Seventeen points against the movie...

[rcraigharman at hotmail.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