Just Saw it. It was bad(? or !)

[vincentjh]

(The original post from the day before was taken down for editing. 
But I got too occupied at work and didn't find time to do so until 
this morning.)

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., "vincentjh" <vincentjh at y...> wrote:
> 
> VJH responds with:
> > 
> > Just a quick note to clarify some points. It's not the length of 
the 
> > movie that bothered me (and some others). The problem is, longer 
> > isn't better. There're ways of compressing the plots into the 
same 
> > 160-minute movie without making it seem disconnected. Not being 
able 
> > to do it shows the short-comings of Columbus & Co. But instead of 
> > finding ways to compress the storyline and make it accessible to 
> > those who havn't read the books, they simply use the length as an 
> > excuse. I'd watch a 4-hour movie if things are done well. But 
with 
> > this script and Columbus' direction, I'd say 140-150 minutes are 
well 
> > enough to fit everything (and more) in.
> > 

Steve wrote:
> A fixed block of movie time is like a glass full of water, you can't
> put more in unless some of what is already there falls out. 

Please note that I didn't say that a movie should be a certain 
length. No. That's not the point. The point is how you tell a story 
effectively. You're right. If you want to put more in a movie, you 
have to cut something else. And that's exactly the problem of CoS. 
Instead of trying to get important back stories in, Columbus wasted 
the time on some "eye candies." If he'd be less obsessed with making 
kids laugh or showing off nice special effects, there'd be enough 
time for Riddle's background.

> You want more time and plot developement at the Weasleys = TIME.
No. I Do not want this. What's in the movie is enough.

> You want more time at the Dursley's to set everything up = TIME.
NO. I do not want this, either.

> You want a full fight scene between Arthur and Lucius = TIME.
NO. It's not needed. Arthur's background isn't all that important in 
this movie.

> You want the Death Day party = Time.
NO. Unless it's of relevance to future development, I'd cut that part 
from the BOOK, too. 

> You want Ron to have more intelligent screen time = TIME.
NOT neccesarily. Just give his lines back to him.

> You want the emotional intensity of the Chamber scene with Tom 
Riddle
> expanded = TIME.
NOT SO. Make the chase shorter and there's time for Riddle. Besides, 
intensity doesn't always come from time. It comes from the way lines 
are delivered, from the way characters interact, from what comes 
before the climax. (More on this later.)

> You want the continuity between scene increased = TIME.
NOT SO. Continuity doesn't take more time. It takes more attention to 
details.

> You want secondary characters better developed, like Colin Crevey = 
TIME.
NO. I don't care about Colin.

> Now the question is, of what is already there, what are you willing 
to
	throw out, in order to insert all this other plot 
developement?
	
I do not want all those things that you supposed I'd want. All I want 
is a clearer storyline with better buildup. That doesn't equal longer 
hours or page-to-page translation of the book onto the big screen. A 
by-the-numbers adaptation may be faithful to the words of the book. 
But it doesn't necessarily mean being true to the spirit of the book.

As I mentioned in previous post(s), there're ways of compressing the 
book into a movie without sacrificing important plots and characters. 
Using more or less the same script, here's a possibility of how to 
make this story more sensible.


Flourish and Blots. Positioning. When Ginny tells Draco to leave 
Harry alone, the Wesley brothers and Hermione should not be there. It 
doesn't make sense that, if the older ones are there, they'd leave it 
to little Ginny to defend Harry. This is also a scene where the 
brothers' protective side could be shown (by trying to keep Ginny 
away from Lucius, for example). It would illustrate the closeness of 
Wesley siblings and give more weight to Ron's reaction to Ginny's 
capture later.

Whomping willow is cool. But it can be slightly shorter. After all, 
the real importance of it won't come until PoA. (30 extra seconds.)

Mandrakes. Related to later development. Funny. But it gets old. Cut 
it after Neville faints and Sprout says "just leave him there" or 
something like that. You still have the laughs. And more time for 
other scenes. 

The Howler. Cut "Is that your owl, Ron?" and "Look, everyone. 
Wesley's got a howler." No need to know the letter is a "howler" to 
find it funny. And Errol isn't Ron's owl. (Same thing goes with the 
Rogue Bludger. Simply having someone ask what goes wrong with the 
bludger is enough. Doesn't matter if it's called a Rogue or Rough or 
Mad Bludger. The scene in the hospital wing later is sufficient to 
make the audience understand that the Bludger was enchanted.)

