From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 00:41:05 2003 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:41:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Tis the season for awards... Message-ID: <20030101004105.27439.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> 'Tis the season for awards and the ads aimed at those whose votes count. Companies that would benefit from the wins run these ads as part of their publicity campaigns. >From it's ads for HPCoS, below is Warner Bros.' list of people to be considered for awards (such as the Academy Awards/Oscars, the Golden Globes, BAFTA, etc). What I don't get is just WHOM is Daniel Radcliffe "supporting." He DOES play the title character after all and should be considered a lead actor, not supporting...even if he doesn't have much of a chance in that category, it's the proper one for him. In contrast, Warner Bros. suggests in another "For Your Consideration" ad (this one for SCOOBY-DOO), that voters consider nominating/voting for Matthew Lillard (Shaggy) for Best Performance by an Actor in a leading role, comedy or musical. Petra, wishing her votes count a n :) BEST PICTURE HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS Produced by DAVID HEYMAN BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR DANIEL RADCLIFFE RUPERT GRINT EMMA WATSON KENNETH BRANAGH ROBBIE COLTRANE RICHARD HARRIS MAGGIE SMITH JASON ISAACS ALAN RICKMAN RICHARD GRIFFITHS FIONA SHAW JULIE WALTERS MARK WILLIAMS DAVID BRADLEY BEST DIRECTOR CHRIS COLUMBUS BEST SCREENPLAY Adapted Screenplay STEVE KLOVES BEST ART DIRECTION Production Designer STUART CRAIG Set Decorator STEPHENIE McMILLAN BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY ROGER PRATT, B.S.C. BEST COSTUME DESIGN LINDY HEMMING BEST FILM EDITING PETER HONESS, A.C.E. BEST MAKE-UP Key Make-up Artist AMANDA KNIGHT Creature and Make-up Effects NICK DUDMAN Hair Designer EITHNE FENNELL BEST ORIGINAL DRAMATIC SCORE JOHN WILLIAMS BEST SOUND Production Mixer JOHN MIDGLEY Re-Recording Mixers RAY MERRIN GRAHAM DANIEL RICK KLINE BEST SOUND EDITING RANDY THOM DENNIS LEONARD BEST VISUAL EFFECTS JIM MITCHELL NICK DAVIS JOHN RICHARDSON BILL GEORGE __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 03:53:45 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 03:53:45 -0000 Subject: Slightly OT but Movie Related: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory Message-ID: This is slightly off topic but it does deal with movies and the cast of the HP movies. "Rupert Grint?s new Film: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" http://www.rupertgrint.net/rumours/gossip_4.htm OK so Rupert is in a new film. I'm very very happy for him. But there is more. Not only is Rupert in the movie but so is.... Emma Watson as Veruca Salt Harry Melling (Dudley) as Augustus Gloop Tom Felton as Mike Tevee Elenor Columbus (presumably Chris Columbus's Daughter) as Violet Beureguard Michelle Pfeiffer as young Charlie's mum Jim Carrey playing the top man himself Wonka Also joining the star packed cast will be Meg Ryan and Daniel Radcliffe as the famous Umpa Lumpas Meg Ryan and Michelle Pfeiffer ....? ...really? Now for the clincher. The release date for this movie is... April 1, 2003. Is that even possible? If it's true, I say GREAT, this time Rupert gets to play the Hero, but , as much as I like the idea, it sound almost impossible given the schedule with PoA. Just thought I would throw that in. bboy_mn From siskiou at earthlink.net Wed Jan 1 04:00:24 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:00:24 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Slightly OT but Movie Related: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <182281606810.20021231200024@earthlink.net> Hi, Tuesday, December 31, 2002, 7:53:45 PM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com wrote: > Now for the clincher. The release date for this movie is... > April 1, 2003. > Is that even possible? Uh, it sounds like an early April Fool's joke to me, with that ensemble and the release date . Happy New Year! -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From purple_801999 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 04:00:17 2003 From: purple_801999 at yahoo.com (purple_801999 ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 04:00:17 -0000 Subject: Casting news? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "c_voth312 " wrote: > > Christi wrote- > I've personally never gotten all swoony at the mention of Oldman's > name, but I think he does have a certain charisma about him--one > which has more to do with attitude rather than physical appearance. > And I think attitude is the primary reason why Sirius (and Lupin too, > for that matter) has such a following in the first place. > > I'd also like to recant my earlier comment about Oldman not being the > right type for Peter. I had "Dracula" firmly in my mind at the time-- > Oldman's versitale enough that he could probably pass for the > sniveling rat as well. > I see Gary Oldman as Lupin myself. Well, him or Ralph Fiennes. But he is a VERY versatile actor so he could probably go either way. I always thought Richard E. Grant would make a good Sirius, he's got the thin frame, intensity, and blue eyes. Alan Cummings would be my pick for Pettigrew. I would like to see Gary Olman as a nice guy,it must get boring to be typecast as the evil psycho killer all the time. Look at how funny John Malkovich was in 'Being John Malkovich'. And since this is my first post here I thought I'd throw my pick for Ludo Bagman out. Has anyone suggested Eddie Izzard? I alsways thought he'd be perfect for the role since I first read GoF. Olivia Grey From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 04:09:05 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 04:09:05 -0000 Subject: RUMOR Only: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > This is slightly off topic but it does deal with movies and the cast > of the HP movies. > > "Rupert Grint?s new Film: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" > http://www.rupertgrint.net/rumours/gossip_4.htm > I just want to add that this is listed and an internet RUMOR, althought it appears to read like a news article of press release. The RupertGrint.net sight is not claiming it's true; just a rumor. Given the film schedule they are already on, it seems almost impossible. I was just wondering if anyone else had come across this from a more reliable source. bboy_mn From lita at sailordom.com Wed Jan 1 05:23:28 2003 From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:23:28 -0700 (MST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RUMOR Only: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20021231221426.B48431-100000@nightwing.sailordom.com> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Steve wrote: > Given the film schedule they are already on, it seems almost > impossible. I was just wondering if anyone else had come across this > from a more reliable source. I think this is simply a rumor--AFAIK (and according to the film's status at Corona), the Willy Wonka movie is still in development hell. I don't think there's been news on the project for a *long* time. There was a director attached to it over a year ago, but it doesn't have a cast attached, let alone be ready for a release in 2003. What's most suspicious, however is that "April 1st" release date. :) April 1, 2003 is a Tuesday--movies in the US are usually released on a Friday (and occasionally a Wednesday). I'm with whoever said it sounds like an early April Fool's joke. :) Lita ----------------------------------------------- -The Society of Lex Redemptionists http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Lex_Society/ -Buffyverse: Redemptionist-friendly discussion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buffyverse/ -Birdwatchers: About the DC comic Birds of Prey http://groups.yahoo.com/group/birdwatchers/ From myphilosophy2001 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 05:30:18 2003 From: myphilosophy2001 at yahoo.com (Moonstruck) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:30:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 'Tis the season for awards... In-Reply-To: <20030101004105.27439.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030101053018.76446.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com> Petra wrote: > What I don't get is just WHOM is Daniel Radcliffe > "supporting." He DOES play the title character > after all and should be considered a lead actor, > not supporting...even if he doesn't have much of > a chance in that category, it's the proper one > for him. My response: I'm in complete agreement about Dan being the clear lead in the HP movies, but I suspect it's a strategic move on WB's part. Often times, the studios will submit an leading actor as a supporting actor, particularly when the movie in question is a reletively ensemble piece, when they consider the competition for "lead actor" category too stiff. I believe they did the same thing to Elijah Wood for "LOTR:FOTR" last year. Fan were a bit put off by it as well, if I remember correctly. I'm at a COMPLETE loss to explain the Matthew Lilliard/Scooby-Doo lead actor bid, however! -Jess :) (Happy New Year!) ===== "One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star." - Friedrich Neitzsche http://www.livejournal.com/users/moonstruck4rjl/ Nimbus_2003-A Harry Potter Symposium: http://www.hp2003.org/index.html __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From buffyeton at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 05:31:23 2003 From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (Tamara ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 05:31:23 -0000 Subject: Casting Questions Message-ID: Okay, as I feel I should cast all the HP movies from now on (I should have started at the beginning with Harry et.al but oh well), I have a few questions. Now I've read the books, over and over and over, but still can't get a total grasp on some of the characters. So please answer these: Remus Lupin: How old: Looks: Personality traits: Sirius Black: How old: Looks: Personality traits: Thanks as always! Tamara From lupinesque at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 11:52:13 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 11:52:13 -0000 Subject: poll re: all-British cast In-Reply-To: <20021231213041.41291.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Petra Pan wrote: > > What are your thoughts on maintaining > > an all-British cast > > Sorry to reply to this message instead of just > voting but none of the choices reflect my > opinion: as long as JKR prefers an all-Brit cast, > then I hope the filmmakers respect her wishes. My thoughts exactly. Thank you, Petra! A peaceful and happy 2003 to all, Amy Z From two_c_cs at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 14:30:22 2003 From: two_c_cs at yahoo.com (two_c_cs ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 14:30:22 -0000 Subject: New to group Message-ID: Hello! My name is Toni. I'm 26 years old, and I love the Harry Potter books and movies! I am wondering... does anyone know where I can find a movie still of Hogwarts? The castle is gorgeous! I am especially looking for the clip between "Who's Nicolas Flamel?" and Hadrid dragging the Christmas tree. There is about a 2 second clip of the outside of Howarts in the snow and it reminds me of a snowglobe. If anyone knows where I can find any pictures of the outside of the castle, please let me know. I can't wait to jump into the discussions of this group! Toni From sholden at flash.net Wed Jan 1 16:25:05 2003 From: sholden at flash.net (SHolden) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 10:25:05 -0600 Subject: Question???? Message-ID: Hi! I'm relatively new here. I'm on HPforGrownUps list, so I know my way around here. Anyway, I was hoping someone could help me, it deals with the PoA movie. I read somewhere that Warner Bros. has put in an order for three sets to be built. I remember one of those from memory because it was very odd, it was a sun dial garden. I'm just curious about the other two sets????? Like I said, I just remember reading somewhere. I do hope someone can help OR correct me. Thanks! Sara [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rvotaw at i-55.com Wed Jan 1 18:08:55 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 12:08:55 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 'Tis the season for awards/ New to Group/ Question??? References: <20030101053018.76446.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00bb01c2b1c0$de732340$ae9ecdd1@RVotaw> Petra wrote: > What I don't get is just WHOM is Daniel Radcliffe > "supporting." He DOES play the title character > after all and should be considered a lead actor, > not supporting...even if he doesn't have much of > a chance in that category, it's the proper one > for him. This blew my mind as well. I really don't think any HP actors will have a shot regardless of the categories, simply because that's the way Hollywood works, but anyway, Daniel Radcliffe is a lead actor without a doubt. I mean the kid is in almost every scene in the entire movie. How can you have any supporting actors at all without a lead actor anyway? Toni writes: > Hello! My name is Toni. I'm 26 years old, and I love the Harry Potter books and > movies! I am wondering... does anyone know where I can find a movie still of > Hogwarts? The castle is gorgeous! I am especially looking for the clip between > "Who's Nicolas Flamel?" and Hadrid dragging the Christmas tree. There is about > a 2 second clip of the outside of Howarts in the snow and it reminds me of a > snowglobe. If anyone knows where I can find any pictures of the outside of the > castle, please let me know. I can't wait to jump into the discussions of this > group! Welcome aboard! As for the Hogwarts image, that depends. Are you looking for a digital image or a print? The best place for a print would probably be Ebay, though I haven't seen one, but that doesn't mean there won't be. A digital image I could send via email offlist. I'm 26 too, by the way. Sara writes: > I'm relatively new here. I'm on HPforGrownUps list, so I know my way around > here. Anyway, I was hoping someone could help me, it deals with the PoA > movie. I read somewhere that Warner Bros. has put in an order for three > sets to be built. I remember one of those from memory because it was very > odd, it was a sun dial garden. I'm just curious about the other two > sets????? > Like I said, I just remember reading somewhere. I do hope someone can help > OR correct me. I believe you're referring to the sets WB wants to build in Glencoe, Scotland. There was the sun dial garden, stone cottages, and a gatehouse. This sounds like Hogsmeade to me. The article was on BBC here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/2594093.stm Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 19:39:59 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 19:39:59 -0000 Subject: Casting Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tamara " wrote: > Okay, as I feel I should cast all the HP movies from now on (I > should have started at the beginning with Harry et.al but oh well), > I have a few questions. Now I've read the books, over and over and > over, but still can't get a total grasp on some of the characters. > So please answer these: bboy_mn fills in the blanks: My responses relate to the characteristics of the actor who should play the character and how the character should be represented. > > Remus Lupin: (actors? - really don't know.) > How old: An actor between an old 30 and a young 45 could play this character. There are repeated references to him being young, but at the same time looking weathered, worn, and weary. > Looks: Average height, slightly underweight (5'7" to 5'9"; 125 to 145 pounds); dark blond to brown hair with slight but noticable grey (grey which could be make-up). Attractive but not devistatingly handsome; cute in a very manish sort of way. > Personality traits: Lupin is a savage, he is a werewolf; a monster, therefore his normal personality will be gentle and intelligent, but with an unmistakable underlying inner strength. This is a man who has lived a torturous hell of a life since he was a little boy, and it's taken it's toll; at great toll in both physical and psychological stress. At the sametime, he has weathered this with great strength of character and little bitterness and resentment. Lupin is a gentle soul, quiet and unassuming, but at the sametime, he has an unmistakable inner strength that no wise man would dare to test. > > Sirius Black: (actors? - I think both Jason Carter or Viggo Mortensen have the perfect look) > How old: Again, anyone from an old 30 to a young 45 or perhaps even as old as 50. > Looks: Above average height (5'9" to 6'0") and strongly built when he is at his full health. Although, due to being in prison, he would have to be slightly underweight (130 to 150 pound). Absolutely must have dark or preferrably black hair, beard (but not a full beard (one like Jason Carter or Viggo Mortensen)), has a very powerful presents, charismatic (people's attention is instantly drawn to him), high cheekbones and hollow cheeks to emphasis how underweight he his, but at the same time given him a very handsome manly look when his is at a health weight. During the best of times, unmistakably a ladies man. > Personality traits: Srtong presents, attractive, handsome, charismatic (duende), impulsive even now, although more so when he was younger, stronge emotions, passionate, but not necessarily hot headed (remember we see him at an unusual time in his life - PoA), showing both a physical strength even in his weakened state as well as great strength of character. A strength of character that is mixed with an element of danger that you don't see in Lupin. Sirius is a very powerful wizard, something you know from your first glimpse. Being loyal and having strong emotions combined with an element of danger tell everyone who comes near that this is one wizard you do not want to cross. Sirius is strong, dark, charismatic, handsome, exuding an umistakable aura of danger but at the same time, the unmistakable essence of an honorable man. > > Thanks as always! > > Tamara Of course, that's just my opinion. But I do think it's important for Lupin to have a gentleness to him that contradicts the werewolf aspects. Just as I think it is important for Black to have an unmistakable element of danger combined with the sense that he is an honorable and trustworth man. Lupin is the guy your mother wants you to marry (in terms of personality); and Black is the kind of guy you father absolutely will not allow you to associate with. bboy_mn From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com Wed Jan 1 21:25:26 2003 From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin ) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 21:25:26 -0000 Subject: latest casting rumor In-Reply-To: <3E111917.8DE37856@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, jazmyn wrote: > > I could see him as Peter maybe, but not Sirius. At least from what I > remember of his acting. Need someone a little more imposing for Sirius. > I mean, he rides a motorcycle and is supposed to be 'dangerous' looking > and all. OMG, Gary Oldman is not dangerously looking enough for you? And here I thought they don't make them more dangerous than he is. ;-) I'd have problems with the other side of Sirius's personality - happy laughter and Gary Oldman don't sit well together in my mind. Irene From boredchocobo at attbi.com Wed Jan 1 10:21:23 2003 From: boredchocobo at attbi.com (Chocobo) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 05:21:23 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Slightly OT but Movie Related: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory References: Message-ID: <000001c2b1f4$3f424740$82647d18@Compuhon> Heh... pretty good joke. Read the small text at the bottom of the page: "Rupert's? Rumours. Best Rumours on the Internet. Don't believe a bit of it." ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 10:53 PM Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Slightly OT but Movie Related: Rupert as Charlie & Chocolate Factory This is slightly off topic but it does deal with movies and the cast of the HP movies. "Rupert Grint?s new Film: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" http://www.rupertgrint.net/rumours/gossip_4.htm OK so Rupert is in a new film. I'm very very happy for him. But there is more. Not only is Rupert in the movie but so is.... Emma Watson as Veruca Salt Harry Melling (Dudley) as Augustus Gloop Tom Felton as Mike Tevee Elenor Columbus (presumably Chris Columbus's Daughter) as Violet Beureguard Michelle Pfeiffer as young Charlie's mum Jim Carrey playing the top man himself Wonka Also joining the star packed cast will be Meg Ryan and Daniel Radcliffe as the famous Umpa Lumpas Meg Ryan and Michelle Pfeiffer ....? ...really? Now for the clincher. The release date for this movie is... April 1, 2003. Is that even possible? If it's true, I say GREAT, this time Rupert gets to play the Hero, but , as much as I like the idea, it sound almost impossible given the schedule with PoA. Just thought I would throw that in. bboy_mn 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 jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Thu Jan 2 02:52:15 2003 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 02:52:15 -0000 Subject: More Shrieking in the Shack: WAS: Re: Casting news? Oldman In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z " wrote: > I never thought of him because I was under the misapprehension that he > was American (I think the only thing I've seen him in is JFK). I > can't see him as Sirius, but as Peter, yes. That's probably because > he is so thoroughly Lee Harvey Oswald in my head. > > Amy > very very glad that Ben Affleck is ruled out on the basis of > nationality What a passel of Marauders: Sirius Black-- Sean Bean Remus Lupin-- Ralph Fiennes Peter Pettigrew-- Gary Oldman Can you just imagine the Shrieking Shack scene with them and Alan Rickman? Nirvana! Ben Affleck cannot hold any of the above four actors' makeup cases when it comes to acting, whatever his nationality. Hasn't anybody here had the misfortune to see Pearl Harbor? Haggridd From buffyeton at yahoo.com Thu Jan 2 05:03:45 2003 From: buffyeton at yahoo.com (Tamara ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 05:03:45 -0000 Subject: Casting Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tamara " > wrote: > > Okay, as I feel I should cast all the HP movies from now on (I > > should have started at the beginning with Harry et.al but oh well), > > I have a few questions. Now I've read the books, over and over and > > over, but still can't get a total grasp on some of the characters. > > So please answer these: > > bboy_mn fills in the blanks: > > My responses relate to the characteristics of the actor who should > play the character and how the character should be represented. > > > > > Remus Lupin: (actors? - really don't know.) > > > How old: > An actor between an old 30 and a young 45 could play this character. > There are repeated references to him being young, but at the same time > looking weathered, worn, and weary. > > Sirius Black: (actors? - I think both Jason Carter or Viggo > Mortensen have the perfect look) > > > How old: > Again, anyone from an old 30 to a young 45 or perhaps even as old as 50. > > > Looks: > Above average height (5'9" to 6'0") and strongly built when he is at > his full health. Although, due to being in prison, he would have to be > slightly underweight (130 to 150 pound). Absolutely must have dark or > preferrably black hair, beard (but not a full beard (one like Jason > Carter or Viggo Mortensen)), has a very powerful presents, charismatic > (people's attention is instantly drawn to him), high cheekbones and > hollow cheeks to emphasis how underweight he his, but at the same time > given him a very handsome manly look when his is at a health weight. > During the best of times, unmistakably a ladies man. > Lupin is the guy your mother wants you to marry (in terms of > personality); and Black is the kind of guy you father absolutely will > not allow you to associate with. > > bboy_mn Steve, that is freaky deaky! One of my top two actors for Sirus Black was Jason Carter! I was watching a rerun of 90210 the other day that he was in and I immeditely went "that should be Sirius Black!" lol. My other picks are James Callis, Jason Flemyng and Max Beesley. As for Lupin, it's a bit more complicated. It is much harder to find an actor that has that sort of natural sensitivty to him that Lupin has. I think maybe James Purefoy, or Damian Lewis. Or, and don't laugh here, because I am serious, Hugh Grant. Of course my favorite pick for Lupin would be Anthony Stewart Head, but he is most likely too old for the role. Ioan Gruffudd may be another, but he may be too young. Tamara From plumeski at yahoo.com Thu Jan 2 05:05:17 2003 From: plumeski at yahoo.com (GulPlum ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 05:05:17 -0000 Subject: Casting Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steve (bboy_mn)wrote: > Lupin is the guy your mother wants you to marry (in terms of > personality); and Black is the kind of guy you father absolutely > will not allow you to associate with. I'd add a few further attributes to each of them which I consider just as important (in some ways related to the above quote). Apart from Lupin's gentleness which Steve underlined so much, I see him as having a very distinguished bearing, despite his external shabinness. His poor appearance is due to lack of funds rather than as a direct result of his lycanthropy (his condition makes it difficult for him to find work and thus feed or dress himself properly). He's very aware of his talents and abilities (as a human being, if not necessarily as a wizard) but is also permanently aware of the limitations imposed by being "ill" regularly for about a week in every four. I see him as a man who, despite his shabby appearance, immediately commands respect, but not fear. More than just about any other character in the Potterverse, I see him as representing the best of the British middle classes. This is perhaps very idiosyncratic, but the way I see his eyes is very important to me. They should be warm and non-threatening, but at the same time world-weary and tired. One thing which is very important to me is the way people speak; I appreciate that for people unattuned to the diversity of British speech patterns this might be irrelevant or not discernable, but one thing about the casting to date which has impressed me the most has been the care taken with that aspect. The kind of voices and the way the actors speak has been spot on. The way I hear (rather than see) Lupin is therefore quite important to me, and further to above, I hear him very much with an educated middle-class accent and all that goes with it. Not quite as clipped as Emma Watson's Hermione, perhaps, and not quite as populistically West London as Alan Rickman's Snape, but somewhere in the middle. As I've said many times before, Jeremy Irons is one actor who immediately springs to my mind as representing the attributes I've listed (if he downgrades his natural accent just a little). Others (of whom non-Brits may not have heard) are Simon Williams (no pics on IMDB, but I found a fairly recent one here: http://www.bigevent.co.uk/live/home/news/simon/sw1.jpg - he's on the right; or a hard closeup of his face on this page: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/07_01_02/tuesday/info3.shtml) or Nigel Havers (again, no pics on IMDB, but there are several on this site which is about his stance on a particular UK political issue rather than his acting talent; his father was a prominent figure in British legal and political life: http://www.nigelhaversalliance.com). Sirius, on the other hand, I see as quite the opposite of Lupin in many ways. Though obviously physically emaciated after a dozen years in Azkaban, he's very physically imposing - he should have something of the boxer's build about him (no, I don't necessarily mean a heavyweight!) and a physical certainty about himself. He's very "in your face", and the kind of person whose apparance you don't forget very quickly. He's a very intimidating presence. Unlike Lupin, not someone you immediately feel compelled to respect, but if not fear, then at least feel anxious around. Quite clearly from canon, he's got a short temper, and doesn't mind people knowing it. I actually wouldn't like for him to played by yet another middle class actor with a typical middle class British accent. I see a definite roughness in his speech, though not necessarily a regional accent. To be perfectly honest, the kind of actor I'd think of is Jason Isaacs, if he wasn't already engaged elsewhere in the Potter series. :-) I was going to comment on the ongoing conversation (which I had to interrupt for the last week or so) about their being believable as Alan Rickman's contemporaries, but I'll leave that for a separate post as it's already gone 5am... :-) From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Thu Jan 2 06:31:30 2003 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 22:31:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Tis the season for awards... In-Reply-To: <20030101053018.76446.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030102063130.21285.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> Yours truly: > What I don't get is just WHOM is Daniel > Radcliffe "supporting." He DOES play the title > character after all and should be considered a > lead actor, not supporting...even if he doesn't > have much of a chance in that category, it's > the proper one for him. Jess replied: > I'm in complete agreement about Dan being the > clear lead in the HP movies, but I suspect it's > a strategic move on WB's part. Often times, the > studios will submit an leading actor as a > supporting actor, particularly when the movie > in question is a reletively ensemble piece, > when they consider the competition for "lead > actor" category too stiff. Yes, differentiating between a lead and a supporting role can often be difficult. But in this case? Not so much. IMO, in wedging Daniel into a category that doesn't apply, Warner Bros. has called attention to their lack of belief in Daniel's chances of competing in his rightful category. There's no call for this: Daniel has no reason to be ashamed if he doesn't get a nomination for his work as a lead actor at this point in his career. I just don't think this improves Daniel's chances - the competition in the supporting category is pretty stiff too - and hedging their bets this way is rather obvious as a bit of a cheat. This just doesn't seem like the Gryffindor thing to do, does it? As much as I think those who played Vernon, Petunia, Mr. & Mrs. Weasley and Filch did admirable jobs with the tiny parts they had, the fact that they were part of this "For Your Consideration" ad may be key. Perhaps the ad is not so much to remind the voters of outstanding performances as it is to avoid offending any of the cast by leaving them out of the ad. Putting everyone in the same category could also serve that purpose, I suppose. If I am right, then Warner Bros. must have thought Christian Coulson unlikely to take offense at being left out despite playing the key role of the film's villain, a part that is more significant than that of Vernon, Petunia, Mr. & Mrs. Weasley and Filch. Or, perhaps burning their bridge with Coulson is considered to be of little matter...but what if the young Riddle makes an appearance in the not-yet-written books? Petra a n :) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From bloubet at incanmonkey.com Thu Jan 2 08:31:42 2003 From: bloubet at incanmonkey.com (bloubet at incanmonkey.com) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:31:42 -0700 (MST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting In-Reply-To: <1041429823.1957.43504.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <1041496301.9974@incanmonkey.com> I'm afraid that there are 2 problems with Viggo Mortensen and Hugh Jackman. First, neither is British. Second, both are busy. (And I'll certainly be glad to see them on the big screen again soon. ) Jackman is still working on X-Men 2 (yes? I don't think they're done with it yet...) and Mortensen starts filming later this month for The Alamo, with Dennis Quaid and Billy Bob Thornton. I think there are still several good choices there for casting Remus and Sirius, though. Enough that I just can't decide who I'd prefer. What a dilemma -- too many good-looking men! Cummings as Pettigrew is a LOVELY idea, though. I do like that. bel From saitaina at wizzards.net Thu Jan 2 13:27:45 2003 From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 05:27:45 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 'Tis the season for awards... References: <20030102063130.21285.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02a401c2b262$bd2a4b80$54bbefd8@p2x5n9> Petra wrote: < What I don't get is just WHOM is Daniel Radcliffe "supporting." He DOES play the title character after all and should be considered a lead actor, not supporting...even if he doesn't have much of a chance in that category, it's the proper one for him.> Daniel IS the title character but he is also a part of three person ensamble lead. A lot of the voters may not have read the books and see it as such. I think WB's move to shove them into supporting cast might actually be a smart move to ensure a Harry Potter win that will help them rather then a loss if they had entered him into the lead catagory. As for some of the other actors mentioned in the same catagory, while I loved the movie and adored performances I think the list should have been wittled down severly. There are certain performances that just arent' memerable enough to be included. I think the WB has to high of hopes for how many awards they can win for this movie though. As a Harry Potter fan I will always love it, but on it's own merrits, it fell flat compaired to a great many movies out this year. Many of the catagories they wish to compete in have far more movies to fill the slots. On the other and completly related not of scooby doo- While Scooby-Doo WAS a complete and full ensamble lead, I left the movie feeling rather put out by the acting and the only shining spot WAS Matthew Lillard who was Shagggy through and through. I wouldn't mind seeing him nominated and win because he carried a lot of the movie when most of the audiance was bored or tuning out. I would also like to see this movie up for special effects for Scooby and Scrappy but that's just my opinion. Saitaina From renati at link.net.id Thu Jan 2 13:33:08 2003 From: renati at link.net.id (Renati Adriani) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 20:33:08 +0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gary Oldman (was: latest casting rumor) In-Reply-To: References: <3E111917.8DE37856@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: >> I could see him as Peter maybe, but not Sirius. At least from what I >> remember of his acting. Need someone a little more imposing for >Sirius. >> I mean, he rides a motorcycle and is supposed to be 'dangerous' >looking >> and all. > >OMG, Gary Oldman is not dangerously looking enough for you? And here >I thought they don't make them more dangerous than he is. ;-) > >I'd have problems with the other side of Sirius's personality - happy >laughter and Gary Oldman don't sit well together in my mind. I agree with that last bit. Plus I don't think he'd make a very convincing father figure either. He doesn't strike me as the kind of persona who'd be transformed by the idea of taking care of a kid - the very reason I fell in love with Sirius, as it happens - much less take that responsibility very seriously. On the other hand, I can easily picture him as Moody. Might be too young for that one though. Tituk From renati at link.net.id Thu Jan 2 13:47:57 2003 From: renati at link.net.id (Renati Adriani) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 20:47:57 +0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 'Tis the season for awards... In-Reply-To: <20030101004105.27439.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR (snip) Whoa - they left out Christian Coulson??!! But he was one of the strong points of the film! Indeed, he and Jason Isaacs would get my vote for best actors out of the lot. Maybe his agent lacked clout? :( Tituk From urbana at charter.net Thu Jan 2 15:18:30 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 15:18:30 -0000 Subject: Casting Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "GulPlum " wrote: > > This is perhaps very idiosyncratic, but the way I see [Lupin's] eyes is > very important to me. They should be warm and non-threatening, but at > the same time world-weary and tired. RALPH FIENNES!! RALPH FIENNES!! RALPH FIENNES!! (Did I suggest Ralph Fiennes yet??) Thanks, Richard, for the absolutely perfect description of *Ralph's* eyes ... even if you perhaps didn't know you were describing them :-) > One thing which is very important to me is the way people speak; I > appreciate that for people unattuned to the diversity of British > speech patterns this might be irrelevant or not discernable, but one > thing about the casting to date which has impressed me the most has > been the care taken with that aspect. The kind of voices and the way > the actors speak has been spot on. > > The way I hear (rather than see) Lupin is therefore quite important > to me, and further to above, I hear him very much with an educated > middle-class accent and all that goes with it. Not quite as clipped > as Emma Watson's Hermione, perhaps, and not quite as populistically > West London as Alan Rickman's Snape, but somewhere in the middle. > Well there you go ... Ralph again! :-) Others > (of whom non-Brits may not have heard) are Simon Williams ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/07_01_02/tuesday/info3.shtml) Is this James from Upstairs Downstairs? Yikes. Probably too old (but he's still handsome). > or Nigel Havers Hmmm. Hadn't thought of Nigel ... but he could do too (he's certainly a contemporary of Alan Rickman!) Anne U (still lobbying for Ralph For Lupin though I realize it's not likely) From rvotaw at i-55.com Thu Jan 2 16:34:28 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:34:28 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting/ Tis the season for awards References: <1041496301.9974@incanmonkey.com> Message-ID: <00d001c2b27c$d26e0670$3aa2cdd1@RVotaw> bel writes: > I'm afraid that there are 2 problems with Viggo Mortensen and Hugh Jackman. > First, neither is British. Second, both are busy. (And I'll certainly be glad > to see them on the big screen again soon. ) Details, details. :) Still, I think Viggo Mortensen could blend well. There is the problem of filming elsewhere, however, whoever is cast as Sirius Black won't be needed that much. One big scene in the Shrieking Shack and on the way back to Hogwarts, a scene over Ron in Gryffindor dorms, and a brief follow up scene later (where he escapes). The rest is just his picture on wanted posters and Snuffles. Lupin will need to be more readily available, though, I would think. Saitaina writes: > Daniel IS the title character but he is also a part of three person ensamble > lead. A lot of the voters may not have read the books and see it as such. I > think WB's move to shove them into supporting cast might actually be a > smart move to ensure a Harry Potter win that will help them rather then a loss > if they had entered him into the lead catagory. On a side note regarding Daniel's lead/supporting role, I was going through my HP weekly 2003 planner last night naming off the characters in each week's picture. I was nearly finished when my mom said jokingly (after innumerable "Harry" pictures), "But he's just a supporting actor, right? He's not the star or anything." > As for some of the other actors mentioned in the same catagory, while I > loved the movie and adored performances I think the list should have been > wittled down severly. There are certain performances that just arent' > memerable enough to be included. I personally would've had it this way: Lead actor: Daniel Radcliffe (regardless of whether he stands a chance or not, I mean really, does anyone actually expect him to get a nomination as a supporting actor? I'm crazy about him, but Hollywood and I don't generally agree). Supporting actors: Rupert Grint Emma Watson Tom Felton Jason Isaacs Alan Rickman Miriam Margoyles Maggie Smith Richard Harris Kenneth Branagh Christian Coulson There. I'd have left it at that and been done with it. I don't think I left anyone too major off. > I think the WB has to high of hopes for how many awards they can win for this > movie though. Myself, I don't anticipate many at all. It's too clean for one thing. I would think the most nominations would be possibly Musical score, set design, possibly costume design? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From two_c_cs at yahoo.com Thu Jan 2 16:50:21 2003 From: two_c_cs at yahoo.com (two_c_cs ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 16:50:21 -0000 Subject: 'Tis the season for awards/ New to Group/ Question??? In-Reply-To: <00bb01c2b1c0$de732340$ae9ecdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: Richelle, A digital image would be great, if you have one. I really appreciate it! Thanks! Toni From splinched at hotmail.com Thu Jan 2 17:40:46 2003 From: splinched at hotmail.com (eudaemonia_splinched ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 17:40:46 -0000 Subject: Casting/ Tis the season for awards In-Reply-To: <00d001c2b27c$d26e0670$3aa2cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: > bel writes: > > Daniel Radcliffe (regardless of whether he stands > a chance or not, I mean really, does anyone actually > expect him to get a nomination as a supporting actor? > I'm crazy about him, but Hollywood and I don't > generally agree). > I agree... which is why I'm not even betting that ANY of the Harry Potter actors get nods although I'd be pleasantly surprised if they do. Too much politics, in my opinion (in the overall industry, not just the awards). The all-Brit cast requirement may have left a bad taste in their mouths (if so, how childish of them!) and, to be quite frank, I don't think the majority of the Academy voters were big fans of this sequel -- it's doing better overseas than in the US -- as indicated by Box Office numbers which I think is a factor. Just look at the Titanic. Not the ONLY factor, mind you. If Hollywood thought it shocking, thought-provoking, emotionally riveting, etc. it'd get the Academy's attention. However, it's still considered a kids movie (hmph!) -- they were marketing it towards kids from what I can perceive in their advertisements (posters and commercial slots) and the movie previews shown before the actual movie ("What A Girl Wants?" and that Nickelodeon cartoon movie? *shiver*). And I've noticed lately that the only kids movies that get serious attention are those done completely in computer animation. After the Sorcerer's Stone Chris Columbus seemed to focus mainly on getting the visual effects right on for this sequel, and he did, so he may get those people nominated. I'd rather watch the BAFTA awards. It's being held on the same night isn't it? I wonder if it'll be televised... Eu From splinched at hotmail.com Thu Jan 2 17:43:05 2003 From: splinched at hotmail.com (eudaemonia_splinched ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 17:43:05 -0000 Subject: Casting/ Tis the season for awards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- I wrote: > > bel writes: > > > > Daniel Radcliffe (regardless of whether he stands > > a chance or not, I mean really, does anyone actually > > expect him to get a nomination as a supporting actor? > > I'm crazy about him, but Hollywood and I don't > > generally agree). > > > > I agree... oops! the person I was quoting was "Richelle", not "bel" sorry about that... Eu From itzregina at hanson.net Thu Jan 2 19:08:16 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 19:08:16 -0000 Subject: POA release rumor Message-ID: http://www.moviehole.net/news.php?newsid=814 June 04. A summer movie? I guess that will work. I'm just used to November releases :-) Gina From heidit at netbox.com Thu Jan 2 19:30:29 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 15:30:29 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA release rumor Message-ID: They've been saying this would be a summer release for a few months now - they're not even starting filming until september. And in November 03 the matrix's final will be released as well as lotr. Too much competition. -----Original Message----- From: "Regina " Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 19:08:16 To:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA release rumor Real-To: "Regina " http://www.moviehole.net/news.php?newsid=814 June 04. A summer movie? I guess that will work. I'm just used to November releases :-) Gina ________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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From rvotaw at i-55.com Thu Jan 2 21:26:42 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 15:26:42 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA release rumor References: <200301021942.h02Jgnq31808@mx.i-55.com> Message-ID: <004a01c2b2a5$a592e250$d89fcdd1@RVotaw> Heidi Tandy wrote: > They've been saying this would be a summer release for a few months now > they're not even starting filming until september. And in November 03 the > matrix's final will be released as well as lotr. Too much competition. Err, what did I miss? I thought they were starting filming in February? If they don't start filming until September, there's no way they could make it a summer release. That's only 9 months, and isn't it generally 10 months filming plus editing, etc.? What with the limited hours and all. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From timregan at microsoft.com Thu Jan 2 22:55:14 2003 From: timregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 22:55:14 -0000 Subject: HP and the Chamber of Nepotism Message-ID: Hi All, I watched the film again over Christmas (third time only ? I know I'm slacking) and stayed for the extra scene after the credits. One thing that struck me was the number of times Columbus pops up as a surname. IMDB lists three of them http://us.imdb.com/Credits?0295297 though it felt like there were more: Eleanor Columbus .... Susan Bones Violet Columbus .... Girl with Flowers Brendan Columbus .... Boy in Study Hall 1 Is this just coincidence? Cheers, Dumbledad. PS They've still got JKR down as "Knockturn Alley Witch #1 (uncredited)", I thought that was firmly denied now. From divaclv at aol.com Thu Jan 2 23:28:55 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 23:28:55 -0000 Subject: HP and the Chamber of Nepotism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan " wrote: > Hi All, > > I watched the film again over Christmas (third time only ? I know > I'm slacking) and stayed for the extra scene after the credits. One > thing that struck me was the number of times Columbus pops up as a > surname. IMDB lists three of them http://us.imdb.com/Credits? 0295297 > though it felt like there were more: > > Eleanor Columbus .... Susan Bones > Violet Columbus .... Girl with Flowers > Brendan Columbus .... Boy in Study Hall 1 > > Is this just coincidence? We know for certain that it isn't in Eleanor's case--she's Chris' daughter. The others, I'm not sure. Casting one's relatives in small (or even not-so-small) roles is not uncommon among directors. Peter Jackson's kids show up in both LOTR films (and I'm guessing they'll get the hat trick), and most of Ron Howard's extended family pops up during the course of "Apollo 13" (Clint's in Mission Control, dad's a priest, and mom plays Lovell's mother). > > PS They've still got JKR down as "Knockturn Alley Witch #1 > (uncredited)", I thought that was firmly denied now. Weird...they took the tidbit of the "trivia" page, so I'd assumed it was denied (or at least, questionable) as well. ~Christi From timregan at microsoft.com Fri Jan 3 00:30:06 2003 From: timregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan ) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 00:30:06 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Enormous_hole_in_the_ground_=96_how_secret_is_that=3F?= Message-ID: Hi All, On my third watching of CoS three things struck me as odd: Exit from the Chamber: When they all fly out of the chamber they fly through an enormous hole in the ground with the mist shrouded castle in the background, not into a bathroom. When the various great wizards and witches have searched for the CoS over the years I wonder why they didn't look in the big hole. I can't remember the other two ? I'll have to see it again :-) Cheers, Dumbledad. From heidit at netbox.com Fri Jan 3 01:55:06 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:55:06 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP and the Chamber of Nepotism Message-ID: Chris wrote: **Weird...they took the tidbit of the "trivia" page, so I'd assumed it was denied (or at least, questionable) as well.** It's inaccurate. She's not in the movie. We at Leaky Cauldron got confirmation from On High about that. And I apologize for my typo about poa before. March is the scheduled start date for principal photography, at this point. I'd been up since 2am and was clearly not thinking and typing at the same time. Heidi Follow me to Nimbus - 2003! Http://www.hp2003.org From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com Fri Jan 3 04:05:40 2003 From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora ) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 04:05:40 -0000 Subject: HP and the Chamber of Nepotism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan " wrote: > Hi All, > > I watched the film again over Christmas (third time only ? I know > I'm slacking) and stayed for the extra scene after the credits. One > thing that struck me was the number of times Columbus pops up as a > surname. IMDB lists three of them http://us.imdb.com/Credits? 0295297 > though it felt like there were more: > > Eleanor Columbus .... Susan Bones > Violet Columbus .... Girl with Flowers > Brendan Columbus .... Boy in Study Hall 1 > > Is this just coincidence? I had noticed that, too. I think those are his children. Doesn't he have four? I was wondering why the fourth one was left out ;) Alora From lilac_bearry at yahoo.com Fri Jan 3 08:57:40 2003 From: lilac_bearry at yahoo.com (Lilac) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 00:57:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics Message-ID: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> Jerry the Frog Production's newest release... Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Puppet Theatre or "Should Have Used Duct Tape" http://www.jerrythefrogproductions.com/ChamberOfSecrets.html best lines (imo)... Harry: Hagrid, what are you doing here (in Knockturn Alley)? Hagrid: I'm, um...getting flesh-eating slug repellent. Yeah. Harry: ...You're selling drugs, aren't you? Hagrid: Go play with Ron and Hermione, Harry. Oh, and Dumbledore has more in common with Nearly Headless Nick than we thought (wink wink, nudge nudge)... Dumbledore (in re: to Fawkes burning): Don't worry...he's not dead, he's just pinin'. He's got lovely plumage. Also, a ton of behind the scene pictures at http://www.rupertgrint.org/index2.htm , including Rupert getting slugs put *into* his mouth...kind of gross, but interesting all the same. Just so's ya know... ~Lilac~ ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* "Professor, can you show me that blocking thing again?" Lockhart cuffed Harry merrily on the shoulder. "Just do what I did, Harry!" "What, drop my wand?" --Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at earthlink.net Fri Jan 3 09:30:19 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:30:19 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <13540354234.20030103013019@earthlink.net> Hi, Friday, January 03, 2003, 12:57:40 AM, lilac_bearry at yahoo.com wrote: > including Rupert getting slugs > put *into* his mouth...kind of gross, but interesting all the same. I loved looking through all the pictures and now officially want some HP movie bloopers. Interesting to see a smiling Snape, too! ;) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From saitaina at wizzards.net Fri Jan 3 12:14:27 2003 From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 04:14:27 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA release rumor References: <200301021942.h02Jgnq31808@mx.i-55.com> <004a01c2b2a5$a592e250$d89fcdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: <006a01c2b321$aa22df60$0dbaefd8@oemcomputer> Richelle wrote: Depends on the movie but for most special effects laden ones they have to have a year to complete everything from primary shots to final editing and insertion of effects. Unless they have quite a bit of footage in the can already they couldn't pull off a summer release. Not even filming in February. I'm looking towards the 2004 release date we first heard about as the actual release and actually quite happy with that because it cuts down on rushes and let's the film makers take a bit more time tweaking this one. Saitaina **** http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina James: "Option One is that we go back into the jail cell and pretend we have no idea how the couch came to be lying in the hall when he comes back." Giles: "Xander don't speak Latin in front of the books." Phoebe: We're rescuing you from the tall dark, and naked man" From potterfan23 at hotmail.com Fri Jan 3 16:33:31 2003 From: potterfan23 at hotmail.com (Emily F) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 10:33:31 -0600 Subject: Awards for CoS - Seriously?! (was: Casting/ Tis the season for awards) Message-ID: Does it really matter what category Daniel is entered into? Does anyone seriously think he has a chance??? No offense meant to Daniel, because he's off to a great start, but he still has plenty of room to grow as an actor. When stacked against seasoned actors (including Daniel Day Lewis, Leonardo diCaprio, Jack Nicholson, Michael Caine, and Tom Hanks - who probably wouldn't win, but at least deserved a GG nomination!) for the Oscars, he doesn't stand a chance. When it comes to the supporting actors, all of the best actors have such small roles that I would be utterly amazed if they won. I adore Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith, but how long are they actually on screen in CoS? Needless to say that Rupert Grint and Emma Watkins still have a long way to go before they deserve an Oscar, or any other acting award (again, no offense meant to either of them!). OT: I'm not sure whether Daniel Day Lewis will fall under Best Actor or Best Supporting Actor, but I haven't seen a performance like that in a long time! Gangs of New York is worth seeing - at full price - just for him. :-) As for the other categories, I can't think of any in which CoS deserves to win. The closest they could come is in the special effects categories, but Two Towers has CoS beaten, hands down. I'm sure CoS gave it the ol' college try, but Jackson & team had a whole lot more time (and money, I think) to craft the effects for TT. All in all, there were some really excellent films released this year. CoS was definitely not one of them. I would toss it, and not even gently, into the mediocre pile. Mediocre movies don't deserve awards, even if they sometimes end up with them. ;-) Emily _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Fri Jan 3 17:48:14 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophia mclaughlin) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 17:48:14 +0000 Subject: Enourmous hole in the ground--how secret is that? Message-ID: Dumbledad wrote: On my third watching of CoS three things struck me as odd: Exit from the Chamber: When they all fly out of the chamber they fly through an enormous hole in the ground with the mist shrouded castle in the background, not into a bathroom. When the various great wizards and witches have searched for the CoS over the years I wonder why they didn't look in the big hole. Me: Typically uncanonical slip-up of the movie-makers. I suppose they felt it made a more impressive shot, and they've got a point (however lacking in logic). Sophia _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From timregan at microsoft.com Fri Jan 3 18:13:02 2003 From: timregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan ) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 18:13:02 -0000 Subject: Who opened the CoS to zapJustin and NHN? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi All, --- I wrote: > On my third watching of CoS three things struck me as odd: > I can't remember the other two ? I'll have to see it again I've remembered number two :-) Ginny's Alibi Harry is sat in some kind of homework session with everybody working away. We see Ginny writing in her diary and various other people working. Harry gets fed up with all the suspicious glances he's getting and tells Ron and Hermione he'll see them later in the common room. Having left the homework room Harry hears the Basilisk again and follows its voice until he discovers a petrified Justin and Nearly Headless Nick. But who led the Basilisk out and back into the Chamber this time? It cannot be Ginny since we saw her in the homework club with the diary. Cheers, Dumbledad. PS I'm not very good with the search-engine-that-should-not-be- named, so if this has been discussed to death already, please just point me at the message number. From sholden at flash.net Fri Jan 3 18:48:48 2003 From: sholden at flash.net (SHolden) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 12:48:48 -0600 Subject: SS/PS Movie Message-ID: Hey guys, I was just rewatching Socerer's Stone and we know that Percy is a perfect during Harry's first year. However, I noticed that in the scene after Harry's flying lesson. Y'all know the one with McGonagall, Harry, & Oliver Wood. Wood comes out from the Defense Against the Darks Arts class to see what McGonagall wants. Anyway, I noticed that Wood is wearing a Prefects badge like Percy's. Is this just a fluke or is this something????? Sorry if this has been talked about already! I haven't had time to search the archives. Sara [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From divaclv at aol.com Fri Jan 3 23:20:35 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 23:20:35 -0000 Subject: Enourmous hole in the ground--how secret is that? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophia mclaughlin" wrote: > Me: Typically uncanonical slip-up of the movie-makers. I suppose they felt > it made a more impressive shot, and they've got a point (however lacking in > logic). Nevertheless, some suggestions: 1.) The hole was somehow caused during the cave-in. 2.) The hole is only visible from the inside of the Chamber, and not the outside (kind of like a two-way mirror). ~Christi, who always wondered how a bird with Fawkes' wingspan was supposed to fly up that pipe in the first place... From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Sat Jan 4 00:05:33 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 18:05:33 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:Re:Enourmous hole in the ground--how secret is that? References: Message-ID: <3E16254D.E7E3B45A@pacificpuma.com> "c_voth312 " wrote: > > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophia mclaughlin" > wrote: > > Me: Typically uncanonical slip-up of the movie-makers. I suppose > they felt > > it made a more impressive shot, and they've got a point (however > lacking in > > logic). > > Nevertheless, some suggestions: > > 1.) The hole was somehow caused during the cave-in. > > 2.) The hole is only visible from the inside of the Chamber, and not > the outside (kind of like a two-way mirror). > > ~Christi, who always wondered how a bird with Fawkes' wingspan was > supposed to fly up that pipe in the first place... Maybe the hole would have been in the forest and noone would brave the giant spiders to get near enough to see it as the entrance to anything? Would YOU enter any cave in the Forbidden Forest? Its insane to even go into the forest, let alone a CAVE in that forest. Jazmyn From lita at sailordom.com Sat Jan 4 08:33:11 2003 From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 01:33:11 -0700 (MST) Subject: More on Dumbledore casting Message-ID: <20030104012534.W57695-100000@nightwing.sailordom.com> According to Corona, reports on Entertainment Tonight and TV Guide on Friday say that WB has officially denied that Michael Gambon has been cast as Dumbledore for PoA. http://www.corona.bc.ca/films/details/harrypotter3.html Lita ----------------------------------------------- -The Society of Lex Redemptionists http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Lex_Society/ -Buffyverse: Redemptionist-friendly discussion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buffyverse/ -Birdwatchers: About the DC comic Birds of Prey http://groups.yahoo.com/group/birdwatchers/ From geri510 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 4 21:45:36 2003 From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510 ) Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 21:45:36 -0000 Subject: PoA Casting Idea Message-ID: Just thought of this - how about Tim Roth (he is British) for Peter Pettigrew? I recently saw him in Planet of the Apes & think that he would make a great Peter (from what I've read) & I don't think I've read his name anywhere. What do you think? From urbana at charter.net Sat Jan 4 23:22:31 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 23:22:31 -0000 Subject: PoA Casting Idea In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "geri510 " wrote: > Just thought of this - how about Tim Roth (he is British) for Peter > Pettigrew? I recently saw him in Planet of the Apes & think that he > would make a great Peter (from what I've read) & I don't think I've > read his name anywhere. > > What do you think? OMG .. Tim Roth as Peter??? How perfect. He's a terrific villain (see "Rob Roy" for a great example) and wonderful at sniveling. And he's even British. Has anyone besides me seen the "news item" online that Gary Oldman has been cast for *the next 2* HP films, meaning PoA and GoF?? To me that means he's been cast as either Sirius or Peter. I wish I could find the link to where I saw that. Anne U (who thinks Gary could handle Voldie pretty well too ;-) From SusanXG at hotmail.com Sun Jan 5 01:49:06 2003 From: SusanXG at hotmail.com (Susan XG) Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 19:49:06 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: PoA Casting Idea Message-ID: >>>>>>Has anyone besides me seen the "news item" online that Gary Oldman has been cast for *the next 2* HP films, meaning PoA and GoF?? To me that means he's been cast as either Sirius or Peter. I wish I could find the link to where I saw that.<<<<<<< I know what you're talking about! Gary Oldman WOULD NOT WORK as Sirius Black. Maybe as Peter Pettigrew...though I always picture PP as a short, dumpy sort of man..err rat! :o) As far as Voldemort goes, I always thought Christopher Walken with a dubbed voice...maybe that guy who did it in the first movie. For Lupin, Ralph Fiennes would be PERFECT! -Susan _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From editor at texas.net Sun Jan 5 03:15:40 2003 From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 21:15:40 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics References: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002b01c2b468$bbb9a720$0904a6d8@texas.net> Lilac posted, eons ago, and I just got to look at it (sorry): > Jerry the Frog Production's newest release... > > Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Puppet Theatre > > or "Should Have Used Duct Tape" > > http://www.jerrythefrogproductions.com/ChamberOfSecrets.html > > best lines (imo)... Best line of all: Ron: I think the irony is blocking the tunnel. ~Amanda From divaclv at aol.com Sun Jan 5 05:15:44 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 05:15:44 -0000 Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lilac wrote: > Oh, and Dumbledore has more in common with Nearly Headless Nick than we thought (wink wink, nudge nudge)... > > Dumbledore (in re: to Fawkes burning): Don't worry...he's not dead, he's just pinin'. He's got lovely plumage. A bit of a running gag (reference?) in that: "That's a DEAD CAT!" "She's not dead, she's resting!" Or something like that :-) ~Christi From jmmears at comcast.net Sun Jan 5 19:12:01 2003 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust ) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 19:12:01 -0000 Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: <20030103085740.27958.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lilac wrote: > > Jerry the Frog Production's newest release... > > Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Puppet Theatre > > or "Should Have Used Duct Tape" > > http://www.jerrythefrogproductions.com/ChamberOfSecrets.html > Really, really funny; thanks Lilac! BTW, am I the only person who doesn't know what the word "bish" means? Any enlightenment would be appreciated. Jo Serenadust, feeling old & unhip From heidit at netbox.com Sun Jan 5 19:17:16 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 15:17:16 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics Message-ID: Bish is short for bishuonen, which is a Japanese term for, iirc, "cute boy." It's used in anime circles a lot and through artists who do anime style drawings of Harry Potter characters, it's moved into the hp fandom, although not incredibly widespread. -----Original Message----- From: "serenadust " Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 19:12:01 To:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics Real-To: "serenadust " --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lilac wrote: > > Jerry the Frog Production's newest release... > > Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Puppet Theatre > > or "Should Have Used Duct Tape" > > http://www.jerrythefrogproductions.com/ChamberOfSecrets.html > Really, really funny; thanks Lilac! BTW, am I the only person who doesn't know what the word "bish" means? Any enlightenment would be appreciated. Jo Serenadust, feeling old & unhip ________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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From jmchik246 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 5 21:41:34 2003 From: jmchik246 at yahoo.com (Kate ) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 21:41:34 -0000 Subject: PoA Casting Idea In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Susan XG" wrote: > > >>>>>>Has anyone besides me seen the "news item" online that Gary Oldman > has been cast for *the next 2* HP films, meaning PoA and GoF?? To me > that means he's been cast as either Sirius or Peter. I wish I could > find the link to where I saw that.<<<<<<< > > I know what you're talking about! Gary Oldman WOULD NOT WORK as Sirius > Black. Maybe as Peter Pettigrew...though I always picture PP as a short, > dumpy sort of man..err rat! > > -Susan OoOoOo.....Gary Oldman would be perfect for Pettigrew! He's such a wonderful character actor that I really thing he could pull off playing a man that had been a rat for 12 years. The man can completely tranform himself in any role. I didnt even really know what the real Gary Oldman looked like until recently, because everything I had seen him in, he looked very different. I'm at such a loss for who would play Sirius. I think I'm going to let the people at Warner Bro.'s do thier job and I'll just sit back and wait to see what happens. Lets pray they don't screw up TOO badly. ~Kate, who will be very, VERY unhappy if they do a bad job casting Lupin. From jmmears at comcast.net Sun Jan 5 22:17:55 2003 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust ) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 22:17:55 -0000 Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heidi Tandy" wrote: > Bish is short for bishuonen, which is a Japanese term for, iirc, "cute boy." It's used in anime circles a lot and through artists who do anime style drawings of Harry Potter characters, it's moved into the hp fandom, although not incredibly widespread. Thanks, Heidi. I'm glad to hear the term's not incredibly widespread rendering me *not* totally clueless. I'm constantly amazed at the width and breadth of the hp fandom, as well as how steadily it's growth continues in spite of the absence of new canon. Jo S., feeling enlightened and educated From heidit at netbox.com Sun Jan 5 22:41:09 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 17:41:09 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> > -----Original Message----- > From: serenadust [mailto:jmmears at comcast.net] > I'm constantly > amazed at the width and breadth of the hp fandom, as well as how > steadily it's growth continues in spite of the absence of new canon. > P'shaw, Jo! :) This is the movie list! We just had new canon 6 weeks ago - and we'll have more when the first stills from PoA start showing up online in a few months. Actually, to be honest, in a clinical way, we the fans of the books did have new canon less than two years ago, in the form of the two schoolbooks, which newcomers to the Harry Potter books often don't even know about until they delve into discussion lists like HpfGU or the practise of writing fanfic, which (if you want to make it as canon-accurate as possible) requires close knowledge of things like Quidditch fouls or the precise traits of certain animals. Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be canonical, and if so, why? Heidi, asking questions on HP lists since 2000 From risako at nexusanime.com Sun Jan 5 23:18:18 2003 From: risako at nexusanime.com (Melissa McCarthy) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 19:18:18 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics References: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: <01c201c2b510$bbe75780$63a694d1@vaio> > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and > the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > canonical, and if so, why? I consider the films to be their own canon and the books to be a completely separate canon. I'm not overly fond of the alternate-universes theory, but in this case, it's the only way I can enjoy both without having my head explode trying to reconcile the two. This also eliminates the "gosh, I would never have cast that actor for that character" difficulty, because in a way it's not the same character at all. I don't have any logical explanation for this theory; basically I choose to believe it because it makes me happy ^^ Melissa From Ali at zymurgy.org Sun Jan 5 23:21:08 2003 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali ) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 23:21:08 -0000 Subject: films as canon was In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: Heidi asked:- Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be canonical, and if so, why? In general, I would have to say, that no, the films are not canonical. For me, they are somebody elses representation of canon, albeit an informed person. There are slightly grey areas though. The "extra scene" in PS/SS was written by JKR especially for the film. This is sufficient for me to think that Voldemort (or one person) went to the Potter's House, by himself, at night. In fact though, what we actually see is very limited so it could be even here that only part of the events that night are being shown giving us a false understanding. I do understand that Robbie Coltrane and Richard Harris were given an insight into their characters, but to take this into account when looking at their portrayals could be dangerous. Supposing they misinterpreted? Hagrid's pause over the Flesh-eating slug repellent is perhaps a scenario where much could be read into his somewhat shifty appearance which I for one did not get when reading the book. Is this because the film makers are trying to show Hagrid in a different light, or was he just having difficulty trying to recall what he was doing? Whilst the directors and producers may well have extra information, they also use their own "artistic licence" - I cannot think what that syrupy scene at the end of CoS means for example. Perhaps they are trying to foreshadow the end of Hagrid, or show us the developing relationship between Ron and Hermione, but the whole scene seems at odds with the scene I thought I had read in the book. Another problem with viewing the films as canon is when they contradict the books. The book Hermione does not say, and presumably would not say "Voldemort", but the film one does and provides us with Dumbledore's explanation. That to me is a canonical error of which there are several, and is more than canon explanation or artistic licence, it's actually character development. In short, I believe that the films are a (usually) fairly faithful interpretation of canon, but can be no more without JKR writing the screenplay and directing the actors. Ali From thalia at aokp.org Mon Jan 6 00:14:19 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 16:14:19 -0800 Subject: a new side (maybe) of ye old topic of canon In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> References: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: depends on whether one worships canon or simply enjoys it. i enjoy the movies as much as the books, and am not as deeply involved as some here (that was diplomatic of me, eh?) in absolutism of canon. so. yes, to me the movies are canon. but to others, such is blasphemy. guess it also makes a difference that i am a highly visual learner--events from the movies stick out far more starkly in my mind than ones from the book. make any sense? thalia 'attempting to step gingerly around sensitive toes' chaunacy "Ah, music. A magic beyond all we do here!" -Albus Dumbledore Heidi oh-so-patiently wrote: "Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on-topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be canonical, and if so, why?" From sarah at mcfarland.co.uk Mon Jan 6 01:05:24 2003 From: sarah at mcfarland.co.uk (S) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 01:05:24 +0000 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: <01c201c2b510$bbe75780$63a694d1@vaio> References: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20030106010406.02f5ffc0@pop.ntlworld.com> > > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and > > the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > > canonical, and if so, why? > >I consider the films to be their own canon and the books to be a completely >separate canon. I'm not overly fond of the alternate-universes theory, but >in this case, it's the only way I can enjoy both without having my head >explode trying to reconcile the two. This also eliminates the "gosh, I >would never have cast that actor for that character" difficulty, because in >a way it's not the same character at all. I don't have any logical >explanation for this theory; basically I choose to believe it because it >makes me happy ^^ I look at it like this. Somewhere "out there" Harry Potter is real - call it an alternative universe or whatever you like. The books and movies are both very close representations of the "real" HP, but neither of them is necessarily exactly spot on. ~Say From rvotaw at i-55.com Mon Jan 6 03:01:29 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 21:01:29 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: COS Puppet Theatre/ films as canon References: <200301051929.h05JTkq11831@mx.i-55.com> Message-ID: <00ec01c2b52f$e98d09e0$739ecdd1@RVotaw> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lilac wrote: > Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Puppet Theatre > > or "Should Have Used Duct Tape" > > http://www.jerrythefrogproductions.com/ChamberOfSecrets.html This was hilarious. Completely hilarious. My favorite quote: Harry: It's okay Fawkes, I'm going to a better place... Fawkes: I'm HEALING you, idiot. Ali writes: > In general, I would have to say, that no, the films are not > canonical. For me, they are somebody elses representation of canon, > albeit an informed person. There are slightly grey areas though. > The "extra scene" in PS/SS was written by JKR especially for the > film. This is sufficient for me to think that Voldemort (or one > person) went to the Potter's House, by himself, at night. In fact > though, what we actually see is very limited so it could be even here > that only part of the events that night are being shown giving us a > false understanding. And we have a limited view of what happens. Once Voldemort's in the house, we only see Lily and Harry. And some green light. There could easily have been a DE (or two or more) following at a distance behind Voldemort as a sort of, I don't know, guard? Just in case something went wrong? Or to watch for muggles? Or good wizards and witches? That said, I do think that the film is a rather lose canon. I think anything that happens in the film that is not true to the books is something that won't really matter in the scope of things. Like whether James played seeker or chaser. That sort of thing. Steve Kloves mentioned something in the press conferences that he had wanted to do something in SS/PS and JKR told him nope, can't do that. Later on you'll find it can't be that way. Something like that. I think she keeps a close enough watch on it to prevent them totally getting off track at least. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jmmears at comcast.net Mon Jan 6 04:26:18 2003 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust ) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 04:26:18 -0000 Subject: Movies as canon? (was CoS Puppet Theater) In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" wrote: > P'shaw, Jo! :) This is the movie list! We just had new canon 6 weeks ago > - and we'll have more when the first stills from PoA start showing up > online in a few months. Has it *only* been six weeks? Time sure flies when you're having fun! (I sure hope you're right about PoA stills; already I can't wait.) Heidi again: > Actually, to be honest, in a clinical way, we the fans of the books did > have new canon less than two years ago, in the form of the two > schoolbooks, which newcomers to the Harry Potter books often don't even > know about until they delve into discussion lists like HpfGU or the > practise of writing fanfic, which (if you want to make it as > canon-accurate as possible) requires close knowledge of things like > Quidditch fouls or the precise traits of certain animals. > > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and > the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > canonical, and if so, why? That's an interesting question. My first thought was that there are two separate canons: movie and book, but that's probably not really accurate either. While there is, of course, a great deal of overlap between the books and movies, there are instances where (As Ali pointed out in her post which makes most of the points I wanted to make ) there are direct contradictions between the two. In the part where we see the plaque with James listed as Seeker, the first film even contradicts a statement JKR herself made. Personally, I consider statements made directly by JKR to be *almost* as canonical as the books, although there is certainly a range of differing opinions on that point. However, I don't really think she was as closely involved in the first movie as we were led to believe, and was even less involved in the CoS movie. There are just too many different layers of interpretation between the books and the movies for me to consider them as canon. In addition, since there will be different directors, actors, and possibly (I hope) screenwriters as the entire series of films are made, I don't even think we can expect the movies to be consistent with one another. This will make it very difficult for there to really be such a thing as "movie canon" as a separate entity apart from "book canon". All that aside, I still enjoy the movies for the most part and can set aside the discrepancies, but I still try hard to remember the differences, if for no other reason to avoid making embarrassing movie/book mistakes on the main list . I wonder if this makes as much difference to people who came to know Harry Potter through the movies first, before reading any of the books? Jo Serenadust, in a relative posting frenzy From holymotherofgod at hotmail.com Mon Jan 6 05:56:38 2003 From: holymotherofgod at hotmail.com (skyw1ngs ) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 05:56:38 -0000 Subject: Out-of-character moments (was Misc. on CoS) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z " wrote: It was a small matter, but one that > irked. I think they could've accomplished what they needed to with a > zoom/cut to a cuff that was pushed up enough to show that he was, in > fact, barefoot. I.e., we need to see it; Lucius needs to see it; > Harry doesn't need to show it off. I totally agree with this and many of your other comments. And although I too immensely enjoyed the film, there were many things about it that seemed to be there just for the laughs, this being one of them. It's been out in Australia for about 5 weeks now, my bro tells me, and when we went to see it a few days ago, there was still a queue to see it. Granted, the theatre was not nearly as full as in the opening day, but it was comfortably full, and mostly full of grown ups who laughed in all those right places. Even if I do cringe a little at all those for-the-laughs scenes, I still somewhat appreciate them because not-so-obsessed watchers of the movie seem to enjoy them. I can't say why the general people's opinion of the movie is important to me, but it is. > DOBBY's little folding of the arms and cute "harumpf" nod at the end > also seemed anachronistic to me, as though I was in the vaguely > medieval world of Hogwarts and Roger Rabbit suddenly came bounding > down the hall. This is hard to explain, because part of the humor of > the books is the anachronistic tensions among quills and parchment > and flying cars and MegaMutilation III; all I can say is that IMO, > JKR always gets the balance right, whereas this little bit seemed > Disneyish in a way that yanked me unceremoniously into 2002. Absolutely right. Another moment that was there to please the general audience with a clich?. Even if I think HP is full of clich?s, and practically based on them (come on, wizards in pointy hats and dusty robes, wands and cauldrons?), there is always that little twist of originality in it that makes it seem new. I think JKR has blasted that age old stigma of only witches ride broomsticks out of the air. A few years ago, boys wouldn't think to ride a broomstick, but now, everyone does! > HERMIONE. But the > welling-up tears were bad, bad, bad. Hermione, with rare exceptions, > is the kind of person who reacts to having her feelings hurt by > getting angry, not by going all quiet and teary. The dynamic with > Draco through the books is definitely one where she's more ticked- off > than wounded by his bigotry. > They gave her one of Dumbledore's lines too ("Fear of the name > increases fear of the thing itself"), which stood out mostly because > I thought it was badly acted, I just didn't like her saying it because it was one of Dumbledore's wise lines. The tears I didn't mind so much, really, since she gets tearful in the future with the stress and all. I mean, she _is_ just a kid and it is hard to put up with verbal and emotional abuse. > RON. . > They blew a great opportunity to lay the groundwork for Ron's > insecurity about his poverty and Harry's wealth, too. It's right > there in the Burrow, and it's very simple: instead of having him > say, "It's not much, but it's home," have him say "It's not much..." > and trail off and look at Harry. Or have him say the things he says > in the book, if they can spare the seconds. But the point is, he's > nervous about whether his friend will like his home and thrilled when > said friend does. Why the hell did they turn it around? This is a point I really wanted them to get as well. Ron's insecurity about his family's poverty is such a constant factor in the books it only makes sense to at least continue referring to it. In PS/SS they had the "No thanks. I'm all set." in the train scene but none in CoS. Sure, the Lucius comments and "We'll manage" in the Burrow were referring to their financial status, but not to Ron's insecurities. I really really wanted to have him be nervous about what Harry might think about the Burrow. People should've brushed up on their HP before each scene, methinks. > > DUMBLEDORE, or whoever was responsible for the Hagrid lovefest. That > was awful. But I could go on in curmudgeonly style for paragraphs > about filmmakers who think the best possible ending to a movie is > some kind of big graduation scene where we all get to clap, like Star > Wars or Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (they just saved the > universe! Let's *clap,* everyone!). It's as if they can't think of > anything more richly emotional than a bunch of people applauding-- > whereas, if they wanted to end on a We Love Hagrid note, IMO they'd > have done much better to cut immediately after Harry's hugging him. > Anyway, the whole thing is not only dumb, it's OOC. Harry wouldn't > declare his feelings in front of the whole school if he could mutter > them privately to the person concerned; Dumbledore wouldn't listen in > and then start clapping. Just ugh. Yes. That was completely and utterly cringe-worthy. I suppose the only good thing was that it was just applause and didn't start as a SLOW clap. OMG. Also, as far as we know, only the 3 kids care about Hagrid! Neville didn't even say hi to him as he passed. Now, Hagrid's "Hi Neville" might've been added post which may be why Neville didn't answer, but then maybe it shouldn't have been added in the first place. Perhaps a few references to how important Hagrid is to the students wouldn't have gone astray. Speaking of which, Hagrid's appreciation for being taken out of Azkaban would also have meant more if we were told about the gaol and the Dementors. > The whole thing is making me worry about PoA, because PS/SS had fewer > OOC moments than CoS, Don't worry. Maybe the new director will pick up on those moments. I had always considered HP a grown up kids movie; not talking down to kids, being a drama rather than a comedy... Hopefully it will live up to that expectation and be a serious film as it should be. I'm not saying not funny, just made seriously. There is too much thought and talk about HP being a kid's book or movie. I really cannot stand it when I hear that, or when 14 year olds say that they're embarrassed about liking HP because they're afraid that they're too old. Please! All I want is faithfulness to the books, the abolishment of the assumption that the audience is 5 years old or too dumb to read subtext, and not resorting to cheap gags in order to secure some audience satisfaction. As long as it is made seriously, it will be a great movie and definitely satisfactory! skywings. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 6 08:47:29 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 08:47:29 -0000 Subject: Film as Canon. In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" wrote: > > ...edited... > > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series > and the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > canonical, and if so, why? > > Heidi, asking questions on HP lists since 2000 bboy_mn: Hummmm..... thought provoking question. I think the difference between the two (book vs film) is like the difference between and example and an illustration. Or perhaps, I can create a better analogy by saying it is like the difference between a photograph and an illustration. A photograph is a real life representation of a person. An illustration is an artistic representation of a person. It's possible for the artistic representation of the person to by so fabulously artistic as to be better than the person themselves, and while it may be fantasically better, it is not a true life representation. The book is the real thing, it is the true to life representation. The movie is the artistic representation; the illustration, and as fabulous as it may be on it's own merit, it is still not the real thing. It's someone else's impression of the real thing. There... I think that should serve as an excellent illustration of my point... or wait... was that an example of my point. Hummm... now I'm confused. Just some thoughts. bboy_mn From itzregina at hanson.net Mon Jan 6 15:57:34 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 15:57:34 -0000 Subject: Sean Biggerstaff not signed for COS? Message-ID: In an article linked at TLC http://www.seanbiggerstaff.com/shots/ignite2.jpg Sean is quoted as saying he has not been signed to COS yet. Surely he is needed for some quidditch scenes. OK, is isn't "needed" but I sure would miss him. Gina From heidit at netbox.com Mon Jan 6 16:02:03 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:02:03 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sean Biggerstaff not signed for COS? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <02af01c2b59c$f5518040$0301a8c0@Frodo> That interview was published over 8 weeks ago, so it shouldn't be considered a statement of current events. > -----Original Message----- > From: Regina [mailto:itzregina at hanson.net] > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 10:58 AM > To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com > Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sean Biggerstaff not signed for COS? > > > Real-To: "Regina " > > In an article linked at TLC > > http://www.seanbiggerstaff.com/shots/ignite2.jpg > > Sean is quoted as saying he has not been signed to COS yet. Surely > he is needed for some quidditch scenes. OK, is isn't "needed" but I > sure would miss him. > > Gina > > > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ > > WARNING! This group contains spoilers! > > Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's > Admin Files! > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20File s/ Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Is your message... An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements. Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie. Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups. None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter. Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com ____________________________________________________________ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From bkdelong at pobox.com Mon Jan 6 16:00:12 2003 From: bkdelong at pobox.com (B.K. DeLong) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:00:12 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sean Biggerstaff not signed for COS? In-Reply-To: <02af01c2b59c$f5518040$0301a8c0@Frodo> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030106105944.0263c1e0@ceci.mit.edu> At 11:02 AM 1/6/2003 -0500, you wrote: >That interview was published over 8 weeks ago, so it shouldn't be >considered a statement of current events. Not to mention the fact that he was talking about PoA and not CoS... ;) -- B.K. DeLong bkdelong at pobox.com 617.877.3271 http://ocw.mit.edu Work. http://www.brain-stream.com Play. http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org Potter. http://www.attrition.org Security. From tinajgr at yahoo.com Mon Jan 6 16:18:48 2003 From: tinajgr at yahoo.com (Tina) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 08:18:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: COS Puppet Theatre/ films as canon In-Reply-To: <1041861782.1105.90621.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20030106161848.1095.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote: Message: 10 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 21:01:29 -0600 From: "Richelle Votaw" Subject: Re: Re: COS Puppet Theatre/ films as canon Ali writes: > In general, I would have to say, that no, the films are not > canonical. For me, they are somebody elses representation of canon, > albeit an informed person. There are slightly grey areas though. > The "extra scene" in PS/SS was written by JKR especially for the > film. This is sufficient for me to think that Voldemort (or one > person) went to the Potter's House, by himself, at night. In fact > though, what we actually see is very limited so it could be even here > that only part of the events that night are being shown giving us a > false understanding. And we have a limited view of what happens. Once Voldemort's in the house, we only see Lily and Harry. And some green light. There could easily have been a DE (or two or more) following at a distance behind Voldemort as a sort of, I don't know, guard? Just in case something went wrong? Or to watch for muggles? Or good wizards and witches? Richelle I have a two (sorta) questions about that scene: 1) Is it completely accurate to what JKR wrote originally, then scrapped? I mean, was LV really alone, or did he have his followers with him but placed somewhere else? 2) I heard that JKR was "ADAMANT" with not having James showing up in that scene also... meaning she didn't want him to be there or seen at all... can anyone speculate why? I'm so curious as to why we didn't get to see James fight LV to his death... Thanks in advance. :) ~Tina I Love to Read, Write, and Listen to Silent Music... http://geocities.com/tinajgr --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From deidre at panix.com Mon Jan 6 16:28:36 2003 From: deidre at panix.com (Deidre) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 11:28:36 -0500 Subject: Movies as canon? In-Reply-To: <1041861782.1105.90621.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20030106105604.04a8bec0@pop.panix.com> At 02:03 PM 1/6/03 +0000, Jo Serenadust wrote: >I wonder if this makes as much difference to people who came to know >Harry Potter through the movies first, before reading any of the >books? I like the idea that has been set forth, that of the movies being an alternative canon. That being said, I am one who came to the Potterverse through the first movie. As a life-long fantasy fan I should have read the novels long ago, but hadn't, mostly because the over-hyping, esp. from well-meaning friends, had about placed me in a corner on the whole issue, esp. when they would claim that JKR was a better writer than Tolkien. (Please note that I am a rabid Tolkien fan and have been most of my life. ) After reading both Tolkien and JKR, I found that comparing their books is like comparing apples and oranges--they have completely different styles (Tolkien is very formal, and JKR rather contemporary), and vastly different subject matters. (He was trying to create a new mythology for Britain, and she has concentrated on a few kids in a boarding school--very different points of view.) Having seen SS as a movie, I rushed out and got the book. Upon reading it, I realized, that as lovely as the first movie is, it's mostly a highlights of the novel. I still think, however, that it is a more faithful adaptation of the book than the movie CoS was of that novel. I do see the books as canon, and was quite steamed up about all the things I thought were wrong with the movie version of CoS. I do see the movies and books as very separate things, and can't imagine how the next two books are going to be filmed in any fashion that I, or most other book fans, consider proper. I've read all four novels several times this past year, and see vast differences between them and the two movies that have been made so far. Had CoS been a better movie (IMHO, and YMMV), I could have forgiven the changes. I have probably ranted about those already. However, if I can forgive Peter Jackson for his changes to LOTR in his movies, then I ought to be able to do the same for any directors of HP movies, or so one would think. I think what must be kept in mind is that these films are *based* upon the books, and aren't going to ever be straight adaptions of the novels. Pity about that, but that's how things often work when translating from one media to another. I suppose that is why it is so hard for me to get over the changes in the HP movies, since JKR already did such a good job in her books of *showing* us the whole story, up to this point. Tolkien did more telling of his story, and in making a visual adaptation of a told story, as opposed to a shown story, more changes have to be made, in order to have one of the basic concepts of drama: that the characters grow and change throughout the story--they are not static. In the end, this is what steams me about the HP movies, we already had the showing, and it just needed to be translated to the screen better than it has been, esp in CoS. *shrugs* Oh well, I could go on this point all day. Deidre, who likes canon as well From urbana at charter.net Mon Jan 6 17:44:05 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 17:44:05 -0000 Subject: Movies as canon? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20030106105604.04a8bec0@pop.panix.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Deidre wrote: >I think what must be kept in mind is > that these films are *based* upon the books, and aren't going to ever be > straight adaptions of the novels. Pity about that, but that's how things > often work when translating from one media to another. I suppose that is > why it is so hard for me to get over the changes in the HP movies, since > JKR already did such a good job in her books of *showing* us the whole > story, up to this point....In the end, this is what steams me about the HP movies, we > already had the showing, and it just needed to be translated to the screen > better than it has been, esp in CoS. *shrugs* Oh well, I could go on this > point all day. > > Deidre, who likes canon as well This is something I noticed right away - JRK's writing style is very "cinematic". She has a great way of describing things so that you can visualize them happening on screen. I read both SS and CoS before seeing TMTMNBN(1) and in both cases I really could imagine how the scenes played out. Thus I've been a tad disappointed with (though not aghast at) at both HP movies. I hope Alfonso Cuaron is able to capture more of that cinematic quality in PoA than Chris Columbus did in SS and CoS. Or maybe I just hope Cuaron will make fewer seemingly random changes than Columbus did. Maybe I should hope that Steve Kloves writes a better screenplay... Anne U (let's hope the third time *is* the charm for HP movies) From ruhgozler at yahoo.com Tue Jan 7 00:11:30 2003 From: ruhgozler at yahoo.com (Linda Williams ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 00:11:30 -0000 Subject: Ian Brown casting rumor Message-ID: >From TLC via "Ain't It Cool News": I got in a rumor over the weekend that Ian Brown (of the Stone Roses) has signed on for a small part in the film [TLC: Cedric? He seems older than fifteen, but you never know. He looks like a Sirius, but that's not a small part, even if he only comes in at the end. Rumour rumour rumour.] My guess is that he would get the part of the executioner. What do you think? From dkewpie at pacbell.net Tue Jan 7 01:30:24 2003 From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 01:30:24 -0000 Subject: Ian Brown casting rumor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Linda Williams " wrote: > From TLC via "Ain't It Cool News": > > I got in a rumor over the weekend that Ian Brown (of the Stone Roses) > has signed on for a small part in the film [TLC: Cedric? He seems > older than fifteen, but you never know. He looks like a Sirius, but > that's not a small part, even if he only comes in at the end. Rumour > rumour rumour.] > > My guess is that he would get the part of the executioner. What do > you think? How about the Knight bus?! No one ever speculate about them?! (at least two small new roles there) Joan From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Tue Jan 7 03:01:16 2003 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 03:01:16 -0000 Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" wrote: > > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and > the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > canonical, and if so, why? > Heidi, I have posted before my deeply felt opinion that the movies, however entertaining, are not and cannot be canon. They are derivative works, collaborative works in which JKR has not had complete creative control. True, Columbus has tried to be faithful to the books-- though what that last scene in CoS was supposed to be is beyond me-- but all the creative choices that are absolutely necessary in order to make a three hour movies out of books that would film for far longer if filmed page by page and word for word, perforce produce different works from the books upon which they are based. Even so, Columbus has shifted words from one character in the book to another, which profoundly changes our perceptions of each character and their respective personalities, and have had plot implications as well. The net effect of these dialogue changes have been to "simpify" the personalties into two-dimensional "types", which are not at all the rich complexities of character to be found in the book. On the simple level of facts: what is located where? do the Malfoys sell dark magical objects in Knockturn Alley or not? was the snake from Brazil or from Burma? was it an Irish fellow or a Geek who gave Hagrid his "pet"? which is true and which is not? If the movies are canon, then we have ourselves a heresy forming, with two antithetical truths. I see no practical alternative to havcing the books prevail in case of conflict, and if this be the case, the books are canon and the movies not. Q.E.D. Hagridd "Beta Readers do it to perfection." From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 7 03:26:03 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 21:26:03 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] films as canon References: <20030106161848.1095.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01bd01c2b5fc$828ab670$d8a1cdd1@RVotaw> Tina writes: > I have a two (sorta) questions about that scene: 1) Is it completely accurate > to what JKR wrote originally, then scrapped? I mean, was LV really alone, or > did he have his followers with him but placed somewhere else? I don't know. I mean, we don't have anything to compare the movie footage with. And we don't really see that far behind Voldemort. At all. A little when he's walking up to the house, once he's in there someone could be standing right beside him and we'd never know it. > 2) I heard that JKR was "ADAMANT" with not having James showing up in that > scene also... meaning she didn't want him to be there or seen at all... can > anyone speculate why? I'm so curious as to why we didn't get to see James fight > LV to his death... Thanks in advance. :) At the risk of getting close to book discussion (but I guess I'm safe with movie discussion above), I, again, don't know. But my wildest speculation is that Snape was standing with or near Voldemort and James when he died. Thus JKR didn't want us to see that bit of spoiler. Or not. :) One way or another, I am convinced there was a missing spell in the priori incantatum from Voldemort's wand. The bounced AK should have shown up as something. A lightning bolt? A flash of light? But there's nothing between Bertha Jorkins and Lily Potter (in the corrected version, of course). There were screams of pain (cruciatus?) and so on. Okay, I'll stop now. Deidre writes: > I like the idea that has been set forth, that of the movies being an > alternative canon. That being said, I am one who came to the Potterverse > through the first movie. As a life-long fantasy fan I should have read the > novels long ago, but hadn't, mostly because the over-hyping, esp. from Me too. Although I was half way through Sorcerer's Stone when I saw the movie. It had taken me maybe two weeks to get half way. Then after the movie it took me two weeks to read all the rest of the books! Anyway, that aside, I have a friend at school who's in her late forties, who couldn't stand hearing my friend and I rave over the HP books without finding out what it was all about. She read them all, I gave her the schoolbooks for Christmas. Loved them. Over the holidays she saw the first movie for the first time. She came to me today and told me she'd watched it. "Then I watched it again. And again." She loved it, loved the kids, etc. I was actually surprised at such a positive view of it from someone who started with the books. All of them, not just the first half of the first book like me. :) Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lupinesque at yahoo.com Tue Jan 7 12:16:00 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 12:16:00 -0000 Subject: COS Puppet Theatre and some Behind-the-Scenes COS pics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Haggridd wrote: > Heidi, I have posted before my deeply felt opinion that the movies, > however entertaining, are not and cannot be canon. They are > derivative works, collaborative works in which JKR has not had > complete creative control. True, Columbus has tried to be faithful > to the books-- though what that last scene in CoS was supposed to be > is beyond me It was for you, Haggs. Amy who agrees with you From mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com Tue Jan 7 16:23:01 2003 From: mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com (mad_about_harrypotter ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:23:01 -0000 Subject: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA Message-ID: Hi guys. Yes, I'm afraid to say Hufflepuff stud-muffin and original "spare" boy Cedric Diggory will NOT appear in the forthcoming movie PoA. How do I know this? Well, a very good friend of mine is an actor, and his casting agents were liasing with WB to secure an audition for the role of Cedric. It looked all systems go until about a week ago, when his casting agency was told that a Cedric would not be required for PoA, only GoF, when it's made. It was a late cut from the cast list. I trust my mate, it wouldn't bullsh*t me on this, he knows how obsessed I am about his slight (very slight) potential role in the HP films, so I take it as 99% definite there's no Cedric in PoA. What do you guys think of this? It was only a small part in PoA, but I think it's important to establish Ced's existence in order to get the full impact of his death in GoF. Peace, C x From Audra1976 at aol.com Tue Jan 7 18:58:18 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:58:18 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Cedric Diggory cut from PoA Message-ID: In a message dated 07/01/2003 11:23:59 Eastern Standard Time, mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com writes: > What do you guys think of this? It was only a small part in PoA, but > I think it's important to establish Ced's existence in order to get > the full impact of his death in GoF. Me: Look at it this way: it's going to be REALLY difficult to fit PoA into even a 3-1/2-hour movie, and I don't know how long the movie is going be, but they are going to have to cut a lot. It IS important to establish Cedric's character to get the full impact of his death in GoF, but remember, GoF is going to be TWO movies. His character will be established in the first movie, and he will die in the second. Audra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Jan 7 19:02:46 2003 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David ) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 19:02:46 -0000 Subject: Movie as canon In-Reply-To: <01dc01c2b50b$8b928be0$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: Heidi asked: > Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully on > topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP series and > the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be > canonical, and if so, why? I think this question is deeper than some of the answers have allowed. If you take it literally, then of course only the books are JKR's canon: the films are part of Columbus's (and Cuaron's) canon. Or you can define canon slightly differently and say they are Kloves's canon. Or you can *define* canon to include the movies. But, to be honest, I don't think that's the point. I think there is an issue: in what sense can the Potterverse be considered to have a coherent existence, other than strictly in JKR's canon? I remember there was a very interesting post about eighteen months ago to the main list raising essentially this question in regard to fanfic, and drawing comparison with oral traditions pre-printing such as the Arthurian romances or the Iliad. (And, Heidi, pointing out the cultural relativism of the notion of copyright). There were virtually no replies IIRC. I will see if I can dig it out. I don't know the answer to the question, but I don't think it will go away, particularly once Book 7 has been published. The desire to maintain and extend the illusion will spawn variant universes and by some mysterious process some will be considered more 'canonical' than others in the fandom. More later on OT on the notion of reality in the Potterverse David From dom-blokey at supanet.com Tue Jan 7 19:17:53 2003 From: dom-blokey at supanet.com (Dom McDermott) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 19:17:53 -0000 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Cedric Diggory cut from PoA References: Message-ID: <004601c2b681$7ae8aaa0$7abf28d5@Blokey> Sorry, did I miss something? I didn't realise that GOF was going to be two movies. Was that not just one of those rumours / suggestions floating around the web, or has someone in an official capacity actually confirmed that a) they will be filming it, and b) it will be in two parts...? Dom > Look at it this way: it's going to be REALLY difficult to fit PoA into even a > 3-1/2-hour movie, and I don't know how long the movie is going be, but they > are going to have to cut a lot. It IS important to establish Cedric's > character to get the full impact of his death in GoF, but remember, GoF is > going to be TWO movies. His character will be established in the first > movie, and he will die in the second. > > Audra > From rvotaw at i-55.com Wed Jan 8 01:03:22 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 19:03:22 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Cedric Diggory cut from PoA References: Message-ID: <00ec01c2b6b1$c3053440$9ea1cdd1@RVotaw> In a message dated 07/01/2003 11:23:59 Eastern Standard Time, mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com writes: >> What do you guys think of this? It was only a small part in PoA, but >> I think it's important to establish Ced's existence in order to get >> the full impact of his death in GoF. Audra writes: >Look at it this way: it's going to be REALLY difficult to fit PoA into even a >3-1/2-hour movie, and I don't know how long the movie is going be, but they >are going to have to cut a lot. It IS important to establish Cedric's >character to get the full impact of his death in GoF, but remember, GoF is >going to be TWO movies. His character will be established in the first >movie, and he will die in the second. The way I see it, if Cedric has been cut, that means the Hufflepuff team as a whole has been cut. Harry's got to fall off the broom in Quidditch, so they must have changed it to have them play Slytherin. The way I see it they've GOT to have two Quidditch games. One for Harry to fall off the broom and Gryffindor to lose. And the other for them to win the Quidditch cup. So I think they'll perhaps combine the fake dementor game and the Quidditch cup game. Have Crabbe and Goyle dress up as dementors and have Harry Expecto Patronus them and catch the Snitch out from under Malfoy at the same time. David Heyman (or Steve Kloves, can't remember which) said PoA would be the same length as or slightly shorter than CoS. So they've got to cut a lot. As for GoF being two movies, I believe it was Steve Kloves who said they were looking at it and as the script writing went along would determine whether it would be one or two movies. But the way they were talking sounded like they were leaning toward two. Maybe WB is waiting to see how the two Matrix movies do (May and November). Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at earthlink.net Wed Jan 8 07:07:11 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 23:07:11 -0800 Subject: Sirius casting? Message-ID: <117463830467.20030107230711@earthlink.net> Hi, Oldman as Sirius? Have no idea how accurate Hollywoodreporter is, but I just came across this: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hollywoodreporter/film/index.jsp -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Wed Jan 8 14:59:28 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophia mclaughlin) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 14:59:28 +0000 Subject: Quidditch in PoA (was: Sean Biggerstaff not signed...) Message-ID: Gina said: ..surely he is needed for some quidditch scenes. OK, it isn't "needed," but I sure would miss him. I'd miss him too. Now did you mean Biggerstaff wasn't needed, or Wood wasn't needed or quidditch wasn't needed? I first interpreted your post to mean quidditch wasn't needed. Even if that's not what you meant, I'd like to comment on it. I've been wondering what Cuaron will make of the set pieces that are emerging as part and parcel of the Potter movie experience, such as the quidditch. Of course, it has to be there somewhere in the background, but can there be a Potter-film without a spectacular quidditch game? (OK, number four will be, of course, but I mean, if you approach PoA from the franchise point of view--number three in the series...) And if so, could it be the next one, considering Cuaron is expected to be a mover and shaker in Potterland? Or would he not have a say in it? Is it all up to Kloves and the producers? As for me, quidditch is terrific, but as the plot thickens and our hero seems to be growing emotionally more complex, there could be so many other aspects of Harry's schoolyear worthy of screen time--and I know there are many of you out there who thought the CoS quidditch-game was a tad long when the minutes are such a precious commodity for telling a complex story. Then again, there's Cho. She's got to be there of course, and quidditch is Harry's and Cho's first encounter, which I'm looking forward to, so let the games begin, eh? I'd love to get some feedback on these ramblings. What say you? Sophia _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From itzregina at hanson.net Wed Jan 8 15:18:25 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:18:25 -0000 Subject: Quidditch in PoA (was: Sean Biggerstaff not signed...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophia mclaughlin" wrote: > > Gina said: > ? ? ..surely he is needed for some quidditch scenes. OK, it isn't "needed," > but I sure would miss him. > > I'd miss him too. Now did you mean Biggerstaff wasn't needed, or Wood wasn't > needed or quidditch wasn't needed? > Sorry about that. Typo. I meant HE isn't "needed". He barely got any time in the last movie. > As for me, quidditch is terrific, but as the plot thickens and our hero > seems to be growing emotionally more complex, there could be so many other > aspects of Harry's schoolyear worthy of screen time--> I personally would prefer more time spent on the growing complexity of Harry's character, but I do enjoy the Quidditch sequences. Harry's and Cho's first encounter, > > Sophia But they wouldn't HAVE to meet on the Quidditch field (pitch). When he sees her at school someone could just tell Harry she plays Seeker for Ravenclaw. Gina > > _________________________________________________________________ > Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online > http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 8 21:00:16 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 21:00:16 -0000 Subject: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: <00ec01c2b6b1$c3053440$9ea1cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: Richelle wrote: > > ...big edit... > > David Heyman (or Steve Kloves, can't remember which) said PoA would be the same length as or slightly shorter than CoS. So they've got to cut a lot. > > As for GoF being two movies, I believe it was Steve Kloves who said they were looking at it and as the script writing went along would determine whether it would be one or two movies. But the way they were talking sounded like they were leaning toward two. Maybe WB is waiting to see how the two Matrix movies do (May and November). > > Richelle bboy_mn: Regarding the Quidditch part I cut from this post. I think they need to have Quidditch. It's expected. What's a Harry Potter movie without Quidditch? Regarding the length of the HP movies. I still don't understand why 2.7hrs for HP is 'butt numbing' but +3 hrs for Lord of the Rings doesn't even rate a comment. I think it is a crime to make any of these movies less than 3 hrs long. That extra 20 minute would allow so much more plot and character developement. It would also allow a lot smoother transitions between scenes, and make the movie a lot less hurried, but still excitint pace. Chamber of Secrets on the big screen; the truth is, they can't effectively squeeze any of the first three books into one movie; at least not when they are shooting for a 2.5 hr target running time. It would be impossible to make CoS in one movie even if it was stretched to 3hrs. Given Warner Bro's desire to keep thier movies short, I doubt they would try to squeeze it into 3.5 hrs. Even 3.5 hours would have a hard time doing it justice. It's going to be very interesting to see what a new director can do with this story. I've already heard rumors that he is challenging the status quo, and planning to approach the movie differently. I hope the first thing he does is makes it longer. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From purple_801999 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 8 21:42:49 2003 From: purple_801999 at yahoo.com (purple_801999 ) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 21:42:49 -0000 Subject: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > Richelle wrote: > > As for GoF being two movies, I believe it was Steve Kloves who said > they were looking at it and as the script writing went along would > determine whether it would be one or two movies. But the way they > were talking sounded like they were leaning toward two. Maybe WB is > waiting to see how the two Matrix movies do (May and November). > > Sounds like a good plan to me considering the amount of action and subplots involved. I do not envy Mr. Kloves the task before him. > bboy_mn wrote: > > Regarding the length of the HP movies. I still don't understand why > 2.7hrs for HP is 'butt numbing' but +3 hrs for Lord of the Rings > doesn't even rate a comment. I think it is a crime to make any of > these movies less than 3 hrs long. That extra 20 minute would allow so > much more plot and character developement. It would also allow a lot > smoother transitions between scenes, and make the movie a lot less > hurried, but still excitint pace. The Harry Potter movies are directed more towards children than to adults, unlike Lord of the Rings. An adult can handle a three hour plus movie, but an adult trying to rangle two or three children who have to go to the bathroom, asking questions about the movie may not have the stamina to keep them still and quiet for more than two hours. And God help you if they lose interest! As popular as Harry Potter is it is still considered a children's novel and will be adapted as one. Thank God for DVD extras. I wonder if the two movie plan would be a good idea for the rest of the book to movie adaptaions. Olivia Grey From deidre at panix.com Thu Jan 9 00:21:18 2003 From: deidre at panix.com (Deidre) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:21:18 -0500 Subject: yet another casting idea In-Reply-To: <1042035940.247.2540.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20030108191437.04d63e10@pop.panix.com> Forgive if someone has mentioned this before, but a good friend who is also quite Buffy-verse obsessed like me suggested that Anthony Stewart Head might be a good choice for either Sirius or Lupin. I hadn't thought of ASH myself (at least I don't think so ), and so I offer this as yet another choice in the Ever-Floating-Casting-Game-Party. Deidre From chiflipgrl at aol.com Thu Jan 9 00:39:23 2003 From: chiflipgrl at aol.com (chiflipgrl at aol.com) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:39:23 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] yet another casting idea Message-ID: <7E8F943D.4DCAC91A.0ACCE7BC@aol.com> Hola, everyone! Wouldn't Anthony Stewart Head be a tad bit too old to play Sirius or Lupin? I mean, I myself am a total Giles-lover/appreciator. However, I just envisioned Lupin and Sirius to be in their early to late 40s, at the most. ASH looks very much like a man in his 50s. (No offense meant. It's just for the sake of saying it.) Besides... Maybe it would be slightly traumatic for us Buffy-Verse inhabitors to see Giles with a wig? ::giggle:: Sorry... I'm being stupid. Back to lurking! *~*Janice*~* - who just envisioned Giles with a hairstyle such as LOTR's Aragorn... ROFL :) From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Thu Jan 9 01:40:47 2003 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:40:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: <117463830467.20030107230711@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20030109014047.34953.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com> Susanne: > Oldman as Sirius? > > Have no idea how accurate Hollywoodreporter is, > but I just came across this: > > http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ > hollywoodreporter/film/index.jsp Note: this site is subscription-based. Access to "old" articles become subscribers-only very quickly so go...go now...if you want to read it. Since the print publication of the above site is one of the top two trade papers for Hollywood, it's usually pretty accurate. Not the most perfect of track records, not the fastest source, but usually pretty accurate. Though, the Reporter's primary rival, Variety, hasn't got this news item on its site the last time I checked. Of course, "in negotiations" is NOT confirmation that all parties will sign on the dotted lines. So, since we're speaking of Oldman, I've been meaning to ask this of those who has had less-than-positive reactions to the idea of Oldman as Sirius: in forming your opinion on this matter, have you contemplated Oldman's performance as Beethoven (no, not the St. Bernard!) the composer in Immortal Beloved (1994)? Not that I think Beethoven and Sirius are one and the same...it's just that Oldman showed a side of him in that film not seen in all the other films mentioned so far on this list, IIRC. Petra a n :) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From divaclv at aol.com Thu Jan 9 04:23:34 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 04:23:34 -0000 Subject: yet another casting idea In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20030108191437.04d63e10@pop.panix.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Deidre wrote: > Forgive if someone has mentioned this before, but a good friend who is also > quite Buffy-verse obsessed like me suggested that Anthony Stewart Head > might be a good choice for either Sirius or Lupin. I hadn't thought of ASH > myself (at least I don't think so ), and so I offer this as yet another > choice in the Ever-Floating-Casting-Game-Party. I "hear" ASH when I read Lupin's dialogue, so the idea definitely appeals to me. He could definitely pull of the quiet strength and guilty-secrets part of the character very well. ~Christi From SusanXG at hotmail.com Thu Jan 9 06:50:00 2003 From: SusanXG at hotmail.com (Susan XG) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 00:50:00 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] yet another casting idea Message-ID: >>>>>>>Wouldn't Anthony Stewart Head be a tad bit too old to play Sirius or >>>>>>>Lupin?<<<<<< I couldn't agree more. However, I also envisioned ASH as someone like Barty Crouch, Sr. Come on, he could be "severe-looking"! >>>>>Besides... Maybe it would be slightly traumatic for us Buffy-Verse >>>>>inhabitors to see Giles with a wig? ::giggle::<<<< You are TOO funny. Well, we did have to suffer through Angel's various wigs. ;o) Susan :o) _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup From SusanXG at hotmail.com Thu Jan 9 07:05:50 2003 From: SusanXG at hotmail.com (Susan XG) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 01:05:50 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA Message-ID: >>>>>Regarding the Quidditch part I cut from this post. I think they need to >>>>>have Quidditch. It's expected. What's a Harry Potter movie without >>>>>Quidditch?<<<<<< I totally agree. They can't cut Quidditch. Not only because it's a reoccuring thing in the books, but the games in PoA are very important. When Harry plays Hufflepuff he is terrorized by the Dementors and loses the Snitch for the first time ever to Cedric Diggory (who wanted to call it off...showing very early what kind of guy he is). This leads him to studying with Lupin about conjuring a Patronus (which is important to the climax of the book). Then when he plays Ravenclaw, we are introduced to Cho Chang, Harry's crush, for the first time...and we see his first "successful" Patronus on Malfoy and company. Then, they play Slytherin and take the Quidditch cup! The first time they win in 7 years! Plus, all that hoopla with the Firebolt and how it causes a rift between Ron/Harry and Hermione? Besides, I need to see Oliver try to "drown himself" in the showers. Qudditch is a very important storytelling device and they can't cut it from the film. Also, even if GoF becomes two films (which is a great idea!), Cedric plays an important role in PoA because early on in GoF, his "victory" over Harry is mentioned by Amos Diggory! >>>>>Regarding the length of the HP movies. I still don't understand why 2.7hrs for HP is 'butt numbing' but +3 hrs for Lord of the Rings doesn't even rate a comment. I think it is a crime to make any of these movies less than 3 hrs long. That extra 20 minute would allow so much more plot and character developement. It would also allow a lot smoother transitions between scenes, and make the movie a lot less hurried, but still excitint pace.<<<< It is SUCH a double standard. I think the whole "Well, HP is a children's book" is a such a lame excuse! Practically everyone I know that's a HP fan is 18 or over. I've seen CoS 5 times (I'm 22) and I loved every minute of it. My sister (who's 18) saw it four times. I only saw "Fellowship" and "The Two Towers" once each in the theaters. What does that tell you? If you are going to adapt a "much beloved" piece of literature, you have to do it right. Besides, AOL Time Warner produces LotR AND HP, which is VERY interesting. The fans of Harry Potter (who aren't just children or are no longer children...) have just as much right to get a "faithful" adaptation as the LotR fans do. Susan _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From myphilosophy2001 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 9 09:33:31 2003 From: myphilosophy2001 at yahoo.com (Moonstruck) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:33:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Quidditch is important in PoA (was: Quidditch in PoA) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030109093331.60154.qmail@web20804.mail.yahoo.com> Gina wrote: > I personally would prefer more time spent on the > growing complexity > of Harry's character, but I do enjoy the Quidditch > sequences. Actually, if you're reading for subtext, the Quidditch squences in PoA -- far more so than PS/SS or CoS --have *EVERYTHING* to do with the growing complexity of Harry's character. I'm working on a paper I hope to present at the Nimbus-2003 regarding the subtext of adolescent depression in PoA, and I've found the Quidditch matches offer a very compelling glimpse not only into Harry's state of mind, but his growing sense strength and self. I could go into greater detail about the symbolism of the matches, of the meaning of both Harry's "failures" and successes on the Quidditch field, of how his two broomsticks -- the Nimbus and the Firebolt -- are representative of Harry's spiritual decline and rebirth, but I'll spare you my overzealous analysis. In short, while I could have argued going light on Quidditch in the PS/SS and CoS movies, I have trouble with the thought or marginalizing them in PoA. -Jess :) ===== "One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star." - Friedrich Neitzsche http://www.livejournal.com/users/moonstruck4rjl/ Nimbus_2003-A Harry Potter Symposium: http://www.hp2003.org/index.html __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Thu Jan 9 10:33:51 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophia mclaughlin) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:33:51 +0000 Subject: Quidditch in PoA Message-ID: Me: Harry's and Cho's first encounter, > Sophia Gina: But they wouldn't HAVE to meet on the Quidditch field (pitch). When he sees her at school someone could just tell Harry she plays Seeker for Ravenclaw. Me: Yes of course he could hear about her that way, but I'd like to see Harry being polite to her on the field and her teasing him--you know, their little interaction there. (in a really whiny voice): I want to see it acted! It'd be sooooo cute! Sophia _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Thu Jan 9 13:07:02 2003 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David ) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:07:02 -0000 Subject: Movie as canon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I half-promised: > I remember there was a very interesting post about eighteen months > ago to the main list raising essentially this question in regard to > fanfic, and drawing comparison with oral traditions pre-printing > such as the Arthurian romances or the Iliad. (And, Heidi, pointing > out the cultural relativism of the notion of copyright). There were > virtually no replies IIRC. I will see if I can dig it out. I found it, by frantyck (Rrishi). It's message 29349 on the main list. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/29349 The whole thing is worth reading, but I note especially: > The way we discuss the HP books on this list and elsewhere shows that more than the stories, the characters and the HP world itself are what attract interest and loyalty. If Rowling is opening up a new world for our literary and imaginative exploration -- and yearning, for a forbidden continent -- then she does not have the right to the last word. The discoverer must ultimately yield to the developer. and > The purpose is also to point out that the definition of 'canon' must be undertaken with an eye to this potential future. For instance, if what is shown in the HP movies does not contradict the fundamental principles of Rowling's vision, it should be treated as canonical. David From rose590 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 9 19:40:43 2003 From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590 ) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 19:40:43 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: <20030109014047.34953.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan wrote: > Susanne: > > Oldman as Sirius? > > > > Have no idea how accurate Hollywoodreporter is, > > but I just came across this: > > > > http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ > > hollywoodreporter/film/index.jsp > Hi My first post here. I've been lurking around since this group first started. As a die hard, card carrying member of the I want to marry Sirius Black club, I have particular interest in who is going to be cast. I don't think there's a man alive that could live up to my mental image of Black. I had to comment on this rumor. If you haven't had the chance, check out this web site: http://www.csh.rit.edu/~halle/oldman/images.html Scroll down to the pictures of Oldman in the Scarlet Letter. Long, scraggly hair and a little more worn down and I could definitely handle Oldman as Sirius :) Still holding out hope for Jason Carter, however. He definitely has my number 1 vote !!!!!!!!! He comes the closest to the mind's eye so far. RoBro :) From voicelady at mymailstation.com Fri Jan 10 00:45:19 2003 From: voicelady at mymailstation.com (voicelady) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:45:19 EDT Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Rapture's posts Message-ID: Hey mods? While I'm all in favor of people having the freedom to believe in whatever religious beliefs they choose, this is not why I suscribe to this list. Can these posts please be moderated? Thanks. From penumbra10 at ameritech.net Fri Jan 10 03:13:27 2003 From: penumbra10 at ameritech.net (Nia ) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:13:27 -0000 Subject: Sean Biggerstaff rumors quashed Message-ID: This just came up on Counting Down. It's a reference to a bit which appears here on Sean's web site: http://www.seanbiggerstaff.com/article.asp?id=44 It seems to be quite an emphatic denial of the rather pervasive web rumor that claims Sean will not be appearing in PoA. Of course we will have to wait for a "solid confirmation," but it might put at least a few of our fears to rest for a while, don't you think? ;-) --Nia From pennylin at swbell.net Fri Jan 10 03:31:42 2003 From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny Linsenmayer) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 21:31:42 -0600 Subject: ADMIN: Spam will happen...... Message-ID: <084501c2b858$cb61c3d0$4f5ffea9@cq5hs01> Hi guys -- We've received a fair number of on-list and off-list comments about the spam posts that hit the Movie list earlier today. Please be assured that we always act quickly to remove offending posts, ban the account that sent the spam and take any other necessary action. We certainly apologize for the inconvenience or offense it may have caused some of you, but without placing some restrictions on new members that would become a fairly heavy burden on the list moderators and administrators, we may have to live with the occasional spam post. The Moderators have recently deliberated about the pros and cons of setting up list membership in ways that might avoid spam and decided against those measures at this time. Again, we apologize for the spam that hit the list today, but we did take quick action against it. As always, you may email the Mods offlist if you have some specific thoughts or suggestions. Penny for the Mods From penny_rabey at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 03:36:46 2003 From: penny_rabey at hotmail.com (pennyspace ) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:36:46 -0000 Subject: yet another casting idea In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Deidre wrote: > > Forgive if someone has mentioned this before, but a good friend who > is also > > quite Buffy-verse obsessed like me suggested that Anthony > Stewart Head > > might be a good choice for either Sirius or Lupin. Christi replied: > I "hear" ASH when I read Lupin's dialogue, so the idea definitely > appeals to me. He could definitely pull of the quiet strength and > guilty-secrets part of the character very well. > > ~Christi I think ASH could definitely do the quiet strength of Lupin. He is older than I imagined Lupin, but then Alan Rickman is in his 50s too, IIRC. The only problem for me is, after watching Buffy for so many years, he *is* Giles. But I am sure I would get over that , he is a very talented actor. I must say though, that my personal preference for Lupin is Ewan McGregor, although I didn't really think of him until I had seen Moulin Rouge. He is such a versatile actor, I think he would be great as Lupin. I also think Ralph Fiennes would make a good Lupin. All IMHO of course :) PennyR (who spends waaay too much time casting POA in her lil head) From julia at thequiltbug.com Fri Jan 10 14:00:19 2003 From: julia at thequiltbug.com (Julia McCallum) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 06:00:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? Message-ID: <20030110060020.21204.h012.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 05:55:12 -0800 (PST), "rose590 " wrote: >>>As a die hard, card carrying member of the I want to marry Sirius Black club, I have particular interest in who is going to be cast.? I don't think there's a man alive that could live up to my mental image of Black. I agree. When JKR said he was "dead sexy," I just got this picture in my head that no one has been able to match. *sigh* >>>>Scroll down to the pictures of Oldman in the Scarlet Letter.? Long, scraggly hair and a little more worn down and I could definitely handle Oldman as Sirius :) I had forgotten that he was in that and also in "Immortal Beloved". Very close, but almost "too" harsh looking. When I think Sirius, I see someone really deranged looking - but underneath you can see how good looking he'd be after some home-cooked meals, a bath, and a haircut, and some TLC...I can't see the "underneath" part with Oldman. >>>>Still holding out hope for Jason Carter, however.? He definitely has my number 1 vote !!!!!!!!!? He comes the closest to the mind's eye so far. I am not sure I know who Jason Carter is. What's he been in? Julia ________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. From rose590 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 10 14:57:08 2003 From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590 ) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:57:08 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: <20030110060020.21204.h012.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Julia McCallum" wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 05:55:12 -0800 (PST), "rose590 " wrote: > > > >>>>Still holding out hope for Jason Carter, however.? He definitely has > my number 1 vote !!!!!!!!!? He comes the closest to the mind's eye so > far. > > I am not sure I know who Jason Carter is. What's he been in? > > Julia > He was in Babylon 5. Not perfect for the part, but pretty durn good. RoBro From natmichaels at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 19:26:35 2003 From: natmichaels at hotmail.com (lorien_eve ) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 19:26:35 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hey! This, too, is my first post in this group. I've been a lurker for a couple of months now. When I saw some of the pictures of Gary Oldman, he didn't fit as my ideal Sirius, either. BUT THEN I saw that picture that you mentioned--the one from The Scarlet Letter-- and now he's definitely one of my picks for Sirius, if they give him that same look. I was a die-hard Jason Carter fan until I saw this picture. IMO, either one of these guys would be a great Sirius. Lorien_Eve > > > > > Hi > > My first post here. I've been lurking around since this group first > started. As a die hard, card carrying member of the I want to marry > Sirius Black club, I have particular interest in who is going to be > cast. I don't think there's a man alive that could live up to my > mental image of Black. I had to comment on this rumor. > > If you haven't had the chance, check out this web site: > > http://www.csh.rit.edu/~halle/oldman/images.html > > Scroll down to the pictures of Oldman in the Scarlet Letter. Long, > scraggly hair and a little more worn down and I could definitely > handle Oldman as Sirius :) > > Still holding out hope for Jason Carter, however. He definitely has > my number 1 vote !!!!!!!!! He comes the closest to the mind's eye so > far. > > RoBro :) From kechelsen at aol.com Fri Jan 10 21:56:18 2003 From: kechelsen at aol.com (kathye_c ) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 21:56:18 -0000 Subject: Harris family speaks about replacement for Richard Message-ID: Over on the InternetMovie Data Base on Thursday, there was a short article which stated that the Harris family has said they would like to see Peter O'Toole take over the Dumbledore role. They felt O'Toole would do well in the role. Kathy From rvotaw at i-55.com Sat Jan 11 03:28:03 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 21:28:03 -0600 Subject: Casting questions and comments Message-ID: <004201c2b921$73891c20$26a2cdd1@RVotaw> Okay, I've been thinking. Since it seems that the Gary Oldman as Sirius Black rumors are at least possible. The latest seems fairly possible and since WB hasn't denied it, that makes me think it's true. Anyway, at first I was worried about height. I always pictured Sirius around 6' or a bit more. With Lupin a little shorter. And Gary Oldman is (according to the IMDB) 5'9" which is (currently) only five inches taller than Daniel Radcliffe. I know, height can be added with shoes and all if needed but it seems like a nuisance. Since I'd pictured Lupin smaller, that limits the height range. But then I thought, why do I think this? Do we have a basis for this? My point is, why do I have those heights fixed in my mind? Is there anything that ever gives a hint about Lupin and Sirius's heights? That one is taller than another? Or is it all in my head and could Lupin actually be taller than Sirius? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dan1575 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 11 07:18:23 2003 From: dan1575 at yahoo.com (dan1575 ) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 07:18:23 -0000 Subject: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hello everyone, I'm new on this board so bear with me. I'd just like to say that I quite agree with Susan on this. The three quidditch matches in PoA are very important. If not, why JK Rowling wrote three separate chapters on it? By far, they were the most thrilling quidditch matches that Ms Rowling had written. It truly saddens me to hear this news that they will be cut, especially since I reread the Hufflepuff match and the Ravenclaw match in PoA last night. I can only hope that this isn't true. > I totally agree. They can't cut Quidditch. Not only because it's a > reoccuring thing in the books, but the games in PoA are very important. When > Harry plays Hufflepuff he is terrorized by the Dementors and loses the > Snitch for the first time ever to Cedric Diggory (who wanted to call it > off...showing very early what kind of guy he is). This leads him to studying > with Lupin about conjuring a Patronus (which is important to the climax of > the book). Then when he plays Ravenclaw, we are introduced to Cho Chang, > Harry's crush, for the first time...and we see his first "successful" > Patronus on Malfoy and company. Then, they play Slytherin and take the > Quidditch cup! The first time they win in 7 years! Plus, all that hoopla > with the Firebolt and how it causes a rift between Ron/Harry and Hermione? From dan1575 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 11 07:29:32 2003 From: dan1575 at yahoo.com (dan1575 ) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 07:29:32 -0000 Subject: Ian McKellen as Dumbledore? Message-ID: Hello, I'm new here so pardon me if this is old news. But, I'd just opened imdb.com and looked if the cast of PoA had been updated or not. Well, it stated Sir Ian McKellen as Dumbledore. Is this true? I think he'd be perfect! What you guys think? From rvotaw at i-55.com Sat Jan 11 16:56:51 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 10:56:51 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA References: Message-ID: <002101c2b992$70d53560$19a2cdd1@RVotaw> dan1575 writes: > I'd just like to say that I quite agree with Susan on this. The three > quidditch matches in PoA are very important. If not, why JK Rowling > wrote three separate chapters on it? By far, they were the most > thrilling quidditch matches that Ms Rowling had written. It truly > saddens me to hear this news that they will be cut, especially since > I reread the Hufflepuff match and the Ravenclaw match in PoA last > night. I can only hope that this isn't true. First of all, let me say I hope the rumors that Sean Biggerstaff is not resigned for PoA aren't true. I understand that the magazine the article where he said he'd not yet been signed (or asked even, can't quite remember) is a couple of months old. Which means that it's possible the interview is a couple of months older than that. He comments in the article about having seen Alan Rickman's Private Life on Broadway. That started in the summer, anyone know how long it ran? Anyway, basically I'm saying if it's been as much as four months, he could easily have signed on in those four months. However, if he's not signed, what does that mean for Quidditch in PoA? You can hardly have Harry playing Quidditch by himself. Or with just the twins. You've got to have the whole team. Is it possible to cut Quidditch entirely? To the story line in general, I mean? It would be a butchering of the story as a whole. As dan1575 wrote above, why would JKR include three separate Quidditch matches/chapters if it weren't important? Just logically speaking for a minute, if Harry isn't playing Quidditch, the dementors can't come to the match and he can't fall off the broom. If he doesn't fall off the broom, he won't know how desperately he needs a defence against the dementors. If he doesn't know that, he won't ask Lupin for help. If he doesn't ask Lupin for help, he won't have dementor lessons, won't know how to produce a patronus, won't save himself, Hermione, etc. Well, there goes the whole story. So he's got to fall off the broom. What else would it be? I think I've successfully convinced myself they can't cut Quidditch entirely. Now, unfortunately, I do think they'll narrow it to two (please, not just one) Quidditch games. Which means no Hufflepuff, no Ravenclaw, no Cho Chang or Cedric Diggory. Which pretty much guarantees they've just about decided to make GoF two movies. One for character development, one for the rest of the story. I guess, theoretically, they could have just one match against Slytherin in which Harry falls off the broom and Malfoy catches the Snitch (ugh). But I can't see them not having that priceless scene with the fake dementors where Harry first produces a patronus of some sort. It's needed. I need it. I need to see McGonagall yelling at Malfoy and co. Or at the very least at Crabbe and Goyle, if they make it the Quidditch final against Slytherin. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ilovelucius at yahoo.com Sat Jan 11 22:55:02 2003 From: ilovelucius at yahoo.com (Robin Van Dusen) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 449 In-Reply-To: <1042295769.2241.43244.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20030111225502.29018.qmail@web41408.mail.yahoo.com> >Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 07:29:32 -0000 > From: "dan1575 " >Subject: Ian McKellen as Dumbledore? >Hello, I'm new here so pardon me if this is old news. But, I'd just >opened imdb.com and looked if the cast of PoA had been updated or >not. Well, it stated Sir Ian McKellen as Dumbledore. Is this true? I >think he'd be perfect! What you guys think? I wrote: I think Sir Ian McKellen is perfect! He is a Gemini (same birthday as me, May 25 ;-)) and Geminis have that *sparkle* that Dumbledore should have. A MOST excellent and my first choice! Ever since I saw him portray Gandalf in LotR, I felt he would be an even better Dumbledore! Robin V. (HP and Lotr maniac!) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com Sun Jan 12 15:57:58 2003 From: feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com (Felicia Rickmann ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:57:58 -0000 Subject: Ian McKellen as Dumbledore? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Does not seem promising as he is now forever Gandalf in the eyes of many. Leaky Cauldron has a report that Michael Gambon (fine actor and not an international *superstar*) has been asked. He is, I think tall enough and can cover the character pretty well. Still my hope is thta Peter O'Toole will get the job. Felicia > Hello, I'm new here so pardon me if this is old news. But, I'd just > opened imdb.com and looked if the cast of PoA had been updated or > not. Well, it stated Sir Ian McKellen as Dumbledore. Is this true? I > think he'd be perfect! What you guys think? From tinkerbell634 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 12 18:11:52 2003 From: tinkerbell634 at yahoo.com (pixie_tink_sweetart ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 18:11:52 -0000 Subject: Extra Scene in CoS Message-ID: I've just watched CoS for the umpteenth time and at the very end, after the credits, there is a short clip of Flourish and Blotts in Diagon Ally; we see a book in the window titled "Who Am I?" and there's a moving picture of Gilderoy Lockhart in a straightjacket. I've sat through the credits before, and it wasn't there, so it has to be new. Check it out, it's really cute! ~Pixie Tink From Audra1976 at aol.com Sun Jan 12 18:22:00 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 13:22:00 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Extra Scene in CoS Message-ID: <6d.6fc3f30.2b530c48@aol.com> In a message dated 1/12/03 1:12:52 PM, tinkerbell634 at yahoo.com writes: << I've sat through the credits before, and it wasn't there, so it has to be new. >> Nope, it's always been there. It just takes a really long time because the credits are so long. Audra From illyana at mindspring.com Sun Jan 12 19:48:06 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:48:06 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Extra Scene in CoS In-Reply-To: <6d.6fc3f30.2b530c48@aol.com> References: <6d.6fc3f30.2b530c48@aol.com> Message-ID: yah, it was there when i saw the movie on opening day. however, i've heard from some people who knew about the scene that their movie theater did not show it (or stopped the movie right at the end of the credits, so that it was not included). that might have been what happened to you - your theater just did not show the scene. illyana > > ><< I've sat through the credits before, and it wasn't there, so it has >to be new. >> > >Nope, it's always been there. It just takes a really long time because the >credits are so long. > >Audra -- S1.3 MIL+++ RWG++# FRI++ CBG++ P&S-- f++/+++ n- $++++ 9F13, 1F22, 2F13, 3F02, 3F05, 4F01, 4F08, 4F11, 4F19 F1980 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 "What's the point in having a Honda if you can't show it off?" - Superintendent Chalmers visit my livejournal! http://www.livejournal.com/users/illyanadmc From illyana at mindspring.com Sun Jan 12 19:50:19 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:50:19 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Extra Scene in CoS In-Reply-To: References: <6d.6fc3f30.2b530c48@aol.com> Message-ID: Just apologizing for my non-use of capitalization in the previous message. I forgot which list I was posting to until it was too late (I usually just use all lower-case, but like to follow the rules of the HPFGU lists). Anyway, I'm sorry! illyana >yah, it was there when i saw the movie on opening day. however, i've >heard from some people who knew about the scene that their movie >theater did not show it (or stopped the movie right at the end of the >credits, so that it was not included). that might have been what >happened to you - your theater just did not show the scene. > >illyana >> >> >><< I've sat through the credits before, and it wasn't there, so it has >>to be new. >> >> >>Nope, it's always been there. It just takes a really long time because the >>credits are so long. >> > >Audra -- 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 From urbana at charter.net Sun Jan 12 20:11:28 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:11:28 -0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron (POA director) and Gambon(?) as DD Message-ID: Friday's Hollywood Reporter online contained this feature about Alfonso Cuaron: As for Michael Gambon playing Dumbledore, I thought that was a rumor that had not been confirmed by Warner Brothers. But perhaps I missed something on this list recently. Anne U (intrigued by the last line of the Cuaron article...:-) From urbana at charter.net Sun Jan 12 20:15:21 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:15:21 -0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron (POA director) and Gambon(?) as DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X X X X X X X Space inserted to defeat ads that interfere with links on Yahoogroups website... X X X X X X X X X X I hope the link shows up better this time. X X X X X Anne U (did it work?) From Ali at zymurgy.org Sun Jan 12 21:40:24 2003 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 21:40:24 -0000 Subject: How "true" does Cuaron have to be? was Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: <002101c2b992$70d53560$19a2cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: << Is it possible to cut Quidditch entirely? To the story line in general, I mean? It would be a butchering of the story as a whole. >> This has made me wonder. How true must Cuaron be to the books? I know that Heyman promised JKR a fairly strict interpretation, but is Cuaron bound to follow that? I know that Columbus and Heyman are still producers, but what sort of "artistic licence" will Cuaron be allowed? Will he be allowed to tamper with the script if he considers it too pedestrian? To date, there have been a number of complaints that in trying to be too true to the books, the films became a little, let's say laborious or lacklustre. It's a no-win situation though isn't it, because I for one will be polishing my LOON badge and complaining the minute I catch a whiff of variation from the books. I just wonder how PoA would be viewed if it was a much "better" film, but less true to the images brought to us by JKR? I think it would be possible to have PoA without Quidditch. Harry could come across the dementors in a different setting, but it wouldn't be PoA as we know it, and it would exclude a part of Harry that we know to be very important to him - it's the only thing he thinks he's any good at. Ali Who asks not to be flamed for calling the films laborious etc, as she was trying to thinking of one term to describe the many complaints she's read. Whatever the faults in PS and CoS she still finds herself sadly addicted From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com Sun Jan 12 21:57:54 2003 From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin ) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 21:57:54 -0000 Subject: How "true" does Cuaron have to be? was Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali " wrote: > > This has made me wonder. How true must Cuaron be to the books? I know > that Heyman promised JKR a fairly strict interpretation, but is > Cuaron bound to follow that? I know that Columbus and Heyman are > still producers, but what sort of "artistic licence" will Cuaron be > allowed? Will he be allowed to tamper with the script if he considers > it too pedestrian? I don't see how he can have too much licence before the books 5-7 are finished. The slightest change can have major consequences in the future plots, almost precluding them from being filmed! Imagine if PS was adapted before PoA had been written. Imagine someone deciding that rats are disgusting and let's Ron have a toad instead - PoA goes out of the window. Or at least Crookshanks becomes a stork. ;-) So unless WB decided they stop after GoF, I don't see big "artistic licence" possible. Irene From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 13 00:10:01 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:10:01 -0000 Subject: How "true" does Cuaron have to be? was Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali " wrote: > How true must Cuaron be to the books? I know that Heyman promised > JKR a fairly strict interpretation, but is Cuaron bound to follow > that? > > Ali Is Cuaron bound to the Heyman agreement? He is if he wants to keep his job. He has probably the most knowledgable and critical audience in the world. 'Tick' them off, and the franchise dies, or at least drops from the top rated down to the middle/mundane somewhere. Cuaron has a story to tell. I can handle changes to the plot as long as the overal story is correct. Many, many, many movie adapted from books take no more than a seed of an idea from the book. The movie is completely unrecognisable relative to the book, they become two separate unrelated things beyond technical legal requirements. The franchise has to continue; billions are at stake. New books are going to be written, and only a fool of a director would create a movie that killed or so massiveley complicate as to kill, any future extensions of the franchise. He has to stay true to the story, but he doesn't have to stay true to the book. (if that makes any sense) There has been an on going dialog about Quidditch and how it will be handled because there are sigificant plot points that are advanced in the games. Solution that is true to the story but not true to the book. Note: So far the movies have only allowed one quidditch game. Now condensing everything into one game. Harry faints on the train and is embarassed, so he ask Lupin to help him protect himself from the dementors. Plot point advanced without quidditch. One quidditch game in which the Dementors come, Harry gets weak but manages to cast a Petronus before he falls off is broom. Dementors defeated, Harry cast the charm, Lupin congradulates him, Harry gets back on his broom and wins the game. Badda-bing badda-boom. Now all we have to do is get Harry a Firebolt. Simple, his other broom doesn't break. He simple gets a new one from Sirius for Christmas. Hermione, McGonagall, take broom, Wood freaks, broom comes back, Harry wins game. What happens to his old broom? It was given to him by the school. It's not really his. It's on loan from the school until he graduates. Katie Bell gets it instead (or whatever) So the key elements of the story are there, but several things are left out. It's enough to get a Quidditch game in the movie, hit key plot points, and move the story along. So changes like this are tolerable when you consider that they are never going to have even remotely enought time to tell the whole story. Sorry, but we lose Draco & company as fake Dementors. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com Mon Jan 13 00:18:29 2003 From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora ) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:18:29 -0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron (POA director) and Gambon(?) as DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Anne " > X > ticle_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1791930> > > Anne U > (did it work?) I can't get the link to work :( Am I the only one? Alora From urbana at charter.net Mon Jan 13 00:26:48 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:26:48 -0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron (POA director) and Gambon(?) as DD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Anne " > X > > > r > > ticle_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1791930> > > > > Anne U > > (did it work?) > > I can't get the link to work :( > > Am I the only one? > > Alora Okay ... let's try again. Go to: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ When that page comes up, type in "Cuaron" in the search box at upper left. A page will come up with links to several articles related to Alfonso Cuaron. The second link is the story I mentioned. Anne U (anyone know when CoS will come out on video????? :-) From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com Mon Jan 13 07:25:11 2003 From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com) Date: 13 Jan 2003 07:25:11 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie Message-ID: <1042442711.331.56827.w5@yahoogroups.com> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPFGU-Movie group: What do you think of the possible casting of Gary Oldman as Sirius Black? o It's the role he was born to play, baby! o Well, yes, it's quite do-able. o This is going to take some swallowing--but I'll learn to live with it o There are far worse things, but yes, I'm disappointed o Ugh-They really blew it this time! To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11019009 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From aphrael at hotmail.com Mon Jan 13 14:28:32 2003 From: aphrael at hotmail.com (Carla ) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:28:32 -0000 Subject: Delurking for (yet another) Dumbledore suggestion Message-ID: I don't know much about Michael Gambon for comment on how he would be as Dumbledore, though I adored 'Gosford Park'... Just throwing out a name for Dumbledore - Donald Sutherland - http://us.imdb.com/Name?Sutherland,+Donald - He's not British but I think could pull off an accent...he's certainly imposing and athoritative...and a brilliant actor to boot... ...and again, my vote for Moody - Billy Connolly - http://us.imdb.com/Name?Connolly,+Billy - I just finished re-reading GOF and kept picturing him...now, who to play young Crouch? Cheers! *back to lurkdom* Carla :) From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Mon Jan 13 15:34:17 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophia mclaughlin) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:34:17 +0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron/yet another Dumbledore Message-ID: Anne U said: >Friday's Hollywood Reporter online contained this feature about Alfonso Cuaron >(intrigued by the last line of the Cuaron article...:-) Me: Must be Dan--he's the great moviebuff of the trio. >As for Michael Gambon playing Dumbledore, I thought that was a rumor ) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:57:03 -0000 Subject: Feature on Alfonso Cuaron/yet another Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Just thought I would let you know that Entertainment Weekly Magazine #691, the January 17, 2003 issue,(page 14)reports that Warner Brothers and Michael Gambon are in negotiations for the Dumbledore role. It further states that Warner Bros. has offered and Gambon wants to do it. Lady Firenze --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophia mclaughlin" wrote: > Anne U said: > >Friday's Hollywood Reporter online contained this feature about > Alfonso Cuaron > >(intrigued by the last line of the Cuaron article...:-) > > Me: Must be Dan--he's the great moviebuff of the trio. > > > >As for Michael Gambon playing Dumbledore, I thought that was a rumor > > I don't think we have OFFICIAL confirmation, but the rumour has not been > refuted, and IMO it seem increasingly likely Gambon will be the next > Dumbledore. He would not have been my first choice, but I know him to be a > first-rate actor, so I think he'll be able to pull off an acceptable > interpretation of the part, but I also hope he will do much more than > that!!! > > Now, if that means Ian McKellen is off the hook for the time being, how > about McKellen for Mad-Eye Moody? !!!!!!! The thought pleased me so much my > heart skipped a beat when it surfaced. > > Sophia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online > http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 14 00:54:07 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:54:07 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:Re:Feature on Alfonso Cuaron/yet another Dumbledore References: Message-ID: <006901c2bb67$7177fdf0$71a2cdd1@RVotaw> Anne U. said: >>(intrigued by the last line of the Cuaron article...:-) Sophia said: >Must be Dan--he's the great moviebuff of the trio. I agree. Rupert having a number of younger siblings would be the least likely in my opinion, and Emma also has a younger brother. Seeing as Y Tu Mama Tambien isn't what's generally referred to as "family" material. Naturally, they could've seen it elsewhere, without family, but Dan seems the most likely candidate Sophia again: >Now, if that means Ian McKellen is off the hook for the time being, how >about McKellen for Mad-Eye Moody? !!!!!!! The thought pleased me so much my >heart skipped a beat when it surfaced. I got really excited when I read that he said he was thinking of other parts available in future Harry Potter films (something like that) and the first thing I thought of was Mad-Eye Moody. I think he would be great for that. He could do it so well. He'd be almost, well, wasted on Dumbledore. Dumbledore is a very important character, of course, but unless they do a drastic character switch he's been pretty much established as a grandfatherly figure in the films. Now that we're on the topic of casting rumors, we've got a strong rumor for Michael Gambon as Dumbledore; Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, yet not even the slightest whisper of a rumor as to who will play Lupin. Which is vitally important, and the wait is driving me nuts! Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aaoconnor2002 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 03:15:03 2003 From: aaoconnor2002 at yahoo.com (aaoconnor2002 ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:15:03 -0000 Subject: Ian McKellen for ? Was: Re:Feature on Alfonso Cuaron/yet another Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <006901c2bb67$7177fdf0$71a2cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: > Sophia said: > > >Now, if that means Ian McKellen is off the hook for the time being, how > >about McKellen for Mad-Eye Moody? !!!!!!! The thought pleased me so much my > >heart skipped a beat when it surfaced. Then Richelle said: > I got really excited when I read that he said he was thinking of other parts available in future Harry Potter films (something like that) and the first thing I thought of was Mad-Eye Moody. I think he would be great for that. He could do it so well. He'd be almost, well, wasted on Dumbledore. Dumbledore is a very important character, of course, but unless they do a drastic character switch he's been pretty much established as a grandfatherly figure in the films. Now me: What about for Barty Crouch Sr.? That would definitely be a change from Gandalf and unless Barty Sr's ghost is going to show up in later books he would only have to commit to one film (maybe two if GoF is done in two parts as has been rumored) Audrey From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 08:04:41 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:04:41 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_just_found_new_website=85?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "althooovlrxcw " wrote: > http://www.geocities.com/xszgdcnjxinx/index.html I think that's the second time someone has 'found' this site, unfortunately, there is nothing there. It doesn't exits according to Yahoo. bboy_mn From illyana at mindspring.com Tue Jan 14 09:24:48 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 02:24:48 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: just found new =?iso-8859-1?Q?website=85?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A note to everyone on this group: messages like that are almost always spam. If the subject is something like "just found new website" or "check out these pictures" and the body of the message is nothing but a link, I never click the link. Ever. Although I am not a moderator of the group, and am not trying to be, I suggest that, every time someone wants to link to a relevant website, they should always post a message about what the link is. That way, it will not get confused with spam, and we can all just ignore the messages that show no Harry Potter relevance! Just a suggestion! illyana >--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "althooovlrxcw >" wrote: >> >>http://www.geocities.com/xszgdcnjxinx/index.html > >I think that's the second time someone has 'found' this site, >unfortunately, there is nothing there. It doesn't exits according to >Yahoo. > >bboy_mn > -- 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 daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 07:36:02 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:36:02 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "rose590 " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Julia McCallum" > wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 05:55:12 -0800 (PST), "rose590 " wrote: > > > > > > >>>>Still holding out hope for Jason Carter, however.? He > definitely has > > my number 1 vote !!!!!!!!!? He comes the closest to the mind's eye > so > > far. > > > > I am not sure I know who Jason Carter is. What's he been in? > > > > Julia > > > > He was in Babylon 5. Not perfect for the part, but pretty durn good. > > RoBro Gabriel Byrne has my vote...He looks like he's the perfect age (his looks match those already cast who are supposed to have attended school at the same time as him), has the perfect look (at first glance appears to be evil, and sexy), and he can act the part... My fingers are crossed. P.S. I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on Kenneth Brannagh...*sigh* Oh well. From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 08:05:00 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:05:00 -0000 Subject: How "true" does Cuaron have to be? was Re: Cedric Diggory cut from PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" > wrote: > > << Is it possible to cut Quidditch entirely? To the story line in > general, I mean? It would be a butchering of the story as a whole. >> > > This has made me wonder. How true must Cuaron be to the books? I know > that Heyman promised JKR a fairly strict interpretation, but is > Cuaron bound to follow that? I know that Columbus and Heyman are > still producers, but what sort of "artistic licence" will Cuaron be > allowed? Will he be allowed to tamper with the script if he considers > it too pedestrian? > > To date, there have been a number of complaints that in trying to be > too true to the books, the films became a little, let's say laborious > or lacklustre. It's a no-win situation though isn't it, because I for > one will be polishing my LOON badge and complaining the minute I > catch a whiff of variation from the books. > > I just wonder how PoA would be viewed if it was a much "better" film, > but less true to the images brought to us by JKR? I think it would be > possible to have PoA without Quidditch. Harry could come across the > dementors in a different setting, but it wouldn't be PoA as we know > it, and it would exclude a part of Harry that we know to be very > important to him - it's the only thing he thinks he's any good at. > > > Ali > > Who asks not to be flamed for calling the films laborious etc, as she > was trying to thinking of one term to describe the many complaints > she's read. Whatever the faults in PS and CoS she still finds herself > sadly addicted Flame Away... I am one of those people who was critical of the first two films, partly because it was "laborious...lacklustre". Moreover, Columbus just didn't infuse the story with any real "heart", for lack of a better term. I have far LESS fear for Cuaron's turn as director, than Columbus' boring paint-by-numbers work. Watching Cuaron's 1994 adaptation of "A Little Princess" will put your fears to rest. It was a beautifully well-crafted film that was criminally underseen in theaters. AND it had something that the Potter films have thus far lacked...HEART...(and better than medicocre acting from the young actors). As for tampering with the script? I remember reading somewhere, that some of the actors, and most likely the director have advanced knowledge of forthcoming books from Ms Rowling, herself, for their characters' sake. With that knowledge, I do not believe Cuaron could alter the films to the detriment of future installments. From lupinesque at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 10:47:47 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:47:47 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Spam_Re:_just_found_new_website=85?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Illyana wrote: > A note to everyone on this group: messages like that are almost > always spam. We certainly consider them spam, and delete them as soon as we see them. Even with Mods, Elves and Geists on three continents and in many time zones, we sometimes don't catch these things for several hours, but we will delete them and ban the poster. Thanks, Amy Z for the HPfGU Magical Moderator team From julia at thequiltbug.com Tue Jan 14 14:03:02 2003 From: julia at thequiltbug.com (Calliope) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 06:03:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius casting/other Lockhart possibilities Message-ID: <20030114060302.15989.h007.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: >>>>Gabriel Byrne has my vote...He looks like he's the perfect age (his looks match those already cast who are supposed to have attended school at the same time as him), has the perfect look (at first glance appears to be evil, and sexy), and he can act the part... Julia says: I never thought about Gabriel Byrne. He would be wonderful...I think he and Alan Rickman would be awesome as adversaries. "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: >>>I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on Kenneth Brannagh Julia says: I would not have been able to watch it without waiting for him to say "as you wish..." :) He would have been great though. I thought I read somewhere, maybe the IMDB, that Hugh Grant was originally supposed to be Gilderoy Lockhart. Now that would have been funny. Brannagh was wonderful, as far as mannerisms went, but not quite "prettified" enough. Julia From Audra1976 at aol.com Tue Jan 14 19:13:55 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:13:55 EST Subject: other Lockhart possibilities Message-ID: <72.28c61c02.2b55bb73@aol.com> In a message dated 1/14/03 9:04:13 AM, julia at thequiltbug.com writes: << "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: >>>I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on Kenneth Brannagh>> Me: Hey, *I'm* still sore over Cary Elwes not being cast as Robin Hood in "Prince of Thieves" instead of the parody "Men In Tights." Stupid, crappy Kevin Costner. Has anyone brought up Elwes as a possibility for Lockheart? And by the way, Emma Watson has said in several interviews that she actually *does* have a real-life crush on Kenneth Brannaugh. Go figure! Audra From rose590 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 19:15:04 2003 From: rose590 at yahoo.com (rose590 ) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:15:04 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman [was] Sirius casting? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > Gabriel Byrne has my vote...He looks like he's the perfect age (his > looks match those already cast who are supposed to have attended > school at the same time as him), has the perfect look (at first > glance appears to be evil, and sexy), and he can act the part... > > My fingers are crossed. > > P.S. I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy > Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on > Kenneth Brannagh...*sigh* Oh well. Naahhh......too old. I picture Sirius in his mid to late 30's and hotter than the fires of h - e - double hockey sticks. Unfortunately, Gabriel Byrne, while a good actor, just doesn't fill that mental picture. RoBro (who....although loving Alan Rickman playing Snape, thinks they cast too old) From mzvqtsezbqiah at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 01:09:45 2003 From: mzvqtsezbqiah at yahoo.com (mzvqtsezbqiah ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:09:45 -0000 Subject: new pictures uploaded here Message-ID: http://www.geocities.com/wrtajwieitwk/index.html From rvotaw at i-55.com Wed Jan 15 01:38:49 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:38:49 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] How "true" does Cuaron have to be? References: Message-ID: <00da01c2bc36$da88ced0$0c9fcdd1@RVotaw> DaughteroftheDust wrote: >Watching Cuaron's 1994 adaptation of "A Little Princess" will put >your fears to rest. It was a beautifully well-crafted film that was >criminally underseen in theaters. AND it had something that the >Potter films have thus far lacked...HEART...