From lani.wright at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 04:50:40 2004
From: lani.wright at verizon.net (laniw01)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 04:50:40 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Naming He-who-must-not-be-named
Message-ID: <cehsr0+q4ai@eGroups.com>

from sophiamcl: "
there is a high likelihood that Ralph Fiennes 
(major babe) will be cast as Voldie!

from Valerie: "I still can't see it! "

from Lani:

I don't see it, either. Fiennes is too young and too handsome.
Here's what I'd be looking for:

Age ? older than the Marauders and younger than Dumbledore.
Wizards clearly age much more slowly than we muggles, but he should 
not look like a contemporary of the Marauders. I'd look for an
actor in his 60s or youthful 70s.

Appearance ? Scary but not creepy. People like Lucius Malfoy
would not hang around with Charles Manson. Though Voldemort's human 
form is affected by his evil nature and his years on the lam, there 
should be at least a hint of his former good looks. Besides, his 
supporters are supposed to cringe from him in fear, not repulsion 
(except Wormtail during V's pre-human phase). I do subscribe to the 
implicit assumption (based on some of the actors recommended so far 
on this list) that he is bald; besides, that's consistent with our 
introduction to him in SS. 

Attitude ? He exudes immense power, of course, but we should also
be able to see the part of him that is skilled at charming people 
into giving him what he wants. 

With all that said, Patrick Stewart comes to my mind. 





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 06:31:52 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:31:52 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]streaking Draco/second task
In-Reply-To: <1ce.2761d9db.2e3d07e4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BD320698.135B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: artsylynda at aol.com
I suppose 
your ":-P" is a "tongue hanging out drooling" icon  rather than a raspberry,
huh?  heehee

Yup! Did you check out those still shots of him on the Conan O'Brien show on
the danradcliffe.com site? I LOVE that sideways look that he gives Conan
when he's talking about how hot Brodie Doyle is! Too, too cute, he is! 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 06:34:13 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:34:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Hermione's clothes
In-Reply-To: <8.53705e69.2e3d72b2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BD320724.135C%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: alexpie at aol.com

<snip> Might as well give Harry a
Blackberry and be done with it!
Cheers--
Ba

[from Valerie]
All right, enlighten me...what's a "blackberry?"





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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 06:41:37 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 02:41:37 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Naming He-who-must-not-be-named
In-Reply-To: <cehsr0+q4ai@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3208E0.135D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "laniw01" <lani.wright at verizon.net>
 
<snip>

With all that said, Patrick Stewart comes to my mind.

[from Valerie]
Is that Capt. Luke Picard from Star Trek? If so, yes I can see that. Plus he
looks like an old boss of mine who was inherently evil!

OK...now shoot me if I've totally lost the storyline somewhere...but Tom
Riddle (in COS) was a real "mudblood" who went to Hogwarts in the 50's.
Later he becomes evil, and changes his persona to Lord Voldemort. When Harry
discovers him through the diary, Tom had trapped his young self in the
diary. But he and Lord V. are one and the same, am I right? So why did he
turn so hideous? Can we assume that when he killed Harry's parents he was a
handsome "older" Tom Riddle, then after tangling with Harry, he
disintegrated into the hideous creature that we saw in SS? Then why does he
become a short, grotesque, monster in GOF? Because he lost his parasitic
relationship with Quirrel and that's all that was left?



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




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Sun Aug  1 06:33:01 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 02:33:01 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Naming He-who-must-not-be-named
References: <BD3208E0.135D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <002501c47791$65e22820$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

From: "laniw01" <lani.wright at verizon.net>
<snip>
With all that said, Patrick Stewart comes to my mind.

[from Valerie]
Is that Capt. Luke Picard from Star Trek? If so, yes I can see that. Plus he
looks like an old boss of mine who was inherently evil!

OK...now shoot me if I've totally lost the storyline somewhere...but Tom
Riddle (in COS) was a real "mudblood" who went to Hogwarts in the 50's.
Later he becomes evil, and changes his persona to Lord Voldemort. When Harry
discovers him through the diary, Tom had trapped his young self in the
diary. But he and Lord V. are one and the same, am I right? So why did he
turn so hideous? Can we assume that when he killed Harry's parents he was a
handsome "older" Tom Riddle, then after tangling with Harry, he
disintegrated into the hideous creature that we saw in SS? Then why does he
become a short, grotesque, monster in GOF? Because he lost his parasitic
relationship with Quirrel and that's all that was left?

Taryn:
I believe it's Dumbledore that explains that Tom Riddle worked so much with dark magic and transifugration in his search for power and immortality after he left school that he caused his own physical deformation. But someone correct me if I'm wrong; my books are under a pile of several other things that I don't really have the energy to move at the moment. ^_^;

----------
Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net

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




From lani.wright at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 09:11:12 2004
From: lani.wright at verizon.net (laniw01)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:11:12 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Naming He-who-must-not-be-named
Message-ID: <ceic3g+2v0a@eGroups.com>

[from Valerie]
Is that Capt. Luke Picard from Star Trek? If so, yes I can see that. 
Plus he looks like an old boss of mine who was inherently evil!

Lani:

Yes, that's Patrick Stewart. He's done some pretty convincing bad 
guys since his Jean-Luc Picard days. It was his shape-shifter role in 
Conspiracy Theory that made me think of him as a contender for 
Voldemort. He could be charming, powerful, ruthless, and downright 
nasty - all in a single scene. 
 





From lani.wright at verizon.net  Sun Aug  1 10:23:14 2004
From: lani.wright at verizon.net (laniw01)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 10:23:14 -0000
Subject: Casting suggestions for OOtP
Message-ID: <ceigai+df8p@eGroups.com>

On a separate but related thread, Iggy wrote: "I'd like to see
Dame Judi Dench as Umbridge"

Lani:

I agree that Dench could play the character very well, but she just 
doesn't look the part. Plus, her voice is too husky. We need an 
actress with a Minnie Mouse voice, squat body, round face and v-e-r-y 
wide mouth. Folks have suggested other actresses who fit the type a 
little better. (I can almost see Imelda Staunton in this role, as 
suggested by Isilvalacirca, though she'll need a really good makeup 
artist.) 

Iggy's post did start me thinking about where we could fit in
Judi Dench. She'd be perfect as Griselda Marchbanks, but that's 
typecasting. (It's so much like her "M" character, I don't see why 
she would even want to do it.) So, I'd give Marchbanks to Glenda 
Jackson and give a vulture hat and red purse to Dame Dench. It will 
take an exceptional actress to be convincingly stern and intimidating 
while wearing a dead bird of prey on her head; Dame Judi Dench is up 
to that task.

