5EA@mailsrv.seattle.nmof.org>

 

 
Rose wrote:

>I think he was just a bit too normal-human-looking.

You mean it's normal for humans to have glowing red eyes that are narrow
slits on their face?

I don't want to sound sarcastic, but I have to disagree with some of the
things I'm hearing about Voldemort's face. I think it was pretty accurate.
Keep in mind, too, that he'll look different when he has his own head.
Sharing head space with someone else has to distort your looks somewhat.

Lotus
 
 
THat's exactly what I said.  Right now he's part of a host and uses his
skin, etc.  But I think when he becomes his own body he will look more evil.
 
Meredith 




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 18:31:44 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:31:44 -0000
Subject: Some observations and comments
In-Reply-To: <014801c171e6$c5eaca00$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <9te7ig+uq2b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Gabriel Edson" <feycat at f...> wrote:
> >>Okay, I finally saw the movie.  Although parts of it were sloppy and 
> cheesy - I still loved it.  Especially the kids.  Rupertt was 
> excellent conveying Ron's emotions by facial features.<<
> 
> LOL! Didn't he look just dismayed by almost everything? He always had a kind of wincing-ready-for-this-to-go-wrong look on his face. Suppose that comes from growing up with Fred and George!
> 
> >>Also... I'm definaltly pulling for Cary Elwes to win the part of 
> Lupin for Azkaban.<<
> 
> No way! We need a lot of subtlety for Lupin. I'm personally pulling for a talented unknown who won't overshadow the part with previous performances. :-)
> 
> -Gabriel
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 I dunno if I picture Cary Elwes as Lupin or not, but anyone who caught the two-part season opener of X-FILES can vouch that Elwes has a good grip on subtlety these days.

 He also looks weirdly different! Dunno if it's the darker hair or the extra five or ten pounds (just enough to gives him a vaguely more solid look than we're accustomed to), or the Boston accent he used, but he's *not* the Cary Elwes of the Lady Jane/Princess Bride/The Crush days.

 (Incidentally, he's a nice guy; I helped him find an astronomy book back when I worked at Barnes & Noble several years back. Didn't ask him for an autograph, but he did give one to the person who rang him up at the front.)

 OHPC: Uhm.... hrm... you know, maybe I could see Alan Cummings as Lupin? Especially since he lost out Lockhart to Branagh.  I believe we'll also see Miriam Margoyles as Moaning Myrtle in the next film. And that Robert Carlyle is the most likely candidate for Arthur Weasley.   




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 18:35:35 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:35:35 -0000
Subject: Some observations and comments
In-Reply-To: <014801c171e6$c5eaca00$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <9te7pn+f5pe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Gabriel Edson" <feycat at f...> wrote:
> >>Okay, I finally saw the movie.  Although parts of it were sloppy and 
> cheesy - I still loved it.  Especially the kids.  Rupertt was 
> excellent conveying Ron's emotions by facial features.<<
> 
> LOL! Didn't he look just dismayed by almost everything? He always had a kind of wincing-ready-for-this-to-go-wrong look on his face. Suppose that comes from growing up with Fred and George!
> 
> >>Also... I'm definaltly pulling for Cary Elwes to win the part of 
> Lupin for Azkaban.<<
> 
> No way! We need a lot of subtlety for Lupin. I'm personally pulling for a talented unknown who won't overshadow the part with previous performances. :-)
> 
> -Gabriel
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 I dunno if I picture Cary Elwes as Lupin or not, but anyone who caught the two-part season opener of X-FILES can vouch that Elwes has a good grip on subtlety these days.

 He also looks weirdly different! Dunno if it's the darker hair or the extra five or ten pounds (just enough to gives him a vaguely more solid look than we're accustomed to), or the Boston accent he used, but he's *not* the Cary Elwes of the Lady Jane/Princess Bride/The Crush days.

 (Incidentally, he's a nice guy; I helped him find an astronomy book back when I worked at Barnes & Noble several years back. Didn't ask him for an autograph, but he did give one to the person who rang him up at the front.)

 OHPC: Uhm.... hrm... you know, maybe I could see Alan Cummings as Lupin? Especially since he lost out Lockhart to Branagh.  I believe we'll also see Miriam Margoyles as Moaning Myrtle in the next film. And that Robert Carlyle is the most likely candidate for Arthur Weasley.   




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Tue Nov 20 18:52:39 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:52:39 -0800
Subject: Vody's face, Fudge, and Oz
In-Reply-To: <1006224126.56535.50762.m6@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006224126.56535.50762.m6@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <9334355807.20011120105239@mindspring.com>


Monday, November 19, 2001, 6:42:06 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote:

shieka99 at yahoo.com:
> Voldemort's face was
> creepy, but I thought it was more like a snake?

So did I -- Bigger, redder eyes, more slit-like nostrils,
maybe even scales...?


Heather:
> OHPC: Uhm.... hrm... you know, maybe I could see Alan Cummings as Lupin?
> Especially since he lost out Lockhart to Branagh.  I believe we'll also see
> Miriam Margoyles as Moaning Myrtle in the next film. And that Robert Carlyle is
> the most likely candidate for Arthur Weasley.

Who do you see as Cornelius Fudge?


Cindy:
> The "Wizard of Oz" movie was done well...

Though there are many diehard Oz fans who consdider that making
Oz a dream was an "Unforgivable Curse".

-- 
Dave




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Nov 20 19:07:17 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 19:07:17 -0000
Subject: Filch's reminder, scheduling
Message-ID: <9te9l5+e8nb@eGroups.com>

   I don't have a problem with this line, because the 3rd floor 
corridor in which Our Three find themselves has obviously been 
unused for  some time. One can assume it's been out of bounds 
for  a while...maybe, in the world of the movie, there was 
something else up there before Fluffy... a particularly malevolent 
ghost, perhaps?
    As a sometime film student I second everything Ali had 
to say about the crazy production schedule. 
         Making a film is more like architecture than novel-writing. 
The cast and the crew  have schedules of their own, in which  
your project is allowed a specific amount of time. You have to be 
ready when they are, otherwise things get wildly expensive and  
may become impossible, as your stars, studio space etc may no 
longer be available.  With a film like this, every detail has to be 
worked out before shooting starts, otherwise it's like trying to lay 
track in front of an oncoming train. 

 Once out of the planning stage, it's generally too late to make 
changes even if you *know* it's not going to work. It's like trying to 
dock the Queen Mary...by the time you can see you're going to hit 
the pier,  it's too late to do anything about it.
  
Pippin




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 19:09:15 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 19:09:15 -0000
Subject: Future casts/Speaking of the Nimbus 2000
In-Reply-To: <9te3ne+79ld@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9te9or+rc44@eGroups.com>

It's interesting to see the debates about casting for future movies 
raising their heads (no, I did not say ugly) again.  Personally, I 
see Joseph Fiennes for Lupin and Daniel Day Lewis for Sirius Black, 
but no one else seems to. ::sigh::

Perhaps we should construct a database on the website for folks to 
put in their suggestions for various actors/roles.  (And then we 
wouldn't have so many posts about casting--like this one. <g>)  
There would be a succinct record to compare with reality when the 
future film casts are announced.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., jenni_stern at y... wrote:

> Has anyone else seen the toy version of Harry's broomstick?  I 
> about died laughing when I first saw it.  Why?  Because they had 
> to put a warning sticker on the box.  It said "Broom Does Not 
> Actually Fly."  
> Tis a pity that such things need to be spelled out.
 
> Jenni

That's one of the funnier merchandising stories I've heard.  It 
reminded me of when I was shopping recently, and I picked up a poppy-
seed salad-dressing whose label proclaimed that it was good on fresh 
peaches.  I peered closer and saw a sticker on the back that 
said, "Does not contain peaches."  Do people actually need to be 
told these things?  Does anybody seriously think that a Nimbus 2000 
will help them to fly?  Don't they know that Muggles can't operate 
these things?  <g>  Now if a witch or wizard were buying it...

--Barb






From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 20:06:34 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:06:34 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
Message-ID: <9ted4a+8cp8@eGroups.com>

Ok, here's who I think could be cast as future characters:

Professer Sprout: Dawn French
Cornelius Fudge: Richard Attenborough
Voldermort: Christopher Lee
Sirius Black: Sean Bean
Lupin: Mark Gatiss
Moody: Hmmm...I think the guy who was Filch would have been good, but 
they can't use him now. Can't think of anyone for him. Maybe the guy 
who plays Father Jack in Father Ted.
Ludo Bagman: Graham Norton
Mr Crouch: Derek Jacobi

Hmmm...can't think of any more right now.

:o)

Dave




From Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 20:30:37 2001
From: Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com (Lino Padrun)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:30:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <1006278582.2073.79367.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011120203037.54118.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>

Cindy wrote:

>> I'm not sure I'd chalk these thing up to sloppiness
and inattention to detail.  For instance, the snake
scene makes more sense in the movie than the book,
IMHO.  As Alex, our resident snake enthusiast
explained, the movie snake is a (fake) Burmese Python.
 Why?  Movies are visual, so perhaps they wanted a
large, colorful snake, and maybe Brazilian Boas don't
fit the bill. Failing to change the snake's origin
would have led to claims that the filmmakers made an
error and don't understand snakes.  So they change the
dialogue to be accurate and avoid an avalanche of
nit-picky letters.  I doubt it was a slip- up, and I
would have made the same decision, as the snake's
origin is unimportant to the story. <<

I do not think we should get into speculating why the
director and screenwriter did this or that, we will
never know the why's. What we can speculate about is
if a change or decision they made worked. Did it
improve the final product or would it have been better
if they did not make the change. For this we have to
re-play the scenes in our heads and try to be as
honest with ourselves as we can about which is the
better solution. As I said in my initial post, I think
the film makers did a wonderful job overall, but I do
think many of the smaller details would have better
off left as they were in the book.

That said -- yes, Alex the snake was fake -- IMHO, it
was fairly obvious it was a CGI. My point is that,
IMO, they could have made the scene work just as well
-- and I do think over all the scene works-- without
changing the species of snake. I'm not even bothered
by the absence of Piers (a good choice in editing and
stream-lining, IMO).

>> As for the Put-Outer, I'll have to take your word
that the movie order is backward (and bestow upon you
a special citation for L.O.O.N- iness for spotting
this).  But perhaps they are setting up the shot, and
they observe that having Dumbledore extinguish the
closest lamp first fouls the lighting or obscures him
or something.  So they fix it on the spot, not out of
ignorance of the book, but because of the practical
issues in filming a movie. <<

This film was made by an experienced director with an
experienced with proper planning they could have made
the scene work any number of ways, including with the
lights going out from closest to furtherest. Close
your eyes and picture the scene as it was in the
movie, but with the lights going out from closest to
furtherest. You see the Put-Outer held up and open...a
long shot of Dumbledor holding it up...light from the
street lights falls on him...a flick of the putter
outer and the light from the nearest lamp goes to him
and into the Put-Outer...the figure at the end of the
street cast into shadows...as he flicks the
Put-Outer...another light comes to him, illuminating
him as it travels to the Put-Outer....etc... I think
this could not only have worked, but it also would
have been much more dramatic.

>> As for Irish vs. Greek, I have no idea.  It could
be that they felt it was more logical for Hagrid to
believe the man to be Irish if it is supposed to be a
cloaked Quirrell.<<

There is no logic to it, as with most of the small
detail changes, which is why I do not like them. The
changes are so small they do not any real effect,
positive or negative, and/or it would have taken an
equal amount of effort to leaving things as they were
in the book, leaving one to wonder why anyone bothered
to changing it. Again, there are some changes,
additions, etc. that I thought were brilliant (Dudley
stomping on the steps is one), but the details should
have been kept.

That's just my $.02

Michael



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From valjean131 at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 20:39:11 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:39:11 -0000
Subject: Put-Outer & Screen Time (was Re: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <20011120203037.54118.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tef1f+3lav@eGroups.com>


> >> As for the Put-Outer, I'll have to take your word
> that the movie order is backward (and bestow upon you
> a special citation for L.O.O.N- iness for spotting
> this).  But perhaps they are setting up the shot, and
> they observe that having Dumbledore extinguish the
> closest lamp first fouls the lighting or obscures him
> or something.  So they fix it on the spot, not out of
> ignorance of the book, but because of the practical
> issues in filming a movie. <<
> 
> This film was made by an experienced director with an
> experienced with proper planning they could have made
> the scene work any number of ways, including with the
> lights going out from closest to furtherest. Close
> your eyes and picture the scene as it was in the
> movie, but with the lights going out from closest to
> furtherest. You see the Put-Outer held up and open...a
> long shot of Dumbledor holding it up...light from the
> street lights falls on him...a flick of the putter
> outer and the light from the nearest lamp goes to him
> and into the Put-Outer...the figure at the end of the
> street cast into shadows...as he flicks the
> Put-Outer...another light comes to him, illuminating
> him as it travels to the Put-Outer....etc... I think
> this could not only have worked, but it also would
> have been much more dramatic.
> 

My problem with the Put-Outer scene is completely different. 
I thought it took *forever*. Backwards or forwards makes
not difference to me. The scene felt slooooooow. It's not 
awe-inspiring magic to me. It's a simple thing that should
have taken less than half the screen time it did. Since
time was of the essense (screen time that is) I would have 
quickened this scene up, by half at least, and added ...hmmmm... 
Snape. Snape deducting points. In my estimation, that would have
been a much better use of the the 20 seconds.

Also, I'm with the reviewers who felt that the start of the
movie was slow. See above as an example. Although, to be honest,
I felt the start of the book was slow too.

-Q





From cindysphynx at home.com  Tue Nov 20 20:40:31 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:40:31 -0000
Subject: POV Shifting in the Film
Message-ID: <9tef3v+j0ms@eGroups.com>

A while back, we had a discussion of the various shifts of point of 
view in the books.  The upshot was that the books are told mostly 
from Harry's POV, except when it is impossible to do so.

Obviously, the movie cannot be shot entirely from Harry's subjective 
POV, although it was shot largely from his perspective.  Mostly, we 
follow Harry around.

But there were a few exceptions.  One was as the owls are delivering 
the letters.  We get a wide shot of the house with owls all over it.  
In the book, of course, we don't learn how the letters get there, 
because Harry doesn't know.  The filmmakers didn't feel constrained 
to stick to Harry's POV, so we got a very nice and effective non-
Harry POV shot.

The other exception I noticed was with the invisibility cloak scene.  
One shot is Harry holding the lamp, so we are following him around 
from the outside.  Then we have a shot of him under the cloak (IIRC), 
which is a bit more intimate, but we're still just following him 
around.  But then we have the shot of Snape, which is totally 
subjective from Harry's POV.  I thought this worked well.  

But I also wonder if there was any other practical way to shoot the 
invisibility cloak scene.  We can't have a typical "follow Harry 
around" shot because Harry's invisible, and the viewer wouldn't 
understand Harry's proximity to Snape.  So the POV shift worked well, 
and it may have been impossible to do it any other way.

Although this is only tangentially related to POV, I also found it 
interesting that the filmmakers chose to show Harry under the cloak 
with his arm and lantern sticking out.  I guess they did this so that 
the viewer could keep track of Harry.  But maybe it really isn't very 
realistic based on canon.  If someone sees him with the lantern, what 
does he do to remain concealed?  If he brings the lantern under the 
cloak, does it become invisible too (assuming Harry doesn't set 
himself on fire)?  Does it continue to light his surroundings?  
(Maybe it should, because we know from canon that sounds and smells 
permeate the invisibility cloak).  If so, then why does he hold it 
out in front of him?  

Anyway, did the filmmakers make maximum usage of the ability to 
deviate from Harry's POV, and were there places where they could have 
used POV shifts to greater advantage?

Cindy




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 20:59:25 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:59:25 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9ted4a+8cp8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teg7d+7j5p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> Ok, here's who I think could be cast as future characters:
> 
> Professer Sprout: Dawn French
> Cornelius Fudge: Richard Attenborough
> Voldermort: Christopher Lee
> Sirius Black: Sean Bean
> Lupin: Mark Gatiss
> Moody: Hmmm...I think the guy who was Filch would have been good, but 
> they can't use him now. Can't think of anyone for him. Maybe the guy 
> who plays Father Jack in Father Ted.
> Ludo Bagman: Graham Norton
> Mr Crouch: Derek Jacobi
> 
> Hmmm...can't think of any more right now.
> 
> :o)
> 
> Dave

 Oh, definitely Rhys Ifans for Mad-Eye Moody / BCjr! Or Robert Carlyle if they go with someone else for AW.

  For Bill Weasley, how about the actor who  played Frank Churchill in the BBC/A&E production of EMMA? 

 And whatever happened to Nicholas Rowe? He'd be of an age for Lupin, wouldn't he?




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 20 21:02:52 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 21:02:52 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9teg7d+7j5p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tegds+d3fe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
>  Oh, definitely Rhys Ifans for Mad-Eye Moody / BCjr! Or Robert 
>Carlyle if they go with someone else for AW.

Isn't Rhys Ifans a bit young? I'd always pictured Moody as a 
Yorkshire man too, not Welsh (the guy from Father Ted has a Yorkshire 
accent in real life). But then, that's my interpretation:o)  I 
suppose Rhys Ifans would be good, I hadn't thought of him:o)

Dave




From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 21:53:03 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:53:03 +0100
Subject: production scheduals & alternative plotting
References: <9tds9i+2drm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003601c1720d$bf8e2630$e500a8c0@shasta>

Cindy wrote,

> What's this?  We have a film student in our ranks?  Ali, I'd love to
> hear your thoughts about Mr. Columbus' direction and the adaptation
> of the book and how a "Wildgoose" production might have been
> different, if you have time.

Me too! That was a terrific post, Ali; sure hope there's more to come! (And
I'm feeling a tad embarrassed to about my own under-informed rants on the
same topic!)

> Now that you mention it, I do recall one rather "wonky" thing that
> must have come from spotty planning.  When Harry's letters start to
> arrive, Dudley is wearing his Smeltings uniform.  I don't believe
> there was any mention of Smeltings, so the viewer is left with the
> strange costuming decision to have Dudley wearing a straw hat to the
> breakfast table.  I assume they filmed the "Smeltings" discussion,
> but cut it out later, leaving the "wonky" costume in because they had
> to.

Glumph - I'd almost forgotten that one. Very wonky indeed. American
youngsters will presumably conclude that straw hats and funny outfits are
what *all* Brits wear to breakfast. Honestly!

* * * * * * * * *

I've been thinking about the difficulties connected to the hut-on-the-rock
scene and found myself wodering whether it would have been better to move
the whole scene to Privet Drive. The wind-whipped island thing is fun, of
course - but I can't think of any reason it couldn't have been played out at
the Dursleys' house. That would have been less confusing and should have let
them develop the story at a more reasonable pace.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

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





From meboriqua at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 22:08:25 2001
From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:08:25 -0000
Subject: Future casts/Speaking of the Nimbus 2000
In-Reply-To: <9te9or+rc44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tek8p+2s9i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:

> It's interesting to see the debates about casting for future movies 
> raising their heads (no, I did not say ugly) again.  Personally, I 
> see Joseph Fiennes for Lupin and Daniel Day Lewis for Sirius Black, 
> but no one else seems to. ::sigh::>

Hey Barb - 

I am totally with you about Joseph Fiennes as Lupin (those eyes!), but 
I'm a big pusher of Colin Firth for Sirius.

Someone mentioned the idea of Miriam Margoyles (sp) for Moaning 
Myrtle.  Am I missing something?  Isn't Miriam M an adult?  Moaning 
Myrtle can't be more than a teen at best.  She is clearly represented 
that way in the books, ghost or not.  Only a teen or younger can play 
her, and a British one, too.

--jenny from ravenclaw *************************************




From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Nov 20 22:09:27 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:09:27 -0600
Subject: Casting Black & Lupin  & Detail Changes
References: <9te9or+rc44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BFAD497.9010500@swbell.net>

Hi --

Barb wrote:

> It's interesting to see the debates about casting for future movies
> raising their heads (no, I did not say ugly) again.  Personally, I
> see Joseph Fiennes for Lupin and Daniel Day Lewis for Sirius Black,
> but no one else seems to. ::sigh::

In general I don't like to get into the fantasy casting stuff.  But, 
since you raised *exactly* the 2 actors I have in mind for those roles, 
I will chime in.  Absolutely no one but Day-Lewis seems right for Black 
as far as I'm concerned.  That's Carole's choice also.  <g>  And, Joseph 
*or* Ralph Fiennes for Lupin is perfect.  I mentioned those 2 as 
possible Lupins to my movie-going buddy this past weekend in fact & she 
gave this a big thumbs-up.

Michael re: the changes to small details:

> The
> changes are so small they do not any real effect,
> positive or negative, and/or it would have taken an
> equal amount of effort to leaving things as they were
> in the book, leaving one to wonder why anyone bothered
> to changing it. Again, there are some changes,
> additions, etc. that I thought were brilliant (Dudley
> stomping on the steps is one), but the details should
> have been kept.

Yes, some of these detail changes left me shaking my head in bafflement. 
*Why* change it from a Greek chappie to an Irish chappie?  *Why*?

Penny




From chattie27million at aol.com  Tue Nov 20 22:57:05 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:57:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP4GU Rules -- Adaptations (GWTW in particular) -- Film Stu...
Message-ID: <d4.f38d568.292c39c1@aol.com>

In a message dated 20/11/01 16:11:51 GMT Standard Time, pennylin at swbell.net 
writes:


> 
> BRITISH DIALOGUE -- Dave mentioned that he disliked the British dialogue 
> that Kloves et al employed at various points.  Is this just Dave, or do 
> other Brits agree?  Wouldn't the all British cast have made this clear 
> to Kloves, Columbus or whoever was around that the dialogue was all 
> wrong?  Wouldn't they have perhaps instinctively (ad lib) changed it 
> while filming if nothing else?  Just curious.
> 

I'm a Brit and i definitely didn't hate all the dialogue.  There were one or 
two patchy areas, I think I might have agreed before with whoever said about 
the line which goes "But how am I to buy my school things? I haven't any 
money."
For me, things like this just don't work, because I myself don't speak like 
that!! Having said that, there isn't really a specific 'british' way of 
speaking as it all depends on your background and where you are from. If 
Harry has been brought up by the Dursleys to speak properly etc. From what we 
learn in the book more so than the film, they do try their hardest to make 
themselves seem upper class as opposed to the middle class that they are, and 
this could have had some bearing on the way Harry speaks I s'pose...
Just my thoughts on that one
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 liesandparanormal at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:28:22 2001
From: liesandparanormal at yahoo.com (Dana Katherine Scully)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:28:22 -0000
Subject: Future casts/Speaking of the Nimbus 2000
In-Reply-To: <9tek8p+2s9i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teoum+dd3l@eGroups.com>

"I am totally with you about Joseph Fiennes as Lupin (those eyes!), 
but 
I'm a big pusher of Colin Firth for Sirius."


God lord, I've found my long lost sister. Colin Firth would just be 
too perfect as Sirius. There's nothing in the world I'd like to see 
more than Firth fighting with Alan Rickman. Gah.. just sends sputters 
of joy down my spine.

As for Joesph Fiennes, he does have lovley eyes, but I never quite 
thought Lupin would look quite like that. I would't complain though 
if he got the part.

The only problem I see though, is that both of these guys are rather 
young looking, and are a million times better looking than James. I 
think James was cast horribly. I always rather imagined Hugh Grant in 
the role of James.

Mmm... THAT would have been a lovley trio. Firth, Fiennes, and Grant.




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:28:39 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:28:39 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9tegds+d3fe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teov7+s2mv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> >  Oh, definitely Rhys Ifans for Mad-Eye Moody / BCjr! Or Robert 
> >Carlyle if they go with someone else for AW.
> 
> Isn't Rhys Ifans a bit young? I'd always pictured Moody as a 
> Yorkshire man too, not Welsh (the guy from Father Ted has a 
Yorkshire 
> accent in real life). But then, that's my interpretation:o)  I 
> suppose Rhys Ifans would be good, I hadn't thought of him:o)
> 
> Dave  
Excuse my ignorance. I watch Father Ted now and then. Which actor is 
Rhys Ifans? The elderly priest who is always drinking? Are you 
English by any chance? Just wondering. Chris




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:34:07 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:34:07 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9teg7d+7j5p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tep9f+tkam@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> > Ok, here's who I think could be cast as future characters:
> > 
> > Professer Sprout: Dawn French
> > Cornelius Fudge: Richard Attenborough
> > Voldermort: Christopher Lee
> > Sirius Black: Sean Bean
> > Lupin: Mark Gatiss
> > Moody: Hmmm...I think the guy who was Filch would have been good, 
but 
> > they can't use him now. Can't think of anyone for him. Maybe the 
guy 
> > who plays Father Jack in Father Ted.
> > Ludo Bagman: Graham Norton
> > Mr Crouch: Derek Jacobi
> > 
> > Hmmm...can't think of any more right now.
> > 
> > :o) 
Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name) 
Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else knows. I 
would have suggested him for Voldemort and Nigel Hawthorne for 
Dumbledore. Now that I went back one I figured the answer to my 
former question about Father Ted. Chris
> > 
> > Dave
> 
>  Oh, definitely Rhys Ifans for Mad-Eye Moody / BCjr! Or Robert 
Carlyle if they go with someone else for AW.
> 
>   For Bill Weasley, how about the actor who  played Frank Churchill 
in the BBC/A&E production of EMMA? 
> 
>  And whatever happened to Nicholas Rowe? He'd be of an age for 
Lupin, wouldn't he?




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:43:43 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:43:43 -0000
Subject: HELLO - I'M NEW HERE
In-Reply-To: <9te3vg+oaiq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teprf+g0mj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Jayne" <Jayne.D.Harsley at b...> wrote:
> Hi - I've just joined this group.  I also belong to another HP 
group 
> and was given a great website address of the Leaky Cauldron and 
found 
> a link for THIS club.  As it's for grown-ups into HP I just had to 
> join!!! 
> 
> How grown-up is grown-up????  That is, I'm 39 - are you all THAT 
> grown-up???  (Although I sometimes wonder whether I actually grew 
up 
> at all LOL!!!!)
> 
> Jayne
Hi to you. I just joined too. After perusing the WB website to see 
what people were saying about the movie. It seems lots of 
dissappointment. After all we are all grownups. I am older but prefer 
to just say 40something.I think I have decided that because we are 
all grownups we have to understand,that this movie is for children 
who can't sit still through more than a two hour movie. If you ask 
me,the books were great,which I only just finished a couple of months 
ago. I don't think any filmmaker on this planet could do those books 
justice for all of us if they worked on it until kingdom come. It 
would be nice however if they would at least take a poll of what 
people think before they make the movies to see who we think should 
be in it and what exactly should make the final cut. But then why 
should they? That is my opinion. Chris Sorry if I got a bit carried 
away.




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:46:07 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:46:07 -0000
Subject: HELLO - I'M NEW HERE
In-Reply-To: <9te3vg+oaiq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tepvv+3vj6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Jayne" <Jayne.D.Harsley at b...> wrote:
> Hi - I've just joined this group.  I also belong to another HP 
group 
> and was given a great website address of the Leaky Cauldron and 
found 
> a link for THIS club.  As it's for grown-ups into HP I just had to 
> join!!! 
> 
> How grown-up is grown-up????  That is, I'm 39 - are you all THAT 
> grown-up???  (Although I sometimes wonder whether I actually grew 
up 
> at all LOL!!!!)
> 
> Jayne
Hi to you. I just joined too. After perusing the WB website to see 
what people were saying about the movie. It seems lots of 
dissappointment. After all we are all grownups. I am older but prefer 
to just say 40something.I think I have decided that because we are 
all grownups we have to understand,that this movie is for children 
who can't sit still through more than a two hour movie. If you ask 
me,the books were great,which I only just finished a couple of months 
ago. I don't think any filmmaker on this planet could do those books 
justice for all of us if they worked on it until kingdom come. It 
would be nice however if they would at least take a poll of what 
people think before they make the movies to see who we think should 
be in it and what exactly should make the final cut. But then why 
should they? That is my opinion. Chris Sorry if I got a bit carried 
away.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:48:07 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:48:07 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9tep9f+tkam@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teq3n+aaau@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:

<snip>
 
> Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name) 
> Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else knows. I 
 <snip>

 It's ALAN RICKMAN, you Death Eater! All right, girls! Let's get to it - DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!! ;>


(My personal belief is that the Uber-Sirius would be played by Bruce Campbell. But alas, he's American and in the final measure he might not quite be able to pull off that underlying gravitas beneath Sirius' out-there exterior.  I could see Jeff Goldblum, too, were PoA to have been made ten or fifteen years ago.)




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:57:26 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:57:26 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9teq3n+aaau@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teql6+jq61@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> 
> <snip>
>  
> > Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name) 
> > Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else 
knows. I 
>  <snip>
> 
>  It's ALAN RICKMAN, you Death Eater! All right, girls! Let's get to 
it - DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!! ;>
> 
> 
> (My personal belief is that the Uber-Sirius would be played by 
Bruce Campbell. But alas, he's American and in the final measure he 
might not quite be able to pull off that underlying gravitas beneath 
Sirius' out-there exterior.  I could see Jeff Goldblum, too, were PoA 
to have been made ten or fifteen years ago.)
thanks I knew that. But I have only seen him a couple of times and I 
understand that his part increases. I agree with Dave? that they 
should have developed Snape's dislike for Potter more but it really 
would have been two movies by the time they finished. I really liked 
the underground Gringotts and Diagon Alley,the Quidditch match,the 
flying keys and trap and most of all the chess match. Sorry if I am 
messing up your thread here. I really wanted them to go through the 
picture more with the password. I really didn't make much sense to 
someone who never read the books. Chris




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:58:23 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:58:23 -0000
Subject: Colin Firth
In-Reply-To: <9teoum+dd3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teqmv+d1rb@eGroups.com>

hrmm... although I enjoy everything Colin Firth has done, I would rather hope he will be too busy working on a film of THE EDGE OF REASON next year. I want more Mark Darcy, please.

How about Jude Law for Sirius Black?

 (Although, honestly, I'm at heart more hoping to see someone interesting and new to me.)

 I also rather suspect that since Anthony Stewart Head has moved back to Britain, we will see him popping up in one if the films to come. It would complement nicely with his rumored BBC BTVS spinoff about Giles. We could see him as Amos Diggory, perhaps - that's a nicely limited role which could be worked around his television production schedule.




From alexp at alltel.net  Tue Nov 20 23:58:30 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:58:30 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9te1l7+1j4n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teqn6+7caj@eGroups.com>

 IMHO.  As Alex, our resident snake enthusiast 
> explained, the movie snake is a (fake) Burmese Python.  Why?  
Movies 
> are visual, so perhaps they wanted a large, colorful snake, and 
maybe 
> Brazilian Boas don't fit the bill.  
Really, Brazilian Boas are very colorful, and a boa would have been 
perfect. Colorful, the right size, everything. Perhaps they dont have 
boas at the london zoo, only burms.
Alex




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 20 23:59:28 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:59:28 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9teql6+jq61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teqp0+pjc2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> > 
> > <snip>
> >  
> > > Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name) 
> > > Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else 
> knows. I 
> >  <snip>
> > 
> >  It's ALAN RICKMAN, you Death Eater! All right, girls! Let's get 
to 
> it - DEATH TO THE INFIDEL!! ;>
> > 
> > 
> > (My personal belief is that the Uber-Sirius would be played by 
> Bruce Campbell. But alas, he's American and in the final measure he 
> might not quite be able to pull off that underlying gravitas 
beneath 
> Sirius' out-there exterior.  I could see Jeff Goldblum, too, were 
PoA 
> to have been made ten or fifteen years ago.)
> thanks I knew that. But I have only seen him a couple of times and 
I 
> understand that his part increases. I agree with Dave? that they 
> should have developed Snape's dislike for Potter more but it really 
> would have been two movies by the time they finished. I really 
liked 
> the underground Gringotts and Diagon Alley,the Quidditch match,the 
> flying keys and trap and most of all the chess match. Sorry if I am 
> messing up your thread here. I really wanted them to go through the 
> picture more with the password. I really didn't make much sense to 
> someone who never read the books. Chris    

UMMM one more little thing. Could anyone tell me how I am supposed to 
enter a chat room? Do I have to download the Yahoo thing? Thanks. 
Chris




From liesandparanormal at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 00:12:54 2001
From: liesandparanormal at yahoo.com (mariel sqwibknott)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 00:12:54 -0000
Subject: Colin Firth
In-Reply-To: <9teqmv+d1rb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teri6+fjm8@eGroups.com>


> hrmm... although I enjoy everything Colin Firth has done, I would 
rather hope he will be too busy working on a film of THE EDGE OF 
REASON next year. I want more Mark Darcy, please.
> 
> How about Jude Law for Sirius Black?

Oh my. Goodness. I never thought about that. More Darcy would be 
nice. Mmm. But I think he could still do HP as he'd only be in very 
few scenes. Plus, what would his son say about turning down a part in 
HP?

As for Jude Law...bleh. Well, he wouldn't be that bad I suppose, but 
not quite as nice to watch on screen.





From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Nov 21 01:02:21 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:02:21 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9teqn6+7caj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teuet+2pid@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:

>  As Alex, our resident snake enthusiast 
> > explained, the movie snake is a (fake) Burmese Python.  Why?  
> Movies 
> > are visual, so perhaps they wanted a large, colorful snake, and 
> maybe 
> > Brazilian Boas don't fit the bill.  

Alex wrote:

> Really, Brazilian Boas are very colorful, and a boa would have been 
> perfect. Colorful, the right size, everything. Perhaps they dont 
have 
> boas at the london zoo, only burms.

Ooop!  Maybe I'd better let Alex field the rest of the snake 
questions.  Sorry, Alex.

Through the process of elimination, we can fairly conclude that the 
filmmakers must have changed Brazilian boa constrictor to Burmese 
python for one and only one reason:  to vex and annoy fans of PS/SS.  
<bg>

Cindy (who wishes the film snake had been an Australian Death Adder, 
just because she likes saying "Death Adder")





From alexp at alltel.net  Wed Nov 21 01:06:34 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:06:34 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9teuet+2pid@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9teumq+qhi9@eGroups.com>

That would really be prett funny. Death adders, Acanthopis 
antarcticus, are only about 20 inches, and a dull red. That would 
have been hilarious. How 'bout a turtle?
Alex 
> Cindy (who wishes the film snake had been an Australian Death 
Adder, 
> just because she likes saying "Death Adder")




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 01:07:06 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:07:06 -0000
Subject: about the polls....
Message-ID: <9teunq+u9ca@eGroups.com>

Ok I know this is my opinion. But how old are the people putting this 
poll together and who is Sean Biggerstaff? I know a lot of you 
personally like Alan Rickman. But really!!!  If you want to be 
fair,the adult actors cannot be judged by their parts only their 
characters as in the first film they do not have enough to go on.
So I don't see how you can say Alan Rickman actually acted as he was 
in only a few scenes in this movie. Only the children had decent 
roles and my big complaint was the sound quality. No one spoke much 
above a whisper. I have good hearing but had to strain to catch their 
words with some of the  accents. The music was loud. I understand 
that Peter O Toole is in agreement about the level of the words. So 
at least one person agrees with me. Chris 




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 01:15:05 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:15:05 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <9tdlbs+g9ek@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tev6p+ejjv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> > Who got a howler in book 1? Am I forgetting something? My kids are
> > responsible for the untimely death of thousands of brain cells a 
day, it
> > wouldn't surprise me.
> 
> Nobody got a howler in Book 1.  The first appearance is the one Ron 
gets from 
> his mom at the beginnig of Book 2.

Didn't Neville get one from his Grandmother in book 1?  That;s when 
we are first exposed to it so we know that it's really bad when Ron 
gets one in book 2.




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 01:36:18 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:36:18 -0000
Subject: about the polls....
In-Reply-To: <9teunq+u9ca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tf0ei+ufq1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> Ok I know this is my opinion. But how old are the people putting 
this 
> poll together and who is Sean Biggerstaff? I know a lot of you 
> personally like Alan Rickman. But really!!!  If you want to be 
> fair,the adult actors cannot be judged by their parts only their 
> characters as in the first film they do not have enough to go on.
> So I don't see how you can say Alan Rickman actually acted as he 
was 
> in only a few scenes in this movie. Only the children had decent 
> roles and my big complaint was the sound quality. No one spoke much 
> above a whisper. I have good hearing but had to strain to catch 
their 
> words with some of the  accents. The music was loud. I understand 
> that Peter O Toole is in agreement about the level of the words. So 
> at least one person agrees with me. Chris

Chris-  I put the poll together, and basically, i was noticing how 
many people were split over who they thought was most attractive or 
whatever and so I was just wondering if they had to pick one, who 
they would choose.  My friend wants me to say she totally agrees with 
you on the difficulty in hearing, especially the music, but she 
doesn't think the accents were the worst part.  Anyway, so the poll 
was not based on thier short-livd parts in the movie.  Besides, Sean 
(As Oliver Wood) didn't have all that long of a part either...

Meg Rose




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 01:38:57 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:38:57 -0000
Subject: *whew!*  OK....
In-Reply-To: <9tev6p+ejjv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tf0jh+ov90@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I 
LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!" <megrose_13 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor at t...> wrote:
> > > Who got a howler in book 1? Am I forgetting something? My kids are
> > > responsible for the untimely death of thousands of brain cells a 
> day, it
> > > wouldn't surprise me.
> > 
> > Nobody got a howler in Book 1.  The first appearance is the one Ron 
> gets from 
> > his mom at the beginnig of Book 2.
> 
> Didn't Neville get one from his Grandmother in book 1?  That;s when 
> we are first exposed to it so we know that it's really bad when Ron 
> gets one in book 2.

Nope, check Book 2 again (chapter 6, page 87 of the American hardcover) when 
Ron gets his howler, he and Neville have to explain it to Harry.   That's our 
first exposure to one, too.




From conshydot at email.com  Wed Nov 21 02:45:59 2001
From: conshydot at email.com (conshydot at email.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:45:59 -0000
Subject: Gazing Into The Crystal Ball
In-Reply-To: <9t5u6g+kp7g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tf4h7+di70@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> > Someone already mentioned this, but Susan Bones was one of the 
few 
> students to be sorted.  Her parents were killed by Voldemort, so 
she 
> must be a Big Deal.
> 
Susan Bones is a big deal already, I believe she was played by Chris 
Columbus' daughter, Nepotism rules.




From alexp at alltel.net  Wed Nov 21 03:02:03 2001
From: alexp at alltel.net (Alex)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 03:02:03 -0000
Subject: Gazing Into The Crystal Ball
In-Reply-To: <9tf4h7+di70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tf5fb+8595@eGroups.com>

You mean the Nattering Naybobs of Neotism?
Oh My!
Alex
> > 
> Susan Bones is a big deal already, I believe she was played by 
Chris 
> Columbus' daughter, Nepotism rules.




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Wed Nov 21 03:46:39 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 19:46:39 -0800
Subject: Future casting...
In-Reply-To: <1006299976.1565.18007.m11@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006299976.1565.18007.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <12813051510.20011120194639@mindspring.com>


> God lord, I've found my long lost sister. Colin Firth would just be
> too perfect as Sirius. There's nothing in the world I'd like to see
> more than Firth fighting with Alan Rickman. Gah.. just sends sputters
> of joy down my spine.

Mr. Darcy vs. Col. Brandon.  :)


> Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name)
> Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else knows. I
> would have suggested him for Voldemort and Nigel Hawthorne for
> Dumbledore.

I never thought of Nigel Hawthone, but that's a good idea!
I'm really not satisfied with Harris.


>   For Bill Weasley, how about the actor who  played Frank Churchill
> in the BBC/A&E production of EMMA?

That's great!  Further borrowing from the BBC _Emma_ , I see Mark Strong
(Mr. Knightley) as Lupin and James Hazeldine (Mr. Weston) as Arthur Weasley.
(And possibly Kate Beckinsale as Madam Rosmerta??)

-- 
Dave




From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 04:01:16 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 00:01:16 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future casts.
References: <9tep9f+tkam@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BFB270C.31F29043@nb.sympatico.ca>

> Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name)
> Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else knows. 

I laughed and laughed when I read this line. Even someone who is not
Alan Rickman obsessed (but I respect the man, find him dead sexy, and
the only choice as Snape so don't flame me) can't help but know. I have
the feeling that the Alan Rickman obsessed would be bombarding you with
Remembralls right now if they could. But I'm sure you had a good reason.
:-)

I wish I was better educated about UK actors so I could jump in on the
thread. I'm going to have to start watching BBC Canada more, right now I
watch it for "The Vicar of Dibley".

Angela
-- 
Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
  "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
      through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



From purrvocative at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 03:55:26 2001
From: purrvocative at aol.com (purrvocative at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:55:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Future casting...
Message-ID: <88.f97aeb8.292c7fae@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/20/2001 9:51:17 PM Central Standard Time, 
DaveH47 at mindspring.com writes:


>  For Bill Weasley, how about the actor who  played Frank Churchill
> > in the BBC/A&E production of EMMA?
> 
> That's great!  Further borrowing from the BBC _Emma_ , I see Mark Strong
> (Mr. Knightley) as Lupin and James Hazeldine (Mr. Weston) as Arthur 
> Weasley.
> (And possibly Kate Beckinsale as Madam Rosmerta??)
 Anyone watch Six Feet Under on HBO? I for some reason picture the Dad on 
there, Richard Jenkins as Arthur Weasley.
Michelle in MO, USA


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




From eberte at vaeye.com  Wed Nov 21 04:11:49 2001
From: eberte at vaeye.com (eberte at vaeye.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 04:11:49 -0000
Subject: Future casting...
In-Reply-To: <12813051510.20011120194639@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <9tf9i5+600t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
> 
)
> > (And possibly Kate Beckinsale as Madam Rosmerta??)
> 
I always pictured Madam Rosmerta as a bit more curvy than Kate 
Beckinsale (that is to say, a bit plumper). 
I agree that Daniel Day Lewis would be wonderful as Sirius Black--he 
has the necessary wild intensity.  




From pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Nov 21 04:49:59 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:49:59 -0600
Subject: ADMIN: The Rules
Message-ID: <3BFB3277.2080106@swbell.net>

Hi everyone --

Again: the *rules* of HPforGrownups apply to this list!

1.  Do not send a bezillion posts to the list in any one day.  Combine 
short responses into a single message.

2.  *NO* one-liners!  No "me too" posts.

3.  Snip off unnecessary quoted material when replying to a message. 
Separate out your thoughts from the quoted material with white space & 
clearly-labelled headers.

4.  Give enough context so that others know what you are talking about.

5.  Use a clear subject line (and change the subject line if needed when 
replying to another message).

6.  Use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation in all posts.

There are other rules & Netiquette considerations, which you should view 
at the HP4GU Hexquarters --

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

WARNING: You can expect to receive e-Howlers and/or be put on moderated 
status if you are a frequent offender of these posting rules.

Penny
Magical Moderator Team




From rosewoof at earthlink.net  Wed Nov 21 06:36:13 2001
From: rosewoof at earthlink.net (Rose Woofenden)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:36:13 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Volde's face
In-Reply-To: <32.1e2de2ca.292bf0d7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011120222611.009ea710@earthlink.net>


>Lotus wrote:


> >You mean it's normal for humans to have glowing red eyes that are narrow 
> slits on their face?

Did you really see the face in the movie looking like it had glowing red 
eyes and narrow slits?
In the book, it describes his face as "chalk white with glaring red eyes 
and slits for nostrils, like a snake." In the movie, it looked very much 
like a normal face, with a normal nose, etc, except that it was a pale 
green. (Not chalk white like the book.)


> >I don't want to sound sarcastic, but I have to disagree with some of the 
> things I'm hearing about Voldemort's face. I think it was pretty 
> accurate. Keep in mind, too, that he'll look different when he has his 
> own head. Sharing head space with someone else has to distort your looks 
> somewhat.


*But* in  HP&SS it is described as I said above. That is when he is sharing 
a body with Quirrell. If that description had been from one of the other 
books, I could see your point, but this description is when he *was* 
sharing a body with Quirrell.

shieka99 at yahoo.com:
 > Voldemort's face was
 > creepy, but I thought it was more like a snake?

And in reply Dave said:
 >So did I -- Bigger, redder eyes, more slit-like nostrils, maybe even 
scales...?

Same here. The texture should have been more snake like, and the color 
should have been *white* as in "chalk white" not that ugly pea soup green. :-)



-Rose (whose spell checker thinks that HPFGU-Movie should really be "Phylum"{


Current book:  A Ring Of Endless Light- Madaline L' Engle
Current Song playing: The Coats- Keep it Simple
Last Words Spoken by me: Nothing worth mentioning










From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 07:07:05 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:07:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future casts
Message-ID: <9b.1e45eddd.292cac99@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/20/2001 2:14:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
blpurdom at yahoo.com writes:


> Personally, I 
> see Joseph Fiennes for Lupin and Daniel Day Lewis for Sirius Black, 
> but no one else seems to. ::sigh::
> 

No, Joseph Fiennes HAS to be Sirius! Forget my last post where I said no one 
fits the bill - you just reminded me why I love Shakespeare in Love.  :-)

I personally think Daniel Day Lewis is too old to play any of the Marauders.  
I think it would be perfect to have Cary Elwes as Lupin and Fiennes as 
Sirius. *sigh* I feel another hormone rush coming on.  ;-)

Lotus


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




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 07:12:53 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:12:53 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future casts.
Message-ID: <155.464715f.292cadf5@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/20/2001 3:15:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
davisaacs at hotmail.com writes:


> Ok, here's who I think could be cast as future characters: <snip list>

For those of us who have no clue who most of these people are (save for Sir 
Richard and Ms. French), could you shed some light, or point us to a web site 
with pictures?

Thanks!
Lotus
the confused American...


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




From lotusmoondragon at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 07:32:36 2001
From: lotusmoondragon at aol.com (lotusmoondragon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 02:32:36 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Volde's face
Message-ID: <47.1446e2df.292cb294@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/21/2001 1:38:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
rosewoof at earthlink.net writes:


> Did you really see the face in the movie looking like it had glowing red 
> eyes and narrow slits?

How could you not? On the few occasions that he opened his eyes, they were 
clearly red. Putting definitions of "glowing" aside, I'd say it rather fits 
the book description. 

However, I can't recall the nose quite clearly just now.  :-) I think I'm one 
of the few weirdos who's only seen it once.  I'm going to see it again on 
Friday with my sister, so I'll have more of a comment then.

Lotus


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




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Wed Nov 21 08:47:48 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 08:47:48 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
Message-ID: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>

Hi, everybody,
I sincerely hope that not too much of what I'm going to write now has 
already been said, but I was in London for five days (to see the 
movie and Alan Rickman in "Private Lives") and therefore my mailbox 
was so full that I could only do a very superficial reading. Here are 
my seventeen points:

1)A really big time line inconsistency: Hagrid comes to the hut out 
on the sea with Harry's birthday cake, so it's supposed to be 31 
July. Then they are off to Diagon Alley, where they arrive on the 
next morning. And from there, they go directly to King's Cross???!!! 
So that would either shift Harry's B-day to 31 August or the start of 
term to 1 August. BIG mistake! (to say nothing of the fact that they 
have what must be breakfast at the LEaky Cauldron and Harry eats some 
kind of soup which for breakfast is a tad unusual)

2) My strongest objection to the film: Richard Harris as Dumbledore. 
Where is the smile, where is the fundamental goodness of this great 
man, where is his wonderful eccentricity? Here is an inaccessible, 
rather authoritarian personality who would never ever say (and in 
fact he doesn't) that his heart's desire are warm socks.

3) From what I saw, the Sorting Hat has already been argued about- 
anyway, it remains incomprehensible to me *why* on earth it's 
impossible to give the hat a tiny little voice, and why the children 
cannot be called in alphabetical order.

4)To somebody who hasn't read the book, it cannot be clear why Harry 
doesn't want to become a Slytherin. There is one short thing Ron 
mutters to him (originally Hagrid's line) about all Dark Wizards 
being ex-Slytherins, but that is certainly not enough.

5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and Snape 
Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, above 
all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.

6) The way the HRH friendship develops has, IMHO, been completely 
bungled. The three of them are shown together in a not so unfriendly 
way when Hermione leads Harry to the showcase with James Potter's 
brass plaque (a totally unnecessary scene, and Hermione's line "It's 
in your blood" is of such striking banality!). Anyway, besides from 
being unnecessary, the scene spoils the effect of the trio becoming 
friends after Harry and Ron have knocked out the troll.

7) I wanted to write a long rant about James Potter, but from what I 
saw of the other posts, he seems to have been sufficiently torn to 
shreds already. So I'll limit myself to saying that he looks like 
Michael Palin in the brilliant bookkeeper sketch, and James Potter 
most definitely shouldn't look like that.

8) Did JKR *tell* Columbus that Voldemort went to Godric's Hollow 
unaccompanied? Or did Columbus make that up by himself? That would re-
raise the question of how V.'s wand and clothes got into Pettigrew's 
hands.

9) Another one in the interminable list of small things that are 
different from the book but wouldn't need to be: Why does the 
Invisibility cloak have to look like a Persian carpet instead of 
being silvery grey?

10) What's everybody's opinion about the moving staircases? For my 
taste, they are much too scary and exaggerated.

11) I'm fully aware that some things have to be cancelled in order 
not to make it a 4 hour-film. But why did they cancel the troll and 
the potions from the obstacles protecting the stone? The Devil's 
Snare scene would not have needed to be that long, and the chess game 
could have been shortened a little, no need to make the chase for the 
key a parody of Hitchcock's "Birds"- and we could have been allowed a 
short glimpse of the k.o. Troll and, far more important, we could 
have seen Hermione solving the logical puzzle. Important because she 
is awarded 50 points "for the use of cool logic in the face of 
danger", which certainly doesn't refer to the Devil's Snare, but to 
the potion puzzle.

12) Did anybody actually *like* the special effect of Quirrell being 
reduced to ashes? It reminded me a lot of the third Indiana Jones 
film. And it makes Harry's actions very questionable. It's one thing 
to see and take advantage of the fact that Quirrell cannot touch him 
without getting all blistered and feeling a lot of pain, but it is 
entirely different to grab his face, knowing that it will be reduced 
to ashes. Quirrell should be killed by Voldemort, not by Harry.

13) Due to the- at least IMO- miscasting of Dumbledore, the 
exaggerated staircases and to a certain extent also to the lighting, 
Hogwarts doesn't seem a very homely place, again IMHO.

14) What are they going to do about characters like Binns, Peeves and 
Sprout? Spout f.ex. will be essential in the next film, let alone 
that she's also Head of House, but then the fact that there *is* such 
a thing as heads of houses is completely neglected (see above)

15) *Very* personal POV: I simply hate Gred and Forge! They look like 
they were two Percys- I cannot imagine them as the super-pranksters 
they should be!

16) When welcoming the new students, McGonagall tells them more or 
less the same things she does in the book, namely that the respective 
houses will be kind of a family, that time will be spent together in 
the common room- so why did they keep that line, but OTOH the 
children are obviously sitting in the Great Hall, studying and 
playing chess?

17) Can't resist my L.O.O.N.y nature: Before going to Hogwarts, Harry 
is wearing Dudley's old clothes, but at Hogwarts, he has got 
perfectly fitting trousers etc. (not the ones that are part of the 
school uniform!). Why and, above all, how?

OK, there are also some points in favour of the film:

1) The scene at Ollivander's is simply brilliant
2) Same goes for the Quidditch match
3) The Great Hall *is* great!
4) Ron, Hermione, Draco (well, the hair...), McGonagall and Snape are 
really well-chosen.
5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.

So, that's it, I hope I didn't hurt anybody's feelings- comments 
welcome!

Susanna/pigwidgeon37




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 11:32:34 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:32:34 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <9teov7+s2mv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tg3ci+561q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> 
wrote:
> > >  Oh, definitely Rhys Ifans for Mad-Eye Moody / BCjr! Or Robert 
> > >Carlyle if they go with someone else for AW.
> > 
> > Isn't Rhys Ifans a bit young? I'd always pictured Moody as a 
> > Yorkshire man too, not Welsh (the guy from Father Ted has a 
> Yorkshire 
> > accent in real life). But then, that's my interpretation:o)  I 
> > suppose Rhys Ifans would be good, I hadn't thought of him:o)
> > 
> > Dave  
> Excuse my ignorance. I watch Father Ted now and then. Which actor 
is 
> Rhys Ifans? The elderly priest who is always drinking? Are you 
> English by any chance? Just wondering. Chris

Sorry, Rhys Ifans isn't in Father Ted, he's a different actor 
altogether. He was Hugh Grant's flat mate in Notting Hill...
The guy I thought for Moody is the elderly alchoholic priest, and yes 
I am English. Can you tell?;o)

Dave 




From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 11:34:51 2001
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt at yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:34:51 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
In-Reply-To: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tg3gr+2f3c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., pigwidgeon37 at y (Susanna)... wrote:

<snip! snip! snip!>

> 2) My strongest objection to the film: Richard Harris as 
Dumbledore. 
> Where is the smile, where is the fundamental goodness of this great 
> man, where is his wonderful eccentricity? Here is an inaccessible, 
> rather authoritarian personality who would never ever say (and in 
> fact he doesn't) that his heart's desire are warm socks.
>
I still saw Dumbledore as a kindly grandfather-type, but I was 
puzzled as to why his humerous lines had been deleted.  I understand 
the time constraints, but his lines about the socks and 
his "nitwit..." line after the sorting ceremony would have added so 
much to his character.  My guess is that people who haven't read the 
books would not have grasped a proper picture of him from just the 
film.
  
> 4)To somebody who hasn't read the book, it cannot be clear why 
Harry 
> doesn't want to become a Slytherin. There is one short thing Ron 
> mutters to him (originally Hagrid's line) about all Dark Wizards 
> being ex-Slytherins, but that is certainly not enough.
> 
Agreed.  If the scene between Draco and Harry in the robe shop had to 
be cut, then they could have at least been introduced to each other 
on the train.  Draco's character struck me as shallow an pratty, but 
not borderline "evil" (ducks as Draco fans hurl sharp objects) as in 
the books.  Another character not put to proper use.

> 5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and 
Snape 
> Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, 
above 
> all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.
>
And Alan Rickman was *far* too sexy! :)  He plays a good Snape, but 
wasn't at all how I pictured Snape in the books.
 
<snip! snip! snip!>

> 10) What's everybody's opinion about the moving staircases? For my 
> taste, they are much too scary and exaggerated.
>
Must disagree with you here :)  I thought they were a good way to 
place them on the forbidden floor due to the time constraints.  Quick 
and easy!

> 11) I'm fully aware that some things have to be cancelled in order 
> not to make it a 4 hour-film. But why did they cancel the troll and 
> the potions from the obstacles protecting the stone? [...] far more 
important, we could 
> have seen Hermione solving the logical puzzle. Important because 
she 
> is awarded 50 points "for the use of cool logic in the face of 
> danger", which certainly doesn't refer to the Devil's Snare, but to 
> the potion puzzle.
>
 My guess to the Hermione bit is that this scene would be too boring 
for the kids.  There's been action and adventure, and having Hermione 
prattle on with no action may have been seen as off-putting.  Yes, 
the knocked-out Troll could have been left in (short scene after all) 
and the potions scene could have been shortened as well.  My friend's 
mom suggested that perhaps it was the walking through fire scene that 
nixed the potions bit.  What if some not-too-bright kids tried to do 
it as well?

<snip! snip! snip!>

> 15) *Very* personal POV: I simply hate Gred and Forge! They look 
like 
> they were two Percys- I cannot imagine them as the super-pranksters 
> they should be!
>
A few pranks wouldn't have taken up much time.  At the very 
least "Gred and Forge" could have been included.  They may as well 
not have been there. 

<snip! snip! snip!>

I would have just written "agreed" to several of your other comments, 
but I've seen Penny when she's angry, and it ain't a pretty sight!! ;)

Cheers!

Mary Ann
(who only saw the movie last night and wants to see it again!)





From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 12:06:44 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:06:44 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <155.464715f.292cadf5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9tg5ck+bakk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., lotusmoondragon at a... wrote:
> For those of us who have no clue who most of these people are (save 
for Sir 
> Richard and Ms. French), could you shed some light, or point us to 
a web site 
> with pictures?

Yep, I'm really sorry about that, I completely forgot that you're all 
mostly Americans:o)  Here I go, with a suitable biography of each:

Professer Sprout: Dawn French, well for those of you who don't know 
(although I'm sure most of you do), she's short fat, and very lively 
and loveable:o)

Cornelius Fudge: Richard Attenborough (on second thoughts, I don't 
think he'd be so good)

Voldermort: Christopher Lee, he's a horror actor (a bit of a cult 
figure), most famous for the Hammer House of horror films, he's also 
played Dracula and is going to play Saruman in The Lord of the Rings. 
I'm sure you can find a picture of him at: 
http://www.lordoftherings.net/ 

Sirius Black: Sean Bean. Erm, how can I describe him? Well, I can't 
really, only to say that he's going to be Boromir in The Lord of the 
Rings. Pictures probably at the above webstie.

Lupin: Mark Gatiss. Do you get The League of Gentlemen in America? If 
not, you won't have a clue who he is, but he's a tall, thin man and 
can play almost any part that's thrown at him! 
http://www.leagueofgentlemen.co.uk/ He's the one on the right with 
the purple background.

Moody: Hmmm...I think the guy who was Filch would have been good, but 
they can't use him now. Can't think of anyone for him. Maybe the guy 
who plays Father Jack in Father Ted. He's a smallish man, quite old, 
and has a very sort of 'gruff' voice. Here's a good picture: 
http://www.father-ted.co.uk/images/jackpup.jpg

Ludo Bagman: Graham Norton. He's a very lively, very camp Irish actor 
(also in Father Ted occasionally), and he has an immensley popular 
chat show in Britain. When I read GoF and Ludo Bagman was introduced, 
I immediately thought: Graham Norton. But then, that's only my 
imperpretation:o) This is the best picture I can find: 
http://www.grahamnorton.co.uk/

Mr Crouch: Derek Jacobi. Erm...he was in I Clauduis and most recently 
in Gladiator. He's meduim sized, quite thin, quite old with very 
white hair. And a bloody good actor to boot. Just how I imagained Mr 
Crouch. Here's a nice picture of him a couple of years ago: 
http://www.linsdomain.com/Derek/pictures/party1.htm

Well, I hope that's all a bit clearer now:o)  Sorry for wasting 
space, but it was quite late and I didn't think that you wouldn't 
know who most of those people were (they're all very big names in 
Britain) :o)

Dave




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 12:22:30 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:22:30 -0000
Subject: Hooch's eyes...
Message-ID: <9tg6a6+5jfo@eGroups.com>

I notice the second time I went to the movie that Zoe Wannamaker (who 
plays Hooch) had very strange yellow, cat eyes. At first I thought 
that it may have been just a nice touch my Chris Collumbus. 

But I was readin CoS last night, and it described Mrs Norris's eyes 
as being yellow. I could be jumping to comclusions, but I think 
there's no doubt that Mrs Norris isn't an ordinary cat, and I've 
always thought she was probably an animagi. And Hooch does one flying 
lesson a year, and a couple of of Quidditch matches, and that's 
it...I've often wondered what she does with the rest of her time.

So, my theory is that Hooch is an animagi and in her spare time she 
helps Filch find students who are breaking the rules.  What do you 
think?

Dave




From inviziblegirl at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 12:42:48 2001
From: inviziblegirl at hotmail.com (Amber ?)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 07:42:48 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hooch's eyes and Gred/Forge
Message-ID: <F1724iWdKdezVifY2SG00010136@hotmail.com>


>From: "David " <davisaacs at hotmail.com>
>
>I notice the second time I went to the movie that Zoe Wannamaker (who
>plays Hooch) had very strange yellow, cat eyes. At first I thought
>that it may have been just a nice touch my Chris Collumbus.

Not just a nice touch. In PS/SS, Chapter 9:

"Their teacher, Madam Hooch, arrived. She had short, gray hair, and yellow 
eyes like a hawk." (US Edition, pg 146)

So it was merely the movie people actually paying attention to really small 
details for a change!

Susanna mentioned Gred and Forge and how they don't come across as 
pranksters; funny, yes, but not pranking. I quite agree, though didn't 
realize it before now. We see them about twice: once at King's Cross and 
once in the halls of Hogwarts. In both scenes, they don't particularly come 
across as people who would send toilet seats to friends and family. *grin*  
In fact, couldn't they have added that bit to the end in the infirmary 
scene? Instead of Dumbledore commenting on Ron already opening Harry's 
chocolate frogs (which isn't the book anyways), why couldn't he have instead 
commented on Gred and Forge sending the toilet seat (which IS in the books). 
Although, I suppose, they wouldn't want kids to actually try that in real 
life...

Establishing them as jokesters, people who bend the rules, is important for 
POA at least, when Harry receives the Marauder's Map from them. If they do 
the third movie, what, is Harry going to receive the Map from Dumbledore? 
It's going to seem strange coming from them unless they do some major 
characterization in COS.

*sighs* It's too darned bad they couldn't have made a four hour movie so 
they could've put in all the little touches and scenes that truly make the 
book...and Percy should've had glasses, darnit! *grouses a bit before 
lapsing into silence*

~Amber

********
http://www.the-tabula-rasa.com

"I'm only happy when it rains
You wanna hear about my new obsession?
I'm riding high upon a deep depression
I'm only happy when it rains
...pour some misery down on me..."
- "Only Happy When It Rains" by Garbage


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




From j.balfour at lmu.ac.uk  Wed Nov 21 12:45:27 2001
From: j.balfour at lmu.ac.uk (Julie Balfour)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:45:27 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <20011120163315.26685.qmail@web9106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tg7l7+ntji@eGroups.com>

Lino Padrun <Padrun_Lino at y...> wrote:
> I also think that while some of the changes made in
> the name of adaptation may have sounded great on
> paper, they would have worked just as well if left as
> is in the book -- most of these issues have to do with
> minor changes in the order of events (i.e., Hagrid
> telling Harry about his parents in the Leakey Coldren
> instead of "on the rock" -- it's half dozen one and
> six the other and works either way).


I have to disagree with this - I think the "Hut on the Rock" scene 
was shambolic.  The Harry using Hagrid's lines at the Dursleys you 
have already mentioned, and I agree with your comments.  Hagrid not 
explaining things to Harry there and then is not at all feasible!  
How can you have an 11 year old boy a discover a piece of news like 
that and then just carry on the scene without him asking questions or 
wanting to know more?

But my main beef with the scene is that Petunia's outburst becomes 
totally out of place.  If Harry and Hagrid had the conversation they 
were supposed to, with the Dursleys listening it would have made 
sense for Petunia to suddenly start ranting - a natural progression.  
As it is it comes as a surprise and seems a bit irrelevant (to 
someone who was expecting it and knows its relevance!!).  Am I the 
only one??




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 12:52:20 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:52:20 -0000
Subject: Still More Musing on Adaptations
In-Reply-To: <9tg7l7+ntji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tg824+691b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Julie Balfour" <j.balfour at l...> wrote:
>I think the "Hut on the Rock" scene 
> was shambolic.  The Harry using Hagrid's lines at the Dursleys you 
> have already mentioned, and I agree with your comments.  Hagrid not 
> explaining things to Harry there and then is not at all feasible!  
> How can you have an 11 year old boy a discover a piece of news like 
> that and then just carry on the scene without him asking questions 
or 
> wanting to know more?
> 
> But my main beef with the scene is that Petunia's outburst becomes 
> totally out of place.  If Harry and Hagrid had the conversation 
they 
> were supposed to, with the Dursleys listening it would have made 
> sense for Petunia to suddenly start ranting - a natural 
progression.  
> As it is it comes as a surprise and seems a bit irrelevant (to 
> someone who was expecting it and knows its relevance!!).  Am I the 
> only one??

Nope, I absolutely agree. It just doesn't work. I think this is an 
example of the screen-writer and director trying to stay *too* 
faithful to the book, and not really considering how it would appear 
to people who haven't read the book. I think they tried to keep a lot 
in (e.g. Norbert) that really would have been better cut out then 
just hinted at, and it would give more time for other more important 
things like character interaction (which is so lacking).

Dave




From j.balfour at lmu.ac.uk  Wed Nov 21 13:08:17 2001
From: j.balfour at lmu.ac.uk (Julie Balfour)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 13:08:17 -0000
Subject: Future casts/Speaking of the Nimbus 2000
In-Reply-To: <9te9or+rc44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tg901+q38d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
Daniel Day Lewis for Sirius Black

Ooh ooh!  I like it!  But not as much as Christopher Eccleston...






From feycat at feycat.net  Wed Nov 21 13:14:13 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 08:14:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Future casts.
References: <9teql6+jq61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006101c1728e$6b6e5580$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Sirius' out-there exterior.  I could see Jeff Goldblum, too, were PoA 
to have been made ten or fifteen years ago.)<<

Jeff Goldblum CAN do serious roles. Anyone ever see Mr. Frost? I'd love to see him do either Lupin or Sirius!

-Gabriel


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




From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 13:52:49 2001
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 05:52:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121135249.73091.qmail@web10903.mail.yahoo.com>

Some interesting points. :)  I'll comment here and there.

--- pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it wrote:
> (to say nothing of the fact that they 
> have what must be breakfast at the LEaky Cauldron and Harry eats some 
> kind of soup which for breakfast is a tad unusual)

Well, this was *after* they'd done all their shopping, so I assumed it was
lunch.  Soup's not that unusual then. ;)
 
> 2) My strongest objection to the film: Richard Harris as Dumbledore. 
> Where is the smile, where is the fundamental goodness of this great 
> man, where is his wonderful eccentricity? Here is an inaccessible, 
> rather authoritarian personality who would never ever say (and in 
> fact he doesn't) that his heart's desire are warm socks.

Yes!  I sorely missed this about Dumblydore.  Harris just didn't have that
twinkle we've come to know and love about him.

> 3) From what I saw, the Sorting Hat has already been argued about- 
> anyway, it remains incomprehensible to me *why* on earth it's 
> impossible to give the hat a tiny little voice, and why the children 
> cannot be called in alphabetical order.

Alphabetical order was dispensed with for dramatic purposes. (Did you
honestly want to wait through the whole sea of kids getting Sorted before
Harry?  And who would wait around *after* Harry was Sorted to see where
Ron ended up?)  I sort of liked the hat's voice, though.  Where did it say
it was supposed to be tiny?

> 4)To somebody who hasn't read the book, it cannot be clear why Harry 
> doesn't want to become a Slytherin. There is one short thing Ron 
> mutters to him (originally Hagrid's line) about all Dark Wizards 
> being ex-Slytherins, but that is certainly not enough.

His only friend so far just got Sorted into Gryffindor, after telling him
that all the bad ones go to Slytherin.  The one he *doesn't* like just got
put into Slytherin.  I think that's sufficient to make an 11 year old boy
want a different House.

> 5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and Snape 
> Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, above 
> all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.

I have seen so many people saying this!!  The FIRST thing we hear about
Snape is Percy saying, "Oh, that's Professor Snape, *HEAD OF SLYTHERIN
HOUSE*."  Harry asks what he teaches, Percy replies with Potions and the
spiel of how he really wants DADA.  It is certainly established that Snape
is head of Slytherin, although I'll admit that McGonagall is not described
as head of Gryffindor.
 
> 6) The way the HRH friendship develops has, IMHO, been completely 
> bungled. The three of them are shown together in a not so unfriendly 
> way when Hermione leads Harry to the showcase with James Potter's 
> brass plaque (a totally unnecessary scene, and Hermione's line "It's 
> in your blood" is of such striking banality!). Anyway, besides from 
> being unnecessary, the scene spoils the effect of the trio becoming 
> friends after Harry and Ron have knocked out the troll.

This is a bit that I think worked fairly well on screen, where it wouldn't
have worked in the book.  Hermione *thinks* she's Harry & Ron's friend
before the troll incident.  I think she decided, "I met them on the train,
they're my House-mates, of COURSE we're friends."  Which is why she spoke
up about James being a Quidditch player.  And *that* is why it hurt her
feelings so much when she heard Ron saying she was a nightmare and didn't
have any friends.  Just hearing a random kid you don't like saying that
isn't bad enough to send you to hide in the bathroom crying all day, but
hearing someone YOU thought of as a friend say that is much worse.

> 8) Did JKR *tell* Columbus that Voldemort went to Godric's Hollow 
> unaccompanied? Or did Columbus make that up by himself? That would re-
> raise the question of how V.'s wand and clothes got into Pettigrew's 
> hands.

We heard that she wrote a new scene especially for the movie.  I assumed
this was it.

> 9) Another one in the interminable list of small things that are 
> different from the book but wouldn't need to be: Why does the 
> Invisibility cloak have to look like a Persian carpet instead of 
> being silvery grey?

I thought it was *really* cool looking, but I don't understand why it
couldn't have been grey, either.

> 10) What's everybody's opinion about the moving staircases? For my 
> taste, they are much too scary and exaggerated.

I liked them, for the most part, and as someone else said, it was an easy
way to get them to the forbidden floor while leaving out the
time-consuming "duel" challenge from Malfoy, etc.

> [snip "We need the potion challenge] Important because she 
> is awarded 50 points "for the use of cool logic in the face of 
> danger", which certainly doesn't refer to the Devil's Snare, but to 
> the potion puzzle.

If you'll notice, Hermione acted a great deal more on her own in the
Devil's Snare here than in the book.  She's the one who figured out how to
get them all out, and quite simply saved Ron's life.  He wasn't far from
being strangled, but she remembered the plant's weakness and the spell to
stop it.  I'd say that's worth 50 points.  The potions challenge, frankly,
would not have translated well to screen, no matter how much I loved it.

> 14) What are they going to do about characters like Binns, Peeves and 
> Sprout? Spout f.ex. will be essential in the next film, let alone 
> that she's also Head of House, but then the fact that there *is* such 
> a thing as heads of houses is completely neglected (see above)

They'll just introduce them in the next film.  It's clear that we don't
meet EVERYONE in Hogwarts during this movie (or during the books, for that
matter!).  We'd never had any reference to Trelawny before POA, but we
accepted her arrival as a long-established Hogwarts prof who Harry simply
hadn't come across before.
 
> 15) *Very* personal POV: I simply hate Gred and Forge! They look like 
> they were two Percys- I cannot imagine them as the super-pranksters 
> they should be!

I really missed the Christmas scene with the Weasleys!  I'm hoping and
praying it's in the DVD (along with the Platform 9 3/4 bit).  They
certainly seemed like pranksters to me - the first time we meet them they
pull the "He's not Fred, I am!" bit which is just hilarious - although not
quite as much as in the books.  I'm confident that will be established bit
by bit through the next two movies so the Marauder's Map won't seem out of
place.  (BTW, to those who've complained about it, since they didn't have
the bit about blowing up a toilet at Platform 9 3/4, Dumbledore mentioning
the twins sending a toilet seat wouldn't make a lot of sense!)

