From urbana at charter.net  Tue Apr  1 05:07:16 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 05:07:16 -0000
Subject: When Harry Potter gets big (was Re: The Importance of Being Flint)
In-Reply-To: <DAV12hLnudBsfl5e5Uz00002424@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <b6b6q4+gqs6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Atherton" <suzloua at h...> 
wrote:
> > wondering if we'll have WB-sponsored clothes and HP bread when 
Harry gets to be real big, if he's currently quite small - unless you 
meant height-wise :D
<<


I was going to do this as a prediction but now I'm doing it as a 
poll... who thinks Daniel Radcliffe will eventually be:

a) 5' 8" tall
b) 5' 10" tall
c) 6 feet tall
d) anything over 6 feet tall

I did see one photo of Daniel's parents together and while his mom 
appeared to be about 5 feet 2, his dad appeared to be at least 6 feet 
tall. And the way Daniel has been growing like a weed the past year,  
I'll be surprised if he isn't as tall as Gary Oldman by the time they 
start filming GOF... 

Anne U
(who thinks Harry Potter-the-Phenomenon is plenty big already)






From Zephyrjaid at aol.com  Tue Apr  1 10:00:06 2003
From: Zephyrjaid at aol.com (zephyrjaid7)
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 10:00:06 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint
In-Reply-To: <177.1851e7ac.2bb9ea8d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b6bnv6+e53h@eGroups.com>

I've been following this discussion with the idea that I should just 
stay out of it, but there are a few comments that have me a bit 
shocked. Thus... 

Kyle said:

> It doesnt seem that way with Alfonso that he wants to stay loyal to 
the fan 
> base!  I had an image of Pettigrew as small and bald not big ass 
and tall!!

I say:

First of all, I wanted to ask where you get the idea that Alfonso 
Cauron does not want to stay loyal to the fan base - I have several 
interviews, including Cauron's, saved on my computer for references 
and I've found nothing that seems upsetting, especially concerning 
his loyalty to the fans. I'm actually very pleased with him so far. 

Now, you seemed to think because Timothy Spall (who is playing 
Pettigrew in the film) is a rather large man and doesn't cater to 
your vision of his character, this somehow has *anything* to do with 
Cauron as a director or his loyalty to the fan base. First of all, 
very rarely does a director cast a film - overseeing it, yes. Actual 
casting, no. At this point no one knows who casted Pettigrew, why he 
was casted, or if he will be good in the role. Our knowledge of him 
comes from only his past works - we've seen absolutely no footage of 
him in POA and I think we should reserve judgement until then. You 
may be pleasantly surprised - I know very few people who thought 
Kenneth Branagh would be the perfect vision of Gilderoy Lockhart 
before seeing CoS, and now he's widely accepted as THE Gilderoy 
Lockhart, hands down. 

So my point is...Cauron's loyalty is moot when compared to casting 
choices. Even if he *did* personally cast Spall, I'm sure he had a 
very good reason for doing so and would undoubtedly think that Spall 
was the best choice for Pettigrew, and thus the best choice to please 
the fans. And even if he didn't feel Spall was the best choice, he 
might have been the only available choice - actor's schedules can 
have them very tied up indeed, especially the caliber of actors that 
are consistently being cast in the HP films. Or maybe JKR herself 
said, "Spall's the man." Whatever the case, I think you should 
reconsider your thoughts here. 

Kyle said:
 
> No we can't but we can raise our voices and be heard and possiably 
change the 
> script!!  Its not too late now but every day we don't do anything 
its going 
> to get harder and harder.  Since there well on their way of making 
the 
> movie!!  

I say:

Even if you got half the world's population to sign a petition and 
presented it to WB, your efforts would be fruitless. During pre-
production of PoA, hundreds of people banded together and set up an 
elaborate schedule that will allow them to bring their script to life 
over the next few months. Their script is their guide - no one is 
about to change it. It's like a map - and they have to get from point 
A to point B, A being the first day of shooting and B being the final 
cut. Say A-1 is the Hogwarts Express. This shoot involves clearing a 
railway for a certain amount of time, renting camera equipment, 
renting a helicopter, transporting cast and crew to the location, 
feeding them, etc. And all of this is a carefully manipulated plan 
that messes with hundreds of people and their schedules. And this is 
just the first week. Then we move on to A-2 in our pseudo-world. This 
is filming the Knight Bus scenes, which (again) involves hundreds of 
different schedules, including the people who live in the houses seen 
in the foreground, the workers who built a brand new playground, the 
people who actually transport the bus...and these are relatively 
unimportant people that I'm naming. And then A-3, A-4 and so on and 
so on all the way up to point B.

WB doesn't have the complete power to dictate everything. They're 
manipulating thousands of different schedules all over Great Britain 
and it all has to come together to make a film by 2004. And a lot is 
at stake, some of which we don't even realize. And all of this is 
controlled by the script. It takes a lot of work to change a script 
and I would bet on anything that they wouldn't change it. 

And say the original plan was to cut Quidditch and then they suddenly 
decided to throw it back in again. This means that they'd have to 
draft a new version of the script to involve a segment which they had 
not budgeted for, which would take away money from other 'areas' of 
the film. And now imagine that the scenes they've already filmed 
(Hogwarts Express, Knight Bus, London) have an element that the new 
draft of the script eliminates, thus allowing Quidditch to have a 
space within their time frame. They've just wasted tons of money and 
time. And not only would they have to rearrange their carefully set 
schedules, they'd also have to hire special effects companies, spring 
it on the Art Department to rapidly come up with all of the Quidditch 
essentials, hire back actors you previously told would not be 
appearing in the film and say, "Oh darn - you'll be working on the 
West End then? I guess we'll have to replace you." Imagine the 
backlash *that* would cause. I think it's completely unreasonable to 
suggest changing the script. I truly don't mean to be rude, but like 
you've said - it's a business and that's how they run it.      

Kyle said:

> Yes its very tempting to blame them for everything!!!  Well okay 
Tom the 
> innkeeper is a mote point but I am just worried who is next!!  It 
starts with 
> the little people then the big people!!

I say:

WB wants to keep the same cast as much as we do. It's like Chris 
Columbus was always spouting, "Why change something that's already so 
successful?" The actors they've chosen for HP are obviously greatly 
loved and fuel their sales. Look at Sean Biggerstaff - he had barely 
any screen time and turned into a wildly popular actor. My little 
cousin is not a huge fan of HP, but saw CoS six times just to see 
Biggerstaff. And WB knows what their audience wants - they aren't 
stupid people. 

Kyle said:

> (Cut some examples of what actors might be required to do)

I think that is 
> uncomfortable but its the business their in!  My point is there not 
always 
> going to like what they do in the acting business but they have to 
remember 
> its a weird artistic business!!  If you boss asked you to remove 
you clothes 
> would you do it!!  Proalby not but in the acting business they are 
habutially 
> asked to remove their clothes and be miserable or not comfortable!!

I say:

Whoa. I think you're going a bit overboard here. And true, actors are 
very rarely comfortable - but what *is* comfortable in this business? 
I'm fourteen and haven't yet had the opportunity to work on projects 
as big as Harry Potter, but I know what acting involves and I know 
what Dan, Rupert and Emma have comitted themselves to. But in this 
case, they have the power and that's a huge responsibility. We're not 
talking about the *normal* pressures of an actor, we're talking about 
thirteen-year-old kids whose every movement is scrutinized. They're 
the *stars.* They are the emotional weight. They represent the entire 
franchise. In Tokyo, Dan was greeted by a mob of obsessive people 
that wanted to get a piece of him and he's still in school. They've 
given up their privacy. I should think that they have the right to 
control their own lives - most importantly their privacy. And the 
only obligation they have to WB is their contract, which will be done 
once PoA is done. This isn't about people who are iffy about acting - 
they've already crossed that line a long time ago. It's the fame. 

Kyle said:
> > No its not but on the other hand do you really think the last 
film is going 
> > 
> > to be as hot as the first and 2nd one???  If they care about 
there fans 
> > they 
> > will still.  
> > 

I say:

So you're saying that they should put their own emotional well being 
on the backburner just to please a bunch of people they don't know? 
Their number one priority is their own health, education, and future. 
And what have their 'fans' given them that would make them want to 
sacrifice their own lives to simply entertain a few people? They're 
*children* with mega responsibility. They haven't even decided 
whether they want to stick with acting or not. I can possibly see 
what you're saying if they wanted to further their careers and stick 
with acting, but they're still deciding. I think Dan has got the 
right idea - deciding what he feels like doing one film at a time. 

He said:
 
> But you don't!!  I mean lets raise our voices before its too 
late!!  They 
> already have some of the movie done but not all!!  If we do our 
damnest to 
> get wood and Flint back in we can but no one wants to!!  They just 
want the 
> movies made!

I say:

Everyone wants the movies made - and we want good movies. That's a 
given. And contrary to popular belief, WB *does* want to please the 
fans because we're the ones paying them. Films make their money by 
getting people to see them repeatedly - and who does that? Us, the 
fans. So they want to make the fans happy to get their money. They're 
not going to take huge risks when it involves billions of dollars. So 
I trust WB because the films that they have turned out have been good 
ones and I just can't see WB doing something so blatently risky when 
it involves so much money. I think we should trust their decisions, 
even if you feel that maybe they aren't the best decisions. But it's 
far to early to judge anything - we don't even know if Quidditch is 
cut at all. We can't come to conclusions yet because there aren't any 
facts - other than that two characters are not appearing in the film, 
which can mean a number of things. I feel that it's useless to fret 
about this when we really don't have any control - WB will *not* 
listen. Perhaps a little, but not enough to change anything drastic. 

Kyle said:
 
 Its never too late!!!  If we raised our voices high and long enough 
we could 
> change the script a little bit!!!  But no one wants to!!

I say:

I think you're right about this - no one does want to, because their 
efforts would be fruitless. And we don't even know what the situation 
is - there's nothing to fight *against.*

Kyle said: 
> Elijah Wood is still considered a child actor!!  He didnt want the 
Kids 
> Choice Award anyway.  How many shows are adult themed in the Kids 
Choice 
> awards??  I dont remember!!  I am sure the movie Hannibal wasnt at 
the Kids 
> Choice Awards !!

I say: 

Elijah Wood is not considered a child actor because he won an award 
chosen by children. Lord of the Rings is decidely *not* a children's 
film but it was very popular with younger people because it had all 
of the elements of a film that would appeal to younger people: 
action, adventure, friendship. And so many children saw this film 
because parents felt comfortable letting their kids see it. You're 
right; that is rare. But that doesn't mean that Elijah Wood is 
considered a child actor because his character, Frodo Baggins, 
appealed to kids enough that they would want to vote for him. Some of 
them probably don't even know that Wood is even an actor - they liked 
Frodo. 
 
Kyle said:

> Not what I heard!!  I heard Dan said the director or powers that be 
may not 
> want him back!!!  I also heard that Rupert says he want to 
possiably stay 
> until the 6th movie comes out!

I say:

You took that out of context. Dan was being fecetious when he said 
that they may not want him back. He was demonstrating a point: that 
things change, and that he would encounter the decision to stay/not 
stay with HP later, when he had more of a perspective of his feelings 
regarding that particular decision. 

And the "powers that be" would have to be blind, deaf and stupid to 
want to get rid of Dan. He's talented, he's definitely something to 
look at, he's charming in interviews...he's the ultimate crowd-
pleaser. Trust me on this one: they don't want to get rid of Dan. 
He's the soul of Harry Potter and they know that. They're probably 
desperate to keep him - but it's all up to Dan. Period. 

Kyle said:

> Huh???  If your saying its real big then why do you think the adult 
actors 
> career's will continue after the movie!

I say:

This makes absolutely no sense. Susan said the movie is huge and you 
wonder why she thinks the adult actors will continue to have acting 
gigs after HP. Ummm...

*sighs exhaustedly* I remember why I usually stay away from stuff 
like this.

Zeph 






From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Tue Apr  1 11:45:50 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 11:45:50 -0000
Subject: When is it a sequel?
Message-ID: <b6bu5e+r2n6@eGroups.com>

There's been some discussion about sequels on this list, and can I just say: 
CoS was NOT a sequel, any more than PoA will. Let me explain--it's all to do 
with the definition of a sequel.  Perhaps there are several definitions, 
depending on the context, but in this context, a movie-sequel comes with 
particular connotations. Ever since CoS came out, it's been referred to in the 
press as a sequel, but to me, there's a problem with that, since that means it 
will be considered along with MIB II and Police Academy V and so on. Usually, 
in the movie world, a sequel is a film a producer decides to make when a 
movie already on the market is making such terrific money that it would be 
stupid not to try to extend the hype. Ergo, the same characters and basic 
settings are used to rehash a success. The outcome is rarely up to the same 
standard as the fist movie, which is why people remeber the exceptions to 
this rule so well.
Now, there is money in HP, true, both PS and CoS have the same characters 
and setting (duh), but this "sequel" is not rehashed material out of a "first 
movie"(though some not familiar with the actual scope of the HP-story as it 
unfolds in the books would argue with me, no doubt) but adapted from a 
book. Some might call the books sequels, but to me, they are installments 
(albeit with distinguishable episodes) in one long story. Hence I dislike calling 
CoS a sequel. To me it has very little in common with the movies usually 
referred to as sequels. Am I making sense to anyone?

Sophia




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  2 00:13:06 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:13:06 -0000
Subject: When is it a sequel?
In-Reply-To: <b6bu5e+r2n6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6d9ui+2vsi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> wrote:
> ... can I just say: CoS was NOT a sequel, any more than PoA will. 
>
> ...edited...
>
> Hence I dislike calling CoS a sequel. To me it has very little in 
> common with the movies usually referred to as sequels. Am I making 
> sense to anyone?
> 
> Sophia


bboy_mn:

Oh yes indeed, you are making sense.

I'm inclined to agree with you. Although by technical definition each
story after the first is a sequel, I wouldn't call them sequels the
way the word is commonly implied or applied. 

The difference between the common applied use of 'sequel' and it's
true definition is that Harry Potter is one continuous story in seven
parts. We know this from the very beginning. It is one continuous
story about the same characters striving toward the same primary
objective for the full seven segements of the tale.

Most sequels, as you pointed out, are simply a rehash of the same
premise with new characters and new settings. The same story with the
same gimmicks and usually with an ambiguous ending in case they decide
to remake the same movie one more time. 

I don't think anyone would call 'Lord of the Rings - The Two Towers' a
sequel to 'Lord of the Rings - Fellowship of the Ring'; it's a
continuation of one story.

That's why it is important for the creators of the movie to made
present judgments giving due consideration to future story lines. If
Cedric is left out of PoA they can probably work around it and
introduce him in GoF, but there are some plot elements that are
crucial to the future stories that need to be established in the
current story. Cho Chang is probably a better example. I can't believe
that she exists in the story just to fill up space and give us a few
laughs; she is a little to noticable. I firmly believe Cho Chang will
become a very significant character in future books, so failure to
develop her character makes it very difficult to bring her into those
later movies. Neville is another good example. Is there anyone who
believe that Neville will not have a very significant role in the
future? Failure to devolop him now makes it much harder to establish
his future significants. 

Also, within a given story there are plot elements that establish
important aspects of the story; elements that are important to
understanding relationships, and important to understanding character
motivation. How are they going to establish Ron as a hero at some
point in the future movies when they continue to portray him as a clown? 

In another post I listed all the intertwining subplots in PoA, and
based on all those complex intertwining plots, I said then and I say
now that I'm glad it's not my job to figure out how to write a
screenplay that can resolve all these subplots and at the same time
not lose anything that will be important to the continuing story.
That's got to be an extremely difficult task.

While I don't envy the difficult task that the movie creators have, as
a fan, a reader, and a view, I view the movies as a series just like
the books, and one screwed up movie can spoil the whole series if the
creators are not careful.

So while I'm inclined to trust the movie makes and wait and see, I
can't help but worry, because I see more  at stake that just this one
movie.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From CLShannon at aol.com  Wed Apr  2 00:21:18 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 19:21:18 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: When is it a sequel?
Message-ID: <4a.1a99a380.2bbb86fe@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/1/03 4:14:44 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

<< 

Most sequels, as you pointed out, are simply a rehash of the same

premise with new characters and new settings. The same story with the

same gimmicks and usually with an ambiguous ending in case they decide

to remake the same movie one more time.  >>

I agree and I want to add that most 'sequels' in the movie sense are not 
something that was intended when the first movie was written and produced. 
More often than not, the first one is a hit and then the production company 
decides to do it again,  changing some plot elements, but keeping the same 
characters and basic situation. For example, Home Alone 2, Gremlins 2, Police 
Academy 2, 3, 4, etc. These weren't conceived as 'multiple movie events' from 
the beginning, they were simply produced to capitalize on the popularity of 
the original movie.
In that sense, Harry Potter films aren't sequels at all - they are 
adaptations of the series of books that was originally conceived as seven 
books telling one continuous story. As for Lord of the Rings - well, that was 
originally all one book, so technically, the movies are all just one 
adaptation of one book. The publisher a long time ago divided it into three 
parts and luckily for us, New Line Cinema decided that it would take three 
films to tell the story ;-)
Cindy



From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Apr  2 01:28:08 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 19:28:08 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] When Harry Potter gets big (was Re: The Importance of Being Flint)
References: <b6b6q4+gqs6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c2f8b7$1e84abb0$fe9dcdd1@RVotaw>

Anne U wrote:

> I did see one photo of Daniel's parents together and while his mom 
> appeared to be about 5 feet 2, his dad appeared to be at least 6 feet 
> tall. And the way Daniel has been growing like a weed the past year,  
> I'll be surprised if he isn't as tall as Gary Oldman by the time they 
> start filming GOF... 

I've seen several pictures of Daniel's parents together (and with him), I'd say they're probably a couple of inches shorter than that.  I really don't think his dad's over about 5'10".  Which means it's possible, that Daniel would outgrow him, but I'd estimate his eventual height at around the same.

Richelle


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr  2 02:12:38 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 21:12:38 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: When is it a sequel?
Message-ID: <8.3616f979.2bbba116@aol.com>

I dont know about that but as long as they keep the same cast!!

I really dont care what you call it!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 



In a message dated 4/1/03 7:23:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, CLShannon at aol.com 
writes:

> 
> In a message dated 4/1/03 4:14:44 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> <<
> 
> Most sequels, as you pointed out, are simply a rehash of the same
> 
> premise with new characters and new settings. The same story with the
> 
> same gimmicks and usually with an ambiguous ending in case they decide
> 
> to remake the same movie one more time.  >>
> 
> I agree and I want to add that most 'sequels' in the movie sense are not 
> something that was intended when the first movie was written and produced. 
> More often than not, the first one is a hit and then the production company 
> 
> decides to do it again,  changing some plot elements, but keeping the same 
> characters and basic situation. For example, Home Alone 2, Gremlins 2, 
> Police 
> Academy 2, 3, 4, etc. These weren't conceived as 'multiple movie events' 
> from 
> the beginning, they were simply produced to capitalize on the popularity of 
> 
> the original movie.
> In that sense, Harry Potter films aren't sequels at all - they are 
> adaptations of the series of books that was originally conceived as seven 
> books telling one continuous story. As for Lord of the Rings - well, that 
> was 
> originally all one book, so technically, the movies are all just one 
> adaptation of one book. The publisher a long time ago divided it into three 
> 
> parts and luckily for us, New Line Cinema decided that it would take three 
> films to tell the story ;-)
> Cindy



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




From a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  2 04:39:21 2003
From: a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com (a_rude_mechanical)
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 04:39:21 -0000
Subject: Casting, the Crouches
Message-ID: <b6dphp+6fc0@eGroups.com>

How about these actors for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively?

Steven Mackintosh   
http://lavender.fortunecity.com/fullmonty/482/gall_sm.htm

David Warner  
 http://www.geocities.com/baddi_101/troy_1.jpg

What do you think??

Elisabeth




From thalia at aokp.org  Wed Apr  2 05:35:35 2003
From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy)
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 21:35:35 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting, the Crouches
In-Reply-To: <b6dphp+6fc0@eGroups.com>
References: <b6dphp+6fc0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200304012135.AA35350386@aokp.org>

elisabeth posted links for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively...

Steven Mackintosh is a hottie, alright. i actually have no physical basis 
for crouch jr in my mind, so, suuure, i wouldn't mind if he's easy on the 
eyes for all of the ten minutes before he gets his soul sucked out. ;)

David Warner link didn't work. :( is it just me?

thalia 'new fangled contraptions'chaunacy




From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Wed Apr  2 05:57:42 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 00:57:42 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: When is it a sequel?
Message-ID: <1a6.1287856f.2bbbd5d6@aol.com>


I think this topic's been done enough, I guess, but the way I see it is: why 
do they have to be called sequels? They're chapters in a planned out series, 
the same way chapter one in a book is followed by chapter 2. Otherwise 
there'd be no chapters and everything would just go on and on...ick. 

I don't remember Star Wars having sequels, or people calling them that. It 
had episodes. I consider HP to be the same way. But only not called 
'episodes.' :-) 

Melly



From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr  2 06:47:03 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 01:47:03 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting, the Crouches
Message-ID: <1d9.6814b8d.2bbbe167@aol.com>

Warner I never thought about him!!  Is he British??

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 



In a message dated 4/1/03 11:41:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> How about these actors for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively?
> 
> Steven Mackintosh   
> http://lavender.fortunecity.com/fullmonty/482/gall_sm.htm
> 
> David Warner  
> http://www.geocities.com/baddi_101/troy_1.jpg
> 
> What do you think??
> 
> Elisabeth
> 



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




From a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  2 17:55:41 2003
From: a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com (a_rude_mechanical)
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 17:55:41 -0000
Subject: Casting, the Crouches
In-Reply-To: <1d9.6814b8d.2bbbe167@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b6f86t+ifdk@eGroups.com>

As far as I know, Warner is British!  I think he's slightly on the 
older side for Crouch Sr, but he has the severity that Crouch needs!

Elisabeth




From urbana at charter.net  Wed Apr  2 21:09:49 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 21:09:49 -0000
Subject: Casting, the Crouches
In-Reply-To: <b6f86t+ifdk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6fjit+eblh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_rude_mechanical" 
<a_rude_mechanical at y...> wrote:
> As far as I know, Warner is British!  I think he's slightly on the 
> older side for Crouch Sr, but he has the severity that Crouch needs!
> 
> Elisabeth

I don't think David Warner is necessarily "too old" to play Barty Sr. 
(after all, in Real Life, Alan Rickman is ~20 years older than Snape, 
and we've accepted his characterization completely:-)  IIRC Barty Jr. 
was only a year or two out of Hogwarts at the time of his post-
VoldieWar trial (shown in the pensieve), which means he is at most 
only a few years younger than the Marauders, who are in their mid-30s 
at the end of GoF. So Barty Sr. is probably at least 55. I suspect 
David Warner is in his mid-60s but if he has aged reasonably well the 
makeup folks ought to have no problem making him "look" 10 years 
younger.

Anne U
(who routintely passes for 10 years younger than her actual age, and 
who wonders why we're worried about GoF casting already... or did I 
forget that Barty Sr. is in POA too?)





From pennylin at swbell.net  Thu Apr  3 18:44:22 2003
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny Linsenmayer)
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 18:44:22 -0000
Subject: Nimbus - 2003: HP4GU Fundraiser
Message-ID: <b6hve6+763j@eGroups.com>

Hi all --

Over the last four years, HP4GU has been the best online source for
in-depth, mature discussion of all things Potter. The list has
burgeoned to 6,300 members, more than twelve sister and regional
lists, and the finest collection of Fantastic Posts essays about HP
that one can locate on the web. Regional meetings are no longer so
regional. In New York City, Chicago, London, Germany and all over the
world in fact, we have met, sometimes in handfuls, sometimes in large
numbers.

And now, this summer, Harry Potter fans take the next step. More than
400 fans will converge on Orlando, Florida, to create the single
largest gathering yet, at the *first ever* symposium centered solely
on Harry Potter. But you know all this - or you do if you've been
around lately. What you might not know is that Nimbus - 2003 needs
HP4GU's help. And HP4GU needs your help.  This vitally important first
year's symposium - and therefore future symposia - depends on your
support.

Many people have said things like, "Well, I can't afford Nimbus this
year, so I'll wait for next year."  We certainly understand if you
can't attend this year.  But, if you can't go this time, there's an
easy way you can help ensure that there is a next time.

When the Nimbus - 2003 team formed in June of 2002, they envisioned
an event that would set the tone. They saw the groundwork for future
events, perhaps even eventually large enough to rent our own castle in
Scotland for a long week-end. If event after event can prove our
sincerity and our integrity, then perhaps we will win the respect of
WB, JKR's agents, and even JKR herself. We could position this chain
of symposia to become the official convention for adults, and possibly
even become the preferred symposium for pursuit of the books. But
without fan support, none of that can happen.

Corporate sponsorship, which the event's organizers believed would
be a natural source of funding, has not materialized as anticipated.
Even corporations with significant ties to HP merchandise have been
uninterested. The Nimbus - 2003 team attributes this to changing
relationships of licensees to WB, the struggle of an unhistoried,
untested event, and of course the general economy and world situation.
Despite their hope that they would be able to supplement registrations
with corporate contributions and lift the burden from the fans, the
team finds themselves in need of grassroots assistance.

Since Nimbus is the event that HP4GU inspired, they have turned to us,
as well as the corners of the fandom, for that help. That is why, in
addition to lending its reputation and support to Nimbus - 2003, we at
HP4GU would like to make that support financial and be an official
Nimbus "Symposium Sponsor."

Nimbus offers Symposium Sponsorhip at the level of $15,000 (USD). That
sounds like a lot. But remember how we said that the list boasts
over 6,000 members? That means that if only half of you are able to
donate $5 apiece, HP4GU can realize its goal. If you can give more,
please give more, because we know there are those among you who cannot
give any, much as you might like to.

This sponsorship would pay for:

** Internet cafe, so that attendees and presenters can connect with HP
fans around the world who are unable to attend Nimbus - 2003.  Cost
includes computer rental and internet access costs.  [$5,000] 

** Coverage of honoraria, hotel, and airfare for the Special Guests,
including: Judith Krug, Connie Neal, John Granger, Philip Nel, and 
Roger Highfield [$3,500]

** Coverage of the Judith Krug Keynote Luncheon (Judith Krug 
is the Director of the Office of Intellectual Freedom for the American 
Library Association and will speak on the subject of censorship and
book banning, with reference to Harry Potter in particular) [$3,000]

** The Farewell Breakfast on Sunday [$2,500]

** Welcoming Feast and Meet-and-Greet on Thursday night [$1,000]

Moreover, for those of you who are U.S. taxpayers, your donation to 
the HP4GU Nimbus - 2003 sponsorship may be tax-deductible. HP Education 
Fanon, Inc., the company created to oversee these periodic recurring 
symposia, has been granted tax-exempt 501(c)3 status as an educational
organization. That means your contribution carries the same
advantages to you as a donation to your local charity of choice.

We hope you will be part of the only event to grow out of the 
excellent, deep, shocking, and hilarious conversations you've enjoyed
online. Be part of the vision shared by list member, elf, geist, and
moderator alike.  Even if you can't attend - even if you will - you
have a chance to help make Harry Potter history. With your help, we
can continue to prove that HP4GU is one of the best HP communities
around - on the Web, or in person.  With your help, that reputation
will only be heightened, through the contact with and exchange between
fans and academics and professionals who are equally enamoured of the
books and all they represent.  Plus, you'll be helping to create an
amazing reality which for some will reinforce - or *create* -
longstanding friendships and new communities.

To make a donation, simply send funds via paypal to:

hpfgu-donate at hp2003.org

Or, if you prefer, you may send your donation (whether in US funds 
or other currency) to:

Harry Potter Symposium - 2003
PO Box 18769
Rochester, NY 14618-0769

We hope that whether you can join us or not, you will consider 
making a contribution to show your support - not just for this year's
event, but to ensure the future of any other similar conferences
brought to you on behalf of *your* email list: HPforGrownups.

Yours in anticipation of Nimbus - 2003,

The HP4GU Moderators

P.S. Don't forget, only $5 from you will do the trick! Follow this
link (http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/nimbus-2003) to contribute to a 
Nimbus - 2003 Symposium Sponsorship today!





From fionap19 at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Apr  3 20:41:16 2003
From: fionap19 at yahoo.co.uk (fionap19)
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 20:41:16 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
Message-ID: <b6i69c+bb1p@eGroups.com>

Has anybody heard if there is going to be any "celebration" of the 
launch of the video on April 11th?  They had a special "do" for the 
launch of the Philosopher's Stone video which took place at Kings 
Cross Station but this time I've heard nothing and its only just over 
a week away!

Fiona Potter




From mariawolters at yahoo.de  Fri Apr  4 14:41:17 2003
From: mariawolters at yahoo.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?Maria=20Wolters?=)
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:41:17 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Launch of DVD/Video
In-Reply-To: <1049466283.2042.71862.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030404144117.60840.qmail@web41003.mail.yahoo.com>

There will be a launch, according to chrisrankin.com

I hope we'll get to see all the actors - how Dan,
Rupes and Em will have grown ...

Maria

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Bis zu 100 MB Speicher bei http://premiummail.yahoo.de



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Apr  4 15:41:15 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 15:41:15 -0000
Subject: Casting, the Crouches
In-Reply-To: <b6dphp+6fc0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6k92r+2p6i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_rude_mechanical" 
<a_rude_mechanical at y...> wrote:
> How about these actors for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively?

Interesting.  I don't think I've ever seen Mackintosh, so I can't 
comment on his acting, but he looks a lot like I picture Jr. (but he 
needs lighter hair).

OTOH, David Warner is one of those actors I'll go see in anything, 
and he can probably pull off anything (I recall him as a bad 
Cardassian and a good Klingon in various ST ventures, both done very 
very well), but his appearance isn't how I picture Sr. at all.  He's 
tall and rangy and has a long face, and I have a vivid picture of 
neat little Mr. Crouch.

Amy




From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Fri Apr  4 17:47:41 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 18:47:41 +0100
Subject: It's gone
Message-ID: <v01540b01bab375786e56@[217.154.252.169]>

CoS finally disappeared from our local multiplex today. A twenty-week
run...not bad.

Looking forward to the DVD next week!

Regards,
Nicholas





From nina.baker at uk.maynepharma.com  Fri Apr  4 16:07:43 2003
From: nina.baker at uk.maynepharma.com (nb100uk)
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 16:07:43 -0000
Subject: Casting, the Crouches
In-Reply-To: <b6dphp+6fc0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6kakf+80jr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_rude_mechanical" 
<a_rude_mechanical at y...> wrote:
> How about these actors for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively?
> 
> Steven Mackintosh   
> http://lavender.fortunecity.com/fullmonty/482/gall_sm.htm
> 
> David Warner  
>  http://www.geocities.com/baddi_101/troy_1.jpg
> 
> What do you think??
> 
> Elisabeth

Ooh, interesting.  I can't believe I didn't think of Steven 
Mackintosh for Crouch Jr.  I LOVE him!  I'm not sure if your side of 
the pond is familiar with Prime Suspect - check out Prime Suspect 5.  
He plays the most evil psychopath - perfect for Crouch.  He's also 
just been on UK TV playing George Boleyn (brother of the ill-fated 
Anne Boleyn) in a really great drama.  He's such a quality actor - 
I've never seen him give a bad performance.

However, this would be another case of a British actor of the highest 
caliber reduced to practically a walk-on part (Crouch Jr as himself 
only appears in GoF in a flashback sequence and at the very end).  I 
have resigned myself to the exceedingly talented Maggie Smith and 
Alan Rickman being seen fleetingly, although in more that one film.  
Seeing one of my favourite actors for mere seconds would be harder to 
bear.  Rather, give it to an unknown and let then run with it.  It's 
certainly less torture for me!!!

Nina





From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Apr  4 21:39:17 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 16:39:17 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Launch of DVD/Video
Message-ID: <77.de7f1ae.2bbf5585@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/4/03 9:42:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
mariawolters at yahoo.de writes:

> 
> 
> There will be a launch, according to chrisrankin.com
> 
> I hope we'll get to see all the actors - how Dan,
> Rupes and Em will have grown ...
> 
> Maria
> 

Whats a launch??

Kyle Longbottom 


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Apr  5 01:51:07 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 20:51:07 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting, the Crouches
Message-ID: <130.1dc9a1a5.2bbf908b@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/4/03 10:43:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
lupinesque at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_rude_mechanical" 
> <a_rude_mechanical at y...> wrote:
> >How about these actors for Crouch Jr, and Sr, respectively?
> 
> Interesting.  I don't think I've ever seen Mackintosh, so I can't 
> comment on his acting, but he looks a lot like I picture Jr. (but he 
> needs lighter hair).
> 
> OTOH, David Warner is one of those actors I'll go see in anything, 
> and he can probably pull off anything (I recall him as a bad 
> Cardassian and a good Klingon in various ST ventures, both done very 
> very well), but his appearance isn't how I picture Sr. at all.  He's 
> tall and rangy and has a long face, and I have a vivid picture of 
> neat little Mr. Crouch.
> 
> Amy
> 

When you think about it Warner proalby can pull off Crouch!!!

What about Bob Hoskins as Mad Eye Moody!!  See the Cotton Club!!  He really 
has that intense stare and voice when he wants to!!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 


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




From autumn_sprite at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  6 04:37:05 2003
From: autumn_sprite at yahoo.com (Marianne)
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 04:37:05 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD
Message-ID: <b6oath+6gcb@eGroups.com>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

Just finished watching the CoS DVD.  Of the deleted scenes, #s 3, 6, 
7, 8 & 13 were the best 
I wish it had been included originally
in 
the movie (just reduce the time spent on the Flying Ford Anglia, the 
Whomping Willow & the Aragog scenes).  The Hufflepuffs -    Justin 
Finch-Fletchley, Ernie Macmillan & Hannah Abbott actually get to 
speak! I think I know why they didn't include the Malfoys meeting 
with Mr. Borgin, the scene made you feel sorry for Draco, and I 
don't think they wanted that at all. 

The ending credits were revised to include David Bradley, Tom 
Felton, Sean Biggerstaff & Robert Hardy.   But how could they have 
forgotten to mention Christian Coulson?!?  And a little nitpick 
about the cast credits 
 I know Maggie Smith is a Dame, but when
has 
that ever been in a movie credit?  Will that mean Michael Gambon 
will be listed as Sir Michael Gambon?  Hannah's last name is not 
Hufflepuff, it is Abbott.

The cast interview was great.  I liked the fact that they included 
more of the student body.  Sean Biggerstaff talks about how his 
character is thoroughly into Quidditch, and how he must win before 
leaving Hogwarts (sigh).  My love for Jason Isaacs grows more 
everyday, he is hysterically funny and so charming!  





From geri510 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  6 04:55:58 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 04:55:58 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD
In-Reply-To: <b6oath+6gcb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6oc0u+q028@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marianne" <autumn_sprite at y...> 
wrote:
Just finished watching the CoS DVD.  


Me: How did you get the DVD? 




From autumn_sprite at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  6 05:54:41 2003
From: autumn_sprite at yahoo.com (Marianne)
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 05:54:41 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD
In-Reply-To: <b6oc0u+q028@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6off1+hpa8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "geri510" <geri510 at y...> wrote:
> Me: How did you get the DVD?

My brother told me that his local video store would be getting their 
shipment in today, and to go in and ask "nicely" for it.  I did the 
opposite of course, but I have the dvd cause he had to get rid of 
me. ;)




From urbana at charter.net  Sun Apr  6 23:43:09 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 23:43:09 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD / video
In-Reply-To: <b6off1+hpa8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6qe2d+5alc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marianne" <autumn_sprite at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "geri510" <geri510 at y...> wrote:
> > Me: How did you get the DVD?
> 
> My brother told me that his local video store would be getting 
their 
> shipment in today, and to go in and ask "nicely" for it.  I did the 
> opposite of course, but I have the dvd cause he had to get rid of 
> me. ;)

Lucky lucky you!! I won't ask what kind of bribe you had to 
offer... ;-)

As for me, alas we have no DVD player yet and are unlikely to get one 
soon due to $$ reasons, and my daughter and I both *must* see COS 
again ASAP (especially since we've only seen it once!). So I plan to 
buy the video on Friday after work, if at all possible. Only 
potential hitch is that I haven't pre-ordered it. But I see it 
advertised here in flyers for Shopco and Target, so obviously all of 
the major discount chains in the United States plan to carry it (I 
haven't seen the Wal-Mart flyer yet but I assume it's in there too). 
Those flyers also contained ads for TVs with a scene from COS in 
them - it's when Harry is in Dumbledore's office. Gawd, I hope I can 
get my hands on a copy of that video next weekend...

Anne U
(hoping I haven't been too stupid about this)





From siskiou at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  7 00:30:09 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 17:30:09 -0700
Subject: CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <b6qe2d+5alc@eGroups.com>
References: <b6qe2d+5alc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5514752501.20030406173009@earthlink.net>



Hi,

seeing that a few people already have the dvd:

I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr  7 00:39:26 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 20:39:26 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
Message-ID: <f4.2b2af003.2bc222be@aol.com>

I like it!!  Its different but you can see more!!  You always can use 
widescreen as well as the other one

Kyle Longbottom 




In a message dated 4/6/03 8:37:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> seeing that a few people already have the dvd:
> 
> I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
> and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net



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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Apr  7 01:45:29 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 20:45:29 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
References: <b6qe2d+5alc@eGroups.com> <5514752501.20030406173009@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <006701c2fca7$601ee290$5ea3cdd1@RVotaw>

I have the widescreen, and can't wait until Friday to get the full screen.  I'm convinced the widescreen cuts the tops off of peoples heads.  I had just the full screen of SS/PS and didn't remember it being so . . . squished.  So I guess I'm not really much help until Friday!

Richelle


  Hi,

  seeing that a few people already have the dvd:

  I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
  and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).

  -- 
  Best regards,
  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
       
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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



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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  7 02:01:25 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 19:01:25 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <006701c2fca7$601ee290$5ea3cdd1@RVotaw>
References: <b6qe2d+5alc@eGroups.com> <5514752501.20030406173009@earthlink.net>
 <006701c2fca7$601ee290$5ea3cdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <920228985.20030406190125@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Sunday, April 06, 2003, 6:45:29 PM, rvotaw at i-55.com wrote:

> I had just the full screen of SS/PS and didn't remember it
> being so . . . squished.  So I guess I'm not really much help until
> Friday!

We have the widescreen version of SS/PS, but watch it on
zoom, mostly, because everything is so darn small.

Maybe we need to get a bigger TV ;)

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr  7 02:06:18 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 22:06:18 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
Message-ID: <190.186457e1.2bc2371a@aol.com>

Widescreen gives you more stuff on the sides!!  With the other screen it cuts 
it off!!  Like in the Chamber of secrets when the have ron's howler with the 
widescreen you will be able to see stuff on the sides instead of just ron 
weasley!!

Kyle Longbottom 




In a message dated 4/6/03 9:48:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rvotaw at i-55.com 
writes:

> 
> I have the widescreen, and can't wait until Friday to get the full screen.  
> I'm convinced the widescreen cuts the tops off of peoples heads.  I had 
> just the full screen of SS/PS and didn't remember it being so . . . 
> squished.  So I guess I'm not really much help until Friday!
> 
> Richelle
> 
> 
>  Hi,
> 
>  seeing that a few people already have the dvd:
> 
>  I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
>  and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).
> 
>  -- 
>  Best regards,
>  Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net



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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  7 02:39:25 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 19:39:25 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <190.186457e1.2bc2371a@aol.com>
References: <190.186457e1.2bc2371a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <16322509901.20030406193925@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Sunday, April 06, 2003, 7:06:18 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:

>  Like in the Chamber of secrets when the have ron's howler
> with the 
> widescreen you will be able to see stuff on the sides instead of just
> ron 
> weasley!!

Oh, I'd be perfectly fine to see just Ron Weasley ;)

But last year somebody did an excellent comparison between
the two version, and in parts you actually saw
more in the fullscreen version.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From illyana at mindspring.com  Mon Apr  7 03:03:29 2003
From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean)
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 20:03:29 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <16322509901.20030406193925@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <8249F82B-68A5-11D7-8C49-003065B8B954@mindspring.com>


On Sunday, April 6, 2003, at 07:39  , Susanne wrote:
>
> Sunday, April 06, 2003, 7:06:18 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
>
> >? Like in the Chamber of secrets when the have ron's howler
> > with the
> > widescreen you will be able to see stuff on the sides instead of just
> > ron
> > weasley!!
>
> Oh, I'd be perfectly fine to see just Ron Weasley ;)
>
> But last year somebody did an excellent comparison between
> the two version, and in parts you actually saw
> more in the fullscreen version.

I remember the huge discussion I started a few months ago about all of 
this, and I still have the link! It's GulPlum's page: 
http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm

illyana

HPGCv1
a22 e+ x+* Rm Ri HP4 S+++ Mo++ HG+/VK++ HaP+/SS+++& FGW++ DM++& VC-- 
GG-- CD+ VK++ SS+++& PT--- AF-- MM++ RL++ O+m FAo F- Sl FHo SfD

visit my livejournal! http://www.livejournal.com/users/illyanadmc


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




From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Mon Apr  7 04:25:56 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 00:25:56 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
Message-ID: <f.e77e160.2bc257d4@aol.com>

To those that have the CoS widescreen DVD, is it the small kind where it's 
like a strip in the middle of the screen, or is it the bigger kind that some 
say looks like it just has two black blocks on top and bottom? 

Melly



From autumn_sprite at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  7 05:28:19 2003
From: autumn_sprite at yahoo.com (Marianne)
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 05:28:19 -0000
Subject: CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <f.e77e160.2bc257d4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b6r29j+gggt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Ripleywriter at a... wrote:
It's the latter.

Marianne




From Audra1976 at aol.com  Mon Apr  7 15:57:58 2003
From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:57:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 538
Message-ID: <1d6.6d70b44.2bc2fa06@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/7/03 7:35:55 AM, Richelle writes:

<< I have the widescreen, and can't wait until Friday to get the full screen. 
 I'm convinced the widescreen cuts the tops off of peoples heads.  I had just 
the full screen of SS/PS and didn't remember it being so . . . squished.>>

Me:
Gah!!  Wrong, wrong, wrong!  Widescreen does not cut of the top and bottom.  
It's full screen that cuts off the sides!  Widescreen is ALWAYS better than 
fullscreen.  If you ever have the choice, get widescreen.

What can I say, I'm very passionate.  ;-)

-Audra-



From robeeena at hotmail.com  Mon Apr  7 16:51:44 2003
From: robeeena at hotmail.com (Robin Keener)
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 09:51:44 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
Message-ID: <F72rV4ZneAzdfTVSxzW000070a0@hotmail.com>

Re: I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).

Widescreen is always better. The screen is smaller, but its to fit 
everything in, whereas Fullscreen versions cut off the sides to fit the 
entire screen.  Think of the Widescreen version as the Theatrical version. 
You don't miss anything that you saw in the theaters.

Robin

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  7 17:25:25 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 10:25:25 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <F72rV4ZneAzdfTVSxzW000070a0@hotmail.com>
References: <F72rV4ZneAzdfTVSxzW000070a0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <18775316671.20030407102525@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Monday, April 07, 2003, 9:51:44 AM, robeeena at hotmail.com wrote:

> Widescreen is always better.

While I agree with this in general, the comparison between
the two versions of PS/SS made me wonder, especially if you
have a smallish TV and have to run the movie in Zoom (which
cuts off the sides a bit) to be able to see ;)

The widescreen version of PS/SS has the largest black blocks
above and below it I've ever come across (to the point where
the strip of movie only takes up about half the tv screen in
the middle).

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  7 18:24:15 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:24:15 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 538
In-Reply-To: <1d6.6d70b44.2bc2fa06@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b6sfof+c72g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Audra1976 at a... wrote:

> 
> Me:
> Gah!!  Wrong, wrong, wrong!  Widescreen does not cut of the top and 
> bottom. It's full screen that cuts off the sides!  ...edited..
> 
> What can I say, I'm very passionate.  ;-)
> 
> -Audra-

Actaully, your both wrong, wrong, wrong, and at the same time,
somewhat right. If you go to GulPlum's webpage and look at the
examples, you will see that indeed, standard format has more image on
the top and bottom while the sides are trimmed off. Widescreen, on the
other hand, has the top and bottome trimmed off, but more image at the
sides.

http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm

In the not too distant past there was a long discussion on this
subject and GulPlum explained it all. Worth searching out.

bboy_mn





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  7 18:58:46 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: widescreen vs. fullscreen [aka] Digest Number 538
In-Reply-To: <b6sfof+c72g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030407185846.24019.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com>

Audra wrote:
> > Gah!!  Wrong, wrong, wrong!  
> > Widescreen does not cut of the 
> > top and bottom. It's full screen
> > that cuts off the sides!  ...edited..
> > 
> > What can I say, I'm very passionate.  ;-)

Steve wrote:
> Actaully, your both wrong, wrong,
> wrong, and at the same time,
> somewhat right. If you go to
> GulPlum's webpage and look at the
> examples, you will see that indeed,
> standard format has more image on
> the top and bottom while the sides
> are trimmed off. Widescreen, on the
> other hand, has the top and bottome
> trimmed off, but more image at the
> sides.
> 
> http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm
> 
> In the not too distant past there
> was a long discussion on this
> subject and GulPlum explained it
> all. Worth searching out.

Audra et al, I agree with Steve, you 
might find GulPlum's explanation of 
this exception to the 'widescreen is 
better' rule of thumb very interesting.  
Be sure to follow the link he had:

http://www.widescreen.org/
aspect_ratios.shtml#Super35

Y'know, I rather miss the days when 
I don't have to take into consideration 
when deciding between WS and FS whether 
the movie I'm thinking of buying was made 
in Super35 or otherwise.

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com



From jenw118 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  7 20:51:40 2003
From: jenw118 at yahoo.com (Jennifer R. Wilson)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
Message-ID: <20030407205140.82642.qmail@web14008.mail.yahoo.com>


Hello everyone :)

While talking with my sister, a fan of the Harry Potter movies, she made an interesting observation about the three stars of the HP movies.  

She thinks that from now on the kids will have difficulty gaining any more movie roles because they'll always be known as the kids from HP and that no one will want to see them in anything else...

I personally have to disagree, I think that all three kids, especially Daniel Radcliffe have potential for other movies, both British and Hollywood filmed.  I think that Dan Radcliffe shows some great potential in many styles of film.

What do you think?  Can you see them doing any other films in the future, or will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids" to you as well? 

Jennifer (who is posting for the first time here, and hopes she hasn't mentioned something that's been said over and over...)

 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Apr  7 23:27:46 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 18:27:46 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 538
References: <1d6.6d70b44.2bc2fa06@aol.com>
Message-ID: <013301c2fd5d$4c4b14d0$3c9dcdd1@RVotaw>

In a message dated 4/7/03 7:35:55 AM, Richelle writes:

<< I have the widescreen, and can't wait until Friday to get the full screen. 
I'm convinced the widescreen cuts the tops off of peoples heads.  I had just 
the full screen of SS/PS and didn't remember it being so . . . squished.>>

Audra:

> Gah!!  Wrong, wrong, wrong!  Widescreen does not cut of the top and bottom.  
> It's full screen that cuts off the sides!  Widescreen is ALWAYS better than 
> fullscreen.  If you ever have the choice, get widescreen.

Sorry, but I'm not wrong.  I'm not stupid, I know widescreen is *traditonally* best, but if you will go to GulPlum's wonderful site (http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm) you will see that widescreen in Harry Potter does indeed cut off the top and bottom.  In the picture of Harry's letter is especially noticeable.  This is because Chris Columbus does not shoot in the typical 2.35:1 wide screen format.  Therefore, you will always lose something, regardless of which format you are watching.  Not in the case of most movies, only in the case of Harry Potter (and, I'm sure, a few others here and there).

Richelle


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




From jeanico at securenet.net  Tue Apr  8 02:29:20 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:29:20 -0000
Subject: Will they always the "Harry Potter Kids"
Message-ID: <b6tc60+k9nr@eGroups.com>

Hi, Jennifer! I am also posting for the 1rst time on this list and I 
found your remarks quite interesting. I don't believe there is any 
negative type casting that will come from the HP movies for the 
younger stars. Like you, I find that Daniel Radcliffe shows a lot of 
promise...sensitive, leading man potential type. Rupert Grint is very 
much the "comedian" of the three, so playing Ron won't hurt his 
chances. Time will tell with Emma Watson: She didn't have much to 
work with in COS but was IMO a fine little actress in Sorcerer's 
Stone. If these kids pursue their dreams and acting is what they 
would like to do, chances are they will succeed thanks to the 
experience they will have acquired working on the HP movies. They 
also appear to have a good head on their shoulders, which is really 
important!      
Nicole    





From boredchocobo at attbi.com  Tue Apr  8 02:49:54 2003
From: boredchocobo at attbi.com (Chocobo)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 22:49:54 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Will they always the "Harry Potter Kids"
References: <b6tc60+k9nr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000501c2fd79$88e93450$82647d18@Compuhon>

There's no doubt in my mind that they will always be known as the Harry Potter kids. I mean, the first two movies are two of the biggest of all time, the first one being the #2 money making movie in history. When people see them they'll think one thing- "Harry" or "Hermione" or "Ron". Especially since the HP movies are likely to be all they get the chance to work on for the next couple of years. On the other hand though, there will definitely be movie makers who will want to cast them, considering they're really famous now. No offense to their fans, but my guess would be that none of them go on to star in big movies afterwards, none of them are really exceptional actors. Maybe Daniel and Emma could get some roles because of their fame and looks. (Then again- they do have plenty of time to learn, and I'm hardly a professional critic, just my opinion.)
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: jeanico2000 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 10:29 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Will they always the "Harry Potter Kids"


  Hi, Jennifer! I am also posting for the 1rst time on this list and I 
  found your remarks quite interesting. I don't believe there is any 
  negative type casting that will come from the HP movies for the 
  younger stars. Like you, I find that Daniel Radcliffe shows a lot of 
  promise...sensitive, leading man potential type. Rupert Grint is very 
  much the "comedian" of the three, so playing Ron won't hurt his 
  chances. Time will tell with Emma Watson: She didn't have much to 
  work with in COS but was IMO a fine little actress in Sorcerer's 
  Stone. If these kids pursue their dreams and acting is what they 
  would like to do, chances are they will succeed thanks to the 
  experience they will have acquired working on the HP movies. They 
  also appear to have a good head on their shoulders, which is really 
  important!      
  Nicole    



        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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



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




From autumn_sprite at yahoo.com  Tue Apr  8 06:15:09 2003
From: autumn_sprite at yahoo.com (Marianne)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 06:15:09 -0000
Subject: CoS widescreen or full screen?
In-Reply-To: <5514752501.20030406173009@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b6tpdd+50rg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> seeing that a few people already have the dvd:
> 
> I was wondering if you have the full or widescreen version
> and what you thought of them (concerning the watchability).

As mentioned in a previous post, I have the dvd in the widescreen 
format.  However if the pictures posted in the Leaky Cauldron are 
anything to go by, there are just some bits of Lucius & Draco I 
refuse to go without.  Gah, it looks like a trip to Target for the 
fullscreen one as well. 

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/COSTrailer10.html 
The top band is the tip of Harry's wand & bottom band is just below 
his index finger

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/COSTrailer2-5.html
Wood's head & Flint's knees

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/ThirdTrailer1.html
(bottom photo) top of Harry's head & right ring finger

Marianne




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Apr  8 13:19:32 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:19:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] will they always be Harry Potter kids?
Message-ID: <1ee.62dc5d1.2bc42664@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/8/2003 8:00:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> I personally have to disagree, I think that all three kids, especially 
> Daniel Radcliffe have potential for other movies, both British and 
> Hollywood filmed.  I think that Dan Radcliffe shows some great potential in 
> many styles of film.
> 
> What do you think?  Can you see them doing any other films in the future, 
> or will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids" to you as well? 
> 

Dan, in particular, looks quite different without his glasses.  He's on "Live 
with Regis and Kelly" this morning, I've got the VCR recording it.  THis is 
the first time I've gotten to see any of these interviews live since I came 
to "fandom" late in the process.  ;->  But I do think all three kids have a 
chance of doing other roles.  Rupert looked quite different in "Thunderpants" 
(I haven't seen it, but saw pics of him from it on his Website).  Girls can 
look very different depending on makeup and hairstyle, so Emma's got a good 
shot at future roles too.  JMHO.


Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr  8 13:30:04 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 08:30:04 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] will they always be Harry Potter kids?
Message-ID: <31467888.1049808604079.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

Personally, I do think they'll always be associated with the Harry Potter 
films, but I don't think it will hurt them all.  It may hurt Ron, at least if 
they continue stereotyping him as a comic character.  As others have said, 
Daniel looks so different without the glasses, not to mention the difference 
when his hair is separated in the front rather than down over his forehead.  As 
for Emma, I don't really know.  Some people seem really impressed with her, I 
don't mean to offend anyone, but she's really starting to get on my nerves.  
She needs a change of attitude, for one thing.  I watched pretty much every 
interview she did, and she'll readily put anyone down to make herself sound 
better.  Which actually backfires, because it ends up making her sound like a 
jerk.  And she's probably not, it's bound to be just a teenage thing.  Or an 
almost teenage thing.

Richelle

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Apr  8 13:47:24 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 09:47:24 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly
Message-ID: <78.3ca1f30c.2bc42cec@aol.com>

That was just odd.  The show was listed as a "new" show, not a rerun.  They 
had Arnold Swartzeneger (sp?) promoting "Terminator 3" which is coming out 
soon, and then the interview with Dan was from before CoS came out!  But it 
was fun to see.  Regis asked Dan if he had a girlfriend, then asked if Emma 
was his girlfriend and Dan turned pink, LOL!  Dan mentioned filming on PoA 
starts "sometime next year" and that Book 5 would probably be out by the end 
of the year, he didn't know, so it couldn't have been a new interview, since 
they've started filming PoA and everyone knows now when Book 5 comes out.  
You don't see many people on TV turn *pink* in interviews.  ;-)  It was fun 
to see.

Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From grace701 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr  8 14:28:28 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 07:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <1049803180.320.20772.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030408142828.26878.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>


They will always be the Harry Potter kids to me, but I think that their acting ability will increase throughout the years and casting directors will give them a call up to have them in another movie.  Isn't Rupert in another movie?  That shows that they can do other films besides Harry Potter.  What I worry about is will they be type casted into kids' movies when they are older just b/c they were in Harry Potter. 
If they decide to not come back and do Harry Potter movie 4-7, I'll be very disappointed only b/c as we are reading Harry grow we would also like to see these characters grow.  (Maybe they can all re-unite for movie 7.)
I personally think that they are great actors for their age, not that I would know, but I just believe that they are the roles that they play.  Then again, it could be that they are just perfect for the HP roles b/c in reality they are, at least to me. 
What is going to be a shame is that being that I live in New York, I'm American and if Emma, Daniel, and Rupert continue to act in other movies I may not be able to see them.  :(  Harry Potter will be my only consolation to see them.  
Greicy, who hopes that DER's (Daniel, Emma, Rupert) world reknown statis doesn't diminish
 


Greicy


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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




From julia at thequiltbug.com  Tue Apr  8 14:44:04 2003
From: julia at thequiltbug.com (Calliope)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 07:44:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly
Message-ID: <20030408074404.20603.h012.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net>

artsylynda at aol.com wrote:

>>Regis asked Dan if he had a girlfriend, then asked if Emma 
was his girlfriend and Dan turned pink, LOL!? <snip>
You don't see many people on TV turn *pink* in interviews.? ;-)? It was fun 
to see.<<

That's hilarious, especially since the raunchy broomstick joke made at his
expense at that awards show a while back didn't seem to ruffle his feathers a
bit.  I'm guessing that this show actually happened previous to that awards
show, and he's gotten a little better with dealing with personal comments since
then.

Our little Dan's growing up, *sniff*.

--Calliope

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Calliopes_fics/
http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Calliope/
http://www.riddikulus.org/authorLinks/Calliope/



From CLShannon at aol.com  Tue Apr  8 16:02:58 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 12:02:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly
Message-ID: <7c.37c3f5f0.2bc44cb2@aol.com>

Well, Regis gives the date right at the beginning of the show and he says 
Nov. 13, 2002, so it's definitely a repeat - unless we all got time turners 
and it is indeed November of last year again <g> 
Cindy



From rainbow at rainbowbrite.net  Tue Apr  8 14:14:26 2003
From: rainbow at rainbowbrite.net (Katy Cartee)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:14:26 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] will they always be Harry Potter kids?
References: <31467888.1049808604079.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>
Message-ID: <01b201c2fdd9$2a190ad0$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>

Richelle wrote:

> As for Emma, I don't really know.  Some people seem really impressed with her, I 
> don't mean to offend anyone, but she's really starting to get on my nerves.  
> She needs a change of attitude, for one thing.  I watched pretty much every 
> interview she did, and she'll readily put anyone down to make herself sound 
> better.  Which actually backfires, because it ends up making her sound like a 
> jerk.  And she's probably not, it's bound to be just a teenage thing.  Or an 
> almost teenage thing.

Wow, really? I haven't seen interviews with any of the kids (grrr)...this surprises me. Is there anywhere online where i can download interviews? I'd really love that :)

As far as Daniel and Rupert go...hrmm. I don't think Rupert will have any trouble, seeing that he's done other movies already. But Daniel, i just don't know. I can't imagine him as anything other than Harry.

~Katy~
Live in the southeast USA? Join the new HP4GU-Southeast-US regional group!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-Southeast-US/

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





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Apr  8 19:39:40 2003
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 19:39:40 -0000
Subject: Early surprise
Message-ID: <b6v8hs+mqmb@eGroups.com>

Ahhh, I do love Amazon.com.  I got CoS today!!  Wheeeeee!  :D

Did anyone else get theirs, too?


Alora




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr  8 20:20:10 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 20:20:10 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <b6i69c+bb1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6vatq+i49n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "fionap19" <fionap19 at y...> wrote:
> Has anybody heard if there is going to be any "celebration" of the 
> launch of the video on April 11th?  

Me: From TLC today -- Be sure to go visit Newsround as they leak in a 
report from the Leavesden set of PoA, where the CoS DVD is getting 
the royal treatment. Be sure to keep checking Newsround tonight and 
tomorrow - we're told there'll be lots of juicy tidbits! 
The link below shows some pics from the launch which took place on 
WEDNESDAY, am I going crazy but isn't it still Tuesday in the UK?????


Here's a link: 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/pictures/galleries/newsid_2930000/29
30415.stm 







From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr  8 20:27:40 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:27:40 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Launch of DVD /Video???
Message-ID: <1508418.1049833660926.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

Geri510 wrote:

> Me: From TLC today -- Be sure to go visit Newsround as they leak in a <BR>
> report from the Leavesden set of PoA, where the CoS DVD is getting <BR>
> the royal treatment. Be sure to keep checking Newsround tonight and <BR>
> tomorrow - we're told there'll be lots of juicy tidbits! <BR>

My word!  Rupert's grown.  Emma's grown.  Can't really tell that Daniel's grown 
anymore.  In fact, if he waits too long Emma'll pass him up.  You know when 
girls start growing, they grow fast!  Great to see the pictures.  On the other 
hand, what did they do with Rupert's hair?!?  Kinda long compared to the last 
two movies.

Richelle

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




From rainbow at rainbowbrite.net  Tue Apr  8 20:47:35 2003
From: rainbow at rainbowbrite.net (Katy Cartee)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:47:35 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Launch of DVD /Video???
References: <b6vatq+i49n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <038b01c2fe10$16274780$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>

> Here's a link: 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/pictures/galleries/newsid_2930000/2930415.stm 

Thanks for the link! Those pics are great! I think Rupert's hair looks wonderful...he is so adorable. Emma looks a little bitchy (am i allowed to say that?) in that first pic. Hrmm. No close-up's of Daniel huh? Poo. In that first pic he looks a lot like an old high school friend of mine. The twin's look like guys out of an old British comedy show...classic :) And Ginny looks absolutely adorable! I think she's just gonna get prettier with age. I would love to meet those guys *sigh*

~Katy~

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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr  8 20:49:44 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:49:44 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Launch of DVD /Video???
Message-ID: <16018604.1049834984913.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

Katy wrote:

> Thanks for the link! Those pics are great! I think Rupert's hair looks 
>wonderful...he is so adorable. Emma looks a little bitchy (am i allowed to say 
>that?) in that first pic. Hrmm. No close-up's of Daniel huh? Poo. In that 
>first pic he looks a lot like an old high school friend of mine. The twin's ?
>look like guys out of an old British comedy show...classic :) And Ginny looks 
>absolutely adorable! I think she's just gonna get prettier with age. I would 
>love to meet those guys *sigh*<BR>

Look here, Katy, there are a few more, incuding closer up pictures of Daniel.  
Bonnie (Ginny Weasley) is indeed a doll!

http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=harry+potter

If it doesn't work, go to Yahoo, select news, choose search for news photos, 
and type in Harry Potter.  There are also pictures of Emma looking slightly 
less, well, anyway you said it, not me. :)

Richelle

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




From thalia at aokp.org  Tue Apr  8 21:05:17 2003
From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 14:05:17 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] re: launch pics
In-Reply-To: <038b01c2fe10$16274780$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>
References: <b6vatq+i49n@eGroups.com> <038b01c2fe10$16274780$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200304081405.AA05170503@aokp.org>

katy provided the link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/pictures/galleries/newsid_2930000/293041
5.stm

and i may be weird, but they seemed like awful pics to me. i suppose 
being famous, you get used to awful pics, but all the same...

emma 'britany spears' watson in the first pic made me laugh myself silly. 
that girl is so trendy it hurts. :) which is probably why dan has his arm 
around her and is looking at her like that...heh.

ugh, how annoying to get in that car again. i would be annoyed, at least.

hmm, onto the headshots. am i the only one who thinks it looks like they 
were holding the camera themselves? and those never turn out the be the 
most quality snapshots. ;)

rupert's a goober. :) phelps twins noticeably NOT red-headed. chris 
rankin not so noticeably un-red-headed, and i was too busy wondering what 
geocentric sculptor had gotten ahold of bonnie's hair to think about the 
color. maybe i'm farther out of the fashion loop than i thought...

thalia 'girl in a bubble' chaunacy




From urbana at charter.net  Tue Apr  8 22:58:45 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 22:58:45 -0000
Subject: Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly
In-Reply-To: <78.3ca1f30c.2bc42cec@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b6vk75+o03k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
 Regis asked Dan if he had a girlfriend, then asked if Emma 
> was his girlfriend and Dan turned pink, LOL!  

I believe that's called "blushing" :-)

> You don't see many people on TV turn *pink* in interviews.  ;-)  It 
was fun 
> to see.

No, you don't...unless they're 13-year-old boys (or girls) being 
asked if they are dating their co-stars!

Anne U
(wishing we had more POA news to discuss)




From urbana at charter.net  Tue Apr  8 23:26:51 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 23:26:51 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <1508418.1049833660926.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>
Message-ID: <b6vlrr+pgl0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote:
> Geri510 wrote:
>told there'll be lots of juicy tidbits! <BR>
> 
> My word!  Rupert's grown.  Emma's grown.  Can't really tell that 
Daniel's grown 
> anymore.  In fact, if he waits too long Emma'll pass him up.

Did anyone besides me notice what appeared to be a young male hand on 
Emma's left shoulder? Looked to me like it could be Daniel's hand...  
And in photo 3 of 8, what really struck me is that (IMO) here Emma 
looks like a very young Julia Roberts.
 
So Emma, Rupert, Chris Rankin, and Oliver & James Phelps rate a 
closeup, but Daniel (the titular star) doesn't?? Hmmmm.


