> I'm not quoting anyone. Just putting my oar in with a few
> thoughts...

> 

> First, regarding the suggestion that Wood might be introduced into PoA
> 

> electronically. Please note what Biggerstaff said on his site:

> 

> "Oliver Wood will not feature in Harry Potter and the Prizoner of
> Azkaban. 

> Obviously this means that I won't feature in it either. When putting a
> 

> novel of the scale of PoA into a two hour movie, cuts have to be made.
> This 

> time Oliver was one of them."

> 

> Cause and effect are clear: his reasoning is not "I wasn't asked
> to be 

> involved and thus assume that there's no Wood", but
> "there's no Wood, so 

> I'm not involved". I think that's a pretty clear and
> conclusive statement 

> that Woiod will not appear in the movie in any form, other than perhaps
> 

> referred to in dialogue.

> 

> Second, regarding petitions.

> 

> As someone who has been involved in social/political activism on one
> 

> subject or another for most of my life, petitions are only good as a
> 

> gimmick. In themselves, petitions have no effect on decision-makers
> 

> whatsoever. They are, however, very good at focusing mass attention on
> a 

> particular issue or increasing a campaigning organisation's mailing
> list 

> (!), but in the case of pen-and-paper petitions, they are usually used
> as a 

> physical object to be handed over at mass rallies, meetings, etc.

> 

> The popularity of online petitions astonishes me, and what astonishes
> me 

> even more is that their authors seem to think that whoever they are
> 

> addressed to will take a blind bit of notice (apart from anything else,
> the 

> addressees need to know of their existence!). And from another angle,
> 

> considering the online population, any petition will only make sense
> and 

> come to public attention if a *MASSIVE* number of people sign it. In
> the 

> case of HP, with several millions of copies of each book sold worldwide
> and 

> several million more cinema tickets sold, such a petition would only
> start 

> developing wings once it had, as a round number, one million
> signatories.

> 

> Considering the worldwide online HP community, a little over 4,100 

> signatories in the couple of days since that petition was launched is,
> 

> frankly, laughable. If you want a comparison, in the first 24 hours of
> my 

> Borough Market filming report's going live, it had over 5,000 distinct
> 

> visitors. The next day, once Mugglenet and a couple of other popular
> sites 

> linked to it, that went up to about 18,000. In other words, at this
> stage, 

> if people felt strongly about this issue, I would expect *at least*
> 10,000 

> people to have heard about the petition. Why have fewer than half of
> them 

> signed it?

> 

> The only kind of protest that has any kind of sense in these kinds of
> 

> circumstances is writing to the decision-makers by snail mail (e-mail
> is 

> pointless; first there's no real way to determine exactly how many
> people 

> have sent in e-mails without examing each and every one very
> carefully), 

> and an electronic inbox is easy to overlook. However, sackfulls of mail
> are 

> not.

> 

> In other words, my advice to anyone who feels strongly enough
> about this 

> to be heard is to write to Leavesden by snail mail, and not even to
> bother 

> with electronic communication. Furthermore, writing to Warner Brothers
> is a 

> complete waste of time. It's in the production team's hands, not the
> 

> executives'.

> 

> Third, my feelings on this issue in general, and why I won't be signing
> any 

> petitions, writing to Leavesden or even getting hot under the
> collar.

> 

> Movie-making is a collective enterprise which starts with a script. We
> have 

> no idea what that script contains. At a rough estimate, in order to
> make a 

> ~2.5 hour movie (plus credits) out of PoA, the book's narrative has to
> be 

> condensed into something half its size. Some characters have to be 

> compounded, some characters have to disappear, some characters need to
> swap 

> lines, and half of the events described in the book have to disappear
> by 

> the wayside.

> 

> I repeat: we have no idea what the script contains and which shortcuts
> were 

> made. I agree that Wood's function in the book is very largely to be
> the 

> driven and obsessed Quidditch captain who pushes Harry to find a way to
> 

> deal with the Dementors. Considering Wood in the first two movies was
> 

> reduced to less than a cameo (his main function was to describe the
> rules 

> in PS/SS to an audience which hadn't read the books) and there was no
> great 

> indication of his obsession (except for one line in CoS:
> "You can't cancel 

> Quidditch, Professor!"), introducing it now would require beefing
> up his 

> character, for which we simply do not have time. I'm sure that few
> would 

> disagree with me that Sirius, Lupin and Pettigrew are far more
> important.

> 

> Wood's drive for the Gryffindor team to win can easily be transferred
> to 

> Ron (and the Twins). They're already around, they have more of a
> connection 

> with Harry than movie!Wood has ever had, and their interest in the
> sport, 

> and Gryffindor's status against Slytherin, has already been
> established.

> 

> I know that (fan)girls of a certain age want to see as much of Wood as
> 

> possible, and I can't say that I blame them. However, as Biggerstaff
> 

> himself said, something has to give, and this time it's him. whilst the
> HP 

> movies are being made as little more than eye candy, there *is* more to
> 

> them than that, and you can't have *all* the eye candy in the
> world.

> 

> In any event, just what does anyone think that venting their spleen
> will 

> accomplish? The script is finished and filming is underway. Apart from
> a 

> few tweaks here and there, no amount of ranting at Cuaron & Co will
> change 

> the structure of the movie.

> 

> Four, as to the suggestion that no Wood equals no Quidditch, I find it
> 

> frankly bizarre. Except for saving a couple of goals in the first two
> 

> movies (and a "look out, Harry!" in the second, which I found
> especially 

> out of place - what was he doing away from the goal hoops?), we saw
> none of 

> him on the pitch, so it's perfectly possible to focus on Harry's
> problems 

> with the Dementors without showing Wood.

> 

> I'm slightly disappointed that this means that there will probably only
> be 

> one match (and I'm prepared to guarantee that there will be *some* 

> Quidditch; see my old posts), and I will be bitterly disappointed if we
> do 

> not see Harry missing the Snitch and Gryffindor losing a match. 

> Movie!Harry's enough of a superhero already without the implication
> that 

> Gryffindor have never lost. However, I'm prepared, albeit reluctantly,
> to 

> wait and see just how Cuaron and Kloves have got around this.

> 

> If I don't like what I see next year, then I shall certainly be venting
> my 

> spleen at Heyman, Kloves and Cuaron (and JKR for letting them do it),
> but 

> until I know what's in the movie, I'm adult enough to accept that it is
> 

> counter-productive (and indeed churlish) to complain *in the absence of
> ALL 

> the facts*.

> 

> --

> GulPlum AKA Richard, who is getting just a little tired of the
> moaning.

> 

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  9 21:23:18 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 13:23:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: 'finality' of cinema (was) Wood/Quidditch
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030309212318.4060.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>

Steve:
> I want to give the Director the
> benefit of the doubt, but I confess
> myself worried. There are no retakes
> once the movie is release. When
> it's done, it's done forever.

True, that is, until it gets a remake.  

Of course, to remake an entire franchise 
of seven movies would be much harder than 
remaking just one particular movie but I 
see the HP movies as being rather ripe for 
future remakes because

(1) the source material has such a strong 
hold on the imagination of so many that 
future generations of fans are very likely 
being bred and raised as we speak, possibly 
creating demand for new films that newly 
interpret HP for generations to come.

(2) the source material can be interpreted 
in so many ways that one version of the 
canon cannot possibly hope to plumb the 
depths definitively...especially a version 
conceived without full knowledge of the 
complete story.

(3) frankly, there's quite a bit of room 
for improvement in terms of plotting, 
character development and even the SFX.  
Canon sets a high bar for style and for 
substance and I don't think that either 
SS or CoS managed to deliver on the 
promises, so to speak, that the canon 
makes for the brand that is "Harry Potter."  
SOMEone, SOMEwhere, SOMEtime is surely 
going to be tempted to build on the first 
versions in hopes of topping them.

Will any of us be alive to see it?    
Who knows?

Having said that...

I'm of two minds in regards to our society's 
practice of capturing performances and 
storytelling on film.  On the one hand, it 
preserves important interpretations for 
later reference.  OTOH, this can also 
discourage the in-depth and personal 
examination of the story that makes it 
meaningful.  Once the universally true 
themes have been interpreted in the 
here-and-now, it somehow seem to touch 
the there-and-then of tomorrow with 
less strength.

It used to be that interpretations of 
stories in the here-and-now remain 
fleeting and exist only in the 
here-and-now.  Whether told by one bard 
by the hearth or by players on a stage, 
people's experience of stories performed 
evolve as the same stories are 
interpreted by different people.  Even 
the best and the most multi-layered 
interpretations of complex canon 
cannot be all things to all people.

With the ability to capture THE 
strongest interpretation of its time 
on film and video and audio etc., the 
idea that there can be one and only 
one definitive interpretation seems to 
be prevailing more often than not.  No 
'retake' is possible if we consider any 
film to be the now-and-FOREVER version. 
See, I'm not sure that the creation of 
dogma aids the development of our 
culture and society...

...nor, for that matter, am I sure that 
this is what Steve was originally 
talking about.  

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

From thalia at aokp.org  Sun Mar  9 21:33:11 2003
From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 13:33:11 -0800
Subject: whoops/casting/Wood
Message-ID: 

re my previous email: oopsie-daisies, sent reply to list instead of 
writer, my bad.

but while i'm at it--

my number one rule of life: LOOK FOR THE BIG PICTURE. we don't know 
what's going on. we don't know what the script looks like and we don't 
know what the auditions were like and well basically we don't know diddly 
squat.

but we know the books.  and we know we love the idea of the movies.

so why the hostility? perhaps we shouldn't get so offended over something 
about which we don't have the whole story. perhaps we should at least 
attempt to get the whole story first. all i hear are complaints based on 
superficiality (casting) and a very small piece of the movie-making pie 
(absence of Wood).

and, on a sidenote, why do so many people sound so determined to hate 
every decision involved in making this movie? have YOU ever tried to make 
a movie out of a book? have you ever tried to make a movie at all? have 
you ever tried to work for a business like warner bros? there are so many 
aspects of this, more than i can even fathom.

all i'm asking for is a little less ignorance.

and come on, folks, we'd go to see it come hell or high water.

thalia 'be nice to the waitresses' chaunacy

'A person who is nice to you, but is rude to the waiter, is not a nice 
person.' Dave Barry

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Mar  9 21:40:39 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 16:40:39 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] whoops/casting/Wood
Message-ID: <114.200f6a55.2b9d0ed7@aol.com>

and come on, folks, we'd go to see it come hell or high water.

I think I would but I want the same cast for the whole nine yards!  It 
bothers me that the water down the twins, colin creevey's and a lot of the 
rest of their parts except for the main ones!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/9/03 4:34:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, thalia at aokp.org 
writes:

> 
> 
> re my previous email: oopsie-daisies, sent reply to list instead of 
> writer, my bad.
> 
> but while i'm at it--
> 
> my number one rule of life: LOOK FOR THE BIG PICTURE. we don't know 
> what's going on. we don't know what the script looks like and we don't 
> know what the auditions were like and well basically we don't know diddly 
> squat.
> 
> but we know the books.  and we know we love the idea of the movies.
> 
> so why the hostility? perhaps we shouldn't get so offended over something 
> about which we don't have the whole story. perhaps we should at least 
> attempt to get the whole story first. all i hear are complaints based on 
> superficiality (casting) and a very small piece of the movie-making pie 
> (absence of Wood).
> 
> and, on a sidenote, why do so many people sound so determined to hate 
> every decision involved in making this movie? have YOU ever tried to make 
> a movie out of a book? have you ever tried to make a movie at all? have 
> you ever tried to work for a business like warner bros? there are so many 
> aspects of this, more than i can even fathom.
> 
> all i'm asking for is a little less ignorance.
> 
> and come on, folks, we'd go to see it come hell or high water.
> 
> thalia 'be nice to the waitresses' chaunacy
> 
> 'A person who is nice to you, but is rude to the waiter, is not a nice 
> person.' Dave Barry
> 

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

From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Mar  9 21:59:07 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (Lynda Sappington)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 21:59:07 -0000
Subject: Am I the only one?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "acciopotter" 
 wrote:
>*snip*   My personal 
> complaint might not make even the slightest dent in the opinions of 
> the people at warner brothers, but at least i can have the pride in 
> saying I said my piece about something I dont't agree with.
> 
> Amanda
> AccioPotter 

But our voices CAN make a difference.  I don't know if any of you 
are "veterans" of other fandoms, but I am.  I was involved in 
the "Starman" TV series fandom for years.  It was a show that lasted 
only one season, but from a grassroots fan effort, ABC (who treated 
it very shabbily, moving it around the schedule 6 times, often 
without any notice of the change) actually did reconsider canceling 
it (they held a special board meeting because of OUR activities 
trying to get them to save the show!), and Sci-Fi picked up the 22 
episodes that existed and broadcast them several times now.  We got 
ABC to listen by contacting them with reasonable, intelligently 
written snail mail letters (of course, this was before email was in 
general use).  Whatever your convictions about Wood/Biggerstaff, 
other characters, other cast members (I'm a firm "keep the original 
trio cast!!!" believer, myself), you have the right to act on those 
convictions.  Contacting WB about your concerns will show that there 
are a lot more fans than just little kids.  Well-written responses 
from mature, educated, well-spoken people actually do have an 
impact.  During my "Starman" years, I was able to speak with, or meet 
with in person, network and studio executives (up to and including 
the President of Sony/Columbia Pictures, and the VP of ABC-TV at the 
time) and they actually did pay attention and listen.  They didn't 
make a decision that I wanted them to, but they DID (in Columbia's 
case) provide the fandom with all kinds of goodies (we auctioned off 
press kits, posters, buttons, props, etc., all to benefit charities) 
as well as their music department head (in his office in the 
Sony/Columbia Pictures headquarters) handing me a tape of the theme 
song of the show without dialog over it -- a form that had never 
before been heard by fans.  (I produced an album of the TV series 
theme, incidental music and fan filks, all with the BLESSING of 
Columbia Pictures, and sold it within the fandom.)  Don't let anyone 
tell you that fans' voices have no impact.  I'm living proof that we 
DO get heard (at least in the USA -- I can't vouch for anyplace else, 
I don't know anything about their systems).  Do what you think is 
right -- it's your right.  

Lynda

From thalia at aokp.org  Sun Mar  9 23:01:06 2003
From: thalia at aokp.org (chanteuse thalia chaunacy)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 15:01:06 -0800
Subject: watered-down characters
In-Reply-To: <114.200f6a55.2b9d0ed7@aol.com>
References: <114.200f6a55.2b9d0ed7@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

Kyle Longbottom wrote: "I want the same cast for the whole nine yards! It 
bothers me that the water down the twins, colin creevey's and a lot of 
the rest of their parts except for the main ones!"

first: the whole nine yards? meaning what?  the whole 
movie series?

moving on... (and this is to everyone who's complained with such 
bitterness, not just Kyle)

i repeat a previous question: you ever tried to make a movie out of a 
book? try it, i dare you.  write the the HP script as you want it, then 
time it. bet you it's over four hours. bet you. prolly more like five, 
with action.

watering down is necessary, and i'll tell you why.

in theatre, one page of dialogue equals one minute of time on stage. this 
does not account for action sequences or close-ups or montages or any of 
that additional movie-type stuff.

PS is 309 pages. that's 5.15 hours. CoS is 341 pages, which is 5.684 
hours. PoA is 435 pages, or 7.25 hours. besides, there are zillions of 
sequences in which tons happens in two paragraphs, difficult at best to 
translate to film. granted, i'm going off of the US versions. somebody 
wanna do this with the UK versions? maybe it's more doable for PS & CoS. 
, but i don't think you can argue with PoA or GoF. they're just 
too long for a 'faithful' 2.5+/- hour movie.

so -- beyond the whole 'they should have made it a mini-series' 
argument, which is valid but neither here nor there -- how do you make it 
a movie? you cut. well, *what* do you cut?

there's the issue.

well, why are you making a movie? because the plot's exciting and the 
characters are interesting, right? i don't think anyone can tell me the 
plots of PS/CoSmovies weren't exciting or that the characters were boring.

so logically, the makers did their job.

but this is our baby, our canon, and we all have our own visions, which 
of course will never be exactly reached.

so ya'll get angry.

now, this doesn't make sense to me. disappointed, i'll go with, but 
negative energy *towards* those involved in the making is megolamaniacal 
and misplaced. all they did was use their vision. this is not an offense. 
this is a *translation*. why do you have the right to belittle them? do 
you yell at fanfic writers too?

thalia 'earning her b*tch points for the day' chaunacy

From kung_fucat at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Mar  9 23:08:37 2003
From: kung_fucat at yahoo.co.uk (kung_fucat)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 23:08:37 -0000
Subject: whoops/casting/Wood
In-Reply-To: <114.200f6a55.2b9d0ed7@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- Although I share many of the concerns about Kloves expressed on
this list, I'm not opposed in principle to taking some liberties in
adapting the books. I'm a big Lord of the Rings fan, and have been
(mostly) quite impressed at the way they have been adapted so far.
I don't object at all to the absence of quidditch in the film (if this
is the case). Quidditch has already been done and shown in both
previous films. Personally I'd rather see better use of the characters
that have already been established. The twins are barely in it,
Dumbledore has been treated terribly by the script, and Severus should
be more of a presence. I'd also be perfectly happy to exchange some
quidditch matches for the Shrieking Shack scene to be shown in all
it's overblown dramatic glory. 
Having said that, I do agree that Sean Biggerstaff is quite easy on
the eye.

Vendea

Who would also like to say that Gary Oldman IS dead sexy!

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sun Mar  9 23:23:50 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 18:23:50 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] watered-down characters
Message-ID: <75.c0c3381.2b9d2706@aol.com>

Here are my bitch points!  I have never made a movie but on the same token if 
you told everybody like on angel we are now revamping the cast!  Would you 
want to go see the movie or t.v program!  It depends, but look at dennis the 
menace or even the Flintstones!  Yes it comes down to cutting!  But why can't 
wood stay since his not in the goblet or have him in the deleted scenes which 
are now real big??  Cutting room floor film now in the dvd!! extra fotage!!  
Yes it does come to the director vision but on the same token the new 
director can go so far out that is doesnt look like the same thing!  What 
happens if they revamp the whole cast!  

It scares me that they could say well we don't need the main or minor cast 
because their too old!  Why??  In the books they grow up!

For me I will have to wait and see now.  Who is next to be on the cutting 
room floor??

Kyle Longbottom  

I am angry for the fact that they really dont care about the fans!  What 
would the problem be if they had wood?    

In a message dated 3/9/03 6:03:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, thalia at aokp.org 
writes:

> Kyle Longbottom wrote: "I want the same cast for the whole nine yards! It 
> bothers me that the water down the twins, colin creevey's and a lot of 
> the rest of their parts except for the main ones!"
> 
> first: the whole nine yards? meaning what?  the whole 
> movie series?
> 
> moving on... (and this is to everyone who's complained with such 
> bitterness, not just Kyle)
> 
> i repeat a previous question: you ever tried to make a movie out of a 
> book? try it, i dare you.  write the the HP script as you want it, then 
> time it. bet you it's over four hours. bet you. prolly more like five, 
> with action.
> 
> watering down is necessary, and i'll tell you why.
> 
> in theatre, one page of dialogue equals one minute of time on stage. this 
> does not account for action sequences or close-ups or montages or any of 
> that additional movie-type stuff.
> 
> PS is 309 pages. that's 5.15 hours. CoS is 341 pages, which is 5.684 
> hours. PoA is 435 pages, or 7.25 hours. besides, there are zillions of 
> sequences in which tons happens in two paragraphs, difficult at best to 
> translate to film. granted, i'm going off of the US versions. somebody 
> wanna do this with the UK versions? maybe it's more doable for PS &CoS. 
> , but i don't think you can argue with PoA or GoF. they're just 
> too long for a 'faithful' 2.5+/- hour movie.
> 
> so -- beyond the whole 'they should have made it a mini-series' 
> argument, which is valid but neither here nor there -- how do you make it 
> a movie? you cut. well, *what* do you cut?
> 
> there's the issue.
> 
> well, why are you making a movie? because the plot's exciting and the 
> characters are interesting, right? i don't think anyone can tell me the 
> plots of PS/CoSmovies weren't exciting or that the characters were boring.
> 
> so logically, the makers did their job.
> 
> but this is our baby, our canon, and we all have our own visions, which 
> of course will never be exactly reached.
> 
> so ya'll get angry.
> 
> now, this doesn't make sense to me. disappointed, i'll go with, but 
> negative energy *towards* those involved in the making is megolamaniacal 
> and misplaced. all they did was use their vision. this is not an offense. 
> this is a *translation*. why do you have the right to belittle them? do 
> you yell at fanfic writers too?
> 
> thalia 'earning her b*tch points for the day' chaunacy

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Mar 10 00:45:31 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 19:45:31 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: whoops/casting/Wood
Message-ID: <6d.c0a2110.2b9d3a2b@aol.com>

I agree with you.  But why cut wood completly from the storyline?  The 
Prisoner would be his last film in the Harry Potter series!  I can't see the 
problem of not having wood there!  Jamie Yeates characters (Marcus Flint) 
days are numbered as well remember he stays on to the goblet and then leaves! 
 I do agree with you lets now develop all the characters!

Kyle Longbottom  

In a message dated 3/9/03 6:09:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
kung_fucat at yahoo.co.uk writes:

> --- Although I share many of the concerns about Kloves expressed on
> this list, I'm not opposed in principle to taking some liberties in
> adapting the books. I'm a big Lord of the Rings fan, and have been
> (mostly) quite impressed at the way they have been adapted so far.
> I don't object at all to the absence of quidditch in the film (if this
> is the case). Quidditch has already been done and shown in both
> previous films. Personally I'd rather see better use of the characters
> that have already been established. The twins are barely in it,
> Dumbledore has been treated terribly by the script, and Severus should
> be more of a presence. I'd also be perfectly happy to exchange some
> quidditch matches for the Shrieking Shack scene to be shown in all
> it's overblown dramatic glory. 
> Having said that, I do agree that Sean Biggerstaff is quite easy on
> the eye.
> 
> Vendea
> 
> Who would also like to say that Gary Oldman IS dead sexy!

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

From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 01:37:43 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 01:37:43 -0000
Subject: Am I the Only One?
Message-ID: 

Lynda wrote: 

"But our voices CAN make a difference. I don't know if any of you 
are "veterans" of other fandoms, but I am. I was involved in 
the "Starman" TV series fandom for years. It was a show that lasted 
only one season, but from a grassroots fan effort, ABC (who treated 
it very shabbily, moving it around the schedule 6 times, often 
without any notice of the change) actually did reconsider canceling 
it (they held a special board meeting because of OUR activities 
trying to get them to save the show!), and Sci-Fi picked up the 22 
episodes that existed and broadcast them several times now. We got 
ABC to listen by contacting them with reasonable, intelligently 
written snail mail letters (of course, this was before email was in 
general use). Whatever your convictions about Wood/Biggerstaff, 
other characters, other cast members (I'm a firm "keep the original 
trio cast!!!" believer, myself), you have the right to act on those 
convictions. Contacting WB about your concerns will show that there 
are a lot more fans than just little kids. Well-written responses 
from mature, educated, well-spoken people actually do have an 
impact."

The problem, though, is that the Harry Potter fandom is *so huge.* 
Even if the WB alienated every single fan over the age of twelve, 
they would still make a *lot* of money. The numbers of protesters 
would have to get truly enormous before they'd pay any attention. I 
think that while you may have the *right* to protest, it isn't 
necessarily going to do a whole lot of good. 

Derannimer (who would also like to add that, as Richard said, *the 
script is finished*)

From lita at sailordom.com  Mon Mar 10 02:17:30 2003
From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 19:17:30 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] watered-down characters
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030309180822.M23124-100000@nightwing.sailordom.com>

I figured I'd take a stab at some of this....I'm probably
several film classes beyond what I need to get the minor in
it by now. :) Plus, all my production classes have been in
screenwriting.

thalia chaunacy wrote:
> in theatre, one page of dialogue equals one minute of time on stage. this
> does not account for action sequences or close-ups or montages or any of
> that additional movie-type stuff.

The general rule of thumb in film is that one page of a
(formatted) script equals one minute of film time.  Most
scripts are in the 110-115 minute range. Note--those are
*not* numbers for production scripts, which are an entirely
different animal. The screenwriter doesn't add in any of the
cinematic stuff. (There are ways to sort of "lead" the
reader into seeing some specific shots, but the screenwriter
does not put in any type of camera movements or editing
directions.)

> PS is 309 pages. that's 5.15 hours. CoS is 341 pages, which is 5.684
> hours. PoA is 435 pages, or 7.25 hours. besides, there are zillions of
> sequences in which tons happens in two paragraphs, difficult at best to
> translate to film.

I don't think you can necessarily make a direct substitution
for the novel's pages with the script's pages. I don't think
that's a fair comparison, as the the writing is completely
different for both. Outside of some very brief descriptions,
all the script contains is dialogue--it goes without saying
that novels include quite a bit more than that. Really, the
only way to tell what the length of a direct book-to-screen
translation is would be to reformat the books into a script
and strip everything out. (And, at that, the dialogue would
likely be off anything because it wouldn't be film
dialogue.)

Having said that, though, it's extremely difficult to adapt
a novel into film--probably because the two are completely
different mediums. Film is visual and novels are very
internal. Even the narrative structure gets handled
differently. In general, it's a very bad idea to strictly
translate a novel into a script simply because most novels
don't work cinematically. There's just too much
"stuff"--what makes sense on the written page just can't all
be fit coherently into a movie.

Which I think is what you're saying, but I did want to
clarify the script length points.

> so -- beyond the whole 'they should have made it a mini-series'
> argument, which is valid but neither here nor there -- how do you make it
> a movie? you cut. well, *what* do you cut?
>
> there's the issue.

I agree that things do need to be left out--that's the
nature of an adaptation.

In fact, I've heard that one of the best ways to adapt a
novel is to *not* read the novel yourself right off the bat,
but to have someone else read it and then tell you the
story. Read the novel *after* you've done your first draft
of the script, when you're ready to revise. (I should
probably point out that it's expected that you'll go through
several drafts--probably only your original framework from
your first draft would remain if you did it like this.) That
way, you'll focus on the important stuff and what the book
is *really* about and not get caught up in all the details
of the book. I realize that's probably horrifying to most
people in any kind of fandom  but I think it does make a
lot of sense. (I myself am originally from the comic book
fandom, which is probably one of the more...uh...fanatical
ones out there.)

What I find to be the biggest flaws in the movies from a
screenwriting perspective, is that I don't think the movies
are a good adaptation of the books. I don't feel that the
movies are about the same things as the books. That is, that
while I think a lot of the events (and lines) are the same
as in the books, they don't mean the same things. In fact,
I get the impression that the movies aren't really "about"
anything other than "look at this cool wizarding world,
kiddies." In a lot of ways, I think the moviemakers were so
concerned with sticking in as many details from the books as
possible that they didn't worry enough about translating the
spirit of the characters to the movies.

Because, let's face it, Wood in the movies is (other than
his looks, I guess) fairly forgettable. The character is
simply exposition in the first film. All the Weasleys other
than Ron are similarly flat. Which is a shame, because
there's only a limited amount of time they can be
used--there was no reason to make what time they had so
bland. The important thing was not to have all those
background characters around, but to have *interesting*
background characters.

> well, why are you making a movie? because the plot's exciting and the
> characters are interesting, right? i don't think anyone can tell me the
> plots of PS/CoSmovies weren't exciting or that the characters were boring.

Well, I would have to disagree with you somewhat here. While
I wouldn't say that the movie!plots were boring, I do think
that they had enough flaws to keep them from being terribly
exciting. And I would have to say that the movie!characters
as written are fairly boring.

What makes the movies work is that they are visually
*amazing* (and, IMO, have a talented cast). I don't think
either the plots are the characters are particularly
interesting in and of themselves--neither inspires much
emotional attachment unless you already have one in place
from reading the books. What the films do is visually make
the world come alive. I've noticed that that "aliveness"
encouraged me to overlook a lot of the flaws of the
movies--probably because I'm something of a film geek. :)
But when I look at it from a screenwriting perspective, I
see a lot of flaws--and not just from the adaptation
perspective.

But as a kid's action flick (which, let's face it, is what
the movies are intended to be), both movies work very well.
Which, to be cynical, really isn't saying much. :)

I have to say that I've given some thought as to how I would
adapt PoA, but I won't go into that now. I think I've ranted
enough for one day.... :)

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 jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 02:48:25 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 02:48:25 -0000
Subject: No Oliver Wood in PoA?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003"  
> 
> Here's another thought to all of you who are not that fried over no 
> Sean Biggerstaff (and possibly no Wood atall which could possibly 
> mean very little quidditch...): Quidditch and the Quidditch Cup 
were 
> the reasons Harry was so desparate to learn how to conjure a 
> Patronus. If these things become peripheral (which is what it's 
> looking like even putting the most positive spin on recent 
events...) 
> then TPTB have decided they can manage plot better than JKR. The 
> brilliance (if I may be so bold as to call it that) of JKR's story 
is 
> that no matter how important plot is, she never lets that keep her 
> from creating wonderful characters like a manic Wood, absolutely 
> single-minded in his pursuit of the Cup. It's all a balance. Throw 
> away a wonderful character (Peeves was funny but not wonderful like 
> Wood) and something intangible will be lost. Of course there will 
be 
> a movie without Wood. Who can argue with that? But why was losing 
Wood
> necessary? That's a very good question no one seems to be able to 
> answer.
> JenD

I thinks this is a time for some consumer feedback to Warner Bros.  
You may think it heresy, but after my disappointment at the way they 
eviscerated CoS in the movie, mking Ron a clown, etc., I am not all 
that fired up about PoA: the Movie.  Oliver Wood and the Quidditch 
matches are integral to the story, no matter what Senor Director may 
think.  I could easily content myself with rereading the books or 
reading fanfics or beta reading and composing filks (which I do now)

Haggridd

From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Mar 10 03:49:41 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 21:49:41 -0600
Subject: My last comment about Wood in PoA
Message-ID: <008b01c2e6b8$1565f6d0$bea2cdd1@RVotaw>

At least for now. :)  To me it's not so much Wood as a vital character in the movies, it's just that he's there.  He's a part of Hogwart's.  Watch SS/PS and CoS.  He's sitting down the table from Harry, he's in the crowds in the hall, he's just there.  He may not be vital to the plot (though I still can't comprehend Quidditch without the captain of the team), but he's a familiar face.  It's like WB is slowly removing characters we're familar with. How would you like it if Seamus weren't in the rest of the movies?  He's not vital to the plot.  While we're at it, take out Dean Thomas, Lee Jordan, and so on. (No, I don't really mean it, I'm being sarcastic.)  I just like familiar faces in the scenes, rather than all extras that we haven't ever seen and won't see again.

And that's all I'm saying about that.  

Richelle

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Mar 10 04:20:50 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 23:20:50 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] My last comment about Wood in PoA
Message-ID: <12f.251484d9.2b9d6ca2@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/9/03 10:50:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvotaw at i-55.com 
writes:

> 
> At least for now. :)  To me it's not so much Wood as a vital character in 
> the movies, it's just that he's there.  He's a part of Hogwart's.  Watch 
> SS/PS and CoS.  He's sitting down the table from Harry, he's in the crowds 
> in the hall, he's just there.  He may not be vital to the plot (though I 
> still can't comprehend Quidditch without the captain of the team), but he's 
> a familiar face.  It's like WB is slowly removing characters we're familar 
> with. How would you like it if Seamus weren't in the rest of the movies?  
> He's not vital to the plot.  While we're at it, take out Dean Thomas, Lee 
> Jordan, and so on. (No, I don't really mean it, I'm being sarcastic.)  I 
> just like familiar faces in the scenes, rather than all extras that we 
> haven't ever seen and won't see again.
> 
> And that's all I'm saying about that.  
> 
> Richelle

Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was going the chamber he 
said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come back?  We will have 
to wait and see.

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From urbana at charter.net  Mon Mar 10 05:07:36 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 05:07:36 -0000
Subject: My last comment about Wood in PoA
In-Reply-To: <12f.251484d9.2b9d6ca2@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
>> Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was going the 
chamber he 
> said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come back?  We 
will have 
> to wait and see.
>

Do you have a web link you can send us about this? I think the actor 
who plays Seamus (is that Devon Murray??) does a good job on the 
fairly small role that is Seamus, but (IMO) he sounds like he's 
getting a bit big for his britches... Maybe he doesn't get a lot of 
screen time, but heck, he doesn't get all that much *book* time 
either. And other than burning off his eyebrows in Charms class in 
SS/PS he doesn't figure into the HP plot much. Let's face it, this 
kid *isn't* Dan, Rupert, Emma or Tom Felton in terms of being 
essential to the plot... and it's not like he's in the Who's Who of 
British movie actors (Dame Maggie, Rickman, the late R. Harris, 
Miriam Margolies, Branagh etc.). More like "Who Dat?"

Well, just my perception here. I can see why one of the adult actors 
(who are mostly well-known) might get miffed about not getting enough 
screen time... but Seamus seems to me to be fairly low on the pecking 
order here. 

Anne U
(thinks maybe he is PO'd that Susan Bones *still* shows up in so many 
scenes ;-)

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Mar 10 06:20:31 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 01:20:31 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My last comment about Wood in PoA
Message-ID: <12d.24f4a2e1.2b9d88af@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/10/03 12:08:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
urbana at charter.net writes:

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> >>Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was going the 
> chamber he 
> >said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come back?  We 
> will have 
> >to wait and see.
> >
> 
> Do you have a web link you can send us about this? I think the actor 
> who plays Seamus (is that Devon Murray??) does a good job on the 
> fairly small role that is Seamus, but (IMO) he sounds like he's 
> getting a bit big for his britches... Maybe he doesn't get a lot of 
> screen time, but heck, he doesn't get all that much *book* time 
> either. And other than burning off his eyebrows in Charms class in 
> SS/PS he doesn't figure into the HP plot much. Let's face it, this 
> kid *isn't* Dan, Rupert, Emma or Tom Felton in terms of being 
> essential to the plot... and it's not like he's in the Who's Who of 
> British movie actors (Dame Maggie, Rickman, the late R. Harris, 
> Miriam Margolies, Branagh etc.). More like "Who Dat?"
> 
> Well, just my perception here. I can see why one of the adult actors 
> (who are mostly well-known) might get miffed about not getting enough 
> screen time... but Seamus seems to me to be fairly low on the pecking 
> order here. 
> 
> Anne U
> (thinks maybe he is PO'd that Susan Bones *still* shows up in so many 
> scenes ;-)
> 
> 

I can't find where he said he may not be back for the Prisoner of Azkaban!  
Here is his unoffical website www.devonmurray.com .  At the moment there is 
not information about him being in the Prisoner.  Wouldn't you be PO'd that 
Susan (Eleanor Columbus) Bones has more scene time just becuase she is the 
daughter of a famous director!  I would if I had to claw, rip my way to the 
top and see a person not even acting and get there just be being releted to 
the director!!  Now I like how Ron Howard has treated his brother Clint 
howard!  He always, until now has made him audtion for roles in all his films 
and sometimes he wouldnt make it.

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From belleps at october.com  Mon Mar 10 06:38:17 2003
From: belleps at october.com (Beth)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 00:38:17 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daniel (WAS Thewlis playing nice)
In-Reply-To: <1047213929.1194.75318.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030310002801.00a170f0@pop.cox-internet.com>

At 12:45 PM 3/9/03 +0000, you wrote:
>Amy Z
>hoping poor Daniel Radcliffe doesn't decide to stay in acting,
>because there aren't likely to be any more adolescent wizard roles
>coming down the pike

Actually, I'm more worried about Rupert from this angle. One thing Dan has 
in his favor is that he's visually a bit of a chameleon, especially when 
you take off his glasses. I've saved a handful of pictures of him, and when 
you place them side by side, it's almost difficult to see that they're of 
the same person. Add the fact that future roles will most likely be without 
the glasses, and I think Dan will be fine.

On the other hand, after listening to several interviews with him, I have 
to say that I'd love to read a book by him or see a movie for which he 
wrote the screenplay (after he's gotten a few more years under his belt). 
His command of language and ability to communicate his thoughts in a mature 
yet accessible fashion are, I think, impressive. I'd miss seeing his face 
on the "big screen", but I think I'd prefer to see him write.

Not that what I'd like him to do matters a farthing.... 

bel 

From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 12:05:33 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 04:05:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adapting books to the big screen (WAS watered-down characters)
In-Reply-To: <1047268174.1405.30455.m4@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030310120533.80273.qmail@web11003.mail.yahoo.com>

Answering to Lita's post on book adaptations:

> The general rule of thumb in film is that one page of a
> (formatted) script equals one minute of film time.  Most
> scripts are in the 110-115 minute range. Note--those are
> *not* numbers for production scripts, which are an entirely
> different animal. The screenwriter doesn't add in any of the
> cinematic stuff. (There are ways to sort of "lead" the
> reader into seeing some specific shots, but the screenwriter
> does not put in any type of camera movements or editing
> directions.)

That kind of depends on the screenwriter -- or are you referring
specifically to Hollywood standard screenwriters? There are some who
will indeed only write dialogues and the basic action, and use only
small phrasing tricks to induce a camera shot ("John gives Mary the
flowers" being different from "Mary receives the flowers from John" or
"the flowers pass from John's hands to Mary's", etc.)  But in the kind
of production where the screenwriter knows he'll be more involved with
the filming itself, it's common to find scripts describing camera
position and movements to the last detail, and even establishing
precisely how many minutes and seconds each scene is supposed to take
on screen. Not to mention those who don't write any script at all and
prefer to work with storyboards all along. 

> Having said that, though, it's extremely difficult to adapt
> a novel into film--probably because the two are completely
> different mediums. Film is visual and novels are very
> internal. Even the narrative structure gets handled
> differently. In general, it's a very bad idea to strictly
> translate a novel into a script simply because most novels
> don't work cinematically. There's just too much
> "stuff"--what makes sense on the written page just can't all
> be fit coherently into a movie.

I totally agree. And that's why I was taken aback when I heard boastful
comments from Columbus and company that PS would be completely faithful
to the books. Mind you, I hadn't read any of the HP books then. My
thoughts at the time were, either those HP books are the poorest excuse
for literature ever, or those guys are digging their graves.

Of course, the two HP movies made so far are NOT completely faithful to
anything. On the other hand, I have a feeling they couldn't completely
let go of the idea that they had to be. The result, in my opinion, is a
dreadful in-between. They have put as many scenes from the books as
they could fit in a two hours gap, and ended up losing any depth the
characters could have had -- because there's no time for that! No time
for non-informational dialogues, no time for developing Harry as a
"narrator" (hence the superboy feel on movie!Harry), no time for
telling who all those people are after all. 

> In fact, I've heard that one of the best ways to adapt a
> novel is to *not* read the novel yourself right off the bat,
> but to have someone else read it and then tell you the
> story. Read the novel *after* you've done your first draft
> of the script, when you're ready to revise. (I should
> probably point out that it's expected that you'll go through
> several drafts--probably only your original framework from
> your first draft would remain if you did it like this.) That
> way, you'll focus on the important stuff and what the book
> is *really* about and not get caught up in all the details
> of the book. I realize that's probably horrifying to most
> people in any kind of fandom  but I think it does make a
> lot of sense. (I myself am originally from the comic book
> fandom, which is probably one of the more...uh...fanatical
> ones out there.)

That is a great way to developing a movie script from an existing story
(as long as the scriptwriter does go through the trouble of writing a
dozen versions of it; sometimes the final script is simply that first
version of a story told by someone else... Irk.) 

> What I find to be the biggest flaws in the movies from a
> screenwriting perspective, is that I don't think the movies
> are a good adaptation of the books. I don't feel that the
> movies are about the same things as the books. That is, that
> while I think a lot of the events (and lines) are the same
> as in the books, they don't mean the same things. In fact,
> I get the impression that the movies aren't really "about"
> anything other than "look at this cool wizarding world,
> kiddies." In a lot of ways, I think the moviemakers were so
> concerned with sticking in as many details from the books as
> possible that they didn't worry enough about translating the
> spirit of the characters to the movies.

Again, I absolutely agree with you. I should add that I've always seen
the HP books as mystery books, so my expectations for an adaptation to
movies would be similar to the adaptations of Agatha Christie's books
-- something that has been tried over and over with very few successful
results. Mystery stories require lots of time. Time to introduce you
all the characters (so the spectator can have enough choices of
suspects) and develop these characters, even the minor ones (so the
spectator can wonder about their motivations); time to mention all the
plot details (and offer also a bunch of other details that are
irrelevant, to induce the spectator on the wrong track); time to
explain carefully what happened after all. No wonder JKR's books are
getting longer as the plots get more complex -- she NEEDS the time to
build those plots, and time in books translate in lots and lots of
pages.

And time is precisely what you don't have in commercial cinema. Two
hours for a standard story, two and a half for a sure blockbuster,
three only if your audience is pretty mature. And it's obvious to me
that Warner Bros didn't have a mature audience in mind when they
decided to film HP. AND, what is the saddest part, there is a dreadful
tradition (in US, but also in other countries) of offering young
audiences movies, TV shows and cartoons that do not present any
intellectual challenge for kids. Sorry if this is a pretty broad
generalization, but it's my experience with that medium gender -- the
exceptions are few, or are eclectic enough to aim for both young and
mature audiences at the same time. Kids aren't expected to guess the
plot or analyze the characters in any way; they're just supposed to
stare in awe and exclaim, "WOW, did you see that?!"

As an example of Warner Bros' option for a "kiddie" movie, I'd like to
mention the trip to Hogwarts on the Ford Anglia in CoS. The most
fascinating and meaningful thing for me in that scene from the book was
that the journey was *boring*. Yeah, yeah, flying cars, isn't that
amazing, but then Harry is getting used to magic stuff around him,
there's nothing to keep him interested for the whole duration of the
trip. Would the movie show a boring trip? Well, of course not! They
have to show the car almost colliding with the train and Harry almost
falling from the car and some other thrilling almost-happenings to keep
the audience staring in awe. Wouldn't want the kids to fall asleep in
the middle of the movie, would they? 

> Because, let's face it, Wood in the movies is (other than
> his looks, I guess) fairly forgettable. The character is
> simply exposition in the first film.

Well, this is where I'm forced to disagree. You see, when I first saw
the PS movie, I hadn't read any of the books. And I must say that there
were only two characters I liked in the whole movie, only two I was
able to remember the names after leaving the theatre (besides Harry's,
which is in the title, duh!), and those were Wood and Snape, in THAT
very order. I remember telling my mother -- who HAD read all the books
-- afterwards that my favourite character was Wood, and she didn't even
remember who I was talking about.
"The captain of the team of that flying broomsticks sport," I reminded
her. 
"Oh, Oliver!" she exclaimed. "But he's not very important in the
books."

*giggles* If I took about a year to decide to read the books, it had
something to do with the thought that one of the only two characters I
had cared about in the movie was described as "not very important" in
the books. And unbelievable as this might sound, Biggerstaff's looks
had only a small part in my liking of Wood's character. Honestly, I
liked him because he felt real in a movie where most characters felt
like caricatures. He was the only character I felt any identification
with -- that's why I could remember his name, and had pretty much
forgot Hermione's, Ron's, Dumbledore's, Hagrid's and Quirrell's. (And
considering he was on for so very little time, you can imagine how I
felt for the rest of the movie.)

> All the Weasleys other
> than Ron are similarly flat. Which is a shame, because
> there's only a limited amount of time they can be
> used--there was no reason to make what time they had so
> bland. The important thing was not to have all those
> background characters around, but to have *interesting*
> background characters.

The CoS adaptation suffered a lot from not developing Ginny and Percy.
They're there, sure, in the background. But the way they made it, when
Ginny is revealed to be the "criminal", an audience who hadn't read the
books are forced to ask around, "Uhn, Ginny who?" (my sister did that).
And those who don't know who the "criminal" is beforehand have no one
to suspect -- JKR put a lot of effort in dropping sidetracking clues
that pointed to Percy, but in the movie none of them was left.
(Although they did go through the trouble of mentioning a Miss
Clearwater in one scene -- I can't imagine why, since she means NOTHING
to the movie plot.)

> thalia chaunacy wrote:
> > well, why are you making a movie? because the plot's exciting and
> the
> > characters are interesting, right? i don't think anyone can tell me
> the
> > plots of PS/CoSmovies weren't exciting or that the characters were
> boring.
> 
> Well, I would have to disagree with you somewhat here. While
> I wouldn't say that the movie!plots were boring, I do think
> that they had enough flaws to keep them from being terribly
> exciting. And I would have to say that the movie!characters
> as written are fairly boring.

I can easily say I found both PS and CoS movie plots "exciting" in a
cheap way (lots of dangerous action and shiny special effects, no
psychological drama) and full of plot holes, and that I found almost
all the characters EXTREMELY boring.

> What makes the movies work is that they are visually
> *amazing* (and, IMO, have a talented cast). 

They have a very talented cast working on a shallow, unchallenging
text, in my very humble opinion. Feels like a waste of talent to have
all those great actors there, displaying hopelessly bidimensional
characters. (Honestly, the only reason I could think of for having
someone like John Cleese playing Nick was if they were going to give
him the chance to show off his humorist skills in the Deathday Party.
As it is, Nick's character could have been completely cut without
damaging the plot of the movies. I mean, seeing him pull his
half-severed head to the side wasn't THAT interesting to justify his
existence.) 

> I don't think
> either the plots are the characters are particularly
> interesting in and of themselves--neither inspires much
> emotional attachment unless you already have one in place
> from reading the books. What the films do is visually make
> the world come alive. I've noticed that that "aliveness"
> encouraged me to overlook a lot of the flaws of the
> movies--probably because I'm something of a film geek. :)
> But when I look at it from a screenwriting perspective, I
> see a lot of flaws--and not just from the adaptation
> perspective.

Over the years of studying cinema I managed somehow to master a useful
trick. I sort of turn off my critic persona while I'm watching a movie,
so I'm free to enjoy the experience as candidly as possible -- and
yeah, staring in awe in all the right moments. Only when I leave the
theatre I enter critic mode and start analyzing the script, the
decoupage, the edition, the sound. (Having a critic grumbling in your
head while watching a movie is the most irritating thing ^__^)

Where it comes to taking a fantastic world from literature and making
it visually alive, the HP movies were pretty much successful (it's my
opinion that they did a terrible job of building a believable phoenix,
but that's me). Understandably, when I think of the places described in
the first two books, I now picture them very similar to their
equivalents in the movies. On the other hand, I keep picturing the
characters very differently from their portrait in the movies (Snape
and Wood being the only exceptions), because they have not convinced me
as characters, no matter how splendid those actors are.

> But as a kid's action flick (which, let's face it, is what
> the movies are intended to be), both movies work very well.
> Which, to be cynical, really isn't saying much. :)

I do not understand why a kid's action flick has to be so shallow, but
I got your point. I suspect they had very un-ambitious gouls about the
storytelling in those movies, so the fact that they reached those goals
doesn't say much at all. 

> I have to say that I've given some thought as to how I would
> adapt PoA, but I won't go into that now. I think I've ranted
> enough for one day.... :)

Oh I'd love to hear it and compare notes! ^__^

Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Mon Mar 10 14:01:36 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:01:36 -0000
Subject: Daniel (WAS Thewlis playing nice)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030310002801.00a170f0@pop.cox-internet.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Beth  wrote:
> At 12:45 PM 3/9/03 +0000, you wrote:
> >Amy Z
> >hoping poor Daniel Radcliffe doesn't decide to stay in acting,
> >because there aren't likely to be any more adolescent wizard roles
> >coming down the pike
> 
> Actually, I'm more worried about Rupert from this angle. One thing Dan has 
> in his favor is that he's visually a bit of a chameleon, especially when 
> you take off his glasses. 

> On the other hand, after listening to several interviews with him, I have 
> to say that I'd love to read a book by him or see a movie for which he 
> wrote the screenplay (after he's gotten a few more years under his belt). 
> His command of language and ability to communicate his thoughts in a 
mature 
> yet accessible fashion are, I think, impressive. I'd miss seeing his face 
> on the "big screen", but I think I'd prefer to see him write.

I think you are right about Dan--his field of options is wide open. Acting is just 
one of many things he might do (successfully). While on the subject of Dan's 
acting, I am certain his range is wider than playing everyone's favourite boy 
wizard. We really haven't been allowed to see properly what he can do. I 
believe he's been limited somewhat by Chris's directing (but that's been 
thoroughly discussed before). I've caught myself thinking that Dan's version 
of Harry is in some way Dan, but how can one tell, when there is nothing to 
compare his performance to? He might come off completely differently in 
different part.
As for Rupert, I think acting is his thing. We haven't come close to seeing 
even half of what he can do. I'm not sure his career will be hampered by 
having played Ron. True, for now his face IS Ron's face, but charming though 
he is, his face seems "bland" to me. Impassive, it doesn't leave an 
impression, which is to his advantage. What really makes Ron is not Rupert's 
facial features Rupert's expressions, which he uses very skillfully, so I think he 
could meld into just about any kind of setting. (Have you seen pictures of him 
in that British feature movie Thunderpants? He looked entirely different. I'll 
see if I can find images and post the address on here.) I don't know to what 
extent he'll stay on screen, but he's got ta career in acting alright. Maybe he'll 
go on the stage. 