I've read occasional mention of icons such as Peter O'Toole
and Sean Connery. I'd like to see them get cameos as former 
headmasters hanging on Dumbledore's walls. They wouldn't get
speaking parts until OotP (Sean Connery could deliver Phinneas 
Nigellus' lines with a perfect blend of suave and snide), but
even a small glimpse in GoF would be a treat. 

I like Leb's suggestion for Ian McShane as Mundungus. I can also
see Michael Palin in the part. He can do `rogue' quite well. 





From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Aug  1 14:12:05 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:12:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 1011
Message-ID: <46.54a6bef5.2e3e5435@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/1/2004 7:33:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

From:  artsylynda at aol.com
I suppose 
your ":-P" is a "tongue hanging out  drooling" icon  rather than a raspberry,
huh?  heehee

Yup!  Did you check out those still shots of him on the Conan O'Brien show on
the  danradcliffe.com site? I LOVE that sideways look that he gives Conan
when  he's talking about how hot Brodie Doyle is! Too, too cute, he is!  



I SAW that interview and have it on DVR.  His glee at  throwing the lever 
(which caused some silly TV scenes to play) was  infectious.  Too cute indeed!  
And yes, he was acting like any normal  teenager about how hot he thinks Brodie 
Doyle is, and yet he had a very  Harry-like caution about being worried that 
Brodie's hubby (boyfriend?) might  beat him up for his interest, heehee.  One 
of the most endearing things  about Dan is that he's so much a kid when he's 
interviewed, and so mature as  well.  You don't see that as much in American 
child stars -- they're all  working on their "sexy images" while Dan's 
apparently enjoying being whatever  age he is to the max.  More power to him!  And 
major KUDOS to his  parents for raising him to be such a sensible, charming and 
funny young  man!  ;->  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Aug  1 14:15:14 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:15:14 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] what's a blackberry/Hermione's wardrobe
Message-ID: <8d.111ab097.2e3e54f2@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/1/2004 7:33:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

From:  alexpie at aol.com

<snip> Might as well give Harry a
Blackberry  and be done with it!
Cheers--
Ba

[from Valerie]
All right,  enlighten me...what's a "blackberry?"



about the size of a pack of cards (smaller, actually), it  sends and receives 
email.  My hubby has one.  I don't know why they  suddenly brought the series 
so much forward in time either.  I liked the  timelessness of the previous 
movies.  The boys' outfits were fairly  "timeless" -- workout jackets like Dan 
wore, and t-shirts and jeans work for  many recent decades.  If Hermione's 
jeans hadn't been hiphuggers, they  wouldn't have been a problem either.  It would 
have only taken a few  changes to make their wardrobes more timeless, not 
locked into the present  age.  But I still love the movie.  I just don't agree 
with some of the  decisions made in the making of it.  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Aug  1 14:24:53 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:24:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] naming He-who-must-not-be-named
Message-ID: <cd.12a6d972.2e3e5735@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/1/2004 7:33:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

OK...now  shoot me if I've totally lost the storyline somewhere...but Tom
Riddle (in  COS) was a real "mudblood" who went to Hogwarts in the 50's.
Later he  becomes evil, and changes his persona to Lord Voldemort. When  Harry
discovers him through the diary, Tom had trapped his young self in  the
diary. But he and Lord V. are one and the same, am I right? So why did  he
turn so hideous? Can we assume that when he killed Harry's parents he  was a
handsome "older" Tom Riddle, then after tangling with Harry,  he
disintegrated into the hideous creature that we saw in SS? Then why does  he
become a short, grotesque, monster in GOF? Because he lost his  parasitic
relationship with Quirrel and that's all that was  left?


Tom's working on Dark Magic for so many years, and working on ways  to keep 
from dying (he thinks dying is the worst possible thing -- in OoP,  Dumbledore 
tells him "there are worse things than dying" and Voldemort says  nothing's 
worse than dying), he's changed himself from the handsome young man he  was into 
something grotesque and horrible -- but still tall (remember when Harry  
"inhabited" him in his dreams and realised he was much taller than usual?   And 
other descriptions of him describe him as tall).  Tom Riddle became  Lord 
Voldemort, yes.  When he killed Harry's parents, he'd been doing  whatever he's been 
doing to become immortal for many years (around 40, since he  was at 
Hogwart's 50 years before Ginny found the diary in Harry's second year --  V. would've 
been around 76 years old in normal years the year Ginny found the  diary, so 
he would've been 11 years younger when he killed James and Lily, or 65  
"normal" years old).  He lost his body when his killing curse rebounded off  of baby 
Harry and maintained his "life force" by reducing his life mass, I  suppose 
you could say -- inhabiting rats and snakes and so forth, and Professor  
Quirrel, as well, drinking unicorn's blood and doing whatever other spells he  could 
manage wandless to keep himself going.  That "ugly baby" thing we saw  in GoF 
before the spell was cast that brought back his body was essentially  
Voldemort's "essence," I think.  Too bad nobody had the guts to smash it  when it was 
that small and helpless (not that it was entirely helpless -- we did  see him 
casting spells in that state via Harry's visions).

Yes, I've spent WAY too much time reading HP books!!   :-D  And I can't see 
anyone like the Finnes guy being him EXCEPT for the  tall, thin build and 
angular face -- I think the makeup department can do a lot  with that to make him 
look like V should look.  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP




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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  1 23:59:15 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 23:59:15 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
Message-ID: <cek04j+qqe9@eGroups.com>

*de-lurking*

Okay, I know it's been talked about how good it is, but I just saw 
PoA for the fourth time, but in IMAX this time.  What can I say, but 
WOW?!

Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was 
unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled 
into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  The 
only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to 
see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town 
having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and I 
don't :(.

Well, sorry to go on and on, but I really enjoyed the movie.  Also, 
for movie buffs that might possibly enjoy M. Night Shayamalan's 
movies, go see "The Village."  Excellent!! But don't read anything 
about it, and cover your ears if anyone tries to tell you about it, 
because the whole movie will be ruined if you listen to them.  
Cheers!

Alora :)




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Aug  2 02:38:19 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 21:38:19 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wow!!
References: <cek04j+qqe9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <410DA91B.000001.00240@TWINKIES>

 
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: 08/01/04 18:59:27
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wow!!
 
*de-lurking*

Okay, I know it's been talked about how good it is, but I just saw 
PoA for the fourth time, but in IMAX this time.  What can I say, but 
WOW?!

Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was 
unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled 
into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  The 
only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to 
see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town 
having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and I 
don't :(.>>

Alora, what part of Texas are you from?  Just curious.  I am down here
in Houston, and I had the same problem as I wanted to see it in IMAX
as well.  My ex-husband took my son and daughter to see POA at the IMAX
theater, but it is on the other side of Houston and since the twins 
saw it already on IMAX I didn't feel like doing the drive.  We have an
IMAX that is somewhat closer to me, but it didn't show POA as it is the
museum IMAX.