Anne U
(who will probably have to fight tooth and nail for her copy of COS 
with the thundering hordes at WalMart)





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Apr  9 00:30:10 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:30:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Close ups of Daniel (was Re: Launch of DVD /Video???)
References: <b6vlrr+pgl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008101c2fe2f$2e446ef0$1ba0cdd1@RVotaw>

Anne U wrote:

> Did anyone besides me notice what appeared to be a young male hand on 
> Emma's left shoulder? Looked to me like it could be Daniel's hand...  

Probably.  It usually is.  All the 12 year old girls panic every time . . . Of course, considering the other hand is usually around Rupert (and would've been in this case, except it was holding a DVD) I think they blow that one out of proportion. 

>So Emma, Rupert, Chris Rankin, and Oliver & James Phelps rate a 
>closeup, but Daniel (the titular star) doesn't?? Hmmmm.

Only on Newsround does Daniel not rate a closeup.  Not to fear, Reuters has closeups:

http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=news_photos&p=harry+potter

>Anne U
>(who will probably have to fight tooth and nail for her copy of COS 
>with the thundering hordes at WalMart)

Richelle
(who knows she will not have to fight anyone to get a copy of COS at Wal-Mart--what a dull town this is)


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




From boredchocobo at attbi.com  Tue Apr  8 23:41:30 2003
From: boredchocobo at attbi.com (Chocobo)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:41:30 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Launch of DVD /Video???
References: <b6vlrr+pgl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001501c2fe28$61589f20$82647d18@Compuhon>

Yep, that's Daniel's hand. BTW, at the Yahoo pictures page, check out this photo- 
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030325/161/3md2l.html

Does her husband remind you of anyone?

--- Original Message ----- 
  From: Anne 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 

  Did anyone besides me notice what appeared to be a young male hand on 
  Emma's left shoulder? Looked to me like it could be Daniel's hand...  
  And in photo 3 of 8, what really struck me is that (IMO) here Emma 
  looks like a very young Julia Roberts.



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




From urbana at charter.net  Wed Apr  9 01:42:53 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 01:42:53 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <001501c2fe28$61589f20$82647d18@Compuhon>
Message-ID: <b6vtqt+ddnm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Chocobo" <boredchocobo at a...> 
wrote:
> Yep, that's Daniel's hand. BTW, at the Yahoo pictures page, check 
out this photo- 
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030325/161/3md2l.html
> 
> Does her husband remind you of anyone?
>

Give him some green contact lenses (under the glasses) and a 
lightning scar and I'd say he looks like a grown-up version of a 
certain boy wizard...

Anne U
(though not as good-looking as the fan-fic versions of that grown-up 
boy wizard)




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Apr  9 02:23:30 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 21:23:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan on Live with Regis and Kelly/ will they always be the Harry Potter kids
References: <20030408074404.20603.h012.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net>
Message-ID: <003b01c2fe3f$03726aa0$cf9dcdd1@RVotaw>

Calliope wrote:

> That's hilarious, especially since the raunchy broomstick joke made at his
> expense at that awards show a while back didn't seem to ruffle his feathers a
> bit.  I'm guessing that this show actually happened previous to that awards
> show, and he's gotten a little better with dealing with personal comments since
> then.

Not to worry, he did turn bright red nonetheless. :)  I do think the Regis show was a bit unusual even for him, he giggled all the way through it.  It was about all he could do, Regis wouldn't shut up.

Katy wrote (regarding my comment on Emma's, err, attitude in some interviews):

> Wow, really? I haven't seen interviews with any of the kids (grrr)...this >surprises me. Is there anywhere online where i can download interviews? I'd >really love that :)

I haven't seen the ones I'm thinking of online.  It generally seems to happen when Emma interviews alone.  On the David Letterman show, for example.  She kept going on about the boys being so immature and making faces and so on.  And basically that Americans say her name wrong.  (It's not WAHtson, it's WOHtson)  Come on, that's what accents are about.  It doesn't mean it's WRONG.  She made an attempt at several jokes of the kind, but no one (including Letterman) seemed to get them.

Then there was the one on TRL in which they asked Emma and Rupert if Daniel had told them anything about being on the show (he was on separately, several days--or weeks, can't remember--earlier).  Rupert said the usual, yea, he said it was great, blah blah.  Emma popped up with "He also said he'd never been so scared in his life."  Okay, maybe he did say that.  I also don't think he intended for her to announce it on television either.

As I said earlier, I'm sure it's just an almost teenage girl thing, but it gets on my nerves.  I've always favored boys anyway, guess that doesn't help!

Katy again:

> As far as Daniel and Rupert go...hrmm. I don't think Rupert will have any 
> trouble, seeing that he's done other movies already. But Daniel, i just don't 
> know. I can't imagine him as anything other than Harry.

Daniel's done more other stuff than Rupert has.  Only thing Rupert's done was Thunderpants.  If that can be called a movie.  (I haven't seen it, but I've heard it's not worth sitting through.)   And that was after HP.  Daniel had done David Copperfield and Tailor of Panama (admittedly, a very small part there) prior to HP.  In fact, it was his role in David Copperfield that initially caught Chris Columbus's eye.  If you haven't seen it, I strongly recommend it.  He was truly heart breaking.  Amazing eyes.  My mom still refuses to watch it, no matter how I try to bribe her. (He's too cute, too sad, etc.)

Richelle


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




From dozierwoman at hotmail.com  Wed Apr  9 02:41:08 2003
From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:41:08 -0000
Subject: will they always be Harry Potter kids?
In-Reply-To: <01b201c2fdd9$2a190ad0$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>
Message-ID: <b70184+nq8n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Katy Cartee" <rainbow at r...> 
wrote:
> Richelle wrote:
> 
> > As for Emma, I don't really know.  Some people seem really 
impressed with her, I 
> > don't mean to offend anyone, but she's really starting to get on 
my nerves.  
> > She needs a change of attitude, for one thing.  I watched pretty 
much every 
> > interview she did, and she'll readily put anyone down to make 
herself sound 
> > better.  Which actually backfires, because it ends up making her 
sound like a 
> > jerk.  And she's probably not, it's bound to be just a teenage 
thing.  Or an 
> > almost teenage thing.
> 
> Wow, really? I haven't seen interviews with any of the kids 
(grrr)...this surprises me. Is there anywhere online where i can 
download interviews? I'd really love that :)
> 
> As far as Daniel and Rupert go...hrmm. I don't think Rupert will 
have any trouble, seeing that he's done other movies already. But 
Daniel, i just don't know. I can't imagine him as anything other than 
Harry.
> 
> ~Katy~

If you haven't had the opportunity to check out Dan's work in David 
Copperfield and Tailor of Panama (which is on HBO2 sometime this 
week) you really should. He was magnificient in Copperfield and did 
quite well in Tailor, even though he part was extremely small. I can 
see him doing quite well with his acting career if that is what he 
chooses to do.

Lisa aka Lady Firenze
> Live in the southeast USA? Join the new HP4GU-Southeast-US regional 
group!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-Southeast-US/
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dozierwoman at hotmail.com  Wed Apr  9 02:49:08 2003
From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:49:08 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <16018604.1049834984913.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>
Message-ID: <b701n4+7715@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote:
> Katy wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for the link! Those pics are great! I think Rupert's hair 
looks 
> >wonderful...he is so adorable. Emma looks a little bitchy (am i 
allowed to say 
> >that?) in that first pic. Hrmm. No close-up's of Daniel huh? Poo. 
In that 
> >first pic he looks a lot like an old high school friend of mine. 
The twin's ?
> >look like guys out of an old British comedy show...classic :) And 
Ginny looks 
> >absolutely adorable! I think she's just gonna get prettier with 
age. I would 
> >love to meet those guys *sigh*<BR>
> 
> Look here, Katy, there are a few more, incuding closer up pictures 
of Daniel.  
> Bonnie (Ginny Weasley) is indeed a doll!
> 
> http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?
c=news_photos&p=harry+potter
> 
> If it doesn't work, go to Yahoo, select news, choose search for 
news photos, 
> and type in Harry Potter.  There are also pictures of Emma looking 
slightly 
> less, well, anyway you said it, not me. :)
> 
> Richelle

Thanks for the link, Richelle. I agree, Emma looks a bit "haughty" if 
you ask me. Right now, both her and Hermione are grating on my 
nerves. (Don't shoot me, my opinion will probably change by morning) 
Anyway, my daughter deemed to tell me today that she heard that 
Hermione is going to die in book 6. Don't know where she got that 
info.

Lisa aka Lady Firenze
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dozierwoman at hotmail.com  Wed Apr  9 02:52:10 2003
From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 02:52:10 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <b6vtqt+ddnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b701sq+50nv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <urbana at c...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Chocobo" <boredchocobo at a...> 
> wrote:
> > Yep, that's Daniel's hand. BTW, at the Yahoo pictures page, check 
> out this photo- 
> > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&u=/030325/161/3md2l.html
> > 
> > Does her husband remind you of anyone?
> >
> 
> Give him some green contact lenses (under the glasses) and a 
> lightning scar and I'd say he looks like a grown-up version of a 
> certain boy wizard...
> 
> Anne U
> (though not as good-looking as the fan-fic versions of that grown-
up 
> boy wizard)

Or a bloody Elton John.

Lisa aka Lady Firenze




From urbana at charter.net  Wed Apr  9 03:41:43 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 03:41:43 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <b701sq+50nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b704pn+107g@eGroups.com>


> > > Does her husband remind you of anyone?
> > >
> > 
> > Give him some green contact lenses (under the glasses) and a 
> > lightning scar and I'd say he looks like a grown-up version of a 
> > certain boy wizard...
> > 
>> 
> Or a bloody Elton John.
> 
> Lisa aka Lady Firenze

Yiikes. I should've noticed that. Elton back when he first started 
wearing toupees, but with restrained glasses.

Anne U
("Don't go breakin' my heart...")





From kristen_tort at hotmail.com  Wed Apr  9 04:58:01 2003
From: kristen_tort at hotmail.com (Kristen)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 04:58:01 -0000
Subject: Will they always the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <b6tc60+k9nr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7098p+krdi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
>Like you, I find that Daniel Radcliffe shows a lot of 
> promise...sensitive, leading man potential type. 

I am facinated by Daniel Radcliffe. Not in a "Whoo! Whoo! He SO hot!" 
way, but just him in general. I just like him. Like most of you, I 
wonder where these actors will end up after HP. 

There is one line in the CoS movie that made me realize that Daniel 
*should* have some kind of future in this business. Now, none of you 
may agree with me but a light came on for me in the beginning of the 
movie when he tells the Dursley's that he'll "be up in his room being 
quiet and pretending that he doesn't exist." No, it wasn't Oscar 
caliber acting, but I just saw so much personality and humor in that 
line. I really can't explain it, but Daniel became Harry for me when 
he said that. I know that sounds wierd, but hey, I never claimed to 
be normal :)

By the way, my name is Kristen. I am new here. I have recently joined 
the fandom and am delighted to find this list where there are adults 
to discuss Harry Potter!





From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  9 08:07:13 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 08:07:13 -0000
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <20030407205140.82642.qmail@web14008.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b70kbh+64bi@eGroups.com>

It depends on them and the development (or lack thereof) of their 
talent...As well as luck.

Maculay Culkin has not faired well, IMO because he can't act, though 
his brother mos' def has skills.

Elijah Wood has fared better because, IMO he does have the skills...

Then there are the inexplicabled bad turns of luck... Henry Thomas 
was brilliant in ET, however we've seen little of him, aside from 
Legends of the Fall.






From jmd at jvf.co.uk  Wed Apr  9 09:02:46 2003
From: jmd at jvf.co.uk (Jeremy Davis)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:02:46 +0100
Subject: The Planman
References: <b70kbh+64bi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005f01c2fe76$ccf1f440$0e010001@jmd2000>

Sorry if this is considered slightly off topic.....

I just finished watching the new two part mini-series called "Planman" with
Robbie Coltrain on ITV1. I'd recommend it to anyone. It's good to see Robbie
back on TV. There is a fair amount of swaring but it's not over done. Robbie
plays a QC (barrister) that turns bad. But you just can't help feeling sorry
for him, though he still seems the good guy!!?? I don't want to say any more
otherwise I'll spoil it for anyone who asn't seen it yet.




From grace701 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  9 15:16:36 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 08:16:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Launch DVD pics
In-Reply-To: <1049875636.1591.65901.m8@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030409151636.96834.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com>


Yes, what is the deal with Daniel looking at Emma like that with his arm wrapped around her?  Could mean anything, but I just *love* to instigate! ;)
What is up with Bonnie's and Daniel's hair?
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I wish Daniel had more lips!  *covers face in shame*
And in regards to bitchy Emma.  I think she's at that stage in life to rebel so maybe that's why she's acting like that.  I wouldn't blame her really.


Greicy


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  9 18:00:13 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 18:00:13 -0000
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <b70kbh+64bi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b71n3d+7tvs@eGroups.com>

Risking an off-topic howler, I had to respond to this one:

<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:

> Then there are the inexplicabled bad turns of luck... Henry Thomas 
> was brilliant in ET, however we've seen little of him, aside from 
> Legends of the Fall.

He has been quite busy, but he has changed so much in appearance that 
you might not recognize him. How about his co-starring role in The 
Gangs of New York as Amsterdam's friend Tom? He was terrific.

To keep this sort of on topic, I think it proves that Dan et al could 
have an extended career post Potter, as witness Henry Thomas. I would 
be happy to continue this discussion in OT-Chatter.

~ Constance Vigilance ~




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  9 20:34:07 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 20:34:07 -0000
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <b71n3d+7tvs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7203v+mr3k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Miller"
<constancevigilance at y...> wrote:
>
>...edited...
> 
> To keep this sort of on topic, I think it proves that Dan et al could 
> have an extended career post Potter, as witness Henry Thomas. I would 
> be happy to continue this discussion in OT-Chatter.
> 
> ~ Constance Vigilance ~

bboy_mn:

What i would really like is to read more of Daniel's writing. The
comment he made about Santa Claus in Reader's Digest was an amazing
piece of writing for someone so young.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/14016

Daniel-
I think it is easy to see that Daniel is an extremely intelligent and
talented boy. I think he has great potential in life if he doesn't
allow himself to become spoiled by fame, or turn into a wild party
animal. 

I think, much like Hermione, being an only child of intelligent
involved parents, has made Dan far more sophisticated than most kids
his age. 

Rupert-
People always comment about Rupert comedic ability, especially as far
as his expressive face, but I think it goes far beyond that. When you
watch the movies of PS/SS and CoS, pay close attention to the scenes
where Ron isn't in the front of the scene. His facial expressions, his
posture and body language, his voice are all dead on for every emotion
he expresses. Take the scene where Harry is being chased by the rogue
bludger. Ron raises his broken wand and says (something like) 'I'll
take care of that' and Hermione stops him. At this point the camera
moves off Ron and you only see him for a second. That could have easly
been a scene where another actor would have just stood there blankly
waiting for the scene to end. But Ron/Rupert's posture and facial
expression in that brief second clearly show Ron disappointment and
humiliation of having a crappy broken wand. Look at the many scenes
where Ron isn't the focus of the scene and you will see he is dead on
with every expression of emotion.

So, I think Rupert has a great range as an actor, and I think he as
great potential. I could see him playing a role in 'East Enders',
although I don't actually know if that show is still in production.
Keep in mind last night I was watching a British TV show that referred
to 1992 as the future.

I will add that Rupert is the one that I worry about the most. He
definitely wants to be an actor, but he is forces to stand in the
shadow of Daniel who gets all the press and all the opportunities. Was
Rupert asked to present any awards? Was he asked to appear as a guest
in 'The Play What I Wrote'? For an aspiring actor these publicity
opportunites are gold, yet he gets lost in the HP background.

Rupert also needs to develop his communication skills. People love
interviewing Daniel because he has a lot to say and is very responsive
to questions. Although, all interviews ask the same endless boring
questions, Dan makes his responses seem spontaneous. Rupert on the
other hand seems to go blank and respond with 'yeh' and 'cool'. I
think there is an art or at least a craft to being interviewed and
Rupert really needs to improve in this area.


Emma-
I think Emma makes a great Hermione, but I'm not sure she has the long
range potential that Dan and Rupert have. Although, I think she could
be a good actress if she set her mind to it.

General-
The saving grace for all these actors is that they are in England. It
is not uncommon for actors to move from one TV series to another to
another to another, and they are immediately accepted as their new
characters. One TV show could end and the very next week an actor
could be in a new TV series without carrying his previous character
with him. I think British audiences are a lot less likely to force
actors into the identity of the character they play. That will give
all the actors a chance to establish themselves in a way that would be
difficult in the USA. 

Britian has a solid film industry, and has a lot of theater acting
opportunites as well as television. That will surely give these HP
actors plenty of chances to prove themselves.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From urbana at charter.net  Wed Apr  9 21:13:07 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:13:07 -0000
Subject: launch pics
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200304081405.AA05170503@aokp.org>
Message-ID: <b722d3+n19p@eGroups.com>

here's a big group of COS DVD/video launch pics:

<http://www.wireimage.com/GalleryListing.asp?
navtyp=CAL====25531&ym=200304>

Anne U

(who also wonders who did what to Bonnie Wright's hair... EEEK!!)

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chanteuse thalia chaunacy" 
<thalia at a...> wrote:
>i was too busy wondering what 
> geocentric sculptor had gotten ahold of bonnie's hair to think 
about the 
> color. 





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  9 22:08:42 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 15:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: looking like Harry... [was] Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <b6vtqt+ddnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030409220842.9149.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com>

"Chocobo":
> > Yep, that's Daniel's hand. BTW, at the 
> > Yahoo pictures page, check out this photo- 
> > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030325/161/3md2l.html
> > 
> > Does her husband remind you of anyone?

Anne:
> Give him some green contact lenses
> (under the glasses) and a 
> lightning scar and I'd say he looks
> like a grown-up version of a 
> certain boy wizard...

Y'know, on my last trip to Scotland, 
half of the male population of Edinburgh 
struck me as looking like a grown-up 
version of a certain boy wizard if given 
green contact lenses, glasses and a 
lightning scar!  <g>

And yes, I saw a quite a few Hermiones 
and Rons and...  Though, I regret to 
report, not a single Hagrid or hag or 
elf...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com



From tesseract197 at earthlink.net  Wed Apr  9 22:01:35 2003
From: tesseract197 at earthlink.net (tesseract197)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:01:35 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <b6vtqt+ddnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7257v+gpc9@eGroups.com>

Chocobo:
Does her (JKR's) husband remind you of anyone?

Anne U:
Give him some green contact lenses (under the glasses) and a 
lightning scar and I'd say he looks like a grown-up version of a 
certain boy wizard...

Me:
To me, he looks more like a grown-up version of the kid who plays 
Neville (Matthew Lewis?) than he does any version of Harry I could 
imagine.  I think it's mostly the smile and the slightly rounded 
cheeks.  Hmmm...

Tess





From tesseract197 at earthlink.net  Wed Apr  9 22:57:43 2003
From: tesseract197 at earthlink.net (tesseract197)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:57:43 -0000
Subject: Launch of DVD /Video???
In-Reply-To: <001501c2fe28$61589f20$82647d18@Compuhon>
Message-ID: <b728h7+rb0g@eGroups.com>

Chocobo:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030325/161/3md2l.html

Does her (JKR's) husband remind you of anyone?

Me (posting a second time as Yahoo ate my first attempt--my apologies 
if this somehow gets duplicated):
Actually, to me he looks more like a grown-up version of the kid who 
plays Neville (Matthew Lewis) than any mental image I've ever had of 
Harry.  I the similarity is in the smile and the slightly rounded 
cheeks.  (Go to http://www.kewlplaces.net/cast02.htm and scroll way 
down the the bottom for a headshot of Matthew--it's old, but I wanted 
one where he was smiling and this was all I cound find.)  Hmmm...

Tess




From Zephyrjaid at aol.com  Wed Apr  9 23:57:42 2003
From: Zephyrjaid at aol.com (zephyrjaid7)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 23:57:42 -0000
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <b7203v+mr3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b72c1m+pu4u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> What i would really like is to read more of Daniel's writing. The
> comment he made about Santa Claus in Reader's Digest was an amazing
> piece of writing for someone so young.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/14016
>

Funny you should mention that. I just cleaned out my desk and I found 
that issue of Reader's Digest and I couldn't remember why I kept it - 
so I read the entire thing until I found Daniel's "The Man in the Red 
Suit." I really agree with you about his writing - there's such 
whimsy. It's hard not to fall in love with it. 

bboy_mn:
> Daniel-
> I think it is easy to see that Daniel is an extremely intelligent 
and
> talented boy. I think he has great potential in life if he doesn't
> allow himself to become spoiled by fame, or turn into a wild party
> animal. 
> 
> I think, much like Hermione, being an only child of intelligent
> involved parents, has made Dan far more sophisticated than most kids
> his age. 

I truly don't see Daniel becoming spoiled by fame or turning into a 
party animal. He already has such a sense of where he stands in the 
world and seems to appreciate it. His parents have definitely given 
him a solid foundation of morals and it doesn't seem that they've 
taught him to take them lightly. Plus, I think he has too many people 
behind him that wouldn't allow him to get above himself, like David 
Heyman. He's surrounded by people that expect him to handle the fame 
admirably, just like he's done in the past.

As far as continuing his career in film, I can completely see him 
remaining successful. He's said may do a role to disassociate himself 
from Harry Potter and I'm sure that if he did that, he'd continue to 
flourish. His work in David Copperfield was entirely different from 
HP and yet still as enchanting (no pun intended). I can already 
disconnect Dan from Harry in my mind and HP mania is at its peak. 
Plus his various interests, like punk music, are perfect material for 
films that he might want to write.  I don't necessarily believe he'll 
continue to act forever, but I have no doubt that he'll remain in 
film. He just boggles my mind because everything that comes out of 
his mouth is exactly the same as what would come out of mine - we 
share favorite films, favorite music, similar upbringings, same age - 
but most importantly, he seems to focus on what my family calls The 
Triangle: screenwriting/directing/acting. It's like a package 
deal. ;) If he were not as interested in The Triangle as he has 
expressed, I think I might not feel so utterly confident that he'll 
remain in the movies, whether behind the screen or in the 
limelight.   

Obviously I feel a great affinity with Dan and I'm somewhat biased, 
but he's *me.* I can't help it. :D

***

I edited out a lot of what you said because I agree wholeheartedly 
and find it pointless to say "me too." I just wanted to make a 
general comment that (kind of) relates to what you had to say.

I was watching an episode of Oprah yesterday that concentrated on 
people who had extremely successful careers, but they just didn't 
have the passion for it and decided to give up their stable jobs to 
focus on what careers really invoked enthusiasm in them. One of the 
guests was a man who gave up his own career to write, and he said 
(I'm paraphrasing) that you should look at careers that are related 
to things your mind is naturally attracted to. Dan and Rupert have 
both said that they've wanted to act even at a very young age. I 
think that tells a lot. Anyway - just throwing that out there. 
  
bboy_mn:
> General-
> The saving grace for all these actors is that they are in England. 
It
> is not uncommon for actors to move from one TV series to another to
> another to another, and they are immediately accepted as their new
> characters. One TV show could end and the very next week an actor
> could be in a new TV series without carrying his previous character
> with him. I think British audiences are a lot less likely to force
> actors into the identity of the character they play. That will give
> all the actors a chance to establish themselves in a way that would 
be
> difficult in the USA. 

This is actually why I plan on going to university in England. I feel 
that the UK community treats acting/filmmaking/theater entirely 
different than we do in America, and I tend to agree with the general 
cinema!consensus in the UK. It just seems more personal and that's 
really important to me. I'm sure Dan/Rupert/possibly Emma (I have 
doubts) will find a lot of wonderful opportunities and I'm sure 
they'll be successful. They're in a very unique situation and fate is 
completely on their side. There are too many factors that are in 
their favor for them *not* to be successful. It seems to me that it's 
a matter of what *they* want to do more than what 
critics/filmmakers/etc want them to do.  

Zeph     






From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 02:02:47 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 22:02:47 EDT
Subject: Missing scene on Access Hollywood
Message-ID: <11c.20fb48e1.2bc62ac7@aol.com>

Did anyone else see the mini clip of a missing scene on last night's Access 
Hollywood? It is one I don't remember reading a description about, but I 
really liked it and wish they had kept it in. 
It's right after the duel and the Parseltongue revelation and Harry is 
walking up the steps with H and R at the bottom of the staircase looking up. 
Harry turns around and says, rather angrily, 'I didn't know I could speak 
Parseltongue...what else don't I know about myself?' And he is rather 
animated  and ticked off, for Harry ;-) It definitely would have helped to 
underscore the dark, threatening tone of COS, especially in terms of things 
Harry finds out about himself. 
When you think about it, he started off as a blank slate, even to himself. 
Most folks in the wizard world know more about him than he does and a line 
about that did make it into the SS movie 'she knows more about you than you 
do' - Ron. Harry, 'who doesn't?'
He has to be made of strong stuff to withstand all the revelations to come 
too ;-)

Cindy



From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 02:10:51 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 22:10:51 EDT
Subject: Access hollywood again
Message-ID: <110.2241c764.2bc62cab@aol.com>

Oh my, Access Hollywood just did a very brief story on the DVD launch and I 
was wondering why all those folks who thought Harry's hair wasn't messy 
enough in the first two movies haven't spoken up ;-) In the pics of the DVD 
launch, Daniel's hair looked decidedly more messy, but in this Access 
Hollywood snippet, it is REALLY messy! And he comments that it's strange to 
look back on the other two movies because they all look so young. He says, 'I 
look about 4 or something.' <g>
Cindy



From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 03:00:34 2003
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 03:00:34 -0000
Subject: Missing scene on Access Hollywood
In-Reply-To: <11c.20fb48e1.2bc62ac7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b72moi+2kd4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CLShannon at a... wrote:
> Did anyone else see the mini clip of a missing scene on last 
night's Access 
> Hollywood? It is one I don't remember reading a description about, 
but I 
> really liked it and wish they had kept it in. 
> It's right after the duel and the Parseltongue revelation and 
Harry is 
> walking up the steps with H and R at the bottom of the staircase 
looking up. 
> Harry turns around and says, rather angrily, 'I didn't know I 
could speak 
> Parseltongue...what else don't I know about myself?' 


Cindy,

I watched that scene yesterday on DVD.....it was great.  It 
definitely would have helped the story, I agree about that.  It was 
also the same scene where Fred and George tease him about being 
a "seriously evil wizard."  Boy, I wish they would have left that 
one in..... ;)

Alora




From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 04:11:33 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:11:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
Message-ID: <138.1df7c51b.2bc648f5@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/9/03 1:35:09 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

<< What i would really like is to read more of Daniel's writing. The

comment he made about Santa Claus in Reader's Digest was an amazing

piece of writing for someone so young.


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/14016 >>

I'm not on that list - could you let us know what he said in Reader's Digest? 
I'd be curious to know, thanks.

<<<
Daniel-

I think it is easy to see that Daniel is an extremely intelligent and

talented boy. I think he has great potential in life if he doesn't

allow himself to become spoiled by fame, or turn into a wild party

animal. 


I think, much like Hermione, being an only child of intelligent

involved parents, has made Dan far more sophisticated than most kids

his age. 
<<

I agree with this - Daniel has a lot of potential and he is extremely 
articulate and poised, which comes in handy in that business ;-) And yes, it 
probably has to do with him being an only child of two intelligent, involved 
parents. They are both professionals too, so he is accustomed to being in 
situations where he has to meet other professional adults and his behavior 
shows that. 

Also, I still chuckle when I see that video clip without narration that was 
from behind the scenes of the filming of SS (I would still like to know where 
that footage came from. I want a copy on videotape ;-) But I found it on a 
web page somewhere and it plays on real player and has no narration, just 
various scenes of them filming, etc.)....well, anyway, during the feast 
scene, Chris Columbus is kneeling next to Dan's seat and explaining to him 
and the others about how the food is going to appear out of nowhere, etc. He 
finishes, stands up to leave and you hear this faint little voice saying, 
'thank you' ;-) And recently Chris Columbus said that Daniel still thanks him 
after every take and 'you won't get that from Julia Roberts' <g>
Such a polite boy ;-)


I agree with what you said about Rupert too, regarding his acting in scenes 
where he isn't the focus. He doesn't take the lazy route that you would 
expect of a young, inexperienced actor. He does react and adds to his 
character in  little ways that don't upstage the person we are supposed to be 
concentrating on. That's a skill that a lot of adult actors don't possess ;-)

Also, I agree he needs to improve his 'interview' behavior. He is polite, 
don't get me wrong, but like you said, he mostly answers with things like, 
'yeh' or 'cool'. A little more elaboration would be nice ;-) Dan, even at the 
tender age of 11, during those press conferences for SS, would stop and think 
before answering a question and then give a well thought out answer. He has 
an excellent vocabulary also.

All in all, I think that they do have a promising future -  like you said, 
English actors aren't pigeon-holed as much as American ones. They can move 
from theater, to tv, to film with ease and no fear of prejudice. It's a bit 
different here. If these kids were American and the movies were American, 
they would be in real danger of never escaping that label of 'Harry Potter 
kids' ;-)
Cindy



From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 08:05:48 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:05:48 -0000
Subject: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
In-Reply-To: <138.1df7c51b.2bc648f5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b738ks+ebrp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CLShannon at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 4/9/03 1:35:09 PM, bboy_mn at y... writes:
> 
> << What i would really like is to read more of Daniel's writing. 
> << The comment he made about Santa Claus in Reader's Digest was an 
> << amazing piece of writing for someone so young.
> 
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/14016 >>
> 


> Cindy:
>
> I'm not on that list - could you let us know what he said in
> Reader's Digest? I'd be curious to know, thanks.
> 
> <<<

bboy_mn:

Go to the Leaky Cauldron website and look in the archive for November
18, 2002.

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/

Direct link to the article. Scroll down to Nov 18.

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/archives/2002_11_17_index.html

Steve






From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 08:12:05 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:12:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
Message-ID: <139.1dfcac02.2bc68155@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/10/03 1:07:32 AM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

<< Go to the Leaky Cauldron website and look in the archive for November

18, 2002.


http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/


Direct link to the article. Scroll down to Nov 18.


http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/archives/2002_11_17_index.html >>

Thank you Steve ;-)
That was certainly a very well written and thoughtful essay by Dan, I'm 
impressed ;-) 
Cindy



From geri510 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 11:40:23 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:40:23 -0000
Subject: 1st pic of a dementor
Message-ID: <b73l77+n3bi@eGroups.com>

According to Godric's Hollow via snitchseeker.com, here is a picture 
of a dementor (1st one I've seen - fits well). 

http://www.godrics-hollow.net/ 




From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 11:52:31 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1st pic of a dementor
In-Reply-To: <b73l77+n3bi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030410115231.99560.qmail@web14914.mail.yahoo.com>

Wow! It's worse than my imagination came up with! Thanks for the head's up! Alex Fox-Malfoy

geri510 <geri510 at yahoo.com> wrote:According to Godric's Hollow via snitchseeker.com, here is a picture 
of a dementor (1st one I've seen - fits well). 

http://www.godrics-hollow.net/ 


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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




From jeanico at securenet.net  Thu Apr 10 13:28:58 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:28:58 -0000
Subject: Missing scene on Access Hollywood
Message-ID: <b73riq+s7o1@eGroups.com>

Talk about a missing scene...I watched Access Hollywood last night 
hoping that there would be something mentioned about the DVD launch 
party and saw nothing...I then watched Entertainement tonight, and 
still nothing! and now I read the posts that there was something 
about it on Access Hollywood...was it so short that I blinked and 
missed it?
Also, does it make sense that they would start messing up Dan's hair 
in the 3rd movie when it wasn't messed up in the 1rst 2 movies?
Even though the director has changed, should'nt they try to be a 
little consistant with the look of the characters for the sake of 
continuity?
Just my 2 cents worth.
Have a great day!
Nicole
Now reading book 3 again for the "I lost track of how many 
times"...it still is my favourite! 




From BJMBriggs at zianet.com  Thu Apr 10 13:37:04 2003
From: BJMBriggs at zianet.com (stockw_98)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:37:04 -0000
Subject: ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT
Message-ID: <b73s20+rq48@eGroups.com>

There is supposed to be something about the COS DVD on tomorrow 
night's ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT.  I don't know how much will be shown.




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Apr 10 14:36:33 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:36:33 -0000
Subject: Harry's hair and misc. casting WAS:Missing scene on Access Hollywood
In-Reply-To: <b73riq+s7o1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b73vhh+nrl9@eGroups.com>

Nicole wrote:

> Also, does it make sense that they would start messing up Dan's hair 
> in the 3rd movie when it wasn't messed up in the 1rst 2 movies?
> Even though the director has changed, should'nt they try to be a 
> little consistant with the look of the characters for the sake of 
> continuity?

Are you referring to Dan's hair at the CoS-party? I was wondering whether 
someone just gave him a cool hairdo for the party or if the public was also 
getting a taste of PoA-Harry. If it is the latter, I welcome it. It did not bother 
me that his hair wasn't particularly unruly in PS/CoS, but I'm excited to see a 
slightly different take on my favourite literary character! (I am saying this with 
the conviction/HOPE that Cuaron's promise to leave his personal mark on the 
franchise will be realized in more ways than Harry's hair.) 

BTW, did you all see the recent quotes by Heyman on CBBC newsround? 
Columbus may not be back 'til movie #5. Does that mean we'll have Cuaron 
directing GoF? Oooooooooooooo... Unfair of me to rejoice at this news, 
perhaps since we have not yet seen--and will have to wait quite a while--how 
HP fares in the hands of Cuaron, but the unruly hair is a good sign, dontcha 
think? Harry the rebel...

Speaking of a renewal of the on-screen HP-world: apparently we can expect 
a NEW Fat lady! Dawn French! And Julie Christie as Madam Rosmerta. (Also 
on CBBC newsround) She's a handsome woman of course and Rosmerta's 
supposed to be pretty, but I thought of her as rounder-faced and a little 
plump, in  the curvy sense. Comments? 

Sophia




From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 17:53:39 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:53:39 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1st pic of a dementor
Message-ID: <72.2c75cb2d.2bc709a3@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/10/03 4:42:22 AM, geri510 at yahoo.com writes:

<< According to Godric's Hollow via snitchseeker.com, here is a picture 

of a dementor (1st one I've seen - fits well). 


http://www.godrics-hollow.net/  >>

I seem to be having some problems with that Godric's Hollow page - where 
exactly is the link to the pic? The page loads sort of funny for me and I 
tried to click on what I thought was the story on it, but got the promotional 
giveaway page ;-)
I want to see that picture ;-)
Cindy



From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 10 17:59:11 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:59:11 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1st pic of a dementor
Message-ID: <186.18116ec7.2bc70aef@aol.com>

Never mind, I figured it out- my browser wasn't loading the page correctly, 
so I switched to a different browser! ;-))
Interesting picture ;-)
Cindy



From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 21:24:28 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:24:28 -0000
Subject: Crouch casting
Message-ID: <b74nec+rqlu@eGroups.com>

How about Jonathan Pryce for B. Crouch Sr.??




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 10 23:18:30 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:18:30 -0000
Subject: ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT
In-Reply-To: <b73s20+rq48@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b74u46+cs2u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "stockw_98" <BJMBriggs at z...> 
wrote:
> There is supposed to be something about the COS DVD on tomorrow 
> night's ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT.  I don't know how much will be 
shown.

It was on tonight - just saw it. I have to say that Daniel needs a 
comb but did look very different. His comment on being "madly, 
madly, madly in love with Cameron Diaz" was very funny.




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 00:50:24 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:50:24 -0000
Subject: 1st pic of a dementor
In-Reply-To: <72.2c75cb2d.2bc709a3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b753gg+dms0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CLShannon at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 4/10/03 4:42:22 AM, geri510 at y... writes:
> 
> << According to Godric's Hollow via snitchseeker.com, here is a picture 
> 
> of a dementor (1st one I've seen - fits well). 
> 
> 
> http://www.godrics-hollow.net/  >>
> 
> I seem to be having some problems with that Godric's Hollow page - 
> where exactly is the link to the pic? ...edited...
> I want to see that picture ;-)
>
> Cindy

bboy_mn:

I'm using Mozilla for a browser and it loaded OK for me. 

Just scroll about 20% of the way down the page and the photo is there
under the article titled "First Glimpse of Dementors". No link to
click on, the photo is on the page in-line with the article.

Comment on photo-
Those Dementors aren't even remotely as scary as they are described in
the book, or as I pictured them in my mind. They are suppose to be red
raw glistening and SCABBY like raw decaying flesh. The Dementors in
the phote look way too nice.

Just an opinion.

bboy_mn






From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Apr 11 00:53:41 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:53:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan/Harry's hair/ Dementors
References: <b74u46+cs2u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a701c2ffc4$cca0ac30$03a3cdd1@RVotaw>

geri510 wrote:

> It was on tonight - just saw it. I have to say that Daniel needs a 
> comb but did look very different. His comment on being "madly, 
> madly, madly in love with Cameron Diaz" was very funny.

He's hilarious.  Anyway, nobody can complain about his hair.  We all asked for it!  :)  It first showed up at the Evening Standard awards where Dan presented, and they'd started filming that week or a week or so before.  It seems to me the hair got messier with each movie!

And if those pictures on Godric's Hollow are really what the Dementors will look like--yikes!  I'm joining Harry in the boggart becomes a dementor thing.  Forget how it makes you feel, it looks scary enough for me!

Also, I can't remember if I mentioned this or not.  It occured to me the other day that perhaps if they really have cut Quidditch, since we know they are doing the boggart lesson, what if they let Harry face the boggart in the lesson?  And he passes out in class?  Since the movie classes are always with Slytherin, *that* just might be embarassing enough for it to be convincing that Harry would go to Lupin for help.  Just a thought.

Richelle


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




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 01:19:03 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:19:03 -0000
Subject: Dementors
Message-ID: <b75567+9nrq@eGroups.com>

Steve wrote: 

>They are suppose to be red raw glistening and SCABBY like raw 
>decaying flesh. The Dementors in the phote look way too nice.

(I wouldn't say that that's a *nice* photo, exactly. . . more like a 
disgusting photo.)

And no, actually, they're not supposed to be red. 

"There was a hand protruding from the cloak and it was glistening, 
*greyish,* slimy-looking, and scabbed, like something dead that had 
decayed in water. . . . " (POA, on the train. My **.) 

See, they are supposed to look like they've been dead for a *while,* 
hence "decayed." If they were red, they'd look far too *recently* 
dead. 

(This is kind of a disgusting conversation.)

But I agree: I'm not sure they look right. They look too. . . 
mummified, or something. Although I want to see how they look in the 
movie before delivering a final verdict. Camera techniques do a lot. 
Are we even sure this is a legit picture?



Derannimer (who really *does* think that this is kind of a disgusting 
conversation. And that that was kind of a disgusting photo; but see, 
there's a problem. The Dementors, IMHO, aren't *supposed* to disgust 
you so much as they are supposed to make your skin crawl with sheer 
*terror.* I'm really not sure if these Dementors will be *scary* 
enough. And I don't think we ought to be able to see their faces.)





From sugarkadi at aol.com  Fri Apr 11 02:01:00 2003
From: sugarkadi at aol.com (sugarkadi at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:01:00 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan/Harry's hair/ Dementors
Message-ID: <5971BAC4.55B0075E.0290C41F@aol.com>



> geri510 wrote:
> 
> > It was on tonight - just saw it. I have to say that Daniel needs a 
> > comb but did look very different. His comment on being 
> "madly, 
> > madly, madly in love with Cameron Diaz" was very funny


Would someone who saw it like to write down what they said, for those of us who didn't see it?  It sounded amusing; those kids are so cute.  Thanks!
~Katey



From urbana at charter.net  Fri Apr 11 03:43:45 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 03:43:45 -0000
Subject: Dementors
In-Reply-To: <b75567+9nrq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b75dlh+4eo1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "derannimer" <susannahlm at y...> 
wrote:
> > And that that was kind of a disgusting photo; but see, 
> there's a problem. The Dementors, IMHO, aren't *supposed* to 
disgust 
> you so much as they are supposed to make your skin crawl with sheer 
> *terror.* I'm really not sure if these Dementors will be *scary* 
> enough. And I don't think we ought to be able to see their faces.)



IMO the dementors won't be *scary enough* unless they literally make 
the audience feel *cold* the way Harry felt cold in their presence. 
Other than doing them as 3-D effects both visually and aurally (in 
surround sound) and shooting extra bursts of air conditioning into 
the theater at the appropriate moments, I've no idea how that might 
be accomplished.

Anne U
(wondering how many people I'll have to trample at Target tomorrow ;-)





From SusanXG at hotmail.com  Fri Apr 11 05:13:48 2003
From: SusanXG at hotmail.com (Susan XG)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:13:48 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Emma at the CoS DVD launch
Message-ID: <F132NPASUaftk6vhSaR00017023@hotmail.com>

thalia wrote:

'emma 'britany spears' watson in the first pic made me laugh myself silly. 
that girl is so trendy it hurts. :) which is probably why dan has his arm 
around her and is looking at her like that...heh.'

Me:

When I saw the first picture of Emma, I started laughing hysterically. Then 
I showed it to a couple of my friends and my sister and they started 
laughing. One of my friends called her a "britney spears wannabe". <shakes 
head> That girl just better watch herself. That's all I have to say.

And Dan's probably thinking "this will definitely improve my rep". ;o)


Susan :o)
prophecygirl.com




_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail




From purple_801999 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 06:44:42 2003
From: purple_801999 at yahoo.com (purple_801999)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:44:42 -0000
Subject: 1st pic of a dementor
In-Reply-To: <b753gg+dms0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b75o8q+iks4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CLShannon at a... wrote:
> > 
> > In a message dated 4/10/03 4:42:22 AM, geri510 at y... writes:
> > 
> > << According to Godric's Hollow via snitchseeker.com, here is a 
picture 
> > 
> > of a dementor (1st one I've seen - fits well). 
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.godrics-hollow.net/  >>
> > 
 
> bboy_mn:
> Comment on photo-
> Those Dementors aren't even remotely as scary as they are described 
in
> the book, or as I pictured them in my mind. They are suppose to be 
red
> raw glistening and SCABBY like raw decaying flesh. The Dementors in
> the phote look way too nice.
> 
> Just an opinion.
> 
> bboy_mn

Yeah,I pictured worse. More of a decayed corpse type thing. 
Definitely with flakier skin and a no eyes or even sockets to speak 
of. Of course I watch a lot of Buffy TVS so my expectations for gorey 
undead beings are pretty high. But I bet they scare the bejeebus out 
of most kids so they can't go overboard and mentally scar their 
younger viewers. They look like they get the job done. I know I 
wouldn't like to spend a lot of time hanging around them myself. 

Olivia Grey




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Fri Apr 11 11:03:46 2003
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (Christin)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:03:46 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: not a dementor
Message-ID: <200304111103.h3BB3kY02024@d1o1121.telia.com>

Sorry, guys.
The picture of the Dementor (if we're talking of the same one, at 
www.godrics-hollow.net) is not from the film.
I couldn't get the original link to work at first, and went searching 
Google for the picture. I came across this particular picture, and 
apparently it's fan art inspired by the nazguls in Lord of the Rings.

Christin



From grace701 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 15:46:57 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Dementor
In-Reply-To: <1050062018.2079.24614.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030411154657.56813.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com>




I have to agree with Steve and Olivia, I thought they'd be scary looking, but I feel as though I've seen them before.  My only problem really is that I thought they had holes as mouths. Did I read that wrong?  Like just a regular hole, not an actually mouth with lines connecting the upper and bottom lips.  

I guess we'll just have to see how they are portrayed in the movie.  Oh and you know what else sucks!  We saw their faces.  I can't believe they actually let us see pictures of their faces.  I should smack myself because now I realized that I want to see their faces when Harry sees it!  I shouldn't have looked at those pictures. :(   I guess it's okay though because they aren't scary enough.  Oh well.

Greicy



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 17:18:49 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 17:18:49 -0000
Subject: not a dementor
In-Reply-To: <200304111103.h3BB3kY02024@d1o1121.telia.com>
Message-ID: <b76tdp+hreo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Christin"
<christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:
> Sorry, guys.
> The picture of the Dementor (if we're talking of the same one, at 
> www.godrics-hollow.net) is not from the film.
> I couldn't get the original link to work at first, and went searching 
> Google for the picture. I came across this particular picture, and 
> apparently it's fan art inspired by the nazguls in Lord of the Rings.
> 
> Christin

bboy_mn:

Thanks for that update. Now that I look at it again, the picture is
pretty generic. These dark hooded cloaked figures are actually pretty
common in fantasy literature, and this particular picture falls so far
short of what the Dementors are suppose to be that I'm glad it's not
real; it would have been very disappointing.

bboy_mn




From amani at charter.net  Fri Apr 11 18:32:46 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 14:32:46 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] not a dementor
References: <200304111103.h3BB3kY02024@d1o1121.telia.com>
Message-ID: <004901c30058$bfcfe220$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Christin:
Sorry, guys.
The picture of the Dementor (if we're talking of the same one, at 
www.godrics-hollow.net) is not from the film.
I couldn't get the original link to work at first, and went searching 
Google for the picture. I came across this particular picture, and 
apparently it's fan art inspired by the nazguls in Lord of the Rings.

Me:
Glad to have heard that. >_> I thought I was the only one thinking, "Gee, I bet I could find that /exact shot/ in Lord of the Rings if I took the time to check," because they looked /exactly/ like the movie Nazgul. But the faces and hands looked fake to me. Like...not quite right in their setting. As if they had been CGIed in.

--Taryn

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




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Fri Apr 11 19:41:16 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 19:41:16 -0000
Subject: An extra's viewpoint
Message-ID: <b775os+g13n@eGroups.com>

This is admittedly third hand information, but I thought you might 
be interested to know how my friend's son is enjoying being an extra 
in PoA:

All the extras are treated very very well. The atmosphere is 
apparently very friendly, and the food is great - he is having the 
time of his life!

His mum is called the day before he is required, to be told he will 
need to act the next day.

Yesterday he was called in to do the Sorting Hat scene (I think), 
and amongst other scenes he has been involved in, was the Hogwarts 
Express arriving at the station. He had to eat sweets - which he 
thought was great on the first take, but after 10 takes, he was left 
feeling very sick!

Rupert Grint is apparently very friendly to everyone. Daniel 
Radcliffe is not. I suggested to my friend that this was probably 
because he was shy. Afterall, it is a different skill to get on with 
a few people on a one-to-one basis than entertain a crowd, she was a 
bit hesitant, but said it could be that. She thinks they just find 
him a bit aloof. I can't believe that!


Ali




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Apr 11 23:36:03 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 19:36:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Dementors
Message-ID: <15.ed79b30.2bc8ab63@aol.com>

If the make it like how Walt and Universal do it!  I would love that!!!  air 
simulating hands and the cold chill of the dementors!!1

Kyle Longbottom




In a message dated 4/10/03 11:44:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
urbana at charter.net writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "derannimer" <susannahlm at y...> 
> wrote:
> >>And that that was kind of a disgusting photo; but see, 
> >there's a problem. The Dementors, IMHO, aren't *supposed* to 
> disgust 
> >you so much as they are supposed to make your skin crawl with sheer 
> >*terror.* I'm really not sure if these Dementors will be *scary* 
> >enough. And I don't think we ought to be able to see their faces.)
> 
> 
> 
> IMO the dementors won't be *scary enough* unless they literally make 
> the audience feel *cold* the way Harry felt cold in their presence. 
> Other than doing them as 3-D effects both visually and aurally (in 
> surround sound) and shooting extra bursts of air conditioning into 
> the theater at the appropriate moments, I've no idea how that might 
> be accomplished.
> 
> Anne U



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Apr 11 23:40:16 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 19:40:16 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] An extra's viewpoint
Message-ID: <13.1b10b120.2bc8ac60@aol.com>

Well not everyone is going to like Mister Potter!!  You can't be everyone's 
friend.  I think Dan was just scared!  You have to remember that actors are 
very tempermental and very insecure since their business calls for 
insecurity!!  Did you son like the set and is he under contract not to tell 
anyone about the filming??

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/11/03 3:44:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ali at zymurgy.org 
writes:

> This is admittedly third hand information, but I thought you might 
> be interested to know how my friend's son is enjoying being an extra 
> in PoA:
> 
> All the extras are treated very very well. The atmosphere is 
> apparently very friendly, and the food is great - he is having the 
> time of his life!
> 
> His mum is called the day before he is required, to be told he will 
> need to act the next day.
> 
> Yesterday he was called in to do the Sorting Hat scene (I think), 
> and amongst other scenes he has been involved in, was the Hogwarts 
> Express arriving at the station. He had to eat sweets - which he 
> thought was great on the first take, but after 10 takes, he was left 
> feeling very sick!
> 
> Rupert Grint is apparently very friendly to everyone. Daniel 
> Radcliffe is not. I suggested to my friend that this was probably 
> because he was shy. Afterall, it is a different skill to get on with 
> a few people on a one-to-one basis than entertain a crowd, she was a 
> bit hesitant, but said it could be that. She thinks they just find 
> him a bit aloof. I can't believe that!
> 
> 
> Ali



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




From sharonlibrarian at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 11 22:50:24 2003
From: sharonlibrarian at yahoo.com (sharonlibrarian)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 22:50:24 -0000
Subject: An extra's viewpoint
In-Reply-To: <b775os+g13n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b77grh+f9qv@eGroups.com>


> 
> Rupert Grint is apparently very friendly to everyone. Daniel 
> Radcliffe is not. I suggested to my friend that this was probably 
> because he was shy. Afterall, it is a different skill to get on 
> with a few people on a one-to-one basis than entertain a crowd, she 
> was a bit hesitant, but said it could be that. > 
> 
> Ali

Me:
And Daniel has more "heavy-duty" stuff to concentrate on, acting-
wise, than Rupert.  PoA is so much more character-driven than SS/PS 
or CoS, and the whole thing revolves around Harry, of course.  It 
must be a lot of pressure for Daniel.  Yes, he is making a lot of 
money and landed a very sought-after film role, but everything and 
everybody relies on him and his performance.

Plus, at home, Daniel is an only child.  I'm no psychologist, but I 
think only-children are generally categorized as being more 
introspective and less outgoing.

And Daniel is "the star."  The kids who are extras might be more 
likely to watch him from afar and be afraid to approach him.  He may 
respond to this by being aloof.

Anybody else care to pick apart poor Dan's personality?  LOL.

Sharon




From amani at charter.net  Sat Apr 12 00:39:04 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 20:39:04 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] An extra's viewpoint
References: <b775os+g13n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c3008b$ebe1be00$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Ali:
Rupert Grint is apparently very friendly to everyone. Daniel 
Radcliffe is not. I suggested to my friend that this was probably 
because he was shy. Afterall, it is a different skill to get on with 
a few people on a one-to-one basis than entertain a crowd, she was a 
bit hesitant, but said it could be that. She thinks they just find 
him a bit aloof. I can't believe that!

Me:
I would agree that it is probably because Daniel Radcliffe is shy and not as good with people as Rupert. I know I get mistaken for being arrogant because I'm so painfully shy and really horrible with people I don't know at all.

--Taryn

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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 12 01:53:22 2003
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 01:53:22 -0000
Subject: PoA set and Only children
Message-ID: <b77rii+28m6@eGroups.com>

I was reading all of your posts on the extra's viewpoint of the set, 
Rupert and Daniel, etc.  I think "aloof"  is a good word for Daniel 
Radcliffe.  I'm an only child myself (just turned 36 the other day)  
and I am still shy with people I don't know.  I've never had loads 
of friends, but I have three or four very close friends I have had 
for over 20 years.  Once I really know someone (and that takes a 
while for me), then I get more silly, outgoing and personal with 
them.  To this day, I am much better one-on-one than with a crowd - 
and we won't even go into confrontations! *LOL*  I stink at those.  
I think Daniel might be somewhat like this - I'm not making any 
assumptions, just giving my two knuts worth as an only child.  

Alora :D




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Apr 12 02:33:42 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 19:33:42 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA set and Only children
In-Reply-To: <b77rii+28m6@eGroups.com>
References: <b77rii+28m6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <56177492344.20030411193342@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Friday, April 11, 2003, 6:53:22 PM, chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com wrote:

> I was reading all of your posts on the extra's viewpoint of the set, 
> Rupert and Daniel, etc.  I think "aloof"  is a good word for Daniel 
> Radcliffe.

Maybe Daniel is better at relating to adults (he seems to
always be praised for his interviews) and Rupert, who
has lots of siblings, is better at relating to kids and gets
tongue tied during official appearances.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From rp2030 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 04:43:39 2003
From: rp2030 at aol.com (rp20302000)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 04:43:39 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <b785hr+l64a@eGroups.com>

Hey, just wondering what everyone thought about the deleted scenes?
   I think at least half were integral to the movie and helping 
illuminate the plot for people who havent read the book and for 
character development.
   Even if they added an additional 15 minutes to a (by some's 
standards) long movie it would have been worth it b/c they added so 
much.
   I saw SS/PS before I had read the book (didn't know what I was 
missing, let me tell you) and it took a second viewing just to get 
the plot down straight.
   Thanks,

    RP





From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 12 08:53:38 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 08:53:38 -0000
Subject: An extra's viewpoint
In-Reply-To: <b775os+g13n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b78k6i+cs1t@eGroups.com>

This could also be because Daniel was raised in a bit of a posh 
household.  He went to a proper, traditional London prep school and 
such.  He most likely isn't as boisterious as a good northern lad 
like Rupert.  Any idea where Daniel has headed for secondary school 
or is it just all tutors for him now?

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> This is admittedly third hand information, but I thought you might 
> be interested to know how my friend's son is enjoying being an 
extra 
> in PoA:
> 
> All the extras are treated very very well. The atmosphere is 
> apparently very friendly, and the food is great - he is having the 
> time of his life!
> 
> His mum is called the day before he is required, to be told he will 
> need to act the next day.
> 
> Yesterday he was called in to do the Sorting Hat scene (I think), 
> and amongst other scenes he has been involved in, was the Hogwarts 
> Express arriving at the station. He had to eat sweets - which he 
> thought was great on the first take, but after 10 takes, he was 
left 
> feeling very sick!
> 
> Rupert Grint is apparently very friendly to everyone. Daniel 
> Radcliffe is not. I suggested to my friend that this was probably 
> because he was shy. Afterall, it is a different skill to get on 
with 
> a few people on a one-to-one basis than entertain a crowd, she was 
a 
> bit hesitant, but said it could be that. She thinks they just find 
> him a bit aloof. I can't believe that!
> 
> 
> Ali




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 11:48:09 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 07:48:09 EDT
Subject: CoS
Message-ID: <ea.37bfe732.2bc956f9@aol.com>

Hi everyone, I'm Faith and I'm new to this mailing list. I do hope I'm not 
about to get into something that that already has been discussed but I found 
out today that I more than likely won't be getting CoS till Monday, I was 
stupid enough to mail order it, rather than go out to the store and buy it. 
So I decided that before I start reading the books *again* I'd watch the 
movie. Now, I really do enjoy the movie, with the exception that they leave 
some good stuff out, the beginning of the movie with the Dursley's for 
example was cut to pieces. I was bummed out today to realize that my favorite 
part of the book was left out of the movie.. When Harry Ron and Hermione are 
trapped by the Devil's Snare. 
'Devils Snare, Devils Snare... What did Professor Sprout say? -- It likes the 
dark and damp.'? Hermione said.
'So light a fire!" Harry choked.
"Yes -- ofcourse -- But theres no wood!" Hermione cried, wringing her hands. 
"HAVE YOU GONE MAD!" Ron bellowed. "ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?"
(and then a few moments later) Ron says "Theres no wood, honestly."
 
It really is always one of those rare book moments that has me laughing out 
loud. And it really was a shame it wasn't included. I'm really hoping CoS is  
more accurate, I never did see it in the theater.
 
~Faith~


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





From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 12 15:44:28 2003
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:44:28 -0000
Subject: Crouch casting
In-Reply-To: <b74nec+rqlu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b79c8s+hmjq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "etonbuffy" <buffyeton at y...> wrote:
> How about Jonathan Pryce for B. Crouch Sr.??

Oh, that would be wonderful! None of the suggestions so far did it for
me (because my mind is so firmly locked on the image of David Niven
:-), but Jonathan Pryce would be just right.

Irene




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Sat Apr 12 18:17:47 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:17:47 -0000
Subject: PoA set and Only children
In-Reply-To: <56177492344.20030411193342@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b79l8b+dqpg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:

 
>>> Maybe Daniel is better at relating to adults (he seems to
 always be praised for his interviews) and Rupert, who
 has lots of siblings, is better at relating to kids and gets
 tongue tied during official appearances.<<<

I agree. I also think that it is probably Rupert who is unusual 
rather than Dan. It is a definite skill to entertain lots of 
strangers. I'm sure that Chris Columbus did an interview saying that 
Rupert was particularly popular. I imagine that he has "the common 
touch", and can talk to anyone. 

It has been said before that Dan is shy. "Becoming" Harry Potter 
might make him more confident, but it also makes him very exposed, 
with everybody wanting to know what he's *really* like, and 
basically get a piece of him. I've seen various remarks from people 
who "know someone who knows him", and they all point to him being a 
nice, popular kid, but that is different from being able to engage 
lots of stranges at a glance - charismatic he is not (IMHO).

Ali

(Who still loves Dan's performance as Harry Potter - warts and all)





From metslvr19 at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 12 20:04:23 2003
From: metslvr19 at yahoo.com (Laura)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 20:04:23 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b785hr+l64a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b79rg7+m6ae@eGroups.com>

"rp20302000" wrote:
> > > 
Hey, just wondering what everyone thought about the deleted scenes?  
I think at least half were integral to the movie and helping 
illuminate the plot for people who havent read the book and for 
character development.
> > > 

First off, I'd like to say that a never-even-created scene that broke 
my heart was the fight in Flourish and Blotts.  I was so angry that 
they didn't include that in the movie. =)

As for the other scenes, some of them were very simple, a few seconds 
long and easy to leave out.

However, there were also quite a few scenes involving the rest of the 
school's suspicion of Harry.  There was almost NO evidence of that in 
the movie.  The only example of that theme I can remember was Fred 
(or was it George? =)) adding to Wood's list of Gryffindor 
advantages, "Besides, they're afraid that Harry'll petrify them if 
they fly too close."  (paraphrase)  I was surprised that they almost 
completely left that whole subplot out of the movie.  I refuse to 
watch movies before I've read the book, so I just took advantage of 
the knowledge that everyone suspected Harry, and didn't even notice 
it was missing until I saw the deleted scenes.

If I had to pick the one scene that should not have been deleted, I'd 
have to say the episode with the Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes.  It 
really emphasizes the relationship between Lucius and Draco, which is 
fairly deeply discussed in relation to both of the motives, 
characters, ect.  Any other candidates?

-Laura  





From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Apr 12 20:27:52 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 13:27:52 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b79rg7+m6ae@eGroups.com>
References: <b79rg7+m6ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <13843990228.20030412132752@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Saturday, April 12, 2003, 1:04:23 PM, metslvr19 at yahoo.com wrote:

> If I had to pick the one scene that should not have been deleted, I'd 
> have to say the episode with the Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes.  It 
> really emphasizes the relationship between Lucius and Draco, which is 
> fairly deeply discussed in relation to both of the motives, 
> characters, ect. 

The problem I have with this scene is that their
relationship *isn't* like this in the books (at least, not
that we've conclusively seen).

It's how the actor (sorry, can never remember the name)
interprets it. In the dvd interview he said he wanted to
gain some sympathy for the Draco character this way.

And it doesn't sound to me as if JKR had all that much input
in the movie, so I'm not sure if she condoned all the little
(and big) characterization changes, or if she wasn't truly
aware of them until she saw the finished product.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 20:36:03 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:36:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <143.ea6fb0c.2bc9d2b3@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 4:28:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> It's how the actor (sorry, can never remember the name)
> interprets it. In the dvd interview he said he wanted to
> gain some sympathy for the Draco character this way.
> 
> 

Okay, time for a recast. Thats not the actors decision to make!

siskiou says:

And it doesn't sound to me as if JKR had all that much input
in the movie, so I'm not sure if she condoned all the little
(and big) characterization changes, or if she wasn't truly
aware of them until she saw the finished product.

I was wondering that when I watched SS, I haven't seen CoS yet, it hasn't 
come in the mail. I don't get why she has so little input in her own movies, 
is it that she just doesn't care?

~Faith!~


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 20:45:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:45:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <c3.32a703f6.2bc9d4d2@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 4:36:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
JessaDrow at aol.com writes:

> 
> 
> In a message dated 4/12/03 4:28:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> siskiou at earthlink.net writes:
> 
> >It's how the actor (sorry, can never remember the name)
> >interprets it. In the dvd interview he said he wanted to
> >gain some sympathy for the Draco character this way.
> >
> >(Jason Issacs Luscis Malfoy!!!)


Kyle Longbottom

> 
> Okay, time for a recast. Thats not the actors decision to make!
> 
> siskiou says:
> 
> And it doesn't sound to me as if JKR had all that much input
> in the movie, so I'm not sure if she condoned all the little
> (and big) characterization changes, or if she wasn't truly
> aware of them until she saw the finished product.
> 
> I was wondering that when I watched SS, I haven't seen CoS yet, it hasn't 
> come in the mail. I don't get why she has so little input in her own 
> movies, 
> is it that she just doesn't care?
> 
> ~Faith!~
> 



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 20:52:16 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:52:16 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <84.e7f4ec9.2bc9d680@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 4:15:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
metslvr19 at yahoo.com writes:

> "rp20302000" wrote:
> >>>
> Hey, just wondering what everyone thought about the deleted scenes?  
> I think at least half were integral to the movie and helping 
> illuminate the plot for people who havent read the book and for 
> character development.


I think it would of helped to have Justin Finch Flecthy, Hannah and Ernie 
Macmallin in the hufflepuff scene!

They should of kept Colin's scene and the rooster scene.  They should of kept 
the Kwik Spell scene.  I think they should of kept the floating cake scene 
and Flourish and Blotts scene!  That could of given us more understanding of 
Draco's character as to why he is so mean.


> >>>
> 
> First off, I'd like to say that a never-even-created scene that broke 
> my heart was the fight in Flourish and Blotts.  I was so angry that 
> they didn't include that in the movie. =)
> 
> As for the other scenes, some of them were very simple, a few seconds 
> long and easy to leave out.


True

> 
> However, there were also quite a few scenes involving the rest of the 
> school's suspicion of Harry.  There was almost NO evidence of that in 
> the movie.  The only example of that theme I can remember was Fred 
> (or was it George? =)) adding to Wood's list of Gryffindor 
> advantages, "Besides, they're afraid that Harry'll petrify them if 
> they fly too close."  (paraphrase)  I was surprised that they almost 
> completely left that whole subplot out of the movie.  I refuse to 
> watch movies before I've read the book, so I just took advantage of 
> the knowledge that everyone suspected Harry, and didn't even notice 
> it was missing until I saw the deleted scenes.
> 
> If I had to pick the one scene that should not have been deleted, I'd 
> have to say the episode with the Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes.  It 
> really emphasizes the relationship between Lucius and Draco, which is 
> fairly deeply discussed in relation to both of the motives, 
> characters, ect.  Any other candidates?
> 
> -Laura  
> 

Lucius liqutes!

Shutterbug Colin

Hufflepuff scene

Justin Finch Fletchley scene

They should of kept all those and the birthday cake one!