Sophia

From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Mar 10 14:05:48 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 09:05:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daniel
Message-ID: <12a.24f8de61.2b9df5bc@aol.com>

> >Amy Z
> >hoping poor Daniel Radcliffe doesn't decide to stay in acting,
> >because there aren't likely to be any more adolescent wizard roles
> >coming down the pike
> 

I'm not worried about Dan -- he looks so different with his hair different 
ways and no glasses, and he's obviously quite a talented actor, so I'm sure 
he'll be fine.  If I were the person in charge of Dan's career, and knew he 
wanted a *career* as an actor, I'd make sure he had other movie roles DURING 
the "Harry" years, even if smallish ones, to ensure the casting directors 
realize the kid can ACT, not just be Harry Potter.  I don't know about the 
British education system, whether he could manage more film time with his 
schooling or not, but doing more than just Harry would be a good idea, career 
wise -- as long as he's enjoying the work and not being overwhelmed (and 
still has time to be a kid!).  With American child actors, tutoring on the 
set seems to equal the regular schooling well enough (as far as I know) that 
kids who work in TV or films and have heavy filming schedules (such as Jodie 
Foster and Brooke Shields, for instance, when they were growing up) manage to 
make it to Harvard, Princeton, other very difficult-to-get-into schools, and 
be honor students at college.  The tutoring apparently works fine for them.  
I grant you, the O.W.L.-sounding system you Brits have described (our "trio" 
of actors have to take some kind of career-determining test in the next 
school year, right?) may not be as flexible as the American school system 
seems to be.  On the other hand, I wouldn't want our *trio* to become 
MacCauley Culkin or Michael Jackson-type *strange people,* either, which 
seems to happen to children who are pushed too hard.  Dan, Rupert and Emma 
all seem to have their heads on fairly straight so far -- I hope all those 
who are involved in their lives continue whatever they're doing *right* to 
keep these kids on an even keel.  That said, how flexible IS the British 
school system?  What are these tests Dan, Rupert and Emma will be taking in 
the next year or so that determines their futures?  Thanks.

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

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

From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Mon Mar 10 14:17:09 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:17:09 -0000
Subject: Rupert (WAS Dan)
Message-ID: 

Here's the address I promised to post: You'll find some screencaps from 
Thunderpants at rupertgrint.org/thunderpants (I really oughtta learn how to 
put up a link...) enjoy!

Sophia

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 19:38:22 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:38:22 -0000
Subject: Rupert (WAS Dan)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl"  
wrote:
> Here's the address I promised to post: You'll find some screencaps 
from 
> Thunderpants at rupertgrint.org/thunderpants (I really oughtta 
learn how to 
> put up a link...) enjoy!
> 
> Sophia

http://www.rupertgrint.org/thunderpants/thunderpants3.htm

This should work.

VJH

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 20:18:09 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:18:09 -0000
Subject: Devon Murray/Seamus
In-Reply-To: <12f.251484d9.2b9d6ca2@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:

> Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was doing the 
> Chamber he said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come 
> back?  We will have to wait and see.
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 

bboy_mn:

First comment, I'm wondering how many people saw the Devon Murray
interview at the premier of Chamber of Secrets?

I was very impressed. He struck me as a very intelligent and
articulate, and very sophisticated for someone so young. Seamus in the
movies comes off as a very nice guy of average intelligence. Devon
Murray amazed me with how much greater than his character he was.

His unofficial website (devonmurray.com) said he is up for the role of
"Artemis Fowl" which is an interesting book. You can read a few pages
of the book at the Amazon.com website. ("Artemis Fowl" by Eoin Colfer)

I can see why he would want to back out of the HP movies if he's not
getting enough exposure. He was offered a role in the Leonardo
DiCaprio movie "Gangs of New York". That certainly would have been an
impressive credit to add to his resume, plus a chance to work with
some of the biggest names in Hollywood [Martin Scorsese, Daniel
Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Liam Neeson (Schindler's List), ...], but he
had to turn it down because of HP movie scheduling conflicts. HP is
good as long as it moves his career forward, but if it starts holding
it back, there is not much incentive to stay.

According to his agent, he has 6 movie offers pending while he waits
to hear IF he is going to be in HP-PoA. That's a lot of opportunity to
keep on hold.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn

From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Mar 10 20:24:48 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:24:48 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daniel
In-Reply-To: <12a.24f8de61.2b9df5bc@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030310194850.0095e220@plum.cream.org>

Lynda wrote:

>I'm not worried about Dan -- he looks so different with his hair different
>ways and no glasses, and he's obviously quite a talented actor, so I'm sure
>he'll be fine.  If I were the person in charge of Dan's career, and knew he
>wanted a *career* as an actor, I'd make sure he had other movie roles DURING
>the "Harry" years, even if smallish ones, to ensure the casting directors
>realize the kid can ACT, not just be Harry Potter.

Well, the person in charge of Dan's career is his agent and on-set 
chaperone: his dad. Radcliffe Senior is torn between developing Dan's 
career as an actor, maximising his chances of keeping his options as open 
as possible (i.e. doing well academically) because as has already been said 
in this thread, Dan doesn't yet know *what* he wants to do (which is 
perfectly normal), and allowing Dan to have as normal a teenagerhood (if 
that's a word) as possible. As I've said several times in the past, I don't 
envy him and wouldn't want to swap places with him (we're approximately the 
same age, although I don't have any kids - at least none that I know of).  :-)

Spending most of the year on one film set is enough upheaval to a normal 
life. Having to do the publicity and celebrity thing makes it even worse. 
Having all kinds of people trying to get to him for one reason or another 
(some honourable, some less so) is more than enough cause for sleepless 
nights.

To add making more movies into the mix might do his acting prospects some 
good, but what other effects would it have? Few would be to his advantage.

(I'm deliberately avoiding the issue of money - thankfully, the Radcliffes 
are more than comfortable already so they have a more realistic attitude 
towards making money from Dan's acting than, say, the Culkins.)

Sure, Dan might be able to do the odd cameo here and there, but anything 
beyond that would be counter-productive.

>  I don't know about the
>British education system, whether he could manage more film time with his
>schooling or not, but doing more than just Harry would be a good idea, career
>wise -- as long as he's enjoying the work and not being overwhelmed (and
>still has time to be a kid!).

Yeah well, that's the big issue. It's not the education system which could 
cause problems (the British system is probably one of the most flexible in 
the developed world) but the employment rules. There are all kinds of 
limitations on what he can and can't do, and when he can and can't do them. 
His school has allowed him time off, but there are strict limits on what he 
can do with that time, and it's unlikely that in such a high-profile 
situation, they would be prepared to bend the rules any more than they 
already have.

>I grant you, the O.W.L.-sounding system you Brits have described (our "trio"
>of actors have to take some kind of career-determining test in the next
>school year, right?) may not be as flexible as the American school system
>seems to be.

Actually, it's a lot *more* flexible. However, that flexibility comes at 
the price of time, and British kids are expected to spend their time being 
at school, not building careers. For each of the examples of successful 
academic careers for American child stars, there are probably 100 failures. 
The British system would consider those failures unacceptable.

This is a "philosophical" difference between our two cultures which has 
lots of ramifications, some of which are exemplified by the number of kids 
involved in the entertainment business in the USA. I'm not saying that it's 
necessarily right or wrong of itself, but it is very different.

As for exams, I'm not sure what year each of the kids is in at school 
(there's room for a certain amount of flexibility), but based on birth 
dates, I expect that Rupert (almost a year older than Dan) might be taking 
his GCSEs next summer (2004). However, by the end of this school year (July 
2003) he will have to decide what subjects he will be taking, and *that* is 
the big career-determining move. Dan has a full year at least before he 
needs to make those decisions.

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 20:43:15 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:43:15 -0000
Subject: Rupert - ThunderPants Trailer
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vincentjh"  wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl"  
> wrote:
> > You'll find some screencaps from  Thunderpants at 
> > rupertgrint.org/thunderpants (I really oughtta learn how to 
> > put up a link...) enjoy!
> > 
> > Sophia
> 
> http://www.rupertgrint.org/thunderpants/thunderpants3.htm
> 
> This should work.
> 
> VJH

bboy_mn:

Thunderpants trailer - 
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/t/thunderpants.php

TRAILER B: is the only one that works.

Rupert is outrageous and totally over the top. It would be worth
seeing the movie just to see his wacky performance.

bboy_mn

From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Mar 10 20:48:11 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:48:11 +0000
Subject: Artemis Fowl (Devon Murray/Seamus)
In-Reply-To: 
References: <12f.251484d9.2b9d6ca2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030310202642.00974ed0@plum.cream.org>

This is 99% off topic but I'll post it here and beg the Mods' indulgence. 
Any further discussion might be better addressed to the OT-Chatter list.

At 20:18 10/03/03 , Steve wrote:

>His unofficial website (devonmurray.com) said he is up for the role of
>"Artemis Fowl" which is an interesting book. You can read a few pages
>of the book at the Amazon.com website. ("Artemis Fowl" by Eoin Colfer)

Small slightly on-topic bit: if Seamus goes the way of Wood in PoA and GoF 
(unless JKR has ordered Kloves and Co to keep him in for future 
development), I certainly don't blame him and his representatives for 
taking Devon out of the HP movies and finding him other acting jobs. I 
can't imagine many high-profile jobs for teenage Irish actors, so if 
Artemis Fowl is on the boil, he should go for it.

Just for the record, I think that Devon would make a "bloody brilliant" 
Artemis Fowl.

I read the books (there are two of them to date) and although I wasn't all 
that impressed (they are very much "kids' books", or rather "boys' books", 
IMO; I didn't need to buy them as I managed to read each cover-to-cover 
standing around in the bookshop), they'd probably make wonderful kids' 
films. I'm not trying to say that adults would be bored (there are a few 
interesting characters), but it's all just a little simplistic and 
gadget-based. However, I'm not sure how prepared parents are for kids to be 
admiring a teenage criminal mastermind! :-)

There's one character who goes around saying "my middle is Trouble" and 
means it. It literally *is* his middle name, and he lives up to it. :-)

Incidentally, it's a bit of a misnomer to call the books Artemis Fowl, as 
the character who plays a more active role in the plot (and gets more page 
time in the books) is his nemesis from the Fairy Police, Captain Holly 
Short. If they get an appropriately attractive young woman to play her, 
that would get the kids' dads in to watch, if not perhaps their mothers. :-)

From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Mar 10 20:58:17 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:58:17 +0000
Subject: Rupert - ThunderPants Trailer
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030310204854.0096dc60@plum.cream.org>

At 20:43 10/03/03 , Steve wrote:

>Rupert is outrageous and totally over the top. It would be worth
>seeing the movie just to see his wacky performance.

There's actually not *THAT* much of Rupert in Thunderpants - he is, after 
all (again) the sidekick character.

It is true, though, that he has lots of opportunities to go WAY, WAY over 
the top. Although there is one nice sequence done for sentiment rather than 
laughs when he and his friend find each other after the friend goes 
searching for him (literally) all around the world. Other than that, it's 
very much a two-dimensional character which requires a caricature rather 
than a performance.

The character's language is very different from Ron's (the character is, 
after all, a certified genius), and he spouts multi-syllable words which 
considerably more aplomb than Emma manages in CoS. Quite possibly my 
favourite line sums up the entire film: when he unveils the Thunderpants to 
his friend, he says, "I have managed to harness the full potential of your 
flatulence".

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who thought Thunderpants was far too silly for words 
and only vaguely amusing. Not worth the full price of the DVD.

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 21:03:32 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 21:03:32 -0000
Subject: Rupert - ThunderPants Trailer- More Trailers
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vincentjh"  wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl"  
> > wrote:
> > > You'll find some screencaps from  Thunderpants at 
> > > rupertgrint.org/thunderpants (I really oughtta learn how to 
> > > put up a link...) enjoy!
> > > 
> > > Sophia
> > 
> > http://www.rupertgrint.org/thunderpants/thunderpants3.htm
> > 
> > This should work.
> > 
> > VJH
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> Thunderpants trailer - 
> http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/t/thunderpants.php
> 
> TRAILER B: is the only one that works.
> 
> Rupert is outrageous and totally over the top. It would be worth
> seeing the movie just to see his wacky performance.
> 
> bboy_mn

another location with both A: and B: Trailers

http://www.rupertgrint.org/thunderpants/trailer.htm

steve

From ripleywriter at aol.com  Mon Mar 10 21:36:05 2003
From: ripleywriter at aol.com (ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 16:36:05 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adapting books to the big screen (WAS watered-down characte...
Message-ID: <1ec.3dc0876.2b9e5f45@aol.com>

As far as the movies go...I saw the first one without having read any of the 
books, so, I have that perspective to share. I loved it! I didn't find any 
writing flaws and I thought it was original and visually stunning, and the 
word magical came up a lot when I was discussing it with friends. But then I 
was interested in reading the books, so I bought the first one, read it, was 
blown away to some distant part of my brain that could only utter "wow..." 
and wondered, "How the heck did I ever understand *anything* in the movie?" 
and "How the heck did I even *enjoy* the movie?" That was my initial 
reaction. 

Now when I re-watch the movie, SS, I can't enjoy it for its writing because 
if I tried, I'd be leaving empty-handed. So, in the case of the HP movies 
they serve two purposes in my mind: as a visually compelling addition to the 
books, or as an entertaining jaunt for the kids. 

In the case of books adapting to movies...Sometimes it goes well, as I think 
the case is with The Cider House Rules. Now, do you know *why* the movie 
worked even though it cut out a major character, about 15 years, etc, 
etc...the movie cut *a lot* and changed quite a bit, but, it worked because 
the movie was adapted into a screenplay by the author of the book. And not 
only that, he took his damn time, too, about 10-15 years, maybe even more (my 
memory is awful but I know it was a long time)

That's something else, as well; I do believe they rushed the movies. When you 
think about it, they never would have gotten the fabulous actors they have 
now if they hadn't made them when they did (say, if they waited until the 
series was all written), and for all the griping I can do about the HP 
movies, bad acting was never a complaint. Sometimes the kids have their stale 
moments, but that never bothers me; they're kids acting among kids a lot of 
the time, and hoo boy I have seen *far* worse. The HP kids impress the hell 
out of me. ;-)

I think it's just a shame; the movies could have been something to write home 
about if J.K. had been at the helm of the screenplays. I suppose she had no 
interest, but I never did hear: she was approached to write them, wasn't she? 

Melly

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 10 22:07:51 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:07:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Adapting books to the big screen
In-Reply-To: <1ec.3dc0876.2b9e5f45@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030310220751.19227.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>

Melly:
> I think it's just a shame; the movies 
> could have been something to write home 
> about if J.K. had been at the helm of 
> the screenplays. I suppose she had no 
> interest, but I never did hear: she was 
> approached to write them, wasn't she? 

Don't recall off hand whether she had 
either the interest or the opportunity, 
but, if she is to write (or participate 
more fully in the writing of) the 
screenplays too, when would she have 
the time to write the books?!?  Not to 
mention everything else in her personal 
life that informs her writing...

Nevertheless, I agree with you in 
theory - the movies would be much 
better if JKR is the one to decide 
what goes and what stays.

Petra, hoping for remakes already 
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Mar 11 04:21:51 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:21:51 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Devon Murray/Seamus
Message-ID: 

I think we can get rid of Seamus Finniagan!  I liked him but Neville has more 
scenes then he does!  On the other end Devon can do Harry and Artemis Fowl 
too!!  Can be done!!  I would miss both Matt and Devon if they don't come 
back.

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/10/03 3:21:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> 
> >Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was doing the 
> >Chamber he said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come 
> >back?  We will have to wait and see.
> >
> >Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> First comment, I'm wondering how many people saw the Devon Murray
> interview at the premier of Chamber of Secrets?
> 
> I was very impressed. He struck me as a very intelligent and
> articulate, and very sophisticated for someone so young. Seamus in the
> movies comes off as a very nice guy of average intelligence. Devon
> Murray amazed me with how much greater than his character he was.
> 
> His unofficial website (devonmurray.com) said he is up for the role of
> "Artemis Fowl" which is an interesting book. You can read a few pages
> of the book at the Amazon.com website. ("Artemis Fowl" by Eoin Colfer)
> 
> I can see why he would want to back out of the HP movies if he's not
> getting enough exposure. He was offered a role in the Leonardo
> DiCaprio movie "Gangs of New York". That certainly would have been an
> impressive credit to add to his resume, plus a chance to work with
> some of the biggest names in Hollywood [Martin Scorsese, Daniel
> Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Liam Neeson (Schindler's List), ...], but he
> had to turn it down because of HP movie scheduling conflicts. HP is
> good as long as it moves his career forward, but if it starts holding
> it back, there is not much incentive to stay.
> 
> According to his agent, he has 6 movie offers pending while he waits
> to hear IF he is going to be in HP-PoA. That's a lot of opportunity to
> keep on hold.
> 
> Just a few thoughts.
> 
> bboy_mn
> 

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

From draco382 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 12 04:53:10 2003
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 04:53:10 -0000
Subject: Daniel (WAS Thewlis playing nice)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030310002801.00a170f0@pop.cox-internet.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Beth  wrote:

> On the other hand, after listening to several interviews with him, 
I have 
> to say that I'd love to read a book by him or see a movie for 
which he 
> wrote the screenplay (after he's gotten a few more years under his 
belt). 
> His command of language and ability to communicate his thoughts in 
a mature 
> yet accessible fashion are, I think, impressive. I'd miss seeing 
his face 
> on the "big screen", but I think I'd prefer to see him write.
> 
> Not that what I'd like him to do matters a farthing.... 
> 
> bel

I would just like to add, that I completely agree with 
you...especially after seeing the video clip of his presentation of 
the technical award at the recent British Film awards show (sorry, 
i've forgotten the name)  On almost every interview that poor kid 
has had to sit through, he's shown incredible poise and maturity, 
and has become quite the public speaker, as indicated by his 
speech.  

I just had to delurk here for a moment, and put in my two cents...I 
think i'm rather dazzled by what I saw of Dan!  ;-)

~draco382 (whose age hasn't stopped her from becoming something of a 
Dan-fangirl)

From irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 12 08:39:40 2003
From: irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 08:39:40 -0000
Subject: Devon Murray/Seamus
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> I think we can get rid of Seamus Finniagan! 

I hope you do realise that there are probably some people out there
that reacted to this idea with the same jumping up and down, flapping
hands routine ... oops, I mean with the same "exclamation mark at the
end of each sentence" routine as you reacted to the idea "we can get
rid of Oliver Wood"?

How one is less blasphemous than the other?

Irene

> I liked him but Neville has more 
> scenes then he does!  On the other end Devon can do Harry and
Artemis Fowl 
> too!!  Can be done!!  I would miss both Matt and Devon if they don't
come 
> back.
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/10/03 3:21:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> bboy_mn at y... writes:
> 
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> > 
> > >Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was doing the 
> > >Chamber he said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come 
> > >back?  We will have to wait and see.
> > >
> > >Kyle Longbottom 
> > 
> > bboy_mn:
> > 
> > First comment, I'm wondering how many people saw the Devon Murray
> > interview at the premier of Chamber of Secrets?
> > 
> > I was very impressed. He struck me as a very intelligent and
> > articulate, and very sophisticated for someone so young. Seamus in the
> > movies comes off as a very nice guy of average intelligence. Devon
> > Murray amazed me with how much greater than his character he was.
> > 
> > His unofficial website (devonmurray.com) said he is up for the role of
> > "Artemis Fowl" which is an interesting book. You can read a few pages
> > of the book at the Amazon.com website. ("Artemis Fowl" by Eoin Colfer)
> > 
> > I can see why he would want to back out of the HP movies if he's not
> > getting enough exposure. He was offered a role in the Leonardo
> > DiCaprio movie "Gangs of New York". That certainly would have been an
> > impressive credit to add to his resume, plus a chance to work with
> > some of the biggest names in Hollywood [Martin Scorsese, Daniel
> > Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Liam Neeson (Schindler's List), ...], but he
> > had to turn it down because of HP movie scheduling conflicts. HP is
> > good as long as it moves his career forward, but if it starts holding
> > it back, there is not much incentive to stay.
> > 
> > According to his agent, he has 6 movie offers pending while he waits
> > to hear IF he is going to be in HP-PoA. That's a lot of opportunity to
> > keep on hold.
> > 
> > Just a few thoughts.
> > 
> > bboy_mn
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From idcre at imap2.asu.edu  Wed Mar 12 10:26:29 2003
From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:26:29 -0000
Subject: Snape's Countercurse...Any lip-readers here?
Message-ID: 

I visited a Snape site and was intrigued by one of the moving-gif 
images there. It's from the scene where Snape is attempting to 
counter the curse on Harry's broom...and it's moving a bit slower 
than real-time, which might make it possible for a good lip-reader to 
make-out what he's saying (or at least work out the phonetics if he's 
not speaking in English). 

I know that some lip-readers have managed (I think) to solve a 
portion of his countercurse from watching the DVD (i.e. figuring out 
the line "You shall leave us be"...or whatever it was). This 
particular GIF is from another portion of that scene.

So, if anyone would like to give it a try (please, please, please), 
here's the link:

http://memnet.tripod.com/artwork.html

Scroll down toward the bottom, and wait for the GIF to load (may take 
a while).

Hope someone can figure it out.

BM

From mariawolters at yahoo.de  Wed Mar 12 13:49:56 2003
From: mariawolters at yahoo.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?Maria=20Wolters?=)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:49:56 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 514
In-Reply-To: <1047476718.569.29885.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030312134956.31231.qmail@web41015.mail.yahoo.com>

> the technical award at the recent British Film
> awards show 

Hey ... where can I get that video clip? Is it on the
net somewhere?

Maria

__________________________________________________________________

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

From jmd at jvf.co.uk  Wed Mar 12 13:55:48 2003
From: jmd at jvf.co.uk (Jeremy Davis)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 13:55:48 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Axerbaijan
References: <20030312134956.31231.qmail@web41015.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00cb01c2e89f$162bd290$0e010001@jmd2000>

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rednoseday/video/harrypotter.shtml

The above link shows a clip of a short parody called "Harry Potter and the
Secret Chamberpot of Azerbaijan" that will be shown in the UK on Friday 10th
March on BBC1 as part of their "Red Nose Day".

The clip features Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders. Jennifer of "Ab Fab"
fame plays JK Rowling and Ron Weasley, and Dawn French plays Harry Potter.

Quote from the parody....

Harry Potter is back! It's one year later, and he learns the truth....
Dumberdore - "You're a woman Harry!"

From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Mar 12 14:13:39 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:13:39 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 514
In-Reply-To: <20030312134956.31231.qmail@web41015.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1047476718.569.29885.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030312140738.00983cf0@plum.cream.org>

At 13:49 12/03/03 , Maria Wolters wrote:

> > the technical award at the recent British Film
> > awards show
>
>Hey ... where can I get that video clip? Is it on the
>net somewhere?

Go to http://www.danradcliffe.com/ and scroll to the bottom of the 
news/updates list. Take the "archives" link and look for the item dated 
26th February. There may be an easier way to get to it, but that's the only 
way I could find.

(Although I could provide a  direct link to the Real Video or Windows video 
file, as a matter of principle, I do not provide direct links to multimedia 
content on personal sites; it pisses me off that some people do it with 
material on my own web sites so I don't do it to other sites. The author of 
that website has the right to be recognised for having taken the trouble.)

From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Mar 12 14:47:04 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:47:04 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of
  Axerbaijan
In-Reply-To: <00cb01c2e89f$162bd290$0e010001@jmd2000>
References: <20030312134956.31231.qmail@web41015.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030312143649.009644d0@plum.cream.org>

At 13:55 12/03/03 , Jeremy Davis wrote:
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/rednoseday/video/harrypotter.shtml

Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders were on an afternoon chat show yesterday 
and talked about it some more. Apparently, the whole skit is about 20 
minutes long and will be shown in two ten-minute segments; the first one 
will be some time between 7pm and 8pm (as Comic Relief is a telethon-type 
show, it's difficult to be more precise).

They also said that the filmed it at Leavesden using some of the movie sets 
and most of the props they used were lent to them by the HP movies' 
production team. Of course, Jennifer and Dawn couldn't use Dan and Ron's 
robes! :-)

It took them four days to film and two months to do the SFX...

(BTW the skit was direct was Ade Edmondson, Jennifer Saunders' husband.)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who can't wait to see the whole thing but is going out 
on Friday so probably won't :-(

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 12 15:07:20 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:07:20 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Axerbaijan
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030312143649.009644d0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: 

Jeremy Davis wrote:
Apparently, the whole skit is about 20 minutes long and will be shown 
in two ten-minute segments; the first one will be some time between 
7pm and 8pm (as Comic Relief is a telethon-type show, it's difficult 
to be more precise).

Me -- Whoa is me - I live in the states & won't be able to watch even 
though I get BBCAmerica. I know they did show the LOTR parody 
recently & am wondering if the will show this one - you just gotta 
love French & Saunders.

From draco382 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 12 17:08:42 2003
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:08:42 -0000
Subject: Digest Number 514
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030312140738.00983cf0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum  wrote:
> At 13:49 12/03/03 , Maria Wolters wrote:
> 
> > > the technical award at the recent British Film
> > > awards show
> >
> >Hey ... where can I get that video clip? Is it on the
> >net somewhere?
> 
> Go to http://www.danradcliffe.com/ and scroll to the bottom of the 
> news/updates list. Take the "archives" link and look for the item 
dated 
> 26th February. There may be an easier way to get to it, but that's 
the only 
> way I could find.

If looking through the archives, doesn't work, look at the section on 
that website called "Exclusives."  Probably the second item down.  It 
is in realMedia and Windows media format, with some screen caps, 
etc...  And i now remember what the awards show was called: Evening 
Standard Awards
~draco382

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Wed Mar 12 20:02:59 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:02:59 -0000
Subject: GCSEs and A Levels/Dan, Emma, and Rupert's future
Message-ID: 

I apologise for the rapidly heading OT nature of this post, but I just wanted to answer any queries for the Americans among us bemused by the English school system.

Lynda wondered:
snippity
 That said, how flexible IS the British 
school system?  What are these tests Dan, Rupert and Emma will be taking in 
the next year or so that determines their futures? 

These tests are the General Certificate of Secondary Education exams, or GCSEs. To be honest, I don't think there is such a thing as a test that determines your future, because you can always go back to night school, but the GCSEs are reasonably important. 

Basically, the English school system runs something like this. First, you have Nursery. Some kids don't go to nursery, some do - it's more a mildly educational childminders than anything else. Then, when you turn four, you toddle off to Reception. This is mandatory, and if you stay in the school system, you won't emerge til you're twenty one. Scary, huh? (Even scarier is that at my sixth form, they actually had an infant and junior school attached, as well as a nursery, so you could enter at age two and not leave til you turned eighteen. Now THAT'S scary. Some more trivia - the school of which I speak is in fact Bolton School, alma mater of Ian McKellen. Isn't that nice?) Reception is I believe the alternative of Kindergarten, and it's basically half playing, half learning. Then you enter infant school - years one to six. I think the Year 1, Year 2 thing equates to the first grade second grade thing. At the end of each year, in June, you take your end of year exams. Once you have finished year six, it's off to secondary school!

Secondary school or high school, is years 7-11. We don't have middle schools. If you want to go to a comprehensive or a high school (basically public schools) you can just wander in, more or less. If you want to go to a grammar school (like me, swagger swagger), you have to take the 11+. The eleven plus is an exam sat by year six's, usually in the half term of the summer term, and I *think* is a standardised test from the government. However, my school also set a level on it - for example, my friend Joanne and I got a place at the school, wheras my friend Andy passed the exam but didn't get a place. Another friend, Danny, didn't pass - the idea being you need, say, 60 to pass, but 80 was the "get a place" level set by the school.

In years 7-9, you can basically screw around (God I wish I'd known that in year 7, I was such a goody-goody!). In year 10, however, the work starts. Years 10 and 11 are devoted to your GCSEs, and year 11 ends in May for study leave, so you can revise without worrying about lessons or homework - or in the case of me and my friends, go to the pub every night and worry about revision the morning before the exam. There are no end of year exams in year 10 so you can continue to work towards the GCSEs. Well, I say there aren't - the usual end of year exams involve the timetable being suspended, and the exams take place in silent classrooms, where everyone sits at their own desk or is seated beside someone from a different year. In year 10, there are end of year tests in each class, but these are much more informal and are usually conducted in class.

In year 11, the year Dan, Emma and Rupert will be in, you take the GCSEs. The GCSEs are written by the exam board, not the school, and are standardised - in every school in the area (eg. my exam board was NEAB because I lived in the NW of England - people in the south had, I think, SEQ) English Lit students are sitting down and taking the English Lit exam, there is no way to ring a mate of yours at another school and ask them the answers. If you miss an exam, you have to bring a doctor's note (if it's a cold, it's basically shut up and put up) for your absence and you then take a different exam after all the others have finished (there is a set time for the resits as well). The point I'm trying to impress is that the education bit of the government takes the GCSEs very seriously, it's big news when people get their results (Results Day usually ends up with people on the news or on a magazine show opening their results live on air) and they do not allow, as you say, much, if any, flexibility.

If Dan, Emma and Rupert screw up their GCSEs, it could affect their chances of getting into sixth form. Sixth form college, or senior school, is probably the equivalent of college in the US. You study from 16-18 taking your A Levels (or NEWTs ;) ), and to get into VI Form usually requires at least five grade C GCSEs (which are pretty easy to get, considering you take 9 subjects by law). Then, in A Level, you study four subjects, which in year two you drop to three. If you get good results in these - and A Levels are *much* harder than GCSEs in my opinion (I got four As and five Bs in my GCSEs and CDD in my first year of A Levels), you can take the course you want at university (I think our uni degrees are about the equiv of a master's in the US). If you want to do English at Oxford, you'll probably need three As; Health Sciences at Preston, and it'll be more like DDD. I wanted to do Creative Writing at Leeds, which was CCC, somewhere in between :D.

So the long answer to a short question is yes, these exam they are taking next year can indirectly affect their future, as it could mean they won't get into the uni they want. However, I'd imagine Rupert and Dan will probably stay in the movie biz, even if Emma and Tom don't (or can't!), so it might not worry them too much. Whether it will worry Radcliffe and Grint Sr, on the other hand, is a different question - I think the world over people can identify with their parents wanting them to do well at school!

Hope you've been illuminated, or at least not *too* bored!

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Mar 12 20:05:58 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:05:58 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GCSEs and A Levels/Dan, Emma, and Rupert's future
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <67273745606.20030312120558@earthlink.net>

Hi,

Wednesday, March 12, 2003, 12:02:59 PM, suzloua at hotmail.com wrote:

> In year 11, the year Dan, Emma and Rupert will be in, you take the
> GCSEs.

Aren't they all three different ages, with Rupert the oldest
and Emma the youngest?

Wouldn't Rupert have already taken this?

Or does the cutoff date come in for that?
I have to admit to not knowing their birth dates.

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

From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Mar 12 20:56:01 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:56:01 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GCSEs and A Levels/Dan, Emma, and Rupert's
  future
In-Reply-To: <67273745606.20030312120558@earthlink.net>
References: 

Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030312202412.00974b30@plum.cream.org>

At 20:05 12/03/03 , Susanne wrote:

>Aren't they all three different ages, with Rupert the oldest
>and Emma the youngest?
>
>Wouldn't Rupert have already taken this [GCSEs]?
>
>Or does the cutoff date come in for that?
>I have to admit to not knowing their birth dates.

A few provisos...
Not *all* schools in England use 1st September as a cut-off date. As a 
matter of law, the entire education system uses 1st September-31st August 
as the school year, but perhaps paradoxically, schools are not required to 
use that as a basis for admissions policy. Nevertheless, the vast majority 
of schools do, simply because it makes life a LOT easier. The majority of 
(the few) schools which depart from the 1st September cut-off date rule are 
private ones.

Emma attends a private school. Her mother is a very high-flying lawyer (I 
know her P.A.) :-) Dan attends a private school. I don't know what the case 
is with Rupert, but apparently his parents aren't exactly "poor".

As a result, it's possible that they aren't in the classes in which they'd 
be with the general population, but assuming that they *are* (there is 
little reason to assume otherwise):

Rupert was born in August 1988, Dan in July 1989 and Emma in April 1990, so 
assuming all other things are equal:

Rupert should currently be in year 10 (I think he confirmed this during the 
Oprah interview when CoS came out; I certainly recall one US interview 
during which he was trying to work out the equivalent US grade), so he 
should be doing his GCSEs next school year, and sitting the exams in June 
2004. As a result, he probably won't be on the move much for PoA movie 
publicity.

Dan should currently be in Year 9. He changed schools in September 2002 
which would give credence to that (unlike state schools, which have a 
changeover at age 11 or after Year Six, most private schools have a 
changeover at age 13 or after Year Eight). He won't be doing his GCSEs 
until June 2005. As I have maintained for the last year, I fully expect his 
parents to refuse to allow him to be involved in any kind of film work for 
the whole of that school year (September 2004-June 2005).

Emma should be in year 8 (I must ask my friend; well actually she's the 
wife of a close friend, so technically she is a friend) :-) and thus GCSEs 
are a fair bit in her future.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who wonders if anyone here read his mega-post on the 
main HPFGU list about UK exams a couple of nights ago...

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Mar 12 21:02:27 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 16:02:27 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Devon Murray/Seamus
Message-ID: <196.17154419.2ba0fa63@aol.com>

You miss understood me!  Devon Murray is going to play Artemitis Fowl!  I 
hope they all  continue!!  I would be disappointed if Devon Murray doesnt 
continue but with Sean Biggerstaff there is like a big hole in the Prisoner!  
How are they going to do quitditch!! if at all!!  Its like a t.v program you 
dont want to see any of the cast leave and it sucks when they replace an 
actor with another actor to play the same part!!  Like in Batman Micheal 
Keaton, Val Kilmer, Goerge Clooney!!  Why make the movie!!  Its like anybody 
can play Batman!!  Some for Harry??  We will see!!  I want to see all the 
minor and major cast members to stay until the 7th book is completed and the 
movie!!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/12/03 3:40:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
irene_mikhlin at yahoo.com writes:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> >I think we can get rid of Seamus Finniagan! 
> 
> I hope you do realise that there are probably some people out there
> that reacted to this idea with the same jumping up and down, flapping
> hands routine ... oops, I mean with the same "exclamation mark at the
> end of each sentence" routine as you reacted to the idea "we can get
> rid of Oliver Wood"?
> 
> How one is less blasphemous than the other?
> 
> Irene
> 
> 
> 
> >I liked him but Neville has more 
> >scenes then he does!  On the other end Devon can do Harry and
> Artemis Fowl 
> >too!!  Can be done!!  I would miss both Matt and Devon if they don't
> come 
> >back.
> >
> >Kyle Longbottom 
> >
> >
> >
> >In a message dated 3/10/03 3:21:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> >bboy_mn at y... writes:
> >
> >>--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> >>
> >>>Seamus Finnigan may not come back either!  When he was doing the 
> >>>Chamber he said if he doesnt get enough scene time he may not come 
> >>>back?  We will have to wait and see.
> >>>
> >>>Kyle Longbottom 
> >>
> >>bboy_mn:
> >>
> >>First comment, I'm wondering how many people saw the Devon Murray
> >>interview at the premier of Chamber of Secrets?
> >>
> >>I was very impressed. He struck me as a very intelligent and
> >>articulate, and very sophisticated for someone so young. Seamus in the
> >>movies comes off as a very nice guy of average intelligence. Devon
> >>Murray amazed me with how much greater than his character he was.
> >>
> >>His unofficial website (devonmurray.com) said he is up for the role of
> >>"Artemis Fowl" which is an interesting book. You can read a few pages
> >>of the book at the Amazon.com website. ("Artemis Fowl" by Eoin Colfer)
> >>
> >>I can see why he would want to back out of the HP movies if he's not
> >>getting enough exposure. He was offered a role in the Leonardo
> >>DiCaprio movie "Gangs of New York". That certainly would have been an
> >>impressive credit to add to his resume, plus a chance to work with
> >>some of the biggest names in Hollywood [Martin Scorsese, Daniel
> >>Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Liam Neeson (Schindler's List), ...], but he
> >>had to turn it down because of HP movie scheduling conflicts. HP is
> >>good as long as it moves his career forward, but if it starts holding
> >>it back, there is not much incentive to stay.
> >>
> >>According to his agent, he has 6 movie offers pending while he waits
> >>to hear IF he is going to be in HP-PoA. That's a lot of opportunity to
> >>keep on hold.
> >>
> >>Just a few thoughts.
> >>
> >>bboy_mn
> >>
> >
> >

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

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 12 23:06:04 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:06:04 -0000
Subject: PoA Plot Summary
Message-ID: 

Someone in one of the HPfGU groups referenced SparkNotes.com which has
complete cliff-notes versions of all the Harry Potter books. 

They are all a very interesting read, well worth a look.

Since we have recently been discussing what is and what isn't
important to the book and therefore to the movie, I thought you might
like to read a summary from an independant source to see if it squares
with what you think is important.

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/potter3/summary.html

Just thought I would pass that along.

bboy_mn

From mckosvc at bmts.com  Thu Mar 13 03:38:45 2003
From: mckosvc at bmts.com (ovc88guelph)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 03:38:45 -0000
Subject: North American Ed system ( was GSCE's)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030312202412.00974b30@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: 

> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard, who wonders if anyone here read his mega-post 
on the 
> main HPFGU list about UK exams a couple of nights ago...  
Actually, no. I'm avoiding the HPFGU until after June 21! I do find 
this discussion about the educational system informative.  The 
American and Canadian systems are fairly similar, so some of this 
will apply to my Yankee neighbours. In Canada, we have Junior and 
Senior Kindergarten, for ages four and five. These are not 
mandatory, but it is rare for children not to attend. Students are 
aged by January first, thus some start JK when they are only three! 
Grade 1 would seem to be equivalent to your Year 2. And while math 
is not my strong suit, this means Year 11 would be Grade 10. North 
American schools run to grade 12. It seems these two years would be 
similar to A level, however, generally more than 3 subjects are 
taken. Students are at this point "streaming" (ie picking courses 
that will be needed for their future careers). After Grade 12, 
students attend either university or college. "University" in Canada 
refers to four year Bachelor (or higher) degrees. "College" refers 
to two year diploma courses, taken at what were once considered more 
practical, but lesser institutions. Similar to universities in other 
countries, the departments within universities are refered to as 
colleges (eg College of Arts, or College of Veterinary Medicine), 
but they offer degree programs, not diplomas. In the States, I think 
the words College and University are used interchangeably. From my 
own experience, a Bachelor degree in the UK is the same as a 
Bachelor degree here, and is not a Masters! Of course, quality of 
education and the value of the degree depends on the "uni" one 
attends. In the States, grades 9 to 12 are often called Freshman, 
Sophmore, Junior and Senior. These are the same terms they use for 
the four years of college. 
   Could someone help me with the terms and holidays in UK school 
system? I'm always perplexed by when breaks and exams occur. In 
particular, it seems odd that classes continue after final exams! I 
also have the impression that the HHR were in school until July. 
Here most schools (and universities...and colleges) run on a 
semester system. The school year runs from Sept to June. The first 
semester runs from Sept to mid Jan, then students write final 
exams.  The second semester then runs from end January to June. 
Exams are written, and summer holidays begin immediately upon their 
completion. High school students (ie Grade 9 to 12) take four course 
per semester. There are three breaks in the school year: two weeks 
at Christmas, three to seven days between semesters, and (right now) 
one week March break. (Americans call this spring break, but I can 
assure you it's not spring here. There's three feet of snow.) Easter 
holiday consists only of Good Friday and Easter Monday off. 
Universities do not have March break. Their first semester ends at 
Christmas, and the second begins in January and ends in May. Should 
one choose not to take summer holidays (or not need to work and earn 
money!), many university programs run a summer semester. 
  As this is my first post, I hope the mods will accept it. It is 
quite OT, but hopefully in line with the previous discussions.

MMCK. who would ask Brits and Euros to refrain from calling all of 
us across the water "Americans". That would be like calling 
Seamus "English"!

From ra_1013 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 04:02:37 2003
From: ra_1013 at yahoo.com (Andrea)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:02:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: North American Ed system ( was GSCE's)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030313040237.1681.qmail@web10905.mail.yahoo.com>

--- ovc88guelph  wrote:
> From my 
> own experience, a Bachelor degree in the UK is the same as a 
> Bachelor degree here, and is not a Masters! Of course, quality of 
> education and the value of the degree depends on the "uni" one 
> attends. In the States, grades 9 to 12 are often called Freshman, 
> Sophmore, Junior and Senior. These are the same terms they use for 
> the four years of college. 

You're correct.  I've had to explain this distinction to a lot of people,
as I'm an American but did part of my schooling in the UK, so I end up
being the person to explain both systems half the time. ;)  I'd say that
the two systems are roughly equal up through the end of GCSE's.  I did my
A-levels in England, and had no trouble starting school at that point.  I
think the American education is broader, whereas the British one is more
intensive in a smaller number of subjects, so it roughly evens out.  

A-levels are the hard ones to classify.  They DO go beyond the average US
high school education, and most US universities will give a full year of
college credit for it. (That's how I graduated in three years. ;))  So I
usually say that A-levels are approximately the equivalent of the US
Associate's degree, and then university yields roughly approximate
degrees. (The extra boost A-levels give are countered by the extra year
Americans spend in undergraduate, IMO.)  Some programs may go beyond that
enough to say they're about the same as a Master's degree, but that's
rare. 

> Could someone help me with the terms and holidays in UK school 
> system? I'm always perplexed by when breaks and exams occur. In 
> particular, it seems odd that classes continue after final exams! I 
> also have the impression that the HHR were in school until July. 

All right, the way MY school ran (and this seemed typical for the schools
in the area -- southeast London, if you're curious) was on a three term
system, beginning at the start of September and running through the end of
June.  At the end of each term, there'd be a term break of two weeks. 
These corresponded with Christmas and Easter.  Then halfway through each
term, we'd have a half-term break of one week.  For students taking GCSEs
and A-levels, the Easter term break would run right into a two week "study
leave", when all classes were cancelled to allow us time to study for
exams.  After those four weeks off, we'd begin the exam time.  Exams were
scheduled more like college exams, each independently scheduled by the
exam boards and spread out over around a three week period.  You'd only go
in when your subject had its exam, and spend the rest of your time
studying independently.

Hope this helps a bit!  I've come to specialize in interpreting Brits for
confused Americans, so feel free to ask if you have more questions. ;)

Andrea

=====
"Reality is for people who lack imagination."

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Mar 13 04:22:11 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 04:22:11 +0000
Subject: UK School holidays
In-Reply-To: 
References: <4.2.0.58.20030312202412.00974b30@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030313034942.0095cee0@plum.cream.org>

I'm keeping this post here rather than sending it straight to the 
OT-Chatter list because hopefully it will close this subject and secondly, 
with the change of topic, it becomes (very!) peripherally related to the HP 
stars' possible plans. :-)

(besides, this list is fairly quiet right now, so we're hardly drowning 
valid posts in a sea of off-topic slime!)

ovc88guelph wrote:

>I'm avoiding the HPFGU until after June 21!

How strange.:-)  What are you "hiding" from? Nothing is being said and no 
subjects are being covered that hasn't been said or covered before... 
Unless and until some new JKR tidbits come up (such as an interview) 
nothing's going to change. And it seems that JKR's not particularly keen to 
get on the publicity bandwagon just yet anyway.

>Could someone help me with the terms and holidays in UK school system? I'm 
>always perplexed by when breaks and exams occur. In particular, it seems 
>odd that classes continue after final exams!

I started typing up a load of stuff, but I decided that a concrete example 
is probably easiest to understand. So here's how this year and next shapes 
up dates-wise here in Birmingham (the Birmingham web sites are some of the 
best for any local authority in Britain):

http://www.bgfl.org/services/schools/termdate.htm

*BTW a "Community" school is what, AFAIK, you call "public" schools in 
North America)

As for exams, once they're over, so is the school year for the kids 
concerned. However, this is not necessarily the case for all schools. At my 
school, exams usually ended about a week before the school year, and that 
week was spent going over exam papers and trying to learn from mistakes.

The rest of this stuff is technically OT for this list and should be 
transferred to the main list if anyone wants to comment.

As far as Hogwarts is concerned, canon is unclear, but it seems like the 
kids laze around a lot once the exams are over and don't actually have classes.

>I also have the impression that the HHR were in school until July.

The best-guess calendar one can extrapolate indicates that the school year 
ends around in the last week of June/first week of July. The best 
indication we have is in GoF. We know that the Third Task took place on 
24th June, and the text refers to the last day of school being two weeks 
later.

>MMCK. who would ask Brits and Euros to refrain from calling all of us 
>across the water "Americans". That would be like calling Seamus "English"!

Sorry, but I don't get the logic. "America" is not a country, it's a 
continent. The fact that residents of the USA haven't invented a name for 
themselves in their 200 year history is their problem. What I mean is that 
the confusion is in calling residents of the USA "Americans", not in 
calling Canadians or Mexicans "Americans".

Personally, I get around the problem by calling all residents of the USA 
"Yanks". :-)

(On what is actually meant as a serious note: I've seen that on formal US 
occasions, the President of the USA is formally intoned as "The President 
of the United States". I really would like it if they actually called their 
country by its name: It is not called "The United States". It is called 
"The United States of America". This laissez-faire attitude really, really 
pisses me off!)

From mckosvc at bmts.com  Thu Mar 13 04:55:21 2003
From: mckosvc at bmts.com (ovc88guelph)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 04:55:21 -0000
Subject: UK School holidays
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030313034942.0095cee0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: 

> 
> >MMCK. who would ask Brits and Euros to refrain from calling all 
of us 
> >across the water "Americans". That would be like calling 
Seamus "English"!
> 
> Sorry, but I don't get the logic. "America" is not a country, it's 
a 
> continent. The fact that residents of the USA haven't invented a 
name for 
> themselves in their 200 year history is their problem. What I mean 
is that 
> the confusion is in calling residents of the USA "Americans", not 
in 
> calling Canadians or Mexicans "Americans".
> 
> Personally, I get around the problem by calling all residents of 
the USA 
> "Yanks". :-)
  Now me again. America is not a continent. North America is. I am 
quite comfortable being called North American, but it's a bit 
long! ;D. Since I'm pretty sure "God Bless America" is not meant to 
bless Canadians and Mexicans as well, and that waving the "American 
Flag" means waving the stars and stipes, it would seem the Yanks 
have indeed invented a name for themselves by referring to 
themselves as Americans. I wonder if those of us who use the 
term "Yanks" or "Yankees" are annoying people from the southern 
States in the same way I am annoyed by being called American! C'est 
la vie!
  Thanks for enlightening me on the school year.  Oh yes, I am 
avoiding HP4GU only because the real thing is so tantalizingly close 
that nothing else will satisfy me!
MMCK, who would move this to the OT board, but doesn't know how! 