Shift the order of the Mandrake and the Howler scenes. (Better 
transition. Gives clearer sense of time passage at school.)

Use the time "saved" from those three scenes, add a scene before the 
one when they all sit together reading and everyone's peeking at 
Harry: The trio walks down the corridor and everyone flees at the 
sight of them. (Better illustrates the fear at school and Harry's 
position. Better transition. Still some "extra" time from the 
Mandrake scene left for later scenes.) (BTW, Ginny should not have 
been there studying with them. She should be out somewhere setting 
the beast free.)

Rearrange the music before and during X'mas scene. Same snow-falling 
shot with a less cheerful music. Same feast. Much fewer students. 
Have one of them mention that almost everyone's gone for the vacation 
if he/she can because no one dares to stay. (More pressure. More 
incentive for Harry and Co. to figure out what's going on. 
Establishes the dark mood without scaring little kids in the 
audience. They won't understand it anyway.)

After Harry and Ron find the diary, cut to the trophy room, have Ron 
explain who Riddle was. One of them notes that Tom might know 
something about the chamber, another observes that the diary is 
blank. Cut to Harry sitting alone examining the diary. Harry tries to 
write something on it. Ink drops. Disappears. Harry thinks for a 
while, tries another time¡K..At the end of memory scene, instead of 
having Harry yelling "Hagrid" with hand reaching out, simply let him 
yell "no!" and cut to Harry sitting in front of the diary again as if 
he has just been "bumped" out of the diary, shocked. Do not 
say "wow." That's not the right reaction. (Less cheesy. More 
background on Riddle. More contribution from Ron. Better explains why 
Harry asks the diary about the chamber.)

Forbidden forest. Get them out of there faster. Spiders are scary. 
Ron's scared of them. No reason he stops the car before they're out 
of the forest. Make the spiders chase them all the way out. 

Chamber scene. The length isn't the major problem. Positioning is. 
Find an action director. Cut that stupid, cheesy, un-Harry-like 
dialogue between him and Ginny. Harry injured. Mind not clear. Stabs 
the diary (reactionary). Fawkes comes in, heals Harry. Ginny wakes 
up, confused and scared. Harry gets her out. (Shorter, more intense, 
less cheesy, makes more sense.)

The final feast. Completely out of place and out of character. Cut 
it. Have Harry walks out of D's office. Walks into sunshine. Cut to 
the feast. Harry runs in. Hagrid's there. Herm's there. No hugs. 
Everyone happy. And you save 5 minutes or so for the earlier scene in 
the trophy room.

It's still a 161-minute movie. But I bet non-readers would have a 
much clearer idea about what's going on. And readers would be happy 
that we're spared of the crappy Hollywood ending and a made-for-
Hollywood Hero.

(edited)

> Rowling's books are written in a tremendously compact and efficient
> style. Big sweeping blocks of plot take place in very few pages. You
> just can't adapt writing that detailed and complex unless you are
> willing to sacrifice something. Are you willing to throw the entire
> story away and let the writer/director create a whole new story 
based
> on this, or do you want to see THE Hary Potter story. You can't have
> both. 

> I don't want some Harry Potter Hollywood fanfiction version of Harry
> Potter. I want THE Harry Potter story, the WHOLE Harry Potter story,
> and I want it developed in more detail. That can only be done with
> more time. I will agree with you in that this extra time has to be
> well spent. But I will not agree with you in that this story could 
be
> told in the limited time frame without some major sacrifies 
somewhere. 

I do not want standard Hollywood fanfiction more than anyone else 
does. I've never ever wanted a movie with "fixed" length. I only want 
a good movie that stands on its own and that's true to the books. You 
don't have to "throw away the entire story" to do that. What it takes 
is a director and a writer who know how to balance the story and tie 
things together. The way Harry and Ron were scripted makes them into 
the classic Hollywood duo and that cheesy ending is, well, Hollywood 
fantiction. It's avoidable and it should have been avoided. 

VJH