[HPFGU-Movie] Re: Poll for HP BAFTA's

[John Walton]

adhara_black wrote:

> I think it WAS snubbed. Not sure why, but I suspect one of the
> reasons may be that it was regarded a children's film. HP probably
> was unlucky to be released in the same year as Lord of the Rings.
> And now I shall go and vote.

Alternatively, it could be for the reasons why *many* of our listmembers
have been disappointed with the film: slightly wooden acting, at times
laughable special effects (e.g. centaur), *awful* (IMO) screenplay which
took JKR's humor out and replaced it with Steve Kloves', and editing which
any first-year media studies student could have surpassed.

Compare this with, say, The Lord of the Rings, which I sat through (in my
first viewing of six) saying "this is so much BETTER than our movie".
Astounding effects, excellent acting, excellent screenplay (actually adding
humor into Tolkien and making brave cutting choices), editing which flowed,
and a generally better film.

I'd like to note at this point that I find the *book* version of LOTR
impenetrable and dull, compared with the exciting, spiriting-away nature of
HP. I just thought the HP movie wasn't that great.

--John

____________________________________________

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

John Walton || john at walton.vu
____________________________________________