(and better than >medicocre acting from the young actors). I had remembered liking Cuaron's version of "A Little Princess" much better than the original one with Shirley Temple, but hadn't seen it in years. Wal-Mart had it for $8 on DVD, so I picked it up this week and watched it last night. Looking at it more critically this time. I love what he does with the film, the use of slow motion, repetition, wind, lighting, etc. However, one can only hope that certain sappiness (is that a word?) was in the script and can be blamed on the screenwriter, not him. One could also say that it was more of a "girl" family movie whereas HP is targeted to boys more (hence the abundance of action figures and the few and far between "girl" HP toys). I admit that particular story needs a great deal of mushy stuff, but it went from aww to *too* mushy at the very end. I won't say any more to spoil it though. :) Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rvotaw at i-55.com Wed Jan 15 01:45:23 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:45:23 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Misc. casting (was re: Sirius casting/other Lockhart possibilities) References: <20030114060302.15989.h007.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> Message-ID: <00e001c2bc37$c5cbb4c0$0c9fcdd1@RVotaw> Okay, somebody tell me this is a joke. TLC has the lastest (and first that I've heard) rumor in the casting of Remus Lupin. Timothy Spall??? No way. Absolutely not. He even refers to himself as a jolly fat guy. Lupin is not a jolly fat guy. Not any kind of fat guy. No, no, no! Quick, start another rumor, this one's killing me! Julia wrote: > I would not have been able to watch it without waiting for him to say "as you > wish..." :) He would have been great though. I thought I read somewhere, > maybe the IMDB, that Hugh Grant was originally supposed to be Gilderoy > Lockhart. Now that would have been funny. Brannagh was wonderful, as far as > mannerisms went, but not quite "prettified" enough. I read someplace that they never actually offered it to Hugh Grant, though they considered him a front runner for a time. But decided that viewers would look at the movie and see Hugh Grant playing Gilderoy Lockhart, but felt that with Kenneth Brannagh viewers would look at it and see Gilderoy Lockhart. Not Kenneth Brannagh as Gilderoy Lockhart. Whatever. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com Wed Jan 15 02:51:07 2003 From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:51:07 EST Subject: radcliffe and felton Message-ID: <145.7dc9089.2b56269b@aol.com> here are two links for Radcliffe and Felton. A petition to keep them in the movies for the Goblet of Fire and the other 2 movies Keep Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter Petition Keep Tom Felton - Signatures Is there a petition for Ron and Hermione??? Sincerly Sir Maylar Ghost of Hufflepuff Common Room [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Audra1976 at aol.com Wed Jan 15 03:07:40 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 22:07:40 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] radcliffe and felton Message-ID: In a message dated 1/14/03 9:52:51 PM, LeeMunLim03 at aol.com writes: << A petition to keep them in the movies for the Goblet of Fire and the other 2 movies >> Me: Maybe I missed a thread, but is there any evidence that The Powers That Be plan on recasting Harry and Draco for "Goblet of Fire"? Audra From minaclare at sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 03:49:21 2003 From: minaclare at sympatico.ca (Mina-Clare Moseley) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 22:49:21 -0500 Subject: Timothy Spall In-Reply-To: <018701c2bc45$45515a80$0c9fcdd1@RVotaw> References: <018701c2bc45$45515a80$0c9fcdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: >Also, for those who may not have seen, TLC is reporting the rumor >has changed slightly (okay, drastically) about Timothy Spall. He's >now being rumored as cast for Peter Pettigrew, NOT Remus Lupin (what >sort of mistake is that!). I absolutely *freaked out* when I saw the Timothy Spall as Lupin rumour. I was blinded by the picture. I thought it was a terrible choice and would ruin the movie. I haven't changed my opinion on that at all. Timothy Spall as Lupin would *never* work. However, he would make an excellent Pettigrew. Timothy Spall is a fantastic actor. I was so blinded by my hatred as him for Remus, I forgot I had been lobbying for him to be in the movies. Personally, I thought Timothy Spall would have made a very nice Ludo Bagman. He's got that gone-to-seed bad boy thing going for him. But he would also work well as Pettigrew. Okay, so we're rumoured to have Gambon as Dumbledore, Oldman as Black and Spall as Pettigrew..... When are we going to get some good casting rumours on Lupin? ~Mina From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 04:00:13 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 04:00:13 -0000 Subject: radcliffe and felton In-Reply-To: <145.7dc9089.2b56269b@aol.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote: > here are two links for Radcliffe and Felton. A petition to keep them in the > movies for the Goblet of Fire and the other 2 movies > >...edited... > Is there a petition for Ron and Hermione??? > > Sincerly Sir Maylar > Ghost of Hufflepuff Common Room bboy_mn: It Tom Felton leaves it will because it was his own choice. He has already indicated the he is ready to take his 'gap year' after PoA then he wants to study at the university. His life's goal it not to be an actor but to be a professional fisherman. When he was fishing in Canada recently he caught a 37 pound fish. That's a big fish. And YES, where the heck is the petition for RON/Rupert???? bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 04:07:39 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 04:07:39 -0000 Subject: new pictures uploaded here In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mzvqtsezbqiah " wrote: > http://www.geocities.com/wrtajwieitwk/index.html You know, the guy who keeps posting this crap is really not very good at it. If he is planning to make his fortune at this, I suspect we will be seeing him in the social welfare line pretty soon. Either that or begging for pennies on the street corner. Or entertaining imated behind bars. Personally, I'm voting for the latter. Complete amateur. Just a thought. bboy_mn From deidre at panix.com Wed Jan 15 05:47:29 2003 From: deidre at panix.com (Deidre) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 00:47:29 -0500 Subject: Spam Re: just found new website? In-Reply-To: <1042557628.349.13561.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20030115003154.00a8bec0@pop.panix.com> At 03:20 PM 1/14/03 +0000, Amy wrote: >Illyana wrote: > > > A note to everyone on this group: messages like that are almost > > always spam. > >We certainly consider them spam, and delete them as soon as we see >them. Even with Mods, Elves and Geists on three continents and in >many time zones, we sometimes don't catch these things for several >hours, but we will delete them and ban the poster. > >Thanks, >Amy Z >for the HPfGU Magical Moderator team Thanks for doing that, and banning the spammer. But the Alphabet Spammer has as many names as one can imagine with the usage of 12 letters of the alphabet in any given email addy, so that's a lot of email addys to have to kick and ban. (Said spammer is mostly likely a bot, btw.) However, for those of us on digest, even if someone deletes the spam in a very timely fashion, it *still* shows up in the digest. (To get rid of the spam, I will have to send the digest back to myself, and edit out the large spam post.) This is just the way Yahoo Groups does things. This little problem of YG has been discussed quite a bit on the various list-owners and moderators groups/lists here. I still think that if the list owner/moderators would just make the list Restricted, we would not have this spam. It's been shown that spammers, as a general rule, do not usually join lists where they have to jump thru even a small hoop of having someone rubberstamp their joining. The digest from yesterday with the *huge* religious spam probably got truncated for some of the list members, depending on how their ISP handles large posts. And AOL is known for converting very large posts into attachments, which is something that most people would not be expecting of a Yahoo Group list. Back to the Alphabet Spammer, as s/he is known on the list owner/moderators lists, it is not a good thing to click on the links offered by said spammer, as one can fall into a nasty trap of multiple-owning browsers, ie, lots of pop-ups-and-unders. Some of these links have led to porno sites in the past; others are speculated to take one to a web site where there is some exploitive code to get one to download an executable file to allow these spammers a back door into one's PC. Best bet is to never download something that you don't want that is being pushed on you by a strange website, and virus scan all files, especially attachments, before opening. HTH, Deidre From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 06:07:37 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 06:07:37 -0000 Subject: How "true" does Cuaron have to be? In-Reply-To: <00da01c2bc36$da88ced0$0c9fcdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > DaughteroftheDust wrote: > > >Watching Cuaron's 1994 adaptation of "A Little Princess" will put > >your fears to rest. It was a beautifully well-crafted film that was > >criminally underseen in theaters. AND it had something that the > >Potter films have thus far lacked...HEART...(and better than > >medicocre acting from the young actors). > ...Looking at it more critically this time. I love what he does with the film, the use of slow motion, repetition, wind, lighting, etc. However, one can only hope that certain sappiness (is that a word?) was in the script and can be blamed on the screenwriter, not him. One could also say that it was more of a "girl" family movie whereas HP is targeted to boys more (hence the abundance of action figures and the few and far between "girl" HP toys)... > > Richelle > Ehh, to each her own.. :-) I don't believe "A Little Princess", was overly sappy (I have been called a romantic, though, so I'm biased). Too me, it was just very much, what it was meant to be, a fairytale. Which sex is "targeted" is not an issue for me, whether it's for boys or girls (or both IMO, since both love the stories) it's all about telling a good story. Columbus on the other hand, has a style that is not only VERY sappy, but insulting to the audience's intelligence. Too much "tell" and not enough "show". I had a REAL problem with the way Harry and his "scoobies" were portrayed as, well, rather spoiled in SS. I almost didn't want them to win the house-cup at the end. More("evil" and not so campy/ambiguious) Snape and (clumsy and pathetic) Longbottom would've answered many of my issues...Though much of the blame may lie on Mr. Klove's shoulders for that. Did anyone else wonder why that wonderful cut scene in the SS DVD of Snape vs. Potter in Potions class was cut?? As for CS, the abundance of action provided enough disctraction from the awful one-liners, and school play quality of acting from the young actors for me to enjoy it more than the first. I for one, am happy to see Columbus go (especially before the adaptation of my favorite book in the series). daughter @)--/--- P.S. Cuaron's a good choice, but Terry Gilliam or Tim Burton would have been ideal for me. I'm still holding out that Burton or Gilliam will get the upcoming Series of Unfortunate Events adaptations... :-) From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 06:55:44 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 06:55:44 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: <72.28c61c02.2b55bb73@aol.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Audra1976 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 1/14/03 9:04:13 AM, julia at t... writes: > << "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > >>>I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy > Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on > Kenneth Brannagh>> > > Me: > > Hey, *I'm* still sore over Cary Elwes not being cast as Robin Hood > in "Prince of Thieves" ...edited... > > Audra Any thoughts about Cary Elwes as LUPIN. His the right height and weight, he looks like he could play a gentle but tortured soul. He looks a bit young in the publicity photos, but you can't real trust them. I think with a little make-up they could age and stress him a bit. Basically, take his 'Jungle Book'(1994) look and roughen it up a bit with his 'Shadow of the Vampire' (2000) look, and you're almost there. If Gary Oldman in truly cast already, I would prefer that he play Lupin. I think they need someone a little darker to play Sirius. Now Timothy Spall strikes me more as a Moody than a Petigrew. So, let's see- Here is my casting call- Cary Elwes - Lupin Jason Carter - Black Gary Oldman - Petigrew Timothy Spall - Moody Now all we need is a Crouch Jr. From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 07:35:35 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 07:35:35 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Audra1976 at a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/14/03 9:04:13 AM, julia at t... writes: > > << "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > > >>>I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy > > Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on > > Kenneth Brannagh>> > > > > Me: > > > > Hey, *I'm* still sore over Cary Elwes not being cast as Robin Hood > > in "Prince of Thieves" ...edited... > > > > Audra > > Any thoughts about Cary Elwes as LUPIN. > > His the right height and weight, he looks like he could play a gentle > but tortured soul. He looks a bit young in the publicity photos, but > you can't real trust them. I think with a little make-up they could > age and stress him a bit. > > Basically, take his 'Jungle Book'(1994) look and roughen it up a bit > with his 'Shadow of the Vampire' (2000) look, and you're almost there. > > If Gary Oldman in truly cast already, I would prefer that he play > Lupin. I think they need someone a little darker to play Sirius. > > Now Timothy Spall strikes me more as a Moody than a Petigrew. > > So, let's see- > > Here is my casting call- > > Cary Elwes - Lupin > Jason Carter - Black > Gary Oldman - Petigrew > Timothy Spall - Moody > > Now all we need is a Crouch Jr. I can picture your cast well, except for Oldman as Petigrew. For me it would just take too much make-up. Gary would have to gain weight, thin his hair, and he may not be short enough. Granted he is a good actor, so I have no doubt he could pull it off, I just think they should cast someone more fitting of the role, i.e. Bob Hoskins, who not only is a good actor, but already looks the part. From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 07:39:39 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 07:39:39 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Audra1976 at a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/14/03 9:04:13 AM, julia at t... writes: > > << "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > > >>>I'm still sore over Cary Elwes not getting cast as Gilderoy > > Lockhart. I had trouble believing Hermione would have a crush on > > Kenneth Brannagh>> > > > > Me: > > > > Hey, *I'm* still sore over Cary Elwes not being cast as Robin Hood > > in "Prince of Thieves" ...edited... > > > > Audra > > Any thoughts about Cary Elwes as LUPIN. > > His the right height and weight, he looks like he could play a gentle > but tortured soul. He looks a bit young in the publicity photos, but > you can't real trust them. I think with a little make-up they could > age and stress him a bit. > > Basically, take his 'Jungle Book'(1994) look and roughen it up a bit > with his 'Shadow of the Vampire' (2000) look, and you're almost there. > > If Gary Oldman in truly cast already, I would prefer that he play > Lupin. I think they need someone a little darker to play Sirius. > > Now Timothy Spall strikes me more as a Moody than a Petigrew. > > So, let's see- > > Here is my casting call- > > Cary Elwes - Lupin > Jason Carter - Black > Gary Oldman - Petigrew > Timothy Spall - Moody > > Now all we need is a Crouch Jr. Just one more note...How about Gary Oldman as Voldermort himself?? I think he'd be perfect in that part. From Audra1976 at aol.com Wed Jan 15 08:08:25 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 03:08:25 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? Message-ID: <1ab.f613116.2b5670f9@aol.com> I wrote: << Hey, *I'm* still sore over Cary Elwes not being cast as Robin Hood in "Prince of Thieves" instead of the parody "Men In Tights." Stupid, crappy Kevin Costner. Has anyone brought up Elwes as a possibility for Lockheart? >> In a message dated 1/15/03 1:56:14 AM, bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes: << Any thoughts about Cary Elwes as LUPIN. >> Oh duh! That's what *I* meant! Cary Elwes for LUPIN. I accidentally typed Lockheart instead! I think he would be fabulous! Audra From urbana at charter.net Wed Jan 15 15:03:25 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:03:25 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > I can picture your cast well, except for Oldman as Petigrew. > > For me it would just take too much make-up. Gary would have to gain > weight, thin his hair, and he may not be short enough. > > Granted he is a good actor, so I have no doubt he could pull it off, > I just think they should cast someone more fitting of the role, i.e. > Bob Hoskins, who not only is a good actor, but already looks the > part. Hoskins is probably too old for Pettigrew. But he'd be an interesting Mad-Eye Moody :-) I was thinking of Wallace Shawn for Pettigrew - except he's (a) way too old, and (b) much too American :-( But he's short and not thin, and he's got the right kind of facial features. So if there's a mid30s-early 40s British actor who kind of looks like Wallace Shawn, he would be my pick. Anne U (with no idea who that might actually be) From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 16 03:07:09 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 03:07:09 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Anne " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "DaughteroftheDust > " wrote: > > I can picture your cast well, except for Oldman as Petigrew. > > > > For me it would just take too much make-up. Gary would have to > > gain weight, thin his hair, and he may not be short enough. > > > > ... someone more fitting of the role, i.e. Bob Hoskins, who > > not only is a good actor, but already looks the part. > -end this part- > Anne: > Wallace Shawn is probably too old for Pettigrew. But he'd be an > interesting . > > Mad-Eye Moody :-) I was thinking of Wallace Shawn for Pettigrew - > except he's (a) way too old, and (b) much too American :-( But he's > short and not thin, and he's got the right kind of facial features. > So if there's a mid30s-early 40s British actor who kind of looks > like Wallace Shawn, he would be my pick. > > Anne U bboy_mn addressing two at once: To Daughter of the Dust- We need to think about casting Pettigrew as his is in PoA, not as he was through out his life. By the time we see the actual person (Peter) he is skinny, balding, weathered, worn, nervoius and stressed. He does not appear in his lifelong Nevillish form. The perfect person, accept for one thing, to play Peter is the gap-toothed, foppish, blond-haired store clerk in the BBC-TV show 'At You Being Served'; Mr. Humphreys. When I read the book, that is the person I see. The pointy face, the squeaky whiney voice, the abnormally skinny body, etc... The one problem is that I think he is about 100 years old now (figuratively). But that's who I see when I read the book; as clear and as vivid as life itself. His face and body are important, but he has this annoying high pitched whiney voice that makes you want to choke him that would really lend itself to Pettigrew. Keep in mind, I saw 'Are You Being Served' in re-runs on PBS in the US. So my vision of him is a little distorted. I have no idea what he looks like today. If he has a son who is nearly his twin, then that's the guy we need to get. The reason I pick Oldman originally for Pettigrew was because I don't see Oldman playing nice parts. His image in my mind is fixed on bad guys. Not dark or comples enough for Sirius, although I think he could pull it off, and way to dark for Remus. That only leaves Pettigrew, and Oldman is a good actor, he could easily play the nasty whining Peter. I don't prefer him, but it seems that he is already signed. If that's true then I have no choice but to stick him with Peter. to Anne- I agree, I think Bob Hoskins could pull off Moody. Wallace Shawn is an acceptionally good actor and has done excellent comdey as well as outstanding dramatic roles, but I have a hard time getting past his cartoon-like voice. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 16 03:13:51 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 03:13:51 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew = Inman (almost) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > > bboy_mn addressing two at once: > > ...edited... > The perfect person, accept for one thing, to play Peter is the > gap-toothed, foppish, blond-haired store clerk in the BBC-TV show > 'Are You Being Served'; Mr. Humphreys. > ...edited... > Just a few thoughts. > > bboy_mn bboy_mn: The guys name is John Inman. Here is a link to his website. http://www.johninman.co.uk/ Regardless of whether he gets the job, he will alway be Peter to me. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Jan 16 03:24:04 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 03:24:04 -0000 Subject: other Lockhart possibilities or perhaps Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " > wrote: > ...edited... > > So, let's see- > > > > Here is my casting call- > > > > Cary Elwes - Lupin > > Jason Carter - Black > > Gary Oldman - Petigrew > > Timothy Spall - Moody > > > > Now all we need is a Crouch Jr. > > -end this part- Daughter of the Dust: > > Just one more note...How about Gary Oldman as Voldermort himself?? > I think he'd be perfect in that part. > -end this part- bboy_mn: ...oouuu..... now you are on to something. I just said in another post that I see Oldman as the bad guy. Yes, I could see Oldman as Voldemort, very much so. He doesn't match my mental image, but I doubt that any one would. Or possibly, Barty Jr. Revised Casting- Cary Elwes - Lupin Jason Carter - Black Gary Oldman - Voldemort (or Crouch Jr) Timothy Spall - Moody John Inman - Pettigres (sadly that will never happen) So, let's see... who's missing from the cast? bboy_mn From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com Thu Jan 16 05:44:57 2003 From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:44:57 EST Subject: Petition for you to sign for Harry Potter Message-ID: <111.1eb24466.2b57a0d9@aol.com> I have created a petition to keep the Main and Minor actors in Harry Potter until the 7th book. Please Sign Sir Maylar Ghost of Hufflepuff Common Room Be sure to tell your friends and their friends We can all do this so sign the petition [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From penumbra10 at ameritech.net Thu Jan 16 17:26:24 2003 From: penumbra10 at ameritech.net (Nia ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:26:24 -0000 Subject: Radcliffe and Felton In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Audra wrote: > Maybe I missed a thread, but is there any evidence that The Powers That Be plan on recasting Harry and Draco for "Goblet of Fire"? Me: I have heard nothing to that effect. It would seem, however, if they were that concerned with the actors' height, Rupert Grint, who is fully six inches taller than Daniel would be their target. Since all of the children are near or at the average heights for their ages, I can only speculate that since there are no scandals surrounding the trio, and they are kept, for the most part out of that wretched limelight, this entire age issue is a way of having something to say about them. Frankly, the story is becoming a bit tired. Daniel is not only a perfect Harry, but he is a wonderful role model and a spendid emissary for promoting the movies. The children mesh very well on screen and they have a very large fan following. It would be quite daft of the studio to look for replacements, especially since they would have to find children that looked very similar to Dan, Rupert and Emma, had their on-screen chemistry and that were the height of the trio last time we saw them on screen. If worse comes to worse, they can always digitally shorten them. Although I signed the petition, just in case, it doesn't seem like a rational move to replace any of the kids unless, like Felton, they expressed a desire to leave. --Nia From siskiou at earthlink.net Thu Jan 16 17:39:16 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:39:16 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Radcliffe and Felton In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <198305104823.20030116093916@earthlink.net> Hi, Thursday, January 16, 2003, 9:26:24 AM, penumbra10 at ameritech.net wrote: > It would seem, however, if > they were that concerned with the actors' height, Rupert Grint, who > is fully six inches taller than Daniel would be their target. Why would they be? In fact, they should like it, since in canon Ron *does* tower over Harry . -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From dkewpie at pacbell.net Thu Jan 16 17:59:39 2003 From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 17:59:39 -0000 Subject: David Thewlis as Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Mirror has reported that David Thewlis has been casted as Lupin, I have to say he totally fit my imagine of Lupin!! Wow! I never realized there is someone out there DO fit my image, He is much better than any other choices I've heard other suggest so far, And I can see him as Lupin better than any of the choice on the poll list too! So I hope this is true! Although everything is still "rumor" since WB hasn't make any official annoucement yet, So far I'm very pleased by all the "choices": Lupin - David Thewlis Sirius - Gary Oldman Petter - Timothy Spall Dumbledore - Michael Gambon From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com Thu Jan 16 18:06:22 2003 From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:06:22 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Radcliffe and Felton References: Message-ID: <3E26F49E.50805@kingwoodcable.com> I don't understand why people are getting paranoid about this. One element of watching movies is to susepnd your disbelief. Int he books Ron is supposed to be taller than Harry, so I don't know why people are upset by this. Daniel is a bit bigger than Harry in the books, but come on! I've always felt, and got the impression from the children that it's up to the children if they want to stay in the role. If they do, then there'd be no reason to recast. I think it' smore likley that the kids will want to do something else rather than the production companies wanting to get rid of them. I'm more willing to accept a child that is not quite the right height or slighlty older, but been in the role since day one, than a brand new child.. Here in the states we've had numerous shows where 20 somethings play teenagers (BH 90210?). A kids who's 17 looks almost the same as an adult who is 21. So I think Daniel and kids making movies when they are 19/20 playing 17/18 years olds isn't going to be aproblem, unless they don't want to do it. The only age problem that I see is if we have to wait another 3 years for the next book, and another 3 yeras for the final book. That might cause a problem. But even then - Danial/Ruper/Emma will about around 19/20 at the time, provided that they make the movies yearly. I worry about that size of the books though. They may just stop making them. GoF is rumored to be made into two movies, and with the size of OotP, they'll probably have to do the same. By all means, I have no problem watching 2 movies for 1 book, but how many people want to do HP for the next 10 years? Katze Nia wrote: > Audra wrote: > > >>Maybe I missed a thread, but is there any evidence that The Powers > > That Be plan on recasting Harry and Draco for "Goblet of Fire"? > > Me: > I have heard nothing to that effect. It would seem, however, if > they were that concerned with the actors' height, Rupert Grint, who > is fully six inches taller than Daniel would be their target. Since > all of the children are near or at the average heights for their > ages, I can only speculate that since there are no scandals > surrounding the trio, and they are kept, for the most part out of > that wretched limelight, this entire age issue is a way of having > something to say about them. Frankly, the story is becoming a bit > tired. Daniel is not only a perfect Harry, but he is a wonderful > role model and a spendid emissary for promoting the movies. > > The children mesh very well on screen and they have a very large fan > following. It would be quite daft of the studio to look for > replacements, especially since they would have to find children that > looked very similar to Dan, Rupert and Emma, had their on-screen > chemistry and that were the height of the trio last time we saw them > on screen. If worse comes to worse, they can always digitally > shorten them. Although I signed the petition, just in case, it > doesn't seem like a rational move to replace any of the kids unless, > like Felton, they expressed a desire to leave. > --Nia From urbana at charter.net Thu Jan 16 21:06:10 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:06:10 -0000 Subject: David Thewlis as Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie " wrote: > The Mirror has reported that David Thewlis has been casted as Lupin, > I have to say he totally fit my imagine of Lupin!! Wow! I never > realized there is someone out there DO fit my image, He is much > better than any other choices I've heard other suggest so far, And I > can see him as Lupin better than any of the choice on the poll list > too! So I hope this is true! > > Although everything is still "rumor" since WB hasn't make any > official annoucement yet, So far I'm very pleased by all > the "choices": > Lupin - David Thewlis > Sirius - Gary Oldman > Petter - Timothy Spall > Dumbledore - Michael Gambon Ahh, well, *my* first choice for Lupin has always been Ralph Fiennes, because for some reason I've been thinking of Lupin as, well, sexy, but perhaps not as dead-sexy as Sirius. David Thewlis has a decent overall look for Lupin, but IMO he's missing a certain softness around the eyes that I've always envisioned Lupin having...and which Ralph has in spades :D Ironically I had been thinking of Thewlis for Peter Pettigrew!! (My list of potential Pettigrews was quite long.) Anyway, if Gary Oldman has been cast as Sirius, and JKR has some kind of general approval on casting (true?), does that mean JKR finds Gary Oldman dead-sexy?? Anne U (assumes we'll still be talking about casting in 2004 when POA is finally released) From bruinfan1988 at yahoo.com Fri Jan 17 10:07:00 2003 From: bruinfan1988 at yahoo.com (bruinfan1988 ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:07:00 -0000 Subject: David Thewlis as Lupin???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: So, granted, I'm just looking at stills, but Thewlis doesn't seem to be HAIRY enough for Lupin. Don't you think it's a bit ironic for Lupin to have an, um, very high forehead? (Take a look at the recent pictures-big time receding hairline.) Also, he's too old to be the Lupin I picture in my mind's eye when I read the books--although I understand that the casting people are backed into a corner, age-wise, because of Alan Rickman. Still, I would prefer someone more senstive-but-manly. And with great hair. And perhaps with a higher profile/bigger star power. Leeanna PS I don't find Gary Oldman dead sexy--does anyone? I find that to be an odd choice for Sirius--he's seems to slightly-built and little to be play a character that is always described as being a huge presense, super charismatic and a ladykiller. From mo.hue at web.de Fri Jan 17 12:25:55 2003 From: mo.hue at web.de (Monika Huebner) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:25:55 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Black???? References: Message-ID: <001501c2be24$d1520a30$4c46348d@pefpc06> ----- Original Message ----- From: > Leeanna wrote: > > PS I don't find Gary Oldman dead sexy--does anyone? I find that to > be an odd choice for Sirius--he's seems to slightly-built and little > to be play a character that is always described as being a huge > presense, super charismatic and a ladykiller. I haven't commented on all those casting threads so far, but being a huge Sirius fan, I thought it was time to chime in. ;) After getting over the first shock caused by a possible casting of Gary Oldman as Sirius (I only remember him vividly from "The Fifth Element", a movie I absolutely hate and where he plays a villain who looks like Hitler), I have to admit that I am starting to like the idea after looking up a bunch of photos of Oldman. He is not quite as tall as I imagine Sirius (although tall enough for my taste anyway, since I am very short), but IMHO he has the right build - I always picture Sirius very slightly built, even in full health. As for being charismatic, we'll have to see what he will make of the part (if he actually gets cast). He might be able to pull it off after all. But *when* is Sirius ever described as a lady-killer in the books? This is something that always baffles me in fanfiction btw. The one and only hint we get that he might have been attractive before Azkaban is when Harry looks up the old wedding photo of his parents. Yes, I know JKR said at a book signing he was dead sexy, and that is how she wrote him IMHO, but he isn't actually described as such or as a lady-killer, for that matter. As for Oldman, he might not fit my image of a "lady-killer", but he's far from being ugly (if he doesn't look like the villain from the 5th Element ;-)), and in my eyes a much better choice than Jason Carter whom so many seem to favour. Just my 2 cents. Monika From heidit at netbox.com Fri Jan 17 09:32:54 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 05:32:54 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Black???? Message-ID: Yes, it's because she told some hpfgu members that he was meant to be "dead sexy" - check out the main list archives circa sept or oct 2000 for more. It's not a fanfic convention - it's based on something jkr said and thus should - imho - have the same relevance as any comment in any interview. Just mho, of course. Heidi Tandy Follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes and ships - 7 sickles an ounce http://www.FictionAlley.org -----Original Message----- From: "Monika Huebner" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:25:55 To: Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Black???? Real-To: "Monika Huebner" ----- Original Message ----- From: > Leeanna wrote: > > PS I don't find Gary Oldman dead sexy--does anyone? I find that to > be an odd choice for Sirius--he's seems to slightly-built and little > to be play a character that is always described as being a huge > presense, super charismatic and a ladykiller. I haven't commented on all those casting threads so far, but being a huge Sirius fan, I thought it was time to chime in. ;) After getting over the first shock caused by a possible casting of Gary Oldman as Sirius (I only remember him vividly from "The Fifth Element", a movie I absolutely hate and where he plays a villain who looks like Hitler), I have to admit that I am starting to like the idea after looking up a bunch of photos of Oldman. He is not quite as tall as I imagine Sirius (although tall enough for my taste anyway, since I am very short), but IMHO he has the right build - I always picture Sirius very slightly built, even in full health. As for being charismatic, we'll have to see what he will make of the part (if he actually gets cast). He might be able to pull it off after all. But *when* is Sirius ever described as a lady-killer in the books? This is something that always baffles me in fanfiction btw. The one and only hint we get that he might have been attractive before Azkaban is when Harry looks up the old wedding photo of his parents. Yes, I know JKR said at a book signing he was dead sexy, and that is how she wrote him IMHO, but he isn't actually described as such or as a lady-killer, for that matter. As for Oldman, he might not fit my image of a "lady-killer", but he's far from being ugly (if he doesn't look like the villain from the 5th Element ;-)), and in my eyes a much better choice than Jason Carter whom so many seem to favour. Just my 2 cents. Monika ________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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From itzregina at hanson.net Fri Jan 17 16:29:28 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:29:28 -0000 Subject: Slides from COS Message-ID: Nice clear pics! The Harry Potter Automatic News Aggregator has posted a series of new screen captures from Chamber of Secrets. http://www.msu.edu/user/guillau2/cos/ Gina From Audra1976 at aol.com Fri Jan 17 16:47:31 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:47:31 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Black???? Message-ID: << > Leeanna wrote: > > PS I don't find Gary Oldman dead sexy--does anyone? >> I do! I do! I've been in love with him since high school when I watched him in "Dracula" and "Immortal Beloved." He may not look like a pretty boy, but he is very sensuous and sexy. It's his presence and voice, and his eyes, and his intensity and grace--much the same reasons why I love Alan Rickman. I must say (I really am a weirdo) I even loved his odd villian in "The Fifth Element" (one of the only things I liked about that movie, actually). And I haven't even mentioned the fact that he's a *brilliant* actor. I've never seen him with the same look and/or accent twice in a movie, and he's always fabulous. If Oldman plays Black I will be very, very happy. I also like this fellow that is being rumored for Lupin now. I had never heard of him before, but from the pictures, he looks very similar to my boyfriend, which is wonderful! He seems to have a tall, lanky build and prominent nose--the look I've been in love with since Dick Van Dyke in "Mary Poppins" when I was little. :) Audra From natmichaels at hotmail.com Fri Jan 17 18:23:02 2003 From: natmichaels at hotmail.com (lorien_eve ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:23:02 -0000 Subject: Oldman as Black???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I was really disappointed in hearing the rumors that Oldman was cast as Sirius. But after I looked up some of his pictures, I came across some from "The Scarlet Letter." Wow! If he looks like, or similar, to this for POA, I'll be happy. Lorien_Eve -- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Audra1976 at a... wrote: > << > Leeanna wrote: > > > > PS I don't find Gary Oldman dead sexy--does anyone? >> > > I do! I do! I've been in love with him since high school when I watched him > in "Dracula" and "Immortal Beloved." He may not look like a pretty boy, but > he is very sensuous and sexy. It's his presence and voice, and his eyes, and > his intensity and grace--much the same reasons why I love Alan Rickman. I > must say (I really am a weirdo) I even loved his odd villian in "The Fifth > Element" (one of the only things I liked about that movie, actually). And I > haven't even mentioned the fact that he's a *brilliant* actor. I've never > seen him with the same look and/or accent twice in a movie, and he's always > fabulous. If Oldman plays Black I will be very, very happy. > > I also like this fellow that is being rumored for Lupin now. I had never > heard of him before, but from the pictures, he looks very similar to my > boyfriend, which is wonderful! He seems to have a tall, lanky build and > prominent nose--the look I've been in love with since Dick Van Dyke in "Mary > Poppins" when I was little. :) > > Audra From bray.262 at osu.edu Fri Jan 17 14:02:56 2003 From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:02:56 +0000 (EST5EDT) Subject: *long sigh* Oh well...... Message-ID: <2BF5CC1186@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu> Gary Oldman as Sirius...... David Thewlis as Lupin.... hmmm.....that's almost enough to make me skip Prisoner altogether. What a horrible let-down. At least they've still got Dan in there as Harry. That will be the only reason I'll go, that's for sure. Rachel Bray The Ohio State University Fees & Deposits The light at the end of the tunnel may be an angry, flying Ford Anglia. From siskiou at earthlink.net Fri Jan 17 19:08:07 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:08:07 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] *long sigh* Oh well...... In-Reply-To: <2BF5CC1186@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu> References: <2BF5CC1186@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu> Message-ID: <8483918428.20030117110807@earthlink.net> Hi, Friday, January 17, 2003, 6:02:56 AM, bray.262 at osu.edu wrote: > hmmm.....that's almost enough to make me skip Prisoner > altogether. I'm starting to feel glad that I'm not too invested emotionally into the characters of Lupin and Sirius. Since I haven't read/heard many interviews with JKR and therefor didn't realize I should see Sirius (Lupin, too?) as dead sexy ;) I'll reserve judgement until I see the movie (hoping the new director has a better grip on Ron's, Hermione's and Harry's character than the old one). -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From ShelaghC at aol.com Fri Jan 17 21:19:31 2003 From: ShelaghC at aol.com (shelaghcol ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:19:31 -0000 Subject: Casting for the HP movies Message-ID: I tend to lurk around here more than post. But just for the record, and of course IMHO, what the folks that put these movies have going against them the *most* are the expectations of those who read the books. And because of fanfic and readers' imaginations, most people already have decided *exactly* what most of the upcoming characters should look like. Witness all the "casting speculation" threads at FAP. The problem with such expectations is that when those expectations aren't fulfilled, people start condemning the production before it even begins filming. The idea that the Marauders are all extremely handsome is never even touched upon in any of the books and to make the assumption that they are, then complain when that assumption doesn't filter through to the movies is unfair to say the least. I remember reading a very high volume of posts in many different places complaining long and loudly about Kenneth Branagh being cast as Gilderoy Lockhart - especially when it came out that Hugh Grant had also been considered. Personally, I thought Branagh was positively brilliant! I found myself wishing for more Lockhart scenes, he fit the bill so well. Of all things people could complain about in reference to the HP movies, my feeling is that casting should be the very lowest on the totem pole. I have rarely seen a set of movies so expertly cast as PS/SS and CoS. While I had my own preferences particularly where Sirius was concerned, I also had made up my mind that the people in charge of finding just the right person to play each of the parts so far have done remarkably well and resolved not to be critical in advance of their decisions. In short: give these actors a chance - you may find that they do the job better than any of you could possibly have expected. Shelagh teetering on her rickety soapbox once again From loverlylaurel at aol.com Fri Jan 17 21:22:37 2003 From: loverlylaurel at aol.com (loverlylaurel at aol.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:22:37 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting for the HP movies Message-ID: I just want to say that I completely agree! :) > I tend to lurk around here more than post. But just for the record, > and of course IMHO, what the folks that put these movies have going > against them the *most* are the expectations of those who read the > books. > > And because of fanfic and readers' imaginations, most people already > have decided *exactly* what most of the upcoming characters should > look like. Witness all the "casting speculation" threads at FAP. > > The problem with such expectations is that when those expectations > aren't fulfilled, people start condemning the production before it > even begins filming. The idea that the Marauders are all extremely > handsome is never even touched upon in any of the books and to make > the assumption that they are, then complain when that assumption > doesn't filter through to the movies is unfair to say the least. > > I remember reading a very high volume of posts in many different > places complaining long and loudly about Kenneth Branagh being cast > as Gilderoy Lockhart - especially when it came out that Hugh Grant > had also been considered. > > Personally, I thought Branagh was positively brilliant! I found > myself wishing for more Lockhart scenes, he fit the bill so well. > > Of all things people could complain about in reference to the HP > movies, my feeling is that casting should be the very lowest on the > totem pole. I have rarely seen a set of movies so expertly cast as > PS/SS and CoS. > > While I had my own preferences particularly where Sirius was > concerned, I also had made up my mind that the people in charge of > finding just the right person to play each of the parts so far have > done remarkably well and resolved not to be critical in advance of > their decisions. > > In short: give these actors a chance - you may find that they do the > job better than any of you could possibly have expected. > > Shelagh > teetering on her rickety soapbox once again [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Fri Jan 17 21:42:09 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:42:09 -0000 Subject: Casting for the HP movies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "shelaghcol " wrote: > IMHO, what the folks that put these movies have going > against them the *most* are the expectations of those who read the > books. > > And because of fanfic and readers' imaginations, most people already > have decided *exactly* what most of the upcoming characters should > look like. Witness all the "casting speculation" threads at FAP. > > The problem with such expectations is that when those expectations > aren't fulfilled, people start condemning the production before it > even begins filming. .... > While I had my own preferences particularly where Sirius was > concerned, I also had made up my mind that the people in charge of > finding just the right person to play each of the parts so far have > done remarkably well and resolved not to be critical in advance of > their decisions. > > In short: give these actors a chance - you may find that they do the > job better than any of you could possibly have expected. Another point to consider is the "Rubik's Cube" nature of booking talent. The casting director (who I believe is a woman?) has to go through her database (and yes she MUST have a database to cast a movie with this many characters) and decide which actors are within the realm of possibility for the movie, in terms of not only talent and physical resemblance to the characters, but also *availability*. Actors tend to be booked not only months ahead of time, but often for months AT A TIME. So trying to get people who meet the physical requirements, can bring the right kind of talent to their roles, are within the right salary range, AND are all available at the same time has got to be pretty daunting a lot of the time. Of course for an extremely high-profile project like POA, there are probably actors coming out of the woodwork, throwing their head shots and resumes at the casting director (via their agents).... like I said, the entire activity is like a Rubik's Cube. I'd hope there would be a certain amount of excitement to this line of work. You'd better be excited about who you've cast ... Anne U (not very good at RC, but might enjoy being a booking agent - for music groups:-) From rvotaw at i-55.com Fri Jan 17 22:10:13 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:10:13 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting References: Message-ID: <004d01c2be75$3647a030$b79fcdd1@RVotaw> Toni writes: > I totally think it's a big mistake to cast David Thewlis as Lupin. When I think > of Lupin, Black, and even Pettigrew, I think- good looking. They have to be, > they were The Marauders and what I visualize as the "A" group of Hogwarts- you > know, the quarterback of the football team, they guys everyone wanted to date, > yada yada yada (I'm making myself sick here). That's just what I think of when > I think of them. I know it's been 20 years and Lupin looks shabby and Black > looks like an ex-convict, but still- underneath all that wear and tear is a > FINE lookin' man. LOL There's really no canon for any of them except Sirius Black being good looking. I've been hunting through the various pictures of Gary Oldman since his name came up, and I think the key might be that he can look so different in various movies. He'd be easy to make believeable as PoA Sirius Black. GoF Sirius Black I'm not completely convinced over, but I have confidence in WB. At the moment. As for David Thewlis as Lupin, I've always imagined Lupin as a sort of average looking guy. I was rooting for Colin Firth, but even I admit he doesn't fit the desciption. How unfortunate. :) Peter Pettigrew I've always imagined short and not particularly pleasant looking. Even before I knew he was the traitor, when he was talked about as a hero in Hogsmeade. Still, it could just be that WB doesn't want to put Alan Rickman, Jason Carter, and Colin Firth all in the same room at the same time. Don't know how much the females in the audience could take. I'd have liked to try it, though. :) Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Audra1976 at aol.com Fri Jan 17 22:11:54 2003 From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:11:54 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] *long sigh* Oh well...... Message-ID: <7a.36202bbe.2b59d9aa@aol.com> bray.262 at osu.edu writes: > Gary Oldman as Sirius...... > David Thewlis as Lupin.... > hmmm.....that's almost enough to make me skip Prisoner > altogether. What a horrible let-down. ShelaghC at aol.com writes: > give these actors a chance - you may find that they do the > job better than any of you could possibly have expected. > Me: Rachel, listen to Shelagh. I can't speak on Thewlis because I've never seen him in anything (I am, however, rather insulted that he is being touted unattractive after I just said that he looks like an older version of my boyfriend), but if the rumor is confirmed and Gary Oldman does play Sirius, I predict that you will change your mind about him. I'm no Sybil Trelawney, but I'm so sure I would bet money on it. Audra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dkewpie at pacbell.net Fri Jan 17 23:59:17 2003 From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie ) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:59:17 -0000 Subject: Casting for the HP movies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I totally agree with Shelagh. I just want to ask those who onced complain about Kenneth Branagh before CoS opened, how he doesn't look right,how he's not handsome enough etc etc....have your opinion change after seeing the movie? Isn't he so great in it? He was bloody brilliant and totally flawless as Lockhart! I honestly can't see Hugh Grant top that! The casting agent have their reason to pick certain actors, esp. since they've seen them act/tried out the part and we haven't. Obviously their decision is made based on whoever did the best in the audition. Given the wonderful casting of the first 2 movies, I trust them for PoA as well. And I'm quite tired of people complaining so-and-so isn't sexy enough, or how this character is suppose to be dead sexy when it's not even emphasize in the book nor play an important role for the plot. Beside, sexy is such a subjective thing, I myself DO find Gary Oldman DEAD SEXY (Look at "Dracula", "Immortal Beloved", even "Sid and Nancy"!) So do David Thewlis, gosh, I think that man IS a good looking man! I couldn't understand why he's condemned as being ugly at all. Certainly beauty is such a subjective thing. Who knows, may be JKR DO find Gary Oldman dead sexy and don't find your standard Hollywood pretty boy sexy at all! Have you guys (who complained about Gary Oldman) ever think that may be it was JKR's choice at the first place?! Didn't she list a wish list of actors/actress she see as her characters to the producers? (ex: Alan Rickman was one of her choice's of Snape, Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid, Maggie smith as Mcgonagal) Joan (really wish Gary Oldman is indeed casted and give a fabulous performance as he always does). --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "shelaghcol " wrote: > I tend to lurk around here more than post. But just for the record, > and of course IMHO, what the folks that put these movies have going > against them the *most* are the expectations of those who read the > books. > > And because of fanfic and readers' imaginations, most people already > have decided *exactly* what most of the upcoming characters should > look like. Witness all the "casting speculation" threads at FAP. > > The problem with such expectations is that when those expectations > aren't fulfilled, people start condemning the production before it > even begins filming. The idea that the Marauders are all extremely > handsome is never even touched upon in any of the books and to make > the assumption that they are, then complain when that assumption > doesn't filter through to the movies is unfair to say the least. > > I remember reading a very high volume of posts in many different > places complaining long and loudly about Kenneth Branagh being cast > as Gilderoy Lockhart - especially when it came out that Hugh Grant > had also been considered. > > Personally, I thought Branagh was positively brilliant! I found > myself wishing for more Lockhart scenes, he fit the bill so well. > > Of all things people could complain about in reference to the HP > movies, my feeling is that casting should be the very lowest on the > totem pole. I have rarely seen a set of movies so expertly cast as > PS/SS and CoS. > > While I had my own preferences particularly where Sirius was > concerned, I also had made up my mind that the people in charge of > finding just the right person to play each of the parts so far have > done remarkably well and resolved not to be critical in advance of > their decisions. > > In short: give these actors a chance - you may find that they do the > job better than any of you could possibly have expected. > > Shelagh > teetering on her rickety soapbox once again From bruinfan1988 at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 00:02:16 2003 From: bruinfan1988 at yahoo.com (bruinfan1988 ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:02:16 -0000 Subject: Casting for the HP movies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Shelagh said: > And because of fanfic and readers' imaginations, most people already > have decided *exactly* what most of the upcoming characters should > look like. Witness all the "casting speculation" threads at FAP. > I agree as well--Sirius, in particular has certainly been featured in fanfiction as quite the studly guy. I also agree that there is certainly a basis in canon and JRK interviews to think that, in particular, James and Sirius were the school leaders--and with that, in high school, usually comes either or both of good looks or great charisma. I don't find Gary Oldman good looking. And canon (I believe) implies that Sirius is powerful and strong, and that, to me, equates to a person who is phyiscally larger than Gary Oldman. But, perhaps Oldman will pull it off with charisma. Oldman certainly did have a sort of twisted charm in Dracula--charismatic and possibly sexy, but not in a, I don't know, healthy way. Still, I think of Sirius being sexy in a sort of normal way--maybe a little edgy, but not Oldman-as-Dracula edgy. So, where does that leave me? Maybe that if Oldman has sufficient charm and acting talent to pull off Dracula, then, perhaps, he can make me forget the weak chin and short stature and turn on the charm as Sirius. Certainly, he'll do well with the tortured/crazy Sirius of PoA. As to Lupin, he's my favorite of the adult characters, so I tend to think of him as super charismatic--and I have no idea if Thewlis can pull that off becauase I've never seen him in a leading role, and don't remember him in supporting roles in movies I've seen (which also causes me concern). Plus, as I said before, the receding hairline just BUGS me for Lupin's character. Having said all that, there's no way I'd miss PoA. Even if I hate the casting, I'd still want to see the movie version. And, if worse comes to worse and I don't like the portrayal of Sirius and Lupin in the movie, well, then, when I read the books I'll probably just see my mental picture of those characters, rather than the movie versions (see, e.g., the Weasley twins--I don't see those boys in my mind's eye when I read the books). Leeanna From divaclv at aol.com Sat Jan 18 00:06:05 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:06:05 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: <004d01c2be75$3647a030$b79fcdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > There's really no canon for any of them except Sirius Black being good looking. I've been hunting through the various pictures of Gary Oldman since his name came up, and I think the key might be that he can look so different in various movies. He'd be easy to make believeable as PoA Sirius Black. GoF Sirius Black I'm not completely convinced over, but I have confidence in WB. At the moment. > What encourages me most is that Oldman is very much a chameleon--he's inhabited a wide range of screen personas very convincingly. If anyone can portray Sirius both as the haunted, ravaged man who escapes from Azkaban and the handsome man lurking underneath all that, he can. ~Christi From doliesl at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 00:19:41 2003 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:19:41 -0000 Subject: Casting for the HP movies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Agree with whoever said about Gary Oldman being sexy in an intense, sensual way. Maybe it's just my odd unconventional taste, I even find Gary's psychotic corrupted cop role in "Leon: The Professional" dangerously sexy too.;) I see some people like to insist on JKR's casual(?) comment "Dead sexy". But sexy or not is really subjective. When I read the book I never imagine Sirius or Lupin being the conventional American Hollywood romantic heroes-ish "handsome" and "sexy" at all. I remember reading an editorial article before in which mention JK Rowling's "dead sexy" idol was the late Joe Strummer of the Clash. Who knows, maybe she has an "angry-bad boy-old-school-punk-rocker" image on her mind for Sirius (btw that's just my own speculation). So Gary -Sid Vicious- Oldman isn't entirely that far OFF if he really was casted. I have no problem seeing him playing Sirius at all. In fact I think he'll enhance Sirius for me (Gary will make Sirius "cool"!). I for one am thrill if the rumor of Gary Oldman is true! -D From natmichaels at hotmail.com Sat Jan 18 01:57:50 2003 From: natmichaels at hotmail.com (lorien_eve ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 01:57:50 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I agree about Lupin and Sirius. I will be terribly upset if they aren't played by some *very* good-looking men! Lorien_Eve --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "two_c_cs " wrote: > I totally think it's a big mistake to cast David Thewlis as Lupin. When I think of Lupin, Black, and even Pettigrew, I think- good looking. They have to be, they were The Marauders and what I visualize as the "A" group of Hogwarts- you know, the quarterback of the football team, they guys everyone wanted to date, yada yada yada (I'm making myself sick here). That's just what I think of when I think of them. I know it's been 20 years and Lupin looks shabby and Black looks like an ex-convict, but still- underneath all that wear and tear is a FINE lookin' man. LOL > Toni From rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 05:23:13 2003 From: rodeodangerqueen at yahoo.com (rodeodangerqueen ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 05:23:13 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "two_c_cs " wrote: > I totally think it's a big mistake to cast David Thewlis as Lupin. When I think of Lupin, Black, and even Pettigrew, I think- good looking. They have to be, they were The Marauders and what I visualize as the "A" group of Hogwarts- you know, the quarterback of the football team, they guys everyone wanted to date, yada yada yada (I'm making myself sick here). That's just what I think of when I think of them. I know it's been 20 years and Lupin looks shabby and Black looks like an ex-convict, but still- underneath all that wear and tear is a FINE lookin' man. LOL > Toni If these rumors hold as true....I'd have to say although I am open to the possibility of fine performances on their (Thewlis and Oldman) parts...my pre-movie excitement will be pretty diminished. Even Gambon as Dumbledore I find unexciting...although I'm sure he's a fine actor who seems to bear a strong resemblance to R. Harris. Yes, I know I should be happy with just "fine actor" and "strong resemblance"...but still...most of this news lacks "oomph" from my standpoint. If you are one of the people out there who likes the news....good for you...but it's not "doing it" for me. *sighs* From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 07:36:31 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 07:36:31 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch Message-ID: I'm sure that I'm just stating the obvious, but I wonder if the problems with casting this latest movie aren't related to the salaries being demanded by the actors now. I'm guessing they got R. Harris pretty cheap. He really took the role to please his grandaughter. And I suspect all the big name actors originally in the cast, started working cheap. They all assumed that this was going to be a nice moderately sucessful kids movie. But now that it is a billion dollar franchise, I don't think names like Peter O'Toole are going to come cheap. Also, as someone else pointed out, many desireable actors may have existing commitments that prevent them from taking the role. I have to wonder how much pressure is on the producers now to give the actors a bigger piece of the pie? Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From lupinesque at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 16:29:31 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:29:31 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Toni wrote: > I totally think it's a big mistake to cast David Thewlis as Lupin. >When I think of Lupin, Black, and even Pettigrew, I think- good >looking. They have to be, they were The Marauders and what I >visualize as the "A" group of Hogwarts- you know, the quarterback of >the football team, they guys everyone wanted to date, yada yada yada >(I'm making myself sick here). Don't take this the wrong way, but you're making me sick too . I know I should get over my instinctual mistrust of the popular and the beautiful, but the fact remains that I would find Lupin a lot less attractive if half the school drooled over him. I hope they pick someone who isn't drop-dead gorgeous. (Uh, except that I want Ralph Fiennes to play him. Oops. But his handsomeness is a drawback, I swear!) Of the four, only Sirius is described as handsome. Lupin is described neutrally, Pettigrew negatively. All we know of James is that he was tall and looked like Harry, who, remember, doesn't like anything about his own looks except his scar. Amy Z From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Sun Jan 19 00:02:02 2003 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd ) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 00:02:02 -0000 Subject: Who is playing Trelawney? Message-ID: Has anybody heard anything about who will play Madam Trelawney? She is a major role and is in GoF as well. From susannahlm at yahoo.com Sun Jan 19 03:10:23 2003 From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (susannahlm ) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:10:23 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch Message-ID: Steve wrote: I suspect all the big name actors >originally in the cast, started working cheap. They all assumed that >this was going to be a nice moderately sucessful kids movie. Um. . . Excuse me? *Harry Potter?* When GOF came out, it had a bigger opening than any other book in the history of publishing. Warner Brother's spent over 100 million dollars doing SS/PS. Spielberg (sp.?) was in talks about directing. Everyone at Warner's always assumed that this was going to be a smash hit--that's the only reason they spent so much money doing it. I think the problems with casting Dumbledore have more to do with the fact that the producers have to unexpectedly *replace* an actor, after the franchise has already been established; it must be harder to re-cast than to cast. Derannimer From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 19 03:52:03 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:52:03 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susannahlm " wrote: > Steve wrote: I suspect all the big name actors > >originally in the cast, started working cheap. They all assumed that > >this was going to be a nice moderately sucessful kids movie. > > > Um. . . Excuse me? > > *Harry Potter?* When GOF came out, it had a bigger opening than any > other book in the history of publishing. Warner Brother's spent over > 100 million dollars doing SS/PS. Spielberg (sp.?) was in talks about > directing. Everyone at Warner's always assumed that this was going > to be a smash hit--that's the only reason they spent so much money > doing it. > > I think the problems with casting Dumbledore have more to do with > the fact that the producers have to unexpectedly *replace* an actor, > after the franchise has already been established; it must be harder > to re-cast than to cast. > > Derannimer bboy_mn: Certainly, no one expected the movie to flop. Warner knew it would be successful, but you simply can't predict a smash hit. It was a kids movie. No kids movie has ever come near the sale figures of a movie like Titanic. So, I suspect they all assumed, worst case, that it would be a modestly successful kids movie. Best case, it would be a very successful kids movie. But kids movies are rarely MEGA-successes. Even Chris Columbus (I believe) said he thought he was making a modest kids movie. He thought it was going to be a fun easy task, and a nice change of pace (paraphrasing). So while the primary actors got acceptable salaries, I don't think they were up to the standards they could have gotten for an adult themed movie. Now that it is a MEGA-success, I think all the NEW actors coming aboard don't was standard salaries, they want a fair share. In other words big bucks. Madam Hooch (Zoa Wanamaker ... is that right) quite the movie because she said all the actors were underpaid, and she thought Warner was ripping people off by low balling the salaries. So the low salary thing, really isn't something I dreamed up. Unless, Warner decides to cough up some serious cash, we won't be seeing her again. The Actor's Equity Union stepped in for Daniel Radcliffe and forced Warner to pay him on a scale more consistent with the hit status of the movie. I think they pushed his salary up from substantial 5 figures to low 7 figures. Since this was the Union, I'm guessing they saw UK?2,000,000 as minimum wage under the circumstance. If the lead role had been Leonardo DeCaprio or Elijah Wood, you can count on their salaries being US$10,000,000 to US$20,000,000. At his peak, Leo was getting a standard US$21,000,000 per movie. For Daniel, a proven actor in a mega-hit movie franchise, he should be getting US$5,000,000 to US$10,000,000 per movie. As it is, I believe he's getting UK?2,000,000 which covers two movies. New actors, which is what I was focusing on since we are talking about current casting, smell the money and they want some. You think Ian McKellan works cheap. I certainly think he, McKellan, commands a much higher salary than Michael Gambon. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From lupinesque at yahoo.com Sun Jan 19 19:34:29 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:34:29 -0000 Subject: Who is playing Trelawney? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Haggridd wrote: > Has anybody heard anything about who will play Madam Trelawney? > She is a major role and is in GoF as well. I Googled Trelawney + casting and the only name I turned up was Emma Chambers, who's the only person I've heard of connected to the role before. The Leaky Cauldron reported in July '01 that someone had said Chambers was up for the role with this information: Apparently she was doing a sort of interview in a London book shop, where she told the audience that "she had been approached about playing a humouros role in a popular series based on a book that is yet to come out. She said that it was a Warner Brothers film and that she would most likely start in 2003 by the way things are going, and that it was a third installment." TLC immediately added that this was a perfect example of how rumors start. The words "Harry Potter" didn't even appear, still less "Trelawney." But it does sound good, doesn't it? Amy Z who will audition if no one steps up soon From kechelsen at aol.com Sun Jan 19 20:44:22 2003 From: kechelsen at aol.com (kathye_c ) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:44:22 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > > The Actor's Equity Union stepped in for Daniel Radcliffe and forced Warner to pay him on a scale more consistent with the hit status of the movie. I think they pushed his salary up from substantial 5 figures to low 7 figures. Since this was the Union, I'm guessing they saw UK?2,000,000 as minimum wage under the circumstance. << Sorry, but I think you must mean the Screen Actor's Guild. Actor's Equity is the THEATRE Actor's union, and would have no say in the salaries on a film. Kathy From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 00:04:30 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:04:30 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "kathye_c " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " > wrote: > > > The Actor's Equity Union stepped in for Daniel Radcliffe and > forced Warner to pay him on a scale more consistent with the hit > status of the movie. I think they pushed his salary up from > substantial 5 figures to low 7 figures. Since this was the Union, I'm > guessing they saw UK?2,000,000 as minimum wage under the > circumstance. << > > Sorry, but I think you must mean the Screen Actor's Guild. Actor's > Equity is the THEATRE Actor's union, and would have no say in the > salaries on a film. > > Kathy boy_mn: Not disputing you at all. The best I can recall the article, which should still be on the internet, didn't refer to it as 'Actor's Equity Union'; it used the word in lower case 'equity' as in 'equity stepped in'. Again, based on my recall. I assume that would mean Actor's Equity. Remember too that this is Britain. I'm not sure if it's different there. I don't think you have to belong to multiple unions. For example, Jonny Carson formerly of 'The Tonight Show', performed his entire career as a member of the magician's union. Again, I don't know the details of how actor unions work in Britain. But you point is well made and well taken. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 00:30:23 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:30:23 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch (News Quotes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " > > wrote: > > > > The Actor's Equity Union stepped in for Daniel Radcliffe and > > forced Warner to pay him on a scale more consistent with the hit > > status of the movie. I think they pushed his salary up from > > substantial 5 figures to low 7 figures. Since this was the Union, > > I'm guessing they saw UK?2,000,000 as minimum wage under the > > circumstance. << > > > > > > Sorry, but I think you must mean the Screen Actor's Guild. > > Actor's Equity is the THEATRE Actor's union, and would have no > > say in the > salaries on a film. > > > > Kathy > bboy_mn: Here are some quotes I'm basing my opinion on. To find this, I search Google for 'Daniel Radcliff salary Hooch' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Radcliffe, Daniel was initially only offered ?125,000 (approximately US$181,500) to film Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. The Actor's Union Equity stepped in, however, and negotiated new terms that increased his salary to roughly ?2,000,000 (US$3,000,000). Star Daniel Radcliffe reportedly only received $97,000 for his work, and would have received only about $162,000 for the sequel before the British actors' union Equity intervened on his behalf. A well-known American child star could have easily commanded five times that much. Zoe Wanamaker has hit out at the makers of the Harry Potter film, accusing them of underpaying their actors. In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Wanamaker, who plays games mistress Madam Hooch, described the film's producers Warner Bros as "notoriously mean" and described the pay as "terrible." "If they want me for a second [film], they'll have to up their rates. I don't think any of the actors have done well out of it," she continued. "Some actors signed three-film deals but the money was so crap I was insulted so just signed for one." Telling the Sunday Times that she received less for the multimillion pound blockbuster than for a recent BBC production,... Wanamaker was also reported to have been angry that many of the actors did not receive any extra payments or royalties for the use of their images in spin-off merchandising and computer games. It is not the first dispute about the stars' salaries. Daniel Radcliffe, who plays Harry Potter, was originally offered only GBP ?75,000 and GBP ?125,000 for the first sequel. However, the actors' union Equity renegotiated new terms which have since made the 12-year old a millionaire. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - bboy_mn From urbana at charter.net Mon Jan 20 01:20:23 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne R Urbanski) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:20:23 -0600 Subject: Susan Bones Message-ID: <4.2.2.20030119190641.00bee750@localhost> Does Susan Bones have any actual lines of dialogue in either HP movie?? I do recall her sitting beneath the Sorting Hat in PS/SS, and also Susan and Hermione making goo-goo eyes at Gilderoy Lockhart in CoS, but I can't recall her actually speaking, in either the books or the movies. I know she is portrayed by Eleanor Columbus, daughter of Chris Columbus, so I'm wondering what her pay scale was. If she had between one and five lines of dialogue she would be paid (if movies are set up like TV soap operas) at a pay scale specifically set up for actors whose roles are just barely above "extras" and significantly less than featured players. I mean, even Colin Creevy and Justin Finch-Fletchley have more lines, IIRC, than Susan Bones. Anne U (just wondering) "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."? - Albus Dumbledore, in "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" "Anyone could be the one to change your life" -- Monte Montgomery http://www.montemontgomery.com From thalia at aokp.org Mon Jan 20 06:09:18 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:09:18 -0800 Subject: PoA casting camps Message-ID: i'm SO glad to see all these folks coming out of the Gary Oldman Closet! even those against it. i think we're all grown up enough to realize it's pretty much subjective. and it's fun to know who thinks what and why. i've only seen him in the fifth element, yet for some reason i'm okay with the rumoured casting. i think that the previous two movies have been EXCELLENTLY casted (tho badly directed). i also have no clue who david thewlis is, but hell, i'm all for educating the american populace about good british actors. :) thalia 'lacking in wittiness but not in perkiness' chaunacy "Ah, music. A magic beyond all we do here!" -Albus Dumbledore From belleps at october.com Mon Jan 20 07:45:41 2003 From: belleps at october.com (Beth) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:45:41 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting In-Reply-To: <1042899358.388.86189.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030120013938.009fbb20@pop.cox-internet.com> At 02:15 PM 1/18/03 +0000, rodeodangerqueen wrote: >Even Gambon as Dumbledore I find unexciting...although I'm sure he's >a fine actor who seems to bear a strong resemblance to R. Harris. >Yes, I know I should be happy with just "fine actor" and "strong >resemblance"...but still...most of this news lacks "oomph" from my >standpoint. If you are one of the people out there who likes the >news....good for you...but it's not "doing it" for me. *sighs* I hadn't seen anything with Gambon in it, so I went out and rented "Dancing at Lughnasa". If you're not sure he can handle Dumbledore, rent the movie. (Even if you're not convinced, you'll have seen a good movie. ) And I have to agree with some about Oldman -- I wasn't sure until I saw the stills from "The Scarlet Letter". I'm convinced that he's got a good chance of pulling it off. Besides, as far as I'm concerned, the casting director hasn't let us down yet. I've been quite pleased (and occasionally pleasantly surprised) with most, if not all, of her choices so far. bel From lupinesque at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 10:54:36 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:54:36 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch (News Quotes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Wanamaker was also reported to have been angry that many of the actors > did not receive any extra payments or royalties for the use of their > images in spin-off merchandising and computer games. She needs a new agent, or lawyer. That should've been in her contract from the start. Otherwise, tough luck. Amy happy she doesn't have any dealings with hard-nosed WB negotiators . . . dealing with CompuServe on a daily basis is quite enough, thank you From lupinesque at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 10:56:30 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:56:30 -0000 Subject: Susan Bones In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20030119190641.00bee750@localhost> Message-ID: Anne wrote: > Does Susan Bones have any actual lines of dialogue in either HP movie?? Nope. She does manage to get into an extraordinary number of shots, though, doesn't she? Hm, I wonder why that is? Oh well, she deserves it, what with her grandparents having been killed by You-Know-Who and all. :-P Amy From julia at thequiltbug.com Mon Jan 20 14:57:20 2003 From: julia at thequiltbug.com (Julia McCallum) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 06:57:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Susan Bones Message-ID: <20030120065720.26942.h013.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> "Amy Z " wrote: Nope.? She does manage to get into an extraordinary number of shots, though, doesn't she?? Hm, I wonder why that is? me: That really bugged me. If he wanted his daughter in so many shots, more power to him. But he should have made her a random Gryffindor instead of a Hufflepuff. Why would Hermione be sitting with/standing beside a Hufflepuff in every single class? Makes no sense. Julia ~The Quilt Bug~ Handmade Baby Quilts, Bedding, and Accessories http://www.thequiltbug.com From sequoiajw at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 16:12:24 2003 From: sequoiajw at yahoo.com (gwynne) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 08:12:24 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Susan Bones References: <20030120065720.26942.h013.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> Message-ID: <002801c2c09e$bf800880$bf0366ce@gj1011405onem> Julia wrote: >>That really bugged me. If he wanted his daughter in so many shots, more power to him. But he should have made her a random Gryffindor instead of a Hufflepuff. Why would Hermione be sitting with/standing beside a Hufflepuff in every single class? Makes no sense. << In the films, they have students from ALL the houses in the same year taking all their classes together, so it's not just a Susan Bones moment. Although Chris Columbus does like cameos. He puts himself in some of his films, too. From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Mon Jan 20 20:49:17 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:49:17 -0000 Subject: DVD extras? Message-ID: We already know that the Borgin&Burkes-scene will be on the DVD. Has anyone heard of other possible extra scenes? On my day-to-day HP calendar (Andrews McMeel publishing) there are several screen caps from what appears to be Lockhart giving the infanous quiz. I'd love for that to be included on the DVD. Anybody know about it? Sophia From kechelsen at aol.com Mon Jan 20 21:16:01 2003 From: kechelsen at aol.com (kathye_c ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:16:01 -0000 Subject: Casting Catch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " > boy_mn: > Not disputing you at all. The best I can recall the article, which > should still be on the internet, didn't refer to it as 'Actor's Equity > Union'; it used the word in lower case 'equity' as in 'equity stepped > in'. Again, based on my recall. I assume that would mean Actor's > Equity. Remember too that this is Britain. I'm not sure if it's > different there. > > I don't think you have to belong to multiple unions. For example, > Jonny Carson formerly of 'The Tonight Show', performed his entire > career as a member of the magician's union. Again, I don't know the > details of how actor unions work in Britain. > > But you point is well made and well taken. > > bboy_mn I realized after I posted the message that you might not have been talking about American theatrical or movie unions but British unions. My apologies for posting before I thought... Kathy From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 21:17:02 2003 From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin ) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:17:02 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030120013938.009fbb20@pop.cox-internet.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Beth wrote: > At 02:15 PM 1/18/03 +0000, rodeodangerqueen wrote: > >Even Gambon as Dumbledore I find unexciting...although I'm sure he's > >a fine actor who seems to bear a strong resemblance to R. Harris. > I hadn't seen anything with Gambon in it, so I went out and rented "Dancing > at Lughnasa". If you're not sure he can handle Dumbledore, rent the movie. I was one of the sceptics, but I saw him yesterday in "The lost prince" and now I think he'll be a fantastic Dumbledore. If those rumours of Gambon materialise, I think we are very lucky. -- Irene From saitaina at wizzards.net Mon Jan 20 21:41:01 2003 From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:41:01 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Susan Bones References: <20030120065720.26942.h013.c011.wm@mail.thequiltbug.com.criticalpath.net> Message-ID: <008d01c2c0cc$a099f1a0$93b9efd8@p2x5n9> Julia wrote: < If he wanted his daughter in so many shots, more power to him. But he should have made her a random Gryffindor instead of a Hufflepuff. Why would Hermione be sitting with/standing beside a Hufflepuff in every single class? Makes no sense. > Actually it does make sense. He's most likely not paying her so instead of paying an extra to stand around in all those shots he's shoving his daughter in and cutting costs. Plus since they mixed all four houses into classes, I think it's reasonable Hermione would be with the hard working Hufflepuffs as she most likely studies with them in the movie world (as apposed to the cannon world). Saitaina From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Tue Jan 21 00:39:06 2003 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:39:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Susan Bones In-Reply-To: <008d01c2c0cc$a099f1a0$93b9efd8@p2x5n9> Message-ID: <20030121003906.99885.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com> Julia wrote: > If he wanted his daughter in so many > shots, more power > to him. But he should have made her a > random Gryffindor instead of a > Hufflepuff. Why would Hermione be > sitting with/standing beside a > Hufflepuff in > every single class? Makes no sense. I agree - no sense integral to the storytelling. But in RL, if she was just a 'random Gryffindor,' Eleanor wouldn't have gotten the by-character-name credit that she did as Susan Bones. Who knows, maybe she's starting a resume already. Saitaina wrote: > Actually it does make sense. He's most > likely not paying her so instead of > paying an extra to stand around in all > those shots he's shoving his daughter in > and cutting costs. Entirely possible IF this was an indie film. Saitaina: > Plus since they mixed all four houses > into classes, I think it's reasonable > Hermione would be with the hard working > Hufflepuffs as she most likely studies > with them in the movie world (as apposed > to the cannon world). Is Hermione more likely to hang out with the Hufflepuffs? Or the Ravenclaws? Why movie world as opposed to canon world? In interviews, Columbus had indicated that his daughter got him to read the HP books. Eleanor may very well be the one who has done so, and therefore wanted to be a part of the movies badly. Or, maybe she just wanted to see her face up on that big screen...a lot. Petra a n :) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 21 03:12:18 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:12:18 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re:Casting/ Casting Catch (News Quotes) References: Message-ID: <00ec01c2c0fa$e8764fe0$25a0cdd1@RVotaw> Amy Z writes: > Of the four, only Sirius is described as handsome. Lupin is > described neutrally, Pettigrew negatively. All we know of James is > that he was tall and looked like Harry, who, remember, doesn't like > anything about his own looks except his scar. But of course, what preteen/teenage boy does like their looks? Personally I think JKR intentionally did not describe Harry's looks as good or bad, you can imagine him as you wish. Of course, with the film, they picked a child cute as a button. Who rather rapidly turned from cute to approaching handsome. Which I don't think they were expecting quite yet! Anyway, with the rumors of David Thewlis as Lupin and Gary Oldman as Sirius, does anyone know how tall David Thewlis is? Amy Z again: >> Wanamaker was also reported to have been angry that many of the actors >> did not receive any extra payments or royalties for the use of their >> images in spin-off merchandising and computer games. >She needs a new agent, or lawyer. That should've been in her >contract from the start. Otherwise, tough luck. I agree. People (in the U.S. at least) were practically begging for a part in HP. Any part. I know Jason Isaacs has said he desperately wanted in on the first film, tried out for Snape? Regardless, no one forces these people to sign contracts for these films. Nobody forced Zoe Wanamaker to play in this movie. If she wasn't happy with the salary and conditions, why sign on? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com Tue Jan 21 03:57:29 2003 From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com) Date: 21 Jan 2003 03:57:29 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie Message-ID: <1043121449.267.72445.w61@yahoogroups.com> Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPFGU-Movie group: What do you think of the Gary Oldman for Sirius Black rumours? o I think he's been offered the part and will take it o I think he's been offered the part and won't take it o I think someone has been offered the part o I don't think anyone has been offered the part yet To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11025878 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Tue Jan 21 05:43:08 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 05:43:08 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie In-Reply-To: <1043121449.267.72445.w61@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: I think a better poll would be what we think of Oldman as Black? Personally, I think he'd be great. :-) I can't believe, I didn't think of that! He's got just the right vibe (aside from Gabriel Byrne) scary, sexy, dark presence...Oldman as Sirius...Perfect...I just hope it's true. --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com wrote: > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > HPFGU-Movie group: > > What do you think of the Gary Oldman > for Sirius Black rumours? > > o I think he's been offered the part and will take it > o I think he's been offered the part and won't take it > o I think someone has been offered the part > o I don't think anyone has been offered the part yet > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11025878 > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups > web site listed above. > > Thanks! From siskiou at earthlink.net Tue Jan 21 05:53:30 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:53:30 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: New poll for HPFGU-Movie In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2746778461.20030120215330@earthlink.net> Hi, Monday, January 20, 2003, 9:43:08 PM, daughterofthedust at yahoo.com wrote: > Oldman as Sirius...Perfect...I > just hope it's true. My daughter (11) and I looked at pictures of Gary Oldman and David Thewlis. She was really happy with Gary Oldman's Scarlet Letter pictures, saying this was exactly how she had imagined Sirius. David Thewlis on the other hand got a big "Oh, no! Not him!" She remembers him from Dinotopia and she doesn't think he's a good choice at all. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 21 09:14:50 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:14:50 -0000 Subject: Casting/ Casting Catch (News Quotes) In-Reply-To: <00ec01c2c0fa$e8764fe0$25a0cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > > Amy Z again: > > >> Wanamaker was also reported to have been angry that many of the > >> actors did not receive any extra payments or royalties for the > >> use of their images in spin-off merchandising and computer games. > > >She needs a new agent, or lawyer. That should've been in her > >contract from the start. Otherwise, tough luck. > > I agree. People (in the U.S. at least) were practically begging for a part in HP. ...edited... If she wasn't happy with the salary and conditions, why sign on? > > Richelle bboy_mn: Because she wasn't satisfied, she only sign a one movie contract, other signed three movie contracts. So she did protect herself. If the movie was modestly sucessful, she would have probably signed the next movie at a modest salary, but considering that it is a megahit, I think she wants a fair share before she will sign a contract again. Other actors (pardon the expression) are screwed. They are locked into a contract, although there is probably some room for negotations. And, Zoa Wanamaker is not just speaking for herself, she is speaking for people who are contractually obligated NOT to speak for themselves. She is not the only person to step in and try to correct this or at least, made the public aware of it. Remember the actor's union stepped in on Daniel's behalf, and I have to assume they did that because the thought he was being ripped off. They wanted him to have something approximating a (keyword) fair share. So, she is not satisfied, and she is not going to sign another contract until she sees fair money. I think all the big name British actors probably have their agents negotiating for more pay, but they are negotiating against a signed contracted. That doesn't give them much power. An the other hand, my guess is when the union step in for Daniel, they had to power to stop production if their demands weren't met. All those people who were begging for a part in a fun popular kids movie, I have to wonder if the wouldn't now be begging for the money they thought they deserved. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 21 16:24:46 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:24:46 -0600 (CST) Subject: CoS DVD/Video release? Message-ID: <5500140.1043166286246.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> TLC is reporting that DarkHorizons is reporting that the DVD/Video release date of Chamber of Secrets is set for April 18th. Anyone heard confirmation on this? That's over a month earlier than the release of SS/PS, though both had mid November theater openings. I wouldn't be surprised if they rushed to get it out earlier, what with OotP due out in June. That way they'd have two months to sell while people are anxiously waiting for June 21st anyway. Hoping this news is true, that's less than 3 months! Richelle From heidit at netbox.com Tue Jan 21 16:38:51 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:38:51 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS DVD/Video release? In-Reply-To: <5500140.1043166286246.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Message-ID: <005a01c2c16b$95521080$0301a8c0@Frodo> > -----Original Message----- > From: rvotaw at i-55.com [mailto:rvotaw at i-55.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:25 AM > To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com > Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS DVD/Video release? > > > Real-To: rvotaw at i-55.com > > TLC is reporting that DarkHorizons is reporting that the > DVD/Video release date > of Chamber of Secrets is set for April 18th. Anyone heard > confirmation on > this? That's over a month earlier than the release of SS/PS, > though both had > mid November theater openings. > We just confirmed it on TLC based on a WB press release. From heidit at netbox.com Tue Jan 21 17:45:49 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:45:49 -0500 Subject: Report from the WB Studios' Museum Message-ID: <007601c2c174$f0608660$0301a8c0@Frodo> I just posted a report on my visit to the museum over on The Leaky Cauldron - http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/archives/2003_01_19_index.html#9021414 5 - feel free to read there and discuss here. heidi [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Tue Jan 21 18:44:07 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:44:07 -0000 Subject: Susan Bones In-Reply-To: <3E2C1F45.C8E91267@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, jazmyn wrote: > Maybe in fact, the Hufflepuff girl likes Hermione, but is not one of her > inner circle like Harry and Ron? Yeah, you have to use your imagination > for that one, but neither the books nor the movies outline EVERY SINGLE > DAY of the character's lives at Hoggwart's. Which reminds me, relative to our discussion a few weeks ago (probably before Christmas) ...my daughter asked me recently, out of the blue, whether the people in the Harry Potter books/movies ever used the bathroom.... Anne U (let's NOT go there again... ;-) From itzregina at hanson.net Tue Jan 21 19:07:06 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 19:07:06 -0000 Subject: Report from the WB Studios' Museum In-Reply-To: <007601c2c174$f0608660$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" wrote: > I just posted a report on my visit to the museum over on The Leaky > Cauldron - > http://www.the-leaky- cauldron.org/archives/2003_01_19_index.html#9021414 > 5 - feel free to read there and discuss here. > > > heidi > Thank you! Now I know where to go during the kids Easter break. We live about 3 hours away from LA, so this will give us something new to see. You wrote that "they're going to transition from props from PS/SS to things from Chamber of Secrets". You don't think they will keep the PS/SS props along with the incoming COS? Gina From heidit at netbox.com Tue Jan 21 19:10:24 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:10:24 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Report from the WB Studios' Museum In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00a001c2c180$c1621340$0301a8c0@Frodo> > -----Original Message----- > From: Regina [mailto:itzregina at hanson.net] > > You wrote that "they're going to transition from props from PS/SS to > things from Chamber of Secrets". You don't think they will keep the > PS/SS props along with the incoming COS? I don't think they'll have room for both - they might try and keep some, but other things are likely to get put into some superarchive and be off-limits to the public. From draco382 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 21 22:31:04 2003 From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382 ) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:31:04 -0000 Subject: Susan Bones In-Reply-To: <20030121003906.99885.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan > > In interviews, Columbus had indicated that his > daughter got him to read the HP books. Eleanor > may very well be the one who has done so, and > therefore wanted to be a part of the movies > badly. Or, maybe she just wanted to see her face > up on that big screen...a lot. > de-lurking here for just a moment to ask a question: now that Columbus is no longer at the helm, will Cuaron hire Eleanor Columbus to reprise her role? Or will Susan Bones mysteriously disappear during the third year. it will probably work out, since I don't remember hearing that name much in the third book anyway, if ever -- IIRC. All said and done, it was pretty funny to see Susan Bones appearing SO OFTEN in the film... ~draco382 From blessedbrian at yahoo.com Wed Jan 22 02:22:32 2003 From: blessedbrian at yahoo.com (Brian Cordova ) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:22:32 -0000 Subject: CoS DVD/Video release? (April 11th seems to be the day) In-Reply-To: <005a01c2c16b$95521080$0301a8c0@Frodo> Message-ID: Here's some info I have found. Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Brian:-) www.mugglenet.com http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_2681000/2681345.stm http://death-curse.com/# From Zephyrjaid at aol.com Wed Jan 22 06:59:40 2003 From: Zephyrjaid at aol.com (zephyrjaid7 ) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 06:59:40 -0000 Subject: Wizarding London Info Needed Message-ID: I am currently planning a fic where a majority of the time is spent in and around Diagon Alley/Knockturn Alley. I'm quite confident that all of my canon information is as thorough as possible, but I would like to have details about the sets in the movie. Countless and creative Google searches and my own fruitless attempts at writing notes from the films have been 'riddikulusly' counter-productive. If anyone can point in me in the right direction, I'd really appreciate it. :) I spent the entire month of November looking for the Architectural Digest that featured the sets, and if anyone has it, please tell me if it features Diagon Alley or Knockturn Alley...internet articles, websites, pictures, magazine articles, personal visits, things you observed from watching the film, quotes from any of the actors - anything I can get my hands on, I need. What I need: - Store names not mentioned in the books; ie Scribbulus Everchanging Inks - Detailed descriptions or pictures of the layout and the shop fronts/interiors - A list of odd props like the black roses in Ollivander's - Names of the sections in Flourish Blotts (like Celestial Studies) - Tidbits like the lady with the lolly cart, bats hanging on signs, large overhead walkway at Gringotts, etc. If anyone feels up to the research, please contact me at zephyrjaid at aol.com. Thank you very much! From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Wed Jan 22 08:07:26 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic ) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:07:26 -0000 Subject: House combining in the films Message-ID: I browse quite a few HP-related forums, and every now and then the topic of non-cannon House-combining crops up. True, in the books, we would not see Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws in a Double Potions class which is supposed to be compsed of only Gryffindors and Slytherins. But it seems film-makers (wisely, in my opinion) combined the Houses not only for both time and logistics limitations...but to make sure many of the lesser, yet well-known, characters from the Hogwarts community were included...adding richness and a sense of the whole Hogwarts family. It should be noted that the film-makers were careful to keep the same ages-groups together in their respective classes (e.g. first years with other first years), so despite it not quite being "cannon," it's rational and believable and is truly such a minor and trivial deviation from the books that it just boggles my mind when I read the occasional uproar from a small minority of fans spouting some of the most unbelievable and thoughtless insults in the direction of the film-makers...and never once considering WHY it was done that way. Truth is, the film-makers simply would not have had the time or the budget to film extra scenes, or write more narration, with just that many more young extras. They have a hard enough time as it is trying to include truly KEY plot and character elements and keep the length of the film within bladder-stress limits. The last thing these gifted professionals need is fans griping about House-combining when they have to make truly more drastic decisions - like cutting-out characters altogether or having to alter, edit-down or leave-out entire scenes. Hence, If seeing these characters at all requires that they be combined with other Houses, I say combine them. BM From rvotaw at i-55.com Thu Jan 23 03:23:24 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:23:24 -0600 Subject: Casting for PoA Message-ID: <000a01c2c28e$ca727b00$1b9dcdd1@RVotaw> Well, since it's officially official that David Thewlis is playing Lupin I might as well learn to live with it. I had hoped we'd end up with a whole group of really gorgeous men, but I guess it's not looking that way after all. At the rate we're going, if the rumors that Sean Biggerstaff isn't in PoA turn out to be true, Daniel Radcliffe will end up being the best looking person in the movie. Note I said best looking. Not sexiest. That's still Alan Rickman. Should've been who'ver played Sirius Black, but I just can't see Gary Oldman as sexy. Better start working on that. Anyway, can anyone recommend a good David Thewlis movie that will get me thinking of him as Lupin? Or Gary Oldman for that matter. I've seen three of his movies (Air Force One, The Fifth Element, and Lost in Space) and none of those characters quite fit the "Sirius Black" persona. Of course, I'd never have picked Kenneth Branagh for Gilderoy Lockhart, so what do I know? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From thalia at aokp.org Thu Jan 23 05:13:39 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:13:39 -0800 Subject: R/Hrm shipping in CoS (was [HPForGrownUps] going down with the SHIP) In-Reply-To: <20030123042412.3091.qmail@web41105.mail.yahoo.com> References: <008a01c2c289$e86de720$0100a8c0@xyrael> <20030123042412.3091.qmail@web41105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Laila wrote: "[the people I saw the movie with] said that it was obvious in the ending scene, with that awkward handshake that she was too shy(for lack of a better word) to hug Ron. Supposedly this meant that she liked him. they said that she was too comfortable with Harry, just as you should be with a good friend. She is unsure of herself with Ron,like you would be with a first crush." The Handshake Scene was like Christmas early for me. I couldn't stop giggling. My boyfriend thinks i'm mad. :) My personal fave, far and above: the drawn-out stutter of 'uhhh..uhhh...welcome back, Hermione.' One of Rupert's shiniest moments. :) thalia 'not above reliving middle school' chaunacy ps still want ya'll to read my fantastic fanfic http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=1106151 From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 06:56:40 2003 From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (DaughteroftheDust ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 06:56:40 -0000 Subject: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: <000a01c2c28e$ca727b00$1b9dcdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: Okay, for Gary Oldman, try Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula, and the afore mentioned Scarlet Letter (a two-star flick, if you ask me, but the look is there). Both roles exude sexiness. To see his acting chops, check out Sid and Nancy, and True Romance. He played polar oppossite characters that have me convinced he can play anything. I don't know Thewlis, (actually this is a good thing in my mind, no character baggage). --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > Well, since it's officially official that David Thewlis is playing Lupin I might as well learn to live with it. I had hoped we'd end up with a whole group of really gorgeous men, but I guess it's not looking that way after all. At the rate we're going, if the rumors that Sean Biggerstaff isn't in PoA turn out to be true, Daniel Radcliffe will end up being the best looking person in the movie. Note I said best looking. Not sexiest. That's still Alan Rickman. Should've been who'ver played Sirius Black, but I just can't see Gary Oldman as sexy. Better start working on that. > > Anyway, can anyone recommend a good David Thewlis movie that will get me thinking of him as Lupin? Or Gary Oldman for that matter. I've seen three of his movies (Air Force One, The Fifth Element, and Lost in Space) and none of those characters quite fit the "Sirius Black" persona. Of course, I'd never have picked Kenneth Branagh for Gilderoy Lockhart, so what do I know? > > Richelle > > From hontes at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 10:17:16 2003 From: hontes at yahoo.com (hontes) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 02:17:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry Potter 5 Order of the Phoenix Message-ID: <20030123101716.60116.qmail@web13504.mail.yahoo.com> ===== Sure, everyone always said 'Socrates what is the meaning of life?' or 'Socrates how can I find happiness?', did anyone ever say 'Socrates hemlock is poison.'??????? - Socrates right before his death __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dozierwoman at hotmail.com Thu Jan 23 12:27:40 2003 From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:27:40 -0000 Subject: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I personally liked Oldman in Immortal Beloved. Check that one out. I've never even heard of Thewlis, so I am as interested as you. Lisa --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > Okay, for Gary Oldman, try Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula, and the > afore mentioned Scarlet Letter (a two-star flick, if you ask me, but > the look is there). > > Both roles exude sexiness. To see his acting chops, check out Sid > and Nancy, and True Romance. He played polar oppossite characters > that have me convinced he can play anything. > > I don't know Thewlis, (actually this is a good thing in my mind, no > character baggage). > > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" > wrote: > > Well, since it's officially official that David Thewlis is playing > Lupin I might as well learn to live with it. I had hoped we'd end > up with a whole group of really gorgeous men, but I guess it's not > looking that way after all. At the rate we're going, if the rumors > that Sean Biggerstaff isn't in PoA turn out to be true, Daniel > Radcliffe will end up being the best looking person in the movie. > Note I said best looking. Not sexiest. That's still Alan Rickman. > Should've been who'ver played Sirius Black, but I just can't see > Gary Oldman as sexy. Better start working on that. > > > > Anyway, can anyone recommend a good David Thewlis movie that will > get me thinking of him as Lupin? Or Gary Oldman for that matter. > I've seen three of his movies (Air Force One, The Fifth Element, and > Lost in Space) and none of those characters quite fit the "Sirius > Black" persona. Of course, I'd never have picked Kenneth Branagh > for Gilderoy Lockhart, so what do I know? > > > > Richelle > > > > From blessedbrian at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 13:24:39 2003 From: blessedbrian at yahoo.com (Brian Cordova ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:24:39 -0000 Subject: More Info on the COS DVD Message-ID: http://www.mugglenet.com/cosdvd.shtml Can't wait to repeat the "trail of butterflies" line over and over again! Also, be sure and forward through the final credits to see the scene that most people missed in the theater (I didn't see it until my third viewing). Brian:-) From rvotaw at i-55.com Thu Jan 23 14:19:23 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:19:23 -0600 (CST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting for PoA Message-ID: <2003419.1043331563906.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Thanks everyone for the movie tips for Oldman/Thewlis. I've seen Seven Years in Tibet, and have absolutely no memory of Thewlis, even after seeing pictures of him from the movie. That's how impressive he was to me, I guess. I'm wondering though, if perhaps WB casting felt he was the best for those particular scenes in working with Daniel Radcliffe, if not the one who fit the "Lupin" image the most. If PoA stays remotely similar to the book, Lupin/Harry i.e. Thewlis/Daniel have the most emotional scenes yet. Perhaps that played a bigger role in getting him the part? Maybe? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Thu Jan 23 14:46:33 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 14:46:33 -0000 Subject: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: <2003419.1043331563906.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote: > Thanks everyone for the movie tips for Oldman/Thewlis. I've seen Seven Years > in Tibet, and have absolutely no memory of Thewlis, even after seeing pictures > of him from the movie. That's how impressive he was to me, I guess. > > I'm wondering though, if perhaps WB casting felt he was the best for those > particular scenes in working with Daniel Radcliffe, if not the one who fit > the "Lupin" image the most. If PoA stays remotely similar to the book, > Lupin/Harry i.e. Thewlis/Daniel have the most emotional scenes yet. Perhaps > that played a bigger role in getting him the part? Maybe? > > Richelle The only thing I've ever seen David Thewlis in was one of the PRIME SUSPECT miniseries that was shown on U.S. Public Broadcasting System (PBS). (I've watched all 4, as I'm a huge fan of Helen Mirren as Inspector Jane Tennyson.) I believe Thewlis played a villain, possibly a serial murderer. I do remember his performance being quite creepy. I think he's probably very good at playing emotions like "rage boiling just below the surface". He does have sort of lupine facial features as well as a sort of animal magnetism on screen. Anne U (So he's not Ralph Fiennes, but I think I can get used to him ;-) From dkewpie at pacbell.net Thu Jan 23 15:32:36 2003 From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:32:36 -0000 Subject: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I'd receommend Oldman in Leon:The Professional too. Though it's one of his psychotic villain roles, but dunno why this particular one is rather sexy for me. (amusing how the character's a Beethoven fan~~ while the man played Beethoven in Immortal Beloved ;) ) Joan From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Thu Jan 23 15:09:58 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:09:58 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS DVD/Video release? (April 11th seems to be the day) Message-ID: I am thrilled to hear that the CoS video will be out as early as April. Our local multiplexes are still showing the movie (three times daily), and expect to continue doing so until mid-February, when the kids have a half-term holiday from school; that means only two months between screen and video... Regards, Nicholas off to see showing number 14 tomorrow... From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Thu Jan 23 15:09:59 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:09:59 +0100 Subject: Video/DVD formats Message-ID: I originally bought the DVD of PS/SS and have watched it...well, quite a number of times. A friend asked for the video for Christmas, and I try to check them through before I give them (nothing so disappointing as a present that has a fault) and noticed that the video version looked different to my DVD. I realised that my DVD was widescreen, but the video was fullscreen-format. It was amazing how much more of the picture you could see in full-screen; so last week I went out and bought the DVD in fullscreen (am I addicted or what??). You lose a bit at the sides, but gain about 20-20% at the top and bottom of the screen, and the image is larger, which means that you can see the actors' faces more clearly. I noticed many subtle expressions which I hadn't seen before, and would recommend the fullscreen DVD to anyone who doubts Daniel Radcliffe's ability to emote. Facially, he is very good indeed, and if Cuaron is able to get rid of some of his awkward physical mannerisms, he will be superb. Incidentally, I heard that DR's favourite actor is Tobey Maguire; another actor who goes in for very understated performances. That's rather telling, I think. Regards, Nicholas From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Thu Jan 23 15:10:01 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:10:01 +0100 Subject: Casting Message-ID: After all the talk about casting, can I come out and say that I really don't care who is cast in PoA? The movies will always take second place to the books for me, and no one can change my mental pictures of the characters. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy the movies; you'll have gathered from my posts that I have seen both of them many times; but how the actor looks doesn't bother me. If he or she doesn't *act* the way the character should, that to me is far more cause for concern. Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in one brief shot), but I enjoyed his performance right up until his 'Clint Eastwood' moment in CoS, which was so out of character that I shuddered. But DR's image isn't what I see in my mind when I read the books, and I'm glad about that. Regards, Nicholas From thalia at aokp.org Thu Jan 23 16:31:30 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:31:30 -0800 Subject: Dan's showing (was re: Casting) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Nicholas wrote: "Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in one brief shot), but I enjoyed his performance right up until his 'Clint Eastwood'moment in CoS, which was so out of character that I shuddered." which brief shot? what 'Clint Eastwood moment?' i can think of a few possibilities, but i hesitate to assume. :) thalia 'lacking wittiness due to early hour' chaunacy "Ah, music. A magic beyond all we do here!" -Albus Dumbledore From jmmears at comcast.net Thu Jan 23 17:31:08 2003 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:31:08 -0000 Subject: DR's acting (was:Video/DVD formats) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, TACtalk at a... wrote: I noticed many subtle expressions which I > hadn't seen before, and would recommend the fullscreen DVD to anyone who > doubts Daniel Radcliffe's ability to emote. Facially, he is very good > indeed, and if Cuaron is able to get rid of some of his awkward physical > mannerisms, he will be superb. > > Incidentally, I heard that DR's favourite actor is Tobey Maguire; another > actor who goes in for very understated performances. That's rather telling, > I think. I agree that Daniel's acting style is more subtle than that of most children his age, and I think that is what makes him so well suited to play Harry. However, I strongly suspect that Toby Maguire's having played Spiderman, and having gotten to kiss Kirsten Dunst (which Dan mentioned he'd like to do) has a lot to do with 13 year old Dan's choice of his favorite actor ;--). Jo Serenadust From Lynx412 at aol.com Thu Jan 23 17:55:40 2003 From: Lynx412 at aol.com (Lynx412 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:55:40 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Info on the COS DVD Message-ID: <152.1ac6d3b9.2b61869c@aol.com> In a message dated 1/23/03 8:25:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, blessedbrian at yahoo.com writes: > Also, be sure and forward through the final credits to see the > scene that most people missed in the theater (I didn't see it until > my third viewing). If it's still there. There's an effort being made to remove it as 'insulting/insensitive to the mentally ill'. Cheryl, sheesh.... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From shufan90 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 19:01:51 2003 From: shufan90 at yahoo.com (shufan) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:01:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030123190151.39400.qmail@web80008.mail.yahoo.com> the BNW films site has a nice write up on Oldman, and a complete list of his films, since he is starring in one of the bmw 'driver' movies. As of all things the devil. But again a nice list of his films if you want to take a look. Jennifer "Lisa " wrote:I personally liked Oldman in Immortal Beloved. Check that one out. I've never even heard of Thewlis, so I am as interested as you. Lisa --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "DaughteroftheDust " wrote: > Okay, for Gary Oldman, try Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula, and the > afore mentioned Scarlet Letter (a two-star flick, if you ask me, but > the look is there). > > Both roles exude sexiness. To see his acting chops, check out Sid > and Nancy, and True Romance. He played polar oppossite characters > that have me convinced he can play anything. > > I don't know Thewlis, (actually this is a good thing in my mind, no > character baggage). > > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" > wrote: > > Well, since it's officially official that David Thewlis is playing > Lupin I might as well learn to live with it. I had hoped we'd end > up with a whole group of really gorgeous men, but I guess it's not > looking that way after all. At the rate we're going, if the rumors > that Sean Biggerstaff isn't in PoA turn out to be true, Daniel > Radcliffe will end up being the best looking person in the movie. > Note I said best looking. Not sexiest. That's still Alan Rickman. > Should've been who'ver played Sirius Black, but I just can't see > Gary Oldman as sexy. Better start working on that. > > > > Anyway, can anyone recommend a good David Thewlis movie that will > get me thinking of him as Lupin? Or Gary Oldman for that matter. > I've seen three of his movies (Air Force One, The Fifth Element, and > Lost in Space) and none of those characters quite fit the "Sirius > Black" persona. Of course, I'd never have picked Kenneth Branagh > for Gilderoy Lockhart, so what do I know? > > > > Richelle > > > > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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 lupinesque at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 20:46:14 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:46:14 -0000 Subject: Casting impact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nicholas wrote: > But DR's image isn't what I see in my mind when I read the books, and I'm > glad about that. Me either, and me too. I was really happy that when I read that first line of OP, the image that came to me was not DR, nor DR grown up a few years, but my own Harry. He hasn't been driven out. Whew! Amy also curious about the brief shot and Clint Eastwood moment (& assuming you don't mean "Dirty Harry," LOL) From siskiou at earthlink.net Thu Jan 23 20:50:15 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:50:15 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting impact In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <321836327.20030123125015@earthlink.net> Hi, Thursday, January 23, 2003, 12:46:14 PM, lupinesque at yahoo.com wrote: > Clint Eastwood moment (& > assuming you don't mean "Dirty Harry," LOL) I don't know about the brief shot, but I'm pretty sure the "Clint Eastwood" moment is the one with Lucius in Dumbledore's office, where Harry answers: "Don't worry, I will be." or something along that line. I read somewhere that Columbus told him to deliver the line in a Clint Eastwood manner. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From lupinesque at yahoo.com Thu Jan 23 20:59:15 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:59:15 -0000 Subject: Macho lines (was Re: Casting impact) In-Reply-To: <321836327.20030123125015@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Susanne theorized: > I don't know about the brief shot, but I'm pretty sure the > "Clint Eastwood" moment is the one with Lucius in > Dumbledore's office, where Harry answers: "Don't worry, I > will be." or something along that line. Oh yeah, that was overly Clintlike. I hope it's the one Nicholas had in mind, because if someone reminds me of a 2nd one, I'll be really ticked off. I cringed when I saw it on the preview. Even though I found it kind of, um, attractive at the same time. *looks embarrassed, makes circles on rug with toe* I excused it to myself with the fact that whereas Clint is a macho, swaggering guy, Harry's "Don't worry, I will be" is not so macho because in the context, it is less about dominance than it is about persistence. I.e., "you just did a fine job almost getting me killed, but it didn't work," not "better watch your step, Mr. M, I'm the boss around here and I'll be keeping an eye on you." Rationalizingly, Amy Z From rvotaw at i-55.com Fri Jan 24 02:28:06 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:28:06 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting References: Message-ID: <010f01c2c350$3ac53d40$bda0cdd1@RVotaw> Nicholas wrote: >Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in one brief shot), >but I enjoyed his performance right up until his 'Clint Eastwood' moment in >CoS, which was so out of character that I shuddered. Ever since I read that JKR said they couldn't have found a better Harry Potter I was convinced. Still, when I read the books I picture a sort of less good looking version of Daniel. Make sense? Jo Serenadust writes: >I agree that Daniel's acting style is more subtle than that of most >children his age, and I think that is what makes him so well suited >to play Harry. I think it's the "old soul in a child's body" that Chris Columbus goes on about that gives him that certain quality. >However, I strongly suspect that Toby Maguire's having played >Spiderman, and having gotten to kiss Kirsten Dunst (which Dan >mentioned he'd like to do) has a lot to do with 13 year old Dan's >choice of his favorite actor ;--). That and the stunts (climbing). He said he loved the chamber scene, climbing on the statue and all, because he felt like Spiderman. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Fri Jan 24 03:18:06 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 03:18:06 -0000 Subject: Casting In-Reply-To: <010f01c2c350$3ac53d40$bda0cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > Ever since I read that JKR said they couldn't have found a better Harry Potter I was convinced. Still, when I read the books I picture a sort of less good looking version of Daniel. Make sense? Yes, I know. Daniel was "cute as a button" (did you say that, Richelle?) at 11, when he was first cast, but I don't think anyone had any idea he would, uh, mature quite as quickly as seems to be the case. (I'm still dumbfounded by it, myself... guess I'd forgotten how much kids, especially boys, change at that age. I guess Daniel got through the "potato-faced" stage pretty quickly and easily...) > >> > I think it's the "old soul in a child's body" that Chris Columbus goes on about that gives him that certain quality. I'd certainly agree there. > > >However, I strongly suspect that Toby Maguire's having played > >Spiderman, and having gotten to kiss Kirsten Dunst (which Dan > >mentioned he'd like to do) has a lot to do with 13 year old Dan's > >choice of his favorite actor ;--). > > That and the stunts (climbing). He said he loved the chamber scene, climbing on the statue and all, because he felt like Spiderman. Didn't Daniel also do most of his Quidditch stunts and also the hanging from the Ford Anglia?? he's a bit of a daredevil, that one. Anne U (who wonders if Daniel will be taller than Gary Oldman by the time POA starts filming next spring....) From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 10:20:19 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:20:19 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters change? In-Reply-To: <010f01c2c350$3ac53d40$bda0cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > Nicholas wrote: > > >Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in one > >brief shot), .... > > Ever since I read that JKR said they couldn't have found a better Harry Potter I was convinced. Still, when I read the books I picture a sort of less good looking version of Daniel. Make sense? > > ...edited... > > Richelle bboy_mn: I'm curious, I remember when the first movie was about to be released, and some reporter made a comment to the effect that the world of HP could never be the same once you saw the movie, because it would destroy you existing mental images of the character. Implying that Harry would no longer be your Harry but Daniel Radcliffe. So, did your image change? Does your Dobby now conform to the movie Dobby? Is your Harry now Daniel's twin? Personally, my images have never changed. There is a right Dobby and a wrong Dobby, and I got it right; they got it wrong. They interviewed a few kids, and the kids didn't think it would make a difference. My Harry does look something like Daniel but only because Daniel looks something like Harry. My Ron never looked like the book described him; tall, skinny, long nose, and big hands and feet. My Ron does somewhat resemble Rupert, but just a resemblance. In my HP world, Ron is slightly taller than Harry and has a somewhat average body where as Harry is a little skinny. In my vision of their adult life, Ron would be the one who would be likely to get fat; not FAT fat, but he would be likely to go from and 'outie' to an 'innie' where as Harry will alway be thin although muscular. Dobby has a butt. I don't care what your images is, or what the movies version was, but my Dobby has a butt. He's still very small, thin neck, thin arms and legs, but a fuller more rounded body. A bit more dwarf like. So, is there even the remotes chance that the movie has corrupted or adjusted your vision of the characters and thier world? Just wondering. bboy_mn From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 10:37:25 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:37:25 -0000 Subject: Casting choices for PoA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Kewpie wrote: > Although everything is still "rumor" since WB hasn't make any > official annoucement yet, So far I'm very pleased by all > the "choices": > Lupin - David Thewlis > Sirius - Gary Oldman > Petter - Timothy Spall (really looks the part!) > Dumbledore - Michael Gambon I agree with you - so far the casting choices seem well thought-out and as accurate as possible to how the characters were written. I'm still a bit disappointed that Ian McKellan won't be Dumbledore because I would have LOVED to have seen McKellan's interpretation of the character! :) And I think Pam Ferris is a good choice for Aunt Marge, too (casting is according to imdb.com). She made a great villian in "Matilda". According to Yahoo movies, Rik Mayall has been cast as Peeves the Poltergeist. Unless all his eventually filmed scenes get cut, this means Peeves may finally appear in a Harry Potter movie! According to the pictures of Rik Mayall I've seen he looks spot-on for the part. As for Trelawny, I think Kristin Scott Thomas would be excellent in the part. Toni Collette would be a good choice as well. Emma Thompson is also a possibility in my mind as well - she's definitely got the humor part. ;) For Cedric Diggory I've love to see Colin Farrell in the part, but he's probably too old for the part at 27. But then again they did cast Christian Coulson as sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle when he was actually 24....so, who knows? I can dream anyway. :) As for Cho Chang, the last rumor I'd read on Yahoo movies was Korean singer Kwon BoA was in talks to play the part [rumor from Mugglenet.com posted on 12/30/02]. I don't know this singer, but I looked up her picture - she's very pretty and only 15. As for other minor parts, I'd lobby for... Mark Addy as Sir Cadogan And Emma Thompson or Toni Collette as Madame Rosmerta Jamie Bell as Stan Shunpike or Ernie Prang Now if only parts could appear for Jeremy Northam and Clive Owen, I'd be a VERY HAPPY camper. :) Diana From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 11:07:12 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:07:12 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Barty_Crouch_Sr._&_Ian_McKellan_&_Alfonso_Cuar=F3n?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It's funny but ever since I've read GoF from the first time through and every reading after that, I can only picture Barty Crouch Sr. as looking just like David Niven! Unfortunately, David Niven died in 1983, so he obviously can't be cast in the part. But if they tried to cast a 'lookalike', I'd be pleased. I can't see McKellan as Barty Crouch Sr. personally, but I can see him as Mad-Eye Moody, though. I'm not overly familiar with Michael Gambon's work (except for "Gosford Park") and I'm sure he'll probably do well as Dumbledore, but I would still have liked to have seen what McKellan would have done with Dumbledore. My preferences aside, though, I think McKellan may be too old for the part of Mad- Eye Moody. :( Alfonso Cuar?n has been heralded as a great director, and I hope it is true. I have not seen any of his work other than "A Little Princess". I was disappointed in his version of this story as I much prefer the 1986 TV miniseries that stars Amelia Shankley as Sara Crewe. So, my hopes on a great director for PoA rests on the recommendations of others for this director. If Cuar?n makes a great movie, I'll be pleased, but he also has to be nice enough to the main child actors (Radcliffe, Watson, Grint, Felton, Lewis, etc.) to make them want to continue coming back to do more movies. Every interview I've seen indicates that these kids will continue to make these movies if they are enjoying doing it. A un-kid-friendly director could prevent them from wanting to come back. This director has a lot on his shoulders and I hope it works out. As I said, I'm unfamiliar with his movies and I've never seen anyone interviewed about what it was like to make a movie with this guy directing them, so I can only hope that all the praise is well- founded. > What about for Barty Crouch Sr.? That would definitely be a change from Gandalf and unless Barty Sr's ghost is going to show up in later books he would only have to commit to one film (maybe two if GoF is done in two parts as has been rumored) > > Audrey From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 11:39:19 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 11:39:19 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters change? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Good question. For me, the casting of the three main characters was very close to my vision of the characters as I was reading the books. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint has definitely become Harry Potter, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley for me as I read the books over again and through PoA and GoF. Radcliffe is a bit bigger than Harry is described in the books, but that doesn't bother me as it is so minor a deviation that I don't even notice it anymore. I really noticed how much bigger and older all the kids looked in CoS versus SS/PS. I've finally gotten used to it though. There's been lots of talk about how fast those teens are growing, but how tall the actors are is so unimportant to me, because, for example, Daniel Radcliffe may be only 13, but he's already four inches tall than I am. Nearly every actor, except Warwick Davis, is taller than I am already...so the actors can't really get too tall to me. LOL As for the other characters... I had actually pictured Maggie Smith when I read McGonagall before she was ever cast in the part. Alan Rickman plays the part well, but I still don't think of Snape as looking like Alan Rickman. Snape is such a nasty character to me that Rickman is too good-looking for him. I don't identify Richard Harris as Dumbledore, though he looks similar to how I imagined him. Robbie Coltrane is perfect for the part and he looks so much like how I pictured the character that he has effectively usurped the character in my own view of the character. As for the others, here's a brief synopsis of all the players, divided into who fused with my personal vision of the character and who just resembles, but not exactly matches my personal vision of the characters: Actors have fused with the characters in my mind: Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter Emma Watson as Hermione Granger Ruper Grint as Ron Weasley Robbie Coltrane as Rubeus Hagrid Matt Lewis as Neville Longbottom Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy Jason Issacs as Lucius Malfoy Mark Williams as Arther Weasley Richard Griffiths as Vernon Dursley Kenneth Branagh as Gilderoy Lockhart Miriam Margoles as Professor Sprout Sean Biggerstaff as Oliver Wood Warwick Davis as Professore Flitwick David Bradley as Argus Filch Gemma Jones as Madame Pomfrey Robert Hardy as Cornelius Fudge Christian Coulson as Tom Riddle John Cleese as Nearly Headless Nick Actors resemble the characters, but aren't interchangable with my vision of the characters: James & Oliver Phelps as Fred & George Weasley Julie Walters as Molly Weasley Chris Rankin as Percy Weasley Ian Hart as Professor Quirrell Shirley Henderson as Moaning Myrtle Actors do not match my vision of the characters: Harry Melling as Dudley Dursley Fiona Shaw as Petunia Dursley Jamie Waylett as Vincent Crabbe Joshua Herman as Gregory Goyle The casting director got many of the parts spot-on for me, so I was pretty happy with the casting overall. :) I wouldn't call it 'corrupting', but enhancing or fleshing-out my vision of the characters. Diana > So, is there even the remotes chance that the movie has corrupted or > adjusted your vision of the characters and thier world? > > Just wondering. > > bboy_mn From hal.9000 at angelfire.com Fri Jan 24 12:09:04 2003 From: hal.9000 at angelfire.com (Hal9000 ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:09:04 -0000 Subject: Casting for PoA In-Reply-To: <2003419.1043331563906.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Message-ID: A good David Thewlis role is opposite Thandie Newton in Bertolucci's BISIEGED. Hal. From dozierwoman at hotmail.com Fri Jan 24 12:16:02 2003 From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:16:02 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters change? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > > Nicholas wrote: > > > > >Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in one > > >brief shot), .... > > > > > Ever since I read that JKR said they couldn't have found a better > Harry Potter I was convinced. Still, when I read the books I picture > a sort of less good looking version of Daniel. Make sense? > > > > ...edited... > > > > Richelle > > bboy_mn: > > I'm curious, I remember when the first movie was about to be released, > and some reporter made a comment to the effect that the world of HP > could never be the same once you saw the movie, because it would > destroy you existing mental images of the character. Implying that > Harry would no longer be your Harry but Daniel Radcliffe. > > So, did your image change? Does your Dobby now conform to the movie > Dobby? Is your Harry now Daniel's twin? > > Personally, my images have never changed. There is a right Dobby and a > wrong Dobby, and I got it right; they got it wrong. > > They interviewed a few kids, and the kids didn't think it would make a > difference. > > My Harry does look something like Daniel but only because Daniel looks > something like Harry. My Ron never looked like the book described him; > tall, skinny, long nose, and big hands and feet. My Ron does somewhat > resemble Rupert, but just a resemblance. In my HP world, Ron is > slightly taller than Harry and has a somewhat average body where as > Harry is a little skinny. > > In my vision of their adult life, Ron would be the one who would be > likely to get fat; not FAT fat, but he would be likely to go from and > 'outie' to an 'innie' where as Harry will alway be thin although muscular. > > Dobby has a butt. I don't care what your images is, or what the movies > version was, but my Dobby has a butt. He's still very small, thin > neck, thin arms and legs, but a fuller more rounded body. A bit more > dwarf like. > > So, is there even the remotes chance that the movie has corrupted or > adjusted your vision of the characters and thier world? > > Just wondering. > > bboy_mn No, not really. I find it easier to picture the characters now that I have seen the movie, and in all the books following, I do picture Dan as Harry, Rupert as Ron, etc. In my old and decrepit brain, I find it easier to picture the characters now than before. It really doesn't effect how I view the stories, it just allows me to visualize more. Lisa Whose old and tired brain just isn't as imaginative as it used to be. From stbinch at actionsd.com Fri Jan 24 17:16:39 2003 From: stbinch at actionsd.com (Steve Binch) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:16:39 -0700 Subject: Gary Oldman as Black = Genious!!! References: <1043418233.1493.21597.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <004801c2c3cc$5b753d70$2101a8c0@ACTIONSTEEL.COM> I have always thought Gary Oldman ruled Hollywood as the number one bad guy actor. It was genious to cast him as Black. Remember the first time you read PoA? Did you ever suspect Black of being innocent? Having Oldman in that role, will do the same thing in the movie, for everyone that has not read the book. I used to think Oldman would play an excellent reborn (not baby) Voldemort, but I like the idea of making him play Black is much better. On another note, why do you all think that Lupin should be sexy? I don't think it ever made mention of any sexyness in the books. Actually, I think it was quite the contrary. And please don't call Danial Radcliff sexy either. This group is for grown-ups and he is 15. -Steve From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net Fri Jan 24 18:14:10 2003 From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S. ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 18:14:10 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters change? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > snip > I'm curious, I remember when the first movie was about to be released, > and some reporter made a comment to the effect that the world of HP > could never be the same once you saw the movie, because it would > destroy you existing mental images of the character. I heard a lot of people voice the same opinion, fearing that "their" characters would be lost after seeing the movies. I have to say that hasn't happened for me. I still "see" the originals that formed in my head as I read the books. Now, some of the special effects such as the car have popped up in my mind but the characters haven't made the transition and I am glad of that. Especially Dobby, they made him so ugly! Karen From rvotaw at i-55.com Fri Jan 24 18:21:10 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:21:10 -0600 (CST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gary Oldman as Black = Genious!!! Message-ID: <18743651.1043432470809.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Steve writes: > I have always thought Gary Oldman ruled Hollywood as the number one bad guy > actor. It was genious to cast him as Black. It can pretty much guarantee that anyone left on the planet who only follows the movies and doesn't know what happens in the book will instantly be convinced Black's a murderer/traitor. But for the rest of us, why bother? We know the truth, we also know he was a "handsome young man" years before, so somewhere underneath there's some handsomeness left. I still can't see Gary Oldman as handsome. But I'll work on it. Steve again: > it was quite the contrary. And please don't call Danial Radcliff sexy
> either. This group is for grown-ups and he is 15.
I can't remember anyone calling Daniel Radcliffe sexy on this group. And I've read all the posts, so unless I missed one (I have them emailed, occasionally one gets lost) you must be referring to the comment I made. I said at the rate they're going with casting, Daniel Radcliffe would be the "best looking" person in PoA. Best looking. Not sexiest. Big difference. As I said in my original post, Alan Rickman still qualifies as sexiest. And I've just got it in my head that Sirius should be sexier than Snape. Oldman'll have his work cut out, I'm not easy to convince. Oh, and Daniel's 13. Not 15. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Fri Jan 24 18:58:46 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 18:58:46 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman as Black = Genious!!! In-Reply-To: <18743651.1043432470809.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote: > Steve again: > > > it was quite the contrary. And please don't call Danial Radcliff sexy
> > either. This group is for grown-ups and he is 15.
> > I can't remember anyone calling Daniel Radcliffe sexy on this group. And I've > read all the posts, so unless I missed one (I have them emailed, occasionally > one gets lost) you must be referring to the comment I made. I said at the rate > they're going with casting, Daniel Radcliffe would be the "best looking" person > in PoA. Best looking. Not sexiest. Big difference. > Oh, and Daniel's 13. Not 15. > > Richelle If you want to find out which thousands of girls in how many countries think Dan is sexy (aka "HOTTTT"), drop in on some of the HP messages boards and Yahoogroups aimed at teenagers, or some of the DR fan websites. Even before Dan started his metamorphosis from merely cute to almost-handsome, he apparently had legions of giggly girls around the world ogling him. (I've never lasted more than 5 minutes reading any of those sites - the saccharine level is way too high.) And while Dan has publicly said that he doesn't see why girls think he's cute, some of the publicity photos appearing on those fan sites suggest that at least his publicist thinks he is. For example: http://www.danielradclifferocks.com/misc05new.htm or http://www.danielradclifferocks.com/misc16new.htm - which I would call beefcake except Dan's not old enough, so maybe it's vealcake... Anne U (who ought to stop looking up these pohotos at lunch time and think instead of officially sexy actors, like Viggo Mortensen ;-) From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Fri Jan 24 18:18:02 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:18:02 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Dan's showing (was re: Casting) Message-ID: Thalia said, following my post yesterday:- >Nicholas wrote: "Daniel Radcliffe doesn't look like *my* Harry (except in >one brief shot), but I enjoyed his performance right up until his 'Clint >Eastwood'moment in CoS, which was so out of character that I shuddered." > >which brief shot? Towards the end of PS/SS, in the chess game. Ron says 'Yes, Hermione, I think this is going to be *exactly* like Wizards' Chess'. Harry looks slowly up at Ron, and every time I see it, I think, yes, that's Harry. It's an amalgamation of lighting, camera angle and facial expression. > what 'Clint Eastwood moment?' i can think of a few >possibilities, but i hesitate to assume. :) Towards the end of CoS, the confrontation with Lucius Malfoy in Dumbledore's study. Lucius says "Let us hope that Mr Potter will always be around to save the day" and Harry replies; "Don't worry... I will be". BookHarry would *never* say something so egotistical. I have heard that these lines were Jason Isaac's idea. He should stick to acting. Regards, Nicholas From LMRourke at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 19:17:21 2003 From: LMRourke at yahoo.com (Lisa Rourke ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:17:21 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters changed? & PoA cast In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi, I'm new to the Group. I jumped in because I was interested in what might be being discussed about the casting for PoA, but this caught my eye so I thought I'd add my 2 knuts. I don't think the movies will ever erase my own mental images of the canon characters because after reading Books 1-4 I felt compelled to try my hand at drawing them as I envisioned them. While I did base a couple on the movie actors (Daniel and Alan Rickman)for practice the majority were a based on models that struck a chord with my imagination. So no matter who they pick for the movies I still have my portraits to go by. While I like Danile Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson in the movies, not one of them was really close to how I pictured them from the books. I suppose if anything's influenced the way I draw a character it was probably fanfiction *lol* Which brings me to the notion of the sexiness of certain characters *g* I think the reason PoA is the most popular book for many fans (myself included)is because of the introduction of 2 very compelling adult characters- Lupin and Sirius. Lupin was, from his introduction on the train, my favorite JKR character. Kind, compassionate, gentle-from my PoV this is what made him "sexy". Even though he was thin and sickly I still envisioned him and drew him as handsome with air of inner strength. David Thewlis was a bit of a dissapointment for me but I'm still willing to keep an open mind and pray that he's as good an actor as a lot of people claim. If not I still have my pictures and my imagination :-) Sorry for the long first post! Lisa R. From ursamajr at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 20:53:04 2003 From: ursamajr at yahoo.com (Ursamajr ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:53:04 -0000 Subject: Argus Filch SIghting! Message-ID: I remember there being some posts on "sightings" but this takes the cake because it actually WAS David Bradley/Argus Filch! My boyfriend was just in the "Happy Days Diner" around the corner form my apartment in Brooklyn, New York. He sees "Filch" sitting by himself reading a script. Calls me (the HP obsessed freak) on the cell phone to tell me. We laugh at how freakishly ridiculous this is. But it wasnt. Aparently he is appearing in a play by Shakespear called "Twelfth Night" right down the street at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. Tzvi of Brooklyn (if I am remembering your name right) and any other fellow Brooklyn people... he is appearing in this play for a while, just letting you know ! Adrienne -who is a very shy lurker in the HPFGU world and always wondered what she would say in her little signature if she did ever post From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 21:53:37 2003 From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin ) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 21:53:37 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman as Black = Genious!!! In-Reply-To: <18743651.1043432470809.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, rvotaw at i... wrote: > As I said in my original > post, Alan Rickman still qualifies as sexiest. And I've just got it in my head > that Sirius should be sexier than Snape. Oldman'll have his work cut out, I'm > not easy to convince. This casting makes me so happy. Not only Sirius's fans will see the error of their ways when Snape is the sexiest character on screen :-) but it also relieved my fears about the Shrieking Shack scenes. You see, I was afraid that Rickman will resurrect his Sherif of Nottingham for the occasion. But now I'm confident - no matter how high over the top Rickman is going to be, Oldman can match him inch for inch. :-) Irene, crazy Snapefan From risako at nexusanime.com Fri Jan 24 22:30:17 2003 From: risako at nexusanime.com (Melissa McCarthy) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 18:30:17 -0400 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Has you image of the characters change? References: Message-ID: <001501c2c3f8$2cd5a5a0$b5a594d1@vaio> Oooh, good topic. I haven't seen the CoS movie yet (I must go shut the oven door on my ears!), so all this refers only to PS. Apologies to Diana for stealing her synopsis framework.... Actors have fused with the characters in my mind: Emma Watson as Hermione Granger (although as I re-read the books, I find my image of Book!Hermione is reasserting itself) Robbie Coltrane as Rubeus Hagrid Richard Griffiths as Vernon Dursley Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall Richard Harris as Professor Dumbledore Warwick Davis as Professor Flitwick Zoe Wanamaker as Madam Hooch Simon Fisher-Becker as The Fat Friar Actors do not match my vision of the characters: Julie Walters as Molly Weasley Fiona Shaw as Petunia Dursley Alan Rickman as Professor Snape (this may simply be because I like Alan Rickman and I dislike Snape) Chris Rankin as Percy Weasley John Cleese as Nearly Headless Nick (only because Cleese is very recognisable... I don't see Nearly Headless Nick so much as I see John-Cleese-as-Nearly-Headless-Nick, but since I like John Cleese, it's not really a problem) Everyone else is both similar enough and dissimilar enough to my mental image of the book characters that they don't strike me either way. > The casting director got many of the parts spot-on for me, so I was > pretty happy with the casting overall. :) I wouldn't call > it 'corrupting', but enhancing or fleshing-out my vision of the > characters. That's a good way of looking at it. I'm still trying very hard to preserve my view of the movie as its own canon, separate from the books, with varying degrees of success. Melissa, having a sudden sinking feeling that I didn't really answer the question... oh dear.... From rvotaw at i-55.com Sat Jan 25 01:07:31 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 19:07:31 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting References: Message-ID: <00f301c2c40e$2353dcc0$cea2cdd1@RVotaw> Anne U. writes: > Yes, I know. Daniel was "cute as a button" (did you say that, > Richelle?) at 11, when he was first cast, but I don't think anyone > had any idea he would, uh, mature quite as quickly as seems to be the > case. (I'm still dumbfounded by it, myself... guess I'd forgotten how > much kids, especially boys, change at that age. I guess Daniel got > through the "potato-faced" stage pretty quickly and easily...) Yep, I'm the one said that. :) In fact, I have a 8 x 10 framed picture of him at that very first photo shoot with his little round face, chubby cheeks and all. Looking all of about 8 1/2 years old. How quickly things can change. Still, boys do change very fast at that age. I stumbled across a boys height chart the other day looking for something else and stopped to examine it. The average height for a 13 year old boy (actually 13 1/2 year old) is 5'4". Daniel's height (as of November) exactly. I'm 5'4" and I'm 26. I've been 5'4" since I was twelve. Of course, boys grow later than girls. > Didn't Daniel also do most of his Quidditch stunts and also the > hanging from the Ford Anglia?? he's a bit of a daredevil, that one. Yes, he said he does about 90% of his own stunts. And something about jumping off a roof? Can't imagine when that was. He does take gymnastics, so I guess he's fit for it. > And while Dan has publicly said that he doesn't see why girls think > he's cute, some of the publicity photos appearing on those fan sites > suggest that at least his publicist thinks he is. For example: > http://www.danielradclifferocks.com/misc05new.htm or > http://www.danielradclifferocks.com/misc16new.htm - which I would > call beefcake except Dan's not old enough, so maybe it's vealcake... Well, he definitely has potential, I'll give him that much. I still look at those pictures and think, "What a cute little boy." Which he probably would not like. :) Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From natmichaels at hotmail.com Sat Jan 25 03:41:27 2003 From: natmichaels at hotmail.com (lorien_eve ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 03:41:27 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters changed? & PoA cast In-Reply-To: Message-ID: For the most part, the characters in the movie are who I think of when I read the book. I see Dumbledore, Crabbe and Goyle differently from the movie, but that's about it. At first, I didn't like the actors they picked to play Harry, Ron, and Hermione in the movie. But after seeing SS/PS I really loved the actors and came to accept them as the characters. Could they be MORE like the book? Yes. Harry should have black, more messed-up hair. Ron should be taller and skinnier. Hermione should have curlier hair and bigger teeth. But I think the actors did a great job, and they have become the people I see when I read/think about Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Lorien_Eve --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa Rourke " wrote: > Hi, I'm new to the Group. I jumped in because I was interested in > what might be being discussed about the casting for PoA, but this > caught my eye so I thought I'd add my 2 knuts. I don't think the > movies will ever erase my own mental images of the canon characters > because after reading Books 1-4 I felt compelled to try my hand at > drawing them as I envisioned them. While I did base a couple on the > movie actors (Daniel and Alan Rickman)for practice the majority were > a based on models that struck a chord with my imagination. So no > matter who they pick for the movies I still have my portraits to go > by. While I like Danile Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson in > the movies, not one of them was really close to how I pictured them > from the books. I suppose if anything's influenced the way I draw a > character it was probably fanfiction *lol* Which brings me to the > notion of the sexiness of certain characters *g* I think the reason > PoA is the most popular book for many fans (myself included)is > because of the introduction of 2 very compelling adult characters- > Lupin and Sirius. Lupin was, from his introduction on the train, my > favorite JKR character. Kind, compassionate, gentle-from my PoV this > is what made him "sexy". Even though he was thin and sickly I still > envisioned him and drew him as handsome with air of inner strength. > David Thewlis was a bit of a dissapointment for me but I'm still > willing to keep an open mind and pray that he's as good an actor as a > lot of people claim. If not I still have my pictures and my > imagination :-) > Sorry for the long first post! > > Lisa R. From insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 25 04:34:59 2003 From: insanus_scottus at yahoo.co.uk (Scott ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 04:34:59 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters changed? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I think this is a really interesting question that...erm...well I *hate* to say that I think of the movie characters now, because that makes my imagination sound a bit uhhh nonexistent, and that simply isn't true. (not that I'm trying to offend anyone by that remark, but you know what I mean...right?) The truth is I think it's a mixture of the two. However more than picturing Dan et al. when I read I *hear* them. There are definitely some lines that come out in Dan's voice in my head. Is that weird? Assuming clever list format: Characters that have in some way fused with my imagination --Dan Radcliffe as Harry --Emma Watson as Hermione --Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid --Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall --Sean Biggerstaff as Oliver Wood --John Hurt as Ollivander --Alan Rickman as Snape (sometimes. I'm beginning to warm to that odd cadence in voice- something that in the past really grated on my nerves.) --David Bradley as Argus Filch --Christian Coulson as Tom Riddle Hmmm... --Jason Issacs...I can't decide --Rupert Grint...??? Characters that...well...not so much. --Richard Harris as Dumbledore --The Phelps twins as Gred and Forge --Dobby --Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy --whatever it was as Firenze That's really the only one's I can think of at the moment...well think of with the aid of imdb.com that is... speaking of which did anyone ever decide if that Knockturn Alley witch *was* Jo? I'mSure it's been mentioned, but imdb lists her for the part. Seriously though for the most part the characters do fit in some form or fashion. I also, after watching SS, went back and read CoS *trying* to picture the characters and...it didn't really fit. Now I find that they slip in unwarranted. (because they fit so well and not because I am being lax.) Speaking of which..more than characters I think that the movies have changed my sense of the settings...I *love* the Gryffindor Common room (I want to live there), and for some reason I always though the Dursley's house was detached or semi-detached, never in a row, but now I see it a bit differently. I didn't picture the King's Cross barrier quite like that, but then thats always been a problem as there isn't a barrier b/w 9and10 at all. The Castle, well...I love the great hall it's just how I imagined it, but there doesn't seem to be an entrance hall...hmmm. I'd be interested to know what you guys thought of the sets in addition to characters. Scott From hp at plum.cream.org Sat Jan 25 08:47:22 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 08:47:22 -0000 Subject: Has you image of the characters change?/PoA casting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Steve wrote: > So, is there even the remotes chance that the movie has corrupted or > adjusted your vision of the characters and their world? For many reasons (including my computer having literally blown up!), I've ben offline since before Christmas, and as this is a topic I was thinking about myself yesterday, I thought I'd make my re-appearance in this thread... There's one common thread between the comments posted to date: all those who have posted knew the books inside out before seeing the PS/SS movie. I'd like to make a few observations as someone who didn't read any of the HP books until I'd seen the first movie twice. Perhaps I'm strange, but When I read books I don't actually visualise characters very much, regardless of how well they are described or in how much detail. I do, however, *hear* them very clearly, and in that respect, I think the HP casting to date has been very well done, with just a few exceptions. I first read PS/SS immediately after seeing the movie (I bought the book on my way home from the cinema, and the remaining three books the next day) and I didn't really feel too many (important) discrepancies between my imagination and what I'd seen on the screen. Having since read each of the books cover-to-cover twice each, and various bits and pieces several times more for the purposes of discussions, I've managed to build up my own picture of how Harry and and hs world "feel" rather than how they *look*, and I'm able to distance myself from the screen "feelings" with no trouble at all. Probably my most significant problem with the casting is the Weasley kids. Frankly (and this isn't just about the book-to-screen translation of their apparance), Percy, the twins and Ron simply don't look like they could possibly be related to each other. Furthermore, their spoken English very clearly comes from different parts of the country (and different social classes). I'm also particularly peeved about Percy's not wearing glasses (although Chris Rankin does wear them!). That aside, and this is a topic I've raised before, one thing which I find just a little disconcerting are the ages of some of the actors, which screws up my imagined inter-relationships. For instance, in the books I always see Vernon and Petunia as rather young (in my imagination, Petunia is significantly younger than Lily, by 5 or more years). It came as something of a shock to me to discover that Richard Griffiths is a few months younger than Alan Rickman, although he appears considerably older (I don't just mean when made up as the HP characters). He appears to be in his early sixties (most of Griffiths' roles in the last few years have been retired gentlemen), whch I think is far too old. Whilst I think Rickman is doing a terrific job, and despite looking about 7 or 8 years younger than his age (even without makeup), he looks at least 10 years older than I imagine Snape (I always imagined Snape to be in his late 30s, even before I discovered what JKR's views are), rather than his late 40s as portrayed by Rickman. (Part of the reason I imagined Snape that age is because I had a very Snape- like teacher myself, and he was in his mid-30s at the time.) Whilst I don't have a view about whether or not Rickman is "sexy", he's certainly more handsome than I imagine Snape to be. I'd always imagined Lucius and Arthur to be rough contemporaries (which is pretty much the case with Isaacs and Williams); however, the pair of them should be *older* than MWPP/Snape/etc., rather than considerably younger (I won't bother with the canon rationale for that deduction), or indeed contemporaries - Oldman is of Williams' vintage, and Thewlis is of Isaacs'. As I've said many, many times before, Snape and Lupin/Black/Pettigrew need to be believable contemporaries. Regardless of Rickman's excellent condition, frankly I don't buy it with the announced or rumoured casting for PoA. Incidentally, Timothy Spall is absolutely NOT my imagined Pettigrew. I can certainly see him doing a great job in the role, but my main objection is that he's simply too big! Furthermore, for his brief appearance, he has to be somewhat ill and badly-fed. Spall could *never* look underfed (at least, not without losing half his bulk!). :-) I also have a big problem with Dobby. Not having had the dubious benefit of the American editions of the books with their chapter illustrations, I didn't have quite as "concrete" an image of how Dobby should look as some folks, but apart from his eyes, his apparance isn't what I expected. Furthermore, I have always imagined him as quite a young House-Elf - his revolutionary ideas and willingness to help Harry don't fit with the more mature appearance the animators gave him. Of course, who's to say what a young House- Elf looks like, and how can one make jugments about the character's age from his appearance, but even so, it doesn't seem quite right to me. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Jan 25 11:25:10 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:25:10 -0000 Subject: Gary Oldman as Black = Genious!!! In-Reply-To: <004801c2c3cc$5b753d70$2101a8c0@ACTIONSTEEL.COM> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve Binch" wrote: > I have always thought Gary Oldman ruled Hollywood as the number > one bad guy actor. It was genious to cast him as Black. > > ...edited... > > On another note, why do you all think that Lupin should be sexy? I > don't think it ever made mention of any sexyness in the books. > -end this part- bboy_mn: I think Oldman is a very versatile actor and will be able to pull the part off nicely, but he isn't who I would have preferred to have play the part. Of course, they need to give him a Jason Carter or Viggo Mortensen look; long hair and beard. I have seen photos of Oldman made up that way, and he does look good. So bottomline, he's not my choice, but I'm sure he will do a good job. Should Lupin be sexy? Exactly what is sexy? I certainly agree he shouldn't be a hollywood pretty boy. He does need to have a 'real person' down to earth quality about him. I think he is modestly attractive. He is afteral relatively young, although he shows a great deal of stress. Oldman could have easily looked the part of Lupin, but I'm not sure if he could have come across with Lupin's gentleness. In many senses, Lupin is like Hagrid; he is a gentle monster. He tempers his darkside with a deep, understated, and genuine warmth. I'm not familiar enough with Oldman's work to know if he could pull that off. I will agree, as I said, that a 'pretty boy' for Lupin's part is all wrong, but I don't see him as bland or plain or homely. He is modestly attractive, not in a Hollywood way, but in a normal person sort of way. -bboy_mn-end this part- > Steve continues" > ... And please don't call Danial Radcliff sexy either. This group > is for grown-ups and he is 15. > > -Steve bboy_mn: Who is now treading on dangerously thin ice, and equally, dangerously close to off topic. I know this has been said by this group, but I don't know if it's been said in this group. I don't understand why you have a problem with that. You can drop one letter from the word 'sexy' and claim that it is all about sex, but in common usage, the word means attractive. "Highly appealing or interesting; attractive", that is not the formal definition, but it is the common usage; slang. On general principle, I have to believe that a teenager can be 'sexy' to an adult, and not have anything to do with sex. There are lots of people I think are sexy, but at the same time, I wouldn't even remotely think of sex with them, not even in fantasies. One does not instantly imply the other. It's about beauty which is in the eye of the beholder of course, but also duende, charisma, a dynamic appeal, a certain presents. But, you do have every right to your opinion, and equally have a right to express it. I'm not saying you are wrong; I'm saying that I don't think many people would agree with your apparent interpretation of the use of the word. Just a few thoughts, and I really hope the last part didn't go too far. bboy_mn From hp at plum.cream.org Sat Jan 25 18:13:02 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:13:02 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nicholas wrote: > I am thrilled to hear that the CoS video will be out as early as > April. Our local multiplexes are still showing the movie (three > times daily), and expect to continue doing so until mid-February, > when the kids have a half-term holiday from school; that means only > two months between screen and video... I suspect that might be a little over-optimistic. I don't know what's "local" for you, but here in Birmingham (and surrounding areas), the dozen or so multiplexes are taking CoS off tomorrow (Sunday). One or two will still have a couple of showings next weekend, and one still has three shows daily until Thursday but that's it for them as well (just my luck - it's about an hour's travel each way for me to get there!). As for half term, it should be noted that Wild Thornberrys comes out on 7th February, and Treasure Planet on the 14th for that audience (for most schools, half term will be w/c Monday 17th February). I don't see any of the cinemas around here reintroducing CoS after it's been off for a couple of weeks, even if spare auditoria could be found. Incidentally, Die Another Day (released a week after CoS) and Star Trek Nemesis (released 3rd Jan) have already disappeared from all Birmingam cinemas, so CoS has really done well for itself still to be in the UK top ten last week! > Nicholas > off to see showing number 14 tomorrow... GulPlum AKA RIchard, who's just come back from his 30-somethingth viewing (I lost count several weeks ago but have a collection of at least 28 ticket stubs, the earliest of which is dated 28th Nov!) and was surprised to be in the company of a sizeable audience! I might just go again tomorrow as it'll probably be my last chance... From itzregina at hanson.net Sat Jan 25 20:01:07 2003 From: itzregina at hanson.net (Regina ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 20:01:07 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "GulPlum " wrote: > Nicholas wrote: > > > I am thrilled to hear that the CoS video will be out as early as > > April. Our local multiplexes are still showing the movie (three > > times daily), and expect to continue doing so until mid-February, > > when the kids have a half-term holiday from school; that means only > > two months between screen and video... > > I suspect that might be a little over-optimistic. I don't know > what's "local" for you, but here in Birmingham (and surrounding > areas), the dozen or so multiplexes are taking CoS off tomorrow > (Sunday). > > Nicholas > > off to see showing number 14 tomorrow... *********** > > GulPlum AKA RIchard, who's just come back from his 30-somethingth > viewing (I lost count several weeks ago but have a collection of at > least 28 ticket stubs, the earliest of which is dated 28th Nov!) and > was surprised to be in the company of a sizeable audience! > > I might just go again tomorrow as it'll probably be my last chance... ******* You guys are lucky! COS was taken off most of our Central California theaters Christmas Eve. They did the same thing to PS/SS. I don't know why they don't keep it on until the holdays are over. I DID manage to see it 8 times at the local theater and then 2 more times at the base theater when they showed it for a weekend. Gina From lilac_bearry at yahoo.com Sat Jan 25 20:42:50 2003 From: lilac_bearry at yahoo.com (Lilac) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 12:42:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Has your image of the characters changed? & PoA cast Message-ID: <20030125204250.86882.qmail@web40308.mail.yahoo.com> Lisa Rourke said: I don't think the movies will ever erase my own mental images of the canon characters because after reading Books 1-4 I felt compelled to try my hand at drawing them as I envisioned them. While I did base a couple on the movie actors (Daniel and Alan Rickman)for practice the majority were a based on models that struck a chord with my imagination. So no matter who they pick for the movies I still have my portraits to go by. Now Me: And *I* have *your* portraits to go by as well, Lisa. They are absolutely splendid! If anyone has not seen Lisa's artwork, you are truly missing out: http://www.sugarquill.net/index.php?action=profile&id=260 scroll down the page to click on the different picture titles. I don't think it will happen, but if the powers that be can get Thewlis (sic?) to look like your Winter Lupin, then I will be very happy with the POA movie, indeed! ~Lilac, who really, really hopes this is the same Lisa Rourke that drew these pictures... ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* "Professor, can you show me that blocking thing again?" Lockhart cuffed Harry merrily on the shoulder. "Just do what I did, Harry!" "What, drop my wand?" --Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From s_ings at yahoo.com Sat Jan 25 23:48:12 2003 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:48:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030125234812.36899.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Regina " wrote: > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "GulPlum > " > ******* > > You guys are lucky! COS was taken off most of our > Central > California theaters Christmas Eve. They did the > same thing to > PS/SS. I don't know why they don't keep it on until > the holdays are > over. I DID manage to see it 8 times at the local > theater and then 2 > more times at the base theater when they showed it > for a weekend. > > Gina > It's still playing at the theatre I work at as well, though I suspect it'll be gone after it's last show on Thursday. It's down to one screening a day. It's in one of the smaller screening rooms (seating 204) and sold about half it's seats today. And a surprising number of people were seeing it for the first time! Sheryll ===== "We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times." blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26 ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca From LMRourke at yahoo.com Sat Jan 25 23:51:49 2003 From: LMRourke at yahoo.com (Lisa Rourke ) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 23:51:49 -0000 Subject: My artwork and Character ages In-Reply-To: <20030125204250.86882.qmail@web40308.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Yes, Lilac, that's my artwork! Thank you so much for your comments and the plug!^_^ Actually, I'd be happy if they could make Thewlis look like my (Moony)The new DADA teacher :-) He's more the correct age. As for the ages of the contemporaries (Severus, Sirius, Remus and Peter) I was always under the impression that in PoA they were in their mid 30's. I also got the impression that Lucius and Arthur were about the same age but definitely older than the above mentioned. I really like Alan Rickman as Snape but casting a considerably older actor (he's 54 I think) has skewed who they could cast as Lupin and Sirius. Gary Oldman is almost 45 and Thewlis is I believe almost 40. But since Sirius has had 12 hard years in Azkaban and Lupin is sickly they can "age" them up somewhat, I guess. Lisa P.S. Since you already plugged my artwork, Lilac, I don't feel so guilty posting this:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LMRourkeArtGallery/ It's my yahoo Group that I started to house all my artwork (HP, LoTR and others) :-) From rvotaw at i-55.com Sun Jan 26 03:08:55 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 21:08:55 -0600 Subject: Rupert's quote about Ron Message-ID: <005201c2c4e8$4397e500$d5a1cdd1@RVotaw> Anyone remember a while back, probably around November when CoS came out, someone remembered a quote from Rupert in which he said Ron was a wimp? And most of us couldn't remember it, and I don't remember if it was ever found. Anyway, I've been collecting older HP mags mostly from ebay (yes, I'm obsessed) and got one in today. It's the 16 special that came out prior to SS/PS release. Interviews with various cast and so on, including Rupert. They ask: "How are you and Ron similar?" Rupert answers (after comments about hair/siblings) " . . . Ron is a wimp and I get scared easily too." Well, I still disagree with him, Ron's not a wimp. Anyway, I just came across that quote and couldn't remember if we'd ever found it before. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ArtsyLynda at aol.com Sat Jan 25 16:10:27 2003 From: ArtsyLynda at aol.com (ArtsyLynda at aol.