TTFN.

Kimberly

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




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 03:26:53 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <cegtop+lk9r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040802032653.40295.qmail@web40504.mail.yahoo.com>


--- mcmaxslb <McGregorMax at ec.rr.com> wrote:

> >  As far as the Yule Ball goes, if those boys
> hadn't figured out 
> >she's pretty from seeing her in the pink sweater
> set and jeans, 
> >then  they're thicker than we've given them credit
> for!  LOL!  I 
> >think  Cuaron and Kolves did the series an
> injustice putting too 
> >much emphasis on  "hero Hermione" and "most
> brilliant witch of her 
> >age" and taking too much of  Harry's part away from
> him.  
> > Lynda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see what the fuss is about Hermione's outfit
> in PoA. It 
> looked like something any girl would wear and not
> particularity 
> glamorous. However you not the only one who got the
> feeling that 
> Cuaron&Kolves wanted to make 'Hermione Granger and
> the PoA'. 

One of the problems with her outfit is that it dates
the movie. Hermione's clothes are clearly 2003 when
the story really takes place in 1993.  My sister was
12 in 1993 and she wouldn't have been caught dead in
pink. And though zip up hoodies are stylish now (I own
about 5) they were standard gym/track clothes then.
The whole hip-huggers thing didn't become popular
until the late 90s(like 1999 and 2000). As people have
said, the first two movies are sort of timeless
because everyone wears uniform, robes or generic (aka,
non-trendy clothes). By putting Hermione in trendy
clothing it not only misfits Hermione's character and
dates the movie. (As does Harry's clothing and a
number of Hermione's other outfits, but I just won't
go there now).

~Kathryn


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 05:18:02 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 05:18:02 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <410DA91B.000001.00240@TWINKIES>
Message-ID: <cekiqa+432d@eGroups.com>

It's not just Texas that has so much distance between IMAXs - I live 
in a suburb of Chicago, and I have to drive at least 40 miles to get 
to one - but I totally agree...it's worth the trip!!!!

When many were feeling let down by the movie - I have to say that 
once you're sitting in an IMAX theater, you can't 'think' about it - 
you just become one with it.  You enjoy the movie so much more - 
feel like you're riding Buckbeak - and even all those wonderful 
cases of acne...LOL!

I hadn't noticed how scarred Lupin was - in all the scenes - until 
IMAX.  Hagrid was done so much better in this movie, and you really 
got the feel of it.  Marvelous.  Sorry to gush, but it's worth the 
time and gas to see it on the reeeeeealy BIG screen!

Kathy




From AnyaSimbi at aol.com  Mon Aug  2 09:07:42 2004
From: AnyaSimbi at aol.com (AnyaSimbi at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 05:07:42 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP timeline (Was: Hermione's clothes)
Message-ID: <1a5.266129c4.2e3f5e5e@aol.com>

Just a thought... Since someone mentioned the timeline, there's a number of 
things in the books that me ponder, but recently I re-read HP4 (having heard 
the books sposedly take place in the early 90s, so HP4= the '94-95 school year), 
and one thing that bothered me was on page 25 of my version, Harry is writing 
to Sirius, and he mentions "so he (Dudley) got really angry & chucked his 
PlayStation out of the window..." Um, did we have PlayStations back then? LoL! I 
was 11 in '94, and had an SNES! And I often borrowed a friend's GameBoy, 
which, were still black & green-screened... Sry if this has been brought up b4... 
^_^ It's probly only a minor book error. 

~*SimbiAni*~ 
http://fanfiction.net/~PrincessSimbiAniDreamzaLuv 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SimbiFanfic 


In a message dated 8/1/04 7:33:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> From: alexpie at aol.com 
> Subject: Hermione's clothes 
> 
> Lani wrote (I think): 
> >After 4 viewings, I still have trouble accepting a Hermione in >a too-small 
> jacket and low-riders. 
> 
> My problem with the clothes described is that they absolutely do not fit in 
> with the HP timeline.  Those clothes became fashionable during the last few 
> years.  According the HP Lexicon (which JKR has admitted she consults herself 
> when she is a bit confused), PoA takes place in 1993!  Might as well give 
> Harry a Blackberry and be done with it!
> Cheers- -Ba 


Look forward to: 
Movie: "HarryPotter3: Prisoner of Azkaban"! (June2004) 
Music: DarrenHayes' 2nd solo CD: "the Tension & the Spark"! (Sept2004) 


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





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 14:26:34 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 14:26:34 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <410DA91B.000001.00240@TWINKIES>
Message-ID: <celiuq+1jiv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" <twinslove at m...> 
> Alora, what part of Texas are you from?  Just curious.  I am down 
here
> in Houston, and I had the same problem as I wanted to see it in 
IMAX
> as well.  My ex-husband took my son and daughter to see POA at the 
IMAX
> theater, but it is on the other side of Houston and since the 
twins 
> saw it already on IMAX I didn't feel like doing the drive.  We 
have an
> IMAX that is somewhat closer to me, but it didn't show POA as it 
is the
> museum IMAX.


I am in Lewisville, just outside Dallas.  I have to say it was well 
worth the drive, I just wish it was closer!  I want to see it again, 
and it'll be a while before I find another babysitter so I can go 
alone, with no kids.  Hubby suffered through PoA with me, since he's 
not a Harry Potter fan, because we had a weekend get-away (favor for 
me;)).  School starts next week and that means no overnight trips 
for us for a while ;).  Anyway, it was excellent and I want to see 
it again and again!  

Alora :)




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Aug  2 14:39:30 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 09:39:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wow!!
References: <celiuq+1jiv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001901c4789e$898b4c30$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 


  I am in Lewisville, just outside Dallas.  I have to say it was well 
  worth the drive, I just wish it was closer!  I want to see it again, 
  and it'll be a while before I find another babysitter so I can go 
  alone, with no kids.  Hubby suffered through PoA with me, since he's 
  not a Harry Potter fan, because we had a weekend get-away (favor for 
  me;)).  School starts next week and that means no overnight trips 
  for us for a while ;).  Anyway, it was excellent and I want to see 
  it again and again!  

  Alora :)>>

  I know where Lewisville is as I use to live in Carrollton,Texas!
  School starts next week here too, and this coming weekend I am free
  of twins, but unfortunately, it is all dedicated to school shopping.
  I'd like to see it on IMAX, but I guess I will miss my chance. :-(

  Kimberly



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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Aug  2 15:03:12 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:03:12 -0000
Subject: some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <20040802032653.40295.qmail@web40504.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cell3g+47b5@eGroups.com>

--- mcmaxslb <McGregorMax at e...> wrote:
> I don't see what the fuss is about Hermione's outfit
> in PoA. It
> looked like something any girl would wear and not
> particularity
> glamorous. However you not the only one who got the
> feeling that
> Cuaron&Kolves wanted to make 'Hermione Granger and
> the PoA'.