From spi00000000 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 13:01:26 2003
From: spi00000000 at yahoo.com (spi00000000)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:01:26 -0000
Subject: North American Ed system ( was GSCE's)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

US school system--

Preschool-- nurseries-ect-- optional-- private intitutions or 
governmnt funded,

Elementary school- private, or public
 Kindergaten-- much is learned here now- a days-- beginning math/ 
reading- writing.
First Grade
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
Some sortof comencment ceramony
Middle or Junior High School
7th     students have more than one teacher and walk from class to 
class.
8th   electives also taken-Forien laugage, art, drama, wood shop, ect.
 6 classes taken
Some sort of comencement ceramony

High School-- usually 6 classes taken except If you have work 
experience or Rop in your senior or junior year. Again electives are 
also taken.
9th--- Freshmen
10th--- Sophomre
11th--- Junior---- take SAT's--- test that helps you get admited 
into "college"--- term used for both 4-year Universities or Community 
colleges.
12th---- Senior

high School graduation-- big Ceramony- much clebrations and youget a 
diploma.
Then 4 choices.....
1) Attend 4-year University
2) Attend Community College
3) Get a Job
4) Do nothing and live off of Parents

hope this helps

Spi

From spi00000000 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 13:11:22 2003
From: spi00000000 at yahoo.com (spi00000000)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:11:22 -0000
Subject: UK School holidays
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "ovc88guelph"  
wrote:
> > 
> > >MMCK. who would ask Brits and Euros to refrain from calling all 
> of us 
> > >across the water "Americans". That would be like calling 
> Seamus "English"!
> > 
> > Sorry, but I don't get the logic. "America" is not a country, 
it's 
> a 
> > continent. The fact that residents of the USA haven't invented a 
> name for 
> > themselves in their 200 year history is their problem. What I 
mean 
> is that 
> > the confusion is in calling residents of the USA "Americans", not 
> in 
> > calling Canadians or Mexicans "Americans".
> > 
> > Personally, I get around the problem by calling all residents of 
> the USA 
> > "Yanks". :-)
>   Now me again. America is not a continent. North America is. I am 
> quite comfortable being called North American, but it's a bit 
> long! ;D. Since I'm pretty sure "God Bless America" is not meant to 
> bless Canadians and Mexicans as well, and that waving the "American 
> Flag" means waving the stars and stipes, it would seem the Yanks 
> have indeed invented a name for themselves by referring to 
> themselves as Americans. I wonder if those of us who use the 
> term "Yanks" or "Yankees" are annoying people from the southern 
> States in the same way I am annoyed by being called American! C'est 
> la vie!
>   Thanks for enlightening me on the school year.  Oh yes, I am 
> avoiding HP4GU only because the real thing is so tantalizingly 
close 
> that nothing else will satisfy me!
> MMCK, who would move this to the OT board, but doesn't know how!

What about "Americans"-- who are infuriated by the word Yanks!!!  I 
feel like I'm in the revolutionary war or something.

Spi

From ABandt at aol.com  Thu Mar 13 13:56:13 2003
From: ABandt at aol.com (ABandt at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 08:56:13 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: North American Ed system ( was GSCE's)
Message-ID: <43.1990014a.2ba1e7fd@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/13/2003 7:03:16 AM Central Standard Time, 
spi00000000 at yahoo.com writes:

> High School-- usually 6 classes taken except If you have work 
> experience or Rop in your senior or junior year. Again electives are 
> also taken.
> 9th--- Freshmen
> 10th--- Sophomre
> 11th--- Junior---- take SAT's--- test that helps you get admited 
> into "college"--- term used for both 4-year Universities or Community 
> colleges.
> 12th---- Senior
> Middle or Junior High School
> 7th     students have more than one teacher and walk from class to 
> class.
> 8th   electives also taken-Forien laugage, art, drama, wood shop, ect.
> 6 classes taken
> Some sort of comencement ceramony
> 

However, some U.S Middle schools run 6-8 and in some situations can run 7-9.  
The school district I atteneded was K-6 Elementary, 7-8 Junior, and 9-12 
High.  But not too long ago, after they build another Middle school on the 
other side of town (when I attented we had two district highschools but only 
one Juinor High) it switched to the 6-8 method.  Another local school 
district is the 7-9 method with high school running 10-12.

<<11th--- Junior---- take SAT's--- test that helps you get admited 
into "college"--- term used for both 4-year Universities or Community 
colleges.>>

Also not every student takes the SAT's it depends on where you live and where 
you plan on attending college.  I took the ACT's which are similar but not 
exactly the same things.  I think some colleges prefer the SAT's but most 
will look at either/or.

~Amy -- who didn't get a comencement ceremony for either Kindergarten *or* 
6th grade *or* Junior High 

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

From buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Mar 13 17:13:28 2003
From: buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Su?=)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 17:13:28 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: education
In-Reply-To: <1047573651.362.60638.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030313171328.98543.qmail@web41507.mail.yahoo.com>

<>

Just posting this for confirmation which I found on the Newsround website where Rupert posts. Anyway he is in year 10!

<>

---------------------------------
With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs

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

From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Mar 13 18:31:44 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:31:44 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GCSEs and A Levels/Dan, Emma and Rupert's future
Message-ID: <55.3b08f336.2ba22890@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/13/2003 11:56:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> So the long answer to a short question is yes, these exam they are taking 
> next year can indirectly affect their future, as it could mean they won't 
> get into the uni they want. However, I'd imagine Rupert and Dan will 
> probably stay in the movie biz, even if Emma and Tom don't (or can't!), so 
> it might not worry them too much. Whether it will worry Radcliffe and Grint 
> Sr, on the other hand, is a different question - I think the world over 
> people can identify with their parents wanting them to do well at school!
> 
> Hope you've been illuminated, or at least not *too* bored!
> 
> Susan
> 

Susan, thank you so much for the great explanation!  I'm amazed that kids 
over there are required to choose what they want to study so young (14 or 15, 
if I read you correctly?).  I changed my major in the middle of my freshman 
year of college, and since school have had several different careers that 
would've required quite different educations.  Do the students over there 
stick with the careers they've studied for, or do they change careers several 
times during their lives as many of Americans do?  

I hope my questions aren't too off-topic, and certainly appreciate the 
understanding these answers are giving me of the Hogwart's school system!!  
Now the school system JKR has written about is starting to make sense to me.  
Do real-life Muggles have homework on their vacations like the Hogwart's 
students do?

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

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

From a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 20:06:00 2003
From: a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com (a_rude_mechanical)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:06:00 -0000
Subject: Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
Message-ID: 

A LONG time ago (Nov, 2001), Laura wrote,(in reference to casting 
for PoA)

"As for Sirius Black -- how about the noteworthy Jeremy Irons? [He 
was
the voice of Scar in "The Lion King."] He might also be good as 
Fudge,
come to think of it. Or maybe Barty Crouch, Sr."

I think he might make a fun Karkaroff!  He has the right eyes and 
the right shaped face (at least, he fits the picture of Karkaroff 
that is in my head!!).

Also, I have a thought for Barty Crouch, Sr.  How about Scottish 
actor Peter Mullan?  

Any thoughts??  I would love hear them--I LOVE casting games!! =)

Elisabeth

From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Mar 13 20:55:28 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:55:28 +0000
Subject: Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030313203312.00971f10@plum.cream.org>

Elisabeth wrote:

>I think he might make a fun Karkaroff!  He has the right eyes and
>the right shaped face (at least, he fits the picture of Karkaroff
>that is in my head!!).

As I said a long time ago, it all depends on how old Karkaroff is meant to 
be. Although he's on first-name terms with Snape, I'm not convinced that 
they are necessarily of the same generation. He could just as easily be 
closer in age to Dumbledore.

One way or another, I don't see the "British actors only" rule applying 
because the character's not British! The same goes for Fleur, Krum, Maxime, 
etc. I don't for a moment assume that JKR made the rule because she wanted 
to keep British actors employed, it's just that she didn't want Columbus & 
Co "Americanising" the story!

So, depending on how the producers want to cast the part, I suggest a 
Dumbledore-aged Karkaroff should be played by Max Von Sydow or a Snape-aged 
Karkaroff should be played by Jurgen Prochnow.

Both have got the "morally seedy" type of character down pat and could play 
Karkaroff with their eyes closed. Even then, they'd probably do a better 
job than most...

>Also, I have a thought for Barty Crouch, Sr.  How about Scottish actor 
>Peter Mullan?

Barty Sr. is *considerably* older than that. Don't forget that he was 
considered for MOM up against Fudge, and Junior was an adult at the time of 
his incarceration, which was 12 years previously. In other words, Senior 
should be more or less Fudge's contemporary. He also has to be the 
punctilious type, which again is something I don't see in Mullan.

From a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 21:37:46 2003
From: a_rude_mechanical at yahoo.com (a_rude_mechanical)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 21:37:46 -0000
Subject: Crouch and Karkaroff: Fun With Casting
Message-ID: 

I suggested Scottish actor Peter Mullan as a choice for Barty 
Crouch, Sr.

GulPlum responded,

"Barty Sr. is *considerably* older than that. Don't forget that he 
was 
considered for MOM up against Fudge, and Junior was an adult at the 
time of 
his incarceration, which was 12 years previously. In other words, 
Senior 
should be more or less Fudge's contemporary."

I don't think that's necessarily true.  First of all, when Harry 
looks in the pensieve in GoF and sees Crouch, Jr, the boy is in 
his "late teens."  Crouch Sr. is described thus: "Crouch's hair was 
dark, his face was much less lined, he looked fit and alert." (Chp. 
30, GoF.)  If this all took place roughly 10-12 year before, we can 
deduce two things: one, a Crouch Sr that is around 50 years of age 
(at time of GoF)could very easily be the father of a man that would 
be in his early 30s; two, Crouch can't be TOO old in GoF if the 
decade previously he was still a man in his prime.

Elisabeth

From morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 23:35:38 2003
From: morgan_d_yyh at yahoo.com (Morgan D.)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:35:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] America and Britain (was: UK School holidays)
In-Reply-To: <1047573651.362.60638.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030313233538.50941.qmail@web11002.mail.yahoo.com>

> > >MMCK. who would ask Brits and Euros to refrain from calling all 
> > > of us across the water "Americans". That would be like calling 
> > >Seamus "English"!

*grins* I'm not Brit or Euro, but I really think it's not that fair
from the USA citizens to "steal" America all to themselves. Since, as
GulPlum pointed out:

> > "America" is not a country, it's  a 
> > continent. The fact that residents of the USA haven't invented a 
> > name for themselves in their 200 year history is their problem. 
> > What I mean is that the confusion is in calling residents of the
> > USA "Americans", not in calling Canadians or Mexicans "Americans".

I whole-heartedly agree, although I admit there's little chance we can
change that at this point. I had to get used to having to explain all
the time which America I'm referring to. Annoying, but... 

GulPlum added:
> > Personally, I get around the problem by calling all residents of 
> > the USA "Yanks". :-)

Which many of them don't appreciate. So if we don't want to pick a
fight, the problem remains. 

Then MMCK countered:
> America is not a continent. North America is. 

*blinks* Someone should alert all the Geography teachers I ever had in
my whole life then. Not to mention all the authors of dictionaries and
encyclopaedias. Sorry, but "the American continent" means all the
countries in the "Three Americas", from Alaska/Canada to
Chile/Argentina. 

> Since I'm pretty sure "God Bless America" is not meant to 
> bless Canadians and Mexicans as well, and that waving the "American 
> Flag" means waving the stars and stipes, it would seem the Yanks 
> have indeed invented a name for themselves by referring to 
> themselves as Americans.

If we're going to judge that from a song title... You're not taking in
consideration all the anti-imperialist songs from Central and South
America who will proclaim devoted loved to America, meaning *their*
America. Those songs are clearly NOT pro-USA. Quite the contrary.

And before I make this posting completely OT: I've been wondering for
quite a while if British viewers resented any Americanisms in the
production of the movies. I've read the Bloomsbury editions of HP and I
noticed some different wordings every now and then in the movies, but
my understanding of English language isn't good enough to pick up any
regionalisms. Were there adaptations of the text to the USA audiences?
(Besides, of course, the Philosopher's Stone/Sorcerer's Stone bit --
and please, don't let me rant about that or I'll never stop.)

Personally, I believe I would have liked better if JKR had insisted on
a British studio and a British crew -- since she already insisted on a
British cast. She wouldn't have made as much money, I suspect, and that
probably had a lot to do with her decision. But thinking of the
tradition of British cinema and the talent of some of Britain's best
scriptwriters and directors, I tend to think the result would have
been, if less flashier and visually thrilling, a lot closer to my
perspective of the books. (On the other hand, I should say I haven't
seen much of European Cinema's production for kids, so maybe I'm being
completely delusional here).

However, some of you have mentioned having hopes for future remakes. I
doubt we'll see any, but I dream of a HP adaptation for TV, a British
production, in the form of a long series of one-hour-long episodes.
That would be the only way of having all our favourite characters and
all our favourite scenes on screen.

Morgan D.
Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 22:56:53 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:56:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030313225653.79249.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>

 Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm new to the movie list.  Who does everyone think should play Cedric Diggory? My roommates and I have been thinking about it, but no one of the right age group comes to mind, so we're thinking it might be a new comer...but we like to speculate anyway:)
~Kathryn

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online

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

From alsaket2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 13 23:11:43 2003
From: alsaket2020 at yahoo.com (saleh ldosary)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 15:11:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GCSEs and A Levels/Dan, Emma and Rupert's future
In-Reply-To: <55.3b08f336.2ba22890@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030313231143.83793.qmail@web14806.mail.yahoo.com>

 artsylynda at aol.com wrote:In a message dated 3/13/2003 11:56:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> So the long answer to a short question is yes, these exam they are taking 
> next year can indirectly affect their future, as it could mean they won't 
> get into the uni they want. However, I'd imagine Rupert and Dan will 
> probably stay in the movie biz, even if Emma and Tom don't (or can't!), so 
> it might not worry them too much. Whether it will worry Radcliffe and Grint 
> Sr, on the other hand, is a different question - I think the world over 
> people can identify with their parents wanting them to do well at school!
> 
> Hope you've been illuminated, or at least not *too* bored!
> 
> Susan
> 

Susan, thank you so much for the great explanation!  I'm amazed that kids 
over there are required to choose what they want to study so young (14 or 15, 
if I read you correctly?).  I changed my major in the middle of my freshman 
year of college, and since school have had several different careers that 
would've required quite different educations.  Do the students over there 
stick with the careers they've studied for, or do they change careers several 
times during their lives as many of Americans do?  

I hope my questions aren't too off-topic, and certainly appreciate the 
understanding these answers are giving me of the Hogwart's school system!!  
Now the school system JKR has written about is starting to make sense to me.  
Do real-life Muggles have homework on their vacations like the Hogwart's 
students do?

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

From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Mar 14 00:07:46 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 00:07:46 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
In-Reply-To: <20030313225653.79249.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
References: 
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030313235618.0095f150@plum.cream.org>

Oh dear, oh dear... I'm having one of those evenings of flitting between 
the main list and this one, and not being sure which one I'm on. :-)

Kathryn Wolber wrote:

>  Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm new to the movie 
> list.  Who does everyone think should play Cedric Diggory? My roommates 
> and I have been thinking about it, but no one of the right age group 
> comes to mind, so we're thinking it might be a new comer...but we like to 
> speculate anyway:)

There hasn't been much speculation, at least not on this list. Mainly 
because, as you seem to be saying, the best solution would be a newcomer 
(or at least someone not widely known).

If memory serves, the last time the subject of Cedric came up, Jack Ryder 
was a popular suggestion.

For the benefit of non-Brits: until recently, he played a very popular 
character in a top-rated soap opera on TV, Eastenders. The character died 
over Christmas (the only time I ever watch it - too many female family 
members around and they all watch it assiduously!).

I'm not sure what his plans are, but he's shown up on TV occasionally since 
then, and he's shaved off his youthful locks and no longer looks anywhere 
near the way I imagine Cedric.

See http://www.whimsical-strawberries.net/jack/ for more.

Anyway, I think he's a little too old (or at least too old-*looking*), but 
then there's no way Tom Riddle looked 16 in CoS...

From urbana at charter.net  Fri Mar 14 00:05:20 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 00:05:20 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: <20030313225653.79249.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Wolber  
wrote:
> 
>  
>  Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm new to the movie 
list.  Who does everyone think should play Cedric Diggory? My 
roommates and I have been thinking about it, but no one of the right 
age group comes to mind, so we're thinking it might be a new 
comer...but we like to speculate anyway:)
> ~Kathryn
> 

How about Sean Biggerstaff?? I hear he's available :-)

Just kidding of course. I'm going to miss Sean. He's soooo cute (and 
he has good taste in music :-)  BTW I believe Saturday is Sean's 
birthday...HB in advance, Sean.

Anyway, what about Orlando Bloom??  He might be available too! 
Except, of course, he had a MUCH bigger role as Legolas (my favorite 
Elven archer) in LOTR than he would have as Cedric, and he'd probably 
ask for a gazillionteen bucks. Oh well.

Anne U
(not familiar with late teenage/early 20s British actors, other than 
Sean and Orlando... which shows you what movies I've seen in the past 
year!)

From siskiou at earthlink.net  Fri Mar 14 00:06:28 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:06:28 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <8494903334.20030313160628@earthlink.net>

Hi,

Thursday, March 13, 2003, 4:05:20 PM, urbana at charter.net wrote:

> Anyway, what about Orlando Bloom?? 

Isn't he, like, way too old?

Not a LOTR fan, so I might be completely off, but he didn't
look like a 16 year old in the pictures I've seen.

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

From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Mar 14 01:33:24 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 01:33:24 +0000
Subject: UK Schooling
In-Reply-To: <20030313231143.83793.qmail@web14806.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <55.3b08f336.2ba22890@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030314011210.009707b0@plum.cream.org>

Lynda wrote:

>Do the students over there (UK) stick with the careers they've studied 
>for, or do they change careers several times during their lives as many of 
>Americans do?

The US idea of "majors" is absent from our system. A lot of people study 
for degrees in combined subjects at university (e.g. two friends of 
mine:  "Economics & Politics", "English & Philosophy"), but swapping around 
is usually difficult if not impossible. The system simply isn't geared up 
for that. Some people might specialise slightly after their first year, but 
they don't usually completely change direction.

The university degrees people have usually bear absolutely no relationship 
to the career they will have later in life, or indeed to the *several* 
careers that a considerable number of young people can expect to have.

In the case of my two friends above (the first is now 4 years since 
graduation, the other 6), they work as a financial auditor for a telecoms 
company and a senior officer (and tech support) of his own web-hosting 
company respectively.

The thing is that neither would have  got their first job without a 
university degree in *something*.

>Do real-life Muggles have homework on their vacations like the Hogwart's
>students do?

It depends on the school. Usually not. However, when I was at school (it 
had a major interest in teaching languages) each language teacher would 
usually set us a book to read over the holidays and to write a report on 
it. To a certain extent it was largely a way to keep in touch with the 
language while at home, and I never had a problem with the policy.

From lita at sailordom.com  Fri Mar 14 01:53:45 2003
From: lita at sailordom.com (Lita)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 18:53:45 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] America and Britain (was: UK School holidays)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030313185013.W36575-100000@nightwing.sailordom.com>

> Then MMCK countered:
> > America is not a continent. North America is.

Morgan D. wrote:
> *blinks* Someone should alert all the Geography teachers I
> ever had in
> my whole life then. Not to mention all the authors of
> dictionaries and
> encyclopaedias. Sorry, but "the American continent" means
> all the
> countries in the "Three Americas", from Alaska/Canada to
> Chile/Argentina.

Actually, there is no continent that is called "America."
There are two continents in the western hemisphere: "North
America" and "South America." I've never seen it stated
otherwise in any encylopedia (and both Encarta and
encyclopedia.com say the same). The way I was always taught
was that there are seven continents: Europe, Asia, Africa,
Australia, Antartica, North America, and South America.
(Although Europe and Asia are really one landmass, much
moreso than the two Americas, which are only connected by
a little strip of land.)

Unless, LOL, this is an Americanism? Do encylopedias
published in other languages/countries refer to a single
"American" continent consisting of both North America and
South America?

Morgan D. also said:
> Personally, I believe I would have liked better if JKR had
> insisted on
> a British studio and a British crew -- since she already
> insisted on a
> British cast. She wouldn't have made as much money, I
> suspect, and that
> probably had a lot to do with her decision.

An entirely British production? Now, that would have been
interesting. (Of course, I believe the rights had already
been sold to Warner Bros. prior to her insistence on a
British cast and shooting location....But that's what I
remember from before I was involved in the fandom, or had
even read the books, so I could be mistaken.) As a strong
admirer of a lot of British films (admittedly, most of those
are older films), I think that would have interesting.

But then I never would have guessed that I'd be so unhappy
with Kloves' adaptations--I love a lot of his previous work
and thought he did an admirable job adapting Wonder Boys.
Now, Columbus, OTOH, I always had reservations about.
::sigh:: Go figure....

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 hansiregi at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 14 01:30:07 2003
From: hansiregi at yahoo.com (hansiregi)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 01:30:07 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD in French
Message-ID: 

I was very disappointed last year when the U.S. edition of the 
Sorcerer's Stone DVD offered only English and Spanish audio tracks, 
since our family was counting on French being included.  We ended up 
purchasing the Canadian version and intended to do the same for 
Chamber of Secrets.  However, I cannot be sure from the technical 
descriptions of the DVDs featured on Amazon.ca that both Canadian 
versions offer both English and French. It doesn't look that way.

Does anyone have any information on these?  Thanks.

From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Mar 14 03:02:57 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 03:02:57 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] CoS DVD in French
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030314025340.00972e90@plum.cream.org>

At 01:30 14/03/03 , hansiregi wrote:
>I was very disappointed last year when the U.S. edition of the
>Sorcerer's Stone DVD offered only English and Spanish audio tracks,
>since our family was counting on French being included.  We ended up
>purchasing the Canadian version and intended to do the same for
>Chamber of Secrets.  However, I cannot be sure from the technical
>descriptions of the DVDs featured on Amazon.ca that both Canadian
>versions offer both English and French. It doesn't look that way.

People in the know are saying that the Canadian DVD of CoS will have an 
English language track only, with French and Spanish only as subtitles.

Nevertheless, if I were in your shoes, I'd double check. All the online 
retailers just repeat the same Warners press release blurb, which included 
no details on the languages. They're probably just guessing.

Count yourself lucky - all we get for the UK edition is English and Arabic!

I might end up buying a Dutch one, as on the day of the release, I'll be 
flying back to England from Africa with a lengthy stop-off in Amsterdam.

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 14 03:14:31 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 03:14:31 -0000
Subject: America and Britain (was: UK School holidays)
In-Reply-To: <20030313233538.50941.qmail@web11002.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Morgan D."  wrote:

> 
> Then MMCK countered:
> > America is not a continent. North America is. 
> 

> Morgan:
> *blinks* Someone should alert all the Geography teachers I ever 
> had in my whole life then. Not to mention all the authors of 
> dictionaries and encyclopaedias. Sorry, but "the American 
> continent" means all the countries in the "Three Americas", from 
> Alaska/Canada to Chile/Argentina. 
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Morgan D.
> Hogwarts Letters - http://www.hogwartsletters.hpg.com.br

bboy_mn:

Well, we are really straying off topic now; way off. Let's hope this
doesn't get too carried away, although I'm sure some think it already is.

Yes, perhaps you should alert your teachers. There are only TWO
Americas relative to continents; North America and South America.
Central America is a geo-political identification not a continental
land mass.

Dictionary: America = United States; Americas = continents. (Of
course, that's from an American Dictionary)

"The American Continent" has no real meaning because it's too general
although most people would assume it referred to North America. The
American ContinentS with an 'S' on the end would collectively refer to
North and South America. (I considered the possiblity that was a
flying-fingers typo)

Most Americans, that is citizens of the United States Of America,
consider themselves just that, citizens of the country of America;
which is short for the United States of America. 

True in techinical language that may not be totally accurate, but in
applied language, I think you will find it is nearly universal in the
US, that it is a reference to just the US. When we refer to North
America, it's an all inclusive term. The 'Stars and Stripes' is the
American flag, for example, but it is obviously not the flag of Canada
or Mexico. 

I will acknowledge that newscasters seem to be moving away from the
America=US reference. Although it's not completely gone, you will most
often here them refer to the US in general news.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 14 03:30:01 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 03:30:01 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD in French
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20030314025340.00972e90@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum  wrote:
> At 01:30 14/03/03 , hansiregi wrote:

> ...edited...
> 
> I might end up buying a Dutch one, as on the day of the release, 
> I'll be flying back to England from Africa with a lengthy stop-off 
> in Amsterdam.

bboy_mn:

I don't know for sure about DVD's but CD's are 'country encoded'. That
means that are slight variation is the encoding format in different
parts of the world. This is to make it harder to pirate copies of the
disk. 

A CD from Japan will probably not work with US equipment. I would make
sure that you aren't going to run into the same problem with DVD's. I
would think they would be MORE likely to encode DVD's this way. 

Keep that in mind.

Can anyone here confirm that for us?

bboy_mn

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 14 05:24:09 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 05:24:09 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD in French
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum  wrote:
> > At 01:30 14/03/03 , hansiregi wrote:
> 
> > ...edited...
> > 
> > I might end up buying a Dutch one, as on the day of the release, 
> > I'll be flying back to England from Africa with a lengthy stop-
off 
> > in Amsterdam.
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> I don't know for sure about DVD's but CD's are 'country encoded'. 
That
> means that are slight variation is the encoding format in different
> parts of the world. This is to make it harder to pirate copies of 
the
> disk. 
> 
> A CD from Japan will probably not work with US equipment. I would 
make
> sure that you aren't going to run into the same problem with DVD's. 
I
> would think they would be MORE likely to encode DVD's this way. 
> 
> Keep that in mind.
> 
> Can anyone here confirm that for us?
> 
> 
> bboy_mn

DVDs are region coded, if that's what you meant.
Europe as a whole has the same coding, regardless of countries. 
Therefore, a Dutch copy would work find with British equipment. In 
fact, a South African or Japanese copy would work, too.

http://www.pioneeraus.com.au/multimedia/dvd/dvd_region_map.htm

VJH

From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 15:02:49 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:02:49 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] UK schooling
Message-ID: <133.1ca28506.2ba34919@aol.com>

GulPlum:

> The US idea of "majors" is absent from our system

so how do you get engineers, nurses, doctors, if they don't major in science, 
for instance?  Sorry to drag this topic out, but this is all new to me -- 
fascinating stuff.  I had no idea our school systems were *that* different.  
Thanks for the information!

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

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

From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 15:10:26 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:10:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
Message-ID: <151.1d0a3fb9.2ba34ae2@aol.com>

VJH:
> while watching The Count of Monte Cristo, I 
> thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good Cedric. Right 
> hair color. Right eye color. A little short but has a pretty face. 
> But at 20, he might be too old.
> 
> Here're some photos of him: 
> http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/photos/moviestills/castle002.jpg
> http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/photos/premieres/premiere007.jpg
> http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/graphics/imagemap.jpg
> 

I hadn't seen this "Monte Cristo" movie, but after looking at these stills, 
yes, this actor looks nearly exactly like my mental image of Cedric!  And I 
see no real problem with 20 year olds playing teens -- happens all the time 
in US TV and movies (it's cheaper to use over-18 actors because they don't 
have to have so many breaks for tutoring, etc.), as long as they have the 
right "look."  And since Cedric is bound to be referred to in the next book 
after GoF (Harry will have a lot of guilt to deal with, he probably feels the 
need to tell Cho and some others exactly what happened, etc.), I expect we 
will see Cedric's ghost from time to time -- having an adult cast in the 
first place, as in the case of Moaning Myrtle (who actually does look too old 
to be a Hogwart's student IMHO), means the actor's appearance probably won't 
change too much between movies.

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

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 15:47:45 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:47:45 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
Message-ID: <140.ce472ce.2ba353a1@aol.com>

They did say he could be up for the part of Cedric!  We will have to wait and 
see.

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/14/03 10:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
artsylynda at aol.com writes:

> 
> VJH:
> >while watching The Count of Monte Cristo, I 
> >thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good Cedric. Right 
> >hair color. Right eye color. A little short but has a pretty face. 
> >But at 20, he might be too old.
> >
> >Here're some photos of him: 
> >http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/photos/moviestills/castle002.jpg
> >http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/photos/premieres/premiere007.jpg
> >http://www.intensevibe.com/henry/graphics/imagemap.jpg
> >
> 
> I hadn't seen this "Monte Cristo" movie, but after looking at these stills, 
> 
> yes, this actor looks nearly exactly like my mental image of Cedric!  And I 
> 
> see no real problem with 20 year olds playing teens -- happens all the time 
> 
> in US TV and movies (it's cheaper to use over-18 actors because they don't 
> have to have so many breaks for tutoring, etc.), as long as they have the 
> right "look."  And since Cedric is bound to be referred to in the next book 
> 
> after GoF (Harry will have a lot of guilt to deal with, he probably feels 
> the 
> need to tell Cho and some others exactly what happened, etc.), I expect we 
> will see Cedric's ghost from time to time -- having an adult cast in the 
> first place, as in the case of Moaning Myrtle (who actually does look too 
> old 
> to be a Hogwart's student IMHO), means the actor's appearance probably 
> won't 
> change too much between movies.
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> "Don't let  the Muggles get you down." Ron Weasley PoA

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

From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Fri Mar 14 18:29:31 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 18:29:31 -0000
Subject: Casting (Cedric)
In-Reply-To: <140.ce472ce.2ba353a1@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

VJH wrote:
I thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good 
Cedric.

Me: ooooo! Yes! he'd be just about perfect! He certainly matches 
my image of him.

Kyle Longbottom wrote:
 They did say he could be up for the part of Cedric!  We will have 
to wait and 
see.

Me: Who are "they"? WB? Sounds intriguing.

Sophia

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 19:02:20 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 14:02:20 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting (Cedric)
Message-ID: <198.171ef69b.2ba3813c@aol.com>

WB!
 I think but don't quoate me on it!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/14/03 1:30:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
sophiamcl at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> 
> VJH wrote:
> I thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good 
> Cedric.
> 
> Me: ooooo! Yes! he'd be just about perfect! He certainly matches 
> my image of him.
> 
> Kyle Longbottom wrote:
> They did say he could be up for the part of Cedric!  We will have 
> to wait and 
> see.
> 
> 
> Me: Who are "they"? WB? Sounds intriguing.
> 
> 
> Sophia

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

From rvotaw at i-55.com  Fri Mar 14 19:44:04 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw at i-55.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:44:04 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
Message-ID: <1411170.1047671044237.JavaMail.root@webmail.i-55.com>

VJH:

> > while watching The Count of Monte Cristo, I 

> > thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good Cedric. Right 

> > hair color. Right eye color. A little short but has a pretty face. 

> > But at 20, he might be too old.

Oh, wow, yes.  Yes, yes, yes, yes.  Fits my mental image, and pleasant to look 
at as well.  How convenient. 

Richelle

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 14 21:08:13 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:08:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: CoS DVD in French
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030314210813.60713.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>

bboy_mn:
> I don't know for sure about DVD's but
> CD's are 'country encoded'.  That
> means that are slight variation is
> the encoding format in different
> parts of the world. This is to make
> it harder to pirate copies of 
> the disk. 
> 
> A CD from Japan will probably not
> work with US equipment. I would make
> sure that you aren't going to run
> into the same problem with DVD's.  I
> would think they would be MORE likely
> to encode DVD's this way. 

Are you sure that CD's are regionally 
coded?  I could swear that I've played 
CD's from foreign countries in my 
American player before.  And I remember 
playing my American CD's in other 
countries' equipment.

DVD's, on the other hand, are usually
regionally coded.  As I understand it, 
this is done so that people in countries 
that a particular movie hasn't had a 
theatrical run in yet can't just buy the 
DVD from the movie's country of origin 
and skip seeing it in the theaters 
altogether when it finally arrives.  
This then also makes piracy that much 
harder.

VJH:
> DVDs are region coded, if that's what
> you meant. Europe as a whole has the
> same coding, regardless of countries. 
> Therefore, a Dutch copy would work
> find with British equipment. In 
> fact, a South African or Japanese copy
> would work, too.
> 
> http://www.pioneeraus.com.au/multimedia/
> dvd/dvd_region_map.htm

Ooh...cool map!  Bookmarking that one now...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Mar 14 21:58:11 2003
From: buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Su?=)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 21:58:11 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
In-Reply-To: <1047649086.418.40442.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030314215811.7642.qmail@web41506.mail.yahoo.com>

<<"As for Sirius Black -- how about the noteworthy Jeremy Irons? [He 
was
the voice of Scar in "The Lion King."] He might also be good as 
Fudge,
come to think of it. Or maybe Barty Crouch, Sr.">>

Did any Brits on here catch the Comic Relief Spoof of Harry Potter that was on earlier this evening? because Jeremy Irons was in it and he was playing Snape!!! I thought he was marvellous and extremely funny!! if Alan Rickman ever needs a stand in....

---------------------------------
With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 23:14:52 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 18:14:52 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting
Message-ID: <1d7.4d357a0.2ba3bc6c@aol.com>

They proably need some in their 20's since that person sounds like the 
character Cedric Diggory is coming back in the Order of the Phoniex!!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/14/03 2:52:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, rvotaw at i-55.com 
writes:

> 
> 
> VJH:
> 
> >> while watching The Count of Monte Cristo, I 
> 
> >> thought Henry Cavill (Marcedes' son) would make a good Cedric. Right 
> 
> >> hair color. Right eye color. A little short but has a pretty face. 
> 
> >> But at 20, he might be too old.
> 
> 
> Oh, wow, yes.  Yes, yes, yes, yes.  Fits my mental image, and pleasant to 
> look 
> at as well.  How convenient. 
> 
> Richelle

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 23:22:41 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 18:22:41 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CoS DVD in French
Message-ID: <66.2fb3d362.2ba3be41@aol.com>

There is a reigon dvd player that will play all dvd's from different 
countries!!  Its a hefty price too!!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/14/03 4:10:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> bboy_mn:
> >I don't know for sure about DVD's but
> >CD's are 'country encoded'.  That
> >means that are slight variation is
> >the encoding format in different
> >parts of the world. This is to make
> >it harder to pirate copies of 
> >the disk. 
> >
> >A CD from Japan will probably not
> >work with US equipment. I would make
> >sure that you aren't going to run
> >into the same problem with DVD's.  I
> >would think they would be MORE likely
> >to encode DVD's this way. 
> 
> Are you sure that CD's are regionally 
> coded?  I could swear that I've played 
> CD's from foreign countries in my 
> American player before.  And I remember 
> playing my American CD's in other 
> countries' equipment.
> 
> DVD's, on the other hand, are usually
> regionally coded.  As I understand it, 
> this is done so that people in countries 
> that a particular movie hasn't had a 
> theatrical run in yet can't just buy the 
> DVD from the movie's country of origin 
> and skip seeing it in the theaters 
> altogether when it finally arrives.  
> This then also makes piracy that much 
> harder.
> 
> VJH:
> >DVDs are region coded, if that's what
> >you meant. Europe as a whole has the
> >same coding, regardless of countries. 
> >Therefore, a Dutch copy would work
> >find with British equipment. In 
> >fact, a South African or Japanese copy
> >would work, too.
> >
> >http://www.pioneeraus.com.au/multimedia/
> >dvd/dvd_region_map.htm
> 
> Ooh...cool map!  Bookmarking that one now...
> 
> Petra
> a
> n  :)
> 

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 14 23:23:45 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 18:23:45 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
Message-ID: <2b.3b2c8608.2ba3be81@aol.com>

I was thinking Bob Hoskins as Mad Eye Moody!!  I just love the gravelly tough 
voice and stance he can potray!!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/14/03 4:59:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk writes:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <<"As for Sirius Black -- how about the noteworthy Jeremy Irons? [He 
> was
> the voice of Scar in "The Lion King."] He might also be good as 
> Fudge,
> come to think of it. Or maybe Barty Crouch, Sr.">>
> 
> Did any Brits on here catch the Comic Relief Spoof of Harry Potter that was 
> on earlier this evening? because Jeremy Irons was in it and he was playing 
> Snape!!! I thought he was marvellous and extremely funny!! if Alan Rickman 
> ever needs a stand in....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

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

From louisa at mishka.fslife.co.uk  Sat Mar 15 00:38:55 2003
From: louisa at mishka.fslife.co.uk (Louisa Brown)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 00:38:55 -0000
Subject: Casting
References: <1047649086.418.40442.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <006401c2ea8b$43012f20$4c79893e@anyuser>

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:56:53 -0800 (PST) Kathryn Wolber
said:
 Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I'm new to the movie list.
Who does everyone think should play Cedric Diggory? My roommates and I have
been thinking about it, but no one of the right age group comes to mind, so
we're thinking it might be a new comer...but we like to speculate anyway:)
~Kathryn

Me:
I'm new too, so again apologies for any repetition, but I would personally
love to see Jamie Bell, of "Billy Elliot" fame, to play Cedric. I think he's
just the right mix of Hufflepuff kindness and teenage-hearthrob-ness! And he
certainly has the emotional range to perform a very moving death scene (and
ghost/shadow) when we finally get to GoF (which had so better be a two part
movie like the Matrix sequels, but that's a whole big rant you don't want
repeated here!)

Louisa,
who will shortly be posting a rambling intro to the main list

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 01:03:13 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 01:03:13 -0000
Subject: CoS DVD in French
In-Reply-To: <66.2fb3d362.2ba3be41@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> There is a reigon dvd player that will play all dvd's from 
different 
> countries!!  Its a hefty price too!!
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> 
> 
Actually, there're many DVD players that are "region-free" or "multi-
regional." And those that aren't can be turned into multi-regional to 
play DVDs from anywhere. It's not always legal to do so, though. And 
I'm not about to tell you how.... Internet is a nice place to get 
lots of information, you know. (Let's just say, if you want your DVD 
player to play DVDs from other regions, better avoid Sony makes. 
Those are difficult to, uh, "modify.")

VJH

From urbana at charter.net  Sat Mar 15 01:32:29 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 01:32:29 -0000
Subject: Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
In-Reply-To: <2b.3b2c8608.2ba3be81@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> I was thinking Bob Hoskins as Mad Eye Moody!!  I just love the 
gravelly tough 
> voice and stance he can potray!!
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 

I think Fudge is already cast (Robert Hardy, right?) Bob Hoskins as 
Mad-Eye Moody, hmmm?? I can see it! Unfortunately, the perfect person 
for Mad-Eye Moody died a number of years back... the late, great 
Marty Feldman :-)

Anne U
("Walk this way"...)

From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Mar 15 01:41:10 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 12:41:10 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fun With Casting: Karkaroff and Crouch
In-Reply-To: 
References: <2b.3b2c8608.2ba3be81@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3E731F66.16000.530E83D@localhost>

On 15 Mar 2003 at 1:32, Anne wrote:

> I think Fudge is already cast (Robert Hardy, right?) Bob Hoskins as 
> Mad-Eye Moody, hmmm?? I can see it! Unfortunately, the perfect person 
> for Mad-Eye Moody died a number of years back... the late, great 
> Marty Feldman :-)

Ever since I read Moody, I've had a view on who should play him - and normally I don't 
have sucn opinions. I thought Chris Ellison (who I very much doubt most Americans 
have heard of - he played Frank Burnside on 'The Bill') would be perfect for how I see 
the role. Bob Hoskins, I could live with but he'd change my perceptions a lot. Marty 
Feldman, to me, would probably have been too over the top to allow me to maintain my 
suspension of disbelief - too much focus on the 'Mad', without showing the Auror behind 
it all.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200

                       "Almighty Ruler of the all;
                 Whose power extends to great and small;
                 Who guides the stars with steadfast law;
                   Whose least creation fills with awe;
                     Oh grant thy mercy and thy grace;
                     To those who venture into space."

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 01:51:23 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:51:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
Message-ID: <20030315015123.85789.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>

For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
my head...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Mar 15 02:08:22 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 02:08:22 +0000
Subject: DVD Region coding
In-Reply-To: <66.2fb3d362.2ba3be41@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030315014852.00974ac0@plum.cream.org>

LeeMunLim03 wrote:
>There is a reigon dvd player that will play all dvd's from different
>countries!!  Its a hefty price too!!

Err... mine does that, and it cost the "hefty" sum of ?80 (about $125). 
Lots of makes are even cheaper than that.

Almost all DVD players can be "multi-regionalised") and it's not difficult. 
In most cases, it's done in software with the use of the remote control. 
There are web sites which provide nothing but instructions for this, brand 
by brand and model by model.

Some players have the region hard-coded into the MPEG decoder chip and 
replacement chips are generally not hard to find. Some makes (e.g. Sony) 
manufacture their own decoder chips and thus region-free chips aren't 
available without making the investment in a decent brand a waste of time 
and money.

Incidentally, in themselves, multi-regional players are perfectly legal. It 
is also perfectly legal for me (as a UK resident, and thus Region 2) to own 
disks from other regions (I have several US or Region 1 DVDs). What's 
illegal is for a shop to sell over the counter (i.e. in person) disks from 
another Region. Which isn't a problem, of course, thanks to the internet 
and online ordering. It is also illegal for a shop to sell over the counter 
multi-regional players. But it's not illegal for them to include simple 
instructions on how to make the machine multi-regional. :-)

The whole thing about dividing the world up into regions is about 
distributors keeping off each others' toes. For instance, a studio like 
Warner Brothers has separate subsidiary companies in different countries 
which "sell" WB products locally. So, e.g. Warner Brothers UK wouldn't take 
kindly to Warner Brothers Australia selling its products on its turf.

Because most electronics companies are completely independent of the 
studios and distributors which make and sell the films on DVD, they're 
happy about selling multi-regional machines, and frequently include a 
leaflet with instructions in the box. A BIG exception to this is Sony, 
which also owns Columbia Pictures, several record labels and other media 
interests. It is therefore to their advantage to make it VERY difficult to 
overcome the region coding.

The moral of the tale: vertical integration doesn't work in consumers' 
bests interests.

From dozierwoman at hotmail.com  Sat Mar 15 03:50:38 2003
From: dozierwoman at hotmail.com (Lisa)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 03:50:38 -0000
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
In-Reply-To: <20030315015123.85789.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

I have heard that name before and I can't for the life of me remember 
where, would you please help me dust the cobwebs out of my head and 
refresh my memory?

Thanks,

Lisa aka Lady Firenze

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan  
wrote:
> For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
> Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
> my head...
> 
> Petra
> a
> n  :)
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 04:09:25 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 04:09:25 -0000
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa"  wrote:
> I have heard that name before and I can't for the life of me 
remember 
> where, would you please help me dust the cobwebs out of my head 
and 
> refresh my memory?

ME: I think he'd make a great Rita Skeeter ? he's hysterical in 
concert (such wit, especially about scooters).  Here's his official 
site ? check out the photos of him in a skirt :)  
http://www.izzard.com

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 04:49:33 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 04:49:33 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: <006401c2ea8b$43012f20$4c79893e@anyuser>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Louisa Brown"  wrote:

> Me:
> .... I would personally love to see Jamie Bell, of "Billy Elliot" 
> fame, to play Cedric. I think he's just the right mix of Hufflepuff 
> kindness and teenage-hearthrob-ness! 
>
> ...edited...
> 
> Louisa,
> who will shortly be posting a rambling intro to the main list

bboy_mn:

Without a doubt Jamie Bell is a fine actor, and equally without a
doubt he is CUTE. But Cedric is suppose to be tall and handsome, young
but very manly; more of a Bradd Pitt type or a Matt Damon. I don't
think Jamie Bell fits that. I will admit that I haven't seen a recent
photo of Jamie, so he could be over 6 feet tall now for all I know.

How about Charlie Hunnam who was also in "Nicholas Nickleb" with Jamie
bell and was also in the original 'Queer as Folk'. He tall very
handsome, light hair; I think he could do it nicely.

Just a thought. (who loves Jamie Bell but doesn't see him as Cedric.)

bboy_mn

From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Sat Mar 15 06:02:14 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 06:02:14 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> How about Charlie Hunnam who was also in "Nicholas Nickleb" with 
Jamie
> bell and was also in the original 'Queer as Folk'. He tall very
> handsome, light hair; I think he could do it nicely.
> 

as someone already brought up this issue in another post, why does so 
many people picture Cedric as a "light hair/Blonde"??? (see Steve's 
reference of "more Brad Pitt, Matt Damon type) when in the canon 
Cedric was described to have dark hair?? Almost 99% of the casting 
suggestion I came across in many HP board for Cedric are all your 
typical blond pretty boy when Cedric is supposed to have dark/darker 
tone hair!

This is quite similar to the case of Draco. Even though it's clearly 
written in the canon more than once that Draco has "white Blonde 
hair" (aka blonder than your average blonde!). However when the first 
movie came out, lots of people complained that "Draco should have 
dark hair" or screamed "I always imagined Draco having Dark hair" and 
claimed the movie people "made a mistake" blah blah. This just really 
puzzle me. 

or could this be some kind of deep-root stereotypes in which a "nice 
popular handsome boy" should be a blond pretty boy, while the "nasty 
bully" should be a dark hair ugly guy or something like that? Can 
those who always imagine Cedric as blond or Draco as dark can 
enlighten me your reasons?

Joan

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 07:36:36 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 07:36:36 -0000
Subject: DVD Deleted Scenes
Message-ID: 

FYI.

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1807858489&cf=trailer

Scroll down to the bottom of page to see four clips of the deleted 
scenes.

(For some reason, the media player clips didn't work on my computer. 
But maybe it's just my problem. Real player worked fine, though.)

VJH

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 08:19:59 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 08:19:59 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

Joan wrote:

> as someone already brought up this issue in another post, why does 
so 
> many people picture Cedric as a "light hair/Blonde"??? (see Steve's 
> reference of "more Brad Pitt, Matt Damon type) when in the canon 
> Cedric was described to have dark hair?? Almost 99% of the casting 
> suggestion I came across in many HP board for Cedric are all your 
> typical blond pretty boy when Cedric is supposed to have 
dark/darker 
> tone hair!
> 
> This is quite similar to the case of Draco. Even though it's 
clearly 
> written in the canon more than once that Draco has "white Blonde 
> hair" (aka blonder than your average blonde!). However when the 
first 
> movie came out, lots of people complained that "Draco should have 
> dark hair" or screamed "I always imagined Draco having Dark hair" 
and 
> claimed the movie people "made a mistake" blah blah. This just 
really 
> puzzle me. 
> 
> or could this be some kind of deep-root stereotypes in which 
a "nice 
> popular handsome boy" should be a blond pretty boy, while 
the "nasty 
> bully" should be a dark hair ugly guy or something like that? Can 
> those who always imagine Cedric as blond or Draco as dark can 
> enlighten me your reasons?

I would just raise my hand and say that "someone" who brought up the 
issue of Cedric being dark-haired was me. However, I've never come 
across anyone who suggested that Draco should have dark hair.

As far as I know, it's fairly common in Hollywood to have 
innocent/angelic blondes and evil brunets, more so in female 
characters than male. The latest example I can remember would 
be "Chicago," in which the more seasoned Velma is dark-haired and the 
young, innocent Roxie has blond hair. (Of course, Velma isn't evil 
and Chicago isn't entirely new material. But it's still in line with 
the tradition.) And I am sure in YA films, more than half of 
the 'cute guys' are blond. Not just blond, but blond with long, 
flowing hair. Perhaps that's why some people automatically picture 
Cedric to be Jack Ryan, or, worse, Aran Cartter (sp?) look-alike. 

However, I,too, wonder whether or not Britain has the same tradition. 
I don't know that many blond British actors. So I often think that 
perhaps British don't fetishize blonds so much. Then, maybe it's just 
because I don't know many that British actors to start with.

Interestingly, JKR seems to have a thing for dark hair. Harry, James, 
Sirius, Cedric, Snape...lots of "good" caracters have dark hair. Even 
the ultimate evil Voldemort was a charming young man with dark hair. 
On the other hand, many on the "bad" side have blond hair--the 
Malfoys, Barty Jr., Aunt Pettura and so on. If the division by hair 
color is to be trusted, I am almost certain that Bagman would be 
evil...

VJH,
who's not sure what she's talking about.

From lake4fam at earthlink.net  Sat Mar 15 10:19:00 2003
From: lake4fam at earthlink.net (dittanymorgan)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 10:19:00 -0000
Subject: Residents of the North American Contintent
Message-ID: 

I may be hopelessly ethnocentric, but I am an American:  I live in 
the United States of America.  Persons who live to the north of my 
country's northern borders are Canadians.  Persons who live to the 
south of my country's southern borders are Mexicans.  We are all 
North Americans (as opposed to South Americans, i.e., Brazilians, 
Argentinos, Peruvianos, etc.) but we are all very different, and 
there are three different languages involved:  English (Canada and 
the U.S.), Spanish (M?xico) and French (Qu?bec.) 

I hope that the residents of the many countries of Europe and the 
residents of the United Kingdom will find this to be of use in future 
discussions of residents of North America.

Namari?

Dittany

From manda at qx.net  Sat Mar 15 13:45:13 2003
From: manda at qx.net (Amanda Pressnell)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 05:45:13 -0800
Subject: World video formats (Was: CoS DVD in French)
In-Reply-To: <20030314210813.60713.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>
References: 
Message-ID: <3E72BDE9.25305.B543BF@localhost>

On 14 Mar 2003 at 13:08, Petra Pan wrote:
> 
> Are you sure that CD's are regionally 
> coded?  I could swear that I've played 
> CD's from foreign countries in my 
> American player before.  And I remember 
> playing my American CD's in other 
> countries' equipment.

CDs are *not* regionally coded. I've thanked my lucky stars many, many times because of this. Videos/DVDs are enough of an annoyance to convert as it is.