Kyle Longbottom and the crabbe and Goyle scene


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 20:53:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:53:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: PoA set and Only children
Message-ID: <158.1e23fb80.2bc9d6b2@aol.com>

If your talking about the pimples yeah I hear ya

Kyle Longbottom



In a message dated 4/12/03 2:29:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ali at zymurgy.org 
writes:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> >>>Maybe Daniel is better at relating to adults (he seems to
> always be praised for his interviews) and Rupert, who
> has lots of siblings, is better at relating to kids and gets
> tongue tied during official appearances.<<<
> 
> I agree. I also think that it is probably Rupert who is unusual 
> rather than Dan. It is a definite skill to entertain lots of 
> strangers. I'm sure that Chris Columbus did an interview saying that 
> Rupert was particularly popular. I imagine that he has "the common 
> touch", and can talk to anyone. 
> 
> It has been said before that Dan is shy. "Becoming" Harry Potter 
> might make him more confident, but it also makes him very exposed, 
> with everybody wanting to know what he's *really* like, and 
> basically get a piece of him. I've seen various remarks from people 
> who "know someone who knows him", and they all point to him being a 
> nice, popular kid, but that is different from being able to engage 
> lots of stranges at a glance - charismatic he is not (IMHO).
> 
> Ali
> 
> (Who still loves Dan's performance as Harry Potter - warts and all)



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




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 22:36:52 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:36:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <a9.3dc20110.2bc9ef04@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/2003 3:36:23 PM Central Standard Time, 
JessaDrow at aol.com writes:

> >It's how the actor (sorry, can never remember the name)
> >interprets it. In the dvd interview he said he wanted to
> >gain some sympathy for the Draco character this way.
> >
> >
> 
> Okay, time for a recast. Thats not the actors decision to make!
> 
> 

Its the director's decision and CC decided to allow Jason Issacs to give it 
that interpretation. He could have told him: 'No don't play it like that.  
Draco is a brat, a spoiled pampered one and Lucius dotes on him'  Instead he 
allowed JI to play Lucius as controlling and indifferent (quidditch scene).



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




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 22:52:44 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:52:44 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <18f.1884cfab.2bc9f2bc@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 6:37:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Meliss9900 at aol.com writes:

> Its the director's decision and CC decided to allow Jason Issacs to give it 
> that interpretation. He could have told him: 'No don't play it like that.  
> Draco is a brat, a spoiled pampered one and Lucius dotes on him'  Instead 
> he 
> allowed JI to play Lucius as controlling and indifferent (quidditch scene).
> 
> 
> 

Doesn't JKR take any kind of active part in the movie though? Wouldn't she 
want a say, and step in if she felt something wasn't playing out right?

~Faith~


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




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Sat Apr 12 22:59:38 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:59:38 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <128.27b0d333.2bc9f45a@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/2003 5:53:52 PM Central Standard Time, 
JessaDrow at aol.com writes:

> Doesn't JKR take any kind of active part in the movie though? Wouldn't she 
> want a say, and step in if she felt something wasn't playing out right?
> 
> ~Faith~
> 

>From what I've been able to discern, her main input is in the scriptwriting 
part.  What does and does not *need* to be there. There was a comment made in 
the DVD (the gist of which was) that she will tell Kloves if something that 
he's thinking of cutting or giving a certain spin is going to be needed 
further down the line.  

Melissa 


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




From doliesl at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 12 23:56:06 2003
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 23:56:06 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <128.27b0d333.2bc9f45a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7a92m+oksh@eGroups.com>

>Doesn't JKR take any kind of active part in the movie though? 
>Wouldn't she want a say, and step in if she felt something wasn't 
> playing out right?

I guess the answer is "YES" JK Rowling does take some part in the 
movie and YES has some say, at least on the scripts. Whatever 
happened later in the hands of the director and actors are probably 
out of Rowling and Kloves's control. A quote from the DVD interview 
of Steve Klowes and JK Rowling:

"Am I on the right path?" and Jo's always been good about it. She's 
made clear she will not tell me what's going to happen but she will 
tell me if I'm going down the wrong path...

The whole Transcript of the interview in DVD
http://www.mugglenet.com/cosdvdint.shtml

Personally I like Jason Issac's personal take on Lucius, he make the 
character more interesting (delicious? ;P) and memorable. And I don't 
think JK Rowling mind much at Jason Issac's modification on Lucius, I 
remember she comment on Jason Issac's Lucius,"he really looks like 
Draco's father." It sure sound like a compliment. Why don't you watch 
the CoS film first before judging whether a re-cast is needed or not? 
For me I enjoyed Issac's Lucius a great deal and disappointed to see 
if there's a change in casting (for all we know he'll be back in GoF, 
as Issac said so himself). 

-D 




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Apr 12 23:57:54 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 16:57:54 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <a9.3dc20110.2bc9ef04@aol.com>
References: <a9.3dc20110.2bc9ef04@aol.com>
Message-ID: <52006624.20030412165754@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Saturday, April 12, 2003, 3:36:52 PM, Meliss9900 at aol.com wrote:

> Its the director's decision and CC decided to allow Jason Issacs to
> give it 
> that interpretation.

Probably, but I'm not too impressed with the Kloves/CC team,
either ;)

At first I believed JKR was very involved in the movie
project, but further reading convinced me she's not.

I'm probably just too much of a purist, but characterization
changes irk me.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 00:01:31 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 20:01:31 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <a1.37092d6f.2bca02db@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 7:56:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
doliesl at yahoo.com writes:

> Personally I like Jason Issac's personal take on Lucius, he make the 
> character more interesting (delicious? ;P) and memorable. And I don't 
> think JK Rowling mind much at Jason Issac's modification on Lucius, I 
> remember she comment on Jason Issac's Lucius,"he really looks like 
> Draco's father." It sure sound like a compliment. Why don't you watch 
> the CoS film first before judging whether a re-cast is needed or not? 
> For me I enjoyed Issac's Lucius a great deal and disappointed to see 
> if there's a change in casting (for all we know he'll be back in GoF, 
> as Issac said so himself). 
> 

Me:

Believe me I do want to see it, the minute it arrives in the mail, it's 
getting popped in my dvd. I was just going on another posters comments about 
the actor wanting to make the role more sympathetic. And going on how unlike 
the book SS was, I'm just hoping this one more more accurate. Don't get me 
wrong, I loved SS but they left out some good stuff.

Faith


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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sun Apr 13 00:15:30 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 17:15:30 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b7a92m+oksh@eGroups.com>
References: <b7a92m+oksh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1943062052.20030412171530@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Saturday, April 12, 2003, 4:56:06 PM, doliesl at yahoo.com wrote:

> Why don't you watch 
> the CoS film first before judging whether a re-cast is needed or not? 
> For me I enjoyed Issac's Lucius a great deal and disappointed to see 
> if there's a change in casting (for all we know he'll be back in GoF, 
> as Issac said so himself). 

I don't know if you were talking to me, but I can assure you
I've watched the movie several times, and have the dvd.

Lucius is lovely in general, and I have no complaints about
the actor's performance, just about some of the
characterization choices.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sun Apr 13 00:19:29 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 17:19:29 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <1943062052.20030412171530@earthlink.net>
References: <b7a92m+oksh@eGroups.com> <1943062052.20030412171530@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <223301327.20030412171929@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Saturday, April 12, 2003, 5:15:30 PM,

I wrote:

> I don't know if you were talking to me,

And I now realize that you didn't.

My mail seems to come in out of order.

Sorry!

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From CLShannon at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 00:52:05 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 20:52:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <173.18ab61c9.2bca0eb5@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/12/03 5:16:42 PM, siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

<< Lucius is lovely in general, and I have no complaints about
the actor's performance, just about some of the
characterization choices.
 >>

I agree with this - I just reread the whole scene in the book and it is 
decidedly different than the deleted scene we got on the DVD. I for one, am 
glad they didn't include it because it does change the original 
characterization of the father-son dynamic. In the book, Lucious does tell 
Draco to touch nothing, but there is not an indication that his voice or 
manner are full of menace.  
And there is no reply from Draco  of 'Yes father' with the trepidation 
underlying the delivery, like we got in the deleted scene. He never replies 
at all like that in the book.

Draco then says, 'but I thought you were going to buy me a birthday present.' 
to which his father replies, 'I said I would buy you a racing broom', while 
drumming his fingers on the counter. Hardly the manner of someone who causes 
quakes of fear around his son, at least not here.  
Then they go on with a lot more conversation about Harry, Hermione, etc.  
Draco even whines a bit about Potter and only gets that one 'quelling' look 
from Lucious.  
Lucious makes this statement, 'And I would remind you that is it not -- 
prudent -- to appear less than fond of Harry Potter, not when most of our 
kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear.' This to me 
shows that Lucious is grooming and training Draco to follow him in his 
footsteps, not beating him into submission. 

Also, during the talk they have, after Draco looks at the hand of glory and 
Lucious says he hopes his son will amount to more than a thief or a 
plunderer, he goes on to say, 'though if his grades don't pick up, that may 
indeed all he is fit for.' 
Draco responds to this with argument - 'it's not my fault, the teachers all 
have favorites...' He doesn't shake in his shoes here, he talks back. 

And later when Draco approaches the cabinet that Harry is in, Lucious doesn't 
swing his cane menacingly over and stop Draco's movement, he merely says, 
'Come, Draco.'

There is really nothing overt in that scene that shows a cruel, abusive 
father.  A stern, demanding one, for sure, but one that also has hopes for 
his son, however evil and demented they are. I never felt that Lucious was 
disgusted with his son, but rather trying to sternly mold him into a proper 
dark wizard and molding his ideas to match  his own.
I think the objection I have to the deleted scene and the reason I am glad it 
was not included is that it shows a false interpretation of the father-son 
dynamic, if you compare it to the book. 
Of course, we don't know what's coming in the books, so time will tell what 
the whole story is behind those two, if JKR intends to even get into that 
part of it. Right now, it appears that the Malfoys serve as good villians 
with no other motivations other than evil ones ;-)
Perhaps she will redeem Draco and/or Lucious in some way in future books, I 
don't know. It's all up for grabs ;-)

The only other reason for the scene might have been to demonstrate that 
Lucious does indeed have some dark arts objects in his house and it confirms 
that he is a dark wizard. It's a shame that doesn't get demonstrated in some 
other way, but if they had used this scene, it would have sacrificed the 
characterization that JKR already set up in the books for the father-son 
relationship.


And finally, as for why the scene was deleted - probably mostly for time, but 
we never know if JKR might have had some input into that process, abeit small 
;-)
Cindy



From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 00:58:39 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 20:58:39 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <175.18fffa3a.2bca103f@aol.com>

Am I right in assuming that the deleted scenes are shown seperatly from the 
rest of the movie on the dvd? I had assumed they would just be put in where 
they belonged. 

~Faith~


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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Apr 13 01:02:24 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 01:02:24 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <223301327.20030412171929@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b7acv0+k1hr@eGroups.com>

I was quite disappointed to see how much some of the deleted scenes 
would have actually filled out the plot. Disappointed because by my 
dvd counter, they added very little time to the film. I am not 
thinking all 19 were necessary. Definitely the Ernie McMillan scene, 
and the very brief thing at the Dueling Club with Justin. Those two 
would have made the Swiss Cheese plot come together in a much more 
forceful way. I think someone, someone in charge of course, was 
banking on the fact that almost no one who sees the movies has not 
read the books. We were obviously supposed to fill in the blanks for 
ourselves. Sadly enough, now we know that they could have been more 
forthcoming in the plot, which also would have enhanced 
characterizations as well. They don't seem extremely interested in 
developing character in the deliberate way that JKR goes about it. 
But those deleted scenes give me so much hope. I wonder if a "dvd 
cut" ever crossed Chris Columbus' mind. I'd buy it. 
JenD




From CLShannon at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 01:04:31 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 21:04:31 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <17f.197ba763.2bca119f@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/12/03 6:01:24 PM, JessaDrow at aol.com writes:

<< Am I right in assuming that the deleted scenes are shown seperatly from 
the 
rest of the movie on the dvd? I had assumed they would just be put in where 
they belonged.  >>

They are separate, on Disk 2 in fact. 
It's not like in Lord of the Rings, Fellowship of the Ring, where they were 
inserted back into the flow of the original theatrical version, complete with 
new musical scoring. This was in the LOTR extended edition DVD set.
Cindy



From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 01:07:33 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 21:07:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <133.1e2ae248.2bca1255@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/12/03 9:04:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
CLShannon at aol.com writes:

> They are separate, on Disk 2 in fact. 
> It's not like in Lord of the Rings, Fellowship of the Ring, where they were 
> 
> inserted back into the flow of the original theatrical version, complete 
> with 
> new musical scoring. This was in the LOTR extended edition DVD set.
> Cindy
> 

Phooey, how disapointing. I have a feeling I'm going to be treating this 
movie much like I treat SS. A wonderful movie in it's own right, but when I 
want to get lost in something turn to the books.

Faith


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




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 13 01:43:05 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 01:43:05 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b7acv0+k1hr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7afb9+tead@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
> I was quite disappointed to see how much some of the deleted 
scenes 
> would have actually filled out the plot. 

ME: I agree, after watching the extra scences I began to wonder if 
they even filmed a scene with Ron explaining why he doesn't like 
spiders? It would have been interesting to see.




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 02:25:17 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 22:25:17 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <11f.208850a2.2bca248d@aol.com>

Well those are valid points but remember Jason had to ask himself why would 
Draco be so cruel!  Now I think Luciuis Malfoy is a very stern and almost 
arrogant person!  Jason did say the cane could of been a controlling factor 
for example beating his son!
Remember Kids grow up to be there parents!!

Kyle Longbottom  





In a message dated 4/12/03 8:53:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
CLShannon at aol.com writes:

> 
> In a message dated 4/12/03 5:16:42 PM, siskiou at earthlink.net writes:
> 
> <<Lucius is lovely in general, and I have no complaints about
> the actor's performance, just about some of the
> characterization choices.
> >>
> 
> I agree with this - I just reread the whole scene in the book and it is 
> decidedly different than the deleted scene we got on the DVD. I for one, am 
> 
> glad they didn't include it because it does change the original 
> characterization of the father-son dynamic. In the book, Lucious does tell 
> Draco to touch nothing, but there is not an indication that his voice or 
> manner are full of menace.  
> And there is no reply from Draco  of 'Yes father' with the trepidation 
> underlying the delivery, like we got in the deleted scene. He never replies 
> 
> at all like that in the book.
> 
> Draco then says, 'but I thought you were going to buy me a birthday 
> present.' 
> to which his father replies, 'I said I would buy you a racing broom', while 
> 
> drumming his fingers on the counter. Hardly the manner of someone who 
> causes 
> quakes of fear around his son, at least not here.  
> Then they go on with a lot more conversation about Harry, Hermione, etc.  
> Draco even whines a bit about Potter and only gets that one 'quelling' look 
> 
> from Lucious.  
> Lucious makes this statement, 'And I would remind you that is it not -- 
> prudent -- to appear less than fond of Harry Potter, not when most of our 
> kind regard him as the hero who made the Dark Lord disappear.' This to me 
> shows that Lucious is grooming and training Draco to follow him in his 
> footsteps, not beating him into submission. 
> 
> Also, during the talk they have, after Draco looks at the hand of glory and 
> 
> Lucious says he hopes his son will amount to more than a thief or a 
> plunderer, he goes on to say, 'though if his grades don't pick up, that may 
> 
> indeed all he is fit for.' 
> Draco responds to this with argument - 'it's not my fault, the teachers all 
> 
> have favorites...' He doesn't shake in his shoes here, he talks back. 
> 
> And later when Draco approaches the cabinet that Harry is in, Lucious 
> doesn't 
> swing his cane menacingly over and stop Draco's movement, he merely says, 
> 'Come, Draco.'
> 
> There is really nothing overt in that scene that shows a cruel, abusive 
> father.  A stern, demanding one, for sure, but one that also has hopes for 
> his son, however evil and demented they are. I never felt that Lucious was 
> disgusted with his son, but rather trying to sternly mold him into a proper 
> 
> dark wizard and molding his ideas to match  his own.
> I think the objection I have to the deleted scene and the reason I am glad 
> it 
> was not included is that it shows a false interpretation of the father-son 
> dynamic, if you compare it to the book. 
> Of course, we don't know what's coming in the books, so time will tell what 
> 
> the whole story is behind those two, if JKR intends to even get into that 
> part of it. Right now, it appears that the Malfoys serve as good villians 
> with no other motivations other than evil ones ;-)
> Perhaps she will redeem Draco and/or Lucious in some way in future books, I 
> 
> don't know. It's all up for grabs ;-)
> 
> The only other reason for the scene might have been to demonstrate that 
> Lucious does indeed have some dark arts objects in his house and it 
> confirms 
> that he is a dark wizard. It's a shame that doesn't get demonstrated in 
> some 
> other way, but if they had used this scene, it would have sacrificed the 
> characterization that JKR already set up in the books for the father-son 
> relationship.
> 
> 
> And finally, as for why the scene was deleted - probably mostly for time, 
> but 
> we never know if JKR might have had some input into that process, abeit 
> small 
> ;-)
> Cindy



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




From sydenmill at msn.com  Sun Apr 13 16:00:15 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:00:15 -0000
Subject: The Curse and Elf Magical Powers
Message-ID: <b7c1if+1obo@eGroups.com>

I watched the movie on video, with captions, and the curse was 
not, "Avada..." but started, "Vera--" 

If you listen to the movie with that in mind, there is absolutely no 
way in the world "Vera--" sounds like, "Avada. . ."

I do believe Malfoy's target was Harry, not Dobby, though. 

Interesting that the power of an elf is so much stronger than that of 
a wizard. In GOF (referenced here as canon) someone mentions 
that, "It takes a very powerful wizard to hoodwink a magical object," 
and Dobby was able to effortlessly close the barrier at Platform 9-
3/4 as well as get the bludger to turn rogue.

And, knock Malfoy on his hiney without Malfoy so much as making an 
effort to respond.

Hm.m.m.m. Sounds like we need to pay attention to these creatures, 
these elves.

bohcoo






From chthonicdancer at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 13 16:29:00 2003
From: chthonicdancer at hotmail.com (chthonia9)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:29:00 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <173.18ab61c9.2bca0eb5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7c38c+avlo@eGroups.com>

Delurking temporarily in honour of DVD-day...

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CLShannon at a... wrote:
> 
> I for one, am 
> glad they didn't include it because it does change the original 
> characterization of the father-son dynamic

I completely agree, and I was one of those very disappointed last 
November that the scene had been cut. Much as I loved JI's Lucius, 
that level of aggression towards Draco was completely out of 
character, IMO.  At least the scenes they left in allowed for more 
ambiguity in the interpretation.

But that wasn't the only reason to dislike the scene:
1) Draco reacted as if he *hated* Lucius - also OOC, IMHO.  That 
level of discord between the two would surely presage some major 
teenage rebellion on Draco's part later on, and there's been no sign 
of that so far.
2) Borgin was OTT - in his focus on the contents of the box he came 
across as being inherently slimy rather than sucking up to Lucius.  
With the result that:
3) Borgin's line about wizarding blood sounded too insincere to me; 
in the book he agrees with Lucius (if only because 'the customer is 
always right')
4) Were they really implying that Borgin saw the diary? OK, that 
might have made things clearer for viewers who hadn't seen the books, 
but I can't believe Lucius would have been that stupid.
5) And were they also implying that Draco saw Harry?!  At least that 
explains the ridiculous way that Harry got caught by the Hand in the 
final cut, but surely Draco would have said something to his father?  
Or at least questioned Harry about it?
6) Ditto with the other snippet, Borgin catching Harry at the exit.  
Would it not have occured to him that Harry would have witnessed that 
scene?
7) I would have *loved* to see Isaacs deliver that 'it is not - 
prudent' line. ;-)

I did like the way they were adding to and subtracting from the pile 
of money, though.  And Lucius' "You can keep the box" line.  Slightly 
OOC, perhaps (it looked like quite a nice box to me), but I suppose 
they had to get rid of it somehow.

Leaving the scene in would have created some gaping plot holes, IMO.  
And I have to agree with CC that introducing Lucius in the bookshop 
made for a far cooler entrance. :-)

Incidentally, that interview with JI really made me giggle.  There's 
something rather bizarre about seeing 'Lucius' chatting.

As for the other scenes, the full scene with Colin Creevy would have 
made the bit they left in less jarring, and Ron's response made me 
laugh - as did the extended scene at the Dursleys. Neither would have 
furthered the plot, though.

The scene with the car in the woods had the same problem as the scene 
where Ron and the twins use it to rescue Harry; the tension in the 
books comes from not *knowing* what it is, but the way they shot it 
the audience knew before Harry and Ron did.

I agree that more should have been made of the school's reaction to 
Harry - especially the Hufflepuffs in the library, though I also 
enjoyed the Fred and George teasing. Possibly there should have been 
more of his inner conflict, though that 'who am I' scene made me 
squirm.  Nice scenery though.

I was expecting there to be some cut Ginny scenes.  They really 
should have shown more of her growing stress and uncertainty.

And speaking of never-filmed scenes, I enjoyed the gallery sketches 
of the Deathday party.

I was disappointed though that there wasn't more of a photogallery - 
and is there really no commentary, or am I just unable to find it? 
Compared to other DVD's of films of this length, there didn't seem to 
be much to justify the two discs.  But I'm glad the wait is over...

Chthonia




From kristen_tort at hotmail.com  Sun Apr 13 17:40:10 2003
From: kristen_tort at hotmail.com (Kristen)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 17:40:10 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b7c38c+avlo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7c7dq+hrdg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chthonia9" <chthonicdancer at h...> 
wrote:
>> 
> I was disappointed though that there wasn't more of a photogallery -
 
> and is there really no commentary, or am I just unable to find it? 
> Compared to other DVD's of films of this length, there didn't seem 
to 
> be much to justify the two discs.  But I'm glad the wait is over...
> 
> Chthonia

My feelings on the DVD are close to yours. I was definitely NOT 
impressed with the "extras." I guess I was just surprised, 
considering that the first movie was the *second highest grossing 
movie of all time* they would put a bit more into the DVD. I did enoy 
the additional scenes and cast interviews, but I just felt like a bit 
more effort could have made it exponentially better. 

I do understand that these movies are geared towards children, but do 
they realize that they are leaving out an entire interested 
demographic? Surely the people on this list are not the only adults 
that would enjoy a more involved "Making of" and commentary. Like you 
said though...I am glad I have it.

Cheers!

Kristen







From amani at charter.net  Sun Apr 13 20:42:35 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:42:35 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Curse and Elf Magical Powers
References: <b7c1if+1obo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c301fd$37449120$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

bohcoo:
I watched the movie on video, with captions, and the curse was 
not, "Avada..." but started, "Vera--" 

If you listen to the movie with that in mind, there is absolutely no 
way in the world "Vera--" sounds like, "Avada. . ."

Me:
*gasp!* No! Lucius was going to turn Harry into a water goblet! Bad Lucius! *giggles madly at that, although she doesn't /really/ think that's what he was going to do* That's what the spell from the CoS backstory scene started with, though, right?

bohcoo:
I do believe Malfoy's target was Harry, not Dobby, though. 

Me:
Most definitely. Lucius's anger was very focused on Harry at the moment. ("You lost me my servent," etc.)

--Taryn

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




From amani at charter.net  Sun Apr 13 20:49:19 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:49:19 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
References: <b7c38c+avlo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004701c301fe$27cbe260$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Chthonia:
1) Draco reacted as if he *hated* Lucius - also OOC, IMHO.  That 
level of discord between the two would surely presage some major 
teenage rebellion on Draco's part later on, and there's been no sign 
of that so far.

Me:
I'll disagree with that. It came across to me much more as if Draco just sort've shrunk down and felt rebuked and intimidated, but I didn't see /hatred/.

Chtonia:
4) Were they really implying that Borgin saw the diary? OK, that 
might have made things clearer for viewers who hadn't seen the books, 
but I can't believe Lucius would have been that stupid.

Me:
I've been wondering what it is that Borgin comments on... I can't be thinking why they would stick lines like that in if it wasn't about the diary, but I couldn't possibly imagine Lucius being so stupid. And then certain other questions would pop up--how did Borgin recognize the diary for something other than a normal diary? Did he see the back and, thus, the "Tom Marvolo Riddle" inscription? So how did /he/ know Voldemort's real identity?

Chtonia:
5) And were they also implying that Draco saw Harry?!  At least that 
explains the ridiculous way that Harry got caught by the Hand in the 
final cut, but surely Draco would have said something to his father?  
Or at least questioned Harry about it?

Me:
I did actually have a first initial instinct that Draco had seen Harry, but he didn't look nearly shocked enough. I'm convinced he was just looking with interest at the items in the store. Draco would've been /way/ more shocked to find Harry down in Knockturn Alley.

--Taryn

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




From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Apr 13 20:09:44 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:09:44 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My 2c on the DVD
Message-ID: <v01540b02babf5854f561@[217.154.252.113]>

My comments on the DVD;

Deleted scenes; I thought that only two or three of them should have been kept.

Firstly; the scene in the snow and at the foot of the staircase, when Harry
is voicing his own doubts about whether or not he is the heir of Slytherin.
That theme comes over very clearly in the book, but is only touched upon in
the movie. I wasn't altogether happy with the way the scene was written,
though; acting from the twins not that great; when one of them calls Harry
a 'seriously evil wizard', Harry should have smiled, to make it plain that
he knew that they didn't mean it. Script for the scene generally weak,
which is probably why it was cut.

The scene in the library, where the Hufflepuffs are talking; someone else
has already mentioned this one; makes the school's attitude to Harry much
clearer, as in the book.

Most importantly, the scene where Harry and Ron visit Hermione in the
hospital (after she drank the Polyjuice Potion and turned into a cat) when
Hermione puts together the whole 'Tom Riddle + fifty years ago + last time
the Chamber was opened' scenario. Makes far more sense then for Harry to
ask the diary, when he finally realises how it works, whether it knows
anything about the Chamber of Secrets.

Other DVD stuff;
Liked the set construction info based around Dumbledore's office. Liked the
JKR/Kloves interview. Liked the production drawings for
Dobby/mandrakes/Fawkes etc.

Deeply disappointed with the cast interviews; I wanted meaty, informative
interviews, not 10-second soundbites.

Desperately wanted more info on the making of the movie; more about the
sets, more about the filming, more off-camera moments on the set; a
movie-length commentary by CC/Kloves/Heyman would have been terrific.

Once again, Warner have catered well to the kids, but I'm really not into
'guess-the-effect-of-the-spell' games. I wish that they would realise that
HP has a large adult fanbase too.

Regards,
Nicholas





From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Apr 13 20:09:39 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:09:39 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <v01540b01babf56517c5a@[217.154.252.113]>

Faith said:-

>Doesn't JKR take any kind of active part in the movie though? Wouldn't she
>want a say, and step in if she felt something wasn't playing out right?

I have said this before, but I know there are several new members. Forgive
me if you have heard this before.

When an author sells the movie rights to his/her book, he/she gives up all
input into what goes on in the movie. The contract for the sale of the
rights may make certain stipulations (in the case of the HP books, received
wisdom is that JKR contracted for a live-action movie, not a cartoon, and a
British cast), but after the contract is signed, JKR has no further right
to intervene in the movie-making.

The producers of the HP movies have repeatedly stated that they want to be
true to JKR's vision; plus, they are filming a work in progress...they do
not know how the story will end.  They have to consult JKR on certain
points, to ensure that they don't change the plot in a way which will make
no sense in the light of yet-to-be-written events. This point was stressed
in the JKR/Kloves interview on the DVD.

Those are the two reasons why JKR is involved in the movies *at all*. Now
that she has sold the rights, she has no legal entitlement to involvement.

Regards,
Nicholas





From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Apr 13 20:09:49 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:09:49 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: An extra's viewpoint
Message-ID: <v01540b00babf56116d7a@[217.154.252.113]>

Etonbuffy said:-

>This could also be because Daniel was raised in a bit of a posh
>household.  He went to a proper, traditional London prep school and
>such.  He most likely isn't as boisterious as a good northern lad
>like Rupert.

Er...northern???

Rupert's accent is pure London.

Regards,
Nicholas





From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 21:09:04 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 17:09:04 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: dvd deleted scenes
Message-ID: <1d8.75c123f.2bcb2bf0@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/13/03 5:04:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk writes:

> I have said this before, but I know there are several new members. Forgive
> me if you have heard this before.
> 

And I'm one of those new members, sorry for making you repeat yourself.

TACtalk
When an author sells the movie rights to his/her book, he/she gives up all
input into what goes on in the movie. The contract for the sale of the
rights may make certain stipulations (in the case of the HP books, received
wisdom is that JKR contracted for a live-action movie, not a cartoon, and a
British cast), but after the contract is signed, JKR has no further right
to intervene in the movie-making.

I forget the term, but I always thought that there was a clause that could be 
put in the contracts stating that the author had input and final say in what 
happens.

~Faith~


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




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 13 21:09:41 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:09:41 -0000
Subject: The Curse and Elf Magical Powers
In-Reply-To: <b7c1if+1obo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7cjml+6brp@eGroups.com>


> Interesting that the power of an elf is so much stronger than that 
of 
> a wizard. In GOF (referenced here as canon) someone mentions 
> that, "It takes a very powerful wizard to hoodwink a magical 
object," 
> and Dobby was able to effortlessly close the barrier at Platform 9-
> 3/4 as well as get the bludger to turn rogue.
> 
> And, knock Malfoy on his hiney without Malfoy so much as making an 
> effort to respond.
> 
> Hm.m.m.m. Sounds like we need to pay attention to these creatures, 
> these elves.
> 
> bohcoo

 I definitely agree...I do believe the elves will be instrumental in 
turning the tide of the eventual "ultimate battle/war" against 
Voldemort and his Deatheaters...




From CLShannon at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 21:19:01 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 17:19:01 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My 2c on the DVD
Message-ID: <1d7.703adfd.2bcb2e45@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/13/03 2:05:45 PM, TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk writes:

<< Deeply disappointed with the cast interviews; I wanted meaty, informative
interviews, not 10-second soundbites.

Desperately wanted more info on the making of the movie; more about the
sets, more about the filming, more off-camera moments on the set; a
movie-length commentary by CC/Kloves/Heyman would have been terrific.

Once again, Warner have catered well to the kids, but I'm really not into
'guess-the-effect-of-the-spell' games. I wish that they would realise that
HP has a large adult fanbase too. >>

Couldn't agree more and thank you for concisely saying what I have been 
struggling to express ;-) 
Those interviews were a major disappointment for me. Not only did we have to 
click on each question, we never knew who was going to answer which one. 
Grrr. How about nice long interviews with many of the principal people? 
That was the first time I had ever seen either Alan Rickman or Maggie Smith 
comment on the movies at all and we got all of 20 seconds from each one.
I guess they figure the span of attention of the average 'kid' viewer is 
short or something.
I think I am definitely spoiled by Peter Jackson and his LOTR DVDs, now that 
is a man who knows what fans want <g>
Also, I am tired of the arrows and tours with that narrator. Why not have the 
art director take us on a tour of Dumbledore's office, explaining what 
everything is? I invariably get frustrated with the arrows, can't get back to 
where I wanted to be, etc. It's horribly frustrating ;-)
Also, the production sketches section was very paltry - no explanation at all 
as to what we were looking at? Just a slideshow with no narration at all? 
Geesh. And did anyone notice the sketches of what looks like the astromony 
tower? We haven't even gotten that in the movies yet, it would have been nice 
for someone to be saying, 'and here are some production sketches of the yet 
to be seen astromony tower' just to confirm it.

After viewing the extras on the LOTR DVD, this one frustrated me. I wanted 
those 'day in the life of...' features - more behind the scenes stories of 
the  filming, not just snippets during the 10 second interviews. 
What about commentary during the film? Some tracks where perhaps the producer 
and director comment on it? Or even the actors? 
The games are fine for the kids - I even played a few of them. But I really 
wanted more behind the scenes stuff - notice how they hardly have given us 
explanations on the special effects, sets, etc., on this film? How exactly do 
they film quidditch?
Compare this to the LOTR DVD - I feel like I know everything about those 
movies and I mean 'everything' - from the special effects to the props to the 
actors to the writers....it goes on and on.

Sorry, got off on a rant - I love this movie and I have to admit the COS DVD 
is a vast improvement over the SS one, which left me wanting to strangle 
something (the extras part, of course, not the movie), but it could have been 
sooooo much better.
Cindy
P.S. And I agree with what Nicholas said about which missing scenes should 
have been left in - esp. the ones that further the suspicion about Harry and 
his own self-doubt.



From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 13 21:28:42 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:28:42 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
Message-ID: <b7ckqa+97fq@eGroups.com>

http://www.comingsoon.net/cgi-bin/archive/fullnews.cgi?
newsid1049921488,95419

Columbus has already done enough damage....Hire Terry Gilliam or 
keep Cuaron....

Columbus' style is too elementary and he doesn't have a firm grasp 
of what the characters are supposed to be...





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Apr 13 21:43:27 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:43:27 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My 2c on the DVD
References: <v01540b02babf5854f561@[217.154.252.113]>
Message-ID: <028901c30205$b870d440$62a1cdd1@RVotaw>

Nicholas wrote:

> Firstly; the scene in the snow and at the foot of the staircase, when Harry
> is voicing his own doubts about whether or not he is the heir of Slytherin.
> That theme comes over very clearly in the book, but is only touched upon in
> the movie. I wasn't altogether happy with the way the scene was written,
> though; acting from the twins not that great; when one of them calls Harry
> a 'seriously evil wizard', Harry should have smiled, to make it plain that
> he knew that they didn't mean it. Script for the scene generally weak,
> which is probably why it was cut.

Several things in this scene seemed rather stiff.  First, why were Ron and Hermione standing so far away from Harry?  Second, the twins were rather stiff, should've come closer to Harry, slapped him on the back or something.  Harry should either a) have smiled or b) said something like "Oh, shut up."  The latter would've kept more with the theme the scene was trying to convey, Harry's clear confusion and "what if" mind frame.  I did like Dan's delivery of the lines to Ron and Hermione once they'd gone inside, and Rupert's "Why would that make anyone happy?" but Hermione's last line in that scene (something about "then we'll truly know who the heir of Slytherin is") was awful.  Maybe it's my imagination, but Emma seems to have a bad habit of making her lines *sound* memorized.  Which is fine when Herminone's lecturing or quoting something from a book, but not in cases like that.  Still, I'd have kept it anyway.

>The scene in the library, where the Hufflepuffs are talking; someone else
>has already mentioned this one; makes the school's attitude to Harry much
>clearer, as in the book.

That one was very good.  Very, very good.  I can't understand why they cut it at all.

> Most importantly, the scene where Harry and Ron visit Hermione in the
> hospital (after she drank the Polyjuice Potion and turned into a cat) when
> Hermione puts together the whole 'Tom Riddle + fifty years ago + last time
> the Chamber was opened' scenario. Makes far more sense then for Harry to
> ask the diary, when he finally realises how it works, whether it knows
> anything about the Chamber of Secrets.

Yes, this one was vital.  For one, as you mentioned, it would've cleared it up rather than leave it looking like Harry just decided to write in a blank book.  Another thing, Ron mentions his detention.  I've complained before that the movie made it look like he got away without detention while Harry served his.  

I'd have also kept the Hagrid with rooster thing in the hallway.  At least to clear up why Hagrid is carrying around roosters in Hogwarts.  Dead ones, at that.

I liked the Hedwig scene, where Harry is pondering who he really is.  However, to be kept it would've needed a lot more transition than boom in the castle, boom outside, boom back in.

> Deeply disappointed with the cast interviews; I wanted meaty, informative
> interviews, not 10-second soundbites.

I did like that they talked with more than just the main characters.  Those kids are all *so* cute!  But why on Earth was Tom talking with his teeth clenched together?  He doesn't usually talk like that.

I enjoyed the behind the scene snips in the interviews, even as short as they were.  Particularly the one where Emma is insisting she's going to be taller than Daniel, and he's insisting that she's just trying to embarass him.  She says something like "I'm not trying to embarass you, I'm just trying to be taller than you." To which he replies "Same thing."  Which is particularly amusing considering I'd just looked at the pictures online from the DVD release party, and in one there's a picture of a large portion of the cast.  Emma is just nearly as tall as Dan, and the only ones he's taller than now are Bonnie (Ginny) and Miriam Margoyles (Prof Sprout)!

Richelle


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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Apr 13 21:47:53 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:47:53 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00babf56116d7a@[217.154.252.113]>
Message-ID: <b7clu9+98pc@eGroups.com>

Can someone (I shouldn't ask for anyone personally, say Nicholas for 
instance....) please map out the accents for me. Where in your humble 
opinion are these kids'accents from? I thought Tom's accent was not 
posh enough for someone who's supposed to be pureblood. I know this 
must have come up so if someone wants to point me to a good 
explanitory post, I will humbly accept that.
JenD




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 22:01:24 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 18:01:24 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please, No....
Message-ID: <1e6.68a1db4.2bcb3834@aol.com>

Cuaron has taken all the minor characters and destroyed them!!

New Fat!!

No Wood or Flint!!

What next no Creevey!!  We may need Creevey in the Order of the Phoneix!

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/13/03 5:29:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> http://www.comingsoon.net/cgi-bin/archive/fullnews.cgi?
> newsid1049921488,95419
> 
> Columbus has already done enough damage....Hire Terry Gilliam or 
> keep Cuaron....
> 
> Columbus' style is too elementary and he doesn't have a firm grasp 
> of what the characters are supposed to be...
> 
> 



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




From urbana at charter.net  Sun Apr 13 22:12:38 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 22:12:38 -0000
Subject: CoS
In-Reply-To: <ea.37bfe732.2bc956f9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7cncm+mssb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, JessaDrow at a... wrote:
> Hi everyone, I'm Faith and I'm new to this mailing list. I do hope 
I'm not 
> about to get into something that that already has been discussed 
but I found 
> out today that I more than likely won't be getting CoS till Monday, 
I was 
> stupid enough to mail order it, rather than go out to the store and 
buy it. 

That's too bad. I walked into the Target discount store about 3 miles 
from my house around 5:15 p.m. Friday and there were multiple copies 
of both the COS DVD and the video up near the check-out lines and no 
line a all of anyone waiting to pick up a copy. Maybe Target 
customers are less manic about HP than folks who pre-order through 
B&N, Borders etc?? At any rate we bought our copy of  COS at Target 
last Friday, on sale for either $13 or $15 American, and we've 
watched it twice since then.

> So I decided that before I start reading the books *again* I'd 
watch the 
> movie. ...I'm really hoping CoS is  
> more accurate, I never did see it in the theater.

No, unfortunately it's not. In fact if you go back in this group to 
mid to late November 2002 you will find tons of reviews, criticisms 
etc. about COS that are very specific about the inaccuracies 
(including various characters' lines being said by other characters 
for no discernable reason). I only saw COS once in the theater but 
when we watched the video this weekend, many of those criticisms came 
back to me. COS was directed by Chris Columbus, as was SS/PS, so it's 
got a fairly typical Columbus feel to it, though fortunately it's not 
slapstick like some of his earlier movies (Home Alone etc.) I mean 
it's not idiotic like those movies, but of course the source material 
is 3,000 times better. Too bad he didn't capture the spirit of the 
book better, but then we can also fault screenwriter Steve Kloves for 
that too.

Anne U
(who MUST get a DVD player this year.... I'm skipping all the DVD 
messages as I'm sure they're spoilers...)





From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 13 22:21:22 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 18:21:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS
Message-ID: <19d.135b13f6.2bcb3ce2@aol.com>

urbana at charter.net writes:

> That's too bad. I walked into the Target discount store about 3 miles 
> from my house around 5:15 p.m. Friday and there were multiple copies 
> of both the COS DVD and the video up near the check-out lines and no 
> line a all of anyone waiting to pick up a copy. Maybe Target 
> customers are less manic about HP than folks who pre-order through 
> B&N, Borders etc?? At any rate we bought our copy of  COS at Target 
> last Friday, on sale for either $13 or $15 American, and we've 
> watched it twice since then.
> 

Yeah it was stupid, I thought if I ordered it early, I might get it early, or 
atleast on time. We don't drive so getting out to Target or the store is a 
bit of a trek.

urbana at charter.net writes:

No, unfortunately it's not. In fact if you go back in this group to 
mid to late November 2002 you will find tons of reviews, criticisms 
etc. about COS that are very specific about the inaccuracies 
(including various characters' lines being said by other characters 
for no discernable reason). I only saw COS once in the theater but 
when we watched the video this weekend, many of those criticisms came 
back to me. COS was directed by Chris Columbus, as was SS/PS, so it's 
got a fairly typical Columbus feel to it, though fortunately it's not 
slapstick like some of his earlier movies (Home Alone etc.) I mean 
it's not idiotic like those movies, but of course the source material 
is 3,000 times better. Too bad he didn't capture the spirit of the 
book better, but then we can also fault screenwriter Steve Kloves for 
that too.

Looks like I'm going to have to adapt the same mentality to this movie that I 
did to SS. It's a nice movie in it's own right, but when I want to really 
enjoy Harry Potter, pick up the book.

~Faith~


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




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 00:01:14 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:01:14 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <1e6.68a1db4.2bcb3834@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7ctoa+29ej@eGroups.com>

He

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> Cuaron has taken all the minor characters and destroyed them!!
> 
> New Fat!!
> 
> No Wood or Flint!!
> 
> What next no Creevey!!  We may need Creevey in the Order of the 
Phoneix!
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 

I'd much rather not see the characters at all then to have them 
wasted, like Neville was in Stone.

I mean really, the smart thing is to focus on character development, 
not stuffing as many character cameos in as possible to the 
detriment of a cohesive well-writen story. Those characters really 
aren't needed in the Azkaban film...It's not like he's killed them...

Besides, Azkaban hasn't been released yet...We don't know how Cuaron 
will fair (though I'm betting he'll be a sight better than 
Christopher "pander to the lowest common denominator" Columbus).







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 01:49:11 2003
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 01:49:11 -0000
Subject: CoS
In-Reply-To: <ea.37bfe732.2bc956f9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7d42n+mq3m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, JessaDrow at a... wrote:
> Hi everyone, I'm Faith and I'm new to this mailing list. I do hope 
I'm not 
> about to get into something that that already has been discussed 
but I found 
> out today that I more than likely won't be getting CoS till 
Monday, I was 
> stupid enough to mail order it, rather than go out to the store 
and buy it. 


Wow, I am sorry you didn't get your CoS yet!  I got mine on Tuesday, 
and I had ordered it from Amazon.  I've never, ever had a problem 
with them.  Did you use Amazon?  I suppose it doesn't matter, but I 
would definitely contact them and tell them you were expecting to 
receive your movie ON TIME.  Going out to the store is always an 
option, but with four kids in tow (most of the time), it's always 
easier for me to order by mail.  Anyway, I hope you get it soon!

Alora




From grace701 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 02:00:51 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 19:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <1050145075.335.54684.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030414020051.4908.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>



Message: 11
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 04:43:39 -0000
From: "rp20302000" 
Subject: dvd deleted scenes

Hey, just wondering what everyone thought about the deleted scenes?
I think at least half were integral to the movie and helping 
illuminate the plot for people who havent read the book and for 
character development.
Even if they added an additional 15 minutes to a (by some's 
standards) long movie it would have been worth it b/c they added so 
much.
I saw SS/PS before I had read the book (didn't know what I was 
missing, let me tell you) and it took a second viewing just to get 
the plot down straight.
Thanks,

RP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I think that they needed to add the scene where Ron and Harry went to visit Hermione in the hospital after finding the diary.  It would explain why Harry would ask Tom Riddle if he knew anything about the Chamber of Secrets.  I really did not like the fact that they cut out that part.  It would only have added 5-10 minutes.  


Greicy


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Mon Apr 14 09:52:20 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 05:52:20 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS
Message-ID: <55.3d8a2e88.2bcbded4@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/13/03 9:50:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com writes:

> Wow, I am sorry you didn't get your CoS yet!  I got mine on Tuesday, 
> and I had ordered it from Amazon.  I've never, ever had a problem 
> with them.  Did you use Amazon?  I suppose it doesn't matter, but I 
> would definitely contact them and tell them you were expecting to 
> receive your movie ON TIME.  Going out to the store is always an 
> option, but with four kids in tow (most of the time), it's always 
> easier for me to order by mail.  Anyway, I hope you get it soon!
> 

Yeah we ordered it through Amazon, they said they shipped it on Friday 
otherwise I would have just canceled the order and treked out to Target, so 
I'm praying I get it today. I swear though I'm not mail ordering the book, 
I'm going to go up to Barnes and Nobels and buy it myself.  And yeah I don't 
envy you, I've got only the one kid, who loves going shopping with mommy, and 
he's super hyper. *grins* Another reason I don't like shopping. 

~Faith~


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




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Mon Apr 14 13:31:41 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:31:41 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <b7clu9+98pc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7ed7t+tchp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:

<<<Where in your humble opinion are these kids'accents from? I 
thought Tom's accent was not posh enough for someone who's supposed 
to be pureblood.>>>

Tom Felton's accent annoys me because it is not consistent. 
Sometimes he sounds much posher than at other times. If you mean by 
pureblood that we should expect Tom to sound "upperclass" or 
aristocratic, then I would agree, that it is probably not posh 
enough. In truth, Daniel Radcliffe's accent is much posher - as is 
Emma Watson's. In terms of pure blood, the Weasleys are also 
pureblood, but we do not have the expectation for them to 
speak "posh".

Rupert Grint's accent sounds Southern to me, but I thought he came 
from Hertfordshire, not London. IMHO, although his accent is not 
posh, it's not what I would call "London" either (I come from East 
London).

Ali
 




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Apr 14 15:09:20 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:09:20 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Stupid question about Sirius Black
Message-ID: <21023981.1050332960988.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

I have an incredibly stupid question, so stupid that I wouldn't post it on the 
main list.  In fact, it does relate to filming, so it sort of belongs here 
anyway.  In PoA, when was Sirius seen in a crystal ball?  I've had a horrible 
mental block and don't remember whether it happened in the book or not.  
<blushing furiously>  I don't, however, have my books with me and I've tried 
waiting until I get home, but it's driving me insane!  Can anyone help?!?

Richelle

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




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 15:21:16 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:21:16 -0000
Subject: Stupid question about Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <21023981.1050332960988.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>
Message-ID: <b7ejlc+cnt9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote:
> I have an incredibly stupid question, so stupid that I wouldn't 
post it on the 
> main list.  In fact, it does relate to filming, so it sort of 
belongs here 
> anyway.  In PoA, when was Sirius seen in a crystal ball?  I've had 
a horrible 
> mental block and don't remember whether it happened in the book or 
not.

Hm.  Well, whether *Sirius* was seen in the crystal ball is a matter 
of interpretation.  Trelawney said she saw the *Grim.*  Maybe she 
did, maybe she didn't; maybe what she saw was a big black dog, not 
the Grim.  No one saw a man resembling Sirius.

HTH,
Amy




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 15:23:40 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:23:40 -0000
Subject: Unstupid question about Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <b7ejlc+cnt9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7ejps+4hcb@eGroups.com>

P.S.  I don't think your question was stupid!

Amy




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 15:41:14 2003
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 08:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: the CoS DVD
In-Reply-To: <1050321024.336.85933.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030414154114.96229.qmail@web14203.mail.yahoo.com>

"chthonia9" <chthonicdancer at h...> 
wrote: 
> I was disappointed though that there wasn't more of
a photogallery -
 
> and is there really no commentary, or am I just
unable to find it? Compared to other DVD's of films of
this length, there didn't seem to be much to justify
the two discs.  But I'm glad the wait is over...

And Kristen replied:
My feelings on the DVD are close to yours. I was
definitely NOT impressed with the "extras." I guess I
was just surprised, considering that the first movie
was the *second highest grossing movie of all time*
they would put a bit more into the DVD. I did enoy 
the additional scenes and cast interviews, but I just
felt like a bit more effort could have made it
exponentially better. 

I do understand that these movies are geared towards
children, but do they realize that they are leaving
out an entire interested demographic? Surely the
people on this list are not the only adults 
that would enjoy a more involved "Making of" and
commentary. Like you said though...I am glad I have
it.


Now me:
I'm a little disappointed with the extras on the CoS
DVD as well. I actually liked the extras on SS better.
I was hoping for longer cast interviews, and still
think that a comentary track with Dan, Rupert and Emma
would be alot of fun. I do think they are ignoring all
the adult fans of the book, but it doesn't have to be
that way.

I bought the new DVD of Who Framed Roger Rabbit a
couple of weeks ago. They did a great job of
packaging: 2 discs, the first is a 'family friendly'
disc with the fullscreen version of the film, 3 Roger
rabbit short cartoons, and a 'making of' documentary
obviously geared towards children. No commetaries or
other hard to navigate things.
The second disc is the 'grownups' disc and has the
letterbox version of the film, with DTS sound and
audio commentaries by the director and others, pop up
facts about the film that can be superimposed over the
action, an unfinished scene, and many other features
geared more towards adults and less towards kids.
So, you basically get the film in two formats-one that
kids will like, the other for film buffs. It would be
easy to do the same for the Harry Potter films. If the
films are too long to do in one package they could do
'family' and grownup' editions instead of fullscreen
and widescreen editions. The extras, etc. would be
geared towards adults in the widescreen edition, and
towards kids in the fullscreen edition. 

Tyler



__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com



From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Mon Apr 14 15:40:57 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:40:57 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b00bac082abdbf2@[195.184.228.115]>

Jen asks:-

>Can someone (I shouldn't ask for anyone personally, say Nicholas for
>instance....) please map out the accents for me. Where in your humble
>opinion are these kids'accents from? I thought Tom's accent was not
>posh enough for someone who's supposed to be pureblood. I know this
>must have come up so if someone wants to point me to a good
>explanitory post, I will humbly accept that.

Well, I'm not sure that my opinion is very humble; I'm actually pretty good
at accents!!!

Here you are then;

Britain has a huge variety of regional accents, and also something called
Received Pronunciation, or RP, which is usually accepted as
regional-accentless English. The BBC used only to employ RP-speakers, I
suppose on the principle that an accentless voice is understandable to all.
Here's a quick list of the HP characters and their accents:-

Harry; Mostly RP, occasional lapses into London. Clearly heard in PS/SS
when walking through Leadenhall Market with Hagrid, saying 'Can we find all
of this in London?' He pronounces is Lahndun, as a Londoner would. RP is
Lundun.
Hermione; pure RP
Ron; London, though not particularly strong
Hagrid; South-west, aka West Country (RC is naturally a Scot)
Dumbledore; Irish
McGonagall; Scottish (though MS is normally fairly RP)
Wood; Scottish, in character and out
Snape; RP
Lockhart; RP (KB's natural accent, rarely heard these days, is Northern Irish)
Vernon and Petunia; RP with a tinge of overemphasis, sign of
pretentiousness. Richard Griffiths's natural accent is pretty RP. Fiona
Shaw is Irish, to my surprise (always thought she was Scottish, but the
Irish brogue came through very clearly on the short interview on the DVD)
Neville; Yorkshire (northern England)
Seamus; Irish
Colin; RP
Lucius; RP with an aristocratic tinge (naturally JI is a Londoner by accent)
Draco; strange. RP in PS/SS, deteriorates to poor London in parts of CoS.
Most noticeable in the Quidditch confrontation, when Harry is surprised
that Malfoy is on the team; he says ' 'at's roight', which is very
lower-class London. I think GulPlum said that he was 'dredging the bottom
of the Thames' or WTTE, which is about right. Incidentally, when watching
the DVD at the weekend, I thought that maybe that bit had been redubbed,
because there was more of a 'th' at the beginning of ' 'at's roight' than
was evident in the cinema.
Aragog; RP (obviously a well-brought-up spider)
Tom Riddle; mostly RP; occasional hint of London.

Have I left out anyone you would want to know about? Let me know if so.

Regards,
Nicholas





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Apr 14 17:44:12 2003
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:44:12 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Stupid question about Sirius Black
References: <21023981.1050332960988.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>
Message-ID: <003101c302ad$76860c00$153d1c40@aoldsl.net>

Richelle asked:

<In PoA, when was Sirius seen in a crystal
ball? >

He wasn't.  Harry faked a prediction about
Buckbeak though (which did end up coming true
in a way) but Sirius was not seen in a
crystal ball, in the book.

Saitaina
****
I had dreamed of the day I would defend a
lady in peril,
but I had hoped to have more then a pot of
honey as a weapon.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"Yours is better than mine. Mine still has
wood-grained fur," Harry complained.
"It's camoflauge kitty. It'll blend with the
wainscoting."





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Apr 14 18:10:06 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:10:06 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Accents
Message-ID: <24143532.1050343806827.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

Nicholas:

> Britain has a huge variety of regional accents, and also something called<BR>
> Received Pronunciation, or RP, which is usually accepted as<BR>
> regional-accentless English. The BBC used only to employ RP-speakers, I<BR>
> suppose on the principle that an accentless voice is understandable to 
all.<BR>
> Here's a quick list of the HP characters and their accents:-<BR>

<snip>

Oh, goody.  This is fascinating.  A few questions here.  I can see obviously 
with the adults, such as Maggie Smith, how they would shift their accents from 
one production to another.  The kids, however, would seem to (based on 
interviews)talk as they normally do.  Therefore, what would explain, for 
example, Daniel's accent being RP but lapsing into a London accent?  Schooling 
versus home?  I'm thinking of my students in southern Louisiana, where I teach 
them to speak one way, but unless I'm standing over them they slip back into 
their "home venacular."  

I do, of course, understand that in areas near each other people can still 
speak with very different accent.  For instance, I live less than forty miles 
north of New Orleans.  While people in New Orleans would say that "Nawlins" 
or "New Awlins" I say "New Orlens" with a short e sound. Others elsewhere will 
say it different still, such as "New Orleens" with a long e sound.  That aside, 
what would account for the difference in, say, Rupert Grint and Daniel 
Radcliffe's accents?  Regional?  Schooling?  

As for Tom Felton's frequent lower class London accent, what would be 
considered upper class accent?  London as in Rupert Grint or RP?

Yes, I'm full of questions!

Richelle

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




From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Mon Apr 14 19:04:32 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 20:04:32 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b04bac0b21dce02@[217.154.252.113]>

Richelle said:-

>Oh, goody.  This is fascinating.  A few questions here.  I can see obviously
>with the adults, such as Maggie Smith, how they would shift their accents from
>one production to another.  The kids, however, would seem to (based on
>interviews)talk as they normally do.  Therefore, what would explain, for
>example, Daniel's accent being RP but lapsing into a London accent?  Schooling
>versus home?

Yes, possibly. If DR's parents speak RP, but he is surrounded at school by
Londoners with more or less of an accent, he would probably have both
elements in his speech. Don't get me wrong; DR is almost entirely RP; there
is just the occasional hint of a London accent, and I doubt that it would
be noticeable to anyone but a freak like me who picks up on accents.

snip the Nawlins example:-

> That aside,
>what would account for the difference in, say, Rupert Grint and Daniel
>Radcliffe's accents?  Regional?  Schooling?

Judging purely by the way in which they speak, I would say that DR's family
is probably slightly higher on the social scale than RG's. RG is London in
accent and intonation, which indicates that he hears that at home as well
as at school. His accent is not the strong Cockney of central/east London,
but it is very plainly from that part of the country.

In Britain, or at least in England, we do tend to judge people by how they
speak; the lighter the accent, the higher up the social scale. That's why
the Dursleys speak as they do; they are striving to be seen as higher up
the social scale than they are. This is the case until you get past the
middle classes, when the RP becomes distorted by the kind of aristocratic
twang which you can hear in Lucius Malfoy's voice. The Royal Family does
not speak RP; they have a particular accent which is identifiable as 'top
of the social scale'.

>
>As for Tom Felton's frequent lower class London accent, what would be
>considered upper class accent?  London as in Rupert Grint or RP?

No, London has its own accent; the strongest form of it is Cockney, it is
very noticeable and not considered upper class. RP is not regional; it's
more indicative of education and social status. I suppose it's rather odd;
we go from working class with strong regional accents, through middle class
which moves further away from regional accents and towards RP the higher
you go; then into the aristocracy and royalty, which have their own strong
accent.

>
>Yes, I'm full of questions!

Hope this helps!

Regards,
Nicholas





From erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 20:26:30 2003
From: erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com (erisedstraeh2002)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 20:26:30 -0000
Subject: My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
Message-ID: <b7f5hm+m9pp@eGroups.com>

I've read with interest the discussion about the characterization of 
the Lucius-Draco relationship in the deleted Borgin and Burkes 
scene.  I've just re-read this scene in CoS, and I really don't think 
the way it was played in the deleted movie scene mischaracterizes 
their relationship.  Granted, Lucius doesn't brandish his walking 
stick around in the book, but he does speak rather viciously to Draco 
regarding his grades and his future. 

I really liked this scene, and given how well it was acted 
(especially compared to some of the other deleted scenes), the fact 
that background music was added, and the inclusion of the name of the 
actor playing Borgin on the credits, leads me to speculate that this 
scene was an integral part of the movie until very late in the 
process.  I thought the scene did a great job of capturing Harry's 
panic when he spots Draco through the window while his hand is 
trapped in the Hand of Glory (I thought it was clear that Draco did 
*not* see Harry), and I loved the sarcophagus that Harry hid in.  I 
also loved the part when Lucius took more coins than were originally 
offered, and then Borgin took one back when Lucius wasn't looking ? a 
clever way to capture how both men are not to be trusted.  I also got 
a chuckle as to how the moviemakers gave Borgin the mossy teeth 
originally attributed to the fingernail carrying witch in the book.

I think this scene is important for establishing that Lucius is a 
dark wizard, as well as for establishing the importance he places on 
pure-blood.  The one part I didn't care for at all was when Borgin 
spots "something" in the box that catches his attention, but Lucius 
says it is not for sale.  Why is it in the box if it's not for sale?  
I didn't get the impression that it was the diary ? the box didn't 
look big enough, and while we can't see the item Borgin takes out, it 
doesn't look as if he's taking out something as large as the diary 
was.  So what was it, and how is this relevant?  That was just 
bizarre, IMO.

I could tell why most of the deleted scenes were deleted.  The first 
one, which prolonged the agony of the dropped pudding, was just that ?
agonizing.  How could the Dursleys keep up the small talk with a 
floating pudding heading toward Mrs. Mason?  The fourth ? the 
Kwikspell letter  -- wouldn't have made sense to someone who didn't 
read the book.  I think it's a fairly major omission in the movie 
that they don't mention Filch's squib-ness, but this scene wouldn't 
have accomplished this - Harry didn't even open the envelope, and 
there's no mention of Filch being a squib.  The fifth one, where 
Borgin attacks Harry ? why would a shopkeeper accost someone in their 
shop?  Especially while asking if he can help him find something??  
Plus, why doesn't Borgin recognize Harry, since everyone else seems 
to at first sight?  Perhaps it was the absence of his scar - I 
couldn't see it, even though his hair was back ? it looked as if the 
soot might have been obscuring it.  

Speaking of the soot ? for some reason, watching the DVD led me to 
notice that all of the Weasleys are also soot-covered ? I got the 
impression from the book that only Harry was soot-covered because he 
landed at the wrong grate.  I didn't think everyone who travels by 
Floo Powder winds up soot-covered.  And if they do, why not get 
cleaned up?

Back to the deleted scenes ? I thought they should have kept in scene 
#6, when Colin explains why he wants to take Harry's picture and he 
tells them that he's a Muggle.  Given how fast Colin talked, it 
wouldn't have added much time to the movie, and it would have 
explained why he was a target of the Basilisk and why he's always 
trying to take Harry's picture.  Also, Ron's "Imagine that?" when 
Colin says that he family thought he was mental was *priceless*.

Scene #7, when Lockhart passes out the quiz, was hysterical.  Not 
integral to the plot, but it was extremely well done and funny.  

I didn't like scene #8, where Harry hurriedly meets Justin, although 
I thought it was a major oversight in the movie to have not 
identified Justin by name before he was petrified, and also to not 
have identified him as a Muggle (once again, the missing link as to 
why he was a target of the Basilisk).  But I think this would have 
worked much better the way it was laid out in the book ? a discussion 
over the mandrakes, rather than a hurried meeting at the duelling 
club.

Also, speaking of the mandrakes, for some reason this hit me more 
when I was watching the DVD ? how silly was it for everyone to be 
listening to Professor Sprout with their ear-muffs on??

Scene #9, where Fred and George say "Make way for the Heir of 
Slytherin ? seriously evil wizard coming through," disturbed me, 
because it was so clearly in contradiction with canon.  In the book, 
when Fred and George say this, it's Percy and Ginny who get annoyed, 
not Harry.  In fact, the book specifically states "Harry didn't mind; 
it made him feel better that Fred and George, at least, thought the 
idea of his being Slytherin's heir was quite ludicrous" (Ch. 12).  So 
I'm very glad this scene was left out.

Scene #10, when Hagrid runs into Harry holding the dead rooster ? 
either this scene should have been left in, or the part of the scene 
in Dumbledore's office where Hagrid bursts in should have been 
deleted.  It doesn't make any sense for Hagrid to come into 
Dumbledore's office holding the rooster and claiming that he can 
vouch for Harry's innocence if the previous scene is missing.

Scene #12, where Ernie McMillan and Hannah Abbott are discussing 
Harry as the Heir of Slytherin ? I think it would have made more 
sense to include this scene rather than the scene that was in the 
movie where everyone was just staring at Harry.  I'm still puzzled as 
to where this scene is supposed to be taking place, however.

Scene #15, where Ron and Harry visit Hermione in the hospital wing 
with Riddle's diary ? I wish they had left this in, it would have 
helped to explain why Harry later asks the diary whether it knows 
anything about the chamber of secrets.

~Phyllis





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 14 21:29:01 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:29:01 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bac082abdbf2@[195.184.228.115]>
Message-ID: <b7f96t+pl4u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, TACtalk at a... wrote:
> Jen asks:-
> 
> ...edited..
>
> Draco; strange. RP in PS/SS, deteriorates to poor London in parts 
> of CoS. Most noticeable in the Quidditch confrontation, ...; he 
> says ' 'at's roight', which is very lower-class London. 
> ...edited...
> 
> Have I left out anyone you would want to know about? Let me know 
> if so.
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas

bboy_mn:

Tom Felton's accent when he is not in his 'speaking' voice is very
hard and clipped, and somewhat difficult to understand. There is a
long interview with him during the CoS premier in London, and there
are a couple of short interviews with him at Newsround.

Since Tom is a very experience actor compared to the other main
characters, I think he has a 'stage voice'. This is his formal classic
 very proper stage voice, and it comes out when ever he is on stage. 

Perfect example, his speech to fake!Crabbe and fake!Goyle in the
Slytherin common room. Even his mannerisms are very classic stage
acting. But during the Quidditch scene, they were outside, and I think
away from the framework of the stage, to some extent he reverted from
Draco's accent (or Tom's stage voice) to his normal speaking voice. 

Personally, I thought when Tom/Draco said 'mudblood', it sounded more
like 'mub-blub', and you are right about the 'that's right' = 'at's
roight'. 

If you can find a interview with Tom, I would really be interested in
hearing your take on his normal speaking voice which I find very
difficult to understand.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From siskiou at earthlink.net  Mon Apr 14 23:12:38 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:12:38 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
In-Reply-To: <b7f5hm+m9pp@eGroups.com>
References: <b7f5hm+m9pp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8817132502.20030414161238@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Monday, April 14, 2003, 1:26:30 PM, erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com wrote:

>  Granted, Lucius doesn't brandish his walking 
> stick around in the book, but he does speak rather viciously to Draco 
> regarding his grades and his future. 

Yes, but in the books Draco talks back, and doesn't sound
like he fears his father much at all, while in the missing
scene this is very different.

To me, Draco comes across as spoiled in the books, and at
least somewhat abused in the movies.