> 5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
> nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.
 
Wasn't that *cute*?  I was so ANGRY with Snape for accusing him of not
paying attention when he was dilligently taking notes.  Poor kid.



Andrea

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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From meboriqua at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 14:41:26 2001
From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 14:41:26 -0000
Subject: A List Elf Speaks (was ADMIN: The Rules)
In-Reply-To: <3BFB3277.2080106@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9tgeem+i8m4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:
 
> Again: the *rules* of HPforGrownups apply to this list!
> 
> 1.  Do not send a bezillion posts to the list in any one day.  
Combine 
> short responses into a single message.
> 
> 2.  *NO* one-liners!  No "me too" posts.>

I am just here to reiterate what Penny and the other Moderators are 
trying very hard to enforce - the rules.  Please try to adhere to 
them!  It makes our lives as well as the lives of all the members here 
much easier.  

I also want to remind everyone that when you post something, it does 
not always show up right away.  If you check webview and you do not 
see your posting, please do not post it again.  Yahoo is not always 
the quickest to respond, so wait a few minutes.  There have been times 
when all of our postings took close to an hour to appear, but they 
were all there, eventually.  Your posting *will* appear, so please try 
and be patient.

Please help us out here.  This list is high traffic and quite crowded 
(I am having trouble keeping up).  Besides, if the Mods put you on 
moderated status, it will be unpleasant.

Thanks for reading keep posting good stuff!

--Smarty jenny elf from ravenclaw **************************




From aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org  Wed Nov 21 15:57:52 2001
From: aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org (Meredith Wilson)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 07:57:52 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Still More Musing on Adaptations
Message-ID: <D8085AFE4BC7D4119EA00090271EDF1503C5FF@mailsrv.seattle.nmof.org>

This is exactly my opinion.  I understood a lot of why they cut things and
even changed things (though with all the CGI in this movie I can't
understand why Harry's eyes are so blatently blue...) but there were a
number of details that were changed for no apparent reason and could have
just as easily stayed the same.
 
My one other complaint is that I think Richard Harris really hurt his
performance by not reading the book.  I don't think his Dumbledore held the
depth of character that Dumbledore should have.  I saw little to none of his
mischievousness.  Not that Dumbledore is a crack-up, but he has such depth,
and as an incredibly important character in the series, I saw Harris
lacking.
 
Other than that stuff... I adored it, though more the second time when I
could relax and let the art flow. :)  I did prove myself to be the town geek
here in Seattle by being one of 3 dressed up people at the midnight Thursday
showing.  One of the other 2 was my husband and the 3rd was in some odd
witch outfit that looked right out of the Spice Girls.  I appreciated the
effort, and loved her tights, but it didn't seem very Hogwarts to me.  I
also was interviewed that night supporting all the Grown-Ups for HP!
 
Meredith

There is no logic to it, as with most of the small
detail changes, which is why I do not like them. The
changes are so small they do not any real effect,
positive or negative, and/or it would have taken an
equal amount of effort to leaving things as they were
in the book, leaving one to wonder why anyone bothered
to changing it. Again, there are some changes,
additions, etc. that I thought were brilliant (Dudley
stomping on the steps is one), but the details should
have been kept.

That's just my $.02

Michael



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 <http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1> 

_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/
<http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/> 

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/> . 





From nansie at bigsky.net  Wed Nov 21 16:05:46 2001
From: nansie at bigsky.net (nancy cleaveland)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:05:46 -0700
Subject: Movie musings, take *7*
References: <9tg7l7+ntji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002d01c172a6$644b2b30$72e2fcce@home>

Hello -- I've been nudged out of lurkdom to post some the
things I've noticed after seeing the movie for the 7th time
yesterday <g>. It goes without saying that I obviously
*love* this movie. I think the movie is what I would see in
*my* Mirror of Erised...

Oliver Wood -- Is a nail-biter. I hope this doesn't mean
that the swooners are going to post every way they can think
of to keep his mouth and fingers occupied so they can't come
in contact with each other <g>. Also, in the first shot you
see of Wood after McGonagall gets him out of Quirrell's
class, he is wearing a badge over the crest on his robe.
Prefect? How can that be? It's definitely the same shape and
color as Percy's Prefect badge. I've only been able to see
it in this one shot - when the camera goes back to Wood
after being on Harry, it's a closeup and you can't see below
his face. (The badge is the same as the one the Ravenclaw
Prefect wears, too.)

Owl mobile -- over baby Harry's bed. And baby Harry's outfit
has bunnies on the arms, on a black background. Rabbits in
hats?

Harry's money -- Notice Harry holding a package in front of
him when they are at Vault 713. His money?

Sorting stool -- Looks like Daniel sat *on* his robe and
couldn't scoot back as far as he wanted to, nor could he sit
up straight because of it.

Note-taking -- The closeup of Harry's note-taking in Snape's
class is *not* what is in front of Harry when Hermione
nudges him. That notebook shows large handwriting and the
page pretty well covered.

McGonagall -- When she transfigures in class, she comes out
of it wearing no glasses, but has them on when she first
speaks. I assume she *could* have put them on while Ron is
talking. She is wearing glasses the first time we see her at
the beginning of the movie, after the shadows change.

Hooch -- Why does she say hello to "Amanda"?

Troll scene -- He knocks down the same bathroom stall walls
twice. There were stalls on only one side of the bathroom
and he seemed to knock them all down the first time, but we
see him do it again (from a different camera angle).

Flitwick -- is in front of and to Snape's right at the
Quidditch game. He's standing on the seat!

Unicorn blood -- When Hagrid first dips his fingers into it,
he gets blood on both his fingers and down the side of his
hand. When he rubs his fingers together in front of him,
there is only blood on his thumb and two fingers.

"Send an owl" -- No explanation of how Hermione is supposed
to get past Fluffy again or back *up* through the Devil's
Snare. In SS, Harry told her to use the brooms to get past
Fluffy, but since there's only the one now, should Ron and
Hermione double up on it? <g>

Last scene -- The trees to the left of the Hogwarts Express
are blowing madly in the wind, but the ones on the right
side of the screen aren't moving at all.

"Happee Birthdae" -- Surely Hagrid, who made it into year
three at Hogwarts, could spell "Happy Birthday"? (He could
spell it in the book.) Is the only reason this was done was
to give weight to Hagrid not being able to spell
"Voldemort"?

Woman holding child -- At King's Cross, is the woman asking
directions related to Columbus, too? The little girl she's
holding looks just like Eleanor.

Chess game -- Does Hermione ever move, or is she standing on
the same square when the game is over? (Gee, something to
look for today!)

Snape's burning robe -- It bothered me that everyone started
stamping out the fire on Snape's robe. Hello!? These people
are wizards. I would expect at least a half dozen wands to
whip out and point at the fire, and somebody's wand arm be
what knocks into Quirrell.

Hedwig in flight -- She is tethered to Harry's arm until we
see her take off, then there is no strap.

Hagrid's flute -- He isn't playing it. The music and
fingering are totally off, unless it's a magical flute that
keeps playing the same note half a beat after you move your
fingers off the keys.

Third floor -- If the staircase hadn't moved, wouldn't the
trio still have been on the third floor since they still
went UP?


--Nancy in Montana, who missed the "Very safe, as they're
both dentists" line most of all.










From rcraigharman at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 16:14:50 2001
From: rcraigharman at hotmail.com (rcraigharman at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 16:14:50 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <20011121135249.73091.qmail@web10903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tgjtq+5e2k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Andrea <ra_1013 at y...> wrote:
> --- pigwidgeon37 at y... wrote:
> > 9) Another one in the interminable list of small things that are 
> > different from the book but wouldn't need to be: Why does the 
> > Invisibility cloak have to look like a Persian carpet instead of 
> > being silvery grey?
> 
> I thought it was *really* cool looking, but I don't understand why
> it couldn't have been grey, either.

Well, consider the description from the books:

"It was very light. [....] Something fluid and silvery gray went
slithering to the floor, where it lay in gleaming folds. [....]
Harry picked the shiny, silvery cloth off the floor.  It was strange
to the touch, like water woven into material."

I had always envisioned the invisibility cloak as looking a bit like
the liquid metal effect used in films such as Terminator 2.  Unlike
the effect, which itself looks viscous, the invisibility cloth had to
be inviscid, gossamer-like, and light.

BUT, there's *already* a common real-world item with this balance of
shimmer and lightness: a Mylar emergency blanket.  So, if the film
makers had chosen to follow Rowling's text to the letter, wouldn't
we all be asking: "Hey, isn't that just an emergency blanket?"

I also think the look of a "genuine" invisibility cloak would have
probably had the same jarring effect of the look of the film that
the plastic wrap around Ron's sandwich has, by looking too modern.
By choosing to use an effect that looks like a meticulously-woven,
slightly-dated veil, Columbus keeps the feel of the film consistent.

....Craig




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 17:08:37 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:08:37 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
In-Reply-To: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgn2l+1jtm@eGroups.com>

Sorry, I can't agree with most of what you have said. The film was 
aimed at two audiences, those who had read the books and those who 
hadn't (yes, there are some). Now, for the film to be watchable it 
had to be a decent length, and leaving it uncut you'd be looking at 4 
hours+. So cuts had to be made which means that there would have to 
be slight changes and re-writes. Luckily, these changes were done by 
JKR so obviously they are gonna be true to the story. This should 
please the fans, but it would leave out just enough to make those who 
haven't read the books curious. I work in a school and have seen a 
sudden increase in children wanting to read the books. Maybe we 
should all stop nitpicking and just ENJOY*!

(To be honest, Dumbledore would not have been an effect Headmaster if 
he was constantly happy etc..... we do see his kind side and also I 
think what he thinks of Harry and Co. in the hospital scene at the 
end and therefore I think Richard Harris was pretty good as 
Dumbledore)






From female_jedis at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 17:17:04 2001
From: female_jedis at yahoo.com (female_jedis at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:17:04 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <9t9k8d+5oj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgnig+dpnj@eGroups.com>

"Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> writes:
"(Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a 
part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are 
Australian wizards.)"

"Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!"

Diane in Philly


Yes! Yes! Yes!!!!!!

I have wanted Russell Crowe as Sirius since I read POA! Put my name 
down on the petition.  Sirius could be Australian right?????

(Now I'd like to nominate Ewan McGregor for Lupin and then I'll be a 
happy camper)




From female_jedis at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 17:18:07 2001
From: female_jedis at yahoo.com (female_jedis at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:18:07 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <9t9k8d+5oj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgnkf+ktn0@eGroups.com>

"Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> writes:
"(Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a 
part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are 
Australian wizards.)"

"Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!"

Diane in Philly


Yes! Yes! Yes!!!!!!

I have wanted Russell Crowe as Sirius since I read POA! Put my name 
down on the petition.  Sirius could be Australian right?????

(Now I'd like to nominate Ewan McGregor for Lupin and then I'll be a 
happy camper)




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 17:20:47 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:20:47 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <9tgnig+dpnj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgnpf+t45r@eGroups.com>

If we are talking casting then I prefer my choice for Gilderoy 
Lockhart over Kenneth Brannagh.

This person is ideal and I thought of him when I first read the book.

My choice is................Lawrence Llewellyn-Bowen (Changing Rooms!)



--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., female_jedis at y... wrote:
> "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> writes:
> "(Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling to throw in a 
> part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books. Surely there are 
> Australian wizards.)"
> 
> "Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!"
> 
> Diane in Philly
> 
> 
> Yes! Yes! Yes!!!!!!
> 
> I have wanted Russell Crowe as Sirius since I read POA! Put my name 
> down on the petition.  Sirius could be Australian right?????
> 
> (Now I'd like to nominate Ewan McGregor for Lupin and then I'll be 
a 
> happy camper)




From jenni_stern at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 17:21:55 2001
From: jenni_stern at yahoo.com (jenni_stern at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:21:55 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <006101c1728e$6b6e5580$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <9tgnrj+tfbs@eGroups.com>

> Jeff Goldblum CAN do serious roles. Anyone ever see Mr. Frost? I'd 
love to see him do either Lupin or Sirius!


The main problem is that he is a Pittsburgh boy - and I seriously 
doubt the casting of non-British folks.

Drat.

*still pulling for Cary Elwes*

Jenni




From joym999 at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 17:28:48 2001
From: joym999 at aol.com (Joywitch M. Curmudgeon)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:28:48 -0000
Subject: Movie musings, take *7*
In-Reply-To: <002d01c172a6$644b2b30$72e2fcce@home>
Message-ID: <9tgo8h+6ibo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "nancy cleaveland" <nansie at b...> wrote:
> Hello -- I've been nudged out of lurkdom to post some the
> things I've noticed after seeing the movie for the 7th time
> yesterday <g>. It goes without saying that I obviously
> *love* this movie. I think the movie is what I would see in
> *my* Mirror of Erised...

[snip long list of excellent, excellent, movie nitpicks and 
observations]

On behalf of L.O.O.N., I would like to bestow upon Nancy in Montana 
the first-ever League of Obsessed Nitpickers Eagle Eye (L.O.O.N.E.E.) 
Award (subdivision movies).  Great bunch, of observations, Nancy, I 
caught only one or two of those.

BTW, would Nancy, and any other potential eagle-eyes out there who 
are going to see the movie over the holidays for the 2nd or 10th time 
please pay close attention to Dumbledore's forehead in the hospital 
scene?  I swear that I saw that he has a faint lightning bolt scar 
just like Harry's, and I would love to know if anyone else sees it or 
if I am just imagining things.

--Joywitch




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 17:50:59 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:50:59 -0000
Subject: Movie musings, take *7*
In-Reply-To: <9tgo8h+6ibo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgpi4+aa7f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Joywitch M. Curmudgeon" <joym999 at a...> > 
BTW, would Nancy, and any other potential eagle-eyes out there who 
> are going to see the movie over the holidays for the 2nd or 10th 
time 
> please pay close attention to Dumbledore's forehead in the hospital 
> scene?  I swear that I saw that he has a faint lightning bolt scar 
> just like Harry's, and I would love to know if anyone else sees it 
or 
> if I am just imagining things.

Nope, I noticed it too...it *could* just be Richard Harris's skin, 
but if it was wouldn't the make-up people have covered it up? Perhaps 
it explains why Voldermort's scared of him, he could have been hit by 
avada kedavra too, and survived.

I've given up on my theory that Dumbledore *is* Harry;o)

Dave




From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Nov 21 17:57:55 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:57:55 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Accomplice (WAS Seventeen points )
In-Reply-To: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgpv3+g748@eGroups.com>

Suzanne wrote:

> 8) Did JKR *tell* Columbus that Voldemort went to Godric's Hollow 
> unaccompanied? Or did Columbus make that up by himself? That would 
re-
> raise the question of how V.'s wand and clothes got into 
Pettigrew's 
> hands.
> 

I'm not sure we can draw many conclusions about canon from that 
scene.  Voldemort appears to be alone, but then again, the snippet 
didn't picture James (did it?), and we know for sure that he was 
there.  Voldemort's accomplice could be elsewhere in the house.

Cindy




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 17:58:31 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:58:31 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <20011121135249.73091.qmail@web10903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tgq07+35km@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Andrea <ra_1013 at y...> wrote:
> Some interesting points. :)  I'll comment here and there.
> 
> --- pigwidgeon37 at y... wrote:
> > (to say nothing of the fact that they 
> > have what must be breakfast at the LEaky Cauldron and Harry eats 
some 
> > kind of soup which for breakfast is a tad unusual)
> 
> Well, this was *after* they'd done all their shopping, so I assumed 
it was
> lunch.  Soup's not that unusual then. ;)
>  
> > 2) My strongest objection to the film: Richard Harris as 
Dumbledore. 
> > Where is the smile, where is the fundamental goodness of this 
great 
> > man, where is his wonderful eccentricity? Here is an 
inaccessible, 
> > rather authoritarian personality who would never ever say (and in 
> > fact he doesn't) that his heart's desire are warm socks.
> 
> Yes!  I sorely missed this about Dumblydore.  Harris just didn't 
have that
> twinkle we've come to know and love about him.
> 
> > 3) From what I saw, the Sorting Hat has already been argued about-
 
> > anyway, it remains incomprehensible to me *why* on earth it's 
> > impossible to give the hat a tiny little voice, and why the 
children 
> > cannot be called in alphabetical order.
> 
> Alphabetical order was dispensed with for dramatic purposes. (Did 
you
> honestly want to wait through the whole sea of kids getting Sorted 
before
> Harry?  And who would wait around *after* Harry was Sorted to see 
where
> Ron ended up?)  I sort of liked the hat's voice, though.  Where did 
it say
> it was supposed to be tiny?
> 
> > 4)To somebody who hasn't read the book, it cannot be clear why 
Harry 
> > doesn't want to become a Slytherin. There is one short thing Ron 
> > mutters to him (originally Hagrid's line) about all Dark Wizards 
> > being ex-Slytherins, but that is certainly not enough.
> 
> His only friend so far just got Sorted into Gryffindor, after 
telling him
> that all the bad ones go to Slytherin.  The one he *doesn't* like 
just got
> put into Slytherin.  I think that's sufficient to make an 11 year 
old boy
> want a different House.
> 
> > 5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and 
Snape 
> > Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, 
above 
> > all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.
> 
> I have seen so many people saying this!!  The FIRST thing we hear 
about
> Snape is Percy saying, "Oh, that's Professor Snape, *HEAD OF 
SLYTHERIN
> HOUSE*."  Harry asks what he teaches, Percy replies with Potions 
and the
> spiel of how he really wants DADA.  It is certainly established 
that Snape
> is head of Slytherin, although I'll admit that McGonagall is not 
described
> as head of Gryffindor.
>  
> > 6) The way the HRH friendship develops has, IMHO, been completely 
> > bungled. The three of them are shown together in a not so 
unfriendly 
> > way when Hermione leads Harry to the showcase with James Potter's 
> > brass plaque (a totally unnecessary scene, and Hermione's 
line "It's 
> > in your blood" is of such striking banality!). Anyway, besides 
from 
> > being unnecessary, the scene spoils the effect of the trio 
becoming 
> > friends after Harry and Ron have knocked out the troll.
> 
> This is a bit that I think worked fairly well on screen, where it 
wouldn't
> have worked in the book.  Hermione *thinks* she's Harry & Ron's 
friend
> before the troll incident.  I think she decided, "I met them on the 
train,
> they're my House-mates, of COURSE we're friends."  Which is why she 
spoke
> up about James being a Quidditch player.  And *that* is why it hurt 
her
> feelings so much when she heard Ron saying she was a nightmare and 
didn't
> have any friends.  Just hearing a random kid you don't like saying 
that
> isn't bad enough to send you to hide in the bathroom crying all 
day, but
> hearing someone YOU thought of as a friend say that is much worse.
> 
> > 8) Did JKR *tell* Columbus that Voldemort went to Godric's Hollow 
> > unaccompanied? Or did Columbus make that up by himself? That 
would re-
> > raise the question of how V.'s wand and clothes got into 
Pettigrew's 
> > hands.
> 
> We heard that she wrote a new scene especially for the movie.  I 
assumed
> this was it.
> 
> > 9) Another one in the interminable list of small things that are 
> > different from the book but wouldn't need to be: Why does the 
> > Invisibility cloak have to look like a Persian carpet instead of 
> > being silvery grey?
> 
> I thought it was *really* cool looking, but I don't understand why 
it
> couldn't have been grey, either.
> 
> > 10) What's everybody's opinion about the moving staircases? For 
my 
> > taste, they are much too scary and exaggerated.
> 
> I liked them, for the most part, and as someone else said, it was 
an easy
> way to get them to the forbidden floor while leaving out the
> time-consuming "duel" challenge from Malfoy, etc.
> 
> > [snip "We need the potion challenge] Important because she 
> > is awarded 50 points "for the use of cool logic in the face of 
> > danger", which certainly doesn't refer to the Devil's Snare, but 
to 
> > the potion puzzle.
> 
> If you'll notice, Hermione acted a great deal more on her own in the
> Devil's Snare here than in the book.  She's the one who figured out 
how to
> get them all out, and quite simply saved Ron's life.  He wasn't far 
from
> being strangled, but she remembered the plant's weakness and the 
spell to
> stop it.  I'd say that's worth 50 points.  The potions challenge, 
frankly,
> would not have translated well to screen, no matter how much I 
loved it.
> 
> > 14) What are they going to do about characters like Binns, Peeves 
and 
> > Sprout? Spout f.ex. will be essential in the next film, let alone 
> > that she's also Head of House, but then the fact that there *is* 
such 
> > a thing as heads of houses is completely neglected (see above)
> 
> They'll just introduce them in the next film.  It's clear that we 
don't
> meet EVERYONE in Hogwarts during this movie (or during the books, 
for that
> matter!).  We'd never had any reference to Trelawny before POA, but 
we
> accepted her arrival as a long-established Hogwarts prof who Harry 
simply
> hadn't come across before.
>  
> > 15) *Very* personal POV: I simply hate Gred and Forge! They look 
like 
> > they were two Percys- I cannot imagine them as the super-
pranksters 
> > they should be!
> 
> I really missed the Christmas scene with the Weasleys!  I'm hoping 
and
> praying it's in the DVD (along with the Platform 9 3/4 bit).  They
> certainly seemed like pranksters to me - the first time we meet 
them they
> pull the "He's not Fred, I am!" bit which is just hilarious - 
although not
> quite as much as in the books.  I'm confident that will be 
established bit
> by bit through the next two movies so the Marauder's Map won't seem 
out of
> place.  (BTW, to those who've complained about it, since they 
didn't have
> the bit about blowing up a toilet at Platform 9 3/4, Dumbledore 
mentioning
> the twins sending a toilet seat wouldn't make a lot of sense!)
> 
> > 5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
> > nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.
>  
> Wasn't that *cute*?  I was so ANGRY with Snape for accusing him of 
not
> paying attention when he was dilligently taking notes.  Poor kid.
> 
> 
> 
> Andrea
> 
> =====
> "Reality is for people who lack imagination."

I haven't read all of your posts. Boy do your minds work overtime or 
what. All this analysis of a movie. You reminded me of two things. 
One about Professor Sprout who got left out of the movie. In the 
book,Hermoine rememebers about the plant and its properties I believe 
because of their herbology lessons. Which were never brought up in 
the film. So right there,except for her looking it up,it doesn't make 
a whole lot of sense as a line in the film. I think the other thing I 
was remembering was that the reason Harry didn't want to go to 
Slytherin,was because of the dark wizard reference,Malfoy,and Snape 
being the head of Slytherin. More things from the book that were left 
out of the movie. Chris
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just 
$8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 18:07:33 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:07:33 -0000
Subject: Miriam Margoyles/Sean Bean/Jeremy Irons
In-Reply-To: <9tg5ck+bakk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgqh5+ku2p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., lotusmoondragon at a... wrote:
> > For those of us who have no clue who most of these people are (save 
> for Sir 
> > Richard and Ms. French), could you shed some light, or point us to 
> a web site 
> > with pictures?
> 
> Yep, I'm really sorry about that, I completely forgot that you're all 
> mostly Americans:o)  Here I go, with a suitable biography of each:
> 
> Professer Sprout: Dawn French, well for those of you who don't know 
> (although I'm sure most of you do), she's short fat, and very lively 
> and loveable:o)
> 

OH!! I was indeed getting Dawn French mixed up with Emma Chambers.  And as I was earlier getting Moaning Myrtle mixed up with Professor Sprout, I will say this with confidence: Miriam Margoyles (who, contrary to popular belief in America, is British - she was in BLACKADDER II, after all) has already committed to play Professor Sprout. I know she's *in* the movie, and Sprout would be the role she'd most likely play.


> Cornelius Fudge: Richard Attenborough (on second thoughts, I don't 
> think he'd be so good)
> 

  For those who *don't* know, Richard Attenborough was John Hammond in JURASSIC PARK and I believe William Cecil in ELIZABETH.


> 
> Sirius Black: Sean Bean. Erm, how can I describe him? Well, I can't 
> really, only to say that he's going to be Boromir in The Lord of the 
> Rings. Pictures probably at the above webstie.
> 

  Sean Bean, like Alan Rickman, has a special facility for playing the "foppish ass" type (although you want to punch him instead of shag him). He was the baddie Lord Fenton in the SCARLETT miniseries (god, did that suck - but it was not the cast's fault).  He was also the baddie recently in DON'T SAY A WORD (god, did that suck - but again, is wasn't really the cast's fault).  It's too bad that Billy Connolly is now rather too old to play Black, although I could see him as Mad-Eye Moody.

Another fearless prediction: Jeremy Irons will play Voldemort. Karma owes him a favor for DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, and it's essentially the same role in a much, much better production. 





From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 18:14:37 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:14:37 -0000
Subject: A short one here re casting and eye color..
Message-ID: <9tgqud+r3a5@eGroups.com>

I love Billy Conolly. I would love to see him play someone in the 
film. Has anyone commented that Harry didn't have green contacts. If 
he did they were awfully subtle. His eyes looked blue to me. Chris




From aiz24 at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 21 18:32:57 2001
From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:32:57 -0000
Subject: Soundtrack on NPR's Performance Today
Message-ID: <9tgs0p+e7fn@eGroups.com>

Hi!  I hope this isn't too late, but I heard that today's Performance 
Today, on National Public Radio, was going to have something about the 
HPSS score.

On my NPR affiliate the show is from 1-3 p.m., but it probably varies. 
 You can probably find out your local schedule on www.npr.org.  Check 
it out!

Amy Z




From meboriqua at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 19:14:49 2001
From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:14:49 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
In-Reply-To: <9tgn2l+1jtm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tguf9+vu49@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote
 
> (To be honest, Dumbledore would not have been an effect Headmaster 
if  he was constantly happy etc..... we do see his kind side and also 
I  think what he thinks of Harry and Co. in the hospital scene at the  
end and therefore I think Richard Harris was pretty good as 
Dumbledore)>

Hi John -

See, now I must disagree with *you*.  Dumbledore is one of my favorite 
characters in the books and one of the reasons I love him is because 
of his superb sense of humor.  In fact, it was the scene in the 
infirmary where he tells Harry about the vomit-flavored Bertie Bott's 
that made me fall in love with HP.  I adore the way Dumbledore's mouth 
twitches when he talks about Filch and his ever-growing list of banned 
items, or the way he is ready to tell a (probably) inappropriate joke 
to his students in GoF.  Why does he need to be so serious all the 
time?

I teach high school and my assistant principal is extremely proper and 
rule-oriented.  However, she has an excellent sense of humor, and that 
makes her prudishness completely tolerable for me.  Like Dumbledore, 
she loves our students and in return, they respect and genuinely like 
her, too.  Like Dumbledore again, no one wants to see my assistant 
principal angry.  I've seen it and it isn't pretty - much in the same 
way Dumbledore's anger at the end of GoF is rather frightening.  

Dumbledore is just as effective a Headmaster with his humor because it 
makes him approachable and compassionate.  Now I know he was 
compassionate in the film, but I would have liked him even more if I 
had seen that twinkle in his eye and the smile always hiding behind 
it.  I see that, though, as the fault of the screenwriter's, not 
Richard Harris.

--jenny from ravenclaw**********************




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 19:21:53 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:21:53 -0000
Subject: Hooch's eyes...
In-Reply-To: <9tg6a6+5jfo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgush+j4ns@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> I notice the second time I went to the movie that Zoe Wannamaker 
> (who plays Hooch) had very strange yellow, cat eyes. At first I 
> thought that it may have been just a nice touch my Chris Collumbus. 
> 
> But I was readin CoS last night, and it described Mrs Norris's eyes 
> as being yellow. I could be jumping to comclusions, but I think 
> there's no doubt that Mrs Norris isn't an ordinary cat, and I've 
> always thought she was probably an animagi. And Hooch does one 
> flying lesson a year, and a couple of of Quidditch matches, and 
> that's it...I've often wondered what she does with the rest of her 
> time.
> 
> So, my theory is that Hooch is an animagi and in her spare time she 
> helps Filch find students who are breaking the rules.  What do you 
> think?

Unfortunately, if JKR wanted to eventually make Hooch and Mrs. Norris 
the same entity, it was ruined by the cat's having red eyes.  (I'm 
not sure what the purpose of that is.)  Also, Hooch greets the class 
by telling them that it is their FIRST flying lesson, so the 
implication would be that there are more to come that simply aren't 
covered in the book.  One also gets the impression that she only 
teaches first-year students, so I'd call her a part-time teacher.  
She does not seem to be an all-purpose substitute teacher since it 
was Professor Grubbly-Plank (sp?--sorry; books not handy) who subbed 
for Hagrid at one point and not Hooch.

Another reason why it is unlikely that she is an Animagus is that 
Hermione would have noticed her name in the list of registered 
Animagi; I doubt that a teacher would be an illegal unregistered 
Animagus.  I also doubt that JKR would have more than one cat 
Animagus at the school, so if I'm correct, that eliminates Mrs. 
Norris and Crookshanks as possible Animagi.  

Even if Hooch WERE an Animagus, given her description, a more likely 
form for her would be a hawk or other bird of prey.  In the end, 
though, JKR has a fondness for using animal similes when describing 
humans' physical appearances (Mrs. Weasley=tiger, Snape=bat, 
Hooch=hawk, etc.), and it's going a bit overboard to assume that each 
time she does this it's because the character is an Animagus.

--Barb




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 19:23:41 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:23:41 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
In-Reply-To: <9tguf9+vu49@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tguvt+lpn2@eGroups.com>

Now I must disagree with you (but in part I also agree) yes, if he 
was not approachable then he would not be effective, but from some of 
the posts I've read, they were expecting a constantly grinning, 
gormless clown, which isn't like the book, because in the book, as 
you know, we also see his serious side. The whole point is that the 
film was supposed to have a darker side than the books. In reality if 
we were going through this kind of situation how would we be.. I work 
in a school and I run a UK version of Day Care and I am well known 
for my sense of humour, but as you know, working in a school 
environment, it is impossible to go 24/7 looking happy....I was at 
the premiere, and heard J K Rowling talking about bringing the story 
true to life...this is one way of doing it!




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 19:27:52 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:27:52 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and five pros
In-Reply-To: <9tguf9+vu49@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgv7o+mfif@eGroups.com>

My main concern is the fact (I've just done it myself and now I'm 
realy miffed) that people are picking holes in a perfectly good film 
when everyone knows its practically impossible to film every scene, 
and because cuts had to be made changes were also needed!

John




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Wed Nov 21 19:40:02 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:40:02 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <9tgv7o+mfif@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121194002.66112.qmail@web14701.mail.yahoo.com>


 I think it's still very arguable whether this is a *really* good film- I'm not so convinced. Of course, you can't film every scene- I absolutely agree with you-, but the cuts have to be sensible and justified. IMO, they stuck to the book even if unnecesary (why f.ex. didn't Hagrid come directly yo the Dursleys' house? That would have saved precious minutes) and left out details that will prove vital to the plot. You know what my suspicion is? That columbus only read the first book. If you limit yourself to PS/SS, the film might seem reasonable (no need to know about Heads of Houses, no need to know more about Slytherin, however biased that might be etc.etc.), but in view of more coming along in the future, especially as the books are growing thicker and thicker, it woulodn't have been bad to set up certain things within the first movie. And, frankly, the 31 July/ 31 August error is unforgivable, at least IMO.
Susanna/pigwidgeon37
  John Hancock <seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk> wrote: My main concern is the fact (I've just done it myself and now I'm 
realy miffed) that people are picking holes in a perfectly good film 
when everyone knows its practically impossible to film every scene, 
and because cuts had to be made changes were also needed!

John


_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at hpforgrownups-owner 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 AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 19:43:46 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (Maggie Connolly)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:43:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <9tgnig+dpnj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121194346.23921.qmail@web20003.mail.yahoo.com>

I'd like to put my bid in to have Russell Crowe play
Black as well - he would be fabulous.  He can do any
accent put in front of him as well as gain/lose weight
as necessary.  He has proved it in the past with The
Insider and Gladiator.

I would like to nominate Hugh Jackman to play Lupin.  

POA is going to be amazing!!!

:)

--- female_jedis at yahoo.com wrote:
> "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> writes:
> "(Now all we need to do is somehow convince Rowling
> to throw in a 
> part for Russell Crowe in one of the latter books.
> Surely there are 
> Australian wizards.)"
> 
> "Hmmm...Sirius Black anyone?  Yee hah!"
> 
> Diane in Philly
> 
> 
> Yes! Yes! Yes!!!!!!
> 
> I have wanted Russell Crowe as Sirius since I read
> POA! Put my name 
> down on the petition.  Sirius could be Australian
> right?????
> 
> (Now I'd like to nominate Ewan McGregor for Lupin
> and then I'll be a 
> happy camper)
> 
> 


=====
Cheers, Maggie

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 19:46:10 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:46:10 -0000
Subject: CoS movie...
In-Reply-To: <20011121194346.23921.qmail@web20003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9th0a2+ccah@eGroups.com>

British Cast Remember!!!




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 19:49:10 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:49:10 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <20011121194002.66112.qmail@web14701.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9th0fm+d5p3@eGroups.com>

My main point is that the cuts that were made, were made by the 
original author J K Rowling......so who are we to argue with the 
creator of this whole hoohaa!!

Quite frankly I'm not going to post any more on the subject as it 
spoils my enjoyment.....call me boring but sorry!




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 19:49:32 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:49:32 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <20011121135249.73091.qmail@web10903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9th0gc+9bd2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Andrea <ra_1013 at y...> wrote:
> --- pigwidgeon37 at y... wrote:
 
> > 6) The way the HRH friendship develops has, IMHO, been completely 
> > bungled. The three of them are shown together in a not so 
> > unfriendly way when Hermione leads Harry to the showcase with 
> > James Potter's brass plaque. [snip]  Anyway, besides from being 
> > unnecessary, the scene spoils the effect of the trio becoming 
> > friends after Harry and Ron have knocked out the troll.
 
> This is a bit that I think worked fairly well on screen, where it 
> wouldn't have worked in the book.  Hermione *thinks* she's Harry & 
> Ron's friend before the troll incident.  I think she decided, "I 
> met them on the train, they're my House-mates, of COURSE we're 
> friends."  [snip] Just hearing a random kid you don't like saying 
> that isn't bad enough to send you to hide in the bathroom crying 
> all day, but hearing someone YOU thought of as a friend say that is 
> much worse.

Excellent point.  She was previously sort of "insinuating" herself 
into their conversations; I also disliked the "it's in your blood" 
line.  Did Kloves swallow a bunch of bad cliches for lunch and feel 
compelled to spit them back out?  (Shades of Ron's slug problem in 
CoS? <g>) 
 
> > 8) Did JKR *tell* Columbus that Voldemort went to Godric's Hollow 
> > unaccompanied? Or did Columbus make that up by himself? That 
> > would re-raise the question of how V.'s wand and clothes got into 
> > Pettigrew's hands.
 
> We heard that she wrote a new scene especially for the movie.  I 
> assumed this was it.

I'm unclear about why people think Voldemort didn't go to Godric's 
Hollow alone.  If Pettigrew had been there, he probably would have 
tried to to kill Harry himself after Voldemort failed, especially 
since Harry was responsible for his master being reduced to less than 
spirit.  Thus either Harry would have been killed after all, or if 
the protection his mother's love gave him extended to ANYONE who 
tried to kill him, Pettigrew would have been hit by a rebounding 
curse.  My guess is that Peter came by later (after Hagrid had 
fetched Harry) to see the devastation he expected Voldemort to wreak 
(whether because he felt guilty or to gloat JKR will still have to 
decide) and found the dropped wand.  Why does Peter need to preserve 
Voldemort's clothes?  This seems unnecessary.  The wand is the 
important thing.
 
> > 5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
> > nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.
>  
> Wasn't that *cute*?  I was so ANGRY with Snape for accusing him of 
> not paying attention when he was dilligently taking notes.  Poor 
> kid.

This served to point up how unfair Snape was in singling him out.  He 
was trying to be very conscientious, after all.  It was the first day 
of school.  Who else but Hermione would have read the entire text and 
have it memorized by then?  I do wish we'd seen Neville melting a 
cauldron or two instead of Seamus blowing up water and feathers.  
Where in the books do we get things exploding when spells are done 
incorrectly?

--Barb





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 20:16:32 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:16:32 -0000
Subject: A short one here re casting and eye color..
In-Reply-To: <9tgqud+r3a5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9th230+h7ac@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> Has anyone commented that Harry didn't have green contacts. If 
> he did they were awfully subtle. His eyes looked blue to me. 

Definitely, they were blue.   Apparently, the green-ness of Harry's eyes was 
not as important as many of us thought.  What color wre his mom's eyes?  In 
the Katie Couric special, when Dan Radcliffe was showing off some props, he 
showed Harry's Weasley sweater, complete with a big "H."  It was blue, not 
green, and it was supposed to match his eyes.  I'm hoping that the sweater's 
existence means that there's some unused Christmas footage that we'll see 
someday on the DVD!




From chattie27million at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 20:23:21 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:23:21 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS movie...
Message-ID: <4e.2166518.292d6739@aol.com>

In a message dated 21/11/01 17:18:59 GMT Standard Time, 
female_jedis at yahoo.com writes:


> 
> (Now I'd like to nominate Ewan McGregor for Lupin and then I'll be a 
> happy camper)
> 

Oh my god.  I'm sorry, I know I'm not supposed to post msgs that just say "ME 
TOO!" so I shall try to think of something constructive to say with this 
comment. I do, of course, completely agree with this suggestion as he's a 
fantastic actor *not too bad looking as well;) Who said Moulin Rouge?! ahem*

I am desperately wracking my brains *i have more than one you know*grin lol* 
to try and think of a part that Jamie Bell could play, as he is a fantastic 
teenage british actor.....But I'm hitting a brick wall. Anyone any 
suggestions?
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 feycat at feycat.net  Wed Nov 21 20:37:55 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:37:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS movie...
References: <4e.2166518.292d6739@aol.com>
Message-ID: <00f001c172cc$66bad660$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>I am desperately wracking my brains *i have more than one you know*grin lol* to try and think of a part that Jamie Bell could play, as he is a fantastic teenage british actor.....But I'm hitting a brick wall. Anyone any 
suggestions?<<

Jaimie could play Cedric, I suppose. :-) I'd love to see him to that part and give Cedric some depth!

-Gabriel


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




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Wed Nov 21 20:43:04 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:43:04 -0500 (EST)
Subject: My late comments
Message-ID: <200111212043.PAA26750@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

Hi,

I saw the movie Sunday afternoon with my 7-year-old daughter and my 
mother-in-law, who's probably about sixty. My daughter hasn't read the books 
(she's just starting to read, but she's also only been speaking English for 
about a year-- long story). My MIL has read and enjoyed all the books. I read 
them this summer for the first time-- I've probably read them about 3 times 
each, at this point. (I sometimes only read parts of them on re-reads, so it's a 
little hard to estimate this.)

After logging into this group, I ploughed through the archives. Well, everything 
since Friday, anyway. :) Not much left to say that hasn't already been said, but 
here are the few points I'd like to make:

First, I guess I'm alone in this, but the altered confrontation between Harry 
and Voldemort/Quirrell really bothered me when I saw it. Where was the point 
about Lily's sacrifice? What's this nonsense about bringing James and Lily back 
to life??? I can see that having Quirrell crumble to dust was more cinematic 
than blisters, but Harry doesn't come across as nearly as brave without the 
issue of the pain from his scar (don't ask me how they would have shown this, 
though). And though I didn't realize this was bugging me until I read the 
comments here, it bothers me that he ends up purposely killing Quirrell. It *is* 
OOC. And I guess I really am the only one to complain about this item: I don't 
think Voldemort should have been able to swoop through Harry like that at the 
end of the fight. For Pete's sake, he's not supposed to be able to *touch* 
Harry. What kind of sense does it make for him to be able to attack him directly 
this way? But I suppose Rowling must have ok'd the change, and I do admit the 
whole thing was more dramatic than the "deus ex Dumbledore" book scene.

Second, I think it weakened the story considerably to have all the other 
characters addressing Voldemort by name. Hagrid whispers it once and then after 
that things just go on as if it doesn't matter at all. That takes out a lot of 
the impact of confronting him directly at the end. Of course, if they'd done it 
properly, they'd have had to leave in the scene where Dumbledore tells Harry to 
use the proper name. (Like many here, I felt Dumbledore especially got chopped 
up in the dialogue department.) But of all things, to leave out the bit where 
Harry rants at Ron and Hermione about what it was like when Voldemort was 
around, Ron getting more and more upset at the way Harry uses the name so 
casually.... Then again, that is one of my favorite scenes. We all have them, 
don't we?

Third (but this has been discussed to death), I think they really underplayed 
Snape, his actions, motivations, history, etc. He's easily the most intriguing 
character from my point of view. Rickman did a great job with the few scenes he 
had (enough for me to forgive him for not being as thin as I've imagined Snape 
to be), but he didn't have enough airtime, and then to leave out Dumbledore's 
explanation for Snape's animosity... unforgiveable!

Overall, I agree with comments that have been made about taking out original 
lines to put in lesser lines, especially in how that affected the humor. I also 
think that while the beginning and middle showed the effect of compressing the 
story somewhat, the ending took the most damage. There's a lot to fit in there, 
to set up for the later stories, and I think they left too much out. I can't see 
how they'll be able to do PoA, let alone GoF (unless the rumor is true and they 
go for two movies for GoF).

But the acting was quite good, the casting was good, and I thought most of the 
effects were decent. (I particularly liked the entrance to Diagon Alley. I'm 
trying to forget about the centaur and the unicorn.) The kids did a really great 
job, all things considered. Even if they did always look made-up, and the 
crinkle tool they used on Hermione's hair was kind of obvious. It really helped 
me to see the relative sizes of the kids, especially in the Quidditch match, to 
understand why it is such a big deal to have a first-year playing on the 
Gryffindor team. I can only imagine that the CGI editing I'd heard they planned 
to use for Harry's eyes just didn't work out in time. No matter. That glare he 
gave Dudley in the zoo didn't need any tinkering.

Given that so many of you have reported liking it better on a second viewing, I 
think I'll see if I can fit that in at some point. And I do hope there's a DVD 
with plenty of extras. I don't know if that four-hour director's cut really 
exists, but I know we saw stuff in the trailer that didn't make it into the 
movie (e.g. the reminder not to use magic in the corridors), so hopefully a less 
cut version would be... well... less cut up. :)

Happy nitpicking, everyone,

Elizabeth

(...who likes Rickman well enough, but has her own ideas about the Snape she'd 
like to invite in for a cup of tea and a bit of cheering up. Poor misunderstood 
fellow.)




From chattie27million at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 20:44:18 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:44:18 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS movie...
Message-ID: <d4.f4ccda1.292d6c22@aol.com>

In a message dated 21/11/01 20:42:27 GMT Standard Time, feycat at feycat.net 
writes:


> Jaimie could play Cedric, I suppose. :-) I'd love to see him to that part 
> and give Cedric some depth!
> 
> -Gabriel
> 

That's actually a great idea. I'd thought of it, but then thought that he 
might be too young....but he wouldn't be now that i think about it!! Thanks 
for that:) Although I did read somewhere that Jamie said he 'felt sorry for 
Daniel Radcliffe', does that make sense to anyone else?! lol
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 cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Nov 21 20:45:40 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:45:40 -0000
Subject: Pettigrew's Presence (WAS Seventeen points against the movie...)
In-Reply-To: <9th0gc+9bd2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9th3pk+a6qv@eGroups.com>

> I'm unclear about why people think Voldemort didn't go to Godric's 
> Hollow alone.  If Pettigrew had been there, he probably would have 
> tried to to kill Harry himself after Voldemort failed, especially 
> since Harry was responsible for his master being reduced to less 
than 
> spirit.  Thus either Harry would have been killed after all, or if 
> the protection his mother's love gave him extended to ANYONE who 
> tried to kill him, Pettigrew would have been hit by a rebounding 
> curse.  >  


I'm not completely sold on the Pettigrew-as-accomplice theory 
entirely.  But the idea is that if Pettigrew had been present when 
Voldemort's curse re-bounded, he would *not* have tried to kill 
Harry.  Pettigrew has every reason to think his own Avada Kedavra 
curse would also rebound, and he doesn't seem the type to risk his 
own neck to finish the job Voldemort started.  

Also, Sirius tells us in PoA that Pettigrew didn't try to kill Harry 
while Pettigrew was living as a rat in the Gryffindor dorm.  This 
suggests that, as Sirius indicates, Pettigrew isn't about to kill 
Harry unless he is sure there is something in it for himself.  As 
Voldemort had just been reduced to spirit at Godric's Hollow, it 
would have been out of character for Pettigrew to attempt to finish 
the job that night.

I think that's the theory, anyway.

Cindy




From cindysphynx at home.com  Wed Nov 21 20:55:18 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:55:18 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
Message-ID: <9th4bm+t1f0@eGroups.com>

We've talked a bit about how the PS/SS special effects were done, and 
what worked and what didn't.  That made me wonder how easy or 
difficult the special effects will be in the next three films.  In 
other words, which scenes in upcoming films might pose the most 
difficult special effects issues?

The scene that sounds like a special effects and logistical nightmare 
to me is the Second Task in GoF.  Harry has to sprout gills and 
flippers, swim, fight grindylows, talk underwater, and save some 
students.  Fluer and Cedric need bubbleheads, Krum has to be a shark-
man, and all of it has to be underwater.  I don't even know whether 
it is legal or advisable to have child actors actually do any 
underwater work, so they might need to use stunt doubles or some 
effect to simulate being underwater.

Are these issues insurmountable, and has anything like it even been 
done before?  Are there other scenes in CoS, PoA or GoF that present 
similar special effects or logistical problems?

Cindy




From chattie27million at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 21:06:09 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 16:06:09 EST
Subject: Daniel on Letterman
Message-ID: <9a.1d2d4c21.292d7141@aol.com>

GRRR i'm really annoyed, we get The David Letterman Show on itv2 here in 
Britain, but i thought we were further behind with the shows than we actually 
are it than we actually are, and I missed Daniel Radcliffe on it. *I only 
realised this when I saw Richard Harris, and David letterman said "We had 
harry potter, er, daniel radcliffe on here the other night!" and i was like, 
"DAMNIT!"* I was wondering if there were any brits out there who had it on 
hand to copy or something? If not, are there any transcripts floating around 
at all on the internet?

Just wondering,
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 Joanne0012 at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 21:07:24 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 21:07:24 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9th4bm+t1f0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9th52c+7olt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
> Harry has to sprout gills and 
> flippers, swim, fight grindylows, talk underwater, and save some 
> students.  Fluer and Cedric need bubbleheads, Krum has to be a shark-
> man, and all of it has to be underwater.  I don't even know whether 
> it is legal or advisable to have child actors actually do any 
> underwater work, so they might need to use stunt doubles or some 
> effect to simulate being underwater.

The shark head, bubbleheads and gills might make it possible to dispsense 
with the child actors altogether for this segment and use stunt doubles 
throughout, since none of the kids looks like themselves anyway!




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Wed Nov 21 21:34:41 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 16:34:41 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and f...
Message-ID: <28.1e149ca2.292d77f1@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/21/2001 3:49:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it writes:

<< 5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and Snape 
 Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, above 
 all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.
  >>
 Percy clearly states to Harry right after the sorting...

That's Snape, head of Slytherin



From sesyred at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 21:41:20 2001
From: sesyred at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Milagros=20Viquez?=)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 21:41:20 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <9th0fm+d5p3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121214120.98569.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- John Hancock <seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk>
wrote: 

"My main point is that the cuts that were made, were
made by the 
original author J K Rowling......so who are we to
argue with the 
creator of this whole hoohaa!!"

Excuse me if I'm being redundant on anything somebody
else has already said, especially since I'm a newbie
and still have a load of messages left to read, but
I'm not entirely sure J.K. Rowling did make the final
cuts to the movie.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that she
stuck around to perfect the look, feel, and just about
everything of the movie, but she certainly didn't have
the tough job of being the person to make the final
decisions on the cutting room floor.  The director is
the artist.  He's the interpreter and, ultimately,
J.K. had little power over what scenes should be kept
and others ommitted. As for the cuts made, I think
that most of them were necessary, even if I can't be
completely sure of this because I haven't seen the
four hour long version (I wish!), but the movie did a
great job in extracting the essential scenes and
showing it on the big screen.  I'll be reading the
other fifty-something messages (do you guys write that
much every single day?!?!  I hope so! =) to get the
complete perspective about what everyone thinks.  By
the way, my name is Milly and I'm a Harry Potter
veteran, first discovering the books at age 18 when my
sister unwisely decided to leave The Sorcerer's Stone
on the dining room table while she went off to take a
shower.  She still hasn't found it!  mwahahhaha!! =)
But, yea, she can just buy herself another
copy...heehee...Well, that's it for now!  Have a great
rest-of-the-day, everyone!  

Warm greetings from Miami, FL...

Milly V. 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com



From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Wed Nov 21 21:41:44 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 21:41:44 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <9th0gc+9bd2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121214144.18032.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Barb <blpurdom at yahoo.com> wrote: 
>> > 5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
>> > nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.
>>  
>> Wasn't that *cute*?  I was so ANGRY with Snape for accusing him of 
>> not paying attention when he was dilligently taking notes.  Poor 
>> kid.

>This served to point up how unfair Snape was in singling him out.  He 
>was trying to be very conscientious, after all.  It was the first day 
>of school.  Who else but Hermione would have read the entire text and 
>have it memorized by then?  I do wish we'd seen Neville melting a 
>cauldron or two instead of Seamus blowing up water and feathers.  
>Where in the books do we get things exploding when spells are done 
>incorrectly?

>--Barb

 

That's just one more of those completely senseless additions that are supposed to be liked by kids (like the flying keys boring into the closed door). And I agree with you that kids would have found it just as funny if Neville had blown up a cauldron. There is no evidence whatsoever of erroneous spells causing explosions- except for the ones Ron performs with his broken wand- might that be a proof that Columbus actually read more than book 1??? That would really astonish me! Why, oh why didn't Terry Gilliam make this movie!!! 

BTW, just to throw in my two knuts about JKR's part in making the film: When you sell your first book to a publishing house, usually you're so glad to have it sold that you don't think of the possibility that anybody might want ot make a film out of it- three guesses how the part of the contract concerning the film rights will have been. At least, that's how things go in germany and Austria- I would be very astonished if it weren't pretty much the same in UK! I have a storng suspicion that, regarding CoS, things will have changed, anyway. Wishful thinking?????

Susanna/pigwidgeon37




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at hpforgrownups-owner 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 sesyred at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Nov 21 22:03:13 2001
From: sesyred at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Milagros=20Viquez?=)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 22:03:13 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A short one here re casting and eye color..
In-Reply-To: <9th230+h7ac@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011121220313.441.qmail@web20808.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Joanne0012 at aol.com wrote: 
<HR>
<html><body>
<tt>
--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:<BR>
> Has anyone commented that Harry didn't have green
contacts. If <BR>
> he did they were awfully subtle. His eyes looked
blue to me. <BR>
<BR>
Definitely, they were blue. Apparently,
the green-ness of Harry's eyes was <BR>
not as important as many of us thought. What
color wre his mom's eyes? In <BR>
the Katie Couric special, when Dan Radcliffe was
showing off some props, he <BR>
showed Harry's Weasley sweater, complete with a big
"H." It was blue, not <BR>
green, and it was supposed to match his eyes.
I'm hoping that the sweater's <BR>
existence means that there's some unused Christmas
footage that we'll see <BR>
someday on the DVD!<BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1"
color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0
cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0>
<tr>
<td align=center><font face=arial
size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=206662.1711183.3234967.1501206/D=egroupweb/S=1705020948:HM/A=817985/R=0/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N2870.yh/B42626.15;sz=300x250;ord=1006373796?"><img
src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N2870.yh/B42626.15;sz=300x250;ord=1006373796?"
alt="" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td>
</tr>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1
src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=206662.1711183.3234967.1501206/D=egroupmail/S=1705020948:HM/A=817985/rand=367933193"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


<br>
<tt>
_________________________________________________________________
<BR>
<BR>
Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you
MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at <a
href="http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/">http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/</a><BR>
<BR>
Warning -- this group contains spoilers! <BR>
<BR>
Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.<BR>
<BR>
Unsubscribing? Email
hpfgu-movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com</tt>
<br>

<br>
<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
of Service</a>.</tt>
</br>

Yea, his eyes were definitely a beautiful, brilliant
blue!  I just read this list from the UK's "Daily
Mirror" that supposedly has all the mistakes from the
movie, one of them being that Harry's eyes were green
while the itty bitty baby who played Harry as a
one-year old had blue eyes.  Ok.  That was strange. 
It may have a problem with my own eyes but, yea,
Harry's eyes seemed to be blue.  If you want the link
to the list, here's the a site where you can read it:

 http://www.thesnitch.co.uk/news/

It's the sixth bit of news down. =)


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com



From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Wed Nov 21 23:11:43 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:11:43 +0100
Subject: Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
References: <9tg7l7+ntji@eGroups.com> <002d01c172a6$644b2b30$72e2fcce@home>
Message-ID: <003c01c172e1$e2ef0d90$e500a8c0@shasta>

Nancy wrote,

> Hello -- I've been nudged out of lurkdom to post some the
> things I've noticed after seeing the movie for the 7th time
> yesterday <g>.

Hello and welcome! And, ummm, has anyone ever mentioned something to the
effect that you're brilliant - a little scary, mind - but brilliant? Great
observations - and congratulations on your 7th viewing!

Some observations on just one point:

> Snape's burning robe -- It bothered me that everyone started
> stamping out the fire on Snape's robe. Hello!? These people
> are wizards. I would expect at least a half dozen wands to
> whip out and point at the fire, and somebody's wand arm be
> what knocks into Quirrell.

Two thoughts here:

(1) About wands: In ch. 13 of PS, Neville is surprised that Ron and Hermione
have brought their wands to the second quidditch match. Hence, it would
appear that wizards don't always bring their wands along - and were reduced
to stamping instead of waving. (Of course, this isn't an easy topic. If
nothing else, no one seems surprised that Hermione had hers at the first
match! I believe that we've seen a few inconclusive discussions on the main
list about why, where and how often wizards carry their wands.)

(2) About the Hogwarts quidditch pitch: A tangential consideration: In the
book, Hermione knocks over Quirrell on her way *toward* Snape; in the movie,
she comes at Snape from underneath the seats (and Quirrell is knocked over
in the commotion). Implication: the book is working with the image of a
pitch surrounded by bleachers (as we have always assumed) - and the movie
has introduced an entirely new layout.

What intrigues me is how they came up with this (very clever!) idea. My
first assumption was that they were having trouble setting up bleachers that
would look (a) imposing and (b) full with only ~400 spectators. (In main
group discussions of Hogwarts' size, Jo's descriptions of quidditch games
have often been used to support arguments for a much larger student body.)

Later on I noticed another issue: in GoF the final task is carried out on
the Quidditch pitch, which has been set up with a great maze made of
twenty-foot high hedgerows (ch. 31). Of course, Flint hunters have often
wondered how the spectators managed to see anything from their seats - but
with the movie's stands, the problem is solved.

So is it possible that Jo's own thinking about quidditch pitches has also
developed a bit since PS - and that the stands in the movie version of PS
are an import from GoF?

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray, who wonders whether there's a special
club for people who apply mind-bogglingly tenuous forms of redaction
criticism to minor issues in children's books. Assuming there is such a
club, he also wonders whether taking a lot of very strong medicine would get
him out of it.)
_______________________

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




From john at walton.vu  Wed Nov 21 23:48:01 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 23:48:01 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9th4bm+t1f0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B821EDB1.530D%john@walton.vu>

Cindy C. wrote:

> The scene that sounds like a special effects and logistical nightmare
> to me is the Second Task in GoF.  Harry has to sprout gills and
> flippers, swim, fight grindylows, talk underwater, and save some
> students.  Fluer and Cedric need bubbleheads, Krum has to be a shark-
> man, and all of it has to be underwater.  I don't even know whether
> it is legal or advisable to have child actors actually do any
> underwater work, so they might need to use stunt doubles or some
> effect to simulate being underwater.

Let me just say that one of the things I enjoyed most about the movie was
the effects. Despite the bouncing moving staircase, and the Mummy-ness of
Quirrellmort, it was very good.

Hmm. I think the major problem is the underwater thing -- especially since
they'll only have Dan for four hours a day for the majority of the movies.

If they're smart, they'll cast young-looking adults (18-year-olds) as
Cedric, Krum and Fleur. As they only turn up towards the end of the scene,
it would be entirely feasible for Harry to be on a suspended rope instead of
faffing about in an underwater tank. The murkiness could be added later.

--John

____________________________________________

"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste
good with ketchup." -Anon.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Thu Nov 22 00:11:19 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:11:19 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) and f...
In-Reply-To: <28.1e149ca2.292d77f1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9thfr7+102b8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Schlobin1 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 11/21/2001 3:49:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> pigwidgeon37 at y... writes:
> 
> << 5) It is never stated that McGonagall is Head of Gryffindor and 
Snape 
>  Head of Slytherin, albeit it is vitally important to the plot, 
above 
>  all to make Snape seem to be the Bad Guy.
>   >>
>  Percy clearly states to Harry right after the sorting...
> 
> That's Snape, head of Slytherin

And at some point, doesn't McGonagall chew out the trio and tell them 
that if they don't behave she'll take points away, "Yes, from my own 
house!"  I don't know if this is the troll scene or what - I've only 
seen the movie once, I'll watch for it next time.

Wanda




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 00:29:37 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 16:29:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: sweater vests?
In-Reply-To: <002d01c172a6$644b2b30$72e2fcce@home>
Message-ID: <20011122002937.57066.qmail@web11507.mail.yahoo.com>

hello!

did anyone notice what color the ribbing on the
sweater vests was for the first years when they
first get off the express?  after they've been
sorted, the ribbing of the v-necks are the house
colors, but they change into their 'uniforms' on
the train.  anyone catch what color the trim was?

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 00:30:49 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:30:49 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9th4bm+t1f0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thgvp+tfrk@eGroups.com>

<Cindy wrote:>
> Are these issues insurmountable, and has anything like it even been 
> done before?  Are there other scenes in CoS, PoA or GoF that present 
> similar special effects or logistical problems?

Offhand...COS: Harry's arm must somehow lose bones, Dobby, the
basilisk, the serpent in Dueling Club, Aragog & co, more Quidditch,
mandrakes? (though I would bet money these are cute)...

POA: Animagus transformations (already done), dementors (heads &
hands), Patronus Charm, Quidditch Final, Buckbeak, flobberworms
(probably not), Marauder's Map, boggarts...

Of these, I would imagine most are not that complicated.  The hardest
to do probably being Dobby (it HAS to be believeable as a creature)
and Buckbeak (they RIDE him for heaven's sake!).




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 00:33:03 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:33:03 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <20011121214120.98569.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9thh3v+89bg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Milagros Viquez <sesyred at y...> wrote:

> I'm not entirely sure J.K. Rowling did make the final
> cuts to the movie.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that she
> stuck around to perfect the look, feel, and just about
> everything of the movie, but she certainly didn't have
> the tough job of being the person to make the final
> decisions on the cutting room floor.  The director is
> the artist.  He's the interpreter and, ultimately,
> J.K. had little power over what scenes should be kept
> and others ommitted.

I think you're right, Millie, JKR was a presence on set and beforehand, but 
there's been no indication that she participated in the editing, more's the pity. 
Several scenes were filmed but not used -- they've shown up in previews, 
among other inidcations -- so even if she saw the script, she didn't necesarily 
approve the final cut.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 00:34:59 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:34:59 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <20011121214144.18032.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9thh7j+bnq7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Susanne Schmid <pigwidgeon37 at y...> wrote:
When you sell your first book to a publishing house, usually you're so glad to 
have it sold that you don't think of the possibility that anybody might want ot 
make a film out of it- 

The press has indicated that JKR was approached by several organizations, 
including Disney, and rebuffed them all until Warner convinced her that they'd 
stick to the book closely enough.




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 00:37:29 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:37:29 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9thgvp+tfrk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thhc9+lafe@eGroups.com>

<I wrote:>
Offhand...COS: Harry's arm must somehow lose bones, Dobby, the
> basilisk, the serpent in Dueling Club, Aragog & co, more Quidditch,
> mandrakes? (though I would bet money these are cute)...

Sorry, that's supposed to be CUT.  Do you think they use the amout of
CGI effects required to determine whether a piece/scene gets cut
(Peeves?)?  I suppose not really for the first, as 99% of the
extra-difficult stuff was LEFT & the easier things cut (grr).  I
wonder as to COS and beyond as the magic (and comp work) becomes
increasingly difficult.  I really do wonder what they are going to do
about Dobby. (I really see him as getting cut, I really do...after
some of the wacky cuttings of PS/SS I wouldn't be surprised!)

-Megan (who is really curious to see how the script would read without
Dobby...and if it might by some chance be better, <vbg as she ducks
the tomatoes>)




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Thu Nov 22 00:39:24 2001
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 22 Nov 2001 00:39:24 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1006389564.136.41122.w24@yahoogroups.com>


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

Which book do you see as the most
cinematically appealling? 

  o Philosopher's Stone 
  o Chamber of Secrets 
  o Prisoner of Azkaban 
  o Goblet of Fire 


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 sesyredchoos at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 00:55:30 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:55:30 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Special Effects Challenges
Message-ID: <b2.2174427.292da702@aol.com>

Megan wrote:
"(who is really curious to see how the script would read without
Dobby...and if it might by some chance be better, <vbg as she ducks
the tomatoes>)"

Dobby is definitely one the coolest characters, and cutting him would 
definitely constitute as a cruel form of sacrilege!  hehe...Don't worry, 
Megan!  I won't throw any cyber tomotoes your way!  Dobby is an integral part 
of the plot; he's the one that's supposed to block Harry and Ron from going 
through Platform 9 and 3/4, and they've already filmed the Ford Anglia 
scenes, so it would be VERY interesting to see what sort of changes they 
might've made to make up for Dobby's absence.  I hope not, though!  He's so 
pitifully adorable!  And I agree about them leaving out the easier stuff and 
accentuating the more difficult scenes.  It's all for the sake of 'wow'-ing 
the audience and, let me tell you, the Quidditch scene was, without a doubt, 
the most impressive one.  I just hope they release the uncut version of the 
movie...can anyone say "Harry Potter Marathon"!??!  I see me lying lazily on 
the couch, equipped with buttery popcorn and Milk Duds, with the DVD remote 
control in hand, and ready to indulge myself in Harry Potter bliss...=)


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




From pbnesbit at msn.com  Thu Nov 22 00:56:22 2001
From: pbnesbit at msn.com (pbnesbit at msn.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:56:22 -0000
Subject: Fantasy Cast: Sean Bean (Was: Miriam Margoyles/Sean Bean/Jeremy Irons)
In-Reply-To: <9tgqh5+ku2p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thifm+kd00@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:


(Snip parts about Dawn French & Miriam Margoyles)

Sean Bean as Sirius: 

> >   Sean Bean, like Alan Rickman, has a special facility for 
playing the "foppish ass" type (although you want to punch him 
instead of shag him). He was the baddie Lord Fenton in the SCARLETT 
miniseries (god, did that suck - but it was not the cast's fault).  
He was also the baddie recently in DON'T SAY A WORD (god, did that 
suck - but again, is wasn't really the cast's fault).  It's too bad 
that Billy Connolly is now rather too old to play Black, although I 
could see him as Mad-Eye Moody.
> 


Sean Bean also played the title role of Richard Sharpe in the BBC 
production of the movies based on the novels by Bernard Cornwell.  
(Find them--they're wonderful!)

Sharpe is quite a bit like Sirius--quick to anger, totally loyal, (& 
dead sexy to boot <g>) and fiercely protective of his friends.  

Bean has the ruggedly handsome bit down pat, IMNSHO.  He'd be 
wonderful as Sirius (that is, if Neil Gaiman can't act. 

Peace & Plenty, 

Parker  




From cindysphynx at home.com  Thu Nov 22 01:17:14 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:17:14 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9thgvp+tfrk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thjmq+v6l0@eGroups.com>

Megan wrote:

 The hardest
> to do probably being Dobby (it HAS to be believeable as a creature)
> and Buckbeak (they RIDE him for heaven's sake!).

I have a feeling that Dobby will be a little guy in a Dobby suit.  
He's in a number of scenes, and, um, perhaps they learned something 
based on their experience with the Centaur.

Buckbeak is a problem, isn't he?  Can you imagine what it would have 
looked like if Harry had ridden the Centaur?  ::shiver::  Please, 
please, let Buckbeak look more attractive than the Centaur.

I also wonder whether they'll cut a big check for special effects 
when Moody transforms into Crouch.  They don't have to (as this sort 
of thing is seen in movies from time to time), but it would be neat 
if they really put their heart into it.

Cindy




From holebind at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 22 01:20:07 2001
From: holebind at hotmail.com (holebind at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:20:07 -0000
Subject: Is there anyone else who really hated it?
Message-ID: <9thjs7+7u47@eGroups.com>


I wanted to leave after 15 minutes, and I am really angry about this 
film. I don't want to bug all the people who seemed to love it so 
much...but if anyone would like to talk about why they didn't like it 
(I have about a million reasons), let me know.




From cindysphynx at home.com  Thu Nov 22 01:24:47 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:24:47 -0000
Subject: Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
In-Reply-To: <003c01c172e1$e2ef0d90$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <9thk4v+qh06@eGroups.com>

Mike wrote:

>Implication: the book is working with the image of a
> pitch surrounded by bleachers (as we have always assumed) - and the 
movie
> has introduced an entirely new layout.
> 
> What intrigues me is how they came up with this (very clever!) 
idea. <snip reasons for bleacher layout>
> 
> Later on I noticed another issue: in GoF the final task is carried 
out on
> the Quidditch pitch, which has been set up with a great maze made of
> twenty-foot high hedgerows (ch. 31). Of course, Flint hunters have 
often
> wondered how the spectators managed to see anything from their 
seats - but
> with the movie's stands, the problem is solved.
> 
> So is it possible that Jo's own thinking about quidditch pitches 
has also
> developed a bit since PS - and that the stands in the movie version 
of PS
> are an import from GoF?
> 

Hmmm.  I kind of envisioned the bleachers for the Third Task a bit 
differently.  First, it would be logical that the bleachers might 
actually be full -- it is the *Third Task* and newsworthy, after 
all.  The other thing I wondered about is that it might be nifty if 
the bleachers were suspended in mid-air to give a view of all four 
contestants in the maze.

But then again, you'd still have the problem that the audience will 
see Moody's shenanigans.

Cindy




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 01:26:08 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:26:08 -0000
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9thhc9+lafe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thk7g+kflm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Megan" <virtualworldofhp at y...> wrote:

> > mandrakes? (though I would bet money these are cute)...
> 
> Sorry, that's supposed to be CUT.  

They are essential for curing the people frozen by the basilisk, so can't be cut 
out entirely.  And as wriggling baby plants, will probably be cute as well, LOL.

.Do you think they use the amout of
> CGI effects required to determine whether a piece/scene gets cut
> (Peeves?)?  

But Peeves was apparently flimed and THEN cut because Columbus didn't like 
the way the scene turned out.

I really do wonder what they are going to do
> about Dobby. (I really see him as getting cut, I really do...after
> some of the wacky cuttings of PS/SS I wouldn't be surprised!)

Yikes, Dobby is so crucial, in book 2 and later, it's hard to see how they'd get 
along without him.  Though personally I wouldn't mind, I find him annoying.  
Anyway, apparently (according to the Leaky Cauldron site) Warner is in 
negotiations for casting someone to do his voice, so he'll apparently be CGI.




From cindysphynx at home.com  Thu Nov 22 01:29:33 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:29:33 -0000
Subject: Is there anyone else who really hated it?
In-Reply-To: <9thjs7+7u47@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thkdt+9obb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., holebind at h... wrote:
> 
> I wanted to leave after 15 minutes, and I am really angry about 
this 
> film. I don't want to bug all the people who seemed to love it so 
> much...but if anyone would like to talk about why they didn't like 
it 
> (I have about a million reasons), let me know.

I didn't hate the movie, although I did have certain issues with it.  
I wasn't ready to leave after 15 minutes, as hardly anything had 
happened by that point.  I did get a bit fidgety in the last 15 
minutes, though.

Perhaps pick your five strongest objections and lay them out for us, 
and perhaps we can rid you of your anger.  Also, let us know if you 
read the books or not, as that will certainly impact how you view the 
movie.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Cindy 




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 01:33:42 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 01:33:42 -0000
Subject: Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
In-Reply-To: <003c01c172e1$e2ef0d90$e500a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <9thklm+f6vf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> wrote:
 in GoF the final task is carried out on
> the Quidditch pitch, which has been set up with a great maze made of
> twenty-foot high hedgerows (ch. 31). Of course, Flint hunters have often
> wondered how the spectators managed to see anything from their seats - but
> with the movie's stands, the problem is solved.
> 
> So is it possible that Jo's own thinking about quidditch pitches has also
> developed a bit since PS - and that the stands in the movie version of PS
> are an import from GoF?

I would love to think that they're planning that far ahead, even though it would 
be inconsistent with the books.  Why would anyone care if the spectators could 
see the action in Task 3, when obviously they couldn't see it in Task 2, which 
was underwater?  And if the spectators *could* see the participants in Task 
3, then of course the participants could see the spectators, too, and Harry 
wouldn't need to be using his wand for orientation, so it's not a flint.  But the 
towers and elimination of the wand/compass would be an OK modification for 
the film, IMHO.




From sesyredchoos at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 01:38:33 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:38:33 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is there anyone else who really hated it?
Message-ID: <c6.216b2ad.292db119@aol.com>

hmmm...Well, I have to say that the beginning lagged a little and topping it 
off with those delightful first notes from "Hedwig's Theme", it could've made 
a person not-so-obssesed with Harry Potter mania droop just the slightest 
bit.  My mom has seen it THREE times and I still have to poke her on the side 
to get her to wake up, but it's not because she thinks the movie is crap.  
She really likes all the fifteen minutes she's seen (that's the sum totat 
from all three times, mind you) and she really wants to see it again so she 
could start piecing the bits from the previous times.  I guess you have to go 
into the movie knowing that it's merely an interpretation of the book and 
that it takes a lot of gut to grab something already so damn perfect and try 
to make another work of art from it.  It has it's merits, but it also has 
it's downfalls (I wanted more humor, dammit!).  But for those of you who 
didn't enjoy or, rather, "hated" the movie, you can console yourselves by 
reading the book again and watching it in your head.  You can't have anything 
better than that.  =)

Milly V.