In addition to DVD regions, countries use different television standards: NTSC (US, Canada, Japan), PAL (UK, Europe, Australia, NZ), and SECAM (France). In the US, even 
if you find a mult-region DVD player it doesn't really do you much good unless it also converts these standards - or you have a PAL TV (..that can run on 110v but lets not 
get into voltage differences too!). This also affects regular ol' VHS. If you order a video from overseas you may have to pay $15 - $25 to have it converted. Of PAL and NTSC, 
PAL is of higher quality. That is why many PAL VCRs (and DVD players?) can play NTSC (though not perfectly) but not vise versa. There are multi-format VCRs that you 
can buy but they are pricey.

More about the world standards:
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/WorldTV/

A chart of which countries use which format:
http://www.sphereproject.org/pal_ntsc.htm

The challenges of buying DVDs from other parts of the world:
http://hometheaterinfo.com/dvd3.htm

> VJH:
> > DVDs are region coded, if that's what
> > you meant. Europe as a whole has the
> > same coding, regardless of countries. 
> > Therefore, a Dutch copy would work
> > find with British equipment. In 
> > fact, a South African or Japanese copy
> > would work, too.

However, most of Europe is PAL and Japan is NTSC. I take it that PAL DVD players will convert?

Manda
--
http://www.MandaMia.com

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Sat Mar 15 15:13:14 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:13:14 -0000
Subject: UK Schooling/Comic Relief
Message-ID: 

First of all, UK people: how funny was the Comic Relief HP spoof? And how great was Jeremy Irons?! "God, I'm GORGEOUS..." Snapefans of the world, unite. Oh, I'm so sad now, though - I REALLY wanted Irons for Lupin, and now I've just got further proof he could nail it. DAMN YOU WARNER BROS CASTING DEPARTMENT!! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!!! heehee

and on with the show. Btw, I'd put five galleons on that Richard has taped the CR HP thing and is about to stick it on his website ;) that's not a hint if you haven't, but it sounds so you!

Lynda (who shares my mum's name, incidentally, completely with a "Y" not an "I") wrote:
Do real-life Muggles have homework on their vacations like the Hogwart's 
students do?

And Richard replied:
It depends on the school. Usually not. However, when I was at school (it 
had a major interest in teaching languages) each language teacher would 
usually set us a book to read over the holidays and to write a report on 
it. To a certain extent it was largely a way to keep in touch with the 
language while at home, and I never had a problem with the policy.

And I say:
I must beg to differ, Richard. Since I just got out of the school system, I regret to inform you that sadly, today's teachers are manic on homework :(

Actually, this could be due to me attending a grammar school when I was in high school, but we certainly had a fair whack of homework during the half terms and end of terms (terms=semesters; half term=one week break about half way through; end of term=two or three week break at Christmas and Easter), usually revising for tests or coursework and the like. During the GCSE years, year 11's holidays were usually "Revise for your exams" and "Revise for your mocks" (mocks being a practice GCSE that is usually the previous year's paper. These are carried out about three months before the actual exams, and are marked internally, by the teachers, not the external exam board. However, they are carried out under GCSE conditions - it is to prepare you for the stress of the exams as much as the workload).

During A Levels, you usually end up with even more homework during holidays, but it's usually coursework. Each subject (under Curriculum 2000, at least) is broken up into modules, and most of the modules are taught in class and then tested in exams at the end of the year (well, January and June now, but you know what I mean). Coursework, on the other hand, is a chance to make up marks if you're not great at exams. It is basically a module which consists of writing an extended essay, or investigation, or analysis, or whatever (depends on the subject - for my English Language coursework I had to write a short story and then do a commentary analysing it; for my History I had to write a 3000 word essay on a subject of my choice - I chose the effectiveness of the Hitler Youth and corresponding propagranda in subverting and indoctrinating the youth of Germany in the 30s and 40s, if anyone's interested) which you prepare over a number of weeks or months, and which your teachers check over and offer you certain advice on (they can't really help you too much, but they can give you hints in the right direction). On or before the deadline (set by the exam board) you have to hand it in, and it is then sent to the external exam board, who mark it, and then factor it into your mark. A friend of mine did appallingly on his exam for Psychology, for example, but he'd done so well on his coursework he ended up with a C; the U(nclassified, the lowest mark) exam balanced out the A coursework for a decent mark.

Personally I think it's a great idea, and I'd like to see Harry and co doing this kind of stuff - she is more or less following the British school system (which, as an ex-teacher I imagine she knows a fair bit about) and they should really be doing coursework. I'd love to see Harry writing a detailed essay about Divination ;) In GCSE, you have to do coursework in each of your nine subjects. Ditto A Level with each of the four/three.

Lynda also asked:
Do the students over there 
stick with the careers they've studied for, or do they change careers several 
times during their lives as many of Americans do?  

And Richard explained:
The US idea of "majors" is absent from our system. A lot of people study 
for degrees in combined subjects at university (e.g. two friends of 
mine:  "Economics & Politics", "English & Philosophy"), but swapping around 
is usually difficult if not impossible. The system simply isn't geared up 
for that. Some people might specialise slightly after their first year, but 
they don't usually completely change direction.
Richard also commented:
The university degrees people have usually bear absolutely no relationship 
to the career they will have later in life, or indeed to the *several* 
careers that a considerable number of young people can expect to have.

I clarify: 
Technically, we don't really have majors here, but only in so much that the actual uni course you choose doesn't really affect your life that much, as Richard says. Obviously, there are certain exceptions - Law, Medicine, and the like are obviously specialised degrees that will require post-grad degrees in law school or medical school, with the obvious eventual goal to become a lawyer or doctor. (This is not to say you can't study Law if you don't want to be a lawyer - you might want to go into the police force, for example, and not do the post-grad bit) But if you are studying English, Philosophy, Psychology, Business Studies, Media Studies, any of these - the fact that you have a degree enables you to go into any field you fancy, rather than the subject of the degree. A Psych student will not necessarily become a psychologist, nor will a Media Studies student go into PR or television. My ex-flatmate (read: roommate, but in a Friends way, not a college way) studied Engineering because he made a random choice - he's now working in London as a graphic designer, his ideal career. He's only 23, as well, so it's not like he had to work his way up through the GD ladder from scratch. His degree got him halfway up.

Lynda also pondered:
I'm amazed that kids 
over there are required to choose what they want to study so young (14 or 15, 
if I read you correctly?).

I reply:
You did indeed read me correctly. The GCSE choices are made at the end of year 9, when you are about 13 or 14. And if you screw up here, you actually can really affect your future. For example, someone not choosing a French GCSE would not be able to take up French at A Level, they'd be too far behind, and so they'd not have a chance with a French degree - usually for subjects like that, they require, say "ABB, with at least a B in French A Level". However, the chances of you messing up too badly are limited by something similar to the HP method - in the same way that Harry and Ron are not allowed to drop Potions, you originally learn something like this: (often changes from year to year, never mind school to school, but this was my year7-9)

English (combining Lit and Lang)
Maths
Biology      )
Physics       } sometimes combined into Science until year 10
Chemistry  )
French
Technology (which rotated every six weeks between Graphics (essentially architecture), Food Tech (domestic science? home economics? not sure what the US version is), Electronics (self-explantory - LEDs, breadboards, soldering, working with various switches and wires) and a couple of others that slip my mind. There was also some IT (Information Techonology -computers) involved in each, although most schools I believe offer IT as a separate GCSE)
German
History
Geography
RE (Religious Education - Bible stuff and ethics/morals too)
PE (Physical Education - gymnastics and indoor activities)
Games (PE but outside stuff - running, football(soccer), hockey)

and probably a couple of others I've forgotten. For GCSE, you *have* to take English, Maths and Science (almost definitely split into the three by then, although usually tested all as one and rewarded with two GCSEs - the Science Double Award), to keep you on reasonably broad options. You then choose four others: one Technology (hence you getting a taster of each in the three preceding years); one humanity - either History, Geography, or RE; one language - in my school, either French, German, or Spanish; and then one other of your choice. Personally, I chose French, Food Tech, History and RE, and have never regretted it - I enjoyed all of the subjects (except maybe French, I'm pretty weak on languages but French was the lesser of two evils!). For my A Levels, this then led to English Language, History, Psychology and IT and dropped IT. Psych or Sociology is not something you can take below A Level, but they prefer you to have a good GCSE mark in something like English or History, something involving a lot of writing and remembering.

OK, I'm now straying from information into reminiscience. Time to go!

Susan
who apologises to the Mods again for the veering off-topicness here
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Mar 15 16:17:26 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 16:17:26 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] UK Schooling/Comic Relief
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030315152935.009738d0@plum.cream.org>

At 15:13 15/03/03 , Susan Atherton wrote:

>Btw, I'd put five galleons on that Richard has taped the CR HP thing and 
>is about to stick it on his website ;) that's not a hint if you haven't, 
>but it sounds so you!

You owe me five Galleons. :-) I suggest you (and any other interested 
parties who haven't already done so) take a look at the OT-Chatter list, 
where I and a few others talked about the spoof last night.

I started my comments by saying that I *won't* be posting a clip, because 
my video capture equipment isn't working. :-) Incidentally, I'm not 
particularly bothered about making it work - the bandwidth requirements for 
the tens of thousands of non-Brits who will want to see that thing would 
probably kill my server. When I posted a clip of Dan Radcliffe's acceptance 
speech at the Variety Club awards last year (and that was 3 minutes as 
opposed to 20 minutes for this), the server just gave up and died during 
the second day. It's simply not designed for that kind of traffic. If I 
could be guaranteed that people would stagger their interest and keep it at 
reasonable levels over a period of say, a month, then I'd do it, but I know 
for a fact that if I post it today, then by midnight the server will have 
crashed from the pressure.

On the subject of holiday homework, Susan disagreed with my comment that 
kids aren't generally given homework over the holidays:

>I must beg to differ, Richard. Since I just got out of the school system, 
>I regret to inform you that sadly, today's teachers are manic on homework :(
>
>Actually, this could be due to me attending a grammar school when I was in 
>high school, but we certainly had a fair whack of homework during the half 
>terms and end of terms (terms=semesters; half term=one week break about 
>half way through; end of term=two or three week break at Christmas and 
>Easter), usually revising for tests or coursework and the like.

Ahh... But you appear to have misunderstood the question. :-) At issue was 
homework over the *summer* holidays, which you appear to accept doesn't 
happen on the whole for the (real world) general pupil population. The 
thing is that during the short (Christmas/Easter) breaks at Hogwarts, they 
do *not* get homework (viz. comments between Ron and Hermione during 
Christmas break in CoS), whereas real-world kids do. I did too, as a matter 
of fact. When replying to the original post, I started going on about the 
short breaks but cut the lot out because it wasn't directly relevant.

 From what you say, other than GCSE and A Level preparations, you didn't 
have homework set during summer holidays, whilst Hogwarts pupils are. 
Which, again, is the comparison I was making to my own experiences.

You also had mocks prior to your GCSEs (as we all did) but it seems that 
Hogwarts doesn't. At least there's not been any reference to them thus far, 
and the Trio would have started to become aware of them by this stage, if 
the exams are only a few months into the new school year.

>JKR is more or less following the British school system (which, as an 
>ex-teacher I imagine she knows a fair bit about) and they should really be 
>doing coursework. I'd love to see Harry writing a detailed essay about 
>Divination ;) In GCSE, you have to do coursework in each of your nine 
>subjects. Ditto A Level with each of the four/three.

Small point of precision here. JKR's teaching experience was in teaching 
English abroad, and then as a second language after her return to the UK. 
She was in the middle of preparing for UK teaching qualifications when the 
HP bandwagon started so she never actually got around to teaching in 
British schools. The advent of coursework counting towards GCSEs is a very 
recent innovation, introduced by the Labour government (or did the Tories 
*just* get it in before they were kicked out in 1997?).

The point of all of that is that JKR wouldn't have *personal* experience of 
the importance of coursework, and she'd never got around to it as a teacher 
before giving up on teaching and becoming a full-time writer. In any case, 
some of the details around the OWLs (if only their name) hark back to O 
Levels rather than GCSEs, which were 100% exam-based.

Incidentally, I'm getting a sense of deja-vu here, because this subject is 
also currently going on over on the main list... Some of the non-Brits who 
read both lists are probably getting all of this in stereo. ;-)

>Obviously, there are certain exceptions - Law, Medicine, and the like are 
>obviously specialised degrees that will require post-grad degrees in law 
>school or medical school, with the obvious eventual goal to become a 
>lawyer or doctor.

Just as a point of precision, as it happens, the vast majority of lawyers 
do NOT have a law degree. I've worked for three legal practices in my time, 
so take it from me. :-) Possessing *a* degree is a required entry 
qualification for law schools, and the only difference is that those with 
degrees in Law get to skip the first year of law school. Law schools issue 
professional rather than academic qualifications.

I count among my personal friends probably 30 lawyers; of those, only two 
have law degrees; the rest have degrees in a variety of subjects including 
various languages, history, archeology, history, politics, etc. Not 
surprisingly, the ones with the Law degrees are the better legal analysts, 
while those with other degrees are better negotiators and face-to-face 
communicators.

There's a simpler way of putting that. :-) The fact of the matter is that 
it is a legal requirement to follow the full school curriculum until Year 
11 regardless of the choices of GCSEs. As I said on the main list, this has 
the effect that even if one realises that one made the wrong pre-selections 
during the previous year, as long as one has the coursework credits, one 
can decide to sit the GCSE exam in any other subject. Back in the O Level 
days, things were even simpler, because there was no coursework, so to all 
practical intents and purposes, the final selection wasn't truly made until 
about 3 months before the exams (by which time the final selections had to 
be made for exam scheduling purposes).

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who has just realised that if he's done his 
calculations correctly, he'd already left *university* by the time Susan 
was even born... (erk! old!)

From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 17:02:17 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 09:02:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Residents of the North American Contintent
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030315170217.6335.qmail@web40505.mail.yahoo.com>

 dittanymorgan  wrote:
I may be hopelessly ethnocentric, but I am an American:  I live in 
the United States of America.  Persons who live to the north of my 
country's northern borders are Canadians.  Persons who live to the 
south of my country's southern borders are Mexicans.  We are all 
North Americans (as opposed to South Americans, i.e., Brazilians, 
Argentinos, Peruvianos, etc.) but we are all very different, and 
there are three different languages involved:  English (Canada and 
the U.S.), Spanish (M?xico) and French (Qu?bec.) 

I hope that the residents of the many countries of Europe and the 
residents of the United Kingdom will find this to be of use in future 
discussions of residents of North America.

In addition to this, I think people from the USA (myself included) just call ourselves Americans because what else would it be? United State's American? We're the only country on the continent of North and South America that have America in it's country's name, so we got coined "Americans".  We're "Americans" not because ouf the continent, but because of the country's name. 

~Kathryn

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online

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

From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sat Mar 15 18:14:23 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 18:14:23 -0000
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
In-Reply-To: <20030315015123.85789.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

Petra wrote
> For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
> Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
> my head...
> 

OK. If you can see Eddie, then I'll permit myself to see e a younger version of 
Dame Edna. :-)

Sophia

From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Mar 15 18:41:12 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 10:41:12 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DVD Deleted Scenes
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <1591227149.20030315104112@earthlink.net>

Hi,

Friday, March 14, 2003, 11:36:36 PM, vincentjh at yahoo.com wrote:

> Scroll down to the bottom of page to see four clips of the deleted 
> scenes.

I wish, but I get "page not found" no matter which one I
click.

Are these available anywhere else?

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

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 15 21:35:28 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 13:35:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter['s mum]
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030315213528.12483.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com>

Yours truly:
> > For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
> > Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
> > my head...

Sophia:
> OK. If you can see Eddie, then I'll
> permit myself to see e a younger
> version of Dame Edna. :-)

Dame Edna would be fabulous as Rita's 
mum, should she ever make an 
appearance in the series.  

Oh goody...now I'm casting characters 
that are yet non-existent...

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com

From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Mar 16 01:03:29 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 01:03:29 +0000
Subject: Robbie Coltrane on Parkinson
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030316005721.009903f0@plum.cream.org>

Further to the UK TV conversations, Coltrane was on the Parkinson show this 
evening, talking about another project (a TV mini series, due to be shown 
in a couple of weeks time. He did get in a few words about Hagrid, and in 
particular about THAT rumour (dying in OotP).

See http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/index.htm for a link to the file (it's 
the first item at the top of the page). The whole clip's about 2.15 mins 
and there are a couple of sentences about THAT rumour approx. 31 secs. into it.

(there's a brief reference to the new show along the way but I didn't 
bother cutting it out; it only lasts a couple of seconds)

Not exactly eye-opening, but I thought some people might enjoy it.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, trying to make up for the lack of Comic Relief clips.

From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Mar 16 03:08:27 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 03:08:27 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Comic Relief skit
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030316030630.0098f410@plum.cream.org>

Oh, heck. For those receiving the main list by email, this message was 
meant to have gone here, not there. :-(

(for those who only follow the main list on webview, don't worry) :-)

OK, folks. My arm has been twisted.

I've not been able to make video files, but I have made some audio clips of
the best lines from the skit (there aren't many of them) at

http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/comicrelief.htm

The one most people will be interested in is the Snape one.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who was meant to have had an early night. :-(

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 16 05:01:16 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 05:01:16 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie"  wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> > How about Charlie Hunnam.... He tall very handsome, light hair; I 
> > think he could do it nicely.
> > 
> 
> ...why do ... people picture Cedric as a "light hair/Blonde"???
> when ... Cedric was described to have dark hair?? Almost 99% of 
> the casting suggestion ... for Cedric are ... blond pretty boys 
> ...edited...
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Joan

bboy_mn:

I couldn't remember anywhere in the book where Cedric's hair was
specificed, so I looked for a reference.

GoF USA HB pg 297 
"Then there was the fact that Cedric looked the part of a champion so
much more than he (Harry) did. Exceptionally handsome, with his
straight nose, DARK HAIR, and gray eyes, ..."

Prior to that, Cedric is only described as tall and very handsome, and
therein lies the problem. Cedric is first mentioned in PoA (USA PB pg
168 of 435), and he is "...tall, good-looking one...".

(435-168=267 + 297 = 564 pages)

So I've had 564 pages of reading spread across two books with several
mentions of Cedric Diggory before I'm actually told he has dark hair.
The only previous hint of his hair color was when they went to the top
of Stoads Hill and met Mr. Doggory, Cedric's father, who has a
'scrubby brown beard' and a ruddy complection (Gof USA HB Pg 77).
Being scandinavian, my instinct would be to assume a young son would
have lighter hair than his father which is pretty consistent for
scandinavians.

The problem is that I already had a picture of Cedric in my head 500
pages before I was told his hair was dark, although it's probably
brown. Too late then, I had my image of Cedric and I couldn't change it. 

Draco, as a better example, is first described as 'pale, pointed face'
(PS/SS USA PB pg 96 of 384) and Harry was strongly reminded of Dudley
(as a bully primarily). From that point on Draco is mostly referred to
as 'a pale boy', and occassionally, pointed face, and grey or pale
eyes. Draco's white-blond hair is mentioned in GoF USA HB Pg 100.
That's 1164 pages and 3.14 books after the character was introduced. I
think most of us had created our own Draco long before GoF. 

Personally, although I can't explain why, I always pictured him as a
blond. Perhaps I naturally assumed pale fair skin meant light colored
hair. If anyone can find an earlier reference to Draco's hair color, I
would like to hear it. 

Most of the dark haired actors who have been mentioned aren't that
tall. Keep in mind being trapped in the frozen tundra of Minnesota
gives me a very limted view of British actors. I also think that tall
is an extremely important characteristic of who ever plays Cedric.
Danial Radcliffe is growing fast, and if we want to retain the image
of him as younger than the other champions, I think all three of them
need to be noticeably taller than Daniel. Others may not think so, but
I do think that characteristic is important to maintain the illusion
that Daniel/Harry is younger than the other champions.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn

From urbana at charter.net  Sun Mar 16 05:15:06 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 05:15:06 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vincentjh"  
wrote:
> Interestingly, JKR seems to have a thing for dark hair. Harry, 
James, 
> Sirius, Cedric, Snape...lots of "good" caracters have dark hair. > 
VJH,
> who's not sure what she's talking about.

IMO JKR definitely has a thing for men with dark hair (I can relate 
to this because I do too!) I remember being kind of astonished when I 
first saw photos of JKR with her current husband, Dr. Neil Murray -- 
I thought, "Omigod, the guy she married looks like Harry might look 
when he grows up!" (Check out the photo of JKR and NM about midway 
down this page):

Maybe GulPlum (fluent francophone that he is) can translate the rest 
of the page (or give us the Cliff's Notes version)... my French is 
extremely rusty but even I can tell it's called "The Personality of 
J.K. Rowling - a psychological portrait of the creator of Harry 
Potter".

Anne U
(who thinks this topic might need to move to OT-Chatter)

From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Mar 16 13:47:06 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 08:47:06 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] UK Schooling/Comic Relief
Message-ID: <10f.1fbee24d.2ba5da5a@aol.com>

Susan Atherton:

> I'd put five galleons on that Richard has taped the CR HP thing and is about 
> to stick it on his website ;) that's not a hint if you haven't, but it 
> sounds so you!
> 
> 

Richard, I'll personally feed your flobberworms for a MONTH if you can put 
this on your site so we Americ. . .er, Yanks (I'm a Southerner, it hurts to 
say that!). . .er, we non-BBC receiving types can see it too!!!!  Aw, rats, I 
just read your subsequent post saying you won't be putting it up.  Ah well. . 
.

Susan:  >today's teachers are manic on homework :(

Actually, this could be due to me attending a grammar school when I was in 
high school, but we certainly had a fair whack of homework <

Er. . .I guess I'm still not clear on your school system.  How do you go to 
grammar school when you're in high school??  Grammar school over here is 
usually grades 1-6 over here usually, although our local system has k-4 in 
grammar school, with 5-8 being in middle school, 9-12 in high school.  I also 
find the term "revise" or "revision" interesting when referring to studying 
for exams (at least, I THINK that's what it means -- we call it "reviewing" 
or "studying").  "Revision" *sounds like* you're "changing" it somehow (if 
you revise a term paper, for instance, you're editing and polishing it -- how 
do you edit and polish stuff you've learned in a class???)

I am thoroughly enjoying all these explanations of the school system over 
there, which are helping the Hogwart's setup make much more sense to me (so 
it's not THAT much off-topic!!!!)  Thank you so much for your thorough 
explanations, one and all!   These "cultural exchanges" we're having on this 
list are quite educational, and I appreciate our List Elves for letting them 
through!

(And Susan -- it's nice to know your mother knows how to spell "Lynda"!  
heehee!!)

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

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

From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Mar 16 14:41:02 2003
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 14:41:02 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] UK Schooling/Comic Relief
In-Reply-To: <10f.1fbee24d.2ba5da5a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20030316140817.00966250@plum.cream.org>

Lynda wrote:

>Richard, I'll personally feed your flobberworms for a MONTH if you can put
>this on your site so we Americ. . .er, Yanks (I'm a Southerner, it hurts to
>say that!). . .er, we non-BBC receiving types can see it too!!!!  Aw, rats, I
>just read your subsequent post saying you won't be putting it up.  Ah well. .

But have you read my post subsequent to *that* with the list of MP3s? :-)

Here it is again: http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/comicrelief.htm

BTW My Flobberworms are all dead anyway from a surfeit of Honeyduke's Best 
Chocolate (I bought a whole box of the stuff last weekend).

>Er. . .I guess I'm still not clear on your school system.  How do you go to
>grammar school when you're in high school??  Grammar school over here is
>usually grades 1-6 over here usually, although our local system has k-4 in
>grammar school, with 5-8 being in middle school, 9-12 in high school.

Terminology problem again. What was it GBS was reputed to have said? 
"America and England. Two countries divided by a common language".

Over here, your "grammar" school is "primary" school. Over here, Grammar 
schools (of which very few remain following the upheaval of the education 
system in the 70s) are secondary schools (i.e. age 11-18). The system as it 
existed between the end of WWII and the beginning of the 70s involved an 
obligatory exam at 11 called the Eleven Plus (a test of English, maths and 
IQ, basically). If you passed, you went to Grammar School; if you failed, 
you went to a Secondary Modern.

Grammar schools are, to all intents and purposes, state schools run along 
the lines of private schools - large emphasis on classics, high discipline 
and significant academic content.

Secondary Modern schools' main purpose was  to keep 
kids off the streets . Less cynically, there was less 
emphasis on academic excellence, and the attempt was to get kids interested 
in *something*, either academically or some kind of trade.

As I said, most Grammar schools disappeared when the Eleven Plus stopped 
being compulsory in (I think) 1973; some local education authorities still 
provide an element of selection at that age, although most don't, and kids 
have a choice either of a private school or the local Comprehensive (e.g. 
Harry and Dudley).

I'm sure that Susan will give us more about her own experiences, of how 
that system worked for her in practice... :-)

>I also find the term "revise" or "revision" interesting when referring to 
>studying
>for exams (at least, I THINK that's what it means -- we call it "reviewing"
>or "studying").  "Revision" *sounds like* you're "changing" it somehow (if
>you revise a term paper, for instance, you're editing and polishing it -- how
>do you edit and polish stuff you've learned in a class???)

Again, it's just another one of those words that has a slightly different 
intonation on either side of the Atlantic. Your definition is perfectly 
correct, but what you're "revising" is your knowledge, not the paperwork. :-)

>I am thoroughly enjoying all these explanations of the school system over
>there, which are helping the Hogwart's setup make much more sense to me (so
>it's not THAT much off-topic!!!!)

My perspective is that it's "more" off topic for this list that it is the 
main one. I do agree that an understanding of the finer points of British 
education is helpful in illuminating some of the details in the books, but 
I don't really see them as being much help with the movies....

I would have posted this to the OT-Chatter list, but I know that someone 
else would have answered your question here anyway. :-)

(Besides, this list is pretty quiet right now, so I'm not *that* bothered, 
although I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Mods popped in an dropped a 
Howler or two...)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who is reading through all the material on that French 
site Anne mentioned in another message. Any comments/translation will 
probably turn up on the main list rather than here.

From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Sun Mar 16 20:05:02 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 20:05:02 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vincentjh"  
wrote:
> I would just raise my hand and say that "someone" who brought up  
the 
> issue of Cedric being dark-haired was me. However, I've never come 
> across anyone who suggested that Draco should have dark hair.

I was glad that you brought that issue up since I am quite interested 
in this topic (where there's a generalization among fans regarding 
how a character should look even though the Canon says another way). 
I think you could even find some posts about Draco should have dark 
hair right here in this group (from way back of course). 

> As far as I know, it's fairly common in Hollywood to have 
> innocent/angelic blondes and evil brunets, more so in female 
> characters than male. The latest example I can remember would 

I suspect that was the main reason too. I always wonder how did this 
stereotypes started in the first place. This stereotype does not 
exist in the country where I grew up since everyone has dark hair 
there. It was until I came to the US I learned there's such 
stereotype. I was quite surprised to read posts (in other HP boards) 
like "There's no way Draco is blonde, he is evil". Even when CoS came 
out, there are still fans saying how Lucius should have dark hair 
despite how blond his son already was.

> Interestingly, JKR seems to have a thing for dark hair. Harry, 
James, 
> Sirius, Cedric, Snape...lots of "good" caracters have dark hair. 
Even 
> the ultimate evil Voldemort was a charming young man with dark 
hair. 
> On the other hand, many on the "bad" side have blond hair--the 
> Malfoys, Barty Jr., Aunt Pettura and so on. If the division by hair 
> color is to be trusted, I am almost certain that Bagman would be 
> evil...

It is really no doubt that JKR have a thing for dark hair and seems 
to have something against blonde (I only say "seems" because she 
herself has blonde hair). Is there ever a "good" character has blonde 
hair in the story? Besides the ones you mentioned, Uncle Vernon and 
Dudley both have blonde hair, there's also Lockhart, Fleur, 
Narcissus, even Rita Skeeter is a blonde too! 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> of Stoads Hill and met Mr. Doggory, Cedric's father, who has a
> 'scrubby brown beard' and a ruddy complection (Gof USA HB Pg 77).
> Being scandinavian, my instinct would be to assume a young son would
> have lighter hair than his father which is pretty consistent for
> scandinavians.

Well piror to the description of Cedric's father, did you already 
made the assumption that Cedric is the blonde Matt Damon/Brad Pitt 
type in PoA? If you did, then whatever is mentioned in GoF doesn't 
really matter since you already see him as a blonde right? That just 
proved my point. When a character is "extremely handsome, popular and 
nice", he is immediately linked with a blonde pretty boy in many 
people's mind. 

> The problem is that I already had a picture of Cedric in my head 500
> pages before I was told his hair was dark, although it's probably
> brown. Too late then, I had my image of Cedric and I couldn't 
change it. 
> 

Even when you re-read the books for the n times? (oh I know we all do 
that right? ;P)
In my case, I never formed a mental image for Cedric when I read PoA 
since he is such a minor character. And I tend to not form any solid 
mental image on any characters until they were mentioned more later 
on. So I don't have problem seeing Cedric as a brunette when his hair 
color was mentioned later in GoF. 

> Personally, although I can't explain why, I always pictured him as a
> blond. Perhaps I naturally assumed pale fair skin meant light 
colored
> hair. If anyone can find an earlier reference to Draco's hair 
color, I
> would like to hear it. 

Yes there is, Draco's hair color is mentioned in PoA, USA Pg 280. in 
the US version, it says "silver-blond hair".

Joan

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Sat Mar 15 15:39:22 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:39:22 -0000
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
References: <1047725004.1121.83701.m8@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: 

Petra Pan thought
> For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing'
> Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in
> my head...
>
> Petra
> a
> n  :)

ROTFL

I *love* Eddie Izzard. I was up late last night watching Comic Relief (and
getting rapidly bored by the constant influx of guilt-films, since I'd
already donated fifteen quid, and I'm a student! We're one step up from pond
life!) and they had a clip of Eddie Izzard doing a bit about toasters and
showers, and how the dials on them are crap because, to quote him "They have
a dial on the side, and they lie. And showers, they also have a dial and
they also lie." It isn't as funny written down, but the way he said it was
hysterical.

Although I have to say, I'd never seen Rita Skeeter as a man. Intriguing
idea - but I'm still stuck on the idea of Ruby Wax. I know, I know, she's
blatantly American, but I'd love for them to make the exception. I'm sure
whoever they get will be fine, but, bloody hell, she flipping *IS* Rita
Skeeter to me. It wouldn't even be acting.

Sigh. I just know they won't, but I think casting her would be up there with
casting Hugh Grant as Lockhart - a piece of casting so perfect it's scary. I
wish he hadn't turned it down. Of course, as long as Rickman's still playing
Snape and Julie Walters is Mrs Weasley, I'll deal with it.

Hmmmm.... hadn't occurred to me, but the reason I love JW as Molly is that
my mum LOVES Julie Walters, and is exactly like her. Mrs Weasley also
reminds me very much of my mum. So if Molly DOES die in OotP - oh no! It's
gonna be like my mum dying on film! argh!!!!

Susan
who's now reconsidering this Harry Potter obsession thing (or as I like to
call it, Quiddiction)

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 17 00:02:09 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 00:02:09 -0000
Subject: Casting - Cedric Tall & Blond?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie"  wrote:

>  
> > As far as I know, it's fairly common in Hollywood to have 
> > innocent/angelic blondes and evil brunets, more so in female 
> > characters than male. The latest example I can remember would 

bboy_mn:
If you were going to stereotype the 'All American Boy', you couldn't
come closer than Cedric with blond hair. He's a smart clean cut health
wholesome tall square jawed boy who loves and respects his 
mama. Of course, this is more of a marketing image created to get
people to buy lots of things they don't really need.
- - - - - - - - - - -

> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> > ... Mr. Doggory, Cedric's father, who has a 'scrubby brown beard' 
> > and a ruddy complection (Gof USA HB Pg 77). ... my instinct would 
> > ... assume a young son would have lighter hair than his father...

Joan:
> 
> Well piror to the description of Cedric's father, did you already 
> made the assumption that Cedric is the blonde Matt Damon/Brad Pitt 
> type in PoA? ...edited..
> 
> 

bboy_mn:
Actually, no, I don't see Cedric as a blond, I see him as not having 
dark hair (and I now acknowledge that that is wrong). I see him with
hair approaching sandy; light brown to possibly very dark blond.

My point was that the quote I gave was the first indication I could
find of any clue that would have helped me determine Cedric's likely
hair color. IF I were to use that clue, based on my heritage and
history, I would have concluded that Cedric had lighter hair than his
father. It's an IF... THEN..., if I were to have used this clue then
this is likely what I would have concluded. 

But the point you made was correct, I did have an image before I read
this, and reading this did not alter that image.
- - - - - - - - - 

bboy_mn:
> 
> > Personally, although I can't explain why, I always pictured him 
> > (Draco) as a blond. Perhaps I naturally assumed pale fair skin 
> > meant light colored hair. If anyone can find an earlier reference
> > to Draco's hair color, I would like to hear it. 

 Joan:
> 
> Yes there is, Draco's hair color is mentioned in PoA, USA Pg 280. in 
> the US version, it says "silver-blond hair".
> 
> 
> Joan

bboy_mn:
I think the blond vs dark hair goes back to the many references in
society to good being light and bad being dark. The good guys always
wear white hats, bad guys black. Also, blond is associated with a
'bright' outgoing personality where as dark hair implies a dark
brooding personality. Of course, it's not true, but I think that is a
general association many people make.

When I suggested Charlie Hunnam, I suggested him because Jamie Bell is
short and Charlie Hunnam is tall, and still looks reasonably young. I
think any tall actors, light or dark hair, in their 20s would be
perfect for the role because they will create the right visual
perspective relative to Daniel/Harry. For me tall is the first
priority in casting.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn

From louisa at mishka.fslife.co.uk  Mon Mar 17 01:20:03 2003
From: louisa at mishka.fslife.co.uk (Louisa Brown)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 01:20:03 -0000
Subject: UK Schooling
References: <1047817942.2145.79589.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <005501c2ec23$57043820$82d7883e@anyuser>

Susan Atherton replied to Lynda:

The GCSE choices are made at the end of year 9, when you are about 13 or 14.
And if you screw up here, you actually can really affect your future. For
example, someone not choosing a French GCSE would not be able to take up
French at A Level, they'd be too far behind, and so they'd not have a chance
with a French degree.

I add (just to confuse things further):

In Scotland the system is quite different - we take Standard Grades in 3rd &
4th year of secondary school (I was 15-16) and then Highers in 5th and have
the option of staying on to do SYSs (Sixth Year Studies - a kind of Advanced
Placement equivalent from the US system but the names are unimportant for
this disscussion and will probably just confuse everyone) in 6th form or
repeat failed Highers or add entirely new subjects. Highers have changed
since I was in school to become more modular but again that's not my point.
What I was meaning to get to sooner was that in Scotland if you chose not to
take French at Standard Grade and then aged 16 had an epiphany that you need
to do a French degree, you may have the option (depending on school size and
the flexibility of your head teacher) to "crash," as we called it, the
two-year Standard Grade French class in just 5th year and take the Higher
the following year. You would have to work your little student backside off,
however. And some universities may not like the look of it on your
application, but basically I'm saying that in Scotland you could
theoretically catch up on a subject a year late.

Given that JKR has spent many years living in Edinburgh the Scottish
(confusing) system may be closer to how she's modelled the Hogwarts
syllabus. Without those weird SYSs.

Which could (I only just thought of this) explain how Percy got so many
NEWTs - maybe he did several in 6th year and more in 7th?

Where did JKR teach as a matter of curiosity? And where does her daughter go
to school? Just in a "English/Welsh/Northern Irish schooling system or
Scottish system?" way, not in a "I want to stalk her child" way. In case you
were worried....

Louisa, who is sufferring from insomnia and may make no sense.

From purple_801999 at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 17 03:39:15 2003
From: purple_801999 at yahoo.com (purple_801999)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 03:39:15 -0000
Subject: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
In-Reply-To: <20030315015123.85789.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan  
wrote:
> For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
> Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
> my head...
> 
> Petra
> a
> n  :)
>

No,no,no. As I have stated several times he should play Ludo Bagman. 
The description fits, he has the right persona and attitude for the 
character, and it would dodge a lot of awkward questions younger 
viewers would be asking their parents.Parents might feel it would 
scar their little psyches.

>From what little I have seen of Ruby Wax she does seem very fit for 
the part.Can she do an English accent? And if not, who cares? If 
Tracey Ullman isn't cast as Trelawny (if I spelled that wrong, sorry) 
she would be good too. 

I think if Eddie Izzard is Rita then it would pigeon hole him even 
more as a transvestite actor/comedian and I think he's trying to get 
away from being known primarily for that. My friends and I have just 
about worn out my 'Dress to Kill' DVD.

Olivia Grey

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Mar 17 04:20:36 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 23:20:36 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: CASTING - Rita Skeeter
Message-ID: <175.178e6653.2ba6a714@aol.com>

I think Tracey Ullman can proably play Professor Trewalny but won't!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/16/03 10:41:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
purple_801999 at yahoo.com writes:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan  
> wrote:
> >For some odd reason, I keep 'seeing' 
> >Eddie Izzard play Rita Skeeter in 
> >my head...
> >
> >Petra
> >a
> >n  :)
> >
> 
> No,no,no. As I have stated several times he should play Ludo Bagman. 
> The description fits, he has the right persona and attitude for the 
> character, and it would dodge a lot of awkward questions younger 
> viewers would be asking their parents.Parents might feel it would 
> scar their little psyches.
> 
> From what little I have seen of Ruby Wax she does seem very fit for 
> the part.Can she do an English accent? And if not, who cares? If 
> Tracey Ullman isn't cast as Trelawny (if I spelled that wrong, sorry) 
> she would be good too. 
> 
> I think if Eddie Izzard is Rita then it would pigeon hole him even 
> more as a transvestite actor/comedian and I think he's trying to get 
> away from being known primarily for that. My friends and I have just 
> about worn out my 'Dress to Kill' DVD.
> 
> Olivia Grey
> 
> 

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

From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Mar 17 14:24:59 2003
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:24:59 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] UK Schooling/Comic Relief/Ron flying
Message-ID: <10e.1fdfd199.2ba734bb@aol.com>

Me:  Aw, rats, I
>just read your subsequent post saying you won't be putting it up.  Ah well. 
.

Richard: But have you read my post subsequent to *that* with the list of 
MP3s? :-)

Here it is again: http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/comicrelief.htm

BTW My Flobberworms are all dead anyway from a surfeit of Honeyduke's Best 
Chocolate (I bought a whole box of the stuff last weekend).

Me again:  My deepest sympathies about your Flobberworms!  And THANKS for 
putting up the MP3's!  Great fun!  Maybe someday they'll run it on cable here 
so we can see it.  And thanks, too, for the explanation of grammar school 
versus secondary school.  Here what you called a 'secondary" school (where 
you learned a trade -- kept kids off the street) is called a "vocational" 
school and is for kids in grades 10-12.  That's where they learn to be auto 
mechanics, veterinary technicians, florists, window dressers, etc.

I'm not on the OT-Chatter list (I'm on too many lists already!) so I'm glad 
the answers were posted here!  HOwever, where can I find the list of all the 
various message boards so I can see if there are others with which I want to 
stuff my email box?

As for the movie -- I was watching the "Sorcerer's Stone" video clips online 
that someone sent the list recently and laughed again (as always!) at the 
scene where they're learning to fly.  They all say "UP!" and Harry's broom 
ZOOMS into his hand, which makes Hermione give him *quite* a look.  But what 
makes me laugh every time is Ron's broom hitting him in the nose, and Harry's 
truly genuine sounding laughter (if Dan wasn't really tickled, he is 
certainly an Oscar-quality actor -- that truly sounded like a real kid who 
was startled into laughter).  Canon says that Ron and his family all play 
Quidditch at home.  So if Ron already flies, why does his broom not recognize 
the fact he knows how?  Why does it pop him in the face instead of leaping 
into his hand (other than for comic effect)?  My theory is that it's those 
cheap school brooms and Ron got a faulty one.  Harry's responded the way it 
did, IMHO, because Harry is probably going to be the most powerful wizard of 
the age and even as a kid, brooms and other things leap to obey as soon as he 
figures out how to ask them correctly.  Thoughts?  (see how neatly I pulled 
this back on topic?  heehee)

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

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

From 5joneses at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 17 14:54:54 2003
From: 5joneses at earthlink.net (Erika J)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:54:54 -0500
Subject: World video formats 
In-Reply-To: <3E72BDE9.25305.B543BF@localhost>
References: <20030314210813.60713.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>

Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030317094251.00a2ddd0@earthlink.net>

Hey everyone, I am not too new on the list but I lurk most of the time but 
I thought I would post some thoughts on this subject.

Most DVD players are programmed to read DVD's in your country/region. I 
don't know what would happen if I bought DVD player in China and tried to 
play my US bought DVD's but I do know that most DVD players can be changed 
by using firmware.  Say a DVD player  was manufactured in China and ships 
to countries all over the world. The UK bound DVD players are programmed to 
read PAL but the US ones are programmed to read NTSC or NSTC (I can't 
remember). This programmed information is changeable. I bought DVD player 
from Walmart over a year ago (Apex - highly recommended) for under $70 and 
looked up some info on enhancing my "viewing pleasure" and found firmware 
that eliminated regions. I burned it on a CD and inserted it in my DVD 
player and my  Apex is now region free.  Also, you can , which I don't  do 
but  I could, tape DVD's onto VHS without the copyright gobbledygook that 
makes it blurry every ten seconds. I can't remember the site I found it at 
but look up your DVD brand and model and see if you can find the "firmware" 
to do this.

EJ 

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

From crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Mar 17 16:38:23 2003
From: crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net (acciopotter)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:38:23 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

 When a character is "extremely handsome, popular and 
> nice", he is immediately linked with a blonde pretty boy in many 
> people's mind. 
>  

  I will disagree here. I never saw Cedric as blonde. I also never 
had any problem with the Malfoys being blonde either. Hair color 
stereotypes don't affect me I suppose...lol.

  The person I feel would best bring Cedric to life is Herny Cavill. 
When I saw a picture of him, after someone on here suggested him, he 
just screamed Cedric Diggory to me. He fits my mental image of him to 
a T. Mind you I am not sure of how tall he is, but he definately has 
the handsome boy-next door look to him.

Amanda 
AccioPotter

From Ali at zymurgy.org  Mon Mar 17 20:12:32 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:12:32 -0000
Subject: UK Schooling
In-Reply-To: <005501c2ec23$57043820$82d7883e@anyuser>
Message-ID: 

 "Louisa Brown" wrote:

 <<< Given that JKR has spent many years living in Edinburgh the 
Scottish (confusing) system may be closer to how she's modelled the 
Hogwarts syllabus. Without those weird SYSs.>>>

I disagree, though it is possible. It's simply that by the time she 
went to live in Scotland, JKR had already spent years mapping out the 
Potterverse. I think that she would already have invented OWLS and 
NEWTS by this time. Also, 7 years appear to be fairly standard at 
Hogwarts, which does not appear to be the case in Scottish schools. 
(Which is why I had always assumed that Scottish degree courses were 
4 years compared to the 3 years in English Universities, as the first 
year of the Scottish degree was in some way comparable to the last 
year in an English school - standards-wise?

I also think that the OWLS are based around O'Levels which JKR took, 
rather than the GCSEs which replaced them. Again, when JKR planned 
the story, she would not have not experience of GCSEs, and OWLs sound 
much more like O'Levels than GCSEs.

 Louisa again:

>>> Which could (I only just thought of this) explain how Percy got 
so many NEWTs - maybe he did several in 6th year and more in 7th?>>>

Me again:

I don't think we've ever been told how many NEWTs he took. This would 
be a key factor in deciding just how similar NEWTS are to A'Levels. 
We are told though that Percy got 12 OWLS. This would seem fairly 
hard to achieve though not impossible - perhaps Potions could count 
as a double OWL, rather like "Science" now counts as a double GCSE? 
Perhaps he took extra subjects like Hermione. (Getting 12 O'Levels 
was certainly possible, I've got 11, and several of my friends have 
got 12).

Ali

(Wondering in her personal capacity why this is on the Movie List...).

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 17 22:10:58 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:10:58 -0000
Subject: All British Cast?
Message-ID: 

When they decided or as someone implied JKR insisted on an all British
cast, was that meant literally, or was it indended to mean the
characters have to be from or related to the country of origin for the
charaters they are playing?

Does Victor Krum have to come from a short list of young British
actors,  or does the 'all British' rule imply that Victor has to be an
actor from Bulgaria (Germany, Austria, eastern Europe, Russia), and
Fleur Delacour has to be from France? 

And Cho Chang, does she have to be British, or simply Asian,
persumably Chinese?

Then I must ask what qualifies as British? Canada? Australia? New
Zealand? These are or were a part of the British Empire at one time.

Of course, we probably can't know for sure, but I'm  still interested
in your opinions.

bboy_mn

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 18 03:00:34 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 03:00:34 -0000
Subject: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

Amanda wrote

> The person I feel would best bring Cedric to life is Herny 
Cavill. When I saw a picture of him, after someone on here suggested 
him, he just screamed Cedric Diggory to me. He fits my mental image 
of him to a T. Mind you I am not sure of how tall he is, but he 
definately has the handsome boy-next door look to him.

VJH:
According to the usually unreliable IMBD, Cavill is 6'1. But I doubt 
it. He's considerably shorter than "Monte Cristo" co-star Jim 
Caviezel, who's listed at 6'2. Since Caviezel used to be a basketball 
player and is more on the tall side, I'm guessing Cavill is probably 
around 6ish or slightly shorter. Not tall, but not exactly short. 

I often picture Cedric as around avarage height and a bit muscular, 
but not the basketball or American football player type. After all, 
he's a seeker and seekers usually aren't tall or buff. But Steve does 
have a point in saying that whoever plays Cedric should clearly look 
older than Dan and be taller than him. I would think Cavill looks old 
enough. The question, then, would be how tall Dan is now.

Steve asked:

> When they decided or as someone implied JKR insisted on an all 
British cast, was that meant literally, or was it indended to mean 
the characters have to be from or related to the country of origin 
for the charaters they are playing?

> Does Victor Krum have to come from a short list of young British 
actors,  or does the 'all British' rule imply that Victor has to be 
an actor from Bulgaria (Germany, Austria, eastern Europe, Russia), 
and Fleur Delacour has to be from France? 

> And Cho Chang, does she have to be British, or simply Asian, 
persumably Chinese?

> Then I must ask what qualifies as British? Canada? Australia? New 
Zealand? These are or were a part of the British Empire at one time.

VJH:
My guess is (again, it's pure speculation) that non-British 
characters would probably be played by actors from the characters' 
orgins. Fake accents are usually painful to listen to. And I really 
doubt young actors (playing Krum and Fluer) can pull them off. (When 
watching the Joy Luck Club, I got so distracted by those phony 
accents, bad Chinese, and worst of all, lousy imitation of "bad 
English" that I couldn't at all enjoy it. Since the director is a 
Cantonese speaker, he probably didn't realize that those actresses 
playing the older generation in flashbacks speak mostly fluent 
Mandarin but those playing the same characters in present have 
Cantaonese accent instead. Urr!) So just to spare us the pain, the 
film makers should simply go for the actors with the right accents 
and demeanors naturally. 

Cho Chang can be a Chinese name or Korean name. Whatever her acestory 
is, I'd like to see her played by an Asian Brit. There're plenty of 
them. And I'm sure many of them are dying to see an Asian female 
character on screen who 1) isn't a high-kicking Kong Fu girl, 2) has 
her clothes on, and 3) speaks English.

VJH,

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Tue Mar 18 03:09:38 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 03:09:38 -0000
Subject: UK Schooling/Ponderings about Hogwarts Colours (Was Re: UK Schooling)
Message-ID: 

<>

Actually I'm forty five, I just pretend to be eighteen to impress strange people on Harry Potter newsgroups. ;D

LOL re-reading that sentence, I meant "strangers", not "people who are strange"...although on hpfgu...

Me: Btw, I'd put five galleons on that Richard has taped the CR HP thing and 
>is about to stick it on his website ;) that's not a hint if you haven't, 
>but it sounds so you!

Him: You owe me five Galleons. :-) I suggest you (and any other interested 
parties who haven't already done so) take a look at the OT-Chatter list, 
where I and a few others talked about the spoof last night.

Me again: Damn! ~counting out my Galleons~ now I'll have to save up for another month for my Firebolt. And also - hehe, you caved to the pressure re the spoof. Wuss ;)

Re: holiday homework...
Me: I must beg to differ, Richard. Since I just got out of the school system, 
>I regret to inform you that sadly, today's teachers are manic on homework :(
>
>Actually, this could be due to me attending a grammar school when I was in 
>high school, but we certainly had a fair whack of homework during the half 
>terms and end of terms (terms=semesters; half term=one week break about 
>half way through; end of term=two or three week break at Christmas and 
>Easter), usually revising for tests or coursework and the like.