And why turn him into a thief, which we haven't seen in the
books at all, so far.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 14 23:50:43 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 19:50:43 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
Message-ID: <145.f294b7d.2bcca353@aol.com>

Becuase he is rotton to the core of his being!!  When Lucius Malfoy would 
almost hit Draco it made me think oh so this is what makes Draco!!

kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/14/03 7:14:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Monday, April 14, 2003, 1:26:30 PM, erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> > Granted, Lucius doesn't brandish his walking 
> >stick around in the book, but he does speak rather viciously to Draco 
> >regarding his grades and his future. 
> 
> Yes, but in the books Draco talks back, and doesn't sound
> like he fears his father much at all, while in the missing
> scene this is very different.
> 
> To me, Draco comes across as spoiled in the books, and at
> least somewhat abused in the movies.
> 
> And why turn him into a thief, which we haven't seen in the
> books at all, so far.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net
> 



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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 15 00:06:54 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:06:54 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
In-Reply-To: <145.f294b7d.2bcca353@aol.com>
References: <145.f294b7d.2bcca353@aol.com>
Message-ID: <10420388927.20030414170654@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Monday, April 14, 2003, 4:50:43 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:

> Becuase he is rotton to the core of his being!!

Who do you mean, here?


>   When Lucius Malfoy
> would 
> almost hit Draco it made me think oh so this is what makes Draco!!

Well, it's still not this way in the books, so canon Draco
might have different motivations than movie Draco ;)


-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 00:32:55 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 20:32:55 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
Message-ID: <2f.37ff82d6.2bccad37@aol.com>

True but again the actor has to think how am I going to play this character 
to this other person!  Jason did say that he wanted to have Draco be afriad 
of him for the role!

Kyle Longbottom 


In a message dated 4/14/03 8:08:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Monday, April 14, 2003, 4:50:43 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
> 
> >Becuase he is rotton to the core of his being!!
> 
> Who do you mean, here?
> 
> 
> >  When Lucius Malfoy
> >would 
> >almost hit Draco it made me think oh so this is what makes Draco!!
> 
> Well, it's still not this way in the books, so canon Draco
> might have different motivations than movie Draco ;)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net



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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 15 00:37:01 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:37:01 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
In-Reply-To: <2f.37ff82d6.2bccad37@aol.com>
References: <2f.37ff82d6.2bccad37@aol.com>
Message-ID: <622196587.20030414173701@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Monday, April 14, 2003, 5:32:55 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:

> Jason did say that he wanted to have Draco be
> afriad 
> of him for the role!

I know!

That's exactly what annoys me <g>.

That the actor gets to decide how to play his character
according to *his* characterization, even if it's not the
same in canon.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 01:02:46 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:02:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My Thoughts on the Deleted CoS Scenes
Message-ID: <27.3df2ae1b.2bccb436@aol.com>

I dont think Jason Issacs did a bad intrepretation of Lucius Malfoy.

Kyle Longbottom



In a message dated 4/14/03 8:37:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Monday, April 14, 2003, 5:32:55 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
> 
> >Jason did say that he wanted to have Draco be
> >afriad 
> >of him for the role!
> 
> I know!
> 
> That's exactly what annoys me <g>.
> 
> That the actor gets to decide how to play his character
> according to *his* characterization, even if it's not the
> same in canon.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net



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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr 15 01:03:50 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 20:03:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Explanation for the (un)Stupid question about Sirius Black
References: <b7ejlc+cnt9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008b01c302ea$f61d8b40$4d9ccdd1@RVotaw>

Amy wrote:

> Hm.  Well, whether *Sirius* was seen in the crystal ball is a matter 
> of interpretation.  Trelawney said she saw the *Grim.*  Maybe she 
> did, maybe she didn't; maybe what she saw was a big black dog, not 
> the Grim.  No one saw a man resembling Sirius.

Well, that's what I thought all along.  Now that I've got a couple of confirmations that Sirius himself was *not* seen in the crystal ball, I'll explain why I asked it.  First, a little spoiler space, as it could possibly, just maybe be considered a spoiler for PoA the movie.

Spoiler

Space

Spoiler

Space

Spoiler

Space

I guess that's enough.

Okay, I'm looking at a PoA call sheet here of what looks to be Gary Oldman's first day filming anything.  

After an hour and a half at Makeup/hair/wardrobe (yes, an hour and a half!) Gary Oldman was filming what was listed as Moving Picture--Sirius Black.  Listings under that were:

Sirius Black in Daily Prophet
Poster of Sirius Black
Black in Newspaper
Have you seen this man poster
Black appears in crystal ball

Now they all make sense until the last one.  What crystal ball?  Either this signals more major changes or it's being used in advertising or something that won't actually appear in the film.  Could be, I suppose.

Richelle


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




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 15 01:18:17 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Explanation for the (un)Stupid question about Sirius Black
In-Reply-To: <008b01c302ea$f61d8b40$4d9ccdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <20030415011817.57919.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com>

Richelle:
> Spoiler
> 
> Space
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> Space
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> Space
> 
> I guess that's enough.
> 
> Okay, I'm looking at a PoA call sheet
> here of what looks to be Gary
> Oldman's first day filming anything.  
> 
> After an hour and a half at Makeup/
> hair/wardrobe (yes, an hour and a
> half!) Gary Oldman was filming what
> was listed as Moving Picture--Sirius
> Black.  Listings under that were:
> 
> Sirius Black in Daily Prophet
> Poster of Sirius Black
> Black in Newspaper
> Have you seen this man poster
> Black appears in crystal ball
> 
> Now they all make sense until the
> last one.  What crystal ball?  Either
> this signals more major changes or
> it's being used in advertising or
> something that won't actually appear
> in the film.  Could be, I suppose.

Or that call sheet is having you on...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com



From stix4141 at hotmail.com  Tue Apr 15 02:40:39 2003
From: stix4141 at hotmail.com (stickbook41)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 02:40:39 -0000
Subject: DVD extras: Timeline
Message-ID: <b7frf7+arce@eGroups.com>

Does anyone know of any links that would allow someone (like myself) 
who is without a DVD-ROM drive to view the Timelines on the CoS 
Extras disc?  Is it transcribed anywhere?  Thanks!

Cheers!

-stickbook





From kristen_tort at hotmail.com  Tue Apr 15 04:58:04 2003
From: kristen_tort at hotmail.com (Kristen Tortorici)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 23:58:04 -0500
Subject: My 2c on the DVD
Message-ID: <F50YqSracSM1cRwSQQ80001b8a8@hotmail.com>



Cindy said:

>I think I am definitely spoiled by Peter Jackson and his LOTR DVDs, now 
>that
>is a man who knows what fans want <g>

I reply:
I totally agree. Peter Jackson spoiled me for "extra stuff" in DVD's 
forever!

Cindy said:
>The games are fine for the kids - I even played a few of them. But I really
>wanted more behind the scenes stuff - notice how they hardly have given us
>explanations on the special effects, sets, etc., on this film? How exactly 
>do
>they film quidditch?

I reply:
I'd like to know about Quidditch. About how much the actors do themselves 
before they are CGI'ed. I would also love to hear about how they made Hagrid 
appear so tall. Did they use methods similar to LOTR? There are a million 
questions I would love to have answered. Maybe they will do better with 
future DVDs.

Kristen

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail




From CLShannon at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 05:06:53 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:06:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My 2c on the DVD
Message-ID: <bf.3097c907.2bcced6d@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/14/03 9:59:26 PM, kristen_tort at hotmail.com writes:

<< I reply:
I'd like to know about Quidditch. About how much the actors do themselves 
before they are CGI'ed. I would also love to hear about how they made Hagrid 
appear so tall. Did they use methods similar to LOTR? There are a million 
questions I would love to have answered. Maybe they will do better with 
future DVDs. >>

Exactly ;-)  I do seem to remember seeing a video clip somewhere of an 
interview with Dan R and when they asked him about how quidditch is filmed, 
he said something along the lines of 'I can't tell you.' 
However, there is that one small video clip that many have seen of Dan and 
Tom on  a soundstage in quidditch gear and Dan is putting on equipment or 
something. I knew they had to do the actors' parts in a studio, but it would 
have been nice to have a nice long behind the scenes feature on the DVD 
explaining and demonstrating moments during  the filming process, quidditch 
included ;-)
And I saw Robbie Coltrane reply in much the same way about how they made 
Hagrid appear so big. Perhaps they are afraid of revealing film and effects 
secrets because they think younger kids will have their sense of fantasy 
ruined <g> Sounds strange, I know, but you never how their minds work ;-) 
I would think that really young kids wouldn't be watching interviews on 
webpages and watching behind the scenes specials anyway, so why not throw a 
few bones to the millions of adult fans? 
Cindy



From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 05:59:32 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 01:59:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DVD extras: Timeline
Message-ID: <6d.ed8e22a.2bccf9c4@aol.com>

Go to Harry potter yahoo!  Its on there.

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/15/03 12:36:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
stix4141 at hotmail.com writes:

> Does anyone know of any links that would allow someone (like myself) 
> who is without a DVD-ROM drive to view the Timelines on the CoS 
> Extras disc?  Is it transcribed anywhere?  Thanks!
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> -stickbook
> 



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 06:05:19 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 02:05:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My 2c on the DVD
Message-ID: <1f1.6a1d3b0.2bccfb1f@aol.com>

No its real simple!

Hagrid is so tall becuase they have him closer to the camara!  The other 
actors are farther away.  Its forced perspective.  When ever Hagrid is like 
walking its a giant that gets no credit.  When its Robbie then they have him 
and Hermoine closer to the camara and Ron and Harry farther back.  

For the Quidditch match they have green screens and there are seats on the 
brooms plus a hoslter to strap them into place like rock climbing gear!  

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/15/03 1:10:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
CLShannon at aol.com writes:

> 
> In a message dated 4/14/03 9:59:26 PM, kristen_tort at hotmail.com writes:
> 
> <<I reply:
> I'd like to know about Quidditch. About how much the actors do themselves 
> before they are CGI'ed. I would also love to hear about how they made 
> Hagrid 
> appear so tall. Did they use methods similar to LOTR? There are a million 
> questions I would love to have answered. Maybe they will do better with 
> future DVDs. >>
> 
> Exactly ;-)  I do seem to remember seeing a video clip somewhere of an 
> interview with Dan R and when they asked him about how quidditch is filmed, 
> 
> he said something along the lines of 'I can't tell you.' 
> However, there is that one small video clip that many have seen of Dan and 
> Tom on  a soundstage in quidditch gear and Dan is putting on equipment or 
> something. I knew they had to do the actors' parts in a studio, but it 
> would 
> have been nice to have a nice long behind the scenes feature on the DVD 
> explaining and demonstrating moments during  the filming process, quidditch 
> 
> included ;-)
> And I saw Robbie Coltrane reply in much the same way about how they made 
> Hagrid appear so big. Perhaps they are afraid of revealing film and effects 
> 
> secrets because they think younger kids will have their sense of fantasy 
> ruined <g> Sounds strange, I know, but you never how their minds work ;-) 
> I would think that really young kids wouldn't be watching interviews on 
> webpages and watching behind the scenes specials anyway, so why not throw a 
> 
> few bones to the millions of adult fans? 
> Cindy
> 



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




From erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 15 13:43:49 2003
From: erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com (erisedstraeh2002)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:43:49 -0000
Subject: Another Thought on the Mysterious Object in the Box
Message-ID: <b7h2al+i5pg@eGroups.com>

I had another thought on the object Borgin takes out of Lucius' box 
in the deleted CoS scene - if the moviemakers were being true to 
canon (I know, this isn't a sure thing!), Borgin wouldn't have known 
that there was anything unusual about the diary because he wouldn't 
have known that Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle.

Also, I wanted to note that I thought it was interesting that a 
number of the deleted scenes were in the trailer even though they 
didn't wind up in the movie (e.g., Hedwig fluttering down to sit by 
Harry at the lake; the Grey Lady sitting with Harry as he looks at 
the diary; the Anglia soaring past Big Ben).

~Phyllis




From jmd at jvf.co.uk  Tue Apr 15 13:58:22 2003
From: jmd at jvf.co.uk (Jeremy Davis)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:58:22 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Another Thought on the Mysterious Object in the Box
References: <b7h2al+i5pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001701c30357$157b5c30$0e010001@jmd2000>

> Also, I wanted to note that I thought it was interesting that a
> number of the deleted scenes were in the trailer even though they
> didn't wind up in the movie (e.g., Hedwig fluttering down to sit by
> Harry at the lake; the Grey Lady sitting with Harry as he looks at
> the diary; the Anglia soaring past Big Ben).

I may be just a bit picky and pedantic, but it's not Big Ben!! It's a clock
tower that is part of St Pancra's train station! :-)




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Apr 15 15:03:25 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:03:25 +0100
Subject: Catching Up (various CoS DVD issues)
In-Reply-To: <b7h2al+i5pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030415152106.00964f00@plum.cream.org>

Only the first of these will be attributed (my comment being only a 
nit-pick). The remainder are thoughts on various disparate subjects which 
I've had while browsing through the last month's-worth of posts (I don't 
have the time to read them all properly).

Phyllis wrote:

<big snip>

>Also, I wanted to note that I thought it was interesting that a
>number of the deleted scenes were in the trailer even though they
>didn't wind up in the movie (e.g., Hedwig fluttering down to sit by
>Harry at the lake; the Grey Lady sitting with Harry as he looks at
>the diary; the Anglia soaring past Big Ben).

It's not Big Ben. It's the Saint Pancras clock tower, literally next door 
to Kings Cross. (As I said many, many months ago while CoS was being 
filmed, I'm not surprised, as the Kings Cross forecourt is particularly 
boring and uninspiring at the best of times; last spring/summer - during 
filming - it was particularly bad, as there was major construction work 
going on in preparation for Saint Pancras becoming the London terminus for 
EuroStar.)

Besides, the car going past the clock tower *was* in the movie; the deleted 
scene only featured them nearly crashing into it. :-)

Re. deleted scenes in general: having acquired the DVD yesterday and made a 
bee-line for this feature, there are only two which I would have considered 
worthy of inclusion in the finished movie: the Hufflepuffs debating Harry's 
being the Heir, and the conversation at Hermione's bedside. As others have 
already said, the first put Harry's increasing popularity in some kind of 
context, and the othe second explained why he'd think of asking the Diary 
about the Chamber. The rest of the deleted scenes were little more than 
fluff (like several other scenes in the finished movie), the acting was 
execrable (same comment) and fully deserved to remain on the cutting-room 
floor.

Re. extra features, several people are going to find this strange: the one 
thing I do NOT need to see on any HP DVD is a feature on filming Quidditch, 
making Hagrid look tall, or the work on creating Dobby or other CGI 
elements. There are so many excellent features on these subjects (not least 
on the LOTR DVD) that to be perfectly honest, I find it exceptionall boring.

Seamless blue- (and green-) screen work has been with us for 25 years and 
more (anyone else remember Superman with the slogan "You'll believe a man 
can fly"?) and has become so common-place in all movies (not only SFX 
extravaganzas) that doing features on this subject is simply a waste of 
space. The same goes for the use of forced perspective/alternate 
actors/putting him on a box to make Coltrane look bigger than he is. LOTR 
has done the definitive feature on this subject (not to mention several 
documentaries about the history of cinema - apart from editing, forced 
perspective is the oldest SFX trick in the history of the medium and 
Georges Melies already blew people's minds away with it in the first decade 
of the 20th century).

Two "extras" shone out for me: one was the Kloves & JKR interview (which 
still could have been a lot better; several questions I'd like to have 
asked weren't raised) and the other was the "building of a scene" 
documentary which went through the process of starting with words on a page 
ad ending with the finished item, including set and costume design, etc.

As most people have said (including myself in the past), the "extra" I 
*really* want to see is a commentary. Ideally, I'd like three: one with 
Columbus and Heyman about the production, one with Kloves and JKR about the 
adaptation, and one with the kids full of filming anecdotes.

Re. DVD-Rom features. Having learned my lesson with the PS/SS DVD (and a 
few other titles), I refuse to install InterActual on my machine. In any 
case, all it does is to act as an interface for a load of HTML and 
ShockWave stuff, all of which can be viewed in any Internet browser. Just 
browse through the directories on the DVD disk and it's all there (although 
the latest Shockwave plugin is required which was quite a hefty download). 
I found the Timeline interesting in that it confirmed the assumptions most 
of the fandom has been making and clarified one or two of them. Nothing 
astonishing. although I did like the presentation.

Re. Widescreen -v- Fullscreen comparison. There's been a huge clamouring 
bother here and in other forums (and my email) for me to repeat the 
exercise I did with PS/SS. I'm afraid I won't be doing one without some 
help. As may have been pointed out before, no fullscreen version has been 
made available on DVD in the UK (although the VS is fullscreen). I have no 
intention of spending money and time on importing a fullscreen version from 
the USA or elsewhere as I'm unlikely ever to vierw it again. However,  if 
someone in the USA has bought the fullscreen version there and has the 
software and know-how to make screen captures, I'd be happy to do the 
comparison work.If anyone reading this want to do this, please email me.

That's enough for now. I'm sure I'll have more (un)related comments in due 
course.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who'd like to say that it's god to be home after a 
month away but would have to be lying to do so...:-)




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 16:47:26 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:47:26 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]David Copperfield
Message-ID: <ae.3da6f896.2bcd919e@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/9/2003 4:11:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> it was his role in David Copperfield that initially caught Chris Columbus's 
> eye.  If you haven't seen it, I strongly recommend it.  He was truly heart 
> breaking.  Amazing eyes.  My mom still refuses to watch it, no matter how I 
> try to bribe her. (He's too cute, too sad, etc.)
> 
> 

Where can I see this (in the US)?  I've looked in the video stores and 
library and not seen it.  I don't really want to BUY it, just watch it.  Any 
suggestions?

And somebody (Anna?) responded to my saying Dan turned "pink" on Regis as 
"that's called blushing" -- I'm American, I do know that, but in the books 
their ears turn pink on a regular basis, hence my saying he turned *pink* -- 
it was really cute (sorry I'm a bit behind -- I'm catching up on days' worth 
of posts -- just returned from a business trip).


Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr 15 17:01:31 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:01:31 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]David Copperfield
Message-ID: <33416126.1050426091973.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>


> Where can I see this (in the US)? I've looked in the video stores and 
> library and not seen it. I don't really want to BUY it, just watch 
> it. Any suggestions?<BR>

Hmm, tough one.  I bought the DVD from Amazon, you may be able to find the DVD 
rental from one of those DVD rental mailing places.  Not sure.  As far as 
buying it goes, I doubt I'll ever watch the entire thing again, but the first 
half with Daniel is priceless.  Really.  The McGonagall giving Harry Potter a 
bath is worth it all right there.  Okay, okay, I know, it's Maggie Smith as 
Betsey Trotwood giving Daniel Radcliffe as David Copperfield a bath.  
Especially since he didn't look ten, he looked about seven.

Richelle

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




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 15 17:24:38 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: David Copperfield
In-Reply-To: <ae.3da6f896.2bcd919e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030415172438.27919.qmail@web21108.mail.yahoo.com>

Lynda, in part:
> Where can I see this (in the US)? 
> I've looked in the video stores and 
> library and not seen it.  I don't
> really want to BUY it, just watch it. 
> Any suggestions?

Hmm...I saw it on PBS and at my local 
library.  Maybe your PBS station can 
tell you if they have any plans for 
re-running it in the future.  Also, 
have you asked the librarians if they 
can locate a copy for you in the 
various library systems that cooperate 
with each other?

Here's the entry from the Los Angeles 
Public Library with the full citation 
on this item:

http://catalog1.lapl.org/cgi-bin/
cw_cgi?fullRecord+2700+965+1699875+5+0

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com



From ololorien at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 15 17:09:30 2003
From: ololorien at yahoo.com (Ololorien)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:09:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]David Copperfield
In-Reply-To: <ae.3da6f896.2bcd919e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030415170930.66139.qmail@web20701.mail.yahoo.com>

I'm new to this group, so a big hello to everyone -
and to answer your question, I would recommend going
to the PBS website and ordering a copy of their video
catalog. I believe you can order it online or you can
call their 800 number to receive it (it's free). PBS
offers most of the programs that have appeared on
"Masterpiece Theatre" on VHS and DVD. If you prefer
not to purchase it, I suggest trying your local
library if they have a video collection. I know mine
carries many of the "Masterpiece Theatre" programs,
including Daniel's "David Copperfield".

You could also look at the "Masterpiece Theatre"
website, just to be sure they don't have a separate
catalog from the PBS one. I'm sorry, I don't know the
address off the top of my head, but putting
"Masterpiece Theatre" into any search engine should
bring it up for you.

Good luck! Sara

--- artsylynda at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 4/9/2003 4:11:20 AM Eastern
> Standard Time, 
> Where can I see this (in the US)?  I've looked in
> the video stores and 
> library and not seen it.  I don't really want to BUY
> it, just watch it.  Any 
> suggestions?


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com




From CLShannon at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 21:39:49 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 17:39:49 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]David Copperfield
Message-ID: <108.21c70243.2bcdd625@aol.com>

I got mine on Amazon and it was real easy - just put in a search on DVD for 
Daniel or David Copperfield and it comes up ;-)
It wasn't expensive either and I have always have had smooth transactions 
with Amazon.
It's well worth it, too, in my opinion ;-)
Cindy



From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Tue Apr 15 21:44:12 2003
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:44:12 -0000
Subject: dvd deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <b79rg7+m6ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7hufc+hmc8@eGroups.com>

Laura wrote:
<SNIP>
If I had to pick the one scene that should not have been deleted, I'd 
have to say the episode with the Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes.  It 
really emphasizes the relationship between Lucius and Draco, which is 
fairly deeply discussed in relation to both of the motives, 
characters, ect.  Any other candidates?


I reply:
I agree with you here as I really enjoyed this scene too, although I 
can understand why some people see it as mischaracterisation. However 
there is one other thing that puzzles me about the deletion of this 
scene and it puzzled me the very first time I saw the film, why did 
they favour the scene with Harry and the Hand of Glory OVER the scene 
of him hiding from the Malfoys? It seemed like a bit of a strange 
choice unless there is a reason behind it. There are certain other 
scenes like this in the movie, where something 'insignificant' has 
been favoured over something that seems to be more important 
(although the others are a lot more subtle) and it just seems 
interesting when taken with JK and Kloves' comment on the interview 
about there being a certain aspect of the books that JK said HAD to 
be included for something else to make sense later in the series.

HOLLYDAZE!!!





From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 15 23:45:17 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:45:17 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Another Thought on the Mysterious Object in the Box
Message-ID: <1c0.8347114.2bcdf38d@aol.com>

Some of the deleted scenes were on the Movie Trailers!!  But not in the 
movies!

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/15/03 9:48:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> I had another thought on the object Borgin takes out of Lucius' box 
> in the deleted CoS scene - if the moviemakers were being true to 
> canon (I know, this isn't a sure thing!), Borgin wouldn't have known 
> that there was anything unusual about the diary because he wouldn't 
> have known that Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle.
> 
> Also, I wanted to note that I thought it was interesting that a 
> number of the deleted scenes were in the trailer even though they 
> didn't wind up in the movie (e.g., Hedwig fluttering down to sit by 
> Harry at the lake; the Grey Lady sitting with Harry as he looks at 
> the diary; the Anglia soaring past Big Ben).
> 
> ~Phyllis



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Apr 16 00:45:43 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:45:43 +0100
Subject: Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes
In-Reply-To: <b7hufc+hmc8@eGroups.com>
References: <b79rg7+m6ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030416012747.00961c80@plum.cream.org>

Hollydaze wrote:

<snip>

>there is one other thing that puzzles me about the deletion of this
>scene and it puzzled me the very first time I saw the film, why did
>they favour the scene with Harry and the Hand of Glory OVER the scene
>of him hiding from the Malfoys? It seemed like a bit of a strange
>choice unless there is a reason behind it. There are certain other
>scenes like this in the movie, where something 'insignificant' has
>been favoured over something that seems to be more important
>(although the others are a lot more subtle) and it just seems
>interesting when taken with JK and Kloves' comment on the interview
>about there being a certain aspect of the books that JK said HAD to
>be included for something else to make sense later in the series.

I've never doubted that the Hand of Glory will make a re-appearance. I 
suspect that Kloves's script giving Malfoy Jr. kleptomaniac tendencies is 
somehow connected to this (viz. the Malfoys' conversation in the book). I 
can just imagine the conversation Kloves had with JKR: "I have a feeling 
you're making Draco out to be a bit of a thief. D'you mind if I give him a 
couple of scenes along those lines?" JKR replies with a snigger and agrees....

:-)

I can understand why Columbus chose not to include the Malfoys at B&B, 
though. In some interview or another he explicitly said that he chose to 
delay Lucius's introduction until Flourish & Blotts. I think I agree with 
him (for a change...).

Introducing Lucius and Draco in a scene dominated by the Weasleys as a 
family unit and juxtaposing the Malfoys' relationship with that of Arthur 
and his sons (and Harry) is very punchy. Introducing him in the context of 
Dark Magic and the Muggle Protection Act is IMO unnecessary as he 
immediately comes across as a nasty piece of work. Viewers can draw their 
own conclusions as to his affiliations from that, and Harry's assertion 
that he put the diary in Ginny's cauldron more mysterious in the absence of 
any previous connection between him and Dark objects.

However, what I don't understand from the final cut of the movie is that 
although Harry does look at the Hand of Glory's label, we viewers are not 
made privy to what it said, despite a close-up being included in the 
deleted scene...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who would like to thank Richelle for offering help 
with full screen version pictures, further to a previous message...




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 01:27:34 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:27:34 -0000
Subject: 'Hand of Glory' info....
Message-ID: <b7ibi7+2tj7@eGroups.com>

>From some light research that I've done on the `hand of glory' (how 
pathetic am I?) ? It seems to be mentioned in folklore, as an item a 
robber would have to help him rob a house. I read that a hanged mans 
hand (right or left) was cut off & covered with herbs & dried. 
Supposedly when the hand is lit with candles, made from the fat of 
the deceased and a certain rhyme was said all the inhabitants of the 
house would fall asleep. The only way to put out the candles was by 
throwing milk over the flames. It seems to be a piece of folklore 
told thru the British Isles ? not that I ever heard it growing up.

Something else I found -- The term the "hand of glory" is believed 
to be derived from the French "main de glorie" or "mandrogore" and 
be related to the legends of the mandrake. The mandrake plant was 
believed to grow under the gallows of the hanged man.

I have no idea how this will play in additional films or books.





From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 03:02:25 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:02:25 -0000
Subject: Any New Pics??
Message-ID: <b7ih41+retk@eGroups.com>

Any new pics coming out of the filming for the PoA?




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Wed Apr 16 10:22:46 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 06:22:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS
Message-ID: <1dc.7988213.2bce88f6@aol.com>

After driving my husband nuts all week I *finally* got the movie from Amazon 
today! And my emotions went from dying to see the movie to actually kinda 
dreading it. Yes, I am one of those annoying people who go crazy when the 
movie is nothing like the book. But knowing what to expect from the first 
movie, and from everyone here, I made myself a promise. I reminded myself 
that this is a movie, and probably a wonderful movie in it's own right, but 
to remember that it's *not* the book, and to try to not watch it with any 
expectations and I'd hopefully love it. Well, I have to admit it worked, I 
loved the movie. I'm sure I drove my husband nuts with my constant 'Hmm, they 
cut soandso out.' One example being the Hufflepuffs in the library. Which 
they added to the cut scenes. There are only two things that bug me really. 
First of being in the beginning of the movie, Harry had his trunk and all his 
school stuff in his room. The Dursleys hated Hogsworth, and always insisted 
on locking up his stuff in the broom closet. And now Fred and George won't 
know where to find Harry's room in GoF. And lastly when Harry wound up in 
Knockburn Alley, apparently only Hermione had gone looking for him, everyone 
else was on line in the book store.

~Faith~


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




From jmd at jvf.co.uk  Wed Apr 16 12:12:53 2003
From: jmd at jvf.co.uk (Jeremy Davis)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:12:53 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Catching Up (various CoS DVD issues)
References: <4.2.0.58.20030415152106.00964f00@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <081b01c30411$82edbf00$0e010001@jmd2000>

> Re. DVD-Rom features. Having learned my lesson with the PS/SS DVD (and a
> few other titles), I refuse to install InterActual on my machine. In any
> case, all it does is to act as an interface for a load of HTML and
> ShockWave stuff, all of which can be viewed in any Internet browser. Just
> browse through the directories on the DVD disk and it's all there
(although
> the latest Shockwave plugin is required which was quite a hefty download).
> I found the Timeline interesting in that it confirmed the assumptions most
> of the fandom has been making and clarified one or two of them. Nothing
> astonishing. although I did like the presentation.

If you only have the HP DVD I'd agree with you and not bother installing
Interactual, but try looking at the Matrix and Star Wars DVDs. On these DVDs
you can watch the DVD with extra commentaries downloaded off the web for
example, plus a load more. The HP DVD extras are pretty sub standard so
there is really no point in installing the Interactual Player.




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Apr 16 16:47:48 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 17:47:48 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bac082abdbf2@[195.184.228.115]>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030416173109.0098ade0@plum.cream.org>

Just a couple of nitpicks on Nicholas's comments:

>Hermione; pure RP

I'd say it's more than that. It borders on "Royal" English, or in any event 
aristocratic RP. I must admit that it's something about Emma (not just 
Hermione) that turns me off. She sounds just a little *too* stand-offish.

I'd add that an interesting comparison between Dan, Rupert and Emma is the 
way they say "Myrtle". On one occasion, Rupert stops just short of an 
almost-cockney glottal stop. Dan seems to be trying to e-n-u-n-c-i-a-t-e in 
the worst stagey tradition (which is pretty close to his normal speech 
patterns, though, so he's allowed), while Emma really drags out the first 
syllable.

>McGonagall; Scottish (though MS is normally fairly RP)

"Fairly"?!? Dame Maggie's speech patterns should be used in RP textbooks! :-)

>Lucius; RP with an aristocratic tinge (naturally JI is a Londoner by accent)

Actually, JI's *real* natural voice is Scouse (he's from Liverpool). JI's 
RP is 100% fake thanks to his years at the Central School of Speech and 
Drama. Of course,  his RP has become entirely second-nature and it's the 
way he speaks normally, but I have heard him talk while (really, as opposed 
to be pretending to be) drunk  once and his Liverpool twang became more and 
more apparent.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard who spoke broad Brummie until the age of 12, but 
replaced it with RP due to peer pressure rather than learning.




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 19:03:37 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:03:37 -0000
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
Message-ID: <b7k9e9+kleb@eGroups.com>

 For those who listened to the interview w/ JK and Kloves...Did 
anyone notice when he mentioned something in the Chamber that will 
come into play later on in the series??

 This is just a guess, but do you think that could possibly be the 
large tunnel/statue of Salazar Slytherin's face??




From jenw118 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 19:23:09 2003
From: jenw118 at yahoo.com (Jennifer R. Wilson)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 12:23:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
In-Reply-To: <b7k9e9+kleb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030416192309.34658.qmail@web14001.mail.yahoo.com>


daughterofthedust wrote: 

For those who listened to the interview w/ JK and Kloves...Did 
anyone notice when he mentioned something in the Chamber that will 
come into play later on in the series??

This is just a guess, but do you think that could possibly be the 
large tunnel/statue of Salazar Slytherin's face??

My response:

I think that it's probably something we know.  I think that it's Dobby/the house elves.

I'm thinking that because the house elves come into play in GoF and I'm sure we'll see more of them in later books as well :) 

Jennifer



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From sydenmill at msn.com  Wed Apr 16 19:27:30 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:27:30 -0000
Subject: Harry and the Hand of Glory
Message-ID: <b7kar2+s5cn@eGroups.com>

Hollydaze wrote:

>there is one other thing that puzzles me about the deletion of this
>scene and it puzzled me the very first time I saw the film, why did
>they favour the scene with Harry and the Hand of Glory OVER the scene
>of him hiding from the Malfoys? It seemed like a bit of a strange
>choice unless there is a reason behind it. There are certain other
>scenes like this in the movie, where something 'insignificant' has
>been favoured over something that seems to be more important
>(although the others are a lot more subtle) and it just seems
>interesting when taken with JK and Kloves' comment on the interview
>about there being a certain aspect of the books that JK said HAD to
>be included for something else to make sense later in the series.

My take:
Yes, yes, yes! Hollydaze, I, too, watched the movie (COS) with that 
information in mind, especially when something in the movie just 
didn't make sense, or, was different from the book and driven home by 
a sledge hammer. (Draco being a thief, Ron's cruelty in the Chamber 
towards an incapacitated Lockhart, affection for Hagrid in the final 
scene, etc.)

One of the biggest things that hit me in COS -- did anyone else 
notice the way Harry kept touching everyone's hands all the way 
through the movie?  First, he slipped his hand into the Hand of 
Glory, then he held hands with Hermoine in the hospital, later he 
kept touching Ginny's hand in the Chamber to see if she had died -- 
not once but a couple of times, and so on. None of this hand-
holding/touching was in the book -- yet, for me, there seemed to have 
been a big emphasis placed on it in the movie. 

Did these things HAVE to be there for some reason? Is there some 
magic in Harry's touch we are supposed to be foreshadowed about?

Bohcoo






From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 20:04:23 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:04:23 -0000
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
In-Reply-To: <20030416192309.34658.qmail@web14001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b7kd07+13h6@eGroups.com>


> <snip>
> My response:
> 
> I think that it's probably something we know.  I think that it's 
Dobby/the house elves.
> 
> I'm thinking that because the house elves come into play in GoF 
and I'm sure we'll see more of them in later books as well :) 
> 
> Jennifer
> 
 But he specificly said, and perhaps I misread or misheard him but 
something in The Chamber...as in that set.




From jenw118 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 20:12:25 2003
From: jenw118 at yahoo.com (Jennifer R. Wilson)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
In-Reply-To: <b7kd07+13h6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030416201225.96950.qmail@web14002.mail.yahoo.com>



daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com> wrote:
But he specificly said, and perhaps I misread or misheard him but 
something in The Chamber...as in that set.

<<<I reviewed that part, and you're correct.  I'm guessing maybe a battle with Voldemort on the face of Slytherin?  Sorry for the prior mistake  Jennifer


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Wed Apr 16 20:19:48 2003
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:19:48 +0100
Subject: Harry and the Hand of Glory
Message-ID: <002401c30455$87e3f260$558f8351@j0dhe>

> >  I wrote:
> >
> >there is one other thing that puzzles me about the deletion of this
> >scene and it puzzled me the very first time I saw the film, why did
> >they favour the scene with Harry and the Hand of Glory OVER the scene
> >of him hiding from the Malfoys? It seemed like a bit of a strange
> >choice unless there is a reason behind it. There are certain other
> >scenes like this in the movie, where something 'insignificant' has
> >been favoured over something that seems to be more important
> >(although the others are a lot more subtle) and it just seems
> >interesting when taken with JK and Kloves' comment on the interview
> >about there being a certain aspect of the books that JK said HAD to
> >be included for something else to make sense later in the series.
> 
> Bohcoo replied:
> Yes, yes, yes! Hollydaze, I, too, watched the movie (COS) with that 
> information in mind, especially when something in the movie just 
> didn't make sense, or, was different from the book and driven home by 
> a sledge hammer. (Draco being a thief, Ron's cruelty in the Chamber 
> towards an incapacitated Lockhart, affection for Hagrid in the final 
> scene, etc.)

Hmm, I'm not sure about those bits actually. I was referring more to things that ARE in the book but had a different spin on them in the film. Although Harry is not grabbed by the Hand of glory in the book, the Hand itself is still there, just made less significant. Basically any importance that it MAY have was hidden in the Malfoy/Borgin conversation. 

The points you've made are things that are totally different from the book, they've been added in, and unless, like the added scene in the first film, they are said to be JK approved -which I think is unlikely- then I don't think they'll have any major significance (if they did have, surely they would have been mentioned in the books wouldn't they?) Remember that JK said it was something that needed to be kept, not something new that needed to be added.


HOLLYDAZE!!!


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




From feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com  Wed Apr 16 20:17:13 2003
From: feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com (Felicia Rickmann)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:17:13 -0000
Subject: Harry and the Hand of Glory
In-Reply-To: <b7kar2+s5cn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7kdo9+hgbd@eGroups.com>

A friend commented to me how the Hand of Glory remains although the 
treatment changes a little (i.e. the label is not ultimately shown in 
the final film) and the link to the "Main de Gloire" or Mandragora as 
the French call it.

Possible link?

Felicia




From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Wed Apr 16 20:47:21 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:47:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...
Message-ID: <114.21fc52f1.2bcf1b59@aol.com>


<<But he specificly said, and perhaps I misread or misheard him but 
something in The Chamber...as in that set.>>

Yeah, he did; I remember wondering about that. Perhaps he meant the sword? It 
was *in* the Chamber of Secrets, after all, even if it left there w/ Harry. 
And stuff happened with it in there...maybe how Fawkes healed Harry will be 
important again in the future? Something to ponder. 

Melly



From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Apr 16 20:32:37 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:32:37 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b00bac362b907fc@[217.154.252.113]>

Steve said:-

>If you can find a interview with Tom, I would really be interested in
>hearing your take on his normal speaking voice which I find very
>difficult to understand.

Judging by the DVD interview, and one other thing that I saw on TV when CoS
came out, his accent is naturally London...like RG, not particularly
strong, but plainly from there. I know what you mean, though; Tom's
delivery is often rather rushed, which makes him difficult to understand. I
found the same with the scene in the Slytherin common room.

Regards,
Nicholas





From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Apr 16 20:32:38 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:32:38 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b01bac3637a3548@[217.154.252.113]>

Me previously:-

>>McGonagall; Scottish (though MS is normally fairly RP)
>
GulPlum's nitpick:-

>"Fairly"?!? Dame Maggie's speech patterns should be used in RP textbooks! :-)

I would have agreed with you until I saw the DVD interview, and was
slightly bemused by a certain London twang which I had never heard in her
voice before. Of course, she rarely gives interviews, so I doubt I have
really heard her true accent much.

Watch the interview; there is a shade of London in her 'a' sounds; when she
says 'dangerous game', 'play' and 'great', the 'a' veres towards the
Cockney 'eye'.

BTW, I saw MS a couple of months ago on stage in London in the two-hander
'Breath of Life' with Judi Dench. An awesome performance. Her accent in
that was definitely RP.

Me again:-
>>Lucius; RP with an aristocratic tinge (naturally JI is a Londoner by accent)
>

GulPlum:-
>Actually, JI's *real* natural voice is Scouse (he's from Liverpool). JI's
>RP is 100% fake thanks to his years at the Central School of Speech and
>Drama. Of course,  his RP has become entirely second-nature and it's the
>way he speaks normally, but I have heard him talk while (really, as opposed
>to be pretending to be) drunk  once and his Liverpool twang became more and
>more apparent.

I believe you. But listen to him on the DVD...no Scouse to be heard (though
presumably he wasn't drunk on this occasion :-)), but a certain choppiness
which originates in London. In the interview, listen to the words
'character' and 'ruthlessness'. Possibly he picked the London up with his
RP during his studies!

As I said before, these things are very slight, and only obsessives like me
would probably notice them.

In my first list, I forgot to mention Filch, who has a strong London
(Cockney) accent. Since compiling that list, I have also watched the extra
scenes again. Colin is really RP-moving-towards-aristocratic, and, to be
frank, it would be extremely unlikely that a boy who spoke like that would
have a father who is a milkman...he would be more likely to own the dairy!

Regards,
Nicholas





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 23:12:40 2003
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:12:40 -0000
Subject: Lockhart's house
Message-ID: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>

I'm watching the movie for the umpteenth time and I always wonder 
what house Lockhart was in.  Any ideas?  He's not brave (not to me, 
anyway), would you guys consider him cunning enough for Slytherin?  
he doesn't seem smart enough for Ravenclaw, so I lean more towards 
Hufflepuff.  What do you think?


Alora




From pattigray at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 16 23:34:58 2003
From: pattigray at yahoo.com (pattigray)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:34:58 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01bac3637a3548@[217.154.252.113]>
Message-ID: <b7kpb2+fvlp@eGroups.com>

First I'd like to say I'm really enjoying the discussion on accents.
I'm American, so even though I can't tell where most of the actors 
are from I can certainly hear the different accents. The one that 
really stuck out was Draco's, especially the difference from the 
first movie to the second. There were times when I couldn't 
understand him at all (in COS).

I agree Colin didn't sound like a milkman's son at all. In the 
deleted scene he spoke very fast, but was quite understandable. Also 
had some trouble understanding Seamus in both movies. I'll have to 
watch the interviews again, now that I know a little more about the 
actors.

PJG




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 16 23:53:02 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:53:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be i...
Message-ID: <22.38d1a371.2bcf46de@aol.com>

I noticed that too!!  Remember she did say some room will be important in the 
future!

Kyle Longbottom 


In a message dated 4/16/03 3:05:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> For those who listened to the interview w/ JK and Kloves...Did 
> anyone notice when he mentioned something in the Chamber that will 
> come into play later on in the series??
> 
> This is just a guess, but do you think that could possibly be the 
> large tunnel/statue of Salazar Slytherin's face??
> 



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 16 23:54:20 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:54:20 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be i...
Message-ID: <1aa.13239641.2bcf472c@aol.com>

She said it would be a room which we all now

Kyle Longbottom 


In a message dated 4/16/03 3:25:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
jenw118 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> 
> daughterofthedust wrote: 
> 
> For those who listened to the interview w/ JK and Kloves...Did 
> anyone notice when he mentioned something in the Chamber that will 
> come into play later on in the series??
> 
> This is just a guess, but do you think that could possibly be the 
> large tunnel/statue of Salazar Slytherin's face??
> 
> My response:
> 
> I think that it's probably something we know.  I think that it's Dobby/the 
> house elves.
> 
> I'm thinking that because the house elves come into play in GoF and I'm 
> sure we'll see more of them in later books as well :) 
> 
> Jennifer



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




From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com  Wed Apr 16 23:23:17 2003
From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 18:23:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house
References: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3E9DE5E5.17D757D8@pacificpuma.com>



alora wrote:
> 
> I'm watching the movie for the umpteenth time and I always wonder
> what house Lockhart was in.  Any ideas?  He's not brave (not to me,
> anyway), would you guys consider him cunning enough for Slytherin?
> he doesn't seem smart enough for Ravenclaw, so I lean more towards
> Hufflepuff.  What do you think?
> 
> Alora
> 

How do we know he went to Hoggwarts?  Maybe he was schooled elsewhere.
There are other schools and for all we know, he might have had parents
who traveled, thus he might have been schooled anywhere?

We don't have enough data on him to assume he was a Hoggwart's student
at all.  He is only good at memory charms and this would have been clear
if he went to Hoggwarts, making him possibly unfit to even apply as a
teacher?

Jazmyn




From sydenmill at msn.com  Thu Apr 17 00:16:25 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:16:25 -0000
Subject: Harry and the Hand of Glory
In-Reply-To: <002401c30455$87e3f260$558f8351@j0dhe>
Message-ID: <b7krop+kkif@eGroups.com>

---  
> The points you've made are things that are totally different from 
the book, they've been added in, and unless, like the added scene in 
the first film, they are said to be JK approved -which I think is 
unlikely- then I don't think they'll have any major significance (if 
they did have, surely they would have been mentioned in the books 
wouldn't they?) Remember that JK said it was something that needed to 
be kept, not something new that needed to be added.
> 
> 
> HOLLYDAZE!!!


My response:
The points I made were not added but were, in fact, in the books --
except the Hagrid-worship at the end. I didn't understand why that 
was played that way at all. Everything else was indeed in the books, 
just in a more subtle way: 

In the movie, it must have been important to highlight Ron's violence 
or cruelty, having him whack the side of Lockhart's head with a rock 
when he was already incapacitated on the ground. In the book, this 
message was relayed as follows: (COS, ch. 16) "There was a dull thud 
and a loud 'ow!' It sounded as though Ron had just kicked Lockhart in 
the shins. . . There was another thud and another 'ow!' from behind 
the rocks..." 

Further, in SS, ch. 16:  "At the foot of the first set of stairs, 
they spotted Mrs. Norris skulking near the top. 'Oh, let's kick her, 
just this once,' whispered Ron in Harry's ear, but Harry shook his 
head."

Ron has a cruel streak, it seems, and the movie made a point of 
showing that.

(JKR seems to love the offhanded, casual mention of extremely vital 
clues -- that we don't "get" when we first see them. A perfect 
example of this is in the very first chapter of GOF when Voldemort 
tells Wormtail, "I will allow you to perform an essential task for 
me, one that many of my followers would give their right hands to 
perform...")

As far as Draco being shown to be a thief, in the movie he rips a 
page from a bookstore volume and stuffs it into his pocket and 
pockets the little package during the Slytherin common room scene. 
Overkill to establish the apparently important information covered 
thus in the book:  

"'Ah, the Hand of Glory!' said Mr. Borgin, abandoning Mr. Malfoy's 
list and sacurrying over to Draco. "...Best friend of thieves and 
plunderers. Your son has fine taste, sir.' 
'I hope my son will amount to more than a thief or plunderer, 
Borgin,' said Mr. Malfoy coldly.

Many facinating theories as to the "Draco the Klepto" theme have been 
set forth earlier in these discussions. I, for one, however, will not 
be surprised to discover Draco as a "plunderer" in later installments.


Bohcoo  







From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 00:58:27 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:58:27 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Catching Up (various CoS DVD issues)
Message-ID: <189.18019994.2bcf5633@aol.com>

If you want to play the card game you need the interactual player and does 
anybody know how to work it??




In a message dated 4/16/03 8:14:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jmd at jvf.co.uk 
writes:

> 
> >Re. DVD-Rom features. Having learned my lesson with the PS/SS DVD (and a
> >few other titles), I refuse to install InterActual on my machine. In any
> >case, all it does is to act as an interface for a load of HTML and
> >ShockWave stuff, all of which can be viewed in any Internet browser. Just
> >browse through the directories on the DVD disk and it's all there
> (although
> >the latest Shockwave plugin is required which was quite a hefty download).
> >I found the Timeline interesting in that it confirmed the assumptions most
> >of the fandom has been making and clarified one or two of them. Nothing
> >astonishing. although I did like the presentation.
> 
> If you only have the HP DVD I'd agree with you and not bother installing
> Interactual, but try looking at the Matrix and Star Wars DVDs. On these 
> DVDs
> you can watch the DVD with extra commentaries downloaded off the web for
> example, plus a load more. The HP DVD extras are pretty sub standard so
> there is really no point in installing the Interactual Player.
> 



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




From trisha.masen at verizon.net  Thu Apr 17 02:00:01 2003
From: trisha.masen at verizon.net (Trisha Masen)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:00:01 -0400
Subject: SHIP: CoS video
References: <1050497748.364.22531.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001a01c30485$0ee6bcf0$0100a8c0@s0023453270>

New here.  First post.  Please be gentle.

I know much has been made of the comment JKR made about Chris Columbus
alluding to possible romantic things in the movie that she doesn't
touch until GoF.  I'm mainly a H/G and R/Hr shipper, so it pains me to
say these things.

The Harry/Hermione "touches" include more than just the enthusiastic
hug at the end.  Having watched the DVD for the second time just
tonight, I noted that twice while Hermione is Petrified, Harry is
stroking her hand.  The first time is when she is first brought to the
hospital (when the Quidditch game is cancelled) - Harry takes the
upraised hand (Hermione's right, I think) and strokes it.  The second
is when he and Ron visit post-Aragog.  Harry strokes her left hand
and, in the process, finds the paper with the basilisk information on
it.

So, I'm reading (or should I say "seeing") the SHIPs go either way:
Harry/Hermione or Ron/Hermione.  I know JKR's quote about the very
"platonic friends" but who's to know if she meant for all seven books.

Thanks for listening.

~Trisha Masen~
http://www.trishamasen.net/trisha.htm







From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Apr 17 02:11:46 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 03:11:46 +0100
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be
  in play later...
In-Reply-To: <b7kd07+13h6@eGroups.com>
References: <20030416192309.34658.qmail@web14001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030417030530.00976c70@plum.cream.org>

daughterofthedust wrote:

>  But he specificly said, and perhaps I misread or misheard him but
>something in The Chamber...as in that set.

Err... sorry to stop this conversation dead, but he said "something in 
Chamber...". He did NOT say "in *the* Chamber".

Please note that throughout the conversation, Kloves refers to the movie 
exclusively as "Chamber" (rather than "Chamber of Secrets", which is how 
JKR refers to it, for instance).

In other words, just as JKR said during the cinema premiere interview, 
there's something in the book that becomes important. Whilst it may be 
something about the chamber itself, nothing in the interview limits the 
comment to that.

My money at present is on the Hand of Glory as one element...




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Thu Apr 17 02:24:51 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:24:51 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house
In-Reply-To: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>
References: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <41107288048.20030416192451@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Wednesday, April 16, 2003, 4:12:40 PM, chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com wrote:

>  What do you think?

Lockhart loyal and hardworking? <g>

I'm not convinced.

Ambitious and using any means to get what
he wants sounds more right to me.

Though as somebody else said, he may have never gone to
Hogwarts, and other schools may have different systems.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 17 02:33:53 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:33:53 -0000
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030417030530.00976c70@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <b7l3qh+lq7e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> daughterofthedust wrote:
> In other words, just as JKR said during the cinema premiere 
interview, there's something in the book that becomes important. 
Whilst it may be something about the chamber itself, nothing in the 
interview limits the comment to that.
> 
> My money at present is on the Hand of Glory as one element...

Me: I think it's the sword, Dumbledore said that "only a true 
Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat," (COS p334). I 
think that we will later learn that Harry is the last true 
Gryffindor heir (many others suggest this), but then again I could 
be reading too much into that statement & only wishing that that is 
what Dumbledore tells Harry in book 5.




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 03:18:13 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 23:18:13 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...
Message-ID: <84.edae24b.2bcf76f5@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/16/2003 4:08:03 PM Central Standard Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:

> But he specificly said, and perhaps I misread or misheard him but 
> something in The Chamber...as in that set.
> 
> 

I just replayed it Kloves said "I will sometimes ask Jo. I will say you know 
this detail You just seem to have cast just a bit more light on this in this 
scene than the other details. Sometimes I'm wrong but often she will say 'no 
that is going to play'. There is one thing in Chamber, actually that Jo 
indicated will play later in the series."

In Chamber not in *the* chamber.  Meaning it could be anything from SHIPping 
issues to swords to Dobby to any possible long term of the diary on Ginny.

Melissa


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 04:25:26 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 00:25:26 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Will they always be the "Harry Potter Kids"
Message-ID: <116.21dbf293.2bcf86b6@aol.com>

Seeing what there doing with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban proably 
not!

Kyle Longbottom




In a message dated 4/9/03 4:08:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:

> It depends on them and the development (or lack thereof) of their 
> talent...As well as luck.
> 
> Maculay Culkin has not faired well, IMO because he can't act, though 
> his brother mos' def has skills.
> 
> Elijah Wood has fared better because, IMO he does have the skills...
> 
> Then there are the inexplicabled bad turns of luck... Henry Thomas 
> was brilliant in ET, however we've seen little of him, aside from 
> Legends of the Fall.
> 
> 



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




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 10:12:55 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 06:12:55 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...
Message-ID: <12e.28168c2b.2bcfd827@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/16/03 10:35:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
geri510 at yahoo.com writes:

> Me: I think it's the sword, Dumbledore said that "only a true 
> Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat," (COS p334). I 
> think that we will later learn that Harry is the last true 
> Gryffindor heir (many others suggest this), but then again I could 
> be reading too much into that statement &only wishing that that is 
> what Dumbledore tells Harry in book 5.
> 

Harry being the Gryffindor heir would explain better why Voldemort tried to 
kill a helpless baby. I'd always just assumed it was because he was evil and 
that never sat with me very well. I always felt that there had to be more to 
it than that. Perhaps there were prophecies about Harry, or the Gryffindor 
heir bringing Voldemort down, and he decided to nip it in the butt.

~Faith~


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




From jeanico at securenet.net  Thu Apr 17 14:46:26 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:46:26 -0000
Subject: Hands...
Message-ID: <b7meo2+6eq0@eGroups.com>

Good morning!
Somebody in this group recently brought up an interesting point and 
I had the same question...why does the COS movie underline so much 
what appears to be Harry's fascination with hands? Whether it be 
with the Hand of Glory, with Ginny, with Hermione or even with the 
Hufflepuff student who gets petrified next to Nick (Harry "plays" 
with the guy's fingertips). Someone must have been trying to draw 
attention to this in the movie because the hand touching ritual is 
filmed more than once in close-up...and it's been driving me nuts!
Also, I know I am being fussy, but why doesn't Harry shake Ginny 
when she is lying on the floor in the chamber? How natural is it for 
him to fall on his knees beside her and then not touch her (aside 
from her hand)?
I guess we'll never know for sure what the film makers had in mind, 
but I would like to know what other fans are thinking about this! Am 
I the only one who finds these things a little strange? 
Nicole         
Who still thinks the HP movies are pretty fabulous as long as they 
are not compared too closely to the books!




From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Thu Apr 17 17:22:27 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:22:27 -0000
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...
In-Reply-To: <12e.28168c2b.2bcfd827@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7mnsj+e1np@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, JessaDrow at a... wrote:
>Perhaps there were prophecies about Harry, or the Gryffindor 
> heir bringing Voldemort down, and [Voldemort] decided to nip it in 
>the butt.

OUCH!!

He tried to nip it in the bud, perhaps, but ended up only nipping 
Harry's forehead :-) Sorry, I just had to say that.

Anne U
("excuse me while I kiss this guy" - Jimi Hendrix...not)




From suzloua at hotmail.com  Thu Apr 17 18:02:26 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 19:02:26 +0100
Subject: Heir of Gryffindor (was Re: Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...)
Message-ID: <Sea1-DAV15tosJ3Ih7j000017a1@hotmail.com>

Faith said:
Harry being the Gryffindor heir would explain better why Voldemort tried to 
kill a helpless baby. I'd always just assumed it was because he was evil and 
that never sat with me very well. I always felt that there had to be more to 
it than that. Perhaps there were prophecies about Harry, or the Gryffindor 
heir bringing Voldemort down, and he decided to nip it in the butt.

And I say gleefully:
And who announced the Gryffindor heir gonna get ya prophecy? Why, Trelawney, of course! That was her first prophecy, that one of the line of Gryffindor would kill one of the line of Slytherin. Hence when he needed to kill James and Harry, because the Potters were once the Gryffindors. Poor ol' Lil just got caught up in the firing line.

Sorry, this Gryffindor-heir/Trelawney-prediction thing has always been one of my pet theories. Any excuse to stick it into conversation... :)

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt


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




From CLShannon at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 18:30:19 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:30:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Heir of Gryffindor (was Re: Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...)
Message-ID: <1e0.6f8bb63.2bd04cbb@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/17/03 11:26:03 AM, suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

<< Faith said:
Harry being the Gryffindor heir would explain better why Voldemort tried to 
kill a helpless baby. I'd always just assumed it was because he was evil and 
that never sat with me very well. I always felt that there had to be more to 
it than that. Perhaps there were prophecies about Harry, or the Gryffindor 
heir bringing Voldemort down, and he decided to nip it in the butt. >>

There's also something that hasn't been answered yet either and that is 'how' 
did Harry survive? It must be something inherent in his being, not something 
conscious, since he was an unaware infant when he somehow managed to throw 
the killing curse back at Voldemort and almost kill him. Harry is no ordinary 
wizard, that's for sure, but we haven't been told what it is about his very 
physical makeup that made him able to do that as an infant. And it was 
definitely an unconscious act, since he was too young to do anything like 
that consciously.
I, for one, hope that Book 5 explains this ;-)
Cindy



From rainbow at rainbowbrite.net  Thu Apr 17 18:59:20 2003
From: rainbow at rainbowbrite.net (Katy Cartee)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:59:20 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Heir of Gryffindor (was Re: Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will ...)
References: <1e0.6f8bb63.2bd04cbb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c30513$75fedba0$2302a8c0@sysonline.com>

Cindy wrote:

> There's also something that hasn't been answered yet either and that is 'how' 
> did Harry survive? 

Actually, that already has been explained. His mother sacrificed herself for him and that protected him with a sort of "love shield" so that he was not killed.

~Katy~
Live in the southeast USA? Join the new HP4GU-Southeast-US regional group!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-Southeast-US/

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




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Thu Apr 17 19:25:06 2003
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 19:25:06 -0000
Subject: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thing in the Chamber that will be in play later...
In-Reply-To: <b7l3qh+lq7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7mv2j+ont@eGroups.com>

> > daughterofthedust wrote:
> > In other words, just as JKR said during the cinema premiere 
> > interview, there's something in the book that becomes important. 
> > Whilst it may be something about the chamber itself, nothing in 
> > the interview limits the comment to that.
> > 
> > My money at present is on the Hand of Glory as one element...


> geri510: I think it's the sword, Dumbledore said that "only a true 
> Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat," (COS p334). I 
> think that we will later learn that Harry is the last true 
> Gryffindor heir (many others suggest this), but then again I could 
> be reading too much into that statement & only wishing that that is 
> what Dumbledore tells Harry in book 5.

Personally, I don't think it is the sword. This is because when I was 
listening to the interview I got the impression that it was something 
that they wanted to take out of the film that JK said they had to 
keep and I can't imagine them taking the sword out as it is pivotal 
to how Harry defeats the Basilisk.

HOLLYDAZE!!!
Who has already given her vote to the Hand of Glory as it is odd that 
it was favoured over the Malfoys in Borgin and Burkes




From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 21:26:17 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:26:17 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hands...
Message-ID: <27.3e312efe.2bd075f9@aol.com>


<<How natural is it for 
him to fall on his knees beside her and then not touch her (aside 
from her hand)?>>

No, I've noticed that too, and it does tend to bug me. It's not natural at 
all. Why doesn't he check her pulse? I don't know about anybody else, but I 
knew how to do that at age 12. His reaction would have informed the audience 
if she was alive or dead. 

Fascinating idea about the hand thing...something else to ponder.

Melly



From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Thu Apr 17 21:31:24 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:31:24 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Heir of Gryffindor (was Re: Re: DVD: Steven Kloves: The Thi...
Message-ID: <68.2f8b41a7.2bd0772c@aol.com>


Susan wrote:
<<And I say gleefully:
And who announced the Gryffindor heir gonna get ya prophecy? Why, Trelawney, 
of course! That was her first prophecy, that one of the line of Gryffindor 
would kill one of the line of Slytherin. Hence when he needed to kill James 
and Harry, because the Potters were once the Gryffindors. Poor ol' Lil just 
got caught up in the firing line.

Sorry, this Gryffindor-heir/Trelawney-prediction thing has always been one of 
my pet theories. Any excuse to stick it into conversation... :)>>

Yes, yes! I 100% agree! Well, maybe not about heir thing, as I'm still unsure 
about that, but I'm willing to bet money that Trelawney's first accurate 
prediction was to Tom Riddle. I pitched this theory to another list and it 
wasn't met with much enthusiasm, I'm so glad somebody else thought up the 
same thing. 

Still confused about why Voldemort told Lily to move aside, though. Why not 
just kill her like he ended up doing? What was the point of her standing 
aside? Well, I realize for the plot, her dying for Harry to provide that 
protection, sure, but logically I didn't think it made sense. 

Melly



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Apr 17 23:26:22 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:26:22 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <b7kpb2+fvlp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7nd6u+sg9b@eGroups.com>

Accent specialists, please comment if possible...
Was Tom being almost Cockney in the Slytherin Common Room when he 
said Dumbledore probably got the Daily Prophet to "hush it aw up..." 
in regards to keeping the attacks quiet? I am also an American and 
can tell some differences. This one stuck me. And as someone else 
noted, Tom sounded quite different from the first movie. I was 
wondering where Chris Columbus was during all this accent shifting. 
Maybe he never noticed. Accent is an important aspect of character to 
me, especially in British films where accent can indicate so much 
about a character. It is disconcerting to have accents be so 
undependable. Enough whinging. At least I can see my sooty little 
Harry anytime I want now!!
JenD




From rios0119 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 18 02:42:18 2003
From: rios0119 at yahoo.com (rios0119)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 02:42:18 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD Timeline
Message-ID: <b7noma+7h51@eGroups.com>

Where on the DVD can one find Rowling's Timeline?  I've checked all 
the extra and special features and can't find it.  Thanks.




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Apr 18 02:49:15 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:49:15 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS DVD Timeline
Message-ID: <ba.3ca27f64.2bd0c1ab@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/17/03 10:46:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
rios0119 at yahoo.com writes:

> Where on the DVD can one find Rowling's timeline?  I've check all the 
> special and extra features and can't locate it.  Thanks.

There is a time line??

Kyle Longbottom 


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




From amani at charter.net  Fri Apr 18 03:40:48 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:40:48 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house
References: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a801c3055c$4d574180$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Alora:
I'm watching the movie for the umpteenth time and I always wonder 
what house Lockhart was in.  Any ideas?  He's not brave (not to me, 
anyway), would you guys consider him cunning enough for Slytherin?  
he doesn't seem smart enough for Ravenclaw, so I lean more towards 
Hufflepuff.  What do you think?

Me:
Why is it that when someone doesn't seem to fit immediately into Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin, they just get shuffled into Hufflepuff? Seems to happen a lot in these types of speculations...

However, if Lockhart /did/ go to Hogwarts, which we don't know, I'd immediately say Slytherin. Extremely ambiitous. Willing to do anything to achieve his goals. Yup. Guess he's not the smartest in some areas, but he has kept up quite a ruse for a while.

--Taryn

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




From boredchocobo at attbi.com  Fri Apr 18 03:58:59 2003
From: boredchocobo at attbi.com (Chocobo)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 23:58:59 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house
References: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com> <00a801c3055c$4d574180$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <00d201c3055e$d781ab50$82647d18@Compuhon>

Definitely Slytherin. He erased the memory of lots of people and claimed other people's accomplishments as his own, and used that to make himself rich and popular. And did it flawlessly for quite a while.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Taryn Kimel 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 11:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house


  Alora:
  I'm watching the movie for the umpteenth time and I always wonder 
  what house Lockhart was in.  Any ideas?  He's not brave (not to me, 
  anyway), would you guys consider him cunning enough for Slytherin?  
  he doesn't seem smart enough for Ravenclaw, so I lean more towards 
  Hufflepuff.  What do you think?

  Me:
  Why is it that when someone doesn't seem to fit immediately into Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin, they just get shuffled into Hufflepuff? Seems to happen a lot in these types of speculations...

  However, if Lockhart /did/ go to Hogwarts, which we don't know, I'd immediately say Slytherin. Extremely ambiitous. Willing to do anything to achieve his goals. Yup. Guess he's not the smartest in some areas, but he has kept up quite a ruse for a while.

  --Taryn


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




From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com  Fri Apr 18 03:53:24 2003
From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn)
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:53:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lockhart's house
References: <b7ko18+9k70@eGroups.com>
 <00a801c3055c$4d574180$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <3E9F76B4.6B252B2B@pacificpuma.com>



Taryn Kimel wrote:
> 
> Alora:
> I'm watching the movie for the umpteenth time and I always wonder
> what house Lockhart was in.  Any ideas?  He's not brave (not to me,
> anyway), would you guys consider him cunning enough for Slytherin?
> he doesn't seem smart enough for Ravenclaw, so I lean more towards
> Hufflepuff.  What do you think?
> 
> Me:
> Why is it that when someone doesn't seem to fit immediately into
> Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin, they just get shuffled into
> Hufflepuff? Seems to happen a lot in these types of speculations...
> 
> However, if Lockhart /did/ go to Hogwarts, which we don't know, I'd
> immediately say Slytherin. Extremely ambiitous. Willing to do anything
> to achieve his goals. Yup. Guess he's not the smartest in some areas,
> but he has kept up quite a ruse for a while.
> 
> --Taryn
> 

Crabe and Goyle are not cunning and if they are ambitious, they must
think that attaching themselves to Draco will get them what they want,
so why would Lockhart have to be cunning to be a Slytherin?  I think
people take stereotyping 'houses' a bit too far.  I mean, far as we
know, Peter was a Gryffindor and we all know what he is like.  Being as
there are only 4 houses, you can't neatly fit each any every person into
one of the 4 molds. There are bound to be those who have none of the
qualities for any house that the hat just randomly tosses them into a
house and hopes for the best.