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




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Thu Nov 22 01:53:47 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 17:53:47 -0800
Subject: Susanna/Pigwdigeon's remarks
In-Reply-To: <1006342357.1643.65233.m10@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006342357.1643.65233.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <11476106044.20011121175347@mindspring.com>


Wednesday, November 21, 2001, 3:32:37 AM, Susanna wrote:

HMyc> 1)A really big time line inconsistency: Hagrid comes to the hut out 
HMyc> on the sea with Harry's birthday cake, so it's supposed to be 31 
HMyc> July.

There could have been a passage of time, but the movie should have
indicated it.

HMyc> 2) My strongest objection to the film: Richard Harris as Dumbledore.
HMyc> Where is the smile, where is the fundamental goodness of this great 
HMyc> man, where is his wonderful eccentricity?

They surgically removed it from Dumbledore, went back in time to the
set of the MGM _Wizard of Oz_, and inserted it into Billie Burke's
Glinda. :)

HMyc> 5) A detail I liked immensely: Harry taking those completely 
HMyc> nonsensical notes at the beginning of the Potions lesson.

I've seem people do it in college so I nodded at that, though
I think it's more a "Hermione" thing to do...

-- 
Dave




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Thu Nov 22 02:40:56 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 02:40:56 -0000
Subject: Susanna/Pigwdigeon's remarks
In-Reply-To: <11476106044.20011121175347@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <9thojo+eior@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
> 
> Wednesday, November 21, 2001, 3:32:37 AM, Susanna wrote:
> 
> HMyc> 1)A really big time line inconsistency: Hagrid comes to the 
hut out 
> HMyc> on the sea with Harry's birthday cake, so it's supposed to be 
31 
> HMyc> July.
> 
> There could have been a passage of time, but the movie should have
> indicated it.
> 

Do they ever mention the calendar date in the movie?  I don't believe 
they ever say what date it is, it's just Harry's birthday, so it's not 
necessary to account for the month that passes between Hagrid's 
arrival and Harry's departure for school.  I assumed they left the 
island that night, went shopping the next day and Harry got right on 
the train.  The discrepancy in dates doesn't exist in the movie.

Wanda





From meboriqua at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 02:59:42 2001
From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 02:59:42 -0000
Subject: Seventeen points against the movie...
In-Reply-To: <9th0gc+9bd2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thpmu+qsec@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
 
> Excellent point.  She was previously sort of "insinuating" herself 
> into their conversations; I also disliked the "it's in your blood" 
> line.  Did Kloves swallow a bunch of bad cliches for lunch and feel 
> compelled to spit them back out?  (Shades of Ron's slug problem in 
> CoS? <g>)>

There are two things that bothered me about the "it's in your blood 
comment".  The first is that it reminded me immediately of the word 
mudblood.  I'm not sure why that's a problem, but it doesn't sit well 
with me.

The second is that Hermione would never and JKR would NEVER say that.  
One of the big themes throughout the books is that our choices, not 
our blood, matters.  Hermione telling Harry that Quidditch is in his 
blood is like telling him he had no choice in the matter.  Boy, did 
that irritate me.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who also believes that our choices mean a hell 
of a lot *****************************************************




From lrcjestes at earthlink.net  Wed Nov 21 14:23:12 2001
From: lrcjestes at earthlink.net (lrcjestes at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 14:23:12 -0000
Subject: Fantasy Casting - Sirius and Remus
In-Reply-To: <9teqmv+d1rb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tgdcg+u5h8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> hrmm... although I enjoy everything Colin Firth has done, I would 
rather hope he will be too busy working on a film of THE EDGE OF 
REASON next year. I want more Mark Darcy, please.
> 
> How about Jude Law for Sirius Black?
> 

Sirius has black hair! He's dark and has very defined (and in PoA 
skeletal) facial structure.  Neither Colin Firth nor especially Jude 
Law are dark.  Law is a blonde and way too young and Firth has light 
brown hair (if I recall correctly) and a much more rounded face.  My 
problem with Joseph Fiennes is that he's too young (born in 1970) and 
too slight to be menacing as Sirius is suppoed to be in PoA.  

My preference is Firth as Lupin (good age...born in 1960) and as 
Penny mentioned Daniel Day Lewis as Sirius.  He's actually 10 years 
younger than Rickman so he's not nearly too old.  Actually he's just 
about the perfect age.  From the trophy case it shows James as seeker 
in 1972.  If we assume that was his 7th year, James would have been 
born in 1954 or 1955.  DDL was born in 1957. 


carole





From meboriqua at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 03:12:55 2001
From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:12:55 -0000
Subject: Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
In-Reply-To: <9thk4v+qh06@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thqfn+l6a0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Cindy C." <cindysphynx at h...> wrote:
 
> Hmmm.  I kind of envisioned the bleachers for the Third Task a bit 
> differently.  First, it would be logical that the bleachers might 
> actually be full -- it is the *Third Task* and newsworthy, after 
> all.  The other thing I wondered about is that it might be nifty if 
> the bleachers were suspended in mid-air to give a view of all four 
> contestants in the maze.
> 
> But then again, you'd still have the problem that the audience will 
> see Moody's shenanigans.>

Cindy, I love your idea of the bleachers suspended - how very magical.  
I just had a lightbulb moment, though about Moody's shenanigans inside 
the maze.  It could be possible that Moody had on his invisibility 
cloak at the time.  Remember, as Crouch Jr. he tells Dumbledore that 
he was wearing one when he killed his father.

I guess from here on in we should take this discussion back to the 
main site if we want to dissect this further.

--jenny from ravenclaw ******************************************




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 03:20:00 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:20:00 -0000
Subject: Fantasy Casting - Sirius and Remus
In-Reply-To: <9tgdcg+u5h8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thqt0+nugt@eGroups.com>

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

> Daniel Day Lewis as Sirius.  He's actually 10 years 
> younger than Rickman so he's not nearly too old.  Actually he's just 
> about the perfect age.  From the trophy case it shows James as seeker 
> in 1972.  If we assume that was his 7th year, James would have been 
> born in 1954 or 1955.  DDL was born in 1957. 

But remember, book 2 begins in 1992, as Nearly-Headless Nick celebrates the 
500th anniversary of his death in 1492.  So unless they change the 1492 date 
(very unlikely, considering that Chris Columbus' production company is called 
1492 Productions -- get it?), then DDL is actually a bit old for the part, 
though no doubt he can play the right age.




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 03:55:21 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 22:55:21 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
Message-ID: <23.14c9def7.292dd129@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/21/2001 6:24:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com writes:

<< who wonders whether there's a special
 club for people who apply mind-bogglingly tenuous forms of redaction
 criticism to minor issues in children's books. >>

Well, it's not HP for Grownups because they're not children's books...



From LJLBub at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 03:58:46 2001
From: LJLBub at aol.com (LJLBub at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:58:46 -0000
Subject: James--Biggerstaff as Wood/Flight Scene
In-Reply-To: <9tavvn+bmc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tht5m+o6gp@eGroups.com>

> When I saw the movie, having the screenwriter add something to the 
> book made it more exciting and refreshing for me.

Note:  This is a reply to a very old post, so excuse the delayed 
reaction.  I just joined the group and am reading the old posts so 
I'm not redundant in my discussions.

I thought that some of the most interesting things to watch (and ones 
that got big laughs from the audience) were the additions.  Take the 
wonderfully swoonworthy Sean Biggerstaff line of his first Quidditch 
match, or the water and rum line with Seamus.  Another nice touch was 
the catchphrase of Hagrid's (I shouldn't have told ya that)... people 
actually started quoting along with it towards the end of the movie. 

However, I did not welcome many of the changes.  Some things did not 
fit into my view of PS/SS- I think I needed to believe these things 
could actually happen in the books to really accept them.  Additional 
lines could have actually happened in the books and were just not 
mentioned (hope that made sense because its about as coherant as I 
can get at the moment).  Some things, like Dudley's jumping on the 
stairs, helped a bit with the characterization of minor parts for 
people who hadn't read the books.  Any thoughts?




From cindysphynx at home.com  Thu Nov 22 04:22:59 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:22:59 -0000
Subject: Wands and Qudditch Pitch Architecture (was Take *7*)
In-Reply-To: <9thqfn+l6a0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9thuj3+gd51@eGroups.com>


Jenny wrote:

> I guess from here on in we should take this discussion back to the 
> main site if we want to dissect this further.

OK.  I moved it to the main list.

Cindy




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 04:25:21 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:25:21 -0000
Subject: SFX Problems and Future Challenges
Message-ID: <9thunh+cm7h@eGroups.com>

Hi~

After seeing the movie the second time yesterday I waited to see who 
did all the SFX for the movie. Well turns out there are three 
different companies listed: Jim Henson's Creature Shop, Sony Digital, 
and ILM(Industrial Light & Magic). This makes a little more sense to 
me now why some of the CG looked better than others. I have a feeling 
ILM did Norbert(which was pretty detailed and realistic) and probably 
the Quidditch match. Sony probably did the troll sequence and 
possibly a lot of the backgrounds, that to me looked a little wonky 
at times.  Henson's most definately did the animatronics.

I was hoping that ILM would have done all the CG work to keep things 
a bit more consistent. However I guess time constraits and possibly 
budget for this movie necessitated the use of two CG companies. 
Although, on the other hand ILM may have only been able to commit to 
certain scenes, due to the fact that they may have their hands full 
with CG for another little movie opening May(Which has a really 
stupid title sorry slight rant).

Anyway I think that in CoS Henson's may create Dobby and other elves 
as an animatronic similar to Yoda instead of being a CG.  Aragog and  
Buckbeak will be(and should be) done by ILM, especially Buckbeak. I 
also think as the movies go on everything will get better and we'll 
find less to nitpick, IMHO.

I do like the effects on a whole but I thought they could be better 
and more consistent.

Cheers,

Kristin




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 04:37:14 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:37:14 -0000
Subject: Future casts.
In-Reply-To: <3BFB270C.31F29043@nb.sympatico.ca>
Message-ID: <9thvdq+aa3m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Angela Boyko <angelaboyko at h...> wrote:
> > Pardon me again but the actor who plays Snape(forgot his name)
> > Couldn't even find it in two articles. But boy everone else 
knows. 
> 
> I laughed and laughed when I read this line. Even someone who is not
> Alan Rickman obsessed (but I respect the man, find him dead sexy, 
and
> the only choice as Snape so don't flame me) can't help but know. I 
have
> the feeling that the Alan Rickman obsessed would be bombarding you 
with
> Remembralls right now if they could. But I'm sure you had a good 
reason.
> :-)
> 
> I wish I was better educated about UK actors so I could jump in on 
the
> thread. I'm going to have to start watching BBC Canada more, right 
now I
> watch it for "The Vicar of Dibley".
> 
> Angela
> -- 
> Current Time zone:  Atlantic		ICQ: 65588507
> Future Time zone:  Mountain		AIM: angelamermaid
> http://www.geocities.com/ochfd42/index.html
>   "Every time I close the door on reality it comes in
>       through the windows."  Jennifer Unlimited



Really,I knew of Alan Rickman,especially from Robin Hood. The man is 
EVIL!!!! I mean,come on,he barely had any lines in HP,how can you say 
anyone in that movie was cute/handsome. I expected the Dursley boy to 
be fatter. Especially in the later books where he falls off a chair. 
Chris ( re-Rickman) not him personally just his characeters.LOL.




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 04:44:46 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:44:46 -0000
Subject: My late comments
In-Reply-To: <200111212043.PAA26750@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <9thvru+7fc6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Elizabeth Dalton <Elizabeth.Dalton at E...> 
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I saw the movie Sunday afternoon with my 7-year-old daughter and my 
> mother-in-law, who's probably about sixty. My daughter hasn't read 
the books 
> (she's just starting to read, but she's also only been speaking 
English for 
> about a year-- long story). My MIL has read and enjoyed all the 
books. I read 
> them this summer for the first time-- I've probably read them about 
3 times 
> each, at this point. (I sometimes only read parts of them on re-
reads, so it's a 
> little hard to estimate this.)
> 
> After logging into this group, I ploughed through the archives. 
Well, everything 
> since Friday, anyway. :) Not much left to say that hasn't already 
been said, but 
> here are the few points I'd like to make:
> 
> First, I guess I'm alone in this, but the altered confrontation 
between Harry 
> and Voldemort/Quirrell really bothered me when I saw it. Where was 
the point 
> about Lily's sacrifice? What's this nonsense about bringing James 
and Lily back 
> to life??? I can see that having Quirrell crumble to dust was more 
cinematic 
> than blisters, but Harry doesn't come across as nearly as brave 
without the 
> issue of the pain from his scar (don't ask me how they would have 
shown this, 
> though). And though I didn't realize this was bugging me until I 
read the 
> comments here, it bothers me that he ends up purposely killing 
Quirrell. It *is* 
> OOC. And I guess I really am the only one to complain about this 
item: I don't 
> think Voldemort should have been able to swoop through Harry like 
that at the 
> end of the fight. For Pete's sake, he's not supposed to be able to 
*touch* 
> Harry. What kind of sense does it make for him to be able to attack 
him directly 
> this way? But I suppose Rowling must have ok'd the change, and I do 
admit the 
> whole thing was more dramatic than the "deus ex Dumbledore" book 
scene.
> 
> Second, I think it weakened the story considerably to have all the 
other 
> characters addressing Voldemort by name. Hagrid whispers it once 
and then after 
> that things just go on as if it doesn't matter at all. That takes 
out a lot of 
> the impact of confronting him directly at the end. Of course, if 
they'd done it 
> properly, they'd have had to leave in the scene where Dumbledore 
tells Harry to 
> use the proper name. (Like many here, I felt Dumbledore especially 
got chopped 
> up in the dialogue department.) But of all things, to leave out the 
bit where 
> Harry rants at Ron and Hermione about what it was like when 
Voldemort was 
> around, Ron getting more and more upset at the way Harry uses the 
name so 
> casually.... Then again, that is one of my favorite scenes. We all 
have them, 
> don't we?
> 
> Third (but this has been discussed to death), I think they really 
underplayed 
> Snape, his actions, motivations, history, etc. He's easily the most 
intriguing 
> character from my point of view. Rickman did a great job with the 
few scenes he 
> had (enough for me to forgive him for not being as thin as I've 
imagined Snape 
> to be), but he didn't have enough airtime, and then to leave out 
Dumbledore's 
> explanation for Snape's animosity... unforgiveable!
> 
> Overall, I agree with comments that have been made about taking out 
original 
> lines to put in lesser lines, especially in how that affected the 
humor. I also 
> think that while the beginning and middle showed the effect of 
compressing the 
> story somewhat, the ending took the most damage. There's a lot to 
fit in there, 
> to set up for the later stories, and I think they left too much 
out. I can't see 
> how they'll be able to do PoA, let alone GoF (unless the rumor is 
true and they 
> go for two movies for GoF).
> 
> But the acting was quite good, the casting was good, and I thought 
most of the 
> effects were decent. (I particularly liked the entrance to Diagon 
Alley. I'm 
> trying to forget about the centaur and the unicorn.) The kids did a 
really great 
> job, all things considered. Even if they did always look made-up, 
and the 
> crinkle tool they used on Hermione's hair was kind of obvious. It 
really helped 
> me to see the relative sizes of the kids, especially in the 
Quidditch match, to 
> understand why it is such a big deal to have a first-year playing 
on the 
> Gryffindor team. I can only imagine that the CGI editing I'd heard 
they planned 
> to use for Harry's eyes just didn't work out in time. No matter. 
That glare he 
> gave Dudley in the zoo didn't need any tinkering.
> 
> Given that so many of you have reported liking it better on a 
second viewing, I 
> think I'll see if I can fit that in at some point. And I do hope 
there's a DVD 
> with plenty of extras. I don't know if that four-hour director's 
cut really 
> exists, but I know we saw stuff in the trailer that didn't make it 
into the 
> movie (e.g. the reminder not to use magic in the corridors), so 
hopefully a less 
> cut version would be... well... less cut up. :)
> 
> Happy nitpicking, everyone,
> 
> Elizabeth
> 
> (...who likes Rickman well enough, but has her own ideas about the 
Snape she'd 
> like to invite in for a cup of tea and a bit of cheering up. Poor 
misunderstood 
> fellow.)


Now that is the very kind of thing I wish to read more of. How people 
felt about the movie,etc. Well put,I dare say. I am in agreement with 
you. Chris




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 04:53:50 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:53:50 -0000
Subject: In regard to the most cinematically challenging or appealing movie
Message-ID: <9ti0cu+68s4@eGroups.com>

Please set me right if I am wrong. I have only read the books once 
each this summer and I do not own one. So I may be mixing things up. 
But I would think,that the last of the books,I believe where the 
other schools come for the challenge and in which Voldemort confronts 
Harry. To me that would be the toughest in length and in content.
 The challenges to the ones whose names were drawn. The underwater 
sequences etc. That is book 4 isn't it? Chris Also what about finding 
a giantess to match Hagrid?




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 04:56:28 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:56:28 -0000
Subject: In regard to the most cinematically challenging or appealing movie
In-Reply-To: <9ti0cu+68s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ti0hs+5klr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dragondor1709 at y... wrote:
> Please set me right if I am wrong. I have only read the books once 
> each this summer and I do not own one. So I may be mixing things 
up. 
> But I would think,that the last of the books,I believe where the 
> other schools come for the challenge and in which Voldemort 
confronts 
> Harry. To me that would be the toughest in length and in content.
>  The challenges to the ones whose names were drawn. The underwater 
> sequences etc. That is book 4 isn't it? Chris Also what about 
finding 
> a giantess to match Hagrid? 

I just reread some of the special effects comments so forgive me for 
going over the same things. I see this has already been covered.




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Thu Nov 22 06:28:11 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 06:28:11 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's birthday in the movie
In-Reply-To: <9thojo+eior@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011122062811.35606.qmail@web14702.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Wanda Sherratt <sherratt at mediaone.net> wrote: 
>--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Dave Hardenbrook <DaveH47 at m...> wrote:
>> 
>> Wednesday, November 21, 2001, 3:32:37 AM, Susanna wrote:
>> 
>> HMyc> 1)A really big time line inconsistency: Hagrid comes to >the 
>hut out 
>> HMyc> on the sea with Harry's birthday cake, so it's supposed to >be 
>31 
>> HMyc> July.
>> 
>> There could have been a passage of time, but the movie should >have
>> indicated it.
>> 

>Do they ever mention the calendar date in the movie?  I don't >believe 
>they ever say what date it is, it's just Harry's birthday, so it's >not 
>necessary to account for the month that passes between Hagrid's 
>arrival and Harry's departure for school.  I assumed they left the 
>island that night, went shopping the next day and Harry got right >on 
>the train.  The discrepancy in dates doesn't exist in the movie.

>Wanda


I made this remark less for L.O.O.N.-iness, but because it could be important that Harry's birthday is 31 July, only we don't know it yet. And the other thing that bothers me about it is that Hagrid has to accompany him to the train station and then simply leaves him there because he "gotta go"- that's nothing Hagrid would do. Of course he has to, following the logic of the story, because otherwise Harry wouldn't meet the Weasleys. But it simply doens't fit into hagrid's character.

Susanna/pigwidgeon37



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at hpforgrownups-owner 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 laurelg85 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 06:34:55 2001
From: laurelg85 at yahoo.com (laurelg85 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 06:34:55 -0000
Subject: sweater vests?
In-Reply-To: <20011122002937.57066.qmail@web11507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9ti6af+nmqn@eGroups.com>

I THINK it was black and white, but Hermione already had her 
Gryffindor tie, which is pretty confusing...

Also, why did Harry not want to be in Slytherin?  Hagrid never 
discussed the Houses with him, and he didn't know what House Draco 
was going to be in.




From silvertongue at messiah.co.uk  Thu Nov 22 07:41:30 2001
From: silvertongue at messiah.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:41:30 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <9thh3v+89bg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tia7a+9ps8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Milagros Viquez <sesyred at y...> wrote:
> 
Well, in fact JKR helped write the screenplay for the movie and 
worked on the adaption including alterations!


> > I'm not entirely sure J.K. Rowling did make the final
> > cuts to the movie.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that she
> > stuck around to perfect the look, feel, and just about
> > everything of the movie, but she certainly didn't have
> > the tough job of being the person to make the final
> > decisions on the cutting room floor.  The director is
> > the artist.  He's the interpreter and, ultimately,
> > J.K. had little power over what scenes should be kept
> > and others ommitted.
> 
> I think you're right, Millie, JKR was a presence on set and 
beforehand, but 
> there's been no indication that she participated in the editing, 
more's the pity. 
> Several scenes were filmed but not used -- they've shown up in 
previews, 
> among other inidcations -- so even if she saw the script, she 
didn't necesarily 
> approve the final cut.




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Thu Nov 22 08:37:51 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:37:51 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing is so much better
Message-ID: <9tidgv+h3of@eGroups.com>

I just came back from the 2nd viewing of the movie, and the 
experience was WAY better than the first one! I really really enjoy 
the movie MUCH more the 2nd time viewing and totally see it 
independently from the book! It was great, I can truly enjoy it for 
what it is (a movie itself) and feeling wanting to go see again ^^;;

also something funny....there were several women at the theatre keep 
laughing whenever Snape appeared on screen! They were giggling so 
loud EVERY single time! Well, I can truly understand their reaction 
but need not to show it so obivous??  :P  

there's a little kid sit next to me got really scare at the end of 
movie (right after the Chess part before going to final stage), he 
was saying to his mom that he's really scare and ask will the movie 
be over soon. His mom had to comfort him that the movie will be over 
and it won't be too scary....poor kid ^^;;

I rate the movie a 8/10 the first time viewing, 2nd time, I give it a 
10/10!  can't wait for the DVD so that I can watch it over and over 
and over and over again!! (esp. all the Snape parts, haha!!)

Kewpie





From monika at darwin.inka.de  Thu Nov 22 11:24:45 2001
From: monika at darwin.inka.de (monika at darwin.inka.de)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:24:45 -0000
Subject: Fantasy Casting - Sirius and Remus
In-Reply-To: <9tgdcg+u5h8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tin9t+j7rj@eGroups.com>

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


> My preference is Firth as Lupin (good age...born in 1960) and as 
> Penny mentioned Daniel Day Lewis as Sirius.  He's actually 10 years 
> younger than Rickman so he's not nearly too old.  Actually he's 
just 
> about the perfect age.  From the trophy case it shows James as 
seeker 
> in 1972.  If we assume that was his 7th year, James would have been 
> born in 1954 or 1955.  DDL was born in 1957. 

I also think he would be a good choice, I have just seen him a few
weeks ago in "The last of the Mohicans". I still can't think of
*anyone* who would be perfect for Sirius, but I think I could live
with DDL. :) And he seems to be a great actor. If Rickman can play
Snape, he's not too old to play Sirius. And it definitely has to be
someone with dark hair.

Oh well, I haven't even seen the first movie, and I'm already talking
about the third. ;) It opens today in Germany, we're going to see it
in about five hours... And we will even get to see the original 
English version - yay! 

Monika

--
Harry Potter fanfiction in German:
http://sites.inka.de/darwin/fanfic






From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 12:11:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 12:11:21 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]Shredding the movie (WAS: Seventeen points ......)
In-Reply-To: <9tia7a+9ps8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tiq19+efbo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <silvertongue at m...> wrote:

> Well, in fact JKR helped write the screenplay for the movie and 
> worked on the adaption including alterations!

And your evidence for this is . . . 




From heidit at netbox.com  Thu Nov 22 12:32:10 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:32:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is there anyone else who really hated it?
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF8724@MIAEXCH1>

I didn't like it much on first viewsing myself but my problems started a bit
later than 15 minutes in. If you flip thru the archives you will see some
critisisms of various aspects of the movie, and I agree with Cindy: let us
know your reasons. 

-----Original Message-----
From: holebind at hotmail.com <holebind at hotmail.com>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed Nov 21 20:20:07 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is there anyone else who really hated it?

Real-To:  holebind at hotmail.com


I wanted to leave after 15 minutes, and I am really angry about this 
film. I don't want to bug all the people who seemed to love it so 
much...but if anyone would like to talk about why they didn't like it 
(I have about a million reasons), let me know.



_________________________________________________________________   

Note from the HPFGU Hexquarters: before posting, you MUST read our Admin
Files! You can find them at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/hpforgrownups/

Warning -- this group contains spoilers! 

Questions, list-based or other? Contact the Mods at
hpforgrownups-owner 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/ 




From heidit at netbox.com  Thu Nov 22 12:40:14 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:40:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Seventeen points against the movie...
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF8725@MIAEXCH1>

Re alphabetizing the sorting:
Why not go Bones, Grangrt, Malfoy,  Patil, Patil, Potter, Weasley?
It would have shown Ravenclaws being sorted, that siblings are not all in
the same house, and adhered to alphabetical order. Plus, showing a
diminishing pool of students would make it clear that others are sorted
among the names we do hear. 



From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Thu Nov 22 13:31:57 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:31:57 -0000
Subject: SFX Problems and Future Challenges
In-Reply-To: <9thunh+cm7h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tiuod+3brg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Kristin" <Alyeskakc at a...> wrote:
> Hi~
> 
> After seeing the movie the second time yesterday I waited to see who 
> did all the SFX for the movie. Well turns out there are three 
> different companies listed: Jim Henson's Creature Shop, Sony Digital, 
> and ILM(Industrial Light & Magic). 

I believe there were more than three, but the only other one I remember is 
Mill Hill, a London group that did the effects for Gladiator. I got the impression 
there were at least six effects companies involved, a mind-boggling logistical 
nightmare. How they did this in a year...

Ivis the elderly






From andrea_richland at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 22 14:20:05 2001
From: andrea_richland at hotmail.com (andrea_richland at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:20:05 -0000
Subject: ooh! New HP posters at Ebay
Message-ID: <9tj1il+ruoh@eGroups.com>


Oooh! Exclusive never-seen-before Harry Potter posters up at Ebay - a 
set of five with Harry, Hermione&Ron, Snape, Hagrid, and the 
International final movie poster!

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1488705178


aren't they nice?






From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 15:06:53 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:06:53 -0000
Subject: Right Wing Reviews
Message-ID: <9tj4ad+plen@eGroups.com>

We're all familiar with right-wing reactionaries decrying Harry 
Potter for "seducing" young people to explore the occult.  (I think 
mostly it "seduces" young people to cheat on their homework--think 
Divination.<g>)

If any of us thought the film would change the (already closed) 
minds of folks who object to Potter, these reviews should establish 
that they are still firmly opposed.  Of course, I don't think the 
film is a very thorough portrayal of the Potter universe, but even a 
thorough portrayal probably wouldn't have swayed these folks.

This is Robert Knight's review (he of the Culture and Family 
Institute):

http://www.cultureandfamily.org/report/2001-11-21/o_knight.shtml

This is the review from Focus on the Family:

http://www.family.org/pplace/pi/films/A0018592.html

Prepare to be appalled...

--Barb





From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 15:24:26 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:24:26 +0100
Subject: Missing something
References: <9sobmp+koea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <018e01c17369$ee6d8600$aa2d07d5@oemcomputer>

I've seen the movie tonight at the midnight premiere, so here comes another
review...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E

First off, I thought it was completely awesome and wonderful... I was
sitting in there with a huge beaming smile on my face the whole time.

Apart from the greatness there were also things that disappointed me. Yes,
they were very true to the books, but there were just things missing that
helped to create the unique HP atmosphere. For example during Quidditch. It
completely took my breath away and I don't think I've ever seen something
that awesome... but I sorely missed Lee's witty comments. True, Lee
commented, but how - it was boring! And Prof McGonagall didn't shake her
fist or knock her hat askew :-(  There were several similar things that I
just missed. It doesn't lessen the quality of the movie, or the fun I had,
but I really noticed it.

Another two things: First off - too little humour. They snipped out many of
those scenes and left out good lines. And - I didn't like the changed
ending. Of course, having Harry pass out and Dumbledore come to the rescue
ould've been a major anticlimax, Quirrell did a nice crumpling act, but I
didn't really think it was a good solution.

And another thing: who knows me from chat also knows that I spend my time
mostly being Mrs. Snape... and what can I say, I'm still in love, more than
ever
before. AR was very good. But  (I know I will get beaten for this - maybe
I'll
change my mind when I've seen it a second time, so don't sue me if I write
tomorow and say he is a really mean git in the movie) - what was it with all
the
robe and hair swishing? Sometimes I felt like he stuck too closely to his
role in
Blow Dry. And another thing is, he didn't really come over *that* mean - it
always sounded like he was being sly and cunning (he's a Slyth after all)
but
you never were sure if he wanted to give an advice or was
simply being a git. I really can't wait for the "teeth-scene" in GoF <g>.
I guess my problems with Sev are mostly due to the bad dubbing (did I say
bad? I meant horrible! Sad fact,but as I thought it would be - they never
manage
to dub right and dubbing AR is impossible).
And just to say it again: I love Snape, he's brilliantly portraied (hey, did
anyone
ever think I wouldn't? <G>) !!!!!!!!!!!

BTW, I also liked Lily - she's always been one of my fave's and the actress
looks good.

Did I mention I'm going again tonight, tomorrow night, Saturday and Sunday?
<g>

  ~ Dinah ~

"That was bloody brilliant!" ~ Ron, PS the movie






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




From john at walton.vu  Thu Nov 22 15:52:23 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:52:23 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Right Wing Reviews
In-Reply-To: <9tj4ad+plen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B822CFB7.53CB%john@walton.vu>

Barb wrote:

> We're all familiar with right-wing reactionaries decrying Harry
> Potter for "seducing" young people to explore the occult.

::attempts to refrain from vomiting:: Folks, don't read these reviews soon
after having lunch. Trust me.

What a bunch of bigots. I particularly like the way that Knight has
indoctrinated his daughter to say "The idea of witchcraft could affect many
people's minds. It looks innocent and cute in Harry Potter, but in reality,
it?s really wicked." The *true* wickedness is that he's closed this poor
girl's mind to anything that doesn't come from his particular brand of
pulpit.

Welcome to America's 100% Grade A Fancy version of the Taliban, folks.

I was, however, remarkably pleased that the Focus on the Family site did
take the time to find positive aspects of the movie, as well as quoting Wren
Walker without making her sound like a Child-Baking,
Gingerbread-House-Living-In Monster. A far cry from their religion-based
trashing of the books.

--John

____________________________________________

I'm tone deaf! Music means nothing to me!
It's only the way my accompanists play that make it appear I'm in key!
Stone tone deaf, can't tell a key from a clef!
            -A Word On My Ear by Donald Swann

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From sesyredchoos at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 16:59:36 2001
From: sesyredchoos at aol.com (sesyredchoos at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:59:36 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sweater vests?
Message-ID: <6.1f8e482f.292e88f8@aol.com>

Yea, I also wondered about that part, and the answer didn't come until the 
second time I watched the movie.  It was a little quick but it would explain 
why Harry didn't want to be put in Slytherin.  Right after Draco was sorted 
into Slytherin, Ron turned to Harry and told him that Voldemort was also 
sorted into that house and that it was that same house that produced the most 
evil wizards.  Ok, I'm not 100% sure of the latter part of that statement, 
but Ron warned Harry right before he was sorted.  Can anyone else confirm 
that?  aaaahhh!  I'll have to watch it AGAIN just to make sure!  Oh, the 
sacrifices!  heehee =)

Milly V.


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




From SALeathem at aol.com  Thu Nov 22 18:19:04 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:19:04 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] sweater vests?
Message-ID: <8d.fc575b4.292e9b98@aol.com>

The jumpers pre sorting were grey v-necks with two lines of black on the 
v-neck.
The tie's pre sorting were also Black, with the Hogwarts crest near the top.

As they're assembled to be sorted in the Great Hall all of the first years 
are dressed like that, so Hermione doesn't already have her Gryffindor tie. 
They might have mucked something up before hand and had her in it by mistake.

Sara



From nansie at bigsky.net  Thu Nov 22 18:25:32 2001
From: nansie at bigsky.net (nancy cleaveland)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:25:32 -0700
Subject: sweater vests, Ron's line, more details
References: <6.1f8e482f.292e88f8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c17383$14984cc0$36e2fcce@home>

Hi - re: sweater vests --  I remember seeing Hogwarts crests
too, and the black piping like Sara mentioned, stripes
knitted into the edging. I wondered about the blonde student
with her hair in a French braid getting off the train; she
looked too old to be a first year. I later noticed that she
had on Gryffindor colors.

Ron's line -- "There wasn't a witch or wizard went bad who
wasn't in Slytherin." No mention of Voldemort.

Troll scene --I was wrong about the troll knocking down all
the bathroom stalls first time. Yesterday <g>, I noticed
that there were still stalls standing before he took the
second swipe. I also noticed that Hermione's body blocked
the broken sink from view.

Dumbledore's scar --Joywitch, YES, I noticed the scar!! My
daughter did too, and I didn't say a thing to her in
advance.

Quirrell's hair -- When did he shave his head? Until the
last scene, he had dark sideburns peeking out of his turban.

Does anyone know who the little girl (dark hair just above
her shoulders) who walks in beside Hermione is in real life
or is supposed to be? That is one beautiful child. I looked
for her at the other tables and spotted her once at a table
next to Gryffindor.

I don't remember there ever being any book mention of Fred
and/or George having an animal at Hogwarts but at least one
of the two had a small cage on their luggage cart at the
station. Finally noticed Scabbers in a cage with Ron's
luggage too.

Noticed wooden knitting needles sticking out of Mrs.
Weasley's bag.

I've been re-reading CoS for the first time since the movie
and I *do* now visualize the movie actors in my head as I
read.

--nancy, who appreciates the L.O.O.N.E.E. honor more than
you know!




From codex79 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 18:45:27 2001
From: codex79 at yahoo.com (codex79 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 18:45:27 -0000
Subject: (hopefully new) Movie Comments
Message-ID: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com>

I watched the movie Wednesday afternoon and wanted to share some 
comments with the group. However, I thought it best to go through the 
archives first to avoid repetition. Anyway, here goes:

The strangest part about the movie was perhaps the supposed 'Snape 
the villain' role. He most certainly did not seem half as nasty as 
the Snape in the books (and while reading posts from Snape fans on 
the main list practically convinced me that he's just a 
misunderstood, socially inept man, a rereading of the books totally 
dispels that view for me). In the potions class, Snape doesn't appear 
arbitrary in picking on Harry ... after all, he's the only one who 
looks like he isn't paying attention. Snape's action seems completely 
justified.

And speaking of potions class ... what on earth was that grand 
entrance about?! It was positively fake, overly dramatic, and the 
lines Rickman delivered seemed incongruous and lacking in context. I 
always imagined him menacingly whispering those lines, not raging and 
half-shouting. Alright, I do admit it was darned cool though. And 
that part where he favours Malfoy with a glance - was it to make up 
for all the cut-out scenes where he displays favouritism or to set up 
for the plot in later films?

Another aspect that served to confuse Snape's relationship to Harry 
are his expressions. When he runs into the trio outside McGonagall's 
office, he delivers a short reprimand and turns to look at Harry. 
However, the expression on his face seemed to convey more confusion - 
and if I didn't know the character better, pain or hurt - at Harry's 
rather antagonistic stare. I thought, 'HUH?' (Again, the part when he 
walks away from the trio with his cloak billowing theatrically behind 
him ... cool but totally unnecessary; is Snape a closet drama queen?)

Perhaps we should assume that the movies are setting up a slightly 
different persona from Snape. Perhaps, as other people mentioned 
earlier, Rickman had studied the post-GOF Snape persona and tried to 
hint at it in his role.

Like others, I also noticed the use of first names during the 'Dark' 
Forest segment. I am not too surprised though, if this was done 
deliberately rather than through neglect. Human nature being what it 
is, we often see our differences as a source of contention and 
conflict. However, when faced with greater differences and challenges 
(i.e. the werewolves and assorted unknowns of the Forest), the 
differences that we perceive between each other dwindle in their 
significance (i.e. we see the whole world uniting against alien 
invaders in 'Independence Day') and barriers are broken down. Harry 
and Draco Malfoy are on the same side in that moment, united in their 
fear and their common experience.

The ending was incredibly ... strange. I really did not like the part 
where Voldemort tries to sweet-talk Harry into joining him. Perhaps 
it reflects some post-book 4 plot ... or not. In any case, I was too 
strongly reminded of Star Wars when that plot segment and the music 
was combined, and I felt that such a parallel was rather out of place 
in the Harry Potter universe.

Overall, the movie was darker and more grown-up than I expected, 
especially for book 1. I was surprised to see Lily's death scene, and 
I am sure many of the parents who were there with their small kids 
were too. With the start of the Forest scene, I saw some parents 
walking out with their younger children ... it was probably a good 
idea too; the atmosphere and the slinking Quirrell were things that 
chilren's nightmares are made of.

A final comment I would like to offer is that the movie was, in a 
way, Rowling's opportunity to go over the material in PS/SS and make 
any changes she may have wanted to make in light of how she had 
further developed her characters. I am, for one, glad that they took 
out Dumbledore's "Nitwit, blubber, oddment, tweak" line. It was fine 
when PS/SS was a stand-alone and Dumbledore was described by everyone 
as a mad genius, but when later books came along, he came across in 
the nonconformist-sense of 'eccentric', not weird and nonsensical. 
For what ever reason the line was omitted, it would have been strange 
in light of Harris' portrayal of Dumbledore in any case.

Now for the Nitpicking:

Someone mentioned the strips hanging from the Sorting Hat ... in my 
opinion, it made the hat seem rather feminine, when it was supposed 
to be Gryffindor's hat. I thought that the students' hats, which 
didn't have brims, made them look like Santa's elves =P. Also, I 
didn't see the point of having the witches and wizards dress in 
rather medieval (or was it Victorian?) Muggle clothing.

And yes, the centaur was AWFUL. I was imagining that it would be a 
torso of a person CG-ed onto the torso of a horse. I most certainly 
didn't expect it to be a demonic-looking beast that would probably 
tower over even Madame Maxime's giant steeds. 

Then there was the Quidditch game, when Harry's broom was bewitched. 
For some reason, I always imagined Snape and Quirrell to be on almost 
opposite sides of the pitch, so that Snape could keep an eye on 
Quirrell. How would Snape know what's up if Quirrell was all the way 
behind him? He couldn't possibly have heard the spell, because other 
professors would hear it too. 

And the chess game ... yeah, I loved it too. But, doesn't the chess 
board seem much smaller than normal (i.e. fewer squares between the 
two sides)? And, while the destruction is certainly impressive and 
all, I preferred the book-version where they just get knocked down. 
After all, if the chess pieces destroy each other, how do you play a 
second game? Where's the litter after Quirrell was done with the game?
And I guess, in the movie, some positions were already empty so the 
challenger couldn't choose their own piece?

To end on a positive note, I was very happy with the wand selection 
scene. I always thought that Ollivander was a perfectly decent 
fellow, and I was sorry that his intensity was interpreted as 
'creepy' by Harry, who consequently 'wasn't sure he liked 
Mr.Ollivander too much'. I'm glad he didn't come across as such in 
the movie. Bravo, John Hurt.

Codex





From rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 19:18:49 2001
From: rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com (rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 19:18:49 -0000
Subject: In the Company Of (Be Judicious)...
Message-ID: <9tjj2p+kg5n@eGroups.com>

I chose some "questionable" company to see the movie with me the 
first time...well...one person was a trusted friend...(on Fri. Nov. 
16th)...but I have viewed it twice since....so my mood 
shortly before, during, and after the viewing the the film may have 
colored my perspective....I honestly didn't "know what to think" 
(that's what kept telling everyone)..but rushed to see it the next 
day with a trusted friend who had yet to see it (Sat. Nov. 17th) and 
then saw it by my little self on this past Tuesday.  

I think it's an ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL FILM, especially upon subsequent 
viewings.

Just consider the fact that the company that you are with may color 
how you experience the viewing of a movie.  So be judicious as far as 
who you sees Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone with 
you.  Actually, that's probably common sense for ANY movie.

I will probably see HPandtheSS/PS again a number of times before it 
leaves theatres.  Now I can't wait until it comes out on 
video...actually...wait...it will probably be my very first DVD.  
Can't wait for the fifth book now, either.

RodeoDangerQueen

P.S.  I thought John Hurt was BRILLIANT during his all-too-brief but 
memorable time on screen.




From laurakay76 at juno.com  Thu Nov 22 20:10:28 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:10:28 -0000
Subject: Hello and Information
Message-ID: <9tjm3k+esp4@eGroups.com>


Hi everyone,

I'm a new member to this list; I'm 25 and as big a Harry Potter fan 
as they come.  So far I've seen the movie three times in the theater, 
and once on bootleg video (ack!).  I don't recommend the video; the 
quality is terrible.  :)  Although I've found a few things to nitpick 
about the film (I didn't care for the appearance of the centaur, and 
they completely neglected to explain about Snape having been Harry's 
father's enemy at school), and of course it's not nearly as wonderful 
as the book, on the whole I've enjoyed it and would gladly go see it 
again.  

I haven't read many back messages for the list, so I don't know if 
anyone has already posted about this.  But www.petitiononline.com has 
a petition up asking Chris Columbus and Warner Bros. to please, 
please, please release a director's cut DVD, so we can see the full 
four hours of footage that were originally supposed to be in the 
movie.  If anyone would be interested in signing the petition, here's 
the address:
http://www.petitiononline.com/hpdvd/petition.html

Happy Thanksgiving to those of you celebrating it today!
Laura K.




From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Thu Nov 22 20:52:37 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 12:52:37 -0800
Subject: Special Effects Challenges
In-Reply-To: <1006404291.2971.97818.m11@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006404291.2971.97818.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <12144445849.20011122125237@mindspring.com>


Wednesday, November 21, 2001, 8:44:51 PM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote:

HMyc> Buckbeak is a problem, isn't he?  Can you imagine what it would have
HMyc> looked like if Harry had ridden the Centaur?  ::shiver::  Please, 
HMyc> please, let Buckbeak look more attractive than the Centaur.

Speaking as someone who knows at least a little bit about computer
graphics, I think the biggest barrier to doing Buckbeak effectively
at this point is that they haven't known how to render feathers
effectively.  Though there's supposedly going to be a giant "ground
bird" in Discover channel's upcoming "Walking With Prehistoric Beasts",
So maybe they've mastered feathers at last... We'll see...

-- 
Dave




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 22 23:56:44 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (Nao Hu)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:56:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] extra scene
In-Reply-To: <12144445849.20011122125237@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20011122235644.39108.qmail@web20409.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello, I'm new here but I've loved HP for a long time and already watched the movie twice.Today when I went to BBC website I found a little bit information about the "extra scene" J.K. Rowling wrote for the movie. Steve Klovis confirmed it's the flashback scene and said J.K. wrote it in full but Chris Columbus edited most of it. The most interesting part is this:"It gives more information about the death of Harry's parents, showing they were living ORDINARY LIVES AS MUGGLES". Why? What kind of job James might taken which allowed him (or limited him)to live as muggles? I can't help but wondering.Here is the link:http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_1664000/1664714.stmI am a foreigner in U.S., so pardon my English.Happy Thanksgiving!Sissy


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

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




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 23 00:02:13 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (Nao Hu)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:02:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] extra scene
In-Reply-To: <20011122235644.39108.qmail@web20409.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011123000213.56703.qmail@web20410.mail.yahoo.com>


Sorry, the link is:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_1664000/1664714.stm


Sissy 
> ---------------------------------
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting,
> just $8.95/month.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Nov 23 01:22:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:22:21 -0000
Subject: extra scene
In-Reply-To: <20011122235644.39108.qmail@web20409.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9tk8cd+eogu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Nao Hu <hunao01 at y...> wrote:
> The most interesting part is this:"It gives more information about the death 
of Harry's parents, showing they were living ORDINARY LIVES AS MUGGLES". 
Why? What kind of job James might taken which allowed him (or limited 
him)to live as muggles? I can't help but wondering.Here is the 
link:http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_1664000/1664714.s
tm I am a foreigner in U.S., so pardon my English.Happy Thanksgiving!Sissy
> 

Remember, James had inherited enough money so he didn't have to work; hence, 
no need for employment in the muggle world.  Certainly, the infancy scenes 
that survived into the film told us absolutely nothing that we didn't already 
know, except that Harry had an owl mobile and possibly wore anachronistic 
Blues Clues rompers.

Since the only wizard home we've ever glimpsed is the Weasleys', we don't 
really know much about wizard homes and it's not even clear that the 
surviving footage was shot in a muggle home rather than a wizard one (at 
least not to me!).




From rcraigharman at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 23 01:26:40 2001
From: rcraigharman at hotmail.com (rcraigharman at hotmail.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:26:40 -0000
Subject: Right Wing Reviews
In-Reply-To: <9tj4ad+plen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tk8kg+hgls@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> We're all familiar with right-wing reactionaries decrying Harry 
> Potter for "seducing" young people to explore the occult.  (I think 
> mostly it "seduces" young people to cheat on their homework--think 
> Divination.<g>)

I already commented to the moderators who passed the comment to Barb,
so I'll say it publicly too.

My problem is that most conservatives, like myself, would have
nothing to do with such extremists.  The right wing is no more
monolithic in its views than the left.  It seems to me that this
group would be better served by focussing on our mutual interest
and appreciation of the Harry Potter series.....

....Craig




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Fri Nov 23 02:19:08 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 02:19:08 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Re: Right Wing Reviews
References: <9tk8kg+hgls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005401c173c5$3c220aa0$053470c2@c5s910j>

Barb had said:

<<We're all familiar with right-wing reactionaries decrying Harry Potter for
"seducing" young people to explore the occult.  (I think mostly it "seduces"
young people to cheat on their homework--think Divination.<g>) >>

Craig commented:

<< My problem is that most conservatives, like myself, would have nothing to
do with such extremists.  The right wing is no more monolithic in its views
than the left.  It seems to me that this group would be better served by
focussing on our mutual interest and appreciation of the Harry Potter
series..... >>

I heartily agree that we should not generalise about any political or social
group when commenting on the Harry Potter books or films.  That said, I
think there is a clear difference between referring to right-wing
reactionaries holding a particular view on Harry Potter and people who
simply define themselves as right-wing.  Barb was referring to a specific
group who have been quite vocal in relation to the Harry Potter phenomenon
and who are, by their own definition, conservative.

I don't think the topic in question is inappropriate for discussion, but we
should choose our words carefully when dealing with sensitive issues and not
assume a consensus viewpoint.

Thanks.

Neil
HPfGU Moderator Team








From devilsangel0809 at aol.com  Fri Nov 23 04:15:51 2001
From: devilsangel0809 at aol.com (Laura)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 04:15:51 -0000
Subject: OWWIE
In-Reply-To: <002f01c17143$7ec6f480$53af1e3e@stephen>
Message-ID: <9tkihn+l7q7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Lucy Austin" <lucy at l...> wrote:
> >In a message dated 19/11/01 18:48:43 GMT Standard Time, 
bray.262 at o... 
> writes:
> > 
> > >Two Sickles get you membership and a nifty little badge, 
> > >an extra Sickle gets you a recording of Sean reading the 
> > >phonebook. ;) 
> > Thank you for making me spray my Diet Coke all over my 
> > monitor and choke!  :-)

Alright this is a bit late on this subject but i just caught up with 
reading all my digests. (I had like 20 to read!!) But i just want to 
put in as many sickles as possible as long as i get more of Sean!!  
When he first came out and talked with his accent i turned to my 
friend and was just like "I want him!" so put in!!

~Laura~





From nansie at bigsky.net  Fri Nov 23 04:50:28 2001
From: nansie at bigsky.net (nancy cleaveland)
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 21:50:28 -0700
Subject: Baby Harry in Blue's Clues romper?
References: <9tk8cd+eogu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000e01c173da$60af4ad0$95f4fcce@home>

Hi - Joanne0012 wrote:
> ...Harry had an owl mobile and possibly wore anachronistic
> Blues Clues rompers.

What I thought were *rabbits* DID look like Blue from
'Blue's Clues' now that I think about it. Interesting...
especially since 'Blue's Clues' first aired in September
1996. <g>

--Nancy, who now wonders what other brand names or
characters pop up in the movie (other than Dudley's Adidas
watch)




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 23 05:05:56 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 05:05:56 -0000
Subject: Baby Harry in Blue's Clues romper?
In-Reply-To: <000e01c173da$60af4ad0$95f4fcce@home>
Message-ID: <9tklfk+pdok@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "nancy cleaveland" <nansie at b...> wrote:
> Hi - Joanne0012 wrote:
> > ...Harry had an owl mobile and possibly wore anachronistic
> > Blues Clues rompers.
> 
> What I thought were *rabbits* DID look like Blue from
> 'Blue's Clues' now that I think about it. Interesting...
> especially since 'Blue's Clues' first aired in September
> 1996. <g>
> 
> --Nancy, who now wonders what other brand names or
> characters pop up in the movie (other than Dudley's Adidas
> watch) 


Heh... MAD Magazine did a spoof on the Adidas watch in one panel of their Harry Potter satire (which is actually rather affectionate!). The put the potions test back in to the 'movie,' and Hermione explains it as (quoted from memory, as close as possible) "two of the bottles hold deadly potions, and the other three are filled with the refreshment of Diet Coke! Drink Diet Coke! Just for the joy of it! Just for the Taste of it! There's nothing like Diet Coke!" (or however the jingle ran... she sings the whole thing).

Then Harry comments on how "this whole product placement in movies thing" is just getting *way* out of hand.



(My other favorite panel: Snape has just made the "Our new.... celebrity" jibe at Harry. Harry moans and wonders aloud to Hermione about who else could possibly relate to the difficulty of attending school with the eyes of the nation closely scrutinizing your every action.  Hermione pipes up immediately with "Jenna Bush?")




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Fri Nov 23 06:23:15 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:23:15 EST
Subject: More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
Message-ID: <5a.21e1a7c.292f4553@aol.com>

Upon reflection, I don't think it was  a great movie, and I still loved it.

The transitions were too jagged, and some of the special effects were really 
bad (centaur, unicorn). To repeat myself, it's highly annoying that they 
substituted bad dialogue for good, often hilarious, dialogue from the book. I 
think the chess game was too long, the keys section was boring, and the 
ending, pretty anticlimactic. I liked the music, and didn't really care about 
issues such as birthdate discrepancy. I will always rant about the change of 
title.when Hermione says "don't you read?" I want to shout, yes, yes, I read 
and I know about the PHILOSOPHER'S STONE! We are not all illiterate here in 
the States."

What I delighted in were the costumes, the sets, the visual arts, and the 
sense that I now know what it all looks like --- Privet drive, Platform 
9-3/4s , the Hogwarts Express, Hogwarts!, the great hall, Gryffindor's 
Commons room, the Forbidden Forest, the inside of Hagrid's Hut, Diagon Alley, 
the Leaky Cauldron, the goblins, Gringotts..Upon reflection, it was not the 
STORY that I liked (I already knew it), but the wonderful visualization of 
the stories. 

These were the places that rang true for me, that fulfilled my inner vision 
of the world?those were the moments, upon seeing the sets, that I wanted to 
go down the rabbit hole and end up in the same universe as Harry 
Potter?(there was a sign for a store to the right just as Harry and Hagrid 
entered Gringotts, did anyone see what it said?)

Hogwarts was a particularly powerful experience. From the express to arriving 
and seeing Hagrid with the lantern..the wonderful scene with the first years 
in the boats sailing across the water with the moon rising?.into the great 
hall?.the staircases and pictures moving, I shared the awe of the first year 
students?when the owl post arrived, it reminded me that I was now in a 
magical world. It assisted in my suspension of belief so that when Ron 
dropped the club on the troll, I believed it. 

I've devised a rating system for the actors, in part based on some 
conversations here.

Extraordinary. This actor/actress enhanced JKR's character, and brought new 
highlights, depth and texture to the character.
Fine - Plus. This actor/actress did a good job of playing JKR's character 
with a little extra.
Fine. This actor/actress did a fine job of playing JKR's character.
Not very good. This actor/actress was not too inspiring..
Replace this one. This actor/actress was awful and needs to be replaced.

Here are my ratings, with hope that they will inspire spirited dialogue.

Harry Potter/Daniel Radcliffe. 
Rating: Fine
He was okay.  He was not spectacular. His best moments were when he lit 
up?upon winning the Quidditch match, at Christmas?.he was pretty wooden 
serving food at the Dursleys, and in the Dark Forest. 

Ron Weasley/Rupert Grint. 
Rating: Extraordinary.
What a talent this kid has..his mobile face, his every expression, his body 
language..I'm sure they gave him extra lines because he was so good. His 
shrugs, his eyebrows, amazing, amazing, amazing..

Hermione Granger/Emma Watson
Rating: Fine. 
She was okay, but not extraordinary. Her best moments were setting fire to 
Snape's robes, and demolishing the Devil's snare.

Albus Dumbledore/Richard Harris.
Rating: Fine
I am almost as annoyed at the anti Richard Harris people (who were determined 
to damn him before they saw him) as I am at those who insist on introducing 
romantic content among 11 year olds?
By God, he looks and sounds like Albus Dumbledore and he DOES twinkle when he 
says that the whole school knows about Harry's encounter with Quirrell. He 
WOULD have done better had he been given the comic/eccentric lines, and I am 
hopeful that he will get off his high horse and do better in the movies to 
come?.What wonderful costumes they gave him to wear.

Severus Snape/Alan Rickman
Rating: Extraordinary
Rickman brings Snape to life - swooping around like a bat. I'm really annoyed 
at the script that makes Snape look like a good guy, who is misunderstood. He 
is far more nasty, capricious and totally unfair in the book. Remember he 
takes a point from Gryffindor in the Potions team, and takes points from 
Harry for taking a library book outside. When my four year old asks me if 
Snape is evil, I keep telling him that's the question everyone wants 
answered?..Anyway, he was great?.unquestionably added to the book's potrayal.

Rubeus Hagrid/Robbie Coltrane
Rating: Extraordinary
Coltrane breathes life into Hagrid in a wonderful, wonderful performance that 
is enhanced  by the script. I could not really understand how Hagrid could be 
so careless in releasing information until I saw the movie. His affection for 
Harry, his involvement with dogs, and dragons, and other magical creatures, 
his devotion to Dumbledore?.they all shine through?.

Minerva McGonagall: Dame Maggie Smith
Rating: Extraordinary
Maggie Smith fills out and enhances McGonagall's character just as I hoped 
she would.
I hope JKR will be inspired to see how adult women can be powerful and 
important. Her lines were delivered impeccably - five points to Gryffindor 
for sheer dumb luck?
You heard me correctly Mr. Malfoy..perhaps I should turn one of you into a 
pocket watch..she is regal in her emerald green robes and witch's hat with a 
twist at the top?

Uncle Dursley: Richard Griffiths
Rating: Between Not Very Good and Fine
He didn't take the part seriously enough. His grin when he burns the letters 
was good, but he didn't really put his heart into the part. Not very 
inspiring. Too much broad humor. Almost as if the people who were doing the 
movie were afraid of the reality of abuse in Harry's house.

Aunt Petunia: Fiona Show
Rating: Fine Minus
I don't know?her speech about her sister seemed awkward?..her throwing 
herself at the glass where Dudley was imprisoned seemed overdone?..she and 
Dudley almost
Played it as a parody or a caricature..but the Dursleys abuse and 
mistreatment of Harry came across much more clearly in the book (although 
when he said 'yes, that's me, too, bred in captivity, that was powerful). 
It's almost as if all the Dursley characters played it as a joke?I guess it 
was okay. I really liked the curlers in her hair in the hut on the sea scene.

Madam Hooch: Zoe Wannamaker
Rating: Fine - Plus
I had not paid much attention to Madam Hooch until I saw the trailer. Zoe 
obviously brings a panache (aided by the costume) that I did not sense in the 
book.  I love her eyes and her boots and her general flair. I love all the 
characters who manage their robes so well.

Professor Quirrell/Ian Hart
Rating: Replace this one
I thought he was awful. I'm glad they don't have to replace them.

Nearly Headless Nick: John Cleese
Rating: Not very good, flat performance, lackluster

Professor Flitwick/Goblin Bank Teller/Warwick Davis
Rating: Between Extraordinary and Fine-Plus
He was GREAT!?I loved his suspicious glare as the head banking teller.
And I loved his squeak as Hermione manages to levitate the feather?really 
happy that they kept in the part about him being perched on a pile of books

Mrs. Weasley/Julie Walters
Rating: Not Very Good - Minus
Too tawdry, too made up, hair too obviously dyed?..

Fred and George Weasley
Rating: Fine
They were pretty much Fred and George. Good job, nothing terrific.

Ginny Weasley
Rating: Not every good?really, who could tell? Not terribly impressive.

Lily and James Potter
Rating: Replace them both. Right now. Find someone who looks like Harry and 
is younger. Find someone who has big blue or green eyes like Harry and is 
younger.

Mr. Ollivander/John Hurt
Rating: Extraordinary
Magickal, spooky, wonderful?.

Percy Weasley/Chris Rankin
Rating: Not Very Good at all
He wasn't pompous! Or condescending. Just kind of fatherly. No good.

Draco Malfoy/Tom Felton
Rating: Fine
He was fine. Wasn't quite as nasty as I would have liked. Much cuter than I 
think he should be, given his portrayal in Canon.

Oliver Wood/Sean Biggerstaff
Rating: Fine Plus
A very good looking young man with a lovely accent and excellent acting 
ability.
I especially like the look he gives the Slytherin Quidditch Captain when he 
blocks his shot.

Seamus Finnegon/Devon Murray
Rating: Not Very Good
Just uninspiring.



Susan McGee, Ann Arbor, Michigan
(I want to be Arabella Figg in the movie)



From bafoster at mindspring.com  Fri Nov 23 15:25:40 2001
From: bafoster at mindspring.com (Barbara Foster Williams)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:25:40 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 46
References: <1006517384.570.83218.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3BFE6A7A.ABA2EC02@mindspring.com>

codex79 at yahoo.com wrote:

> 
> Then there was the Quidditch game, when Harry's broom was bewitched.
> For some reason, I always imagined Snape and Quirrell to be on almost
> opposite sides of the pitch, so that Snape could keep an eye on
> Quirrell. How would Snape know what's up if Quirrell was all the way
> behind him? He couldn't possibly have heard the spell, because other
> professors would hear it too.
> 

Think about it, though.  If Quirrell was on the other side of the field,
Hermione setting Snape's robes on fire wouldn't have affected him in the
slightest.  He had to be near Snape in order to get knocked down when
she set fire to the robes.

<delurk>, btw.  I used to read HP4GU religiously, and quit because I
just couldn't keep up.  I did want to talk some about the movie, though. :)

Barbara



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Nov 23 16:01:45 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:01:45 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 46
In-Reply-To: <3BFE6A7A.ABA2EC02@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <9tlrt9+a8k7@eGroups.com>

> codex79 at y... wrote:
> > 
> > Then there was the Quidditch game, when Harry's broom was bewitched.
> > For some reason, I always imagined Snape and Quirrell to be on almost
> > opposite sides of the pitch, so that Snape could keep an eye on
> > Quirrell. How would Snape know what's up if Quirrell was all the way
> > behind him? He couldn't possibly have heard the spell, because other
> > professors would hear it too.

I think Snape didn't even know it WAS Quirrel who was casting the spell on 
Harry's broom -- he just knew that SOMEBODY was.  If he knew it was Quirrell, 
all he would have to do was turn around and break Q's concentration/eye 
contact.  As it was, he couldn't take his eyes off Harry, so *wherever* Quirrell 
was, he couldn't "Keep an eye on him."




From trusg at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 23 21:44:21 2001
From: trusg at hotmail.com (trusg at hotmail.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 21:44:21 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing is so much better
In-Reply-To: <9tidgv+h3of@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tmfvl+7dfe@eGroups.com>

-I just came back from the 2nd viewing of the movie, and the 
> experience was WAY better than the first one! I really really enjoy 
> the movie MUCH more the 2nd time viewing and totally see it 
> independently from the book! It was great, I can truly enjoy it for 
> what it is (a movie itself) and feeling wanting to go see again ^^;;
>

I also found the 2nd viewing alot better than the first, mainly 
because the first time I went I couldn't relax into it being a film 
at all, I could only worry about what was and wasn't there, and how 
little bits should have been different. I also found it easier the 
second time not to, if you will, "read the bok whilst watching the 
film", that is, filling in words sotto voce that should have been 
there and weren't! 

There was a hilarious moment the first time I went: when Fred and 
George are explaining the Quidditch rules (a strange situation in 
itself) they say that referees are liable to vanish and turn up 
months later but never fill in the punch line "in the Sahara Desert". 
Where that line should have been, my friend Emma and I both, at 
exactly the same time, said "in the Sahara Desert". It was quite a 
true reflection, I think, of how well we all know the book, and 
therefore what we expected of the film. The second time I was a lot 
tempted to do this, and watched it for what it was, rather than a 
tense couple of hours in which I hoped they weren't going to ruin my 
favourite book.

Anyone else had moments like this??

 RavenSinger :-)
 





From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Fri Nov 23 22:56:44 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (UcfRentLuvr at cs.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:56:44 EST
Subject: Upon further reflection...
Message-ID: <cd.f77761a.29302e2c@cs.com>


Just took my mom to see the movie today. She hasn't read the books yet, 
although she wants to, and on the whole, she really liked it. She said she 
didn't have any particular favorite parts, but she liked the way some of the 
actors said their lines--"I shouldna said that" and "She needs to sort out 
her priorities" and etc etc. 

Things I noticed the second time around:

1) I totally agree--It's much better the second time than the first time. 
(Can't wait til I see it again in Dec. with my brother and sister. <g> )

2) Actually noticed Petunia dyeing Harry's clothes this time. 

3) Just an interesting tidbit: When Ollivander is getting the wands for 
Harry, I noticed on the box of Harry's real wand, that it says "Phoenix" on 
it...or at least it looked like it did. :)

4) When they show the shot of Gringott's, there is a sign to some store on 
the right-hand side of the screen. I think maybe someone else asked about 
this already, but is it a sign for another wand shop? I could've sworn it 
said something like "Windhall Wands" on it. 

5) Many people commented on how Harry called Draco by his first name in the 
Forest. Earlier in the film, when Harry goes after the Remembrall, he calls 
Malfoy. When he calls him Draco in the forest, I kind of think he did it for 
emphasis. Maybe I'm reading way to much into this, but just watch how Harry 
says Draco's name. It's like he did it on purpose.

Well, that's it for now. :)

***Dixie Malfoy***


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




From jferer at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 00:09:31 2001
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:09:31 -0000
Subject: Fantasy Casting - Sirius and Remus
In-Reply-To: <9tgdcg+u5h8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tmofr+10k83@eGroups.com>

Carol said, "My problem with Joseph Fiennes [as Sirius] is that he's 
too young (born in 1970) and  too slight to be menacing as Sirius is 
suppoed to be in PoA."

Too slight is not a problem...Sirius is gaunt from doing twelve years 
of very hard time. I like the idea of taking a handsome man like 
Fiennes and making him look like a hard-timer; it creates a tension, 
and Sirius was a handsome man before going to Azkaban.

Carol again:"My preference is Firth as Lupin (good age...born in 1960) 
and as Penny mentioned Daniel Day Lewis as Sirius."

I hold out for Kenneth Branagh as Lupin. He has the perfect voice, 
appearance, and demeanor. He can bring the sensitivity he needs to the 
part.

I can well live with Lewis as Sirius.




From taradiane at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 00:12:48 2001
From: taradiane at yahoo.com (Tara)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:12:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: harry touching quirrell
In-Reply-To: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011124001248.6251.qmail@web11504.mail.yahoo.com>

question....

in the movie (and maybe in the book as well,
can't quite remember), they have quirrell holding
harry down by the neck.  you can see his hands
touching harry's bare skin, and yet when harry
touches him with his hands, quirrell gets burned.
 so why doesn't quirrell get burned while holding
harry down?  is it just in harry's hands, or was
this a flint?

=====
@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@
"...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!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 01:47:04 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (Joli Grostephan)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:47:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fantasy Casting - Sirius and Remus
In-Reply-To: <9tmofr+10k83@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011124014704.23317.qmail@web14803.mail.yahoo.com>

Hehehe, my math teacher would be a perfect Lupin!! The
only problem is he's not British.


=====
***I'm so diggin' your scene!***

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From vesperah at aol.com  Sat Nov 24 03:23:45 2001
From: vesperah at aol.com (vesperah at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 03:23:45 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing is so much better
In-Reply-To: <9tmfvl+7dfe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tn3s1+cq38@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., trusg at h... wrote:
> -I just came back from the 2nd viewing of the movie, and the 
> > experience was WAY better than the first one! I really really 
enjoy 
> > the movie MUCH more the 2nd time viewing and totally see it 
> > independently from the book! It was great, I can truly enjoy it 
for 
> > what it is (a movie itself) and feeling wanting to go see again 
^^;;
> 
> Anyone else had moments like this??
> 
>  RavenSinger :-)


Yes....... When I saw it the first time, I did exactly what you did, 
and was so disapointed at what they left out, and what they changed.  
The second time, I watched it "as a movie" and pretended I never read 
the book, and I really loved it.  The first time seemed so choppy to 
me, and they really took their time through the first 3/4 of the 
movie, then it seems as if the director looked at his watch suddenly 
and said "Hey, we've got to wrap this thing up!!"  I felt the ending 
was rushed and not true to the book.  And I don't understand also why 
Quirrels hands weren't burned when he choked Harry.  
Well...... I'm seeing it again tomorrow, and I'm leaving the book 
once again out of my mind.
I really hope they do CoS in two movies.  I want to see all of it.
Also, I can't wait for the directors cut of SS.

Cheers, 
Vesperah
~~For the Love of Snape~~




From lemina007 at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 24 06:17:30 2001
From: lemina007 at hotmail.com (Lemina O.)
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:17:30 -1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 2nd viewing is so much better
References: <9tn3s1+cq38@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OE69lJxtY2347nDJomq0001ba83@hotmail.com>

  >>>Well...... I'm seeing it again tomorrow, and I'm >>>leaving the book 
  >>>once again out of my mind.
  >>>I really hope they do CoS in two movies.  I want to see all of it.
  >>Also, I can't wait for the directors cut of SS.

  Cheers, 
  Vesperah
  ~~For the Love of Snape~~

  The director's cut? Where and when do we see that?

  Lemina


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




From sabin_oo7 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 06:16:32 2001
From: sabin_oo7 at yahoo.com (sabin_oo7 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 06:16:32 -0000
Subject: H P Movie favor (causing me great confusion)
Message-ID: <9tne00+1uni@eGroups.com>

> There is a point in the HP movie that was bothering
> me. When Hermione goes to show Harry the trophy with
> his father's name on it there are two other embossed
> plaques on the trophy. It happened so fast I couldn't
> tell if I saw it right. I say the last name McGonagol
> on one of the plaques... this would seriously bother
> me. If it were Ms. McGonagol that would mean that she
> was either in the same year as James, or at the
> veryleast an extremely experienced Quiddich player. If
> you are going to see the movie again please be extra
> observant and clear up my confusions for me.>> Scott Chatten




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 06:43:09 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 06:43:09 -0000
Subject: (hopefully new) Movie Comments
In-Reply-To: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tnfht+ahlq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., codex79 at y... wrote:
> And speaking of potions class ... what on earth was that grand 
> entrance about?! It was positively fake, overly dramatic, and the 
> lines Rickman delivered seemed incongruous and lacking in context. 
I > always imagined him menacingly whispering those lines, not 
raging and > half-shouting. Alright, I do admit it was darned cool 
though.

Yes and no... a dangerous whisper *would* be more like the book-
Snape, but I imagine Snape has a natural sense of drama, in the film 
(the billowing robes) and in the books (all that black). Snape 
leaping almost eagerly into the classroom was too perky, though, and 
detracts from his threatening aura somewhat. It's also a little out 
of character, given that he normally moves so silently, coming upon 
people by surprise. (You touched upon this sense of drama further 
down in your post, "closet drama queen," <cackle!>)


And > that part where he favours Malfoy with a glance - was it to 
make up > for all the cut-out scenes where he displays favouritism 
or to set up > for the plot in later films?

This bit seemed hammy... I don't think Snape would gaze quite so 
lovingly at Malfoy, or at least so obviously. He can't have met the 
boy often. His father, sure, but hardly the boy.


> Another aspect that served to confuse Snape's relationship to 
Harry > are his expressions.

Also confusing for me was that moment when Snape stops behind Harry 
at the Gryffindor table during breakfast before the Quidditch match, 
to wish him luck. I don't understand the utility of that, except to 
offset his later 'jinxing' of the broom, show his concern for Harry. 
A "huh?" moment for me.


> Perhaps, as other people mentioned > earlier, Rickman had studied 
the post-GOF Snape persona and tried to > hint at it in his role.

That's possible! Still, softening Snape does throw the balance of 
the first book/story. There's no villain left.


> Like others, I also noticed the use of first names during 
the 'Dark' > Forest segment.
[snip much] Harry > and Draco Malfoy are on the same side in that 
moment, united in their > fear and their common experience.

That's a thoughtful explanation. Still, weren't they using first 
names before they had reason to be truly terrified?


> Overall, the movie was darker and more grown-up than I expected, 
> especially for book 1.

It oscillated a bit. Some of the humour and twitches were obviously 
designed for kid-laughs and cheers (the wrong-wand disasters at 
Ollivander's; Biggerstaff' silly, un-charged look at Flint when he 
blocked that goal; Finnigan's exploding jape; Hagrid's line, etc.), 
and the scary stuff was disappointingly uncerebral, unlike the 
books. There was no growing sense of tension, the rat-in-the-maze 
claustrophobia of being confined in a school where some awful danger 
lurks and strengthens, of the universal scope of this danger... this 
turns up only at the end, and imperfectly. The viewer should enter 
the last chamber along with Harry, purged and shriven almost, with 
everything focused on the do-or-die moment. This is really what is 
scary, the sheer absence of second chance. Tough to show, despite 
Grint's urgent speech just before he gets knocked off his stone 
horse.


> A final comment I would like to offer is that the movie was, in a 
> way, Rowling's opportunity to go over the material in PS/SS and 
make > any changes she may have wanted to make in light of how she 
had > further developed her characters.

This is a very interesting point. We know that she read the script 
and at some level okayed the sets and props and details, but whether 
she had a role in the weighing of the film as a whole, I wonder.


> And the chess game ... yeah, I loved it too. But, doesn't the 
chess > board seem much smaller than normal (i.e. fewer squares 
between the > two sides)? And, while the destruction is certainly 
impressive and > all, I preferred the book-version where they just 
get knocked down. 

Yes, did anyone compare the chess board which Ron and Harry were 
using in the Great Hall with the one in the chess task? I agree with 
your other chess points.