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:10:27 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Has your image of the characters changed? Message-ID: <16e.19b279bd.2b6410f3@aol.com> I'll use this handy-dandy list format of Mellissa McCarthy's to answer: > Actors have fused with the characters in my mind: Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter (the vast majority of the time - I thought that "Clint Eastwood" moment was out of character too) > Emma Watson as Hermione Granger (except Emma is prettier than Hermione seems > in the first book) > Robbie Coltrane as Rubeus Hagrid -- absolutely! > Richard Griffiths as Vernon Dursley -- except his hair in the book is > black, not light > Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall -- excellent! > Richard Harris as Professor Dumbledore -- outstanding! > Warwick Davis as Professor Flitwick -- he's also the head Goblin at > Gringott's -- what kind of being is Flitwick, anyway? He's perfect in this > part. > Zoe Wanamaker as Madam Hooch -- yes > Simon Fisher-Becker as The Fat Friar -- I didn't have that strong an > impression of him from the book, so the guy portraying him is doing fine. Alan Rickman as Snape -- he is one of my favorites, and I LOVE his over-the-top, scenery-chewing performance! And how does he always get that cape to fly like that? JOhn Cleese as Nearly Headless Nick -- I like Cleese and in this part, I do see Cleese before Nick, but he does the part with great panache -- quite suitable to dear Nick, I believe. Fred and George Weasley (I can't think of the actors' names) -- they are exactly as I pictured them. Oliver Wood -- he's even better than I pictured him -- I love his accent ;-> Neville -- the boy playing him suits that character well. Malfoy and his father -- I can't stand the kid who plays Malfoy, which is appropriate since Malfoy is such a bully! His father is played with the same delicious scenery-chewing skill as Snape -- I dislike the character but love to watch that actor play him. Kenneth Branaugh as Gilderoy -- another over-the-top actor who did a phenomenal job IMHO > Actors do not match my vision of the characters: > Julie Walters as Molly Weasley > Fiona Shaw as Petunia Dursley > Chris Rankin as Percy Weasley > Dudley is supposed to be blond, and the kid playing him has dark hair -- other than that, he's a pretty good Dudley. Seamus and Dean -- they have more character in the books than in the movie -- both boys just kind of fade into the woodwork, aren't distinctive enough looking to remember, "oh yeah, they're in Harry's year, in his dorm, etc." Personally, I hope they keep the same actors throughout the series despite the fact the kids are growing faster than the books. Lots of movies and TV shows have people in their 20's playing teenagers. Harry might not be a "little" boy for the later movies, but in reality, most boys 15 and over that will be normal size at maturity have started to grow by then. They might look immature, but they aren't necessarily "little" unless they're always going to be small. Our son was very tiny for his age until he hit 14 -- then he grew 10 inches in one year and he eventually was 6'2"! Matt Damon just played 15 to 30's, I guess, in "Catch Me if You Can" and was convincing at every age -- I see no reason Dan Radcliffe and the rest can't do the same. JMHO. Lynda Sappington Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold and sterling silver. From ArtsyLynda at aol.com Sat Jan 25 16:14:31 2003 From: ArtsyLynda at aol.com (ArtsyLynda at aol.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:14:31 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]has your image of the characters changed? & PoA cast Message-ID: <165.1a38e29d.2b6411e7@aol.com> In a message dated 1/25/2003 9:30:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes: > Could they be MORE like the book? Yes. Harry > should have black, more messed-up hair. Ron should be taller and > skinnier. Hermione should have curlier hair and bigger teeth. But I > think the actors did a great job, and they have become the people I > see when I read/think about Harry, Ron, and Hermione. > I've also wondered why they didn't dye Dan's hair (and Vernon's and Dudley's for that matter) so they matched the book -- and why not use gel or something to give Dan cowlicks, which must be why his hair won't lay flat (unless he just refuses to comb it, which doesn't seem appropriate -- somehow he seems like a decently-behaved boy, and he does know where he puts things, so he must be somewhat tidy in his habits -- I did say "somewhat"!! LOL) I thought Hermione's hair was plenty bushy, but I didn't really notice her teeth as being oversized -- they are, but not enough for anyone to make fun of them or use them as a weapon of humiliation as Malfoy did. JMHO Lynda Sappington Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold and sterling silver. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ArtsyLynda at aol.com Sat Jan 25 16:19:49 2003 From: ArtsyLynda at aol.com (ArtsyLynda at aol.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:19:49 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Has your image of the SETS changed? (was "of the characters") Message-ID: <3e.2b03adbd.2b641325@aol.com> Scott wrote: > I think that the movies have > changed my sense of the settings...I *love* the Gryffindor Common > room (I want to live there), and for some reason I always though the > Dursley's house was detached or semi-detached, never in a row, but > now I see it a bit differently. > > I didn't picture the King's Cross barrier quite like that, but then > thats always been a problem as there isn't a barrier b/w 9and10 at > all. > > The Castle, well...I love the great hall it's just how I imagined > it, but there doesn't seem to be an entrance hall...hmmm. > > I think the movie sets brought the settings more to life than the book did, amazingly enough. I'm an artist and I pay close attention to the artistry involved in set design. The Chamber of Secrets, the Great Hall, so many other places are full of exquisite design that was never mentioned in the book. I particularly like the sculpture that is part of Dumbledore's spiral staircase -- wonderful work! And the various paintings and sculptures in the building, and the building itself -- just outstanding. There's always something new to discover every time I watch either movie, just as the books are so full of rich detail they stay fresh and intriguing through repeated readings. Lynda Sappington Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold and sterling silver. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com Sun Jan 26 04:53:07 2003 From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 20:53:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: transcript [was] panel event with Cuaron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030126045307.50693.qmail@web21107.mail.yahoo.com> As a follow-up to the post below, here are some links for your reading pleasure. Please be forwarned that this event had nothing to do with HP and involved quite a diverse groups of people. In other words, Cuaron is just one in the big crowd. Nevertheless, it's an interesting read. Personally, I can't believe they thought the time they had allotted would be enough. In other respects, the event was well put together and Cuaron made some interesting points. Petra a n :) http://www.wga.org/pr/0103/membernews0103.html for pulled quotes & soundbites http://www.wga.org/craft/wehateyou/wehateyou.html for brief intro and some background http://www.wga.org/craft/wehateyou/WeHateYou.pdf the actual transcript REMINDER: any discussion of the actual politics IS OFF-TOPIC HERE. Even I know that... * * * I had wrote: > If you are in the Los Angeles area this > Thursday > and interested in taking a personal measure of > Cuaron, email me (ms_petra_pan AT yahoo.com) > for > the details. > > Cuaron is scheduled to sit on a panel entitled > "We Hate You (But Please Keep Sending Us > Baywatch), The Impact of American Entertainment > on the World." > > Obviously not a Cuaron-centric (or for that > matter, HP-centric) event but should be an > interesting (and free!) chance to hear the man > speak...as long as his schedule permits his > attendance. > > The panel discussion will take place on > Thursday, > December 5, from 7:30 to 9 P.M. with a > reception > to follow. > > Petra > a > n :) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From siskiou at earthlink.net Sun Jan 26 05:46:42 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 21:46:42 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <199206854331.20030125214642@earthlink.net> Hi, Saturday, January 25, 2003, 12:01:07 PM, itzregina at hanson.net wrote: > You guys are lucky! COS was taken off most of our Central > California theaters Christmas Eve. Here in my part of Oregon it's still on in the main theaters, though down to 2 showings. And after that it'll move into the "cheap" theater ($1 for the matinee and $1.50 for the other showings) :) I'll certainly see it there a few times! You can't beat the price, even though the seats are a bit less comfortable and the screen not quite as large. If I'm lucky, the DVD will be out by the time it gets taken off here! -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Jan 26 07:43:26 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 07:43:26 -0000 Subject: Rupert's quote about Ron In-Reply-To: <005201c2c4e8$4397e500$d5a1cdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" wrote: > ...edited... > > They ask: "How are you and Ron similar?" > Rupert answers (after comments about hair/siblings) " . . . Ron is > a wimp and I get scared easily too." > > Well, I still disagree with him, Ron's not a wimp. Anyway, I just > came across that quote and couldn't remember if we'd ever found it > before. > > Richelle bboy_mn: I rememvber it slightly different so maybe there are two interviews. But I have to wonder if this is his impression of Ron in the book, or if this is the direction they are pushing his character in the movie. I liked Rupert performance. When he was scared in the car/tree and in the forest, that intensity got to me. It amplified the scene because he had it seem real. He has a very expressive face and not just for comedy. All his emotion even subtle one come across clearly in hi s expression and body language. But they didn't give him anything to balance his role. They gave all his best lines to Hermione. I can understand that, because without those lines Hermione would have had nothing to say. Can you think of any thing Hermione said in the movie that she actually said in the book. I think 90% of her lines belonged to someone else. Back to my point, I have to wonder if Rupert wasn't expressing a slight frustration at the 'dumbing down' of Ron in the movie? This is a trend that I really really hope does not carry over into Prisoner of Azkaban. Just a thought. bboy_mn From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Sun Jan 26 09:33:12 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 09:33:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's hair & his (sometimes) green eyes Message-ID: I did notice when I first watched SS that Harry's hair wasn't quite as dishelved as usually described in the book, but after a while I didn't even notice. Now I'm kind of glad they didn't make his hair too wild all the time or it might have been too distracting to the action going on in the movie. As for the color, I agree the film makers could have insisted that Radcliffe dye his hair black for better conformity to the books' Harry, but I can't blame them for not wanting to make an 11-year-old dye his hair. Chris Colombus is always being described as a kid-friendly director (plus he has four of his own), so I can imagine him being the one who refused to insist on a dye job. With all the mentions on the list of how Daniel Radcliffe's hair isn't quite as unruly as Harry's hair is described in the books, I'd thought I'd bring up a small thing that annoys me considerably. I'm talking about the blue eyes Harry has in most scenes of the movie. Don't get me wrong - Daniel Radcliffe's eyes are a beautiful blue (see more on this below), but Harry's eyes are *supposed* to be brilliant green! With what SFX people can do nowadays, they could easily have changed Harry's eye color to brilliant green consistently within every frame of the movie. But, for some reason they didn't and Harry's eyes are pale green in some scenes and pale blue (Dan's real eye color) in others. I wish the filmaker's had shown more consistency with Harry's eye color, especially since Harry's eye color *may* have some signifigance to the story later on. Of course, Daniel Radcliffe can't help his eye color and the movie would never have been made if they'd held out for a Daniel Radcliffe twin with brilliant green eyes. :) But I do hope that eye color anomaly is fixed in PoA. A quick word about Daniel Radcliffe's eye color - they are quite a lovely blue, aren't they? When I saw his eye color I began thinking about how many actors have blue eyes. I've noticed many of the top- paid and most popular stars have noticably blue eyes. I think this is because blue eyes photograph really well. Green eyes photograph fairly well too, but blue eyes really dazzle when lighted and photographed well. Plus blue eyes really attract a person's attention - I know I notice eye color a lot. I think other people really notice eye colors as well because both my children have blue eyes and strangers constantly comment on their blue eyes. I've even had a few comments on my own rather boring green eyes, so I'm thinking most people just really like looking at eye color. I've noticed those deep, rich brown eye colors as well that some people are so lucky to have. Diana -wishing I had brilliant green eyes From myrrhmyrrh at netzero.net Sun Jan 26 15:01:30 2003 From: myrrhmyrrh at netzero.net (myrrh321 ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 15:01:30 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas /How many times have you sennCoS In-Reply-To: <199206854331.20030125214642@earthlink.net> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne wrote: > Hi, > How uncanny! I was just stewing over this subject this weekend!!! CoS is gone from all but a very few (maybe 3) suburban theatres here in Philadelphia, Pennsylania. I had planned to see it again ( It would have only been my third time )on Saturday, but looking at the weekend listings, found it was not showing anywhere in the immediate city area...:-( When CoS came out, I had visions of blissful after-work sessions at the movie theaters after the holidays. BUT right after Christmas all showings were cut to matinees only-all before 3pm--so the only time I could go was on the weekends and-wouldn't you know-until recently my weekends have been hectic hell. With the movie showing only twice before 3, there was no way I could see it. Now I really can't wait for the DVD!!! I was wondering, just who orchestrates these movie timings? Since school children aren't allowed in theatres (w/o an adult) during school hours, and MOST adults are working and don't usually have a 3- 4 hour block to skip off work--just who did they think would be in the theatres during those hours? Makes me wonder if CoS would have had a much bigger gross if not for the matinee status? I'm sure many more adults would have liked to see it and/or take their children to see it at a more resonable time than the theatres were showing. The one Saturday I did get to see it the theatre(2nd(last)showing of the day)was packed. Sorry this is so long-but I really,really,really wanted to see CoS this weekend and I'm frustrated!!! Come on April!!:-) DeNece-putting on the CoS soundtrack to ease her frustration... From blessedbrian at yahoo.com Sun Jan 26 16:50:08 2003 From: blessedbrian at yahoo.com (Brian Cordova ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 16:50:08 -0000 Subject: How many times did you see CoS in the theater? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: We've seen it three times (of which I haven't done with a movie since the advent of video!). The last time was during the opening weekend of the new LOTR movie and yet there was still an excellent crowd for COS. Brian:-) --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana " wrote: > I'm curious as to how many times other list members have seen "Harry > Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" in the theater? > > I'm also hoping I can't be the only one who saw it six times. :) > > Diana -who even paid full evening-ticket price four of those times! From kristilynn5 at yahoo.com Sun Jan 26 18:55:26 2003 From: kristilynn5 at yahoo.com (Kristi Smith) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 10:55:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] How many times did you see CoS in the theater? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030126185526.2581.qmail@web40303.mail.yahoo.com> "Diana " wrote: I'm curious as to how many times other list members have seen "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" in the theater? I'm also hoping I can't be the only one who saw it six times. :) Diana -who even paid full evening-ticket price four of those times! I, too, have only seen it six times, at full price except for two times! So you are not alone, Diana! I could probably see it a dozen more and not be tired of it! ;) Kristi Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From natmichaels at hotmail.com Sun Jan 26 19:48:14 2003 From: natmichaels at hotmail.com (lorien_eve ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 19:48:14 -0000 Subject: Has your image of the characters changed? & PoA cast In-Reply-To: <20030125204250.86882.qmail@web40308.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Those pictures are just beautiful! Thanks so much for sharing them! Lorien_Eve --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lilac wrote: > > Lisa Rourke said: > > I don't think the movies will ever erase my own mental images of the canon characters because after reading Books 1-4 I felt compelled to try my hand at > drawing them as I envisioned them. While I did base a couple on the > movie actors (Daniel and Alan Rickman)for practice the majority were > a based on models that struck a chord with my imagination. So no > matter who they pick for the movies I still have my portraits to go by. > > Now Me: > > And *I* have *your* portraits to go by as well, Lisa. They are absolutely splendid! If anyone has not seen Lisa's artwork, you are truly missing out: > > http://www.sugarquill.net/index.php?action=profile&id=260 scroll down the page to click on the different picture titles. > > I don't think it will happen, but if the powers that be can get Thewlis (sic?) to look like your Winter Lupin, then I will be very happy with the POA movie, indeed! > > ~Lilac, who really, really hopes this is the same Lisa Rourke that drew these pictures... > > > > > > > > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > > "Professor, can you show me that blocking thing again?" > > Lockhart cuffed Harry merrily on the shoulder. "Just do what I did, Harry!" > > "What, drop my wand?" > > --Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets > > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From urbana at charter.net Sun Jan 26 20:10:58 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 20:10:58 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: <199206854331.20030125214642@earthlink.net> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne wrote: > > > Hi, > > Saturday, January 25, 2003, 12:01:07 PM, itzregina at h... wrote: > > > You guys are lucky! COS was taken off most of our Central > > California theaters Christmas Eve. > > Here in my part of Oregon it's still on in the main > theaters, though down to 2 showings. > Here in Madison, Wisconsin, CoS was (last I looked) down to 3 showings on one screen at a single theaters, whereas it started as 4 showings/day on 2-3 screens at 3 theaters. I am a bit ashamed to say I've only seen it once so far. My husband didn't want to go back to see it again (he doesn't quite "get" HP the way my kid and I do); and my daughter was too scared by the basilisk and said she didn't want to see it on the big screen again; and I didn't want to see it again all by myself. The good news is that the April 11th release of the CoS DVD will give us a good impetus to finally buy a DVD player - though a friend has told me to make sure we have DVD-compatible speakers so that we can take advantage of all the DVD features, e.g. surround sound. Is that really necessary? We can afford a DVD player right now (in the $200 range) but not sure we can spring for additional sound equipment at this time. Anne U (who really wants to see all those "extras" on the DVD) From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Sun Jan 26 21:23:12 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:23:12 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) Message-ID: Previously I said:- >> Our local multiplexes are still showing the movie (three >> times daily), and expect to continue doing so until mid-February, >> when the kids have a half-term holiday from school; that means only >> two months between screen and video... > Richard replied:- >I suspect that might be a little over-optimistic. I don't know >what's "local" for you, but here in Birmingham (and surrounding >areas), the dozen or so multiplexes are taking CoS off tomorrow >(Sunday). Possibly, but I have two reasons for thinking so; 1. PS/SS lasted until after half-term last year 2. Our nearest multiplex, when asked straight out, as we are considering options for our soon-to-be-seven-year-old's birthday outing, said that the decision came from head office, but that they expected it to be on until mid-Feb. It's certainly still going strong on three showings per day for the coming week. I see your point about upcoming children's movies, but last year there was 'Monsters Inc' and I think one other released at about this time, and that didn't affect PS/SS. However, I will keep you posted... Regards, Nicholas From hp at plum.cream.org Mon Jan 27 00:20:10 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 00:20:10 -0000 Subject: Star gazing (OT?) Message-ID: Probably only of interest to those in the UK... I caught a few minutes of "State of Mind" on ITV this evening and had a nagging suspicion that the herione's young son looked familiar. I then realised where I'd seen him before and the end credits confirmed that it was indeed Hugh Mitchell AKA Colin Creevey. There's a Part Two of this thing tomorrow (Monday) night if anyone's interested in seeing him do something a little more dramatic than running around with a camera. :-) Just thought I'd pass it on... From dozierwoman at hotmail.com Mon Jan 27 01:49:24 2003 From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 01:49:24 -0000 Subject: Has your image of the characters changed? In-Reply-To: <16e.19b279bd.2b6410f3@aol.com> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ArtsyLynda at a... wrote: > I'll use this handy-dandy list format of Mellissa McCarthy's to answer: > > > Actors have fused with the characters in my mind: > > Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter (the vast majority of the time - I thought > that "Clint Eastwood" moment was out of character too) > > > Emma Watson as Hermione Granger (except Emma is prettier than Hermione seems > > in the first book) > > Robbie Coltrane as Rubeus Hagrid -- absolutely! > > Richard Griffiths as Vernon Dursley -- except his hair in the book is > > black, not light > > Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall -- excellent! > > Richard Harris as Professor Dumbledore -- outstanding! > > Warwick Davis as Professor Flitwick -- he's also the head Goblin at > > Gringott's -- what kind of being is Flitwick, anyway? He's perfect in this > > part. > > Zoe Wanamaker as Madam Hooch -- yes > > Simon Fisher-Becker as The Fat Friar -- I didn't have that strong an > > impression of him from the book, so the guy portraying him is doing fine. > Alan Rickman as Snape -- he is one of my favorites, and I LOVE his > over-the-top, scenery-chewing performance! And how does he always get that > cape to fly like that? > JOhn Cleese as Nearly Headless Nick -- I like Cleese and in this part, I do > see Cleese before Nick, but he does the part with great panache -- quite > suitable to dear Nick, I believe. > Fred and George Weasley (I can't think of the actors' names) -- they are > exactly as I pictured them. > Oliver Wood -- he's even better than I pictured him -- I love his accent ;-> > Neville -- the boy playing him suits that character well. > Malfoy and his father -- I can't stand the kid who plays Malfoy, which is > appropriate since Malfoy is such a bully! His father is played with the same > delicious scenery-chewing skill as Snape -- I dislike the character but love > to watch that actor play him. > Kenneth Branaugh as Gilderoy -- another over-the-top actor who did a > phenomenal job IMHO > > > > Actors do not match my vision of the characters: > > Julie Walters as Molly Weasley > > Fiona Shaw as Petunia Dursley > > Chris Rankin as Percy Weasley > > Dudley is supposed to be blond, and the kid playing him has dark hair -- > other than that, he's a pretty good Dudley. > Seamus and Dean -- they have more character in the books than in the movie -- > both boys just kind of fade into the woodwork, aren't distinctive enough > looking to remember, "oh yeah, they're in Harry's year, in his dorm, etc." > > Personally, I hope they keep the same actors throughout the series despite > the fact the kids are growing faster than the books. Lots of movies and TV > shows have people in their 20's playing teenagers. Harry might not be a > "little" boy for the later movies, but in reality, most boys 15 and over that > will be normal size at maturity have started to grow by then. They might > look immature, but they aren't necessarily "little" unless they're always > going to be small. Our son was very tiny for his age until he hit 14 -- then > he grew 10 inches in one year and he eventually was 6'2"! Matt Damon just > played 15 to 30's, I guess, in "Catch Me if You Can" and was convincing at > every age -- I see no reason Dan Radcliffe and the rest can't do the same. > JMHO. > > > Lynda Sappington > Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast > porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in > 14K gold and sterling silver. Lynda, I happen to agree with you 100% about not replacing the actors who have already been in the previous 3 movies. I just don't think that new actors will have the same qualities on screen. I will be highly disappointed if cast changes are made. Lisa (who just had to put her 2 cents worth in.) From Patty at backstreet-wallpaper.net Mon Jan 27 03:14:05 2003 From: Patty at backstreet-wallpaper.net (Patty ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 03:14:05 -0000 Subject: How many times did you see CoS in the theater? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: "Diana wrote: > I'm curious as to how many times other list members have seen "Harry > Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" in the theater? > > I'm also hoping I can't be the only one who saw it six times. :) > > Diana -who even paid full evening-ticket price four of those times! I have seen CoS in the theaters 4 times. Last night being my fourth. Meanwhile two of my sisters have seen it 5 and 6 times each and my two nephews have also seen it 5 and 6 times each. So no Diane, you're not alone in the amount of times you've seen it. :) Trust me, if I had not been working at the time (when my sisters and nephews went without me) I too would have seen it 6 times. I am still amazed that it is still playing in the theaters, but it is getting more and more difficult to find one that is playing it. We had farther to travel to see it last night. Patty From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 05:58:59 2003 From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 05:58:59 -0000 Subject: Dumbing don of Ron: WAS Re: Rupert's quote about Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve " wrote: > I rememvber it slightly different so maybe there are two interviews. > But I have to wonder if this is his impression of Ron in the book, or > if this is the direction they are pushing his character in the movie. > > I liked Rupert performance. When he was scared in the car/tree and in > the forest, that intensity got to me. It amplified the scene because > he had it seem real. He has a very expressive face and not just for > comedy. All his emotion even subtle one come across clearly in hi s > expression and body language. But they didn't give him anything to > balance his role. They gave all his best lines to Hermione. > > I can understand that, because without those lines Hermione would have > had nothing to say. Can you think of any thing Hermione said in the > movie that she actually said in the book. I think 90% of her lines > belonged to someone else. > > Back to my point, I have to wonder if Rupert wasn't expressing a > slight frustration at the 'dumbing down' of Ron in the movie? > > This is a trend that I really really hope does not carry over into > Prisoner of Azkaban. > > Just a thought. > > bboy_mn This is perhaps the most insidious of the changes Columbus has wrought in the two movies so far, with the trend accelerating in CoS. What were three balanced, complex individuals, with differing characters and different strengths, has become three cartoons: Harry the Hero; Hermione the Brain; and Ron the Clown. This is awful, and belies the notion that Columbus has been "faithful" to the books. I am glad that there will be a change in director, if for no other reason than to stop this trend (I certainly hope he will). As for Hermione's lines, if they simply gave her the opportunity to say those things she said in the books, Hermione would have plenty to say, and all of it interesting. Haggridd From manda at qx.net Mon Jan 27 16:52:00 2003 From: manda at qx.net (Amanda Pressnell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 08:52:00 -0800 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: <1043673069.2416.84891.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3E34F330.14467.129750F@localhost> "Anne " wrote: > > The good news is that the April 11th release of > the CoS DVD will give us a good impetus to finally buy a DVD player - > though a friend has told me to make sure we have DVD-compatible > speakers so that we can take advantage of all the DVD features, e.g. > surround sound. Is that really necessary? We can afford a DVD player > right now (in the $200 range) but not sure we can spring for > additional sound equipment at this time. Nah.. it's not necessary. We got a $120 DVD player for Christmas and [having watched the VHS 25+ times *blushes*] it's amazing what sound quality we get just out of the two little speakers built into the TV. I once scoffed at people raving about DVD quality sound, but color me impressed. > Anne U > (who really wants to see all those "extras" on the DVD) I was rather unimpressed by the SS/PS extras. When you get right down to it, the only really good extras are the deleted scenes. I'm glad the COS DVD will have lots of interviews and stuff. Here's a peek at the cover. http://www.dvdpricesearch.com/cgi-bin/dvdcalc2?cmd=calc&tmpCart=23458 Yeah, it's the same as the theatrical poster, but it gave me a little thrill to see it. :-) And for the record, I only got to see COS twice in the theater (and one was that disastrous time with the disappearing howler scene). We wanted to see it a third time, but my local small town theater took it off a week before Christmas. *sigh* Manda From dozierwoman at hotmail.com Mon Jan 27 15:13:29 2003 From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:13:29 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: <3E34F330.14467.129750F@localhost> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Pressnell" wrote: > "Anne " wrote: > > > > The good news is that the April 11th release of > > the CoS DVD will give us a good impetus to finally buy a DVD player - > > though a friend has told me to make sure we have DVD-compatible > > speakers so that we can take advantage of all the DVD features, e.g. > > surround sound. Is that really necessary? We can afford a DVD player > > right now (in the $200 range) but not sure we can spring for > > additional sound equipment at this time. > > Nah.. it's not necessary. We got a $120 DVD player for Christmas and [having watched the VHS 25+ times *blushes*] it's amazing what sound quality we get just out of the > two little speakers built into the TV. I once scoffed at people raving about DVD quality sound, but color me impressed. > > > Anne U > > (who really wants to see all those "extras" on the DVD) > > I was rather unimpressed by the SS/PS extras. When you get right down to it, the only really good extras are the deleted scenes. I'm glad the COS DVD will have lots of > interviews and stuff. Here's a peek at the cover. > > http://www.dvdpricesearch.com/cgi-bin/dvdcalc2? cmd=calc&tmpCart=23458 > > Yeah, it's the same as the theatrical poster, but it gave me a little thrill to see it. :-) > > And for the record, I only got to see COS twice in the theater (and one was that disastrous time with the disappearing howler scene). We wanted to see it a third time, but > my local small town theater took it off a week before Christmas. *sigh* > > Manda Thanks for the preview of the cover. But I do have a question, which is better, full screen or wide screen? Lisa (who is still trying to figure out technology) From urbana at charter.net Mon Jan 27 15:16:38 2003 From: urbana at charter.net (Anne ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:16:38 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: <3E34F330.14467.129750F@localhost> Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Pressnell" wrote: > "Anne " wrote: > > > > The good news is that the April 11th release of > > the CoS DVD will give us a good impetus to finally buy a DVD player - > > though a friend has told me to make sure we have DVD-compatible > > speakers so that we can take advantage of all the DVD features, e.g. > > surround sound. Is that really necessary? We can afford a DVD player > > right now (in the $200 range) but not sure we can spring for > > additional sound equipment at this time. > > Nah.. it's not necessary. We got a $120 DVD player for Christmas and [having watched the VHS 25+ times *blushes*] it's amazing what sound quality we get just out of the > two little speakers built into the TV. I once scoffed at people raving about DVD quality sound, but color me impressed. My real concern is that our *TV* can't handle the DVD sound quality. The TV most likely to be hooked up to the DVD is 13 years old and the picture quality on it sucks to the point where any white article of clothing ends up green around the edges (I don't know the technical term for this but it's very annoying to look at). I guess we're lucky our TV can handle 100+ cable channels. Anne U (so maybe we should buy a new TV *before* we get the DVD player...) From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Mon Jan 27 20:04:54 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:04:54 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Subject:=A0_Re:_Gary_Oldman_as_Black_=3D_Genious!!!?= Message-ID: ? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ? ? bboy_mn: I think Oldman is a very versatile actor and will be able to pull the part off nicely, but he isn't who I would have preferred to have play the part. Of course, they need to give him a Jason Carter or Viggo Mortensen look; long hair and beard. I have seen photos of Oldman made up that way, and he does look good. So bottomline, he's not my choice, but I'm sure he will do a good job. me: Exactly. Carter would have been my choice. However, I saw "State of Grace" the other day, and I think I know one of the reasons Oldman got the = job. That man has "dangerous and suffering lunatic" down to a tee, which suits how Sirius is presented in the story until his true history is reveal= ed. However, the book specifically describes him as once handsome, which does not fit Oldman. He could be attractive alright, but that is not the same as= handsome. Still, I'm increasingly fine with the Sirius casting. bboy_mn: dangerously close to off topic. You can drop one letter from the word 'sexy' and claim that it is all about sex, but in common usage, the word means attractive. "Highly appealing or interesting; attractive", that is not the formal definition, but it is the common usage; slang. me:(dangerously close to off topic.) Can't agree. "Sexy" to me is attractive with the subtext "desireable." Just= "attractive" on the other hand works in all kinds of contexts, like "duende= , charisma, a dynamic appeal, a certain presence". Just my two knuts. From kechelsen at aol.com Mon Jan 27 21:09:41 2003 From: kechelsen at aol.com (kathye_c ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:09:41 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Subject:=A0_Re:_Gary_Oldman_as_Black_=3D_Genious!!!?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I've been in and out of here of late so maybe I've missed something. Has Gary Oldman been officially named as playing Sirius Black? Thanks. Kathy From divaclv at aol.com Mon Jan 27 23:30:09 2003 From: divaclv at aol.com (c_voth312 ) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:30:09 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Subject:=A0_Re:_Gary_Oldman_as_Black_=3D_Genious!!!?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "kathye_c " wrote: > I've been in and out of here of late so maybe I've missed something. > Has Gary Oldman been officially named as playing Sirius Black? The last I heard (although I haven't exactly been keeping my ear constantly to the ground on this subject) was that he was "in talks" to play the role--which I think means that the notion has been discussed by Oldman and the production staff, but no contracts have been signed as yet so it's not "official." ~Christi From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 28 01:34:24 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:34:24 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wide/full screen/ DVD players (was Re: CoS still on in cinemas)/ "sexy" (was Oldman as Sirius) References: Message-ID: <019001c2c66d$641c8200$f79ccdd1@RVotaw> Lisa writes: > Thanks for the preview of the cover. But I do have a question, which > is better, full screen or wide screen? Full screen. Some movies wide screen is better, but with HP (at least SS/PS) you lose more with the wide screen than you do with the full screen. Make sense? There's a site somewhere that has some pictures comparing the shots, and to me the wide screen cuts off so much it takes away from the movie. Like part of Harry's letter, things like that are important to me! Anne U. writes: > My real concern is that our *TV* can't handle the DVD sound quality. > The TV most likely to be hooked up to the DVD is 13 years old and the > picture quality on it sucks to the point where any white article of > clothing ends up green around the edges (I don't know the technical > term for this but it's very annoying to look at). I guess we're lucky > our TV can handle 100+ cable channels. I don't even have a TV, I have an ancient computer monitor that's hooked up to my DVD/VCR. The sound was okay through it, but I figured out how to hook it up so the picture goes to it and the sound goes to the big speakers on my stereo system. Which is awesome, but can definitely blast you out of the room if you're not careful! bboy_mn: >>You can drop one letter from the word 'sexy' and claim that it >>is all about sex, but in common usage, the word means attractive. >>"Highly appealing or interesting; attractive", that is not the formal >>definition, but it is the common usage; slang. Sophiamcl writes:(dangerously close to off topic.) >Can't agree. "Sexy" to me is attractive with the subtext "desireable." Just= >"attractive" on the other hand works in all kinds of contexts, like "duende= >, charisma, a dynamic appeal, a certain presence". Just my two knuts. I object. I have never in my life used the word "sexy" to mean desirable. I suppose I get this from my aunt, who uses the term very loosely. For example, she loves the way I wear my socks folded down, it shows my sexy ankles. Is there anything desirable about my ankles? I think not. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Rosenatti at aol.com Tue Jan 28 02:04:51 2003 From: Rosenatti at aol.com (rosenatti ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 02:04:51 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Subject:=A0_Re:_Gary_Oldman_as_Black_=3D_Genious!!!?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The wire story I saw confirming Thewlis as Lupin referred to Gary Oldman as the "front runner" for Sirius. It might mean he's indeed the top contender; it might mean he's the only contender they know of. Time will tell... though I must admit I'm rooting for Oldman, because he's one of the few actors who could make me feel any sympathy for Sirius "The Prank" Black. *ducks, gets hit anyway* > > The last I heard (although I haven't exactly been keeping my ear > constantly to the ground on this subject) was that he was "in talks" > to play the role--which I think means that the notion has been > discussed by Oldman and the production staff, but no contracts have > been signed as yet so it's not "official." > > ~Christi From illyana at mindspring.com Tue Jan 28 02:53:53 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:53:53 -0700 Subject: Widescreen is better! (was Re: Wide/full screen/ DVD players) In-Reply-To: <019001c2c66d$641c8200$f79ccdd1@RVotaw> References: <019001c2c66d$641c8200$f79ccdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: >Lisa writes: > >> Thanks for the preview of the cover. But I do have a question, which >> is better, full screen or wide screen? > >Full screen. Some movies wide screen is better, but with HP (at >least SS/PS) you lose more with the wide screen than you do with the >full screen. Make sense? There's a site somewhere that has some >pictures comparing the shots, and to me the wide screen cuts off so >much it takes away from the movie. Like part of Harry's letter, >things like that are important to me! > I believe that Richelle is the person who wrote the response to Lisa's post, but there was no signature, so I am just taking the name attached to the email. Anyway, I know that this is totally off-topic, but I would really like to reply, and I don't know if this person is on the OT list. I beg to differ regarding the full vs. widescreen. You say that widescreen "cuts off so much." This is not true. The film that is used to make a movie has a 4x3 aspect ratio - this is the same aspect ratio as a normal TV. When a movie is filmed in widescreen (such as both of the Harry Potter movies), pieces of metal are placed at the top and the bottom of the gate on the camera - the gate is the area of the camera where the film will be exposed while shooting. It is basically the "shutter" of the camera - where the camera brings in information. This process is called "gating." Although parts of the film are not used during the filming, these pieces are not exposed and, therefore, do not contain any information (they did not film anything). This creates widescreen. When you watch Harry Potter in the theatre, you are viewing *everything* that the camera captured. When the movie is put onto a DVD in widescreen format, you are seeing exactly what you saw in the movie theatre - *nothing* is cut out. However, when you watch the full-screen version of Harry Potter on DVD (also referred to as "pan-and-scan"), you are cutting out part of the film. The way they make the fullscreen version of the DVD is that they enlarge the image to get rid of the "letterbox" (the black space at the top and bottom that is created by "gating"). In doing this, the left and right sides of the picture are pushed offscreen; therefore, you are *not* seeing everything that was shot. Pan-and-scan refers to the nauseating effect that is created when something important occurs in the left or right areas of the film that was cut-off and the frame is moved over to one of these areas. This quote is taken from the back of my Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone Widescreen DVD box: "Widescreen version presented in a "Letterbox" widescreen format preserving the "scope" aspect ratio of its original theatrical exhibition." (The word "scope" is the name that Warner Bros. chose to give to the aspect ratio that the movie was shot in) Basically, Warner Bros. is saying that the information on this DVD is exactly the same as what was presented in the theatre. I would like to have the URL of this website you mentioned, because there is *absolutely* no reason that someone's widescreen DVD shouldn't contain everything that was shown on the big-screen. Plus, if what you are saying is correct, Warner Bros. is basically lying in that quote up there. 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 From rvotaw at i-55.com Tue Jan 28 02:57:57 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:57:57 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Widescreen is better! (was Re: Wide/full screen/ DVD players) References: <019001c2c66d$641c8200$f79ccdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: <002b01c2c679$104b2da0$6c9dcdd1@RVotaw> > I beg to differ regarding the full vs. widescreen. You say that > widescreen "cuts off so much." This is not true. The film that is > used to make a movie has a 4x3 aspect ratio - this is the same aspect > ratio as a normal TV. When a movie is filmed in widescreen (such as I realize that the normal movies are shot for widescreen, i.e. theatre size screen. However, if you compare these pictures, you will find that something *is* cut off when you look at widescreen versus full screen. Here's the link with comparision pictures: http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm I think this is GulPlum's site? Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hp at plum.cream.org Tue Jan 28 03:08:04 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 03:08:04 -0000 Subject: Wide/full screen/ DVD players (was Re: CoS still on in cinemas)/ "sexy" (was Oldman as Sirius) In-Reply-To: <019001c2c66d$641c8200$f79ccdd1@RVotaw> Message-ID: Richelle Votaw wrote: > Lisa writes: > > > which is better, full screen or wide screen? > > Full screen. Some movies wide screen is better, but with HP (at > least SS/PS) you lose more with the wide screen than you do with > the full screen. Make sense? There's a site somewhere that has > some pictures comparing the shots, and to me the wide screen cuts > off so much it takes away from the movie. Like part of Harry's > letter, things like that are important to me! It's a page, not a site, and it's mine, actually. :-) http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm As I say on the page, which is "better" is really difficult to decide. As to "losing", the widescreen version is the one you saw in the cinema, so you're losing *something* from that experience. If one didn't know that the full screen picture occasionally included better shots than the widescreen, would you be talking about "loss"? The process used for filming PS/SS (and CoS), Super 35, is used by some directors and cinematographers to better effect than others. Some are able to frame their shots so that they work well in either one or the other format, and very rarely, in both (James Cameron is a case in point). IMO, in the case of PS/SS, Columbus has fallen between two stools, and there is *huge* disparity from shot to shot. Harry's letter probably makes the best case for the full screen version, whilst Fluffy works much, much better in widescreen. As I say on the page, it's all down to personal preference. Speaking for myself, I own the widescreen version and wouldn't have it any other way. BTW, Yes, I fully intend to make a similar comparison for CoS as soon as the DVD comes out, but it'll probably take me some time before I publish it. :-) The way I did it with PS/SS was to have both versions playing side-by-side at 1/4 speed (which means just running the movie took about 10 hours in short segments over a couple of days as I had to remain highly concentrated throught!) and then I had to take the screenshots, and then play around with them. Then came the tricky part of limiting myself to only 20 pictures! Having seen CoS so many times at the cinema, I probably won't need to watch both versions side-by-side - I already have a mental note of at least a dozen shots whose appearance in full screen will probably look dreadful. The trick will be to find those sequences which look better in full screen (and I fully expect there to be some!). From waterdogn at aol.com Tue Jan 28 03:37:54 2003 From: waterdogn at aol.com (waterdogn ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 03:37:54 -0000 Subject: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa " wrote: But I do have a question, which > is better, full screen or wide screen? Hi Lisa- We had a discussion of this back in May 2002 when the PS/SS DVD came out. That's when GulPlum put together that great comparison page! For a nice in-depth discussion of the filming technique that shoots both wide screen and full screen at the same time, refer to post #2450 in the archives. I must confess that I bought both versions! Robin Nicholls Waterdogn @ aol.com Southern California From siskiou at earthlink.net Tue Jan 28 03:44:04 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:44:04 -0800 Subject: wide screen? was Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS still on in cinemas (CoS DVD/Video release) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <12694897535.20030127194404@earthlink.net> Hi, Monday, January 27, 2003, 7:37:54 PM, waterdogn at aol.com wrote: > I must confess that I bought both versions! And which one do you watch more often? :) We own the wide screen version, but zoom in a lot of the time, because things are a bit far away and tiny, otherwise. Maybe it looks better on a bigger TV or a wide screen one? -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From hp at plum.cream.org Tue Jan 28 03:47:59 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 03:47:59 -0000 Subject: Widescreen is better! (was Re: Wide/full screen/ DVD players) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: illyana delorean wrote: > Anyway, I know that this is totally off-topic, but I would really > like to reply, and I don't know if this person is on the OT list. This is going even further off-topic, but I beg indulgence for one moment while I correct a few inaccuracies. (The original post has been snipped.) > When a movie is filmed in widescreen (such as > both of the Harry Potter movies), pieces of metal are placed at the > top and the bottom of the gate on the camera - the gate is the area > of the camera where the film will be exposed while shooting. It is > basically the "shutter" of the camera - where the camera brings in > information. This process is called "gating." Although parts of the > film are not used during the filming, these pieces are not exposed > and, therefore, do not contain any information (they did not film > anything). This creates widescreen. Not true. Super 35 exposes the full (roughly) 4:3 frame. Hence, as per PS/SS, there is information above and below the widescreen picture. What I found baffling about the PS/SS release was that the fullscreen version did not consist of the full Super 35 picture, but of a different sub-set of it, although there are exceptions (such as Harry's letter). When composing their shots, the director and cinematographer will watch what the camera is seeing either through the camera itself or on monitors. Usually they see the full picture with the area that the cinema release will include framed within it. Others (such as Spielberg and his current cinematographer Janusz Kaminski) actually black out the non-cinema elements because they find them distracting. This is where the whole point of widescreen -v- fullscreen comes to a head, because ultimately the widescreen picture is the one for which the framing, composition, lighting, etc. were designed. Even if there is more information on the full screen version (as is the case with Super 35 and similar processes), it's not what was *intended*; it's not what all the artistic decisions were geared up to. > When you watch Harry Potter in the theatre, you are viewing > *everything* that the camera captured. When the movie is put onto a > DVD in widescreen format, you are seeing exactly what you saw in > the > movie theatre - *nothing* is cut out. However, when you watch the > full-screen version of Harry Potter on DVD (also referred to as > "pan-and-scan"), you are cutting out part of the film. The way they > make the fullscreen version of the DVD is that they enlarge the > image > to get rid of the "letterbox" (the black space at the top and > bottom > that is created by "gating"). In doing this, the left and right > sides > of the picture are pushed offscreen; therefore, you are *not* > seeing > everything that was shot. Pan-and-scan refers to the nauseating > effect that is created when something important occurs in the left > or > right areas of the film that was cut-off and the frame is moved > over > to one of these areas. That is only true of widescreen films shot in Panavision, Scope or other similar processes. It is NOT true of most films shot on Super 35 and similar. The widescreen version is as much "panned and scanned" as the full screen version, except that it's up and down rather than side to side. In a way, the widescreen vesion is even *more* panned and scanned than the full screen once, as the full screen usually is just that - the whole exposed frame, whereas the widescreen one is less than 2/3 of it. For en excellent demonstration of this, I recommend people watch one of the features on the "Seven" (special edition) DVD release, in which we witness Fincher, his editor and cinematographer, go through the process of re-scanning one scene for the DVD release. > This quote is taken from the back of my Harry Potter and the > Sorcerer's Stone Widescreen DVD box: > > "Widescreen version presented in a "Letterbox" widescreen format > preserving the "scope" aspect ratio of its original theatrical > exhibition." > > (The word "scope" is the name that Warner Bros. chose to give to the > aspect ratio that the movie was shot in) No. It's the name of the aspect ratio in which the film was released in cinemas, which is exactly what that sentence means. It does NOT say the film was *shot* in Scope. To discover that the film was *shot* in Super 35, you need to watch the technical section of the end credits. > Basically, Warner Bros. is saying that the information on this DVD is > exactly the same as what was presented in the theatre. Quite. It is NOT saying that it is what the camera saw. > > I would like to have the URL of this website you mentioned, because > there is *absolutely* no reason that someone's widescreen DVD > shouldn't contain everything that was shown on the big-screen. Plus, > if what you are saying is correct, Warner Bros. is basically lying in > that quote up there. No, they're not. Basically, you have an incomplete understanding of the processes involved and the meaning of the quote. Incidentally, as implied in my other post, lest my above comments give anyone the wrong idea, I am a huge fan of widescreen movies and there are valid reasons why an anamorphic widescreen DVD release (which PS/SS is) is technically better than the fullscren version, and not only artistically (the word "anamorphic" is key here; look at any site about DVD technology for more on the subject; the application of the word is slightly different when used about DVDs rather than celluloid). P.S. Richelle - I see that our last two posts crossed. :-) From illyana at mindspring.com Tue Jan 28 04:53:01 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:53:01 -0700 Subject: i guess widescreen *isn't* better in this case! (was Re: Widescreen is better!) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >i wrote: >> When a movie is filmed in widescreen (such as >> both of the Harry Potter movies), pieces of metal are placed at the >> top and the bottom of the gate on the camera - the gate is the area >> of the camera where the film will be exposed while shooting. It is >> basically the "shutter" of the camera - where the camera brings in >> information. This process is called "gating." Although parts of the >> film are not used during the filming, these pieces are not exposed >> and, therefore, do not contain any information (they did not film >> anything). This creates widescreen. then, GulPlum totally proved me wrong: >Not true. Super 35 exposes the full (roughly) 4:3 frame. Hence, as >per PS/SS, there is information above and below the widescreen >picture. What I found baffling about the PS/SS release was that the >fullscreen version did not consist of the full Super 35 picture, but >of a different sub-set of it, although there are exceptions (such as >Harry's letter). Thank you so much for clearing all of this up. I did not know that the movie was shot in Super 35; therefore, everything I said is untrue about the way they shot it! It is pretty strange that Chris Columbus chose to shoot the movie at 4:3, though, and I know that you (GulPlum) agree with this because I checked out your website! > >That is only true of widescreen films shot in Panavision, Scope or >other similar processes. It is NOT true of most films shot on Super >35 and similar. The widescreen version is as much "panned and >scanned" as the full screen version, except that it's up and down >rather than side to side. In a way, the widescreen vesion is even >*more* panned and scanned than the full screen once, as the full >screen usually is just that - the whole exposed frame, whereas the >widescreen one is less than 2/3 of it. Understood. I really need to watch the movie again, because I didn't notice any panning and scanning going on - maybe because it is up-and-down and not side-to-side, as I am used to (I really hate that!). Plus, I was totally not expecting any, so I guess my brain didn't register it as being panned and scanned. > > > "Widescreen version presented in a "Letterbox" widescreen format >> preserving the "scope" aspect ratio of its original theatrical > > exhibition." >> > >No. It's the name of the aspect ratio in which the film was released >in cinemas, which is exactly what that sentence means. It does NOT >say the film was *shot* in Scope. To discover that the film was >*shot* in Super 35, you need to watch the technical section of the >end credits. Okay, it makes sense that way, too. Thanks for the clear-up. GulPlum, I think that it is very cool that you took the time to set up that website. It obviously cleared-up a lot of confusion for me, and I am sure that other HP fans appreciate it, as well! To make this less-OT: Does anyone want to venture a guess regarding which format Cuaron will choose to film POA? Do you think he will use Super 35 and continue what Columbus started, or will he go his own way? I have seen "Y Tu Mama Tambien," but, truthfully, I was not paying too much attention to the cinematography, so I don't know too much about Cuaron's style! illyana p.s. My boyfriend actually gave me a lot of the information that I presented in my previous post (he is a film student), and when he learned about the way Chris Columbus filmed the movie, and after he took a look at your website, he likes Columbus even less. Why should we have to buy both versions in order to catch every little bit of cinema? -- 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 From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Tue Jan 28 05:58:31 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 05:58:31 -0000 Subject: Pic of Snape's wand (was Re: CoS Calander and This Morning) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > [edit]...I can't wait to see Snape's wand...