Him: Ahh... But you appear to have misunderstood the question. :-) At issue was 
homework over the *summer* holidays, which you appear to accept doesn't 
happen on the whole for the (real world) general pupil population. 

Me: No no, I did mean the summer holidays too! I don't think I explained myself very well - I tend to write in streams of consciousness and when it's late I can't be bothered to check them over. Again, perhaps it was because I was in a grammar school (which Richard defined so elegantly - but then, I was minus eleven in 1973, so you have to give me some leeway with the history stuff!) ie - and I don't like saying this, because it makes me sound v.stuck up - a "clever" school, but we did get a fair bit of homework in *all* the holidays during 7-9, GCSE years, and A Levels. It was only generally as much as at Xmas and Easter though, so we just got more time to spread it over (ie 6wks rather than 2wks). However, in my summer between yr1 and yr2 of A Levels, I had to do 90% of my Psychology coursework over the holiday, to be finished up at school due to the pre-Xmas deadline. So sometimes there is, sometimes there isn't. ~shrug~ Guess it depends on subject, teacher and school.

On JKR as a teacher:
Me: JKR is more or less following the British school system (which, as an 
>ex-teacher I imagine she knows a fair bit about) and they should really be 
>doing coursework.

Him: Small point of precision here. JKR's teaching experience was in teaching 
English abroad, and then as a second language after her return to the UK. 
She was in the middle of preparing for UK teaching qualifications when the 
HP bandwagon started so she never actually got around to teaching in 
British schools. 

Me again: I actually didn't know she taught abroad, I'd just heard she was an English teacher at some point and it stuck in the back of my head. My general point was she might still keep an eye on the teaching system with more of an interest than any old mum, but thank you for clearing that up!

Re: the law-as-degree, law-as-profession thing:
I'm really only aiming this bit at Richard himself - huh! Did not know that - I thought you needed a Law degree to get into Law school. Eee, you learn something new every day, don't you?! PS - to anyone NOT from Yorkshire or Lancashire - I apologise for the "eeee". I'm glad no-one can hear me, because I sound like Neville Longbottom in real life, only less polished than he does in the movies. (Seriously. If you've never heard anyone from Burnley, trust me, he's polished as all get out.)

Richard again:

There's a simpler way of putting that. :-) The fact of the matter is that 
it is a legal requirement to follow the full school curriculum until Year 
11 regardless of the choices of GCSEs. 

Me: ROTFL Yes, that would have been easier to say. I gotta stop posting in the middle of the night. ~checks watch~ Too late.

On grammar schools vs. comprehensives:

Richard: I'm sure that Susan will give us more about her own experiences, of how 
that system worked for her in practice... :-)

Me: ~falling over self to give you more about my own experiences of how that system worked for me in practice~ heehee. Nahhh, I think I've skated dangerously close to the OT line (close? Let's be honest, to quote Joey Tribbiani, the line is a dot to me) with all my reminisciences already!

As for your other questions, Lynda, Richard has answered them far more eloquently and succintly than I could ever hope to. And Louisa Brown, thanks for adding the Scottish system to our little discussion - oh, the new perspectiveness of it all :D

Louisa also said:
And where does her daughter go
to school? Just in a "English/Welsh/Northern Irish schooling system or
Scottish system?" way, not in a "I want to stalk her child" way. In case you
were worried....

Me: I thought that was funny. Heehee.

Now to hopefully bring this post a bit back on-topic, and vaguely still in the manner of school and also movies, I was re-watching PS today and I finally put my finger on what's always bothered me about the Sorting (beyond the hat speaking out loud and W apparently coming before P in the alphabet, of course). 

During the scenes on the train and in the corridor, and during the welcome feast, every first year is wearing plain black robes, plain grey sweaters, and black ties with the Hogwarts crest on them. Later that night, we see Harry sitting at his window with Hedwig, and we pan over to him, over neatly folded sweaters with the Gryffindor stripes on, Gryffindor ties, and Gryffindor scarves, on each chair (I think we see Dean's, Harry's and Ron's). When we next see the kids, they also have Gryffindor patches on their robes. Now, here's my wondering - do we think each child bought a tie etc for each house, and then kept the only one they needed? (Making five outfits in all, including the generic one) Do we think their generic things change, either by "magic" (ie one minute they're plain, turn away, and then next thing they're Gryffindor) or by specifically house elves, prefects, McGonagall etc going round and changing them? And most of all, do we not think it would have been a much cooler effect to spend a bit less money on making the Hat talk, and maybe spend a bit on making the ties and sweaters suddenly morph into the right colours when the name of the house is called?

Just me? Probably.

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 18 03:14:43 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 19:14:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030318031443.62549.qmail@web14903.mail.yahoo.com>

 vincentjh  wrote:
Amanda wrote

> The person I feel would best bring Cedric to life is 

In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:19:05 PM Central Standard Time, 
vincentjh at yahoo.com writes:

> http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnews/page.cfm?
> objectid=12743906&method=full&siteid=50142
> 
> I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the 
> movie....
> 
> VJH
> 
> 

The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are recasts of 
James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf thing and 
meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.

Melissa

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

From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Tue Mar 18 05:07:45 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 05:07:45 -0000
Subject: The Other Lupin Casted?
In-Reply-To: <1ee.491209c.2ba7eb4a@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:19:05 PM Central Standard Time, 
> vincentjh at y... writes:
> > I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the 
> > movie....
> The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are 
recasts of 
> James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf 
thing and 
> meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.

may be Madam Rosmerta????

Joan

From CLShannon at aol.com  Tue Mar 18 05:13:06 2003
From: CLShannon at aol.com (CLShannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 00:13:06 EST
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast? Was "The Other Lupin Casted?"
Message-ID: <199.17509021.2ba804e2@aol.com>

Sorry, I had to change the subject heading ;-) The past tense of cast in the 
movie sense is cast, not casted. Everytime I read that someone has been 
'casted' for the movie, I think they broke a bone and had a cast put on 
So, it's The other Lupin cast? ;-)
Cindy

From petra.delisser at postikaista.net  Tue Mar 18 08:44:58 2003
From: petra.delisser at postikaista.net (brinforest)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:44:58 -0000
Subject: Cedric Tall & Blond? OT: book illustrations
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:

> I think the blond vs dark hair goes back to the many references in
> society to good being light and bad being dark. The good guys 
always
> wear white hats, bad guys black. Also, blond is associated with a
> 'bright' outgoing personality where as dark hair implies a dark
> brooding personality. Of course, it's not true, but I think that 
is a
> general association many people make.

How's this for influence?? The Finnish cover illustration of CoS 
portrays both Draco and Lucius with shiny black hair combed tightly 
to the sides with a middle parting, almost Hitler-style. Draco shows 
some longer neck hair beneath the ears, but not Lucius. And Lucius 
is wearing a muggle coat and tie, of all things!!! (And D and L are 
both hideously ugly, mind you - although to put it harshly, so is 
everyone else, since the covers are done in an over-the-top cartoony 
style.)

The cover of GoF, then, portrays a kind of sandy-blond dreamy-
looking Cedric, and a PROFOUNDLY weird-looking Krum. And I mean 
SERIOUSLY. Even his mother wouldn't recognise him. He has plaits 
with some red and green ribbon in front of his ears. Don't ask!! And 
that's far from the only weird thing in the Finnish cover 
illustrations, but that's totally OT... I like other things that 
artist has done, but I think he really should have read the books 
with a smaller dose of, erm, Confusing Concoction...

Brin

From Audra1976 at aol.com  Tue Mar 18 16:32:34 2003
From: Audra1976 at aol.com (Audra1976 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:32:34 EST
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast?
Message-ID: <111.217997f0.2ba8a422@aol.com>

In a message dated 18/03/2003 09:04:21 Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:19:05 PM Central Standard Time, 
> vincentjh at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> > http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnews/page.cfm?
> > objectid=12743906&method=full&siteid=50142
> > 
> > I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the 
> > movie....
> > 
> > VJH
> > 
> > 
> 
> The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are recasts of 
> James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf thing and 
> meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.

Me:

I definitely got the impression that the kickboxer fellow is to play 
Werewolf!Lupin.  He also says a "ballet dancer" from Holland, not a 
"ballerina."  I'm thinking it is a *male* ballet dancer, and they will both 
play werewolves in different scenes.  

Audra

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

From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Tue Mar 18 16:36:04 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:36:04 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Other Lupin Cast?
Message-ID: <5a.1982320b.2ba8a4f4@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/18/2003 10:33:17 AM Central Standard Time, 
Audra1976 at aol.com writes:

> Me:
> 
> I definitely got the impression that the kickboxer fellow is to play 
> Werewolf!Lupin.  He also says a "ballet dancer" from Holland, not a 
> "ballerina."  I'm thinking it is a *male* ballet dancer, and they will both 
> 
> play werewolves in different scenes.  
> 
> Audra
> 

Ohh that is a very good possibilty. (this guy just didn't look like he could 
be James  to me. . too rugged looking). 

Melissa

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

From crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net  Tue Mar 18 17:02:40 2003
From: crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net (acciopotter)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:02:40 -0000
Subject: Cedric Tall & Blond? OT: book illustrations
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "brinforest" 
 wrote:

> 
> The cover of GoF, then, portrays a kind of sandy-blond dreamy-
> looking Cedric, 

Me:  Ok..here is another example of the Cedric hair color issue: on 
the cover of GoF (american) Cedric is definately shown with dark 
brown hair..cough..likeHenryCavill..cough

Amanda
AccioPotter *who desperately wants Cavill for Cedric..even though I 
doubt it will happen

From urbana at charter.net  Tue Mar 18 17:05:47 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:05:47 -0000
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast? / L&J
In-Reply-To: <5a.1982320b.2ba8a4f4@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote:
(this guy just didn't look like he could 
> be James  to me. . too rugged looking). 
> 
> Melissa

And of course, James needs to be played by someone who *looks like 
Harry* ... which means who looks like Daniel Radcliffe aged up about 
20 years... Of course my question is, should James & Lily look like 
they did when they died (at approx. age 20-21) OR should they look 
like they might if they were still alive?? Based on PS/SS it appears 
they have cast actors (Geraldine James and Adrian whose last name 
escapes me) who look like "aged-up" Lily and James.

Anne U
(who wonders if anyone else has noticed that Daniel's *hair* (in POA 
stills) looks decidedly more Harry-like than in SS and COS)

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Tue Mar 18 17:21:07 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:21:07 -0000
Subject: Fw: Cedric Tall & Blond?/Cedric casting
Message-ID: 

Crap. I just sent this to the main list by mistake. Oops!

"Steve"  wrote:

> I think the blond vs dark hair goes back to the many references in
> society to good being light and bad being dark. The good guys 
always
> wear white hats, bad guys black. Also, blond is associated with a
> 'bright' outgoing personality where as dark hair implies a dark
> brooding personality. Of course, it's not true, but I think that 
is a
> general association many people make.

Me: I agree. I don't tend to get actual images of characters in my head, I more get a sense of them. For me, Hermione is very much Emma Watson now, because Emma is so very Hermione-looking (except prettier). Ron to me is taller, cleverer, more languid and sarcastic. I also picture him having a Northern accent - but maybe that's because I sometimes see myself in Ron ;) Harry is very like Dan, but not quite the same. And Draco never really had an image in my head, he was more like a cruel flash. So Felton is like Emma, they ARE the characters to me. 

Now, like most people, I imagined Cedric as blonde too. Why? Well, I think Steve answered the question admirably. I just picture someone as honourable and upright as Cedric as having blonde hair - maybe it's an angel complex, it's the idea of him having almost a halo. As it is, I think if they cast Cedric with dark hair, my image will change, but at the moment he's blonde to me. 

And I'd like to see Jack Ryder playing him, just because I think he's very Cedric like. However, Charlie Hunnam would scare me, because I see him doing ANYTHING and I just think of Nathan Maloney, the brattiest kid in Canal Street. Ah, how I laughed when Hazel and Donna give him and Dazz some of Bernie's bucket... heehee

I don't know this Henry Cavill kid though - sounds intriguing!

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Tue Mar 18 17:35:35 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 12:35:35 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Other Lupin Cast? / L&J
Message-ID: 

In a message dated 3/18/2003 11:08:38 AM Central Standard Time, 
urbana at charter.net writes:

> Anne U
> (who wonders if anyone else has noticed that Daniel's *hair* (in POA 
> stills) looks decidedly more Harry-like than in SS and COS)
> 
> 

Actually I have noticed (at least in the Knight Bus photos) and I find it 
very, very distracting. Messy is good. Looking as if someone shoved his hand 
in an electrical outlet is not.  I do hope that they tame it down a bit for 
once the action moves to Hogwarts.  There was an actor on a program I used to 
watch whose hair was soooo unkempt I found myself wishing I could get after 
it with a comb and a pair of shears and not watching the show at all.  

Melissa (who also finds handheld camera shots to be very distracting, not to 
mention dizzying)

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

From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Tue Mar 18 20:05:36 2003
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 20:05:36 -0000
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast? / L&J
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

Anne wrote:
> And of course, James needs to be played by someone who 
*looks like 
> Harry* ... which means who looks like Daniel Radcliffe aged up 
about 
> 20 years... Of course my question is, should James & Lily look 
like 
> they did when they died (at approx. age 20-21) OR should they 
look 
> like they might if they were still alive?? Based on PS/SS it 
appears 
> they have cast actors (Geraldine James and Adrian whose last 
name 
> escapes me) who look like "aged-up" Lily and James.

There was a discussion on the L&J-casting age issue a few 
weeks ago. If you like, check out message 5366 and the replies.

Sophia

From buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Mar 18 20:56:29 2003
From: buffyslays_uk at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Su?=)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 20:56:29 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: casting
In-Reply-To: <1047996124.286.84020.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030318205629.28205.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com>

<>

I did'nt realise the accents in the Joy Luck Club were so bad! anyway I am an Asian Brit and you're definately right! I love to see a 'normal' Asian Brit on screen. Believe me....people really do believe stereotypes. It is quite a natural thing to do but it's also very annoying - so many people think I can't speak English because of the way I look!

If Cho starts speaking broken English.. I'd be very disappointed. 

Kibi

---------------------------------
With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs

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

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 18 21:40:41 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:40:41 -0000
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast?
In-Reply-To: <111.217997f0.2ba8a422@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

Cindy wrote:
> Sorry, I had to change the subject heading ;-) The past tense of 
cast in the movie sense is cast, not casted. Everytime I read that 
someone has been 'casted' for the movie, I think they broke a bone 
and had a cast put on 
So, it's The other Lupin cast? ;-)

Thanks for enlightening a non-native speaker.

Audra wrote:
> I definitely got the impression that the kickboxer fellow is to 
play Werewolf!Lupin.  He also says a "ballet dancer" from Holland, 
not a "ballerina."  I'm thinking it is a *male* ballet dancer, and 
they will both play werewolves in different scenes.  

Opps. You're right. It can be a male dancer. (There goes the 
stereotype.) A dancing werewolf? That'd be interesting.

VJH

From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 18 18:02:02 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:02:02 -0000
Subject: All British Cast?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> When they decided or as someone implied JKR insisted on an all 
British
> cast, was that meant literally, or was it indended to mean the
> characters have to be from or related to the country of origin for 
the
> charaters they are playing?

> Then I must ask what qualifies as British? Canada? Australia? New
> Zealand? These are or were a part of the British Empire at one time.
> 
> Of course, we probably can't know for sure, but I'm  still 
interested
> in your opinions.
> 
> bboy_mn

For me, and it is a rule that I can live with, it should mean someone 
who doesn't have to fake a british isles accent.
What that means for Fleur, and other foreigners, I'm not sure.

-Sophietje

From crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net  Wed Mar 19 00:06:54 2003
From: crookshanks731 at sbcglobal.net (acciopotter)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 00:06:54 -0000
Subject: All British Cast?
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

   Me: I think what it means is that the characters who are British 
in the book should be portrayed by actors from the same region as 
their counterpart. And as for the various charactors that are foreign 
in either looks or actuality...Fleur in my opinion should be French, 
Victor should be Bulgarian and Cho, well, I agree with whoever said 
in an earlier post..that she should be asian in appearance but live 
in Brittain. Something about her makes me think that she was raised 
in England. 

Amanda
AccioPotter

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sophie"  wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve"  wrote:
> > When they decided or as someone implied JKR insisted on an all 
> British
> > cast, was that meant literally, or was it indended to mean the
> > characters have to be from or related to the country of origin 
for 
> the
> > charaters they are playing?
> 
> > Then I must ask what qualifies as British? Canada? Australia? New
> > Zealand? These are or were a part of the British Empire at one 
time.
> > 
> > Of course, we probably can't know for sure, but I'm  still 
> interested
> > in your opinions.
> > 
> > bboy_mn
> 
> 
> For me, and it is a rule that I can live with, it should mean 
someone 
> who doesn't have to fake a british isles accent.
> What that means for Fleur, and other foreigners, I'm not sure.
> 
> -Sophietje

From belleps at october.com  Wed Mar 19 04:52:43 2003
From: belleps at october.com (Beth)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:52:43 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Other Lupin Cast?
In-Reply-To: <1047996124.286.84020.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030318224555.00a44b50@pop.cox-internet.com>

At 02:02 PM 3/18/03 +0000, you wrote:
>In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:19:05 PM Central Standard Time,
>vincentjh at yahoo.com writes:
>
> > http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnews/page.cfm?
> > objectid=12743906&method=full&siteid=50142
> >
> > I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the
> > movie....
> >
> > VJH
> >
> >
>
>The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are recasts of
>James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf thing and
>meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.
>
>Melissa

Actually, the article says "ballet dancer". I assumed it was referring to a 
MALE ballet dancer. 

My guess? They're using 3 actors for Lupin: David Thewlis day-to-day, the 
ballet dancer as a mid-level morph, and "Big Spen" as the full wolfman 
form. Why not change actors when you're changing the facial features and 
body size? Makes sense to me. He'll be Lupin (the wolf) the same way that 
David Prowse was Darth Vader. He didn't speak, and you never saw his face, 
but he was Darth's size, presence, mannerisms.

bel 

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Mar 19 12:11:51 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 07:11:51 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Other Lupin Cast?
Message-ID: <7e.36cada94.2ba9b887@aol.com>

James and Lily have been recast for Prisoner?

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/19/03 12:07:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
belleps at october.com writes:

> 
> 
> At 02:02 PM 3/18/03 +0000, you wrote:
> >In a message dated 3/17/2003 9:19:05 PM Central Standard Time,
> >vincentjh at yahoo.com writes:
> >
> >>http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnews/page.cfm?
> >>objectid=12743906&method=full&siteid=50142
> >>
> >>I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the
> >>movie....
> >>
> >>VJH
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are recasts of
> >James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf thing and
> >meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.
> >
> >Melissa
> 
> Actually, the article says "ballet dancer". I assumed it was referring to a 
> 
> MALE ballet dancer. 
> 
> My guess? They're using 3 actors for Lupin: David Thewlis day-to-day, the 
> ballet dancer as a mid-level morph, and "Big Spen" as the full wolfman 
> form. Why not change actors when you're changing the facial features and 
> body size? Makes sense to me. He'll be Lupin (the wolf) the same way that 
> David Prowse was Darth Vader. He didn't speak, and you never saw his face, 
> but he was Darth's size, presence, mannerisms.
> 
> bel 
> 

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

From mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com  Wed Mar 19 20:10:55 2003
From: mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com (mad_about_harrypotter)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:10:55 -0000
Subject: Ron's misbehaving broom
Message-ID: 

Lynda said:
Canon says that Ron and his family all play Quidditch at home.  So if 
Ron already flies, why does his broom not recognize the fact he knows 
how?  Why does it pop him in the face instead of leaping into his 
hand (other than for comic effect)?  My theory is that it's those 
cheap school brooms and Ron got a faulty one.  

I de-lurk to answer:

Nice theory Lynda, but I just think Chris Columbus/Steve Kloves were 
going for their usual cheap laughs at Ron's expense. Ha ha, how my 
sides split as inept ComedySidecick!Ron was smacked in the face by a 
broom (not).

This is one of my pet hates about the films, the reduction of Ron to 
little more than some scaredy-cat buffoon, but I won't go there, as I 
know this topic has been done to death...

So yes, whilst it is conceivable that Ron's broom was just rubbish 
and unresponsive, I'm more inclined to think it's just one of the 
Columbus'/Kloves' first stabs at "Ron the Clown", more's the pity.

Anyone want to take bets on what they'll get the poor kid to do in 
PoA? A galleon says Ron doesn't come across as brave in the Shreiking 
Shack scene as he does in the book. Maybe they'll show him in 
counselling following the dramatic Sirius Black-attempted-murder-in-
the-dorms scene...

C
- who thinks there's way more to Ron, and Rupert Grint for that 
matter, than WB seem to realise. Have they read the books??

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 19 20:54:52 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:54:52 -0000
Subject: The Other Lupin Cast?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030318224555.00a44b50@pop.cox-internet.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Beth  wrote:
> >vincentjh at y... writes:
> >
> > > http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnews/page.cfm?
> > > objectid=12743906&method=full&siteid=50142
> > >
> > > I wonder what a Dutch ballerina is supposed to be doing in the
> > > movie....
> > >
> > > VJH
> > >
> > >
> >
> >The only thing I can even remotely  think of is that they are 
recasts of
> >James and Lily . .maybe the reporter got it wrong with the wolf 
thing and
> >meant a stag? But why would Lily be Dutch.
> >
> >Melissa
> 
> Actually, the article says "ballet dancer". I assumed it was 
referring to a 
> MALE ballet dancer. 
> 
> My guess? They're using 3 actors for Lupin: David Thewlis day-to-
day, the 
> ballet dancer as a mid-level morph, and "Big Spen" as the full 
wolfman 
> form. Why not change actors when you're changing the facial 
features and 
> body size? Makes sense to me. He'll be Lupin (the wolf) the same 
way that 
> David Prowse was Darth Vader. He didn't speak, and you never saw 
his face, 
> but he was Darth's size, presence, mannerisms.
> 
> bel

I do feel like the dumbest kid at school now....

Although the article implies so, the actor/kickboxer didn't exactly 
say he was to play the "wolf" Lupin. But if he is, then I am 
confused. Isn't a werewolf supposed to look just like a normal wolf 
instead of a man-wolf (wolf-man?)? Or is he going to play 
Lupin/werewolf during the transformation only? If it's so, would it 
be possible that they are using the ballet dancer to play 
Sirius/black dog in the same way?

VJH

From vincentjh at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 19 21:06:16 2003
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:06:16 -0000
Subject: Cedric Tall & Blond? OT: book illustrations
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

Brin wrote,

> How's this for influence?? The Finnish cover illustration of CoS 
> portrays both Draco and Lucius with shiny black hair combed tightly 
> to the sides with a middle parting, almost Hitler-style. Draco 
shows 
> some longer neck hair beneath the ears, but not Lucius. And Lucius 
> is wearing a muggle coat and tie, of all things!!! (And D and L are 
> both hideously ugly, mind you - although to put it harshly, so is 
> everyone else, since the covers are done in an over-the-top 
cartoony 
> style.)
> 
> The cover of GoF, then, portrays a kind of sandy-blond dreamy-
> looking Cedric, and a PROFOUNDLY weird-looking Krum. And I mean 
> SERIOUSLY. Even his mother wouldn't recognise him. He has plaits 
> with some red and green ribbon in front of his ears. Don't ask!! 
And 
> that's far from the only weird thing in the Finnish cover 
> illustrations, but that's totally OT... I like other things that 
> artist has done, but I think he really should have read the books 
> with a smaller dose of, erm, Confusing Concoction...
> 
> 
> Brin

Just for reference, here're the Finnish covers.
http://www.openflame.com/harrypotter/book_covers_finland.shtml

(I didn't know Krum was supposed to be a vampire!)

http://www.openflame.com/harrypotter/harry_images/covers/book3/cover3_
b_denmark.gif

Book 3 cover from Denmark shows a very beautiful hippogriff. Now I 
wonder how they'll do it in the movie. 

VJH

From grace701 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 19 15:20:06 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 07:20:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Daniel's Hair
In-Reply-To: <1048079566.441.34984.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030319152006.98589.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com>

Anne U
(who wonders if anyone else has noticed that Daniel's *hair* (in POA 
stills) looks decidedly more Harry-like than in SS and COS)

Could you please send me these stills?  I'd love to see Daniel's "Harry-like" hair.

Greicy

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Mar 19 21:33:52 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:33:52 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Ron's misbehaving broom
Message-ID: <69.36378352.2baa3c40@aol.com>

I wish they would flesh out the characters more!!  Its like the only people 
that are important are the 3 kids Rupert, Daniel and Emma!

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/19/03 3:12:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
mad_about_harrypotter at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> Lynda said:
> Canon says that Ron and his family all play Quidditch at home.  So if 
> Ron already flies, why does his broom not recognize the fact he knows 
> how?  Why does it pop him in the face instead of leaping into his 
> hand (other than for comic effect)?  My theory is that it's those 
> cheap school brooms and Ron got a faulty one.  
> 
> I de-lurk to answer:
> 
> Nice theory Lynda, but I just think Chris Columbus/Steve Kloves were 
> going for their usual cheap laughs at Ron's expense. Ha ha, how my 
> sides split as inept ComedySidecick!Ron was smacked in the face by a 
> broom (not).
> 
> This is one of my pet hates about the films, the reduction of Ron to 
> little more than some scaredy-cat buffoon, but I won't go there, as I 
> know this topic has been done to death...
> 
> So yes, whilst it is conceivable that Ron's broom was just rubbish 
> and unresponsive, I'm more inclined to think it's just one of the 
> Columbus'/Kloves' first stabs at "Ron the Clown", more's the pity.
> 
> Anyone want to take bets on what they'll get the poor kid to do in 
> PoA? A galleon says Ron doesn't come across as brave in the Shreiking 
> Shack scene as he does in the book. Maybe they'll show him in 
> counselling following the dramatic Sirius Black-attempted-murder-in-
> the-dorms scene...
> 
> C
> - who thinks there's way more to Ron, and Rupert Grint for that 
> matter, than WB seem to realise. Have they read the books??

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

From rvotaw at i-55.com  Thu Mar 20 00:48:06 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 18:48:06 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Cedric Tall & Blond? OT: book illustrations
References: 
Message-ID: <006e01c2ee7a$67d5c980$f99ecdd1@RVotaw>

VJH wrote:

> Just for reference, here're the Finnish covers.
> http://www.openflame.com/harrypotter/book_covers_finland.shtml
> 
> (I didn't know Krum was supposed to be a vampire!)

Hmm, rather pale, isn't he?!  As for Cedric, I never pictured him blond.  However, I tend to favor the dark haired sort anyway, so my ideal "handsome" wouldn't be blond.

> http://www.openflame.com/harrypotter/harry_images/covers/book3/cover3_
> b_denmark.gif
> 
> Book 3 cover from Denmark shows a very beautiful hippogriff. Now I 
> wonder how they'll do it in the movie. 

Wow, I like that hippogriff.  Much better looking than the one on the US cover.  I wouldn've thought it could turn out to be pretty, but that one is.  

Richelle

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

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 21 02:28:05 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 02:28:05 -0000
Subject: CoS Slide Show at....
Message-ID: 

www.danielradclifferocks.com

There are about 500 slides of the movie, once you load it it moves 
pretty fast (1st time take a while). Keeps you satisfied till the 
DVD comes out.

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 02:37:55 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 21:37:55 EST
Subject: Marcus Flint!!!!!
Message-ID: <14b.1d52c182.2bad2683@aol.com>

I am so pissed 
PPPPPPPIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!! 

Now Wood Now Flint!!!!!!!!!!!

What or who is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anything to Win - Marcus Flint 

His gone done finished!!!  We have to do something now !!!!!!!!!  They are 
destroying Harry Potter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  We need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anybody have any suggestions!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It would be 
apprecaited!!!!!!!!!!!! 

We need to do something before Harry goes down into the depths of hell sorry 
for the languge but something or anything needs to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boycott the movie sign petitions anything!!!!!!   But we need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!  

They are destroying Harry Potter!!!!!  Lets do something now before its too 
late!!!!!!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 22 02:55:17 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 18:55:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Marcus Flint!!!!!
In-Reply-To: <14b.1d52c182.2bad2683@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030322025517.2503.qmail@web14904.mail.yahoo.com>

I hate to hear about Flint!! That sucks!!!The only thing I know to do is to sigh petitions. Here is a link to one about Wood and quidditch that I got off a story on the BBC
http://www.petitiononline.com/wood1212/petition.html
Since it was a story about Harry Potter protest and petitions , they are getting attention!
Alex, hating The Powers That Be!
 LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:I am so pissed 
PPPPPPPIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!! 

Now Wood Now Flint!!!!!!!!!!!

What or who is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anything to Win - Marcus Flint 

His gone done finished!!!  We have to do something now !!!!!!!!!  They are 
destroying Harry Potter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  We need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anybody have any suggestions!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It would be 
apprecaited!!!!!!!!!!!! 

We need to do something before Harry goes down into the depths of hell sorry 
for the languge but something or anything needs to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boycott the movie sign petitions anything!!!!!!   But we need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!  

They are destroying Harry Potter!!!!!  Lets do something now before its too 
late!!!!!!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

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

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! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 02:57:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 21:57:06 EST
Subject: Marcus Flint!!!!!
Message-ID: <18d.17b2aa82.2bad2b02@aol.com>

I am so pissed 
PPPPPPPIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!! 

Now Wood Now Flint!!!!!!!!!!!

What or who is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anything to Win - Marcus Flint 

His gone done finished!!!  We have to do something now !!!!!!!!!  They are 
destroying Harry Potter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  We need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anybody have any suggestions!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It would be 
apprecaited!!!!!!!!!!!! 

We need to do something before Harry goes down into the depths of hell sorry 
for the languge but something or anything needs to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boycott the movie sign petitions anything!!!!!!   But we need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!  

They are destroying Harry Potter!!!!!  Lets do something now before its too 
late!!!!!!!!

We need to do something now I repeat now!!!!!!!!!!  If you want to see Jamie 
Yeates as Marcus Flint we need to flood the warner Brothers Email boxes and 
sign petitions to keep the quidditch match and Sean and Jamie!!!!!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 02:56:54 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 21:56:54 EST
Subject: Marcus Flint!!!!!
Message-ID: <1e9.4d4e583.2bad2af6@aol.com>

I am so pissed 
PPPPPPPIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!! 

Now Wood Now Flint!!!!!!!!!!!

What or who is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anything to Win - Marcus Flint 

His gone done finished!!!  We have to do something now !!!!!!!!!  They are 
destroying Harry Potter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  We need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anybody have any suggestions!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It would be 
apprecaited!!!!!!!!!!!! 

We need to do something before Harry goes down into the depths of hell sorry 
for the languge but something or anything needs to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boycott the movie sign petitions anything!!!!!!   But we need to do something 
now!!!!!!!!!!!  

They are destroying Harry Potter!!!!!  Lets do something now before its too 
late!!!!!!!!

We need to do something now I repeat now!!!!!!!!!!  If you want to see Jamie 
Yeates as Marcus Flint we need to flood the warner Brothers Email boxes and 
sign petitions to keep the quidditch match and Sean and Jamie!!!!!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 03:15:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:15:06 EST
Subject: Our Voices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Message-ID: <12d.259f4099.2bad2f3a@aol.com>

To the staff at Leaky Cauldren.org Marcus flint has been cut as well!!!!!!!1

WE CAN DO THIS!!!!  IF PEOPLE CAN SHUT DOWN PEE-WEE PLAYHOUSE !!!!  WE CAN 
FORCE WARNER BROTHERS TO GIVE US WHAT WE WANT WHICH IS MARCUS FLINT!!!!!!!

CREATE PETITIONS, GO TO STUDIOS WITH BOYCOTT SIGNS ( FIRST GO TO A LAW OFFICE 
SO YOU CAN HAVE LEGAL PAPERS TO PICKET THE STUDIOS WHERE THEY ARE FILMING!!! 
SO YOU DONT GET ARRESTED)  

IF WE FIGHT LONG AND HARD I BELIEVE WE CAN CHANGE THEM BUT WE MUST BE HEARD 
WE MUST!!!!!!!!  WHERE EVER YOU LIVE GO AND MAKE PETITIONS TO KEEP THE 
QUIDDITCH MATCH AND KEEP FLINT!!  IF WE DO NOTHING THEN WHO IS TO SAY WHICH 
ACTOR IS GOING NEXT!!  CHRIS COLUMBUS SAID HE WANTS THE MAIN ACTORS TO LEAVE 
AFTER THE PRISONER!!!!!!  WHY IS IT A BIG DEAL IF THE ACTORS ALL THE ACTORS 
STAY UNTIL THE BLOODY HARRY POTTER FILMS AND BOOKS ARE FINISHED!!!!

LETS MAKE OUR VOICES HEARD AGAINST THIS UNJUSTICE!!!!!

WHERE EVER YOU LIVE GET PETITIONS GET WOOD AND YEATES BACK IN HARRY 
POTTER!!!!!!

WE CAN DO THIS!!!!!

kYLE lONGBOTTOM 

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

From ripleywriter at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 03:43:47 2003
From: ripleywriter at aol.com (ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:43:47 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Our Voices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Message-ID: <75.d181e57.2bad35f3@aol.com>

Wow...scary post. Trust me, calm and lower-cased with much less exclamation 
points is the way to go to get your point across. Now, I've read all the 
books a few times and I never seem to be able to remember who Marcus Flint 
is. I'm more concerned about what that site said, that there would be no 
Quidditch in the third movie. 

I'd see the movie no matter what, but for me it's a matter of whether I'd be 
inclined to see it more than once, recommend it or eventually buy it. But I'd 
still like to see it regardless of how awfully they might flub it up. Can't 
wait to see the trailers, that's truly the best part of a movie like this, 
anyway. The trailers. The anticipation. And that very first time. *sigh* 
Still upset about Wood, still unsure of the casting of Sirius and Lupin and 
Dumbledore...but I can't imagine signing a petition or boycotting the movie. 

I'm just in it for the visualizations, anyway. I'm looking forward to seeing 
how they portray a hipogriff, if they're even in the movie. 

And hey, the fifth book is coming out! Did you see that US cover? That's 
something to be excited about without worrying about it sucking. *g* 

Melly

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Sat Mar 22 03:44:23 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 22:44:23 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Marcus Flint!!!!!
Message-ID: <16f.1c0fe72e.2bad3617@aol.com>

I hate to hear about Flint!! That sucks!!!The only thing I know to do is to 
sigh petitions. Here is a link to one about Wood and quidditch that I got off 
a story on the BBC
http://www.petitiononline.com/wood1212/petition.html
Since it was a story about Harry Potter protest and petitions , they are 
getting attention!
Alex, hating The Powers That Be!

If your in school then try to get them to sign a petiton online or send the a 
hard copy petiton to Warner Brothers!!  Your not the only ones hating them 
now!!!!

I am sorry if I am confusing you susan but I need to vent!!

Sorry 

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/21/03 9:57:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
trinity61us at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> 
> 
> I hate to hear about Flint!! That sucks!!!The only thing I know to do is to 
> sigh petitions. Here is a link to one about Wood and quidditch that I got 
> off a story on the BBC
> http://www.petitiononline.com/wood1212/petition.html
> Since it was a story about Harry Potter protest and petitions , they are 
> getting attention!
> Alex, hating The Powers That Be!
> LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:I am so pissed 
> PPPPPPPIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!! 
> 
> Now Wood Now Flint!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> What or who is next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anything to Win - Marcus Flint 
> 
> His gone done finished!!!  We have to do something now !!!!!!!!!  They are 
> destroying Harry Potter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  We need to do something 
> now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Anybody have any suggestions!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It would be 
> apprecaited!!!!!!!!!!!! 
> 
> 
> We need to do something before Harry goes down into the depths of hell 
> sorry 
> for the languge but something or anything needs to be done!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Boycott the movie sign petitions anything!!!!!!   But we need to do 
> something 
> now!!!!!!!!!!!  
> 
> They are destroying Harry Potter!!!!!  Lets do something now before its too 
> 
> late!!!!!!!!
> 
>  
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> 

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

From urbana at charter.net  Sat Mar 22 03:56:57 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 03:56:57 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch?? (Was: Marcus Flint!!!!!)
In-Reply-To: <16f.1c0fe72e.2bad3617@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> I hate to hear about Flint!! That sucks!!!The only thing I know to 
do is to 
> sigh petitions. Here is a link to one about Wood and quidditch that 
I got off 
> a story on the BBC
> http://www.petitiononline.com/wood1212/petition.html
> Since it was a story about Harry Potter protest and petitions , 
they are 
> getting attention!
> Alex, hating The Powers That Be!
> 
>  

Here's a quote from www.marcusflint.com:

"Jamie (Bell) has not been approached for the 3rd movie. Story is 
that there will be no quidditch in the 3rd movie. Bummer for us Flint 
fans. But then again things may change."

I'm not particularly a fan of the character Marcus Flint (now Oliver 
Wood, that's different)... but I am starting to be concerned that 
perhaps there really *won't* be any Quidditch in POA the Movie. It's 
my understanding that Alfonso Cuaron wants this movie to be more 
character-driven than the first two ... but it's hard for me to 
believe that having NO Quidditch at all would be in the best interest 
of character and plot development. I know we've gone over this 
several times in recent weeks, but maybe it's worth discussing again, 
in a rational and calm manner (if we possibly can!). To me, Quidditch 
isn't just a fluffy narrative filler... it's an important part of 
Harry's development. AACK. I'm getting worried.

Anne U
(anybody got any *good* POA movie news??)

From heidit at netbox.com  Sat Mar 22 15:16:36 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 15:16:36 -0000
Subject: NIMBUS - 2003 :: An Update
Message-ID: 

Earlier this month, Nimbus - 2003 announced its wonderful 
slate of programs and presentations (available here: 
http://www.hp2003.org/nimbuspgmtrack.html). 

Now, since the programming is settled, we're pleased to be able to 
add something NEW to Nimbus - 2003's already-varied selection of 
sponsorship opportunities - our Programming Sponsorship 
opportunities. 

Each of the presentations, panels, round tables, debates and 
discussions on that list above is available for sponsorship, at a 
rate of $100 per session. In other words, a website, a small 
business, a mailing list, a group of friends, or an individual can 
be the Official Sponsor of one of our wonderful sessions.

Session sponsors will receive a sign in the room and an 
acknowledgement in the program, and we'll work with you to create 
the sign and the language for the program as well! Also, session 
sponsors who are also exhibitors get the same consideration as all 
other sponsors, including a guaranteed space in the Exhibition Room. 

Session sponsorship reservations will be held for 10 business days 
from the session sponsor's sending a reservation email to me, or to 
Sponsor at hp2003.org, by which time a completed Sponsorship Form must 
be returned to lock in the sponsorship. 50% payment must be received 
within 30 days of receipt of the sponsorship form, with the balance 
due on or before May 31, 2003. 

You can ask me any questions you have about this - offlist, though, 
I think...

Heidi Tandy
Sponsorship Chaser - Nimbus-2003
http://www.hp2003.org

PS #1: Are you participating in the Nimbus - 2003 banner exchange 
yet? If not, go here: http://www.hp2003.org/nimbushelpsplinks.html 
and sign up!

PS #2: If this is the first you've heard of Nimbus - 2003, please 
check out our website at http://www.hp2003.org - it's a Harry Potter 
event set for July 17 - 20 in Orlando, Florida. Almost 400 people 
have registered so far, and we've got a great set of events, 
presentations and food-events for you to enjoy!

From htfulcher at comcast.net  Sat Mar 22 17:16:07 2003
From: htfulcher at comcast.net (marephraim)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 17:16:07 -0000
Subject: Implications for Cho, WAS Re: No Quidditch?? 
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

If Wood and Flint aren't in the movie because Quidditch isn't in the 
movie, does that mean that Cho Chang also won't be in the movie?

Does this indicate that Harry's infatuation with Cho will not be 
developed in future books? 

Presumedly, if her character were that important for any upcoming 
plot developments, JKR would have indicated to the script-writer and 
Couron that not including her would not be a good idea.

What do you think?

From spellbound_hogwarts_gryffindor at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 22 19:44:28 2003
From: spellbound_hogwarts_gryffindor at yahoo.com (~SpellBound Gryffindor~)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 19:44:28 -0000
Subject: Our Voices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In-Reply-To: <75.d181e57.2bad35f3@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ripleywriter at a...

~*~ SpellBound Hogwarts Gryffindor Wrote:

~*~*~*~ Greetings Melly...!  Marcus Flint is the creepy loking guy who
heads the Slytherin Quidditch team. You see him alot in the Quiddich
match in the "Harry Potter And The Sorcerers Stone" DVD of the Movie.

Marcus Flint is tall and lanky with very short black hair and Horrible
looking stained and crooked big teeth. His voice is like a monsterous
growl. In the Movie he bumps and slams Very hard into the Gryffindor
teammates when flying on his broom in a Quidditch match. He breaks
game rules whenever he can. He is a Slytherin to the core. He is Far
worse than Draco Malfoy and most other Slytherins. He portrays the
worst of Slytherin and very likely that his family is very linked to
the Death Eaters. He is an important villian in the feeling and
portrayal of the Slytherin house. ~*~*~*~

~*~*~*~*~*~ SpellBound Hogwarts Gryffindor ~*~*~*~*~*~

^,,^**************************************************************
>Y<*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*)O(*
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ  

~*~ Melly Wrote:
> 
> Wow...scary post. Trust me, calm and lower-cased with much less
exclamation 
> points is the way to go to get your point across. Now, I've read all
the 
> books a few times and I never seem to be able to remember who Marcus
Flint 
> is. I'm more concerned about what that site said, that there would
be no 
> Quidditch in the third movie. 
> 
> I'd see the movie no matter what, but for me it's a matter of
whether I'd be 
> inclined to see it more than once, recommend it or eventually buy
it. But I'd 
> still like to see it regardless of how awfully they might flub it
up. Can't 
> wait to see the trailers, that's truly the best part of a movie like
this, 
> anyway. The trailers. The anticipation. And that very first time.
*sigh* 
> Still upset about Wood, still unsure of the casting of Sirius and
Lupin and 
> Dumbledore...but I can't imagine signing a petition or boycotting
the movie. 
> 
> I'm just in it for the visualizations, anyway. I'm looking forward
to seeing 
> how they portray a hipogriff, if they're even in the movie. 
> 
> And hey, the fifth book is coming out! Did you see that US cover?
That's 
> something to be excited about without worrying about it sucking. *g* 
> 
> Melly

From uncmark at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 23 00:03:31 2003
From: uncmark at yahoo.com (Mark D.)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 00:03:31 -0000
Subject: SorSt, Hagrid and Diagon Alley
Message-ID: 

I'm watching Sorcerer's Stone for the 100th time today and have a 
question. At the entrance to Diagon Alley Hagrid reaches UP to tap 
the correct beicks to open the alley... 

UP??? From the Special effects and camera angle Hagrid appears 
almost double Harry's height. Even if we judge Harry as only 5 foot 
(not unheard of for an 11yo) this would place Hagrid as between 8 
and 9 feet and he reached up to bricks at least 10 feet up!

So how would a normal wizard tap the correct bricks?

IMHO the wizard merly taps the bricks around the dent. This dent 
would magically reorient to the wizard approaching it.

OPINIONS?

--Mark

From cade00000 at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 23 02:03:50 2003
From: cade00000 at yahoo.com (cade m.)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 18:03:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] SorSt, Hagrid and Diagon Alley
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030323020350.79344.qmail@web13205.mail.yahoo.com>

"Mark D."  wrote:I'm watching Sorcerer's Stone for the 100th time today and have a question. At the entrance to Diagon Alley Hagrid reaches UP to tap the correct beicks to open the alley... 

UP??? From the Special effects and camera angle Hagrid appears 
almost double Harry's height. Even if we judge Harry as only 5 foot 
(not unheard of for an 11yo) this would place Hagrid as between 8 
and 9 feet and he reached up to bricks at least 10 feet up!

So how would a normal wizard tap the correct bricks?

IMHO the wizard merly taps the bricks around the dent. This dent 
would magically reorient to the wizard approaching it.

OPINIONS? >>>>>>

By levitation?  Just a silly guess.

--"Cade" 

From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 23 15:38:02 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 07:38:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Implications for Cho, WAS Re: No Quidditch??
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030323153802.62752.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>

 marephraim  wrote:
If Wood and Flint aren't in the movie because Quidditch isn't in the 
movie, does that mean that Cho Chang also won't be in the movie?

Does this indicate that Harry's infatuation with Cho will not be 
developed in future books? 

I think that Cho will be at the school, she just won't be playing Qudditch.  It would be a big loss to not see Harry's crush because it's a sign of his growing maturity.  Also, unless the Yule Ball's not going to be in the 4th movie, they better introduce us to Cho soon.  She has alot to do with Harry's jealousy of Cedric, so unless they're going to completely leave that out of the movie...she has to at least be in it.

~Kathryn

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From potterfan23 at hotmail.com  Sun Mar 23 22:54:46 2003
From: potterfan23 at hotmail.com (Emily F)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 16:54:46 -0600
Subject: No Quidditch??
Message-ID: 

>To me, Quidditch
>isn't just a fluffy narrative filler... it's an important part of
>Harry's development. AACK. I'm getting worried.

I agree that *in the books* quidditch is an important part of Harry's 
development.  However, in the movies, it isn't.  A lot of you talked about 
how wonderful Oliver Wood's character is, and I agree wholeheartedly, *in 
the books*.  Movie!Wood is just a goalkeeper.  There's none of Wood's 
passion or humor.  He's just...there.  And that's how I felt about quidditch 
in CoS.  Visually stunning, and undoubtedly fun for the CGI folks, but 
pointless.  (I'll admit that I loved it in SS/PS, but that was because we 
finally got to see it for the first time.)

I guess my feeling about quidditch in PoA is that I can take it or leave it. 
  It's fun to watch, but the movie matches are never as cool as they seem to 
be in the books.  There is so much character building (and not just for 
Harry!) that goes on in PoA that I don't want any time taken away from that. 
  Sure, quidditch is a part of the plot (Harry losing his broom, needing 
help with the dementors, etc.), but it's incidental.  For example, remember 
Harry's shame on the train for "going to pieces" (I think that's how he puts 
it) because of the Dementor, when no one else did?  Isn't that a sufficient 
enough reason to want anti-Dementor lessons?  Works for me.

I'm open to suggestion that the movie absolutely CAN NOT be made without 
quidditch.  So far, though, most people seem to just want to watch a game of 
quidditch.  No one has described why it's ESSENTIAL to the plot of PoA 
(i.e., there is NO other way to explain or demonstrate certain aspects of 
the plot).  We lived without quidditch through GoF, remember?  Of course, I 
could lose quidditch, Hagrid, Dumbledore, all class scenes (except for 
Defense Against the Dark Arts, to show how cool Professor Lupin is), and 
even Buckbeak if it means they'll leave in the entire Shack scene.  :-)  
*keeping fingers crossed*  *has complete faith in Cuaron*

Emily, who still doesn't see how No Wood + No Flint = No Quidditch

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

From grace701 at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 24 01:47:18 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 17:47:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 525
In-Reply-To: <1048423764.256.41848.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030324014718.2376.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>

marephraim wrote:

If Wood and Flint aren't in the movie because Quidditch isn't in the 
movie, does that mean that Cho Chang also won't be in the movie?

Does this indicate that Harry's infatuation with Cho will not be 
developed in future books? 

Presumedly, if her character were that important for any upcoming 
plot developments, JKR would have indicated to the script-writer and 
Couron that not including her would not be a good idea.

What do you think?

I had thought that if they weren't going to shoot Quidditch anymore they'd at least introduce Cedric and Cho some other way.  Perhaps Cedric sees Harry in the hallway and asks to speak with him and tells him he had thought it wasn't a fair game.  Cho, well I thought they'd find a way since Harry is jealous of Cedric's relationship in book 4.  But then as you say it means she won't have any major plot developments for books 5-7 and that gives the Hermione/Harry Love a chance! :D

Greicy

Greicy

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Mar 24 03:18:09 2003
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 21:18:09 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Quidditch??
References: 
Message-ID: <006501c2f1b3$ff11c5b0$729ccdd1@RVotaw>

I think this latest development (or lack there of) with no Marcus Flint leaves us with one of two options.

a) WB plans to use footage they already have and/or CGI to create the rest of the Quidditch team.  Which would probably at the very least eliminate the Quidditch championship (i.e. no celebration).

b) WB plans to completely change the plot and eliminate Quidditch entirely from PoA.  Which means Harry will  not have the fall from the broom and thus the Quidditch loss to lead him to ask Lupin for training in defense against the dementors.  Therefore, something else will happen.  Or they'll just have him embarassed from passing out on the train and go to Lupin straight away.  (I don't buy into that one though.)  What could happen to replace the broom fall/Quidditch loss?  Any ideas?