Thoughtful post.




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 07:18:18 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 07:18:18 -0000
Subject: (hopefully new) Movie Comments
In-Reply-To: <9tnfht+ahlq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tnhjq+snnm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., frantyck at y... wrote:

 
> Yes, did anyone compare the chess board which Ron and Harry were 
> using in the Great Hall with the one in the chess task? I agree with 
> your other chess points.
> 
> Thoughtful post. 

 I might have an answer for this!

 The chess set which Ron and Harry were using in the Great Hall was modeled after a historical reproduction of an actual Viking chess set. The Lewis Chessmen were found in the early 1830's on the Isle of Lewis. The cache consisted of 87 pieces and most likely came from two or three similar sets owned by the same games enthusiast. They date from the mid-to-late 1100's, during a time when the Isle of Lewis was still under Norse rule. 

You can see a repro of the set at this site:  http://www.rosechess.co.uk/lewis.html


 Many companies which sell repro Lewis Chessmen do so in a package which markets itself not as modern chess, but a similar medieval norse game called Hnefatafl. Hnefatfl had different versions with varying game board sizes, ranging from 7 X 7  on up. If the Great Hall chessboard was indeed smaller than a "normal" chessboard (I didn't notice; I was too tickled at recognizing the chessmen!), it's possible that they were using a hnefatafl board which came with the pieces the props people had obtained. 




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sat Nov 24 08:51:39 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:51:39 -0000
Subject: H P Movie favor (causing me great confusion)
In-Reply-To: <9tne00+1uni@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tnn2r+otm0@eGroups.com>

Hi Scott,

Yes I noticed it too. There was an M. McGonagall next to James 
Potter -  His had the year 1971 on it so its possible I suppose that 
hers had a different year! Maybe its a Quidditch Player of the Year 
Shield!

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., sabin_oo7 at y... wrote:
> > There is a point in the HP movie that was bothering
> > me. When Hermione goes to show Harry the trophy with
> > his father's name on it there are two other embossed
> > plaques on the trophy. It happened so fast I couldn't
> > tell if I saw it right. I say the last name McGonagol
> > on one of the plaques... this would seriously bother
> > me. If it were Ms. McGonagol that would mean that she
> > was either in the same year as James, or at the
> > veryleast an extremely experienced Quiddich player. If
> > you are going to see the movie again please be extra
> > observant and clear up my confusions for me.>> Scott Chatten




From natabat at barrysworld.com  Sat Nov 24 09:49:51 2001
From: natabat at barrysworld.com (Natalie)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 01:49:51 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] (hopefully new) Movie Comments
References: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006701c174cd$5d52a6e0$46e8ce3f@ucsd.edu>

codex79 at yahoo.com wrote:
> Overall, the movie was darker and more grown-up than I expected,
> especially for book 1.

Saw it for the fourth time today with my mom, and she commented several
times (first when encountering Fluffy, and other various times) that she was
suprised it was so scary. As we were walking out, she said that she would
have be really scared if she had seen this as a child. Of course, she's also
a wuss (she cried at the end too...but I knew she would...<g>)

> And the chess game ... yeah, I loved it too. But, doesn't the chess
> board seem much smaller than normal (i.e. fewer squares between the
> two sides)? And, while the destruction is certainly impressive and
> all, I preferred the book-version where they just get knocked down.
> After all, if the chess pieces destroy each other, how do you play a
> second game? Where's the litter after Quirrell was done with the game?
> And I guess, in the movie, some positions were already empty so the
> challenger couldn't choose their own piece?

I made sure to count the squares a couple of times today. It is indeed 8x8
(which is normal size, right?) It does look smaller though--maybe because
the pieces are so big.

I would imagine that wizards use a Repairo spell after a game. Otherwise,
you'd have to buy a new set after every game. You can see broken chess
pieces in the pits off to the sides of the board when the Trio walk in. So,
those are probably the pieces whose spaces are empty (Quirrel no t bothering
to repair them after he was done, and it being a pretty short game).
Actually, they may purposely have been left empty as an added security
measure. You'd need more than one person to get through that task. Of
course, that doesn't explain how Quirrel got through.

Natalie
natabat at barrysworld.com
http://hosted.barrysworld.net/natabat
-----
"I have no particular talent. I am merely inquisitive."
- Albert Einstein





From owl_dumbledore at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 10:50:19 2001
From: owl_dumbledore at yahoo.com (owl_dumbledore at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:50:19 -0000
Subject: The Sean Biggerstaff Fan Site
Message-ID: <9tnu1b+kmku@eGroups.com>

Go to http://biggerstaff.topcities.com
There are wallpapers, screensavers, pictures, news, etc.
All devoted to Yummy Oliver Wood!




From fleurmellor at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 14:28:42 2001
From: fleurmellor at yahoo.com (fleurmellor at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:28:42 -0000
Subject: Servus Snape an attractive character??
Message-ID: <9toaqq+3neg@eGroups.com>


Do you think that Servus Snape being an attractive character to women 
is somthing that Rowling did not want/expect because of the 
descriptions on him in the book ('greasy' 'sallow skinned' yellow 
fingers' ect)
Do you think that it has come about because of Alan Rickman being 
chosen to play Snape or is the character in himself an attractive 
character because of his mysteriousness, evilness ect
just curious to what everyone else thinks on this.




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 14:36:35 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...aka Deb)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 06:36:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Servus Snape an attractive character??
In-Reply-To: <9toaqq+3neg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011124143635.44798.qmail@web11904.mail.yahoo.com>

If I may drop my invisibility cloak, I would like
to begin posting to this group as well as to the
book/grownups list! :)

--- fleurmellor at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> Do you think that Servus Snape being an
> attractive character ...has come about because
of Alan Rickman being chosen to play Snape...?

I *never* thought of Snape as attractive - until
I heard Mr. Rickman had the part. Then the rumor
that he falls in love in Year 5 was quite a bit
more intriguing!

That said, IMHO the movie makeup artists did a
fine job making Mr. Rickman look Snape-y. The
friend who took me to the premiere whispered, "I
know he's your favorite actor, but he looks like
Michael Jackson!"

And that said, I thought Mr. Rickman imbued the
character with a smokiness that makes the rumor
of a love interest a lot more believable.

Finally, somewhere else, someone hypothesized
that there may have been something between
Severus and Lily before she married James. That
thought had occurred briefly, before, but again,
after seeing Mr. Rickman as Severus....yah, back
in the less-sallow, cleaner-hair days, this
viewer can believe that might have been true! :)

Delighted to be here,
Wendelin (aka Deb)

=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Sat Nov 24 15:34:23 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:34:23 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Servus Snape an attractive character??
In-Reply-To: <9toaqq+3neg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011124153423.56739.qmail@web14706.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  fleurmellor at yahoo.com wrote: 

<Do you think that Servus Snape being an attractive character to women 
<is somthing that Rowling did not want/expect because of the 
<descriptions on him in the book ('greasy' 'sallow skinned' yellow 
<fingers' ect)
<Do you think that it has come about because of Alan Rickman being 
<chosen to play Snape or is the character in himself an attractive 
<character because of his mysteriousness, evilness ect
<just curious to what everyone else thinks on this.

She certainly wanted to make him an intriguing character and successfully so- he's by far the most pluridimensional personality in the books. As for being physically attractive... I think JKR used, and again with great success, the romantic 19th century clich? of the dark brooding type (Heathcliffe, Mr. Rochester etc.)who, especially in female readers, provokes the typical "There has to be something more to him"- reaction. And after all, hair can be washed, teeth can be cleaned, and if the reason for his sallow skin is some liver disease, give him a few pills and the man will win Witch Weekly's "Most Charming Smile Of The Year" award.

Susanna/pigwidgeon37 (convinced that there's more to snape than meets the eye)

 


 
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..."



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalised at My Yahoo!.

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




From jonathandupont at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 24 15:49:50 2001
From: jonathandupont at hotmail.com (jonathandupont at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:49:50 -0000
Subject: Right Wing Reviews; DVD & Book 5 Release Date
In-Reply-To: <9tj4ad+plen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tofiv+3q2p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> We're all familiar with right-wing reactionaries decrying Harry 
> Potter for "seducing" young people to explore the occult.  (I think 
> mostly it "seduces" young people to cheat on their homework--think 
> Divination.<g>)
> 
> If any of us thought the film would change the (already closed) 
> minds of folks who object to Potter, these reviews should establish 
> that they are still firmly opposed.  Of course, I don't think the 
> film is a very thorough portrayal of the Potter universe, but even 
a 
> thorough portrayal probably wouldn't have swayed these folks.
> 
> This is Robert Knight's review (he of the Culture and Family 
> Institute):
> 
> http://www.cultureandfamily.org/report/2001-11-21/o_knight.shtml
> 
> This is the review from Focus on the Family:
> 
> http://www.family.org/pplace/pi/films/A0018592.html
> 
> Prepare to be appalled...
> 
> --Barb

I actually find those sort of reviews rather amusing (especially when 
they're reviewing, say, South Park). I was very tempted to start 
putting a signature at the bottom of my emails so I could include 
some quotes from the CAP review:-

"Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. An amazing excursion through 
dazzling computer animation and computer-aided graphics. A colorful 
display of goth art. A bunch of delightful and bright kids displaying 
great talent and skills. Ingenious planning and outstanding attention 
to detail rivaling commercial nuclear power production (and I spent 
14 years as a nuke). Several points of wisdom, integrity and honor 
skillfully placed. And all to present evil as good"

"I have not read any of the "Harry Potter" books. Thus I am not 
influenced or biased by them... And what better time to embrace evil 
in entertainment" 

(I'm sure there's a better example of the contradiction, but you get 
the point).

"By the way, Harry converses with a snake in this movie. Not a cow, 
not a dog [wait until Book 3], not a cat [McGonagall count?], but a 
snake. And one of the characters is 665.5 years old."

(How did they work that out, btw?)

One thing I found confusing was that "willingness to commit suicide 
to enable victory of friends" was down as a bad thing. But the worst, 
most messed up thing they wrote:-

"Harry also befriends and is befriended by two special schoolmates: 
Hermoine Granger (Emma Watson), a delightful young lady with the gift 
of intellect and study; Ron Wesley (Rupert Grint), not talented in 
much of anything."

Will the Ron bashing EVER end? (joking)

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/harrypottersorc.htm for the full 
thing, if you're interested.

Oh, and BBC Teletext was reporting yesterday that the DVD would come 
out next summer at around the same time as Book 5 - which they seemed 
to reckon was May 2002.

Jon




From anakin at edsamail.com.ph  Sat Nov 24 16:00:20 2001
From: anakin at edsamail.com.ph (Beejay de Venecia Bautista)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:00:20 -0000
Subject: hello! i'm new here...
Message-ID: <9tog6k+ofpa@eGroups.com>

hi everyone!

i sure hope i'm in the right place. i'm turning twenty this december. 
does that qualify me as a grown-up? well, i hope to have a lot of fun 
communicating about the moive and the upcoming CoS with you guys and 
gals.

toodle-doo!






From anakin at edsamail.com.ph  Sat Nov 24 16:03:13 2001
From: anakin at edsamail.com.ph (Beejay de Venecia Bautista)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:03:13 -0000
Subject: hello! i'm new here...
Message-ID: <9togc1+vv75@eGroups.com>

hi everyone!

i sure hope i'm in the right place. i'm turning twenty this december. 
does that qualify me as a grown-up? well, i hope to have a lot of fun 
communicating about the moive and the upcoming CoS with you guys and 
gals.

toodle-doo!






From john at walton.vu  Sat Nov 24 16:06:51 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:06:51 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: Re: hello! i'm new here...
In-Reply-To: <9tog6k+ofpa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B825761B.566B%john@walton.vu>

Folks, all introductions and other off-topic material should be posted on
HPFGU-OTChatter, our Off-Topic Chatter board. (Catchy name, eh?)

Join it at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/otchatter and then post to it by emailing
hpfgu-otchatter at yahoogroups.com.

All this is in our Admin Files which everyone MUST read before posting.
They're at

http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin

Thanks,

--John, Moderator Team
__________________________________
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 dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 17:02:26 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 17:02:26 -0000
Subject: H P Movie favor (causing me great confusion)
In-Reply-To: <9tnn2r+otm0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tojr2+dg0d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Yes I noticed it too. There was an M. McGonagall next to James 
> Potter -  His had the year 1971 on it so its possible I suppose 
that 
> hers had a different year! Maybe its a Quidditch Player of the Year 
> Shield!
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., sabin_oo7 at y... wrote:
> > > There is a point in the HP movie that was bothering
> > > me. When Hermione goes to show Harry the trophy with
> > > his father's name on it there are two other embossed
> > > plaques on the trophy. It happened so fast I couldn't
> > > tell if I saw it right. I say the last name McGonagol
> > > on one of the plaques... this would seriously bother
> > > me. If it were Ms. McGonagol that would mean that she
> > > was either in the same year as James, or at the
> > > veryleast an extremely experienced Quiddich player. If
> > > you are going to see the movie again please be extra
> > > observant and clear up my confusions for me.>> Scott Chatten





If we were to assume that the wizards were at one time students at 
Hogwarts,or maybe prefects,that Prof. McGonnagal et al,played 
Quidditch at one time. After all,she was awfully excited to be able 
to get Harry on the team. Say What? Sorry if my knowledge of the 
books isn't all that some seem to have. Just my theory.




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 17:52:11 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendeline...aka Deb)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 09:52:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Right Wing Reviews; DVD & Book 5 Release Date
In-Reply-To: <9tofiv+3q2p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011124175211.22824.qmail@web11901.mail.yahoo.com>

I don't think it's all necessarily *right*-wing.
I have at least one leftist friend who considers
the stories too violent, blablabla.

Having been alerted to another author's book
agaisnt HP (he who is, by the guidelines,
not-to-be-discussed here) I read on his website
the claim that on her 1999 NPR interview with
Diane Rehm, JKR admitted [sic] that one-third of
the book was "the occult." 

Listening to the interview on Real Player, I
heard JKR say that "about a third" of the magic
the characters do is based on the way "people did
things in Britain" ages ago. 

Ms. Rehm asked JKR if she believed in magic, and
JKR said - I'm paraphrasing of course - that she
believed in the type of magic that comes from
imagination, etc. etc., but as to "drawing a
circle on the ground" and saying words to make
things happen, "No," she did not.

Thanks to the anti-HP author for his accusations
and the link to the WAMU website! Bet he didn't
expect anybody to check it out, but I did and I'm
vindicated and glad.

Wendelin aka Deb

=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From syrena at angelfire.com  Sat Nov 24 18:19:20 2001
From: syrena at angelfire.com (Syrena)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:19:20 -0000
Subject: New Snape Photos
Message-ID: <9toob8+59no@eGroups.com>


Hi all,

There are several new photos of Snape in the Snape's Society Movie 
Gallery as well as an absolutely gorgeous new Snape Poster, with 
thanks to Kris for sending it in!

Quick link: http://jareth.com/snape.html

All the best,

-Syrena
Severus Snape's Slytherin Society
http://jareth.com/severus.html




From john at walton.vu  Sat Nov 24 18:17:21 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:17:21 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: Everyone! Listen up!
In-Reply-To: <9tom2v+9jh1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B82594B1.56AC%john@walton.vu>

**Ignore this at your peril, both newbies and older list members.**

Welcome to everyone who's joined recently, either as a result of the movie
or the NYTimes article. We're glad to have you here. Of course,
HPforGrownups, like any community, has certain rules which must be followed
in order to ensure the smooth functioning of our lists. These are the Admin
Files and can be found at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin -- READ THEM.

Now, a few more pointers:

1) ADMIN messages are *NOT* to be ignored. No "I didn't think it applied to
me", no "I thought one message would be okay". If you ignore ADMIN messages,
you *will* be put on Moderated Status or turned into a ferret. You MUST also
read the Admin Files before posting to our lists. Yep, there are a few of
them, but they amount to only a few pages. You've sat through a 2-1/2 hour
movie and read 1400-odd pages of HP. Now read a few pages of Admin Files.

2) We have four principal lists here at HPforGrownups, and they have titles
which, surprisingly, reflect their function:

HPforGrownups: The Main List is for BOOK-RELATED DISCUSSION ONLY.
HPFGU-OTChatter: The OTChatter list is for off-topic and chatty-type posts.
HPFGU-Announcements: The Announcements list is for announcements: New sites,
news, etc.
HPFGU-Movie: The Movie list is for EVERYTHING movie. Fantasy casting,
comments, comparisons with the books, etc.

If you can't figure out where your post goes, ask the Mods. Chances are,
with 20-odd people (Mods & Elves) reading the
hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com email address, you'll get an immediate
reply. Even if you don't, your post will still be there if it takes an hour
or two.

3) Use accurate subject headings. People like to skim topics and read only
what they're interested in. They can't do that if posts aren't labelled
accurately. You *will* be reminded once, then Howlered and then put on
Moderated Status if you frequently use inaccurate subject headings. ("I was
only replying to someone else's message" is not an excuse.)

4) When you reply to posts, you must give us some idea what you are replying
to -- either a bit of the post quoted (note "a bit", not the whole post!) or
your own paraphrase: "Re: Penny's comments on why Ron is great for
Hermione". This is something, like the subject heading thing, that the Mods
are particularly irritated by. So snip!

5) If you have a simple question (like "where does it say that Hermione's
birthday is September 19th") do check the group's VFAQ file at
http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/vfaq and then the HP Lexicon at
http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon and if it's a real quandary contact the
Mods at hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com.

6) Use decent English. netspeek iz not kewl. Nor is using numbers and
letters 2 say what u mean. The vast majority of the list gets *really*
annoyed by it and you will find yourself ignored. Check your spelling and
grammar too. We're all adults -- we should all be able to write like adults.
Of course, we realise that many of our members do not have English as a
first language -- we applaud you for your knowledge of English and your
willingness to join an English-language group. However, you should be able
to compose written English to a high-school standard.

Anyway...if you have any questions at all, please contact the Moderator
Team. That's Penny the list mom, Amy Z (what *does* that Z stand for?), Neil
aka Flying Ford Anglia the Mechanimagus Moderator, and me, John, Moderator
With Rock #47. Email us at hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com (our List
Elves will see it as well and may reply to you if we're off gallivanting
somewhere).

Get reading those Admin Files! :D

--John, for the Moderator Team.

__________________________________
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 catlady at wicca.net  Sat Nov 24 18:36:21 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:36:21 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape an attractive character??
In-Reply-To: <9toaqq+3neg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9topb5+bv08@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., fleurmellor at y... wrote:
> 
> Do you think that Servus Snape being an attractive character to 
> women is somthing that Rowling did not (snip)
> Do you think that it has come about because of Alan Rickman being 
> chosen to play Snape 

'Servus' instead of 'Severus' is a thought-provoking name change. I 
can't imagine him ever servile, not even to Voldemort, but 
serviceable, yes...

I think Rowling was surprised to discover that some readers were 
attracted to Snape. I think she meant him to be repulsive because of 
his personality, regardless of his looks. She does describe his looks 
as hideous, but I doubt how much she means it, because she wanted 
Alan Rickman to play the part even before she knew her book (book 1) 
would be a big success and be made into a movie. Apparently some 
people have switched to liking (or at least lusting after) Snape as 
result of watching Rickman act the part, but there were tons of women 
(any men?) dreaming on Snape long before the movie was cast. There 
are all those mlists like snapefans and snapeslash that were founded 
long ago.





From hfakhro at nyc.rr.com  Sat Nov 24 18:55:18 2001
From: hfakhro at nyc.rr.com (Hella)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:55:18 -0000
Subject: Hermione and power in the movie
Message-ID: <9toqem+57u4@eGroups.com>

Remember when Steve Kloves tried to write something new in the movie 
but JKR told him he couldn't do that because of what happens in book 
five or six? Obviously he didn't include that scene, but there may be 
something else that he's 'touching' upon. The scene with Hermione, 
Harry, and Ron on the train. This is the scene where Hermione's 
character bugged me for some reason, as I thought it was such a 
departure from the book. First of all, she recognizes Harry (I don't 
know how, as his scar wasn't showing) and immediately smiles in 
recognition "You're Harry Potter!" She then fixes his glasses. Then 
she looks at Ron in disdain and says "And you are...?" He says "Ron 
Weasley" and she says "Pleasure" with a look of disgust upon her face.

I posted a theory on the main list that Hermione has a 'thing' for 
power, and although I vehemently disagree that she does, this scene 
from the movie makes me wonder whether this is something that Kloves 
touched upon correctly. She is snooty and downright rude to Ron, but 
very nice to famous Harry Potter (before she even knows him!) I 
wondered about this, because Kloves has stated that his favourite 
character is Hermione... does anyone else see Hermione in this way? 
The way the scene played out might be nothing than the filmmakers' 
attempts to get the audience to laugh at how cute they all are, but 
I'm wondering if there is something more.




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sat Nov 24 19:43:50 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 19:43:50 -0000
Subject: H P Movie favor (causing me great confusion)
In-Reply-To: <9tojr2+dg0d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tot9m+dpb5@eGroups.com>

> Scott Chatten wrote:

> If we were to assume that the wizards were at one time students at 
> Hogwarts,or maybe prefects,that Prof. McGonnagal et al,played 
> Quidditch at one time. After all,she was awfully excited to be able 
> to get Harry on the team. Say What? Sorry if my knowledge of the 
> books isn't all that some seem to have. Just my theory.


In my opinion I believe it could be a player of the year type award. 
As JKR is British I would think she would base it on what she knows 
of English schools, and lots of Secondary schools tend to have 
similar awards passed down over the years with the names of winners 
having different smaller shields. I know we have one in the school 
where I work..




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Sat Nov 24 20:29:35 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:29:35 -0500
Subject: More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
References: <1006517384.570.83218.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C00032F.6EE48425@sun.com>

Susan,

I agree with your ratings of the actors, for the most part. I think Daniel might
have been correct in being rather "wooden" at the Dursley's, though. Harry is
suppressing practically everything about himself while he's around them-- he's a
classic abused child. And maybe he was "scared stiff" in the Forest, though I
know I'm reaching a bit here. I thought he was weakest at the beginning of the
final Quirrel confrontation, before Voldemort appears (what's all that shifting
around? DO something!) but I blame that on the script and directing-- that scene
just doesn't work for me. But as I've mentioned before, the glare he gave Dudley
at the zoo was pretty convincing, and the smirk after Dudley falls into the
snake's enclosure was priceless. And many of his other moments were very good. I
thought he did a nice job with the mirror, and that's a tricky scene. I *really*
wanted to see him railing on at Hermione and Ron about how bad things would be
if they didn't try to stop Voldemort. <sigh.>

In SS/PS, the Dursleys *are* more or less caricatures, don't you think? I've
always felt that was rather a weak point in the books, since the other
characters tend to have more depth, so the Dursleys really stand out as flat and
cartooney. But they start to get more interesting in GoF, and I'm hoping for a
lot more development in OoP. I keep reminding myself that SS/PS is, after all,
told from the point of view of an 11-year-old, and his perceptions are not
always accurate. He sees most things as simpler than they really would be. The
Dursleys are stupid and evil; Dumbledore is loony, but likeable; Snape is a
menacing villain. The characterization of all the characters becomes deeper as
Harry matures (and, not coincidentally, Rowling gets more writing experience).
Hopefully that will happen in the movies, as well.

That being said, I thought all three of the Dursleys were pretty weak, and I
really didn't get the over-the-edge feeling about Vernon that I should have.
Dudley's "Daddy's gone mad, hasn't he" seemed almost necessary to make the
point, when in the book Dudley is probably the last one to notice this obvious
fact.

(Couldn't the makeup team do *something* with Hermione's hair to make it look
actually frizzy, instead of messy? I suppose it would be too much to ask for
them to add caps to her teeth....)

Elizabeth



From hermione808 at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 24 21:25:14 2001
From: hermione808 at hotmail.com (Hermione808)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:25:14 -1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
References: <1006517384.570.83218.m12@yahoogroups.com> <3C00032F.6EE48425@sun.com>
Message-ID: <DAV488DlKtt5Imwix2p00007f34@hotmail.com>

  >>Susan,
  >>
  >>I agree with your ratings of the actors, for the most >>part. I think Daniel might
  >>have been correct in being rather "wooden" at the >>Dursley's, though. Harry is
  >>suppressing practically everything about himself while >>he's around them-- he's a
  >>classic abused child. And maybe he was "scared stiff" in >>the Forest, though I
  >>know I'm reaching a bit here. I thought he was weakest >>at the beginning of the
  final Quirrel confrontation, before Voldemort appears >>>>>>(what's all that shifting
  >>around? DO something!) but I blame that on the script >>and directing-- that scene
  >>just doesn't work for me. But as I've mentioned before, >>the glare he gave Dudley
  >>at the zoo was pretty convincing, and the smirk after >>Dudley falls into the
  >>>snake's enclosure was priceless. And many of his other >>moments were very good. I
  >>thought he did a nice job with the mirror, and that's a >>tricky scene. I *really*
  >>wanted to see him railing on at Hermione and Ron about >>how bad things would be
  >>if they didn't try to stop Voldemort. <sigh.>

  >>In SS/PS, the Dursleys *are* more or less caricatures, >>don't you think? I've
  >>always felt that was rather a weak point in the books, >>since the other
  >>characters tend to have more depth, so the Dursleys >>really stand out as flat and
  >>cartooney. But they start to get more interesting in >>GoF, and I'm hoping for a
  >>lot more development in OoP. I keep reminding myself >>that SS/PS is, after all,
  >>told from the point of view of an 11-year-old, and his >>perceptions are not
  >>always accurate. He sees most things as simpler than >>they really would be. The
  >>Dursleys are stupid and evil; Dumbledore is loony, but >>likeable; Snape is a
  >>menacing villain. The characterization of all the >>characters becomes deeper as
  >>Harry matures (and, not coincidentally, Rowling gets >>more writing experience).
  >>Hopefully that will happen in the movies, as well.

  >>That being said, I thought all three of the Dursleys >>were pretty weak, and I
  >>really didn't get the over-the-edge feeling about Vernon >>that I should have.
  >>Dudley's "Daddy's gone mad, hasn't he" seemed almost >>necessary to make the
  >>point, when in the book Dudley is probably the last one >>to notice this obvious
  >>fact.

  >>(Couldn't the makeup team do *something* with Hermione's >>hair to make it look
  >>actually frizzy, instead of messy? I suppose it would be >>too much to ask for
  >>them to add caps to her teeth....)

  >>Elizabeth

  Hey all,
  I've been reading a lot of posts about peole who have seen the HP movie, and I've noticed a lot of complaints about so and so didn't look like how I thought they should and all. And I can't say I disagree. I have very poor vision, so basically I was watching the film all by sound, and in my opinion, other then scenes I had hoped they would put in, I wasn't at all disappointed. You should try just watching the film with no sight. It's fascinating. 
  And about the actors, Daniel R. and the rest of his co-stars (other than the adults) were all very young and had very little experience n acting. They're just not all of a sudden going to be the next Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt or whomever else. Although I have to admit that Daniel R. in my opinion was a little stilty in the very beginning of the film.

  I'm not writing all this to make anyone mad though, so please don't get the wrong idea. I mean, they spent, as I heard, over 100 million for this movie. With that much money, don't you think that they did the best they could with everything?

  Personally, I'm glad they made the movie. I don't know what anyone else was expecting, but I was just in it to see the book come alive. And they did that, and I thought it was well done.

  Also really quick, someone in a previous post mentioned a director's cut. Where is that mentioned? I've been looking on the web, but I don't see anything mentioned about it.

  H808


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




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Sat Nov 24 22:41:32 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:41:32 -0000
Subject: Severus Snape an attractive character??
In-Reply-To: <9topb5+bv08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tp7ms+b655@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., fleurmellor at y... wrote:
> > 
> > Do you think that Servus Snape being an attractive character to 
> > women is somthing that Rowling did not (snip)
> > Do you think that it has come about because of Alan Rickman being 
> > chosen to play Snape 
> 

As a Snape fan, I can't see why many of my fellow fans think he's 
attractive.  I agree with Catlady that JKR meant to construct him as 
a character for us to love to hate, at least for the first half of 
the series, throwing tiny bits of redeeming quality in the mix but 
never fails to show us he's repulsive in both appearance and 
personality.  Book Snape is as unattractive as it comes.  When she 
was asked whether Snape would fall in love, JKR memorably answered 
why would any woman want Snape to fall in love with them.  Then she 
told us to wait for book seven, when all would be revealed!

The evolution of fanon Sexy! Snape has a lot to do with Alan Rickman -
- after he's cast into the role, I noticed a sharp increase in 'Snape 
is sexy' posts and the number of Imperius fics. (Snape fandom speaks, 
meaning the author cast an imperius curse on the OFC to make her fall 
in love with Snape.)






From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 23:05:22 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:05:22 -0000
Subject: One mystery *partially* solved!
Message-ID: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>

I was reading the following CNN article:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/SHOWBIZ/Movies/11/22/hol.wkd.next.potter.film.
ap/index.html

and found further reference to the scene that Steve Kloves had to 
take out because JKR told him a future book would make it 
impossible.  For anyone, who isn't in the know, Kloves commented on 
this once before, but failed to disclose specifics.  Now there's some 
more specifics, but we still don't know much.  Here's the new CNN 
quote:

> "I wrote a piece of dialogue referring to Sirius Black," -- one of 
> the main figures in the third book -- and she said, 'you can't do
> that because you will see in book five, that's not possible,' "
> Kloves said. 

So we know now that it has something to do with Sirius Black.  
Interesting.  I assume then that it would have been brought up at 
some point in Hagrid's comments about where he got the motorcycle 
(per canon--these lines were either cut or never filmed for the 
movie).  So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said 
about Black that book five will make impossible?

-Luke




From john at walton.vu  Sat Nov 24 23:08:24 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:08:24 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B825D8E8.573A%john@walton.vu>

caliburncy at yahoo.com wrote:

> So we know now that it has something to do with Sirius Black.
> Interesting.  I assume then that it would have been brought up at
> some point in Hagrid's comments about where he got the motorcycle
> (per canon--these lines were either cut or never filmed for the
> movie).  So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said
> about Black that book five will make impossible?

I have a particular feeling that it has to do with Hagrid giving Harry the
photograph album in the final scene. This is obviously a rewrite/mashing
together of earlier scenes (actually, did Hagrid even give Harry the album
in PS/SS?), and I think Kloves might have written Hagrid to say "'Ere's
Sirius Black at yer parents' weddin', 'Arry" or something similar.

--John

____________________________________________

American Bipartisanship: I'll hug your elephant if you'll kiss my ass.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it  Sat Nov 24 23:33:21 2001
From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:33:21 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <B825D8E8.573A%john@walton.vu>
Message-ID: <20011124233321.92389.qmail@web14701.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  John Walton <john at walton.vu> wrote: 
<caliburncy at yahoo.com wrote:

>> So we know now that it has something to do with Sirius Black.
>> Interesting.  I assume then that it would have been brought up at
>> some point in Hagrid's comments about where he got the motorcycle
>> (per canon--these lines were either cut or never filmed for the
>> movie).  So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said
>> about Black that book five will make impossible?

>I have a particular feeling that it has to do with Hagrid giving Harry the
>photograph album in the final scene. This is obviously a rewrite/mashing
>together of earlier scenes (actually, did Hagrid even give Harry the album
>in PS/SS?), and I think Kloves might have written Hagrid to say "'Ere's
>Sirius Black at yer parents' weddin', 'Arry" or something similar.

>--John


John, I'm scandalized!!! Of course Hagrid gave him the album, when he visited Harry in the Hospital Wing. What I found funny, when I saw the movie, was the thought that they had to put in another pic than lily's and Lames's wedding, becuase they don't yet have the actor for Sirius. So it must have been something else. Very thought-provoking! 

susanna/pigwidgeon37
____________________________________________

American Bipartisanship: I'll hug your elephant if you'll kiss my ass.

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________


________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 wcdawson at optonline.net  Sun Nov 25 00:04:50 2001
From: wcdawson at optonline.net (wcdawson at optonline.net)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:04:50 -0000
Subject: Snape, Head of Slythern House
Message-ID: <9tpcj2+lebj@eGroups.com>

I've seen it written here that it is never mentioned that Snape is 
head of Slytherin - but it is! In the first Great Hall eating scene, 
shortly after everyone has been sorted:

Harry: "Say Percy, who's that teacher talking to Professor Quirrel?"
Percy: "Oh, that's Professor Snape, Head of Slytherin House."

Just thought I'd clarify that.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 00:43:14 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:43:14 -0000
Subject: Potter Spotter: Hi and Lois comic, 11-24
Message-ID: <9tper2+kkqk@eGroups.com>

Hullo, all. This morning's "Hi and Lois" by Walker & Browne had a 
Potter theme.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/comics/king.htm?
name=Hi_and_Lois&refresh=true

You may have to reconstruct the link!

The figurine is rather strange. The spectacles suggest Harry, but it 
looks more like his father. Or something.




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 01:35:43 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 17:35:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
In-Reply-To: <DAV488DlKtt5Imwix2p00007f34@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20011125013543.73248.qmail@web11903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Hermione808 <hermione808 at hotmail.com> wrote:
<snipped> 
I mean, they spent, as I heard, over 100 million
> for this movie. With that much money, don't you
> think that they did the best they could with
> everything?

For one opinion, I do, indeed, and it occurs that
part of viewers' frustration with actors'
performances is the ickle bits of time the actors
had to portray our fictional friends.

Julie Walters as Mrs. Weasley, for instance. The
woman is a fine actress (her performance in
"Educating Rita" is memorable), yet she has all
of, what?, three lines in the HP movie. Same for
Fiona Shaw, one of England's fine stage and film
actresses, portraying Petunia.  

If only there could have been a miniseries,
following nearly every line in the book! Some
people may gasp at the literalness of the idea,
but others might consider that the characters
would truly "come to life" as the actors had
generous opportunity to interpret them.

Ah, we can dream. ;)
Wendelin/Deb




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From jeri at kronerxf.net  Sun Nov 25 02:10:48 2001
From: jeri at kronerxf.net (jeri)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 21:10:48 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] just a thought..  Hmmm...I wonder.....let's send CC a howler
References: <9tolm1+sj9k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00ba01c17556$66c4df20$9b461218@ctsvlle1.pa.home.com>

<< In light of all the disappointment overall with the HPSS movie;Does
anyone think (maybe a good question for the polls?)that Chris
Columbus should not direct any more of the films? Maybe WB should get
themselves a new director with a different slant to things? Chris >>

Overall disappointment? Who makes up this "overall" group? Every person I
know who's seen it has loved it immensely. Most of them are experts on the
books as well. Every movie has its naysayers, but that doesn't mean it's an
"overall disappointment".

jeri, positively *thrilled* with the movie, and can't wait for the next six
:)
-----------------
jeri's basement: http://www.themajestic3.com/jeri.htm
Kroner, KS: http://www.kronerxf.net
SWLD: http://swld.tripod.com
-----------------
9-11 |*=

"Before we begin, I would like to say a few words. And they are: Nitwit!
Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! Thank you!"    -- Albus Dumbledore




From editor at texas.net  Sun Nov 25 02:14:02 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 20:14:02 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Seventeen points against the movie (not all L.O.O.N.) 
 and five pros
References: <9tfpnk+c8un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C0053E9.9B5BFB07@texas.net>

pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it wrote:

> no need to make the chase for the key a parody of Hitchcock's "Birds"-

I liked this, it made the key challenge a challenge and dangerous.
Otherwise it just seemed a bit silly and contrived, with those brooms
waiting there.

> and, far more important, we could have seen Hermione solving the
> logical puzzle. Important because she is awarded 50 points "for the
> use of cool logic in the face of
> danger", which certainly doesn't refer to the Devil's Snare, but to
> the potion puzzle.

Sheryll and I saw this last night, for the third time each, and what
Dumbledore says is, "the cool use of intellect," which certainly can
apply to the Devil's Snare. We're all remembering the book speech, not
what he says in the script. I was listening for this, because I'd heard
this criticism before and wanted to check it out.

By the way, Fred and George *do* chant, "We got Potter," but they don't
look overwhelmingly excited by the time you notice they're doing it,
probably because by that time they're done gloating and are winding down
and having their attention diverted to congratulating Harry himself,
who's just gotten to the table.

--Amanda, who hasn't checked her email since last Monday night and had
almost 1500 emails waiting, aaaaaaaagh




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




From MMMfanfic at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 02:42:11 2001
From: MMMfanfic at hotmail.com (MMMfanfic at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 02:42:11 -0000
Subject: One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tplq3+rd4l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> Here's the new CNN 
> quote:
> 
> > "I wrote a piece of dialogue referring to Sirius Black," -- one 
of 
> > the main figures in the third book -- and she said, 'you can't do
> > that because you will see in book five, that's not possible,' "
> > Kloves said. 
> 
> So we know now that it has something to do with Sirius Black.  
> Interesting.  I assume then that it would have been brought up at 
> some point in Hagrid's comments about where he got the motorcycle 
> (per canon--these lines were either cut or never filmed for the 
> movie).  So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly 
said 
> about Black that book five will make impossible?
> 
> -Luke

It can't be about the wedding photo because Sirius was there as 
James's best man.  

I found it strange that Hagrid did not know Sirius was suppose to be 
the Potter's secret keeper.  I'm guessing that the 'you can't do 
that' might have been Dumbledore telling Hagrid about Sirius.  When 
Hagrid talked about returning the motorcycle to Sirius, Dumbledore 
didn't say anything.  Another anomaly -- Dumbledore believed Sirius 
to be guilty at the time but did not stop Hagrid looking for Sirius, 
why?

My best speculation is that it has something to do with the backstory 
between Hagrid, Dumbledore and Sirius.  May be there is some reason 
why Dumbledore didn't tell Hagrid about Sirius's role, which will be 
revealed in book 5.




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 03:41:29 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 03:41:29 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing / seating arrangement at table / Harry's pjs / and more
Message-ID: <9tpp99+6gva@eGroups.com>

Went in for my second viewing today, looking for some very specific
things, and here's just a bit of my thoughts:

The second viewing of this movie was MUCH better than the first!  I
have a feeling (based on others' comments as well) that this is the
type of movie that grows better and better with each viewing.  I think
it's because every time we watch it, we're able to relax just a little
bit more & watch it a bit more removed *as a movie*.

Did anyone else notive that practically EVERY time the students were
showed at a meal (I think except one) they were sitting in exactly the
same seats?  Was this just for convience sake of Columbus?  (what I
can remember:) Hermione, Harry, Percy, Lee Jordan on one side; and
across it was Ron, Fred, George (or vice versa), Oliver Wood, some
other younger girl.  I'm pretty sure Neville and Seamus were on the
same side with H&H, but I don't want to say for certain, since I
cannot exactly remember these.  I just thought it was a bit odd that
they sat on the same end of the table (near the Head Table) and next
to the same people almost everytime.  (I think the one exception was
at breakfast before Quidditch match when Harry & Ron were next to each
other and Hermione was across)

Harry-the-baby-in-flashback was DEFINITELY wearing Blue Clue's PJs!  I
looked for it specifically and for-certain saw the little dog on his
left sleeve.

BTW, because now everytime I think of it, it drives me up the wall:
after Ron (Rupert Grint) is knocked "unconscious" by the Queen in the
chess match, he moves not once but THREE times!  Come on, Chris,
that's just sloppy!  Okay, I know I'm picky, but it detracts.

Another point on Ron: I like Rupert EVEN BETTER (is that possible?)
after time Number Two.  This kid has definitely got some talent in
facial expressions & comedic timing!  I simply can't wait to see his
beautiful retorts to Hermione in GOF, because I know I will not be
able to stop laughing. (The hit-in-the-nose-with-the-broom scene STILL
makes me crack up even though I've watched that one about 10 times now)

More notes on Oliver Wood.  The actor playing him is VERY GOOD, but
given little opportunity to develop Wood's passion for the game. 
Another note: he's also got a nice sense of humor and well-trained in
physical acting (Bludger)--and WHO could miss that gorgeous grin when
he blocks Flint's attempted score?  Note again: some people were
speculating that once Wood is knocked onto the pitch, the goal is left
unguarded, giving Slytherin unfair opportunity, but if you look
closely a few minutes AFTER Wood is knocked off, he's back up &
actually blocks a goal!  It's just extremely fast & hard to catch if
you're not looking.

Note on Hermione/Emma: was it just me or did she seem awfully mean to
Ron in the very beginning?  Probably just being snobbish, but she
completely snubbed him when he introduced himself (of course, VERY
well could be a very proper 11-yr-old [1979 plug here!] just being
generally repulsed because Ron's being quite crude].

Okay, I'll be looking for things to put on a list of look for next
time I go back! <vbg> (It's becoming like a game now!)

-Megan (who knows if there was a cinema locally, she'd be on her
eighth viewing instead of just two)




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Nov 25 03:51:47 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 03:51:47 -0000
Subject: One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tppsj+9l6u@eGroups.com>

btw WELCOME BACK, AMANDA, and tell us (on OT) all about what you and 
Sheryll got up to!

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:

> > "I wrote a piece of dialogue referring to Sirius Black," -- one 
> > of  the main figures in the third book -- and she said, 'you 
> > can't do that because you will see in book five, that's not 
> > possible,' " Kloves said. 
> 
> So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said 
> about Black that book five will make impossible?

H'mmmm. Book dialogue: Dumbledore asked "And where did you get that 
motorcycle?" and Hagrid replied "Young Sirius Black lent it to me." 
and Dumbledore DID NOT reply "When? Don't you know that it was Sirius 
Black who betrayed the Potters?!" and MMMfanfic could be right that 
book five reveals the reason why Dumbledore did not tell Hagrid that.

Or maybe Kloves had been thinking about the law against enchanting 
Muggle artifacts and had Hagrid say: "It's okay, I borrowed it from 
Sirius Black, and he has a permit to have a flying motorcycle" and 
book five reveals that the motorcycle was already illegal in 1980. 
Or maybe the other way around, Kloves had Dumbledore say something 
about flying motorcycles being illegal, but book 5 will reveal that 
they were legal back then.

I'd like to think that the Kloves line had something to do with 
Sirius's love life, maybe a a reference to Sirius being Harry's 
godfather and his wife or girlfriend being Harry's godmother. Such a 
line could be wrong in So Many Ways, from Kloves having said wife (or 
girlfriend) when book 5 will reveal it was girlfriend (or wife) to 
Sirius & Remus having been a well-known monogamous couple to Sirius 
having been a totally slutty single.   
 







From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 04:35:14 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 04:35:14 -0000
Subject: Daniel, Food, and Sequels (per Rosie and MSNBC special)
Message-ID: <9tpse2+le2g@eGroups.com>

I've seen some discussion here on who might be doing which of the 
following movies. Daniel made it very clear on Rosie that he is 
interested in doing all of them. She mentioned that he might become 
"...too tall?" and he immediately replied, "Wellll...Harry grows
along with the books...." to which they both agreed that it's WB 
limiting him to two movies and it is WB that will be making the 
decision. But the discussion ended with the impression that Daniel 
at this point would like to do them all.

Since Daniel is growing at an obvious rate, I found the food segment 
on Rosie enlightening. Rupert and Emma barely tried the goodies, but 
Daniel chowed right in, guzzling all the butter beer, including
trying to symbolically take the whole table in with his arms at the 
commercial break. Did anyone else notice that Rupert tentatively
takes a partial lick of the poprock drenched lollypop, but Daniel 
sticks the whole thing in his mouth (with various arm flails as the 
pop rock sensation grows while the camera is on to other things)? 

Which brings us to the MSNBC special the other night. Just how much 
Daniel has grown is apparent in them juxtaposing him speaking at his 
first press conference after getting the role with him speaking at
the recent premiere. He is very thin and growing, and a bottomless 
pit. This is underscored in the MSNBC shot of him asking Chris if
it's lunchtime yet during a scene. Columbus looks at his watch, says 
it's almost lunchtime, but doesn't stop, continues on with the scene, 
to which Daniel's immediate response is a very loud "DAMN!" (We had
to play that one over a couple times to see if we got that one
right!)(also, watch 'Seamus' turn to Dan with a "Yeah, yeah, you tell 
him!" type of response). 

About the 'bags' under Dan's eyes that others have mentioned, the
bags remind me of when he was much younger and in 'David Copperfield' 
so I'm not so sure in his case that it is a sign of being tired. It
might be a case of the lighting.

Thanks for indulging me. You can tell I'm old enough to be his mom. 
Rosie wants to toss him onto a roller coaster. I just want to go
bake him some brownies and make sure he has the extra large tub of 
popcorn at the movies.




From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com  Sun Nov 25 04:53:01 2001
From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (UcfRentLuvr at cs.com)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:53:01 EST
Subject: 2nd viewing 
Message-ID: <123.7e9ed76.2931d32d@cs.com>

but if you look closely a few minutes AFTER Wood is knocked off, he's back up 
&
actually blocks a goal!  It's just extremely fast & hard to catch if you're 
not looking.>>

I actually caught that the second time I saw the movie but I think that one 
of the girls, I think Katie, blocked the shot. At the very end when they do 
the 360 shot of Harry holding up the Snitch--count how many Gryffindor 
players are flying around him: two girls and the Weasley Twins. If I saw it 
correctly, Oliver and Angelina weren't there.

***Dixie Malfoy***





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




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 04:55:05 2001
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (Kristin)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 04:55:05 -0000
Subject: Overall Disappointment / Chris Columbus, 1492 & Sir Nicholas' Deathday
In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17556$66c4df20$9b461218@ctsvlle1.pa.home.com>
Message-ID: <9tptj9+kqbk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "jeri" <jeri at k...> wrote:

> Overall disappointment? Who makes up this "overall" group? Every 
>person I know who's seen it has loved it immensely. Most of them are 
>experts on the books as well. Every movie has its naysayers, but 
>that doesn't mean it's an "overall disappointment".


I agree, I don't think the movie was an overall diappointment at all. 
I think Chris Columbus did an excellent job in maintaining the 
intergrity of the book.  Yes I have some issues with certain aspects 
of the film, but who doesn't. James is a big one. I think some of the 
editing could have been better, certain scenes seemed a little thrown 
together and choppy. I definately enjoyed it more the second time 
around. 


In HPFGU-Movie at y...Joanne0012@a...wrote:

>But remember, book 2 begins in 1992, as Nearly-Headless Nick 
>celebrates the 500th anniversary of his death in 1492.  So unless 
>they change the 1492 date (very unlikely, considering that Chris 
>Columbus' production company is called 1492 Productions -- get it?), 
>then DDL is actually a bit old for the part, though no doubt he can 
>play the right age.


Actually I believe 1492 Productions is so named because Chris is 
short for Christopher, hence Christopher Columbus. In 1492 Columbus 
sailed the ocean blue, or something like that. Anyway it just happens 
to be a coincedence that Nearly-Headless Nick's deathday is in 1492.
Just another of the meanigless trivial facts floating around in my 
brain. :)

Cheers,

Kristin 

 





From laurakay76 at juno.com  Sun Nov 25 05:15:09 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:15:09 -0500
Subject: Director's cut
Message-ID: <20011125.010130.-149159.4.laurakay76@juno.com>


Hermione808 wrote:

  Also really quick, someone in a previous post mentioned a director's
cut. Where is that mentioned? I've been looking on the web, but I don't
see anything mentioned about it.

That was me.  :)  At present, there is an extremely popular petition at
the Petition Site, asking Chris Columbus and Warner Bros. to release a
director's cut DVD when they do eventually release a DVD at all.  If
you'd like to sign it, go to http://www.thepetitionsite.com and look for
the link to the Harry Potter petition.  

~Laura K.
________________________________________________________________
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 laurakay76 at juno.com  Sun Nov 25 05:09:22 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:09:22 -0500
Subject: Hermione and power in the movie
Message-ID: <20011125.010130.-149159.3.laurakay76@juno.com>


I don't think she was regarding Ron with disgust, exactly, at their first
meeting.  Her expression and tone of voice when she said "Pleasure"
suggested to me that she was viewing him with disdain, which is not the
same thing.  On the one hand she was looking at Harry Potter, the famous
boy who survived an attack by the Dark Lord and saved all of wizardom. 
(And you can see just a little bit of his scar when he takes off his
glasses to look at how she fixed them -- I think that's how she knew who
he was.)  On the other hand, she was looking at Ron Weasley, who had dirt
on his nose and was talking to her through a mouth stuffed with candy.  I
adore Ron -- he reminds me a great deal of my husband, who is also a
redhead! -- but I don't think his manners were exactly charming at that
moment.  Also, he had a rat on his lap, and that wouldn't really make a
fabulous first impression with me either.  =)

~Laura K.
________________________________________________________________
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 laurakay76 at juno.com  Sun Nov 25 05:49:56 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:49:56 -0500
Subject: HRH Dynamic (a little long, sorry)
Message-ID: <20011125.010130.-149159.5.laurakay76@juno.com>


I'm wondering whether anyone else feels that the actual relationship
between HR&H is made more, shall we say, real by the portrayal of such in
the movie.  Having seen the film three times now, I find that I'm looking
at the way the trio relates to each other a little differently than I did
when I had simply memorized chunks of the books.  These are my
impressions, based mainly on the movie, and I'd like to know anyone
else's opinions.

Hermione -- She seems to have a bit of hero worship going on with Harry. 
I don't think it qualifies as a proper crush, just a great deal of
admiration for his babyhood accomplishments as well as his present day
character.  Observe the way she knows about his father having been a
Seeker, and seems to be trying very hard to become a part of his "inner
circle" (consisting basically of himself and Ron, really) until the troll
incident.  After the troll incident, I think she develops a healthier
respect for Ron as well, since they both had a hand in rescuing her. 
Clearly her initial disdain for Ron changes into friendship and even
affection by the time they enter the trapdoor; her sorrow and fear at his
intentions of self-sacrifice in the chess match are a strong indication
of this, as is her hearty applause when Dumbledore awards him fifty
points.  She even grows to be more tolerant of his [or what she thinks
are his] shortcomings; she rescues him from the Devil's Snare without so
much as a word of reproof.

Ron -- He's quite amazed that a person of Harry's notoriety would choose
him for a best friend.  The movie doesn't really get much into how he's
been overshadowed by his older brothers, but I always thought that maybe
this was a bit of something Ron was able to do that his brothers didn't
-- become the best friend of one of the most famous people in modern-day
wizardry.  He also seems to share in Hermione's hero worship, just a
little bit, but his reasoning evolves into a different sort from hers; he
knows firsthand what a nice guy Harry is.  His view of Hermione is fairly
transparent as it progresses from mild irritation to thorough disgust to
tolerance to friendship.  Helping to rescue her from the troll seems to
make her a little more acceptable to him, as though it proved to all of
them that she's not able to do everything.  I think he comes to admire
her, in a way, almost as much as he does Harry; my favorite line in the
movie is "You're a little bit scary sometimes, you know that?  Brilliant,
but scary."  Young boys just love things they find scary; it's not so
much that she spooks him here, but that he's amazed by her being able to
do what she has to do.  To my mind, one of the best things about Ron's
developing friendship with H&H is that it gives him the chance to be
something of a hero in his own right.

Harry -- His liking of Ron is instantaneous; I think the open, friendly
face of Rupert Grint helps us to accept that more readily than we
otherwise might.  He's not used to being liked by people, never mind
being famous, so forming such a quick and ready friendship with Ron comes
as something of a surprise to him -- almost as if he's thinking, "Someone
likes me?  Maybe I'm not so unlovable as the Dursleys would have me
believe."  I don't think he quite knows what to make of Hermione at the
outset.  Certainly her quick mind and magical skill are a point of
admiration with him (she fixed his glasses, after all), but the
overbearing nature of her personality puts him off some.  He puts this
aside, however, when the time comes to rescue her from the troll; all
that matters at this point is that a classmate is in mortal peril, and
he's one of the only people who knows it.  Once he and Ron have saved
her, she becomes their staunch ally and, more importantly, their loyal
friend.  I think the clearest visual of Harry's feelings for Ron and
Hermione, however, comes toward the end of the film, when he returns to
Gryffindor Tower from the hospital wing.  They're on the landing above
him, and he's gazing up at them with one of the sweetest smiles he offers
during the whole movie -- Harry is looking at the two living people he
loves most in the world.  

Okay, everyone still awake?  ;)  Any thoughts?  Arguments?  Concurrences?
 Cookies?
~Laura K.

________________________________________________________________
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 hermione_heidi at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 09:17:09 2001
From: hermione_heidi at hotmail.com (hermione_heidi at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 09:17:09 -0000
Subject: Errors!!!!
Message-ID: <9tqcul+tsmk@eGroups.com>

Hi I am new here although I have been on the HPFGP list for awhile.
I just went and saw the movie for the 3rd time today and I noticed 
something that I did not before.  There is a contunity error(that is 
an error like if a character has a hat on in one scene, making sure 
he has the hat on in the next shot of the same scene) I noticed today 
that in the scene right after Harry has been sorted he goes and sits 
down by Ron but in the next scene he is sitting next to Percy on the 
other side of the table....
Hummm just wanted to share the info
Sincerly 
Heidi H 




From cindysphynx at home.com  Sun Nov 25 13:29:08 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:29:08 -0000
Subject: One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tqrn4+8v3p@eGroups.com>

Luke wrote:

So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said 
> about Black that book five will make impossible?

Thanks for the outstanding question, Luke.  I love a good mystery!

Maybe the Kloves lines were references to Black being Harry's 
godfather.  Something like Hagrid says essentially "Sirius wants to 
raise Harry.  Shouldn't Harry go live with Sirius Black?" and 
Dumbledore says essentially "No, that can never happen."  So in Book 
5, Harry finally does get to go live with Sirius, which means Sirius 
doesn't die and gets his name cleared in Book 5?  

The logic is that it would be natural for Kloves to include something 
about the godfather relationship so that the reference to the 
motorbike in PS/SS would make some sense.  It also makes sense that 
Kloves would want to flesh out Hagrid's statements in the book that 
Sirius argued with him about taking Harry.  

Cindy (whose opinion on this is undoubtedly influenced by the fact 
that she likes Sirius and doesn't want him to die in Book 5)




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 14:07:49 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:07:49 -0000
Subject: Errors!!!!
In-Reply-To: <9tqcul+tsmk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tqtvl+1i48@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hermione_heidi at h... wrote:
> I noticed today 
> that in the scene right after Harry has been sorted he goes and sits 
> down by Ron but in the next scene he is sitting next to Percy on the 
> other side of the table....

There are quite a few such problems.  The one you note is the very first on the 
Harry Potter list at Movie-Mistakes.com

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




From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 16:05:39 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 12:05:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: One mystery *partially* solved!
Message-ID: <F84U47WEdhiBjKtCvhK00009320@hotmail.com>

>From: "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at wicca.net>
>
>I'd like to think that the Kloves line had something to do with
>Sirius's love life, maybe a a reference to Sirius being Harry's
>godfather and his wife or girlfriend being Harry's godmother. Such a
>line could be wrong in So Many Ways, from Kloves having said wife (or
>girlfriend) when book 5 will reveal it was girlfriend (or wife) to
>Sirius & Remus having been a well-known monogamous couple to Sirius
>having been a totally slutty single.

Maybe Hagrid was to say "I'd better return the motorcycle, it's the only way 
Sirius can attract the ladies" and Book 5 reveals just how dead sexy Sirius 
is. ;-)

Angela

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




From Nmhitz630 at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 16:13:01 2001
From: Nmhitz630 at aol.com (Nmhitz630 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:13:01 EST
Subject: hermione's hair
Message-ID: <12b.7f51c33.2932728d@aol.com>

I thought it was rather obvious that the hair stylist was not consistant with 
the methods they used for Hermione's hair. It looked very teased like she 
doesn't even brush it at all which looked unrealistic. I personally never 
imagined Hermione with the sort of hair she had in the movie but rather just 
thick and wavy not just fluffed up. Did anyone else notice that in one scene 
it was quite obvious that they had used a crimping iron on it? No one has 
hair that is naturally crimpy so I just thought that wasn't such a great 
idea. I'd like to see some sort of consistancy with Hermione's hair in the 
next movie.

Nicole


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




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 17:32:23 2001
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (Zarleycat at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 17:32:23 -0000
Subject: See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions
Message-ID: <9tr9v7+stse@eGroups.com>

I finally saw the movie, and it was so visually overwhelming that I 
will go see it again sometime this week.  So perhaps some of what I 
say may be revised after a second viewing.  I went to the movie with 
a friend who has not read any of the books.  We thought this could be 
interesting to see if the movie worked for someone who was only aware 
of Potterverse in the broadest terms.

Both of us felt some of the transitions were jumpy, especially in the 
beginning.  I understand that some things had to be left out, but the 
first 20 minutes or so seemed rushed to me.  My friend said she felt 
that she couldn't relax into the flow of the movie because it was 
trying to tell her too much too quickly.  

On the whole, my Muggle friend liked the movie, also.  She believed 
that Snape was trying to harm Harry, not protect him.  "That poor 
kid - he gets away from his awful family and has to deal with an 
awful teacher!"  Her main problem with the film was that Draco made 
her think of a blond Eddie Munster (for those of you who remember the 
TV show "The Munsters" from the 1960s.)

I had some minor disappointments - no discussion of wand material and 
wand cores, the Sorting Hat speaking out loud, Fred and George being 
relegated to very minor characters.

My main problem with the film is with Snape.  There is no indication 
of the bad blood between James and Snape.  Granted, Harry finds this 
out late in PS/SS but it plays a part in why Snape is frequently 
nasty to Harry.  My non-Potter reading friend wanted to know if Snape 
took a dislike to Harry simply because he was writing something 
during the beginning of their first Potions class.  I had to tell her 
that that was made up and in the book, Snape uses the "our newest 
celebrity" line when he's calling the roll.  In the book Snape 
initiates the hostility between them.  It's almost as if the film is 
presenting a kinder, gentler Snape.  Not exactly warm and cuddly, but 
decidedly not as nasty as the book version.

Okay, load up your blunderbusses and get ready to let me have it. I'm 
not a big fan of the Rickman portrayal.  I love the voice, I get a 
kick out of the sweeping, black robes, but I'd like a little more 
facial expression.  I thought he was too expressionless, except for 
those amazing dancing nostrils.  Give me a sneer, a curl of the lip, 
a frightening frown, something....I asked my friend how old she 
thought Snape was supposed to be.  Her estimate was early 50s, but 
trying to look late 40s.  I assume that the actors selected to play 
Lupin and Black will also have to fall into this age bracket.

Random thoughts:

Did anyone else think of the movie "The Gladiator" as the Gryffindor 
Quidditch team prepared to take the field?

I liked the use of a scrim effect to show what the kids saw when they 
were under the Invisibility Cloak.

Loved Robbie Coltrane.  Hated the music.

Was James a Seeker, as indicated in the film, or a Chaser?

And, I want Dumbledore's wardrobe, especially that nice number he's 
wearing at the end-of-year feast.


Marianne, who's prepared to reasses her Snape views upon a second 
screening
   





From srae at mindspring.com  Sun Nov 25 18:16:54 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:16:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions
In-Reply-To: <9tr9v7+stse@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011125131654.00a89808@pop.mindspring.com>

Ok, I'm new to the list. Hello hello. :)  Been lurking for a few days and I
decided to dive in with this one.  So here goes.


Marianne said:

>I went to the movie with 
>a friend who has not read any of the books.  We thought this could be 
>interesting to see if the movie worked for someone who was only aware 
>of Potterverse in the broadest terms.

>Both of us felt some of the transitions were jumpy, especially in the 
>beginning.  I understand that some things had to be left out, but the 
>first 20 minutes or so seemed rushed to me.  

I've been very interested in the opinions of those who haven't read the
books as well.  My first viewing was with my aunt, her two girls, and my
mother. Of the five of us, only my mom hadn't read the books.  She loved
the movie, and had no trouble following it. I asked her that specifically
because I too thought it seemed a little jumpy and rushed through the first
30 minutes or so.  Once they actually get on the train, things seemed to
calm down a bit though.  As for my aunt and myself, we were almost weepy
with the sheer joy of how wonderful it all was.  I find it very difficult
to find much wrong with the movie, except for the sense of rush at the
beginning.  Like your friend, my mother also was duped into believing that
Snape was the bad guy.  I grilled her, because it's just so hard to judge
how effective things like that are when you already know.  She is of the
opinion that she was better off having not read the books, since everything
was a surprise to her. My aunt and I are of the opinion that no one could
*possibly* have enjoyed it more than us!
 
>awful teacher!"  Her main problem with the film was that Draco made 
>her think of a blond Eddie Munster (for those of you who remember the 
>TV show "The Munsters" from the 1960s.)

Oh dear.  Now you've done it...I won't be able to see it again without
giggling now.  Thank you so much. :)

>I had some minor disappointments - no discussion of wand material and 
>wand cores, the Sorting Hat speaking out loud, Fred and George being 
>relegated to very minor characters.

I had some very minor disappointments, but nothing I really even thought
much about for more than a second or two.  I would like to have seen
Peeves, but mostly because he was played by Rik Mayall and I adore him.
And I'd have liked to have seen Vernon going about his day, seeing all the
'strange folk' and hearing a 'whisper about the Potters' everywhere he
went.  Nothing that I felt was really essential was left out, though.

>nasty to Harry.  My non-Potter reading friend wanted to know if Snape 
>took a dislike to Harry simply because he was writing something 
>during the beginning of their first Potions class.  I had to tell her 

I thought it was fairly obvious on that first night at Hogwarts that Snape
disliked Harry. The filmmakers certainly made a point of showing Snape
glaring at him from the teachers' table.  But again, this might be because
I already knew that. I should ask my mom if it was evident to her.

>Okay, load up your blunderbusses and get ready to let me have it. I'm 
>not a big fan of the Rickman portrayal.  I love the voice, I get a 
>kick out of the sweeping, black robes, but I'd like a little more 
>facial expression.  I thought he was too expressionless, except for 
>those amazing dancing nostrils.  Give me a sneer, a curl of the lip, 
>a frightening frown, something....

Really? Oh, I thought he was fabulous.  No loaded blunderbuss here!  But I
did love his portrayal.  It was all in the voice and the eyes.  To be any
more animated would have detracted, I think, from his silent, still menace.
 But I'm a longtime Rickman fan, and was as overjoyed to hear he was going
to be Snape as I was to hear Rik Mayall was to be Peeves.

>
>Loved Robbie Coltrane.  Hated the music.

Robbie Coltrane was *brilliant* as Hagrid.  Am I the only one who has been
pronouncing Hagrid wrong?  I think his beard should have been longer though.

>Was James a Seeker, as indicated in the film, or a Chaser?

In the books he was definitely a Chaser.  Not sure why that particular
change was made, unless it was just a mistake.

Here's something I haven't seen discussed (could have overlooked it
somewhere I suppose)...why were Harry's eyes not changed to green in the
film?  I remember reading somewhere that they were going to digitally make
them green, and on the calendar and other photos I've seen around, they are
a rather startling brilliant green.  But not in the movie.  Not that it
matters, I suppose, I was just curious why it'd be so obvious in the
merchandise and not in the movie.

Ok, so there it is...first post!

Shannon



From ruth at hamburg.de  Sun Nov 25 18:47:01 2001
From: ruth at hamburg.de (Ruth Meyer)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:47:01 +0100 (CET)
Subject: School bags and staircases (and other things)
Message-ID: <1318326.1006714021697.JavaMail.nobody@imperator.e0k.nbg-hannover.de>

Finally I've seen the movie for the first time 
yesterday and now I feel propelled to sneak out
of lurkdom today :-)

While I have to admit that my immediate feeling
after seeing the film was mainly disappointment
I definitely think that was due to my state of
mind at the beginning of / during the film. I just
wasn't relaxed enough to sit back and watch it
as a film. Instead I was in "nitpicking mode" with
at the same time (paradoxically?) very high raised
expectations. Well, I now just take your word for
it that it will be much better on second viewing.

I'd like to share some of my observations. Though
most of you had a head start, of course, I think I have a
few new points that nobody IIRC so far commented upon.

(1) School bags. I only spotted students carrying bags
in the scene after the final exams when everyone is
walking around the yard. Hermione definitely carries 
a bag with her during her conversation with Ron and Harry.
But what does this bag look like? IMHO it's not just
wrong - because it lacks a shoulder strap - it's plain awful,
looks like a sort of shopping bag with its two short handles,
not like a school bag that you can sling over your
shoulder. 

In this scene Harry realizes that Hagrid might have spilled 
the beans about Fluffy to the guy with the dragon egg, so the
trio runs to Hagrid's hut. During this run Hermione's bag is
not visible. I was just about to congratulate her that she
obviously managed to get rid of her hideous bag :-) when she
had it right back with her when they talked to Hagrid. 

(2) Lee Jordan. While I certainly missed his commentary during
the Quidditch match, too, I also found him much too young 
looking to be in the same year as Fred and George. He looked
more like a first year than a third year to me.

(3) After the first flying lesson when McGonagall brings Harry
to meet with Oliver Wood she actually "borrows Wood" not from
Flitwick as in canon but from Quirell. And we get to see 
Quirell holding what looks like a giant chameleon while 
standing in whirling mist - that's exactly like the picture of 
him I remember from a magazine shot (Vanity Fair?).

(4) Dormitory staircases. When Percy first shows the first years
into the Gryffindor common room I remember him pointing out a
staircase to his left for the boys' dormitories and another one
to his right for the girls' dormitories. But in later scenes
only one staircase seems to exist: the trio descend the same staircase into the common room to meet Trevor and Neville 
before leaving for the final "trial". And Hermione leaves Harry
and Ron to "go to bed before they come up with another idea to
get them killed..." definitely not in the common room but on 
some sort of gallery or landing. At least I imagined the 
(wooden) door Hermione leaves through to be the door to her
dormitory.
So do I recall the scene with Percy correctly or not? 

(5) In the trophy room scene I was already prepared to look
at the other plaques instead of at James' plaque. So while I
now can't tell you anything about James' plaque I spotted
R.J.H. King 1969 and M.G. McGonagal 1970. That seems to go
with the theory of "player of the year" displayed there...


- Ruth,
now looking forward to watch the film a second time

By the way, I was lucky enough to catch the original version of
the movie, not the German dubbed one. And we got to see the
British version with "Philosopher's Stone". I noticed in the
scene at Hagrid's hut that you can't see the trio mouthing "We know about the Sorcerer's /Philosopher's Stone" because Hagrid
conveniently closes the door right in front of them so that they
are shut out of view with the words "We know -". Guess that way
you have to shoot this scene only once and do a voice over for the second version?



From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Sun Nov 25 18:59:33 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:59:33 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hat talking / general impressions
References: <3.0.1.32.20011125131654.00a89808@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <014301c175e3$51d31ae0$53af1e3e@stephen>

>shannon said:
>I had some minor disappointments - no discussion of wand material and 
>wand cores, the Sorting Hat speaking out loud, Fred and George being 
>relegated to very minor characters.

I sort of got the impression that the spectators in the Hall couldn't hear the Hat. When Hermione has it on, the Hat is saying things like 'right, yes' as if in reply to what Hermione is thinking. When Harry has it on, we can hear him thinking 'Not Slytherin' (yes I know you can see his lips moving, but bear with me a minute) but as the camera pans round the other students and the teachers, none of them is reacting at all to the conversation we are hearing, so I think they can't hear it! Thoughts on this please?

I also want to join in the advice for one-time viewers - go and see it again, it's even better the second time round!!! The first time I was waiting for each addition and bit left out, the second I was prepared for these things and could relax and enjoy the film. First viewing I hated Ron swearing at McGonagall, 2nd time I still didn't like this, but my new hate item is on the train, when Harry tells the trolley witch they'll buy everything - I mean, even Ron couldn't eat all the stuff on the trolley which is intended for a whole train full of hungry kids! Why couldn't Harry say 'we'll take some of everything' which is what happens in the book?

Saw the Leaky Cauldron sign, Petunia dying the clothes, and McGonagall's name on the trophy (I reckon this is Minerva's son / daughter), but missed Neville & grandmother - have to see it a 3rd time now!  :-)

I also agree that Richard Harris MUST read the books before the next film - his Dumbledore was friendly and a bit mysterious, but hardly any sense of humourous eccentricity. Why couldn't they have had 'Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak' and the sock comment by the mirror - about 1 minute of screen time, and would have added a huge amount of understanding of Dumbledore's character.

But overall, a truly superb film - can't wait to find another group of people to go with, as my fiance doesn't really want to see it a third time in 3 weeks (shock! horror!)

Lucy


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




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 19:02:57 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:02:57 -0000
Subject: Snape Opinions
In-Reply-To: <9tr9v7+stse@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9trf91+b0nv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Zarleycat at a... wrote:
>  
>  
> On the whole, my Muggle friend liked the movie, also.  She believed 
> that Snape was trying to harm Harry, not protect him.  "That poor 
> kid - he gets away from his awful family and has to deal with an 
> awful teacher!"   
> My main problem with the film is with Snape.  There is no 
indication 
> of the bad blood between James and Snape.  Granted, Harry finds 
this 
> out late in PS/SS but it plays a part in why Snape is frequently 
> nasty to Harry.  My non-Potter reading friend wanted to know if 
Snape 
> took a dislike to Harry simply because he was writing something 
> during the beginning of their first Potions class.  I had to tell 
her 
> that that was made up and in the book, Snape uses the "our newest 
> celebrity" line when he's calling the roll.  In the book Snape 
> initiates the hostility between them.  It's almost as if the film 
is 
> presenting a kinder, gentler Snape.  Not exactly warm and cuddly, 
but 
> decidedly not as nasty as the book version.
 
I have heard other HP fans complaining the same thing. So I guess I'm 
in the minority here. I have no problem about the screen time for 
Snape. I thought the few scenes left in the movie are efficient 
enough for misleading first-time viewers to think that it's Snape who 
tried to harm Harry. Considering the time constraint, I feel that's 
enough for the 1st movie. They have plenty of time to explain Snape's 
motive in 2nd or 3rd movies.
However, I have other complaints.
1) I hope the characters didn't cite Voldemort's name so often 
instead calling him "you-know-who". It totally destroyed the fear 
factor and didn't explain the background of the story well. I guess 
non-HP fans just don't understand what's the big deal for Harry 
facing Voldemort the second time when he shouldn't broke any more 
rules. For this reason, I wish they'd add the scene where Harry 
shouted to Ron and Hermione "When Voldemort comes back there won't be 
any Hogwarts to get expelled from! If I get caught I'll just to go 
back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me there, it's 
only dying a bit later than I would have because I'm never going over 
to the dark side! Voldemort KILLED MY PARENTS, remember?" That would 
explain his motive so much better. I don't like people to think Harry 
going there just because he wants to play a hero. 
2)I hope they left the scene where Neville got bullied by Malfoy and 
Harry said to him "you worth twelve of him". Just a short scene, but 
it could make the final point giving so much more meaningful for 
Neville. It also shows more interaction between the trio and other 
classmates. Actually, some people in another HP forum wrote a scene 
where Harry got yelled "Thanks for losing us 150 points" and then 
Malfoy laughed at him. After this short confrontation, Malfoy left 
and pushed Neville down to floor. The trio then comforted Neville and 
encouraged him. That's a super idea, revealing so much about the 
relationships among the characters. I really wish there was a similar 
scene in the film.
3) The final scene. It did bother me that Harry killed Quirrell using 
his bare hands. They could just show Quirrell get burned and knocked 
out without turning into a pile of ashes and then show Voldemort's 
spirit leaving him and going through Harry's body. 
Overall, I loved this movie and watched it twice. The second time was 
even better than the 1st.
  
