Prisoner's hopes and dreams

[susanbones2003 <rdas@facstaff.wisc.edu>]

> Suzanne raised some really good points about characterizations:

I *like* Hermione in the books, with all her rough edges,
> but movie Hermione..., I can't stand her.
> 
> And Ron is a completely different character (I think Rupert
> Grint could do just about anything asked of him, but almost
> all they are giving him is comic relief scenes).
> 
> I understand that they can't put everything in the books
> into a movie script, but why the differences in
> characterization?
> 
> And I want to know if JKR thinks, the three main characters
> ring true to her books."

It seems, and this is entirely cynical, it seems the JKR has given 
the "movie" people free reign to get their movies made as long as 
they don't wreck future plotlines. That's the only assumption I can 
come up with and that saddens me to no end after having seen her 
on "60 Minutes" a few years back and heard her tell how hard she was 
working not to sell out to all the merchandisers and such (really she 
did say that and she did hold out an awfully long time before 
caving...) Maybe all she really cares about is seeing quidditch on 
screen and realizing that. I am a staunch Danny fan. I saw him when 
he was a nobody in "David Copperfield" and he was trasfixing. He held 
the viewer in the palm of his hand. I regret that his performance in 
the two Potters so far has had to exist in a very tight little 
superhero box. I know he's capable of much more. Yesterday when I 
started this thread, I was convinced it was mostly Chris' fault. Then 
a very good post made me consider Kloves culpability. But ultimately, 
it's JKR who washed her hands of character accountability and for 
someone who so zealously guards her characters in print, that's quite 
a disappointment.

I quote Suzanne:
> So, like any good pessimist, I'm expecting nothing from the
> next movie, so I can't be disappointed ;)
>JenD