Richelle

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

From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 24 11:19:48 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:19:48 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch??
In-Reply-To: <006501c2f1b3$ff11c5b0$729ccdd1@RVotaw>
Message-ID: 

Richelle speculated:

> b) WB plans to completely change the plot and eliminate Quidditch 
>entirely from PoA.  Which means Harry will  not have the fall from 
>the broom and thus the Quidditch loss to lead him to ask Lupin for 
>training in defense against the dementors.  Therefore, something 
>else will happen.  Or they'll just have him embarassed from passing 
>out on the train and go to Lupin straight away.  (I don't buy into 
>that one though.)  What could happen to replace the broom 
>fall/Quidditch loss?  Any ideas?

And will they let go of the Firebolt subplot, or will they find 
another way for Harry's Nimbus to get pulverized?

Amy

From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Mar 24 14:25:04 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 14:25:04 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch??
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z"  wrote:
> Richelle speculated:
> 
> > b) WB plans to completely change the plot and eliminate Quidditch 
> >entirely from PoA.  Which means Harry will  not have the fall from 
> >the broom and thus the Quidditch loss to lead him to ask Lupin for 
> >training in defense against the dementors.  Therefore, something 
> >else will happen.  Or they'll just have him embarassed from 
passing 
> >out on the train and go to Lupin straight away.  (I don't buy into 
> >that one though.)  What could happen to replace the broom 
> >fall/Quidditch loss?  Any ideas?
> 
> And will they let go of the Firebolt subplot, or will they find 
> another way for Harry's Nimbus to get pulverized?
> 
> Amy

I can't see any other way to have Harry learn to confront dementors 
than by going to Lupin straight away after the incident on the train 
unless the writers are going to actually create plot. So far they 
have only cut plot, embellished plot, skirted around plot or 
condensed plot. They've never acutally just created a plotline. As 
much as I hate to think of it, I can't see how the Firebolt will be 
in the film and make sense if the Quidditch is left out. And because 
these are action movies, (okay, I do have some hope left that Cuaron 
will give some time to the Shreiking Shack...) Harry's going right to 
Lupin will be only a brief event. There won't even be time to 
contemplate it. That's my thought on it.

By the way, I think the Knight Bus will take Harry straight to the 
train station and Platform 9 and 3/4. Does anyone know if this is the 
case? I think I read that Fudge won't be in this movie. Tell me I am 
wrong.

JenD

From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 24 18:07:54 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 18:07:54 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch??
Message-ID: 

Jen wrote:

>By the way, I think the Knight Bus will take Harry straight to the 
>train station and Platform 9 and 3/4. Does anyone know if this is 
>the case? I think I read that Fudge won't be in this movie. Tell me 
>I am wrong.

You're wrong. Richard went to London and saw the team filming at the 
Leaky Cauldron. 

Here: 

http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/poafilming.htm

Enjoy. 

Derannimer (who must apologize for the brief nature of this post)

From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 24 22:21:08 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 22:21:08 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch?? - Subplots
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "derannimer"  wrote:
> Jen wrote:
> 
> > ... I think I read that Fudge won't be in this movie. Tell me 
> >I am wrong.

> Derannimer
> 
> You're wrong. Richard went to London and saw the team filming at the 
> Leaky Cauldron. 
> 
> Here: 
> 
> http://plum.cream.org/HP/misc/poafilming.htm
> 
> Enjoy. 
> 
> 
> Derannimer 

bboy_mn:

You're not quite wrong. It's been a while since I read Richard's
observations on the filming of Harry arriving at the Leaky Cauldron,
but I'm pretty sure Fudge wasn't there. That is, in the filming
Richard saw, Fudge didn't come out to greet Harry; Harry went straight
from the bus into the Leaky Cauldron. 

However, that doesn't mean Fudge isn't there, he could appoach Harry
inside the Leaky Cauldron. Or, I speculate, it could be Mr. Weasley
who meets Harry inside the Leaky Cauldron in Fudge's place. That would
save them a week of Harry milling around Diagon Alley, and let them
get right to the Weasley's and Hermione all being there. 

The next question is, given all that they are cutting from the story,
are they going to skip Hermione buying Crookshanks? She could just
have a cat and resolve it with a couple lines of dialog, or they could
skip the cat all together. If they do, does that mean the whole
Crookshanks/Scabber subplot would be lost?

Personally, I don't see how they could. The whole Crookshanks/Scabbers
subplot establishes sympathy for Scabbers that is shattered when we
find out who he really is. Without some extended subplot related to
Scabbers the emotional impact of what happens is lost. True, we are
still going to be suprised, but it will be surprise with very little
emotion and sympathy. 

I realize that the real story is Sirius Black, but some back ground,
some subplots around which the Sirius Black story will unfold, have to
exist. And, from the limited window we have, they seem to be cutting
the many of those subplots. Of course, they have to cut some, but at
what point have they cut so much that the story is lost?

The failing in the first movies is that they struggle so hard to keep
every key scene that there was very little time to develop the story,
or to develop any characters, drama, emotion, suspense, or mystery. It
just jumped rapidly from scene to scene with very little setup for
those scenes. 

This movie (PoA) could go the opposite direction. They could spend so
much time setting up the main plot that the overal story itself gets lost.

I can't believe it's possible to cut Quidditch. Quidditch plays a
bigger part in setting up the story in PoA than any other book. True,
it isn't the primary story, but the purposes of subplots are to build
the foundation that the primary plot rests on.

Quidditch is really the foundation that establishes the need for Harry
to learn to fight the Dementors. Without his need to win at Quidditch,
what reason does he even have to care about the Dementors? He can't
leave the castle grounds, so he doesn't have to deal with them. So
where is the problem; where is the conflict in the story? 

Beyond the incident on the train, what is there to delvelop the
Dementors and to show their horrible effects on people? Other than the
fact that they are ugly, what establishes them as horrible and
dangerous creatures? Also, where is the foundation for Harry to
establish his relationship with Lupin? If the Dementors aren't
developed, then Harry's need to fight them isn't developed, and if he
has no need to fight them, he has no need to ask Lupin for help. 

The Dementor/Quidditch/Lupin subplot establishes the foundation upon
which Harry developes his misplaced hate for Sirius, and helps
establish what a horrible thing it is that Sirius appears to have
done. It also is the foundation for our dislike of Pettigrew once we
find out he was the betrayer of Harry's parents. It allow the
emotional tension that would be created by those subplots to be
transferred over to Pettigrew very quickly.

I can see how they could modify Quidditch to trim the plot down. For
example, a lot of Oliver Woods parts could be transferred over to Ron.
It could be Ron who pesters Harry to buy a new broom, and constantly
reminds him not to catch the Snitch until the team is 50 points ahead.
 During much of the Quidditch we have seen so far, most of the players
are so far in the background during game that you can't really make
out who they are or what they are doing, so the whole Quidditch team
could be close ups of Harry, Fred, and George while the rest of the
team are computer generated in the background. They wouldn't even have
to be computer generated that well, since you can barely see them anyway.

The game where Harry falls off his broom, establishes Harry's
motivation for the anti-dementor lessons, and shows the beginning of
an increasing depth to the memories he relives. That first defeat and
the destruction of his broom establish his fierce resolve to win the
Quidditch Cup. The game where Draco and friends are fake Dementors,
establishes that under the right circumstances, Harry really can cast
a full powered petronus. Although, that could easily be combined with
the Quidditch final since that game involves some pretty rough and
dirty tactics and the fake Dementors would fit right in.

I just don't see how it's possible to eliminate Quidditch from the
story. Not only does it establish key plot elements but it establishes
part of the foundation of daily life at the school, upon which the
greater plots rest.

Having said that, I don't envy the director's position at all. There
are a lot of intertwined subplots in this book, and sorting them out
into something usable has to be a monumental task.

Subplots-
-Harry/Aunt Marge
-Harry/the Grim
-Harry/Dementors
-Harry/Lupin/boggart/anti-dementor lessons
-Harry/Sirius Black/Black's entering the castle
-Harry/Quidditch Cup
-Harry/the Firebolt
-The Maurader's Map
-Crookshanks/Scabbers 
-Hermione/Ron conflict
-H/R/H/Draco/Hippogriff
-Hermione's schedule/Time Turner
-School life
-The Shrieking Shack
-The Dementor Defeat
-The Time Turner rescue

Like I said, I'm glad I'm not the one who has to sort it all out.

Just some thoughts.

bboy_mn

From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Mar 24 22:25:19 2003
From: heidit at netbox.com (heiditandy)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:25:19 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Quidditch?? - Subplots
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <027201c2f254$4284f6a0$9865fea9@Frodo>

> > Jen wrote:
> > 
> > > ... I think I read that Fudge won't be in this movie. Tell me
> > >I am wrong.
> 

He's on the casting list announced by WB a few weeks ago, so that means
he'll at least be filmed. Of course, the Borgin & Burkes scenes were
filmed for CoS and didn't make it onto the screen, but they will be on
the DVD...

Heidi
*ask me about Nimbus - 2003 :: The Most Magical Scheme of the Year*
http://www.hp2003.org

From jrpessin at mail.millikin.edu  Tue Mar 25 00:48:11 2003
From: jrpessin at mail.millikin.edu (Jonathan Pessin)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 18:48:11 -0600
Subject: Casting thought
Message-ID: 

OK, so I'm not really sure this is the right forum for this, and I'm not sure if it's been discussed before (just joined the group...), but who could you people see playing Moody in the fourth movie?  I admit that I'm not that well versed in British actors, but I sort of see Moody as a type of Clint Eastwood figure: old and grizzled, yet still very powerful and intimidating.  If it weren't for the accent...  Anyway, who do you guys see playing him?  I can just now imagine the entrance scene, where Moody bangs into the Great Hall in a flash of lightning...

Hobbit-guy, who really HAS to get this imagination under control...

"You haven't been getting into the Gaffer's home brew again, have you?"
"No... Well, yes, but that's beside the point."
-Frodo and Bilbo Baggins, Fellowship of the Rings Extended Edition DVD

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 25 01:28:36 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:28:36 -0000
Subject: Casting thought
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan Pessin" 
 wrote:
> OK, so I'm not really sure this is the right forum for this, and 
I'm not sure if it's been discussed before (just joined the 
group...), but who could you people see playing Moody in the fourth 
movie?  I admit that I'm not that well versed in British actors, but 
I sort of see Moody as a type of Clint Eastwood figure: old and 
grizzled, yet still very powerful and intimidating.  If it weren't 
for the accent...  Anyway, who do you guys see playing him?  I can 
just now imagine the entrance scene, where Moody bangs into the 
Great Hall in a flash of lightning...

Me: Not sure if this has ever been discussed (new myself) but I've 
always pictured Alert Finney - he's british & a brillian actor.

From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Mar 25 01:42:22 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 01:42:22 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch?? - Subplots
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

As to the reason Harry will need to confront the Dementors, bboy 
wrote:
> Beyond the incident on the train, what is there to delvelop the
> Dementors and to show their horrible effects on people? Other than 
the> fact that they are ugly, what establishes them as horrible and
> dangerous creatures? Also, where is the foundation for Harry to
> establish his relationship with Lupin? If the Dementors aren't
> developed, then Harry's need to fight them isn't developed, and if 
he has no need to fight them, he has no need to ask Lupin for help. 
> 
>
I totally agree with you that without Quidditch, there doesn't seem 
to be much reason to confront and repel the dementors. The only 
reason I can reach for is that Harry may be so disturbed at hearing 
his mum and dad trying to fight off Voldemort that he seeks help from 
Lupin. He will presumably hear from Hermione that Lupin repelled the 
dementor on the train. Your ideas about a CG Quidditch team, while 
feasible, sickens me somewhat. It is disheartening to think of this 
foundational aspect of Book 3 reduced to computer generation. I like 
my Oliver Wood alive and kicking. What are the chances they may 
simply refer to the matches and what transpires in them? Then Ron 
could provide the information that Wood would have. Does that make 
any sense?
JenD

From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Tue Mar 25 02:11:11 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 21:11:11 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Quidditch?? - Subplots
Message-ID: <1e4.52b12af.2bb114bf@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/24/2003 7:44:06 PM Central Standard Time, 
rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu writes:

> What are the chances they may 
> simply refer to the matches and what transpires in them? Then Ron 
> could provide the information that Wood would have. Does that make 
> any sense?
> JenD
> 
> 

As I posted not to long ago I can see that happening.  Harry wakes up in the 
hospital wing. Hermione and Ron tell him what happened with the dementors and 
Cedric catching the Snitch, then Hermione gives Harry the busted up Nimbus.  

Melissa

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

From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Tue Mar 25 02:26:26 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 21:26:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting thought
Message-ID: <136.1c7a95e4.2bb11852@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/24/2003 7:25:43 PM Central Standard Time, 
jrpessin at mail.millikin.edu writes:

> OK, so I'm not really sure this is the right forum for this, and I'm not 
> sure if it's been discussed before (just joined the group...), but who 
> could you people see playing Moody in the fourth movie?

I have a vivid mental imagine of Ozzy Osbourne. . pity the drugs have messed 
up his speaking ability.

Melissa

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

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Tue Mar 25 03:48:44 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:48:44 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch??
Message-ID: 

Emily F wrote:
I'm open to suggestion that the movie absolutely CAN NOT be made without 
quidditch.  So far, though, most people seem to just want to watch a game of 
quidditch.  No one has described why it's ESSENTIAL to the plot of PoA 
(i.e., there is NO other way to explain or demonstrate certain aspects of 
the plot).  

I grin:
You give me an opening... for the record I'm on the Keep Quidditch side of things.

OK, let's break it down into thing by thing. What happens in the Quidditch matches that is relevant to plot, rather than purely Quidditch?

Hufflepuff:
-Invaded by Dementors 

This is important. Quidditch is the most important thing to Harry, so this is the impetus for his beginning Patronus lessons. However, it's possible they may cut this in favour of the train sequence.

-Harry sees "The Grim" 

Again, significant as far as little clues go, but could be cut for the Grim on Magnolia Crescent, which we know is in.

-Cedric Diggory catches the Snitch, but offers a rematch 

I believe this is VASTLY significant, because it proves Harry is not infallible or invincible. It also demonstrates Cedric is honourable and honest, which sets up the sympathy vote for him in GoF. I can't see any other way of doing this, but I suppose they might cut it anyway.

-Harry's Nimbus is destroyed by the Whomping Willow 

SURELY this is significant, because otherwise why would he need the Firebolt? However, it's possible the Nimbus could be destroyed by Malfoy, or Crookshanks, or any other conveniently located "broom-destroying bad thing". After all, Ron's wand wasn't destroyed in the crash of the Anglia, but rather by tapping it against the steering wheel in TMTMNBN2. Because wands are oh-so-flimsy, of course.

Ravenclaw: 
-Harry meets Cho Chang

Again, this should be a good opportunity to introduce Cho now rather than waiting for GoF. But, like Cedric, it's a good possibility she'll be cut.

-The "Dementors" come to the match 

Not very important. Easily cut.

-Harry successfully casts a Patronus 

Shows Harry is getting there on the Patronus thing - makes the leap from "fainting" to "defeating a whole bunch of Dementors" slightly more believable. But then, when are the HP movies believable?!

Slytherin:
-Gryffindor win the Quidditch Cup, for the first time since Harry joined the team

Unimportant plot-wise, but would be great to see.

So what is important? I think it mainly comes down to Cedric's victory. This is the only thing I can see that is important to plot and character development, and can only be done with Quidditch. However, Cedric shouldn't win if Harry doesn't faint. For Harry to faint, the Dementors have to come to the match, thus causing the destruction of the Nimbus, and maybe even a glimpse of the Grim. And once again, the interweaving plot strands that make the Potter books such good books and such bad screenplays come into play. Hopefully Cuaron can fix it somehow, but I'm not holding my breath.

And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do you really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Tue Mar 25 05:39:07 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 00:39:07 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: No Quidditch??
Message-ID: <178.181feb9a.2bb1457b@aol.com>

And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do you 
really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?

My comments:

Why have flint!  Well then why have Hermoine, Ron, Draco, Harry, Dudley, 
Vernon, Petunia, Snape!  My question why not have Wood and Flint!  Its there 
last year at least for Wood!  Why not just change all the cast! We really 
don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the robes! 
 Its just a movie like Inspector Gagdet!  Gagdet part two want straight to 
video and dvd by the way. 

Kyle Longbottom 

In a message dated 3/24/03 10:54:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> 
> Emily F wrote:
> I'm open to suggestion that the movie absolutely CAN NOT be made without 
> quidditch.  So far, though, most people seem to just want to watch a game 
> of 
> quidditch.  No one has described why it's ESSENTIAL to the plot of PoA 
> (i.e., there is NO other way to explain or demonstrate certain aspects of 
> the plot).  
> 
> I grin:
> You give me an opening... for the record I'm on the Keep Quidditch side of 
> things.
> 
> OK, let's break it down into thing by thing. What happens in the Quidditch 
> matches that is relevant to plot, rather than purely Quidditch?
> 
> Hufflepuff:
> -Invaded by Dementors 
> 
> This is important. Quidditch is the most important thing to Harry, so this 
> is the impetus for his beginning Patronus lessons. However, it's possible 
> they may cut this in favour of the train sequence.
> 
> -Harry sees "The Grim" 
> 
> Again, significant as far as little clues go, but could be cut for the Grim 
> on Magnolia Crescent, which we know is in.
> 
> -Cedric Diggory catches the Snitch, but offers a rematch 
> 
> I believe this is VASTLY significant, because it proves Harry is not 
> infallible or invincible. It also demonstrates Cedric is honourable and 
> honest, which sets up the sympathy vote for him in GoF. I can't see any 
> other way of doing this, but I suppose they might cut it anyway.
> 
> -Harry's Nimbus is destroyed by the Whomping Willow 
> 
> SURELY this is significant, because otherwise why would he need the 
> Firebolt? However, it's possible the Nimbus could be destroyed by Malfoy, 
> or Crookshanks, or any other conveniently located "broom-destroying bad 
> thing". After all, Ron's wand wasn't destroyed in the crash of the Anglia, 
> but rather by tapping it against the steering wheel in TMTMNBN2. Because 
> wands are oh-so-flimsy, of course.
> 
> Ravenclaw: 
> -Harry meets Cho Chang
> 
> Again, this should be a good opportunity to introduce Cho now rather than 
> waiting for GoF. But, like Cedric, it's a good possibility she'll be cut.
> 
> -The "Dementors" come to the match 
> 
> Not very important. Easily cut.
> 
> -Harry successfully casts a Patronus 
> 
> Shows Harry is getting there on the Patronus thing - makes the leap from 
> "fainting" to "defeating a whole bunch of Dementors" slightly more 
> believable. But then, when are the HP movies believable?!
> 
> Slytherin:
> -Gryffindor win the Quidditch Cup, for the first time since Harry joined 
> the team
> 
> Unimportant plot-wise, but would be great to see.
> 
> 
> So what is important? I think it mainly comes down to Cedric's victory. 
> This is the only thing I can see that is important to plot and character 
> development, and can only be done with Quidditch. However, Cedric shouldn't 
> win if Harry doesn't faint. For Harry to faint, the Dementors have to come 
> to the match, thus causing the destruction of the Nimbus, and maybe even a 
> glimpse of the Grim. And once again, the interweaving plot strands that 
> make the Potter books such good books and such bad screenplays come into 
> play. Hopefully Cuaron can fix it somehow, but I'm not holding my breath.
> 
> And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> you really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?
> 
> Susan

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

From potterfan23 at hotmail.com  Tue Mar 25 16:34:09 2003
From: potterfan23 at hotmail.com (Emily F)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:34:09 -0600
Subject: Cedric (was No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: 

Susan said:
>-Cedric Diggory catches the Snitch, but offers a rematch
>
>I believe this is VASTLY significant, because it proves Harry is not 
>infallible or invincible. It also demonstrates Cedric is honourable and 
>honest, which sets up the sympathy vote for him in GoF. I can't see any 
>other way of doing this, but I suppose they might cut it anyway.

And I can't agree more:
This IS vastly significant.  However, I am concerned about how Cedric's 
character is going to be built-up for GoF in general.  My concern has 
nothing to do with the PoA movie, but rather with Cedric as a character.  We 
don't even meet him until PoA (right? or at least, he doesn't play a role in 
the plot before then), and we really only see him a little during GoF.

In PoA, we see that Cedric seems to have great character.  Is he the only 
one?  Hardly.  We know that Harry, Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, and Dumbledore 
seem to have good character thus far (more or less, just humor me).  I've 
got nothing against Neville, McGonagal, Cho, or Madam Pomphrey for that 
matter.  The point I'm trying miserably to make is that we are supposed to 
assume that Cedric's a great guy based on that one instance (I'll get to GoF 
in a second).  Was that sufficient to establish him as a wonderful person?  
I don't know.  I guess I assume that children are inherently good until I 
learn otherwise, so Cedric's actions weren't surprising to me.  In fact, if 
I were a parent, I would expect that kind of honest behavior from my 
16-year-old child.

On to GoF...  It's been a while since I've read it, so bear with me.  We see 
Cedric treating Harry kindly while most of the school doesn't.  There is an 
alternate explanation for this: Perhaps Cedric knows Harry has no chance to 
compete, so he sort of feels sorry for him.  We also see Cedric and Harry 
help each other out early on.  Alternate explanation: It's better that a 
Hogwarts student win than someone from one of the other schools.  We also 
know that neither Harry nor Cedric was letting the other in on his hard 
work; they both had help, and were essentially passing on that help.  
(Incidentally, I bring up these alternate explanations because we're seeing 
Cedric's character from Harry's eyes and we really don't know Cedric's 
motivations.)  I think the first time we really get the glimpse of Cedric's 
true character is at the end of the maze - I'll admit that that moment 
almost brought tears to my eyes.  Unfortunately, the character development 
was just too late.  I didn't cry when Cedric died.  I might have if Rowling 
had put more time into developing this character, but the books are focused 
on Harry and what he sees, so I didn't see enough development to love Cedric 
as much as I do some other characters.

GET BACK ON TOPIC, you say?  :D  Okay, how my ramblings tie in to the 
movies:  If Cedric's death didn't make me cry in GoF, I'm not going to be 
disappointed if my friend who hasn't read the books isn't in tears.  The 
most important thing is that a student died.  Hogwarts is not untouchable 
(and possibly even not safe; we'll see where Rowling takes this in future 
books).  That's the message I expect from Cedric's death in the movie.  So 
I'm not going to be too bummed if Cedric's character isn't developed in the 
movie.  After all, I don't think it was developed enough in the books.

Let's also keep in mind that people even closer to Harry, and presumably 
people that we've grown to love, will be dying in the future.  I won't talk 
about who, but it's safe to say that by the end of Book 7, we'll all be hurt 
by someone's death at some point along the way.  I would much rather have 
them spend time in future movies on the deaths of characters that we know 
much better than Cedric.

Oops, forgot something.  As to the Hufflepuff match showing Harry's 
invincibility - again, I'm okay with leaving that until GoF.  The graveyard 
scene did more for me than the Hufflepuff match.  Let's just hope Cuaron can 
direct the graveyard scene well (hint hint).

Emily

_________________________________________________________________

From grace701 at yahoo.com  Tue Mar 25 15:29:02 2003
From: grace701 at yahoo.com (Greicy de los Santos)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:29:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: No Quidditch?? Subplots
In-Reply-To: <1048598164.339.21837.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030325152902.58281.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com>

Steve wrote:
Subplots-
-Harry/Aunt Marge
-Harry/the Grim
-Harry/Dementors
-Harry/Lupin/boggart/anti-dementor lessons
-Harry/Sirius Black/Black's entering the castle
-Harry/Quidditch Cup
-Harry/the Firebolt
-The Maurader's Map
-Crookshanks/Scabbers 
-Hermione/Ron conflict
-H/R/H/Draco/Hippogriff
-Hermione's schedule/Time Turner
-School life
-The Shrieking Shack
-The Dementor Defeat
-The Time Turner rescue

Like I said, I'm glad I'm not the one who has to sort it all out.

Just some thoughts.

bboy_mn
==============================================

Yeah I wouldn't want to be the person to sort all of that out either.  Like I said before, there are other ways to introduce Cho and Cedric and Lupin can suggest to help Harry after seeing how he fainted in the train.  I do love the Quidditch scenes and it is Wood's last year, but the book/movie is about Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, not Harry Potter and Oliver Wood in Quidditch.

The movie is coming out in the summer of 2004, right.  So I was just thinking maybe they're taking so long with this movie because of the key/sub plots.  They want to make sure it all looks good and makes sense.

Greicy

_

Greicy

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From michael.metzner at web.de  Tue Mar 25 15:12:49 2003
From: michael.metzner at web.de (max_bessermann)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:12:49 -0000
Subject: Realistic setting of historic scenes
Message-ID: 

I believe a good point would have been to add some color to the 
godric's hollow scene by using more end-70's/80's style for the 
setting - the murder took place in 1981! It's not crucial, of course, 
but I'd have been delighted with some realistic environment (hair 
style, record player, cars, news ...).

What do you think about?

"Michael"

From urbana at charter.net  Wed Mar 26 02:10:50 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 02:10:50 -0000
Subject: No Quidditch?? Subplots - release date??!
In-Reply-To: <20030325152902.58281.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Greicy de los Santos wrote:

> The movie is coming out in the summer of 2004, right.  So I was 
just thinking maybe they're taking so long with this movie because of 
the key/sub plots.  They want to make sure it all looks good and 
makes sense.
> 

Maybe yes and maybe no. IMDB.com reported today on the possibility of 
the POA technical crew going on strike in the near future:

'Harry Potter 3' Faces Strike Threat

The construction crew working on Harry Potter and the Prisoner of 
Azkaban, the third Harry Potter movie, may halt production of the 
movie at Leavesden studios in the U.K. on Friday unless their demands 
for a pay raise are met. One unnamed staff worker told the Daily Sun 
newspaper: "We had a meeting on Friday and were told that we weren't 
going to be getting any more money. Around 90 percent of the 
construction team said they will walk out. We won't return until this 
is resolved. If that means the film is delayed reaching cinemas, so 
be it." The film is now in its third week of production. 
> Greicy
> 

Anne U
(aaack!)

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Wed Mar 26 02:27:31 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 02:27:31 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: 

I wrote:
And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do you 
really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?

Kyle replied:
Why have flint!  Well then why have Hermoine, Ron, Draco, Harry, Dudley, 
Vernon, Petunia, Snape!  My question why not have Wood and Flint!  Its there 
last year at least for Wood!  Why not just change all the cast! We really 
don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the robes! 
 Its just a movie like Inspector Gagdet!  Gagdet part two want straight to 
video and dvd by the way. 

And I say:
OK, let's get a bit of perspective. How important is Marcus Flint? Well, what do we know about him? He is the Slytherin Quidditch captain. He's very stupid and got held back a year (or JKR made a boo-boo with her numbers - hang on a sec, JKR screwing up with maths? Couldn't happen!!). And he and Wood seem to be old enemies on the Quidditch field.

THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. 

While I admire your enthusiasm, Kyle, I must question your logic. The most exciting thing about Marcus Flint is that his name has lent itself to an acronym used on this fandom. (That's Flint-Like Inconsistencies Nitpicked Triumphantly, for those who aren't aware) Is is really that important to you to keep him in the movies? The boy has had a handful of mentions in canon, almost all of them purely in the "Wood shook hands with the Slytherin captain, Flint" vein. Wood, on the other hand, is one of Harry's friends. He is mentioned in the common room, in Quidditch practices, in Quidditch games, and even gets a brief cameo in GoF for no real reason other than a nice goodbye. (Although I'm hoping he'll be back in OotP, I'm not holding my breath) He is much more important to Harry, and therefore more important to the canon.

Now let me try and decipher the rest of your post. Are you actually suggesting that Marcus Flint is as important to the storyline as Harry Potter? Or Hermione? Or Draco? Or any of the others you listed there? I'm glad you're such a big Flintfan, but do you genuinely believe he's that important to the story? I know I sure don't. I couldn't care less if we see Flint again, in movie or print. I would've liked to see Wood, but the decision has been made and there's not a huge amount of point bitching about it now. (Like that's stopped us before... ;) )

"Why not just change all the cast! We really 
don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the robes! "

Are you being sarcastic? I'm afraid you've lost me a bit here. Do you want the cast changing or not? This isn't a question of someone else playing Flint, it's a question of Flint's character being removed altogether. If this is about the whole "will DR/RG/EW/TF etc stay on after PoA" thing, then you have to remember that it's not in our hands. Although we can discuss whether or not we'd like to see a new cast or keep the old one, we won't get much of a choice; if Dan decides he doesn't want to be pigeonholed as Harry forever, or Emma falls in love and emigrates, or Rupert decides to concentrate on his exams rather than his acting, or Tom decides to do something crazy like concentrate on his fishing... 

~pauses, wonders where Felton is going to be fishing, considers cultivating an interest in it herself~

~shakes self and continues~

...well, we can't stop them! Although I personally would love to see these actors staying on, we can't insist that WB try and trap them into contracts they can't get out of, particularly with the non-principal kids, who could be doing other stuff (as was discussed recently with Devon Murray (I think?) doing Artemis Fowl).

You ask why not just keep Wood and Flint, since it's Wood's last year anyway. Well, as bboy_mn so eloquently listed, there are a whole lotta subplots in PoA. It's only going to be a two to three hour movie - something's gotta get cut. And I'd rather lose Quidditch and get a good explanation from H&R in the hospital ward and get a excellent Shrieking Shack and Time Turner rescue than a substandard Shack/Turner and a lot of Quidditch (and as you may have picked up from other post, I am a major affiliate of keeping bucketloads of Quidditch in Potter movies).

And finally, you completely lost me in the last sentence, Kyle. I'm not sure what the Inspector Gadget thing was about at all... 

Susan
wondering if Hermione knows any spells along the lines of "Go go gadget alohomora..!"
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Mar 26 04:11:14 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:11:14 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <170.1c3bb6f4.2bb28262@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/25/03 9:29:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> 
> I wrote:
> And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> you 
> really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?
> 
> Kyle replied:
> Why have flint!  Well then why have Hermoine, Ron, Draco, Harry, Dudley, 
> Vernon, Petunia, Snape!  My question why not have Wood and Flint!  Its 
> there 
> last year at least for Wood!  Why not just change all the cast! We really 
> don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the 
> robes! 
> Its just a movie like Inspector Gagdet!  Gagdet part two want straight to 
> video and dvd by the way. 
> 
> And I say:
> OK, let's get a bit of perspective. How important is Marcus Flint? Well, 
> what do we know about him? He is the Slytherin Quidditch captain. He's very 
> stupid and got held back a year (or JKR made a boo-boo with her numbers - 
> hang on a sec, JKR screwing up with maths? Couldn't happen!!). And he and 
> Wood seem to be old enemies on the Quidditch field.

Okay first reponse:

No you really don't need Flint but why cut flint and the whole Quidditch 
scene if everybody loves it???  

> 
> THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. 
> 
> While I admire your enthusiasm, Kyle, I must question your logic. The most 
> exciting thing about Marcus Flint is that his name has lent itself to an 
> acronym used on this fandom. (That's Flint-Like Inconsistencies Nitpicked 
> Triumphantly, for those who aren't aware) Is is really that important to 
> you to keep him in the movies? The boy has had a handful of mentions in 
> canon, almost all of them purely in the "Wood shook hands with the 
> Slytherin captain, Flint" vein. Wood, on the other hand, is one of Harry's 
> friends. He is mentioned in the common room, in Quidditch practices, in 
> Quidditch games, and even gets a brief cameo in GoF for no real reason 
> other than a nice goodbye. (Although I'm hoping he'll be back in OotP, I'm 
> not holding my breath) He is much more important to Harry, and therefore 
> more important to the canon.
> 
> Now let me try and decipher the rest of your post. Are you actually 
> suggesting that Marcus Flint is as important to the storyline as Harry 
> Potter? Or Hermione? Or Draco? Or any of the others you listed there? I'm 
> glad you're such a big Flintfan, but do you genuinely believe he's that 
> important to the story? I know I sure don't. I couldn't care less if we see 
> Flint again, in movie or print. I would've liked to see Wood, but the 
> decision has been made and there's not a huge amount of point bitching 
> about it now. (Like that's stopped us before... ;) )

Well why do you feel nothing can get done???  No we are not workers 
protesting pay for Harry Potter but on the other hand if we don't like 
something we well make it not air anymore!  Think Pee-Wee Playhouse.  You may 
say there is a difference but how??  We picketed and it left the air waves.  

> 
> "Why not just change all the cast! We really 
> don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the 
> robes! "
> 
> Are you being sarcastic? No, I am being frustrated to no end!!  I'm afraid 
> you've lost me a bit here. Do you want the cast changing or not? No I don't 
> want the cast to change.  This isn't a question of someone else playing 
> Flint, it's a question of Flint's character being removed altogether. If 
> this is about the whole "will DR/RG/EW/TF etc stay on after PoA" thing, 
> then you have to remember that it's not in our hands. Well not nessecary 
> and why do you believe its not in our hands!  Although we can discuss 
> whether or not we'd like to see a new cast or keep the old one, we won't 
> get much of a choice; if Dan decides he doesn't want to be (how do we know 
> Dan or the rest havent been pigeonholed right now or Alan Rickman, Robbie 
> Coltrane etc, etc !!) pigeonholed as Harry forever, or Emma falls in love 
> and emigrates, or Rupert decides to concentrate on his exams rather than 
> his acting, or Tom decides to do something crazy like concentrate on his 
> fishing... 

Well if we as the audience really want the cast to stay the same then we can 
tell them they have to stay or we won't go see the film!  So you telling me 
and others if they (WB) revamp the whole cast then we the public should just 
accept it and go on???  When Sir Arthuer Conan Doyle Killed Holmes there was 
much protest and he brought him back to life for one last adventure. So I 
guess we should let Harry Potter be in the hands of Warner Brothers and we 
shouldnt have our voice heard becuase there going to do what they want 
regardless.  

> ~pauses, wonders where Felton is going to be fishing, considers cultivating 
> an interest in it herself~

Wonders why anybody would not want to at least do acting part time???  It 
does have it perks!  Why can't Felton do both???  Shakes head wondering why 
not live life to the fullest.

> 
> ~shakes self and continues~

Shakes head in disbelief that we can destroy a T.V series but not a movie!  I 
guess since Harry Potter is so big we just need to tuck our tails between our 
legs and not do anything? Right??  I hope Tom and all the cast can go behind 
harry potter but again acting is a fickle business!  

> 
> ...well, we can't stop them! Although I personally would love to see these 
> actors staying on, we can't insist that WB try and trap them into contracts 
> they can't get out of, particularly with the non-principal kids, who could 
> be doing other stuff (as was discussed recently with Devon Murray (I 
> think?) doing Artemis Fowl).

No we can't!!!  I do agree with you on that but on the other hand there is 
always ways to keep actors on board!  Ian Mckellan was shooting X-Man and 
Lord of the Rings at the same time!!  So Devon Murray could stay on doing 
both!  If he wants to!   

> 
> You ask why not just keep Wood and Flint, since it's Wood's last year 
> anyway. Well, as bboy_mn so eloquently listed, there are a whole lotta 
> subplots in PoA. It's only going to be a two to three hour movie - 
> something's gotta get cut. And I'd rather lose Quidditch and get a good 
> explanation from H&R in the hospital ward and get a excellent Shrieking 
> Shack and Time Turner rescue than a substandard Shack/Turner and a lot of 
> Quidditch (and as you may have picked up from other post, I am a major 
> affiliate of keeping bucketloads of Quidditch in Potter movies).
> 
> 
> And finally, you completely lost me in the last sentence, Kyle. I'm not 
> sure what the Inspector Gadget thing was about at all... 

Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of being in 
theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing if its such a good 
film??  They made 4 never ending storys!  Does anybody know about the 4th 
one???  Now they proably will make all 7 films but how good will it be if 
they recast everybody???  I am sure the Goblet will do good work but its not 
going to be the same without radcliffe being harry potter or the rest of the 
cast being there!  I am finding out people really don't care about the movies 
as much as they do about the books!  Do you really think your going to get 
the fans, old young, teen guys and girls if they keep doing what there doing 
to the movies of Harry Potter???   

> 
> 
> Susan
> wondering if Hermione knows any spells along the lines of "Go go gadget 
> alohomora..!"

Why do we have more desire to Destroy Pee-Wee's Play house but let the powers 
that be destroy Harry Potter or change it to their own interpretation of the 
books???  Why have the same cast for Lord of the Rings but not Harry 
Potter???  Why is that a problem???  Do you really think that Elijah Wood is 
going to go far in his career??  Like I said before the business of acting is 
a fickle business!  You never know if one or two of this actors from Harry 
Potter will be in a t.v series or another movie.  In all likely hood will any 
of this actors really be famous and be able to go on behind Harry Potter??  I 
don't think so unless they really disappear for awhile and come back!  But 
even then its diffcult!  Not impossiable but diffcult.

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 26 07:59:01 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:59:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: <170.1c3bb6f4.2bb28262@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030326075901.92014.qmail@web14901.mail.yahoo.com>

Sarcasm, hmmmmmm.....I like it! But seriously, the next movie will depend on the plot line of this one. And if we dont have the quidditch match, the plot line for the next movie is ruined,. I hate "the powers that be"!!!
Alex ( Polishing Lucius' wand) Fox
 LeeMunLim03 at aol.com wrote:In a message dated 3/25/03 9:29:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> 
> I wrote:
> And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> you 
> really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to?
> 
> Kyle replied:
> Why have flint!  Well then why have Hermoine, Ron, Draco, Harry, Dudley, 
> Vernon, Petunia, Snape!  My question why not have Wood and Flint!  Its 
> there 
> last year at least for Wood!  Why not just change all the cast! We really 
> don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the 
> robes! 
> Its just a movie like Inspector Gagdet!  Gagdet part two want straight to 
> video and dvd by the way. 
> 
> And I say:
> OK, let's get a bit of perspective. How important is Marcus Flint? Well, 
> what do we know about him? He is the Slytherin Quidditch captain. He's very 
> stupid and got held back a year (or JKR made a boo-boo with her numbers - 
> hang on a sec, JKR screwing up with maths? Couldn't happen!!). And he and 
> Wood seem to be old enemies on the Quidditch field.

Okay first reponse:

No you really don't need Flint but why cut flint and the whole Quidditch 
scene if everybody loves it???  

> 
> THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. 
> 
> While I admire your enthusiasm, Kyle, I must question your logic. The most 
> exciting thing about Marcus Flint is that his name has lent itself to an 
> acronym used on this fandom. (That's Flint-Like Inconsistencies Nitpicked 
> Triumphantly, for those who aren't aware) Is is really that important to 
> you to keep him in the movies? The boy has had a handful of mentions in 
> canon, almost all of them purely in the "Wood shook hands with the 
> Slytherin captain, Flint" vein. Wood, on the other hand, is one of Harry's 
> friends. He is mentioned in the common room, in Quidditch practices, in 
> Quidditch games, and even gets a brief cameo in GoF for no real reason 
> other than a nice goodbye. (Although I'm hoping he'll be back in OotP, I'm 
> not holding my breath) He is much more important to Harry, and therefore 
> more important to the canon.
> 
> Now let me try and decipher the rest of your post. Are you actually 
> suggesting that Marcus Flint is as important to the storyline as Harry 
> Potter? Or Hermione? Or Draco? Or any of the others you listed there? I'm 
> glad you're such a big Flintfan, but do you genuinely believe he's that 
> important to the story? I know I sure don't. I couldn't care less if we see 
> Flint again, in movie or print. I would've liked to see Wood, but the 
> decision has been made and there's not a huge amount of point bitching 
> about it now. (Like that's stopped us before... ;) )

Well why do you feel nothing can get done???  No we are not workers 
protesting pay for Harry Potter but on the other hand if we don't like 
something we well make it not air anymore!  Think Pee-Wee Playhouse.  You may 
say there is a difference but how??  We picketed and it left the air waves.  

> 
> "Why not just change all the cast! We really 
> don't want the same actors year after year!  Let someone else wear the 
> robes! "
> 
> Are you being sarcastic? No, I am being frustrated to no end!!  I'm afraid 
> you've lost me a bit here. Do you want the cast changing or not? No I don't 
> want the cast to change.  This isn't a question of someone else playing 
> Flint, it's a question of Flint's character being removed altogether. If 
> this is about the whole "will DR/RG/EW/TF etc stay on after PoA" thing, 
> then you have to remember that it's not in our hands. Well not nessecary 
> and why do you believe its not in our hands!  Although we can discuss 
> whether or not we'd like to see a new cast or keep the old one, we won't 
> get much of a choice; if Dan decides he doesn't want to be (how do we know 
> Dan or the rest havent been pigeonholed right now or Alan Rickman, Robbie 
> Coltrane etc, etc !!) pigeonholed as Harry forever, or Emma falls in love 
> and emigrates, or Rupert decides to concentrate on his exams rather than 
> his acting, or Tom decides to do something crazy like concentrate on his 
> fishing... 

Well if we as the audience really want the cast to stay the same then we can 
tell them they have to stay or we won't go see the film!  So you telling me 
and others if they (WB) revamp the whole cast then we the public should just 
accept it and go on???  When Sir Arthuer Conan Doyle Killed Holmes there was 
much protest and he brought him back to life for one last adventure. So I 
guess we should let Harry Potter be in the hands of Warner Brothers and we 
shouldnt have our voice heard becuase there going to do what they want 
regardless.  

> ~pauses, wonders where Felton is going to be fishing, considers cultivating 
> an interest in it herself~

Wonders why anybody would not want to at least do acting part time???  It 
does have it perks!  Why can't Felton do both???  Shakes head wondering why 
not live life to the fullest.

> 
> ~shakes self and continues~

Shakes head in disbelief that we can destroy a T.V series but not a movie!  I 
guess since Harry Potter is so big we just need to tuck our tails between our 
legs and not do anything? Right??  I hope Tom and all the cast can go behind 
harry potter but again acting is a fickle business!  

> 
> ...well, we can't stop them! Although I personally would love to see these 
> actors staying on, we can't insist that WB try and trap them into contracts 
> they can't get out of, particularly with the non-principal kids, who could 
> be doing other stuff (as was discussed recently with Devon Murray (I 
> think?) doing Artemis Fowl).

No we can't!!!  I do agree with you on that but on the other hand there is 
always ways to keep actors on board!  Ian Mckellan was shooting X-Man and 
Lord of the Rings at the same time!!  So Devon Murray could stay on doing 
both!  If he wants to!   

> 
> You ask why not just keep Wood and Flint, since it's Wood's last year 
> anyway. Well, as bboy_mn so eloquently listed, there are a whole lotta 
> subplots in PoA. It's only going to be a two to three hour movie - 
> something's gotta get cut. And I'd rather lose Quidditch and get a good 
> explanation from H&R in the hospital ward and get a excellent Shrieking 
> Shack and Time Turner rescue than a substandard Shack/Turner and a lot of 
> Quidditch (and as you may have picked up from other post, I am a major 
> affiliate of keeping bucketloads of Quidditch in Potter movies).
> 
> 
> And finally, you completely lost me in the last sentence, Kyle. I'm not 
> sure what the Inspector Gadget thing was about at all... 

Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of being in 
theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing if its such a good 
film??  They made 4 never ending storys!  Does anybody know about the 4th 
one???  Now they proably will make all 7 films but how good will it be if 
they recast everybody???  I am sure the Goblet will do good work but its not 
going to be the same without radcliffe being harry potter or the rest of the 
cast being there!  I am finding out people really don't care about the movies 
as much as they do about the books!  Do you really think your going to get 
the fans, old young, teen guys and girls if they keep doing what there doing 
to the movies of Harry Potter???   

> 
> 
> Susan
> wondering if Hermione knows any spells along the lines of "Go go gadget 
> alohomora..!"

Why do we have more desire to Destroy Pee-Wee's Play house but let the powers 
that be destroy Harry Potter or change it to their own interpretation of the 
books???  Why have the same cast for Lord of the Rings but not Harry 
Potter???  Why is that a problem???  Do you really think that Elijah Wood is 
going to go far in his career??  Like I said before the business of acting is 
a fickle business!  You never know if one or two of this actors from Harry 
Potter will be in a t.v series or another movie.  In all likely hood will any 
of this actors really be famous and be able to go on behind Harry Potter??  I 
don't think so unless they really disappear for awhile and come back!  But 
even then its diffcult!  Not impossiable but diffcult.

Kyle Longbottom 

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

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
var lrec_target="_top";var lrec_URL = new Array();lrec_URL[1] = "http://rd.yahoo.com/M=246920.2960106.4328965.2848452/D=egroupweb/S=1705020948:HM/A=1508984/R=0/id=flashurl/*http://www.gotomypc.com/u/tr/yh/cpm/grp/300_02F/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl";var link="javascript:LRECopenWindow(1)";var lrec_flashfile = 'http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/1-/flash/expert_city/093002_weather300x250_02f.swf?clickTAG='+link+'';var lrec_altURL = "http://rd.yahoo.com/M=246920.2960106.4328965.2848452/D=egroupweb/S=1705020948:HM/A=1508984/R=1/id=altimgurl/*http://www.gotomypc.com/u/tr/yh/cpm/grp/300_02F/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl";var lrec_altimg = "http://us.yimg.com/a/ex/expert_city/300x250_yh1.gif";var lrec_width = 300;var lrec_height = 250;
________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! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Wed Mar 26 14:23:55 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:23:55 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <126.25d7ce30.2bb311fb@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/26/2003 2:00:12 AM Central Standard Time, 
trinity61us at yahoo.com writes:

> Well why do you feel nothing can get done???  No we are not workers 
> protesting pay for Harry Potter but on the other hand if we don't like 
> something we well make it not air anymore!  Think Pee-Wee Playhouse.
***You may > say there is a difference but how??***  We picketed and it left 
the air waves.
> 
> 

Are you seriously asking that question?  The answer's fairly simple: Pee 
Wee's Playhouse was a rather insignificant children's TV show appearing on 
American TV that parents found objectionable based on Paul Rueben's. . .ummm 
questionable behavior, among other things. The network didn't lose much 
pulling it.  The Harry Potter series is a billion dollar franchise being 
shown on every continent (excepting Antarctica although I'd have to ask my 
cousin to be sure).  You'd stand a better chance of stopping the tides than 
of stopping this production over very minor characters that most movie goers 
wouldn't remember anyway.

Something HAS to be cut, PoA would be well over 4 hours if it weren't. While 
I would be willing to sit through a 4+ hour movie, I know my children 
wouldn't . .not even for Harry Potter nor would, I imagine, the vast majority 
of adults who are just casual fans
or who are only going because their kids want too. Would you rather lose the 
Flint or the Time Turner? Flint or Buckbeak? Flint or Shrieking Shack?  The 
plot happenings involving Quidditch. . .including the dementors. . . can be 
far more easily explained to the audience via Hermione or Ron. 

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

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 26 15:36:20 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 15:36:20 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: 

According to BBC & Variety carpenters, painters, plasterers, riggers 
and stage hands have said that they will go on strike this Friday 
because of low wages. This strike will not only effect the filming of 
HP3 but Thunderbirds & Troy, as well as all films currently in 
production in the UK.  

Here is the link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2888027.stm

From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Wed Mar 26 17:17:39 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 17:17:39 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: <170.1c3bb6f4.2bb28262@aol.com>
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, LeeMunLim03 at a... wrote:
> Okay first reponse:
> 
> No you really don't need Flint but why cut flint and the whole 
Quidditch 
> scene if everybody loves it???  
> 

Hey Hey, not EVERYBODY loves them, okay? Just speak for yourself, 
please.

I'm among the people who don't think Flint is important at all and  
the removal of this character IS necessary to give time for far more 
important things. Do you even remember what PoA is about? It's not 
Wood and Flint and Quiddtich, okay? There are so many far more 
important MAIN storylines and MAIN characters to cover in PoA for a 3 
hours (or near 3 hours) movie.  The entire Sirius, Lupin, Peter 
conflict would takes up more than half of the movie, okay? 

Remember Buckbeak? time turner/travel? Shierking Shack? Hogsmead? 
Sirius's terrorism on school? Backstory of MWPP+Snape? Plus other 
transistional stuffs (ex: Dursley, Hogwart express) these all 
practically takes up at lesat 3 hours, can't you see?

Please try to think realistically! The movie could only be as long as 
3 hours (even though you wish it's 4-8 hours, it's not gonna happen!) 
Some cut HAS to be made. Which you prefer to be cut? Quiddtich house 
cup or the Shierking Shack? Wood or Buckbeak? Flint or time 
turner/travel? 