> I asked my friend how old she 
> thought Snape was supposed to be.  Her estimate was early 50s, but 
> trying to look late 40s.  I assume that the actors selected to play 
> Lupin and Black will also have to fall into this age bracket.

 
That's what I'm thinking about. For this reason I think Ralph Finnes 
(Lupin) and Day Lewis (Black) are perfect. They're in their 40s.





From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Sun Nov 25 19:10:49 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:10:49 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry murderer? / eyes / Snape menace
References: <9trf91+b0nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <015a01c175e4$e4ff1480$53af1e3e@stephen>

>hunao01 said:

>3) The final scene. It did bother me that Harry killed Quirrell using 
his bare hands. They could just show Quirrell get burned and knocked 
out without turning into a pile of ashes and then show Voldemort's 
spirit leaving him and going through Harry's body. 
Overall, I loved this movie and watched it twice. The second time was 
even better than the 1st.
  
I wasn't too keen on this bit either, but after the second time viewing I don't think Harry intended him to crumble to bits. After he grabs Quirrell's hand and it crumbles, Harry looks at his hands as if he can't believe what just happened. Then he and Quirrell rush towards each other and Harry jams his hands onto Quirrell's face. He than pulls away and looks with horrified amazement at his hands again, still unable to understand the effect it is having on Quirrell. I think the book way was better when he just fainted and Voldemort killed Quirrell when abandoning him, but I don't think movie-Harr was a deliberate murderer.

On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind Harry having blue eyes particularly - I know the ideal boy would have had green eyes, but it's pretty difficult to find a black / dark brown haired boy with blue eyes instead of hazel or brown, let alone trying to find one with green eyes! If the lenses and special effects didn't work, so be it - it's still pretty close to the right colour!

I also like the menacing Snape in the movie - I don't think he should have slammed his way into the classroom - looked as if he was running late and hurring to start the lesson! But I think I would have been fooled into thinking he was the menace, not Quirrell!

Back to lurking!

Lucy



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




From seijin_dinger at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 19:11:34 2001
From: seijin_dinger at hotmail.com (Seijin Dinger)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:11:34 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions
References: <9tr9v7+stse@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OE56EmrR2PO54HDf6er00017236@hotmail.com>

Zarleycat wrote I am not a big fan of the Rickman portrayal.

I havent seen the movie yet but when I finished with the first book (I red all 4 books in 3 days) I already had a Good Idea about snape, who has turned out to be my favorite character. I felt that Jeremy Irons (The voice of Scar from the Lion King) would have made an excellent Snape


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




From srae at mindspring.com  Sun Nov 25 19:22:01 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:22:01 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry murderer? / eyes / Snape menace
In-Reply-To: <015a01c175e4$e4ff1480$53af1e3e@stephen>
References: <9trf91+b0nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011125142201.00a7e028@pop.mindspring.com>

At 07:10 PM 11/25/2001 -0000, you wrote:
<<On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind Harry having blue eyes
particularly - I know the ideal boy would have had green eyes, but it's
pretty difficult to find a black / dark brown haired boy with blue eyes
instead of hazel or brown, let alone trying to find one with green eyes! If
the lenses and special effects didn't work, so be it - it's still pretty
close to the right colour!>>

Oh, I didn't mind it either.  I just wondered why it was changed on the
merchandise, but not in the movie.  It really didn't even occur to me until
after I saw the movie the first time and the next day saw the calendar,
with Harry's eyes being SO green you could see them across the room. 

Shannon



From SALeathem at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 19:31:26 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:31:26 EST
Subject: Quidditch shield/Snape smiling?
Message-ID: <36.1f44a0b4.2932a10e@aol.com>

In a message dated 25/11/2001 18:48:22 GMT Standard Time, ruth at hamburg.de 
writes:

<< 
 (5) In the trophy room scene I was already prepared to look
 at the other plaques instead of at James' plaque. So while I
 now can't tell you anything about James' plaque I spotted
 R.J.H. King 1969 and M.G. McGonagal 1970. That seems to go
 with the theory of "player of the year" displayed there... >>

The only other thing I noticed when I saw it again on friday night was that 
James' year is listed as 1972. I never saw that first time round. But if King 
& McGonagall are '69 & '70, and James is '72 and the final name on the 
plaque, where's '71? 

The other (main) thing was during the Quidditch match, when it's announced 
that Harry has the snitch and Gryffindor win, the camera cuts back to Snape, 
and I swear I saw him start to smile. Will have to watch more closely next 
time. Anyone else notice any possible smiles??

Sara



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 19:46:24 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:46:24 -0000
Subject: Quidditch shield/Snape smiling?
In-Reply-To: <36.1f44a0b4.2932a10e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9trhqg+h84a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., SALeathem at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 25/11/2001 18:48:22 GMT Standard Time, ruth at h... 
> writes:
> 
> << 
>  (5) In the trophy room scene I was already prepared to look
>  at the other plaques instead of at James' plaque. So while I
>  now can't tell you anything about James' plaque I spotted
>  R.J.H. King 1969 and M.G. McGonagal 1970. That seems to go
>  with the theory of "player of the year" displayed there... >>
> 
> The only other thing I noticed when I saw it again on friday night was that 
> James' year is listed as 1972. I never saw that first time round. But if King 
> & McGonagall are '69 & '70, and James is '72 and the final name on the 
> plaque, where's '71? 
> 

Gryffendor may not have won the Cup on 1971; that year would reside on the Plaque belonging to the club who won that year.






From bludger_witch at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 19:44:39 2001
From: bludger_witch at yahoo.com (Dinah)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:44:39 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Quidditch shield/Snape smiling?
References: <36.1f44a0b4.2932a10e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <004101c175e9$b0a1ad60$472b07d5@oemcomputer>

> But if King & McGonagall are '69 & '70, and James is '72 
> and the final name on the > plaque, where's '71? 
> Sara

McGonagall was '71. It's a bit hard to read, though.

Dinah


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




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 20:20:29 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:20:29 -0000
Subject: Harry murderer? / eyes 
In-Reply-To: <015a01c175e4$e4ff1480$53af1e3e@stephen>
Message-ID: <9trjqd+tn9q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Lucy Austin" <lucy at l...> wrote:
> I wasn't too keen on this bit either, but after the second time 
viewing I don't think Harry intended him to crumble to bits. After he 
grabs Quirrell's hand and it crumbles, Harry looks at his hands as if 
he can't believe what just happened. Then he and Quirrell rush 
towards each other and Harry jams his hands onto Quirrell's face. He 
than pulls away and looks with horrified amazement at his hands 
again, still unable to understand the effect it is having on 
Quirrell. I think the book way was better when he just fainted and 
Voldemort killed Quirrell when abandoning him, but I don't think 
movie-Harr was a deliberate murderer.


Oh, I don't think Harry was a murderer either, and I agree with you 
that in the fighting scene Harry's reaction was perfectly normal. 
What bothered me is that in Harry and Dumbledore's conversation they 
failed to acknowledge that he killed somebody. If only Harry 
asked "Why" and "How" and let Dumbledore told him Quirrell only died 
because he intended to kill Harry (Lilly's protection only hurt 
people who want to hurt her son), I would be perfectly happy with 
that scene.

> On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind Harry having blue 
eyes particularly - I know the ideal boy would have had green eyes, 
but it's pretty difficult to find a black / dark brown haired boy 
with blue eyes instead of hazel or brown, let alone trying to find 
one with green eyes! If the lenses and special effects didn't work, 
so be it - it's still pretty close to the right colour!

I don't mind it either. Daniel has very expressive eyes, so "Harry-
like". Somebody pointed out that the green eyes may be very important 
for future books but I guess since JKR said nothing about this 
inconsistency, it's not as important as we thought. Maybe what is 
essential for the books is the fact that "Harry has his mother's 
eyes" instead of "Harry has green eyes". Lilly could have blue eyes 
for all I care.
 
Sissy (Who realy should take Dumbledore's advice to "not dwell on 
dreams"and focus on her final instead of HP)




From mirzamblack at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 20:27:13 2001
From: mirzamblack at yahoo.com (Mirzam Black)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:27:13 -0000
Subject: James' position / press kit
In-Reply-To: <9shnb4+a9vb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9trk71+564r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> I'm not quite sure yet how to handle a LOT of things. For example, 
> the names of new shops on Diagon Alley...do I include them? As for 
> James' postition, I might put it on there that it was identified as 
> Seeker in the film. The date is more important, actually. If he 
> received the award in 1972, that means our date figuring is more or 
> less correct. So do I accept that but not the Seeker part? *sigh*
> 

Did you notice that M.G. McGonagall received some award in 1972 too? 
Did anyone of you get any other marks to the timeline from the movie?

And if James received this award in 1972, could his second year at 
Hogwarts really BEGIN in 1972? I think that all this awarding 
business takes place when schoolyear is ending, and because Harry was 
the youngest Seeker in 100 years, does that mean that in 1972 begun 
James's third year at Hogwarts? Or am I totally wrong in this one?

//Mirzam




From seijin_dinger at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 21:17:09 2001
From: seijin_dinger at hotmail.com (Seijin Dinger)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:17:09 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: James' position / press kit
References: <9trk71+564r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OE472i50ddbahByTmd60000c2bd@hotmail.com>

And if James received this award in 1972, could his second year at 
Hogwarts really BEGIN in 1972? I think that all this awarding 
business takes place when schoolyear is ending, and because Harry was 
the youngest Seeker in 100 years, does that mean that in 1972 begun 
James's third year at Hogwarts? Or am I totally wrong in this one?

//Mirzam


I whole heartedly agree, Remember, the Quiddich season ends near the end of the school year, and well after the new year so that would place James's second year from 1971-1972


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




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Sun Nov 25 21:49:12 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:49:12 -0000
Subject: James position?
Message-ID: <9trp0o+kltc@eGroups.com>

I think you have already discussed this but I have been looking 
thought the arcives and can not find the message that deals with this 
even though I have found stuff about Quidditch but is James a seeker 
or Chaser because it says in the film he is Gryffindor Seeker and yet 
JK has said about 10 times that he played CHASER? What is going on 
and can some nice soul please inform me of where i might find the 
messages on Quidditch and what position James played?

HOLLYDAZE!!!




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Sun Nov 25 21:50:49 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:50:49 -0000
Subject: third time notes/list of errors
Message-ID: <9trp3p+l2us@eGroups.com>

Back again. Saw it for the third time last night. A couple of notes 
(and maybe they've been noted, I don't know, I can't keep up with 
messages on here):

1 - Filch is with the Slytherins at the Quidditch match -- can we 
conclude that he is a Slytherin?

2 - they never call Mrs. Norris by that name, just "Filch's cat."

3 - there are little chains hanging over the books in the restricted 
section

4 - sorry, Lee Jordan looks ridiculous -- he looks like a girl. My 
wife will not believe that it's supposed to be a boy

5 - that bit where Malfoy swings around the crowd on his broom just 
before shooting up into the air with the Rememberall is really cool

6 - I can't wait to see this on DVD so I can freeze frame everything 
and write everything down -- I miss so much: pictures moving, signs 
on Diagon Alley, the postmark date on the letter that arrives with 
Harry's first envelope from Hogwarts, etc. etc. If anyone catches 
any of those details, please let me know for the Lexicon!

7 - Malfoy is no meaner to Ron than Hermione is on first meeting. So 
why is he snubbed so terribly? He looks downright hurt by it, not 
angry, and I can hardly blame him. I hope Malfoy gets more time to 
be properly nasty in future films.

I'd like to put together a list of errors in the movie for the 
Lexicon. I'm not talking about continuity errors, since I don't give 
a hoot about those, and I'm not talking about honest artistic 
decisions and edits that have to be made to convert a novel to a 2-
1/2 hour movie. I'm talking about things that are inexplicably 
different, things like Hagrid getting Fluffy from an "Irish chap" 
instead of a Greek chap, Hagrid's hut not being made of wook, or 
Potions class not being held in the dungeon. Anyone have anything to 
suggest?

Steve Vander Ark
The Harry Potter Lexicon
http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon




From seijin_dinger at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 21:57:05 2001
From: seijin_dinger at hotmail.com (Seijin Dinger)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:57:05 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] James position?
References: <9trp0o+kltc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OE691q4gtopWd7KKQpQ0001c6a3@hotmail.com>

it says in the film he is Gryffindor Seeker and yet 
JK has said about 10 times that he played CHASER? - Hollydaze.

I would say he was a Chaser, because a movie says one thing doesnt mean its right, but when the Author says something, you cannot contest it as it is the author's world. She could say Snape wore a frilly Tutu and Snaope would wear a Frilly Tutu (LOL I just got the mental Image)


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




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Sun Nov 25 22:57:18 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 22:57:18 -0000
Subject: third time notes/list of errors
In-Reply-To: <9trp3p+l2us@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9trt0e+7daq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> 1 - Filch is with the Slytherins at the Quidditch match -- can we 
> conclude that he is a Slytherin?

Filch, being a squib, wouldn't have been admitted to Hogwarts and hence 
wouldn't have any house at all.

> 3 - there are little chains hanging over the books in the restricted 
> section

I believe that this scene was filmed at the chained library at Oxford.  
Pre-Gutenberg, books were so valuable that they were actually chained to the 
walls or shelves.  There's another famous one at Hereford, I believe.
 
> 4 - sorry, Lee Jordan looks ridiculous -- he looks like a girl. My 
> wife will not believe that it's supposed to be a boy

Nor would my daughter, and she's read the book 3 times. She's convinced that 
since "Lee" is an androgynous name, they've made Lee a girl!

> 6 - I can't wait to see this on DVD so I can freeze frame everything 
> and write everything down -- I miss so much: pictures moving, 

My Tudor-obsessed daughter spotted a portrait of Anne Boleyn just to the 
right of the entrance to Gryffindor!

>7 - Malfoy is no meaner to Ron than Hermione is on first meeting. So 
> why is he snubbed so terribly? 

In the discussion just before the Sorting, he reveals himself to be a big fat 
bigot, so he's ostracized on principle, not because of the way he has treated a 
specific classmate. IMHO, Hermione is just acting disgusted with Ron's talking 
with his mouth full, which is MUCH easier to amend.





From slaybelle_15 at hotmail.com  Sun Nov 25 23:21:34 2001
From: slaybelle_15 at hotmail.com (slaybelle_15 at hotmail.com)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:21:34 -0000
Subject: seating arrangement at table / Oliver
In-Reply-To: <9tpp99+6gva@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9trudu+98a2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Megan" <virtualworldofhp at y...> wrote:
> Did anyone else notive that practically EVERY time the students were
> showed at a meal (I think except one) they were sitting in exactly 
> the same seats? <snip about positions>
 
Actually I noticed it too.  It makes a lot of sense.  Columbus can 
film the same people close up and doesn't have to worry about having 
the same actors show up in a different house or something.  Also if 
everyone has 'assigned' seats (just from Columbus) he doesn't have to 
worry about changing camera positions as much.  It's probably the 
same reason all the houses take classes together.  Less people need 
to be cast but the whole school gets represented.

Also when they do switch positions the whole side switches 
positions.  Before the quidditch match Oliver is next to Harry 
(because he looks really dumbfounded when Harry gets the broom.)  
They also have more mysterious place switches during opening feast.  
When the 1st years walk in Oliver is at the end of the Gryffindor 
table.  When people go to sit down Fred and George are at the end.  
It doesn't look like they came in but I guess they could have.
 
> More notes on Oliver Wood.  The actor playing him is VERY GOOD, but
> given little opportunity to develop Wood's passion for the game. 
> Another note: he's also got a nice sense of humor and well-trained 
>in physical acting (Bludger)--and WHO could miss that gorgeous grin 
>when he blocks Flint's attempted score?  Note again: some people were
> speculating that once Wood is knocked onto the pitch, the goal is 
> left unguarded, giving Slytherin unfair opportunity, but if you look
> closely a few minutes AFTER Wood is knocked off, he's back up &
> actually blocks a goal!  It's just extremely fast & hard to catch if
> you're not looking.
> 
I love that little smirk.  But I'd rather talk about the score.  
I think Oliver stays on the ground.  F+G and The two girls circle 
around Harry but no one else.  Angelina and he are probably still on 
the ground.  I'm pretty sure one of the girls tried to block the 
shot.  Also the Slytherin score couldn't go up too much-they have to 
get the quaffle from Angelina (and fly her into the ground.)  Also we 
don't know the final score so it could have gone up a ton while Harry 
was catching the snitch but not enough to win.

Also I think someone said that Oliver has a badge like Percy's when 
pulled out of class.  I looked on my third viewing and noticed that 
he does.  Maybe Oliver really is a good student too.  Or possibly 
Columbus knew he'd need 2 prefects and decided that picking Oliver 
(as he's the only other 5th year we know) seemed like a good idea.

--Brigid, who probably spent a little too much time staring at Oliver.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 00:17:49 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:17:49 -0000
Subject: Steve's 3rd time notes, # of first years, Draco unravelling
In-Reply-To: <9trp3p+l2us@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ts1nd+hutf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> 5 - that bit where Malfoy swings around the crowd on his broom just 
> before shooting up into the air with the Rememberall is really cool.

Yes, this is amazingly cool. What's a bit interesting is that when 
Malfoy mounts the broom, he seems to be stepping onto a footrest or 
something equivalent. It's way too vertical for him to actually be 
sitting on the cushioning charm.

Also, what kind of a flying teacher has people line up *facing* each 
other for a flying lesson? Hooch's order, which Neville preempted, 
was to rise up and move forward a bit, then come down again. Wouldn't 
they have crashed into each other? Very funny, but poor training.


> 6 - I can't wait to see this on DVD so I can freeze frame 
everything 
> and write everything down -- I miss so much: pictures moving, signs 
> on Diagon Alley, the postmark date on the letter that arrives with 
> Harry's first envelope from Hogwarts, etc. etc. If anyone catches 
> any of those details, please let me know for the Lexicon!

About freezing and checking on a DVD, the old Hogwarts numbers debate 
came to mind third time around this afternoon: The number of students 
on the long benches works out, according to Steve's calculations, at 
about 400 (about fifty a side). This seems right, but another way to 
calculate the same thing is to ask how many first-years there were. I 
couldn't get a clear idea of numbers when they were streaming up the 
stairs to the Great Hall, nor when they line up for the Sorting 
ceremony. However, when they leave the Hall for their respective 
dorms, the Gryffindor flock behind Percy going up the stairs seems to 
number about 20. In the next shot, of them walking up the stairs past 
the moving portraits, about fifteen students are shown following 
Percy. There seemed to be more below.

So, if the new Gryffindors number about twenty, the first-years 
should be (given the implied proportions as well as the relative 
equalness of the numbers at the house tables in the Great Hall) about 
eighty. That means approximately 7x80=560 students in all.


Fans of the Boy with the Impeccable Dress Sense, please note: At the 
end of the Quidditch match, when Draco buries his face in his hands, 
one of his woollen gloves seems to be unravelling at the fingertips. 
Yikes!




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 00:27:04 2001
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (scully931 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:27:04 -0000
Subject: director's cut petition
Message-ID: <9ts28o+e09r@eGroups.com>

Hi, this is my first time posting, but I've been reading the posts 
for some time. Anyway, I noticed a message about a petition to 
release a director's cut of HP. I went to the site: 
www.thepetitionsite.com and I couldn't find any link for Harry 
Potter. I looked on the main page and on the entertainment page. Has 
anyone found this yet? Thanks!

Deborah




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 01:18:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 01:18:21 -0000
Subject: DVD due in April
Message-ID: <9ts58t+revr@eGroups.com>

VideoTropic reports:

"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."

Hmmm, I don't see any mention of a director's cut!

http://www.videotropic.com/




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Nov 26 01:47:14 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 01:47:14 -0000
Subject: third time notes/list of errors
In-Reply-To: <9trp3p+l2us@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ts6v2+lqc5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:

> I'd like to put together a list of errors in the movie for the 
> Lexicon. I'm not talking about continuity errors, since I don't give 
> a hoot about those, and I'm not talking about honest artistic 
> decisions and edits that have to be made to convert a novel to 
a 2-
> 1/2 hour movie. I'm talking about things that are inexplicably 
> different, things like Hagrid getting Fluffy from an "Irish chap" 
> instead of a Greek chap,

   It turns out there *is* a legendary Irish gate-keeping dog 
guardian...the Dormarth. Read about it here:
http://members.tripod.com/~Moonpfyr/celticdeity.html

JKR has been known to combine mythologies before.  Maybe 
she just wanted someone to notice.
    
Someone mentioned Shakespeare as an example of how canon 
should be regarded. But Shakespeare in performance is given  
nowhere near the reverence paid to  Shakespeare  as literature. 
Directors  cut, reinterpret, reassign lines, etc. to their heart's 
content. 
    
Pippin




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 02:02:17 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 02:02:17 -0000
Subject: third time notes/list of errors
In-Reply-To: <9ts6v2+lqc5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ts7r9+uvn1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., foxmoth at q... wrote:
 
>    It turns out there *is* a legendary Irish gate-keeping dog 
> guardian...the Dormarth. Read about it here:
> http://members.tripod.com/~Moonpfyr/celticdeity.html
> 
> JKR has been known to combine mythologies before.  Maybe 
> she just wanted someone to notice.

Nah, I'm not buying that, I still think this is a Klove script flint, or perhaps 
something that Columbus or Coltrane changed because it sounded better to 
them and JKR wasn't on the set to monitor little details like this.  First of all, 
Dormath only has one head.  Plus, he's guarding the underworld, which is just 
the opposite of Fluffy's assignment. 

(HEY, do we need a movie equivalent for "flint"? How about "Woodie" in honor 
of the mistake about Hagrid's hut? As in "I've got a. . . " Oh, nevermind. Er, how 
about "Fluffy", which fits in with the word "fluff," meaning to mess up, as in 
an actor fluffing his lines.) 




From teeravec at fas.harvard.edu  Sun Nov 25 05:40:03 2001
From: teeravec at fas.harvard.edu (Samaporn Teeravechyan)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:40:03 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: third time notes/list of errors
In-Reply-To: <9trt0e+7daq@eGroups.com>
References: <9trp3p+l2us@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.20011125004003.00819228@pop.fas.harvard.edu>

At 10:57 PM 11/25/01 -0000, you wrote:
>  --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
>> 1 - Filch is with the Slytherins at the Quidditch match -- can we 
>> conclude that he is a Slytherin?
> 
> Filch, being a squib, wouldn't have been admitted to Hogwarts and hence 
> wouldn't have any house at all.

He was probably placed with the Slytherins because of his rather close
interaction with Snape, both in the book and the movie.

Samaporn



From margdean at erols.com  Mon Nov 26 02:57:59 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:57:59 -0500
Subject: Chained Books
References: <9trt0e+7daq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C01AFB7.FF3C2042@erols.com>

Joanne0012 at aol.com wrote:
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:

> > 3 - there are little chains hanging over the books in the restricted
> > section
> 
> I believe that this scene was filmed at the chained library at Oxford.
> Pre-Gutenberg, books were so valuable that they were actually chained to the
> walls or shelves.  There's another famous one at Hereford, I believe.

My husband noticed this bit when we went to see the movie last
week (I didn't catch it), and we were chuckling about it on the
way home, because of course although in the Muggle world books
would be chained for the reason you give above, in the wizarding
world they could very well be chained to keep them from escaping
on their own!  We thought that was a nice touch . . .


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From margdean at erols.com  Mon Nov 26 03:01:27 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 22:01:27 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] School bags and staircases (and other things)
References: <1318326.1006714021697.JavaMail.nobody@imperator.e0k.nbg-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <3C01B087.BAC47EED@erols.com>

Ruth Meyer wrote:

> (3) After the first flying lesson when McGonagall brings Harry
> to meet with Oliver Wood she actually "borrows Wood" not from
> Flitwick as in canon but from Quirell. And we get to see
> Quirell holding what looks like a giant chameleon while
> standing in whirling mist - that's exactly like the picture of
> him I remember from a magazine shot (Vanity Fair?).

Actually I believe that was an iguana.  I know people who keep
them as pets, so it's presumably a good choice for a nicely
reptilian-looking beastie that would nevertheless not try to chow
down on the actor.  (They're herbivorous.)


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 04:04:14 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:04:14 -0000
Subject: more third time notes
Message-ID: <9tsevu+t21b@eGroups.com>

Here's a couple more comments:

1 - Why are HRH the only people who ever go into the Gryffindor 
Common room? Even Christmas morning it's just Ron and Harry. I 
realize that they tend to use the Great Hall as everyone's common 
room, but even so we should see SOMEONE sitting there once in a 
while. 

2 - It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a spell to make 
someone fly. But Quirrel flies away from the centaur in the forest 
and flies across the chamber to attack Harry just as nice as you 
please. 

3 - spells: instead of using existing spells which would have worked 
just fine (grrrr), we get a couple of new ones. I remember them as:
    - oculus reparo (fixes Harry's glasses)
    - lumos solarum (creates sunlight, which shouldn't be possible, 
since the only light spell they use is Lumos, which is not nearly 
that much light, and if it were possible to create that bright 
light, Dumbledore would have done so when they were looking around 
the forest for Crouch Sr. and Lupin would have done it when the 
Dementor was on the train)
    - the one that creates the fire on Snape's robe, which I 
couldn't catch, but wasn't Incendio, and didn't create the Bluebell 
Flames that the books mention, which is too bad
Can anyone verify these or give me the correct phrases used?

Steve Vander Ark
The Harry Potter Lexicon






From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 04:06:59 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:06:59 -0000
Subject: Quirrel's class
In-Reply-To: <3C01B087.BAC47EED@erols.com>
Message-ID: <9tsf53+mrnu@eGroups.com>

Notice that while he's holding an iguana, there are all sorts of 
creature-ish things hanging from the ceiling, a dragon skeleton 
sitting nearby, and a lot of roaring sounds that stop while Quirrell 
talks to MacGonagall. I wonder what he was teaching, anyway? Dragons 
aren't dark creatures, after all. 

Steve




From dragondor1709 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 04:24:39 2001
From: dragondor1709 at yahoo.com (dragondor1709 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:24:39 -0000
Subject: A  few thoughts about Quirrel and mistakes
Message-ID: <9tsg67+qb5o@eGroups.com>

Referring a bit to some other comments if I may. 
1)I only saw this movie once so far. Prof. Quirrel taught DADA,but 
was there an actual class?  

2) I also believe that I read about Prof. Flitwick or Flitiwick,being 
obsessed with Goblin History. No mention of that in his first class.
(I may be mixing up books here)

3) Re the secret room with the flying keys and Quirrel.
Referring to  something elsewhere about a mistake with the damage 
done by Harry and none by Quirrel and asking whether the room 
restored itself....    
Wouldn't having Voldemort on his back,be enough to get him through 
without all the destruction caused by HRH?
Certainly he had the skills.Chris




From whywhy86 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 04:25:13 2001
From: whywhy86 at yahoo.com (YY)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:25:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] director's cut petition
In-Reply-To: <9ts28o+e09r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011126042513.56255.qmail@web11307.mail.yahoo.com>

--- scully931 at yahoo.com wrote:

> Anyway, I noticed a message about a petition to 
> release a director's cut of HP. I went to the site: 
> www.thepetitionsite.com and I couldn't find any link
> for Harry Potter. I looked on the main page and
> on the entertainment page. Has anyone found this
> yet? Thanks!
> 
> Deborah

I signed one at www.petitiononline.com. Here's the
direct link:

http://www.petitiononline.com/hpdvd/petition.html

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Nov 26 04:53:26 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:53:26 -0000
Subject: Sirius / JAMES / iguana / prefects / SPELLS / Flitwick
Message-ID: <9tshs6+8e3v@eGroups.com>

Today I missed chat because I went to see MONSTERS, INC (at a SAG 
screen with my friend who is a SAG member) and I liked it even 
better than the HP movie.

Angela wrote:

> Maybe Hagrid was to say "I'd better return the motorcycle, it's the
> only way Sirius can attract the ladies" and Book 5 reveals just how 
> dead sexy Sirius is. ;-)

ROTFL

Zarleycat wrote:

> Was James a Seeker, as indicated in the film, or a Chaser?

I wanted James to have been a Seeker. I was annoyed when JKR said he 
was a Chaser, and pleased that the movie changed him back.

Mirzam Black wrote:

> And if James received this award in 1972, could his second year at 
> Hogwarts really BEGIN in 1972? 

I missed something. What does the plaque have to do with James's 
second year? I'm sure the date is the end of that school year, the 
one in which he won the award, but it could be his seventh or sixth 
or fifth or fourth or third or second year. The date of 1972 kind of 
rules out James having finished school in 1979 (if 78-79 was his 
seventh year, then 72-73 was his first and he wasn't even at Hogwarts 
yet in 71-72). If he finished school in 1976, then his first year was 
69-70, 71-72 was his third year. If he was spectacular enough to win 
Most Valuable Player as a third-year, why don't we see him win it 
again when older and stronger? If he finished school in 1974, he won 
MVP as a fifth-year, which seems more reasonable. Having won it in 
his last year would be more reasonable yet, but would mess up my 
timeline.

Ruth Meyer wrote:

> And we get to see Quirell holding what looks like a giant chameleon

Whereupon I immediately elbowed my companion and whispered: "What's 
he going to do to that poor iguana? He's not going to cook it in a 
potion, is he?"

Brigid slaybelle wrote:

> Or possibly Columbus knew he'd need 2 prefects and decided that 
> picking Oliver (as he's the only other 5th year we know) seemed
> like a good idea. 

Does that mean he got JKR's approval not to have a girl prefect? I 
liked the scene where Percy was leading the Gryffindor first-years in 
the same crowd as a Ravenclaw (boy) prefect was leading Ravenclaw 
first-years, but it shouldn't be that ALL the prefects are boys.

Lexicon Steve wrote:

> It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a spell to make 
> someone fly. But Quirrel flies

At that point, Quirrell is Voldemort. He can do impossible things.

> - oculus reparo (fixes Harry's glasses)

in canon, I think in CoS, Mr Weasley uses Reparo to fix Harry's 
glasses. I don't consider Oculus Reparo to be a new spell, just that 
Hermione, as a beginner, uses the whole incantation rather than 
summarizing.

> - - the one that creates the fire on Snape's robe,

It was Something Incendario. I am quite irritated that I didn't hear 
the whole incantation.

> creates sunlight, which shouldn't be possible, (snip) Lupin would 
> have done it when the Dementor was on the train)

It was Patronus, not light, that deflected the Dementor on the train.

Chris Dragondor wrote:

> I also believe that I read about Prof. Flitwick or Flitiwick, being 
> obsessed with Goblin History. 

No, that was Professor Binns, the ghost who taught History of Magic. 
Flitwick taught Charms.




From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 26 04:59:47 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:59:47 -0400
Subject: My second viewing
Message-ID: <F82VyTyDdXRS1LaLpmm0000a043@hotmail.com>

Like so many others, I enjoyed my second viewing more than the first. The 
first section is still too choppy, but by the middle of the movie, I had 
stopped comparing it to the book.

Here are my nitpicks and observations: (and correct me if I'm wrong)

It's never said that owning a dragon is illegal. So the full weight of 
hagrid keepign Norbert is lost. Certainly, having such a little firebug 
around is dangerous and comical, but it's never explained how awful it was 
to have Draco witness it.

I think Hermione treated Ron with disdain at their first meeting because he 
spoke with a mouth full of food, and he had that dirty nose.

The Hogwarts Express should have had more cars. Just because it would look 
grander. :-)

When Professor McGonagall greets the first years, she never introduces 
herself. She doesn't in the book either, but Hagrid does address her by name 
when he brings the first years to her.

Those were definitely Blues Clues pyjamas that baby Harry was wearing. I saw 
Blue embroidered on the shoulder.

James Potter didn't look as old as I reemmbered the first time - but he 
doesn't look quite right. Too conservative - the Dursleys wouldn't have 
hated him on sight.

When Dumbledore was leading up to awarding Neville's points, McGonagall had 
a secret smile - makes me think that she pointed out Nevile's actions to 
Albus and thereby had soemthing to do with him getting the points. It makes 
me happy to think that she was looking out for him.

About Harry and Quirrell - to me, it looked like Harry was trying to block 
Quirrell from reaching the stone. It appeared that Harry stepped in front of 
Quirrell while he was heading for the stone, and put his hands on his face 
to try and block Quirrell.

I noticed in the Leaky Cauldron that Harry put out his hand to shake 
Quirrell's while they were being introduced - and Quirrell definitely 
avoided shaking Harry's hand.

Angela

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




From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 05:20:25 2001
From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 05:20:25 -0000
Subject: flying/ chaser or seeker/ spells/
In-Reply-To: <9tshs6+8e3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tsjeq+8v72@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> I wanted James to have been a Seeker. I was annoyed when JKR said 
he 
> was a Chaser, and pleased that the movie changed him back.

I would argue that the film doesn't have the authority to change him 
back. He's a Chaser until JKR says otherwise. Sorry...I agree that 
Seeker would have been "cooler." But Chasers are pretty cool too. 
Angelina rocks...and the stars of the Irish team at the QWC were the 
Chasers, not the Seeker!

> 
> Lexicon Steve wrote:
> 
> > It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a spell to make 
> > someone fly. But Quirrel flies
> 
> At that point, Quirrell is Voldemort. He can do impossible things.

Where has Voldemort demonstrated the ability to do impossible 
things? He has strong magical powers, true, but his powers still 
obey the laws set up by JKR for magic in her world. And Voldemort is 
not a powerful being when we meet him in SS/PS. He is extremely 
weak, actually (Quirrell even suggests that he's not strong enought 
to talk to Harry himself). He certainly is not up violating the laws 
of magical physics with someone else's body. He's lucky he can talk! 
Clearly that was a bit of dramatic license on the part of the 
filmmakers, yet another indication that the film cannot be 
considered canon.


> 
> > - oculus reparo (fixes Harry's glasses)
> 
> in canon, I think in CoS, Mr Weasley uses Reparo to fix Harry's 
> glasses. I don't consider Oculus Reparo to be a new spell, just 
that 
> Hermione, as a beginner, uses the whole incantation rather than 
> summarizing.

I think you hit the nail right on the head with this one. As with 
other spells, the full version would include an object as well as an 
action. And of course, there are a number of instances of people 
(including Hagrid) creating fires without saying anything at all!

> 
> > - - the one that creates the fire on Snape's robe,
> 
> It was Something Incendario. I am quite irritated that I didn't 
hear 
> the whole incantation.

And wouldn't it have been nice to see her recapture her bluebell 
flames in a jar and trot off with them? Ah well...Did anyone catch 
the words?


> 
> > creates sunlight, which shouldn't be possible, (snip) Lupin 
would 
> > have done it when the Dementor was on the train)
> 
> It was Patronus, not light, that deflected the Dementor on the 
train.

I'm talking about the handful of pale flame Lupin conjures to light 
the compartment before the Dementor shows up. He must have suspected 
that there were Dementors about. If there were a sunlight spell, he 
would certainly have used it then! No, if there were such spells 
available, and simple enough for a first year to do, we'd have seen 
them.

On the other hand, why the heck AREN'T there better light spells? 
They can't be all that hard to do! After all, someone worked out a 
spell to clip dragon's tonails. Certainly someone would have worked 
on a better light spell!

Steve
@Lexicon




From prettyballerina21 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 05:37:42 2001
From: prettyballerina21 at yahoo.com (pretty one)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:37:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: sorting hat
Message-ID: <20011126053742.19061.qmail@web20110.mail.yahoo.com>

speaking of hat talking...... i wish they added the
part when the sorting hat sang first, explaining the
four houses..... 

=====
MONIQUE.....THE GREATEST AND PRETTIEST BALLERINA IN EXISTENCE!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 10:30:28 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 10:30:28 -0000
Subject: Review: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"
Message-ID: <9tt5k5+ibj6@eGroups.com>

Here's my review of the film:

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE 
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, John Cleese, 
Robbie Coltrane, Richard Griffiths, Richard Harris, Ian Hart, Alan 
Rickman, Fiona Shaw, Maggie Smith, Julie Walters. 
Dir: Chris Columbus 

Boy, did I underestimate the crowds today! I left the house at around 
11:00 am to catch the first show at around noon. I thought most of 
the audience for this film was either at school or at work and only 
die-hard fans like myself willing to call in sick and absent 
themselves for the day would be going to see it. I thought it would 
be a modest crowd. Not too big. Boy, was I wrong! All the first 
screenings were sold-out. Suprisingly, I looked around, 90% of the 
people were actually composed of older teens and young adults. I only 
saw a handful of kids on hand for the opening day. 

But what about the movie, you ask? First the good news, Steve 
Kloves's script was faithful. It nailed pretty much 90% of the
book 
and captured the much of the book's wit and charm. Relative 
newcomers, Radcliffe, Grint and Watson, acquit themselves quite well 
to their roles. They truly made the characters come to life. The 
adult cast was also superb with Coltrane, Rickman and Smith as 
standouts. Stuart Craig's sets and the visual effects also nailed
it 
right on the mark. The Quidditch match and the Chess Game were way 
better than anything I could imagine. I don't care what other
critics 
think, I liked the John Williams score. 

The bad news? Well, despite all the good material to work with, Chris 
Columbus's flaws as director were still there (thankfully, he did
not 
get too slapstick-y or syrupy).He did not seem to know what to do 
with all the great material he had to work with and seemed to not 
know what to bring to it. He lacked the whimsy and edginess needed to 
truly an artistic success (which Tim Burton and Terry Gilliam would 
have certainly brought to it). 

Despite the two-and-a-half hour running time, it did not feel like it 
at all. As a matter of fact, I felt it was too short. It, 
unfortunately, reduced the roles of the other characters in the book, 
namely the Weasley twins (who were hilarious in the book but 
hopefully, they'll shine in the second film), Mrs. Weasley (whose 
role in the book was short enough as it is. It was further reduced in 
the film. What a pity! Anyway, with Julie Walters in the role,
she's 
gonna be superb when her character's role increases in the
succeeding 
books) and Neville Longbottom. 

Yes, I think the book's still better but at least the film did
not 
butcher it too much. I won't be hunting down Chris Columbus to 
disembowel him this time. LOL. 

Oscar Prospects: Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay are not out-
of-reach. Should be a contender for Best Art Direction, Best Visual 
Effects, Best Sound, Best Makeup, Best Sound Effects Editing and Best 
Costume Design. 

Grade: A- 








From arenkel at t-online.de  Mon Nov 26 12:25:42 2001
From: arenkel at t-online.de (Andrea Renkel)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:25:42 -0000
Subject: some thoughts about the movie
Message-ID: <9ttcc6+netf@eGroups.com>

Hi all,

I'm fairly new to this list (didn't want to join before I had seen 
the movie). I've watched it for the second time yesterday. Most of 
what I think, has already been posted, so I'd just like to add my 
opinion and a few thoughts.

I must admit, I had been extremely nervous before I went to see the 
movie, not only because I'm obsessed with the books, but also because 
I write movie reviews myself (rarely on Hollywood blockbusters 
though) and this is a quite disillusioning work - more often than 
not, even highly anticipated movies turn out to be disappointing. So 
I had braced myself for the worst.
In short: I was more than pleasantly surprised! 

There wasn't a single actor who didn't match the image I had of that 
particular character - except maybe for Emma Watson, who in my 
opinion is a little too pretty for Hermione - somewhere I read a 
review comparing her to Britney Spears and that image has been 
haunting me ever since.
I can't agree with those who described Daniel Radcliffe's performance 
as "wooden"; in fact he's very much the Harry I've always imagined: a 
kid that would prefer to keep out of the spotlight unless 
deliberately earned for himself, full of wonderment about his luck, 
being thrown in the middle of a world far beyond his wildest dreams, 
always a little reluctant to believe this is *really* happening to 
him and very grateful for those small things others take for granted, 
like having friends, getting christmas presents or having the 
appreciation of others. Not forgetting the fact, that Daniel 
Radcliffe carries a weight on his shoulders, more seasoned actors 
would find hard to bear, he's doing a tremendous job!

Rupert Grint is simply adorable, has fantastic timing and facial 
expressions and I hope he's heading for a great career.
Alan Rickman was brilliant. Snape not being so malicious as in the 
books didn't disturb me at all. Maybe because I never felt he's evil -
 unfair, yes; surely lacking even the faintest trace of warmth and 
humor - but then again, after reading all of the books, I believe 
he's very convincingly acting the part of the "bad guy" for certain 
reasons. (Maybe my subconscious tries to tell me, I'm a secret Snape-
fan?)
Robbie Coltrane IS Hagrid!!! 'nuff said! :-)

To cut this short, the entire cast was amazing. If there were flaws, 
they were so minor that it didn't disturb the fun I had. This goes 
for almost the entire look and feel of the film. Hogwarts felt 
exactly right and Diagon Alley was wonderful! I wanted to jump right 
in and stroll through there, have a look at all the shops... I hope 
the guys at Warner realize how tempting this is and include some 
feature on Diagon Alley on the DVD!
The best thing was the Quidditch match! When I read it, I found it 
hard to imagine (mostly because I read slower than they fly...), so I 
loved to see it in all its splendour - and violence. Loved the little 
exchange between Harry and Oliver before the match ("I woke up in 
hospital one week later.") Mr. Wood surely knows how to encourage a 
new player... very funny!

There were of course a few things I didn't like:

Quirrell turning to dust at the end reminded me of "Indiana Jones" 
and "The Mummy" and half a dozen other films. I believe they should 
have kept the blisters (impressive enough!) AND more important, the 
fact that Quirrell can't touch Harry. The changes to the scene give a 
slightly different meaning to an important detail I think.

The fact that Voldemort was such a deadly threat for the wizard 
community, what it meant for them when he disappeared (and what it 
would mean, should he reappear) and therefore Harry's fame in the 
wizarding world were not explained clearly enough for those who 
haven't read the books. Too short and too harmless, not enough 
emphasis on the fact, that the world Harry (and we) have grown to 
love would fall apart if Voldemort came back to life.
Also the fact that every wizard, apart from Dumbledore and Harry, is 
afraid even to speak Voldemort's name, is not made clear enough. This 
detail tells a lot about Harry's character in the book.

The cut from Privet Drive to the hut where the Dursleys and Harry are 
hiding is too sudden and confusing for someone who hasn't read the 
books. Why not add a minute of screen time and show their flight in 
short sequences?

A question at the end: what happened to the "oh" in "Her-my-oh-nee"? 
Maybe there's something wrong with my ears, but I always heard "Her-
my-nee".
Sorry if this question has been asked before or it's already a well-
known fact; I couldn't find something about the pronunciation in the 
archives.
Could someone please explain for a poor non-native speaker?

Thanks for reading this far!
Andrea
*not from Bulgaria, but from Germany*




From arenkel at t-online.de  Mon Nov 26 12:28:46 2001
From: arenkel at t-online.de (Andrea Renkel)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:28:46 -0000
Subject: Chained Books
In-Reply-To: <3C01AFB7.FF3C2042@erols.com>
Message-ID: <9ttchu+a43l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Margaret Dean <margdean at e...> wrote:

> My husband noticed this bit when we went to see the movie last
> week (I didn't catch it), and we were chuckling about it on the
> way home, because of course although in the Muggle world books
> would be chained for the reason you give above, in the wizarding
> world they could very well be chained to keep them from escaping
> on their own!  We thought that was a nice touch . . .
> 
> 
> --Margaret Dean
>   <margdean at e...>

Funny, this was what I thought immediately - I don't know if you're 
familiar with Terry Pratchett's discworld novels, but the books in 
the library of the Unseen University (imagine it like a very weird 
version of Hogwarts) are sometimes chained too; and for good reasons, 
most of them are not very well behaved.

Andrea




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 13:14:21 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:14:21 -0000
Subject: more third time notes/Christmas
In-Reply-To: <9tsevu+t21b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9ttf7d+3s5c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> Here's a couple more comments:
> 
> 1 - Why are HRH the only people who ever go into the Gryffindor 
> Common room? Even Christmas morning it's just Ron and Harry. I 
> realize that they tend to use the Great Hall as everyone's common 
> room, but even so we should see SOMEONE sitting there once in a 
> while. 

Isn't it possible that Harry and Ron were the only Gryffindors who stayed at 
Hogwarts over the Christmas break?  Or that the few others who stayed either 
had gone to breakfast or weren't up yet?

Certainly, their 3 dorm-mates had gone home, or Harry wouldn't have rushed 
yelling into the room when he woke Ron to tell him about the Mirror of Erised.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 13:17:55 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:17:55 -0000
Subject: director's cut petition
In-Reply-To: <20011126042513.56255.qmail@web11307.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9ttfe3+h0jp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., YY <whywhy86 at y...> wrote:
> --- scully931 at y... wrote:
> 
> http://www.petitiononline.com/hpdvd/petition.html
> 

This site requests the release of "the full 4-hour version of the Harry Potter 
movie."  Since the studio denies that such a version exists -- and I believe 
them -- IMHO this petition is over-specific.  Is there another one, somewhere 
that merely asks for all the footage rather than this mythical 4-hour version?

The young actors who play Neville and Dudley have referred in interviews to 
scenes that didn't appear onscreen, so we know there's more unused footage 
than just Peeves, but for them to shoot and edit an entire extra 1.5 hours just 
doesn't seem likely to me.




From feycat at feycat.net  Mon Nov 26 13:41:24 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 08:41:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Special Effects Challenges
References: <9thhc9+lafe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004601c17680$0b85e3e0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>I really do wonder what they are going to do
about Dobby. (I really see him as getting cut, I really do...after
some of the wacky cuttings of PS/SS I wouldn't be surprised!)<<

They can do Dobby as entirely CGI. I don't see why they wouldn't. They did it with (gag) Jar Jar, and they are going to be doing Gollum (LoTR) entirely CGI as well. Dobby seems like a prime candidate for it!

-Gabriel


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




From feycat at feycat.net  Mon Nov 26 13:52:36 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 08:52:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fantasy Cast: Sean Bean (Was: Miriam Margoyles/Sean Bean/Jeremy Irons)
References: <9thifm+kd00@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005901c17681$9b322ca0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

> It's too bad 
that Billy Connolly is now rather too old to play Black, although I 
could see him as Mad-Eye Moody.<

Well, during lunch this weekend we were "dream-casting" and we thought Sean Connory is the perfect Mad-Eye Moody! :-)

-Gabriel


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




From john at walton.vu  Mon Nov 26 13:55:00 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:55:00 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: How To Act Like A Grownup Online
Message-ID: <B827FA33.59CD%john@walton.vu>

Hi again from the Hexquarters.

The Moderator Team have noticed a really worrying decline in the quality of
posting to the lists. Some people seem unable to follow basic language
mechanics (Spelling, Punctuation, Grammar and Proofreading) or a simple set
of Admin Files. For the record, here is what is expected of every member of
our HPFGU community:

You might think we sound like a bunch of crotchety old people. Ha. *waves
stick* We're not -- we don't mind mature teenagers at all -- in fact, some
of us are high-school students. However, act like you're an adult. Please
bear in mind that there are parents, teachers, professionals,
businesspeople, academics and people from many countries, some of whom speak
English as a second or third language, making it imperative that all members
use correct English.

This includes using capital letters at the beginning of sentences, periods
at the end and commas in the middle to show phrasing. Question marks end
questions, don't they? Oh, and please restrain yourself from using too many
exclamation marks. They make you look overly-excitable. And there's NEVER a
need for more than one exclamation mark at the end of a sentence. "!!!!!!!"
will get you smacked up the side of the head by a broomstick.

* Never use all lower case letters or, worse still, all CAPITAL LETTERS in a
message. It is a major no-no, visually jarring, incredibly irritating and
using all caps is considered SHOUTING! The odd word in capital letters for
EMPHASIS is okay, though.

* Never, EVER, *EVER* use netspeak. Some common abbreviations (see
http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/shorthand) are fine (the BTW, IIRC, AFAIK type) but
using numbers for words ("2" for "to", "4" for "for", "l8r" for later),
single letters for words ("u" for "you", "r" for "are", "b" for "be") and
other such stupidity are not. They make you look like a total moron who just
got out of kindergarten. Don't do it.

* Spell characters' names correctly. It's "Hermione" not "Hermoine",
"McGonagall" not "McGonagal" or "McGongle" or anything else. Nothing (apart
from netspeak) makes you look like a moron faster than repeatedly
misspelling characters' names. Also, "Pensieve" is for some reason tricky to
certain people.

* 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 -- and will be much better received without
the spelling mistakes.
?
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.

__________________________________

For more information, read the group's Admin Files.

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

Questions? Mail the Mods below :)

__________________________________
The HPforGrownups Moderator Team
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com



?




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Mon Nov 26 14:44:47 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 09:44:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: flying faceoff, Hermione's hair, Grint's Ron, Snape, Tom Baker
Message-ID: <200111261444.JAA08881@gaea.East.Sun.COM>


> Also, what kind of a flying teacher has people line up *facing* each 
> other for a flying lesson? Hooch's order, which Neville preempted, 
> was to rise up and move forward a bit, then come down again. Wouldn't 
> they have crashed into each other? Very funny, but poor training.
> 

I wondered about this too, while I was watching. I was surprised no one else 
mentioned it up to this point. I remember thinking, "good thing this lesson 
didn't go any farther!" Maybe Madam Hooch was going to have one line take off, 
then the other? That still doesn't make much sense....

Probably the reason I was so dissatisfied with Hermione's hair is that I had 
exactly the hair Rowling described, as an adolescent. Very frizzy, not crimped, 
not just messy. And since it's a plot element in GoF, I rather wanted to see 
them do a better job with it. But then again, they probably won't have time for 
that level of detail in GoF, even if they do make two movies. (Is there any 
substance to that rumor that someone could post, like an interview pointer?)

OTOH, I never had a strong mental image of Ron before seeing the movie. Rupert 
Grint *is* Ron, as far as I'm concerned. :)

I've been amused to read the debate about whether Snape is attractive because of 
Rickman, or what. In the first book, I thought Snape was interesting, and I had 
a lot of respect for Rowling *not* making him the villain. He was so *obvious*-- 
but it wasn't him after all. That was a nice touch for a "kid's" book. It's 
really in the later books that he becomes fascinating. (I wouldn't go so far as 
to say "attractive" or "sexy" or whatever-- just very intriguing.) When I heard 
Rickman had the part, I thought he'd do a good job, and I still think he did. I 
liked the extra "nice" bits that Rickman/Kloves put in, though I think they 
should have left in more of his nastiness. But this en masse swooning is kind of 
baffling to me....

Does anyone else think Tom Baker (of Dr. Who fame) would have made a good 
Dumbledore? (Does he even act anymore?) He plays a good omniscient loonie. (In 
my own "fantasy casting," I've always had him pegged for Antryg Windrose, in 
Barbara Hambly's *The Silent Tower.*)

Well I'm out of room in the subject line, so I guess that's it for now.

Elizabeth

(Hm. Twice now I've posted here, and my posts have been copied in full by at 
least one person who responded. Let's see if it happens again.... could this be 
a new curse?)




From feycat at feycat.net  Mon Nov 26 14:56:12 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 09:56:12 -0500
Subject: Quidditch fouls??
References: <9sobmp+koea@eGroups.com> <018e01c17369$ee6d8600$aa2d07d5@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <013501c1768a$80e2dbc0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

Just saw the movie for the third time this weekend (Okay, I know I'm way behind a lot of you...) and we counted six BLATENT, OBVIOUS fouls during the Quidditch match (5 to Slytherin and one to HP himself) - why wasn't a SINGLE ONE of those called? Did they think a foul shot would make the action slower? What exactly did Madame Hooch DO to ref the match, if she was ignoring all these awful fouls, just flying around?

And how are they going to make the cheating/fouls in later books shocking when the Slytherins were allowed to throw people right onto the ground in this one??

-Gabriel


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




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Mon Nov 26 15:07:01 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 10:07:01 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Quirrel flying, James vs. Dursleys, Quirrel's handshake, Dormath
Message-ID: <200111261507.KAA08906@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

> Lexicon Steve wrote:
> It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a spell to make 
> someone fly. But Quirrel flies

and later:
> Clearly that was a bit of dramatic license on the part of the 
> filmmakers, yet another indication that the film cannot be 
> considered canon.

QA says there's a levitation spell, it's just not good for distances, doesn't 
get much height, doesn't go very fast, etc. Still, you're right, the movie is 
not canon. ;)

Angela Boyko wrote:
> James Potter didn't look as old as I reemmbered the first time - but he 
> doesn't look quite right. Too conservative - the Dursleys wouldn't have 
> hated him on sight.

He came from Hogwarts-- of *course* the Dursleys hated him on sight! Petunia and 
Vernon, anyway. Probably Petunia's parents thought he was ok, if they were 
really that pleased with Lily being a witch.

> I noticed in the Leaky Cauldron that Harry put out his hand to shake 
> Quirrell's while they were being introduced - and Quirrell definitely 
> avoided shaking Harry's hand.

This scene has been the source of a bunch of threads on the book list, I think. 
Because of course Quirrel does shake his hand in the book. I think the popular 
theory is that Voldemort was not cohabiting Quirrel's body in mid-summer, but 
became posessed between then and the start of the school term.

Joanne0012 at aol.com wrote:
> Dormath only has one head.  Plus, he's guarding the underworld, which is just 
> the opposite of Fluffy's assignment. 

Fluffy is pretty obviously a reference to Kerberos, the three-headed dog who 
guards the Greek underworld. (Hence, a "Greek chap.") I think Orpheus got past 
him with music, too. (Seems like this discussion would belong on the book list, 
except that we're arguing about the "Irish chap" in the movie. I don't know as 
Dormath is a good enough excuse for changing it, but I'm glad to know that at 
least there's a similar legend.) Still, I like a "Fluffy" instead of "Flint" for 
movie errors.

Elizabeth




From feycat at feycat.net  Mon Nov 26 15:25:25 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 10:25:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] (hopefully new) Movie Comments
References: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <016901c1768e$93eb75c0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Also, I 
didn't see the point of having the witches and wizards dress in 
rather medieval (or was it Victorian?) Muggle clothing.<<

I noticed that too. I really hate that they used "college" robes rather than full-fledged ROBES for the wizards. After all, the old man from GoF would have a hard time getting a "healthy breeze around his privates" without getting shut away if he was wearing those open-fronted robes, wouldn't he?? I HATED that all the students wore normal Muggle clothes underneath their robes. It's supposed to be a big deal that they don't know how to dress like Muggles ie the beginning of the World Cup.

>>And yes, the centaur was AWFUL. I was imagining that it would be a 
torso of a person CG-ed onto the torso of a horse. I most certainly 
didn't expect it to be a demonic-looking beast that would probably 
tower over even Madame Maxime's giant steeds. <<

He says "Here is where I leave you, Harry Potter." Excuse me? He didn't TAKE Harry anywhere. That's a prime example of very poor editing if you ask me!

>>And the chess game ... yeah, I loved it too. But, doesn't the chess 
board seem much smaller than normal (i.e. fewer squares between the 
two sides)? And, while the destruction is certainly impressive and 
all, I preferred the book-version where they just get knocked down. 
After all, if the chess pieces destroy each other, how do you play a 
second game? Where's the litter after Quirrell was done with the game?<<

There WAS litter, it was all over the place. That's why they said it was a "graveyard" at first.

-Gabriel


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




From laurakay76 at juno.com  Mon Nov 26 15:23:55 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 10:23:55 -0500
Subject: DVD petition
Message-ID: <20011126.103257.-3200965.1.laurakay76@juno.com>


Hi, I just went to look for it myself.  Apparently the petition has been
concluded and sent to Warner Bros.  When I signed it several days ago, it
had over three thousand signatures, so my guess is that either it got too
big or there is a time limit on how long a petition can stay at that
website and it "expired."  Sorry for posting a dud link!

~Laura K.
________________________________________________________________
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 foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Nov 26 15:45:35 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:45:35 -0000
Subject: Quirrel's class
In-Reply-To: <9tsf53+mrnu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tto2v+q4lb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., hp_lexicon at y... wrote:
> Notice that while he's holding an iguana, there are all sorts of 
> creature-ish things hanging from the ceiling, a dragon skeleton 
> sitting nearby, and a lot of roaring sounds that stop while 
Quirrell 
> talks to MacGonagall. I wonder what he was teaching, anyway? 
Dragons  aren't dark creatures, after all. 

What is the difference between dark and dangerous?  Dragons 
are XXXXX  according to Fantastic Beasts.  They are known 
wizard killers. Several varieties prefer to prey on humans. 
Certainly young wizards would need to be taught basic 
techniques of dragon defense and DADA seems the natural 
place to learn these.  Making dragon defence a fifth year topic fits 
nicely with canon Harry's ignorance  in GoF.  BTW, I distinctly 
heard Quirrel's voiceover say something about *vampires*  as 
Wood and co. were leaving. Anyone catch any more of his lines?

Pippin
wondering if a mention of vampires was the mysterious thing 
JKR said couldn't be cut from the film.




From goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 15:49:30 2001
From: goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com (Eliza Duke)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 07:49:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] more third time notes
In-Reply-To: <9tsevu+t21b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011126154930.99710.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>


--- hp_lexicon at yahoo.com wrote:
> Here's a couple more comments:
> 
> 1 - Why are HRH the only people who ever go into the
> Gryffindor 
> Common room? Even Christmas morning it's just Ron
> and Harry. I 
> realize that they tend to use the Great Hall as
> everyone's common 
> room, but even so we should see SOMEONE sitting
> there once in a 
> while. 
> 
> 2 - It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a
> spell to make 
> someone fly. But Quirrel flies away from the centaur
> in the forest 
> and flies across the chamber to attack Harry just as
> nice as you 
> please. 

What about levtation? Flitwick said it was the primary
thing that wizards do.
> 
> 3 - spells: instead of using existing spells which
> would have worked 
> just fine (grrrr), we get a couple of new ones. I
> remember them as:
>     - oculus reparo (fixes Harry's glasses)
>     - lumos solarum (creates sunlight, which
> shouldn't be possible, 
> since the only light spell they use is Lumos, which
> is not nearly 
> that much light, and if it were possible to create
> that bright 
> light, Dumbledore would have done so when they were
> looking around 
> the forest for Crouch Sr. and Lupin would have done
> it when the 
> Dementor was on the train)
>     - the one that creates the fire on Snape's robe,
> which I 
> couldn't catch, but wasn't Incendio, and didn't
> create the Bluebell 
> Flames that the books mention, which is too bad
> Can anyone verify these or give me the correct
> phrases used?
> 
> Steve Vander Ark
> The Harry Potter Lexicon
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From tnpream at eschelon.com  Mon Nov 26 15:54:27 2001
From: tnpream at eschelon.com (Pream, Tom N.)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 09:54:27 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] more third time notes
Message-ID: <E37A7C49F2F2E04EAE60A86D0C570C18046522A9@k2.corp.eschelon.com>

1.  How do I stop this incessant stream of stupid e-mail?
2. Please remove me mrom this list!!!  There are no adults on this board.

Tom Pream
eschelon telecom
Switch Engineer
730 2nd /ave S.Suite 1200
Minneapolis, MN 55402
TEL 612-436-6044
FAX 612-436-6144

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Eliza Duke [SMTP:goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com]
> Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 9:50 AM
> To:	HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject:	Re: [HPFGU-Movie] more third time notes
> 
> 
> --- hp_lexicon at yahoo.com wrote:
> > Here's a couple more comments:
> > 
> > 1 - Why are HRH the only people who ever go into the
> > Gryffindor 
> > Common room? Even Christmas morning it's just Ron
> > and Harry. I 
> > realize that they tend to use the Great Hall as
> > everyone's common 
> > room, but even so we should see SOMEONE sitting
> > there once in a 
> > while. 
> > 
> > 2 - It states quite clearly in QA that there isn't a
> > spell to make 
> > someone fly. But Quirrel flies away from the centaur
> > in the forest 
> > and flies across the chamber to attack Harry just as
> > nice as you 
> > please. 
> 
> What about levtation? Flitwick said it was the primary
> thing that wizards do.
> > 
> > 3 - spells: instead of using existing spells which
> > would have worked 
> > just fine (grrrr), we get a couple of new ones. I
> > remember them as:
> >     - oculus reparo (fixes Harry's glasses)
> >     - lumos solarum (creates sunlight, which
> > shouldn't be possible, 
> > since the only light spell they use is Lumos, which
> > is not nearly 
> > that much light, and if it were possible to create
> > that bright 
> > light, Dumbledore would have done so when they were
> > looking around 
> > the forest for Crouch Sr. and Lupin would have done
> > it when the 
> > Dementor was on the train)
> >     - the one that creates the fire on Snape's robe,
> > which I 
> > couldn't catch, but wasn't Incendio, and didn't
> > create the Bluebell 
> > Flames that the books mention, which is too bad
> > Can anyone verify these or give me the correct
> > phrases used?
> > 
> > Steve Vander Ark
> > The Harry Potter Lexicon
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
> 
> 
> ________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/ 
> 



From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Mon Nov 26 15:55:02 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:55:02 -0400
Subject: Halloween money?
Message-ID: <F8378wPoFGQuiYsioKi0000a36b@hotmail.com>

Last night, I noticed that during the Halloween sequence, there are lots of 
gold coins scattered on the tables. Is this a British tradition?

Angela

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




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 16:01:41 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 16:01:41 -0000
Subject: flying faceoff, 
In-Reply-To: <200111261444.JAA08881@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <9ttp15+gibi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Elizabeth Dalton <Elizabeth.Dalton at E...> wrote:
> 
> > Also, what kind of a flying teacher has people line up *facing* each 
> > other for a flying lesson? Hooch's order, which Neville preempted, 
> > was to rise up and move forward a bit, then come down again. Wouldn't 
> > they have crashed into each other? Very funny, but poor training.
> > 
> 
> I wondered about this too, while I was watching. I was surprised no one else 
> mentioned it up to this point. I remember thinking, "good thing this lesson 
> didn't go any farther!" Maybe Madam Hooch was going to have one line take 
off, 
> then the other? That still doesn't make much sense....

This whole scene was just full of bad thinking, IMHO.  

She gives them NO instruction about HOW to do the things she tells them to do.   

She gives absolute beginners directions that involve three or four new steps 
they've never tried (has the woman studied NO pedagogy), even after seeing 
how much trouble they have with just "Up!"  

Then when she blows the whistle, why does only Neville take off?  Perhaps the 
students, like us, are afraid that they're going to run into each other? We know 
that at least Draco has flown before, so he and probably other students 
should've also been off the ground, too - in the book, Neville starts up before 
the whistle.

Why does Hooch have no broom of her own, to show them how to do things, or 
to go fetch kids like Neville who can't control their brooms? Surely, he's not 
the first to ever have this problem.  Or isn't there some sort of anti-levitation 
spell she should've had handy?

My niece thinks she spotted a Hufflepuff (perhaps even the Columbus daughter, 
who plays Susan Bones during the sorting) among the class, which is supposed 
to be just Gryffindors and Slytherins.  Perhaps somebody who's going to the 
movie again should watch for non-Gryffindor/Slytherin insignia on the 
students' robes in hopes of adding this item to the "list of errors".

I'm clearly disgruntled with this whole scene, partly because I'm peeved with 
Zoe Wanamaker for her whining about her contract, but I must admit that she 
looked fabulous.

There were two tiny moments in this scene that I found just delightful -- 
Neville's perfect, soft "Ow, ow, ow" when Mme. Hooch moved his wrist, and 
Draco swaying a bit and giving just the slightest nonverbal "Whoa!" (with his 
facial expression and body language) as Harry goes whizzing past him in 
pursuit of the remembrall




From margdean at erols.com  Mon Nov 26 16:54:19 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:54:19 -0500
Subject: Tom Baker
References: <200111261444.JAA08881@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <3C0273BB.3B75458E@erols.com>

Elizabeth Dalton wrote:
 
> Does anyone else think Tom Baker (of Dr. Who fame) would have made a good
> Dumbledore? (Does he even act anymore?) He plays a good omniscient loonie. 

Oh, how true!  He would have been a wonderful Dumbledore.

> (In my own "fantasy casting," I've always had him pegged for Antryg
> Windrose, in Barbara Hambly's *The Silent Tower.*)

Heh.  From what I know of the author, so did she.  ;)


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From john at walton.vu  Mon Nov 26 16:24:35 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 16:24:35 +0000
Subject: Unsubscribing: (was: more third time notes)
In-Reply-To: <E37A7C49F2F2E04EAE60A86D0C570C18046522A9@k2.corp.eschelon.com>
Message-ID: <B8281D43.5A09%john@walton.vu>

Pream, Tom N. wrote:

> 1.  How do I stop this incessant stream of stupid e-mail?
> 2. Please remove me mrom this list!!!  There are no adults on this board.
> 
> Tom Pream
> eschelon telecom
> Switch Engineer
> 730 2nd /ave S.Suite 1200
> Minneapolis, MN 55402
> TEL 612-436-6044
> FAX 612-436-6144

May I suggest looking at the Admin note at the bottom of every (incessantly
streaming) email, where the adults on this list must have noticed that it
handily suggests emailing the unsubscribe address:

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

John Walton
HPFGU Moderator Team
Moderator With Rock #47
HPFGU Hexquarters
2B Ayne Alley
London 1M ODD
Owls: "HPFGU Moderator Team, London"
Howlers: "Malfoy Manor, Chipping Sodbury"





From m.davids1 at chello.nl  Mon Nov 26 16:42:14 2001
From: m.davids1 at chello.nl (Misha)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:42:14 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] (hopefully new) Movie Comments
References: <9tjh48+3sen@eGroups.com> <016901c1768e$93eb75c0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <009f01c17699$4daad640$8f69bbd4@chello.nl>

Hi,

> He says "Here is where I leave you, Harry Potter." Excuse me?
> He didn't TAKE Harry anywhere. That's a prime example of very
> poor editing if you ask me!

I thought what Firenze meant was: "At this point in time I leave you",
rather than: "At this place in the forest I leave you". So it would be al
right.

Take care,

Misha










From prefectmarcus at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 17:35:22 2001
From: prefectmarcus at yahoo.com (Marcus )
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:35:22 -0000
Subject: List of Improvements on the Book
Message-ID: <9ttugq+73ae@eGroups.com>

Instead of nitpicking the movie where it changed details of the book, 
here is my preliminary list of where the movie actually improved 
things IMO.

(1) Fluffy's origin.  It always bothered me that somebody from Greece 
shows up in Scotland with a gigantic three-headed dog.  The 
logistical nightmares that entails boggles the mind.  Where was the 
MoM?  It makes more sense for somebody from Ireland to have him.  It 
might even be an Irish bloke living in Scotland.  Yes, yes, I am 
fully aware of Cerebus, or whatever his name was.  But Centaurs 
aren't exactly standard British mythology either.

(2) Norbert's fate.  It makes more sense for Dumbledore to step in 
and take care of Norbert.  I've had a very hard time swallowing the 
idea that Draco Malfoy would sit on such a juicey piece of 
information for more than a week and not try to take advantage of it.

(3) The end of the quest.  It has always bothered me how quickly 
Dumbledore arrives on the scene.  Just how did he get through all the 
obstacles so fast?  If he had a back door, the bad guys could easily 
find it and use it.  If only he could use it, then what use is all 
the obstacles.  Just seal the passages up and be done with it.

As it is, he showed up "in the -- TA DA! -- nick of time."  In the 
movie, Harry collapses and he is found at an unspecified time later.  
This makes far more logical sense.  

Marcus





From bert.coules at fonix.org  Mon Nov 26 18:25:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:25:00 -0000
Subject: Tom Baker
In-Reply-To: <3C0273BB.3B75458E@erols.com>
Message-ID: <9tu1ds+i4et@eGroups.com>

Yes, Tom Baker is still acting.  He was one of the leads in the 
revived Randall & Hopkirk Deceased on BBC1 recently, and crops up on 
BBC radio too.  I was working with him myself recently, on a Sherlock 
Holmes series which will air in early 2002.

He's also extremely active as a voice-over artist.  By a splendid 
coincidence at exactly the moment I started to type this message his 
voice rolled out of my TV advertising a forthcoming documentary on 
Real Wizards ("In search of Harry's Ancestors".)

I agree that with his combination of gravitas and eccentricity he 
would have made a splendid Dumbledore.  

Bert Coules




From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Sun Nov 25 21:13:16 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:13:16 -0000
Subject: Quidditch shield/Snape smiling?
In-Reply-To: <9trhqg+h84a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9trmtc+p3t5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., SALeathem at a... wrote:
> > In a message dated 25/11/2001 18:48:22 GMT Standard Time, 
ruth at h... 
> > writes:
> > 
> > << 
> >  (5) In the trophy room scene I was already prepared to look
> >  at the other plaques instead of at James' plaque. So while I
> >  now can't tell you anything about James' plaque I spotted
> >  R.J.H. King 1969 and M.G. McGonagal 1970. That seems to go
> >  with the theory of "player of the year" displayed there... >>
> > 
> > The only other thing I noticed when I saw it again on friday 
night was that 
> > James' year is listed as 1972. I never saw that first time round. 
But if King 
> > & McGonagall are '69 & '70, and James is '72 and the final name 
on the 
> > plaque, where's '71? 
> > 
> 
> Gryffendor may not have won the Cup on 1971; that year would reside 
on the Plaque belonging to the club who won that year.





I think there is a it of confusion...the quidditch cup is a seperate 
trophy there are images of it.....I think what is being said is the 
sheild is an "overall" player of the year type award......maybe the 
1971 season was called off for some reason...similar to the 
cancellation in GOF? Maybe I'm wrong??





From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 19:17:19 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:17:19 -0000
Subject: List of Improvements on the Book
In-Reply-To: <9ttugq+73ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu4fv+6a5t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Marcus " <prefectmarcus at y...> wrote:
> Instead of nitpicking the movie where it changed details of the 
> book, here is my preliminary list of where the movie actually 
> improved things IMO.
> 
> (1) Fluffy's origin.  It always bothered me that somebody from 
> Greece shows up in Scotland with a gigantic three-headed dog.  The 
> logistical nightmares that entails boggles the mind.  Where was 
> the MoM?  It makes more sense for somebody from Ireland to have 
> him.  It might even be an Irish bloke living in Scotland.  Yes, 
> yes, I am fully aware of Cerebus, or whatever his name was.  But 
> Centaurs aren't exactly standard British mythology either.