Jazmyn





From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Apr 18 13:29:35 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:29:35 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS DVD Timeline
In-Reply-To: <ba.3ca27f64.2bd0c1ab@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030418141621.00983e70@plum.cream.org>

At 03:49 18/04/03 , LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 4/17/03 10:46:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>rios0119 at yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Where on the DVD can one find Rowling's timeline?  I've check all the
> > special and extra features and can't locate it.  Thanks.
>
>There is a time line??

It's one of the DVD-ROM features and although I generally don't go in for 
flashy presentations, I quite liked this one. Not that it actually says 
anything really new, besides putting down Hogwarts' founding down to c. 
AD993 and confirms a few other bits and pieces.




From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Fri Apr 18 17:24:21 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:24:21 -0000
Subject: Accents and soot
In-Reply-To: <b7nd6u+sg9b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7pcc5+9pfp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
. At least I can see my sooty little 
> Harry anytime I want now!!
> JenD

hehehe Jen, Harry certainly does get dusted up quite a bit in COS. 
Kind of gives new meaning to the phrase "Dirty Harry" ... <ducking>

Sorry, I'm taking a 4-day weekend and am kind of giddy at the 
prospect of not going back to the office until Tuesday :-)

Anne U
(who noticed Daniel's transition from cute kid lead to very young 
leading man by the end of COS)





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Apr 19 19:27:29 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 19:27:29 -0000
Subject: Accents and soot
In-Reply-To: <b7pcc5+9pfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7s7v1+dff6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Anne" <anneu53714 at s...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
> wrote:
> . At least I can see my sooty little 
> > Harry anytime I want now!!
> > JenD
> 
> hehehe Jen, Harry certainly does get dusted up quite a bit in COS. 
> Kind of gives new meaning to the phrase "Dirty Harry" ... <ducking>
> Anne U
> (who noticed Daniel's transition from cute kid lead to very young 
> leading man by the end of COS)

I reply:
I realized after I let that remark slip that it probably belonged 
more appropriately at another site (say "Daniel Radcliffe Rocks") and 
should have been attributed to someone much younger than myself!!
I am alternately enthralled and disturbed by the playing around with 
Harry's image in the second film. I am thankful that the books never 
let us forget he's a scrawny little boy who just happens to have the 
guts and survival instincts of a very powerful grown-up wizard. Even 
Daniel, I must remind myself in a very serious and stern fashion, was 
only 12 years old when he was propelled out of that grate in 
Knockturn Alley and perfectly air-brushed with soot.
Does that bother anyone else?
JenD





From gallo at wpaccs.com  Sat Apr 19 23:07:39 2003
From: gallo at wpaccs.com (Amy)
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 23:07:39 -0000
Subject: Accents and soot
In-Reply-To: <b7s7v1+dff6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7skrr+8es4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:

<snip>  Even Daniel, I must remind myself in a very serious and stern 
fashion, was only 12 years old when he was propelled out of that 
grate in Knockturn Alley and perfectly air-brushed with soot.
> Does that bother anyone else?
> JenD

ME:

Yeah.  We talk about that fact all the time.  Daniel (to me) does 
*not* look like a 12 year old, especially in certain scenes.  More 
like 16 or 17.  I do think that may be just the way Daniel is, 
though.  I've seen him in several interviews and giving a 
presentation somewhere (sorry, forgot where), and he was 
exceptional.  He was more put together than some adults I know!  
Look out when he *does* grow up ;)!  

I wonder how his mother handles all the attention Daniel gets.  I 
have 2 boys of my own and I honestly don't know how I'd react to it 
all.  

Harry in my mind now, though, is Daniel.  I cannot separate them in 
my mind's eye.  So no matter how "scrawny" dear Harry is described in 
the books, Daniel he is.  Oh well.  

Quidditchmom :)




From glorificus21 at bigpond.com  Sun Apr 20 02:51:13 2003
From: glorificus21 at bigpond.com (glory)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:51:13 +1000
Subject: Accents and soot
References: <b7skrr+8es4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00b601c306e7$b5b38900$2f898a90@yourog0e5epvsj>

<snip>  Even Daniel, I must remind myself in a very serious and stern 
fashion, was only 12 years old when he was propelled out of that 
grate in Knockturn Alley and perfectly air-brushed with soot.
> Does that bother anyone else?
> JenD


Absolutely. What's more disturbing is that a dear friend of mine has two 14 year old boys that look like they could slip quietly into Daniel Radcliffe's place. That, in itself, is more disconcerting than Daniel's apparent ability to be somewhat ageless. But yes, viewings of CoS in this household have been known to be peppered with exclaimations of "He's only 12!" and yes, it's disturbing when you actually sit down and think about it.

Regards,
Glory


PS: I'm new to the list and I thought I'd just say hi!


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




From bard7696 at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 03:11:47 2003
From: bard7696 at aol.com (darrin_burnett)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:11:47 -0000
Subject: More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
Message-ID: <b7t35j+j3ls@eGroups.com>

OK, I'm not going to sign a petition or some such, because I don't think such 
things work, but something about the news that Sean Biggerstaff won't be 
back to play Oliver Wood bothered me.

In the story, Biggerstaff talked about "cutting down to a two-hour movie."

The first two movies have been well over two hours, with CoS pushing two-
and-a-half hours. I do hope this is not studio pressure to cut the movie, 
considering that CoS made about $50m less than SS/PS.

Many critics have taken the filmmakers to task for filming the books, not 
understanding that fans really want to see that happen.

Quidditch is, more than any other book, crucial to the plot of PoA. It is during a 
Quidditch match with Hufflepuff that Harry realizes what the Dementors can 
do. It is during the match with Ravenclaw that Harry uses the Patronus spell 
for the first time, and it's a delicious Malfoy moment besides.

And then they WIN the Quidditch cup? C'mon, you've got to put that in.

I realize some condensing is necessary, but it is disturbing to think that two 
hours is going to be the standard now, especially with GoF and OoP, two 
double-sized books, to think about.

Darrin
-- Just hope Gary Oldman knows that Sirius COMES BACK in GoF




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 20 03:51:41 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:51:41 -0000
Subject: More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
In-Reply-To: <b7t35j+j3ls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7t5gd+ls8h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "darrin_burnett" <bard7696 at a...> 
wrote:
In the story, Biggerstaff talked about "cutting down to a two-hour 
movie."


Me: This is what Sean said: "Apparently some people have been 
freaking out because I described Harry Potter 3 as a two hour movie. 
I was not being precise. Funnily enough, given that the film hasn't 
been made yet and I'm not in it, I don't know how long it'll be. I'd 
imagine It'll be closer to three hours."

That being said I'm sure PoA will be nearer 3 hrs than 2, I mean it 
was a bigger book & if they keep taking parts out that are crucial 
it just won't be worth seeing. I totally agree about the games, but 
knowing the 'writer :(' they will probably encompass the results 
somewhere else & that's what really scares me. 

I think many fans would site thru a 3+hr movie - am I right? 




From glorificus21 at bigpond.com  Sun Apr 20 04:18:18 2003
From: glorificus21 at bigpond.com (glory)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 14:18:18 +1000
Subject: Concerns about PoA and future films
References: <b7t5gd+ls8h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00df01c306f3$df91a6b0$2f898a90@yourog0e5epvsj>

geri510 said:

I think many fans would site thru a 3+hr movie - am I right? 



I agree completely. Part of me argues that this film, and the others in the series, are being made for the fans of the books, that those groups of people are the ones who will appreciate the film more, therefore, making sense that the books should be depicted in their entirety. Then the logical part of me responds with the certain financial, time and marketing constraints of producing such films. It saddens me to know that apparently there will be no quidditch in PoA, I was really looking forward to seeing Gryffindor win the cup and the aforementioned delicious Draco moment - well said Darrin.

The fact that something as significant as quidditch has been effectively 'dropped' from PoA definately stirs concerns for the future films. Has anyone else here heard of the films being referred to the 'Harry Potter Trilogy'? I've heard this in a few places, though for the life of me I can't remember where, and it quite frightens me. The idea that WB wouldn't make all the films has always been a fear of mine. But in the same breath, I have heard whisperings of plans to make GoF into a two part film to be realesed in much the same manner that the two Matrix sequels are being released this year. Also, to help dispel rumours that PoA will be the last Potter film they make, Jason Isaacs has confirmed previously that he has been signed on for GoF. So the fear of an incomplete Harry Potter film series may end up to be groundless but others fears in regards to the production of these films quickly creep up to take it's place.

Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change part way through a series of films. 


Any other opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.



Regards,
Glory






      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
     
     


________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 05:11:21 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 01:11:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <172.1969cf81.2bd385f9@aol.com>

I agree Glory but Tom Felton says he doesnt want to keep going and making the 
films!  He wants to be a fisherman which I can respect but I hope and pray he 
stays on until the seventh film is made!!
Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/20/03 12:38:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
glorificus21 at bigpond.com writes:

> 
> 
> geri510 said:
> 
> I think many fans would site thru a 3+hr movie - am I right? 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree completely. Part of me argues that this film, and the others in the 
> series, are being made for the fans of the books, that those groups of 
> people are the ones who will appreciate the film more, therefore, making 
> sense that the books should be depicted in their entirety. Then the logical 
> part of me responds with the certain financial, time and marketing 
> constraints of producing such films. It saddens me to know that apparently 
> there will be no quidditch in PoA, I was really looking forward to seeing 
> Gryffindor win the cup and the aforementioned delicious Draco moment - well 
> said Darrin.
> 
> The fact that something as significant as quidditch has been effectively 
> 'dropped' from PoA definately stirs concerns for the future films. Has 
> anyone else here heard of the films being referred to the 'Harry Potter 
> Trilogy'? I've heard this in a few places, though for the life of me I 
> can't remember where, and it quite frightens me. The idea that WB wouldn't 
> make all the films has always been a fear of mine. But in the same breath, 
> I have heard whisperings of plans to make GoF into a two part film to be 
> realesed in much the same manner that the two Matrix sequels are being 
> released this year. Also, to help dispel rumours that PoA will be the last 
> Potter film they make, Jason Isaacs has confirmed previously that he has 
> been signed on for GoF. So the fear of an incomplete Harry Potter film 
> series may end up to be groundless but others fears in regards to the 
> production of these films quickly creep up to take it's place.
> 
> Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors 
> currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would 
> hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the 
> actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to 
> the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, 
> just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change 
> part way through a series of films. 
> 
> 
> Any other opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Glory



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




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Sun Apr 20 05:43:47 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 05:43:47 -0000
Subject: More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
In-Reply-To: <b7t35j+j3ls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7tc2j+86e4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "darrin_burnett" <bard7696 at a...> 
> -- Just hope Gary Oldman knows that Sirius COMES BACK in GoF

Gary Oldman was signed for TWO films. So yes, he has already signed 
to play Sirius for GoF.

as for 2 hours or not, please refer to Sean Biggerstaff's response to 
that as someone already posted it. Clearly the film is NOT going to 
be only 2 hours, alright?

Joan





From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 20 06:44:06 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 06:44:06 -0000
Subject: If YOU were writing and directing
Message-ID: <b7tfjm+j9s2@eGroups.com>

If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would you have done 
differently?  




From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Apr 20 08:50:21 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 09:50:21 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b01bac80e60cfde@[217.154.250.227]>

JenD said:-

>Was Tom being almost Cockney in the Slytherin Common Room when he
>said Dumbledore probably got the Daily Prophet to "hush it aw up..."
>in regards to keeping the attacks quiet? I am also an American and
>can tell some differences. This one stuck me.

Yes, that is a good example, as was the first part of the
sentence....'surprised' and 'Daily' (as in Daily Prophet) were both very
London.

> And as someone else
>noted, Tom sounded quite different from the first movie. I was
>wondering where Chris Columbus was during all this accent shifting.
>Maybe he never noticed.

Yes. David Heyman is the one who really should have known better. I can't
really blame Columbus, since he may just not have the ear for it. Any Brit
would know the difference, though.

>Accent is an important aspect of character to
>me, especially in British films where accent can indicate so much
>about a character. It is disconcerting to have accents be so
>undependable.

It's the same in the US as well; a character who speaks with a patrician
Bostonian accent, as opposed to good ol' Bubba from Miss-hippy...you judge
by accents too.

Regards,
Nicholas





From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 10:56:22 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 06:56:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] If YOU were writing and directing
Message-ID: <128.283268b9.2bd3d6d6@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/20/03 3:14:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
buffyeton at yahoo.com writes:

> If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would you have done 
> differently?  
> 

Oh thats a really terrifying question. *grins* First off let me start out by 
saying that I love the movies, they are wonderful, but they really don't do 
the books justice. Now, if I was writing the movies, I wouldn't be so 
obsessed with time, I'd be true to the stories, and tell them right. For 
example, I'm rereading CoS right now, and when they are explaining to Harry 
what a parselmouth is, it's Ron who's freaking out, and explaining things to 
Harry. In the movie Hermione does the explaining. Who cares if the movies 
over three hours long? I just would love to see on screen the movies being 
truer to the books.

~Faith~


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




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 11:01:47 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 07:01:47 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <77.f0a0342.2bd3d81b@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/20/03 12:38:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
glorificus21 at bigpond.com writes:

> Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors 
> currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would 
> hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the 
> actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to 
> the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, 
> just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change 
> part way through a series of films. 
> 

I think there was talk of recasting in the future because the actors have a 
tendency to grow older faster than the characters in the books. While I'd 
hate to see this happen, can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
playing school kids?

~Faith~


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




From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 20 11:18:44 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 11:18:44 -0000
Subject: If YOU were writing and directing
In-Reply-To: <128.283268b9.2bd3d6d6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b7tvmk+hc37@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, JessaDrow at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/20/03 3:14:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> buffyeton at y... writes:
> 
<snip> Who cares if the movies 
> over three hours long? I just would love to see on screen the 
movies being 
> truer to the books.
> 
> ~Faith~

I definitely agree with this.  The filmakers seem to rely much to 
much on billowy music and loooonnnnngggg quidditch scenes.  For 
instance, the whole bit with the flying car was horrible!  They could 
have cut most of that and done the deathday scene.  I also thought 
the quidditch scene was much to long, where Harry and Draco fly 
through the tunnels etc.  That went on for ages.  

And whatever direction Chris Columbus was giving to Rupert was 
terrible.  He turned him into a cartoon tacky sidekick, instead of 
the sarcastic, yet intelligent, sensetive character he is in the 
books.  

As for the first movie, I would have kept the scene in the robes shop 
where Harry first meets Draco, and the scene in the wand shop nearly 
word perfect with the book.  

Also, am I the only one who thinks the entrance hall at Hogwarts is 
all wrong in the film?  Why did they have to go up the staircase 
before getting to the Great Hall???

The sorting hat scene is a particularly hard one.  I mean, it would 
be a bit tedious to go through the entire roll for every new pupil as 
it does in the book, but it still would have been interesting to see 
a few other students sorted, outside the very main characters.  

They also didn't need the "touching" scene of Harry looking out his 
dormitory window on his first night at Hogwarts.  That was just 
cheezy and time consuming.

When Harry get's his Nimbus 2000, they should have kept that scene as 
it was in the book.  It would have had more impact, and humour.

As for the scene where they first find Fluffy, half of me wishes they 
could have found some way to keep Neville there.  It makes his later 
scene, where he tries to stand up to Harry, Hermione and Ron much 
more interesting, and helps with his character.

A question though, what was up with Seamus always blowing himself 
up??  It seemed like a time waster, and a try for a cheap laugh that 
didn't work.  

Two other minor annoyances: uniforms.  Quidditch and school.  Neither 
of them existed in the book.  I don't mind the school ones, they add 
that touch of Britishness to the film that it sometimes seems to 
need, but the Quidditch ones are just ridiculous money wasters.  

Well, that's about all I can think of right now.  Looking back, it is 
quite a lot lol.

Tamara





From glorificus21 at bigpond.com  Sun Apr 20 11:49:20 2003
From: glorificus21 at bigpond.com (glory)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 21:49:20 +1000
Subject: future movie concerns/Tom Felton
References: <77.f0a0342.2bd3d81b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <012a01c30732$e1a7b6d0$2f898a90@yourog0e5epvsj>

Faith said:

I think there was talk of recasting in the future because the actors have a 
tendency to grow older faster than the characters in the books. While I'd 
hate to see this happen, can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
playing school kids?


I say:

I've been thinking about this ... In theory, the idea of the 'dream team' being in their twenties and playing schoolkids is not at all how I would like the series to end up, I do have to ask myself if by that time it would matter? I mean honestly, if the cast remains intact and follows it through to the final film - be that seven films or more - would anyone really see how great the difference is? Or would everyone just see Daniel as Harry or Emma as Hermione just like they have during the entire series?

It would be awful if the films ended up looking like a wizard version of Beverley Hills 90210 where half the students look like they could be old enough to teach the classes not attend them but with the cast so young as it is, it would be plausible that the series of films could be completed with the actors still at the believeable age. But for that to happen, the films need to be shot in sequence NOW. If the gap between films keeps widening, the window of oppourtunity will be lost and the possibilities of having the cast intact for all the films are greatly diminished.



Kyle Longbottom said:

I agree Glory but Tom Felton says he doesnt want to keep going and making the 
films!  He wants to be a fisherman which I can respect but I hope and pray he 
stays on until the seventh film is made!!


I too have heard Tom Felton say that he would like to stop making films by his 16th birthday so that he could concentrate on his studies and future career. Tom celebrated his 16th birthday last year in September. Since that time I have heard that he is looking forward to playing Draco Malfoy in the future and even expressing concern that his character would be getting killed off in OoP. At this point in time, I'm trying to cling to the positive bits of information that are coming through. Draco is my favorite character and I would hate to see anyone but Tom playing him.



Regards,
Glory


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




From JessaDrow at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 11:57:29 2003
From: JessaDrow at aol.com (JessaDrow at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 07:57:29 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: If YOU were writing and directing
Message-ID: <11a.21a471af.2bd3e529@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/20/03 7:46:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
buffyeton at yahoo.com writes:

> The filmakers seem to rely much to much on billowy music and loooonnnnngggg 
> quidditch scenes.  For instance, the whole bit with the flying car was 
> horrible!  They could have cut most of that and done the deathday scene.  I 
> also thought 
> the quidditch scene was much to long, where Harry and Draco fly through the 
> tunnels etc.  That went on for ages.  
> I totally agree, the car scene while interesting got boring real fast, I 
> couldn't wait for it to finally fall out of the tree. And while I love the 
> quidditch scenes, it really did go on forever. I could be wrong, but I 
> don't think that was in the book.
> 
> 
> As for the first movie, I would have kept the scene in the robes shop 
> where Harry first meets Draco, and the scene in the wand shop nearly 
> word perfect with the book.  
> Ironically enough we were watching the first movie last night, and I was 
> bitching to my husband about that very thing. It was an important scene, 
> and they should have kept it in. I did like the wand scene however, I loved 
> how they showed that Harry had the right wand.
> 
> The sorting hat scene is a particularly hard one.  I mean, it would 
> be a bit tedious to go through the entire roll for every new pupil as 
> it does in the book, but it still would have been interesting to see 
> a few other students sorted, outside the very main characters.  
> 
The thing that drives me nuts about the sorting hat is he doesn't sing the 
song, when I first watched the movie, I was dying to actually hear it sung 
out.

> They also didn't need the "touching" scene of Harry looking out his 
> dormitory window on his first night at Hogwarts.  That was just 
> cheezy and time consuming.
> I think it was nice that they symbolized Harry feeling safe and comfortable 
> finally, like he finally came home. It would have been nice though if say 
> Neville or someone found him up and came to talk to him. They don't give 
> the kids enough lines. 

> When Harry get's his Nimbus 2000, they should have kept that scene as 
> it was in the book.  It would have had more impact, and humour.
> 
> As for the scene where they first find Fluffy, half of me wishes they 
> could have found some way to keep Neville there.  It makes his later 
> scene, where he tries to stand up to Harry, Hermione and Ron much 
> more interesting, and helps with his character.
> 
> A question though, what was up with Seamus always blowing himself 
> up??  It seemed like a time waster, and a try for a cheap laugh that 
> didn't work.  
> This is wonderful, you're pointing out all the stuff that drove the me 
> crazy last night, I couldn't agree more. The Seamus scenes were annoying, 
> they could have found better and more important stuff to put in those 
> places if they were looking stretch time out. 
> Two other minor annoyances: uniforms.  Quidditch and school.  Neither 
> of them existed in the book.  I don't mind the school ones, they add 
> that touch of Britishness to the film that it sometimes seems to 
> need, but the Quidditch ones are just ridiculous money wasters.  
> My husband keeps pointing out everytime we watch a Quidditch scene that the 
> Slytherin colors for the robes are wrong, he says something about them not 
> matching the colors on their school uniform badges. 

~Faith~



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




From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 20 12:14:19 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:14:19 -0000
Subject: future movie concerns/Tom Felton
In-Reply-To: <012a01c30732$e1a7b6d0$2f898a90@yourog0e5epvsj>
Message-ID: <b7u2ur+rkht@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "glory" <glorificus21 at b...> wrote:
> Faith said:
> 
> I think there was talk of recasting in the future because the 
actors have a 
> tendency to grow older faster than the characters in the books. 
While I'd 
> hate to see this happen, can you picture 'the dream team' in their 
twenties, 
> playing school kids?
> 
> 
> I say:
> 
> I've been thinking about this ... In theory, the idea of the 'dream 
team' being in their twenties and playing schoolkids is not at all 
how I would like the series to end up, I do have to ask myself if by 
that time it would matter? I mean honestly, if the cast remains 
intact and follows it through to the final film - be that seven films 
or more - would anyone really see how great the difference is? Or 
would everyone just see Daniel as Harry or Emma as Hermione just like 
they have during the entire series?
> 
> It would be awful if the films ended up looking like a wizard 
version of Beverley Hills 90210 where half the students look like 
they could be old enough to teach the classes not attend them but 
with the cast so young as it is, it would be plausible that the 
series of films could be completed with the actors still at the 
believeable age. But for that to happen, the films need to be shot in 
sequence NOW. If the gap between films keeps widening, the window of 
oppourtunity will be lost and the possibilities of having the cast 
intact for all the films are greatly diminished.
> 
> 

No offense to the kids playing Harry, Ron and Hermione, but I don't 
really see any acting futures for them.  Maybe for DR, maybe, but the 
other two just aren't talented enough to tackle other roles.

Tamara




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Apr 20 14:26:46 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 15:26:46 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Concerns about PoA and future films
In-Reply-To: <00df01c306f3$df91a6b0$2f898a90@yourog0e5epvsj>
References: <b7t5gd+ls8h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030420094957.0096acc0@plum.cream.org>

glory wrote:

>I agree completely. Part of me argues that this film, and the others in 
>the series, are being made for the fans of the books, that those groups of 
>people are the ones who will appreciate the film more, therefore, making 
>sense that the books should be depicted in their entirety.

Not quite. These films are NOT being made *primarily* for existing fans of 
the books. For most existing fans of the books, whether or not movies are 
made is largely irrelevant, if not a Bad Thing (TM).

The first two films are being marketed towards younger children than the 
books' are, namely 6-9 year-olds rather than roughly 12+.  In that respect, 
Columbus was probably a good choice of director - he might not have much 
talent for personalities or character, but he's a fair director of 
slapstick and similar stuff. Cuaron is, if anything, the reverse (none of 
his movies to date have featured much in the way of action sequences, for 
instance).

Columbus & Co have, however, been mindful of the fact that a huge 
percentage of modern movies' grosses come from repeat attendances, and 
they've clearly tried their best not alienate the books' fans. As far as 
I'm concerned, this is not necessarily a Good Thing (TM) because these 
movies will always be little more than "scenes from the books" rather than 
decent movies in their own right UNLESS the production team are allowed to 
take liberties with the books' narratives.

Condensing PoA into even a three-hour movie means losing at least half of 
the narrative events. Judging by the reaction to Sean Biggerstaff's 
departure, a huge proportion of the fans are either unwilling or unable to 
grasp the fact that this is a different medium which requires a different 
kind of story-telling.

To a HUGE extent, I place the blame for this squarely on JKR's own 
shoulders. I find it nothing less than completely absurd that she has 
refused to tell Kloves where the underlying plot is going. As he says in 
the CoS DVD interview, he's writing a story whose end he does not know. 
Sure, plenty of films go into production with incomplete scripts, but 
*some* kind of end is known before the final cut is made. But this is very 
different. The production team is being deliberately kept in the dark and 
they don't know what they're doing. JKR has shown that her priorities, 
while admirable on some levels, are in all the wrong places. She, like many 
of the books' fans, wants to see her favourite episodes brought to life. 
She clearly doesn't appreciate that films have different narrative tools to 
novels, and making good films as such is not high on her list.

>The fact that something as significant as quidditch has been effectively 
>'dropped' from PoA definately stirs concerns for the future films.

Whoah. We have absolutely no reason to assume that Quidditch as a whole has 
been dropped from PoA. All we know is that Wood doesn't have a speaking 
part. As I've said on countless occasions before, I can't see them excising 
Quidditch altogether as it's one of the elements of the HP "formula", much 
as car chases are part of James Bond. The production team know that they 
fiddle with the formula at their peril. Wood's Quidditch obsession was 
absent from the first two movies, so there really is nowhere for the 
character to go in terms of the PoA plot. Ron, Harry or the twins can 
easily be given the obsessive role without any detriment to the plot.

I really do find it distasteful to see the amount of verbiage expounded 
online by people who are jumping to conclusions based on incomplete 
information and a lack of understanding of the film-making process, not to 
mention absolutely no knowledge of the finished script.

Personally, the fact that *some* liberties have been taken with PoA's plot 
are for me a Good Thing (TM) and I only hope that the condensing of the 
book's plot is more astute than that witnessed in the first two movies.

My major problem with CoS (and PS to a smaller degree) is that although the 
book's key events are present and accounted for, a large chunk of the 
*spirit* of the book (and in particular of the characters) has been lost by 
unnecessary fiddling with the dialogue. Despite Kloves's statement that he 
"steals JKR's best stuff", regrettably he replaces too much of it with his own.

>Has anyone else here heard of the films being referred to the 'Harry 
>Potter Trilogy'? I've heard this in a few places, though for the life of 
>me I can't remember where, and it quite frightens me.

I've never heard that anywhere, and certainly not in anything coming from 
WB. If fans use that term then they only have themselves to blame. Just as 
with the "No Wood = No Quidditch" statements coming from fans, one of he 
most dangerous things about online communication is the spread of 
misinformation and I REALLY, REALLY wish that people had the good sense of, 
say, the Leaky Cauldron editors, and simply refused to repeat unfounded 
rumours. Especially on this list, which is purportedly for people with the 
maturity to appreciate the difference...

>The idea that WB wouldn't make all the films has always been a fear of mine.

Warners bought the first four books because that's all that's available to 
buy. They have an option on succeeding books because that's all they can 
have, in view of he books' non-existence. They will continue making the 
movies only for as long as they make money. Not a moment more or less. If 
the films continue to be successful, they will continue to be made. It's a 
simple as that.

>But in the same breath, I have heard whisperings of plans to make GoF into 
>a two part film to be realesed in much the same manner that the two Matrix 
>sequels are being released this year. Also, to help dispel rumours that 
>PoA will be the last Potter film they make, Jason Isaacs has confirmed 
>previously that he has been signed on for GoF. So the fear of an 
>incomplete Harry Potter film series may end up to be groundless but others 
>fears in regards to the production of these films quickly creep up to take 
>it's place.

I you were satisfied with the first two, there is no reason for the later 
ones to be worse. Cuaron & Co have a big problem with PoA because it's far 
and away the favourite of the books' committed readership as a whole, and 
it's going to require a lot more condensing than the first two. I repeat: 
we all need to be prepared for the fact that major changes MUST be made 
from the book to the film simply to squeeze it into a reasonable running 
time. A significant number of people refuse to accept this and I for one 
will prefer a well-made movie which stands up in its own right (and as a 
successor to the first two) rather than a scene-by-scene translation of the 
book.

As for GoF, Columbus himself hinted at the possibility of its being made 
into two movies (back before PS was even released!) although the hints 
being dropped at present seem to indicate that it will probably be one 
single movie. If anyone cares to look back at my comments in the past on 
this subject, I'm dead against it. The Matrix sequels were conceived, 
designed and written as two movies; GoF would need a considerable amount of 
tinkering to make it into two valid separate movies.

Jason Isaacs' confirmation of having been cast to return in GoF isn't the 
major casting highlight: Robbie Coltrane was taken on from the start for 
five, and Richard Harris contracted for seven possible movies. In any case, 
the fact that these actors have agreed to appear is not in itself 
confirmation of anything on Warners' part beyond an *intention* to make 
seven movies. This is normal for the movie industry, and actors' contracts 
always depend on the studios actually making the movies they intend to. For 
instance, it is normal procedure nowadays for the main cast of all 
blockbusters to sign on for any possible sequel as a matter of course, even 
though the studio won' decide whether or not a sequel will be made until 
after the movie's release.

>Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors 
>currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would 
>hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the 
>actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to 
>the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, 
>just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change 
>part way through a series of films.

Errr... isn't that just a bit obvious? Nobody would want the cast to have 
to change, from the studio to the production team to the fans. But then 
that's true of any franchise and just because this issue was raised at the 
onset with this particular franchise doesn't of itself make it any more or 
less likely to happen.

The fact that the cast are schoolchildren, though, makes all the 
difference. Again, as I've said countless times before, I don't see how the 
Dan's parents are going to allow him to spend the whole of his GCSE year at 
school making GoF. Something tells me that we're either going to suffer a 
production delay, a recasting or grumpy Radcliffes.

For the time being, it seems that everyone apart from Tom Felton has no 
problems with staying in showbusiness, but again these kids are still quite 
young and only time (and academic achievement) will tell. Even Felton, 
though, has said that considering he has a fairly small part (certainly in 
PoA and GoF there's very little of him) he's prepared to continue as long 
as he's wanted.

One way or the other, though, a heck of lot of all this speculation is all 
about counting chickens before the hen's been hatched, never mind the eggs 
themselves. Until we have a much better idea of what the PoA script 
contains or whether GoF has been successfully condensed into a single 
script, I find very little point in wringing our hands and screaming blue 
murder.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who is feeling particularly opinionated this Easter 
Sunday...





From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 20 16:10:47 2003
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 09:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 552
In-Reply-To: <1050833441.2072.30127.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030420161047.71461.qmail@web14201.mail.yahoo.com>

etonbuffy asked:
If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would
you have done differently?

ME:
Turned myself into Terry Gilliam and made really
interesting films that aren't afraid to take a few risks!

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com



From amani at charter.net  Sun Apr 20 17:16:31 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:16:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Concerns about PoA and future films
References: <77.f0a0342.2bd3d81b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c30760$96810ac0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Glory:
> Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors 
> currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would 
> hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the 
> actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to 
> the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, 
> just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change 
> part way through a series of films. 

Faith:
I think there was talk of recasting in the future because the actors have a 
tendency to grow older faster than the characters in the books. While I'd 
hate to see this happen, can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
playing school kids?

Me:
Easily. It's done all the time in film and TV. Hell, the actor who played Tom Riddle's in his late twenties (26?). By the time the trio reaches their twenties, I doubt they'll be younger than 16 or so in movie-time, which isn't a big problem in the film world.

--Taryn

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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Apr 20 18:26:48 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:26:48 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01bac80e60cfde@[217.154.250.227]>
Message-ID: <b7uop8+pue6@eGroups.com>

I wrote:> >Accent is an important aspect of character to
> >me, especially in British films where accent can indicate so much
> >about a character. It is disconcerting to have accents be so
> >undependable.
> 
>Nicholas replied:
 It's the same in the US as well; a character who speaks with a 
patrician
> Bostonian accent, as opposed to good ol' Bubba from Miss-
hippy...you judge
> by accents too.
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas
 
And yet again, me:

I hope I didn't sound patronizing about British characters and 
accents. I never even thought about it concerning Americans. Remember 
the out-take where the pudding hits Mrs. Mason over the head? Before 
that, she and her husband both spoke with what may have been American 
accents. He sounded Mid-western to me and she sounded like a somewhat 
patrician Southerner (we do have them you know!!! Virginians 
especially...). We do have our many varieties obviously. It's easy to 
miss it in your own back yard...
JenD




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Apr 20 18:42:05 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:42:05 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
References: <b7t35j+j3ls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00df01c3076c$8acda060$b0a2cdd1@RVotaw>

Darrin wrote:

> The first two movies have been well over two hours, with CoS pushing two-
> and-a-half hours. I do hope this is not studio pressure to cut the movie, 
> considering that CoS made about $50m less than SS/PS.

I think a number of things must be taken into consideration here.  First, we must ALL view PoA as a movie separate from the book.  I'm 90% sure there are a LOT of major changes taking place.  David Heyman said in an interview when CoS came out that PoA would be about the same length or a little shorter than CoS.  And the book is much longer.  Which means they're leaving a lot out and thus changing a lot of the plot.  We know already that the whole blowing up Aunt Marge/Knight Bus thing is there, it's been filmed.  So far no one who is in the movie strictly because they're on the Quidditch team has been back for PoA.  So I'm 95% sure that Quidditch has been cut.  Which will be a great disappointment for all of us, I'm sure.  However, several things must be looked at here.  First, there is no Quidditch (at Hogwarts) in GoF.  Which during reading I felt was dropped too suddenly.  So perhaps they decided to go ahead and cut it now to save time on PoA.  

No Quidditch means some major plot changes.  I, for one, think that Harry will face the Dementor/Boggart in Lupin's class, will pass out (or be extremely shaken) in front of all his classmates.  And to prevent that from happening again (and embarassing himself in front of Malfoy, since they will be in class together in the movie) he goes to Lupin for help at that point.  There you have it, no Quidditch.  Unfortunately, this means no Firebolt, which I was REALLY looking forward to seeing!

Richelle


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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Apr 20 18:48:32 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 13:48:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] If YOU were writing and directing
References: <b7tfjm+j9s2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00e801c3076d$7262c090$b0a2cdd1@RVotaw>

etonbuffy wrote:

> If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would you have done 
> differently?  

Hmm, good question.  I could go on for hours, but I'll just touch on a couple of things that I consider major.  In SS/PS I'd have done the final scene with Quirrelmort like it was in the book.  Quirrell burning,  Harry hanging on, Voldemort screaming, and so on.  To me they toned it down too much and in the process made Harry look vengeful instead of self defensive.

In CoS I'd have cut the Herbology entirely and let Hermione read us something about Mandrakes in a book.  I'd also have given Ron's lines back to him instead of handing them off to Hermione.  I'd have also kept the part where Snape finds Harry and Ron after they crash into the Whomping Willow instead of changing it to Filch.  But I think they just wanted more reason to dislike Filch.

Richelle


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




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Sun Apr 20 19:40:40 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:40:40 -0000
Subject: Question
Message-ID: <b7ut3o+pp9e@eGroups.com>

About two months ago there were some cast interviews on line. At the 
time I was under the impression that they had come from the DVD. 
However, since I could not find them on the DVD I assume I was wrong.

The two I was interested in was of Dan talking about movies Chris 
Columbus had suggested that Dan study, and the second was of Richard 
Harris talking about working with Dan.

As I recall both were in street clothes.

If anyone had seen these I would be interested where they were 
posted, or from what source they were extracted form

WCF




From Lynx412 at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 20:14:54 2003
From: Lynx412 at aol.com (Lynx412 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:14:54 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] If YOU were writing and directing
Message-ID: <1c1.86d9d54.2bd459be@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/20/03 2:49:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rvotaw at i-55.com 
writes:


> .  I'd have also kept the part where Snape finds Harry and Ron after they 
> crash into the Whomping Willow instead of changing it to Filch.


       Cheers loudly....

       I liked the Snape version much better, it gave such a clearer 
indication of his personality. Besides, the Filch version made the later 
Snape sequence nonsensical. Just why *would* Filch have brought the boys to 
Snape instead of McGonagall right from the start?

       Cheryl the Lynx


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




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Sun Apr 20 21:03:14 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 21:03:14 -0000
Subject: More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
In-Reply-To: <00df01c3076c$8acda060$b0a2cdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <b7v1ui+gj4k@eGroups.com>

Don't forget the use of computers in today's films. The fewer live 
actors in a computer scene  the better the scene looks.

They really only need Harry and Draco, and it does not need to be a 
long scene.


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...> 
wrote:
> Darrin wrote:
> 
> > The first two movies have been well over two hours, with CoS 
pushing two-
> > and-a-half hours. I do hope this is not studio pressure to cut 
the movie, 
> > considering that CoS made about $50m less than SS/PS.
> 
> I think a number of things must be taken into consideration here.  
First, we must ALL view PoA as a movie separate from the book.  I'm 
90% sure there are a LOT of major changes taking place.  David 
Heyman said in an interview when CoS came out that PoA would be 
about the same length or a little shorter than CoS.  And the book is 
much longer.  Which means they're leaving a lot out and thus 
changing a lot of the plot.  We know already that the whole blowing 
up Aunt Marge/Knight Bus thing is there, it's been filmed.  So far 
no one who is in the movie strictly because they're on the Quidditch 
team has been back for PoA.  So I'm 95% sure that Quidditch has been 
cut.  Which will be a great disappointment for all of us, I'm sure.  
However, several things must be looked at here.  First, there is no 
Quidditch (at Hogwarts) in GoF.  Which during reading I felt was 
dropped too suddenly.  So perhaps they decided to go ahead and cut 
it now to save time on PoA.  
> 
> No Quidditch means some major plot changes.  I, for one, think 
that Harry will face the Dementor/Boggart in Lupin's class, will 
pass out (or be extremely shaken) in front of all his classmates.  
And to prevent that from happening again (and embarassing himself in 
front of Malfoy, since they will be in class together in the movie) 
he goes to Lupin for help at that point.  There you have it, no 
Quidditch.  Unfortunately, this means no Firebolt, which I was 
REALLY looking forward to seeing!
> 
> Richelle
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 22:47:52 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:47:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
Message-ID: <19d.13bbd004.2bd47d98@aol.com>

I will miss the Firebolt too!  Well for Live actors in a computer screen its 
not that advanced as to have the computer genarated actor up close since you 
then can see how fake they are!!  We are still a long way off but getting 
there!!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 




In a message dated 4/20/03 5:04:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
WFeuchter at msn.com writes:

> 
> 
> Don't forget the use of computers in today's films. The fewer live 
> actors in a computer scene  the better the scene looks.
> 
> They really only need Harry and Draco, and it does not need to be a 
> long scene.
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...> 
> wrote:
> >Darrin wrote:
> >
> >>The first two movies have been well over two hours, with CoS 
> pushing two-
> >>and-a-half hours. I do hope this is not studio pressure to cut 
> the movie, 
> >>considering that CoS made about $50m less than SS/PS.
> >
> >I think a number of things must be taken into consideration here.  
> First, we must ALL view PoA as a movie separate from the book.  I'm 
> 90% sure there are a LOT of major changes taking place.  David 
> Heyman said in an interview when CoS came out that PoA would be 
> about the same length or a little shorter than CoS.  And the book is 
> much longer.  Which means they're leaving a lot out and thus 
> changing a lot of the plot.  We know already that the whole blowing 
> up Aunt Marge/Knight Bus thing is there, it's been filmed.  So far 
> no one who is in the movie strictly because they're on the Quidditch 
> team has been back for PoA.  So I'm 95% sure that Quidditch has been 
> cut.  Which will be a great disappointment for all of us, I'm sure.  
> However, several things must be looked at here.  First, there is no 
> Quidditch (at Hogwarts) in GoF.  Which during reading I felt was 
> dropped too suddenly.  So perhaps they decided to go ahead and cut 
> it now to save time on PoA.  
> >
> >No Quidditch means some major plot changes.  I, for one, think 
> that Harry will face the Dementor/Boggart in Lupin's class, will 
> pass out (or be extremely shaken) in front of all his classmates.  
> And to prevent that from happening again (and embarassing himself in 
> front of Malfoy, since they will be in class together in the movie) 
> he goes to Lupin for help at that point.  There you have it, no 
> Quidditch.  Unfortunately, this means no Firebolt, which I was 
> REALLY looking forward to seeing!
> >
> >Richelle
> >



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 20 22:54:32 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:54:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <24.3c708daf.2bd47f28@aol.com>

How old do you think Shirly Henderson is?  She is not a teenager anymore!!  
Plus Tom Riddle is not that young!  Its very pluasiable to have the same cast 
until the 7th book!  Oh why would they have the teachers signed until the 4th 
film when some of them you dont need!  The ghosts Professor Flitwick!  you 
need the younger actors not the older ones!  It seems to be like okay we dont 
need Radcliffe and company but we need the adults!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 



In a message dated 4/20/03 1:17:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
amani at charter.net writes:

> 
> Glory:
> >Such as the idea that they would recast characters because the actors 
> >currently playing them decided they didn't want to do it anymore. I would 
> >hate for this to happen. After only two films, I've become attached to the 
> 
> >actors that play these characters, much like how I've become attached to 
> >the characters themselves in the books. To me, Daniel Radcliffe is Harry, 
> >just like Tom Felton is Draco. It would be awful for the cast to change 
> >part way through a series of films. 
> 
> Faith:
> I think there was talk of recasting in the future because the actors have a 
> 
> tendency to grow older faster than the characters in the books. While I'd 
> hate to see this happen, can you picture 'the dream team' in their 
> twenties, 
> playing school kids?
> 
> Me:
> Easily. It's done all the time in film and TV. Hell, the actor who played 
> Tom Riddle's in his late twenties (26?). By the time the trio reaches their 
> twenties, I doubt they'll be younger than 16 or so in movie-time, which 
> isn't a big problem in the film world.
> 
> --Taryn



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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Apr 20 23:47:42 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:47:42 -0000
Subject: Concerns about PoA and future films
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030420094957.0096acc0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <b7vbiu+9t45@eGroups.com>

>GulPlum wrote in regards to Columbus/Cuaron:
 The first two films are being marketed towards younger children than 
the books' are, namely 6-9 year-olds rather than roughly 12+.  In 
that respect,Columbus was probably a good choice of director - he 
might not have much talent for personalities or character, but he's a 
fair director of slapstick and similar stuff. Cuaron is, if anything, 
the reverse (none of his movies to date have featured much in the way 
of action sequences, for instance).
 
I reply:
What did you think of the scene in "The Little Princess" at the end 
where Sara walks across a plank several stories up in pouring rain in 
order to escape the evil head mistress and inadvertantly discovers 
her father?
I thought that was action-oriented, very well paced and controlled. 
The supsense the first time I saw it was very painful and I knew 
there was a happy ending coming!! That very scene gave me hope that 
Cuaron might be able to capture more complex emotions and play scenes 
in a more developed and compelling way that heretofore seen.
JenD




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Mon Apr 21 03:14:57 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 03:14:57 -0000
Subject: Accents and soot
In-Reply-To: <b7skrr+8es4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b7vnnh+emr5@eGroups.com>

--- 
I suspect that Dan's parents are bursting with pride at what he has 
done, and worried sick hoping that he can keep it all together.

WF

In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amy" <gallo at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
> wrote:
> 
> <snip>  Even Daniel, I must remind myself in a very serious and 
stern 
> fashion, was only 12 years old when he was propelled out of that 
> grate in Knockturn Alley and perfectly air-brushed with soot.
> > Does that bother anyone else?
> > JenD
> 
> ME:
> 
> Yeah.  We talk about that fact all the time.  Daniel (to me) does 
> *not* look like a 12 year old, especially in certain scenes.  More 
> like 16 or 17.  I do think that may be just the way Daniel is, 
> though.  I've seen him in several interviews and giving a 
> presentation somewhere (sorry, forgot where), and he was 
> exceptional.  He was more put together than some adults I know!  
> Look out when he *does* grow up ;)!  
> 
> I wonder how his mother handles all the attention Daniel gets.  I 
> have 2 boys of my own and I honestly don't know how I'd react to 
it 
> all.  
> 
> Harry in my mind now, though, is Daniel.  I cannot separate them 
in 
> my mind's eye.  So no matter how "scrawny" dear Harry is described 
in 
> the books, Daniel he is.  Oh well.  
> 
> Quidditchmom :)




From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Apr 21 04:28:01 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 04:28:01 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 552
In-Reply-To: <20030420161047.71461.qmail@web14201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b7vs0h+o1i4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> etonbuffy asked:
> If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would
> you have done differently?
> 
> ME:
> Turned myself into Terry Gilliam and made really
> interesting films that aren't afraid to take a few risks!
> 


Imagine if PS/SS or COS had been made with the kind of risk-taking 
that went into BRAZIL (IMO one of the most brilliant movies ever 
made)... 

Anne U
(we can dream, can't we?  Ni! Ni!)





From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Apr 21 04:46:32 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 04:46:32 -0000
Subject: If YOU were writing and directing ...& SHIPping
In-Reply-To: <00e801c3076d$7262c090$b0a2cdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <b7vt38+ksei@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...> 
wrote:
> > In CoS I'd have cut the Herbology entirely and let Hermione read 
us something about Mandrakes in a book.  

Having seen this scene several times now on video, I would probably 
agree with Richelle. I didn't think it produced nearly as much 'bang 
for the buck' as Kloves/Columbus/WB must have thought it did. 
Besides, if Hermione said she'd read it in a book, it would have to 
be true, wouldn't it?? :-)

>I'd also have given Ron's lines back to him instead of handing them 
off to Hermione.  

My daughter and I will finish re-reading COS tomorrow night, and this 
time through, my first time re-reading COS since seeing the movie, I 
was extremely annoyed by the large variety of instances in which 
Ron's lines were handed to Hermione for, in most cases, no 
discernable reason. Several people have mentioned specific instances 
over the past few months and I can't remember all of them but it 
really did annoy me to see so many of Ron's good lines coming out of 
Hermione's mouth (and I'm a huge fan of Canon-Hermione as well as 
Canon-Ron).

Anne U
(who must start re-reading GOF this week so we can complete it again 
before June 21st ... reading HP out loud to a 6 year old can take a 
LOOOONG time :-)





From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Mon Apr 21 04:56:33 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 00:56:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More concerns about Prisoner of Azkaban
Message-ID: <129.283015a6.2bd4d401@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/20/2003 1:42:33 PM Central Standard Time, 
rvotaw at i-55.com writes:

> No Quidditch means some major plot changes.  I, for one, think that Harry 
> will face the Dementor/Boggart in Lupin's class, will pass out (or be 
> extremely shaken) in front of all his classmates.  And to prevent that from 
> happening again (and embarassing himself in front of Malfoy, since they 
> will be in class together in the movie) he goes to Lupin for help at that 
> point.  There you have it, no Quidditch.  Unfortunately, this means no 
> Firebolt, which I was REALLY looking forward to seeing!
> 
> Richelle
> 

I think that they will have him pass out on the train initially (thereby 
introducing us to Lupin) Later have them allude to the Hufflepuff/Gryffindor 
Quidditch match by picking up with the scene from the book where the team 
minus Wood (who the twins think is trying to drown himself in the shower) 
explains what happened including Cedric's offer to play the game over) and 
Hermione handing him the bag of Nimbus toothpicks.  

Melissa


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 21 06:07:09 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 02:07:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents and soot
Message-ID: <6d.f3b0259.2bd4e48d@aol.com>

I thought he was 13 when he did The Chamber of Secrets??

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 

In a message dated 4/20/03 11:15:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
WFeuchter at msn.com writes:

> --- 
> I suspect that Dan's parents are bursting with pride at what he has 
> done, and worried sick hoping that he can keep it all together.
> 
> WF
> 
> In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amy" <gallo at w...> wrote:
> >--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
> >wrote:
> >
> ><snip>  Even Daniel, I must remind myself in a very serious and 
> stern 
> >fashion, was only 12 years old when he was propelled out of that 
> >grate in Knockturn Alley and perfectly air-brushed with soot.
> >>Does that bother anyone else?
> >>JenD
> >
> >ME:
> >
> >Yeah.  We talk about that fact all the time.  Daniel (to me) does 
> >*not* look like a 12 year old, especially in certain scenes.  More 
> >like 16 or 17.  I do think that may be just the way Daniel is, 
> >though.  I've seen him in several interviews and giving a 
> >presentation somewhere (sorry, forgot where), and he was 
> >exceptional.  He was more put together than some adults I know!  
> >Look out when he *does* grow up ;)!  
> >
> >I wonder how his mother handles all the attention Daniel gets.  I 
> >have 2 boys of my own and I honestly don't know how I'd react to 
> it 
> >all.  
> >
> >Harry in my mind now, though, is Daniel.  I cannot separate them 
> in 
> >my mind's eye.  So no matter how "scrawny" dear Harry is described 
> in 
> >the books, Daniel he is.  Oh well.  
> >
> >Quidditchmom :)
> 



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




From CLShannon at aol.com  Mon Apr 21 06:17:42 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 02:17:42 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents and soot
Message-ID: <10e.212cabb2.2bd4e706@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/20/03 11:10:18 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com writes:

<< I thought he was 13 when he did The Chamber of Secrets?? >>

Well, according to all the interviews, they started filming Cos only days 
after the first film opened, which I believe was in Nov. 2001, right? Anyway, 
since Dan was born in July of 1989, he was still 12 when they started 
filming. I think I read that the shooting schedule for COS was a bit shorter 
than for the first one, but it was still about 7 months, give or take. So, he 
may not even have turned 13 by the time they finished since his birthday is 
in July  ;-) If the filming took them past July of 2002, then he did turn 13 
towards the end. 
I hope I did all that math right and had the dates right too, I've read so 
many interviews and articles, it's hard to keep track sometimes <g>
Cindy
P.S. All of this of course means that he won't turn 14 until this July, so he 
will be both 13 and 14 while that goes on. I have no idea how long they will 
film POA, but I would assume about 7-8 months.



From paulined at optushome.com.au  Mon Apr 21 07:17:17 2003
From: paulined at optushome.com.au (Pauline)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 17:17:17 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: If YOU were writing and directing ...&
  SHIPping
In-Reply-To: <b7vt38+ksei@eGroups.com>
References: <00e801c3076d$7262c090$b0a2cdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20030421171717.0145a420@10.0.0.3>

> Anne U
> (who must start re-reading GOF this week so we can complete it again 
> before June 21st ... reading HP out loud to a 6 year old can take a 
> LOOOONG time :-)

I can relate to that.  My 7yo daughter is obsessed with the Potter series.
Maybe you could buy, or borrow from the library the GoF book on tape.  Both
the British (Stephen Fry) and American (Jim Dale) versions are excellent
IMO.  We listen to them in the car and as she goes to sleep every night.

I *can't* wait for the new book, and particularly the Shrieking shack scene
in the PoA movie.  

Pauline in Sydney (who is going on the Gleebooks Express on June 21 - a
steam train ride with pumpkin juice and a certain book appearing at 9am)



From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 21 09:36:51 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:36:51 -0000
Subject: If YOU were writing and directing
In-Reply-To: <b7tfjm+j9s2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b80e3j+gntd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "etonbuffy" <buffyeton at y...> wrote:
> If you had written and directed SS and CoS, what would you have done 
> differently?

bboy_mn:

I'm cutting a quote from another thread; 'Concerns about PoA and
future films'.

Glory Wrote:
"Part of me argues that this film, and the others in the series, are
being made for the fans of the books, that those groups of people are
the ones who will appreciate the film more, therefore, making sense
that the books should be depicted in their entirety. Then the logical
part of me responds with the certain financial, time and marketing
constraints of producing such films."


I think Glory has hit the nail right on the head. These films are
being made for fans of the book. 

That's not true of very many books adapted to film. With most adapted
books, the movie makers take a seed of an idea from a book, and write
a new story based on that seed. Little or no attempt is made to
compare the movie to the book it was adapted from, and few people who
enjoy the movie ever read the book. That is certainly not true of the
Harry Potter books.

Unfortunately, Warner Brothers still thinks it is making an action
movie for 10 year olds; basically the 'Spy Kids' crowd. Nothing could
be futher from the truth, and they keep making mistakes in their story
and editing decisions that reflect this misconception. 

I looked at a lot of the deleted scenes from the CoS DVD, and many of
them would have gone a long way toward explaining things, and helping
build emotion, drama, mystery, and a sense of suspense. As it was, the
story jumped for scene to scene so fast that there was no time for the
story to develop.

My niece, who is a Harry Potter fan, couldn't understand the
connection between Harry stabbing the diary and what was happening to
Tom Riddle (referring to the movie) because the purpose and function
of the diary weren't very well established in the movie. Although, I
will admit, she wasn't being very attentive when she was watching the
movie. Her, my other niece, and my brother were busy throwing Easter
eggs are each other while the movie was playing. 

They are doing a tremendous injustice to these movies by not realizing
they have a broad cross section of an audience who's primary
motivation is having read the book. This is definitely not limited to
the Mary Kate and Ashley, or Spy Kids crowd.

Is is also a crime to make any of these movies less than 3 hours long.
Why is it that at 2.6 hours, critics called HP-CoS butt numbing, but
no one made any comment about Lord of the Rings being 3 hours? True 7
and 8 year olds might get a little tired in a three hour movie, but I
think they make up a very small portion of the audience. I certainly
think anyone 10 and over who is a fan, would not have a problem
sitting through 20 minute more movie. 

So the first think I would do, is figure out who my audience was. The
second thing, I would do is make the movies longer, not with an eye on
putting more story into the movie, but on allowing the story that is
already there to be developed, to create a foundation for people's
characters and motives, to allow enough time to set the mood of the
story, to allow enough time for some transitions between scenes.
Third, this extra time would allow me to actually write an ending for
 CoS instead of that pointless hand-clapping hug-fest at the end.

In closing I will say again that I don't envy the people who have to
adapt PoA. There are so many simultaneous plots with each one having
so many twists and turns, that I don't know how I would begin to
reconcile them all. That has to be a really tough job.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From gallo at wpaccs.com  Mon Apr 21 16:23:12 2003
From: gallo at wpaccs.com (Amy)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 16:23:12 -0000
Subject: Phoenix Statue in CoS
In-Reply-To: <20030421152545.26556.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b815tg+j7f6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Greicy de los Santos 
<grace701 at y...> wrote:

> Has anyone else noticed that the statue that leads Harry to 
Dumbledore's office is a Phoenix?  

ME:

I always thought it was a griffin.  But you're right, a phoenix is 
*much* more interesting!  Does anyone out there know for sure?

Quidditchmom...who should brush up on her mythical animals...




From erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 21 20:51:47 2003
From: erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com (erisedstraeh2002)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 20:51:47 -0000
Subject: Phoenix Statue in CoS
In-Reply-To: <b815tg+j7f6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b81ll3+meqo@eGroups.com>

Greicy de los Santos wrote:

> Has anyone else noticed that the statue that leads Harry to 
> Dumbledore's office is a Phoenix?  
 
and Amy (Quidditchmom) responded:

> I always thought it was a griffin.  But you're right, a phoenix is 
> *much* more interesting!  Does anyone out there know for sure?

Now me:

I'm fairly sure it's a griffin.  It looks like it has the head of an 
eagle and the body of a lion, which is how a griffin is defined in 
mythology.

In the book, the brass knocker on Dumbledore's office door is in the 
shape of a griffin, so I think the movie-makers decided to make the 
staircase into the shape of a griffin so it would be more obvious to 
us Muggles.

I, however, liked the subtlety in the book a lot better.  The movie 
seems to scream "notice the griffin!" while the book lets you choose 
whether or not to notice it (it took me until my second reading to 
notice it).

I think the door knocker is one of the many clues that support the 
theory that Dumbledore's office was once Gryffindor's office (since 
there are various objects in Dumbledore's office that once belonged 
to Gryffindor - the sword, the hat and (IMO) the phoenix).

~Phyllis




From amani at charter.net  Mon Apr 21 21:44:16 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 17:44:16 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Phoenix Statue in CoS
References: <20030421152545.26556.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005b01c3084f$282bbee0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>


Greicy:
Has anyone else noticed that the statue that leads Harry to Dumbledore's office is a Phoenix?  I realized it like the fourth time I saw the movie, my sister said, "DUH!"  Am I the only one who's slow in noticing it? Greicy
 
Me:
Actually, it's a griffin. I've been trying to find a picture and this is the best I've got so far:

http://www.mantissa.org/~lcauldron/images/2002/10/ThirdTr/Picture39.jpg

But the front legs are clear (and the hind legs are still visible).

--Taryn

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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Apr 21 22:06:50 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 23:06:50 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Phoenix Statue in CoS
In-Reply-To: <005b01c3084f$282bbee0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
References: <20030421152545.26556.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030421230108.00972da0@plum.cream.org>

At 22:44 21/04/03 , Taryn Kimel wrote:

>Actually, it's a griffin. I've been trying to find a picture and this is 
>the best I've got so far:
>
>http://www.mantissa.org/~lcauldron/images/2002/10/ThirdTr/Picture39.jpg
>
>But the front legs are clear (and the hind legs are still visible).

Here's a better one http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/door.jpg which leaves me 
with the same conclusion.

(I'm in the middle of preparing a widescreen/fullscreen comparison page and 
thus have the DVD and screen capturing sofware in full flow.) :-)

A public thank you to Richelle for the full screen captures. If I get my 
act together and suffer no other side-tracking, the page should be up 
within the next twelve hours. Then again, I'm planning a re-organisation of 
my site, so it might take longer.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who is coming to some .... "interesting"... 
conclusions with the comparisons...



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Apr 22 00:09:29 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:09:29 -0000
Subject: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030421230108.00972da0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com>

GulPlum wrote (huzzah, huzzah, my emphasis added!!!)>
 
> (I'm in the middle of preparing a widescreen/fullscreen comparison 
page and 
> thus have the DVD and screen capturing sofware in full flow.) :-)
> 
> A public thank you to Richelle for the full screen captures. If I 
get my 
> act together and suffer no other side-tracking, the page should be 
up 
> within the next twelve hours. Then again, I'm planning a re-
organisation of 
> my site, so it might take longer.
> 
> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard, who is coming to some .... "interesting"... 
> conclusions with the comparisons...

I write (with many thanks to both Richelle and GulPlum):
Such a comparison couldn't come fast enough. I think I made the wrong 
choice and will have to face up to it and buy the other one....
JenD




From insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Apr 22 02:40:00 2003
From: insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk (Scott)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:40:00 -0000
Subject: Harry meets Beckham (well sort of)
Message-ID: <b82a20+krdp@eGroups.com>

I'm afraid this is veering OT, and if so my apologies in advance, 
but having recently seen the film "Bend it like Beckham" I am too 
enchanted not to comment. It's an absolutely lovely, fresh, jem of a 
film despite the predictable plot (one of the things that made it 
work all the more).  I suggest going to see it if you haven't, but 
I'm also curious to see what other people thought.

I'm absolutely in love with Parminder Nagra (Jess)...she's really 
great, and pulls the part of a teen (about 17/18?) off exquisitely 
to have been born in 1975 (according to imdb.com) which is just more 
proof, in my mind anyway, that our HP kids can handle all the films 
just fine (no matter what their age).

I think it's great to see a strong indian female character on screen 
and I only wish there was a role for Parminder in Harry Potter...

Yet speaking of casting...how about Johnathon Rhys-Myers for Cedric? 
I know, I know he's Irish, but seeing him as the swoon-worthy coach/ 
an admirable sports figure who's really got heart...he's not how I 
pictured Cedric (physically), but I think he'd do well.

whattya think?

Scott
Who going even further off topic wishes he could find some good 
Bollywood movies...but they aren't exactly in profusion in the small 
town south.







From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Tue Apr 22 03:15:11 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 03:15:11 -0000
Subject: Harry meets Beckham (well sort of)
In-Reply-To: <b82a20+krdp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b82c3v+ens0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <insanus_scottus at y...> 
wrote:
> Yet speaking of casting...how about Johnathon Rhys-Myers for 
Cedric? 
> I know, I know he's Irish, but seeing him as the swoon-worthy 
coach/ 
> an admirable sports figure who's really got heart...he's not how I 
> pictured Cedric (physically), but I think he'd do well.
> 

Nope I absolutely can't see it. I'm too used to seeing Johnathan 
playing bad boys, spoil brat and pyschotic villain (ex: Velvet 
Goldmine, Titus, Ghomaghast) and he plays extremely well and 
convincing in those kind of roles too. In fact his role in Bend it 
like Beckham is quite unfit for him IMO. I'm NOT convince he's the 
sporty goody goody nice guy throughout the entire film at all! I 
think it's because of his appearance, he got the 
druggie/decandance/punk look all over him, not to mention he has 
these beautiful deliciously evil looking eyes. In fact I can see him 
as a grown up  Draco easily instead. But Cedric? Nooooo way!! 


Joan (who has been a big fan of JRM since Velvet Goldmine)






From origamiwizard at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 22 09:37:46 2003
From: origamiwizard at yahoo.com (origamiwizard)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 09:37:46 -0000
Subject: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b832ha+8qqk@eGroups.com>

GulPlum wrote:

> GulPlum wrote (huzzah, huzzah, my emphasis added!!!)>
>  
> > (I'm in the middle of preparing a widescreen/fullscreen 
comparison 
> page and 
> > thus have the DVD and screen capturing sofware in full flow.) :-)
> > 
> > A public thank you to Richelle for the full screen captures. If I 
> get my 
> > act together and suffer no other side-tracking, the page should 
be 
> up 
> > within the next twelve hours. Then again, I'm planning a re-
> organisation of 
> > my site, so it might take longer.
> > 
> > --
> > GulPlum AKA Richard, who is coming to some .... "interesting"... 
> > conclusions with the comparisons...


susanbones2003 wrote:

> I write (with many thanks to both Richelle and GulPlum):
> Such a comparison couldn't come fast enough. I think I made the 
wrong 
> choice and will have to face up to it and buy the other one....
> JenD


I bought the widescreen version and have been pondering the comparison
(s) with the fullscreen. *thinks back to HPSS comparisons*  I was 
just about to break down and buy the fullscreen version too, but I 
think I will wait until I see your brilliant conclusions and 
comparisons! Where will it be posted?  (Sorry, uninformed Newbie 
here.) 

OrigamiWizard, who impatiently twiddles her thumbs and hums to 
herself, as she awaits Richard's screen captures and insights.





From grace701 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 22 14:50:59 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 07:50:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Phoenix Statue in CoS
In-Reply-To: <1051007158.320.64281.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030422145059.55007.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com>


Thank Taryn for clearing that up for me.  I hadn't noticed the legs at all.  I'll make sure to have my sister check it out next time.

In response to someone's comment on it's screaming GRIFFIN!  I obviously didn't see it, so I'm sure someone else didn't notice as well.  =)


Greicy


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Apr 22 15:50:45 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 11:50:45 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <1ec.719d389.2bd6bed5@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> playing school kids?
> 
> ~Faith~
> 

oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or films in the 
US that feature "high school" kids (which is what our kids will be playing 
when they're in their twenties if they're still doing HP films) are played by 
actors in their twenties.  "Smallville" (a TV series on the WB network) stars 
Tom Welling who's at least 23, but he's playing 16.  "Beverly Hills 90210" 
which I never watched, but you may have heard of, was a TV series with a 
whole group of young people who were supposed to be in high school, then 
college and adult life, but they all started out over 18.  "Friends" is 
supposed to be people in their twenties, but the actress who plays "Phoebe" 
just turned 40!  They hire actors over 18 as often as possible so they can 
use them for longer hours, with no tutoring problems and no law requiring 
them to only work so many hours per day (3 or 4, I've forgotten), which 
severely limits filming time.  These are US laws (and shows), it may be 
different in Britain, I don't know. In films, the only child actors playing 
their age are usually 13 and younger, most often playing kids even younger 
than they actually are.  Once the character is age 15-up, they are usually 
played by actors who are over 18.  So I see absolutely no reason why our kids 
can't continue to do the films even into their twenties.  It's an accepted 
convention, and will make filming go faster once they're past that age when 
their time is restricted.  