And I for one is tired of seeing Quiddtich on the big screen. It's 
been done, nothing new. so I hope the PoA movie would keep Quidditch 
as minimum as possbile (just the essential).

Joan

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 26 17:43:12 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 17:43:12 -0000
Subject: Possible Strike Delays Next Potter Film...
Message-ID: 

According to BBC & Variety carpenters, painters, plasterers, riggers 
and stage hands have said that they will go on strike this Friday 
because of low wages. This strike will not only effect the filming of 
HP3 but Thunderbirds & Troy, as well as all films currently in 
production in the UK. 

Here is the link 

PS - Next time I should remember to a subject line in.

From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 26 18:35:50 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:35:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Possible Strike Delays Next Potter Film...
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030326183550.40811.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>

 geri510  wrote:
According to BBC & Variety carpenters, painters, plasterers, riggers 
and stage hands have said that they will go on strike this Friday 
because of low wages. 

I don't see how this should be a problem for the Harry Potter film...seeing how they've cut a bunch of cast members and aren't filming on location at the castle for the 3rd movie...they should have LOADS of money to pay their tech people:)

~Kathryn, who is infact still very bitter about Sean Biggerstaff being cut from the film :`(

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Mar 26 19:13:47 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:13:47 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie"  wrote:
> > And I for one is tired of seeing Quiddtich on the big screen. 
It's 
> been done, nothing new. so I hope the PoA movie would keep 
Quidditch 
> as minimum as possbile (just the essential).
> 
> Joan

Okay, so we don't have to see an extended bit of Quidditch. It has 
been done but some of the things that happen at the matches could 
have been depicted and not break the time bank. I will miss the 
exhiliration of seeing the team win the Cup. Call me an unrealistic 
so-and-so but that wouldn't have taken years. I also was looking 
forward to Harry's excellent patronus frightening the living 
daylights out of Malfoy. But don't tell me to get realistic because 
the absence of some bit of these scenes saddens me.
JenD 

From Ripleywriter at aol.com  Wed Mar 26 19:44:42 2003
From: Ripleywriter at aol.com (Ripleywriter at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:44:42 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Possible Strike Delays Next Potter Film...
Message-ID: <1ec.51f7b5d.2bb35d2a@aol.com>

<>

They aren't? Here's me out of the loop again, 'cause this is news to me. 
Where are they going to film, then? Are they making duplicate sets? 

<<~Kathryn, who is infact still very bitter about Sean Biggerstaff being cut 
from the film :`(>>

Melly, who's right there with ya  *g*

From dkewpie at pacbell.net  Wed Mar 26 21:04:38 2003
From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (Kewpie)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:04:38 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003"  
wrote:
> Okay, so we don't have to see an extended bit of Quidditch. It has 
> been done but some of the things that happen at the matches could 
> have been depicted and not break the time bank. I will miss the 
> exhiliration of seeing the team win the Cup. Call me an unrealistic 
> so-and-so but that wouldn't have taken years. I also was looking 
> forward to Harry's excellent patronus frightening the living 
> daylights out of Malfoy. But don't tell me to get realistic because 
> the absence of some bit of these scenes saddens me.

First you don't know whether those scenes you mentioned are really in 
the film or not, you haven't seen the finish film yet. May be some 
were there in the film? So before you scream/cry/sign petitions about 
something, why not make sure they are indeed being remove or not 
first? Yes we know Wood is cut and that's for sure, but we aren't 
sure the entire Quidditch is removed and we don't know whether 
Harry's excellent patronus is cut either. Unless you give me proves.

Second, they have been cutting fan's favorite scenes in the past 
movies anyways. Where were all the potion classes? where is Peeves? 
where is Valentine's Day? Where is the bit where Hermione solving the 
potion logic? There are so much more and we all know that....so my 
point is, since there have been too many book fan's favorites scenes 
being cut from the movie in the past, shouldn't we know what to 
expect by now? You can't have everything!
so the more important thing to worry/look forward is whether Alfonso 
Cauron would do a good job in translating/interpreting the book as 
best as possible, instead of worry/cry/scream/sign petition about 
this scene and this character being cut. Especially since those cut 
could mean better things for the finish product, you never know!

Joan

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Wed Mar 26 21:58:13 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:58:13 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <150.1d6d79f5.2bb37c75@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/26/03 4:06:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
dkewpie at pacbell.net writes:

> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003"  
> wrote:
> >Okay, so we don't have to see an extended bit of Quidditch. It has 
> >been done but some of the things that happen at the matches could 
> >have been depicted and not break the time bank. I will miss the 
> >exhiliration of seeing the team win the Cup. Call me an unrealistic 
> >so-and-so but that wouldn't have taken years. I also was looking 
> >forward to Harry's excellent patronus frightening the living 
> >daylights out of Malfoy. But don't tell me to get realistic because 
> >the absence of some bit of these scenes saddens me.
> 
> First you don't know whether those scenes you mentioned are really in 
> the film or not, you haven't seen the finish film yet. May be some 
> were there in the film? So before you scream/cry/sign petitions about 
> something, why not make sure they are indeed being remove or not 
> first? Yes we know Wood is cut and that's for sure, but we aren't 
> sure the entire Quidditch is removed and we don't know whether 
> Harry's excellent patronus is cut either. Unless you give me proves.
> 
> Second, they have been cutting fan's favorite scenes in the past 
> movies anyways. Where were all the potion classes? where is Peeves? 
> where is Valentine's Day? Where is the bit where Hermione solving the 
> potion logic? There are so much more and we all know that....so my 
> point is, since there have been too many book fan's favorites scenes 
> being cut from the movie in the past, shouldn't we know what to 
> expect by now? You can't have everything!
> so the more important thing to worry/look forward is whether Alfonso 
> Cauron would do a good job in translating/interpreting the book as 
> best as possible, instead of worry/cry/scream/sign petition about 
> this scene and this character being cut. Especially since those cut 
> could mean better things for the finish product, you never know!
> 
> Joan

No you dont know, but I am very concerned now!

Kyle Longbottom 

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

From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Mar 26 23:49:20 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:49:20 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie"  wrote:
Joan wrote:
> so the more important thing to worry/look forward is whether 
Alfonso 
> Cauron would do a good job in translating/interpreting the book as 
> best as possible, instead of worry/cry/scream/sign petition about 
> this scene and this character being cut. Especially since those cut 
> could mean better things for the finish product, you never know!
> 
> Joan

You know, you are right. All kinds of things were cut before. I 
personally thought that the editing of Book 2 was right on target in 
many ways. Long development isn't always necessary. It's just that 
Book 3 is different. It's Harry's first shot at embracing all kinds 
of feelings. And there's character development further down the line. 
The twins, and Wood, most particularly become fuller. Moments of 
triumph are neat. I know we won't see the winning of the Cup. I have 
just read rumors about the existence of Quidditch and they make 
sense, if you are not having either team captain back. I don't care a 
fig for Flint. I care what he represents. I worry too that Cuaron may 
have a very different take on Harry, especially since his last film 
made such a splash and was so provocative. I personally am not ready 
for "Harry and your mama too." I am not a petition waving kook. I 
just have this Harry and company running around in my brain and am 
hoping that somehow he gets up there on the screen. I am beginning to 
think, and it's a bit of a shock, that Sorcerer's Stone may yet be 
the best interpretation we get. 
JenD

From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 27 00:01:18 2003
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:01:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Possible Strike Delays Next Potter Film...
In-Reply-To: <1ec.51f7b5d.2bb35d2a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030327000118.83115.qmail@web40513.mail.yahoo.com>

 Ripleywriter at aol.com wrote:

Kathryn:<>

They aren't? Here's me out of the loop again, 'cause this is news to me. 
Where are they going to film, then? Are they making duplicate sets? 

I read somewhere (BBC Newsround perhaps?) that they have enough unused footage of the outside of the castle to not have to go back.  What we know of the inside of the castle is of course not REALLY what's at the castle they film.  So they have sets for the whole inside...they just went to the castle for outside shots...like the flying lessons.

~Kathryn:)

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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

From keithmascarenhas at hotpop.com  Thu Mar 27 03:40:42 2003
From: keithmascarenhas at hotpop.com (Keith Mascarenhas)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:10:42 +0530
Subject: Casting Thoughts - Fleur Delacour - GOF
Message-ID: <003e01c2f412$a7f44f30$140110ac@e97z2grx09q8y3k>

I have with me a desktop image of Rosamund Pike and I can't help thinking to myself that she'd make an excellent Fleur Delacour. 

All she needs to do  is to replace her upper-class Brit accent with a French one, she's got the looks, the haughtiness and even though she's in her early-mid '20, she could pass of for an 18 year old!

Keith

PS: I can send an enclosure with the desktop if anyone wants to take a look.

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

From smholden at earthlink.net  Thu Mar 27 04:43:23 2003
From: smholden at earthlink.net (SHolden)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:43:23 -0600
Subject: Ignore - Testing
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

Sorry about this, but I have a new email address and I'm not getting my
messages.  Can someone help me here!!!

Sara
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Kewpie [mailto:dkewpie at pacbell.net]
  Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:05 PM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No
Quidditch??)

  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" 
  wrote:
  > Okay, so we don't have to see an extended bit of Quidditch. It has
  > been done but some of the things that happen at the matches could
  > have been depicted and not break the time bank. I will miss the
  > exhiliration of seeing the team win the Cup. Call me an unrealistic
  > so-and-so but that wouldn't have taken years. I also was looking
  > forward to Harry's excellent patronus frightening the living
  > daylights out of Malfoy. But don't tell me to get realistic because
  > the absence of some bit of these scenes saddens me.

  First you don't know whether those scenes you mentioned are really in
  the film or not, you haven't seen the finish film yet. May be some
  were there in the film? So before you scream/cry/sign petitions about
  something, why not make sure they are indeed being remove or not
  first? Yes we know Wood is cut and that's for sure, but we aren't
  sure the entire Quidditch is removed and we don't know whether
  Harry's excellent patronus is cut either. Unless you give me proves.

  Second, they have been cutting fan's favorite scenes in the past
  movies anyways. Where were all the potion classes? where is Peeves?
  where is Valentine's Day? Where is the bit where Hermione solving the
  potion logic? There are so much more and we all know that....so my
  point is, since there have been too many book fan's favorites scenes
  being cut from the movie in the past, shouldn't we know what to
  expect by now? You can't have everything!
  so the more important thing to worry/look forward is whether Alfonso
  Cauron would do a good job in translating/interpreting the book as
  best as possible, instead of worry/cry/scream/sign petition about
  this scene and this character being cut. Especially since those cut
  could mean better things for the finish product, you never know!

  Joan

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  WARNING! This group contains spoilers!

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

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

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

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

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

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Thu Mar 27 05:01:24 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 00:01:24 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <9.da54382.2bb3dfa4@aol.com>

My other thing that I would like to get off my chest is why do people think 
we can't persuade WB to change or to keep the same cast??  If your saying we 
can't win with a Franchise will then we will never win with that attuide!  
For Example Mcdonalds is a franchise right??  I think so I am not sure but 
they had hygiene issues and it was aired on 20/20 and they closed that 
particular mcdonalds!  Now I think we can make a difference but why do you 
say we can't when if we have our voices heard then they will bend over 
backwards for us!!    I just don't want to see harry potter go the way of 
Terminator with Arnold Scazanagger, Alien and the rest of the movies that 
have sequals!!

Kyle Longbottom

Hufflepuff Prefect

In a message dated 3/26/03 5:05:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
LeeMunLim03 at aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 3/26/03 4:06:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> dkewpie at pacbell.net writes:
> 
> >
> >
> >--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003"  
> >wrote:
> >>Okay, so we don't have to see an extended bit of Quidditch. It has 
> >>been done but some of the things that happen at the matches could 
> >>have been depicted and not break the time bank. I will miss the 
> >>exhiliration of seeing the team win the Cup. Call me an unrealistic 
> >>so-and-so but that wouldn't have taken years. I also was looking 
> >>forward to Harry's excellent patronus frightening the living 
> >>daylights out of Malfoy. But don't tell me to get realistic because 
> >>the absence of some bit of these scenes saddens me.
> >
> >First you don't know whether those scenes you mentioned are really in 
> >the film or not, you haven't seen the finish film yet. May be some 
> >were there in the film? So before you scream/cry/sign petitions about 
> >something, why not make sure they are indeed being remove or not 
> >first? Yes we know Wood is cut and that's for sure, but we aren't 
> >sure the entire Quidditch is removed and we don't know whether 
> >Harry's excellent patronus is cut either. Unless you give me proves.
> >
> >Second, they have been cutting fan's favorite scenes in the past 
> >movies anyways. Where were all the potion classes? where is Peeves? 
> >where is Valentine's Day? Where is the bit where Hermione solving the 
> >potion logic? There are so much more and we all know that....so my 
> >point is, since there have been too many book fan's favorites scenes 
> >being cut from the movie in the past, shouldn't we know what to 
> >expect by now? You can't have everything!
> >so the more important thing to worry/look forward is whether Alfonso 
> >Cauron would do a good job in translating/interpreting the book as 
> >best as possible, instead of worry/cry/scream/sign petition about 
> >this scene and this character being cut. Especially since those cut 
> >could mean better things for the finish product, you never know!
> >
> >Joan
> 
> No you dont know, but I am very concerned now!
> 
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 

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

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Thu Mar 27 11:24:50 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:24:50 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint
Message-ID: 

Oh, Kyle. We do argue over the silliest things :)

You wrote:
No you really don't need Flint but why cut flint and the whole Quidditch 
scene if everybody loves it???  

I reply:
Because certain things have to go! Look, as I've said many time before, I'm a major advocate for keeping Quidditch, I'm written several posts on the importance of Quidditch in PoA, particularly the Hufflepuff match, but the script is done! If they've already written it out, then it's gone. I think it completely sucks, but as I've said before - I would sacrifice Quidditch, seeing the Firebolt in action, Sir Cadogan, even ~steels self to say it~ the Boggart lesson, if it means we get a good climax. The Shrieking Shack scene is SO important to the story, and the Time Turner rescue, if done properly, would add the action and tension usually introduced via Quidditch. 

That said, I *really* hope they don't cut the Boggart lesson...

The thing we need to accept is that Cuaron is not making our movie. The only person who would make a PoA to completely satisfy me is me. The only person who would make a PoA to completely satisfy you is you. Cuaron is making his movie, not ours. I have faith in him that it will be a worthwhile film - I'm just doubtful as to how well it well stand up to my vision of PoA in my head.

I said:
I would've liked to see Wood, but the 
> decision has been made and there's not a huge amount of point bitching 
> about it now. (Like that's stopped us before... ;) )

Kyle said:
Well why do you feel nothing can get done???  No we are not workers 
protesting pay for Harry Potter but on the other hand if we don't like 
something we well make it not air anymore!  Think Pee-Wee Playhouse.  You may 
say there is a difference but how??  We picketed and it left the air waves.  

And I say:
I assume you are talking about the issues over striking on the set about the wages. That's a completely different issue. Striking over pay is not about Harry Potter. It's about being paid what they feel they deserve. (The more cynical among us might say "being paid whatever they feel they can squeeze out of the WB/HP franchise"; I don't know what their current wages are or what they're asking, so I can't really say.) It has nothing to do with Harry and his chums; on the contrary, it could have happened on any film.

And Pee-Wee's Playhouse - yeah I say there's a difference! Okay, I'm English and we never got it over here, so you'll have to give me a certain amount of leeway here. I know it's that thing with Paul Reubens that looked seventeen different types of awful (they did show the movie one afternoon on satellite - I watched it for about five minutes out of curiousity). That was a TV show for preschoolers, am I correct? (that's not a rhetorical question, I'm really not sure of what age group it was aimed at. Please correct me if I'm wrong) Meaning that they had a limited audience in the first place. I don't know why it was picketed (something to do with Reuben's charges about certain things being found on his PC? I don't know when it was, either, so you'll have to help me out), but I'd warrant that most of the parents got behind it and made a big stink over whatever disturbed them so. If it WAS the pictures on his computer, then of course it got cancelled - the general policy of most companies is to immediately distance themselves from any kind of negative publicity in the area of sex crime lawsuits. I don't know if non-Brits will get the reference, but look at the John Leslie rape thing, or all that stuff with Matthew Kelly. Both were sacked IMMEDIATELY, without any kind of ado - guilty until proven innocent, as far as the media is concerned. Matthew Kelly was proven innocent, so he got his job back - John Leslie, on the other hand, is still out in the cold. When that Blue Peter presenter was snapped by the paparazzi taking cocaine, he was sacked instantly too - when kids presenters do anything, it's even more touchy.

If it WASN'T the pics on his PC - well, I just rambled for a paragraph. Sorry :) But either way, the total boycott of everything Pee-Wee would have had an impact. But you know full well, Kyle, that everyone in this fandom will go to see PoA when it comes out, yourself included. The HP fandom worldwide is just too big - and a lot of them are kids, who don't care about the subtle subplots, they just want to see Harry. Doing anything. They'd watch Harry watching paint dry, for crying out loud :) The only thing WB would listen to is a boycott, because then they'd have to watch their little brown cash cow keel over. And the chances of enough people boycotting to make any sort of impact are tiny. The first movie is the second biggest grossing film of all time - literally millions of us would have to boycott to get them to change their minds, and it still wouldn't work until PoA comes out, because people can *say* they'll boycott all they want, but unless they actually do it, GoF will go ahead without fan input too. (which I don't think woudl be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared to the books, but they weren't unwatchable)

I said:
Although we can discuss 
> whether or not we'd like to see a new cast or keep the old one, we won't 
> get much of a choice; if Dan decides he doesn't want to be 

inserted by Kyle:
(how do we know 
> Dan or the rest havent been pigeonholed right now or Alan Rickman, Robbie 
> Coltrane etc, etc !!) 
I say: Er, because Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane have had long-standing acting careers for years (ditto Maggie Smith, Gemma Jones, Miriam Margolyes, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman etc). I really don't think history will look back on Kenneth Branagh and say "ah, Lockhart" rather than "ah, Hamlet". As for Dan and the rest - well, that's debatable as to whether or not they've already been stereotyped. If they have, no wonder they want to get out now.

me again:
pigeonholed as Harry forever, or Emma falls in love 
> and emigrates, or Rupert decides to concentrate on his exams rather than 
> his acting, or Tom decides to do something crazy like concentrate on his 
> fishing... 

He said:
Well if we as the audience really want the cast to stay the same then we can 
tell them they have to stay or we won't go see the film!  

So I say:
I'm sorry, but this is irking me more and more. You are acting as though these kids are our personal property, just because they're famous. They're kids, for crying out loud! I just gave you a bunch of examples for why they might not stay, you need to take that into consideration! If they decide they don't want to do it anymore - let's take Felton as an example, because he's close to or actually already has decided to quit - then it's unbelievably arrogant of us to say "Tom, we, people you've never met, know what's best for you. You must continue to do the Harry Potter movies." If he wants to be a fisherman, so what? It does blow, because he's a great Draco - I think he's one of three people in that film who were cast PERFECTLY - but to say he should be denied the same opportunities and freedom as any other child is horrible. I don't know if you have kids, but you'd kill yourself trying to see them happy, any parent would - what makes you think the Watsons, Feltons, Radcliffes and Grints are any different?

" they have to stay or we won't go see the film!"
Hmmm. Do you really think they'll care if they aren't in it? Not *their* problem.  

<>

Yeah, pretty much. If you don't want to watch them, don't watch them - doesn't mean you'll stop everyone else doing, particularly the kid factor.

<>

Holmes was fictional. BIG difference. If we were talking about rowing with JKR over writing an eighth book (which I dont' doubt will happen when bk7 has been published) it would be a different matter entirely. You are talking about the movies, which impact on many people's lives - the cast, the crew, the producers and directors, plus the non-filming people (editors, marketing people, etc). JKR has herself, her editor, and her publisher to think about - that's it. If she doesn't want to write any more HP, she doesn't have to - she's  not putting anyone out of a job, nor is she disappointing her fans (this is assuming she will continue to write, jsut not about Harry).

<>

No no, if you want to petition, go ahead. But as I've said above, I'm just warning you that you might waste an awful lot of effort over something we can't really change.

<>

Felton probably *could* do both - HE JUST DOESN'T WANT TO!!! He (for some god only knows reason!) thinks fishing is living life to the full (not fullest, that's not a word, love). Fair play to him - who are we to decided what does and does not signify living life to the full? And you aren't talking about destroying any old movie. Harry Potter is a runaway train of merchandise and franchising. It'd be like trying to stop McDonalds from introducing a new item on the menu, or making Coca-Cola stop producing Diet Coke. And yes, I'm thinking about the New Coke thing now, but it doesn't fit into my argument, so I'm ignoring it ;) 

Kyle said:
there is always ways to keep actors on board!  Ian Mckellan was shooting X-Man and 
Lord of the Rings at the same time!!  So Devon Murray could stay on doing 
both!  If he wants to!   

I say:
Key words: if he wants to. 

And McKellen is an adult, and an experienced theatre actor. He is a) used to long hard days and b) allowed to work more than 4hrs a day - not to mention c) no he wasn't - he did LOTR in New Zealand and X-Men in Hollywood, so although he did them close together, he wasn't literally doing one day on one set and one on another. Unless, of course, he was doing eleven hour flights every other day :)

He also said:
Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of being in 
theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing if its such a good 
film??  

I respond:
I'd imagine it's because the script sucks. You are making the mistake many people are making - that the sequels can only get worse because that's what sequels do. As a rule, yes, that's what sequels do - but we already know the plot of the next two movies, and we know it's solid. The tough thing is getting all the plot in there, not trying desperately to fill because the plot is too flimsy. (Step forward, Cruel Intentions 2...)

<> 

REALLY?? I *loved* the Neverending Story!! Aw, now I wanna watch it...

<> 

We'll never know until we watch them (although I'm betting not great. Again though, they haven't been great so far, so who knows?)

<> 

Of course we don't. Duh.

<>

Hell yeah. In case you'd forgotten, Pottermania hit the headlines with serious determination when GoF was published in June 2000 - that's eighteen months earlier than the PS movie, Dec 2001. And compare the anticipation of waiting for the CoS DVD to waiting for June 21. Although people are still lookign forward to it, it's not the rabid, almost frenzied pre-ordering and party-at-midnight-at-the-book-store planning and booking-the-day-off-work-to-read-it-as-soon-as-I-buy-it stuff that's going on with OotP. On this newsgroup alone, we're dissecting every word of the two paragraphs. We're pulling to pieces the three covers. We're obsessed :D

<> 

Oh, now you're just being silly! Interpreting the books their own way is what changing something to a new medium is all about. And you are using two different definitions of "destroy" - we wanted to get rid of PWPH (well, you guys did. I didn't really care.) TPTB do *not* want to get rid of HP - he's the reason they all bought boats last year...

<>

Because LOTR was shot back to back. Harry is being shot, released, shot, released, shot...etc. The cast all signed up for 1 long movie cut into three parts - the HP cast didn't.

<> 

Probably. Orlando Bloom's had a bunch of offers off the back of Fellowship, he's now worked with Heath Ledger and Johnny Depp. I don't doubt Thewlis will get the same. And Elijah Wood was already an established star before LOTR - that's like saying "Do you think Liv Tyler is going to go far in her career?"

<>

Very true. But denying them that option by insisting they stay in HP? You gotta let them spread their wings! Maybe they won't make it - but they're allowed to try, aren't they?

<>

Again, very true. That's why I think only one of the four principals will make it, probably Dan. (I'd've said Tom, but he's allegedly quitting acting altogether, not just HP) However, that's the kids I'm talking about - people only know them for HP, they've never done anything else. Hopefully you're talking about the same thing - if you're actually suggesting Alan Rickman or Gary Oldman or Maggie Smith will have trouble finding roles after Harry... 

:)

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Thu Mar 27 16:17:55 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:17:55 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Importance of Being Flint
Message-ID: <1c5.6a66cef.2bb47e33@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/27/03 6:38:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> Oh, Kyle. We do argue over the silliest things :)
> 
> You wrote:
> No you really don't need Flint but why cut flint and the whole Quidditch 
> scene if everybody loves it???  
> 
> I reply:
> Because certain things have to go! Look, as I've said many time before, I'm 
> a major advocate for keeping Quidditch, I'm written several posts on the 
> importance of Quidditch in PoA, particularly the Hufflepuff match, but the 
> script is done! If they've already written it out, then it's gone. I think 
> it completely sucks, but as I've said before - I would sacrifice Quidditch, 
> seeing the Firebolt in action, Sir Cadogan, even ~steels self to say it~ 
> the Boggart lesson, if it means we get a good climax. The Shrieking Shack 
> scene is SO important to the story, and the Time Turner rescue, if done 
> properly, would add the action and tension usually introduced via 
> Quidditch. 
> 
> That said, I *really* hope they don't cut the Boggart lesson...

First response they could!!!

> 
> The thing we need to accept is that Cuaron is not making our movie. The 
> only person who would make a PoA to completely satisfy me is me. The only 
> person who would make a PoA to completely satisfy you is you. Cuaron is 
> making his movie, not ours. I have faith in him that it will be a 
> worthwhile film - I'm just doubtful as to how well it well stand up to my 
> vision of PoA in my head.

Me too but remember the director also wants to be faithful to the loyal 
fanbase as well.

> 
> I said:
> I would've liked to see Wood, but the 
> >decision has been made and there's not a huge amount of point bitching 
> >about it now. (Like that's stopped us before... ;) )
> 
> Kyle said:
> Well why do you feel nothing can get done???  No we are not workers 
> protesting pay for Harry Potter but on the other hand if we don't like 
> something we well make it not air anymore!  Think Pee-Wee Playhouse.  You 
> may 
> say there is a difference but how??  We picketed and it left the air waves. 
>  
> 
> And I say:
> I assume you are talking about the issues over striking on the set about 
> the wages. That's a completely different issue. Striking over pay is not 
> about Harry Potter. It's about being paid what they feel they deserve. (The 
> more cynical among us might say "being paid whatever they feel they can 
> squeeze out of the WB/HP franchise"; I don't know what their current wages 
> are or what they're asking, so I can't really say.) It has nothing to do 
> with Harry and his chums; on the contrary, it could have happened on any 
> film.

True but it seems its becoming more and more a kids film!!  Which is 
baaaaaadddddd !!!

> 
> And Pee-Wee's Playhouse - yeah I say there's a difference! Okay, I'm 
> English and we never got it over here, so you'll have to give me a certain 
> amount of leeway here. I know it's that thing with Paul Reubens that looked 
> seventeen different types of awful (they did show the movie one afternoon 
> on satellite - I watched it for about five minutes out of curiousity). That 
> was a TV show for preschoolers, am I correct?
You are correct

 (that's not a rhetorical question, I'm really not sure of what age group it 
was aimed 
> at. Please correct me if I'm wrong) Meaning that they had a limited audience 
> in the first place. I don't know why it was picketed (something to do with 
> Reuben's charges about certain things being found on his PC? 

No two separate things!  They cancelled t.v series becuase he want to a porn 
theatre and jerked off!  The other charge was he was out and they didnt have 
a warrent to come into his house and found questionable material!

I don't know when it was, either, so you'll have to help me out), but I'd 
warrant that 
> most of the parents got behind it and made a big stink over whatever 
> disturbed them so. If it WAS the pictures on his computer, then of course 
> it got cancelled - the general policy of most companies is to immediately 
> distance themselves from any kind of negative publicity in the area of sex 
> crime lawsuits.

Yes the parents made the T.V series go under since Pual Ruebens got horny and 
jerked off in public!  Like other people havent done that and regretted it!!  
We have to condome him for it since he is doing a Kids t.v show!! 

 I don't know if non-Brits will get the reference, but look at the John 
Leslie rape 
> thing, or all that stuff with Matthew Kelly. Both were sacked IMMEDIATELY, 
> without any kind of ado - guilty until proven innocent, as far as the media 
> is concerned. Matthew Kelly was proven innocent, so he got his job back - 
> John Leslie, on the other hand, is still out in the cold. When that Blue 
> Peter presenter was snapped by the paparazzi taking cocaine, he was sacked 
> instantly too - when kids presenters do anything, it's even more touchy.
> 
> If it WASN'T the pics on his PC - well, I just rambled for a paragraph. 
> Sorry :) But either way, the total boycott of everything Pee-Wee would have 
> had an impact. But you know full well, Kyle, that everyone in this fandom 
> will go to see PoA when it comes out, yourself included. 

In all honesty your right I proably will but the Goblet and the Order of the 
Phoneix is questiable sorry dont know how to spell!

The HP fandom worldwide is just too big - and a lot of them are kids, who 
don't 
> care about the subtle subplots, they just want to see Harry. Doing anything. 
> 

Too True.

They'd watch Harry watching paint dry, for crying out loud :) The only thing 
WB 
> would listen to is a boycott, because then they'd have to watch their little 
> brown cash cow keel over. And the chances of enough people boycotting to 
> make any sort of impact are tiny. 

Very true which I am learning now.

The first movie is the second biggest grossing film of all time - literally 
millions of 
> us would have to boycott to get them to change their minds, and it still 
> wouldn't work until PoA comes out, because people can *say* they'll boycott 
> all they want, but unless they actually do it, GoF will go ahead without 
> fan input too.

No but I still want the same cast!!!  I think the Goblet will do better then 
the rest but by that time the movies will have sucked (tom the innkeeper is 
being played by someone else now!!)

 (which I don't think woudl be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared 
to 
> the books, but they weren't unwatchable)

You thought the movies sucked!!  I loved the movies and  I thought the 
chamber wasnt going to be a good one but it was excellent!!

> 
> 
> I said:
> Although we can discuss 
> >whether or not we'd like to see a new cast or keep the old one, we won't 
> >get much of a choice; if Dan decides he doesn't want to be 
> 
> inserted by Kyle:
> (how do we know 
> >Dan or the rest havent been pigeonholed right now or Alan Rickman, Robbie 
> >Coltrane etc, etc !!) 
> I say: Er, because Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane have had long-standing 
> acting careers for years (ditto Maggie Smith, Gemma Jones, Miriam 
> Margolyes, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman etc). I really don't think history 
> will look back on Kenneth Branagh and say "ah, Lockhart" rather than "ah, 
> Hamlet". As for Dan and the rest - well, that's debatable as to whether or 
> not they've already been stereotyped. If they have, no wonder they want to 
> get out now.

Well for that question I think using Kenneth Branagh us a bad example since 
his in only one film!  I agree it very debatable about the younger cast 
memebers!

> 
> me again:
> pigeonholed as Harry forever, or Emma falls in love 
> >and emigrates, or Rupert decides to concentrate on his exams rather than 
> >his acting, or Tom decides to do something crazy like concentrate on his 
> >fishing... 
> 
> He said:
> Well if we as the audience really want the cast to stay the same then we 
> can 
> tell them they have to stay or we won't go see the film!  
> 
> So I say:
> I'm sorry, but this is irking me more and more. You are acting as though 
> these kids are our personal property, just because they're famous. They're 
> kids, for crying out loud! I just gave you a bunch of examples for why they 
> might not stay, you need to take that into consideration! If they decide 
> they don't want to do it anymore - let's take Felton as an example, because 
> he's close to or actually already has decided to quit - then it's 
> unbelievably arrogant of us to say "Tom, we, people you've never met, know 
> what's best for you. You must continue to do the Harry Potter movies." If 
> he wants to be a fisherman, so what? It does blow, because he's a great 
> Draco - I think he's one of three people in that film who were cast 
> PERFECTLY - but to say he should be denied the same opportunities and 
> freedom as any other child is horrible. I don't know if you have kids, but 
> you'd kill yourself trying to see them happy, any parent would - what makes 
> you think the Watsons, Feltons, Radcliffes and Grints are any different?

I dont think they are different but I think its like  Luke Skyewalker can't 
spell it!  Okay now in the middle of filming lets change the cast since  
Radcliffe and company are leaving and there really not happy anymore.  
Remember this is a business!  Your not always going to be happy in what you 
do!  I don't think the kids  are our personal property but just think what 
would happen if Rupert, Dan or Emma decided to quit???

It irks me that people think Harry Potter is going be be hot if they recast 
every roll!!

> 
> " they have to stay or we won't go see the film!"
> Hmmm. Do you really think they'll care if they aren't in it? Not *their* 
> problem. 

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

Obvisuosly yes, maybe not you personally.

> 
> 
> < and others if they (WB) revamp the whole cast then we the public should 
> just 
> accept it and go on???>>
> 
> Yeah, pretty much. If you don't want to watch them, don't watch them - 
> doesn't mean you'll stop everyone else doing, particularly the kid factor.

Yes I do agree on that with the kid factor.

> 
> < much protest and he brought him back to life for one last adventure.>>
> 
> Holmes was fictional. BIG difference. If we were talking about rowing with 
> JKR over writing an eighth book (which I dont' doubt will happen when bk7 
> has been published) it would be a different matter entirely. You are 
> talking about the movies, which impact on many people's lives - the cast, 
> the crew, the producers and directors, plus the non-filming people 
> (editors, marketing people, etc). JKR has herself, her editor, and her 
> publisher to think about - that's it. If she doesn't want to write any more 
> HP, she doesn't have to - she's  not putting anyone out of a job, nor is 
> she disappointing her fans (this is assuming she will continue to write, 
> jsut not about Harry).

Fandom his its place!  I think it would be unwise not to keep at least 
hogwarts alive!  Harry its debateable!  Well here on the impact matter!  Fans 
do have a voice but it seems to me that people just want the films to be made 
without any intgrety (Can't  spell it).  Well will have to see about Harry 
Potter future since its so much up in the air now.

> 
> < and we 
> shouldnt have our voice heard becuase there going to do what they want 
> regardless.>>
> 
> No no, if you want to petition, go ahead. But as I've said above, I'm just 
> warning you that you might waste an awful lot of effort over something we 
> can't really change.
>  
> < 
> does have it perks!  Why can't Felton do both???  Shakes head wondering why 
> 
> not live life to the fullest.
> Shakes head in disbelief that we can destroy a T.V series but not a movie!  
> I 
> guess since Harry Potter is so big we just need to tuck our tails between 
> our 
> legs and not do anything? Right??  I hope Tom and all the cast can go 
> behind 
> harry potter but again acting is a fickle business!>>
> 
> Felton probably *could* do both - HE JUST DOESN'T WANT TO!!! He (for some 
> god only knows reason!) thinks fishing is living life to the full (not 
> fullest, that's not a word, love). 

Oh sorry English wasnt my favorite subject

Fair play to him - who are we to decided what does and does not signify 
living life 
> to the full? And you aren't talking about destroying any old movie. Harry 
> Potter is a runaway train of merchandise and franchising. It'd be like 
> trying to stop McDonalds from introducing a new item on the menu, or making 
> Coca-Cola stop producing Diet Coke. And yes, I'm thinking about the New 
> Coke thing now, but it doesn't fit into my argument, so I'm ignoring it ;)

Well I think it does becuase Harry Potter is a runaway train but if they hear 
enough voices they will bend over backwards for us!!  Since  people think 
there isnt going to be much we can do okay I am resigned to the fact Harry 
Potter is going to sh(t in a  hand basket! 
> 
> 
> Kyle said:
> there is always ways to keep actors on board!  Ian Mckellan was shooting 
> X-Man and 
> Lord of the Rings at the same time!!  So Devon Murray could stay on doing 
> both!  If he wants to!   
> 
> I say:
> Key words: if he wants to. 
> 
> And McKellen is an adult, and an experienced theatre actor. He is a) used 
> to long hard days and b) allowed to work more than 4hrs a day - not to 
> mention c) no he wasn't - he did LOTR in New Zealand and X-Men in 
> Hollywood, so although he did them close together, he wasn't literally 
> doing one day on one set and one on another. Unless, of course, he was 
> doing eleven hour flights every other day :)

I think he was since a article said he was shooting X-Men one day and off the 
to the Lord of the Rings the next!!  Its stressful being in the entertainment 
business.

> 
> 
> He also said:
> Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of being in 
> theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing if its such a 
> good 
> film??  
> 
> I respond:
> I'd imagine it's because the script sucks. You are making the mistake many 
> people are making - that the sequels can only get worse because that's what 
> sequels do. As a rule, yes, that's what sequels do - but we already know 
> the plot of the next two movies, and we know it's solid. The tough thing is 
> getting all the plot in there, not trying desperately to fill because the 
> plot is too flimsy. (Step forward, Cruel Intentions 2...)

Well I do admit that sequels can do good but I am very worried about Harry 
Potter and company!!  If the recast Tom the innkeeper is Dudley next???

> 
> <>
> 
> REALLY?? I *loved* the Neverending Story!! Aw, now I wanna watch it...

My point is made!!!  

I loved it too but when they recast everybody it just got like why are they 
waste our time and there's!!  Now I will admit Harry Potter is very different 
but when your making a film of this proportions you want the same cast 
regardless!!!   

> 
> < one???  Now they proably will make all 7 films but how good will it be if 
> they recast everybody??? >>
> 
> We'll never know until we watch them (although I'm betting not great. Again 
> though, they haven't been great so far, so who knows?)

My other point made!!!  yes thats the question who know???

> 
> < going to be the same without radcliffe being harry potter or the rest of 
> the 
> cast being there! I am finding out people really don't care about the 
> movies 
> as much as they do about the books! >>
> 
> Of course we don't. Duh.

It hurts!!!  It really hurts!!

> 
> < the fans, old young, teen guys and girls if they keep doing what there 
> doing 
> to the movies of Harry Potter???   >>
> 
> Hell yeah. In case you'd forgotten, 

We'll never know until we watch them (although I'm betting not great. Again 
though, 
> they haven't been great so far, so who knows?)

Pottermania hit the headlines with serious determination when GoF was 
published 
> in June 2000 - that's eighteen months earlier than the PS movie, Dec 2001. 
> And compare the anticipation of waiting for the CoS DVD to waiting for June 
> 21. Although people are still lookign forward to it, it's not the rabid, 
> almost frenzied pre-ordering and party-at-midnight-at-the-book-store 
> planning and booking-the-day-off-work-to-read-it-as-soon-as-I-buy-it stuff 
> that's going on with OotP. On this newsgroup alone, we're dissecting every 
> word of the two paragraphs. We're pulling to pieces the three covers. We're 
> obsessed :D

Yes and I am obessed too but with the movies I don't know!!  Like someone 
else said the movies and books are going to be very different and as you said 

> 
> < powers 
> that be destroy Harry Potter or change it to their own interpretation of 
> the 
> books??? >>
> 
> Oh, now you're just being silly! Interpreting the books their own way is 
> what changing something to a new medium is all about. And you are using two 
> different definitions of "destroy" - we wanted to get rid of PWPH (well, 
> you guys did. I didn't really care.) TPTB do *not* want to get rid of HP - 
> he's the reason they all bought boats last year...

I think there more interested in the money not our the loyal fanbase

> 
> < Potter???  Why is that a problem???  >>
> 
> Because LOTR was shot back to back. Harry is being shot, released, shot, 
> released, shot...etc. The cast all signed up for 1 long movie cut into 
> three parts - the HP cast didn't.

Well they should of done it that way but didnt!!

> 
> <>

why then is Elijah wood still recognized as a child actor???  He was a 
nominaee for a kids award and his now 23 or 24 maybe younger but an adult! 
> 
> 
> Probably. Orlando Bloom's had a bunch of offers off the back of Fellowship, 
> he's now worked with Heath Ledger and Johnny Depp. I don't doubt Thewlis 
> will get the same. And Elijah Wood was already an established star before 
> LOTR - that's like saying "Do you think Liv Tyler is going to go far in her 
> career?"
> 
> < never know if one or two of this actors from Harry Potter will be in a t.v 
> series or another movie.  >>
> 
> Very true. But denying them that option by insisting they stay in HP? You 
> gotta let them spread their wings! Maybe they won't make it - but they're 
> allowed to try, aren't they?

Yes I do agree with you on that but I would stay in Harry Potter until the 
end!!  Why does the director think or Steve Kloves think having the same cast 
will be not good!!!!!!  There in school for god sakes!!  Its like they want 
them not to grow up!!  I liked National Lapoons Vacation but it wasnt the 
same without the orignal cast and it wasnt as good!!  

> 
> < to go on behind Harry Potter??  I 
> don't think so unless they really disappear for awhile and come back!  But 
> even then its diffcult!  Not impossiable but diffcult.>>
> 
> Again, very true. That's why I think only one of the four principals will 
> make it, probably Dan. (I'd've said Tom, but he's allegedly quitting acting 
> altogether, not just HP) However, that's the kids I'm talking about - 
> people only know them for HP, they've never done anything else. Hopefully 
> you're talking about the same thing - if you're actually suggesting Alan 
> Rickman or Gary Oldman or Maggie Smith will have trouble finding roles 
> after Harry... 

True but remember there growing up and changing too the kids!  You really 
think Dan is going to make it??  Its going to be interesting seeing where all 
their careers go!!  As for the adults Gary Oldman I think is very verstile 
actor and I think he is not as pivotal as the rest of the older cast Rickman 
and Smith.  I think for the Adults your proably right but you never know!!  
If Harry Potter gets to be real big I think the adults will be stuck as well 
but again you never know!!

> 
> :)
> 
> Susan

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 

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

From geri510 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 27 21:00:36 2003
From: geri510 at yahoo.com (geri510)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 21:00:36 -0000
Subject: Strike Called OFF
Message-ID: 

Well at least this shouldn't delay anything else. The Union & WB came 
to an agreement.

From cade00000 at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 27 21:44:40 2003
From: cade00000 at yahoo.com (cade m.)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 13:44:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: <126.25d7ce30.2bb311fb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030327214440.93159.qmail@web13207.mail.yahoo.com>

 Meliss9900 at aol.com wrote:
<< Something HAS to be cut, PoA would be well over 4 hours if it weren't. While 
I would be willing to sit through a 4+ hour movie, I know my children 
wouldn't . .not even for Harry Potter nor would, I imagine, the vast majority 
of adults who are just casual fans or who are only going because their kids want too. >>

I would!!! I would sit thru an 8-hour movie if it is exceptionally good....not the likes of "Gods and Generals" though.

"Cade"

From cade00000 at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 28 00:01:38 2003
From: cade00000 at yahoo.com (cade m.)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:01:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
In-Reply-To: <170.1c3bb6f4.2bb28262@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030328000138.88151.qmail@web13208.mail.yahoo.com>

suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> I wrote:
> And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> you really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to? >>

Here is one response I could give to the question "Who cares?" ...well obviously I can only speak for myself. But if it is being talked about it and debated here then obviously some people care. There opinions carry as much weight as the opinions of those people who don't care. Please please refrain from making statements that could be construed by some as insulting or that their opinions are not as important or that theirs should not be heard. There's already too much fighting going on in the world.

"Cade"

From lahela2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 28 01:02:31 2003
From: lahela2000 at yahoo.com (lahela2000)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:02:31 -0000
Subject: Quiddich
Message-ID: 

It would be very hard NOT to include Quiddich in PoA, think of the 
reason why Harry wants to learn to defend himself from the Dementors. 
Plus this is Woods (Sean Biggerstaff) last year (last movie). He 
totally needs to be in the film.

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 28 02:38:35 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 21:38:35 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <1d2.6273d90.2bb50fab@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/27/03 5:11:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cade00000 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> Meliss9900 at aol.com wrote:
> < While 
> I would be willing to sit through a 4+ hour movie, I know my children 
> wouldn't . .not even for Harry Potter nor would, I imagine, the vast 
> majority 
> of adults who are just casual fans or who are only going because their kids 
> want too. >>
> 
> 
> I would!!! I would sit thru an 8-hour movie if it is exceptionally 
> good....not the likes of "Gods and Generals" though.
> 
> 
> "Cade"

Here here !!!  Now if we can convince the others !!!  I sat through the the 
two towers and I had to pee so BBBBBBAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD

God it was a relief to pee!!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 

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

From slaross at total.net  Fri Mar 28 02:43:45 2003
From: slaross at total.net (tiggereh1987)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:43:45 -0000
Subject: Musings on casting, actors and  awards...was: The Importance of Being Flint
Message-ID: 

Greetings all!

Haven't posted here yet, but saw Susan's response to Kyle and I had 
to comment myself.

Susan said:
I would've liked to see Wood, but the decision has been made and 
there's not a huge amount of point bitching  about it now. (Like 
that's stopped us before... ;) )

I say:
This is true.  Besides, the public rarely hears the full story about 
the negotiations between actors and producers.  Remember, Zo? 
Wannamaker wasn't in CoS because she wanted more screen time.  I
am sure that over the course of putting all seven books onto the big 
screen, we will see other changes/exclusions of characters.  

Susan said:
Pee-Wee's Playhouse I don't know why it was picketed 
(something to do with Reuben's charges about certain things being 
found on his PC? I don't know when it was, either, so you'll have to 
help me out), but I'd warrant that most of the parents got behind it 
and made a big stink over whatever disturbed them so. 

I say:
It was the fact that Paul Rubens (PeeWee) was caught inside 
an `adult' theatre doing what some people do in those types of 
theatres.  In Canada, there were a couple of children's
entertainers that were accused of molestation and they were 
boycotted until they were cleared (I believe it was Raffi and 
another one, I didn't have children then)

Susan said:
But you know full well, Kyle that everyone in this fandom will go to 
see PoA when it comes out, yourself included. The HP fandom 
worldwide is just too big - and a lot of them are kids, who don't 
care about the subtle subplots, they just want to see Harry. Doing 
anything. They'd watch Harry watching paint dry, for crying out 
loud :) The only thing WB would listen to is a boycott, because then 
they'd have to watch their little brown cash cow keel over. And the 
chances of enough people boycotting to make any sort of impact are 
tiny. The first movie is the second biggest grossing film of all 
time - literally millions of us would have to boycott to get them to 
change their minds, and it still wouldn't work until PoA comes out, 
because people can *say* they'll boycott all they want, but unless 
they actually do it, GoF will go ahead without fan input too. (Which 
I don't think would be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared 
to the books, but they weren't unwatchable)

I say:
We have to remember that Warner Brothers paid A LOT of money for the 
Harry Potter franchise.  I have been in the entertainment business 
for the past fifteen years, and the only studio that seems to wield 
more power than WB is The Mouse (aka Disney).  Regardless of who is 
cast, who isn't, who should be and who shouldn't be, Warner
is going to make a boatload of money on these films.  Think about 
most films based on books
they're not as good as the book, but people
still want to see them.

Kyle Said:
(how do we know Dan or the rest haven't been pigeonholed right
now or Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltrane etc, etc !!) 
Susan said:
Er, because Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane have had long-standing 
acting careers for years (ditto Maggie Smith, Gemma Jones, Miriam 
Margolyes, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman etc). I really don't think 
history will look back on Kenneth Branagh and say "ah, Lockhart" 
rather than "ah, Hamlet". As for Dan and the rest - well, that's 
debatable as to whether or not they've already been stereotyped. If 
they have, no wonder they want to get out now.

I say:
The British entertainment industry and the North American industry 
are different to the Extreme!  In England, a person can play the 
same character for years and years (David Jason in Only Fools and 
Horses for example), but yet still take on other roles and be 
successful (Pa Larkin in The Darling Buds of May).  In the US, if an 
actor plays the same role for more than 5-6 years, more often than 
not, he is pigeon-holed. (Alan Alda is one, Kelsey Grammer is 
another.)

Susan Said:
I'm sorry, but this is irking me more and more. You are acting as 
though these kids are our personal property, just because they're 
famous. They're kids, for crying out loud! I just gave you a bunch 
of examples for why they might not stay, you need to take that into 
consideration! If they decide they don't want to do it anymore - 
let's take Felton as an example, because he's close to or actually 
already has decided to quit - then it's unbelievably arrogant of us 
to say "Tom, we, people you've never met, know what's best for you. 
You must continue to do the Harry Potter movies." If he wants to be 
a fisherman, so what? It does blow, because he's a great Draco - I 
think he's one of three people in that film who were cast PERFECTLY -
 but to say he should be denied the same opportunities and freedom 
as any other child is horrible. I don't know if you have kids, but 
you'd kill yourself trying to see them happy, any parent would - 
what makes you think the Watsons, Feltons, Radcliffes and Grints are 
any different?

I say:
>From what I remember, Watson, Radcliffe and Grint signed on for just 
the three movies.  More than likely, they will re-negotiate their 
contract for GoF and OoP films.  The producers didn't want to
force the kids into making a decision that would affect them for ten 
years.  It's different for Coltrane and Rickman et al., as they
are grown, have perfectly successful careers and know that they 
would want to do the role for all seven movies.  The kids, however, 
are treated very differently over in England vs North America, once 
again, because of the differences in the industry.  In Britain, 
movie stars are treated rather differently.  Sure, there are the 
tabloids, but, from my experience, the right to privacy is somewhat 
different.  When I try to research actors as part of my job, I have 
a horrible time trying to find information on some British actors 
(Coltrane and Rickman aside, of course.  I challenge anyone to find 
me a biography of Robert Daws of Outside Edge
which also stars 
Timothy Spall
which is really good
).  All I'm
saying is that it's a different culture over there. Not better, not 
worse, just different.  Being Canadian, I am exposed to both on a 
regular basis.