I agree that there are some things that were improved upon in the 
film, but IMO, this isn't necessarily one of them.  It still strikes 
me as an unnecessary change, especially since the idea that Hagrid 
is the one who acquired Fluffy is still in the script.  You do make 
a good point, however, that the MoM seems to be asleep at the switch 
when it comes to regulating magical creatures.  Just look at the 
sequence in PoA where Buckbeak is "on trial."  A bit like closing 
the barn door after the horses have gotten out.  What if he really 
WAS a dangerous creature?  And look at the Skrewts.  No one seems to 
be keeping track of what Hagrid is up to, do they? (BTW, the three-
headed dog is Cerberus.)

> (2) Norbert's fate.  It makes more sense for Dumbledore to step in 
> and take care of Norbert.  I've had a very hard time swallowing 
> the idea that Draco Malfoy would sit on such a juicey piece of 
> information for more than a week and not try to take advantage of 
> it.

I had a very, very hard time picturing a pair of eleven-year-olds 
smuggling what had become a very large, unwieldy dragon up a tower.  
Logistically, I think this is the least believable part of the first 
book.  JKR doesn't even have them using any sort of levitating charm 
or anything; they're just supposedly carrying the dragon. (JKR 
glosses over this by writing, "How they managed to get the crate 
back up to the castle, they never knew."  I don't think SHE knew, 
either.) The film represents a HUGE improvement over the 
implausibility of Harry and Hermione managing this alone.  (Perhaps 
they needed Ron there saying, "Are you a witch or not?" so she'd 
remember to levitate the dragon. <g>)

> (3) The end of the quest.  It has always bothered me how quickly 
> Dumbledore arrives on the scene.  Just how did he get through all 
> the obstacles so fast?  If he had a back door, the bad guys could 
> easily find it and use it.  If only he could use it, then what use 
> is all the obstacles.  Just seal the passages up and be done with 
> it.
> 
> As it is, he showed up "in the -- TA DA! -- nick of time."  In the 
> movie, Harry collapses and he is found at an unspecified time 
> later.  This makes far more logical sense.  

I was unclear about how Dumbledore did that, as well.  It's never 
properly explained in the book; Dumbledore talks about him and 
Hermione's owl crossing in the air, and Dumbledore being afraid that 
the effort required for Harry to fight back against Quirrell had 
killed him, but it's all rather vague.

--Barb

Get Psyched Out!
http://schnoogle.com/authorlinks/barb/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych
 





From clio at unicum.de  Mon Nov 26 19:27:07 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio at unicum.de)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:27:07 -0000
Subject: See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions
In-Reply-To: <9tr9v7+stse@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu52b+6cuk@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone, being a long-time silent observer, I have finally 
decided to post for the first time.
 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Zarleycat at a... wrote:

> My main problem with the film is with Snape. 
Snip
>It's almost as if the film is 
> presenting a kinder, gentler Snape.  Not exactly warm and cuddly, 
but 
> decidedly not as nasty as the book version.
>

I totally agree with you. My first thought was -oh, no they got him 
all wrong. After thinking about it for a while I think they changed 
him a little on pupose. What purpose, I'm not sure about. 
 
> I'm not a big fan of the Rickman portrayal.  

Neither am I, but I started to ask myself if his version of Snape is 
the one JKR really intended. I mean she specifically requested 
Rickman for the job. And he got some extra background information on 
the character that is not in the books (or so is the rumor). So maybe 
his play is a little bit foreshadowing of the REAL Snape, yet to see 
through Harry's eyes in book 5? I hope not, because although being a 
bigtime Snape fan, I hope he will never turn out kind, gentle and 
sadly misunderstood.


> Did anyone else think of the movie "The Gladiator" as the 
Gryffindor 
> Quidditch team prepared to take the field?

I felt strongly remembered of the scene in Spartacus, when the 
galdiators have to wait in that wooden shack until they are send out 
for the trial fights.

Clio




From clio at unicum.de  Mon Nov 26 19:47:00 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio at unicum.de)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:47:00 -0000
Subject: One mystery *partially* solved!
In-Reply-To: <9tp93i+j92e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu67k+lbvs@eGroups.com>

So the new mystery is: what could Kloves have possibly said 
> about Black that book five will make impossible?
> 


I think he wrote something about borrowing or returning the bike to 
Sirius Black. Many people believe that there is something messed up 
with the time line (Sirius going to Godric's Hollow, Hagrid fetching 
harry, Hagrid turning up in Privet Drive). There seem to be 24 h 
missing in between. So maybe there is REALLY something odd. And maybe 
Kloves didn't realize when he wrote that scene. If JKR decided to 
unveil the 24-h-riddle in bk 5, she certainly didn't want to have a 
spotlight on it in the movie.

Clio,
who cannot wait till bk 5 




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Mon Nov 26 19:53:50 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:53:50 -0000
Subject: (hopefully new) Movie Comments
In-Reply-To: <016901c1768e$93eb75c0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <9tu6ke+vab8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Gabriel Edson" <feycat at f...> wrote:
> He says "Here is where I leave you, Harry Potter." Excuse me? He 
didn't TAKE Harry anywhere. That's a prime example of very poor 
editing if you ask me!
> 
I don't understand why everyone has such a problem with this line - it 
didn't strike me as odd at all.  Is it the word "here" or is it 
"leave" that makes the difficulty?  Both of the them work, it seems to 
me.  I read "here" as referring to that moment in time, not location; 
the way one would say "Now here's where Harry and Malfoy go into the 
Forest and find the dead unicorn."  And "leave" is just "taking one's 
leave", or departing, as in "John, I'm leaving you."  Sure, it worked 
originally when the centaur had carried Harry on a journey and then 
put him down, but it works in this context too.  It's not exactly what 
I would say in such a situation, but I figure centaurs talk a little 
more poetically than humans.

Wanda





From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Mon Nov 26 19:56:28 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:56:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Snape again, Sparticus
Message-ID: <200111261956.OAA09880@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

Clio wrote:

>  So maybe 
> his play is a little bit foreshadowing of the REAL Snape, yet to see 
> through Harry's eyes in book 5? I hope not, because although being a 
> bigtime Snape fan, I hope he will never turn out kind, gentle and 
> sadly misunderstood.

I just can't see him turning out kind or gentle, the way Rowling's written him. 
But sadly misunderstood... *that* I could see. Probably dating back to birth, or 
at least when he arrived at Hogwarts. (Wouldn't it be great to see flashbacks in 
GoF of MWPP with Severus in the background, looking left out?)

I think we needed to see him tormenting Neville more. That would solve two 
problems: Snape being too nice and Neville not having enough of a chance to show 
how timid he usually is. Throw in the bit about Hermione helping Neville, and 
you also get a clearer sense of how Hermione isn't just a know-it-all show-off. 
Thirty seconds, tops-- think how much it would have helped... I wonder if they 
had someone watch the edited version who hadn't read the books yet (somehow), 
just to see how they interpreted the characters?

> I felt strongly remembered of the scene in Spartacus, when the 
> galdiators have to wait in that wooden shack until they are send out 
> for the trial fights.

Thanks, I knew there was something that reminded me of! It's the very Roman 
looking trimming on the Quidditch robes, I think. All that red and gold.

Elizabeth




From cindysphynx at home.com  Mon Nov 26 20:08:03 2001
From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:08:03 -0000
Subject: List of Improvements on the Book
In-Reply-To: <9ttugq+73ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu7f3+48p4@eGroups.com>

Marcus wrote:

> 
> (1) Fluffy's origin.  It always bothered me that somebody from 
Greece 
> shows up in Scotland with a gigantic three-headed dog.  The 
> logistical nightmares that entails boggles the mind.  Where was the 
> MoM?  It makes more sense for somebody from Ireland to have him.  
It 
> might even be an Irish bloke living in Scotland.  Yes, yes, I am 
> fully aware of Cerebus, or whatever his name was.  But Centaurs 
> aren't exactly standard British mythology either.

A wholeheartedly agree.  I'd add that it makes more sense to me that 
Hagrid would trust an Irish stranger, and it makes more sense that 
the stranger is Irish if the stranger is really supposed to be a 
disguised Quirrel with Quirrel's accent.  

 
Marcus again:

> (2) Norbert's fate.  It makes more sense for Dumbledore to step in 
> and take care of Norbert.  I've had a very hard time swallowing the 
> idea that Draco Malfoy would sit on such a juicey piece of 
> information for more than a week and not try to take advantage of 
it.

Yes.  It troubled me that Hagrid, the adult, lets a bunch of kids 
risk injury and risk getting caught out of bounds, essentially 
letting them take the rap for him by not speaking up about who is 
responsible for the dragon.  Having Dumbledore take care of it is 
much better.  

Marcus again:

>> (3) The end of the quest.  It has always bothered me how quickly 
> Dumbledore arrives on the scene.  Just how did he get through all 
the 
> obstacles so fast?  If he had a back door, the bad guys could 
easily 
> find it and use it.  If only he could use it, then what use is all 
> the obstacles.  Just seal the passages up and be done with it.
> 
> As it is, he showed up "in the -- TA DA! -- nick of time."  In the 
> movie, Harry collapses and he is found at an unspecified time 
later.  
> This makes far more logical sense.  

I also like the elimination of the potions challenge.  Are we really 
to believe that, if they get the logic wrong (or if the person 
setting up the challenge gets it wrong), Harry will gulp poison or 
catch fire walking through the flames?  
 

I'd add a few more examples of improvements:

(4) The snake scene makes more sense without the "Amigo."  Having 
Dudley trapped behind the glass was a nice touch.

(5)  Wood's pre-Quiddich talk to Harry in the movie is much better 
than the book version.  In the book, it is quite flat.  It is 
essentially "OK.  This is the best team we've had in years.  I know 
we'll win.  Good luck." 

(6)  The movie provides a compelling motivation for Hagrid to give 
Dudley a pig tail, i.e. Dudley was behaving like a pig by stealing 
the cake.  This comes out of nowhere in the book.  Worse, it comes 
off as though Hagrid is either punishing Dudley for the sins of his 
father, or punishing Dudley for being overweight.  Not nice.

(7)  Chocolate frogs being alive is much more cute.

Cindy




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Mon Nov 26 20:17:29 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:17:29 -0000
Subject: Sirius / JAMES / iguana / prefects / SPELLS / Flitwick
In-Reply-To: <9tshs6+8e3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu80p+105ua@eGroups.com>


> Mirzam Black wrote:
> 
> > And if James received this award in 1972, could his second year 
at 
> > Hogwarts really BEGIN in 1972? 
> 
> I missed something. What does the plaque have to do with James's 
> second year? I'm sure the date is the end of that school year, the 
> one in which he won the award, but it could be his seventh or sixth 
> or fifth or fourth or third or second year. 
<SNIP>

OK I think I can prove that it was either his 2nd or 3rd (can't be 
any more presis -sp- without more info) year but you'll have to 
follow my line of though a bit first.

Ok first let us consider the information we know, from the book, the 
film and from JK.

We know that in book 4, Harry is 14.
We know that by at the end of book 4 Snape is 35/36 (we presume he 
was in the same year as James) we know this from JK.
We know that James won a tophy for Quidditch in 1972.
We know that James and Lily were killed when Harry was 1 (in 1981)
And lastly we know that Harry was Born in 1980.

We can now work this out.

If we follow Snape as being 35/36 and therefore James as being 35/36 
(if he was still alive NOW) then this would mean that James must have 
been 21/22 when Harry was born because 35/36 - 14 is 21/22.

So we know now that James was 21/22 in 1980.
therefore he was 20/21 in 1979
19/20 in 1978
18/19 in 1977
17/18 in 1976
16/17 in 1975
15/16 in 1974
14/15 in 1973
13/14 in 1972

Going on Both British School cut off dates AND Ron's birthday and Age 
this would point at James having received this trophy either in his 
2nd or 3rd year, here is the reasoning.

In a British school (due to the Sep 1st cut of date) you celebrate 
your 13th birthday during your second year and your 14th birthday 
during your 3rd year, now I know some people will object to this so I 
am also going to use Ron's birthday to "prove" this.

We know Ron's Birthday is on the 1st of March and everyone is agreed 
that Ron is older than Harry.

Since Harry celebrates his 13th birthday at the beginning of book 
three, it is therefore safe to presume that Ron would celebrate his 
13th birthday in the March of Book 2 (their second year) and his 14th 
birthday in the March of book 3 (their 3rd year), this has to be teh 
case or Ron would be younger than Harry. 
This would imply it is either in James' second or third year.

Also the likely hood of him being born in a month after Harry that 
would still qualify him for the same year as Snape is less than 
2/12!!! 

HOLLYDAZE!!!




From clio at unicum.de  Mon Nov 26 20:24:33 2001
From: clio at unicum.de (clio at unicum.de)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:24:33 -0000
Subject: Fluffy's origin
In-Reply-To: <9tu7f3+48p4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu8e1+h0p0@eGroups.com>

Cindy C and Marcus wrote:
> 
> > 
> > (1) Fluffy's origin.  It always bothered me that somebody from 
> Greece 
> > shows up in Scotland with a gigantic three-headed dog.  The 
> > logistical nightmares that entails boggles the mind.  Where was 
the 
> > MoM?  It makes more sense for somebody from Ireland to have him.  
> It 
> > might even be an Irish bloke living in Scotland.  Yes, yes, I am 
> > fully aware of Cerebus, or whatever his name was.  But Centaurs 
> > aren't exactly standard British mythology either.
> 
> A wholeheartedly agree.  I'd add that it makes more sense to me 
that 
> Hagrid would trust an Irish stranger, and it makes more sense that 
> the stranger is Irish if the stranger is really supposed to be a 
> disguised Quirrel with Quirrel's accent.  
> 

Actually, the stranger who really might be the disguised Quirrel is 
the man who wants to know about how to get past the dog. That is not 
the same person who sells the dog to Hagrid. Sorry.

Generally I disagree with you guys. I loved the implication that 
Hagrid really bought Cerberos, the guarding dog of the Greek Hades 
and named it Fluffy.

Clio  




From neilward at dircon.co.uk  Mon Nov 26 20:42:56 2001
From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:42:56 -0000
Subject: Seeing the film first - PC game based on the film's actors
Message-ID: <9tu9gg+9qsr@eGroups.com>

At first, I found it hard to believe that anyone could have been to 
see the Harry Potter film without having read at least Book 1, but 
today I encountered two people who had done just that, and their 
reactions were quite different:-

The first person - a work colleague - took his two sons, aged 5 and 
almost 7, to see the film.  He thought he'd read the book, but it 
turned out that he'd read GoF, so he decided the film "made no sense 
at all". He felt that it was rather violent for younger children, and 
also noted the smattering of swear words, which he felt were 
inappropriate.  

I wouldn't have taken a child under 7 to see the film, but I think he 
was perhaps under the impression it was a family film and safe 
viewing from cradle to grave (well, not literally for deceased 
viewers, but you catch my drift).

The other reviewer was a close friend who has been sneering at me 
ever since I confessed to liking the Harry Potter books.  I refused 
to attend the film with him when he expressed an interest, since he 
hasn't read any of the books.  He loved the film and now can't wait 
to read all the books!  Quel surprise.  He told me he found the film 
very entertaining and had no difficulty in following the story.  Of 
course, when he reads the book, he'll get a lot more information than 
he would have gleaned from the film.

***

My other point is to note that the Harry Potter computer game is 
quite cool.  The reason I'm mentioning that here is that the 3D 
characters are modelled on the actors in the film.  The voices are 
soundalikes (such as that Sowerbutts boy they hired to do Harry's 
voice) and the boy doing Malfoy's voice is superb, IMO.  

It veers quite seriously from canon, even from movie-canon, but 
somehow seems to have won the approval of WB and JKR.  I won't review 
it here, of course, (HPfGU-ComputerGame anyone?), but I was 
interested to see that the representation of Professor Sprout doesn't 
look a bit like Miriam Margolyes, although the voice is like hers.  
I'm not sure if this is because Sprout had not been cast when the 
game was designed, or because MM is not going play Sprout in CoS (she 
is though, surely?).  Similarly, Peeves does not look or sound like 
Rik Mayall in this game.  Read into that what you will.

Neil
___________________
Flying Ford Anglia





From DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Mon Nov 26 22:18:10 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:18:10 -0800
Subject: Magical "technology", Is Hagrid a felon? and other things
In-Reply-To: <1006775677.308.88123.m12@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1006775677.308.88123.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <10013926276.20011126141810@mindspring.com>


HMyc> Wouldn't having Voldemort on his back,be enough to get him through
HMyc> without all the destruction caused by HRH?

I guess with access to the other teachers, it was possible for Quirrell
to obtain the "cheats" for all the obstacles, not just Fluffy.  I just
find it hard to believe the other teachers told him.  (Maybe V used an
advanced form of "Impedimenta" to freeze the keys so he could grab the
right one, and maybe V or Quirrell or both are as good chess players as
Kasparov.)

HMyc> It's never said that owning a dragon is illegal. So the full weight of
HMyc> hagrid keepign Norbert is lost. Certainly, having such a little firebug 
HMyc> around is dangerous and comical, but it's never explained how awful it was 
HMyc> to have Draco witness it.

Maybe they decided to whitewash it because so many Anti-Potterites have called
Hagrid a "criminal who should be locked up" because of Norbert (and the
Skrewts)?

HMyc> I think you hit the nail right on the head with this one. As with
HMyc> other spells, the full version would include an object as well as an 
HMyc> action.

I agree -- We have other examples of spells that "take arguments", like
"Mobili-<object to move>".  What I'm wondering is, who or what does the
"parsing"?

HMyc> On the other hand, why the heck AREN'T there better light spells? 
HMyc> They can't be all that hard to do! After all, someone worked out a 
HMyc> spell to clip dragon's tonails. Certainly someone would have worked 
HMyc> on a better light spell!

Beats me... why are there now multi-gigahertz computer processors but
still no shopping carts whose wheels all move in the same direction?

-- 
Dave




From laurakay76 at juno.com  Mon Nov 26 22:04:42 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:04:42 -0500
Subject: the movie's Oscar prospects
Message-ID: <20011126.171640.-756061.1.laurakay76@juno.com>

 angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com wrote:

Oscar Prospects: Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay are not out-
of-reach. Should be a contender for Best Art Direction, Best Visual 
Effects, Best Sound, Best Makeup, Best Sound Effects Editing and Best 
Costume Design. 

I heartily agree that this movie will very likely be nominated for some,
if not all of these.  I'm surprised, however, that you didn't think it
would get nominated for Best Original Score -- Hollywood LOVES John
Williams.  (So do I -- I have a tendency to whistle the opening theme at
work, which confuses the heck out of my coworkers, who don't recognize
it!)  On the Best Picture front, I'd say it has a strong chance; I can't
think of many other movies this year that compare with HPSS in terms of
quality, except for "Shrek" and "Monsters, Inc."  Although since we have
yet to see "Lord of the Rings," that will probably be HP's biggest rival
for the crown.

I also think it may receive a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, most
likely for Robbie Coltrane or possibly even for Rupert Grint.  (Sorry,
Snapefans -- I love Alan Rickman but he just didn't have enough to do for
an Oscar nod.)  I'd be utterly tickled to see Daniel Radcliffe get
nominated for Best Actor, and Emma Watson for Best Supporting Actress,
but with Hollywood the way it is I'm not really holding my breath.

~Laura K.
________________________________________________________________
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 arenkel at t-online.de  Mon Nov 26 22:28:55 2001
From: arenkel at t-online.de (Andrea Renkel)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:28:55 -0000
Subject: Fluffy not from Greece?
In-Reply-To: <9tu4fv+6a5t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tufn7+q2v7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:

> I agree that there are some things that were improved upon in the 
> film, but IMO, this isn't necessarily one of them.  It still 
strikes 
> me as an unnecessary change, especially since the idea that Hagrid 
> is the one who acquired Fluffy is still in the script.  


I found that little change quite disappointing (though I agree on the 
logistical nightmares of getting Fluffy from Greece to Merry Old 
England). But when I first read about him in the book, I instantly 
thought "Ha, he looks like Cerberus!" - and I was rolling on the 
floor laughing when later I read Hagrid's "Bought him off a *greek* 
chappie" line. One more moment of brilliant humour that fell out of 
the movie for no reason. Sad!

Another line I was missing was Ron's "Are you a witch or not?" in the 
Devil's Snare scene - but since Snape's potion riddle was missing in 
the movie, Hermione's reaction had to be less confused when dealing 
with the plant, otherwise she couldn't have well been awarded points 
for "the use of cool logic" later.

Andrea




From pennylin at swbell.net  Mon Nov 26 22:29:42 2001
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 16:29:42 -0600
Subject: Blues Clues Pajamas
References: <F82VyTyDdXRS1LaLpmm0000a043@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3C02C256.8070309@swbell.net>

Hi --

Angela Boyko wrote:


> Those were definitely Blues Clues pyjamas that baby Harry was wearing. I 
> saw
> Blue embroidered on the shoulder.

I saw the movie for the 5th time last night with Amanda & Sheryll, who 
drove over for a visit.  Amanda says that the PJs are definitely *NOT* 
Blues Clues.  She can elaborate further, but she said the dog had no 
spots or other distinguishing characteristics of Blue.

Penny




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 22:34:37 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:34:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the movie's Oscar prospects
In-Reply-To: <20011126.171640.-756061.1.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <20011126223437.24534.qmail@web11904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Laura Klotz <laurakay76 at juno.com> wrote:
>  angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> Oscar Prospects: (Sorry, Snapefans -- I love
Alan Rickman but he just didn't have enough to do
for an Oscar nod.)  I'd be utterly tickled to see
> Daniel Radcliffe get
> nominated for Best Actor, ...
> but with Hollywood the way it is I'm not really
> holding my breath.

Well, you just never know. Who would have thought
that Judi Dench's miniscule contribution to
"Shakespeare In Love" would land her best
supporting actress? True, Dame JD may be more
well known in Hollywood circles than Mr. Rickman
or any of the great child actors in HP, but odder
things have happened! ;)

W/D

=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 22:49:37 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:49:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the movie's Oscar prospects
In-Reply-To: <20011126223437.24534.qmail@web11904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011126224937.22218.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>

As past movie History will show, any movie that is
Science Fiction or Fantasy, the actors and actresses
just might be nominated. But it will never happen.
Science Fiction and Fantasy have their own type of
awards show. The best one was with Mark Hamill has
host and the late GREAT Vincent Price was on and
received a very special Sci-Fi movie award! That was
back around in the late 70's!  Showing my age! Anyway
the Academy of Arts and Science, big joke there, do
not honor the above mention catagories as art or
dramatic enough for them. Oh sure, the give out awards
for special effects, costumes, music, set decores, and
all the stuff to make a movie happen! But the actors
and actresses get snubbed! Star Wars did not get any
awards for the actors, Jaws should have been Best
Movie, but NO, One Flew Over The Coocoo Nest got it!
So as far as actors in HP, I really doubt it. But one
can always hope for change!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very
Merry Band of Muggles 100%  ______


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Mon Nov 26 19:29:50 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:29:50 -0000
Subject: List of Improvements on the Book
In-Reply-To: <9tu4fv+6a5t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tu57e+shov@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Marcus " <prefectmarcus at y...> wrote:
> > > (3) The end of the quest.  It has always bothered me how 
quickly 
> > Dumbledore arrives on the scene.  Just how did he get through all 
> > the obstacles so fast?  If he had a back door, the bad guys could 
> > easily find it and use it.  If only he could use it, then what 
use 
> > is all the obstacles.  Just seal the passages up and be done with 
> > it.
> > 
> > As it is, he showed up "in the -- TA DA! -- nick of time."  In 
the 
> > movie, Harry collapses and he is found at an unspecified time 
> > later.  This makes far more logical sense.  
> 



Well, I imagined that as Dumbledore is Hogwarts Headmaster and the 
main guy protecting it, he'd probably want to get to it eventually so 
he'd have some way of doing it.....maybe an incantation that would do 
away with all the magic tasks!

John





From laurakay76 at juno.com  Mon Nov 26 23:08:05 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:08:05 -0500
Subject: Two movies for GoF?
Message-ID: <20011126.180806.-756061.5.laurakay76@juno.com>

Elizabeth Dalton wrote:
>But then again, they probably won't have time for 
>that level of detail in GoF, even if they do make two movies. (Is there
any 
>substance to that rumor that someone could post, like an interview
pointer?)

>From an article in the National Post:

	The fourth volume, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, is more than 600
pages long, presenting a troll-	sized problem for filmmakers trying to
squeeze so much story into a movie-size script.

	"I see it as two films," Columbus said. "Shoot a four-hour version,
release two hours at Thanksgiving 	and two hours at Christmas, because
it's the only way I think it could be done and also do justice to the
	books."

Read the full article at:
http://www.nationalpost.com/artslife/arts/music/story.html?f=/stories/200
11123/800231.html




________________________________________________________________
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 Joanne0012 at aol.com  Mon Nov 26 23:20:02 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:20:02 -0000
Subject: Blues Clues Pajamas
In-Reply-To: <3C02C256.8070309@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <9tuin2+dmdm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin at s...> wrote:

> I saw the movie for the 5th time last night with Amanda & Sheryll, who 
> drove over for a visit.  Amanda says that the PJs are definitely *NOT* 
> Blues Clues.  She can elaborate further, but she said the dog had no 
> spots or other distinguishing characteristics of Blue.

I asked my niece (who sees PLENTY of genuine Blues Clues with her kids) to 
watch for this specifically.  She also reports that it's not genuine Blues Clues, 
something about a missing trademark paw print.

Somehow, picturing our little Harry in a knockoff seems even worse.




From ohtoresonate at yahoo.com  Mon Nov 26 23:24:37 2001
From: ohtoresonate at yahoo.com (ohtoresonate at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:24:37 -0000
Subject: Kloves speaks as a "Writer on Writing"
Message-ID: <9tuivl+iqre@eGroups.com>

If you're in the Los Angeles area on Thursday, Nov. 29th, Steve Kloves 
will be speaking at 7:30pm at the Writers Guild.

The audience Q&A to follow should be interesting...if you've got 
burning questions for Steve Kloves, email me off-list at OhToResonate 
AT yahoo DOT com for details on how to get tickets ($20).

:) OTR
 
 
 




From heidit at netbox.com  Tue Nov 27 00:50:50 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:50:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: centaur dialogue
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF87A9@MIAEXCH1>

The line by Firenze "Here is where I leave you," is an exampl of a line that
hewed exactly to the book but without the surrounding context of Harry
traveling on Firenze it doesn't make sense. In the book, the Centaurs'
dialogue has the same framework, linguistically, as humans, in contrast to
House Elves who have a different syntax. 
I assume that the CG was done for that bit of dialogue before they had
determined that they couldn't / wouldn't include Harry riding Firenze, and
changing it would've been cost prohibitive. 
Too bad they couldn't just get rid of "is where" as it would've worked that
way.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Wanda Sherratt <sherratt at mediaone.net>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon Nov 26 14:53:50 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: (hopefully new) Movie Comments

Real-To:  "Wanda Sherratt" <sherratt at mediaone.net>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Gabriel Edson" <feycat at f...> wrote:
> He says "Here is where I leave you, Harry Potter." Excuse me? He 
didn't TAKE Harry anywhere. That's a prime example of very poor 
editing if you ask me!
> 
I don't understand why everyone has such a problem with this line - it 
didn't strike me as odd at all.  Is it the word "here" or is it 
"leave" that makes the difficulty?  Both of the them work, it seems to 
me.  I read "here" as referring to that moment in time, not location; 
the way one would say "Now here's where Harry and Malfoy go into the 
Forest and find the dead unicorn."  And "leave" is just "taking one's 
leave", or departing, as in "John, I'm leaving you."  Sure, it worked 
originally when the centaur had carried Harry on a journey and then 
put him down, but it works in this context too.  It's not exactly what 
I would say in such a situation, but I figure centaurs talk a little 
more poetically than humans.

Wanda




________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/ 




From heidit at netbox.com  Tue Nov 27 00:52:00 2001
From: heidit at netbox.com (Tandy, Heidi)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:52:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: centaur dialogue
Message-ID: <C8CB3DE988C8D3119BDA00A0C9B3BD4D02DF87AF@MIAEXCH1>

The line by Firenze "Here is where I leave you," is an exampl of a line that
hewed exactly to the book but without the surrounding context of Harry
traveling on Firenze it doesn't make sense. In the book, the Centaurs'
dialogue has the same framework, linguistically, as humans, in contrast to
House Elves who have a different syntax. 
I assume that the CG was done for that bit of dialogue before they had
determined that they couldn't / wouldn't include Harry riding Firenze, and
changing it would've been cost prohibitive. 
Too bad they couldn't just get rid of "is where" as it would've worked that
way.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Wanda Sherratt <sherratt at mediaone.net>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon Nov 26 14:53:50 2001
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: (hopefully new) Movie Comments

Real-To:  "Wanda Sherratt" <sherratt at mediaone.net>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Gabriel Edson" <feycat at f...> wrote:
> He says "Here is where I leave you, Harry Potter." Excuse me? He 
didn't TAKE Harry anywhere. That's a prime example of very poor 
editing if you ask me!
> 
I don't understand why everyone has such a problem with this line - it 
didn't strike me as odd at all.  Is it the word "here" or is it 
"leave" that makes the difficulty?  Both of the them work, it seems to 
me.  I read "here" as referring to that moment in time, not location; 
the way one would say "Now here's where Harry and Malfoy go into the 
Forest and find the dead unicorn."  And "leave" is just "taking one's 
leave", or departing, as in "John, I'm leaving you."  Sure, it worked 
originally when the centaur had carried Harry on a journey and then 
put him down, but it works in this context too.  It's not exactly what 
I would say in such a situation, but I figure centaurs talk a little 
more poetically than humans.

Wanda




________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/ 




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 02:53:02 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:53:02 -0000
Subject: See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions 
In-Reply-To: <9tu52b+6cuk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tuv6e+pml2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., clio at u... wrote:
> 
> Neither am I, but I started to ask myself if his version of Snape is 
> the one JKR really intended. I mean she specifically requested 
> Rickman for the job. And he got some extra background information on 
> the character that is not in the books (or so is the rumor). So maybe 
> his play is a little bit foreshadowing of the REAL Snape, yet to see 
> through Harry's eyes in book 5? I hope not, because although being a 
> bigtime Snape fan, I hope he will never turn out kind, gentle and 
> sadly misunderstood.
> 


 Although Rickman's portrayal was perhaps not as grotesque as Snape was described in the books, I don't really think he's playing him as a misunderstood teddy. Still, Lord, I have to agree with you: that would be a horrible developent! I love the character as he is. 

AND I don't want this all to turn out to be "wounded Snape, torturing himself over the torch he has carried for Lily Evans, turned into a reclusive monster by the cruelty of his classmates....."  He's not the Grinch, dammit. Let's hope Ron Howard never gets his hands on a piece of the franchise!

 -- Heather  




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 03:33:35 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:33:35 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various Notes...
Message-ID: <79.1ebff154.2934638f@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/20/2001 6:26:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk writes:

<<  Does 
 this preserve the sense of Canon?
 
 Edis
  >>

Absolutely..and I can tell you (as a born New Yorker) that someone who said 
"I've never been to New York" meaning the city, who had been to Brooklyn 
would have been totally credible. The City means Manhattan. (With apologies 
to any who live in Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and do not concur)



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 03:34:41 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 03:34:41 -0000
Subject: See it with a Muggle/ Snape Opinions 
In-Reply-To: <9tu52b+6cuk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tv1kh+srab@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., clio at u... wrote:
> 
> Neither am I, but I started to ask myself if his version of Snape is 
> the one JKR really intended. I mean she specifically requested 
> Rickman for the job. And he got some extra background information on 
> the character that is not in the books (or so is the rumor). So maybe 
> his play is a little bit foreshadowing of the REAL Snape, yet to see 
> through Harry's eyes in book 5? I hope not, because although being a 
> bigtime Snape fan, I hope he will never turn out kind, gentle and 
> sadly misunderstood.
> 


 Although Rickman's portrayal was perhaps not as grotesque as Snape was described in the books, I don't really think he's playing him as a misunderstood teddy. Still, Lord, I have to agree with you: that would be a horrible developent! I love the character as he is. 

AND I don't want this all to turn out to be "wounded Snape, torturing himself over the torch he has carried for Lily Evans, turned into a reclusive monster by the cruelty of his classmates....."  He's not the Grinch, dammit. Let's hope Ron Howard never gets his hands on a piece of the franchise!

 -- Heather  




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 03:44:44 2001
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (Schlobin1 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:44:44 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Snape not shown long-term
Message-ID: <34.1e79073d.2934662c@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/20/2001 11:44:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
feycat at feycat.net writes:

<< > 2. We never see Harry get that Snape hates HIM, not just that he's
 > particularly unpleasant. We know he's more unpleasant toward Harry,
 > but H. never even wonders about it, and Dumbledore never told him that
 > James saved Snape's life...I agree with most cuts from the book, but
 > this one I think was important, very important, for setting up
 > future emotion.
 
 I too was REALLY bothered by that. Because they cut out so much, you never 
get a real sense of time. You don't see that this was a long-term, ongoing 
thing that made Harry miserable every time he knew he was going to Potions 
class. You didn't get to see Snape single him out and pick at him EVERY DAY. 
Also, they cut out Snape picking points away from Griffindor daily for no 
real reason. ("Potter! Why didn't you tell him not to add the porcupine 
quills? Thought it would make you look better?" etc) 
 
 In my mind, cutting out Snape essentially cheating against Griffindor made 
the final scene where Dumbledore hands out all those points to Griffindor 
look terrible. The Slytherins may be jerks, but they are still children and 
students at Hogwarts. It looks like Dumbledore just took his favorites and 
gave them enough points to yank the cup out of Slytherin's hands at the last 
minute. It seemed a cruel thing to do to the whole other table of children. 
Granted, Harry and the others did really cool things, but it still looks like 
favoritism until you know that Slytherin has been essentially cheating points 
out during the whole year.
 
 -Gabriel
 
  >>

Gabriel, I agree.

Letting Snape look only semi-evil is 5000 times more important (IMHO) than 
putter outers, or Greek versus Irish, or the snake question.....

One of the big mysteries of the books is: is Snape good or evil...I mean for 
gosh sakes, he's a former DEATH EATER...he participated in murder and torture 
(most likely) and he treats the Gryffindors (especially Harry) foully. It 
does look as if Dumbledore is just playing favorites...and it's confusing to 
have Snape wish Harry good luck..it makes our trio look like hysterical kids 
to have suspected Snape..and I miss the line about James and Snape having a 
relationship like Harry and Malfoy's.


  Also Malfoy must be more vicious for the whole thing to make 
sense..Dramatically it might have worked better to have no scene on the train 
and no scene in Madam Malkin's...but Harry's vehemence about not being in 
Slytherin does not come across as very logical..whereas in the book, he 
dislikes Malfoy immediately, and Malfoy goes on about purebloods and status 
and being in Slytherin.....then we have the scene on the train to reinforce 
it.....

Susan



From eleri at aracnet.com  Tue Nov 27 07:47:09 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (eleri at aracnet.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:47:09 -0000
Subject: Daniel as Harry 
In-Reply-To: <9t4m8i+5f95@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tvgdt+6ak2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., genevieve373 at y... wrote:
> > # Hurts to say this, but Dan Radcliffe is really not very good. 
He 
> > has the "stillness" which moviemakers seem to look for in child 
> > actors, and which Harry needs, but otherwise he's a bit wooden. 
> > Absolutely likeable, but not very interesting or revealing to 
watch.
> 
> 
> I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily expressive all the time, 
> but I think that is more the character than the actor.  I wouldn't 
> expect a child who grew up psychologically abused to completely 
come 
> out of his shell all at once in a drastically different 
environment.  
> He used more expression at the appropriate times, and was stoic at 
> other times...I guess this is just what I might expect from Harry.  

(Trying to play catch up here...)
This is just the thing I was discussing with another mom who's had 
experience with abused children. Daniel as Harry comes across just as 
a child whose been abused for 11 years.
Consider that Harry, every time he showed some emotion or expression, 
was punished or degraded in some way for the entirety of his life, so 
he learns to hide all emotion and expression. That sort of survival 
reflex doesn't go away quickly or easily. Someone who's been in a 
situation like that doean't act and react like a normal child, and 
often comes across as stiff, unemotional and fake. 
IIRC, there was an interview that said that Daniel had that "haunted" 
look they wanted, that he could portray an abused child well. I think 
that came across perfectly in the film (Although I do think it took 
about a third of the film before any of the kids hit their stride.)

Eleri




From idouright2 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 07:52:30 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:52:30 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daniel as Harry
Message-ID: <111.90d8142.2934a03e@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/26/2001 11:48:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
eleri at aracnet.com writes:


> This is just the thing I was discussing with another mom who's had 
> experience with abused children. Daniel as Harry comes across just as 
> a child whose been abused for 11 years.
> Consider that Harry, every time he showed some emotion or expression, 
> was punished or degraded in some way for the entirety of his life, so 
> he learns to hide all emotion and expression. That sort of survival 
> reflex doesn't go away quickly or easily. Someone who's been in a 
> situation like that doean't act and react like a normal child, and 
> often comes across as stiff, unemotional and fake. 
> IIRC, there was an interview that said that Daniel had that "haunted" 
> look they wanted, that he could portray an abused child well. I think 
> that came across perfectly in the film (Although I do think it took 
> about a third of the film before any of the kids hit their stride.)
> 
> Eleri
> 

I agree it took a while for things to start going more naturally and I 
thought DR did a brilliant job as Harry I can't read the books anymore 
without picturing the characters as the actors (except i think hermione was a 
bit too pretty for the part but did it great and was my overall fave kid in 
the movie) and Alan Rickman is my ideal Snape and always has been since i 
first read the book...ok im going on now because I just joined the list but 
once again I think DR did a brilliant job....and hey anything's better than 
then....child....from Episode 1! so anyways hi all!

-step


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




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 08:00:16 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:00:16 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <9tvh6g+da9a@eGroups.com>

Does Rupert consistently seem to be uncomfortable during interviews? I'e only seen a few clips of one or two interviews, instead of the full-on battery of Rosie O'Donnell appearances and the like. 

In the ones I've seen, Emma seems to always get very coquettish with her interviewer. Dan just settles in comfortably and has a nice chat, or starts cutting up a little. But Rupert always looks as if he is sitting with worms in his pants and wants to run off to do his homework or wash his hair.

Does he strike anyone else as rather shyer than the other two kids?

 -- Heather




From eleri at aracnet.com  Tue Nov 27 08:30:55 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (eleri at aracnet.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:30:55 -0000
Subject: Thoughts from a latecomer
Message-ID: <9tvivv+h7lk@eGroups.com>

And I apologize in advance if I cover stuff that's already been said. 
980 some mesages is a lot to read through.

I am very easy to please. I loved the movie (have seen it twice 
already) I'm not desperately nitpicky so I wasn't too bothered by 
things they'd changed or omitted. One thing I did like is that I 
never felt bored. In many movies there'll be parts where it feels 
like it's only reason for existance is to Get To The Next Good Part. 
I didn't experience that here. 

I adored Rickman as Snape. I think the took out too much of his 
character, and you loose some of the background, but I think he came 
across as nicely sinister and 'oooky'. I got the chills every time he 
did that Stare.

Quidditch was fantastic. I didn't even get motion sick while watching 
it, and I was afraid I would (long story). I liked the addition of 
the raised seating, made more sense to me. And yes, Biggerstaff is 
nummy, and he got to day "damn" on screen, too (not unusual for a PG 
movie, I know)

I heard somewhere that the "Shouldnae have told ye that" line was 
Coltrane's contribution...anyone have that confirmed?

Leaving some of the Norbert bit in was important, else how would they 
know that someone had grilled Hagrid about Fluffy? And Norbert was 
adoribble, too!

Rupert Grint is brillant as Ron. Ron's always been my favorite, and 
he was just as I'd imagined him. I was dissapointed that we didn't 
get to see more of the twins, that should change in the next couple 
of movies though. And they do have my favorite line "Honestly woman, 
and you call yourself out mother!" 

Anyhoo, 'nough rambling from me!

Eleri




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Tue Nov 27 11:09:58 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:09:58 -0000
Subject: No subject
In-Reply-To: <9tvh6g+da9a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9tvsa6+lptd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> Does Rupert consistently seem to be uncomfortable during
interviews? I've only seen a few clips of one or two interviews,
instead of the
full-on battery of Rosie O'Donnell appearances and the like. 


errrrm..actually I had the opposite impression. I too have only seen
the NBC and MSNBC specials [don't get me started--what a load of
condescending ----!] and the online clips from the UK premiere, but I
felt that Rupert seemed most at ease chatting with Katie Couric [for
you UK readers she is the host of a morning TV show and just
unbearably Perky]. Dan, on the other hand, struck me as the shy and fidgety 
one. Polite,but shy...Agree with your evaluation of Emma.

Ivis the elderly

Oh all right--am I the ONLY one who thinks that NOBODY at NBC/MSNBC
who was involved with those specials had ever read the books???




From srae at mindspring.com  Tue Nov 27 11:52:17 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:52:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] (unknown)
In-Reply-To: <9tvh6g+da9a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011127065217.00a8c430@pop.mindspring.com>

At 08:00 AM 11/27/2001 -0000, you wrote:
>Does Rupert consistently seem to be uncomfortable during interviews? I'e
only seen a few clips of one or two interviews, instead of the full-on
battery of Rosie O'Donnell appearances and the like. 
>
>In the ones I've seen, Emma seems to always get very coquettish with her
interviewer. Dan just settles in comfortably and has a nice chat, or starts
cutting up a little. But Rupert always looks as if he is sitting with worms
in his pants and wants to run off to do his homework or wash his hair.
>
>Does he strike anyone else as rather shyer than the other two kids?


I haven't seen a lot of interviews with him.  I've read quite a few, but I
think I've only actually seeon one that I downloaded.  Oh, and that special
with Katie Couric just before the movie came out.  He didn't seem used to
the whole process but he didn't really seem shy.  Now, Daniel Radcliffe, on
Regis Philbin last week, HE seemed very nervous to me. Again, I haven't
seen a lot of television interviews, but of all the ones I have seen, DR's
on Regis struck me as the most uncomfortable.  It's nice though, he really
seems like a kid, not a 40 year old in a 12 year old body like so many
other child actors.

Shannon




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Tue Nov 27 14:11:51 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:11:51 -0500
Subject: Brilliant Movie Review (Christian standpoint)
References: <1006863624.201.75712.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C039F27.DD6AFFE@sun.com>

That was a nice review, wasn't it. Thanks for posting the link. My favorite bit:

"...there really IS a Boogey Man, but rather
than explain in grown-up detail just how un- beautiful
life can be, it makes more sense to present
imaginative stand-ins like Tolkien's Saruman or
Rowling's "You Know Who" along with positive models
like Harry Potter to show us how even kids can stand
against the darkness."

Not the first time I've heard someone praising Harry Potter as a source of moral
values, but the most unexpected. :)

Elizabeth

"Aberforth's Goat" wrote:
> His movie review, now up at
> http://www.cornerstonemag.com/imaginarium/movies/potter.htm is IMHO even
> more insightful than his older review of the books...



From Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 14:15:45 2001
From: Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com (Lino Padrun)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:15:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 44
In-Reply-To: <1006404291.2971.97818.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011127141545.83240.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>

Many people have noted that they liked the use of
Hagrid saying the catchphrase, "I shouldn't have told
you that".

I was reading part of SS/PS and noted Hagrid used this
phrase at least once in the book, in Ch. 16 (p. 266 in
the US paperback ed.), just after telling Harry & Co.
about playing music for Fluffy.

Michael

P.S. One detail gripe I keep forgeting and have not
seen was Fang. The Neopolitain was cute, but a Great
Dane (formerly known as Boar Hounds) still could have worked.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Tue Nov 27 15:30:53 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:30:53 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daniel as Harry
Message-ID: <F107Ejx3y3wdlhczDqw00005561@hotmail.com>

I also think Dan did a great job portraying an abused child. Harry had to 
keep himself in check with the Dursleys - because when he did let go of his 
emotions, things would happen like disappearing glass or his hair growing 
long overnight, and he would be punished for it.

Throughout the movie, we see Harry learning to relax and enjoy himself, and 
to trust that he is in a place where he can be himself. I love the scene of 
his first night at Hogwarts, where he sits in the window with Hedwig. I can 
feel that Harry is full of wonder and tentative joy. He's found a place 
where he can escape from the Dursleys. He's met this boy Ron who he gets 
along with very well. He has an owl of his own - a birthday prsent! (I'm 
assuming James and Lily showered him with gifts for his first brithday, but 
he can't remember those). And he is a wizard! Following the movie timeline, 
the night before he was lying on a floor in an isolated hut drawing a 
brithday cake in the dirt.

And then the winter scene with Hedwig flying away - to me, it feels that 
Harry has really settled in at Hogwarts and is letting go of the past, as 
much as he can.

Dan did a good job of portraying Harry without words in those scenes. He is 
also very expressive as a listener to those around him.

Angela

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




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 15:48:14 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:48:14 -0000
Subject: Daniel as Harry
In-Reply-To: <F107Ejx3y3wdlhczDqw00005561@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u0cju+v5tp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Angela Boyko" <angelaboyko at h...> wrote:

> Throughout the movie, we see Harry learning to relax and enjoy himself, and 
> to trust that he is in a place where he can be himself. I love the scene of 
> his first night at Hogwarts, where he sits in the window with Hedwig. I can 
> feel that Harry is full of wonder and tentative joy.

Yes, that's exactly what I saw in that scene, too.  

Another scene that captures his low-key excitement is his first glimpse of 
the Hogwarts Express.  He seems to be believing, for the first time, that he's 
really going to be starting a new life.




From Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 16:05:55 2001
From: Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com (Lino Padrun)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:05:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Madam Hooch: Zoe Wannamaker
In-Reply-To: <1006517384.570.83218.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011127160555.92511.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>

Anyone hear anything about if Zoe Wannamaker is
returning for CoS? 

According to this article
(http://film.guardian.co.uk/harrypotter/news/0,10608,596072,00.html)
Wannamaker was annoyed about the lack of money she got
and was not planning to return for another movie
unless she got a better deal. She also noted that
while many of the actor had signed three movie deals
she only signed on for the one.

Michael

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 16:22:06 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:22:06 -0000
Subject: Madam Hooch: Zoe Wannamaker
In-Reply-To: <20011127160555.92511.qmail@web9105.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u0eje+56sd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Lino Padrun <Padrun_Lino at y...> wrote:
> Wannamaker was annoyed about the lack of money she got
> and was not planning to return for another movie
> unless she got a better deal. She also noted that
> while many of the actor had signed three movie deals
> she only signed on for the one.

We have to presume that Ms. Wanamaker is literate and on speaking terms 
with her agent, so if she didn't like her contract, she has nobody to blame but 
herself.   

It's pretty naive of her to believe (as she stated in the interview) that 
Radcliffe was offered only a pittance.  By the time he agreed to even consider 
the part, the producers were desperately looking down the gaping maw of an 
impending shooting schedule without a star.  His mom's in the business so she 
would have fully understood that they had the upper hand.

Wanamaker did a fabulous job as Mme. Hooch (IMHO), but since her later role 
seems to be only as quidditch referee, she shouldn't be surprised if they 
decide they can do without her next time.  




From feycat at feycat.net  Tue Nov 27 16:40:48 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:40:48 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry murderer? / eyes 
References: <9trf91+b0nv@eGroups.com> <015a01c175e4$e4ff1480$53af1e3e@stephen>
Message-ID: <003801c17762$46389c20$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>I wasn't too keen on this bit either, but after the second time viewing I don't think Harry intended him to crumble to bits. After he grabs Quirrell's hand and it crumbles, Harry looks at his hands as if he can't believe what just happened.<<

And then he goes after him with his hands outspread and a sort of determined snarl on his face. Yes, he looks at his hands like he can't believe it, but he definately knew it was going to happen that second time!!

>>On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind Harry having blue eyes particularly - I know the ideal boy would have had green eyes, but it's pretty difficult to find a black / dark brown haired boy with blue eyes instead of hazel or brown, let alone trying to find one with green eyes!<<

Can anyone say CONTACT LENSES?? The color-alone ones are only like $100 and look really bright! I'm sure with their huge FX budget they could have bought Daniel a few pairs of green lenses! *grump*

Gabriel
Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper
"Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?"



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




From dawncad1 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 16:49:49 2001
From: dawncad1 at yahoo.com (dawncad1 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:49:49 -0000
Subject: McGonagall wearing green?
Message-ID: <9u0g7d+sp6h@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone,

This is my first time posting. 

I saw the movie for the second time yesterday, and something has been 
bothering me. I was wondering why Prof. McGonangall always wears 
green robes in the film. Is there any reference to this in the books?




From margdean at erols.com  Tue Nov 27 17:22:41 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:22:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: eyes
References: <9trf91+b0nv@eGroups.com> <015a01c175e4$e4ff1480$53af1e3e@stephen> <003801c17762$46389c20$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <3C03CBE1.6613AF54@erols.com>

Gabriel Edson wrote:

> >>On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind Harry having
> >>blue eyes particularly - I know the ideal boy would have had
> >>green eyes, but it's pretty difficult to find a black / dark
> >>brown haired boy with blue eyes instead of hazel or brown, let
> >>alone trying to find one with green eyes!<<
> 
> Can anyone say CONTACT LENSES?? The color-alone ones are only
> like $100 and look really bright! I'm sure with their huge FX
> budget they could have bought Daniel a few pairs of green lenses!
> *grump*

>From what I understand, they did try the contact lenses but
Daniel Radcliffe couldn't tolerate them; some people's eyes are
more sensitive than others to these things.  I for one am not
willing to torture an eleven-year-old just so film!Harry can have
green eyes.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From Dar20 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 16:59:00 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (Dar20 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:59:00 -0000
Subject: Two movies for GoF?
In-Reply-To: <20011126.180806.-756061.5.laurakay76@juno.com>
Message-ID: <9u0gok+r6th@eGroups.com>

> From an article in the National Post:
> 
> 	The fourth volume, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, is 
more than 600
> pages long, presenting a troll-	sized problem for filmmakers 
trying to
> squeeze so much story into a movie-size script.
> 
> 	"I see it as two films," Columbus said. "Shoot a four-hour 
version,
> release two hours at Thanksgiving 	and two hours at Christmas, 
because
> it's the only way I think it could be done and also do justice to 
the
> 	books."
> 
> Read the full article at:
> http://www.nationalpost.com/artslife/arts/music/story.html?
f=/stories/200
> 11123/800231.html


I also read this in Time Magazine.  You know they'd make a killing.. 
it's guaranteed income as long as they keep doing as well as they did 
with the first movie.

Dar




From Dar20 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 17:03:41 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (Dar20 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:03:41 -0000
Subject: Daniel as Harry
In-Reply-To: <F107Ejx3y3wdlhczDqw00005561@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u0h1d+ct3a@eGroups.com>

Angela wrote:
> I also think Dan did a great job portraying an abused child. 
> 
> Dan did a good job of portraying Harry without words in those 
scenes. He is 
> also very expressive as a listener to those around him.

I read somewhere that one of the things 'they' (directors?  not 
sure...) like about DR is that he is very expressive with his eyes.  
I think that's one of the things I loved about watching him.  His 
eyes give away everything, and are at the same time mysterious and 
guarded.  

Yes, I'm a married woman.. if only I had a 12 yo daughter to live 
vicariously through.  ;)

Dar




From feycat at feycat.net  Tue Nov 27 17:31:44 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:31:44 -0500
Subject: Hooch's crappy class
References: <9ts1nd+hutf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00c601c17769$62fcf160$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Yes, this is amazingly cool. What's a bit interesting is that when 
Malfoy mounts the broom, he seems to be stepping onto a footrest or 
something equivalent. It's way too vertical for him to actually be 
sitting on the cushioning charm.<<

I assumed that since he was holding the broom nearly vertical, he was stepping onto the bundled top of the broom bristles.

>>Also, what kind of a flying teacher has people line up *facing* each 
other for a flying lesson? Hooch's order, which Neville preempted, 
was to rise up and move forward a bit, then come down again. Wouldn't 
they have crashed into each other? Very funny, but poor training.<<

Also, why didn't she levitate poor Neville?? She had plenty of time the way they filmed it, and even got out her wand. Where the heck was she? When Neville was dangling from either bits of the wall she could have levitated him... Flitwick says it's one of the most basic and important wizarding spells.

I add this to my grudge against Hooch for apparantely flying around the Quiddich match with her eyes closed and ignoring six SHOCKING fouls. 

She looked great, but apparently she's just eye candy. :-(

Gabriel
Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper
"Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?"



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




From blpurdom at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 18:00:44 2001
From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:00:44 -0000
Subject: McGonagall wearing green?
In-Reply-To: <9u0g7d+sp6h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0kcc+ihdt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dawncad1 at y... wrote:
> I saw the movie for the second time yesterday, and something has 
> been bothering me. I was wondering why Prof. McGonangall always 
> wears green robes in the film. Is there any reference to this in 
> the books?

>From the American paperback, p. 9

"He turned to smile at the tabby, but it had gone.  Instead he was 
smiling at a rather severe-looking woman who was wearing square 
glasses exactly the shape of the markings the cat had had around its 
eyes.  She, too, was wearing a cloak, an emerald one."

>From p. 113

"The door swung open at once.  A tall black-haired witch in emerald-
green robes stood there."

I didn't go looking for more, but these are the first two times we 
see McGonagall in the book, and she is described the same way both 
times.  Personally, I love Maggie Smith's emerald cloak/robe.  I 
wonder if she was allowed to keep it!

--Barb

Get Psyched Out!
http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych




From changeling707 at lycos.de  Tue Nov 27 18:01:11 2001
From: changeling707 at lycos.de (Christina Gross)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:01:11 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
In-Reply-To: <5a.21e1a7c.292f4553@aol.com>
References: <5a.21e1a7c.292f4553@aol.com>
Message-ID: <vgk70u43qjqsc0q33bfuo1lv21993mk85e@4ax.com>

Hi, 

I'm Christina and usually lurk on the main list because I can never
catch up on reading my HP mail. 

I, too, loved the movie. It was great to see everything on the screen,
the casting was inspired, and on the whole it's a good companion piece
to the book, a promising start and much better than I'd expected from
a director with Chris Columbus' record.

What I missed were the lingering effects of Voldemort's presence, the
evidence that people are still afraid of him, even if they believe
that he is gone for good, and the pressure Harry felt himself under to
prove himself, to prove that he really belonged in Hogwarts and the
magical world. 

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:23:15 EST, Schlobin1 at aol.com wrote:

>Here are my ratings, with hope that they will inspire spirited dialogue.
>
>Harry Potter/Daniel Radcliffe. 
>Rating: Fine
>He was okay.  He was not spectacular. His best moments were when he lit 
>up
upon winning the Quidditch match, at Christmas
.he was pretty wooden 
>serving food at the Dursleys, and in the Dark Forest. 

I thought he was just right. He is the quiet one of the trio and he
seemed very determined. The Dark Forest scene was the only part of the
book I felt they really ruined. 

>Ron Weasley/Rupert Grint. 
>Rating: Extraordinary.
[snip]

He was brilliant. I hope they will give him a few good fights with
Malfoy in future movies. I can just see him stubbornly turning a cold
shoulder on Hermione or Harry, too. 

>Hermione Granger/Emma Watson
>Rating: Fine. 
>She was okay, but not extraordinary. Her best moments were setting fire to 
>Snape's robes, and demolishing the Devil's snare.

Loved her. But then, Hermione is my favorite character. Emma was just
as snotty, just as eager to show off as she had to be. I liked how her
sense of adventure was awakening after a while. Maybe she was too
cute, but since I never pictured Hermione as ugly I didn't have a
problem with that. I wish they'd given her the teeth, though. This way
we're losing another Snape-moment.

>Albus Dumbledore/Richard Harris.
>Rating: Fine
[snip]
>By God, he looks and sounds like Albus Dumbledore and he DOES twinkle when he 
>says that the whole school knows about Harry's encounter with Quirrell. He 
>WOULD have done better had he been given the comic/eccentric lines, and I am 
>hopeful that he will get off his high horse and do better in the movies to 
>come
.What wonderful costumes they gave him to wear.

In the hospital scene it became quite obvious that Richard Harris
could have played Dumbledore the right way if they'd let him, IMHO.
There was the twinkle and the wisdom and the fatherly touch. Some of
that was also there in the scene with the Mirror of Erised, but here
and at the opening feast they surgically removed his eccentric sense
of humor. 

>Severus Snape/Alan Rickman
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Rickman brings Snape to life - swooping around like a bat. I'm really annoyed 
>at the script that makes Snape look like a good guy, who is misunderstood. He 
>is far more nasty, capricious and totally unfair in the book.
[snip]

I did a little dance when I heard that Rickman was going to play
Snape. He is just the man to play one of Rowling's most complex
characters. It's interesting that she felt she needed to tell Rickman
more about Snape than what was in the book. I hope they won't go any
further trying to make him nicer, though. His wishing Harry good luck
for the match was too much already. He is honorable in his own way and
brave, but also bitter and nasty and unfair, and Rickman should be
allowed to play him that way. 

>Rubeus Hagrid/Robbie Coltrane
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Coltrane breathes life into Hagrid in a wonderful, wonderful performance that 
>is enhanced  by the script. I could not really understand how Hagrid could be 
>so careless in releasing information until I saw the movie. His affection for 
>Harry, his involvement with dogs, and dragons, and other magical creatures, 
>his devotion to Dumbledore
.they all shine through
.

Agreed. What do you think Rowling told him about Hagrid? Other than
Snape, Hagrid seemed to be just the guy from the book.

>Minerva McGonagall: Dame Maggie Smith
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Maggie Smith fills out and enhances McGonagall's character just as I hoped 
>she would.
>I hope JKR will be inspired to see how adult women can be powerful and 
>important. 
[snip]

I hope so, too. As it is Dame Maggie's part will become less
interesting with every movie. What a waste. 

>Uncle Dursley: Richard Griffiths
>Rating: Between Not Very Good and Fine
[snip]

>Aunt Petunia: Fiona Shaw
>Rating: Fine Minus
[snip] 
>It's almost as if all the Dursley characters played it as a joke
I guess it 
>was okay. I really liked the curlers in her hair in the hut on the sea scene.

I liked Vernon's joviality that was covering the nastiness. Petunia's
speech about Lily didn't work without the context provided by Hagrid
in the book, but Fiona Shaw delivered it well. I thought they conveyed
the important things about Harry's life at the Dursleys without
dwelling on it too much. Rowling also hides the abuse behind the
parody.

>Madam Hooch: Zoe Wannamaker
>Rating: Fine - Plus
>I had not paid much attention to Madam Hooch until I saw the trailer. Zoe 
>obviously brings a panache (aided by the costume) that I did not sense in the 
>book.  I love her eyes and her boots and her general flair. I love all the 
>characters who manage their robes so well.

Number Three on my personal Top Ten of Hogwarts teachers. And I pretty
much ignored her in the books. Rowling ought to write a few extra
lines for her, too. 

>Professor Quirrell/Ian Hart
>Rating: Replace this one
>I thought he was awful. I'm glad they don't have to replace them.

Agreed. The stammer was awful and he didn't work as a villain at all.

>Nearly Headless Nick: John Cleese
>Rating: Not very good, flat performance, lackluster

Judgement reserved till CoS. I don't know why they bothered to bring
him on already. BTW, the Bloody Baron zipping across the Slytherin
table with a big laugh on his face? I think not!

>Professor Flitwick/Goblin Bank Teller/Warwick Davis
>Rating: Between Extraordinary and Fine-Plus

I liked the Goblin. Flitwick was ok, but he didn't really get to do
much yet.

>Mrs. Weasley/Julie Walters
>Rating: Not Very Good - Minus
>Too tawdry, too made up, hair too obviously dyed
..

They need to work on her costume. But she is Molly. Wait until you
hear her howler. Or just watch Billy Elliott. :-)

>Fred and George Weasley
>Rating: Fine
>They were pretty much Fred and George. Good job, nothing terrific.

Agreed. They were introduced and left alone, which was a good idea
given the time constraints. Their time will come....

>Ginny Weasley
>Rating: Not every good
really, who could tell? Not terribly impressive.

There was no reason for her to be impressive in PS/SS. She just had to
be there.

>Mr. Ollivander/John Hurt
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Magickal, spooky, wonderful
.

Nice cameo.

>Percy Weasley/Chris Rankin
>Rating: Not Very Good at all
>He wasn't pompous! Or condescending. Just kind of fatherly. No good.

Hard to say. 

>Draco Malfoy/Tom Felton
>Rating: Fine
>He was fine. Wasn't quite as nasty as I would have liked. Much cuter than I 
>think he should be, given his portrayal in Canon.

They need to do something about his hair. And let him be nasty and
arrogant and condescending. He ought to have been established as
Harry's adversary more clearly. 

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 witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 18:15:36 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (Joli Grostephan)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:15:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: eyes
In-Reply-To: <3C03CBE1.6613AF54@erols.com>
Message-ID: <20011127181536.81468.qmail@web14805.mail.yahoo.com>

I didn't think it looked bad, Alot of gren eyes look
blue in some lights, I knwo mine do. I think he was
perfect for the part, he's such a cutie!!!! and a
great actor too.
--- Margaret Dean <margdean at erols.com> wrote:
> Gabriel Edson wrote:
> 
> > >>On a slightly different subject, I didn't mind
> Harry having
> > >>blue eyes particularly - I know the ideal boy
> would have had
> > >>green eyes, but it's pretty difficult to find a
> black / dark
> > >>brown haired boy with blue eyes instead of hazel
> or brown, let
> > >>alone trying to find one with green eyes!<<
> > 
> > Can anyone say CONTACT LENSES?? The color-alone
> ones are only
> > like $100 and look really bright! I'm sure with
> their huge FX
> > budget they could have bought Daniel a few pairs
> of green lenses!
> > *grump*
> 
> From what I understand, they did try the contact
> lenses but
> Daniel Radcliffe couldn't tolerate them; some
> people's eyes are
> more sensitive than others to these things.  I for
> one am not
> willing to torture an eleven-year-old just so
> film!Harry can have
> green eyes.
> 
> 
> --Margaret Dean
>   <margdean at erols.com>
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 18:18:54 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (Joli Grostephan)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:18:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Who would you like to see playing Viktor Krum in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <vgk70u43qjqsc0q33bfuo1lv21993mk85e@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20011127181854.2989.qmail@web14808.mail.yahoo.com>

Myself, I picture him as a younger Gavin Rossdale,
without the ultra long curly hair *shudders*. Whjat
does everyone else think about it???

=====
***I'm so diggin' your scene!***

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From dawncad1 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 18:22:57 2001
From: dawncad1 at yahoo.com (dawncad1 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:22:57 -0000
Subject: McGonagall wearing green?
In-Reply-To: <9u0kcc+ihdt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0lm1+gi9s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Barb" <blpurdom at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., dawncad1 at y... wrote:
> > I saw the movie for the second time yesterday, and something has 
> > been bothering me. I was wondering why Prof. McGonangall always 
> > wears green robes in the film. Is there any reference to this in 
> > the books?
> 
> From the American paperback, p. 9
> 
> "He turned to smile at the tabby, but it had gone.  Instead he was 
> smiling at a rather severe-looking woman who was wearing square 
> glasses exactly the shape of the markings the cat had had around 
its 
> eyes.  She, too, was wearing a cloak, an emerald one."
> 
> From p. 113
> 
> "The door swung open at once.  A tall black-haired witch in emerald-
> green robes stood there."
> 
> I didn't go looking for more, but these are the first two times we 
> see McGonagall in the book, and she is described the same way both 
> times.  Personally, I love Maggie Smith's emerald cloak/robe.  I 
> wonder if she was allowed to keep it!
> 
> --Barb
> 
> Thank you! I'm re-reading the books so I'll be on the look-out for 
more references to this.




From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Tue Nov 27 18:34:46 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:34:46 -0000
Subject: Two movies for GoF?
In-Reply-To: <9u0gok+r6th@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0mc6+vtmd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Dar20 at a... wrote:
> > From an article in the National Post:
> > 
> > 	The fourth volume, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, is 
> more than 600
> > pages long, presenting a troll-	sized problem for filmmakers 
> trying to
> > squeeze so much story into a movie-size script.
> > 
> > 	"I see it as two films," Columbus said. "Shoot a four-hour 
> version,
> > release two hours at Thanksgiving 	and two hours at Christmas, 
> because
> > it's the only way I think it could be done and also do justice to 
> the
> > 	books."
> > 
> > Read the full article at:
> > http://www.nationalpost.com/artslife/arts/music/story.html?
> f=/stories/200
> > 11123/800231.html
> 
> 

I personally would love to see it as two movies, GoF is my favorite 
out of the Harry Potter series and I think if it is made as well as 
the first one then we are in for a treat. I can just imagine the 
sequence for the duel between Harry and Voldemort, it could look 
really spectacular.





From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Tue Nov 27 18:42:37 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:42:37 -0000
Subject: eyes
In-Reply-To: <20011127181536.81468.qmail@web14805.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u0mqt+hvg5@eGroups.com>

> > 
      Margaret wrote:

> > From what I understand, they did try the contact
> > lenses but
> > Daniel Radcliffe couldn't tolerate them; some
> > people's eyes are
> > more sensitive than others to these things.  I for
> > one am not
> > willing to torture an eleven-year-old just so
> > film!Harry can have
> > green eyes.
> > 
> > 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that children are not allowed 
to wear eye contacts until their mid teens? I agree with Margaret it 
is a bit drastic.






From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Tue Nov 27 19:32:38 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:32:38 -0000
Subject: Emma, Rupert and Dan's attitudes.
In-Reply-To: <9tvsa6+lptd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0pom+ntav@eGroups.com>

> > Does Rupert consistently seem to be uncomfortable during
> > interviews? 
> I
> felt that Rupert seemed most at ease chatting with Katie Couric [for
> you UK readers she is the host of a morning TV show and just
> unbearably Perky]. Dan, on the other hand, struck me as the shy and 
> fidgety 
> one. Polite,but shy...Agree with your evaluation of Emma.

I'm British and saw them all in three interview on a prgram called 
Newsround and also in interview on the morning news on BBC1. I have 
to agree with the second opinion, Rupert seemed just as excited about 
the film and was just as confident as Emma (but with out the 
cockiness) while Dan seemed a bit more reserved than the other two.

Oh also while we are on teh subject of Emma something else that may 
well add o our opinions of her in this way. My school is lucky enough 
to be one of the schools used for extras for the film (I wanted to do 
this but unfortuntely year 11s -as I was tehn- were not allowed to do 
it by the school) and I know someone who played a Gryffindor in the 
Great Hall scenes and Slytherin in the Quidditch scenes. She told me 
there is a scene (that was cut from the film) were Harry and Hermione 
(Dan and Emma - she didn't say about Rupert) go along a line of 
people shaking their hands (she was in the line) Dan was fine with 
this but apparently Emma had a very "I'm better than you" attitude 
and was hardly touching people's hands at all, you know the kind of 
just touching figer tips as though they ahd dirty hands or something. 

I am not trying to spread rumours so please don't flame me, I have 
been told this by someone who was in the film and a couple of other 
people who were in it too (also at my school) the thing is whne I 
first heard this I dismissed it as someone who was Jealous (sp) etc 
but I have know seen about 5 interviews with Emma were she comes 
across in EXACTLY the way this person portayed her to me and I think 
that is mroe than a co-incidence!

HOLLYDAZE!!!




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 19:46:02 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:46:02 -0000
Subject: Emma, Rupert and Dan's attitudes.
In-Reply-To: <9u0pom+ntav@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0qhq+pqm0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Hollydaze" <hollydaze at b...> wrote:
 
> there is a scene (that was cut from the film) were Harry and Hermione 
> (Dan and Emma - she didn't say about Rupert) go along a line of 
> people shaking their hands (she was in the line) Dan was fine with 
> this but apparently Emma had a very "I'm better than you" attitude 
> and was hardly touching people's hands at all, you know the kind of 
> just touching figer tips as though they ahd dirty hands or something. 

But, um, Emma was being Hermione at the time!  The  half-hearted type of 
handshake is indeed the sort of thing Hermione would do.  I don't see how this 
could be used as evidence of Emma's attitudes or behavior, when she might 
well have just been in character.

But here's yet another scene that we can hope to see on the DVD.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 21:10:39 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:10:39 -0000
Subject: hpmovie offlist: grinterviews
In-Reply-To: <9tvh6g+da9a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0vgf+bkgo@eGroups.com>

Heather,

Sorry about the offlist.. do you think you could point me to a 
website with clips of those interview? I don't have a TV at home 
(good thing too) and so I miss all those juicy sightings you discuss 
on the list.

Thanks very much,

Rrishi

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> Does Rupert consistently seem to be uncomfortable during 
interviews? I'e only seen a few clips of one or two interviews, 
instead of the full-on battery of Rosie O'Donnell appearances and 
the like.




From frantyck at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 21:12:56 2001
From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:12:56 -0000
Subject: hpmovie offlist: grinterviews NOT AGAIN
In-Reply-To: <9u0vgf+bkgo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u0vko+bjem@eGroups.com>

I'm terribly sorry about that inadvertent offlist being posted 
here... I hit send instead of preview, or whatever the button was.