Kathryn replied:
>>One of the problems with her outfit is that it dates
the movie. Hermione's clothes are clearly 2003 when
the story really takes place in 1993.<<

Rebecca:
Not to get into *this* argument again but...what exactly about jeans 
and a jacket "dates" the story? I don't see a lot of kids running 
around in pink now either, its never been too popular a color, but it 
was more in the early nineties then it is now. (FYI, I had a jacket 
*very* much like that in the late '80s, same color and everything). 
Zip-up-jackets have been around for awhile, just because they are 
getting very popular now, doesn't mean they *just now* started being 
a common thing to wear. 
And as for the story taking place in 1993, that is sort of an obscure 
fact. Unless you take the time to do the math with Nick's deathday, 
or have looked at the timeline on the CoS disc (which I have never 
been able to find), you wouldn't know when the books are set. I 
wasn't aware of it until I entered the fandom. Besides, books are 
books, and movies are movies. The deathday wasn't included in the CoS 
movie, so the movies could be set in present time for all we know. 
Even if its not, these are not meant to be 'period' movies, so the 
date they're set in has nothing at all to do with the story.

As for Hermione's outfit seeming out of place for her, it was just a 
little tighter and 'cuter' than you'd expect "bookish" Hermione (or 
her dowdy parents) to pick out for herself. Of course its *possible* 
that she would, but it ruins her 'transformation' at the Yule Ball in 
GoF to have her already look cute in PoA.




From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Aug  2 15:29:18 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 15:29:18 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <cekiqa+432d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <celmke+4kbm@eGroups.com>

Kathy wrote:
>>It's not just Texas that has so much distance between IMAXs - I live
in a suburb of Chicago, and I have to drive at least 40 miles to get
to one - but I totally agree...it's worth the trip!!!!

When many were feeling let down by the movie - I have to say that
once you're sitting in an IMAX theater, you can't 'think' about it <<

Rebecca:
Now I'm quite jealous of all of you...)o; There's an IMAX in my town, 
but its a museum, so it doesn't play 'hollywood' movies. The closest 
one is about a 3 to 5 hour drive away and I don't have a car. I think 
I would have to have a stronger reason than seeing a movie to take a 
bus or a train there (at the very least I would have to convince 
someone to go with me). Is it really *that* much better? I saw it 
four times in the theater, and I felt like I was taking in 
everything, and of course there's always DVD right? 


-Rebecca/HunterGreen (who is feeling quite left out)




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 18:22:53 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 18:22:53 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <celmke+4kbm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cem0pt+mcvu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...> 
wrote:
 
> Rebecca:
> Now I'm quite jealous of all of you...)o; There's an IMAX in my 
town, 
> but its a museum, so it doesn't play 'hollywood' movies. The 
closest 
> one is about a 3 to 5 hour drive away and I don't have a car. I 
think 
> I would have to have a stronger reason than seeing a movie to take 
a 
> bus or a train there (at the very least I would have to convince 
> someone to go with me). Is it really *that* much better? I saw it 
> four times in the theater, and I felt like I was taking in 
> everything, and of course there's always DVD right? 


Rebecca:

yes, it's really, really great to see it in IMAX.  But I never saw 
CoS or SS  in Imax.  I saw them at the theatre umpteen times and 
then watched the DVD a million more.  If you had closer access to an 
IMAX, I'd say go, but you don't, so I wouldn't worry about it if I 
were you.  I think it's more the "bigness" of the IMAX that makes it 
so good.  Everything is so much larger, so you can see it better.  
Honestly, my main reason for going was that I had seen PoA three or 
four times (I'm losing count)  and I had NOT heard the ticking, 
which was making me mad.   I knew this IMAX was supposed to sound 
awesome as well, so I just mostly went for the ticking! *L*  

Alora :)




From martita8304 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 17:26:50 2004
From: martita8304 at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Marte=20Clausen?=)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 19:26:50 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <001901c4789e$898b4c30$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <20040802172650.66448.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

I don't mean to be difficult or anything, but could you guys please take this rather personal "I live in Texas"-discussion somewhere else?  I woud like to hear different opinions on the movies, not small (or big) town american geography.  
Thanks
 
Marte, who really doesn't want to be nit picking...

Kimberly Roth <twinslove at mindspring.com> wrote:

  ----- Original Message ----- 


  I am in Lewisville, just outside Dallas.  I have to say it was well 
  worth the drive, I just wish it was closer!  I want to see it again, 
  and it'll be a while before I find another babysitter so I can go 
  alone, with no kids.  Hubby suffered through PoA with me, since he's 
  not a Harry Potter fan, because we had a weekend get-away (favor for 
  me;)).  School starts next week and that means no overnight trips 
  for us for a while ;).  Anyway, it was excellent and I want to see 
  it again and again!  

  Alora :)>>

  I know where Lewisville is as I use to live in Carrollton,Texas!
  School starts next week here too, and this coming weekend I am free
  of twins, but unfortunately, it is all dedicated to school shopping.
  I'd like to see it on IMAX, but I guess I will miss my chance. :-(

  Kimberly



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



________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
  
      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  
      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


Ny versjon av Yahoo! Messenger 
Nye ikoner og bakgrunner, webkamera med superkvalitet og dobbelt s? morsom

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





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Aug  2 20:18:04 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:18:04 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wow!!
References: <20040802172650.66448.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c478cd$d4b7f170$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>



Oh please... that was the end of the conversation. 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Marte Clausen 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 12:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wow!!


  I don't mean to be difficult or anything, but could you guys please take this rather personal "I live in Texas"-discussion somewhere else?  I woud like to hear different opinions on the movies, not small (or big) town american geography.  
  Thanks

  Marte, who really doesn't want to be nit picking...

  Kimberly Roth <twinslove at mindspring.com> wrote:

    ----- Original Message ----- 


    I am in Lewisville, just outside Dallas.  I have to say it was well 
    worth the drive, I just wish it was closer!  I want to see it again, 
    and it'll be a while before I find another babysitter so I can go 
    alone, with no kids.  Hubby suffered through PoA with me, since he's 
    not a Harry Potter fan, because we had a weekend get-away (favor for 
    me;)).  School starts next week and that means no overnight trips 
    for us for a while ;).  Anyway, it was excellent and I want to see 
    it again and again!  