Kyle said:
So I guess we should let Harry Potter be in the hands of Warner 
Brothers and we shouldnt have our voice heard becuase there going to 
do what they want regardless.>>

Susan Said:
No no, if you want to petition, go ahead. But as I've said above, 
I'm just warning you that you might waste an awful lot of effort 
over something we can't really change.

I say:
I think it's always worth it to try.  Who knows, perhaps it might 
reach the right person when the casting of GoF is happening.  Though 
I'm sure that the first cast will have first right ofrefusal
as they 
should.  Not that I advocate a full cast change of HRH, etc.  I 
think of some series that were successful with a leading actor 
change (James Bond) and some that weren't IMHO (Jack Ryan).

Kyle also said:
Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of 
being in theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing 
if its such a good film??  

Susan said:
I'd imagine it's because the script sucks. You are making the 
mistake many people are making - that the sequels can only get worse 
because that's what sequels do. As a rule, yes, that's what sequels 
do - but we already know the plot of the next two movies, and we 
know it's solid. The tough thing is getting all the plot in there, 
not trying desperately to fill because the plot is too flimsy. (Step 
forward, Cruel Intentions 2...)

I respond:
Sometimes, financially, it just makes sense to market it straight to 
video
it costs a lot of money to put a film out theatrically. 
The marketing costs are phenomenal!  (Example ? a full page ad in 
Entertainment Weekly costs over $50,000 US ? I don't have the
exact figure, but that rings right.  And that's just one ad in one 
publication!  LA Times charges big bucks for an ad as well
you
are looking at a marketing budget of at least $1,000,000 to do the 
US and Canada, not including television, promotional appearances, 
posters, etc etc etc.  Then they have to do it all over again on 
video.  If they go direct to video, they only have to spend the 
money once, and are more likely to break even/make a profit.  If a 
film tanks at the box office, then they still have to pay for the 
theatrical marketing as well as the video marketing.  Remember, 
Paramount tried to say that they lost money on Forrest Gump, even 
though it made over $400 million at the US box office.  Now, I
don't think they will have a problem with Harry Potter!

Kyle said:
In all likely hood will any of this actors really be famous and be 
able to go on behind Harry Potter??  I don't think so unless they 
really disappear for awhile and come back!  But even then it's 
difficult!  Not impossible but difficult

Susan Said:
Again, very true. That's why I think only one of the four principals 
will make it, probably Dan. (I'd've said Tom, but he's allegedly 
quitting acting altogether, not just HP) However, that's the kids 
I'm talking about - people only know them for HP, they've never done 
anything else. Hopefully you're talking about the same thing - if 
you're actually suggesting Alan Rickman or Gary Oldman or Maggie 
Smith will have trouble finding roles after Harry... 

I say:
I agree with Susan.  I think that the kids, if they decide that they 
want to pursue acting, will succeed.  For these young people to 
bring alive the spirit of Harry Potter at their young age, I think 
they will go far.  Hopefully, they will study at the Royal Academy 
of Dramatic Art, or Academy of Speech and Drama and get some serious 
experience on stage, which will help them to go far!

Remember, the kids have some serious acting ability surrounding them 
and hopefully, it will rub off on them:

Alan Rickman has won a BAFTA (British Academy Award), an Emmy, a 
Golden Globe, a Screen Actor's Guild Award, and nominated for 2 
Tonys (out of the two plays he was in on Broadway)
Robbie Coltrane has won 3 BAFTAs
Maggie Smith has won 2 Oscars, 5 BAFTAS, and 2 Golden Globes
Julie Walters has won 3 BAFTAS and nominated for two Oscars
Kenneth Branaugh has been nominated for 3 Oscars, won 2 BAFTAS, an 
Emmy
Miriam Margolyes has won a BAFTA
Richard Harris was nominated for two Oscars, won a Golden Globe,
John Cleese was nominated for an Oscar, Won 2 BAFTAS, an Emmy, 
Gary Oldman won a BAFTA
Timothy Spall has been nominated for three BAFTAS
Not to mention the number of nominations that I haven't
mentioned, 
or wins for film festivals, guilds, OBEs, etc!

We can only hope that Radcliffe, Watson, Grint and Felton are 
destined for greatness as these other actors are!

Leigh 
(Who is in the video industry and loves British entertainment.   and 
has had her copy of CoS on order with Amazon for months!)

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 28 02:55:42 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 21:55:42 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Importance of Being Flint (was Re: No Quidditch??)
Message-ID: <2b.3c3623e5.2bb513ae@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/27/03 7:21:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cade00000 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> suzloua at hotmail.com writes:
> 
> >I wrote:
> >And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> >you really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to? >>
> 
> 
> Here is one response I could give to the question "Who cares?" ...well 
> obviously I can only speak for myself. But if it is being talked about it 
> and debated here then obviously some people care. There opinions carry as 
> much weight as the opinions of those people who don't care. Please please 
> refrain from making statements that could be construed by some as insulting 
> or that their opinions are not as important or that theirs should not be 
> heard. There's already too much fighting going on in the world.
> 
> 
> "Cade"
> 
> 

Thank you!!!  Finally someone who agree's with me!!!

Kyle Longbottom 

hufflepuff Prefect 

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

From urbana at charter.net  Fri Mar 28 04:06:24 2003
From: urbana at charter.net (Anne)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 04:06:24 -0000
Subject: Strike Called OFF
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "geri510"  wrote:
> Well at least this shouldn't delay anything else. The Union & WB 
came 
> to an agreement.

It's nice to see Warner Brothers "doing the right thing". They tried 
to get Dan, Rupert & Hermione (especially Dan) on the cheap for CoS 
and fortunately the British actor's union stepped in and got Daniel a 
raise -- which WB could well afford given how much $$ PS/SS grossed 
worldwide.

Now if they had only been smart enough to hire Ralph Fiennes as 
Lupin!! ;-) Just kidding (sort of). I still think Ralph would have 
been perfect but ... David Thewlis it is... I'm sure I'll learn to 
love him in the role ... 

Anne U
(glad the movie crew will continue to help make HP magic)

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Fri Mar 28 04:25:06 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 23:25:06 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Musings on casting, actors and  awards...was: The Importanc...
Message-ID: <6b.d760f0f.2bb528a2@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/27/03 10:07:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
slaross at total.net writes:

> Greetings all!
> 
> Haven't posted here yet, but saw Susan's response to Kyle and I had 
> to comment myself.
> 
> Susan said:
> I would've liked to see Wood, but the decision has been made and 
> there's not a huge amount of point bitching  about it now. (Like 
> that's stopped us before... ;) )
> 
> I say:
> This is true.  Besides, the public rarely hears the full story about 
> the negotiations between actors and producers.  Remember, Zo? 
> Wannamaker wasn't in CoS because she wanted more screen time.  I
> am sure that over the course of putting all seven books onto the big 
> screen, we will see other changes/exclusions of characters.  
> 
> Susan said:
> Pee-Wee's Playhouse I don't know why it was picketed 
> (something to do with Reuben's charges about certain things being 
> found on his PC? I don't know when it was, either, so you'll have to 
> help me out), but I'd warrant that most of the parents got behind it 
> and made a big stink over whatever disturbed them so. 
> 
> I say:
> It was the fact that Paul Rubens (PeeWee) was caught inside 
> an `adult' theatre doing what some people do in those types of 
> theatres.  In Canada, there were a couple of children's
> entertainers that were accused of molestation and they were 
> boycotted until they were cleared (I believe it was Raffi and 
> another one, I didn't have children then)
> 
> Susan said:
> But you know full well, Kyle that everyone in this fandom will go to 
> see PoA when it comes out, yourself included. The HP fandom 
> worldwide is just too big - and a lot of them are kids, who don't 
> care about the subtle subplots, they just want to see Harry. Doing 
> anything. They'd watch Harry watching paint dry, for crying out 
> loud :) The only thing WB would listen to is a boycott, because then 
> they'd have to watch their little brown cash cow keel over. And the 
> chances of enough people boycotting to make any sort of impact are 
> tiny. The first movie is the second biggest grossing film of all 
> time - literally millions of us would have to boycott to get them to 
> change their minds, and it still wouldn't work until PoA comes out, 
> because people can *say* they'll boycott all they want, but unless 
> they actually do it, GoF will go ahead without fan input too. (Which 
> I don't think would be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared 
> to the books, but they weren't unwatchable)
> 
> I say:
> We have to remember that Warner Brothers paid A LOT of money for the 
> Harry Potter franchise.  I have been in the entertainment business 
> for the past fifteen years, and the only studio that seems to wield 
> more power than WB is The Mouse (aka Disney).  Regardless of who is 
> cast, who isn't, who should be and who shouldn't be, Warner
> is going to make a boatload of money on these films.  Think about 
> most films based on books?they're not as good as the book, but people
> still want to see them.

I agree on that

> 
> Kyle Said:
> (how do we know Dan or the rest haven't been pigeonholed right
> now or Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltrane etc, etc !!) 
> Susan said:
> Er, because Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane have had long-standing 
> acting careers for years (ditto Maggie Smith, Gemma Jones, Miriam 
> Margolyes, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman etc). I really don't think 
> history will look back on Kenneth Branagh and say "ah, Lockhart" 
> rather than "ah, Hamlet". As for Dan and the rest - well, that's 
> debatable as to whether or not they've already been stereotyped. If 
> they have, no wonder they want to get out now.
> 
> I say:
> The British entertainment industry and the North American industry 
> are different to the Extreme!  In England, a person can play the 
> same character for years and years (David Jason in Only Fools and 
> Horses for example), but yet still take on other roles and be 
> successful (Pa Larkin in The Darling Buds of May).  In the US, if an 
> actor plays the same role for more than 5-6 years, more often than 
> not, he is pigeon-holed. (Alan Alda is one, Kelsey Grammer is 
> another.)

Will see.

> 
> Susan Said:
> I'm sorry, but this is irking me more and more. You are acting as 
> though these kids are our personal property, just because they're 
> famous. They're kids, for crying out loud! I just gave you a bunch 
> of examples for why they might not stay, you need to take that into 
> consideration! If they decide they don't want to do it anymore - 
> let's take Felton as an example, because he's close to or actually 
> already has decided to quit - then it's unbelievably arrogant of us 
> to say "Tom, we, people you've never met, know what's best for you. 
> You must continue to do the Harry Potter movies." If he wants to be 
> a fisherman, so what? It does blow, because he's a great Draco - I 
> think he's one of three people in that film who were cast PERFECTLY -
> but to say he should be denied the same opportunities and freedom 
> as any other child is horrible. I don't know if you have kids, but 
> you'd kill yourself trying to see them happy, any parent would - 
> what makes you think the Watsons, Feltons, Radcliffes and Grints are 
> any different?
> 
> I say:
> From what I remember, Watson, Radcliffe and Grint signed on for just 
> the three movies.  More than likely, they will re-negotiate their 
> contract for GoF and OoP films.  The producers didn't want to
> force the kids into making a decision that would affect them for ten 
> years.  It's different for Coltrane and Rickman et al., as they
> are grown, have perfectly successful careers and know that they 
> would want to do the role for all seven movies.  The kids, however, 
> are treated very differently over in England vs North America, once 
> again, because of the differences in the industry.  In Britain, 
> movie stars are treated rather differently.  Sure, there are the 
> tabloids, but, from my experience, the right to privacy is somewhat 
> different.  When I try to research actors as part of my job, I have 
> a horrible time trying to find information on some British actors 
> (Coltrane and Rickman aside, of course.  I challenge anyone to find 
> me a biography of Robert Daws of Outside Edge?which also stars 
> Timothy Spall?which is really good?).  All I'm
> saying is that it's a different culture over there. Not better, not 
> worse, just different.  Being Canadian, I am exposed to both on a 
> regular basis.
> 
> Kyle said:
> So I guess we should let Harry Potter be in the hands of Warner 
> Brothers and we shouldnt have our voice heard becuase there going to 
> do what they want regardless.>>
> 
> Susan Said:
> No no, if you want to petition, go ahead. But as I've said above, 
> I'm just warning you that you might waste an awful lot of effort 
> over something we can't really change.
> 
> I say:
> I think it's always worth it to try.  Who knows, perhaps it might 
> reach the right person when the casting of GoF is happening.  Though 
> I'm sure that the first cast will have first right ofrefusal?as they 
> should.  Not that I advocate a full cast change of HRH, etc.  I 
> think of some series that were successful with a leading actor 
> change (James Bond) and some that weren't IMHO (Jack Ryan).

Yeah but the kids are not James bond.

> 
> Kyle also said:
> Why is Inspector Gadget going straight to home viewing instead of 
> being in theatres???  Why is The never ending story in home viewing 
> if its such a good film??  
> 
> Susan said:
> I'd imagine it's because the script sucks. You are making the 
> mistake many people are making - that the sequels can only get worse 
> because that's what sequels do. As a rule, yes, that's what sequels 
> do - but we already know the plot of the next two movies, and we 
> know it's solid. The tough thing is getting all the plot in there, 
> not trying desperately to fill because the plot is too flimsy. (Step 
> forward, Cruel Intentions 2...)
> 
> I respond:
> Sometimes, financially, it just makes sense to market it straight to 
> video?it costs a lot of money to put a film out theatrically. 
> The marketing costs are phenomenal!  (Example ? a full page ad in 
> Entertainment Weekly costs over $50,000 US ? I don't have the
> exact figure, but that rings right.  And that's just one ad in one 
> publication!  LA Times charges big bucks for an ad as well?you
> are looking at a marketing budget of at least $1,000,000 to do the 
> US and Canada, not including television, promotional appearances, 
> posters, etc etc etc.  Then they have to do it all over again on 
> video.  If they go direct to video, they only have to spend the 
> money once, and are more likely to break even/make a profit.  If a 
> film tanks at the box office, then they still have to pay for the 
> theatrical marketing as well as the video marketing.  Remember, 
> Paramount tried to say that they lost money on Forrest Gump, even 
> though it made over $400 million at the US box office.  Now, I
> don't think they will have a problem with Harry Potter!

No I agree with you on that.

> 
> Kyle said:
> In all likely hood will any of this actors really be famous and be 
> able to go on behind Harry Potter??  I don't think so unless they 
> really disappear for awhile and come back!  But even then it's 
> difficult!  Not impossible but difficult
> 
> Susan Said:
> Again, very true. That's why I think only one of the four principals 
> will make it, probably Dan. (I'd've said Tom, but he's allegedly 
> quitting acting altogether, not just HP) However, that's the kids 
> I'm talking about - people only know them for HP, they've never done 
> anything else. Hopefully you're talking about the same thing - if 
> you're actually suggesting Alan Rickman or Gary Oldman or Maggie 
> Smith will have trouble finding roles after Harry... 
> 
> I say:
> I agree with Susan.  I think that the kids, if they decide that they 
> want to pursue acting, will succeed.  For these young people to 
> bring alive the spirit of Harry Potter at their young age, I think 
> they will go far.  Hopefully, they will study at the Royal Academy 
> of Dramatic Art, or Academy of Speech and Drama and get some serious 
> experience on stage, which will help them to go far!
> 
> Remember, the kids have some serious acting ability surrounding them 
> and hopefully, it will rub off on them:
> 
> Alan Rickman has won a BAFTA (British Academy Award), an Emmy, a 
> Golden Globe, a Screen Actor's Guild Award, and nominated for 2 
> Tonys (out of the two plays he was in on Broadway)
> Robbie Coltrane has won 3 BAFTAs
> Maggie Smith has won 2 Oscars, 5 BAFTAS, and 2 Golden Globes
> Julie Walters has won 3 BAFTAS and nominated for two Oscars
> Kenneth Branaugh has been nominated for 3 Oscars, won 2 BAFTAS, an 
> Emmy
> Miriam Margolyes has won a BAFTA
> Richard Harris was nominated for two Oscars, won a Golden Globe,
> John Cleese was nominated for an Oscar, Won 2 BAFTAS, an Emmy, 
> Gary Oldman won a BAFTA
> Timothy Spall has been nominated for three BAFTAS
> Not to mention the number of nominations that I haven't
> mentioned, 
> or wins for film festivals, guilds, OBEs, etc!
> 
> We can only hope that Radcliffe, Watson, Grint and Felton are 
> destined for greatness as these other actors are!
> 
> Leigh 
> (Who is in the video industry and loves British entertainment.   and 
> has had her copy of CoS on order with Amazon for months!)

Me too!!

Kyle Longbottom 

Hufflepuff Prefect 

> 
> 

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

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Fri Mar 28 04:52:51 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 20:52:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Direct-to-Video & Cast Changes (was) The Importance of Being Flint
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030328045251.44756.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>

Kyle:
> Why is Inspector Gadget going
> straight to home viewing instead 
> of being in theatres???  Why is
> The never ending story in home 
> viewing if its such a good film

So...you would have us believe that 
Warner Bros. will never make changes 
to the HP movie cast over the course 
of 7 films because once you point 
out their folly to them, WB would 
surely want to avoid the 
'inevitable' fate of direct-to-
video that befalls inexorably all 
sequels that change cast members?

Are you quite sure that the cast 
change from Matthew Broderick to 
French Stewart is the reason IG2 
never got a theatrical release?

See, IMNSHO, it's more likely the 
decision to NOT release IG2 in the 
theaters is the reason for the cast 
change...NOT the other way around.

The fact that IG1's box office take 
is not good enough to warrant the 
gamble of a 2nd try at a theatrical 
release is probably the reason that 
the studio didn't shell out the 
money for Broderick.  Whether IG2 
was destined for the big screen or 
the small screen first is a decision 
made, most likely, before casting 
even began.  Gotta have a budget 
y'know.

If you want us to join in your 
crusade, you must first present us 
with solid and compelling reasons.  
Your argument that changes in the 
cast will make such an impact on the 
final product that Warner Bros. will 
have no choice but to release the 
inferior film on DVD/VHS instead of 
the big screens is supported by 
citations of movies that are not at 
all equivalent to the HP movies.

Go to 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/

and compare the amount of money made 
by IG1 and HP1/HP2.  These two 
franchises are in no way shape or 
form going to follow the same 
business model.  How can they 
possibly?

Why does this matter?  Because 
neither you, I, nor presumably 
anyone else reading this list have 
the money to bankroll our own 
version of HP.  Until you do have 
the money, before you tell a 
corporation how they should spend 
money that isn't yours, perhaps 
m'dear, you should look much more 
carefully into all the factors that 
influence that corporation in its 
decision making process.

In other words, why should Warner 
Bros. take you seriously as someone 
whose advice they should heed in how 
they grow their assets?  I don't say 
this to be mean...I say this to 
direct your attention to a weak spot 
that needs some shoring up.

Or avoid exposure of: Don't weaken 
your own argument by going into this 
area of business and financial 
planning - your strongest point is 
your opinion that changes in the 
cast will alienate fans like 
yourself who are consumers of the 
franchise.

Take Moody's advice: Play to your 
strength.

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com

From feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com  Sat Mar 29 17:49:35 2003
From: feliciarickmann at dsl.pipex.com (Felicia Rickmann)
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 17:49:35 -0000
Subject: Direct-to-Video & Cast Changes (was) The Importance of Being Flint
In-Reply-To: <20030328045251.44756.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: 

Heavens, what a diatribe.

Whatever the reasoning behind it, did it have to be so long.

Felicia

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan  
wrote:
> Kyle:
> > Why is Inspector Gadget going
> > straight to home viewing instead 
> > of being in theatres???  Why is
> > The never ending story in home 
> > viewing if its such a good film
> 
> So...you would have us believe that 
> Warner Bros. will never make changes 
> SNIP

who are consumers of the 
> franchise.
> 
> Take Moody's advice: Play to your 
> strength.
> 
> Petra
> a
> n  :)
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your 
desktop!
> http://platinum.yahoo.com

From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sat Mar 29 23:15:19 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 15:15:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Direct-to-Video & Cast Changes
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: <20030329231519.38297.qmail@web21101.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Felicia Rickmann  wrote:
> Heavens, what a diatribe.
> 
> Whatever the reasoning behind it, did it have to be so long.
> 
> Felicia

Ah.  My apologies, if I had wasted your or anyone else's time.

My thanks to those who read it all the way through despite having the
alternative of skipping it.

Petra
a
n  :|

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com

From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 30 01:33:20 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 01:33:20 -0000
Subject: Diatribe?
Message-ID: 

Felicia Rickmann  wrote:

>> Heavens, what a diatribe.
>> 
>> Whatever the reasoning behind it, did it have to be so long.
>> 
>> Felicia

And Petra wrote:

>Ah. My apologies, if I had wasted your or anyone else's time.

And I write:

Nope. Didn't waste mine. I really enjoy your posts, btw, Petra. And I 
copied that post of yours into Microsoft Word; once it had been taken 
out of the long column format, it only ran to about a page of text. 

I would hardly call it a diatribe.

Derannimer

From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Sun Mar 30 02:55:58 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 02:55:58 -0000
Subject: ADMIN:  Play nice
Message-ID: 

Ahem.  We run things with a pretty relaxed grip over here on Movie, 
but some rules still apply.  Be polite.  If you think someone is in 
violation of the rules, please alert a Mod offlist (HPFGU-Movie-owner 
@ yahoogroups.com).  If you just don't like what someone has to say, 
skip it or respond nicely.  

We now return you to the scheduled program.

Amy Z, aka Amygeist
for HPfGU list admin

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Mon Mar 31 17:14:05 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:14:05 +0100
Subject: Apology
Message-ID: 

I wrote:
> And as far as Flint being cut goes - who cares? If we can't save Wood, do 
> you really think we'll save Flint? And do we even really want to? >>

Cade replied:
Here is one response I could give to the question "Who cares?" ...well obviously I can only speak for myself. But if it is being talked about it and debated here then obviously some people care. There opinions carry as much weight as the opinions of those people who don't care. Please please refrain from making statements that could be construed by some as insulting or that their opinions are not as important or that theirs should not be heard. There's already too much fighting going on in the world.

I say:
This was a throwaway comment, and not meant to be offensive. I was in no way implying that Kyle's opinions did not matter - on the contrary, I have made every effort to make sure what I'm saying does not come across as "I'm right you're wrong", because although I don't agree with what he's saying, I would never say he has no right to say it. I apologise if I offended you, Cade :) 

Also, since I'm writing, Leigh and Petra Pan, I loved both your posts "Musings on casting, actors and  awards" and "Direct-to-Video & Cast Changes" that referenced mine. It's nice to know people with such insightful opinions are reading what I'm saying. God, I just re-read that, it sounds so kiss-ass!!! heehee!

Susan
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From suzloua at hotmail.com  Mon Mar 31 17:16:17 2003
From: suzloua at hotmail.com (Susan Atherton)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:16:17 +0100
Subject: The Importance of Being Flint
Message-ID: 

Firstly, my apologies to Amy Z. I think it was my post that started off most of the arguing you were referring to; although I was trying to write it in a friendly debate sense, I can see some of my sarcastic comments may have come off as hostile arguing. It's my sense of humour, and I have enough trouble IRL with people miscontruing what I say - I should know better than to push it in text, where I don't have body language and tone of voice to soften the blow. Sorry anyone else who was offended by my comments - the majority of the reasoning behind my argument is simply playing devil's advocate to Kyle, I like discussing stuff like this and it wasn't intended to get nasty.

Secondly, Felicia, you didn't half make me giggle when you said Petra Pan's (in my opinion very good) post was too long when it was about a quarter of the length of my original Importance of Being Flint one!!

Disclaimer in place, I must dust off my soap box and share the wonder of my opinion with you all again :)

Kyle said:
Now I think we can make a difference but why do you 
say we can't when if we have our voices heard then they will bend over 
backwards for us!!    I just don't want to see harry potter go the way of 
Terminator with Arnold Scazanagger, Alien and the rest of the movies that 
have sequals!!

Now, as I keep saying, I do admire your gusto - to quote a wise man, I completely disagree with what you say but would fight to the death for your right to say it - and it's nice to see you are such a fan of the HP movies (to me, they really are just an enhancement of the books, not a separate and equally good series), but some of your arguments confound me. Especially since you've picked here Terminator 2 and Aliens, Alien 3, and Alien Resurrection (I know T3 is being made, but since no-one's seen it yet, I don't count it). T2 and Aliens are, along with the Godfather part II, generally agreed to be some of the very few sequels that are far better than their predecessors. You don't want the HP series to get better as time goes on?? ~scratches head in confusion~

I said:
That said, I *really* hope they don't cut the Boggart lesson...
Kyle replied:
First response they could!!!

~pulls out hair~

Gah! I know that, sweetie! I'm well aware that they could cut all my favourite scenes, and I'm starting to feel I should get "I WANT TO KEEP QUIDDITCH" tattooed on my forehead, I've said it so often. I'm just pointing out the fact that they can do more or less everything they want.

I said:
 I have faith in him that it will be a 
> worthwhile film - I'm just doubtful as to how well it well stand up to my 
> vision of PoA in my head.
He said:
Me too but remember the director also wants to be faithful to the loyal 
fanbase as well.

You say "the director". I'm taking that as one of three interpretations:
a) Chris Columbus wants to be faithful to the loyal fanbase.
b) Alfonso Cuaron wants to be faithful to the loyal fanbase.
c) Directors in general want to be faithful to the loyal fanbase of any sequels to beloved movies.

a) Columbus DID say that remaining faithful to the book was very important to him, but Columbus isn't directing PoA (how sad... ~vbg~)
b) Cuaron made no such promise. He's just here to make a good movie.
c) It's not an unwritten rule. Or a written rule. It was Columbus' own principals that came into play - we cannot reasonably expect Cuaron to play by Columbus' rules.

He said:
True but it seems its becoming more and more a kids film!!  Which is 
baaaaaadddddd !!!
I say:
Well, to be honest, "becoming" brings to mind the words "horse" "door" "after" and "bolted". The books were just written by JKR for JKR - if anyone else wanted to buy them, more power to them. She never intended them as books for adults or kids - they were just seen as kids books by Scholastic and Bloomsbury, and marketed thus. WB, knowing the majority of the fanbase lay in the under 16 demographic, marketed the films similarly. I think this is why a lot of adults have trouble with the movies - they are really made for the kids. It bothers us the way everything is slapdash and the delightful strands of plot are squished up - kids for the most part couldn't care less, they want the more the better. I mean, the entire Polyjuice thing in CoS is pointless when you look at it - they found out NOTHING, except that Malfoy wasn't behind it. (Or did they find out the Chamber had been opened before? No, they learned that in the hospital. That Myrtle had died, maybe? Oh, I can't remember.) But simply by introducing it, she'd set up a little mention of boomslang skin in GoF that could be slipped in innocently enough and set up the Polyjuice ending. This is just one random example of the sneakiness in the books that is lost in the films.

Anyway.

<>

Kyle said:
No but I still want the same cast!!!  I think the Goblet will do better then 
the rest but by that time the movies will have sucked (tom the innkeeper is 
being played by someone else now!!)
I say:
I don't really understand why you are backing these particular horses. I can see your point on the HRHD thing, because I agree, I want them to stay too - but Tom the one line Innkeeper? Marcus "Look at my teeth not my acting" Flint? Do you seriously believe that the change of actor from "whoever played him in PS" to "Whoever's playing him in PoA" will affect the film that badly? Maybe the actor who played Tom didn't want to do it again. Maybe he died. Maybe he's busy. We can't blame WB for EVERYTHING. (Tempting though, huh?!)

I said:
(which I don't think woudl be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared to the books, but they weren't unwatchable)
Kyle said:
You thought the movies sucked!!  I loved the movies and  I thought the 
chamber wasnt going to be a good one but it was excellent!!
I say:
Don't get me wrong, as movies they are okay, but they aren't a very good representation of the books, nor are they a very good ambassador to the non-HP world.

Kyle said:
I dont think they are different but I think its like  Luke Skyewalker can't 
spell it!  Okay now in the middle of filming lets change the cast since  
Radcliffe and company are leaving and there really not happy anymore.  
Remember this is a business!  Your not always going to be happy in what you 
do!  I don't think the kids  are our personal property but just think what 
would happen if Rupert, Dan or Emma decided to quit???

I say:
Luke Skywalker? Huh? Do you mean that Mark Hamill hasn't done much acting since Star Wars, or that they changed Luke Skywalker? Because they didn't change him... ~confused~
If you're referring to the current trilogy, they are prequels. Luke hasn't been born yet. And if you mean that they changed *Anakin* Skywalker from Jake Lloyd to Hayden Christiansen in Ep2, they kinda had to - the films are set ten years apart, he had to become 19 in two or three years.

As far as "remembering this is a business" - well, I'm sorry, but you are really starting to worry me now. They're just children. How on earth can you say they should be miserable to entertain us for a couple of hours? 

If they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to. You are essentially talking about denying them the right to choose just to make you happy. And that's a horrible attitude to have. I'm not trying to be harsh, here, I just want you to hear what you're saying.

I said:
> " they have to stay or we won't go see the film!"
> Hmmm. Do you really think they'll care if they aren't in it? Not *their* 
> problem. 
He said:
No its not but on the other hand do you really think the last film is going 
to be as hot as the first and 2nd one???  If they care about there fans they 
will still.  
I say:
One might say if their fans care about them, they'd support their decisions... What exactly do you mean by "hot", by the way? I mean, are we talking Hansel ("he's so hot right now" hehe)?

He said:
Well I think it does becuase Harry Potter is a runaway train but if they hear 
enough voices they will bend over backwards for us!!  Since  people think 
there isnt going to be much we can do okay I am resigned to the fact Harry 
Potter is going to sh(t in a  hand basket! 

They will bend over backwards? No offence, but I think you are being a little naive. They might shift a little if the fandom really DID go into action, but the WB execs are rich, powerful men. They don't bend over backwards for their mothers, never mind us.

Re: McKellen
He said:
I think he was since a article said he was shooting X-Men one day and off the 
to the Lord of the Rings the next!!  Its stressful being in the entertainment 
business.

Perhaps it meant he was shooting X2 and follow-up reshoots for TTT or ROTK at the same time? I'm pretty sure he was in NZ for all the time he was shooting LOTR. Or maybe it meant he finished shooting X-Men and hopped on a plane to NZ and started on LOTR the next day, or vice-versa? As I said, NZ and California are a good eleven hours from each other. To make one of your principals fly back and forth two and three times a week isn't good business sense for either production - I really think you should double-check that. Common sense dictates they wouldn't work that way.

Kyle said:
Well I do admit that sequels can do good but I am very worried about Harry 
Potter and company!!  If the recast Tom the innkeeper is Dudley next???

You missed my point somewhat. I was saying that on the whole sequels DO suck, but it's because the original idea that made the first film so sh*t-hot is subverted over the series. In the case of adaptations, it can be that the original book has no sequel - hence Jurassic Park and The Lost World doing ridiculously well at the box office and JPIII more or less sinking without trace (although the fact that we're used to amazing CGI now could have something to do with it - maybe one of those mad Stephen King spin-offs might have been a better example).

As far as comparing Tom and Dudley - check your books. How many canon mentions does Tom have compared to little Duddikins? You really can't put the two together.

Kyle said re WB and the powers that be:
I think there more interested in the money not our the loyal fanbase
I throw up my hands in joy and shout:
He sees the light!!

Kyle said:
> < Potter???  Why is that a problem???  >>
I said:
> Because LOTR was shot back to back. Harry is being shot, released, shot, 
> released, shot...etc. The cast all signed up for 1 long movie cut into 
> three parts - the HP cast didn't.
He said:
Well they should of done it that way but didnt!!
I shrug and say:
Tough nuggies, really. Too late now.

He said:
why then is Elijah wood still recognized as a child actor???  He was a 
nominaee for a kids award and his now 23 or 24 maybe younger but an adult! 

I take it you are referring to a Kids Choice award or something? They are chosen by kids, not specifically for children only. One might argue that the Oscars are an "adult" award, so what business did Haley Joel Osment have being nominated for Best Supporting Actor? What about Beauty and the Beast for Best Picture? etc etc.

Kyle said:
I would stay in Harry Potter until the end!! 

Bully for you. I'd do the same. They don't want to - maybe, just maybe they know better than we do? Since they are actually living it, and we're just imagining?

Kyle said:
Why does the director think or Steve Kloves think having the same cast 
will be not good!!!!!!  

Oh lordy. They do! They want to keep them! It's the kids themselves who want to leave, not the directors! And Steve Kloves? He's a writer - they rank just above coffee boy on a film set.

Kyle then said something I found pretty amusing:
If Harry Potter gets to be real big I think the adults will be stuck as well 
but again you never know!!

Sorry, I just had to mention this bit. IF HARRY POTTER GETS TO BE REAL BIG??? Are you kidding me?!?! :) 

Susan
wondering if we'll have WB-sponsored clothes and HP bread when Harry gets to be real big, if he's currently quite small - unless you meant height-wise :D
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
"Help me Jebus!" --Homer Simpson
"Shame on you! Ugly baby judges you!" --Ross Geller
"Oh yeah, and did I mention I've got a baby?" --Stuart Alan Jones
"You know, I telephoned my grandparents the other day, and my grandfather said to me, 'We saw your movie.' 'Which one?' I said, and he shouted, 'Betty, what was the name of that movie I didn't like?'" --Brad Pitt

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

From LeeMunLim03 at aol.com  Mon Mar 31 19:01:33 2003
From: LeeMunLim03 at aol.com (LeeMunLim03 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:01:33 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Importance of Being Flint
Message-ID: <177.1851e7ac.2bb9ea8d@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/31/03 12:26:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
suzloua at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> Firstly, my apologies to Amy Z. I think it was my post that started off 
> most of the arguing you were referring to; although I was trying to write 
> it in a friendly debate sense, I can see some of my sarcastic comments may 
> have come off as hostile arguing. It's my sense of humour, and I have 
> enough trouble IRL with people miscontruing what I say - I should know 
> better than to push it in text, where I don't have body language and tone 
> of voice to soften the blow. Sorry anyone else who was offended by my 
> comments - the majority of the reasoning behind my argument is simply 
> playing devil's advocate to Kyle, I like discussing stuff like this and it 
> wasn't intended to get nasty.

I think it got nasty now its more of a discussion!!

> 
> Secondly, Felicia, you didn't half make me giggle when you said Petra Pan's 
> (in my opinion very good) post was too long when it was about a quarter of 
> the length of my original Importance of Being Flint one!!
> 
> Disclaimer in place, I must dust off my soap box and share the wonder of my 
> opinion with you all again :)
> 
> Kyle said:
> Now I think we can make a difference but why do you 
> say we can't when if we have our voices heard then they will bend over 
> backwards for us!!   I just don't want to see harry potter go the way of 
> Terminator with Arnold Scazanagger, Alien and the rest of the movies that 
> have sequals!!
> 
> Now, as I keep saying, I do admire your gusto - to quote a wise man, I 
> completely disagree with what you say but would fight to the death for your 
> right to say it - and it's nice to see you are such a fan of the HP movies 
> (to me, they really are just an enhancement of the books, not a separate 
> and equally good series), but some of your arguments confound me. 
> Especially since you've picked here Terminator 2 and Aliens, Alien 3, and 
> Alien Resurrection (I know T3 is being made, but since no-one's seen it 
> yet, I don't count it). T2 and Aliens are, along with the Godfather part 
> II, generally agreed to be some of the very few sequels that are far better 
> than their predecessors. You don't want the HP series to get better as time 
> goes on?? ~scratches head in confusion~

Yes I do want Harry Potter to get better with time!!  But why change the 
cast!!!  I didnt know Alien Resurrection did well at the box office and I 
sure am not going to see Terminator for the script anymore since two of the 
main cast have either left or can't be there (drug problem)!!  I heard Joss W
headon did the script or something and I think he needs to stick with Buffy 
and Angel until he gives us something more tasty!!

> 
> I said:
> That said, I *really* hope they don't cut the Boggart lesson...
> Kyle replied:
> First response they could!!!
> 
> ~pulls out hair~
> 
> Gah! I know that, sweetie! I'm well aware that they could cut all my 
> favourite scenes, and I'm starting to feel I should get "I WANT TO KEEP 
> QUIDDITCH" tattooed on my forehead, I've said it so often. I'm just 
> pointing out the fact that they can do more or less everything they want.

But why do you say who cares if flint is not in the movie!!  Big Question 
Mark???

> 
> I said:
> I have faith in him that it will be a 
> >worthwhile film - I'm just doubtful as to how well it well stand up to my 
> >vision of PoA in my head.
> He said:
> Me too but remember the director also wants to be faithful to the loyal 
> fanbase as well.
> 
> You say "the director". I'm taking that as one of three interpretations:
> a) Chris Columbus wants to be faithful to the loyal fanbase.
> b) Alfonso Cuaron wants to be faithful to the loyal fanbase.
> c) Directors in general want to be faithful to the loyal fanbase of any 
> sequels to beloved movies.

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

> 
> a) Columbus DID say that remaining faithful to the book was very important 
> to him, but Columbus isn't directing PoA (how sad... ~vbg~)
> b) Cuaron made no such promise. He's just here to make a good movie.
> c) It's not an unwritten rule. Or a written rule. It was Columbus' own 
> principals that came into play - we cannot reasonably expect Cuaron to play 
> by Columbus' rules.

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

> 
> He said:
> True but it seems its becoming more and more a kids film!!  Which is 
> baaaaaadddddd !!!
> I say:
> Well, to be honest, "becoming" brings to mind the words "horse" "door" 
> "after" and "bolted". The books were just written by JKR for JKR - if 
> anyone else wanted to buy them, more power to them. She never intended them 
> as books for adults or kids - they were just seen as kids books by 
> Scholastic and Bloomsbury, and marketed thus. WB, knowing the majority of 
> the fanbase lay in the under 16 demographic, marketed the films similarly. 
> I think this is why a lot of adults have trouble with the movies - they are 
> really made for the kids. It bothers us the way everything is slapdash and 
> the delightful strands of plot are squished up - kids for the most part 
> couldn't care less, they want the more the better. I mean, the entire 
> Polyjuice thing in CoS is pointless when you look at it - they found out 
> NOTHING, except that Malfoy wasn't behind it. (Or did they find out the 
> Chamber had been opened before? No, they learned that in the hospital. That 
> Myrtle had died, maybe? Oh, I can't remember.) But simply by introducing 
> it, she'd set up a little mention of boomslang skin in GoF ( you mean 
> Potter skinny dipping episode in the Prefects bathroom??) that could be 
> slipped in innocently enough and set up the Polyjuice ending. This is just 
> one random example of the sneakiness in the books that is lost in the 
> films.

What sneakiness. Please explain

> 
> 
> Anyway.
> 
> < better than me>>
> 
> Kyle said:
> No but I still want the same cast!!!  I think the Goblet will do better 
> then 
> the rest but by that time the movies will have sucked (tom the innkeeper is 
> 
> being played by someone else now!!)
> I say:
> I don't really understand why you are backing these particular horses. 
> (What do you mean horses???)  I can see your point on the HRHD thing, 
> because I agree, I want them to stay too - but Tom the one line Innkeeper? 
> Marcus "Look at my teeth not my acting" Flint? Do you seriously believe 
> that the change of actor from "whoever played him in PS" to "Whoever's 
> playing him in PoA" will affect the film that badly? Maybe the actor who 
> played Tom didn't want to do it again. Maybe he died. Maybe he's busy. We 
> can't blame WB for EVERYTHING. (Tempting though, huh?!)

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

> 
> I said:
> (which I don't think woudl be SUCH a bad thing - PS and CoS sucked compared 
> to the books, but they weren't unwatchable)
> Kyle said:
> You thought the movies sucked!!  I loved the movies and  I thought the 
> chamber wasnt going to be a good one but it was excellent!!
> I say:
> Don't get me wrong, as movies they are okay, but they aren't a very good 
> representation of the books, nor are they a very good ambassador to the 
> non-HP world.

Well we can open a whole pandora's box about wiccans not liking the movie!!  
My parents even told me wicca's don't like the movie since they say it doesnt 
really represeant them!!  Well movies and books are a little different but 
the same as well!  I mean I thought I wouldnt like the Chamber but then its 
my bias when I read the books!!  I feel if I didnt read the books I wouldnt 
have had those angry feelings and then when I watched it I loved it!!  Deep 
down I guess I wanted to see it!!  

> 
> 
> Kyle said:
> I dont think they are different but I think its like  Luke Skyewalker can't 
> 
> spell it!  Okay now in the middle of filming lets change the cast since  
> Radcliffe and company are leaving and there really not happy anymore.  
> Remember this is a business!  Your not always going to be happy in what you 
> 
> do!  I don't think the kids  are our personal property but just think what 
> would happen if Rupert, Dan or Emma decided to quit???
> 
> I say:
> Luke Skywalker? Huh? Do you mean that Mark Hamill hasn't done much acting 
> since Star Wars, or that they changed Luke Skywalker? Because they didn't 
> change him... ~confused~

No I am saying why change the cast since you already have your cast!!!!

> If you're referring to the current trilogy, they are prequels. Luke hasn't 
> been born yet. And if you mean that they changed *Anakin* Skywalker from 
> Jake Lloyd to Hayden Christiansen in Ep2, they kinda had to - the films are 
> set ten years apart, he had to become 19 in two or three years.

If we are talking about the trilogys now thats a whole different ball game!!  
Remember you really dont need Mark Hamill since he wasnt born yet when Hayden 
Christiansein played him!

> 
> As far as "remembering this is a business" - well, I'm sorry, but you are 
> really starting to worry me now. They're just children. How on earth can 
> you say they should be miserable to entertain us for a couple of hours?

I dont remember saying they need to be miserable but, but!!  What I am trying 
to say is yes there children but on the other hand there also actors Think 
now and then and Apt Pupil  How many people are going to say well in this 
scene the wormer brothers are swimming in the lake skinny dipping and the 
girls come and steal there clothes!!!  This is acting where there always 
emotional naked and sometimes physically naked!  I think that is 
uncomfortable but its the business their in!  My point is there not always 
going to like what they do in the acting business but they have to remember 
its a weird artistic business!!  If you boss asked you to remove you clothes 
would you do it!!  Proalby not but in the acting business they are habutially 
asked to remove their clothes and be miserable or not comfortable!!

 > 
> If they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to. No I agree with you 
> but they are in the business and sometimes they are not going to like what 
> they have to do I didnt like drawing nudes but Now I think its okay so 
> bring on the nudes as well as clothed models!!  You are essentially talking 
> about denying them the right to choose just to make you happy. And that's a 
> horrible attitude to have. I'm not trying to be harsh, here, I just want 
> you to hear what you're saying.
> 
> I said:
> >" they have to stay or we won't go see the film!"
> >Hmmm. Do you really think they'll care if they aren't in it? Not *their* 
> >problem. 
> He said:
> No its not but on the other hand do you really think the last film is going 
> 
> to be as hot as the first and 2nd one???  If they care about there fans 
> they 
> will still.  
> I say:
> One might say if their fans care about them, they'd support their 
> decisions... What exactly do you mean by "hot", by the way? I mean, are we 
> talking Hansel ("he's so hot right now" hehe)?

No not hansel but what I am trying to say is you dont even know about the 4th 
installment of the Never Ending Story, so Harry Potter may become that!

> 
> 
> He said:
> Well I think it does becuase Harry Potter is a runaway train but if they 
> hear 
> enough voices they will bend over backwards for us!!  Since  people think 
> there isnt going to be much we can do okay I am resigned to the fact Harry 
> Potter is going to sh(t in a  hand basket! 
> 
> They will bend over backwards? No offence, but I think you are being a 
> little naive. They might shift a little if the fandom really DID go into 
> action, but the WB execs are rich, powerful men. They don't bend over 
> backwards for their mothers, never mind us.

Well every dog has its day!!!  Or the other example maybe David and Golitah 
the Giant!!

> Re: McKellen
> He said:
> I think he was since a article said he was shooting X-Men one day and off 
> the 
> to the Lord of the Rings the next!!  Its stressful being in the 
> entertainment 
> business.
> 
> Perhaps it meant he was shooting X2 and follow-up reshoots for TTT or ROTK 
> at the same time? I'm pretty sure he was in NZ for all the time he was 
> shooting LOTR. Or maybe it meant he finished shooting X-Men and hopped on a 
> plane to NZ and started on LOTR the next day, or vice-versa? As I said, NZ 
> and California are a good eleven hours from each other. To make one of your 
> principals fly back and forth two and three times a week isn't good 
> business sense for either production - I really think you should 
> double-check that. Common sense dictates they wouldn't work that way.

Thats what I read and Marlu Henna From Evening Shade and Taxi would be at her 
dying mothers side and go back the next moring to work in hollywood then come 
back to her mothers side at night in Philly!!!

> 
> Kyle said:
> Well I do admit that sequels can do good but I am very worried about Harry 
> Potter and company!!  If the recast Tom the innkeeper is Dudley next???
> 
> You missed my point somewhat. I was saying that on the whole sequels DO 
> suck, but it's because the original idea that made the first film so 
> sh*t-hot is subverted over the series. In the case of adaptations, it can 
> be that the original book has no sequel - hence Jurassic Park and The Lost 
> World doing ridiculously well at the box office and JPIII more or less 
> sinking without trace (although the fact that we're used to amazing CGI now 
> could have something to do with it - maybe one of those mad Stephen King 
> spin-offs might have been a better example).
> 
> As far as comparing Tom and Dudley - check your books. How many canon 
> mentions does Tom have compared to little Duddikins? You really can't put 
> the two together.

Well I think I can since Dudley is always in the books with his parents!!  
Someone said well Draco doesnt have to be in the Goblet of Fire as much so 
Felton can leave??  Plus in the 5th book The Dursleys will have a bigger 
role!

> 
> 
> Kyle said re WB and the powers that be:
> I think there more interested in the money not our the loyal fanbase
> I throw up my hands in joy and shout:
> He sees the light!!

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

> 
> Kyle said:
> >< >Potter???  Why is that a problem???  >>
> I said:
> >Because LOTR was shot back to back. Harry is being shot, released, shot, 
> >released, shot...etc. The cast all signed up for 1 long movie cut into 
> >three parts - the HP cast didn't.
> He said:
> Well they should of done it that way but didnt!!
> I shrug and say:
> Tough nuggies, really. Too late now.

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

> 
> He said:
> why then is Elijah wood still recognized as a child actor???  He was a 
> nominaee for a kids award and his now 23 or 24 maybe younger but an adult! 
> 
> I take it you are referring to a Kids Choice award or something? They are 
> chosen by kids, not specifically for children only. One might argue that 
> the Oscars are an "adult" award, so what business did Haley Joel Osment 
> have being nominated for Best Supporting Actor? What about Beauty and the 
> Beast for Best Picture? etc etc.

I have to disagree with you on that one!!  Any actor in the Oscars can win an 
award regardless of age!!  Think Jessica Tandy Dead and she got the award!!!  
How on earth is she going to enjoy the fruits of her labor if she is dead!!  
Elijah Wood is still considered a child actor!!  He didnt want the Kids 
Choice Award anyway.  How many shows are adult themed in the Kids Choice 
awards??  I dont remember!!  I am sure the movie Hannibal wasnt at the Kids 
Choice Awards !!

> 
> Kyle said:
> I would stay in Harry Potter until the end!! 
> 
> Bully for you. I'd do the same. They don't want to - maybe, just maybe they 
> know better than we do? Since they are actually living it, and we're just 
> imagining?

Yep

Kyle said:
> 
> Why does the director think or Steve Kloves think having the same cast 
> will be not good!!!!!!  
> 
> Oh lordy. They do! They want to keep them! It's the kids themselves who 
> want to leave, not the directors! And Steve Kloves? He's a writer - they 
> rank just above coffee boy on a film set.

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

> 
> Kyle then said something I found pretty amusing:
> If Harry Potter gets to be real big I think the adults will be stuck as 
> well 
> but again you never know!!
> 
> Sorry, I just had to mention this bit. IF HARRY POTTER GETS TO BE REAL 
> BIG??? Are you kidding me?!?! :) 

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

> 
> 
> Susan
> wondering if we'll have WB-sponsored clothes and HP bread when Harry gets 
> to be real big, if he's currently quite small - unless you meant 
> height-wise :D
> 
> 
> No I mean the movies!!  There was WB stores but they want out of business!!
> 
> 
> 
> Kyle Longbottom 
> 
> Hufflepuff Prefect

I am not mad at you susan!!

Just blooooodddddddyyy Frustrated!! 

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