Grovelling,

Rrishi




From farris5 at swbell.net  Tue Nov 27 21:34:37 2001
From: farris5 at swbell.net (Russ & Wanda)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:34:37 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I loved the movie
References: <5a.21e1a7c.292f4553@aol.com>
 <vgk70u43qjqsc0q33bfuo1lv21993mk85e@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <004701c1778b$507e52a0$2c554241@hppav>

Hi, I took my dad, my sister, my 11 year old daughter and myself to see SS on Sunday of the opening weekend. It was like watching old friends. I loved the movie. Sure, it didn't match up exactly to the book and a few things could have been better. All in all though, I really loved it. The only thing that I felt it was truly missing was the dialogue throughout the novel about how nobody could say Voldemort's name. It was only mentioned once, maybe twice, but is a big part of the book. In the book, it really signifies how afraid people were of him and how powerful it was felt that he was. I am going to take my daughter to see it again this weekend. We are both anxious to get the 5th book into our hands too. 
Love the list, 
Wanda




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




From Dar20 at aol.com  Tue Nov 27 21:36:40 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (Dar20 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:36:40 -0000
Subject: Emma, Rupert and Dan's attitudes.
In-Reply-To: <9u0qhq+pqm0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u1118+aqo1@eGroups.com>

Did anyone catch Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly last Friday?  Their 
chairs swivel, and he kept trying to make it swivel.  He looked very 
nervous, but excited to be there.  Like a typical kid.  My favorite 
line of his from the interview.. "America is awesome!"    :)

Dar




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 21:50:27 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:50:27 -0000
Subject: Emma's portrayal of Hermione/Screen writing (Was Emma's attitude)
In-Reply-To: <9u0qhq+pqm0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u11r3+f0sv@eGroups.com>

>Hollydaze wrote:
> > there is a scene (that was cut from the film) were Harry and 
Hermione 
> > (Dan and Emma - she didn't say about Rupert) go along a line of 
> > people shaking their hands (she was in the line) Dan was fine 
with 
> > this but apparently Emma had a very "I'm better than you" 
attitude 
> > and was hardly touching people's hands at all, you know the kind 
of 
> > just touching figer tips as though they ahd dirty hands or 
something. 

Joanne0012 at a... wrote: 
> But, um, Emma was being Hermione at the time!  The  half-hearted 
type of 
> handshake is indeed the sort of thing Hermione would do.  

No, I don't think Hermione would do this kind of thing. Besides being 
know-it-all, Hermione is actually very caring (think how she treats 
Neville) and passionate (hug Harry at the end of SS, slap Malfoy in 
PoA and burst into tears when Harry and Ron apologize to each other 
in GoF). I don't think we could use this case against Emma's attitude 
either, but it did make me think about her portrayal of Hermione. 
Yes, she is very cute and charming on big screen. She also portrays a 
know-it-all Hermione very well, but, she tends to overact Hermione's 
snobbishness while downplay her kindness. 
On second thought, maybe I should blame Kloves for this. Although he 
gave us a very faithful (plot-wise) adaption, I can't help noticing 
he tends to stereotype those characters. For example, I don't know 
why he didn't give Harry the line "I don't know, why don't you ask 
Hermione" in the potions lesson; or why he let Hagrid tell 
Harry "your cousin don't know you're not allowed to use magic". He 
made Harry too perfect while use Ron mostly as comic relief and 
Hermione as Ms. Know-it-all. Hope he did better for the 2nd movie.





From litalex at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 21:56:08 2001
From: litalex at yahoo.com (Alexandra Y. Kwan)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:56:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Emma, Rupert and Dan's attitudes.
In-Reply-To: <9u0pom+ntav@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011127215608.26620.qmail@web13801.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello,

--- Hollydaze <hollydaze at btinternet.com> wrote:
> this but apparently Emma had a very "I'm better than
> you" attitude 
> and was hardly touching people's hands at all, you

Maybe she's a Method actor and was too enmeshed in her
role as Granger <g>.

little Alex

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From april at syclo.com  Tue Nov 27 22:02:43 2001
From: april at syclo.com (David S April)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:02:43 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Emma's portrayal of Hermione/Screen writing
  (Was Emma's attitude)
In-Reply-To: <9u11r3+f0sv@eGroups.com>
References: <9u0qhq+pqm0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011127155845.0232b6a0@quake.xnet.com>

At 09:50 PM 11/27/01 +0000, you wrote:

>On second thought, maybe I should blame Kloves for this. Although he
>gave us a very faithful (plot-wise) adaption, I can't help noticing
>he tends to stereotype those characters. For example, I don't know
>why he didn't give Harry the line "I don't know, why don't you ask
>Hermione" in the potions lesson; or why he let Hagrid tell
>Harry "your cousin don't know you're not allowed to use magic". He
>made Harry too perfect while use Ron mostly as comic relief and
>Hermione as Ms. Know-it-all. Hope he did better for the 2nd movie.

This is a good point. I was a bit disappointed in the Devil's snare scene 
that he didn't match the screenplay to the book, especially since it was so 
short. In the book, Hermione briefly loses her composure as she attempts 
the spell to free everyone from the snare and Ron and Harry have to yell at 
her to get her head "back in the game". As you mentioned, it is an 
important break from the "know it all" stereotype as it shows that just 
because she is book smart, she necessarily perform under pressure. Rounds 
out her character in a subtle way, IMO.

Dave






--
David S. April                  Syclo LLC
april at syclo.com                 1250 S Grove Av - Suite 304
(847) 842-0320                  Barrington, IL 60010-5066
http://www.soasoas.com/

"Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much, much *better*."
     - Laurie Anderson




From litalex at yahoo.com  Tue Nov 27 22:10:16 2001
From: litalex at yahoo.com (Alexandra Y. Kwan)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:10:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Emma's portrayal of Hermione/Screen writing (Was Emma's attitude)
In-Reply-To: <9u11r3+f0sv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011127221016.70817.qmail@web13804.mail.yahoo.com>

Hello,

--- hunao01 at yahoo.com wrote:
> why he didn't give Harry the line "I don't know, why
> don't you ask 
> Hermione" in the potions lesson; or why he let

Oh, I was so waiting for that line!  Very sad that
they cut it/didn't film it.

little Alex

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org  Tue Nov 27 23:55:31 2001
From: aviationoutreachcoord at museumofflight.org (Meredith Wilson)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:55:31 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hooch's eyes and Gred/Forge
Message-ID: <D8085AFE4BC7D4119EA00090271EDF1503C632@mailsrv.seattle.nmof.org>

 I totally disagree here.  I adored the boys playing Gred and Forge and
thought they were perfect.  I really would have liked to see them more, like
at Christmas, but the way they do their little bit at King's Cross is
beautiful.  Funny but subtle and a great straight face.
 
Meredith, going to see it for the 3rd time tonight
 
 
*** Susanna mentioned Gred and Forge and how they don't come across as 
pranksters; funny, yes, but not pranking. I quite agree, though didn't 
realize it before now. We see them about twice: once at King's Cross and 
once in the halls of Hogwarts. In both scenes, they don't particularly come 
across as people who would send toilet seats to friends and family. *grin*  





From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Wed Nov 28 02:16:13 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:16:13 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
Message-ID: <9u1hdd+t933@eGroups.com>

I was really surprised by "bloody brilliant" from the first time I heard it in the 
trailer. Back in the Dark Ages when I lived in London, no child would have said 
that in front of an adult, much less a teacher. Is it possible this did not appear 
in the UK film? I did check the book [UK version], and "bloody" 
[except for the Baron] is NOT used. Of course, it's also possible that times 
have changed... ;)

any thoughts, Aberforth's Goat? others?

Ivis the elderly




From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Nov 28 03:02:29 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:02:29 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Madam Hooch: Zoe Wannamaker
Message-ID: <33.1eac2c5a.2935adc5@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/27/2001 8:08:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Padrun_Lino at yahoo.com writes:


> According to this article
> (http://film.guardian.co.uk/harrypotter/news/0,10608,596072,00.html)
> Wannamaker was annoyed about the lack of money she got
> and was not planning to return for another movie
> unless she got a better deal. She also noted that
> while many of the actor had signed three movie deals
> she only signed on for the one.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 

wow that's pretty bad i liked her too madamme hooch rocks....i heard that the 
rest of them had 2 movie deals but they own the right to all four books...i 
can't remember where i read that i think it was cnn.com where they were 
talking about it....here i found the article and 2 more for whoever is 
interested. i personally would think it's tacky if they start changing cast 
members it would make me really angry and WB will have to start coughing up 
more if they want these people around for 7 movies...

 <A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2001/SHOWBIZ/Movies/11/22/hol.wkd.next.potter.film.ap/index.html">CNN.com - Filmmakers, actors get started on 'Potter' No. 2 - November 22, 
2001</A> 

 <A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2001/SHOWBIZ/News/11/27/showbuzz/index.html#1">CNN.com - showbuzz - November 27, 2001</A> 

 <A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/showbiz.today/featured.story/0111/27.html">CNN Programs - Showbiz Today</A> 

hope you all enjoy

-step


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




From kel4 at columbia.edu  Wed Nov 28 03:08:20 2001
From: kel4 at columbia.edu (kel4 at columbia.edu)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:08:20 -0000
Subject: inconsistency/Voldemort/Mirror of Erised
Message-ID: <9u1kf4+ki3l@eGroups.com>

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 angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 03:09:23 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:09:23 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
Message-ID: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>

I'd like to share my 2 knuts on who should be cast in the future films:

THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS

Cornelius Fudge - Derek Jacobi
Lucius Malfoy - Richard E. Grant
Mr. Weasley - Hugh Laurie
Tom Riddle - Ciaran Owens or Michael Legge (see "Angela's Ashes")

THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN

Marge Dursley - Brenda Fricker (Although Elizabeth Spriggs, who plays 
the Fat Lady, can take on this role)
Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I think. 
Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan or even Hugh 
Grant can fill the bill.
Sirius Black - The first person who came into my mind for this role is 
Willem Dafoe but he's American so I think Robert Carlyle would be the 
most logical British choice.
Sir Cadogan - Eric Idle or Michael Palin.
Professor Trelawney - Only one person comes to mind: Tracey Ullman. 
Cedric Diggory - Jamie Bell
Madame Rosmerta - Kate Winslet
Peter Pettigrew - Mark Addy

THE GOBLET OF FIRE

Frank Bryce - Ian Holm
Professor Karkaroff - Nigel Hawthorne
Madame Maxime - Juliette Binoche
Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins
Voldemort - Gary Oldman (It'll be good though to retain Ian Hart again)
Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry
Mr. Crouch - Tom Wilkinson
Rita Skeeter - Jane Horrocks

What do you guys think? 





From bkdelong at pobox.com  Wed Nov 28 03:20:41 2001
From: bkdelong at pobox.com (B.K. DeLong)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:20:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20011127221234.0442be50@brain-stream.com>

At 03:09 AM 11/28/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Cornelius Fudge - Derek Jacobi

Too regal. Need someone who's more of a fuddy-duddy who thinks he's important.

>Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I think.
>Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan or even Hugh
>Grant can fill the bill.

All those actors are too chiseled/good looking. Not that Lupin is nasty or 
anything but I still think Ralph Fiennes would be a better choice.

>Professor Karkaroff - Nigel Hawthorne

Nah...need someone a little younger....and Slavic. I think of Rade 
Serbedzija who played Boris 'The Blade/The Bullet Dodger' Yurinov  in the 
movie "Snatch".

>Madame Maxime - Juliette Binoche

Too young and way too petite. Madame Maxime is half-giant, after all and 
should be of similar age to the rest of the Hogwarts staff.

>Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins

Actually, someone suggested Billy Connolly. I recently saw the movie 
"Boondock Saints" where he has a small cameo as "Il Duche" or "The Duke". 
Just before he "cleaned up" he was the spitting image of how I pictured old 
Mad-Eye.

>Voldemort - Gary Oldman (It'll be good though to retain Ian Hart again)

Richard Bremmer is actually the "face" and voice of Voldemort in SS. I 
assume he'll be playing the role through the series.

--
B.K. DeLong

The Harry Potter Galleries
http://www.hpgalleries.com/

Editor-in-Chief
The Leaky Cauldron News section
bkdelong at the-leaky-cauldron.org
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/
+1.617.877.3271






From idouright2 at aol.com  Wed Nov 28 03:27:01 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:27:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: McGonagall wearing green?
Message-ID: <e6.1efb26ea.2935b385@aol.com>

In a message dated 11/27/2001 10:04:35 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
blpurdom at yahoo.com writes:


> I didn't go looking for more, but these are the first two times we 
> see McGonagall in the book, and she is described the same way both 
> times.  Personally, I love Maggie Smith's emerald cloak/robe.  I 
> wonder if she was allowed to keep it!
> 

i liked her hat lol :)

-step


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




From beck_rulz at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 28 06:09:18 2001
From: beck_rulz at hotmail.com (beck_rulz at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:09:18 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u1v2e+7ud8@eGroups.com>

angelx_ph2002 at y... wrote:
> Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I 
think. 
> Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan or even Hugh 
> Grant can fill the bill.

Actually he is from New Zealand..... 

> Sirius Black - The first person who came into my mind for this role 
is Willem Dafoe but he's American so I think Robert Carlyle would be 
the most logical British choice.

The person I always imagine when thinking of Sirius is Kevin Smith 
who is Ares off Xena and Hercules (My sad past comes out....). He 
does the bad guy thing really well. He is actually an NZer to. But 
most of you probably have no idea who he is..... moving on then

> Cedric Diggory - Jamie Bell

I never thought of him as Cedric, but if we're going to insist on 
trying to fit him in, IMO Cedric is the best.



> THE GOBLET OF FIRE
> 
> Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins

Hopkins would be fantastic for Moody.

Only two and a half days until I *finally* see the movie!!!
Beck




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 06:25:16 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:25:16 -0000
Subject: eyes
In-Reply-To: <3C03CBE1.6613AF54@erols.com>
Message-ID: <9u200c+d6td@eGroups.com>

With their huge FX budget I thought they would computer FX the eyes 
green on closeups. No lenses necessary. The impact, with the
Slytherin color being green, is important. It wouldn't have had to 
have been a bright green, but something at least close enough to 
suggest it as a natural color. Most green eyes I've seen have some 
blue in them or brown (which would make them hazel).

> > Can anyone say CONTACT LENSES?? The color-alone ones are only
> > like $100 and look really bright! I'm sure with their huge FX
> > budget they could have bought Daniel a few pairs of green lenses!
> > *grump*





From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 06:40:19 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:40:19 -0000
Subject: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
Message-ID: <9u20sj+6s1g@eGroups.com>

If we're attempting to make scarves for all the Hogwarts' houses in 
the movie, what colors are they?

There are three of us guessing on this, but we need help. Two gold
and two silver? As in maybe:

Gryffindor
red (burgundy? maroon?) / gold

Hufflepuff
yellow (brown? - but their quidditch capes are yellow) / gold

Ravenclaw
blue (royal) / silver (light blue?) -- one of the scenes has a clutch 
of Ravenclaws passing in the background in scarves but we can't tell 
if the light color is gray [silver] or light blue

Slytherin
green (very dark pine) / silver (gray in scarf)




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 07:01:28 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:01:28 -0000
Subject: Steven Spielberg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9n6kbl+orae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>

I think there is some of the 'fox and sour grapes' in his comments, 
but also it's been reported that he balked at allowing J. K. Rowling 
so much input overriding his own interpretation.  Everyone's touched 
on some of the factors I think, but the first thing I thought of way 
back when his name was first mentioned was how was he going to work 
with Rowling. 

It's coming back to me -- I'll have to look it up, but isn't there a 
news report way back somewhere where Rowling dissed Spielberg and
then did a small sort of "Oops! I hope I don't get sued"? Does anyone 
else remember that? I can't remember where or when or in what format
I saw it but it made an impression on me.




From catlady at wicca.net  Wed Nov 28 07:00:00 2001
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:00:00 -0000
Subject: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
In-Reply-To: <9u20sj+6s1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u221g+g7m3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., windyroselane at y... wrote:
> If we're attempting to make scarves for all the Hogwarts' houses in 
> the movie, what colors are they?
> 
> There are three of us guessing on this, but we need help. Two gold
> and two silver? As in maybe:
> 
> Gryffindor
> red (burgundy? maroon?) / gold

Yes, that is what I saw the Gryffindors in the movie wearing.
> 
> Hufflepuff
> yellow (brown? - but their quidditch capes are yellow) / gold

I don't recall seeing any Hufflepuff scarves, but their House colors 
are yellow (like their Quidditch robes) (actually the yellow is 
Heraldic gold) and black: the badger on the Hufflepuff quarter of the 
Hogwarts arms is black. Were any kids in the movie wearing black 
and yellow striped scarves like honeybees?
> 
> Ravenclaw
> blue (royal) / silver (light blue?) -- one of the scenes has a 
> clutch of Ravenclaws passing in the background in scarves but we 
> can't tell if the light color is gray [silver] or light blue

I wish Ravenclaw's colors were blue and silver (my favorite colors 
and I am a Ravenclaw) but GoF said Ravenclaw's colors are blue and 
bronze. Bronze is not a heraldic color, so the eagle on the arms MUST 
be Heraldic gold (giving me the consolation prize that Ravenclaw's 
colors are the same as UCLA's). Anyway, my conclusion is that the 
pale stripes must be light blue because there is no reason for them 
to be gray/silver. 
> 
> Slytherin
> green (very dark pine) / silver (gray in scarf)

Yes, their scarves in the movie Looked like black (possibly navy 
blue) and gray, but we KNOW it must be green.





From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Wed Nov 28 08:39:44 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:39:44 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <9u1hdd+t933@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u27sg+e2ta@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> I was really surprised by "bloody brilliant" from the first time I 
heard it in the 
> trailer. Back in the Dark Ages when I lived in London, no child 
would have said 
> that in front of an adult, much less a teacher. Is it possible this 
did not appear 
> in the UK film? I did check the book [UK version], and "bloody" 
> [except for the Baron] is NOT used. Of course, it's also possible 
that times 
> have changed... ;)
> 
> any thoughts, Aberforth's Goat? others?
> 
> Ivis the elderly

Well I must say I would have thought twice about swearing to a 
teacher, however "Bloody" is not really a swear word. My reasoning 
behind this is that we are forever refering to people and places in 
history as "Bloody..", for instance Mary. As a child I knew I could 
stretch this to a point! I think children are far more liberal now, 
so in all honesty I was not surprised by his comments, but I'm not 
sure I would have said it to a teacher as strict as McGonagall!




From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Wed Nov 28 09:00:01 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:00:01 -0000
Subject: Does anyone know whether the role of Moaning Myrtle has been cast yet?
In-Reply-To: <9u27sg+e2ta@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u292h+og56@eGroups.com>

I was just wondering if anyone knew whether the role of Moaning 
Myrtle had been cast or not. I was trying to work out how old she 
would be and I was wondering if anyone knew. Something is tell me 
she's about 14/15 but I think I'm wrong.

Thanks 
Madaboutsteps




From bert.coules at fonix.org  Wed Nov 28 09:25:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:25:00 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Help from UK viewers/readers? language    
In-Reply-To: <1006914416@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <1006939977@fonix.org>

Ivis the elderly wrote...

IN>I was really surprised by "bloody brilliant" from the first time I 
  >heard it trailer. Back in the Dark Ages when I lived in London, 
  >no child would have said that in front of an adult, much less a 
  >teacher. 

I agree.  I haven't seen the film as yet, but that moment in the 
trailer really struck a jarring note.  I seem to recall a couple of 
instances in the books where Ron is said to have sworn - isn't there a 
line like "He called Snape something which made Hermione exclaim 
'Ron!'" somewhere or other? - but making it concrete, and in front of a 
teacher, is surely quite wrong.

In reported speech, even in the most critical of situations, the 
strongest oath that Ron can come out with is usually "Blimey!" - which 
of course is totally in keeping with the generally 30s - 40s 
private-boarding-school atmosphere of the books.  Rowling and the 
writers of the Frank Richards/Anthony Buckridge school have far more in 
common than is generally acknowledged, I think.

Bert

 * 1st 2.00 #6252 * 




From mediaphen at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 28 11:00:08 2001
From: mediaphen at hotmail.com (Martin Smith)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:00:08 +0100
Subject: More reflections and ratings of the actors - very, very long
References: <1006897005.2038.38493.m8@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <DAV68WMJ69ik6kvXsn20001b0f9@hotmail.com>

Hi everybody!

First post on this list, some of you may recognise me from the book list.
I wanted to express my opinions on the actors, giving them grades in my
special range 0-6, where
6 = Extraordinary, Edward Norton in Fight Club or American History X(very
rarely given, the kind of acting performance that makes you want to see a
movie over and over, just because of that)
5 = Very, very good, Ewan MacGregor in Trainspotting
4 = Good
3 = Okay, if it's a smaller part, otherwise, no, I don't think so
2 = Pretty lame
1 = Bad, Steven Segal in just about any movie
0 = Embarrassing, Anna Nicole Smith (and we're *not* related, AFAIK) (also
very rarely given, it'd had to be so uncommonly bad that you'd actually
leave the theatre if a performance of grade 0 was given by someone playing a
lead character)

Get it? Good, let's see then:

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:23:15 EST, Schlobin1 at aol.com wrote:

>Here are my ratings, with hope that they will inspire spirited dialogue.
>
>Harry Potter/Daniel Radcliffe.
>Rating: Fine
>He was okay.  He was not spectacular. His best moments were when he lit
>up.upon winning the Quidditch match, at Christmas..he was pretty wooden
>serving food at the Dursleys, and in the Dark Forest.

I never felt like I got to know Harry the way I "know" him from the books,
and sometimes Dan delivers his lines quite stiffly, but overall, given that
Harry is supposed to be somewhat introvert after years of Dursley abuse, I
guess that makes sense.

Grade: 4

>Ron Weasley/Rupert Grint.
>Rating: Extraordinary.
[snip]

As far as his height and lack of freckles go, I couldn't blame Rupert. It
doesn't really matter, because he carries the part with such confidence that
I firmly believe that, despite what the books say, Ron actually /is/
slightly smaller than Harry. Rupert Grint shows repeatedly that he can
deliver whatever Ron's emotions are at the moment, from his amazement over
Harry's scar, to the uncertainty he feels at the giant chess set.

Grade: 5

>Hermione Granger/Emma Watson
>Rating: Fine.
>She was okay, but not extraordinary. Her best moments were setting fire to
>Snape's robes, and demolishing the Devil's snare.

I beg to differ. Remember Anna Paquin in "The Piano" (a part she recieved an
Oscar for, BTW)? Or Natalie Portman in "The Professional" aka "Leon"? Parts
where children, supposedly with much less talent and experience totally
outshines their more famous, experienced and well-paid thespian
counterparts? Emma Watson now joins the group of unforgettable child acting
performances big time. "Charmed, I'm sure." Her portrayal of especially, but
not limited to, the bossy know-it-all Herm seems to be in the beginning of
the film (and book), is nothing short of brilliant! Emma Watson IS Hermione.
Tell literally everyone she's super! So there.

Grade: 6

>Albus Dumbledore/Richard Harris.
>Rating: Fine
[snip]
>By God, he looks and sounds like Albus Dumbledore and he DOES twinkle when
he
>says that the whole school knows about Harry's encounter with Quirrell. He
>WOULD have done better had he been given the comic/eccentric lines, and I
am
>hopeful that he will get off his high horse and do better in the movies to
>come..What wonderful costumes they gave him to wear.

I would agree that Mr Harris doesn't get to be that humouristic, eccentric
headmaster we all know and love, so therefore his perfomance can't really
reach the top. I am sure that, in later films, where Dumbledore gets more
concerned, Harris' acting becomes more in its right element. So far, I
didn't see anything out of the ordinary.

Grade: 4

>Severus Snape/Alan Rickman
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Rickman brings Snape to life - swooping around like a bat. I'm really
annoyed
>at the script that makes Snape look like a good guy, who is misunderstood.
He
>is far more nasty, capricious and totally unfair in the book.
[snip]

I couldn't agree more. I could try, but I would not be succesful. Even
though he is not given the lines to demonstrate Snape's nastiness, Rickman
somehow manages to show the audience that anyway, using that subtle,
miniscule acting one would expect from Snape.

Grade: 5

>Rubeus Hagrid/Robbie Coltrane
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Coltrane breathes life into Hagrid in a wonderful, wonderful performance
that
>is enhanced  by the script. I could not really understand how Hagrid could
be
>so careless in releasing information until I saw the movie. His affection
for
>Harry, his involvement with dogs, and dragons, and other magical creatures,
>his devotion to Dumbledore..they all shine through..

I have to admit, I wasn't to fond of our Rubeus before seeing the film (to
much of a caricature of a teddybearesque craftsman). With Coltrane's help, I
now like him a lot better. Good job.

Grade: 5

>Minerva McGonagall: Dame Maggie Smith
>Rating: Extraordinary
>Maggie Smith fills out and enhances McGonagall's character just as I hoped
>she would.
>I hope JKR will be inspired to see how adult women can be powerful and
>important.
[snip]

Yep, I agree, Dame Maggie Smith (and we're *not* related, AFAIK) is a superb
actress, and she carries the role with stern hands. To small a part to get a
higher grade, sadly.

Grade: 4

>Uncle Dursley: Richard Griffiths
>Rating: Between Not Very Good and Fine
[snip]

>Aunt Petunia: Fiona Shaw
>Rating: Fine Minus
[snip]
>It's almost as if all the Dursley characters played it as a joke.I guess it
>was okay. I really liked the curlers in her hair in the hut on the sea
scene.

I wasn't too pleased with the Dursleys. In Griffith's and Shaw's portrayals
they seem to be more of the Disney variety of nasty step-parents, and it
gives the beginning of the film a much more childish tone than I would see
fit. Please be more evil next time!

Grade: 3

>Professor Quirrell/Ian Hart
>Rating: Replace this one
>I thought he was awful. I'm glad they don't have to replace them.

Sorry, but I actually hope Quirrell isn't dead, just so they can get Ian
Hart back for film 5, 6 or 7. I thought Hart made just the right stammering,
inscure DADA teacher, as well as the Voldie-possessed villain. He is not
supposed to stammer like a native stammer, because Quirrell is also putting
up an act. He is not supposed to be a Gary Oldman-type evil overlord, since
he is merely the servant of one. Hart balances this very well, IMO.
Grade: 4

>Nearly Headless Nick: John Cleese
>Rating: Not very good, flat performance, lackluster

Too well, he wasn't there much. John Cleese was actually my number five
actor in the Monty Python gang (given how much I *adore* MP, that would put
him in my top #50 altogether), but that was ages ago, and now he's been
given a part lightyears from the hysterical Basil Fawlty-type he can portray
so well. I wasn't pleased, and I must say "Ni!" to him, until he gives a
better performance. Ni!
Grade: 2

>Draco Malfoy/Tom Felton
>Rating: Fine
>He was fine. Wasn't quite as nasty as I would have liked. Much cuter than I
>think he should be, given his portrayal in Canon.

Give him more screentime and develop the Malfoy-Potter feud further. I am
sure, after what I saw in PS, that Felton can smirk just as well as the
Buckbeak-threatening, Dementor-impersonating, Position-as-seeker-buying
little brat I picture when reading.
Grade: 4


All in all, great performances in a good film. I hereby found
W.E.I.G.H.T.L.E.S.S. (Watson, Emma *Is* Granger, Hermione. Tell Literally
Everyone She's Super!), and the entry fee is the usual two knuts, which will
go directly to the good cause of bribing the Academy into giving her an
Award. Not that it's needed, though, her performance speaks for itself.

Well, that would be all for me. I return after my second screening, which is
tonight (I wasn't too focused the first time, being in an overwhelmingly
strong need of a visit to the you-know-what, sitting in the middle of the
theatre, unable to sneak out. Hopefully I'm more focused this time.).

Martin Smith





From angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 11:56:42 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:56:42 -0000
Subject: Steven Spielberg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u2jdq+nt1f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., windyroselane at y... wrote:
> I think there is some of the 'fox and sour grapes' in his comments, 
> but also it's been reported that he balked at allowing J. K. 
Rowling 
> so much input overriding his own interpretation.  Everyone's 
touched 
> on some of the factors I think, but the first thing I thought of 
way 
> back when his name was first mentioned was how was he going to work 
> with Rowling. 
> 
> It's coming back to me -- I'll have to look it up, but isn't there 
a 
> news report way back somewhere where Rowling dissed Spielberg and
> then did a small sort of "Oops! I hope I don't get sued"? Does 
anyone 
> else remember that? I can't remember where or when or in what format
> I saw it but it made an impression on me.

As far as I know those are just RUMORS. Yes, Steven Spielberg DID 
seriously consider directing the "Harry Potter" movie (in fact, he 
was the first person to read Steve Kloves's script) but "Harry 
Potter" was just one of FOUR films he is choosing from. The others 
being "A.I.", "Minority" Report" and "Memoirs of a Geisha". He would 
choose the film which came together first and that film was "A.I." 

Spielberg IS interested in directing the third book though, "The 
Prisoner of Azkaban".





From angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 12:00:25 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:00:25 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20011127221234.0442be50@brain-stream.com>
Message-ID: <9u2jkp+10obr@eGroups.com>


> >Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I 
think.
> >Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan or even Hugh
> >Grant can fill the bill.
> 
> All those actors are too chiseled/good looking. Not that Lupin is 
nasty or 
> anything but I still think Ralph Fiennes would be a better choice.

Ralph Fiennes IS chiseled and good-looking. LOL. But good choice, BTW.

 
> >Madame Maxime - Juliette Binoche
> 
> Too young and way too petite. Madame Maxime is half-giant, after 
all and 
> should be of similar age to the rest of the Hogwarts staff.

Well, there is such a thing as makeup and visual effects. 

> 
> >Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins
> 
> Actually, someone suggested Billy Connolly. I recently saw the 
movie 
> "Boondock Saints" where he has a small cameo as "Il Duche" or "The 
Duke". 
> Just before he "cleaned up" he was the spitting image of how I 
pictured old 
> Mad-Eye.

Great idea. Billy Connolly would be fantastic in that role.
 
> >Voldemort - Gary Oldman (It'll be good though to retain Ian Hart 
again)
> 
> Richard Bremmer is actually the "face" and voice of Voldemort in 
SS. I 
> assume he'll be playing the role through the series.

I don't think so. Richard Bremmer played Voldemort in the flashback 
scene. Ian Hart played him during the finale. Check the credits again.





From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 13:50:19 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 05:50:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Steven Spielberg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011128135019.57384.qmail@web11907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- windyroselane at yahoo.com wrote:> It's coming
back to me -- I'll have to look it
> up, but isn't there a  news report way back
somewhere where Rowling dissed Spielberg and
> then did a small sort of "Oops! I hope I don't
> get sued"? Does anyone else remember that? 

I *do* remember seeing it, and I remember seeing
it on-line.  Perhaps there's a story linked from
www.the-leaky-cauldron.org (wonderful weblog on
which I found this e-group) or from
www.harrypotter.ns.

The only other place I've indulged my HP-mania is
the "Vanity Fair" feature. It's on my desk and
I'll find some time (wink!) to look at it this
morning.

On the same track,

Does anyone else remember hearing that Mr.
Spielberg had it in mind to re-make the plot of
the story with an American high school basketball
team as the protagonists?? For some reason, that
item is in the windmills of my mind, but I
haven't come across it since.

W/D


=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 13:53:34 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:53:34 -0000
Subject: Steven Spielburg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9n6kbl+orae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u2q8u+jnsg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., kabuki_darling at h... wrote:
> I just heard on the radio a major insult from Spielburg, about the 
> upcoming HP movie. It went something like this:
> '"The Harry Potter is too easy, I purposely passed on the chance to 
> direct it. At this point in my career, I need a challenge. I want to 
> film more...authentic films. Harry Potter is like ducks in a barrel 
> (*what does that mean?*). It'd be taking a million dollars to put in 
> my bank."' You get the gist. We all know that he just didn't like 
> that they didn't want Haley Joel Osman for Harry Potter. And what's 
> this about authentic? As if his little alien films are much more 
> authentic? Don't get me wrong I think he's made some great movies 
but 
> still...
> 
> Sylph

 Spielburg has always been more interested in Prisoner of Azkaban.




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Wed Nov 28 14:01:09 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:01:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Casting the Other Films, Moody's Mad Eye
Message-ID: <200111281401.JAA16725@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

Beck said:

> 
> The person I always imagine when thinking of Sirius is Kevin Smith 
> who is Ares off Xena and Hercules (My sad past comes out....). He 
> does the bad guy thing really well. He is actually an NZer to. But 
> most of you probably have no idea who he is..... moving on then
> 

I do know who you mean. But I've never seen him playing a good guy. (Unless you 
want to count those episodes when he and Xena and co. are on the same side for 
some temporary reason.) He's supposed to show a fair amount of warmth and 
concern in GoF, remember. And I don't think I've ever seen him look desperate as 
Ares, either (though I haven't watched most of the episodes-- my husband used to 
be watching it as I'd get home from work.) Looks-wise he's fine, but I just 
haven't seen him portray the emotions/attitudes Sirius will need, at least not 
on Xena. What else has he done?

> 
> Hopkins would be fantastic for Moody.
> 

Oh yeah. Just thinking of his performance in that last Zorro movie, as the "old" 
Zorro.... yeah. A controlled (more or less) madman. Perfect.

Not that I know enough British actors (or any actors) to make any more 
constructive suggestions than that....

I wonder how they'll do Moody's Mad Eye? He's not going to be on screen as much 
as Harry, but so far their track record on "eye" effects isn't so good.

Elizabeth




From aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Nov 28 14:11:55 2001
From: aleksrothis at yahoo.co.uk (Aleks)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:11:55 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u2jkp+10obr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u2rbb+vnk2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., angelx_ph2002 at y... wrote:
> >Voldemort - Gary Oldman (It'll be good though to retain Ian Hart 
> again)
> > 
> > Richard Bremmer is actually the "face" and voice of Voldemort in 
> SS. I 
> > assume he'll be playing the role through the series.
> 
> I don't think so. Richard Bremmer played Voldemort in the flashback 
> scene. Ian Hart played him during the finale. Check the credits
again.

I respectfully disagree. Ian Hart played Professor Quirrel. Richard
Bremmer was the voice of Voldemort, although I heard that the face was
CGI'd.

Aleks




From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Wed Nov 28 14:25:44 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:25:44 -0500 (EST)
Subject: sound quality
Message-ID: <200111281425.JAA16857@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

I've only seen it once, more than a week ago, and I was distracted by a 
squirming seven-year-old. :) But did anyone else think the sound was kind of 
off? Specifically, it seemed to me that all of the actors were sitting right on 
top of the mic. There was never any "distance" to show position relative to the 
audience or each other. And it didn't seem like they were using stereo much. 
Maybe it's just that the volume was turned up a bit too much when I saw it (or 
the theatre is too cheap to run movies in stereo....) I know they re-record all 
the dialogue (and other sounds) to get the cleanest possible sound, it just 
seemed like it was "off" in this film. (Sorry I don't know the technical terms 
for what I'm trying to say-- maybe one of our film students could enlighten me?)

Elizabeth

PS - A guy I work with who knows way more about film than I do just walked by. 
He says the term I'm looking for is "imaging" and that in the theatre he saw it 
in, the quadrophonic sound was used to good effect, and he didn't notice any 
problem with the imaging. So maybe it was just my theatre. What did the rest of 
you think?

PPS - He also said he very much enjoyed the film, despite not having read any of 
the books yet. (He and his wife *immediately* went out and bought the first two 
books after seeing the film. She's done with them now, and he plans to read them 
soon.)




From feycat at feycat.net  Wed Nov 28 14:25:18 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:25:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting the Other Films
References: <9u1v2e+7ud8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <012601c17818$8235d9c0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

> Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I 

Jeremy Irons! Isn't he from the UK?

> Sirius Black - The first person who came into my mind for this role 

How about Gabriel Byrne? He's soooo good at playing dark, brooding characters, he's English AND sexy! :-)


> Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins

Sean Connory!! I have this FABULOUS image!

Gabriel
Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper
"Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?"



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




From feycat at feycat.net  Wed Nov 28 14:26:43 2001
From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 09:26:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
References: <9u20sj+6s1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <012c01c17818$b42bc480$0b01a8c0@enet.com>

>>Hufflepuff
yellow (brown? - but their quidditch capes are yellow) / gold<<

According to their house crest, they're yellow and black.

>>Ravenclaw
blue (royal) / silver (light blue?) -- one of the scenes has a clutch 
of Ravenclaws passing in the background in scarves but we can't tell 
if the light color is gray [silver] or light blue<<

According to their house crest, blue and orange.

Gabriel
Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper
"Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?"



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




From AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 14:30:53 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (Maggie Connolly)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:30:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011128143053.47228.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com>


--- angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com wrote:
> THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
> 
> Mr. Weasley - Hugh Laurie

I would love to see Hugh Laurie as Mr. Weasley!

> THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
> 
> Marge Dursley - Brenda Fricker (Although Elizabeth
> Spriggs, who plays 
> the Fat Lady, can take on this role)
 
How about Monty Python's Terry Jones?  He would be a
great Marge!

> Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's
> Austalian I think. 
> Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan
> or even Hugh 
> Grant can fill the bill.

I think that Hugh Jackman would be a great choice for
Lupin.  


> Sirius Black - The first person who came into my
> mind for this role is 
> Willem Dafoe but he's American so I think Robert
> Carlyle would be the 
> most logical British choice.

For Black - I would pick Colin Firth.  I think that he
could be great.

> Sir Cadogan - Eric Idle or Michael Palin.

Yes, Michael Palin!!

> Professor Trelawney - Only one person comes to mind:
> Tracey Ullman. 

She would be great!
> 
> THE GOBLET OF FIRE
> 
> Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry - Yes!

> Rita Skeeter - Jane Horrocks - Yes!
> 
> What do you guys think? 

I am also excited to see who is cast for Bill and
Charlie Weasley.

 


=====
Cheers, Maggie

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From april at syclo.com  Wed Nov 28 14:35:51 2001
From: april at syclo.com (David S April)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:35:51 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Vanity fair posters? (was Steven
  Spielberg disses the movie)
In-Reply-To: <20011128135019.57384.qmail@web11907.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20011128083137.0274ba80@quake.xnet.com>

At 05:50 AM 11/28/01 -0800, you wrote:

>The only other place I've indulged my HP-mania is
>the "Vanity Fair" feature. It's on my desk and
>I'll find some time (wink!) to look at it this
>morning.

speaking of which, does anyone know if Annie Leibovitz's shots are 
available as images or posters?
I love the Gryffindor Quidditch Team photo in particular.

Dave


--
David S. April                  Syclo LLC
april at syclo.com                 1250 S Grove Av - Suite 304
(847) 842-0320                  Barrington, IL 60010-5066
http://www.soasoas.com/

"Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much, much *better*."
     - Laurie Anderson




From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 14:38:33 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:38:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] sound quality
In-Reply-To: <200111281425.JAA16857@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <20011128143833.33182.qmail@web11905.mail.yahoo.com>


FWIW, with a slight hearing impairment that can
make unfamiliar accents particularly troublesome,
I had no problem. Might well have been your
local, cheap theater! ;)

W/D

--- Elizabeth Dalton
<Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM> wrote:
> I've only seen it once, more than a week ago,
> and I was distracted by a 
> squirming seven-year-old. :) But did anyone
> else think the sound was kind of 
> off? 

=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 14:42:10 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:42:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <20011128143053.47228.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20011128144210.33501.qmail@web11905.mail.yahoo.com>

Oh, yes to all! Except I'd like to see them cast
C. Firth 'against type' as Lupin. With his
skeletal appearance (ok, I overstate the case,
but he was too skinny) in "Bridget Jones's
Diary," he could be a heck of a Lupin. See his
performance also in "Pride & Prejudice" for more
taste of his ability to appear misunderstood,
troubled, brooding, intense and driven.

woo to the hoo! 
W/D, gettin' INTO it!

--- Maggie Connolly <AgentIrish at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> --- angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com wrote:
> > THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
> > 
> > Mr. Weasley - Hugh Laurie

=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From chris at dickson.demon.co.uk  Wed Nov 28 14:50:14 2001
From: chris at dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:50:14 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Steven Spielberg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>
References: <9n6kbl+orae@eGroups.com> <9u2248+e1qa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3NERrtQmmPB8Ew2p@dickson.demon.co.uk>

In message <9u2248+e1qa at eGroups.com>, windyroselane at yahoo.com writes
>It's coming back to me -- I'll have to look it up, but isn't there a
>news report way back somewhere where Rowling dissed Spielberg and
>then did a small sort of "Oops! I hope I don't get sued"? Does anyone
>else remember that? I can't remember where or when or in what format
>I saw it but it made an impression on me.

JKR said it at the Scottish Charity Gala Premiere. Specifically, there
were at least three (and probably four) screens at the cinema where the
movie was being simultaneously; an eyewitness alleged that JKR spoke
words to the effect of "Thank God it wasn't Spielberg... can we be sued
for saying that?" in her comments to the audience in screen 8. She
certainly didn't say it in her comments to the audience in screen 7,
where I saw the movie at the time. (Source: a posting in FictionAlley
Park at the time.)

I suspect we will never know exactly what Spielberg had in mind...
Chris

-- 
  Chris M. Dickson, Middlesbrough, Great Britain; chris at dickson.demon.co.uk
  Sport Editor, Flagship PBM mag: http://www.antsnest.demon.co.uk/flagship/
  Labyrinth Games: puzzle and game consultancy http://www.qwertyuiop.co.uk/
   MSO Worldwide -*- Bringing Brains Together -*- http://www.msoworld.com/



From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Wed Nov 28 14:56:19 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:56:19 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <1006939977@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <9u2tuj+94p1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., bert.coules at f... wrote:
> 
> In reported speech, even in the most critical of situations, the 
> strongest oath that Ron can come out with is usually "Blimey!" - 
which 
> of course is totally in keeping with the generally 30s - 40s 
> private-boarding-school atmosphere of the books.  Rowling and the 
> writers of the Frank Richards/Anthony Buckridge school have far 
more in 
> common than is generally acknowledged, I think.
> 

> 
But the books are not set in the 30's and 40's, they are set in the 
90's. J.K Rowling I believe said in an interview that Harry was born 
in 1980. Which means that it is highly plausable that he would swear. 
Though I agree that perhaps not to a teacher like McGonagall.




From mollymc2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 15:08:59 2001
From: mollymc2000 at yahoo.com (Sylvia Petrella)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:08:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011128150859.91486.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com>

--- angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com wrote:
> I'd like to share my 2 knuts on who should be cast
> in the future films:
> 
> THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
> Mr. Weasley - Hugh Laurie


I have to put my vote in here for Michael Crawford
(all right, I know all the Brits are saying...."Not
Frank!!", but the first thing that struck me about
Rupert Grint was how much he reminded me of a young
Michael!  It would really be a hoot to see Michael
play his father.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 15:46:29 2001
From: goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com (Eliza Duke)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:46:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <012601c17818$8235d9c0$0b01a8c0@enet.com>
Message-ID: <20011128154629.6834.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Gabriel Edson <feycat at feycat.net> wrote:
> > Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but
> he's Austalian I 
> 
> Jeremy Irons! Isn't he from the UK?

What about Peter Wingfield as Lupin. He is Welish and
he is the right age and he is talented.

 > Sirius Black - The first person who came into my
> mind for this role 
> 
> How about Gabriel Byrne? He's soooo good at playing
> dark, brooding characters, he's English AND sexy!
> :-)
> 
> > Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins
> 
> Sean Connory!! I have this FABULOUS image!
> 
> Gabriel
> Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper
> "Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?"> 


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


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 15:50:30 2001
From: goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com (Eliza Duke)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:50:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Steven Spielburg disses the movie
In-Reply-To: <9u2q8u+jnsg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011128155030.54296.qmail@web20701.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Heather Moore <heathernmoore at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., kabuki_darling at h... wrote:
> > I just heard on the radio a major insult from
> Spielburg, about the 
> > upcoming HP movie. It went something like this:
> > '"The Harry Potter is too easy, I purposely passed
> on the chance to 
> > direct it. At this point in my career, I need a
> challenge. I want to 
> > film more...authentic films. Harry Potter is like
> ducks in a barrel 
> > (*what does that mean?*). It'd be taking a million
> dollars to put in 
> > my bank."' You get the gist. We all know that he
> just didn't like 
> > that they didn't want Haley Joel Osman for Harry
> Potter. And what's 
> > this about authentic? As if his little alien films
> are much more 
> > authentic? Don't get me wrong I think he's made
> some great movies 
> but 
> > still...
> > 
> > Sylph
> 
>  Spielburg has always been more interested in
> Prisoner of Azkaban.
> 
> 
I think Columbus should stay with the Harry Potter
Movies.  He is a good director, and he knows the cast
and he is the kind of director that wants to see the
char.s grow.  

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Wed Nov 28 16:15:41 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:15:41 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films (long)
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u32jd+eltu@eGroups.com>

Here are my thoughts:

> Cornelius Fudge - Derek Jacobi

Hmmm, I think he would be better as Mr Crouch. What about Sir John 
Mills for Fudge?

> Lucius Malfoy - Richard E. Grant

Yes, he would be good. Personally, I think Chris Morris (a Brittish 
comedian) would be great.

> Mr. Weasley - Hugh Laurie

Oh yes, completely! But wouldn't he look a bit stupid with red 
hair?;o)

> Tom Riddle - Ciaran Owens or Michael Legge (see "Angela's Ashes")

I think it'll be an unknown, I was going to go to an audition for the 
part, but on the day I was ill in bed with flu and completely forgot 
about it:o(

> 
> THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
> 
> Marge Dursley - Brenda Fricker (Although Elizabeth Spriggs, who 
plays 
> the Fat Lady, can take on this role)

Don't know who that is, but I think Terry Jones would be fantastic. 
Failing that, Dawn French (who I want to get into the film in *some* 
way).

> Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I 
think. 
> Are Australians allowed? If not, then Pierce Brosnan or even Hugh 
> Grant can fill the bill.

I still think Mark Gatis would be excellent as Lupin.

> Sirius Black - The first person who came into my mind for this role 
is 
> Willem Dafoe but he's American so I think Robert Carlyle would be 
the 
> most logical British choice

I can't think of anyone really to play Sirius. Sean Bean's the best I 
can come up with.
.
> Sir Cadogan - Eric Idle or Michael Palin.

Definately one of these two. Absolutely!

> Professor Trelawney - Only one person comes to mind: Tracey Ullman.

I always imagined her as a lot older...sort of Dame Thora Hird, I was 
thinking.

 
> Cedric Diggory - Jamie Bell

I don't think he's right for this part. They'll probably cast an 
unknown (me hopefully ;o) )

> Madame Rosmerta - Kate Winslet

Hmmm...maybe a bit too posh. Best I can come up with though:o)

> Peter Pettigrew - Mark Addy

Who's that? I thought Rowan Atkinson would be good as wormtail...

> 
> THE GOBLET OF FIRE

> Professor Karkaroff - Nigel Hawthorne

Can he do accents though?

> Madame Maxime - Juliette Binoche

Too soft-spoken and good looking, I think.

> Mad Eye Moody - Anthony Hopkins

Oh, he'd be excellent:o)

> Voldemort - Gary Oldman (It'll be good though to retain Ian Hart 
again)

He'd be great...he can be very sinister.

> Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry

As well as Hugh Laurie?;o) He'd be good, I suppose but I'd prefer 
Graham Norton:o)

> Rita Skeeter - Jane Horrocks

Or Joanna Lumley perhaps?
 
Dave:o)




From john at walton.vu  Wed Nov 28 16:35:10 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:35:10 +0000
Subject: ADMIN: New Introductory Membership for New Members
Message-ID: <B82AC2BA.5DC9%john@walton.vu>

Dear HPforGrownups members,

This message effects a change in list policy towards new members on the
HPforGrownups list. It's with some reluctance that the Moderator Team have
to make this change, so we wanted to take this opportunity to explain to you
why we feel this change is necessary.

As many of you have undoubtedly observed, the list is growing quickly,
particularly as interest in HP and the group has increased with the release
of the movie and with our exposure in the New York Times. Hundreds of new
members have been welcomed onto the list.  That's fantastic, and we expect
our membership to continue to grow as anticipation of Book 5 mounts.

The unfortunate consequence of that, however, is that the Mods -- and
members -- are seeing a dramatic spike in the number of posts that violate
one or more of our rules.  We have seen snipping problems, inattentive
spelling and grammar, posting on the wrong board, inaccurate subject lines,
and failure to read our Admin Files and ADMIN messages.

This reduces the enjoyment of the group for everyone. In fact, some newer
members (who have not seen the list at what we'd consider its best) have
left, citing reasons of post volume -- and quality.

We think that the discussion here is of a higher quality than you'd expect
from other Harry Potter lists. We *know* we have more rules than others.
This is not a coincidence. The reason HPFGU has survived without degrading
into meaningless drivel and the reason that the older members stick around
without getting tired of the repetition is because we have these rules to
keep the list running smoothly. They are for everyone's benefit -- if you
don't appreciate that now, you'll come to appreciate it soon.

For these reasons, we've decided to introduce an introductory period of
membership to the list.

YahooGroups has a handy technical option which we have been considering for
quite a while. It's called "unmoderated, moderate new members", and several
groups we've seen use it to excellent effect. This means that all incoming
members, retroactive to November 22, will be on Moderated Status for a short
period of time.  We understand that the way HPFGU works is complex, and
misunderstandings can result in repeated violations of list policy.

Moderated Status allows the Moderators to check the posts for compliance
with the rules before releasing them to the group at large. Since we have a
large number of people with Moderator privileges (the Mods, Elves and
Poltergeists), we expect that posts will either be approved or rejected
promptly. When a post is rejected, it will be sent back to the author for
revision in accordance with our list rules.

After a brief period of good posting in observance of list policy, new
members will be removed from Moderated Status and will then be able to post
as normal.

In the meantime, we encourage all of our new members to keep an eye on the
email accounts they used to register with HPFGU, as this is where you will
receive notification of any problems concerning any of your posts.  Also,
remember that if your post does not appear right away, you should give it
time, then check your email account.  Do not simply keep sending your
message over and over.

Our other lists, HPFGU-Movie, -OTChatter and -Announcements will remain
unchanged, although the number of warnings for posts not complying with list
rules will be reduced to one.

Please understand that this change in policy is by no means designed to
discourage our new members from participating in our group.  Each new member
brings his or her unique point of view to the community, and it is this
diversity of perspective, experience and personality that keeps the list
exciting, interesting and fresh.  We hope all of you will continue to offer
your insights and contribute to our discussions.

For more information, or to comment on this new policy, email the Moderator
Team at MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com.

--AJJP&N, Magical Moderator Team




From Dar20 at aol.com  Wed Nov 28 17:19:38 2001
From: Dar20 at aol.com (Darlene)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:19:38 -0000
Subject: sound quality
In-Reply-To: <200111281425.JAA16857@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <9u36ba+d1gr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Elizabeth Dalton <Elizabeth.Dalton at E...> 
wrote:
> But did anyone else think the sound was kind of 
> off? 

Elizabeth,

I've seen the movie twice, in different theatres.  The first time, I 
wasn't overly impressed with the sound quality.  Wasn't bad, just 
wasn't really great.

The second time I saw it, it was completely different.  The sound 
quality was great.  In fact, the scene where Dumbledore finds Harry 
at the Mirror of Erised, I could have sworn the sound of rain was 
coming from outside, instead of the movie!

Darlene




From bert.coules at fonix.org  Wed Nov 28 17:24:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:24:00 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
Message-ID: <1006968309@fonix.org>

MS>But the books are not set in the 30's and 40's, they are set in the
  >90's.

But they're not *our* nineties, are they?  They're Rowling's, and she 
can (and does) make up whatever rules she likes for them.

MS>...Harry was born in 1980. Which means that it is highly plausable
  >that he would swear.

In real life, perhaps.  But this is fiction.  In real life, how many
thirteen-year-olds would instinctively use "Blimey!" (as Ron does,
repeatedly) as an expression of surprise?  

Bert
http://www.bertcoules.co.uk

 * 1st 2.00 #6252 * 




From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Wed Nov 28 19:02:00 2001
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:02:00 -0000
Subject: The Onion on HP/SS The Movie
Message-ID: <9u3cb9+1n1s@eGroups.com>

>From The Onion's News in Brief:

New Harry Potter Film Turns Children On To Magic Of Not Reading

LOS ANGELES? Around the world, children are being turned on to the 
magic of not reading by the blockbuster film Harry Potter And The 
Sorcerer's Stone. "My daughter Julia never liked to sit passively and 
stare at a screen, but this new movie has really locked the power of 
her imagination," said Hannah Foss, 38, of Dayton, OH. "She can't put 
her books away fast enough." "Movies are great," said Tarzana, CA, 10-
year-old Emily Hart. "You can see exactly what the characters look 
like without having to guess."

http://www.theonion.com

  - CMC





From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 28 19:28:47 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:28:47 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <1006968309@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <9u3dtf+jekq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., bert.coules at f... wrote:

> In real life, perhaps.  But this is fiction.  In real life, how many
> thirteen-year-olds would instinctively use "Blimey!" (as Ron does,
> repeatedly) as an expression of surprise?  
> 
> I work in a London Primary school and in various youth clubs, and I 
can tell you in 14 years I've never heard a "blimey" but I've heard my 
fair share of "bloody hells". Children's language nowadays is a lot 
more colourful! I suppose they wanted to keep the PG rating so they 
couldn't go too far and after all its a kids film! (Although, 
thinking back I did hear a blimey out in the country!)

John





From seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk  Wed Nov 28 19:34:02 2001
From: seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk (John Hancock)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:34:02 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films (long)
In-Reply-To: <9u32jd+eltu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u3e7a+jvaf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry
> 

Has anyone else heard rumours that Colm Meaney has been discussed in 
regard to the above role, and does anyone else think that Ken 
Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?





From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Nov 28 15:02:06 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:02:06 EST5EDT
Subject: After my 6th viewing....
Message-ID: <2953A125C@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Yes, 6.  And tonight is # 7.  Obsessed?  Possibly.  But 
more to the point, I have friends who haven't seen it yet 
and want to see it with me and me only so I work with their 
schedules.

Anyway....tonight I see it on my own.  I've been out of 
commission since Thanksgiving Day with the flu and I need 
something warm, cuddly and comforting.  And this movie does 
it for me.  Every time I go see it I feel like I'm meeting 
up with friends for coffee, pie and catch-up conversation.  
I smile from the moment the WB logo comes on the screen to 
the moment the final credit rolls by.

I'm in love with this movie.  Yes, there are lots of things 
I miss that didn't make it into the movie: "Ickle 
firsties.", more of the twins' antics (especially 
bewitching the snowballs to follow Quirrell around, 
smacking him in the back of the head), more Quidditch 
games, and the Norbert storyline.  And yes, there are 
things that made me raise an eyebrow: Voldemort going 
through Harry at the end, Hedwig's name not even being 
mentioned let alone her part being pretty much cut out, and 
Alan Rickman being Snape (my problem with this is that I 
have this "thing" for Rickman....I DON'T want a "thing" for 
Snape!).

But I absolutely adore this movie.  Every moment, every 
scene, every character. 

Especially Oliver.  (sorry....had to throw him in there 
somewhere.  :-)  )

I saw Moulin Rouge 19 times before it finally left 
Columbus.  I'm sure that Harry will beat that, especially 
once it gets to the $1 theater (which probably won't be 
until February or March).

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 witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 20:24:28 2001
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:24:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] After my 6th viewing....
In-Reply-To: <2953A125C@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <20011128202428.94182.qmail@web13709.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Rachel Bray <bray.262 at osu.edu> wrote:
> Yes, 6.  And tonight is # 7.  Obsessed?  Possibly. 
> I smile from the moment the WB logo comes on the
> screen to 
> the moment the final credit rolls by.
> I'm in love with this movie.  Yes, there are lots of
> things I miss that didn't make it into the movie. I
absolutely adore this movie.  Every moment, every 
> scene, every character. 
> Rachel Bray

You lucky duck you! I will be going with my Band of
Merry Muggles next weekend for our second viewing! We
love this movie too! I agree with you about things
missed, but we get a chance to be in Harry's World!

We loved every moment of being there to see it! My
favorite in the movie is Hedwig! Love all the kids and
adults too! We have a housefull of Birds, that's why I
love Hedwig! 

Hope everyone who enjoyed this movie gets the chance
to go back and just be there in the HP Universe, even
if it is for two and half hours, more or less, to get
away from Muggle land!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very
Merry Band of Muggles 100% 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 20:36:31 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:36:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting the Other Films (long)
In-Reply-To: <9u3e7a+jvaf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011128203631.90577.qmail@web11901.mail.yahoo.com>

Putting up a shield charm, (wink) but Mr. Branagh
always strikes me as one who is playing himself,
playing a role, rather than an actor who portrays
a character. Would much rather have seen H.
Grant, but if one had everything, where would one
put it?

It occurs that the Irish actor Ciaran Hinds would
do very well as Mad-Eye Moody! 

W/D
--- John Hancock <seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk>
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David "
> <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry
> > 
> 
> Has anyone else heard rumours that Colm Meaney
> has been discussed in 
> regard to the above role, and does anyone else
> think that Ken 
> Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?
> 
> 
> 


=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com  Wed Nov 28 20:36:15 2001
From: Aberforths_Goat at Yahoo.com (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:36:15 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Onion on HP/SS The Movie
References: <9u3cb9+1n1s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <019b01c1784c$5370e600$e500a8c0@shasta>

CMC revealed that,

> Around the world, children are being turned on to the
> magic of not reading [...]

Oh dear. Another Onion article. I sure hope the teachers' union won't follow
precedent by passing around horrified news about HP as the Merciless Bane of
Reading and Culture ...

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

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




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Wed Nov 28 20:46:29 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:46:29 -0000
Subject: Branagh as Lockhart (WAS Casting the Other Films)
In-Reply-To: <20011128203631.90577.qmail@web11901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u3if5+qgtg@eGroups.com>

I think Branagh is a good choice for Lockhart - Hugh Grant has the 
looks, but Branagh has a pushier personality, and Lockhart is very 
definitely on the make.  I think Branagh will bring a sort of brassy 
self-promoting phoniness (and I mean that in a GOOD way!) to the role. 
I always think of Lockhart as a sort of Professor Hill from "The Music 
Man" type character, but not as charming.

Wanda



--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Wendelin...akaDebWA" <findmeabargain at y...> 
wrote:
> Putting up a shield charm, (wink) but Mr. Branagh
> always strikes me as one who is playing himself,
> playing a role, rather than an actor who portrays
> a character. Would much rather have seen H.
> Grant, but if one had everything, where would one
> put it?
> 





From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM  Wed Nov 28 20:53:00 2001
From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:53:00 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Casting the Other Films, Hedwig
Message-ID: <200111282053.PAA18953@gaea.East.Sun.COM>

Wendelin wrote:
> Oh, yes to all! Except I'd like to see them cast
> C. Firth 'against type' as Lupin. With his
> skeletal appearance (ok, I overstate the case,
> but he was too skinny) in "Bridget Jones's
> Diary," he could be a heck of a Lupin. See his
> performance also in "Pride & Prejudice" for more
> taste of his ability to appear misunderstood,
> troubled, brooding, intense and driven.

Lupin, "misunderstood, troubled, brooding, intense and driven"? Did you 
mean Sirius Black? I thought Lupin came across as cool and relatively 
confident, in an understated sort of way. Not that I have any idea who 
Colin Firth is, mind.

Wanda wrote:
> My favorite in the movie is Hedwig! 

My four-year-old nephew, who has claimed not to particularly like Harry 
Potter until now, saw the movie with his mom and promptly told my mother 
"I want a Hedwig for Christmas!" (Never mind that I personally wouldn't 
have taken a four-year-old to this movie, no matter how precocious....) 
Fortunately, snowy owl stuffed animals are relatively easy to come by, 
even if she doesn't find a "brand-name" Hedwig. :)

Elizabeth




From sherratt at mediaone.net  Wed Nov 28 20:54:36 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:54:36 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u1kh3+250t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u3iuc+34q2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., angelx_ph2002 at y... wrote:

> Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry

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.

Wanda





From chattie27million at aol.com  Wed Nov 28 20:58:05 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:58:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart [WAS: Re: Casting the Other Films (long) ]
Message-ID: <3b.1e0888cc.2936a9dd@aol.com>

In a message dated 28/11/01 19:50:14 GMT Standard Time, 
seeker at hogwarts-alumni.co.uk writes:


> does anyone else think that Ken 
> Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?
> 

I don't think he's a bad choice at all, though I have to say that I'm really 
*really* dissapointed that Hugh Grant isn't able to do it instead.  Upon 
watching Notting Hill again the other day, I realised that I've actually now 
started to picture him in the role when reading CoS.

Having said that, any other brits thinking Laurence Lewellen~Bowen? *sorry if 
that is the wrong spelling of his name!*
Hugs
Rach *who has suddenly realised that she probably shouldn't be on this list 
as she's only 17......but loves it anyway:)*
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 LivBeatles at aol.com  Wed Nov 28 23:01:01 2001
From: LivBeatles at aol.com (LivBeatles at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 23:01:01 -0000
Subject: First time posting
Message-ID: <9u3qbd+gd00@eGroups.com>

Hello everyone, this is my first time posting and I'm trying 
desperately to read throught the large amount of posts (which, I must 
say, are much more interesting than my college books)!  I have only 
seen the movie once but was very pleased with it.  I can't wait to 
see it again (and again and again and again if I had my way).  I 
really hope that Daniel, Rupert and Emma can continue the roles of 
Harry, Ron and Hermione.  I haven't seen many of the interviews on 
television with the actors, because I became a fan pretty late (I 
read the first book on my plane trip home for Thanksgiving, saw the 
film the next day, and read the 2nd/3rd book immeadiately after--I am 
making myself wait until after Finals to read the 4th book [which is 
taking a lot of self control]).  But I find it interesting (but good) 
that there seem to be less interviews with Daniel on the internet 
than with Emma and Rupert.  I believe I read somewhere that 
Radcliffe's parents were limiting the amount of promotion he could do-
-a wise step I believe.  Anyways, I am very glad to have joined this 
group and look forward to reading everyone's thoughts. :)

Cynthia




From editor at texas.net  Thu Nov 29 00:08:48 2001
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:08:48 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
References: <9u20sj+6s1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C057C90.82486F5C@texas.net>

windyroselane at yahoo.com wrote:

> If we're attempting to make scarves for all the Hogwarts' houses in
> the movie, what colors are they?

Do you want to know what they *should* be, as in what the primary colors
are from the books, or what they are in the movie? With one exception,
that being that they changed Hufflepuff's badger from black to white,
they're pretty much the same as the book. I can give you this:

Gryffindor: red and gold (goldish yellow will do, metallic yarn looks
odd)
Slytherin: green and silver
Ravenclaw: blue and "bronze" (which is not an heraldic color, argh, and
I'd use the same gold as Gryffindor for contrast)
Hufflepuff: gold and black, unless you watched the  movie, in which case
it's gold and silver/white, which has absolutely putrid contrast and I'd
use black regardless of the movie but I'm opinionated about this so do
whatever.

--Amanda, font of heraldic trivia


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




From sweet_brunette27 at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 00:14:33 2001
From: sweet_brunette27 at hotmail.com (Christina Davis)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:14:33 -0500
Subject: Ian Hart WAS:More reflections and ratings of the actors 
Message-ID: <F66D9SKSpAw5GbhibIs000185fd@hotmail.com>

> >Professor Quirrell/Ian Hart
> >Rating: Replace this one
> >I thought he was awful. I'm glad they don't have to replace them.
>
>Agreed. The stammer was awful and he didn't work as a villain at all.

*gulp* Am I the only one who REALLY liked Ian Hart as Quirrell?  I think he 
brought a lot of very interesting nuances to a very small part.  His 
reactions in the "troll in the girl's room" scene were very entertaining and 
very telling of his character.
Quirrell is not a character who ever held much interest for me, I hated him 
because your supposed to hate him but I never cared about him one way or the 
other.  Ian Hart managed to make me care much more.  I found his Quirrell to 
be someone who was relishing finally being someone of importance, someone 
who had finally found a meaning to his life and "that" is what made his 
character someone to fear.  He didn't just believe in what he was doing, he 
loved what he was doing.

Christy
http://www.thepiratequeen.net

"You live in terror of not being misunderstood."

                -"Velvet Goldmine"





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




From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 02:06:05 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:06:05 -0000
Subject: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
In-Reply-To: <3C057C90.82486F5C@texas.net>
Message-ID: <9u456d+na7t@eGroups.com>

Thank you, Amanda. I think I would like a list of both the book and 
the movie colors. If some one knows of an existing list let me know, 
or if there isn't one I can start one (even make a web page if 
necessary as a reference). For needleworkers this could be
invaluable, and it could also include samples with yarn color numbers 
(I am currently working on this). As a start I'll dig out the
detailed web directions I found for hand knitting any and all of the 
scarves. 

Most pressing at the moment is a request for a scarf in the movie 
Ravenclaw colors. We're on the fence 50/50 right now as to whether it 
is:

royal blue / light blue

or

royal blue / gray (as in the same silver gray used by Slytherin)

There is one good shot in the movie (near Christmas?) of a group of 
Ravenclaw scarved pupils moving in the background, inside, from right 
to left. Can any more folks post their impression as to which of the 
above colors they are wearing?

Without the scarves, there are numerous shots of Ravenclaws wearing 
royal blue alternated with the same light blue/silver-gray, like in 
their ties. We're 50/50 over here as to whether it is light blue or 
the silver-gray. May take a couple more viewings to figure this out, 
or maybe someone on the inside can help us out.

Any more input from anyone?  Thanks.





From windyroselane at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 02:16:49 2001
From: windyroselane at yahoo.com (windyroselane at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:16:49 -0000
Subject: After my 6th viewing....
In-Reply-To: <2953A125C@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9u45qh+vnud@eGroups.com>

Yes, Rachel, this was the very first thing I commented on after
seeing the movie the first time, and they even have Harry petting him 
when they're looking out the window. Hedwig deserves his name. All 
they needed to do was let Harry or somebody else say it once, just 
once. Not a big cutting floor decision to have left it in. One word.
Perhaps Hagrid should have said it. He names all the other creatures 
in the movie and he gave Hedwig to Harry.

"Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> Hedwig's name not even being mentioned 




From eleri at aracnet.com  Wed Nov 28 22:00:15 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:00:15 -0500
Subject: hats
In-Reply-To: <1006951645.681.75641.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011128165916.00b77de0@mail.aracnet.com>

At 12:47 PM 11/28/01 +0000, you wrote:
> > I didn't go looking for more, but these are the first two times we
> > see McGonagall in the book, and she is described the same way both
> > times.  Personally, I love Maggie Smith's emerald cloak/robe.  I
> > wonder if she was allowed to keep it!
> >
>
>i liked her hat lol :)

Did you notice that the more experienced a wizard you are, the more bends 
and brim you have to you hat? I thought that was cute.

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




From LivBeatles at aol.com  Thu Nov 29 03:19:39 2001
From: LivBeatles at aol.com (LivBeatles at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 03:19:39 -0000
Subject: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
In-Reply-To: <9u456d+na7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u49gb+m7k4@eGroups.com>

WindRoseLane said: 

<<As a start I'll dig out the
detailed web directions I found for hand knitting any and all of the 
scarves.>>

I, for one, would love to see these.  My friend and I both love 
scarves, and one of the first things we both said when talking about 
the movie was "I want one of those scarves!" :)

Cynthia



--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., windyroselane at y... wrote:
> Thank you, Amanda. I think I would like a list of both the book and 
> the movie colors. If some one knows of an existing list let me 
know, 
> or if there isn't one I can start one (even make a web page if 
> necessary as a reference). For needleworkers this could be
> invaluable, and it could also include samples with yarn color 
numbers 
> (I am currently working on this). As a start I'll dig out the
> detailed web directions I found for hand knitting any and all of 
the 
> scarves. 
> 
> Most pressing at the moment is a request for a scarf in the movie 
> Ravenclaw colors. We're on the fence 50/50 right now as to whether 
it 
> is:
> 
> royal blue / light blue
> 
> or
> 
> royal blue / gray (as in the same silver gray used by Slytherin)
> 
> There is one good shot in the movie (near Christmas?) of a group of 
> Ravenclaw scarved pupils moving in the background, inside, from 
right 
> to left. Can any more folks post their impression as to which of 
the 
> above colors they are wearing?
> 
> Without the scarves, there are numerous shots of Ravenclaws wearing 
> royal blue alternated with the same light blue/silver-gray, like in 
> their ties. We're 50/50 over here as to whether it is light blue or 
> the silver-gray. May take a couple more viewings to figure this 
out, 
> or maybe someone on the inside can help us out.
> 
> Any more input from anyone?  Thanks.




From hermione_heidi at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 04:05:40 2001
From: hermione_heidi at hotmail.com (Heidi Henshaw)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:05:40 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
Message-ID: <F45iWqlB6luJkop9ZT20001077c@hotmail.com>

In my opinion I do not think that Either Hugh Grant or Pierce Brosnan would 
make a good Lupin, I had pictured Lupin as someone who was a bit frazzled 
around the edges.
I also think that Billy Connelly would make an excellent Mad Eye Moony but 
Anthony Hopkins would be good too.

Heidi H

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




From jeri at kronerxf.net  Thu Nov 29 04:15:53 2001
From: jeri at kronerxf.net (jeri)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 23:15:53 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: After my 6th viewing....
References: <9u45qh+vnud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01ba01c1788c$89b24200$9b461218@ctsvlle1.pa.home.com>

<< Hedwig deserves his name. >>

Hedwig is a "she". My mom's aunt was named Hedwig. Just FYI ;)

jeri
-----------------
jeri's basement: http://www.themajestic3.com/jeri.htm
Kroner, KS: http://www.kronerxf.net
SWLD: http://swld.tripod.com
-----------------
9-11 |*=

"When two Neptunes appear in the sky, it is a sure sign that a midget in glasses is being born..."    -- Ron Weasley


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




From chappnee at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 05:54:09 2001
From: chappnee at hotmail.com (~ chappnee ~)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:54:09 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
Message-ID: <F13FBTOW4JQfmUKZi2U000125fc@hotmail.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
I was really surprised by "bloody brilliant" from the first time I
heard it in the trailer. Back in the Dark Ages when I lived in London, no 
child
would have said that in front of an adult, much less a teacher. Is it 
possible this did not appear in the UK film? I did check the book [UK 
version], and "bloody"
[except for the Baron] is NOT used. Of course, it's also possible
that times
have changed... ;)
any thoughts, Aberforth's Goat? others?
Ivis the elderly

------------------------------

I had a concern with another issue that is quite similar to this one 
actually.  I was very disappointed when I heard Malfoy say, "A@%."  I'm not 
sure about Britain and other countries, but at least in Canada and I'm sure 
I can include the U.S., that is most definitely a swear.  I thought it was 
totally uncalled for.  This IS a children's movie after all.  When I brought 
this up with a friend she made a very good point: Warner Brothers' don't 
rate the movies they produce.  They could very well have added a swear to 
make sure the movie had a PG rating.  There are a few scenes that would seem 
really scary to a kid.  WB may not have wanted to take the chance of having 
it rated G because of that.  The reason why I'm bringing this up is because 
they might have had Ron saying, "Bloody Brilliant," for the same reason.  
Although, I'm not sure why he would say it in front of a teacher if it is 
considered a swear by many people in Britain.