[snip]< You don't have to. There's a picture of Snape's wand (and many others described in the calendar) at Coutingdown.com. This URL will take you to their COS page (where you can click on the "images" tab to access their pictures...or select other options check-out some of their other features): http://www.coutingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2 This URL (I hope) should take you to the picture of Snape's wand (or at least to the page on which the image appears): http://www.countingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2/multimedia/images? start=180 BM From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Tue Jan 28 06:06:13 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 06:06:13 -0000 Subject: OT: Forgive WAY late reply Message-ID: Due to a momentary lapse of reason, I thought I was replying to a recent post (re: someone wanting to see a pic of Snape's wand), only to realize too late that I'd replied to a message from November. The links I provided for Countingdown.com are still valid, but I'd wager most everyone here has long been well aware of them. My apologies, BM From mo.hue at web.de Tue Jan 28 07:25:49 2003 From: mo.hue at web.de (Monika Huebner) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:25:49 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PS Wide/full screen References: Message-ID: <002601c2c69e$7eaeea00$4c46348d@pefpc06> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 4:08 AM Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wide/full screen/ DVD players (was Re: CoS still on in cinemas)/ "sexy" (was Oldman as Sirius) > The process used for filming PS/SS (and CoS), Super 35, is used by > some directors and cinematographers to better effect than others. > Some are able to frame their shots so that they work well in either > one or the other format, and very rarely, in both (James Cameron is a > case in point). IMO, in the case of PS/SS, Columbus has fallen > between two stools, and there is *huge* disparity from shot to shot. > Harry's letter probably makes the best case for the full screen > version, whilst Fluffy works much, much better in widescreen. There's a reason for this. I guess PS was filmed in the same way as Roland Emmerich's "Independence Day", in Super 35, which is also referred to as "open matted". The top and the bottom of the picture was "matted" for presentation in the theatre. It means that you actually see more picture in full screen when the movie is transferred to video or DVD, but this *only applies to scenes that have actually been filmed, not to special effects*. SF/X are created digitally, in the very format needed for the movie. So any shot that contains a special effect will be cut at the sides for full screen format. For ID4 that was about 40% of the movie, and PS contains quite a lot of SF/X, too, which are forcibly cut at the sides in the full screen version. It would be way too expensive to create the SF/X in both 4:3 and 2.38:1 aspect ratio. If I buy a movie for my collection, I always look for the original aspect ratio shown in the theatre. Now that we have DVDs it's not a problem, but on video there wasn't always a widescreen edition. Monika From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Jan 28 08:40:34 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:40:34 -0000 Subject: HP Moive - Widescreen & Letterbox Photos Compaired. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, illyana delorean wrote: bboy_mn: I start with an apology, I haven't been following all of this thread, but I thought I might have something that was usefull. At this website you can see both widescreen and letterbox images of HP and the Sorcerer's Stone overlayed, so one image give you both formats for easy comparison. http://plum.cream.org/HP/dvd.htm Click on the images to view a larger version. It's kind of a toss up, there are some scenes where letterbox give a better picture and others where widescreen works best. That's one of the reason I've put off buying this movie. I can't decide which format to get. Just a suggestion. bboy_mn From hp at plum.cream.org Tue Jan 28 09:43:36 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:43:36 -0000 Subject: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: Message-ID: A few posts in one... Steve wrote: > I start with an apology, I haven't been following all of this thread, > but I thought I might have something that was usefull. It's a pity you didn't read one or two of the earlier messages, Steve, because that web site (mine!) :-) has been quoted at least four times in the thread so far. :-) Incidentally, Steve, your renamed subject title is misleading, as "Widescreen" usually means "letterbox"; I think you meant to say "full screen -v- letterbox". :-) Monika Huebner wrote: > SF/X are > created digitally, in the very format needed for the movie. So any > shot that contains a special effect will be cut at the sides for > full screen format. For ID4 that was about 40% of the movie, and > PS contains quite a lot of SF/X, too, which are forcibly cut at the > sides in the full screen version. It would be way too expensive to > create the SF/X in both 4:3 and 2.38:1 aspect ratio. As it happens, in the case of PS/SS, all digital SFX were generated for the whole Super 35 frame, and thus the above comments don't really apply. I deliberately included some SFX-heavy shots in the selection i made (Fluffy, Quidditch) to show that this was the case. illyana delorean wrote: > I really need to watch the movie again, because I didn't > notice any panning and scanning going on - maybe because it is > up-and-down and not side-to-side, as I am used to (I really hate > that!). Plus, I was totally not expecting any, so I guess my brain > didn't register it as being panned and scanned. Panning (rapidly moving the captured area across the screen to catch something on opposite ends of the widescreen picture), as opposed to scanning (selecting which part of the frame to capture as a continuous shot) is fairly rare and always has been. Apart from being (slightly) more expensive, even pan & scan enthusiasts admit the rhythm of the original shot is ruined, and thus studios tend to avoid panning as much as possible. One of the most famous examples of what's lost when a full widescreen picture (filmed as such) is cropped to a "full screen" TV picture is in 2001: A Space Oddysey when the two astronauts are talking in the pod: their faces are either side of the screen, with the blinking eye of Hal in the middle. I saw one (bad) panned & scanned version of that film once in which the captured area zoomed from one face to the other. It was enough to give me motion sickness. The usual way that scene is done in panned & scanned versions is to leave the scan in the middle of the frame, showing Hal in the middle and nothing but the astonauts' lips and nosetips either side. Whilst still bad, it is much less offensive than the panned version. In any case, Columbus seems to prefer vertical pans (I mean as part of the artistic side of film-making) and thus the perpetual up-and- down motion of the camera when scanning the negative for what goes into the widescreen version is much less noticeable than it otherwise would have been. > To make this less-OT: Does anyone want to venture a guess regarding > which format Cuaron will choose to film POA? Do you think he will > use Super 35 and continue what Columbus started, or will he go his > own way? I have seen "Y Tu Mama Tambien," but, truthfully, I was > not paying too much attention to the cinematography, so I don't > know too much about Cuaron's style! I suspect that Super 35 was imposed on Columbus by the studio. They would have been mindful of the fact that the film's target audience (children) watching it at home wouldn't be impressed by explanations that the widescreen picture with huge black areas on their TV screen is the way to watch it. Warners would probably have insisted on a reasonable fullscreen edition and the obvious solution is Super 35. Cuaron has used both Super 35 and anamorphic processes in the past, so he seems at ease with both. For the reasons stated above, he'll probably continue wih Super 35 and we'll have this whole discussion over again when PoA comes out on DVD. :-) From mo.hue at web.de Tue Jan 28 12:13:58 2003 From: mo.hue at web.de (Monika Huebner) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 13:13:58 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox References: Message-ID: <000d01c2c6c6$bc84cfc0$4c46348d@pefpc06> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:43 AM Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox > As it happens, in the case of PS/SS, all digital SFX were generated > for the whole Super 35 frame, and thus the above comments don't > really apply. I deliberately included some SFX-heavy shots in the > selection i made (Fluffy, Quidditch) to show that this was the case. So this might have changed during the past years with digital effects becoming better and (maybe?) cheaper. It's interesting, though, that Warner hasn't included the fullscreen version on the European release of the DVD, but only the widescreen version. This undermines the argument that it would be difficult to explain the black bars to children, unless they think European children won't mind. I don't know in which format the video is, but in general the video version would rather be full screen in Germany. But what about "artefacts" in the "matted" area? In the past, directors were said to be rather careless in this regard and didn't care too much about filming equipment being visible in the area that wouldn't be shown in theatres. Monika From sophiamcl at hotmail.com Tue Jan 28 12:51:56 2003 From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:51:56 -0000 Subject: Dumbing down of Ron Message-ID: bboy_mn said:(emphasis added) I liked Rupert performance. When he was scared in the car/tree and in the forest, that intensity got to me. It amplified the scene because he had it seem real. He has a very expressive face AND NOT JUST FOR COMEDY. All his emotion even subtle one come across clearly in hi s expression and body language. But they didn't give him anything to balance his role. Me: Exactly. Though Columbus capitalized on Rupert's ability to "make faces" and his sense of comedic timing and delivery (which at its best is as demanding an art, if not more so, than "high drama")at the expense of a more nuanced Ron, Rupert performed the task he was given expertly. Every look, expression, emotion conveyed, though in caricature format sometimes, was spot on every time. I'm certain CoS showed us only a narrow range of Rupert's capabilites. Remeber his performance in PS--100% natural delivery all the time. It didn't feel like he was acting at all. He was just being Ron. (Right now I'm thinking especially of his "WOW" when he sees Harry's invisibility for the first time, or that little embarrased gesture he makes with his arms in the flying lesson when he says "shut up Harry"). As much as I LOVED Dan as Harry in PS, I thought Rupert gave by far the most convincing performance overall of the trio in that one. Furthermore, I thought Rupert managed the infamous hugging-scene (cringe-worthy or not)in CoS beautifully (the LOOK, the hesitation, the voice), and is an indication of the kind of performance we might hope for if Klove's and Cuaron give him the chance. Sophia From hp at plum.cream.org Tue Jan 28 18:21:52 2003 From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum ) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:21:52 -0000 Subject: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <000d01c2c6c6$bc84cfc0$4c46348d@pefpc06> Message-ID: Monika Huebner wrote: > It's interesting, though, that Warner hasn't included the > fullscreen version on the European release > of the DVD, but only the widescreen version. This undermines the > argument that it would be difficult to explain the black bars to > children, unless they think European children won't mind. Err.. I don't know about Germany, but here in the UK (and I know the same is the case in the USA), there are two versions of the DVD: one widescreen and the other "full screen". I know from a friend who manages the audio/visual department at a local big supermarket that lots of people brought back fullscreen versions bought in error (the widescreen packaging has a yellow band across the top saying "Widecreeen Edition"). A suggestion has been put forward that as most DVD releases are ONLY in widescreen format, it's the full screen versions which should be tagged, as they are not the norm. :-) (My personal suggestion for a phrasing of the tag would be "WARNING: This version of the film is NOT the the one you saw in the cinema!") > I don't > know in which format the video is, but in general the video version > would rather be full screen in Germany. AFAIK, the VHS release is available ONLY as the "full screen" version, in every market. Says something about those unwilling or unable to update their hardware... :-) > But what about "artefacts" in the "matted" area? In the past, > directors were said to be rather careless in this regard and didn't > care too much about filming equipment being visible in the area > that wouldn't be shown in theatres. The popularity (to studios) of Super 35 has meant that film directors/ cinematographers are generally (but not necessarily always) aware of artefacts outside the "cinema" frame but still in "full screen" shot so the appearnce of booms and mikes is getting increasingly rare. Ths certainly seems to be the case with Columbus and his collaborators. -- GulPlum AKA Richard, who would like to apologise for any typos/non sequiturs due to having imbibed half a bottle of brandy to compensate for toothache. My idiot dentist won't see me until Thursday. I shall refrain from posting until then - I still have 2 bottles of brandy available. :-) From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Tue Jan 28 12:31:14 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 06:31:14 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pic of Snape's wand (was Re: CoS Calander and This Morning) References: Message-ID: <3E367812.6B7FAB73@pacificpuma.com> "backstagemystic " wrote: > > > [edit]...I can't wait to see Snape's wand...[snip]< > > You don't have to. There's a picture of Snape's wand (and many > others described in the calendar) at Coutingdown.com. > > This URL will take you to their COS page (where you can click on > the "images" tab to access their pictures...or select other options > check-out some of their other features): > > http://www.coutingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2 > > This URL (I hope) should take you to the picture of Snape's wand (or > at least to the page on which the image appears): > > http://www.countingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2/multimedia/images? > start=180 > > BM > Umm.. Everytime I try to load Coutingdown.com, its a porn site?? What gives? Or were you talking about a different kind of wand then we thought you were? Jazmyn From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Wed Jan 29 00:30:39 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic ) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:30:39 -0000 Subject: AACK -typo. Countingdown.com In-Reply-To: <3E367812.6B7FAB73@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: Aaargh (turning three shades of red). I suppose it would help if I typed URL properly. In my haste, I missed the letter "N" in "counting (much to my chagrin, considering the consequences)...so my sincere apologies for that blunder. One more time (checking very carefully for typos): Countingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2 Click on the "images" option, and there should be about 4 pages of stills related to COS. If memory serves me correctly, one can find several pictures of various props, including the wands, on pages 3 and 4. BM ------------------ Jazmyn wrote: > Umm.. Everytime I try to load Coutingdown.com, its a porn site?? What gives? Or were you talking about a different kind of wand then we thought you were?< From rvotaw at i-55.com Wed Jan 29 02:14:02 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:14:02 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Widescreen is better! (was Re: Wide/full screen/ DVD players) References: Message-ID: <009001c2c73c$1dcec310$8b9ccdd1@RVotaw> GulPlum wrote: > Not true. Super 35 exposes the full (roughly) 4:3 frame. Hence, as > per PS/SS, there is information above and below the widescreen > picture. What I found baffling about the PS/SS release was that the > fullscreen version did not consist of the full Super 35 picture, but > of a different sub-set of it, although there are exceptions (such as > Harry's letter). Thanks for clearing that up for us. :) Now, this may be a stupid question, but why can't they just release one double sided DVD? With full screen on one side, widescreen on the other? I bought a DVD a few weeks ago that was like that. (In fact, it was The Little Princess, not a brand new movie by any means, and a cheap one at that). I suppose the point is to make us buy both versions and spend more money. I haven't yet bought the widescreen for PS/SS, though I do have the fullscreen DVD and video. > P.S. Richelle - I see that our last two posts crossed. :-) Well, you know what they say about great minds. :) Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From thalia at aokp.org Wed Jan 29 05:36:51 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:36:51 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] How many times did you see CoS in the theater? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 6 :) thalia 'can't hold a candle to some out there' chaunacy "Ah, music. A magic beyond all we do here!" -Albus Dumbledore From mo.hue at web.de Wed Jan 29 07:22:00 2003 From: mo.hue at web.de (Monika Huebner) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:22:00 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox References: Message-ID: <000a01c2c767$206b7f70$4c46348d@pefpc06> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 7:21 PM Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox > Err.. I don't know about Germany, but here in the UK (and I know the > same is the case in the USA), there are two versions of the DVD: one > widescreen and the other "full screen". AFAIK, we only have one version of the DVD in Germany, sorry for "generalizing". The common release format for DVDs over here is widescreen nowadays, but in the past there have been quite a few releases of full screen DVDs without the original language track (only the German dubbed version - yech). I own a couple of older DVDs, though, that have both widescreen and full screen versions on them, but I never bothered to check the latter ones out. > A suggestion has been put forward that > as most DVD releases are ONLY in widescreen format, it's the full > screen versions which should be tagged, as they are not the norm. :-) > (My personal suggestion for a phrasing of the tag would be "WARNING: > This version of the film is NOT the the one you saw in the cinema!") Good idea. :-) Although some people might still feel cheated by the black bars and might want a picture that fits their TV screen. > AFAIK, the VHS release is available ONLY as the "full screen" > version, in every market. Haven't looked at videos lately, but in the past there sometimes were two video versions, one in full screen and one in widescreen, the latter one being usually more expensive. (Why, because you actually got the *whole* movie?!) > Says something about those unwilling or unable to update their > hardware... :-) I don't own a widescreen TV set but still wouldn't buy full screen versions of movies, so it's more in the heads of people I suppose. > The popularity (to studios) of Super 35 has meant that film > directors/ cinematographers are generally (but not necessarily > always) aware of artefacts outside the "cinema" frame but still > in "full screen" shot so the appearnce of booms and mikes is getting > increasingly rare. Ths certainly seems to be the case with Columbus > and his collaborators. Good to know, but still not a reason to buy full screen DVDs. :-) Monika From belleps at october.com Wed Jan 29 10:26:01 2003 From: belleps at october.com (Beth) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 04:26:01 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan's showing In-Reply-To: <1043504914.446.63257.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030129041644.00a04520@pop.cox-internet.com> Thalia: >> what 'Clint Eastwood moment?' i can think of a few >>possibilities, but i hesitate to assume. :) Nicholas: >Towards the end of CoS, the confrontation with Lucius Malfoy in Dumbledore's study. Lucius says "Let us hope that Mr Potter will always be around to save the day" and Harry replies; "Don't worry... I will be". BookHarry would *never* say something so egotistical. I have heard that these lines were Jason Isaac's idea. He should stick to acting.< Hmm. I never took that line to be "egotistical", though I see how it could certainly be taken that way. I took Lucius' line as a subtle threat, which Harry picks up on. Harry's reply (IMHO) is defiance, not egotism. He's not saying, "I'm Harry Potter, of course I'll be here." He's saying, "I know you're against me, and I plan to fight back." The challenge has been issued and, to Lucius' surprise (I think), acknowledged and accepted. It's pushing back against the aggression of an adult, and that I CAN see Book!Harry doing. The only problem I had with the line was getting tired of it being used in all the trailers. bel From stbinch at actionsd.com Wed Jan 29 14:35:02 2003 From: stbinch at actionsd.com (Steve Binch) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:35:02 -0700 Subject: Widescreen -v- Letterbox References: <1043850205.223.10752.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001301c2c7a3$9b981ff0$2101a8c0@ACTIONSTEEL.COM> Most new HDTVs are the shape of the widescreen so that you can use your entire screen without having to see the black lines on the top and bottom of the screen. These are the future of television and our children will remember back to our square televisions and chuckle. -Steve From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 29 17:07:49 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (Madeleine) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:07:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <001301c2c7a3$9b981ff0$2101a8c0@ACTIONSTEEL.COM> Message-ID: <20030129170749.11106.qmail@web12202.mail.yahoo.com> Actually that is not entirely true. We have the 16x9 Sony (the widescreen), and most widescreen movies, including PS, are formatted to still have the black bars at the top and bottom to "preserve the theatrical experience for our home use". We thought our tv was broken when we first hooked it up at Christmas. Now we have noticed that most movies you will still get the black bars even with "widescreen" formats. :) Steve Binch wrote:Most new HDTVs are the shape of the widescreen so that you can use your entire screen without having to see the black lines on the top and bottom of the screen. These are the future of television and our children will remember back to our square televisions and chuckle. -Steve Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bray.262 at osu.edu Wed Jan 29 12:49:17 2003 From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:49:17 +0000 (EST5EDT) Subject: How many times did you see CoS in the theater? Message-ID: An even dozen. But I'm done now. I can wait until the DVD comes out. I've now got Chicago to take up all my movie time. Oh, a couple more hobbit viewings will be in there, too, I'm sure. Gotta have my Hobbit fix or I start getting the jitters. Rachel Bray The Ohio State University Fees & Deposits The light at the end of the tunnel may be an angry, flying Ford Anglia. From illyana at mindspring.com Wed Jan 29 18:02:08 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 11:02:08 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <20030129170749.11106.qmail@web12202.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030129170749.11106.qmail@web12202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: The reason you're still getting the black lines is that practically no widescreen films are 16x9; therefore, they would not fit your TV perfectly unless they got stretched-out. I believe that some films shot in HD are 16x9, but not any normal films. Maybe GulPlum can confirm this, as he seems to be the resident widescreen expert! illyana Madeleine wrote: >Actually that is not entirely true. We have the 16x9 Sony (the >widescreen), and most widescreen movies, including PS, are formatted >to still have the black bars at the top and bottom to "preserve the >theatrical experience for our home use". We thought our tv was >broken when we first hooked it up at Christmas. Now we have noticed >that most movies you will still get the black bars even with >"widescreen" formats. :) >Steve Binch wrote:Most new HDTVs are the >shape of the widescreen so that you can use your >entire screen without having to see the black lines on the top and bottom of >the screen. These are the future of television and our children will >remember back to our square televisions and chuckle. -- 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 From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 29 18:25:28 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (Madeleine) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:25:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> Each film is filmed or at least "printed" with different ratios, I don't know why this is, but we check each DVD we buy now (even the HD DVDs all vary, I haven't noticed more HDs fitting than non-HDs). If you look at the ratios you can tell if they will fit a widescreen tv or not. But many DVDs including PS actually say they have kept the black bars to preserve the theatrical experience. I am not sure if all Widescreen TVs are the same but we have a zoom feature that allows us to stretch the picture out a bit to fill the screen better, but with PS we still have a little black at the top and bottom. A big benefit to this format is that if you use subtitles they appear on the black portion of the screen making them much easier to read. But it is still quite frustrating that we bought a widescreen tv to get rid of the black bars, and find out we still have to put up with them! :) illyana delorean wrote:The reason you're still getting the black lines is that practically no widescreen films are 16x9; therefore, they would not fit your TV perfectly unless they got stretched-out. I believe that some films shot in HD are 16x9, but not any normal films. Maybe GulPlum can confirm this, as he seems to be the resident widescreen expert! illyana Madeleine wrote: >Actually that is not entirely true. We have the 16x9 Sony (the >widescreen), and most widescreen movies, including PS, are formatted >to still have the black bars at the top and bottom to "preserve the >theatrical experience for our home use". We thought our tv was >broken when we first hooked it up at Christmas. Now we have noticed >that most movies you will still get the black bars even with >"widescreen" formats. :) >Steve Binch wrote:Most new HDTVs are the >shape of the widescreen so that you can use your >entire screen without having to see the black lines on the top and bottom of >the screen. These are the future of television and our children will >remember back to our square televisions and chuckle. -- 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 Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From illyana at mindspring.com Wed Jan 29 19:13:04 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:13:04 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Madeline wrote: > But many DVDs including PS actually say they have kept the black >bars to preserve the theatrical experience. That's strange, because PS is 2.35:1. So, it wouldn't sync-up perfectly with your 16:9 TV no matter what! Funny that they put that little "disclaimer" there - maybe so that people with widescreen TV's won't think that there's something wrong with their TV (or try to return the DVD because it's not perfectly flush with the TV). For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) or it stretches the picture up-and-down in order to fill the screen, but that would horribly distort everything. I am hoping that it uses the first method, but that would kind of be useless since you're cutting out parts of the picture. Please explain! 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 From siskiou at earthlink.net Wed Jan 29 19:28:23 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 11:28:23 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: References: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5382311694.20030129112823@earthlink.net> Hi, Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 11:13:04 AM, illyana at mindspring.com wrote: > For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make > the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the > sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) It cuts off the sides somewhat, but otherwise the picture doesn't look strange. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From siskiou at earthlink.net Wed Jan 29 19:35:02 2003 From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 11:35:02 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: References: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1682710983.20030129113502@earthlink.net> Hi, Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 11:13:04 AM, illyana at mindspring.com wrote: > For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make > the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the > sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) Sorry, I misread! We are using the zoom feature on our dvd player. Our TV doesn't have one, so I don't know if there is a difference. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net From illyana at mindspring.com Wed Jan 29 20:28:07 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:28:07 -0700 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <1682710983.20030129113502@earthlink.net> References: <20030129182528.58188.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> <1682710983.20030129113502@earthlink.net> Message-ID: >Hi, > >Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 11:13:04 AM, illyana at mindspring.com wrote: > >> For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make >> the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the >> sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) > >Sorry, I misread! > >We are using the zoom feature on our dvd player. >Our TV doesn't have one, so I don't know if there is a >difference. > Actually, Susanne, I was responding to Madeleine's email (#5158). She said: "I am not sure if all Widescreen TVs are the same but we have a zoom feature that allows us to stretch the picture out a bit to fill the screen better..." So, I was asking about the zoom feature on the TV, not on the DVD player. Thanks for responding, though. illyana p.s. Madeleine, if I am getting your name wrong, please let me know. Since you didn't sign the email I am referencing (and was replying to in the earler email), I just took the name attached to your email and used that. Sorry if it's not your real name! -- 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 From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 29 20:17:20 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (Madeleine) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:17:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <1682710983.20030129113502@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20030129201720.81014.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com> It stretches the image a bit, but if it is already widescreen version you don't really notice much of a difference. Nothing gets cut off though. We still get the full image. Susanne wrote: Hi, Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 11:13:04 AM, illyana at mindspring.com wrote: > For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make > the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the > sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) Sorry, I misread! We are using the zoom feature on our dvd player. Our TV doesn't have one, so I don't know if there is a difference. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 29 20:21:19 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (Madeleine) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:21:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Letterbox In-Reply-To: <5382311694.20030129112823@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20030129202119.49132.qmail@web12202.mail.yahoo.com> Ours doesn't cut anything off, but does stretch the image abit. Its not really noticeable though. Not as much as when we have to stretch regular full screen images. If you ever need an ego boost come watch all the super models on our tv, they look much more human all stretched out. :) Made Susanne wrote: Hi, Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 11:13:04 AM, illyana at mindspring.com wrote: > For the sake of curiosity: does the "zoom" feature on your TV make > the picture look strange? I am assuming that either it cuts off the > sides of the picture (in order to minimize distortion) It cuts off the sides somewhat, but otherwise the picture doesn't look strange. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________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. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Wed Jan 29 22:35:06 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (duchessmadeleine ) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:35:06 -0000 Subject: Where is the humor? Message-ID: I am new to these boards and if this has been discussed before I apologize, I couldn't find anything glancing through the archives. Is anyone else disappointed about how Harry has been portrayed in the movies? In the book he has this wonderful dry british sense of humor, but in the movies he seems much more stoic. I realize they can not portray everything in the movies, but I think they have damaged his character development by removing those humor aspects that I personally came to love in the books. The quick witted comments, and "digs" at people also showed how intelligent he is and how he has coped so well with everything that has happened in his life. In the books Harry is very much a trouble maker, he seeks out trouble and I would classify him as a cheeky little rascal (in the best most humorous fun loving sense! I wish I could come up with come backs like he does!). But in the movies he is very serious, you rarely see him laughing, and they make it seem like all the trouble just finds him, instead of him seeking out a lot of it on his own. I do like the movies but the books show me a different Harry that I like so much more. I wish they had kept some of those traits that I so dearly love in Harry. Does anyone else feel this way? Made From bray.262 at osu.edu Wed Jan 29 19:28:55 2003 From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:28:55 +0000 (EST5EDT) Subject: #6 All Time Box Office Message-ID: Didn't know if anyone had posted this yet but Chamber has moved into the #6 spot on the all-time top grossing movie list. As of yesterday it's made $827.1 million. Still above it is Fellowship of the Ring, Jurassic Park, Phantom Menace, Sorcerer's Stone (yay!) and, of course, that mighty titan of them all, Titanic. (which still blows my mind that it's the top grossing film of all time. I mean....I saw it...I liked it, but.....almost $2 billion worldwide?.....unbelievable. I didn't think it was THAT good.) It will be interesting to see where it ends up by the time the DVD comes out. It's still at all my neighborhood theaters and it's yet to hit the $1 theater in town....could end up in the Top 5 before it's all over. (It's at $827.1 million, Fellowship is at $862.2 million.) Rachel Bray The Ohio State University Fees & Deposits The light at the end of the tunnel may be an angry, flying Ford Anglia. From dom-blokey at supanet.com Thu Jan 30 00:37:46 2003 From: dom-blokey at supanet.com (Dom McDermott) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 00:37:46 -0000 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] #6 All Time Box Office References: Message-ID: <00e401c2c7f7$d00986d0$64bc28d5@Blokey> Noting the difference in information available to us evidently... this is what I found yesterday, courtesy of www.hpana.com and mugglenet...: 'With an estimated international gross of $568.2m, Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets has overtaken Jurassic Park as the third highest grossing international release of all time. The family sequel took $7.1m over the weekend and just over one million admissions from 4,000 screens in 53 territories, according to studio estimates. The new total puts it behind second-placed Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone on $649.59m and Titanic, which leads the all-time international box office on $1.2bn. Warner Bros has projected a number one opening in China for Chamber Of Secrets, on a par with its predecessor. New reporting systems in the territory, along with rampant video piracy and poor weather in Shanghai, have delayed accurate figures for China.' Dom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rachel Bray" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 7:28 PM Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] #6 All Time Box Office > Didn't know if anyone had posted this yet but Chamber has > moved into the #6 spot on the all-time top grossing movie > list. As of yesterday it's made $827.1 million. Still > above it is Fellowship of the Ring, Jurassic Park, Phantom > Menace, Sorcerer's Stone (yay!) and, of course, that mighty > titan of them all, Titanic. (which still blows my mind > that it's the top grossing film of all time. I mean....I > saw it...I liked it, but.....almost $2 billion > worldwide?.....unbelievable. I didn't think it was THAT > good.) > From sequoiajw at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 01:56:35 2003 From: sequoiajw at yahoo.com (gwynne) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:56:35 -0800 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Where is the humor? References: Message-ID: <000f01c2c802$d84fe680$a32367ce@gj1011405onem> duchessmadeleine wrote: >>Is anyone else disappointed about how Harry has been portrayed in the movies? In the book he has this wonderful dry british sense of humor, but in the movies he seems much more stoic. I realize they can not portray everything in the movies, but I think they have damaged his character development by removing those humor aspects that I personally came to love in the books.<< I agree. I think that what I like least about the movies is that they seem to have lost most all the humor from the books, not just with Harry. There are some wickedly funny moments in both SS/PS and COS that just got dropped from the films. I don't know if Columbus & Co were going for a grittier feel, but... why leave out the little touches that make the books so wonderful and engaging: Lockhart's pictures in curlers running out of the way, the way the Dursleys really are portrayed as so buffoonish, Lucius and Arthur fistfighting, Fred and George bewitching snowballs to smack into Quirrel's turban... oh, I could go on and on about what is missing, since this is my pet peeve about the films. The films really are quite enjoyable, but I'm glad I can go back to the books and remember how engaging they really are. From sarah at mcfarland.co.uk Thu Jan 30 02:06:03 2003 From: sarah at mcfarland.co.uk (S) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 02:06:03 +0000 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Where is the humor? In-Reply-To: <000f01c2c802$d84fe680$a32367ce@gj1011405onem> References: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030130020153.03058978@pop.ntlworld.com> > >>Is anyone else disappointed about how Harry has been portrayed in >the movies? In the book he has this wonderful dry british sense of >humor, but in the movies he seems much more stoic. I realize they can >not portray everything in the movies, but I think they have damaged >his character development by removing those humor aspects that I >personally came to love in the books.<< > >I agree. I think that what I like least about the movies is that they >seem to have lost most all the humor from the books, not just with >Harry. There are some wickedly funny moments in both SS/PS and COS >that just got dropped from the films. I don't know if Columbus & Co >were going for a grittier feel, but... why leave out the little >touches that make the books so wonderful and engaging: Lockhart's >pictures in curlers running out of the way, the way the Dursleys >really are portrayed as so buffoonish, Lucius and Arthur fistfighting, While I agree that a lot of the humour from the books was lost, I don't see how that fistfight could be considered humour . . . IIRC it was two men fighting over one of them making bigoted comments about a friend of the other's son - with Arthur knowing that Lucius almost certainly got a kick from killing, torturing, and otherwise harassing Mudbloods like Hermione. Rather than being amusing, that was one of the most tense moments of the book for me. Perhaps one of the reasons why it was removed was precisely because they thought it might come over humorously. Gollum/Smegle in TTT is a perfect example of how cinema audiences can laugh at very tense, psychologically gripping moments - thus severely damaging the atmosphere. ~Say From corgi at SFF.net Thu Jan 30 03:48:56 2003 From: corgi at SFF.net (Corgi ) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 03:48:56 -0000 Subject: A somewhat belated casting note: Message-ID: Excerpted from The Leaky Cauldron, Thursday, January 23, 2003 (www.the-leaky-cauldron.org) 'Filmjerk's Chris Faile posted an article this morning about the Oldman casting, and why WB hasn't announced it officially yet... it does re-confirm casting with one of their own sources and mention that Oldman has been signed for as long as ten days. Quotage: "The reason the studio is not publicly acknowledging he has been cast is press strategy. They're going to do a slow burn on the casting announcements for the remaining characters, including Dumbledore, until they hit production time...."' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So, it's done. This effort to get Jason Carter cast as Sirius, I mean. The strong impression I have been given by Jina Jay's assistant is that, for reasons nobody has condescended to share, Jason Carter wouldn't be considered for Sirius even if Gary Oldman was kidnapped by aliens. (I still believe they're not thinking far enough outside the box.) Thank you VERY much to everyone (I can't possibly list all the names) who participated in this... 'Crusade', and to those who had positive words.... This reached so many people; I'll never know the full extent. I just feel quite bad there isn't more I can give you for your energy and efforts, other than a couple of 'souvenir' buttons (at http://www.SFF.net/people/Corgi/JasonCarter/siriuspx1.gif and siriuspx2.gif). Off to find another windmill.... With appreciation and regret, 'Do?a Quixote' Corgi P.S. I'll be around... just won't have quite as much to say as before. From thalia at aokp.org Thu Jan 30 03:54:09 2003 From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 19:54:09 -0800 Subject: Harry Potter and the WHAT??? Message-ID: So this loverly typo is from my hometown newspaper (and the theatre a short trip from my neighborhood)! Oh, wee Tacoma, how you shame me! http://www.countingdown.com/movies/harrypotter2/multimedia/images? item_id=2804433 Thalia 'that's Washington STATE, mind you!' Chaunacy "You have to laugh at yourself, because you'd cry your eyes out if you didn't." Emily Saliers From bray.262 at osu.edu Thu Jan 30 08:47:40 2003 From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:47:40 +0000 (EST5EDT) Subject: #6 All Time Box Office Message-ID: Hmmm....that's an interesting difference...I got my info from: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/ Rachel Bray The Ohio State University Fees & Deposits The light at the end of the tunnel may be an angry, flying Ford Anglia. From ArtsyLynda at aol.com Thu Jan 30 13:58:05 2003 From: ArtsyLynda at aol.com (ArtsyLynda at aol.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:58:05 EST Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] where is the humor Message-ID: <143.91b5f6e.2b6a896d@aol.com> I miss the humor from the book too, but I read somewhere that Rowlings insisted the keep "everything" that's in the books in the movie (all the sequences, action, everything that happened) and in doing so, the films have gotten very long -- and that's with the SHORT books! ;-> Something had to be cut, and unfortuneately, some of it was the humor (if I were the screenwriter, I wouldn't cut ANY of Fred and George's antics -- I get a huge kick out of them!) I also miss seeing Harry's humor, but overall, I think the filmmakers have done as well as can be expected with a hugely daunting task. With Book 4 and 5 being so long, I can't imagine how they can get them done as one movie each -- it may take two to get all the action, all the "stuff that happens" in and to tell the entire story of each. That's good for US! More HP movies! YAY! And I sure hope they keep the same cast throughout -- I was just reading PoA and Dan has definitely taken over my prior mental image of Harry as I read -- I hear the dialog in his and Rupert's and Emma's voices now. And I have no problem with them growing up. Our son was a shrimp until he hit 14 -- he grew 8 inches one summer (thank goodness it was summer so he was in shorts and we didn't have to keep buying new long pants!!) ;-> Lynda * * * "Don't let the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lupinesque at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 14:08:46 2003 From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z ) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:08:46 -0000 Subject: Where is the humor? In-Reply-To: <000f01c2c802$d84fe680$a32367ce@gj1011405onem> Message-ID: Gwynne wrote: > why leave out the little > touches that make the books so wonderful and engaging: Lockhart's > pictures in curlers running out of the way Watch the Lockhart scenes again. They did great things with the portraits. Amy Z From hoeppli at freesurf.ch Thu Jan 30 14:45:05 2003 From: hoeppli at freesurf.ch (hoeppli at freesurf.ch) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:45:05 +0100 Subject: Where is the humour? In-Reply-To: <1043934174.347.70584.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3E36864200000E07@freesurfmta05.sunrise.ch> I also think, that some of the subtle humour from the books was lost in the film. I would say that it is to blame on the script. In several scenes I had the impression, that the dialogue was somewhat "hacked". I don't know other work by Steve Kloves, but surely he has by no means as much talent as JKR. I think in some scenes it would have been wiser to just take the exact dialogue that was in the books. When it was already similar, why change? Other than the director, I rather hoped that someone else would do the script for PoA. That was from the beginning the one thing I didn't like about the films. At some points, Daniel Radcliffe was critized for the way he portrayed Harry, but frankly, he not always had the most brilliant lines to say. So, if he doesn't get a witty line to say, how can he portray the humoristic side of Harry from the books? Silvia > >Message: 15 > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:56:35 -0800 > From: "gwynne" >Subject: Re: Where is the humor? > >duchessmadeleine wrote: > >>>Is anyone else disappointed about how Harry has been portrayed in >the movies? In the book he has this wonderful dry british sense of >humor, but in the movies he seems much more stoic. I realize they can >not portray everything in the movies, but I think they have damaged >his character development by removing those humor aspects that I >personally came to love in the books.<< > >I agree. I think that what I like least about the movies is that they >seem to have lost most all the humor from the books, not just with >Harry. There are some wickedly funny moments in both SS/PS and COS >that just got dropped from the films. I don't know if Columbus & Co >were going for a grittier feel, but... why leave out the little >touches that make the books so wonderful and engaging: Lockhart's >pictures in curlers running out of the way, the way the Dursleys >really are portrayed as so buffoonish, Lucius and Arthur fistfighting, >Fred and George bewitching snowballs to smack into Quirrel's turban... >oh, I could go on and on about what is missing, since this is my pet >peeve about the films. > >The films really are quite enjoyable, but I'm glad I can go back to >the books and remember how engaging they really are. > > sunrise premiumsurf - geben Sie sich nicht mit weniger zufrieden http://internet.sunrise.ch/de/internet/int_sps.asp From stbinch at actionsd.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:30 2003 From: stbinch at actionsd.com (Steve Binch) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:57:30 -0700 Subject: Films filter out less important scenes References: <1043934174.347.70584.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003601c2c878$4b5f6950$2101a8c0@ACTIONSTEEL.COM> We all know that there are scenes in every book that seem irrelevant at first, but then becomes important in another book. When the screenplay is written, they have to eliminate many of the scenes in order to get the film with 2-3 hours. But they must be careful not to eliminate scenes that will play a greater importance later on. A couple examples of this are: 1. When Harry goes to the zoo and speaks to the snake (we learn Harry is a Parselmouth). 2. When Ron tries to turn Scabbers yellow (we at least need to become familiar with scabbers). Can you think of any more? And who wants to speculate on scenes that are setting up for books 5-7? -Steve From duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca Thu Jan 30 17:27:13 2003 From: duchessmadeleine at yahoo.ca (Madeleine) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 12:27:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Where is the humor? In-Reply-To: <000f01c2c802$d84fe680$a32367ce@gj1011405onem> Message-ID: <20030130172713.94400.qmail@web12208.mail.yahoo.com> Thanks for expanding even more on this, i am glad I am not the only one. The books have a real balance of light and dark moments. But the movies only focus on the dark. You mention lots of very funny great scenes from the books that don't involve Harry, and I agree there is far more funny stuff from the books that they cut (I really miss the Fred and George I know from the books too). However I think they have really changed the character of Harry in the movies, he just doesn't seem like the same person I know from the books. And since he is such a central character, I feel like the movies are telling the story of a different boy. For me this became especially evident in COS, which makes me really worry how they will portray him in POA. gwynne wrote: I agree. I think that what I like least about the movies is that they seem to have lost most all the humor from the books, not just with Harry. There are some wickedly funny moments in both SS/PS and COS that just got dropped from the films. I don't know if Columbus & Co were going for a grittier feel, but... why leave out the little touches that make the books so wonderful and engaging: Lockhart's pictures in curlers running out of the way, the way the Dursleys really are portrayed as so buffoonish, Lucius and Arthur fistfighting, Fred and George bewitching snowballs to smack into Quirrel's turban... oh, I could go on and on about what is missing, since this is my pet peeve about the films. The films really are quite enjoyable, but I'm glad I can go back to the books and remember how engaging they really are. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From illyana at mindspring.com Thu Jan 30 23:32:30 2003 From: illyana at mindspring.com (illyana delorean) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:32:30 -0700 Subject: POA casting question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There has been some discussion on a more "juvenile" Harry Potter list i am on about the casting of POA. Some of the fangirls are upset because Gary Oldman is reportedly cast as Sirius, and they started bashing Cuaron because of this. Now my question: does anyone here know who is casting POA? Is it Cuaron? Or is there a casting director? If I remember correctly, Columbus did have a lot to do with the casting of PS/SS - maybe he will continue to help out with casting since he has done such a good job. He is an executive producer of POA. Anyway, who should these fangirls be upset at? 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 From heidit at netbox.com Thu Jan 30 23:31:31 2003 From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 18:31:31 -0500 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA casting question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <01c701c2c8b7$b88cc9c0$2401010a@Frodo> > -----Original Message----- > From: illyana delorean [mailto:illyana at mindspring.com] > > Anyway, who should these fangirls be upset at? Nobody. They should rent Sid & Nancy, the silly ickle things. :) No, really - a director does have a reasonable of say over who is cast in the principal roles - and possibly all the speaking ones. It's a multiple-person process. From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Fri Jan 31 01:06:31 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 02:06:31 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan's showing Message-ID: me previously:- > >Towards the end of CoS, the confrontation with Lucius Malfoy in >Dumbledore's study. Lucius says "Let us hope that Mr Potter will always be >around to save the day" and Harry replies; "Don't worry... I will be". >BookHarry would *never* say something so egotistical. I have heard that >these lines were Jason Isaac's idea. He should stick to acting.< > This was Beth:- >Hmm. I never took that line to be "egotistical", though I see how it could >certainly be taken that way. I took Lucius' line as a subtle threat, which >Harry picks up on. Harry's reply (IMHO) is defiance, not egotism. He's not >saying, "I'm Harry Potter, of course I'll be here." He's saying, "I know >you're against me, and I plan to fight back." The challenge has been issued >and, to Lucius' surprise (I think), acknowledged and accepted. In either case, I cannot imagine the Harry of CoS acknowledging and accepting such a challenge. He has the courage to rise to the occasion when necessary, but doesn't consider himself in any way exceptional, and certainly would not judge himself capable of confronting seriously evil wizards. I find it infuriating that the filmmakers took out bona fide examples of Harry standing up for himself (for example, when he answers back to Snape in their first classroom confrontation), and then try to redress the balance by inventing heavy-handed, non-textual ways of getting the point across. I mean, they *filmed* the damn Snape-confrontation scene, why did they edit it out? (maybe you have already discussed this one to death; I have only been part of this list for a few months). Regards, Nicholas From TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk Fri Jan 31 01:06:33 2003 From: TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk (TACtalk at adelanta.co.uk) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 02:06:33 +0100 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Widescreen -v- Fullframe Message-ID: Ok; in the interests of research, I brought my PS/SS fullformat DVD along on my current business trip, and spent part of a rather long flight enjoyably watching the movie on my laptop. Here are a few things that I noticed; In the scene where the letters come down the chimney, the first shot in Widescreen has a headless Harry in the background. In FullFrame, you can see him properly. In the next scene, in the hall when Uncle Vernon grabs Harry, the Widescreen version shows part of UV and the top of Harry's face; in FullFrame, you can see the whole of both faces. At Ollivanders, when Mr O is explaining about Harry's and Voldemort's wands, the Widescreen version just shows his face; in FullFrame, you can see the wand in his hand as he's speaking; it just makes a more complete image. The sequence in the Dark Forest looks completely different; I must look at the Widescreen version again to see why. I think that it's been noted previously on this list that Columbus favours a lot of headshots. If you watch the movie in FullFrame, there are fewer of them; and to me, that's an improvement. So, if I can, I'll be buying CoS in FullFrame. However, I found with PS/SS that the Widescreen is far more easily available, so I may end up with both versions again. Regards, Nicholas From rvotaw at i-55.com Fri Jan 31 02:02:44 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:02:44 -0600 Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] RE: Where is the humour? References: <3E36864200000E07@freesurfmta05.sunrise.ch> Message-ID: <017001c2c8cc$d921a6a0$749ecdd1@RVotaw> Steve writes: > We all know that there are scenes in every book that seem irrelevant at > first, but then becomes important in another book. When the screenplay is > written, they have to eliminate many of the scenes in order to get the film > with 2-3 hours. But they must be careful not to eliminate scenes that will > play a greater importance later on. Yes, there are a great many things that must be eliminated. But some of them just get glossed over. For example, Fred/George's "We got Potter" after the sorting in SS/PS. I thought it had been skipped entirely. But it's there. You just can't hear them. It took me at least 40 watchings to notice it! But Oliver or James (whichever) was definitely saying "We got Potter." And Daniel rolling his eyes when Emma says "Nearly headless? How can you be nearly headless?" It's hilarious, but it took me forever to notice! Of course, that's not from the book at all anyway. But it was cute. Richelle [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]