    Alora :)>>

    I know where Lewisville is as I use to live in Carrollton,Texas!
    School starts next week here too, and this coming weekend I am free
    of twins, but unfortunately, it is all dedicated to school shopping.
    I'd like to see it on IMAX, but I guess I will miss my chance. :-(

    Kimberly



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



  ________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!

  Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________



  Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


  ---------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
    
        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
    
        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


  Ny versjon av Yahoo! Messenger 
  Nye ikoner og bakgrunner, webkamera med superkvalitet og dobbelt s? morsom

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




  ________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!

  Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________



        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  3 04:50:54 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 04:50:54 -0000
Subject: HP timeline - Dudley's Playstation
In-Reply-To: <1a5.266129c4.2e3f5e5e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cen5je+ihoc@eGroups.com>

I just looked this up and found out that the first Playstation as we 
know it was released in 1994. So, she cut it close, but it fits. 
Wonder if that was a bit of good luck or if she follows the timeline 
closely? This story depends on years so much less than most because, 
as we said, it's timelessness. (Clothes, news, etc.) 

~Deborah


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnyaSimbi at a... wrote:
> Just a thought... Since someone mentioned the timeline, there's a 
number of 
> things in the books that me ponder, but recently I re-read HP4 
(having heard 
> the books sposedly take place in the early 90s, so HP4= the '94-95 
school year), 
> and one thing that bothered me was on page 25 of my version, Harry 
is writing 
> to Sirius, and he mentions "so he (Dudley) got really angry & 
chucked his 
> PlayStation out of the window..." Um, did we have PlayStations 
back then? LoL! I 
> was 11 in '94, and had an SNES! And I often borrowed a friend's 
GameBoy, 
> which, were still black & green-screened... Sry if this has been 
brought up b4... 
> ^_^ It's probly only a minor book error. 
> 
> ~*SimbiAni*~ 
> http://fanfiction.net/~PrincessSimbiAniDreamzaLuv 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SimbiFanfic 
> 




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  3 18:27:10 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:27:10 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <cek04j+qqe9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ceoldu+rn2k@eGroups.com>

 "chrisnlorrie" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> *de-lurking*
> 
> Okay, I know it's been talked about how good it is, but I just saw 
> PoA for the fourth time, but in IMAX this time.  What can I say, 
but 
> WOW?!
> 
> Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was 
> unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled 
> into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  The 
> only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to 
> see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town 
> having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and 
I 
> don't :(.
> 
> Well, sorry to go on and on, but I really enjoyed the movie.  Also, 
> for movie buffs that might possibly enjoy M. Night Shayamalan's 
> movies, go see "The Village."  Excellent!! But don't read anything 
> about it, and cover your ears if anyone tries to tell you about it, 
> because the whole movie will be ruined if you listen to them.  
> Cheers!
> 
> Alora :)

My turn:

OMG!!!  I saw it this weekend on IMAX at the Ft. Lauderdale Party.  
This was my first IMAX movie and I just have to say GOF will 
definitely get an IMAX view.  LOL  I heard more, including all the 
background action!  And I finally heard Ron clearly about his leg 
having to be chopped off. And you get to see all the little pimples 
on their faces.  hehe  And that large, the dementors in the quidditch 
scene are a bit scarier.

For a description and pics from the party: 
www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics
choose Goblet of Gab? on the menu.

Marci




From muirnin at earthlink.net  Tue Aug  3 14:44:45 2004
From: muirnin at earthlink.net (Muirnin Cocan)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 08:44:45 -0600
Subject: Fashions and Harry Potter
Message-ID: <002201c47968$6c1fce80$a0cffea9@oemcomputer>

I'm delurking for a bit after having read many of the debates going on with the clothing that Harry and Hermione wore in the movies...

First off I grew up in the era that James and Lily did... I was born in 1961... but I also like a great number of those commenting on the fashions am from the United States... I also was raised in the San Francisco Bay Area... I was there during the 'Summer of Love' or for those not informed... 1969...

Now as for how they dressed... Many people tend to forget that this is a story based in the UK... not the US... that said the trends of fashion in the UK are not the same as what we see in the US... many times they are before us in fashion (could possibly be due to being so close to the soul of fashion in Paris... but I digress).  I saw many things in San Francisco that would have shocked most people in the United States... for some bizarre reason we saw things from the UK almost a decade before people saw them in the rest of the US.

Case in point... 

Men wearing Ruffles

Many of the popular groups in the UK were wearing ruffles as part of their stage look during the 60's... but they did not even make an appearance at all until the late 70's early 80's... (for those needing an idea of who I speak... Moody Blues in the 60's Prince in the early 80's as an example.. there are others)

Hip Huggers... we wore them in the 60's... we wore them straight legged... we wore them bell bottomed... we were just NOT allowed to wear them to school... we had to wear skirts or dresses... I did not even get to wear my first pair of slacks (pants) to school until the early mid 70's... 

Zippered hooded jackets... Yup we wore those as well... in the 70's 80's  90's and even to this day... 

Sometimes we tend to look at things as being So OBVIOUS that we also tend to forget we are talking different cultures... Not every culture is going to have the same clothing time era. Just because you may not have worn something doesn't mean that it is forbidden to be of that era... 

But then... not everyone is looking at things through rose colored glasses either.  

If Harry or any of the Hogwarts crowd come out with a shirt that says something like RIP Princess Diana... I'll argue that it is out of place and not of the 'time' but I do not see that happening...

My biggest evidence of how the look of the movie is canon is that a certain writer from Scotland who writes certain books that we tend to debate every single word and frame of movie about said that POA was the most accurate when it came to how they dressed... She even said that she had always imagined when she wrote the books that the kids would wear muggle clothing under their school robes but that it did not look as convincing on screen... hence the need for School Uniforms... IN THE MOVIES.

Ok... I'm going back to Lurking again...

Peace,
As Always,
 (`'.?(`'o..?..o'?)?.'?) 
??`o.* Muirnin *.o??` 
 (?.'?(?.o'??`'o.?)`'.) 
"An imaginative mind is a terrible thing to waste..."
@}>---'---,---

"Harry needs her badly" - JKR on Hermione

http://fanfiction.portkey.org/profile/785
http://www.livejournal.com/users/muirnin/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Muirnins_Musings/


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





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  3 19:11:31 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:11:31 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <ceoldu+rn2k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ceoo13+e25b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" <blackgold101 at y...> > My 
turn:
> 
> OMG!!!  I saw it this weekend on IMAX at the Ft. Lauderdale 
Party.  
> This was my first IMAX movie and I just have to say GOF will 
> definitely get an IMAX view.  LOL  I heard more, including all the 
> background action!  And I finally heard Ron clearly about his leg 
> having to be chopped off. And you get to see all the little 
pimples 
> on their faces.  hehe  And that large, the dementors in the 
quidditch 
> scene are a bit scarier.
> 
> For a description and pics from the party: 
> www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics
> choose Goblet of Gab? on the menu.
> 
> Marci

Yes, I had had trouble hearing the "they might have to chop it" part 
in the regular theatre, but I got it after the third time by filling 
in the blanks!  *LOL*  I agree with the Dementors being scarier, 
especially when it turned its nasty looking mouth toward the 
camera.  Yuck!