~Jenn




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




From nethilia at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 05:19:13 2001
From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Nethilia De Lobo)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 05:19:13 -0000
Subject: Movie Review on Brunching.com
Message-ID: <9u4ggh+pu5t@eGroups.com>

http://www.brunching.com/selfmade/harrypotter.html

I love Brunching Shuttlecocks and the Self-Made Critic. He gave the 
movie a glowing review. 

"So do yourself a favor: fight the crowds, step on the small children 
wearing the colorful robes and pointed hats, grab a seat, refuse to 
give it up to a crying child, and take in a wonderful movie." ~A 
small quote

--Neth 




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 06:24:04 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:24:04 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films (long)
In-Reply-To: <9u3e7a+jvaf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u4ka4+9ac6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry
> > 
> 
> Has anyone else heard rumours that Colm Meaney has been discussed 
in 
> regard to the above role, and does anyone else think that Ken 
> Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?


Oooh, don't take the wind out of my sails on Brannaugh. I predicted 
him before I even knew they were making a movie. I used to imagine 
Lockhart AS Brannaugh. The casting is totally brilliant. They are 
creepily similar in real life...Brannaugh is so terrible arrogant, 
yet smooth. The only difference is that Brannaugh is actually 
brilliant whereas Lockhart is an idiot.

-Cornflower O'Shea




From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 06:29:16 2001
From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:29:16 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20011127221234.0442be50@brain-stream.com>
Message-ID: <9u4kjs+t4j2@eGroups.com>

Hi! Oooh, casting...what fun! They did such a fantastic job with the 
first it will be intersesting how they do with the rest...

Cornelius Fudge > If we are doing a Python reunion why not Terry 
Jones? I always think of Fudge as a stuffy round sort of fellow. Or 
is he just too silly? Should Fudge have that evil edge? Jackobi is 
too intense for my liking; too Claudius.

Mad-Eye
B.K. DeLong wrote:
> Actually, someone suggested Billy Connolly. I recently saw the 
movie 
> "Boondock Saints" where he has a small cameo as "Il Duche" or "The 
Duke". 
> Just before he "cleaned up" he was the spitting image of how I 
pictured old 
> Mad-Eye.
> 

Brilliant! But would you want your kids hanging around Billy 
Connolly? Could it be stipulated in his contract that he musn't 
say "*&$*&", "*^$^", or "%#$^%@&&^! ! !", and if it were, could he 
actually do it? :)


> >Professor Lupin - Sam Neill could play him but he's Austalian I 
think.
Don't take this the wrong way but...NOOOOOOOOO! This is just my 
grudge but I think Sam Neill is one of the most over-rated actors in 
the Hollywood spectrum. Did you see his King Arthur fiasco? I agree 
with whomever it was that suggested Ralph Fiennes. He has the 
gauntness and the intensity with the added bonuses that a) he is 
British and b) he knows how to act.

>> Black
I like the Hugh Jackman suggestion, but does the man really want to 
be typecast as men who transform into wild beasts? And a dog might 
be considered a step down from a wolverine on the coolness scale, 
after all. :) Actually I like Jackman. He kind of reminds me of a 
young ______________________ (fill me in folks, the guy who played 
Bill Sykes in "Oliver" and died during the filming of Gladiator?), 
which is a good thing.

Take care all! Cheers!
Cheers!

- Cornflower O'Shea

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

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

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





From seijin_dinger at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 06:50:56 2001
From: seijin_dinger at hotmail.com (Seijin Dinger)
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:50:56 -0800
Subject: Casting
Message-ID: <OE67sJHHfCm3hJ4xch90001ef20@hotmail.com>

Ok, at the risk of being executed for lack of knowledge I think that the actor who plays Lister on Red Dwarf should be cast as Lupin. I can just picture at the end of the movie him handing the Marauder's Map back to Harry.

-Dinger- The unenlightened one who cant remember Red Dwarf cast members.


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




From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 07:17:10 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:17:10 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films (long)
In-Reply-To: <9u4ka4+9ac6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u4ndm+jsko@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., tenpinkpiggies at h... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "John Hancock" <seeker at h...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "David " <davisaacs at h...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Mr. Bagman - Stephen Fry
> > > 
> > 
> > Has anyone else heard rumours that Colm Meaney has been discussed 
> in 
> > regard to the above role, and does anyone else think that Ken 
> > Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?
> 
> 
> Oooh, don't take the wind out of my sails on Brannaugh. I predicted 
> him before I even knew they were making a movie. I used to imagine 
> Lockhart AS Brannaugh. The casting is totally brilliant. They are 
> creepily similar in real life...Brannaugh is so terrible arrogant, 
> yet smooth. The only difference is that Brannaugh is actually 
> brilliant whereas Lockhart is an idiot.


  And Brannagh is also said to have a genuinely likeable charm and 
sense of humor, despite the self-worship. You wouldn't mind being 
stuck in an elevator with him for about twenty minutes, although 
soon after *that* you'd start searching around in your purse for 
your feminine hygiene products and asking him to turn around and 
give you privacy, just to torture him and make him squirm. Also ditto 
the "not Lockhart" part of the equation - it would be straight for 
the sharpened-nailfile shiv for that one, baby, and none of this 
"press the emergency button and see if someone answers" crap!

 Hrm... although... Lockhart would have still commanded a soft spot in 
my heart if only he hadn't been so willing to leave the kids down 
there as basilisk chow while he got his own yeller ass outta dodge. 
Damn you, Lockhart. You were rather cute in your bumbling, windbagged 
bluster right up until that point.





From heathernmoore at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 07:18:59 2001
From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:18:59 -0000
Subject: Have Actor, Need Part
Message-ID: <9u4nh3+ehp3@eGroups.com>

Okay -- Iron Casting Director time:

  Ingredient: Helena Bonham Carter


  What part for her? Ready.... set.... GO!




From bert.coules at fonix.org  Thu Nov 29 07:59:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:59:00 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <1007013723@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <1007021039@fonix.org>

  >I had a concern with another issue that is quite similar to this one
  >actually.  I was very disappointed when I heard Malfoy say, "A@%."  

I haven't seen the movie yet so I'm not entirely sure of my ground 
here, but do you mean "arse"?  If so, I'd say that it's regarded as a 
vulgarism but not really an oath - I would expect Malfoy to be more 
down-to-earth in his language than the good guys, as a simple matter of 
characterisation.

Malfoy using "bloody" wouldn't have struck me as jarring at all.

Bert
http://www.bertcoules.co.uk
 

 * 1st 2.00 #6252 * 




From A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk  Thu Nov 29 09:48:44 2001
From: A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk (A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:48:44 -0000
Subject: Inner life lack ( review by someone bored at the film)
Message-ID: <9u509s+2rob@eGroups.com>

This review is on SALON online magazine by someone who thought the 
film is wretched and craven.

Edis

See:
http://www.salon.com/sex/turn_on/2001/11/29/harry/index.html

Harry Potter doesn't get "Blue Velvet"
The boy has no profound psychosexual life, which keeps the film from 
being dangerous -- and important. 
By David Thomson Nov. 29, 2001 

Text includes>>>
As I sat beside a merry child -- my own -- at "Harry Potter and the 
Sorcerer's Stone," sinking deeper into despond and boredom, I tried 
to fathom why the film was so empty, and so indifferent to the magic 
it kept blathering about. 

Now I can imagine the parents among you gasping in affront at the 
very suggestion that a Harry Potter film should be as loaded with sex 
(or psycho-sex, or mythic yearnings) as an episode from "Friends." ...
(snip... To which I would reply, in brief, that literature, movies, 
myth and the possible enlightenment of our children one day are all 
far more important than two and a half hours in which weary parents 
may reckon that all is safe and secure. 

I am not hugely impressed by J.K. Rowling's books, though they are 
immeasurably more interesting and potent than this wretched, craven 
film. And since, for this moment, few things loom larger in the 
imaginations of our children, this protest is worthy and important. 
We deserve better. Our children have to have something more 
compelling. The only true measure of greatness in Harry Potterism 
is .... whether young minds are formed, advanced and imperiled by its 
ideas. For growing up has to be dangerous. 
<<<<<end extracts.






From beck_rulz at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 10:07:59 2001
From: beck_rulz at hotmail.com (beck_rulz at hotmail.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:07:59 -0000
Subject: Casting the Other Films, Moody's Mad Eye
In-Reply-To: <200111281401.JAA16725@gaea.East.Sun.COM>
Message-ID: <9u51dv+7oeg@eGroups.com>

Beck said:
>The person I always imagine when thinking of Sirius is Kevin Smith 
who is Ares off Xena and Hercules (My sad past comes out....). He 
does the bad guy thing really well. He is actually an NZer to. But 
most of you probably have no idea who he is..... moving on then
 
Elizabeth said:  
> I do know who you mean. But I've never seen him playing a good guy. 
(Unless you want to count those episodes when he and Xena and co. are 
on the same side for some temporary reason.) He's supposed to show a 
fair amount of warmth and concern in GoF, remember. And I don't think 
I've ever seen him look desperate as Ares, either (though I haven't 
watched most of the episodes-- my husband used to be watching it as 
I'd get home from work.) Looks-wise he's fine, but I just haven't 
seen him portray the emotions/attitudes Sirius will need, at least 
not on Xena. What else has he done?


I was just thinking looks wise. I've only ever seen him in Xena and 
Herc. Apart from playing good-Ares, he also played Hercules' other 
brother in some episodes who I think was good. I think most of his 
other work was stuff within New Zealand.




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Thu Nov 29 10:28:55 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:28:55 -0000
Subject: Have Actor, Need Part
In-Reply-To: <9u4nh3+ehp3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u52l7+oe6c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> Okay -- Iron Casting Director time:
> 
>   Ingredient: Helena Bonham Carter
> 
> 
>   What part for her? Ready.... set.... GO!

How about:

Never again appears in any movie I watch?

:)

Oh, you want reasons? Mostly, that she appears to have a single facial 
expression and has been playing Room With a View for the last decade or 
so....

Ivis the elderly




From chattie27million at aol.com  Thu Nov 29 12:33:32 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:33:32 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
Message-ID: <81.13d503f1.2937851c@aol.com>

In a message dated 29/11/01 06:52:30 GMT Standard Time, 
seijin_dinger at hotmail.com writes:


> -Dinger- The unenlightened one who cant remember Red Dwarf cast members.

I am pretty sure you're talking about Craig Charles........But I don't really 
imagine it myself! Having said that, I'm having difficulty picturing him 
without all the leathers etc on which he wears in Red Dwarf!

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 angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 14:24:11 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:24:11 -0000
Subject: Have Actor, Need Part
In-Reply-To: <9u52l7+oe6c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u5geb+i21u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore" <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> > Okay -- Iron Casting Director time:
> > 
> >   Ingredient: Helena Bonham Carter
> > 
> > 
> >   What part for her? Ready.... set.... GO!
> 
> How about:
> 
> Never again appears in any movie I watch?
> 
> :)
> 
> Oh, you want reasons? Mostly, that she appears to have a single 
facial 
> expression and has been playing Room With a View for the last 
decade or 
> so....
> 
> Ivis the elderly

Oooh. That's cruel. I happen to think Helena Bonham Carter is a 
wonderful actress. Hmmmm. What part could she play? I hear in the 
next HP book, "The Order of the Phoenix", there's gonna be a female 
Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher. Maybe she could play that. If 
not, Narcissa Malfoy would be a good choice.





From AgentIrish at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 14:41:47 2001
From: AgentIrish at yahoo.com (Maggie Connolly)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:41:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <9u4kjs+t4j2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011129144147.6717.qmail@web20004.mail.yahoo.com>


--- tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com wrote:
> >> Black
> I like the Hugh Jackman suggestion, but does the man
> really want to 
> be typecast as men who transform into wild beasts?
> And a dog might 
> be considered a step down from a wolverine on the
> coolness scale, 
> after all. :) Actually I like Jackman. He kind of
> reminds me of a 
> young ______________________ (fill me in folks, the
> guy who played 
> Bill Sykes in "Oliver" and died during the filming
> of Gladiator?), 
> which is a good thing.

Oh, that would be Oliver Reed - He was also fabulous
as Athos in the 3 Musketeers.  


=====
Cheers, Maggie

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From findmeabargain at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 14:47:52 2001
From: findmeabargain at yahoo.com (Wendelin...akaDebWA)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Have Actor, Need Part
In-Reply-To: <9u5geb+i21u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011129144752.7797.qmail@web11903.mail.yahoo.com>

Ooh, I like this game! 

> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Heather Moore"
> <heathernmoore at y...> wrote:
> > > Okay -- Iron Casting Director time:
> > > 
> > >   Ingredient: Helena Bonham Carter

Here are my nominations. For now! ;)

Amanda Root. A British (they all are) actress who
appeared opposite Fiona (Petunia) Shaw in a
recent remark of J.Austen's "Persuasion." Can act
any part, and with her big ole buggy eyes and
gaunt appearance, could fit about anywhere in the
wizarding world.

Sophie Thompson. Emma's sister and a much better
actress IMNSHO. Where ET seems as self-conscious
as her ex, Mr. Branagh, when one watches Sophie,
one forgets one is watching Sophie and sees The
Character. What a thought. You'll recall her from
the same "Persuasion" as well as a recent "Emma"
and "Four Weddings."

Samuel West. Can and has played everything from a
supremely confident officer in "Horatio
Hornblower" to the doomed clerk in "Howard's
End." Tall, curly blond hair, narrow face. Come
to think of it, he could be Draco's movie dad, no
problem.

There's a nother fellow - name escapes me - he
has played the genial husband to Fiona Shaw in
"Persuasion" and the unredeemably hateful villain
in...was it "Great Expectations"? He'd be a
perfect Fudge, I think.

W/D



=====
"So long as dancing is cultivated, civilization progresses; but no sooner is the interdict set forth against it, than the people who were once refined by its inspiration, relapse into barbarism." 
- Thomas Hilgrove, 1856

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Nov 29 17:04:22 2001
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:04:22 -0000
Subject: Oliver Wood (filk)
Message-ID: <9u5pqm+3142@eGroups.com>

Oliver Wood
A filk by Pippin, to the tune of  The Beatles' Norwegian Wood 
Dedicated to S.W.O.O.N.

I once saw this guy
Up on the screen
Making the scene
He rode on a broom
Lookin' so good
Oliver Wood

I wish I could mount on his  Nimbus
And fly through the  air
I'm losing my heart to a guy
Who is not  really there

I spend every night
Dreaming of flight
Wind in my hair
We Quaffles pursue
Up in the blue
Quidditch for two

I dreamt of a date with that actor
Named Sean Biggerstaff
I told him his name was a factor
And tried not to laugh

But when I awoke
I was alone
This Keeper'd flown
So much for desire
Up I got stood
That's (H)ollywood




From witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 17:43:45 2001
From: witchgrrl2004 at yahoo.com (Joli Grostephan)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:43:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting the Other Films
In-Reply-To: <F45iWqlB6luJkop9ZT20001077c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20011129174345.81033.qmail@web14802.mail.yahoo.com>

Who do you all think would make a good Viktor Krum??
--- Heidi Henshaw <hermione_heidi at hotmail.com> wrote:
> In my opinion I do not think that Either Hugh Grant
> or Pierce Brosnan would 
> make a good Lupin, I had pictured Lupin as someone
> who was a bit frazzled 
> around the edges.
> I also think that Billy Connelly would make an
> excellent Mad Eye Moony but 
> Anthony Hopkins would be good too.
> 
> Heidi H
> 
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From bray.262 at osu.edu  Thu Nov 29 13:42:27 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:42:27 EST5EDT
Subject: Oh, that's just great!!!
Message-ID: <1941F02A24@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Thanks for the Oliver Wood song.  I cracked up.  It's 
hilarious.  Now I'll never be able to hear Norwegian Wood 
again without singing about my Oliver...er....our Oliver.

Good job, Pippin!

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 DaveH47 at mindspring.com  Thu Nov 29 19:30:50 2001
From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:30:50 -0800
Subject: Harry Potter and the Crimson Short One
In-Reply-To: <1007028485.1557.23301.m11@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1007028485.1557.23301.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <11950044740.20011129113050@mindspring.com>


Thursday, November 29, 2001, 2:08:05 AM, Dinger wrote:

HMyc> Ok, at the risk of being executed for lack of knowledge I think that the actor who plays Lister on Red Dwarf should be cast
HMyc> as Lupin. I can just picture at the end of the movie him handing the Marauder's Map back to Harry.

Craig Charles.  I'm afraid I can't go with that... Lupin should be
gaunt and Craig is certainly not that... However I *do* see Craig as
Ludo Bagman (a Beater, BTW), especially since Jim Dale gives him a
Liverpudian accent.

HMyc> -Dinger- The unenlightened one who cant remember Red Dwarf cast members.

I see various Dwarfers in the Harry Potter universe -- I initially
thought of Chris Barrie (Rimmer) for Filch or even (in "Ace Rimmer"
mode) Lockhart.  I can also imagine Mac MacDonald (Capt. Hollister)
as either Fudge or Crouch, Sr. and Chloe Annett (Kochanski) as Madam
Rosmerta.

-- 
Dave




From eleri at aracnet.com  Thu Nov 29 15:37:20 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:37:20 -0500
Subject: Lockhart
In-Reply-To: <1007028485.1557.23301.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011129103224.00b2e690@mail.aracnet.com>

At 10:08 AM 11/29/01 +0000, you wrote:
> > does anyone else think that Ken
> > Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?
> >
>
>I don't think he's a bad choice at all, though I have to say that I'm really
>*really* dissapointed that Hugh Grant isn't able to do it instead.  Upon
>watching Notting Hill again the other day, I realised that I've actually now
>started to picture him in the role when reading CoS.

Hmmm, cause I can't see Hugh Grant as Lockhart at all. Everything I've seen 
HG in he comes across as very shy, kind of bumbling and not at all wanting 
attention focused on himself. Brannagh can pull off the Always In The 
Spotlight additude that covers for Lockhart's complete inadequacy as DADA 
Professor

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




From eleri at aracnet.com  Thu Nov 29 15:45:57 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:45:57 -0500
Subject: Quirrell
In-Reply-To: <1007028485.1557.23301.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011129103821.024af740@mail.aracnet.com>

At 10:08 AM 11/29/01 +0000, you wrote:
> >Agreed. The stammer was awful and he didn't work as a villain at all.

My friend who came to see the movie with me, had read the first couple of 
chapters of SS to his daughter, and had *no* idea what the ending was. All 
though the movie he was *sure* it was Snape, because "kids books never have 
big twists in them like that!" and "Quirrell never acted like the bad 
guy!!" He went back to see it a second time, just so he could pick out all 
the clues...like in the Leaky Cauldron, when Quirrell won't shake his hand 
(not in the book, but a nice touch, Voldemort's influence? Does V know that 
Harry's touch might be damaging? Or not wanting to reveal his presence 
through direct contact?) and the first time Harry's scar hurts, he's 
looking at Snape, but Snape is talking to Quirrell, who has his back to 
Harry, so Harry's *facing* Voldemort! Lots of other little clues...

About the flying at the end, it wasn't in the book, but it didn't jar me at 
all. I would expect a DADA teacher to be able to do things like move 
quickly in unexpected ways, and do larger spells without a wand. Or it 
could have been that packing around Voldemort endowed Quirrell with some of 
his powers.

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




From davisaacs at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 20:01:47 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:01:47 -0000
Subject: Lockhart
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.0.20011129103224.00b2e690@mail.aracnet.com>
Message-ID: <9u647b+87d6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., CB <eleri at a...> wrote:
> At 10:08 AM 11/29/01 +0000, you wrote:
> > > does anyone else think that Ken
> > > Brannagh isn't the right choice for Lockhart?

Absolutely, I can't imagine him in the role at all. Hugh Grant would 
have been good, but I think Steve Coogan would be able to tackle the 
rold absolutely perfectly (but then he can tackle any rold thrown at 
him perfectly), and I hope to see him crop up in future Harry Potter 
films.

Dave




From chattie27million at aol.com  Thu Nov 29 20:03:48 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:03:48 EST
Subject: More Casting News: Lupin and Black
Message-ID: <102.cd16186.2937eea4@aol.com>

Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:

http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php

If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really pleased! 
Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as Sirius 
Black!
Hugs
Rach
xxx

> A person associated with Warner Bros. film arm mentioned to me that Chris 
> Columbus had been playing phone tag with Ewan McGregor's agent, trying to 
> pin the Scottish actor down for the part of Remus Lupin in PofA... His 
> particiaption in the project is not yet confirmed they are trying to see 
> whether or not the shooting schedule will conflict with the filming of the 
> third Star wars film. McGregor is also contracted to play James Joyce in a 
> Biopic, in 2003. Also under consideration for Sirius Black is Robson Green, 
> relatively unknown in America, the British actor starred in the acclaimed 
> "Touching Evil" series. Columbus is said to be looking for someone "darker 
> than anyone yet cast".
> 
> 
    
    
    
    



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




From angelaboyko at hotmail.com  Thu Nov 29 20:05:39 2001
From: angelaboyko at hotmail.com (Angela Boyko)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:05:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Ian Hart WAS:More reflections and ratings of the actors
Message-ID: <F132hq0rsTHOcFBv13v0000c655@hotmail.com>


> > >Professor Quirrell/Ian Hart
> > >Rating: Replace this one
> > >I thought he was awful. I'm glad they don't have to replace them.
> >
> >Agreed. The stammer was awful and he didn't work as a villain at all.
>
>*gulp* Am I the only one who REALLY liked Ian Hart as Quirrell?  I think he
>brought a lot of very interesting nuances to a very small part.  His
>reactions in the "troll in the girl's room" scene were very entertaining 
>and
>very telling of his character.

No, I liked him too. Appropriately jumpy and quivery, before the final 
scenes. And very effective as a Death Eater anxious to serve his master by 
whatever means necessary.

I haven't seen this mentioned before on this list - when Quirrell commands 
Harry to come to the mirror, it appears to me that he used some sort of 
spell, by the stiff way Harry walked down the steps. He didn't say anything 
like a spell, but he also flew without one. Agreements? Disagreements? 
Tomatoes?

Angela

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




From hunao01 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 20:33:26 2001
From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:33:26 -0000
Subject: More Casting News: Lupin and Black
In-Reply-To: <102.cd16186.2937eea4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9u662m+njr0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., chattie27million at a... wrote:
> Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:
> 
> http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php
> 
> If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really 
pleased! 
> Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as 
Sirius 
> Black!
> Hugs
> Rach
> xxx
> 
> > A person associated with Warner Bros. film arm mentioned to me 
that Chris 
> > Columbus had been playing phone tag with Ewan McGregor's agent, 
trying to 
> > pin the Scottish actor down for the part of Remus Lupin in 
PofA... His 
> > particiaption in the project is not yet confirmed they are trying 
to see 
> > whether or not the shooting schedule will conflict with the 
filming of the 
> > third Star wars film. McGregor is also contracted to play James 
Joyce in a 
> > Biopic, in 2003. Also under consideration for Sirius Black is 
Robson Green, 
> > relatively unknown in America, the British actor starred in the 
acclaimed 
> > "Touching Evil" series. Columbus is said to be looking for 
someone "darker 
> > than anyone yet cast".
> > 
This is very interesting news. Thanks. Judging by Robson Green's 
photos I found on the Internet, he could be a very nice Black. 
However, I have doubts about Ewan McGregor. Well, actually I have 
nothing against Mr.McGregor. I know he is a good actor and I do like 
Trainspotting and Moulin Rouge. 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.
It seems that Columbus will direct the 3rd one as well since he's 
busy looking for Lupin and Black (if this info is true). I believe he 
will also want to keep the original kid actors. Good news, but I hope 
he will learn from the mistakes they made in SS. PoA is just too 
beautiful to be chopped.(I love SS and don't mind overlook its flaws, 
but same mistakes could totally ruin PoA, which in my opinion is most 
poetic of all.)
Sissy





From idouright2 at aol.com  Thu Nov 29 20:46:06 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:46:06 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
Message-ID: <a1.1f1506cd.2937f88e@aol.com>

Ok I don't want to make a pointless post and I apologize if this takes up space in people's mailboxes but I am totally confused. Are people here selling scarf's? If so I am totally for buying one! The pricess on them on eBay are totally outrageous for a scarf! (But no doubt if I had it I would buy one!) Someone else on eBay has been selling really cool cloaks that look exactly like the ones in the movie! There was one that looked exactly like Dumbledore's final ourfit in the film it went for over 3,000 dollars. I would like a Hogwarts cloak! But yeah I'm so sorry if I've strayed too off topic I was just curious! Thanks all!
-step



From idouright2 at aol.com  Thu Nov 29 20:49:08 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:49:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] hats
Message-ID: <14d.4de3327.2937f945@aol.com>

>>>Did you notice that the more experienced a wizard you are, the more bends 
and brim you have to you hat? I thought that was cute.

Really I never noticed that! I noticed that her hat had alot of bends to it but I thought that was just the way they did it I never knew it ad meaning. I have sadly only seen the movie once! I've been planning to go see it again and if I'm done with work a little early today I might go catch the 2 o'clock showing the first time I went I missed the very beggining due to the flow into the theatre and I had a 7 and 9 year old with me. I'll be sure to keep a close eye out this time!
-step



From goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 21:28:00 2001
From: goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com (Eliza Duke)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:28:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting the Other Films, Moody's Mad Eye
In-Reply-To: <9u51dv+7oeg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011129212800.92578.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>

I heard Jeff Hordely (spelled right?) could be Sirius
Black
--- beck_rulz at hotmail.com wrote:
> Beck said:
> >The person I always imagine when thinking of Sirius
> is Kevin Smith 
> who is Ares off Xena and Hercules (My sad past comes
> out....). He 
> does the bad guy thing really well. He is actually
> an NZer to. But 
> most of you probably have no idea who he is.....
> moving on then
>  
> Elizabeth said:  
> > I do know who you mean. But I've never seen him
> playing a good guy. 
> (Unless you want to count those episodes when he and
> Xena and co. are 
> on the same side for some temporary reason.) He's
> supposed to show a 
> fair amount of warmth and concern in GoF, remember.
> And I don't think 
> I've ever seen him look desperate as Ares, either
> (though I haven't 
> watched most of the episodes-- my husband used to be
> watching it as 
> I'd get home from work.) Looks-wise he's fine, but I
> just haven't 
> seen him portray the emotions/attitudes Sirius will
> need, at least 
> not on Xena. What else has he done?
> 
> 
> I was just thinking looks wise. I've only ever seen
> him in Xena and 
> Herc. Apart from playing good-Ares, he also played
> Hercules' other 
> brother in some episodes who I think was good. I
> think most of his 
> other work was stuff within New Zealand.
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 21:44:13 2001
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:44:13 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <F13FBTOW4JQfmUKZi2U000125fc@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u6a7e+eon4@eGroups.com>



> 
> I had a concern with another issue that is quite similar to this one 
> actually.  I was very disappointed when I heard Malfoy say, "A@%." 
I'm not 
> sure about Britain and other countries, but at least in Canada and
I'm sure 
> I can include the U.S., that is most definitely a swear.

Is a swear, agreed, but I've seen it twice & am pretty sure he said
"arse", which is not quite the same here in the US.  (In fact, I do
remember thinking something like, "I hope people don't think he just
said "a--" because I know that was "arse").

-Megan (who could just be hearing things)




From megrose_13 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 23:18:34 2001
From: megrose_13 at yahoo.com (Meg Therese Elizabeth-Rose, but Meg for short...  I LUV HARRY POTTER!!!!)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:18:34 -0000
Subject: House Colors in the Movie -- HELP!
In-Reply-To: <a1.1f1506cd.2937f88e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9u6foa+c8op@eGroups.com>

What a coincidence!  My friend is making scarves for all of our 
friends for christmas, but I told her that Ravenclaw's colors are 
Blue and Gray.  Here, people are saying Blue and Bronze. Oh, well...  
Where on earth do you suppose I came up with my color scheme...?

A slightly confused Meg  Rose...




From bert.coules at fonix.org  Thu Nov 29 23:39:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:39:00 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <1007070264@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <1007077243@fonix.org>

Megan wrote...

MN>(In fact, I do remember thinking something like, "I hope people 
  >don't think he just said "a--" because I know that was "arse").

Now I'm really confused.  What is this word "a--"?  I assumed that the 
discussion was about "ass", but doesn't that mean the same as "arse"?  
That's to say, behind, posterior, bum, butt, sitapon, rear end, bot, 
and all the rest?

So if "a--" isn't "ass" (or "arse") what the bloody hell is it?  (g)

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
www.bertcoules.co.uk

 * 1st 2.00 #6252 * 




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 29 23:57:47 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:57:47 -0000
Subject: Daniel as Harry
In-Reply-To: <9tvgdt+6ak2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u6i1r+i5a1@eGroups.com>

Been lurking here, but I'm emerging from the shadows to add my two 
knuts' worth re. Daniel as Harry:
I agree completely that Harry isn't prone to showing much emotion and 
that is a reflection of the environment in which he was raised. I was 
raised in an environment very similar (verbal and emotional abuse) 
and, to this day, (I'll be 38 in January and I'm VERY HAPPY about 
it!) I don't show emotion much. Those sorts of lessons stay with you 
for a long time, and it's rarely that I feel safe enough with someone 
to show what I really feel. Look at Daniel's eyes, though, and you'll 
be able to tell what Harry really feels. 
Nice "meeting" all of you!

Nancy


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., eleri at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., genevieve373 at y... wrote:
> > > # Hurts to say this, but Dan Radcliffe is really not very good. 
> He 
> > > has the "stillness" which moviemakers seem to look for in child 
> > > actors, and which Harry needs, but otherwise he's a bit wooden. 
> > > Absolutely likeable, but not very interesting or revealing to 
> watch.
> > 
> > 
> > I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily expressive all the 
time, 
> > but I think that is more the character than the actor.  I 
wouldn't 
> > expect a child who grew up psychologically abused to completely 
> come 
> > out of his shell all at once in a drastically different 
> environment.  
> > He used more expression at the appropriate times, and was stoic 
at 
> > other times...I guess this is just what I might expect from 
Harry.  
> 
> (Trying to play catch up here...)
> This is just the thing I was discussing with another mom who's had 
> experience with abused children. Daniel as Harry comes across just 
as 
> a child whose been abused for 11 years.
> Consider that Harry, every time he showed some emotion or 
expression, 
> was punished or degraded in some way for the entirety of his life, 
so 
> he learns to hide all emotion and expression. That sort of survival 
> reflex doesn't go away quickly or easily. Someone who's been in a 
> situation like that doean't act and react like a normal child, and 
> often comes across as stiff, unemotional and fake. 
> IIRC, there was an interview that said that Daniel had 
that "haunted" 
> look they wanted, that he could portray an abused child well. I 
think 
> that came across perfectly in the film (Although I do think it took 
> about a third of the film before any of the kids hit their stride.)
> 
> Eleri




From dawncad1 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 00:32:58 2001
From: dawncad1 at yahoo.com (dawncad1 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 00:32:58 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <1007077243@fonix.org>
Message-ID: <9u6k3q+olii@eGroups.com>


> 
> So if "a--" isn't "ass" (or "arse") what the bloody hell is it?  (g)
> 
> 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
> www.bertcoules.co.uk
> 
>  * 1st 2.00 #6252 *

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.




From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Fri Nov 30 01:14:52 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 01:14:52 -0000
Subject: Quirrell and Harry
In-Reply-To: <F132hq0rsTHOcFBv13v0000c655@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u6mic+cavi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Angela Boyko" <angelaboyko at h...> wrote:
> No, I liked him too. Appropriately jumpy and quivery, before the
final 
> scenes. And very effective as a Death Eater anxious to serve his
master by 
> whatever means necessary.
> 
> I haven't seen this mentioned before on this list - when Quirrell
commands 
> Harry to come to the mirror, it appears to me that he used some
sort of 
> spell, by the stiff way Harry walked down the steps. He didn't say
anything 
> like a spell, but he also flew without one. Agreements?
Disagreements? 
> Tomatoes?

I thought Quirrell was great and yes, I too assumed that he
used some sort of compulsion to get Harry to come forward...he showed no 
signs of doing so prior to Quirrell's command. 

Ivis the elderly





From sherratt at mediaone.net  Fri Nov 30 01:30:31 2001
From: sherratt at mediaone.net (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 01:30:31 -0000
Subject: Quirrell and Harry
In-Reply-To: <9u6mic+cavi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u6nfn+v8la@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., irbohlen at e... wrote:
> I thought Quirrell was great and yes, I too assumed that he
> used some sort of compulsion to get Harry to come forward...he 
showed no 
> signs of doing so prior to Quirrell's command. 
> 
I also thought he was making Harry come towards him, though I think it 
could have been made more obvious.  Of course, there was nowhere else 
really for Harry to go, with all that fire behind him, but I don't 
think he would have gone over to the mirror of his own free will, 
knowing what its purpose was. Actually, I liked Ian Hart as Quirrel - 
he really looked the part, and I thought his turban was cool.  He did 
a good job making himself the least-likely suspect, and seemed very 
weak and harmless until the end.  The way he delivered the line "But I 
am never alone," looking up at the mirror, suddenly made him a very 
dangerous character.

Wanda





From irbohlen at email.unc.edu  Fri Nov 30 01:39:42 2001
From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen at email.unc.edu)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 01:39:42 -0000
Subject: mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused
In-Reply-To: <9u6k3q+olii@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u6o0u+8kru@eGroups.com>

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





From sweet_brunette27 at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 30 01:58:58 2001
From: sweet_brunette27 at hotmail.com (Christina Davis)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:58:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Casting News: Lupin and Black
Message-ID: <F142IPNTAbAWFswl3tT0001e1d8@hotmail.com>

>Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:
>
>http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php
>
>If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really pleased!
>Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as Sirius
>Black!
>Hugs
>Rach

And I had just gotten used to Christian Bale as a potential Lupin.  It's an 
interesting choice and Ewan is my favorite actor but I can't say I quite see 
it.  One note on the article though, it mentions Ewan playing James Joyce in 
a biopic slated for 2003.  Ewan HAS already played James Joyce in a biopic, 
it's called "Nora" and it's already out in video in some places.  Not sure 
if he's playing James Joyce again but I would doubt that.

Christy
http://www.thepiratequeen.net

"You live in terror of not being misunderstood."

                -"Velvet Goldmine"

>xxx


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




From srae at mindspring.com  Fri Nov 30 02:03:03 2001
From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:03:03 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Casting News: Lupin and Black
In-Reply-To: <102.cd16186.2937eea4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011129210303.00a9f9d0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 03:03 PM 11/29/2001 EST, you wrote:
>Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:
>
>http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php
>
>If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really pleased! 
>Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as Sirius 
>Black!
>Hugs
>Rach


oooooh. Ewan McGregor.  I don't care who he plays, just get him in there!
I'd always thought he'd be a fabulous Gilderoy Lockhart.  I always imagined
Lupin with dark hair.  Does it specify that in the books or am I just
imaginging things?  He's such a fabulous actor though, he can pretty well
morph into anything he wants.  Here's to hoping for Ewan McGregor!

Shannon



From goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 02:20:43 2001
From: goofygirl22_2000 at yahoo.com (Eliza Duke)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:20:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <9u6k3q+olii@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011130022043.33868.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>

Thiswas not a children's film, a children's film is G
or PG13.  This was a PG film, I am not shocked that an
11 year old said this.  
--- dawncad1 at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> > 
> > So if "a--" isn't "ass" (or "arse") what the
> bloody hell is it?  (g)
> > 
> > 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
> > www.bertcoules.co.uk
> > 
> >  * 1st 2.00 #6252 *
> 
> 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.
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 02:57:14 2001
From: angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com (angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 02:57:14 -0000
Subject: More Casting News: Lupin and Black
In-Reply-To: <F142IPNTAbAWFswl3tT0001e1d8@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <9u6sia+8cg8@eGroups.com>

Ewan McGregor and Christian Bale? Hmmm. I always thought they were 
TOO young to play Lupin. After all, aren't they supposed to be James 
Potter's age. They're supposed to be in their mid-30's or early 40's. 
That's why I think Ralph Fiennes or Hugh Grant would best suit the 
role. 


--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Christina Davis" <sweet_brunette27 at h...> 
wrote:
> >Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:
> >
> >http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php
> >
> >If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really 
pleased!
> >Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as 
Sirius
> >Black!
> >Hugs
> >Rach
> 
> And I had just gotten used to Christian Bale as a potential Lupin.  
It's an 
> interesting choice and Ewan is my favorite actor but I can't say I 
quite see 
> it.  One note on the article though, it mentions Ewan playing James 
Joyce in 
> a biopic slated for 2003.  Ewan HAS already played James Joyce in a 
biopic, 
> it's called "Nora" and it's already out in video in some places.  
Not sure 
> if he's playing James Joyce again but I would doubt that.
> 
> Christy
> http://www.thepiratequeen.net
> 
> "You live in terror of not being misunderstood."
> 
>                 -"Velvet Goldmine"
> 
> >xxx
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp




From idouright2 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 03:06:37 2001
From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:06:37 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Casting News: Lupin and Black
Message-ID: <8f.1336aa08.293851c0@aol.com>

In a message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2001  9:01:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Christina Davis" <sweet_brunette27 at hotmail.com> writes:

> >Just thought I would pass this on to you all, I found it at:
> >
> >http://www.harry-potter-movies.net/HPC/index2.php
> >
> >If the Ewan McGregor thing happens, I will be really, really pleased!
> >Although i have to say I've never really imagined Robson Green as Sirius
> >Black!
> >Hugs
> >Rach
> 
> And I had just gotten used to Christian Bale as a potential Lupin.  It's an 
> interesting choice and Ewan is my favorite actor but I can't say I quite see 
> it.  One note on the article though, it mentions Ewan playing James Joyce in 
> a biopic slated for 2003.  Ewan HAS already played James Joyce in a biopic, 
> it's called "Nora" and it's already out in video in some places.  Not sure 
> if he's playing James Joyce again but I would doubt that.

I love Ewan and would adore to see him in a Potter film but whoever brought up the age thing earlier was totally right he's too young. But if they cast him as Lupin no complaining from me! I'm highly anticipating the release of Moulin Rouge on DVD this December! But yes...my point was what about Anthony Stewart-Head, of Buffy fame, as Lupin? I mean he's british and a great and charming actor in my opinion
-step


> 
> Christy
> http://www.thepiratequeen.net
> 
> "You live in terror of not being misunderstood."
> 
>                 -"Velvet Goldmine"
> 
> >xxx
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 
> 
> 
> ________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/ 





From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 03:12:22 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:12:22 -0000
Subject: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <20011130022043.33868.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u6tem+fr2s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Eliza Duke <goofygirl22_2000 at y...> wrote:

> Thiswas not a children's film, a children's film is G
> or PG13.  This was a PG film, I am not shocked that an
> 11 year old said this.  
> --- dawncad1 at y... wrote:

It's my understanding that PG comes between "G" and PG-13 in the ratings 
hierarchy.    Films that are rated PG-13 are not recommended for kids under 
13.   So HPSS's PG rating means that it's not  appropriate for the youngest 
kids, but is OK for kids under 13.




From john at walton.vu  Fri Nov 30 03:35:52 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:35:52 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language
In-Reply-To: <9u6tem+fr2s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <B82CAF18.60A3%john@walton.vu>

someone (dawncad) wrote:

> 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.

Joanne0012 at aol.com wrote:

> It's my understanding that PG comes between "G" and PG-13 in the ratings
> hierarchy.    Films that are rated PG-13 are not recommended for kids under
> 13.   So HPSS's PG rating means that it's not  appropriate for the youngest
> kids, but is OK for kids under 13.

I too am unsurprised by the language used -- in fact I feel it's quite mild
for the age. When I started at boarding school at 13, our mothers would have
washed our mouths out with soap if they could have heard us. I think that
JKR has watered down the language a *lot*.

Bear in mind, too, that "arse" in UK-speak isn't *really* as offensive as
"ass" in US-speak. (I'm an American of British parentage and education who
has lived in the US all my life apart from five years at boarding school &
three years at university; I still live in NY, so I do have a handle on
this.)

--John

____________________________________________

The order was given to turn cows to whoppers
Enforced by the might of ten thousand coppers
But on the horizon surrounding the shoppers
Came the deafening roar of chickens in choppers
    --"Cows With Guns", by Dana Lyons

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________






From caliburncy at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 03:48:35 2001
From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:48:35 -0000
Subject: US Ratings and HP swears (was Re: Help from UK viewers/readers? language)
In-Reply-To: <9u6tem+fr2s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u6vij+donj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Eliza Duke <goofygirl22_2000 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > Thiswas not a children's film, a children's film is G
> > or PG13.  This was a PG film, I am not shocked that an
> > 11 year old said this.  
> > --- dawncad1 at y... wrote:
> 
> It's my understanding that PG comes between "G" and PG-13 in the
> ratings hierarchy.  Films that are rated PG-13 are not recommended
> for kids under 13.  So HPSS's PG rating means that it's not
> appropriate for the youngest kids, but is OK for kids under 13.

Yes, this is correct.  The MPAA ratings system used in the United 
States works as follows, for any international folks unfamiliar with 
it and interested:

***

G -- General Audiences -- All Ages Admitted

PG -- Parental Guidance Suggested -- Some Material May Not Be 
Suitable for Children

PG-13 -- Parents Strongly Cautioned -- Some Material May Be 
Inappropriate for Children Under 13

R -- Restricted -- Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult 
Guardian

NC-17 -- No One 17 and Under Admitted

***

(Also, you can visit www.mpaa.org for more info if you're *really* 
interested, though I can't imagine why you would be.)

In any case, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is pretty much 
in keeping with typical PG movies these days in terms of 
objectionable content.  Despite popular belief to the contrary, there 
is no concrete "system" by which the MPAA makes its ratings' 
decisions (i.e. no particular number of swear words or particular 
types of swear words or that sort of thing).  There are definitely 
certain *guidelines* and *conventions* along these lines, but the 
final call is made by a board comprised of 8-13 members and based on 
the opinions of those members in a very abstract sense, not a 
checklist or other sort of system, at least according to the MPAA.

So, anyway, parents may object to the use of mild profanity in 
Philosopher's Stone, but they probably shouldn't be particularly 
surprised by it either, because it's relatively consistent with the 
PG rating.

As for the *logic* of Ron saying "bloody" in front of an extremely 
strict teacher without her reacting in turn--that's another matter 
entirely.  I can't really comment on how offensive Prof. McGonagall 
would find this (if at all), because I am not British.

"Arse" on the other hand seems, logically speaking, a reasonable 
enough thing for our dear friend Mr. Draco Malfoy to say when he 
doesn't feel in danger of being overheard.  On the one hand, I 
thought it was a pretty weak piece of dialogue on the whole, but then 
again, despite his continual delusions to the contrary, Mr. Draco 
Malfoy is not a truly witty fellow in general.

-Luke




From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 03:56:22 2001
From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:56:22 -0000
Subject: HP swears 
In-Reply-To: <9u6vij+donj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u7016+29qi@eGroups.com>


Okay, I'm confused here. Is "bloody" considered profanity in the UK? 
Granted, I'm from Texas (we speak another language than the rest of 
the US) but I never thought "bloody" was that bad. (Written by the 
girl who uses the phrase "fixin' to" on a regular basis.)
Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised to see 
a blond.  





From bray.262 at osu.edu  Fri Nov 30 08:28:24 2001
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 08:28:24 EST5EDT
Subject: A bit confused with an IMDb remark....
Message-ID: <2C06913D50@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

I got on IMDb to see where Harry was standing on their Top 
250 (it's 208, by the way...yay!) and saw that they had 
their Movie Connections category up.

It has Star Wars, Labyrinth and Gladiator.  Star Wars, I 
get.  Labyrinth....OK.  But I don't understand Gladiator.  
Now, I only saw Gladiator once so I may be missing 
something.

Does anyone have any insight on this one?

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 davisaacs at hotmail.com  Fri Nov 30 13:36:42 2001
From: davisaacs at hotmail.com (David )
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 13:36:42 -0000
Subject: A bit confused with an IMDb remark....
In-Reply-To: <2C06913D50@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <9u821a+7vhr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> wrote:
> I got on IMDb to see where Harry was standing on their Top 
> 250 (it's 208, by the way...yay!) and saw that they had 
> their Movie Connections category up.
> 
> It has Star Wars, Labyrinth and Gladiator.  Star Wars, I 
> get.  Labyrinth....OK.  But I don't understand Gladiator.  
> Now, I only saw Gladiator once so I may be missing 
> something.
> 
> Does anyone have any insight on this one?

Hmmmm...when the team were about to go onto the Quidditch match, and 
they were standing there, Wood giving his speech about not 
remembering his first match, I think that was a reference to 
Gladiator. That could be it, otherwise I can't think of any 
connections.

Dave




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Fri Nov 30 14:20:29 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 06:20:29 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A bit confused with an IMDb remark....
References: <9u821a+7vhr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002001c179aa$2b324300$414e28d1@oemcomputer>

One of the adult HP actors was in Gladiator...Richard Harris if I remember
correctly, hence the connection.

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From margdean at erols.com  Fri Nov 30 15:57:52 2001
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:57:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Malfoy's Hair
References: <9u7016+29qi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3C07AC80.1CD6DAEF@erols.com>

nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com wrote:

> Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised to see
> a blond.

The books describe him as pale blond, so if anything the movie
version is darker than what Rowling wrote him as.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>




From john at walton.vu  Fri Nov 30 15:57:27 2001
From: john at walton.vu (John Walton)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:57:27 +0000
Subject: HP and Gladiator (was: A bit confused with an IMDb remark....)
In-Reply-To: <2C06913D50@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <B82D5CE7.6124%john@walton.vu>

Rachel Bray wrote:

> It has Star Wars, Labyrinth and Gladiator.  Star Wars, I
> get.  Labyrinth....OK.  But I don't understand Gladiator.
> Now, I only saw Gladiator once so I may be missing
> something.

Remember as they're trooping out to the Quidditch field? Think Maximus' last
battle.

Tenuous, I know...but there you go.

--John

____________________________________________

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

John Walton -- john at walton.vu
____________________________________________




From madaboutsteps at barclays.net  Fri Nov 30 16:20:36 2001
From: madaboutsteps at barclays.net (madaboutsteps at barclays.net)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:20:36 -0000
Subject: HP swears
In-Reply-To: <9u7016+29qi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u8bkk+ru68@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote:
> 
> Okay, I'm confused here. Is "bloody" considered profanity in the 
UK? 
> Granted, I'm from Texas (we speak another language than the rest of 
> the US) but I never thought "bloody" was that bad. (Written by the 
> girl who uses the phrase "fixin' to" on a regular basis.)
> Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised to 
see 
> a blond.

Well I'm British and quite frankly I'm not insulted by the 
word "Bloody", Kids use far worse words. I'm not insulted by "Arse" 
either, I think that both these words are evident in everyday 
language whether considered vulgar or not. The use of both these 
words for me actually adds a bit of reality to the movie as most kids 
are not so well spoken as we would hope. I know that people will say 
that the film is not supposed to reflect reality as such but in a way 
we still have to believe in it, otherwise it would be a pointless 
exercise.
Funny you should say that about Malfoy, at first I thought he was 
dark haired too, it was not until the fourth book that I realised he 
was not dark haired but indeed blond like his mother and his father. 




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Fri Nov 30 17:20:13 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:20:13 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
References: <81.13d503f1.2937851c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <00a001c179c3$47aba760$53af1e3e@stephen>

As a stupid person who can never remember actor's names etc, would it be possible for those of you doing the fantasy casting to link us to a picture wherever possible? I'd love to have an opinion on whether these suggestions fit my mental images or not!!!

Thanks,

Lucy


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




From sbiber at optushome.com.au  Fri Nov 30 17:41:31 2001
From: sbiber at optushome.com.au (Simon Biber)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 04:41:31 +1100
Subject: An Australian's first viewing, and movie ratings
References: <1007124414.247.41797.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <006a01c179c6$3f255020$0500a8c0@eagle>

Hi, I'm Simon from Australia, 19 years old, and I have seen HPPS once, on
opening night, Thursday 29th November. Unfortunately the movie releases are
always delayed here but it wasn't as bad as in some previous cases. I did
read most of the reviews on this list as they came in on this list from
people in the UK then the US, and I still was very impressed with the movie!

I won't spend forever reiterating the great points made by everyone else,
but I was impressed with H/R/H, Malfoy could have been nastier, Filch was
excellent, Snape was fine though could have been uglier, and they could have
shown stronger abuse from the Dursleys. Nearly Headless Nick was useless,

Luke wrote about the American MPAA system:
> G -- General Audiences -- All Ages Admitted
>
> PG -- Parental Guidance Suggested -- Some Material May Not
> Be Suitable for Children
>
> PG-13 -- Parents Strongly Cautioned -- Some Material May Be
> Inappropriate for Children Under 13
>
> R -- Restricted -- Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or
> Adult Guardian
>
> NC-17 -- No One 17 and Under Admitted

Here is the Australian system, under which Harry Potter was rated PG
(Parental guidance recommended for persons under 15 years) which I feel is
quite appropriate. It's not a children's movie, and there are concepts and
scenes which some people may find disturbing.

(G) GENERAL - Suitable for all ages

(PG) PARENTAL GUIDANCE - Parental guidance recommended for persons under 15
years

(M) MATURE - Recommended for mature audiences 15 years and over

(MA 15+) MATURE ACCOMPANIED - Restrictions apply to persons under the age of
15. The MA category is legally restricted. Children under fifteen will not
be allowed to see MA films in the cinema or hire them on video unless in the
company of a parent or adult guardian.

(R 18+) RESTRICTED - Restricted to adults 18 years and over

(Filched from http://movies.sofcom.com.au/censorship_ratings.html)

--
Simon Biber.




From valjean131 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 18:14:48 2001
From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:14:48 -0000
Subject: Malfoy's Hair and more
In-Reply-To: <3C07AC80.1CD6DAEF@erols.com>
Message-ID: <9u8iao+p0u7@eGroups.com>


> 
> > Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised to 
see a blond.> >

> 
> The books describe him as pale blond, so if anything the movie
> version is darker than what Rowling wrote him as.

Perhaps I'm reaching here, but I got a very "Arian Nation" thing
from the Malfoys. I assumed JK was using the clicheed 
look to supplement the Nazi ethnic cleansing parallels. 

Sort of on this subject...

Obviously prejudice is a huge theme in the books. Against Muggles, 
half-bloods, Giants, etc...

How do ya'll think the muggles, if at all, will fit into the war 
against Voldy? There's something slightly condescending about the way 
Wizards, most anyway, see Muggles. I think it would be a wonderful 
lesson in prejudice if a Muggle or Muggles played a key role in 
helping defeat the Dark Lord. Perhaps even a slight breaking down of 
the segregation in the Potterverse.

Thoughts?

And a little thing that bothered me. Why is it, Hermione, who is so 
skilled at magic, can't summon her broom easily in the flying lesson 
scene?


-Monique




From dramaticdecision at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 18:16:05 2001
From: dramaticdecision at yahoo.com (mandy cole)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:16:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: some questions on draco
In-Reply-To: <1007124414.247.41797.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all!
I'll just ask and respond real quick and then get back
to lurking...

first, can someone enlighten me as to where draco said
'arse' in the movie? I don't seem to recall hearing
it; I've been twice. 

second, yes, I actually did picture him with dark hair
when reading the books, and now I actually think I
like him better blonde.

third, anyone else actually LIKE snape after seeing
the movie? This scares me.

*Mandy in MO*

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



From deely168 at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 18:30:04 2001
From: deely168 at yahoo.com (deely168 at yahoo.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:30:04 -0000
Subject: harry's broomstick surfing
Message-ID: <9u8j7c+h1d9@eGroups.com>

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.




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 18:35:15 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:35:15 -0000
Subject: some questions on draco/liking Snape
In-Reply-To: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u8jh3+e7k3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., mandy cole <dramaticdecision at y...> wrote:

> third, anyone else actually LIKE snape after seeing
> the movie? This scares me.

Yes, Mandy, I liked Snape, and I do mean the character -- I'm not one of those 
gals who's falling for him!  The protrayal in the film reinforced my belief that 
Snape is not any sort of enemy of Harry, but is hard on him for the same 
reason that Dumbledore left him with the Dursleys -- to toughen him up, so 
that fame doesn't go to his head.

In the movie, he's even softer than in the book -- he chastises Harry in class 
only because he *seems* to not be paying attention; he wishes Harry good luck 
before the quidditch match; and he (in both book and film) does save his life 
when Quirrell hexes Harry's broomstick.  Furthermore, I think that he's a 
double agent and ally of Dumbledore, who heads Slytherin and coddles Malfoy 
only in order to appear thoroughly Slytherin-ish.  And I think he's hiding his 
disappointment that Harry didn't end up in Slytherin.




From Manda1999 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 18:37:21 2001
From: Manda1999 at aol.com (Manda1999 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:37:21 -0000
Subject: some questions on draco
In-Reply-To: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u8jl1+g42a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., mandy cole <dramaticdecision at y...> wrote:
> Hi all!
> I'll just ask and respond real quick and then get back
> to lurking...
> 
> first, can someone enlighten me as to where draco said
> 'arse' in the movie? I don't seem to recall hearing
> it; I've been twice. 
>
I believe it was after Madam Hooch took Neville to the hospital wing 
after he fell. Something about if he'd had the remembrall maybe he 
would've remembered to fall on his fat 'arse' instead of his wrist. 
It wasn't easy to catch. There were a bunch of kids onscreen talking. 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just 
$8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1




From Joanne0012 at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 18:41:29 2001
From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:41:29 -0000
Subject: harry's broomstick surfing
In-Reply-To: <9u8j7c+h1d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u8jsp+7dp6@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.

Yes, it was cringe-worthy and completely unnecessary.   I read about it before 
seeing it, and was *so* grateful that we saw mostly just his feet, not a 
full-fledged surfer dude!  I suppose Harry, having seen surfers on muggle TV, 
would be more likely to think of such a strategy than the teammates raised in 
the wizarding world. 

I do hope that in CoS, Kloves and Columbus include more of the original dry-ish 
humor, and less of such American-style dramatic hijinks.




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Fri Nov 30 19:31:59 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:31:59 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP swears
References: <9u8bkk+ru68@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <015401c179d5$ae08ece0$53af1e3e@stephen>

>> Okay, I'm confused here. Is "bloody" considered profanity in the 
UK? 
>> Granted, I'm from Texas (we speak another language than the rest of 
>> the US) but I never thought "bloody" was that bad. (Written by the 
>> girl who uses the phrase "fixin' to" on a regular basis.)
>> Did anyone else picture Malfoy with dark hair? I was surprised to 
see 
>> a blond.

So was my fiance, I've just found out - he says it's obviously a girl thing to notice hair colour as he didn't realise Lockhart was blond either! BTW, why is 'fixin to' a rude thing to say?


>Well I'm British and quite frankly I'm not insulted by the 
word "Bloody", Kids use far worse words. I'm not insulted by "Arse" 
either, I think that both these words are evident in everyday 
language whether considered vulgar or not. The use of both these 
words for me actually adds a bit of reality to the movie as most kids 
are not so well spoken as we would hope. I know that people will say 
that the film is not supposed to reflect reality as such but in a way 
we still have to believe in it, otherwise it would be a pointless 
exercise.
Funny you should say that about Malfoy, at first I thought he was 
dark haired too, it was not until the fourth book that I realised he 
was not dark haired but indeed blond like his mother and his father. 

No, I'd have to disagree on that one. It doesn't offend me too much in context, like when you realise you've forgotten something and say 'bloody hell', but I was brought up in a quite old-fashioned family (I'm 27, BTW) and I find unneccessary F's and B's etc very offensive indeed. I know bloody and arse are mild swear words, but I think it was unnecessary to put them in when JKR didn't have them in the book. I particularly cringed at the 'bloody brilliant miss' - as I said in a previous post, it is unbelievable that an 11 year old would swear right in front of a very strict teacher like that - at least I would have found it unbelievable! We always were rude about the teachers, but almost never to their faces. Maybe I'm just hopelessly out of touch! Actually, he wouldn't have said 'miss' either - they always say 'professor' in the books, don't they?

Lucy, suddenly feeling very old and a bit sad about how rude people are nowadays!


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




From lucy at luphen.co.uk  Fri Nov 30 19:34:05 2001
From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:34:05 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: harry's broomstick surfing
References: <9u8jsp+7dp6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <015b01c179d5$f9d279c0$53af1e3e@stephen>

>> 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.

>Yes, it was cringe-worthy and completely unnecessary.   I read about it before 
seeing it, and was *so* grateful that we saw mostly just his feet, not a 
full-fledged surfer dude!  I suppose Harry, having seen surfers on muggle TV, 
would be more likely to think of such a strategy than the teammates raised in 
the wizarding world. 

>I do hope that in CoS, Kloves and Columbus include more of the original dry-ish 
humor, and less of such American-style dramatic hijinks.

Yes, aarrghh!!! I couldn't believe it when I saw that scene - yuck, yuck! The whole point of flying (particularly a top broom like the Nimbus) is surely being able to move around in the sky - if he needed to get closer, he could have just gone a bit higher and faster. If they HAD to add drama, he could maybe have flung himself forwards nearly off the broom, like I think he does in some other matches - but no surfing - aaargh!

Lucy, back to lurkdom again now.


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




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Fri Nov 30 19:46:29 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:46:29 -0000
Subject: some questions on draco
In-Reply-To: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u8nml+29e5@eGroups.com>


> first, can someone enlighten me as to where draco said
> 'arse' in the movie? I don't seem to recall hearing
> it; I've been twice. 

It is during the flying class scene, after Madam Hooch took 
Neville to the hospital.

> second, yes, I actually did picture him with dark hair
> when reading the books, and now I actually think I
> like him better blonde.

Can you enlighten me why you picture him with dark hair?
In which way did the book description of him gave you the 
impression he has black hair? I'm really curious because I've 
heard several assumption like this before and it just really puzzle 
me.  It say so few times in the book he has "Ice-Blond" hair.  

> third, anyone else actually LIKE snape after seeing
> the movie? This scares me.

What's NOT to like of the movie Snape? Why does that scare 
you? Snape has always been my favorite character so certainly I 
really like him in the movie as well.  He's a great and very 
interesting character!




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Fri Nov 30 19:48:26 2001
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:48:26 -0000
Subject: some questions on draco
In-Reply-To: <20011130181605.92241.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9u8nqa+9htq@eGroups.com>


> first, can someone enlighten me as to where draco said
> 'arse' in the movie? I don't seem to recall hearing
> it; I've been twice. 

It is during the flying class scene, after Madam Hooch took 
Neville to the hospital.

> second, yes, I actually did picture him with dark hair
> when reading the books, and now I actually think I
> like him better blonde.

Can you enlighten me why you picture him with dark hair?
In which way did the book description of him gave you the 
impression he has black hair? I'm really curious because I've 
heard several assumption like this before and it just really puzzle 
me.  It say so few times in the book he has "Ice-Blond" hair.  

> third, anyone else actually LIKE snape after seeing
> the movie? This scares me.

What's NOT to like of the movie Snape? Why does that scare 
you? Snape has always been my favorite character so certainly I 
really like him in the movie as well.  He's a great and very 
interesting character!




From SALeathem at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 19:48:44 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:48:44 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused
Message-ID: <cb.1a06af76.29393c9c@aol.com>

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

Not censored in the UK, hasn't been for a very long time. In fact, there's 
only one 4 letter word (not the f one) that is still censored on British TV. 
I think you can say pretty much everything else (after 9pm, which is the 
watershed time). And even then it's not going to be long before they stop 
censoring it.

The language in the movie was tame by normal british-kids-that-age standards. 
Really, it was. Very tame.


Ivis wrote:
<< 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. >>

As for when. First flying lesson. Neville flies off and gets caught on a flag 
pole (or something), his robes tear and he falls to the ground. Madam Hooch 
takes him to the hospital wing and Malfoy finds Neville's rememberall. He 
then shows everyone what he's got and says (roughly):

"maybe if he'd given this a shake he'd have remembered to fall on his fat 
arse" (lots of sniggering).

After that, Harry tells malfoy to give it back, they end up flying and that's 
when Harry is witnessed by McGonagall catching the rememberall. Next thing, 
he's been taken off to see Oliver Wood about Quidditch. 
Yes, arse means bum, backside etc. Americans have a word for the same body 
part, that in the UK means something very different, and it's not something 
you want to go about saying to anyone. So just be careful :) 


<< 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". >>

Umm, not all of us. Only those born in the south & posh people. The rest 
don't add r's to words that have none (ie: Bath & Path, and France which, 
while it has the one R, has just that - One R. Not several, as you might 
think when someone from the south says it).


<< 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. >>

I don't think it was so much that. In the books there is the suggestion of 
worse swear words than arse or bloody (if you still class such as swearing, 
and really, I don't, nor do I think any of the kids the same age as HRH are 
in the movie/books would) in the books, but due to the age group the 
publishers aim the books at, or maybe because JKR wants the universal appeal, 
we don't actually hear them. Instead, we hhave McGonagall shouting "JORDAN!", 
or Hermione saying "RON!". In cases where Hermione's not around to say "RON!" 
we get something like - 

Ron said a word that would have made Hermione say "RON!" 

(There was another version but I can't find it right now, but you get the 
idea).

On this whole subject of swearing, 'git' is a swear word too y'know. I don't 
know if it's known in the US, but it is in the UK. But again, very mild. 

Sara



From SALeathem at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 19:51:41 2001
From: SALeathem at aol.com (SALeathem at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:51:41 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Blond Malfoy (was RE: HP swears)
Message-ID: <91.14461fe4.29393d4d@aol.com>

In a message dated 30/11/2001 04:04:26 GMT Standard Time, 
nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com 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



From chattie27million at aol.com  Fri Nov 30 20:05:17 2001
From: chattie27million at aol.com (chattie27million at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:05:17 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Blond Malfoy (was RE: HP swears)
Message-ID: <147.57f8ac9.2939407d@aol.com>

In a message dated 30/11/01 19:53:24 GMT Standard Time, SALeathem at aol.com 
writes:


> . Is he really blond in real life and they just made it even lighter, 
> or does he normally have darker hair? 

I think his hair in real life is actually brown, but don't quote me on that!! 
I know that in pictures I saw of him in things before HP, he had brown hair.

I suppose it was blonde on Blue Peter because they will have started some 
work on CoS, or at least be about to start.
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 saitaina at wizzards.net  Fri Nov 30 20:06:20 2001
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 12:06:20 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Blond Malfoy (was RE: HP swears)
References: <147.57f8ac9.2939407d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <005b01c179da$7b3e5ac0$104e28d1@oemcomputer>

Tom Felton has light brown to dark dark blonde hair, it changed colour
sometime during Anna and the King and is blonde in all later appearances
(ranging from dark blonde to oh my god! blonde).

Saitaina
*****
Giles (to the Council members): You all stand around and look somber.
(Indeed they do.) Good job.
Quentin: You used to respect us, Giles. You used to be one of us.
Giles: You used to pay me.

"The only way to get rid of temptation is to give in."
-Oscar Wilde




From bert.coules at fonix.org  Fri Nov 30 20:20:00 2001
From: bert.coules at fonix.org (bert.coules at fonix.org)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:20:00 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] mysterious "a-words" now we're REALLY confused
Message-ID: <1007151945@fonix.org>

Sara wrote...

SM>Yes, arse means bum, backside etc. Americans have a word for the
  >same body part, that in the UK means something very different...

I must say, I've been surprised to learn that "ass" (however you
pronounce it) is evidently regarded in the US as quite strong language.
Is this really the case, or have I misinterpreted what people have
been saying here?

And if it is that objectionable, is it because it has an alternative
meaning other than "bum, backside, etc" for Americans?

For what it's worth on the language-in-the-movie question, I found the
"bloody" jarring, not because it's particularly offensive or
unusual for a contemporary British youngster, but simply because it 
was out of character for Ron under those particular circumstances. As 
Sara said, there are several unspoken but clearly implied "bastards" 
and similar (or worse) throughout the books - just not usually in 
front of teachers. 

Besides, it's part of the spirit, the tone of the books that we don't 
have such language spelled out for us, but are left to supply it from 
our own imagination.  Film is, of course, a much more concrete medium 
than the written word, but it would have been pleasant if the script 
had at least tried to find a cinematic equivalent of Rowling's 
narrative reticence in these matters.

Bert
http://www.bertcoules.co.uk

 * 1st 2.00 #6252 * 




From eleri at aracnet.com  Fri Nov 30 17:38:09 2001
From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 12:38:09 -0500
Subject: hats
In-Reply-To: <1007084453.3067.38039.m5@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011130123641.00b21ce0@mail.aracnet.com>

At 01:40 AM 11/30/01 +0000, you wrote:
> >>>Did you notice that the more experienced a wizard you are, the more bends
>and brim you have to you hat? I thought that was cute.
>
>Really I never noticed that! I noticed that her hat had alot of bends to 
>it but I thought that was just the way they did it I never knew it ad 
>meaning. I have sadly only seen the movie once! I've been planning to go 
>see it again and if I'm done with work a little early today I might go 
>catch the 2 o'clock showing the first time I went I missed the very 
>beggining due to the flow into the theatre and I had a 7 and 9 year old 
>with me. I'll be sure to keep a close eye out this time!
>-step

*nodnod* Watch at the end of the year feast...the first years have a pinty 
hant, no brin, no bends, the second years have no brim, but a bend, and you 
can kinda see brims and more bends down the table.

Eleri




From scrapbook at holmes.net  Fri Nov 30 21:07:48 2001
From: scrapbook at holmes.net (Delenne)
Date: 30 Nov 2001 13:07:48 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A bit confused with an IMDb remark....
Message-ID: <20011130210748.9042.cpmta@c000.snv.cp.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20011130/9329f18d/attachment.ksh>

From laurakay76 at juno.com  Fri Nov 30 02:47:14 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:47:14 -0500
Subject: Ludo Bagman, and our new casting game
Message-ID: <20011129.221441.-587369.1.laurakay76@juno.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.

Yes, according to GoF, Bagman was a Beater for the Wimbourne Wasps.  How
about putting Eric Idle in that role?  

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.

I think Ralph Fiennes is a good choice for Lupin, but I would personally
love to see that role bestowed on one of my own British favorites -- Cary
Elwes.  (Unlike other Robin Hoods, he can speak with an English accent.) 
Cornelius Fudge is a harder one for me to make a decision about, because
all I get in my head is the voice assigned to him by audiobook reader Jim
Dale, which has a crispness about it and also a slight whine.  I can't
think of anyone who fits that bill.

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.
________________________________________________________________
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 laurakay76 at juno.com  Fri Nov 30 02:47:14 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:47:14 -0500
Subject: Ludo Bagman, and our new casting game
Message-ID: <20011130.170314.-609613.1.laurakay76@juno.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.

Yes, according to GoF, Bagman was a Beater for the Wimbourne Wasps.  How
about putting Eric Idle in that role?  

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.

I think Ralph Fiennes is a good choice for Lupin, but I would personally
love to see that role bestowed on one of my own British favorites -- Cary
Elwes.  (Unlike other Robin Hoods, he can speak with an English accent.) 
Cornelius Fudge is a harder one for me to make a decision about, because
all I get in my head is the voice assigned to him by audiobook reader Jim
Dale, which has a crispness about it and also a slight whine.  I can't
think of anyone who fits that bill.

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.
________________________________________________________________
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 laurakay76 at juno.com  Fri Nov 30 22:27:21 2001
From: laurakay76 at juno.com (Laura Klotz)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:27:21 -0500
Subject: Voldemort in the Mirror of Erised
Message-ID: <20011130.173715.-609613.6.laurakay76@juno.com>


Katie wrote:
>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?

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.")  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.  Perhaps, in
a storyline sense, Voldemort didn't want Quirrell to take his eyes off of
Harry, so he could be prepared to stop him if he tried to escape or do
something drastic.

~Laura K.
________________________________________________________________
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 dramaticdecision at yahoo.com  Fri Nov 30 22:50:25 2001
From: dramaticdecision at yahoo.com (mandy cole)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: more on draco/snape
In-Reply-To: <1007154472.2411.58590.m2@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20011130225025.61054.qmail@web14913.mail.yahoo.com>


 Ok all, I know I promised I'd go back to lurking, and I *really* mean it this time, but I just HAD to respond to some of your responses!
first, thank you to all who reminded me where the now infamous 'arse' was. I suppose the fact that I (who attend a private christian college somewhere in the buckle of the bible belt of missouri) didn't catch it after watching the movie twice (and I REALLY watched closely!) should indicate that it may have been overlooked by some who may otherwise object. Did that come out right? I'm *really* tired. In my opinion, Draco making a remark like that about Neville is totally -in character-, despite the fact that those words may not have been in the text.
second, I own the audio and text versions of the books, and what with listening in the car, at home, etc., I've been through the books more times than I wish to even estimate (it's got to be over 10 each). Until the movie was cast and those wonderful clips began showing, I honestly did have a very vivid image in my head of Draco as a dark-haired. Now that you all mention the passages in the book, I can appreciate and remember them, but I guess I really do have limited control over what my imagination wants to do to an image of a character it perceives as evil. Perhaps it's because I'm very fair haired that I don't want to imagine a fair haired person as evil. *just a thought*
thirdly, after the movie I did like snape more. Yes, I liked him as a giggling school girl might like alan rickman (he is stunning, isn't he?), but more importantly I developed a deeper affection for the character himself. You can chalk that up to my being a very visual person; it's so much harder for me to hate someone that I *know*, and after seeing snape in this live action film, I feel just that much closer to him. It's complicated, and like I said I'm very tired, but I'm sure someone out there can (sort of ) follow.
Okay, now I promise not to babble on anymore.
p.s. My face was doing the worst things the first time I saw that 'surfing' bit. My husband poked me (apparantly I must have groaned) and said, Oh it's only a movie!!! :)
*Mandy In MO*



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

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




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Fri Nov 30 21:52:34 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 21:52:34 -0000
Subject: After my 6th viewing....
In-Reply-To: <9u45qh+vnud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u8v32+94hd@eGroups.com>

> Yes, Rachel, this was the very first thing I commented on after
> seeing the movie the first time, and they even have Harry petting 
him 
> when they're looking out the window. Hedwig deserves his name. 

OK this is probably totally irrelevant but Hedwig is female :) 
It says in the first book that when Harry and Hagrid leave Eeylop's 
Owl Emporium that "Harry now carried a large cage which held a 
beautiful snowy owl, fast asleep with HER head under her wing" plus 
Harry alway refers to Hedwig as HER when he doesn't call her by name.

HOLLYDAZE (who feels she is being WAAAAY to picky!! :)





From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Fri Nov 30 23:19:55 2001
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 23:19:55 -0000
Subject: Ewan as Lupin
In-Reply-To: <9u662m+njr0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <9u946r+tsqj@eGroups.com>

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!!!