As for their education, American child actors tutored on the set often wind  
up in Harvard or other such very hard-to-get-into schools, and do well there 
despite breaks from school for filming.  I don't know how they do it, except 
that they must be more mature and goal-oriented than the average kid their 
age.  I think it's amazing and highly commendable that they're be able to get 
a good education while still working (if that's what they want to do).  Jodie 
Foster and Brooke Shields are two who immediately come to mind as having gone 
to Ivy League colleges while still making films.  Our kids can do it if they 
want to.  

And as for Tom Felton wanting to go fishing -- quite honestly, Draco doesn't 
have that many scenes in any of the books (or movies).  It shouldn't be a big 
dent in Tom's schedule to shoot those scenes.  If he had to be replaced, it 
wouldn't be as big a blow as if one of the main characters were replaced, 
although I'd prefer to keep the cast intact.  If Dan were the one who wanted 
to fish instead of act, that would be different.  He carries each film on his 
own shoulders, is in nearly every scene, so he has much more of a workload 
than anyone else.  If he wanted more free time, that would be a serious 
problem.  I'm glad he seems to be enjoying himself so much.  My first 
reaction when I saw the publicity photos from the CoS DVD release was, "Dan 
looks like he's having great fun!"  Rupert was making faces, which seems 
normal for him (he seems to be quite a funny guy), Emma was "posing" so she 
must have had some recent modeling training or is modeling herself after 
someone (Britney Spears or a model, same pose works either way).  But Dan 
just looks joyful in nearly every picture.  Since he's the one who has the 
most work to do, I'm glad he's still so happy!

Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 22 16:55:19 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 12:55:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <10c.22e15f1c.2bd6cdf7@aol.com>

Yep I do!   If Felton wants to fish fine just finish harry potter!  If he has 
some more scenes in the Order of the Phoneix then what?
Kyle Longbottom 


In a message dated 4/22/03 11:54:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
artsylynda at aol.com writes:

> 
> 
> In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> >can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> >playing school kids?
> >
> >~Faith~
> >
> 
> oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or films in 
> the 
> US that feature "high school" kids (which is what our kids will be playing 
> when they're in their twenties if they're still doing HP films) are played 
> by 
> actors in their twenties.  "Smallville" (a TV series on the WB network) 
> stars 
> Tom Welling who's at least 23, but he's playing 16.  "Beverly Hills 90210" 
> which I never watched, but you may have heard of, was a TV series with a 
> whole group of young people who were supposed to be in high school, then 
> college and adult life, but they all started out over 18.  "Friends" is 
> supposed to be people in their twenties, but the actress who plays "Phoebe" 
> 
> just turned 40!  They hire actors over 18 as often as possible so they can 
> use them for longer hours, with no tutoring problems and no law requiring 
> them to only work so many hours per day (3 or 4, I've forgotten), which 
> severely limits filming time.  These are US laws (and shows), it may be 
> different in Britain, I don't know. In films, the only child actors playing 
> 
> their age are usually 13 and younger, most often playing kids even younger 
> than they actually are.  Once the character is age 15-up, they are usually 
> played by actors who are over 18.  So I see absolutely no reason why our 
> kids 
> can't continue to do the films even into their twenties.  It's an accepted 
> convention, and will make filming go faster once they're past that age when 
> 
> their time is restricted.  
> 
> As for their education, American child actors tutored on the set often wind 
>  
> up in Harvard or other such very hard-to-get-into schools, and do well 
> there 
> despite breaks from school for filming.  I don't know how they do it, 
> except 
> that they must be more mature and goal-oriented than the average kid their 
> age.  I think it's amazing and highly commendable that they're be able to 
> get 
> a good education while still working (if that's what they want to do).  
> Jodie 
> Foster and Brooke Shields are two who immediately come to mind as having 
> gone 
> to Ivy League colleges while still making films.  Our kids can do it if 
> they 
> want to.  
> 
> And as for Tom Felton wanting to go fishing -- quite honestly, Draco 
> doesn't 
> have that many scenes in any of the books (or movies).  It shouldn't be a 
> big 
> dent in Tom's schedule to shoot those scenes.  If he had to be replaced, it 
> 
> wouldn't be as big a blow as if one of the main characters were replaced, 
> although I'd prefer to keep the cast intact.  If Dan were the one who 
> wanted 
> to fish instead of act, that would be different.  He carries each film on 
> his 
> own shoulders, is in nearly every scene, so he has much more of a workload 
> than anyone else.  If he wanted more free time, that would be a serious 
> problem.  I'm glad he seems to be enjoying himself so much.  My first 
> reaction when I saw the publicity photos from the CoS DVD release was, "Dan 
> 
> looks like he's having great fun!"  Rupert was making faces, which seems 
> normal for him (he seems to be quite a funny guy), Emma was "posing" so she 
> 
> must have had some recent modeling training or is modeling herself after 
> someone (Britney Spears or a model, same pose works either way).  But Dan 
> just looks joyful in nearly every picture.  Since he's the one who has the 
> most work to do, I'm glad he's still so happy!
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA



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




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Tue Apr 22 16:59:28 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:28 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]concerns about PoA and future films
In-Reply-To: <1ec.719d389.2bd6bed5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b83sdg+e3jl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> > can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> > playing school kids?
> > 
> > ~Faith~
> > 
> 
> oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or 
films in the 
> US that feature "high school" kids (which is what our kids will be 
playing 
> when they're in their twenties if they're still doing HP films) 
are played by 
> actors in their twenties.  "Smallville" (a TV series on the WB 
network) stars 
> Tom Welling who's at least 23, but he's playing 16.  "Beverly 
Hills 90210" 
> which I never watched, but you may have heard of, was a TV series 
with a 
> whole group of young people who were supposed to be in high 
school, then 
> college and adult life, but they all started out over 
18.  "Friends" is 
> supposed to be people in their twenties, but the actress who 
plays "Phoebe" 
> just turned 40!  They hire actors over 18 as often as possible so 
they can 
> use them for longer hours, with no tutoring problems and no law 
requiring 
> them to only work so many hours per day (3 or 4, I've forgotten), 
which 
> severely limits filming time.  These are US laws (and shows), it 
may be 
> different in Britain, I don't know. In films, the only child 
actors playing 
> their age are usually 13 and younger, most often playing kids even 
younger 
> than they actually are.  Once the character is age 15-up, they are 
usually 
> played by actors who are over 18.  So I see absolutely no reason 
why our kids 
> can't continue to do the films even into their twenties.  It's an 
accepted 
> convention, and will make filming go faster once they're past that 
age when 
> their time is restricted.  
> 
> As for their education, American child actors tutored on the set 
often wind  
> up in Harvard or other such very hard-to-get-into schools, and do 
well there 
> despite breaks from school for filming.  I don't know how they do 
it, except 
> that they must be more mature and goal-oriented than the average 
kid their 
> age.  I think it's amazing and highly commendable that they're be 
able to get 
> a good education while still working (if that's what they want to 
do).  Jodie 
> Foster and Brooke Shields are two who immediately come to mind as 
having gone 
> to Ivy League colleges while still making films.  Our kids can do 
it if they 
> want to.  
> 
> And as for Tom Felton wanting to go fishing -- quite honestly, 
Draco doesn't 
> have that many scenes in any of the books (or movies).  It 
shouldn't be a big 
> dent in Tom's schedule to shoot those scenes.  If he had to be 
replaced, it 
> wouldn't be as big a blow as if one of the main characters were 
replaced, 
> although I'd prefer to keep the cast intact.  If Dan were the one 
who wanted 
> to fish instead of act, that would be different.  He carries each 
film on his 
> own shoulders, is in nearly every scene, so he has much more of a 
workload 
> than anyone else.  If he wanted more free time, that would be a 
serious 
> problem.  I'm glad he seems to be enjoying himself so much.  My 
first 
> reaction when I saw the publicity photos from the CoS DVD release 
was, "Dan 
> looks like he's having great fun!"  Rupert was making faces, which 
seems 
> normal for him (he seems to be quite a funny guy), Emma 
was "posing" so she 
> must have had some recent modeling training or is modeling herself 
after 
> someone (Britney Spears or a model, same pose works either way).  
But Dan 
> just looks joyful in nearly every picture.  Since he's the one who 
has the 
> most work to do, I'm glad he's still so happy!
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Have you ever seen Dan not happy? I haven't, and you are right he 
carries the whole franchise on his shoulders and seems to really 
enjoy it.

You know if the cast (kids) carry on to the end, Warners could start 
making up sequels and they could spend their whole acting life in 
the wizard world.

WF





From manda at qx.net  Tue Apr 22 20:09:54 2003
From: manda at qx.net (Amanda Pressnell)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 13:09:54 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <b82v9o+o5qq@eGroups.com>
References: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3EA53F22.226.526A43@localhost>

On 22 Apr 2003 at 8:42, origamiwizard wrote:
> SusanBones2003 said:
> > I write (with many thanks to both Richelle and GulPlum):
> > Such a comparison couldn't come fast enough. I think I made the 
> wrong 
> > choice and will have to face up to it and buy the other one.... JenD
> 
> I bought the widescreen version and have been pondering the comparison
> (s) with the fullscreen.

I own the widescreen DVD and I borrowed the fullscreen one from the library over the weekend. To be honest, I couldn't tell much difference between the two besides what 
you'd expect. Both are perfectly watchable. Personally, though, I still prefer the widescreen. There are situations where some characters are half-in-half-out of the shot in the 
fullscreen version that *really* annoys me. For example, when Mrs. Weasley is confronting Ron, Harry, Fred and George at the Burrow, half of one of the twins is cut out. 
Grr. And in the car right after they crash when Ron says "Look at my wand!", I couldn't. The wand is right at the edge and my TV screen is slightly rounded so I could hardly 
see any of the wand. So I'm still happy with my choice. But keep in mind I am a huge widescreen fan (even though I don't have the biggest TV). I'd much rather see the 
actors standing on the sides of the screen instead of more of the wall behind their heads.

I am still looking forward to seeing the screen captures, though. I first saw the first movie on VHS and got very used to the fullscreen version before buying the widescreen 
DVD in December. It was much tougher this time around for me to tell what exactly was different.

Manda
--
http://www.mandamia.com



From manda at qx.net  Tue Apr 22 21:26:41 2003
From: manda at qx.net (Amanda Pressnell)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:26:41 -0700
Subject: Shortcut to the Chamber tour (DVD)
Message-ID: <3EA55121.7935.98BA07@localhost>

When you get to the end of the Chamber of Secrets tour it mentions a shortcut that will help you bypass the questions next time. Here's the instructions:

http://www.dvdeastereggs.com/showEgg.php?eggid=1090

Basically, at the very beginning (while that annoying narrator is still yapping) press the left and then up arrows. That will highlight a hidden arrow.

That takes care of that. Does anyone have any hints for the Forbidden Forest game? I tried for a while but it gave me motion sickness speeding along all those paths. LOL.

Manda
--
http://www.mandamia.com



From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 22 19:07:47 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 15:07:47 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Shortcut to the Chamber tour (DVD)
Message-ID: <1ac.13b36407.2bd6ed03@aol.com>

If you go where the spiders dont go you get out !!

Kyle Longbottom


In a message dated 4/22/03 2:29:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, manda at qx.net 
writes:

> 
> When you get to the end of the Chamber of Secrets tour it mentions a 
> shortcut that will help you bypass the questions next time. Here's the 
> instructions:
> 
> http://www.dvdeastereggs.com/showEgg.php?eggid=1090
> 
> Basically, at the very beginning (while that annoying narrator is still 
> yapping) press the left and then up arrows. That will highlight a hidden 
> arrow.
> 
> That takes care of that. Does anyone have any hints for the Forbidden 
> Forest game? I tried for a while but it gave me motion sickness speeding 
> along all those paths. LOL.
> 
> Manda
> --
> http://www.mandamia.com



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




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 22 21:11:31 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:11:31 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <1ec.719d389.2bd6bed5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b84b63+10oh0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> > can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> > playing school kids?
> > 
> > ~Faith~
> > 
> 
> oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or 
> films in the US that feature "high school" kids (which is what our 
> kids will be playing when they're in their twenties if they're still
>  doing HP films) are played by  actors in their twenties.  
> "Smallville" (a TV series on the WB network) stars Tom Welling who's
> at least 23, but he's playing 16.  
> 
> ...edited..
>
> Lynda 
> * * *
> "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


boy_mn:
What destroys young actor's careers is not age but looks. Many
incredibly cute kids pass through puberty and become only marginally
good looking adults.

Take- 
Tony Dow and Jerry Mathers (Wally & Beaver) of Leave it to Beaver
(1957). Actors who once they developed their adult looks, never saw
the light of day in the acting world again. Although, Jerry Mathers is
still trying desparately to cash in on his 'Beaver' fame by doing
guest shots on TV.

Fred Savage (Kevin Arnold) of 'The Wonder Years'. A heart-throb of a
young boy who, like many dominated teen mags like '16' & 'Bop'. When
he reached his teen years his looks completely changed, and while he
did get a short lived series playing an adult, for the most part he
has never been heard of again.

Wil Wheaton - most famous for his role of Wesley Crusher on Star
Trek-NG. He has over 43 credits and made two movie with Richard
Dreyfuss, and of course, the classic "Stand by Me" with River Phoenix.
Yet once, his appearance change, and he took on his adult appearance,
he has struggle to find work. I've always been a big Wesley
Crusher/Wil Wheaton fan. ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/ ). He has been
struggling against the change is his looks and against being
perpetually seen as Wesly Crusher.

Now take -
Mccaulay Culkin - he still looks pretty much the same. His features
didn't change dramatically as he aged. While, mostly due to family
trouble, he dropped out of sight for a while, he has been doing very
well on the London theater stage, and has been in a long running play
in which he plays a 15 year old boy (he's 23). Keep in mind that he is
short. 

Micheal J Fox - who because he was short and somewhat boyish looking,
has been playing character who ages are far below his own. I think his
first role was, at age 16 or 17, to play a boy who was age 12 on stage.

Frankie Muniz of "Malcolm in the Middle" (age 18) who plays a
character who just this season, I believe, moved from Junior High to
highschool. So his character is 13 or 14 and Frankie is age 18. Again
because he is short and retained his boyish looks as he aged. 

The extreme examples of this would be Emanual Lewis and [Sorry, I'm
drawing a blank on the other short black kid who's career is in the
dumper since he was no longer able to play kid roles].

Point-
Our trio of actors can and will continue to play their Harry Potter
roles as long as they look the parts regardless of age. 

Rupert Grint has changed dramatically but not badly. He's lost his
round little boy face and his features are sharper and more angular,
but I still think he looks the part. But if his appearance continues
to change, there is a good possibility he will lose the role.

Daniel Radcliffe has also lost that round little boy appearance and he
does have a very mature look to him, but he is still short, still
looks young, and can probably carry the role throught PoA. But if he
has a substantial growth spurt and his facial features become more
sharp and defined, there is a good change we will not see him in GoF.
Remember that GoF is probably 3 and possibly 4 years away.

So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still play
the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish looks. One
of the big killers is height. It's hard to believe that a person 6 ft.
2 in. with sharp angular features is still in highschool.

For reference -
Clark Kent - Tom Welling is 26
Frodo - Elijah Wood is 22
Justin Berfield - Malcom's older brother is 17 (Malcom/Fankie is 18)
Kevin Arnold - Fred Savage is 27

Just a thought

bboy_mn





From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Tue Apr 22 20:31:22 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:31:22 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b00baca0245e4f0@[217.154.249.28]>

JenD said:-

>I hope I didn't sound patronizing about British characters and
>accents.

No, not at all.

> I never even thought about it concerning Americans. Remember
>the out-take where the pudding hits Mrs. Mason over the head? Before
>that, she and her husband both spoke with what may have been American
>accents. He sounded Mid-western to me and she sounded like a somewhat
>patrician Southerner (we do have them you know!!! Virginians
>especially...).

How interesting. They both spoke with a Northern English accent, and Mrs M
had that 'upwardly mobile' pretentiousness that I mentioned earlier.

Regards,
Nicholas





From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Apr 22 21:30:05 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:30:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <f9.2c579d32.2bd70e5d@aol.com>


Well as for Wil Wheaton not getting any roles now!  He is on the board of sag 
and Melissa Gilbert.  So I don't think they going to have the time to act.  I 
know its like they still in high school and they tower over the teachers!!  
But they could always work around that!  Since Professor Flitwick is so 
small!

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/22/03 5:13:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> >In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> >HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> >
> >>can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> >>playing school kids?
> >>
> >>~Faith~
> >>
> >
> >oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or 
> >films in the US that feature "high school" kids (which is what our 
> >kids will be playing when they're in their twenties if they're still
> > doing HP films) are played by  actors in their twenties.  
> >"Smallville" (a TV series on the WB network) stars Tom Welling who's
> >at least 23, but he's playing 16.  
> >
> >...edited..
> >
> >Lynda 
> >* * *
> >"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA
> 
> 
> boy_mn:
> What destroys young actor's careers is not age but looks. Many
> incredibly cute kids pass through puberty and become only marginally
> good looking adults.
> 
> Take- 
> Tony Dow and Jerry Mathers (Wally &Beaver) of Leave it to Beaver
> (1957). Actors who once they developed their adult looks, never saw
> the light of day in the acting world again. Although, Jerry Mathers is
> still trying desparately to cash in on his 'Beaver' fame by doing
> guest shots on TV.
> 
> Fred Savage (Kevin Arnold) of 'The Wonder Years'. A heart-throb of a
> young boy who, like many dominated teen mags like '16' &'Bop'. When
> he reached his teen years his looks completely changed, and while he
> did get a short lived series playing an adult, for the most part he
> has never been heard of again.
> 
> Wil Wheaton - most famous for his role of Wesley Crusher on Star
> Trek-NG. He has over 43 credits and made two movie with Richard
> Dreyfuss, and of course, the classic "Stand by Me" with River Phoenix.
> Yet once, his appearance change, and he took on his adult appearance,
> he has struggle to find work. I've always been a big Wesley
> Crusher/Wil Wheaton fan. ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/ ). He has been
> struggling against the change is his looks and against being
> perpetually seen as Wesly Crusher.
> 
> Now take -
> Mccaulay Culkin - he still looks pretty much the same. His features
> didn't change dramatically as he aged. While, mostly due to family
> trouble, he dropped out of sight for a while, he has been doing very
> well on the London theater stage, and has been in a long running play
> in which he plays a 15 year old boy (he's 23). Keep in mind that he is
> short. 
> 
> Micheal J Fox - who because he was short and somewhat boyish looking,
> has been playing character who ages are far below his own. I think his
> first role was, at age 16 or 17, to play a boy who was age 12 on stage.
> 
> Frankie Muniz of "Malcolm in the Middle" (age 18) who plays a
> character who just this season, I believe, moved from Junior High to
> highschool. So his character is 13 or 14 and Frankie is age 18. Again
> because he is short and retained his boyish looks as he aged. 
> 
> The extreme examples of this would be Emanual Lewis and [Sorry, I'm
> drawing a blank on the other short black kid who's career is in the
> dumper since he was no longer able to play kid roles].
> 
> Point-
> Our trio of actors can and will continue to play their Harry Potter
> roles as long as they look the parts regardless of age. 
> 
> Rupert Grint has changed dramatically but not badly. He's lost his
> round little boy face and his features are sharper and more angular,
> but I still think he looks the part. But if his appearance continues
> to change, there is a good possibility he will lose the role.
> 
> Daniel Radcliffe has also lost that round little boy appearance and he
> does have a very mature look to him, but he is still short, still
> looks young, and can probably carry the role throught PoA. But if he
> has a substantial growth spurt and his facial features become more
> sharp and defined, there is a good change we will not see him in GoF.
> Remember that GoF is probably 3 and possibly 4 years away.
> 
> So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still play
> the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish looks. One
> of the big killers is height. It's hard to believe that a person 6 ft.
> 2 in. with sharp angular features is still in highschool.
> 
> For reference -
> Clark Kent - Tom Welling is 26
> Frodo - Elijah Wood is 22
> Justin Berfield - Malcom's older brother is 17 (Malcom/Fankie is 18)
> Kevin Arnold - Fred Savage is 27
> 
> Just a thought
> 
> bboy_mn
> 



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




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Tue Apr 22 22:07:31 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 22:07:31 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b84b63+10oh0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b84ef3+e0u4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> > In a message dated 4/21/2003 3:55:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> > HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> > 
> > > can you picture 'the dream team' in their twenties, 
> > > playing school kids?
> > > 
> > > ~Faith~
> > > 
> > 
> > oh yes, absolutely! It happens all the time.  Most TV series or 
> > films in the US that feature "high school" kids (which is what 
our 
> > kids will be playing when they're in their twenties if they're 
still
> >  doing HP films) are played by  actors in their twenties.  
> > "Smallville" (a TV series on the WB network) stars Tom Welling 
who's
> > at least 23, but he's playing 16.  
> > 
> > ...edited..
> >
> > Lynda 
> > * * *
> > "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA
> 
> 
> boy_mn:
> What destroys young actor's careers is not age but looks. Many
> incredibly cute kids pass through puberty and become only 
marginally
> good looking adults.
> 
> Take- 
> Tony Dow and Jerry Mathers (Wally & Beaver) of Leave it to Beaver
> (1957). Actors who once they developed their adult looks, never saw
> the light of day in the acting world again. Although, Jerry 
Mathers is
> still trying desparately to cash in on his 'Beaver' fame by doing
> guest shots on TV.
> 
> Fred Savage (Kevin Arnold) of 'The Wonder Years'. A heart-throb of 
a
> young boy who, like many dominated teen mags like '16' & 'Bop'. 
When
> he reached his teen years his looks completely changed, and while 
he
> did get a short lived series playing an adult, for the most part he
> has never been heard of again.
> 
> Wil Wheaton - most famous for his role of Wesley Crusher on Star
> Trek-NG. He has over 43 credits and made two movie with Richard
> Dreyfuss, and of course, the classic "Stand by Me" with River 
Phoenix.
> Yet once, his appearance change, and he took on his adult 
appearance,
> he has struggle to find work. I've always been a big Wesley
> Crusher/Wil Wheaton fan. ( http://www.wilwheaton.net/ ). He has 
been
> struggling against the change is his looks and against being
> perpetually seen as Wesly Crusher.
> 
> Now take -
> Mccaulay Culkin - he still looks pretty much the same. His features
> didn't change dramatically as he aged. While, mostly due to family
> trouble, he dropped out of sight for a while, he has been doing 
very
> well on the London theater stage, and has been in a long running 
play
> in which he plays a 15 year old boy (he's 23). Keep in mind that 
he is
> short. 
> 
> Micheal J Fox - who because he was short and somewhat boyish 
looking,
> has been playing character who ages are far below his own. I think 
his
> first role was, at age 16 or 17, to play a boy who was age 12 on 
stage.
> 
> Frankie Muniz of "Malcolm in the Middle" (age 18) who plays a
> character who just this season, I believe, moved from Junior High 
to
> highschool. So his character is 13 or 14 and Frankie is age 18. 
Again
> because he is short and retained his boyish looks as he aged. 
> 
> The extreme examples of this would be Emanual Lewis and [Sorry, I'm
> drawing a blank on the other short black kid who's career is in the
> dumper since he was no longer able to play kid roles].
> 
> Point-
> Our trio of actors can and will continue to play their Harry Potter
> roles as long as they look the parts regardless of age. 
> 
> Rupert Grint has changed dramatically but not badly. He's lost his
> round little boy face and his features are sharper and more 
angular,
> but I still think he looks the part. But if his appearance 
continues
> to change, there is a good possibility he will lose the role.
> 
> Daniel Radcliffe has also lost that round little boy appearance 
and he
> does have a very mature look to him, but he is still short, still
> looks young, and can probably carry the role throught PoA. But if 
he
> has a substantial growth spurt and his facial features become more
> sharp and defined, there is a good change we will not see him in 
GoF.
> Remember that GoF is probably 3 and possibly 4 years away.
> 
> So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still 
play
> the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish looks. 
One
> of the big killers is height. It's hard to believe that a person 6 
ft.
> 2 in. with sharp angular features is still in highschool.
> 
> For reference -
> Clark Kent - Tom Welling is 26
> Frodo - Elijah Wood is 22
> Justin Berfield - Malcom's older brother is 17 (Malcom/Fankie is 
18)
> Kevin Arnold - Fred Savage is 27
> 
> Just a thought
> 
> bboy_mn

>From what I have heard, GOF will go into preproduction starting in 
November. It will more than likely be filmed as one and then it will 
be decided if it  should be broken into 2 parts.

This implies that it will be released Christmas 2004

WF





From geri510 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 22 23:31:32 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 23:31:32 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b84ef3+e0u4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b84jck+f12h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "hpoldfan" <WFeuchter at m...> 
wrote:
> From what I have heard, GOF will go into preproduction starting in 
> November. It will more than likely be filmed as one and then it 
will 
> be decided if it  should be broken into 2 parts.
> 
> This implies that it will be released Christmas 2004
> 
> WF


How can it be released in Christmas 2004 if PoA is being released in 
June 2004? Wouldn't they wait at least a year to release the next HP 
movie?




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 00:25:22 2003
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:25:22 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <b7ckqa+97fq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b84mhi+onbd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> http://www.comingsoon.net/cgi-bin/archive/fullnews.cgi?
> newsid1049921488,95419
> 
> Columbus has already done enough damage....Hire Terry Gilliam or 
> keep Cuaron....
> 
> Columbus' style is too elementary and he doesn't have a firm grasp 
> of what the characters are supposed to be...

*shudder* Agreed. And while they're at it, they could fire that 
Kloves guy. He has to shoulder some of the blame for lifting 
Rowling's work wholesale.

Some people seem to be of the opinion that all fans want is a 
straight translation, like a book on tape + video. I couldn't 
disagree more. Book adaptations require filmmakers with enough 
understanding of film to realize that books and movies are totally 
different media and should be treated as such.




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 00:50:03 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:50:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <1c2.887a1f3.2bd73d3b@aol.com>

Just get it done with the same cast!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 


In a message dated 4/22/03 7:33:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
geri510 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "hpoldfan" <WFeuchter at m...> 
> wrote:
> >From what I have heard, GOF will go into preproduction starting in 
> >November. It will more than likely be filmed as one and then it 
> will 
> >be decided if it  should be broken into 2 parts.
> >
> >This implies that it will be released Christmas 2004
> >
> >WF
> 
> 
> How can it be released in Christmas 2004 if PoA is being released in 
> June 2004? Wouldn't they wait at least a year to release the next HP 
> movie?
> 
> 



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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 00:55:29 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:55:29 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please, No....
Message-ID: <77.f30aa2d.2bd73e81@aol.com>

But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a sudden you 
dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that necessary 
but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and everything is 
changing!!

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/22/03 8:28:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
saintbacchus at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
> <daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> >http://www.comingsoon.net/cgi-bin/archive/fullnews.cgi?
> >newsid1049921488,95419
> >
> >Columbus has already done enough damage....Hire Terry Gilliam or 
> >keep Cuaron....
> >
> >Columbus' style is too elementary and he doesn't have a firm grasp 
> >of what the characters are supposed to be...
> 
> *shudder* Agreed. And while they're at it, they could fire that 
> Kloves guy. He has to shoulder some of the blame for lifting 
> Rowling's work wholesale.
> 
> Some people seem to be of the opinion that all fans want is a 
> straight translation, like a book on tape + video. I couldn't 
> disagree more. Book adaptations require filmmakers with enough 
> understanding of film to realize that books and movies are totally 
> different media and should be treated as such.
> 



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




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 23 00:56:54 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:56:54 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b84b63+10oh0@eGroups.com>
References: <b84b63+10oh0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <19178433159.20030422175654@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 2:11:31 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com wrote:

> So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still play
> the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish looks.

I don't really see the point.

Why would the actors have to retain "very young, childish"
looks, if they are characters that are growing up in the
books.

I don't expect Harry or Ron or anyone else to keep looking
like 12 year olds, if they are supposed to be fifteen and
older in coming movies.

All three actors already look very different from the
characters described in the books, and while JKR doesn't
describe changes in their looks very much, I still assume
they happen.

So, if Rupert's face changes more or Daniel's, I really fail
to see why that should make them lose their roles, if they
want to continue.

All the kids who've been following the story are changing,
too, and new, young viewers probably wouldn't expect 16 year
old Harry to look like a little kid, either.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 01:08:48 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 21:08:48 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <1ed.739aaa1.2bd741a0@aol.com>

Me either I can't understand why they have to be the same since its a school 
for kids??  They change!  Hermoine is not going to be flat chested much 
longer!  Draco, Harry and Ron are going to be either taller or their voices 
are going to change!  You ever notice that all the actors never have any 
zits!!  I had some when i was there age but with young teen actors you never 
see any zits!!

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/22/03 9:03:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
siskiou at earthlink.net writes:

> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 2:11:31 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> >So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still play
> >the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish looks.
> 
> I don't really see the point.
> 
> Why would the actors have to retain "very young, childish"
> looks, if they are characters that are growing up in the
> books.
> 
> I don't expect Harry or Ron or anyone else to keep looking
> like 12 year olds, if they are supposed to be fifteen and
> older in coming movies.
> 
> All three actors already look very different from the
> characters described in the books, and while JKR doesn't
> describe changes in their looks very much, I still assume
> they happen.
> 
> So, if Rupert's face changes more or Daniel's, I really fail
> to see why that should make them lose their roles, if they
> want to continue.
> 
> All the kids who've been following the story are changing,
> too, and new, young viewers probably wouldn't expect 16 year
> old Harry to look like a little kid, either.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Susanne               mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Apr 23 01:19:49 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 02:19:49 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <b832ha+8qqk@eGroups.com>
References: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030423020625.00974c90@plum.cream.org>

At 10:37 22/04/03 , origamiwizard wrote:

<snip>

>I bought the widescreen version and have been pondering the comparison
>(s) with the fullscreen. *thinks back to HPSS comparisons*  I was
>just about to break down and buy the fullscreen version too, but I
>think I will wait until I see your brilliant conclusions and
>comparisons! Where will it be posted?  (Sorry, uninformed Newbie here.)

Well... It seems like my conclusions would be of great interest to you, 
then.:-)

>OrigamiWizard, who impatiently twiddles her thumbs and hums to
>herself, as she awaits Richard's screen captures and insights.

Wait no longer. It's taken me a lot more time than I envisaged, partially 
because I decided I had to write a *LOT*  of text to explain my ideas, and 
partially because something else cropped up which required a lot of my time 
and energy today.

That fact that Richelle and I started off with almost 100 pictures which I 
had to boil down to a manageable number and couldn't decide which had to go 
once I'd reached 50 didn't help much, either. Richelle's away until the end 
of the week, so I just might get away with not including two pictures of 
which she was particularly fond. :-)

I'm far from happy with the page's layout, so any comments or constructive 
criticism would be gratefully received: http://plum.cream.org/HP/cos/dvd.htm

BTW Heidi Tandy (or other TLC editors), if you're reading this, please feel 
free to add a link from TLC. I'll  probably write in tomorrow anyway. :-)

While I'm writing, here's a picture we did which wasn't germane to the 
topic at hand, for those who've not yet bought their home copy but didn't 
get to see the post-credits sequence at the cinema:

http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/23458.JPG


--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's bushed and would like to warn folks that he'll 
be going to bed in about half an hour if there are any urgent comments 
anyone wants to make (such as the page not working at all...)




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Wed Apr 23 01:36:48 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 01:36:48 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b84jck+f12h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b84qng+b2kd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "geri510" <geri510 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "hpoldfan" <WFeuchter at m...> 
> wrote:
> > From what I have heard, GOF will go into preproduction starting 
in 
> > November. It will more than likely be filmed as one and then it 
> will 
> > be decided if it  should be broken into 2 parts.
> > 
> > This implies that it will be released Christmas 2004
> > 
> > WF
> 
> 
> How can it be released in Christmas 2004 if PoA is being released 
in 
> June 2004? Wouldn't they wait at least a year to release the next 
HP 
> movie?

Well how about 2005. Time does fly!
WF




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 03:37:50 2003
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 03:37:50 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <77.f30aa2d.2bd73e81@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b851qe+daac@eGroups.com>

Kyle Longbottom writes:

> But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a 
sudden you 
> dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that 
necessary 
> but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and 
everything is 
> changing!!

Did I miss something? We are talking about the Quidditch team, right?




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Wed Apr 23 05:17:15 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 05:17:15 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <77.f30aa2d.2bd73e81@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b857kr+j658@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a 
sudden you 
> dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that 
necessary 
> but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and 
everything is 
> changing!!
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 

Are you saying "keeping the same cast" is more important than nailing 
the right charactization for each character as well as a more 
superior handling in storytelling and direction?  

You keep putting down Cauron for "not keeping the same cast" and 
praising Columbus just because he "keep the same cast". Is that 
really all you care?!! Do you honestly think Columbus did a great job 
in the first two movies beside just "keeping the same cast"? 
  

Joan




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 06:31:26 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 06:31:26 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <19178433159.20030422175654@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b85bvu+gr6n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 2:11:31 PM, bboy_mn at y... wrote:
> 
> > So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and still
> > play the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young childish 
> >looks.


> 
> I don't really see the point.
> 
> Why would the actors have to retain "very young, childish"
> looks, if they are characters that are growing up in the
> books.
> 
> ...edited....
> 
> All the kids who've been following the story are changing,
> too, and new, young viewers probably wouldn't expect 16 year
> old Harry to look like a little kid, either.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Susanne     

bboy_mn:

You missed the point, it's not about IF they change, for certainly
they will and have changed; it's about HOW they change.

If Daniel is 16 and looks 30 he's (pardon the French) screwed, but if
he is 30 and looks 16 then he can continue to play the part.

Note the examples I gave in my original post.

Fred Savage - changed dramatically once he was firmly into puberty. I
have always suspected that was one of the reasons the show was canceled.

Micheal J. Fox - because he is small and looks young, has always
played parts much younger than he was. In the third "Back to the
Future" movie, Fox was 29 and played a highschool kid. Ben Affleck, on
the other hand, who is 9 years younger than Fox will NOT be playing
highschool kids when he is 30 (note: he's 31 now).

Frankie Muniz - who is short and very boyish looking, will probably be
able to play young characters for a long time. Like M.J.Fox, Muniz
could conceivably play a teenager when his is 30. Although, his
features are starting to sharpen, ft the change is too drastic, and
the 'cute boy' look goes away, it very possible the Frankie Muniz as
an actor will go with it.

Macaulay Culkin, who is 23, short and has boyish good looks, is still
able to believably play a teenager.

So, again, it's not IF you change, but HOW you change. Puberty has
been the death of many young actors.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From buffyeton at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 08:34:58 2003
From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (etonbuffy)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:34:58 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b85bvu+gr6n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b85j7i+t6dt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 2:11:31 PM, bboy_mn at y... wrote:
> > 
> > > So age is irrelevant, the actors could be in their 30's and 
still
> > > play the parts, AS LONG AS they retain their very young 
childish 
> > >looks.
> 
> 
> > 
> > I don't really see the point.
> > 
> > Why would the actors have to retain "very young, childish"
> > looks, if they are characters that are growing up in the
> > books.
> > 
> > ...edited....
> > 
> > All the kids who've been following the story are changing,
> > too, and new, young viewers probably wouldn't expect 16 year
> > old Harry to look like a little kid, either.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Best regards,
> >  Susanne     
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> You missed the point, it's not about IF they change, for certainly
> they will and have changed; it's about HOW they change.
> 
> If Daniel is 16 and looks 30 he's (pardon the French) screwed, but 
if
> he is 30 and looks 16 then he can continue to play the part.
> 
> Note the examples I gave in my original post.
> 
> Fred Savage - changed dramatically once he was firmly into puberty. 
I
> have always suspected that was one of the reasons the show was 
canceled.
> 
> Micheal J. Fox - because he is small and looks young, has always
> played parts much younger than he was. In the third "Back to the
> Future" movie, Fox was 29 and played a highschool kid. Ben Affleck, 
on
> the other hand, who is 9 years younger than Fox will NOT be playing
> highschool kids when he is 30 (note: he's 31 now).
> 
> Frankie Muniz - who is short and very boyish looking, will probably 
be
> able to play young characters for a long time. Like M.J.Fox, Muniz
> could conceivably play a teenager when his is 30. Although, his
> features are starting to sharpen, ft the change is too drastic, and
> the 'cute boy' look goes away, it very possible the Frankie Muniz as
> an actor will go with it.
> 
> Macaulay Culkin, who is 23, short and has boyish good looks, is 
still
> able to believably play a teenager.
> 
> So, again, it's not IF you change, but HOW you change. Puberty has
> been the death of many young actors.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> bboy_mn


Maybe it was just bad directing, but I never thought any of the three 
main actors were right for the parts.  So bring on a new cast!

Tam




From suzloua at hotmail.com  Wed Apr 23 12:13:03 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:13:03 +0100
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <Sea1-DAV31Ui6uPmEl900007384@hotmail.com>

bboy_mn wrote:
Mccaulay Culkin - he still looks pretty much the same. His features
didn't change dramatically as he aged. While, mostly due to family
trouble, he dropped out of sight for a while, he has been doing very
well on the London theater stage, and has been in a long running play
in which he plays a 15 year old boy (he's 23). Keep in mind that he is
short. 

Now I'm just nitpicking with:
Actually, if you're referring to that thing with Colin Hanks in it too, that's the wrong Culkin - I'm 99% sure it's Kieran, might be Rory but I think Rory's the little one from Signs. It's definitely not Macalauley though - I was in London on Monday, and I saw a poster for it on the tube. I can't remember what it's called... anyone in London care to help me out? Is it Our House or something like that? Gah!

But on the most part, I fully agree with your analysis. I think as long as our kids stay reasonably the same, we should be okay. And it's rather interesting to me that Rupert is shooting up, and Ron's supposed to be gangly, wheras Dan is taking his sweet time, and Harry's supposed to be short. Draco is supposed to be very pale and small, or that's the impression I got, and Felton has this to a tee - obviously some of it is good casting initially, but it's intriguing to me that they've managed to get kids who are actually mimicking the growth patterns of their characters!

Among your other examples, it's nice to see Frankie Muniz doing other stuff than Malcolm in the Middle, although he's still stuck on kids flicks. He seems like a cute kid, and it's always nice to see child actors suceed beyond the gap. As for Tom Welling on Smallville - 23? Wow. I thought he was only about 18 or 19. Who knew?!

Susan
who fancies the arse off Tom Welling, and is intrigued to know he's a little older than her - saucy...
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt


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




From suzloua at hotmail.com  Wed Apr 23 12:27:08 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:27:08 +0100
Subject: Please, No....
Message-ID: <Sea1-DAV39wD43oFLaq000074cf@hotmail.com>

Kyle Longbottom said:
But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a sudden you 
dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that necessary 
but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and everything is 
changing!!

And I stick my oar in with:
Kyle, come on. Columbus, god love him, isn't an AWFUL director; I'm sure many people loved Bicentennial Man. Well, some people. But he is an amateurish director when it comes to a plot of such delicacy. Kloves' screenplay is pretty shoddy too, but since writers are one step above the floor-cleaner on a film set, I guess we can't completely blame him. But Chris Columbus' direction was poor. Not unwatchable, but poor. 

But his directing talents are not what's under debate here. It's the casting. Obviously I can't know for sure, but I'd put a fair bit of money on Chris Columbus having little to no power in the casting arena. He's just there to milk his postition for his daughter ;) and tell Ron "Scared! More scared! Even scareder!".

Alfonso Cuaron, on the other hand, is a talented, Oscar-nominated director. He has done kid films (A Little Princess). He has done drama, plot twists, character development, all kinds of things which to me are integral to PoA. And I'm sorry to keep saying this, but I really couldn't give a rat's ass as to whether or not a few people disappear from the cast (and we're not talking half the cast - we have two cuts and one recast so far, all of whom are either unimportant or even unnoticeable) as long as he handles the important stuff okay. I'm sad we're either Quidditch-free or Quidditch-lite, but the Sirius Black storyline, the MWPP-Snape storyline, the Crookshanks v Scabbers/Hermione v Ron storyline - all of these are far more important to me than Quidditch - and most people here know I've made long and passionate arguments for keeping Quidditch in PoA.

Susan
hoping desperately her faith in Cuaron will be repaid, but not holding her breath...
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt


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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Apr 23 13:47:58 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:47:58 -0000
Subject: Accents
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00baca0245e4f0@[217.154.249.28]>
Message-ID: <b865ie+gg5s@eGroups.com>

Nicholas wrote in regards to the Masons' accents:> 
> How interesting. They both spoke with a Northern English accent, 
and Mrs M
> had that 'upwardly mobile' pretentiousness that I mentioned earlier.
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas
 
That's what Northen English accents sound like? Do you know American 
accents? Did they sound even faintly American at all to you?
I really am astonished. Either my ears are really letting me down or 
my, we (as in two peoples not sharing a common language...) have more 
in common than I ever guessed.
JenD




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 23 15:34:55 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:34:55 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <b85bvu+gr6n@eGroups.com>
References: <b85bvu+gr6n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <13328263218.20030423083455@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Tuesday, April 22, 2003, 11:31:26 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com wrote:

> You missed the point, it's not about IF they change, for certainly
> they will and have changed; it's about HOW they change.

Yep, I did miss the point <g>.

I overlooked that you were talking about 30 year olds.

Though I'm hoping it won't take quite *that* long for JKR to
finish the last two books!

I was more thinking late teens, early twenties, for the
current actors, if they decide they want to stay with HP.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From Audra1976 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 17:10:07 2003
From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:10:07 EDT
Subject: Accents
Message-ID: <111.22d1861b.2bd822ef@aol.com>

Watching the CoS DVD with my boyfriend, I brought up our discussion about 
accents, and how Tom Felton as Draco sometimes slips into a "lower class" 
British accent, as someone here mentioned, which probably doesn't fit in with 
his "higher class" character.  

My boyfriend then pointed out the fact that so many upper-middle class kids 
here in The States try to use slang and talk like they're from the streets 
just to sound cool, and maybe that's what Draco is doing.  He definitely has 
a point about American kids doing that. I don't know about British kids.  
Does that go on over there too?  If so, maybe that explains it.

-Audra-


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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Wed Apr 23 17:20:53 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:20:53 -0000
Subject: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
Message-ID: <b86i1l+7cdk@eGroups.com>

Well, you may have thought this topic has already been done to death, 
but I've got a heads up for you: I can't say whether this is 100% 
reliable, but in an article in a German magazine, available with a 
partial translation at danradcliffe.com (please, somebody tell me how 
to make a direct link)Daniel mentions a "quidditch match in which the 
special effects will put everything in the shade--It's called: 
Quidditch in Lightning and thunder!" Good news for all the quidditch 
lovers! You'll find the article at the top of the news&updates, wich 
is right on the first page. Enjoy!

Sophia




From CLShannon at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 17:32:58 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:32:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Re: Please, No....
Message-ID: <11d.2156a31e.2bd8284a@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/23/03 5:32:10 AM, suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

<< 
But his directing talents are not what's under debate here. It's the casting. 
Obviously I can't know for sure, but I'd put a fair bit of money on Chris 
Columbus having little to no power in the casting arena. He's just there to 
milk his postition for his daughter ;) and tell Ron "Scared! More scared! 
Even scareder!". >>

Actually, Columbus had quite a lot to do with the casting of Daniel, at least 
that's the story I've read in more than a few places (Entertainment Weekly as 
an example). He worked with the casting director and auditioned many kids and 
the story is that the casting director got frustrated and said, 'I just don't 
know what you want!', whereupon Columbus pointed to a DVD on the shelf with 
Daniel's picture on it (it was David Copperfield) and Columbus said, 'that 
kid, I want him..' . I'm paraphrasing here, but the articles I've read have 
the exact quotes. 
And David Heyman seeing Daniel at the theater with his parents happened 
either right after this or at the same time because Heyman was also 
determined to talk to Daniel's parents about having Daniel audition. Heyman 
met with all of them for tea and the rest is history ;-)
Cindy



From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 23 17:34:00 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 10:34:00 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <b86i1l+7cdk@eGroups.com>
References: <b86i1l+7cdk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <713966772.20030423103400@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Wednesday, April 23, 2003, 10:20:53 AM, sophiamcl at hotmail.com wrote:

> You'll find the article at the top of the news&updates, wich 
> is right on the first page. Enjoy!

Haven't read a "Bravo" forever <g>.

The article also claims that Heyman said it's 90% sure
Daniel will be back for the fourth movie.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From Audra1976 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 17:35:22 2003
From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:35:22 EDT
Subject: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison 
Message-ID: <1de.766328d.2bd828da@aol.com>

The comparison page is great!  All in all, I'm glad I went with the 
widescreen version. I just have one comment to make.  On the clock at the 
Weasley house, Richard says the clock clearly shows only 8 hands, but I think 
I see all 9.  In the fullscreen capture, I see Fred, George, and Ron at 
"Lost", then 2 at "Quidditch," and I see 4 at "Garden."  3 + 2 + 4 = 9 
Weasleys.  I think you might be missing the 2nd one in the "Quidditch" 
position.  It is pretty obscured by the opposite ends of the hands of the 
family members at "Garden."

-Audra-


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




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 18:28:46 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:28:46 -0000
Subject: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <713966772.20030423103400@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b86m0u+f8ea@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Wednesday, April 23, 2003, 10:20:53 AM, sophiamcl at h... wrote:
> 
> > You'll find the article at the top of the news&updates, wich 
> > is right on the first page. Enjoy!
> 
> Haven't read a "Bravo" forever <g>.
> 
> The article also claims that Heyman said it's 90% sure
> Daniel will be back for the fourth movie.
> 
>
Actually it says 'third movie' which of course has to be a mistake!




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 23 18:36:55 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 11:36:55 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <b86m0u+f8ea@eGroups.com>
References: <b86m0u+f8ea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1587743337.20030423113655@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Wednesday, April 23, 2003, 11:28:46 AM, geri510 at yahoo.com wrote:

> Actually it says 'third movie' which of course has to be a mistake!

Nope! It's at the very end of the article and says: Zu 90%
wird Dan auch in Teil vier wieder Harry Potter sein.

"Teil vier" translates to "part four".

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 19:03:13 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:03:13 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <Sea1-DAV31Ui6uPmEl900007384@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <b86o1h+k4de@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Atherton" <suzloua at h...> wrote:
> bboy_mn wrote:
> Mccaulay Culkin - ... he has been doing very well on the London 
> theater stage, and has been in a long running play in which he 
> plays a 15 year old boy (he's 23). ....
> 
> Now I'm just nitpicking with:
> Actually, if you're referring to that thing with Colin Hanks in it
too, that's the wrong Culkin - I'm 99% sure it's Kieran, might be Rory
but I think Rory's the little one from Signs. It's definitely not
Macalauley though -
> 
> ...edited..
> 
> Susan

bboy_mn:

Actually, is was Macaulay, Dan Radcliffe even commented on it in an
interview. The stage play which had a long and successful run in
London, is now playing on Broadway. The play is "Madame Melville".

"His role is that of a little lost sheep with a curling smile, a
floppy haircut and a knowing look that borders on the satanic. You can
imagine a whole range of man/boy roles opening up to him, and he is
compulsively watchable.... Culkin has eloquent body language and an
assured presence."

http://w1.1396.telia.com/~u139602049/2000cul.html


MACAULAY CULKIN IS "COMPULSIVELY WATCHABLE"
ON THE WEST END STAGE

19/10/2000

MACAULAY CULKIN has scored a major critical success on the West End
stage in RICHARD NELSON'S "MADAME MELVILLE", along with co-star IRENE
JACOB.

MACAULAY plays Carl, a 15 year old studying in Paris in 1966. His
simmeringly sultry, incredibly cultured 30 year-old French teacher
Claudie ? played by IRENE - introduces him to sensual delights and the
pleasures of fine art, film, jazz and classical music.

http://www.borkowski.co.uk/press/madamemelville191000.html

In addition-
http://www.culkinonline.com/index.shtml

Appolgies for going off topic, but I wanted to re-enforce the point I
originally made. 

bboy_mn




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 19:25:47 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:25:47 -0000
Subject: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <1587743337.20030423113655@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b86pbr+rghf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:

> 
> "Teil vier" translates to "part four".
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at e...

Ah, so the translation I was reading was wrong, thanks for the 
correction.




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Apr 23 20:13:09 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:13:09 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <b86pbr+rghf@eGroups.com>
References: <b86pbr+rghf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <7513518727.20030423131309@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Wednesday, April 23, 2003, 12:25:47 PM, geri510 at yahoo.com wrote:

> Ah, so the translation I was reading was wrong, thanks for the 
> correction.

Now I have to go and check out the translation.

I'm German, so I just read it directly, even though it was
pretty small print, especially on the pictures.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From heavenlee_spice at dslextreme.com  Wed Apr 23 19:25:49 2003
From: heavenlee_spice at dslextreme.com (jodi_dgn)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:25:49 -0000
Subject: after the movie
Message-ID: <b86pbt+7iif@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone, I just watched the COS DVD for about the umpteenth time 
after a friend pointed out something unusual at the end and thought 
I'd come out of lurkdom briefly to post here as I have not seen it 
mentioned anywhere else yet.

If you have enough patience to sit through the nearly 10 minutes (or 
so it seems) of credits at the end of the film, there is a funny 
little bit hiding behind them all. I won't spoil it and tell you what 
it is, but I highly reccommend that you take a peek!


jodi 
(who has the movies, the audio books, the soundtracks and two sets of 
the books and is truly addicted!)






From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 20:54:29 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:54:29 -0000
Subject: Once again: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <7513518727.20030423131309@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b86ui5+olu3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:

> Now I have to go and check out the translation.
> 
> I'm German, so I just read it directly, even though it was
> pretty small print, especially on the pictures.
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at e...

O.K., I got it translated: To 90% Dan will be also in part four again 
Harry Potter. 

So who knows maybe he will be & I can start to rest easy, well at 
least for now :)




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 22:21:05 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:21:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <f6.2b5bd8a0.2bd86bd1@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/23/2003 7:06:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Have you ever seen Dan not happy? I haven't, and you are right he 
> carries the whole franchise on his shoulders and seems to really 
> enjoy it.
> 
> You know if the cast (kids) carry on to the end, Warners could start 
> making up sequels and they could spend their whole acting life in 
> the wizard world.
> 
> WF
> 

That would be FINE with me!  ;->  I wish JKR would continue to write the 
books past book 7, too!!  But I can understand them wanting to do other 
things once they're grow.  Dan does always seem to be happy, or at least 
cheerful and willing to please (in interviews, etc.).  That's the mark of a 
star -- he's got a bright future ahead of him (but I agree about his writing 
as exhibited in that Reader's Digest thing -- the kid is multi-talented. I 
just hope his writing doesn't get in the way of his acting.)




Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 22:23:46 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:23:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please, No....
Message-ID: <180.1932330b.2bd86c72@aol.com>

Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We need a new 
Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/23/03 1:18:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dkewpie at pacbell.net writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> >But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a 
> sudden you 
> >dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that 
> necessary 
> >but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and 
> everything is 
> >changing!!
> >
> >Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> Are you saying "keeping the same cast" is more important than nailing 
> the right charactization for each character as well as a more 
> superior handling in storytelling and direction?  
> 
> You keep putting down Cauron for "not keeping the same cast" and 
> praising Columbus just because he "keep the same cast". Is that 
> really all you care?!! Do you honestly think Columbus did a great job 
> in the first two movies beside just "keeping the same cast"? 
>  
> 
> Joan



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 22:36:26 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:36:26 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]concerns about PoA
Message-ID: <132.1e2d7476.2bd86f6a@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/23/2003 7:06:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> It's hard to believe that a person 6 ft.
> 2 in. with sharp angular features is still in highschool.
> 
> For reference -
> Clark Kent - Tom Welling is 26
> 
yes, and he's playing a guy who's 16 or 17, is 6'3" and has a somewhat 
angular face.  But he pulls it off (quite nicely, too!  "Smallville" is one 
of my fav. shows right now.).



Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 22:38:45 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:38:45 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] age vs looks
Message-ID: <12f.28723093.2bd86ff5@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/23/2003 7:06:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Hermoine is not going to be flat chested much 
> longer!  

She'd better not be - Emma certainly isn't!  ;->

Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 22:55:00 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:55:00 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] after the movie
Message-ID: <1d6.80a1306.2bd873c4@aol.com>

I already saw it!  It is funny isnt it!

Kyle Longbottom

Hufflepuff Prefect 



In a message dated 4/23/03 4:17:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
heavenlee_spice at dslextreme.com writes:

> Hi everyone, I just watched the COS DVD for about the umpteenth time 
> after a friend pointed out something unusual at the end and thought 
> I'd come out of lurkdom briefly to post here as I have not seen it 
> mentioned anywhere else yet.
> 
> If you have enough patience to sit through the nearly 10 minutes (or 
> so it seems) of credits at the end of the film, there is a funny 
> little bit hiding behind them all. I won't spoil it and tell you what 
> it is, but I highly reccommend that you take a peek!
> 
> 
> jodi 
> (who has the movies, the audio books, the soundtracks and two sets of 
> the books and is truly addicted!)
> 
> 
> 



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




From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 23 22:48:33 2003
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt Huber)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 15:48:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]concerns about PoA
In-Reply-To: <132.1e2d7476.2bd86f6a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030423224833.57145.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com>

Ummm...he is Superman after all so shouldn't he look older?!?  as his "real" age is far different then teenagers.

artsylynda at aol.com wrote:In a message dated 4/23/2003 7:06:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> It's hard to believe that a person 6 ft.
> 2 in. with sharp angular features is still in highschool.
> 
> For reference -
> Clark Kent - Tom Welling is 26
> 
yes, and he's playing a guy who's 16 or 17, is 6'3" and has a somewhat 
angular face.  But he pulls it off (quite nicely, too!  "Smallville" is one 
of my fav. shows right now.).



Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Apr 23 23:05:52 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:05:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] concerns about PoA and future films
Message-ID: <193.193656fa.2bd87650@aol.com>

I dont think movie actors would stay on for T.V actors!  The cast of Big Fat 
Greek Wedding the boyfriend never stayed on!!

Kyle Longbottom



In a message dated 4/23/03 6:23:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
artsylynda at aol.com writes:

> 
> In a message dated 4/23/2003 7:06:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> >Have you ever seen Dan not happy? I haven't, and you are right he 
> >carries the whole franchise on his shoulders and seems to really 
> >enjoy it.
> >
> >You know if the cast (kids) carry on to the end, Warners could start 
> >making up sequels and they could spend their whole acting life in 
> >the wizard world.
> >
> >WF
> >
> 
> That would be FINE with me!  ;->  I wish JKR would continue to write the 
> books past book 7, too!!  But I can understand them wanting to do other 
> things once they're grow.  Dan does always seem to be happy, or at least 
> cheerful and willing to please (in interviews, etc.).  That's the mark of a 
> 
> star -- he's got a bright future ahead of him (but I agree about his 
> writing 
> as exhibited in that Reader's Digest thing -- the kid is multi-talented. I 
> just hope his writing doesn't get in the way of his acting.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA



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




From ed4u at attbi.com  Wed Apr 23 22:59:32 2003
From: ed4u at attbi.com (Katy Melo)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:59:32 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Black and White
References: <1d6.80a1306.2bd873c4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3EA71AD4.00001A.02000@KATY>

Ok maybe I am slow not sure if this has been discussed yet but has anyone
else noticed that in the Diary scene Everything is a "Old News Print Color"
while Harry is in RED!! After probably 8 views just a minute ago was the
first time I really noticed it!! Reminds me of some other movies!!! I really
enjoyed finally catching onto that part of the movie!! Made the scene so
much more powerful for me!!!! 

HP Addict Extreme

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




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 00:26:03 2003
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 00:26:03 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <180.1932330b.2bd86c72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b87aur+2jo9@eGroups.com>

Kyle Longbottom emoted:

<<
Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We 
need a new Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???
>>

I don't think anybody is saying that, least of all Alfonso Cuaron. So 
unless you have some line to Warner Bros. that none of the rest of us 
do, you should really just relax.

As long as we're talking about the cast, it's honestly not the kiddie 
set I'm worried about. Even if they get behind a couple of years, I 
can't see it mattering that much - Hollywood casts actors older than 
their characters all the time. On the other hand, Columbus' misuse of 
the immense talent in the adult cast was positively criminal. I'm 
hoping Cuaron will put them to better use.

--Anna




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Thu Apr 24 00:32:30 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:32:30 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please, No....
Message-ID: <48.1bb2d37f.2bd88a9e@aol.com>

Yeah I agree with the watering down of the cast!  it sucked big time!!  

Lets hope Cuaron does a better job 

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/23/03 8:28:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
saintbacchus at yahoo.com writes:

> Kyle Longbottom emoted:
> 
> <<
> Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We 
> need a new Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???
> >>
> 
> I don't think anybody is saying that, least of all Alfonso Cuaron. So 
> unless you have some line to Warner Bros. that none of the rest of us 
> do, you should really just relax.
> 
> As long as we're talking about the cast, it's honestly not the kiddie 
> set I'm worried about. Even if they get behind a couple of years, I 
> can't see it mattering that much - Hollywood casts actors older than 
> their characters all the time. On the other hand, Columbus' misuse of 
> the immense talent in the adult cast was positively criminal. I'm 
> hoping Cuaron will put them to better use.
> 
> --Anna
> 



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Apr 24 01:19:01 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:19:01 +0100
Subject: Catching up on lots of topics
In-Reply-To: <193.193656fa.2bd87650@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030424003220.0095f520@plum.cream.org>

Apologies, I'm a bit tired this evening and perhaps I shouldn't be posting 
under the circumstances. Apologies if my comments may appear a little 
terse, but I'll post them anyway before I get too behind...

Kyle Longbottom wrote:

>I dont think movie actors would stay on for T.V actors!  The cast of Big Fat
>Greek Wedding the boyfriend never stayed on!!

Yeah well, John Corbett thinks he has a movie career going, There's no way 
he's going to sign on for a TV series under the circumstances.

(BTW Kyle, do you REALLY have to use so many exclamation marks? It's 
getting just a little annoying. Or should that be "Just a little 
annoying!!!" Also, could you - and other people - please follow this 
group's guidelines and crop text from posts not germane to your reply and 
add your comments *below*. Thanks.)

I'm not Joan, but to comment on another of Kyle's posts:

>Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We need a new
>Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???

Joan has never said that she *wants* the cast to be changed. I doubt anyone 
does. The point is, what's more important: having a decent director who 
might decide that the cast is no longer appropriate, or a crap 
paint-by-numbers director who's milking a cash cow?

jodi_dgn wrote:

>Hi everyone, I just watched the COS DVD for about the umpteenth time
>after a friend pointed out something unusual at the end and thought
>I'd come out of lurkdom briefly to post here as I have not seen it
>mentioned anywhere else yet.

<snip>

Err...actually, it's been mentioned here several times on a regular basis 
over the last four months. Most recently by me, in a post about 24 hours 
ago, in which I included a link to a screenshot 
(http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/23458.JPG)...

Audra wrote regarding my new CoS widescreen/fullscreen page:

>I just have one comment to make.  On the clock at the Weasley house, 
>Richard says the clock clearly shows only 8 hands, but I think I see all 
>9.  In the fullscreen capture, I see Fred, George, and Ron at "Lost", then 
>2 at "Quidditch," and I see 4 at "Garden."  3 + 2 + 4 = 9 Weasleys.  I 
>think you might be missing the 2nd one in the "Quidditch" position.  It is 
>pretty obscured by the opposite ends of the hands of the family members at 
>"Garden."

I stared at that picture long and hard while I was putting the page 
together (and in higher resolution than appears on the site) and couldn't 
discern another hand/person at the Quidditch position (or the other end of 
a "hand" at the opposite side of the clock).

In any event, the numbers and positions don't actually make sense. Assuming 
Charlie is the one at Quidditch (he is, after all, the family's great 
Quidditch player), Ginny and Molly are clearly in the Garden position, and 
assuming Percy is one of the others in the Garden (incidentally, what's he 
doing out there if his appearance at the breakfast table makes it clear 
he's just got out of bed - neither his hair nor attire make coming from the 
garden reasonable), that leaves Bill and  Arthur to account for.

Arthur enters through the front door a while later (there's a cut between 
Molly's "have a bite" line and their sitting down to breakfast - for 
starters, Harry, Ron, Fred & George have had the opportunity to sit down), 
so he was hardly in the Garden. From his dialogue, he wasn't playing 
Quidditch either. So I would maintain that the missing hand is Arthur's, 
and for some bizarre reason, Bill has been placed in the Garden.

I would've preferred it if two unidentified hands (Arthur's and Bill's) 
were pointing towards the bottom somewhere, at positions as yet 
unidentified (both at "Work", for instance?). The clock hands as they 
appear don't allow for the possibility of any other hand being at any other 
position.

I know I'm nit-picking, but hey, isn't that what we're here for? :-)

Audra again, on the subject of Accents:

<snip>

>My boyfriend pointed out the fact that so many upper-middle class kids 
>here in The States try to use slang and talk like they're from the streets 
>just to sound cool, and maybe that's what Draco is doing.  He definitely 
>has a point about American kids doing that. I don't know about British 
>kids.  Does that go on over there too?  If so, maybe that explains it.

Yes, it does go on here in Britain. There are several famous people 
(adults) who deliberately disguise their "posh" accents to give them a more 
populist persona (Ben Elton, for one; and even various members of the Royal 
family have tried it on occasion), and for youngsters, speaking as if 
you've been brought up in the streets is certainly a shortcut for "street 
smart", which is always and everywhere a badge of honour.

However, Draco is not someone who would want to give himself street 
credibility. He considers himself superior to pretty much everyone else, 
and certainly his class-mates, and he would never, ever, let anyone forget 
it. For him, adopting "streetwise" speech patterns would indicate dropping 
his standards. Speaking "posh" is as much a part of his supercilious 
personality as calling Hermione a Mudblood. For Draco to drop consonants is 
as likely as cheering Gryffindor. :-)

JenD wrote, in a separate thread on Accents (re: the Masons', replying to 
Nicholas:

>That's what Northen English accents sound like? Do you know American
>accents? Did they sound even faintly American at all to you?
>I really am astonished. Either my ears are really letting me down or
>my, we (as in two peoples not sharing a common language...) have more
>in common than I ever guessed.

I must admit that the first time I heard them speak, I assumed them both to 
be southern American. However, on reading Nicholas's comments, I listened 
again, and although Mr Mason still sounds that way to me, Mrs Mason has a 
definite Yorkshire drawl (Pam Ferris's natural speech is pretty much RP, 
with a little je ne sais quoi mixed in, which I ascribe to her 
multi-national upbringing - born in Germany and raised in Wales and New 
Zealand).

BTW yes, southern American can sound very much like some Yorkshire.

A couple of nit-picks on Steve's (strictly speaking, OT) rundown of 
(American) child stars who did or didn't make adult careers:

Re: Wil Wheaton: His struggle to find work after ST:TNG had little (or 
nothing) to do with his appearance, but the circumstances in which he left 
that show as a regular. Gene Roddenberry gave him a "you'll never work in 
this town again" line after they had a disagreement when Wheaton was fired. 
Roddenberry was in a position to make good on the threat until his death, 
after which time his widow Majel tried to do her best to make life 
difficult for Wil.

The fact that US casting directors suffer from typecasting as much as the 
population at large (if not more so) didn't help. Ensign Crusher (Wheaton's 
character) was almost universally hated by the Star Trek community (I used 
to participate in a popular light-hearted newsgroup called 
wesley.crusher.die.die.die which kept coming up with ever-more gruesome 
ways of killing the character) and the antagonism rubbed off onto Wheaton 
(a scary moment was the creation of a newsgroup entitled 
wil.wheaton.die.die.die, which was NOT light-hearted!). During his first 
appearance at a Star Trek convention, Wheaton was famously pelted with 
rotten fruit.

It's therefore little surprise that he sought other avenues to make a living.

