opening scene PoA

[Dan Feeney]

Matt Huber:
> ummm...The potter series has a traditional opening crane shot of 
>Privet drive.

Two is not necessarily a tradition.

I was merely advocating for a film that translates the book to film 
medium in more than a literal way. A film that can stand more on its 
own than as an elipsed shorthand for the book. Film speaks a 
different language, has a different grammar - it has shorter time to 
do stuff, but more registers to do it in (music, transpositions, 
visual content etc.) Columbus' efforts seemed too "after school 
special" for me, way too linear. Columbus didn't take ANY chances, 
and the films made so far are popular, I submit, because of the 
books, but they aren't works of art themselves, they are just literal 
(if edited) and somewhat banal transcriptions. (Tarkovsky is my 
favourite director, followed by Kirosawa. Think what Tarkovsky did 
for Lem's Solaris! - the film has even supplanted the story on which 
it was based. Or what Kirosawa did for King Lear (Ran). Or what 
Jackson did with LoTR. Now, that's a great movie, it isn't a 
literal/banal translation of the book, and the director took chances, 
used the techniques of his medium to create the spirit of the books, 
not use the techniques of book to make a film. Fans may not agree 
with Jackson's story, but, but a whole lot of them go, more than once 
too, and more people agree on his capturing the spirit of the books 
than anything else. If HP were only the banal transcription Columbus 
made, A.S.Byatt's criticisms would be dead on. Columbus didn't do any 
of that. His films aren't art, they're precis.)

My opening would stun the audience, like Jackson does in the trilogy -
 they wouldn't be expecting it, it would "set the tone" WAY better 
than by letting the real subject of the film sneak up, as it were, 
and it has more art to it. Might even be Oscar or Cannes material, 
something Columbus' telling of HP never had the remotest chance of 
being. Great films are aren't transcriptions, but that's the kind of 
film Columbus makes.

But really, in all this, there's just the sense for me that this 
director might actually make a film that puts on screen the 
incredible story of MWPP - what we know of it. Done in such a way 
that we "know" exactly why this character is to be feared. Later, 
when we see more of the scene (the retelling, the explanations) WE 
can experience the change that HP experienced. And, maybe just as 
important, my opening scene doesn't suggest the belief that people 
have read the book, nor does it suggest they haven't. It's the way to 
make a movie that rocks.

>A scene that "explains" does not "set" the mood of the film.

It explains nothing, by the way. It misleads, is what it does. We see 
it from the perspective, as in the books, of those who have assumed 
SB's guilt for 12 years. It puts us exactly where we're supposed to 
be, so that we know we are somewhere else by the end of it. 

>Thus >the opening shot will be a crane shot of #4 privet drive, most 
>likely zoming in through the window of Harry's room with him lying 
>in bed reading the Muggle paper with Sirius' picture on the front, 
>then the scene continues with Harry being called to dinner and 
>having the Muggle news in the background talking about the escaped 
>convict, which flows nicely to a small discussion of it with the 
>family, which segways to Aunt Marge, which begins Harry's 3rd year 
>adventure.