Alora :)




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Aug  4 04:18:33 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:18:33 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] naming He-who-must-not-be-named
In-Reply-To: <cd.12a6d972.2e3e5735@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BD35DBD9.138A%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: artsylynda at aol.com

Tom's working on Dark Magic for so many years, and working on ways  to keep
from dying (he thinks dying is the worst possible thing -- in OoP,
Dumbledore 
tells him "there are worse things than dying" and Voldemort says  nothing's
worse than dying), he's changed himself from the handsome young man he  was
into 
something grotesque and horrible -- but still tall (remember when Harry
"inhabited" him in his dreams and realised he was much taller than usual?
And 
other descriptions of him describe him as tall).  Tom Riddle became  Lord
Voldemort, yes.  When he killed Harry's parents, he'd been doing  whatever
he's been 
doing to become immortal for many years (around 40, since he  was at
Hogwart's 50 years before Ginny found the diary in Harry's second year --
V. would've 
been around 76 years old in normal years the year Ginny found the  diary, so
he would've been 11 years younger when he killed James and Lily, or 65
"normal" years old).  He lost his body when his killing curse rebounded off
of baby 
Harry and maintained his "life force" by reducing his life mass, I  suppose
you could say -- inhabiting rats and snakes and so forth, and Professor
Quirrel, as well, drinking unicorn's blood and doing whatever other spells
he  could 
manage wandless to keep himself going.  That "ugly baby" thing we saw  in
GoF 
before the spell was cast that brought back his body was essentially
Voldemort's "essence," I think.  Too bad nobody had the guts to smash it
when it was 
that small and helpless (not that it was entirely helpless -- we did  see
him 
casting spells in that state via Harry's visions).

[from Valerie]
Thanks for the great synopsis! 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Aug  4 04:21:59 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:21:59 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <cek04j+qqe9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD35DCA7.138B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "chrisnlorrie" <chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com>
<snip>
Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was
unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled
into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  The
only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to
see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town
having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and I
don't :(.

I live in the Washington, DC area (nation's capital and all that) and they
don't even have an IMAX! Actually they do at the Smithsonian museum
downtown, but it only plays specialty documentaries, not commercial films.
Ah well...



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




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  4 06:28:17 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 06:28:17 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <BD35DCA7.138B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cepvm1+3en6@eGroups.com>

That's how it is with me.  The very first IMAX theater is here in San 
Diego and it rarely plays anything commercial.

Tim

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> 
> I live in the Washington, DC area (nation's capital and all that) 
and they
> don't even have an IMAX! Actually they do at the Smithsonian museum
> downtown, but it only plays specialty documentaries, not commercial 
films.
> Ah well...
> 





From phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Aug  4 10:48:49 2004
From: phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk (Phil Boswell)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:48:49 -0000
Subject: Dufftown
Message-ID: <ceqeuh+jo4f@eGroups.com>

I haven't been able to find any discussion of the revelation in the
POA movie that Hogwarts is somewhere near Dufftown in Morayshire,
Scotland:

Go to:
http://multimap.co.uk/
and enter "Dufftown" in the search box (the URL is just too huge :-).

HTH HAND
-- 
Phil




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Wed Aug  4 10:49:18 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:49:18 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dufftown
In-Reply-To: <ceqeuh+jo4f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <41114BCE.17547.96185A@localhost>

On 4 Aug 2004 at 10:48, Phil Boswell wrote:

> I haven't been able to find any discussion of the revelation in the
> POA movie that Hogwarts is somewhere near Dufftown in Morayshire,
> Scotland:
> 
> Go to:
> http://multimap.co.uk/
> and enter "Dufftown" in the search box (the URL is just too huge :-).

I did mention this on the main list a few weeks back - trying to 
work out if a near Dufftown location meshed with other information 
we have.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  4 13:03:44 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:03:44 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <BD35DCA7.138B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <ceqmrg+koco@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:

> I live in the Washington, DC area (nation's capital and all that) 
and they
> don't even have an IMAX! Actually they do at the Smithsonian museum
> downtown, but it only plays specialty documentaries, not 
commercial films.
> Ah well...


Well!  You would think they would have one, wouldn't you?   The one 
in Dallas rotates through 3 or 4 films each day.  At 8am it was 
NASCAR, 11am was PoA, 2pm was Spiderman, and I can't remember what 
the other one was.  So, you get there early because the line forms 
fast and if you miss it, that's it - you have to drive the 40 
minutes again!  My husband didn't think anyone would be there that 
early for PoA, because he is always amazed at how many HP fans there 
are.  He couldn't believe how many people were there! :D

Alora 




From phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Aug  4 13:11:12 2004
From: phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk (Phil Boswell)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:11:12 -0000
Subject: Dufftown
In-Reply-To: <41114BCE.17547.96185A@localhost>
Message-ID: <ceqn9g+d4kt@eGroups.com>

"Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
> On 4 Aug 2004 at 10:48, Phil Boswell wrote:
> > I haven't been able to find any discussion of the revelation in
> > the POA movie that Hogwarts is somewhere near Dufftown in
> > Morayshire, Scotland:
> I did mention this on the main list a few weeks back - trying to 
> work out if a near Dufftown location meshed with other information 
> we have.

I cross-referenced this to Steve's maps at 

http://www.homestead.com/BlueMoonMarket/Files/Hogwarts/UK-Hogwarts.htm

and I think it makes (3) and (4) more likely.

Can we assume that JKR would have vetoed the reference to Dufftown if
it was too far wrong?
-- 
Phil




From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  4 21:32:11 2004
From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:32:11 -0000
Subject: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <ceigai+df8p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cerkkr+etr1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laniw01" <lani.wright at v...> 
wrote:
> On a separate but related thread, Iggy wrote: "I'd like to see
> Dame Judi Dench as Umbridge"

Has anyone considered Kathy Bates for Delores Umbridge?. Since the 
very first time I read the description given to Umbridge, Kathy Bates 
has been at the front of my mind to play the part. She fits the 
descrition pretty well and can play sweet and evil with the best of 
them. What does everyone else think?
Gotta go- time for Quidditch practice and Angelina will be livid if I 
am late again!   -NearlyheadlessRyan




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Wed Aug  4 22:53:32 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:53:32 -0000
Subject: TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
Message-ID: <cerpdc+lg4s@eGroups.com>

According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, and 
Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.

