film allusions and characterization (WAS: film adaptations)

[sophiamcl <sophiamcl@hotmail.com>]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve <bboy_mn at y...>" 
<bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> > At 03:04 24/02/03 , Robin Keener wrote:
> > >JenD:
> > > >getting them to utter silly phrases that never occured in the
> > > > books (as in "Don't worry, I will be...")
> > >
> 
> Many many people saw Harry/Dan is this scene portrayed as arrogant, 
I
> on the other hand saw it as a refusal to be intimidated by Lucius 
much
> that same way the first scene in PS/SS potions class went

I agree with you. Whether the line was abominable or no, I read it as 
defiance, and rather enjoyed it, to be honest. I don't know if Dan 
pulled it off as a Clint Eastwood allusion, but I'd like to point out 
another allusion--another possible "say it like" from Chris Columbus:
When Crabbe and Goyle (what are the names of those actors again? What 
a terrific performance they gave as Harry and Ron in disguise) are 
leaving Christmas dinner to find the two cupcakes floating in mid-
air, they give off a distinct Beavis and Butthead vibe. They are 
sniggering in the classic Bavis-vein (hm-hm-hm-he-he-he-he-hm-hm) and 
in finding the cupcakes, Goyle says--distinctly Beavis-like "Cool!hm-
he-he-hm etc" Did anyone else pick up on that or am I just imagining 
things?

A couple of other comments:
The statue Ron and Harry hide behind in the aforementioned scene, who 
does it portray. I'm sure it is one of the founders, since he appears 
to be holding a replica of the great hall in his right hand, and at 
forst I pegged him as Godric Gryffindor beacuse of the lion at his 
right foot, but then I noticed a badger at his left foot and was no 
longer so sure.

We have read a slew of comments regarding Kloves and Columbus failure 
to translate the characers as we know them from the book to the 
screen. Apart from the changes in the trio and the trio dynamic, not 
many characters have survived the transfer--although this is not in 
every case a bad thing. Most of the "transfers" are interpretations 
of the Rowling characters, and I suppose we must always allow some 
leeway. However, as I've thought about it for the past couple of 
days, I have come to realize just how few of the characters strike me 
the same as in the book.

For instance (this has been mentioned before, I know), Dumbledore has 
his wisdom intact, but his movie-self is incomplete since all of his 
cookiness and eccentricity has been excised. 
Furthermore,in the book, Snape is entirely unpleasant in my view, 
with no redeeming qualities to date (except hints of possible bravery 
in the past--but that's sstuff for a different list)but the movie-
Snape comes off as a dedicated teacher who's just having a hard time 
keeping a personal grudge under wraps. The fact that he's also 
menacingly attractive I'm just putting down to Rickman himself. 

Also, as little as we've seen of Percy, he too, seems to me 
considerably more sympathetic than in the books. This could possibly 
be a result of that (in)famous morning hair scene in CoS. Book-Percy 
to me would never appear at breakfast other than fully dressed and 
neatly combed.

Finally, Crabbe and Goyle in the book have so far no redeeming 
qualities--they are just mean and unpleasant all the way. In the 
films, however, CoS particularly, we see them as bullied by Draco, 
possibly insecure around him--hangers on for protection by Malfoy's 
status maybe. They're just kind of stupid-cute. Notice that they try 
to get up to applaud Hagrid's return in the final great hall scene, 
but Malfoy stops them.

Why is that? Perhaps Kloves and Columbus decided to make these 
characters a little more human--after all they are nearly caricatures 
in the books, very belieavable, but still types in a sense. Perhaps 
the movie perspective ís supposed to give us a more "objective" take 
on the characters, whereas the book-characters are all seen through 
Harry's eyes.

Sophia (screwing up her brain)