A small correction on Macaulay Culkin's London stage play: that play 
wrapped some time ago, and he was in it only for a short time. There has 
been a trend in London commercial theatres over the last couple of years to 
employ big-name Hollywood stars for short runs which gives the productions 
massive publicity, and the stars some kind of "credibility". Although the 
reviews of Culkin's performance were generally positive, plenty of people 
weren't all that impressed. As for his believability as a teenager, yes, 
it's true that his appearance has changed very little over the last ten 
years or so. Nevertheless, his unemployability over that time hasn't *only* 
been down to his personal problems. Most casting directors have decided 
that he's actually not a very good actor. (Nevertheless, I can't wait for 
his latest film, "Party Monster", to get a UK release - word from the 
Sundance Festival was that he's meant to be pretty good in it.)

Returning a little closer to on-topicality, I'd like to comment on several 
suggestions about Terry Gilliam as an HP director. I think I've said before 
that although I admire his work greatly, and Twelve Monkeys in particular, 
I don't think he'd be appropriate for HP. Certainly not now, at any rate. 
He could only do his job at the end of the series, after all seven books 
have been published. He certainly wouldn't allow himself to be in the 
position Kloves and Columbus have put themselves in, where they don't know 
where a multi-movie franchise is headed.

Furthermore, Gilliam is not (how can I put this?) the most collaborative of 
film directors. I absolutely do not see him allowing himself to be hemmed 
in by JKR's vision of how the Potterverse looks and works. He would, to put 
it simply, change too many things to leave JKR and the books' fans happy. 
Whilst I think that Columbus and Kloves are playing it *too* safe (it 
remains to be seen what Cuaron manages to do), Gilliam would go *way* over 
the top to make the films *his* vision, and not JKR's. In itself, that is 
perhaps not a bad thing, but it would make the set hell to work in, and the 
movies quite possibly a bigger mess than Columbus's efforts have been.

Oh, and may have a little moment of crowing and in view of that German 
interview, may I state that I have always maintained that the removal of 
Wood does not necessarily equate the removal of Quidditch from PoA? :-)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who has now caught up with all the posts on this list 
and now has only almost 300 on the main list to plough through...




From grace701 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 02:06:31 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: after the movie
In-Reply-To: <1051143968.4653.25285.m7@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030424020631.41123.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>


Aw come on you guys!  Let me know what it is b/c I'll probably won't get it.  Email me if you'd like as not to spoil the surprise. ;)  

Greicy


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 02:10:31 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 19:10:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Catching up on lots of topics
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030424003220.0095f520@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <20030424021031.96145.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>

Kyle Longbottom wrote:
> I dont think movie actors would stay
> on for T.V actors!  The cast of Big
> Fat Greek Wedding the boyfriend never
> stayed on!!

GulPlum: 
> Yeah well, John Corbett thinks he has
> a movie career going, There's no way 
> he's going to sign on for a TV series
> under the circumstances.

Gentlemen, I take it neither of you watch 
the cable channel FX?  John Corbett either 
chose the new FX series called Lucky over 
BFGW or he was legally bound to honor his 
committment to Lucky (can't remember which).  
Personally, I wish they'd recast with Ian 
Gomez, since he IS the real life 
inspiration.  :)

GulPlum:
> (BTW Kyle, do you REALLY have to
> use so many exclamation marks? It's 
> getting just a little annoying. Or
> should that be "Just a little 
> annoying!!!" Also, could you - and
> other people - please follow this 
> group's guidelines and crop text from
> posts not germane to your reply and
> add your comments *below*. Thanks.)

I second that...or should I say

I SECOND THAT!!!

<eg>

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com



From doliesl at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 02:51:22 2003
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:51:22 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <180.1932330b.2bd86c72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b87jfa+rbab@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We 
need a new 
> Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???
> 

Kyle, I've always found your way of reasoning too black and white 
(maybe it's your one-liner way of response), it's always simply 
either this or that. Whoever suggest not having/wanting SAME "major" 
cast? What have Alfonso ever done EVER suggest his desire of changing 
of cast on MAJOR IMPORTANT characters for whatever reasons?  People 
here are criticizing Columbus's lack of talent and depth in making HP 
films, and the fact him keeping the same casts in PS and CoS (which 
you valued above everything else) is not REAL important & vital 
factor do HP series any justice.   

It seems ridiculous for you to make correlation between the "cut of 
Wood/Flint" and "changing MAJOR MAIN characters like Harry, Draco, 
etc." Let's be realistic for once alright? Characters like Wood and 
Flint is pretty trivial compare to changing MAJOR MAIN characters 
like Harry, Snape and Draco. I just don't think you really understand 
the idea of translating and interpretating a book into a different 
medium. Stuffing as much little details does NOT necessary convey the 
spirit of the book, as Chris Columbus's not-so-impressive effort has 
shown (and you should have read tons of well-written, well-reasoned 
critique here by mature HPfans). To do each little characters 
justice, you have to NAIL the characterization RIGHT and given 
appropriate time for them to develop. And an 2 1/2 hr. movie just 
aren't enough space and time for EVERYBODY. Some characters just 
gotta go. 

Especially for average film-goers who either never read the book, or 
even book-reader but hardcore fans, rarely do they 
remember/notice/care for who the hell these forgettable, no-
personality background one-liner side characters are. These 
paperboard background character just do NOT add much to the film 
overall, nor they are vital KEY in keeping the spirit and charm of 
translating the book to film. 

Here we have Alfonso, who's making an artistic decision in snipping 
out what's unnecessary, in order to tell a story more effectively. 
And we all know what a complicated story PoA is, and how it 
introduced a new set of generation of characters (Sirius & co.) who 
happened to be the focus of this particular story. I think most 
matured HP fans agree we rather want more FOCUSED, DEEP-
characterization and and REAL in-depth emotions, rather than the 
shallow parade show of all-characters that Columbus has done (which 
is pointless and forgettable). 

-D.




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Thu Apr 24 02:52:03 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 02:52:03 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <180.1932330b.2bd86c72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b87jgj+e1ds@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> Hell yeah!!  So your telling me lets not have the same cast??  We 
need a new 
> Draco, Hermoine, Harry etc etc???
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 

Kyle, would you please carefully re-read my post please? I NEVER said 
and meant "let's not have the same cast", okay? 

You keep saying how Alfonso "suck" just because "half of the cast is 
gone". Please enlighten me, what are the "half of the casts" that are 
gone? Since when did that happen? And how's that entirely Alfonso's 
fault? Last time I check WB is the boss and Heyman is the producer 
who makes the ultimate decision, not Alfonso. 

Honestly, please answer me again, who are the "half of the cast" that 
are gone? I'm puzzled why you keep saying this over and over again. 
Just because Wood is not needed in the film (many have already write 
very good analysis why he's NOT needed) and just because they replace 
Tom the Innkeeper and Fatlady doesn't mean "half of the cast", is it?
Beside, wasn't that Columbus's decision to cast French Dawn as the 
new Fatlady?! It was Columbus's decision, NOT Alfonso, alright? 
Obviously they have their reasons, and we don't know exactly why. May 
be the original actors/actresses don't want the role anymore or are 
too busy at the moment. You don't know what was going on and neither 
do I. So I say it's rather silly for you to keep crying "Alfonso is 
evil and is ruining the film by changing the casts" and start 
petition or whatever.

Also, so many people have already explained to you that, if some cast 
decide to leave, it could be THEIR (the actors/actresses) decisions. 
The director can't do anything about it can he? Have you ever 
consider this possibility at all? Of course I too wish the same cast 
stay in all the films, at least all the main characters. However, if 
they themselves don't want to do it anymore, there's NOTHING we can 
do is there? 

Let me ask you again, do you honestly believe that, "keeping the same 
cast" is more important than "staying true to the spirit of the book" 
as well as "superior storytelling skill, smooth transition and not 
page-to-page summary direction"?!  Do you really prefer a director 
just because he "keep the same cast" than a much more talented and 
brilliant director who have the ability AND credibility to handle the 
film in a much more superior way?

Joan (who totally agree with Richard about one-liner and the overuse 
of exclamation marks, it is getting quiet annoying)
 

> In a message dated 4/23/03 1:18:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> dkewpie at p... writes:
> 
> > 
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> > >But at least with Colubus you had the same cast!!  Now all of a 
> > sudden you 
> > >dont have half the cast!!!  I mean the train operator wasnt that 
> > necessary 
> > >but it was nice to see somethings that had not changed and 
> > everything is 
> > >changing!!
> > >
> > >Kyle Longbottom 
> > 
> > Are you saying "keeping the same cast" is more important than 
nailing 
> > the right charactization for each character as well as a more 
> > superior handling in storytelling and direction?  
> > 
> > You keep putting down Cauron for "not keeping the same cast" and 
> > praising Columbus just because he "keep the same cast". Is that 
> > really all you care?!! Do you honestly think Columbus did a great 
job 
> > in the first two movies beside just "keeping the same cast"? 
> >  
> > 
> > Joan
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Thu Apr 24 03:07:30 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 03:07:30 -0000
Subject: Black and White
In-Reply-To: <3EA71AD4.00001A.02000@KATY>
Message-ID: <b87kdi+1s06@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Katy Melo" <ed4u at a...> wrote:
> Ok maybe I am slow not sure if this has been discussed yet but has 
anyone
> else noticed that in the Diary scene Everything is a "Old News 
Print Color"
> while Harry is in RED!! After probably 8 views just a minute ago 
was the
> first time I really noticed it!! Reminds me of some other movies!!! 
I really
> enjoyed finally catching onto that part of the movie!! Made the 
scene so
> much more powerful for me!!!! 
> 
> HP Addict Extreme


Yes Katy, I noticed that when we saw COS in the theatre in November 
and again on the video. Putting the "memory" or "flashback" scenes in 
sepia tone is something of a convention in movies, I think. Everyone 
else seems to have the color drained out of them, but Harry (who is 
the only one *in the present*) is in full color.

Anne U
(Must. Watch. COS. Again.)





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 09:35:42 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 09:35:42 -0000
Subject: Young and Young Looking Actors
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030424003220.0095f520@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <b88b5e+8a4s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
>
> ...edited....
> 
> A couple of nit-picks on Steve's rundown of (American) child stars
who did or didn't make adult careers:
> 
> Re: Wil Wheaton: His struggle to find work after ST:TNG had little 
> (or nothing) to do with his appearance, but the circumstances in 
> which he left that show as a regular. Gene Roddenberry gave him a 
> "you'll never work in this town again" line a ...edited...
> 

bboy_mn:

Not exactly; if you want to find out what really happened, why not go
to Wil Wheaton himself instead of the grape vine.

http://wilwheaton.net/faq.php

Gene Roddenberry was already dead, and if he were alive there wouldn't
have been a problem. As it was, the network bigwigs were jacking Wil
around and he got tired of it, so he went to his agent and said he
wanted out.

As far as Wesley/Wil being universally hated, I don't think so. Many
many people only watch ST:TNG because Wil Wheaton/Wesley Crusher was
on it. I was one of those people; he was my favorite character. And,
if he was so hated, why does he still have long lines waiting for his
autograph at Star Trek conventions?

I will admit, I can see why some people would hate Wesley because he
was sooooooo perfect. But then any guy who doesn't fit the All
American Highschool Jock Pretty-Boy image usually is hated. I
seriously doubt that Bill Gates of Microsoft was very popular when he
was a teen. Certainly every ham-headed jock hated him.


> 
> A small correction on Macaulay Culkin's London stage play: that play 
> wrapped some time ago, and he was in it only for a short time. 
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard,



bboy_mn:

Again, not exactly. True "Madame Melville' was no 'Cats', but it had 
(roughly) a run of 6 months in London and another 6 months on
Broadway. Based on my information, he play the character Carl in both
productions for the full run. Macaulay also has three new movies; one
in release ('Party Monster') and two in post production ('Saved' &
'Jerusalem'). 'Saved' has just been picked up by United Artist for
worldwide distribution. Side note; he is again playing a highschool
kid in 'Saved'. Also, he just appeared on 'Will & Grace'.

And let's not forget that Macaulay Culkin is a millionaire. According
to his father's website, Macaulay recieved $20,000,000 AFTER TAXES
which had been held in trust until he turned 18. I don't think
Macaulay is desparate for the work which is why he chose a comfortable
stage play in order to get back into acting again.

All of which is irrelevant, because the point was that in his 20's he
still looks young and can therefore play young characters; in the case
of 'Madame Melville', a 15 year old. 

My main point was that it doesn't matter how old Dan/Rupert/Emma are.
What matters is how they look. In a year, they could all look too old,
or in 10 years, they could all still look just right for their parts.

I repeat, puberty has been the career death of many young actors.

As I have said before, I think Dan/Rupert/Emma have a tremendous
advantage career-wise by being in Britain. The British are far less
likely to get stuck on actor typecasting than the US entertainment
industry. In Britain, they are looking for an actor that can do the
job, in the US, more often than not, they are looking for a formula
they can repeat. Also, the British audiences seem very willing to
accept actors in a new role. I see the same UK actors moving from TV
series to TV series, and to movies, and the audiences seem to have no
trouble accepting them in their new roles. One additional thing, it's
not a requirement for British male actors to all be drop dead gorgeous
pretty-boy Hollywood types. Again, the British are looking for actors
that can do the job, not a pretty face that they can package into a
commodity and sell. Because of these things, I think Dan and Rupert
have significant potential for future roles in TV and movies in Britain. 

Just a thought.

bboy_mn







From origamiwizard at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 10:10:10 2003
From: origamiwizard at yahoo.com (origamiwizard)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:10:10 -0000
Subject: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030423020625.00974c90@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <b88d62+qvli@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> Wait no longer. It's taken me a lot more time than I envisaged, 
partially 
> because I decided I had to write a *LOT*  of text to explain my 
ideas, and 
> partially because something else cropped up which required a lot of 
my time 
> and energy today.
> 
> That fact that Richelle and I started off with almost 100 pictures 
which I 
> had to boil down to a manageable number and couldn't decide which 
had to go 
> once I'd reached 50 didn't help much, either. Richelle's away until 
the end 
> of the week, so I just might get away with not including two 
pictures of 
> which she was particularly fond. :-)
> 
> I'm far from happy with the page's layout, so any comments or 
constructive 
> criticism would be gratefully received: 
http://plum.cream.org/HP/cos/dvd.htm
> 
> BTW Heidi Tandy (or other TLC editors), if you're reading this, 
please feel 
> free to add a link from TLC. I'll  probably write in tomorrow 
anyway. :-)
> 
> While I'm writing, here's a picture we did which wasn't germane to 
the 
> topic at hand, for those who've not yet bought their home copy but 
didn't 
> get to see the post-credits sequence at the cinema:
> 
> http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/23458.JPG
> 
> 
> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard, who's bushed and would like to warn folks that 
he'll 
> be going to bed in about half an hour if there are any urgent 
comments 
> anyone wants to make (such as the page not working at all...)

*applauds vigorously*  That was great, Richard!  Many, many thanks to 
you and Richelle.  I also have to extend an extra "thank you"  to you-
-for unbeknownst to me, it was your site that I was referring to when 
I put, *thinks back to HPPS comparisons*.  So a belated but very 
enthusiastic "thank you!" for that too!

Your HPPS comparisons forced me to buy the fullscreen version as well 
as the widescreen one.  As I mentioned before, I pondered the same 
comparisons as I watched my widescreen version the CoS dvd, and was 
just about the break down and buy the fullscreen version to make my 
own comparisons.  Thank God I saw your post and waited for your 
superb comparisons and comments!  

The screen captures were incredible. I loved the overlays, but I also 
appreciated your addition of the side-by-side comparisons--very nice!
Of course it all wouldn't have been anything without your awesome 
insights and comments (the dvd technicians doing their own non-
pureblood ridding--lol!) After reading (and re-reading) everything, I 
am SO GLAD I did not buy the fullscreen version--it looks pretty 
sad.  Thank you, Richard--you've saved me some pretty sickles and 
knuts!

BTW, I was in Costco the other day, and they had a Sony 57" HDTV with 
a widescreen monitor on display--and they were playing CoS on it!!  I 
parked my shopping cart right in front it, and stared mesmerized at 
the Chamber scene.  (I know, 'tis very sad--when it comes to HP, I 
have no pride.)  It was GREAT--the widescreen monitor leaves no 
wasted space, and the Chamber scene looked fabulous!

Thanks again.  I think you deserve a "special award for services to" 
the HP Fandom!

OrigamiWizard, who has deposited her saved sickles and knuts into a 
Gringotts account for her Sony 57" HDTV with widescreen monitor.  
*wishful thinking*




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Apr 24 10:14:27 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:14:27 -0000
Subject: age vs looks
In-Reply-To: <12f.28723093.2bd86ff5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b88de3+eogr@eGroups.com>

I may be veering slightly of the age vs. looks discussion, but I'd just like to 
point out that there's more to the trio than looks. They weren't chosen solely 
for their looks to play the parts. Rupert doesn't look like Ron if compared to 
canon description, neither does Dan. Emma is WAY too pretty to play 
Hermione. Yet, they come across to me, and many others with me, as Harry 
and Ron, not because of their faces, but what they project. (I haven't made 
up my mind about Emma yet. She was Hermione-ish in PS, but I didn't get 
what she--or Columbus--was up to with her part in CoS, if anything. But 
that's beside the point I'm trying to make.) I understand that ageing can be a 
concern for fans and producers because of the particular circumstances 
governing the HP-franchise, but as many of you have pointed out--"age isn't 
everything" in this case. It's not just the trios' looks that determine whether 
they will seem believable in their parts in the future, since there are evidently 
other qualities that got them the parts in the first place. (Though we may 
disagree on what those qualities are.)

Sophia 




From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Thu Apr 24 20:14:50 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:14:50 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Accents
Message-ID: <v01540b00bacc95512b9b@[217.154.250.174]>

Previously I wrote, re the Masons' accents

>> How interesting. They both spoke with a Northern English accent,
>and Mrs M
>> had that 'upwardly mobile' pretentiousness that I mentioned earlier.

Jen replied:-

>That's what Northen English accents sound like? Do you know American
>accents? Did they sound even faintly American at all to you?
>I really am astonished. Either my ears are really letting me down or
>my, we (as in two peoples not sharing a common language...) have more
>in common than I ever guessed.

Yes, I do know American accents, though obviously not all of them; I am
usually in the States 4-5 times a year, in  many different parts of your
country. I see what you mean, but they key difference is in the vowel
sounds. When Mr M says 'I play ocasionally', his consonants are an almost
American enunciation; but the vowels are clearly
northern-English-with-pretentions. Mrs M's the same.

In fact, it's usually vowel sounds which give away one's place of origin.

Audra said:-

(snip)  so many upper-middle class kids
>here in The States try to use slang and talk like they're from the streets
>just to sound cool, and maybe that's what Draco is doing.  He definitely has
>a point about American kids doing that. I don't know about British kids.
>Does that go on over there too?  If so, maybe that explains it.

Not at the level at which Draco is supposed to be. Upper-middle class kids
might use street vocabulary, but it would be extremely unusual for them to
emulate a working-class accent, except as a joke.

I'm afraid it was just Tom F unable to keep up his upper-crust accent. The
surprising thing is that he was allowed to get away with it. There must
have been dialogue coaches on the set?

Regards,
Nicholas





From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 24 20:25:45 2003
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 20:25:45 -0000
Subject: Film Theorist Question
Message-ID: <b89h89+u7vi@eGroups.com>

Hi Everyone,
Thanks for letting me join your conversation.  As a new member I haev 
read the most recent posts in order to catch up and would like to 
address (or re-address as the case may be)the issues that the group 
seems to have towads the 1st 2 films in the series.  

I have read some dissent on Columbus' rendering of the story to the 
screen.  As a person with a Bachelor of Science degree in Film 
Theory, I would like to hear everyone's comments specifically 
describing what they dislike about the films and how else it could 
have been done.

I think that we all have our opinions and I would like to hear them.  
The fancinating idea to me is the discussion of how a children's book 
and film has underlying (sometimes overbearing) adult themes.

Thanks to all for your input and I look forward to reading your 
responses.  I apologize if i am treading over something that has been 
talked about before.  If that is the case please point me in the 
direction of the previous posts.  Thanks!

--Matt
P.S.  Thanks again for including me in the discussion.





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Apr 25 00:39:59 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:39:59 -0000
Subject: Accents and input
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bacc95512b9b@[217.154.250.174]>
Message-ID: <b8a04v+omg7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, TACtalk at a... wrote:
> Previously I wrote, re the Masons' accents
> 
> >> How interesting. They both spoke with a Northern English accent,
> >and Mrs M
> >> had that 'upwardly mobile' pretentiousness that I mentioned 
earlier.
> > SNIP
JenD (ME) replies:
You know, I couldn't place exactly where Mrs. Mason came from and 
it's good to know how much Yorkshire accents sound like an old money 
Southerner!! I am a Southerner and she sounded a lot like a DAR 
matron to me!! But something was amiss and I can take your word for 
it as well as Richard's. 

Nicholas wrote in regards to Tom's Lahndon accent:
> I'm afraid it was just Tom F unable to keep up his upper-crust 
accent. The
> surprising thing is that he was allowed to get away with it. There 
must
> have been dialogue coaches on the set?
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas

Me again:
I find it terribly fishy, the lack of continuity in regards to so 
much on screen. As if it didn't matter. As if no one would notice. I 
have this theory, that Chris held a meeting for the actors and asked 
for their input on how to make this movie more "edgy," more dark and 
fierce and then he took suggestions. Of course Draco is more menacing 
brandishing about that tough-guy talk ("At's rieght Potter!!" not to 
mention all the little incidences of thievery) and of course Jason 
Issacs, bless his heart, devoted as he is to the books, felt it added 
so much to the film to make Lucius a great deal more malevolent than 
necessary. Everyone seems to have had a fair amount of input.
JenD




From origamiwizard at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 25 05:14:06 2003
From: origamiwizard at yahoo.com (origamiwizard)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 05:14:06 -0000
Subject: Knockturn/Diagon Alley Entrances
Message-ID: <b8ag6u+4lvi@eGroups.com>

My apologies if this has been posted before, but I was just watching 
CoS (again!), and I noticed that the shot of the entrance/exit from 
Knockturn Alley back to Diagon Alley seemed VERY similar to Harry and 
Hagrid's Leaky Cauldron entrance shot in HPPS/SS.  Popped HPSS back 
in the dvd, and by gollies, it looks like the Leaky Caudron's 
entrance is right next to Knockturn Alley's!(You can see the 
Knockturn Alley entrance/exit to Harry's right as he walks through 
the Leaky Caudron's entrance to Diagon Alley.) Simply a set 
limitation, or a sgnificant little morsel . . .Hmmmm. . . Lol!

OrigamiWizard




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Fri Apr 25 11:34:08 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:34:08 -0000
Subject: PS/CoS spoofs
Message-ID: <b8b6fg+t4jv@eGroups.com>

I just finished reading movie spoofs of PS and CoS. I'm sitting in a 
computer lab, so I tried not to laugh out loud, but was only 
moderatly successful. See the link on mugglenet.com

Sophia




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Apr 25 13:20:02 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:20:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] catching up on lots of topics
Message-ID: <43.1bc59db0.2bda9002@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/25/2003 6:32:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> >I dont think movie actors would stay on for T.V actors!  The cast of Big 
> Fat
> >Greek Wedding the boyfriend never stayed on!!
> 
> Yeah well, John Corbett thinks he has a movie career going, There's no way 
> he's going to sign on for a TV series under the circumstances.
> 
> 
Sorry guys, you're both wrong.  John Corbett has been a TV star for years, 
from "Northern Exposure" days and other things.  He didn't take the "Greek 
Wedding" TV series because he'd already signed to do a series called "Lucky" 
on one of the cable networks (WB maybe??  UPN?  I can't remember).  His show, 
"Lucky" is doing rather well, while "Greek Wedding" isn't.  And the man 
playing Corbett's part in "Wedding" is the man ORIGINALLY CAST when "Wedding" 
was first pitched as a TV pilot, not a movie.  The pilot didn't sell, so Nia 
what's-her-name, the star of both who created the movie and TV series, took 
her show to stage as a one-woman act.  Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson (who's of 
Greek ancestry) saw it, loved it, and Rita became the producer who brought it 
to the screen, then TV.  John Corbett was cast for the movie and has said he 
would've done the series, except that he'd already agreed to do "Lucky."  
MANY actors go back and forth between TV and movies -- it's not the stigma it 
was years ago.



Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From ABandt at aol.com  Fri Apr 25 13:44:50 2003
From: ABandt at aol.com (ABandt at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:44:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 558
Message-ID: <7f.36351b3a.2bda95d2@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/25/2003 5:31:55 AM Central Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


> Yeah well, John Corbett thinks he has a movie career going, There's no way 
> he's going to sign on for a TV series under the circumstances.

Actually he opted out of the TV series because he had a conflict with the 
series he's doing on Showtime.  Which incidently is doing better then the 
MFGW TV show.  (There was an article about this in Entertainment weekly a 
couple of weeks ago but I can't remember which one to go hunt it up).

Not that this has anything to do with Harry Potter :-)

~Amy


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




From ABandt at aol.com  Fri Apr 25 13:48:33 2003
From: ABandt at aol.com (ABandt at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:48:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 558
Message-ID: <1e7.78b36d9.2bda96b1@aol.com>

In a message dated 4/25/2003 5:31:55 AM Central Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


> Gentlemen, I take it neither of you watch 
> the cable channel FX?  John Corbett either 
> chose the new FX series called Lucky over 
> BFGW or he was legally bound to honor his 
> committment to Lucky (can't remember which).  
> Personally, I wish they'd recast with Ian 
> Gomez, since he IS the real life 
> inspiration.  :)

Eh...so I had the wrong channel...I new it was one of those cable channels 
that I don't have <sigh>

~Amy


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




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 25 13:51:03 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 13:51:03 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 558
In-Reply-To: <7f.36351b3a.2bda95d2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8beg7+j8ou@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ABandt at a... wrote:
Actually he opted out of the TV series because he had a conflict with 
the 
> series he's doing on Showtime.  Which incidently is doing better 
then the 
> MFGW TV show.  (There was an article about this in Entertainment 
weekly a 
> couple of weeks ago but I can't remember which one to go hunt it 
up).
> 
> Not that this has anything to do with Harry Potter :-)
> 
> ~Amy
Actually the shows on F/X




From grace701 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 25 18:13:55 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Accents and teeth
In-Reply-To: <1051266670.333.39484.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030425181355.41121.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com>

Okay, I'm not a dentist and I'm not British,  I'm American, so I'm sailing on a ship that could at any moment sink.  So here goes.... In PS/SS, Tom Felton teeth weren't all there.  You have your two front teeth and the two next to them and then the next two after those.  Well I think that latter were messed up or something in PS/SS, but he must have gotten braces and has them fixed.  Could this be why he sounds different?  I know I'm going to go off topic, but the rapper 50 Cent got shot and bullet went right through his molar making even a whole where the molar was and he said his voice changed.   So can your teeth positioning make you sound different, thus making Tom Felton sound different? Greicy, who's sinking



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From d_lea25 at yahoo.ca  Fri Apr 25 19:47:35 2003
From: d_lea25 at yahoo.ca (Lea)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:47:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <1ed.739aaa1.2bd741a0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030425194735.72257.qmail@web13007.mail.yahoo.com>


 
 LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
>Me either I can't understand why they have to >be the same since its a school 
>for kids??  They change!  Hermoine is not >going to be flat chested much 
>longer!  Draco, Harry and Ron are going to be >either taller or their voices 
>are going to change!  You ever notice that >all the actors never have any 
>zits!!  I had some when i was there age but >with young teen actors you never 
>see any zits!!

>Kyle Longbottom 


Hi Kyle: 

If you haven't noticed any zits - then I hope you'll watch CoS again and just keep an eye on Dan's face.  He does have them and they are not always in the same place...  the one that stands out as most noticeable in my mind is when he's talking to Riddle in the Chamber.....  mind you, it's only about one zit at a time, but they're there!  

I'm glad to see that they're letting the kids grow up naturally and have zits - grow taller - voice changes, etc.  The whole story-line here is about kids who are growing up and these are some of the changes that they all go through.

Lea  :)




---------------------------------
Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals


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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Apr 25 21:42:09 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:42:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <187.18e60306.2bdb05b1@aol.com>

They need to be more obviouse about it

Kyle Longbottom



In a message dated 4/25/03 5:29:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, d_lea25 at yahoo.ca 
writes:

> 
> LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:
> >Me either I can't understand why they have to >be the same since its a 
> school 
> >for kids??  They change!  Hermoine is not >going to be flat chested much 
> >longer!  Draco, Harry and Ron are going to be >either taller or their 
> voices 
> >are going to change!  You ever notice that >all the actors never have any 
> >zits!!  I had some when i was there age but >with young teen actors you 
> never 
> >see any zits!!
> 
> >Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> 
> Hi Kyle: 
> 
> If you haven't noticed any zits - then I hope you'll watch CoS again and 
> just keep an eye on Dan's face.  He does have them and they are not always 
> in the same place...  the one that stands out as most noticeable in my mind 
> is when he's talking to Riddle in the Chamber.....  mind you, it's only 
> about one zit at a time, but they're there!  
> 
> I'm glad to see that they're letting the kids grow up naturally and have 
> zits - grow taller - voice changes, etc.  The whole story-line here is 
> about kids who are growing up and these are some of the changes that they 
> all go through.
> 
> Lea  :)
> 
> 



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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sat Apr 26 00:55:33 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 19:55:33 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
References: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com> <4.2.0.58.20030423020625.00974c90@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <01b101c30b8e$8b305d10$0fa1cdd1@RVotaw>

GulPlum wrote:

> That fact that Richelle and I started off with almost 100 pictures which I 
> had to boil down to a manageable number and couldn't decide which had to go 
> once I'd reached 50 didn't help much, either. Richelle's away until the end 
> of the week, so I just might get away with not including two pictures of 
> which she was particularly fond. :-)

Oh, sure, wait for me to leave town and dump my favorites. :)  I forget, which ones were my favorites that you left out?  The one with Fawkes maybe, and was it Dobby?  Well, that shows I'm not too crushed over their loss!  (Though I didn't like that Dobby's fingers got cut off on the widescreen)  Still, as a whole that's not as important as entire people getting cut off (poor old Dean, Neville, Fred & George).

Anyway, that aside, thanks for working so hard on it, Richard, you did a great job.  All in all, I'm glad I have both versions.  That way I can choose to lose the characters on the sides or the "details" in other things.  Thanks for getting it together for us!

Richelle  


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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sat Apr 26 01:06:20 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:06:20 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
References: <b85bvu+gr6n@eGroups.com> <13328263218.20030423083455@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <01b701c30b90$0cae94f0$0fa1cdd1@RVotaw>

I've missed most of this discussion on vacation, but I'll throw my two cents worth in.  First of all, I've been listening to CoS and PoA in the car while driving (and driving and driving) and noticed that it's mentioned more than once in PoA that Harry had grown several inches over the past year.  Which basically means he'd have begun to grow during CoS and been noticeably taller (enough to buy new robes) by PoA.  So Daniel grew a few months before Harry, big deal.

Height aside, some people have said Daniel *looks* older than thirteen. (Or twelve in CoS.)  But in my mind, I've always pictured Harry looking older than he is.  Not by size, but by mannerisms, and, well, looks.  Harry's been through a lot.  Abused child, parents dead, faces Quirrelmort! and nearly dies doing it, faces a Basilisk and Riddle, not to mention what dementors must do to age a person.   Compared to a "normal" happy-go-lucky preteen/teen I think Harry would look a lot older (I'm still not talking about size, can't overemphasize that) due to circumstances beyond his control that have aged him beyond his years.

As for Daniel, Rupert & Emma playing Harry, Ron and Hermoine into their thirties--heaven forbid it take JKR that long to write books 6 & 7.  I shudder at the thought!

Richelle


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




From pattigray at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 26 01:14:08 2003
From: pattigray at yahoo.com (pattigray)
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 01:14:08 -0000
Subject: Accents and teeth
In-Reply-To: <20030425181355.41121.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b8cmh0+410i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Greicy de los Santos 
<grace701 at y...> wrote:
> Okay, I'm not a dentist and I'm not British,  I'm American, so I'm 
sailing on a ship that could at any moment sink.  So here goes.... In 
PS/SS, Tom Felton teeth weren't all there.  You have your two front 
teeth and the two next to them and then the next two after those.  
Well I think that latter were messed up or something in PS/SS, but he 
must have gotten braces and has them fixed.  Could this be why he 
sounds different?  I know I'm going to go off topic, but the rapper 
50 Cent got shot and bullet went right through his molar making even 
a whole where the molar was and he said his voice changed.   So can 
your teeth positioning make you sound different, thus making Tom 
Felton sound different? Greicy, who's sinking
> 
> Well, I'll get on your sinking ship. When I  saw COS, my first 
thought was that he was wearing braces, which can make speech a bit 
indistinct at first. I still hear a change in his accent from the 
first movie, but he nearly mumbles in the beginning of COS.

PJG




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 26 16:12:54 2003
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Braces and speech
In-Reply-To: <1051349178.275.96985.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030426161254.72198.qmail@web14205.mail.yahoo.com>

Greicy asks:
So can your teeth positioning make 
you sound different, thus making Tom Felton sound
different?

ME:
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Tom Felton had
braces during the filming of PS/SS, if you look
closely you can apperantly see them on his bottom
teeth.
Do they change speech? I think so, but not by much. I
wear braces now; for a few days after I first got them
on, and occasionally after a big adjustment, I can
hear slight changes in my own speech. I think it's a
question of ajusting to the new contours inside the
mouth.
In some cases, involving very crooked teeth, I do
believe that straightening the teeth can cause a
permanent change in pronounciation of at least some
words. However, you'd have to ask an orthodontist to
be sure.

Tyler


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com



From anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net  Sun Apr 27 00:54:35 2003
From: anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net (Anne)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:54:35 -0000
Subject: concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
In-Reply-To: <187.18e60306.2bdb05b1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8f9ob+apc2@eGroups.com>

So Kyle, are you saying that Dan, Emma, Rupert etc. should have giant 
honking zits filled with bubotuber pus?? ;-)

Anne U
(well, that *would* make their zits more noticeable...)

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> They need to be more obviouse about it
> 
> Kyle Longbottom
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 4/25/03 5:29:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
d_lea25 at y... 
> writes:
> > > Hi Kyle: 
> > 
> > If you haven't noticed any zits - then I hope you'll watch CoS 
again and 
> > just keep an eye on Dan's face.  He does have them and they are 
not always 
> > in the same place...  > > 
> > Lea  :)
> 




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 27 01:16:16 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:16:16 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:concerns about PoA -Age vs Looks
Message-ID: <1e3.7a5e7c4.2bdc8960@aol.com>

Oh no but I think there needs to be that realism there!  Sorry about the 
exclamnation marks some people dont like it.  I am saying that we need the 
same cast until the 7th movie comes out!  Its going to be sad if they dont 
keep them.

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/26/03 8:55:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
anneu53714 at sbcglobal.net writes:

> 
> So Kyle, are you saying that Dan, Emma, Rupert etc. should have giant 
> honking zits filled with bubotuber pus?? ;-)
> 
> Anne U
> (well, that *would* make their zits more noticeable...)
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> >They need to be more obviouse about it
> >
> >Kyle Longbottom
> >
> >
> >
> >In a message dated 4/25/03 5:29:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> d_lea25 at y... 
> >writes:
> >>>Hi Kyle: 
> >>
> >>If you haven't noticed any zits - then I hope you'll watch CoS 
> again and 
> >>just keep an eye on Dan's face.  He does have them and they are 
> not always 
> >>in the same place...  >>
> >>Lea  :)
> >
> 



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




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 27 02:38:37 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 02:38:37 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <48.1bb2d37f.2bd88a9e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8ffrd+aipm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
 

> On the other hand, Columbus' misuse of 
> > the immense talent in the adult cast was positively criminal. 
I'm 
> > hoping Cuaron will put them to better use.
> > 
> > --Anna
> > 

Agreed. :-)

I hope Cuaron tells Rickman (though, I love him as an actor) to tone 
down the campiness and amp up the creep factor...

The reason his character works so well in the books is that he seems 
so slimy, so hateful, and we don't know the whole story behind why. 
That's intriguing...

In the films he just comes off, to me, as a generally strict teacher 
who favors his house...

Plus, I think his "evil energy" must match Sirius'...Otherwise the 
conflict won't be interesting.





From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 27 02:59:13 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 02:59:13 -0000
Subject: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <b89h89+u7vi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8fh21+kniq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <mhuber92211 at y...> wrote:

> I think that we all have our opinions and I would like to hear 
them.  
> The fancinating idea to me is the discussion of how a children's 
book 
> and film has underlying (sometimes overbearing) adult themes.
> 
 

 I'll address this, Matt (BTW, welcome :-)...I really despise when 
filmmakers (not just Columbus) talks down to his/her young audience, 
as if they must somehow simplify the material so their young minds 
can grasp it...

 I remember loving Dark Crystal as a young child, because it felt to 
me to be such a "cool" story precisely because of "the mature 
themes" (which btw, I didn't fully understand until some viewings 
and years later). I remember thinking wow, "It's cool that these 
characters are so masty and dark", etc...like I was privy to seeing 
something I almost shouldn't.

 A glaringly recent example, like the Columbus Potter films, are the 
awful sequels to Disney classic animated films that keep coming out 
on video, of late. One can just tell they were made without regard 
to the audience, but as a simple way to line corporate pockets. 
Oddly enough, this is the same studio that recently released the 
counter-example Spirited Away, another film which kids will love 
now, and grow to appreciate and fully understand later (I also loved 
the criminally under-seen The Iron Giant). 

 So, I guess to sum it up... A filmmaker should trust his or her 
audiences' intelligence, regardless of age... 

 It's better to make a film that's not completely understood at 
first, only to gain greater appreciation on subsequent viewings, 
than to make one that at first glance has a parade of "cool" 
recognizable elements, only to lose points for noticable 
storytelling shortcomings on later viewings.

--daughter @)--/----




From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 27 03:22:57 2003
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt Huber)
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 20:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <b8fh21+kniq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030427032257.23317.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>

Thanks for the welcome.  You bring up a mulitude of thoughts which albeit wonderful to explore, are slightly outlandish in the day and age of "corporate" Films. The idea that a film gets better with each suvsequent viewing is exactly a way to process and identify a "great" or "Instant Classic".  While I completely agree with the direct to Video versions of Disney films (albeit meant for more babysitting hours then anything) I have to take issue on the arguement behind it.  While i hate to see the orginal film "re-worked" i like to see sequels, if only for the added joy of the character development that has to take place.  Obviously this rarely happens with a good result.   I would like to go back to my main question, and that is specifically directed towards Chris Columbus and the adapataions of the Harry Potter series.  What should have been done in order to amke a better film?  (Playing Devil's advocate and trying to be completely objective here). Thanks again for everyone's input! -- Matt P.S. I love the topic of Films getting better with age and subsequent Viewings, but i don't want to steer completely off topic!  Best example is of course Raiders of the Lost Ark!  :)  (Slight Implication of favortism here)
daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com> wrote:--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <mhuber92211 at y...> wrote:

> I think that we all have our opinions and I would like to hear 
them.  
> The fancinating idea to me is the discussion of how a children's 
book 
> and film has underlying (sometimes overbearing) adult themes.
> 


I'll address this, Matt (BTW, welcome :-)...I really despise when 
filmmakers (not just Columbus) talks down to his/her young audience, 
as if they must somehow simplify the material so their young minds 
can grasp it...

So, I guess to sum it up... A filmmaker should trust his or her 
audiences' intelligence, regardless of age... 

It's better to make a film that's not completely understood at 
first, only to gain greater appreciation on subsequent viewings, 
than to make one that at first glance has a parade of "cool" 
recognizable elements, only to lose points for noticable 
storytelling shortcomings on later viewings.

--daughter @)--/----


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From editor at texas.net  Sun Apr 27 03:40:14 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 22:40:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please, No....
References: <b8ffrd+aipm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001401c30c6e$b7c0af20$8004a6d8@texas.net>

> I hope Cuaron tells Rickman (though, I love him as an actor) to tone
> down the campiness and amp up the creep factor...
>
> The reason his character works so well in the books is that he seems
> so slimy, so hateful, and we don't know the whole story behind why.
> That's intriguing...
>
> In the films he just comes off, to me, as a generally strict teacher
> who favors his house...

My husband observed, after seeing the "full" potions scene from the first
movie, that Rickman is playing Snape with some clear overtones. He makes
very abrupt movements and gestures--and anyone who has seen Rickman in other
things knows that this is *absolutely* not the way he normally moves; he is
the essence of suave and smooth, ordinarily, in almost every other character
I've seen. He is doing this quite deliberately.

I get two "vibes" from this, which ring very true to my take on Snape:
(1) emotional suppression. Rickman's Snape is a pressure cooker; he's
holding so much in that his every movement is guarded and controlled, and
his responses come out abruptly, like little hisses of steam from under the
lid.
(2) predatory. Rickman's Snape is true to his House's character. The way he
maintains eye contact, the way he shifts his attention (by moving not only
his gaze but his head), the way he "stalked" Harry and Ron around his
desk...this is predatory, the attitude of one in control.

The way he's portraying Snape could be the result of direction; but Rickman
is nothing if not participatory in his roles, and JKR has given him extra
information about Snape to aid his characterization. I think he works *with*
the director, not *for* him.

~Amanda




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Sun Apr 27 04:05:10 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 04:05:10 -0000
Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
Message-ID: <b8fktm+e2qd@eGroups.com>

Chris Columbus, Steve Kloves, and David Heyman were tasked with the 
job of bring Harry Potter to the screen. They had to be true to the 
books, and have the approval of JKR of all the material. This almost 
has never been done before on this scale.

To reach this end they hired a cast that was recognizable by 
everyone who had read a least on of the books. When the pictures of 
the cast was first published no one needed captions to recognize all 
the characters.

The dialog in the first two movies was 90% straight from the books.

The end results was two movies that are the second and third highest 
grossing pictures ever made.

Now everyone seems to want to compare Harry and the Lord of the 
Rings. Anyone who has read LOR knows that it is a story of the 
Hobbits. The movies are not about the Hobbits. The movie is so far 
from the books that it is almost a different story.

The people behind LOR have done what some people want done to Harry. 
I do not think Harry Potter fans want that to happen in future films!





From amani at charter.net  Sun Apr 27 04:11:29 2003
From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 00:11:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
References: <b8fktm+e2qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006c01c30c73$14ac14a0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

hpoldfan:
Chris Columbus, Steve Kloves, and David Heyman were tasked with the 
job of bring Harry Potter to the screen. They had to be true to the 
books, and have the approval of JKR of all the material. This almost 
has never been done before on this scale.

To reach this end they hired a cast that was recognizable by 
everyone who had read a least on of the books. When the pictures of 
the cast was first published no one needed captions to recognize all 
the characters.

The dialog in the first two movies was 90% straight from the books.

The end results was two movies that are the second and third highest 
grossing pictures ever made.

Me:
These films would have been huge box office successes no matter how bad they were. The popularity of Harry Potter guarantees it.

hpoldfan:
Now everyone seems to want to compare Harry and the Lord of the 
Rings. Anyone who has read LOR knows that it is a story of the 
Hobbits. The movies are not about the Hobbits. The movie is so far 
from the books that it is almost a different story.

The people behind LOR have done what some people want done to Harry. 
I do not think Harry Potter fans want that to happen in future films!

Me:
Why are the LotR movies so much more highly praised than the HP movies? Because they are true to the /spirit/ of the book, something the HP movies certainly aren't. The LotR movies have the depth and wonder of the books (even adding a lot of depth to characters like Aragorn that was not found in the books), while the HP movies, while entertaining, are extremely flat and childish. I would be /exceedingly/ happy if the HP movies got the same type of creative treatment that the LotR movies did. 

--Taryn

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




From alician at bigpond.com  Sun Apr 27 08:43:42 2003
From: alician at bigpond.com (Alicia)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 08:43:42 -0000
Subject: Film Theorist Question (long answer)
In-Reply-To: <b89h89+u7vi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8g57u+o876@eGroups.com>

Matt wrote:

> I have read some dissent on Columbus' rendering of the story to the 
> screen.  As a person with a Bachelor of Science degree in Film 
> Theory, I would like to hear everyone's comments specifically 
> describing what they dislike about the films and how else it could 
> have been done.

Long-time lurker on the main HP4GU board visiting and deciding to 
delurk here for a bit


I'll start by saying that I enjoyed the 2 films so far, but
nothing more. Yes, it was nice to see Harry Potter's Greatest
Hits on screen, but I wasn't overwhelmed, and it wasn't
anything I couldn't already imagine anyway. I saw CoS not long
before I saw "The Two Towers": one was a pleasant evening out
and the other finished with the crowd bursting into applause at the 
end. And that just about sums up the Columbus experience for me:
he's a paint-by-numbers workman, rather than an artist with an
over-arching vision.

First off, I think Columbus faced the huge problem, not of his own 
making, of doing his films at the same time Peter Jackson has been 
giving a 3-film lesson in book adaptation. I realise that Jackson has 
about 50 years' worth of serious Tolkien scholars as well as the 
completed novels to draw on, while Columbus had about 5 years and an 
ultimately incomplete series that is regarded by the general 
community, and marketed, as children's fiction. But I don't
think that excuses the lack of an overall plan for the HP films.

I think Columbus took the fan expectation too much to heart. Every 
time a well-loved book is adapted to film, there are howls of 
outrage ? a Texan to play Bridget Jones! An expanded role for
Arwen! It happened with HP too, and Columbus (and others involved in 
the films) went to great lengths to counter that and show how 
faithful they were being ? mainly British actors, consultation
with JKR,etc. And I think too much of it filtered through to the 
script and direction; rather than allow some scenes to be expanded at 
the expense of cutting others in order to develop characters, they 
kept as much as possible, squeezing it all into the running time. One 
of the things that makes me hopeful about Cuaron's film is that 
he/Kloves/etc have obviously decided to make changes ? no Wood
? that aren't necessarily popular for fans to hear, but may be
vindicated when we see a more developed film with stronger 
characterisation.

Regarding the overall vision of the films, I think 
Columbus/Kloves/etc were operating under difficulty not knowing the 
end of the story. In interviews they've mentioned foreshadowing
and JKR telling them to leave certain things in that will become 
important later in the series, but surely it's difficult to 
foreshadow anything when you don't know exactly what you're 
foreshadowing. This is particularly an issue, because I really
don't think of CoS and PoA as sequels to the first film, more as
a continuation of a longer story.

This is also a problem in the over-simplification of some aspects, 
especially in PS/SS, which will *force* changes down the 
track. Two examples here ? Neville and Quidditch. By cutting 
Neville's scenes out or giving his lines to other characters,
they have eliminated the character development/viewer identification 
that will become important in the GoF film, when we find out about 
his parents
 if that element is left in the story. Similarly, the
reason there is no need in the PoA film for Wood's last chance at
winning the Quidditch Cup is that it was implied that Gryffindor won 
the Cup on the basis of that one game shown in PS/SS. 

Like everyone, I guess I have my own little dislikes: one of the 
decisions Columbus did make to change in PS/SS was to show Harry a 
Quidditch trophy with his father's name on it ? now, I'm
fine with that, but why was McGonagall's name on it too? Unless
it was some sort of Gryffindor "team of the century", I
don't see how she and James Potter have played on the same team
? but it's in there now, for everyone to puzzle over. And I
won't even start on the age of the actor playing Moaning
Myrtle


This has already gone much longer than I meant. Basically, I wanted 
to say that I felt Columbus wasn't making adult films that
children can watch too. I also felt that he lacked 
confidence/ability/both to make the films to his own over-arching 
vision of the entire series and let it stand by itself, rather than 
to a checklist of Things That Must Be Included that has to be rushed 
through due to the running time. My impression of the films, 
especially the first one, was of one of those end-of-year letters 
people send with Christmas cards ? we did this, and went here,
and this happened, love to all, the end. I realise Columbus was using 
his limited time to concentrate on Harry rather than the extended 
school community, but I don't believe he got the balance right.

Thanks to anyone still reading,
Alicia (going back to lurkdom with her long and wordy thoughts)





From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 27 13:29:33 2003
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 13:29:33 -0000
Subject: Please, No....
In-Reply-To: <b8ffrd+aipm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8glvt+4bde@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust"
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:

> Agreed. :-)
> 
> I hope Cuaron tells Rickman (though, I love him as an actor) to tone 
> down the campiness and amp up the creep factor...
> 
> The reason his character works so well in the books is that he seems 
> so slimy, so hateful, and we don't know the whole story behind why. 
> That's intriguing...
> 
> In the films he just comes off, to me, as a generally strict teacher 
> who favors his house...

Because that's maybe what he is when not viewed from Harry's POW? :-)
Ever wondered what Slytherins think of McGonagall?

The only moment I would describe as "camp" was in CoS, when Snape says
to Lockhart "Malfoy, perhaps?" And even there I thought the gestures
and the tone were to mock Lockhart, not just because Rickman felt like
camping it up.

I think Rickman is doing wonders with the meagre stuff he's got so far.
There was not even a reaction shot to the Lockhart's "If I only wanted
to block your spell, it was too obvious". How stupid was not to give
reaction shot here? Criminally stupid, I say.
After watching the DVD deleted scenes, I blame Columbus much more than
Kloves. So there is hope for PoA yet.

Irene

> 
> Plus, I think his "evil energy" must match Sirius'...Otherwise the 
> conflict won't be interesting.




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Sun Apr 27 14:22:47 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 14:22:47 -0000
Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
In-Reply-To: <006c01c30c73$14ac14a0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <b8gp3n+o23h@eGroups.com>


> 
> hpoldfan:
> Now everyone seems to want to compare Harry and the Lord of the 
> Rings. Anyone who has read LOR knows that it is a story of the 
> Hobbits. The movies are not about the Hobbits. The movie is so far 
> from the books that it is almost a different story.
> 
> The people behind LOR have done what some people want done to 
Harry. 
> I do not think Harry Potter fans want that to happen in future 
films!
> 
> Me:
> Why are the LotR movies so much more highly praised than the HP 
movies? Because they are true to the /spirit/ of the book, something 
the HP movies certainly aren't. The LotR movies have the depth and 
wonder of the books (even adding a lot of depth to characters like 
Aragorn that was not found in the books), while the HP movies, while 
entertaining, are extremely flat and childish. I would 
be /exceedingly/ happy if the HP movies got the same type of 
creative treatment that the LotR movies did. 
> 
> --Taryn

LOTR is true to the book, or the spirt of the book? I would suggest 
you reread the books as you are watching the movies. They could not 
be further from what Tolkien had written.
WF
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jeanico at securenet.net  Sun Apr 27 18:00:12 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 18:00:12 -0000
Subject: Zits and my 2 cents worth
Message-ID: <b8h5rc+us49@eGroups.com>

Good morning, all! I just wanted to comment on the recent multiple 
posts about zits and hopefully we can put this issue behind us...If 
any of you are managing to find zits on the faces of any of the 
actors in the HP movies, may I recommend you not sit so close to your 
television sets? those kids have fine complexions and one zit does 
not equal problem skin...I was lucky, I guess, because I never had 
any zits when I was a teenager and neither do any of my nephews (they 
range in age from 11 to 19). My 18 year old daughter does have a few 
pimples that pop up when she is stressed or at "that" time of month 
and she handles the problem with a bit of makeup. Making pimples more 
apparent on screen is really not necessary to the "growing-up and 
becoming a teenager" story line!
Also, to all who have been picking these young actors work to pieces, 
please remember that Dan, Rupert and Emma are still very young and so 
are actual works in progress. I find that it is a joy to see them 
blossom and change before our very eyes!  Daniel Radcliffe is, in my 
opinion, an actor to watch...he is poised, intelligent and extremely 
solid for his age and has IMO a real star quality about him.
My 2 cents worth,       
Have a great day,
Nicole    




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Sun Apr 27 21:08:54 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:08:54 -0000
Subject: Zits and my 2 cents worth
In-Reply-To: <b8h5rc+us49@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8hgt6+qmsh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
> Good morning, all! I just wanted to comment on the recent multiple 
> posts about zits and hopefully we can put this issue behind 
us...If 
> any of you are managing to find zits on the faces of any of the 
> actors in the HP movies, may I recommend you not sit so close to 
your 
> television sets? those kids have fine complexions and one zit does 
> not equal problem skin...I was lucky, I guess, because I never had 
> any zits when I was a teenager and neither do any of my nephews 
(they 
> range in age from 11 to 19). My 18 year old daughter does have a 
few 
> pimples that pop up when she is stressed or at "that" time of 
month 
> and she handles the problem with a bit of makeup. Making pimples 
more 
> apparent on screen is really not necessary to the "growing-up and 
> becoming a teenager" story line!
> Also, to all who have been picking these young actors work to 
pieces, 
> please remember that Dan, Rupert and Emma are still very young and 
so 
> are actual works in progress. I find that it is a joy to see them 
> blossom and change before our very eyes!  Daniel Radcliffe is, in 
my 
> opinion, an actor to watch...he is poised, intelligent and 
extremely 
> solid for his age and has IMO a real star quality about him.
> My 2 cents worth,       
> Have a great day,
> Nicole

Right on. All three of the kids have the potential of becoming major 
stars as adults. And I agree with you that Dan has so many talents 
that one has no idea where he will end up. Actor, writer, director 
or who knows. Every thing that Warner Bros. has thrown at him he has 
managed to handle with aplome ana a smile.

To quote the late Richard Harris about working with the kids, " Dan 
is good, he is very good".

The one thing you can be sure of whatever Dan does in life he will 
be a success

WF






From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Apr 27 21:21:34 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 17:21:34 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Zits and my 2 cents worth
Message-ID: <78.3e0a0b31.2bdda3de@aol.com>

Well I like talking about there bodies changing since they wont be the same 
if they keep going to the 7th film.  I would like to see a little more zits 
since we all have had them at one time or another.  I think all of them are 
evovling and growing into good kids

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/27/03 2:02:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
jeanico at securenet.net writes:

> Good morning, all! I just wanted to comment on the recent multiple 
> posts about zits and hopefully we can put this issue behind us...If 
> any of you are managing to find zits on the faces of any of the 
> actors in the HP movies, may I recommend you not sit so close to your 
> television sets? those kids have fine complexions and one zit does 
> not equal problem skin...I was lucky, I guess, because I never had 
> any zits when I was a teenager and neither do any of my nephews (they 
> range in age from 11 to 19). My 18 year old daughter does have a few 
> pimples that pop up when she is stressed or at "that" time of month 
> and she handles the problem with a bit of makeup. Making pimples more 
> apparent on screen is really not necessary to the "growing-up and 
> becoming a teenager" story line!
> Also, to all who have been picking these young actors work to pieces, 
> please remember that Dan, Rupert and Emma are still very young and so 
> are actual works in progress. I find that it is a joy to see them 
> blossom and change before our very eyes!  Daniel Radcliffe is, in my 
> opinion, an actor to watch...he is poised, intelligent and extremely 
> solid for his age and has IMO a real star quality about him.
> My 2 cents worth,     
> Have a great day,
> Nicole   
> 



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




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 00:28:11 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:28:11 -0000
Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
In-Reply-To: <b8gp3n+o23h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8hsir+6lku@eGroups.com>


> LOTR is true to the book, or the spirt of the book? I would 
suggest 
> you reread the books as you are watching the movies. They could 
not 
> be further from what Tolkien had written.
> WF



 Just because someone has different opinion than you on a subject, 
does not mean that they haven't examined it as thoroughly as you 
have... 

 It just means they have a different opinion. ;-)

 I'm under the opinion that I'd rather see a director stray from the 
rigid formula of the book, to the benefit of what's on screen, than 
to do a "by the numbers" straight adaptation with no creativity, 
imagination, or spirit...



>The people behind LOR have done what some people want done to 
>Harry. 
>I do not think Harry Potter fans want that to happen in future 
films!



 I am a true Potter fan (from back when they were first released 
here in the States) and I would also like the see the same passion 
and "spirit" of the LOTR trilogy (thus far) injected into the Harry 
Potters movies.... I have also loved Tolkien's books from when I was 
12 years old. 

 Don't speak for all of us.

 --daughter @)--/---





From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 00:49:20 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:49:20 -0000
Subject: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <20030427032257.23317.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b8htqg+7oem@eGroups.com>

>What should
have been done in order to amke a better film?

 Here's the short answer: Focus on developing the characters and not 
on getting every single recogizable element from the book to the 
screen.

...and some examples (to make the answer that much longer): I was 
highly disappointed with the way Longbottom's character was handled.

 I actually got a little glassy-eyed at the end of the book (don't 
laugh!) when Neville got the winning points for Gryffindor... And 
the reason why??? Because I really got a sense of his "can't-get-
right" character... In the movie he simply isn't developed enough 
for me to care, when he gets the points...

 All of the characters are treated in that same "revue" style. 
Like "You know them *wink-wink*, do we really have to develop them 
for you?" "Simply sit back and watch as we hit every visual scene,  
you ever imagined from the book, while neglectng character 
development...because *wink-wink* you already know them, right?"

 A few set-piece scenes (Harry gazing out of his Hogwart's room 
window, Harry staring at his owl in the snow for example) could have 
been cut in favor of (the much discussed in here) scene where Harry 
snaps back at Snape in the Potions class for exmaple. 

 My mind is boggled over the fact that scene (the best for 
establishing tension between Snape and Potter) was cut. 

 That is very bad direction, in my opinion.

 So, there ya' go... I hope that was clearer.

 ---daughter @)--/---

 P.S. As for making truely "classic" films this day and age being 
outlandish?? 

 I would be as cynical if not for evidence to the contrary than it 
can be done right, if not for corporate laziness(Miyazaki's film 
collection, The Iron Giant, and Cuaron's The Little Princess). ;-)




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 01:12:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:12:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
Message-ID: <147.103c230a.2bddd9e6@aol.com>

Me either Duaghter!  I mean I can understand why he didnt keep the rest in 
but to cut Snape and Harry scene together!  Thats crimnal!  Its frustrating 
becuase it seems to me he is more of an action director and not more 
character development but I am not saying Harry Potter and the Socerers Stone 
was bad but just too fast!  For the Chamber I would of left a lot of the 
deleted scenes in 

Hufflepuffs

Shutterbug Colin

Rooster Scene 

Justin Finch Fletchleys scene

But again it was just too fast!  I mean I would of like more character 
development with the Weasleys or the Dursleys.  Chris should of kept the 
Masons scene in or left it out and just had the Gnome tossing scene.  It show 
that the Weasleys really like him!  

With Chris I liked the fact he kept the same cast but with Alfonso Cuaron I 
dont know becuase why get rid of the quidditch scene or get rid of the 
quidditch team all togther??  I mean wood and Flint had one more movie to do 
and that was it.

Kyle Longbottom 


In a message dated 4/27/03 8:51:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> >What should
> have been done in order to amke a better film?
> 
> Here's the short answer: Focus on developing the characters and not 
> on getting every single recogizable element from the book to the 
> screen.
> 
> ...and some examples (to make the answer that much longer): I was 
> highly disappointed with the way Longbottom's character was handled.
> 
> I actually got a little glassy-eyed at the end of the book (don't 
> laugh!) when Neville got the winning points for Gryffindor... And 
> the reason why??? Because I really got a sense of his "can't-get-
> right" character... In the movie he simply isn't developed enough 
> for me to care, when he gets the points...
> 
> All of the characters are treated in that same "revue" style. 
> Like "You know them *wink-wink*, do we really have to develop them 
> for you?" "Simply sit back and watch as we hit every visual scene,  
> you ever imagined from the book, while neglectng character 
> development...because *wink-wink* you already know them, right?"
> 
> A few set-piece scenes (Harry gazing out of his Hogwart's room 
> window, Harry staring at his owl in the snow for example) could have 
> been cut in favor of (the much discussed in here) scene where Harry 
> snaps back at Snape in the Potions class for exmaple. 
> 
> My mind is boggled over the fact that scene (the best for 
> establishing tension between Snape and Potter) was cut. 
> 
> That is very bad direction, in my opinion.
> 
> So, there ya' go... I hope that was clearer.
> 
> ---daughter @)--/---
> 
> P.S. As for making truely "classic" films this day and age being 
> outlandish?? 
> 
> I would be as cynical if not for evidence to the contrary than it 
> can be done right, if not for corporate laziness(Miyazaki's film 
> collection, The Iron Giant, and Cuaron's The Little Princess). ;-)



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




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 01:17:24 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 01:17:24 -0000
Subject: Kloves in negotiations to write & direct....
Message-ID: <b8hvf4+hlmv@eGroups.com>

According to The Guardian Steve Kloves is in negotiations to write 
and direct "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" a 
book being published in 6/03. So my question - how is Steve going to 
finish writing the film for book 4 or even bk 5 (if there is one)? 
Or is it going to be years b/f he actually starts on "Curious"  Just 
curious.




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 01:29:35 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:29:35 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Kloves in negotiations to write & direct....
Message-ID: <46.382d462f.2bddddff@aol.com>

OH GOD dont say that !  We need good vibes not bad!

We must have the same cast

Kyle Longbottom 



In a message dated 4/27/03 9:19:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
geri510 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> According to The Guardian Steve Kloves is in negotiations to write 
> and direct "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" a 
> book being published in 6/03. So my question - how is Steve going to 
> finish writing the film for book 4 or even bk 5 (if there is one)? 
> Or is it going to be years b/f he actually starts on "Curious"  Just 
> curious.
> 



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




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 01:31:59 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 01:31:59 -0000
Subject: Kloves in negotiations to write & direct....
In-Reply-To: <46.382d462f.2bddddff@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8i0af+a14n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> OH GOD dont say that !  We need good vibes not bad!
> 
> We must have the same cast
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 
Me: Ah, but the good news might be that there will be a new writer?




From CLShannon at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 01:48:09 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:48:09 EDT
Subject: POA pics
Message-ID: <185.1a1b7851.2bdde259@aol.com>

In case anyone's interested, danradcliffe.com has some new pics of the 
Knights Bus filming that I haven't seen before. They are the title page when 
you go there, in the update for today. 
These pics show Dan a lot more in the 'action' sequences - looks like the 
close ups after Harry is almost run over by the bus. Perhaps the stunt man 
was needed to do the actual falling ;-)
The pics come from a site called iphoto and there are quite a few that I 
don't believe anyone has posted before. They don't look like shots taken by 
someone who happened on the shoot, they look a bit more professional.
Cindy



From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 01:58:53 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:58:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA pics
Message-ID: <a1.37beeac9.2bdde4dd@aol.com>


Well they did say that Dan used a stunt double for the shots some of them 

Kyle Longbottom


In a message dated 4/27/03 9:50:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
CLShannon at aol.com writes:

> 
> In case anyone's interested, danradcliffe.com has some new pics of the 
> Knights Bus filming that I haven't seen before. They are the title page 
> when 
> you go there, in the update for today. 
> These pics show Dan a lot more in the 'action' sequences - looks like the 
> close ups after Harry is almost run over by the bus. Perhaps the stunt man 
> was needed to do the actual falling ;-)
> The pics come from a site called iphoto and there are quite a few that I 
> don't believe anyone has posted before. They don't look like shots taken by 
> 
> someone who happened on the shoot, they look a bit more professional.
> Cindy



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




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Apr 28 02:04:45 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:04:45 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Kloves in negotiations to write & direct....
References: <46.382d462f.2bddddff@aol.com>
Message-ID: <005701c30d2a$8e56b320$32a0cdd1@RVotaw>

In a message dated 4/27/03 9:19:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
geri510 at yahoo.com writes:
 
> According to The Guardian Steve Kloves is in negotiations to write 
> and direct "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" a 
> book being published in 6/03. So my question - how is Steve going to 
> finish writing the film for book 4 or even bk 5 (if there is one)? 
> Or is it going to be years b/f he actually starts on "Curious"  Just 
> curious.