They are both fantastic. They keep raising the bar with all these 
truly great British actors cast in these films.  I wanted Miranda to 
play Bellatrix but she will be a phenomenal Rita.  And I imagined a 
much older man as Voldemort, but who's to say that LV didn't choose 
to regenerate himself into a young mans body at the end of GoF.  

Can't wait!  Roll on movie 4!

Mandy





From amani at atlanticbb.net  Wed Aug  4 22:57:33 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 18:57:33 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
References: <cerpdc+lg4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001901c47a76$6e8a3f20$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Mandy:
According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, and 
Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.

They are both fantastic. They keep raising the bar with all these 
truly great British actors cast in these films.  I wanted Miranda to 
play Bellatrix but she will be a phenomenal Rita.  And I imagined a 
much older man as Voldemort, but who's to say that LV didn't choose 
to regenerate himself into a young mans body at the end of GoF.  

Can't wait!  Roll on movie 4!

Taryn:
YES! I LOVE Ralph Fiennes! And just note, it's a lot easier to age OLDER with makeup than to age YOUNGER. Plus, he's probably going to be in such a large amount of makeup anyway from Voldemort's whole snake-face thing that his age will become rather ambiguous.

I can only remember seeing Miranda Richardson in The Hours and Sleepy Hollow, both of which I have not seen in a LONG time anyway. But from what I remember, she'll be great.

----------
Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net

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




From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  4 23:41:55 2004
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:41:55 -0000
Subject: TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
In-Reply-To: <001901c47a76$6e8a3f20$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <cers83+gsiu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" <amani at a...> wrote:
> Mandy:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
> Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, and 
> Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.

I am VERY happy about this. I've always felt the scenes (in the books) where LV 
finally appears in person are a weak spot in Jo's writing; somehow the baddy never 
manages to live up to the hype and to the true terror he creates (and which Jo 
writes so brilliantly) by sowing fear and distrust in the world around him. In GOF, 
obviously, this really comes to a head (well, a body, actually) and I could see the 
potential for the graveyard scene to go badly wrong and end up laughable with the 
wrong actor as LV. Fiennes is such a strong actor and such a subtle one, with a very 
strong line in creepy-evil roles, that I'm sure he will make LV just as terrifying as he 
needs to be.

Carin




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 01:05:41 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:05:41 -0000
Subject: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <ceqmrg+koco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ces155+10at4@eGroups.com>

Well, this Texan  now living in Colorado should feel very fortunate! 
Here in Denver we have an IMAX that shows regular features and it's 
only a few minutes from my house.  We saw POA and Spiderman 2 within 
a few weeks of each other.  Can't say enough about how great it is!  
I highly recommend the drive and extra price to get to one if you 
can.  Also, go see Spiderman 2.  You won't be sorry.  I actually 
screamed at one point.  
By the way, our IMAX doesn't show previews, so if you're running a 
little late, you'll miss the beginning of the show.  (I found out 
the hard way on my second viewing of POA)  

Enjoy all!












--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chrisnlorrie" 
<chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
> <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> 
> > I live in the Washington, DC area (nation's capital and all 
that) 
> and they
> > don't even have an IMAX! Actually they do at the Smithsonian 
museum
> > downtown, but it only plays specialty documentaries, not 
> commercial films.
> > Ah well...
> 
> 
> Well!  You would think they would have one, wouldn't you?   The 
one 
> in Dallas rotates through 3 or 4 films each day.  At 8am it was 
> NASCAR, 11am was PoA, 2pm was Spiderman, and I can't remember what 
> the other one was.  So, you get there early because the line forms 
> fast and if you miss it, that's it - you have to drive the 40 
> minutes again!  My husband didn't think anyone would be there that 
> early for PoA, because he is always amazed at how many HP fans 
there 
> are.  He couldn't believe how many people were there! :D
> 
> Alora




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 01:10:45 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:10:45 -0000
Subject: TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
In-Reply-To: <cers83+gsiu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ces1el+n2d2@eGroups.com>

Another good movie with Miranda Richardson is "Enchanted April"  She 
and Josie Lawrence and Joan Plowright were lovely in this film.  I'd 
still like to see Josie and Joan end up casted in a Potter film in 
the future.





--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "carin_in_oh" <aldhelm at e...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" <amani at a...> 
wrote:
> > Mandy:
> > According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
> > Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, 
and 
> > Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.
> 
> I am VERY happy about this. I've always felt the scenes (in the 
books) where LV 
> finally appears in person are a weak spot in Jo's writing; somehow 
the baddy never 
> manages to live up to the hype and to the true terror he creates 
(and which Jo 
> writes so brilliantly) by sowing fear and distrust in the world 
around him. In GOF, 
> obviously, this really comes to a head (well, a body, actually) 
and I could see the 
> potential for the graveyard scene to go badly wrong and end up 
laughable with the 
> wrong actor as LV. Fiennes is such a strong actor and such a 
subtle one, with a very 
> strong line in creepy-evil roles, that I'm sure he will make LV 
just as terrifying as he 
> needs to be.
> 
> Carin




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Aug  5 02:47:01 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:47:01 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] WOW!
Message-ID: <7BE34D0E.01284017.0AE51F07@aol.com>

Okay, I know it's been talked about how good it is, but I just saw
PoA for the fourth time, but in IMAX this time.  What can I say, but
WOW?!

Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was
unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled
into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  >>The
only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to
see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town
having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and I
don't :(.<<

Hey, only 40 minutes is not bad at all!  I had to drive over 100 miles to see it in IMAX (luckily, my best friend lives 30 miles east of the IMAX, so I got to visit with her as well as seeing Harry in IMAX).  The nearest IMAX theaters to us are 90 to 100 miles away, except for one in a museum that doesn't show "feature films" -- consider yourself lucky to be only 40 minutes from one!

Lynda





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Aug  5 03:39:53 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:39:53 -0400
Subject: HP3
In-Reply-To: <ceqmrg+koco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD372449.13A2%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "chrisnlorrie" <chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com>

Well!  You would think they would have one, wouldn't you?   The one
in Dallas rotates through 3 or 4 films each day.  At 8am it was
NASCAR, 11am was PoA, 2pm was Spiderman, and I can't remember what
the other one was.  So, you get there early because the line forms
fast and if you miss it, that's it - you have to drive the 40
minutes again!  My husband didn't think anyone would be there that
early for PoA, because he is always amazed at how many HP fans there
are.  He couldn't believe how many people were there! :D

Alora 

I noticed that HP3 is starting to leave theatres now. Anyone else noticed
that in their towns?
Valerie

PS. I saw a very lame-o film tonight (Timeline). Rented it because it had
David Thewlis in it, and I had never seen any of his other work. He looked
different without that crazy mustache and wavy hair from HP3! He was good,
but that movie was certainly not a prime venue for his talents. He was
sporting an American accent mixed with what sounded like Scottish
undertones. He's a Brit, right? 