Nobody panic (or celebrate, for that matter).  Steve Kloves is already writing the script for GoF as we speak.  According to either David Heyman or Chris Columbus (I always get mixed up who says what between those two, though I do know the difference).  I would think he'd get the script done for GoF then take a few months off of HP to work on this other thing.  Then either return to write the script for OOP or they'll hire someone else.  Which is doubtful, considering how much JKR trusts him with her "baby."  He could begin half way through filming of GoF and still have time to finish it up.

Richelle


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




From glorificus21 at bigpond.com  Mon Apr 28 02:34:42 2003
From: glorificus21 at bigpond.com (glory)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 12:34:42 +1000
Subject: Quidditch in PoA
Message-ID: <00a101c30d2e$bca543f0$7a2ea4cb@yourog0e5epvsj>

Hello to all,

I was just browsing through one of the many Hp-themed websites out there when I came across an englinsh translation of a German article where Dan Radcliffe refers to the quidditch match in PoA being the most exciting yet ... he refers to it as 'quidditch under thunder and lightning'. 

So it seems that quidditch (according to this article) WILL be making an appearance in PoA.

Apologies if I am repeating information that everyone else already knew, or if I seem to be starting rumours, just thought I'd pass it on.



Regards,
Glory


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




From CLShannon at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 05:57:20 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 01:57:20 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Quidditch in PoA
Message-ID: <1da.8773fde.2bde1cc0@aol.com>


In a message dated 4/27/03 7:35:27 PM, glorificus21 at bigpond.com writes:

<< 
I was just browsing through one of the many Hp-themed websites out there when 
I came across an englinsh translation of a German article where Dan Radcliffe 
refers to the quidditch match in PoA being the most exciting yet ... he 
refers to it as 'quidditch under thunder and lightning'. 

So it seems that quidditch (according to this article) WILL be making an 
appearance in PoA. >>

I read the same thing and wondered why no one picked up on it at the time ;) 
Considering the uproar over the lack or not of quidditch in POA, I thought 
someone would mention this interview ;-)
It does sound wonderful though. The thunder and lightning match is the one 
where he falls off the broom, isn't it? 
Cindy



From doliesl at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 06:20:47 2003
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 06:20:47 -0000
Subject: Quidditch in PoA
In-Reply-To: <1da.8773fde.2bde1cc0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8ih7v+812m@eGroups.com>

> I read the same thing and wondered why no one picked up on it at 
the time ;) 
> Considering the uproar over the lack or not of quidditch in POA, I 
thought 
> someone would mention this interview ;-)
> It does sound wonderful though. The thunder and lightning match is 
the one 
> where he falls off the broom, isn't it? 
> Cindy

This news did got picked up on this list about 5 days ago by Sophia
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/message/6200

I too wondered why the lack of response to this post at that time 
(even though it could just be a rumor, no one confirm the validity of 
the interviews), but as some people here kept on complaining about 
(and sound like they're 100% sure) how there'd be NO Quidditch, I was 
thinking maybe this article can ease some of their anguish.

-D
 




From twelvecabins at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 04:54:56 2003
From: twelvecabins at yahoo.com (Sara Lynne)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 21:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 560
In-Reply-To: <1051434523.310.56862.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030428045456.91159.qmail@web13406.mail.yahoo.com>

>Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 04:05:10 -0000
>From: "hpoldfan" <WFeuchter at msn.com>
>Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he
>was tasked to do?
>Now everyone seems to want to compare Harry and the
>Lord of the 
>Rings. Anyone who has read LOR knows that it is a
>story of the 
>Hobbits. The movies are not about the Hobbits. The
>movie is so far 
>from the books that it is almost a different story.

I am new to this group so, first and foremost, hello
to everyone. Secondly, I must disrepectfully disagree
with this assessment of LotR, seeing as how I am even
more obsessed with these stories and films than I am
with HP. I have read the books repeatedly (and seen
the films repeatedly), and although you are right that
the primary character is a Hobbit and the story
centers around his strength to do what no others could
accomplish, the book is certainly not just about
Hobbits. Tolkien paid just as much attention to the
human and elven characters as Peter Jackson has in the
films; indeed, with the exception of books 1 and 2,
the rest are divided between the exploits of the
Hobbits and other characters, many of whom are just as
critical to the plot.

But I do understand what you mean about Columbus - why
is he criticized for sticking so faithfully to the
books when other directors are heaped with scorn for
diverging in the slightest from their source material?
I'm not sure I have an answer to that, I don't really
get it myself. Perhaps it has to do with age: kids are
extremely pleased when it sticks closely to the books,
but older fans with more sophisticated tastes may be
looking for a bit more subtlety or mystery? Maybe we
perceive much more darkness in the books than kids do
and want to see that reflected on the screen. I don't
know.

Sara

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com



From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 07:34:04 2003
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt Huber)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 00:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <b8htqg+7oem@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030428073404.77293.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com>

I am glad that my question has been recieved and such well formulated answers have been created. I would like to apologize if I had been previously offensive as this was not my intent.  I am one that is not holding an opinion on this matter until I can fully understands others outlook on it.  Hence my further questions. From what i can tell, from previous posts, is that the Large and main complaint with the first 2 films is the lack of character development.  THis is inronic as it seems that this is the one thing that the filmmakers have identified as an area that they felt they couldn't convey properly in order to keep the pacing of the film on target.  This apparently is the reason for the deleted scenes, which we discover from the interviews found on the DVD's. I wonder how the filmmakers could have strayed from the story and shown more development.  Which film do they do this in?  SS/PS was the inital story set up, and COS was the obliquitory "keep the ball rolling" sort of story.  But looking back on them both, and thinking about them without including our knowledge gained from the future installments, what have we missed?  Looking at each as a story "arc", similarly found in TV series, we have to examine what the story sets up and comparing that to the film translations.  What have we missed in setting up for the future.   This is what I was trying to convey previously.  When a filmmaker knows that a sequel is obvious to occur then they sacrafice the character development for action, romance, and humor.  They figure they can continue to develop the central characters later.  A perfect example of this is the upcoming Spiderman sequel, where the story will pick up where it left off and continue to develop the fancinating "story arc" of best friends and sworn enemies. Basically, i would like to continue to debate this in an open discussion, but If the only problem with the film is lack of character development then I would have to say that we need to give the filmmaker a break realizing that there is more to come. --Matt  P.S. I am not impling that this is could be only subject of criticsm on the films. Also please help me out and explain Neville's Character in the 1st 2 stories and how it could be developed further, without hinting towards any future developments.

daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com> wrote:>What should
have been done in order to amke a better film?

Here's the short answer: Focus on developing the characters and not 
on getting every single recogizable element from the book to the 
screen.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 14:49:50 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:49:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Quidditch in PoA
Message-ID: <1ee.7a15efd.2bde998e@aol.com>

How are they not going to have Oliver Wood??

Kyle longbottom 



In a message dated 4/28/03 2:21:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
doliesl at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> >I read the same thing and wondered why no one picked up on it at 
> the time ;) 
> >Considering the uproar over the lack or not of quidditch in POA, I 
> thought 
> >someone would mention this interview ;-)
> >It does sound wonderful though. The thunder and lightning match is 
> the one 
> >where he falls off the broom, isn't it? 
> >Cindy
> 
> This news did got picked up on this list about 5 days ago by Sophia
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/message/6200
> 
> I too wondered why the lack of response to this post at that time 
> (even though it could just be a rumor, no one confirm the validity of 
> the interviews), but as some people here kept on complaining about 
> (and sound like they're 100% sure) how there'd be NO Quidditch, I was 
> thinking maybe this article can ease some of their anguish.
> 
> -D



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




From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Mon Apr 28 16:11:49 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:11:49 -0000
Subject: Quiddtich in PoA
In-Reply-To: <1ee.7a15efd.2bde998e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b8jjs5+nrqi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> How are they not going to have Oliver Wood??
> 
> Kyle longbottom 


Well obviously the camera would follow Harry all the time since the 
main purpose of the game is to show Harry falling off the 
broomstick,  They don't really need to show close up of other players 
at all. Now, according to the rumor, since there are thunders and 
rain, they can easily add CG players in the background, and sure you 
won't be seeing them clearly since there's rain and thunders. Indeed, 
just because there's no Sean Biggerstaff doesn't mean there's no No 
Quidditch or even no Wood, get it?

Please think back in CoS, Wood only appears like 3 secs and doesn't 
do ANTYHING during the Quiddtich game. His scene doesn't contribute 
anything to the plot nor the game, they could totally deleted all his 
scenes (the "watch out Harry then got hit by bludger" scene is 
unnecessary) and the game still works out fine. The Game (especially 
the PoA one against Cedric) is all about Harry, period.

Joan 




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 17:04:54 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:04:54 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter section at festival
Message-ID: <196.197e71eb.2bdeb936@aol.com>

Honest, dear Mod Elves, this is on-topic!  I think.  I don't know where else 
to post it.  Anyway. . . There's a new festival as part of the Kentucky Derby 
festivities this year, called Village Place.  It takes place at the 
Louisville Slugger Park in Louisville (yes, "Louisville Slugger" like the 
baseball bat -- it's a ball park).  There are various "villages" as part of 
Village Place, one of which is the Children's Village.  The Children's 
Village will feature a Harry Potter section.  I don't know what all is 
planned for that area (since I'm in another "Village"), but I was told by one 
of the organizers that they will have the Lego Grand Master Builders there 
creating a 15 foot tall "Hagrid."  I will try to get a photo of it so I can 
share it with the rest of you, but no guarantees!  The festival is May 1-3 
and the hours are 10 AM to 10 PM (I think -- my brain is fuzzy with all the 
work of getting ready to go). You can watch the Derby Saturday afternoon on 
the giant screens in the ball park.  For more info on the festival 
(directions, etc.), click here:   <A HREF="http://villageplace.org/villageplace.htm">Village Place ? A Derby Experience Unlike 
Any Other.</A>  (And if you'd like to meet a fellow Potter fan, look for me in 
the entrance of the Fine Arts Village -- Equine Art by Lynda Sappington -- 
I'd love to meet fellow Potter fans!)

Lynda 
* * *
"Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA


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




From hollydaze at btinternet.com  Mon Apr 28 17:44:05 2003
From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:44:05 -0000
Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
Message-ID: <b8jp95+rb1l@eGroups.com>

I am apologising now, at the beginning of this email. I am absolutely 
not in any way a film expert or connected with films at all and have 
no idea what I'm talking about ;). As such I have quite some 
difficulty in expressing some of my views on films especially in 
comparing why I like and don't like films so if this email seems very 
confusing it is because it's expressing some views that I have had 
(and still have) problems working out and find confusing myself. Part 
of this confusion is actually due to some of the views in this group 
which have helped me to partly sort out my views, it's just getting 
all the different reasons to work together that's the problem. So I'm 
blaming all of you lot for this confusing email ;)

hpoldfan:
> > > Now everyone seems to want to compare Harry and the Lord of the 
> > > Rings. Anyone who has read LOR knows that it is a story of the 
> > > Hobbits. The movies are not about the Hobbits. The movie is so 
> > > far from the books that it is almost a different story.
> > > The people behind LOTR have done what some people want done to 
> > > Harry. I do not think Harry Potter fans want that to happen in 
> > > future films!
> 
> > Taryn:
> > Why are the LotR movies so much more highly praised than the HP 
> > movies? Because they are true to the /spirit/ of the book, 
> > something the HP movies certainly aren't. The LotR movies have 
> > the depth and wonder of the books (even adding a lot of depth to 
> > characters like Aragorn that was not found in the books), while 
> > the HP movies, while entertaining, are extremely flat and 
> > childish. I would be /exceedingly/ happy if the HP movies got the 
> > same type of creative treatment that the LotR movies did. 
> > 
> 
>  hpoldfanF:
> LOTR is true to the book, or the spirit of the book? I would 
> suggest you reread the books as you are watching the movies. They 
> could not be further from what Tolkien had written.

I have to agree with Taryn, I absolutely LOVE the LOTR books. I love 
both HP and LOTR *books* to about the same degree. But when it comes 
to the films, LOTR is far superior. After much confusion and 
discussion with friends (who started looking very bewildered!) I've 
actually put this down to the same reason that you don't seem to like 
the films: the changes they've made. They've needed too make them but 
the important thing is that even in the bits they have changed they 
have kept the essence/spirit of the books. They have adapted the 
books into movies.

The HP films haven't done that, as many others have said, they've 
bunged in as much as they possibly can and not really worried about 
whether it works as a movie.

I've actually thought about this in some detail just because it 
puzzled me so much why I loved the LOTR films but really didn't like 
HP (in fact I almost despise PS now) especially as LOTR seemed to 
have changed so much more than HP. I'm still not exactly sure why I 
like one but not the other. There seem to be a lot of reasons (and 
many of them actually contradict one another which is why I have such 
problems trying to work it out). The simplest way of expressing the 
conclusion I've come to is that Peter Jackson wanted to make the 
books into a movie while CC wanted to make the movies into the books. 
What I think this approach has lead to is that PJ, in making the 
books into movies, has successfully *recreated* (for want a better 
word) the books and made an amazing movie, CC on the other hand, in 
trying to make the movies into the books, has failed at both.

When I was thinking about the changes in the stories I got myself 
into some really confusing contradictions because one week I'd be 
thinking that I didn't like HP because it had changed too much of the 
story and LOTR hadn't, yet the very next day I'd be thinking that I 
didn't like HP because it hadn't changed enough of the story while 
LOTR had. I eventually came to the conclusion that this was linked to 
the reasons behind the changes, that in wanting to make a successful 
adaptation Peter Jackson had changed many things but most of those 
changes had a reason behind them. After thinking about this I 
actually watched FOTR with the intention of seeing how many changes I 
could spot that seemed to have absolutely no reason to them and I 
spotted about 5, every other change seemed to have a valid reason. I 
compared this to Harry Potter and virtually every change I spotted 
seemed to have absolutely no reason at all, and those that did seemed 
to have been changed in such a way as to contradict a lot of the 
rules that the book and the movie had set down (I'll come back to 
that later). The perfect example of unnecessary changes being the 
whole James = seeker/chaser argument. That doesn't mean there aren't 
changes in LOTR that don't bug me (Faramir is a perfect example) but 
I can put up with and get used to them because they are so few that 
don't have valid reasons. HP just seemed to be full of changes that 
don't work.

Coming back to the whole "Rules" thing. (prepare for confusion). This 
was another thing that I was thinking about with regards to the two 
films. I don't know if there is any "technical term" for what I'm 
talking about but the HP movies seem to contradict a lot of the HP 
*rules*, not just with regards to the books but with regards to the 
movies themselves. This is very difficult to explain exactly what I 
mean so I'm hoping you might pick it up as I talk about it. It's 
basically to do with hmm, rules of consistency I suppose. It includes 
the ideas of flints and such, contradictions that are inherent within 
the books/movies, things that break the "spirit of canon" (as 
discussed in a thread on the main list a few months back) and some 
other stuff that I am not even going to attempt to put into words. In 
a straight off book(series), rules are basically to do with 
consistency because you aren't adapting anything. LOTR as a book is 
exceptionally good at keeping to it's own rules, there are very 
few "flints" (to use our HP term) in them, and I always marvel at how 
few there are in a book that is so complex. The HP books aren't quite 
so good (see the many discussion on the main list) but they're still 
very consistent when they absolutely need to be. 
 
With movies based on books, there are multiple sets of *rules* and 
these are not all based around consistency. The main rules come from 
the books themselves as the movies have to follow some of those rules 
because otherwise there would be no connection between the movies and 
the books at all.These aree not the same as the consistency rules of 
the books I mentioned above. They include things like the rules of 
the main plotlines, you can change some of the details of how that 
plotline happens or how you get from A to B but you have to keep the 
idea or the story becomes a totally different story. Secondly there 
are the rules the movies establish for themselves (these are the 
movie consistency rules), basically the details they might change, or 
the minor plotlines that they have to remove, they have to make sure 
that anything else relating to those changes/removals is also changed 
so that it is still consistent. There are other things as well but 
they are a bit difficult to explain (I'm not even sure about them 
they are more feelings than anything else) and they are what stop me 
from just referring to these *rules* as consistency. 

The first of the HP movies seems to break a lot of these rules, the 
first example that springs to mind is the whole Norbert storyline, I 
can deal with them having to remove it (it's one of the few changes I 
can understand) but it's how they've gone about it that bugs me. I 
compare this to FOTR (especially the extended version) and that movie 
is pretty good at following both the books rules and it's own. There 
are not many annoying/obvious contradictions, or jsut plane annoying 
changes. 

Looking at CoS, there are a lot less instances of *rulebreaking* 
compared to PS, but there are still some there. One that I can think 
of which kinda fits into the "other" category of rules is that in the 
books you are always given clues to who the person responsible for 
what is happening is, it's just that your given them in such a way 
that most people misinterpret them, but they are there (especially on 
a second reading, as we all know!). In COS, and to an extent in PS, a 
lot of these clues were either missing or were way too obvious (I 
told you there were contradictions ;). I have a couple of friends who 
have not read HP and neither of them could guess who it was on their 
first viewing or on a second viewing spot any of the clues that would 
have implicated Quirrel or Ginny/Riddle except the diary, which was 
so OBVIOUSLY placed in the cauldron by Malfoy that you couldn't not 
miss it. 

However just to be fair I must also point out that TTT falls foul of 
some of these rules to, it's entire Merry/Pippin/Treebeard plotline 
is riddled with rulebreaking (although in that case they take the 
form of flints) so it's more a consistency problem. I hope you see my 
point here and sorry if I've thoroughly confused you. 
 
Anyway I feel I'm getting away from my point now. Basically I feel 
that the HP movies break to many of these rules to be decent 
adaptations of the books. There are some really stupid changes in 
there (Hermione spouting Dumbledore for one) that just have no 
reason. There are unnecessary inconsistencies within the films and 
they do not seem to carry the spirit of the books/canon with them at 
all. When you compare this to how Peter Jackson and his team have 
adapted LOTR I just think there is no comparison, as an adaptation of 
the books and as a movie in it's own right LOTR is far superior to HP.
 
Just to finish off, there are other problems as well. As someone (I'm 
sorry, I'm writing this offline and I read the emails online so I 
can't check who) pointed out, there is the problem that CC, DH and SK 
don't really know what they are supposed to be foreshadowing, they 
don't know where the story is going, they only have clues and guesses 
to go on and that is going to lead to some problems/inconsistencies 
etc, especially when comparing these early movies to the ones that 
will follow. I also feel the fact that they have so obviously 
marketed these films at younger children does take away slightly from 
the movies feeling, but then that's also them missing out as they 
have this whole area of the demographic that they could end up losing 
if the films don't gain the same appeal as the books. 
 
Anyway I think I've made my point about the way I personally compare 
LOTR and HP and other people are free to (dis)agree and I hope I 
haven't confused you all as much as I've confused myself and that I 
at least made some sense (which I'm not sure that I did!).
 
HOLLYDAZE!!!
hpoldfanF, have you actually tried reading LOTR while watching the 
movies cos I'd think it was pretty much impossible? ;) Also, I don't 
know if your interested (or you might already know) but if you'd like 
to look at some of the views of some REALLY die hard LOTR fans (some 
are even non Hp fans - huh, shock horror ;) and see their views then 
you could try http://www.theonering.net/movie/reviews/index.html and
http://www.theonering.net/movie/ttreviews/index.html
there are literally thousands of reviews there although you have to 
search for the decent ones that really actually have valid points to 
make in terms of book/film adaptation.




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 19:52:10 2003
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:52:10 -0000
Subject: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <20030428073404.77293.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b8k0pa+riul@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Matt Huber <mhuber92211 at y...> 
wrote:
> I am glad that my question has been recieved and such well 
formulated answers have been created. I would like to apologize if I 
had been previously offensive as this was not my intent.... 

If I had been offended, I would not have wasted my time 
responding...as it would have been a sure sign to me (getting pissed 
at an anonymous poster) that I need to get a life. ;-)

I do however, love to contribute my opionion.

>I wonder how the filmmakers could have strayed from the story and 
shown more development.  

"A few set-piece scenes (Harry gazing out of his Hogwart's room 
window, Harry staring at his owl in the snow for example) could have 
been cut in favor of (the much discussed in here) scene where Harry 
snaps back at Snape in the Potions class for exmaple." 




From itzregina at hanson.net  Mon Apr 28 20:10:06 2003
From: itzregina at hanson.net (cagina62)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:10:06 -0000
Subject: Hasn't Chris Columbus done exactly what he was tasked to do?
In-Reply-To: <b8fktm+e2qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b8k1qu+mgul@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "hpoldfan" <WFeuchter at m...> wrote:
> 
> The dialog in the first two movies was 90% straight from the books.

 MANY reviews that I have read complained if the HP movies changed 
anything that was not like the books.  It seems to be expected, 
mostly among children, that the movies stay true to the books.  I'm 
seeing the same thing brought up about the movie "Holes".  Most of 
the readers of the book LOVED the movie because they said it was 
almost exactly like the book.  I think the difference is that the 
AUTHOR wrote the screenplay for "Holes".  Who else would intimately 
know the heart of the book and thus translate that to the screen? 
Maybe the HP movies should have been made after all 7 books were 
written and then JK would have been available to write the 
screenplays :-)

Gina




From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 28 22:19:51 2003
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt Huber)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:19:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <b8k0pa+riul@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030428221951.88641.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com>

Hoopefully I will become less anonymous if the group likes what i write :) Anyhow, as for the much maligned scene with Harry showing disrespect towards Snape, I can understand both sides.  First, it makes sense to increase the tension between two of the more developed characters in the books.  On the otherhand it shows that early on Harry has no respect for authority, which doesn't make sense for his character, as it was authority that had been his whole life until 2 weeks before that.  We all have to remember that Harry was a "muggle" and had no idea of his real life until very recently.  He is still coming to grips with that, and it should be noted that the scenes that don't make sense (in the snow around christmas is meant to protray loneliness) are to highlight that concept.  You can tell this by watching the deleted scenes in CoS when they cut all the scenes invloving the school turning on him.  In Reality Harry is a lonely young boy who has to live with celebrity.  Lockhart, albeit a humorous character, was one that was created to explain more about Harry's fame and how it affects him.  "Fame is a fickle friend"  Very true statement.  Let me also wonder about if the scene where Harry snaps back at snape is left in, the audience will wonder why Harry doesn't do it more often when Snape seems to do worse things to him.  Overall, the scene is out of character for both Harry to do it and Snape to allow it. --Matt

daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com> wrote:--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Matt Huber <mhuber92211 at y...> 
wrote:
> I am glad that my question has been recieved and such well 
formulated answers have been created. I would like to apologize if I 
had been previously offensive as this was not my intent.... 

If I had been offended, I would not have wasted my time 
responding...as it would have been a sure sign to me (getting pissed 
at an anonymous poster) that I need to get a life. ;-)

I do however, love to contribute my opionion.

>I wonder how the filmmakers could have strayed from the story and 
shown more development.  

"A few set-piece scenes (Harry gazing out of his Hogwart's room 
window, Harry staring at his owl in the snow for example) could have 
been cut in favor of (the much discussed in here) scene where Harry 
snaps back at Snape in the Potions class for exmaple." 


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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


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


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

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




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Mon Apr 28 21:39:31 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 21:39:31 -0000
Subject: Harry and Snape
Message-ID: <b8k72j+g0gn@eGroups.com>

>.......
>A few set-piece scenes (Harry gazing out of his Hogwart's room 
>window, Harry staring at his owl in the snow for example) could 
>have been cut in favor of (the much discussed in here) scene where 
>Harry snaps back at Snape in the Potions class for exmaple." 

May I point out that in the book Harry does not snap back at Snape. 
He suggests that Hermione may know the answer.

Harry snapping at anyone, especially just after arriving at 
Hogswarts, and finding out who he is would be completly out of 
character.




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Apr 28 22:57:06 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 18:57:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter section at festival this week
Message-ID: <1d5.86a829e.2bdf0bc2@aol.com>

I posted this on the HP movie list, and someone suggested I should post it 
here, so here goes!  There's a new festival as part of the Kentucky Derby 
festivities this year, called Village Place.  It takes place at the 
Louisville Slugger Park in Louisville (yes, "Louisville Slugger" like the 
baseball bat -- it's a ball park).  There are various "villages" as part of 
Village Place, one of which is the Children's Village.  The Children's 
Village will feature a Harry Potter section.  I don't know what all is 
planned for that area (since I'm in another "Village"), but I was told by one 
of the organizers that they will have the Lego Grand Master Builders there 
creating a 15 foot tall "Hagrid."  I will try to get a photo of it so I can 
share it with the rest of you, but no guarantees!  The festival is May 1-3 
and the hours are 10 AM to 10 PM (I think -- my brain is fuzzy with all the 
work of getting ready to go). You can watch the Derby Saturday afternoon on 
the giant screens in the ball park.  For more info on the festival 
(directions, etc.), click here:   <A HREF="http://villageplace.org/villageplace.htm">Village Place ? A Derby Experience Unlike 
Any Other.</A>  (And if you'd like to meet a fellow Potter fan, look for me in 
the entrance of the Fine Arts Village -- Equine Art by Lynda Sappington -- 
I'd love to meet fellow Potter fans!)

Lynda

* * * *
Don't let the Muggles get you down!  -- Ron Weasley


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Apr 29 01:39:56 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 02:39:56 +0100
Subject: What's wrong with the first movie (VERY long)
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030428231232.009836a0@plum.cream.org>

I've been inordinately busy over the last few days and although I started 
writing a reply to Matt's original post, I decided I was going off on the 
wrong tack and deleted it. Furthermore, many people have said stuff I'd 
have wanted to say, so my original thoughts have become redundant. On the 
other hand, this new set of thoughts will also tie in to a few other issues 
which have been raised recently.

This post was originally entitled "What's wrong with the first two movies", 
but having spent the last four hours on this (I'm writing this sentence 
during proof-reading), I've decided to leave my comments about CoS until 
tomorrow (with any luck; it may have to be later).

Overall, I agree with what almost everything Alicia said yesterday. BTW you 
should definitely post more, and not just lurk, Alicia. :-)

There are two separate issues at stake here, and the debate thus far has 
all but  completely overlooked one of them. This is, after all, an HP fan's 
forum and comparisons with the books are clearly valid arguments for or 
against the movies, but we should also think about how these films stand up 
on their own merits, *as movies*.

 From comments which I've seen thus far in this conversation, I think I'm 
unique in that I saw the first movie without having read any of the books 
first, and thus have a different attitude towards it. I'm therefore going 
to present my views of the first film as a voyage of discovery; my views on 
the second (and beyond) will be slightly different seeing as I've already 
read (and analysed) the books. :-)

So, attempting to think back to my ideas prior to reading the book, what 
can I say about PS/SS? From the hype (heck, although I'd not read any 
Potter books, it was impossible not to have a vague idea of what they were 
about!) I knew the names, if not a lot more, of the main characters who 
were going to be driving this franchise. I also knew that this was an 
"introductory" movie/book, where the story/plot played second fiddle to 
setting up the characters.

And *boy* were there a lot of characters! And every one an archetype, if 
not stereotype. We have the charming, intelligent and sanguine orphan who's 
been brought up by nasty step-parents. We have the step-family: the abusive 
pater familias, the mother doting on her natural child while using the 
step-child as slave labour and the bullying step-sibling.

Our hero is rescued from this environment to discover the avuncular 
mentor/headmaster; the strict-but-fair teacher, the nasty teacher, the 
sporty teacher, and the childlike adult who relates to Our Hero on his own 
level. And we have Our Hero's mates: the studious and bookish one, the 
funny one, the fat one who's the butt of many jokes, the incompetent one, 
the one from another ethnic background; not forgetting the class bully and 
his cronies. Then we have various older pupils whose purpose is to stay in 
the background but underline that Our Hero is in his first year of a new 
school a needs to be shown the ropes: the handsome older one, the bossy 
one, the slightly rebellious one(s).

There are also a few other characters who help Our Hero understand that he 
has a great destiny and much is expected of him.

The plot is another archetype: Our Hero discovers that the Really Evil guy 
who killed his parents is in the background somewhere, and perhaps is now 
after him (Our Hero chooses not to seek vengeance, but tries to show the 
Really Evil guy just how Evil he is and tries to defeat his Evil ways). The 
Really Evil guy has his henchman whom Our Hero has to identify and show for 
what he is. Of course, Our Hero is apparently the only one who realises all 
of this, and with the help of his motley class-mates, embarks upon 
unmasking him. Of course, Our Hero mis-identifies the henchman at first; 
the "suspect" is in fact on his own quest to bring down the Really Evil guy 
and unmask the henchman. The henchman is killed, the Really Evil guy 
escapes (this is, of course, just setting up the franchise, so the Really 
Evil guy can't be dead), but not before telling Our Hero just how The Plan 
was meant to have worked. The Really Evil guy is a caricature of humanity, 
and is little more than a cartoon character. He's larger-than-life while 
being completely two-dimensional.

So far, so formulaic, and completely unoriginal. So the thought occurs: 
what on earth possessed so many people around the world to embrace this 
re-hash of so many legends and stories and to make it the phenomenon it had 
become? This film is *so* unoriginal, *so* simplistic, and *so* much geared 
for under-10s (including the marketing: the toys which have flooded the 
market don't seem to cater in the slightest for the infamous adult fans of 
the books; all advertising and hype on British TV is exclusively part of 
children's programming) that I wonder how the book upon it was based 
managed to grab a worldwide adult readership. Not only that, but the plot 
fails to answer one question the formula requires: *why* does the presumed 
bad guy (who is proved to be nothing of the sort) put himself into the 
position where he can be suspected?

On a technical level, the film is very mixed: the sets and cinematography 
are sumptuous, but several other elements make this thing look like a rush 
job done on a shoe-string budget, not a major blockbuster: the end-to-end 
overblown John Williams music (the main theme becomes frankly boring by the 
tenth time one has heard it), digital effects which look like they were 
done by a bored ten-year-old with no imagination on a slow computer and 
acting which goes from the sublimely camp through the sublimely ridiculous 
and acting-by-numbers from people who should know better, to cringingly bad 
by some of the young actors. In terms of style, I actually resent 
Columbus's over-use of close-ups of Dan's face. OK, he's cute, but the 
number of close-ups really was well OTT. At some stage, I'm going to have 
to count them...

The script appears to have no knowledge of the characters or the archetypes 
they represent - again, I am baffled by the fact that adults might possibly 
be interested in these cardboard cut-outs and the machine-written plot. For 
adults to be interested, the characters and plot would need some kind of 
knowing/post-modernist twist: "you know these people, you know this plot, 
but it's not *quite* what you expect".

Other than the smarmy, scene-stealing Alan Rickman and the odd absolutely 
magical image, this film has absolutely *nothing* to recommend itself.

Then, in circumstances and for reasons I've talked about at length before, 
I decide to read the book (to summarise for those who've not seen those 
reasons, the main reason is to discover why Snape hates Harry and why he's 
the one trying to unmask Quirrel). I discover that the characters, while 
archetypes, aren't *quite* the stereotypes the movie presents:

Harry is *not* a wilting wallflower. While not openly disrespectful of 
authority (quite the contrary!) he has a sarcastic wit making it clear when 
he feels he's been wronged. While "good", he's far from perfect. He has a 
ready temper, and several buttons which cause him to erupt whenever they 
are pushed;

Ron is *not* a witless, clueless, bungling fool. Sure, he's not 
particularly bright or articulate, but his vocabulary extends beyond 
"wicked" and "cool" (quite possibly, the two youth buzzwords I despise the 
most); Ron would *never* ask about an obviously-broomstick-shaped package 
"I wonder what it is?" Ron is *not* underfed and greedy: look at him during 
the sweets scene on the Hogwarts Express, hogging all the goodies and 
trying to east as many as possible at one, or look at him when the food 
appears, as if he's never had a square meal in his life! (The Weasleys may 
be poor, but the books make it abundantly clear that they always have 
enough food to eat!).

Hermione is possibly the closest to her book self (although perhaps Emma's 
a little too pretty) and has had fewest of her lines re-written. Malfoy's 
pretty much on the nail as well, as are MacGonagall and Snape. I won't go 
into how Dumbledore is completely unrecognisable or how much Hagrid's "I 
shouldn't have said that" grates on me.

I find it interesting that in the various discussions about the first movie 
I've had in several HP forums, I seem to be the only one who thinks that 
it's a Good Idea (TM) that the infamous Potions Puzzle was excised from the 
movie script. Similarly, I think that Norbert's exit from the plot was more 
elegantly handled than it was in the book. Furthermore, frankly, except for 
the fact that they will probably return, I'd have written Norbert, the 
Forest and the Centaurs out of PS/SS completely. In terms of that film, 
they add absolutely nothing. And we've already been introduced to far too 
many characters for those to be added into the mix as well. However, I 
shall reserve complete judgment on their presence in this fillm, and and 
alternative way of introducing them, until their inevitable return

Matt mentioned that we have more films which can deal with character 
development. My main problem with that is: "what character?"! The main 
characters have been mis-drawn and all those things which make them 
*characters* have been excised from the script. They are cartoons, 
stereotypes. They are not "characters"! Besides, the remaining movies have 
so much *plot* to squeeze in that there is little or no time for character 
development, at least the way in which they develop in the books. They can 
continue with the characters as they are, but these are not recognisable 
from the books.

Then there's the comparisons with LOTR. As it happens, I really, really, 
really, dislike the LOTR books. I got through "The Hobbit" when I was about 
10 and found it "interesting". I re-read it about 10 years ago and from a 
new perspective, found it boring, unoriginal and derivative. I've tried 
reading LOTR on and off for the last 30 years and have never managed to get 
beyond around page 80 before being thoroughly bored and pissed off that I 
was wasting my time. I therefore can't compare the books to the movies but 
what I can say is that the movies (while not exactly my cup of tea in terms 
of subject matter) are very well done and make sense. From what I 
understand from the books' fans, a lot of things have been changed but I 
sat gripped through the extended DVD version of FOTR in a way neither of 
the HP movies has managed to grip me. I wasn't quite as impressed with TTT, 
but again I think I'll reserve judgment until I've seen the extended 
version (the cinema version of FOTR missed a lot of stuff).

I'll have more to say on other topics which have arisen when I talk about 
CoS...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who is beginning to wonder if the above actually makes 
sense.



From penumbra10 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 29 01:38:40 2003
From: penumbra10 at yahoo.com (Nia)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 01:38:40 -0000
Subject: What Cuaron will bring to PoA
Message-ID: <b8kl31+fohi@eGroups.com>

     This subject has been touched upon before, but I thought it 
might be interesting to delve a little deeper and toss around a few 
more ideas and observations.
     The surest judge of what a director will do with a new project 
is evidenced by what he (or she) has done before. 
 
     Cuar?n is not just a gifted filmmaker, he is a gifted filmmaker 
with an ability to really see people.  A think a good analogy 
between his work and Columbus' is that Cuar?n sees events and people 
fully realized, with a past and a future, in other words, in three 
dimensions, but for Columbus, everything he creates is like a false 
front set you might see in Hollywood?-nothing quite rings true; 
neither his people nor the events. Everything seems fake and 
contrived.  (I'm thinking especially of movies like "Mrs. Doubtfire" 
and "Stepmom," both of which could have said some beautiful and 
poignant things about life, but instead opted for the old Hollywood 
sidestep.)

	In "Y Tu Mam? Tambi?n" the clear, natural daylight of the 
majority of scenes added another dimension of reality to a picture 
which was already brutally honest.  Because there was no Hollywood-
style gloss to the film, we the audience are compelled to become a 
part of this `slice of life.'  We can't help it.  We see not only 
the major characters, the boys and Luisa, in increasing honesty, but 
also the country and the people who inhabit it all so clearly we 
feel as if we have lived it.   But, unlike the "truth"-obsessed 
young filmmakers who seem driven to bring out the absolute worst in 
everyone and everything and leave their audiences in a gothic 
angsty  funk, Cuar?n's film is strangely life-affirming even in its 
saddest moments.  I think this is an extraordinary achievement and 
bodes very well for PoA.   

	I cannot say enough about the way the characters were 
handled.  Like the overall experience of the film, after a while, 
you forget you are watching actors, the characters are portrayed so 
honestly.  After seeing the wonderful work Cuar?n did with the two 
young actors who portrayed Tenoch and Julio, I can't wait to see how 
he works with Radcliffe, Watson and Grint.  Daniel created a 
wonderfully believable David Copperfield, and, even with Columbus' 
misguided dirction born of his misguided concept of the Harry 
character, I thought both of Dan's portrayals of Harry Potter were 
sincere and believable?he just needed the kind of direction that 
Columbus was unable to give him.  Richard Harris himself said that 
Dan was "good, very good." In the scenes where he wasn't turned into 
a clown, Grint revealed a wealth of underutilized acting talent.  
And, of course, Watson is a natural?given the right lines.   
	In "A Little Princess," Cuaron demonstrates his talent at 
finding magic in the mundane.  Again, even though this is a 
different type of story entirely, we are drawn into Sara's world and 
into her imagination without realizing where the filmmaker has taken 
us.  Colors are used as powerful symbols for Sara's joy and her 
abuse, and little things; a gesture, a touch, a tear, have profound 
significance.  Minor characters are presented to us in vivid detail, 
and are never allowed to become *living props* for the main 
character to work around as you see in Columbus' work. Cuaron allows 
us to see their humanity and in so doing is able to touch our own.  
I don't think he is likely to abandon these techniques in "Prisoner 
of Azkaban."  If anything (depending on the script Kloves has 
offered him, *fingers crossed, toes crossed*) we are likely to see 
those tiny gestures, those looks and those glimpses of people that 
made the book so memorable in the first place.  
     Many in the fandom have been concerned about the reduction of 
screen time for Quidditch, but, in the book, it was not exactly the 
Quidditch that we responded to, (although I distinctly remember 
holding my breath as I was reading about the Dementors coming onto 
the Quidditch pitch.)  What we most responded to was Harry and the 
first stirrings of a crush as he sees Cho; his depression at having 
lost the game against Hufflepuff because of what he deemed was a 
personal weakness; his utter joy when he was able to overcome the 
influence of the Dementors and was hailed as a hero.  These are the 
things that touch us as we read because Jo Rowling managed to get us 
to connect with Harry and his friends on a deeply personal level.  I 
honestly believe that Cuaron will also be able to cause us to 
connect with whatever it is he puts on the screen next year.  I 
don't think it will be canon by rote, but we won't be bystanders as 
we have been for the last two films, we'll be participants.










From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Apr 29 01:52:51 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 02:52:51 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen/Standard Screen Comparison
In-Reply-To: <01b101c30b8e$8b305d10$0fa1cdd1@RVotaw>
References: <b8217p+qa64@eGroups.com>
 <4.2.0.58.20030423020625.00974c90@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030429024533.00967e40@plum.cream.org>

Richelle Votaw wrote:

>Oh, sure, wait for me to leave town and dump my favorites. :)  I forget, 
>which ones were my favorites that you left out?  The one with Fawkes 
>maybe, and was it Dobby?  Well, that shows I'm not too crushed over their 
>loss!

You clearly remember, though. :-)

>(Though I didn't like that Dobby's fingers got cut off on the 
>widescreen)  Still, as a whole that's not as important as entire people 
>getting cut off (poor old Dean, Neville, Fred & George).
>
>Anyway, that aside, thanks for working so hard on it, Richard, you did a 
>great job.  All in all, I'm glad I have both versions.  That way I can 
>choose to lose the characters on the sides or the "details" in other 
>things.  Thanks for getting it together for us!

Yeah, well, I'm not sure that the "details" in the fullscreen version 
actually warrant the money. The only picture which in my view adds anything 
to the equation is the Weasley clock, but we're clearly going to see more 
of that clock in the future anyway. The Evening Prophet was "cute", but 
beyond that, completely unimportant.

Knowing that these things are absent from the picture doesn't spoil my 
enjoyment of the widescreen version. Seeing  things like the train excised 
from Platform 9 3/4 made me squirm when I recently saw the fullscreen one, 
though!

There were other pictures which I prepared but didn't include on the site 
(mainly because I didn't really have any specific comments to make) but 
have uploaded to this group's photo albums. If you're seeing this on the 
web, use the "Photos" link on the left to go to the albums and select the 
"CoS ws-v-fs" album, or alternatively, here's a direct link:

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/lst?.dir=/COS+ws-v-fs&.src= 
gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/

Have fun!





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Apr 29 01:56:36 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:56:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] What's wrong with the first movie (VERY long)
References: <4.2.0.58.20030428231232.009836a0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <012a01c30df2$91de0840$919ccdd1@RVotaw>

First I'll say that my comments on GulPlum's comments are a lot shorter than his.  And, for that matter, less intricate.  :)  For one thing, I'm pretty much happy with both movies.  Pretty much.

GulPlum wrote:

> become? This film is *so* unoriginal, *so* simplistic, and *so* much geared 
> for under-10s (including the marketing: the toys which have flooded the 
> market don't seem to cater in the slightest for the infamous adult fans of 

Amen.  Considering if you average out the age of HP *readers* they'd be over ten, why is the movie aimed at such a younger age?  Because they buy toys?  Ha, come take a look around my room, you can't move an inch without bumping into something Harry Potter.  Usually a toy.  My main complaint at the under-10 aim of the movie was the way they completely and totally ruined the last scene.  Leaving out Hermione's big part (the logic) was one thing, it would've been rather complicated to translate to screen and still be mildly entertaining.  But the confrontation at the end was a load of baloney.  Ooh, look, this guy crumbles if he touches me.  Hmm, I'll aim for his face.  Oh, wow, a pile of dust.  Guess I'll pick up the stone now.  Eek, Voldemort vapor!  I'd better fall over.  Next thing you know Harry's in the hospital.  Why?  Did he bang his head on the concrete step falling over?  That's the best I could tell.  What happened to all the screaming, between Quirrell burning, Harry's scar on fire, and Voldemort yelling it should've been a lot more dramatic.  And how about that, this eleven year old saves the day, saves the stone, saves himself ALONE.  No Dumbledore in sight.  To me that was going too far.  Harry was brave, yes.  But Dumbledore DID show up in the book.  No sign of him in the movie.  The movie makes Harry look a) like a murder by aiming for Quirrell's face, not so apparently in self defense as in the book (just hanging on to him) b) the big hero because he defeats him ALONE and c) a wimp because even though he did all that a little Voldemort vapor and falling down winds him up in the hospital.

> by some of the young actors. In terms of style, I actually resent 
> Columbus's over-use of close-ups of Dan's face. OK, he's cute, but the 
> number of close-ups really was well OTT. At some stage, I'm going to have 
> to count them...

Aww, come on.  He just knew those chubby cheeks wouldn't last, and had to make the most of them. :)

> The script appears to have no knowledge of the characters or the archetypes 
> they represent - again, I am baffled by the fact that adults might possibly 
> be interested in these cardboard cut-outs and the machine-written plot. For 

Yea, did you know that Ron has twin brothers?  If you watch closely you can see them once every half hour.  And they even have a line now and then!  For that matter, some things are done but they don't record the sound for you to know about it.  It wasn't until about the 25th watching of SS/PS that I noticed at least one of the twins was actually saying "We got Potter" after Harry got sorted into Gryffindor.  Just like the book.  Would've been nice to HEAR that.  My lip reading is only so-so.

> Ron is *not* a witless, clueless, bungling fool. Sure, he's not 

Oh, yes, absolutely right.  I blame Steve Kloves for the dumbing down of Ron.  (Can we send him a copy of this email?  Anybody know where to send it?)

> Hermione is possibly the closest to her book self (although perhaps Emma's 
> a little too pretty) and has had fewest of her lines re-written. Malfoy's 

She also has more of Ron's lines than anyone else.

> Then there's the comparisons with LOTR. As it happens, I really, really, 
> really, dislike the LOTR books. I got through "The Hobbit" when I was about 
> 10 and found it "interesting". I re-read it about 10 years ago and from a 
> new perspective, found it boring, unoriginal and derivative. I've tried 
> reading LOTR on and off for the last 30 years and have never managed to get 
> beyond around page 80 before being thoroughly bored and pissed off that I 
> was wasting my time. I therefore can't compare the books to the movies but 

Well, confession time.  I tried and tried to read the LOTR books.  I finally made it through the first one.  By skipping all the Elvish. (I don't speak Elvish, sorry).  And skimming through the overabundance of songs.  (sorry again)  For the others I had to buy the CD's.  And it was pretty good.  I like the movies.  But that could be mainly because of Viggo Mortensen <sigh>--I love men with swords.  Anyway, I'll use my uncle as an example here.  He's been a long time fan of the LOTR books.  Read them and reread them more times than even he can count.  He hates the movies.  Positively despises them.  Wouldn't even go see Twin Towers, he was still busy being mad after Fellowship of the Ring.  So I really don't think everyone is wild about the LOTR movies.  Whatever my point was, I forgot.

Well, I've rambled enough (this was supposed to be short, I don't know what happened).

Richelle


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




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Tue Apr 29 07:02:44 2003
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Christin=20Gahnstr=F6m?=)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 09:02:44 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
Message-ID: <200304290702.h3T72ii05948@d1o270.telia.com>

I don't write to the list very often. But as I've been giving a lot of
thought as to why the first (and in parts the second) HP films turned
out rather bad, I thought I'd try to put theses thoughts in print. It's
pretty long, but here it goes:

First, I did enjoy HPPS as a novel. At least it was enough to make me
keep reading the following two that were out at the time. But I
remember thinking even then that filming the book might be difficult.
As many of you have pointed out, there isn't much of a storyline. But
then again a lot of things are going on that might be needed for events
later in the series.

The strength in the first novel lies partly in the irony and the very
realisticly described magical world. I find the magic in the movie
terribly overdone. Columbus has resorted to put blue light and smoke
all over the screen, which is a shame since the story is magical enough
in it self, it doesen't need to look like a cheap 80's fantasy film.

The production also feels rushed. I'm not only talking about the
frankly embarrassing special effects but also about the lack of
continuity, the (at times) very odd editing and the music that is
sometimes completely out of tune with what's happening on the screen.
Why, for example, didn't someone take the time to make Harrys eyebrows
and hair match from take to take? I realize that Dan Radcliffe grew a
great deal during filming, but that doesn't explain the hair and the
eyes.

There are times in the film where you almost get the feeling a whole
reel is missing. Think about the scene which ends with Dudley's
"daddy's gone mad" that cuts to the rock in the sea.
There's also a scene in which Harry picks up his first Hogwarts letter
from the floor. Listen to the music in that shot.

These are things hardly ever seen in big Hollywood productions, and it
surprises me that a film with such a large budget can look this bad and
still be released. Some more time spent with the editing, music and
special effects would have helped a great deal.

Then, of course, there is the narrative. The way Columbus tells the
story might have worked if he had three or four hours, or a whole tv-
series, on his hands. As it is, we get a story that wants to tell so
much it ends up telling nothing. Many people on this list have wished
for a longer film. That might have given us more live pictures from the
book. But if what we wished for was a better film, as a film, not as
moving illustrations, I'd say we'd be better of if the film were half
an hour shorter, with more focus on the main characters and actions
essential to the plot.

In the second film, however, I think much of the things that went wrong
in the first one are put right. The editing (though slighly abrubt at
times) works much better. The music interacts well with the action on
the screen and the special effects are flawless. Compared to two other
SF-filled films of the last year, The Two Towers and Spider-Man, I'd
say The Chamber of Secrets comes out as number one.

The storyline could have been more focused (and the film shorter). And
sometimes the direction, rather than the acting, is rather uninspired.
You'd think a broken arm would hurt a bit more than it seems to do in
the Quidditch-scene, and why Hermione reacts with such excitement when
Harry tells her he hears voices for the first time is hard to
understand.

But in all, the second film is a huge improvement and I enjoyed it a
great deal more than the first.

Of course, Hogwarts hosts the bunch of oldest looking twelve-year-olds
the world has seen ;).

As English is not my first language, and I have no access to a
spell-check or dictionary, I realize some words may be spellt wrongly,
or may not exist at all. I appologize. I would also like to thank you
if your're still reading. You are a very patient person ;)

Christin Gahnstrm



From rose590 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 29 14:16:16 2003
From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 14:16:16 -0000
Subject: What's wrong with the first movie 
In-Reply-To: <012a01c30df2$91de0840$919ccdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: <b8m1fg+9tt7@eGroups.com>

Well, someone has finally driven my back out of lurkdom after several 
months of pouting over the fact that Jason Carter was not cast as 
Sirius in PoA.  Please excuse me since once I get started, I have a 
tendencey to rant on for a while...

First of all, I am replying to both the original post and the reply.  
All I have to say is....HEAR....HEAR !!!!!!

Someone has FINALLY pinpointed what I haven't been able to articulate 
into words.  Don't get me wrong.  I love the HP Books and the movies, 
however, there has always been something wrong with the movies that I 
haven't been able to put my finger on.  I love watching them over and 
over because I am a very visual person and it puts faces in my mind 
of the characters as I am re-reading the books.  The script of the 
movie, howver, bores me to tears.  Every time I re-read the books, I 
still feel a thrill of anticipation when I get toward the end even 
though I already know what is going to happen.  I don't get that with 
the movie.  There is no build up in the plot of the movie that has 
you hanging on the edge of your seat.  In the books, there is.  When 
I read the books, I still get emotional and teary-eyed in certain 
spots. (Yes, I know...I'm a sap) But I feel nothing emotionally 
whatsoever when I watch the movies.  There is no characterization in 
the movies.  They are empty, soulless people that are moving around 
on the screen.  I don't think that any of the characters are 
accurately portrayed on screen.  Don't even get me started on Snape's 
character in CofS.  Every time I watch it I find myself wishing 
they'd take him off the anti-depressants and let him be himself 
again.  Even when he was trying to be mean he was being too nice.  I 
love Alan Rickman, he's a brilliant actor, but even the best of 
actors can't do miracles with a bad script. I'm not looking forward 
to seeing how they butcher the mothering compassion of Molly Weasley 
in the upcoming movies.

In my honest opinion, Jim Dale did a better job with characterization 
in his readings of the books for audio then the actors did on screen 
for the movie.

As for the movie, if you take it for what it is, a movie that is 
meant to entertain children, then it is very good, simple, and 
appealing to the elementary school crowd.  If you are looking for the 
depth of spirit that is found in the books, you are not going to get 
it.  Obviously, it is not the intent of the studio to market this to 
adults in any way shape or form, so that is something we will just 
have to live with.  It's just mindless entertainment.

Well, I'm going to end my rant there, return to lurkdome and brace 
myself to lick the wounds I will no doubt receive after some of the 
things I've just said........

.........and still dream about my Sirius.......

RoBro




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Tue Apr 29 15:59:37 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:59:37 -0700
Subject: World's oldest 12-year olds ;), was Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <200304290702.h3T72ii05948@d1o270.telia.com>
References: <200304290702.h3T72ii05948@d1o270.telia.com>
Message-ID: <19156859199.20030429085937@earthlink.net>



Hi,

Tuesday, April 29, 2003, 12:02:44 AM, christin.gahnstrom at telia.com wrote:

> Of course, Hogwarts hosts the bunch of oldest looking twelve-year-olds
> the world has seen ;).

Then the twelve-year-olds in my daughter's school must be
really unusual, because they look just as "old" and a couple
of them could get away with claiming they are 16 :)

There are two boys in the class who make Crabbe and Goyle
look like 2nd graders ;)

Anyway, kids grow at different rates, and for some reason it
seems like most adults want to see "young-looking" kids on
the screen.

My daughter and her friends (ten and eleven-year olds) have
had no complaints at all about the actors ages and we talk
about HP frequently.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net




From geri510 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 29 16:50:57 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 16:50:57 -0000
Subject: World's oldest 12-year olds ;), was Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <19156859199.20030429085937@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <b8mahh+c23h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> There are two boys in the class who make Crabbe and Goyle
> look like 2nd graders ;)
> 
> Anyway, kids grow at different rates, and for some reason it
> seems like most adults want to see "young-looking" kids on
> the screen.

Me: I have to agree - I was nearly 5ft 8in when I was 13, was the 
tallest girl in my year & could pass for 18 - each child grows 
differently.




From diana at slashcity.com  Tue Apr 29 18:18:44 2003
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 14:18:44 -0400
Subject: World's oldest 12-year olds ;), was Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
References: <200304290702.h3T72ii05948@d1o270.telia.com> <19156859199.20030429085937@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <106c01c30e7b$dc858510$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

> Tuesday, April 29, 2003, 12:02:44 AM, christin.gahnstrom at telia.com wrote:
>
> > Of course, Hogwarts hosts the bunch of oldest looking twelve-year-olds
> > the world has seen ;).

Susanne replied:

> Then the twelve-year-olds in my daughter's school must be
> really unusual, because they look just as "old" and a couple
> of them could get away with claiming they are 16 :)
>
> There are two boys in the class who make Crabbe and Goyle
> look like 2nd graders ;)

Me:
I agree.  My son is 12 (just turned 13 this week, actually) and he is an
inch taller than I am - and I'm 5'6".  He's also had his voice change and
the first indications of facial hair.  My daughter already comes up to my
chin (she's 10) and is frequently mistaken for a 12-year-old in terms of
facial maturity.  Kids grow in spurts, and you'll see all sorts of height
variations and levels of maturity once they reach the 8-14 year age group
for girls and 10-16 for boys.  (After that it tends to settle down
somewhat.)

Diana Williams
----------------------------------
website at http://diana.slashcity.com
List-Mom to Slash-Writers - www.yahoogroups.com/groups/slash-writers
Webmaster for Ink Stained Fingers, a Harry Potter Slash archive
http://inkstain.slashcity.net






From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Tue Apr 29 18:41:40 2003
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Christin=20Gahnstr=F6m?=)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:41:40 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=20Re:=20World's=20oldest=2012-year=20olds=20;),=20was=20Re?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?:=20[HPFGU-Movie]=20Re:=20Film=20Theorist=20Question?=
Message-ID: <200304291841.h3TIfeY24371@d1o1121.telia.com>

Maybe it's something they ate? ;)

No, really, I know some kids grow faster than others. But as a former 
substitute teacher and a scout leader I've seen litterally hundreds and 
hundreds of twelve-year-olds. Some are more mature than others. Dan 
Radcliffe is proof enough. But it's very unusual with so many kids in 
the same (fairly small) group that could easily pass for 14 or 15. We 
have Harry, Ron, Draco and either Crab or Goyle (can't tell the 
difference, shame on me). The only ones that look like avarage pre-
teens are the ones in the background. It's not important, though. 
Honest.

Christin



From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk  Tue Apr 29 20:56:42 2003
From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:56:42 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Film theorist question
Message-ID: <v01540b00bad48bd2f130@[217.154.254.13]>

Matt said:-

>>Anyhow, as for the much maligned scene with Harry showing disrespect
>>towards Snape, I can understand both sides.  First, it makes sense to
>>increase the tension between two of the more developed characters in the
>>books.  On the otherhand it shows that early on Harry has no respect for
>>authority, which doesn't make sense for his character, as it was authority
>>that had been his whole life until 2 weeks before that.

Quibble;
Harry answering back to Snape is in the book. The film script wasn't
word-for-word, but if you look in Chapter Eight 'The Potions Master', you
have Snape asking all those questions, and then:-

'I don't know', said Harry quietly. 'I think Hermione does, though. Why
don't you ask her?'

If it's in the book, I don't think you can really argue that it doesn't
belong in the movie. I think that the response to Snape should have been
kept in; it showed that Harry wasn't intimidated by him.

If you read the first few chapters of PS/SS with the Dursleys, you will
also find that Harry doesn't take their bullying lying down. He cheeks
back.

Harry *does* respect authority, though; but only competent authority. He
shows respect for Dumbledore, McGonagall and, in the books, almost all of
his other teachers...but not Snape. The reason he doesn't respect Snape is
that Snape is unjust. He loathes Harry and picks on him for (apparently) no
reason; and Rickman conveyed that pretty well.

Regards,
Nicholas





From potterfan23 at hotmail.com  Tue Apr 29 22:17:54 2003
From: potterfan23 at hotmail.com (Emily F)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:17:54 -0500
Subject: Film Theorist Question
Message-ID: <BAY8-F91fGdMNFmWAFs00003a78@hotmail.com>

First of all, I'm at work and a little busy (so why am I not working, you 
ask?  ;D) so hopefully I can get my point across in a relatively short post. 
  This talk of the LOTR and HP movies has reminded me of something I thought 
about while watching the FOTR uber-DVD for the thousandth time.  For those 
of you who own it, have you listened to all the commentary and watched all 
the special features?  I did, and the one thing that really stood out for me 
was how much EVERYONE who worked on any part of the movie genuinely CARED 
about the film they were making.  The actors spent time in the workshop 
admiring the work of the special effects folks.  Peter Jackson himself spent 
hundreds of hours with those performing the digital imaging to make every 
scene just right.  The composer wrote several "themes" to catpture the 
emotion of each scene, rather than writing one blanket theme and using it 
over and over.  After thinking about all of this, I gained a new 
appreciation for the LOTR movies.  All those involved in the film really 
worked hard - not because they were paid to, but because it was important to 
them that the product they made was truly excellent.

Unfortunately, this care really seems to be lacking in PS/SS and CoS.  
That's why I'm not happy with the HP movies (well, among other reasons that 
have already been explained by others).  I certainly don't mean to imply 
that no one's trying, but the love of what they're doing just doesn't seem 
to be there.  Everyone involved seems perfectly alright with the fact that 
the movies are sub-par.  Or maybe I've just been spoiled by Peter Jackson.  
:-)

Emily

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail




From WFeuchter at msn.com  Tue Apr 29 22:24:18 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 22:24:18 -0000
Subject: World's oldest 12-year olds ;), was Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Film Theorist Question
In-Reply-To: <200304291841.h3TIfeY24371@d1o1121.telia.com>
Message-ID: <b8mu2i+9qul@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Christin Gahnstr?m" 
<christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:
> Maybe it's something they ate? ;)
> 
> No, really, I know some kids grow faster than others. But as a 
former 
> substitute teacher and a scout leader I've seen litterally 
hundreds and 
> hundreds of twelve-year-olds. Some are more mature than others. 
Dan 
> Radcliffe is proof enough. But it's very unusual with so many kids 
in 
> the same (fairly small) group that could easily pass for 14 or 15. 
We 
> have Harry, Ron, Draco and either Crab or Goyle (can't tell the 
> difference, shame on me). The only ones that look like avarage pre-
> teens are the ones in the background. It's not important, though. 
> Honest.
> 
> Christin

About 2 years ago there was a program on Discovery Health, I think, 
that documented the transition from child into adolescent. It 
followed a 12 year old boy and12 year old girl. When the boy turned 
13 + a couple of months, he entered a growth spurt where he grew 6 
inches and his voice changed, and started growing body hair. Sounds 
like Dan is just where he is supposed to be

WF





From gwendolyngrace at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 30 13:00:08 2003
From: gwendolyngrace at yahoo.com (Gwen)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 06:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: News from Nimbus: Saturday Lunch, Casting Contest
Message-ID: <20030430130008.42138.qmail@web13508.mail.yahoo.com>

A few months ago, you may recall, we announced that
our Saturday Luncheon speaker would be Cheryl Klein of
Scholastic. Most unfortunately, only a few weeks after
agreeing to come, Ms. Klein had a sudden change of
plans involving her family and had to cancel.

The Nimbus  2003 Programming team is therefore very
pleased to announce that instead, our Saturday
Luncheon speaker will be Ari Rapkin, Computer Graphics
Software Engineer, from Industrial Light and Magic.
Ms. Rapkin has been with ILM since 1998, working on
ILMs sequences in films such as "Jurassic Park III,"
"Star Wars: Episode II 'Attack of the Clones,'" and
"A.I. Artificial Intelligence." She is currently
working on the cloth simulation system for use in
several upcoming films including "The Hulk," "Van
Helsing" and "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of
Azkaban." Her talk will offer us some insights into
the mysteries and secrets of film enhancement through
computer animation.

If youve been waiting to find out who the speaker
will be before signing up for the lunch, please make
your upgrade quickly! The $19.75 luncheon fee for
Saturday is only available until May 6; as of May 7,
the price will increase to $29.75. We are sorry we
could not extend the lower rate further, but our
negotiations with ILM ran longer than we anticipated.


Speaking of the film versions, we also have another
fun activity to announce: 

HP Movie Casting Contest!

How about those HP films? Did they make the right
casting choices? Do you agree with JK Rowling's
insistence on casting only actors from the British
Isles, Canada, and Australia? Well, Nimbus - 2003
offers you alternatives!

Objective: Cast any one of the films (including OoP!)
with the actors you would have picked if *you* were in
charge. To aid people who might not know your choices,
please bring a picture, filmography, or other evidence
of the person's suitability. For each choice, write a
*short* (no more than 3 sentence) description of why
you think that person is right for the part. 

Scenario #1: "Looks can be Deceiving" - Pick your cast
members based on looks (or looks and personality)
alone, not necessarily because of their acting skills.
The object in this choice is to assemble a cast that
*looks* as close to your vision as you can find.

Scenario #2: "Englishman in New York" - Cast the film
as well as you can from nations *not* on JKR's
approved list.

Scenario #3: "If Worse Comes to Worst..." - Go the
other way. If you felt the movies made poor choices,
just how much worse could it get? Pick your ultimate
worst choices - but still be realistic! For example,
Ringo Starr as Snape. For this one, they must fit
JKR's bill and come from a British country or
commonwealth.

Assemble your lists, collages, or whatever, and
display them all weekend in the Nimbus - 2003 banquet
room!


Finally, we remind you that our submissions for
Artwork and T-Shirt designs are still open! Please see
the LiveJournal
(http://www.livejournal.com/community/hp_orlando/13913.html)
for details. To answer one question that came up on
the artwork: Designs may absolutely be full colour,
but bear in mind that (especially for the t-shirt), we
may have to print in only one or two colours to keep
costs low. If its totally spiffy, though, we might
just have to go with the extra expense!




=====
Bring Your Own Broom to Nimbus - 2003!
http://www.hp2003.org/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com



From WFeuchter at msn.com  Wed Apr 30 13:12:42 2003
From: WFeuchter at msn.com (hpoldfan)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 13:12:42 -0000
Subject: Film theorist question
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bad48bd2f130@[217.154.254.13]>
Message-ID: <b8oi4a+5u25@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, TACtalk at a... wrote:
> Matt said:-
> 
> >>Anyhow, as for the much maligned scene with Harry showing 
disrespect
> >>towards Snape, I can understand both sides.  First, it makes 
sense to
> >>increase the tension between two of the more developed 
characters in the
> >>books.  On the otherhand it shows that early on Harry has no 
respect for
> >>authority, which doesn't make sense for his character, as it was 
authority
> >>that had been his whole life until 2 weeks before that.
> 
> Quibble;
> Harry answering back to Snape is in the book. The film script 
wasn't
> word-for-word, but if you look in Chapter Eight 'The Potions 
Master', you
> have Snape asking all those questions, and then:-
> 
> 'I don't know', said Harry quietly. 'I think Hermione does, 
though. Why
> don't you ask her?'
> 
> If it's in the book, I don't think you can really argue that it 
doesn't
> belong in the movie. I think that the response to Snape should 
have been
> kept in; it showed that Harry wasn't intimidated by him.
> 
> If you read the first few chapters of PS/SS with the Dursleys, you 
will
> also find that Harry doesn't take their bullying lying down. He 
cheeks
> back.
> 
> Harry *does* respect authority, though; but only competent 
authority. He
> shows respect for Dumbledore, McGonagall and, in the books, almost 
all of
> his other teachers...but not Snape. The reason he doesn't respect 
Snape is
> that Snape is unjust. He loathes Harry and picks on him for 
(apparently) no
> reason; and Rickman conveyed that pretty well.
> 
> Regards,
> Nicholas

While indeed the scene is in the book, I read it as someone under 
attack trying to find a way out. And being respectful about it. In 
the deleted scene, and this is from memory, Harry is counter 
attacking which is not something that one would do at that time in 
his life.

Granted as time goes on Harry indeed takes a proactive stance 
against Snape, just as he does with his Uncle.

The way the scene was played it just did not fit.

WF