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




From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 09:45:42 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 02:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP3
In-Reply-To: <BD372449.13A2%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040805094542.12396.qmail@web14208.mail.yahoo.com>

<snip>

> I noticed that HP3 is starting to leave theatres
> now. Anyone else noticed
> that in their towns?
> Valerie

 Yes, POA is down to one showing a day here...and that
is at 12:30pm...makes it tough for anyone who has a
job.
I suspect the second run theaters will get it
soon..and
keep it for awhile.


=====
Elen sila lumenn omentielvo.  Aa' menle nauva calen ar' ta hwesta e' ale'quen le.


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From sara1412au at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 10:14:23 2004
From: sara1412au at yahoo.com (Sara_ELL)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 10:14:23 -0000
Subject: TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
In-Reply-To: <cerpdc+lg4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cet19v+57hh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
> Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, 
and 
> Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.
> 
> They are both fantastic. They keep raising the bar with all these 
> truly great British actors cast in these films.  I wanted Miranda 
to 
> play Bellatrix but she will be a phenomenal Rita.  And I imagined 
a 
> much older man as Voldemort, but who's to say that LV didn't 
choose 
> to regenerate himself into a young mans body at the end of GoF.  
> 
> Can't wait!  Roll on movie 4!
> 
> Mandy

I think that this is excellent casting as Fiennes is notorious for 
being somewhat choosy about whom he portrays (though I can only 
imagine that the excreble "Maid in Manhatten" was on account of 
wanting to break into the US market). It is a sign of faith in the 
series that he's been prepared to commit himself to another four 
films though I imagine that Cuaron's excellent installment and the 
involvement of Miranda Richardson (amongst the other brilliant 
British actors on board) had something to do with it.

Fiennes researches his parts mercilessly and I'm quite certain that 
he'll bring the required intensity, charisma and terror to the role 
(which I imagine will be very limited). He certainly succeeded in 
scaring me in "Red Dragon" and was downright creepy in "Spider".  
Now, if only Kirsten Scott-Thomas was to be cast as Bellatrix, we'd 
even have a bizarre "English Patient" reunion of sorts happening. 

My two knuts,

Sara_ELL 





From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Thu Aug  5 12:30:04 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 12:30:04 -0000
Subject: HP3
In-Reply-To: <20040805094542.12396.qmail@web14208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cet98c+i7j3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Barb <goalieracer at y...> 
wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> > I noticed that HP3 is starting to leave theatres
> > now. Anyone else noticed
> > that in their towns?
> > Valerie
> 
>  Yes, POA is down to one showing a day here...and that
> is at 12:30pm...makes it tough for anyone who has a
> job.
> I suspect the second run theaters will get it
> soon..and
> keep it for awhile.

I guess you're all American, right? I remember when I was in the 
Boston-area a few years back that there aren't that many films 
running at the same time, and that most films are only in the big 
theatres for a few weeks. I suppose with that many screens 
showing the same film there isn't much need for flicks to be 
shown for a longer period. 
Anyway, here in Sweden, PoA is still on the top ten list. August 
2nd (the most recent date I found) it was no 3. I keep checking 
boxofficemojo.com for updated international numbers, but they 
are kind of slow.  

Christin




From roque_888 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 04:27:47 2004
From: roque_888 at yahoo.com (roque_888)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 04:27:47 -0000
Subject: WOW!
In-Reply-To: <7BE34D0E.01284017.0AE51F07@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cesd03+5jtn@eGroups.com>


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> Okay, I know it's been talked about how good it is, but I just saw
> PoA for the fourth time, but in IMAX this time.  What can I say, but
> WOW?!
> 
> Awesome.  I could see so much more detail on the sets, it was
> unbelieveable.  I felt like I was THERE.  Yes, I was finally pulled
> into the new millenium, since this was my first IMAX movie.  >>The
> only problem is that I have to travel about 40 minutes from home to
> see it.   Does anyone ever foresee a regular neighborhood or town
> having their own IMAX?  Doesn't seem fair that Dallas gets one and I
> don't :(.<<
> 
> Hey, only 40 minutes is not bad at all!  I had to drive over 100 
miles to see it in IMAX (luckily, my best friend lives 30 miles east 
of the IMAX, so I got to visit with her as well as seeing Harry in 
IMAX).  The nearest IMAX theaters to us are 90 to 100 miles away, 
except for one in a museum that doesn't show "feature films" -- 
consider yourself lucky to be only 40 minutes from one!
> 
> Lynda


HI! I'm new here.  
I saw PoA in IMAX too and my reaction was also WOW!!!
It was such and awesome experience, almost made up for the fact that 
I had to fork out $15 dollars for it but as I told my friends who 
came with me "It's Harry Potter!"  
For me its not so much the drive since the nearest IMAX is only 20 
minutes away, it was the money that got me cringing.  Had to pay the 
$15 for the tix and then also pay for the parking, which was not 
cheap considering it was in San Francisco *ouch*.

"roque_888" 




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 11:34:03 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:34:03 -0000
Subject: GoF Cast
Message-ID: <cet5vb+4k6l@eGroups.com>

Hello, this is my first time posting to this board.  I have read many
of the previous posts.

I want to say first, I love the casting they've done so far for GoF,
both unknowns and established actors.  They always do such a good job
of casting these films.  I remember reading in one post that Katie
Leung (Cho Chang) was lovely.  I can't find a picture of her, does
anyone know a site that has one?

Also, I really love the pick of Brendan Gleeson for Moody.  That's one
of my favorite characters and I think they will do a good job of
makeup for him and I just can't wait to see it.  Also, Rita Skeeter is
another favorite character (absolutely hilarious) and I love the pick
for her as well.  ALso love Ralph Fiennes as VM, he played a bad guy
in Red Dragon, I think he will be great.

Every time I see a new cast memeber and look at the picture I say,
"yes, yes, that's the perfect ________!"

MAE (praying they include the Yule Ball. Ron and Harry are such
typical 15 year-old boys in it.





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 16:44:22 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:44:22 -0000
Subject: Imax WOW!
In-Reply-To: <cesd03+5jtn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ceto56+80ou@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "roque_888" <roque_888 at y...> 
wrote:
> HI! I'm new here.  
> I saw PoA in IMAX too and my reaction was also WOW!!!
> It was such and awesome experience, almost made up for the fact 
that 
> I had to fork out $15 dollars for it but as I told my friends who 
> came with me "It's Harry Potter!"  
> For me its not so much the drive since the nearest IMAX is only 20 
> minutes away, it was the money that got me cringing.  Had to pay 
the 
> $15 for the tix and then also pay for the parking, which was not 
> cheap considering it was in San Francisco *ouch*.
> 
> "roque_888"

Hey, and welcome!

And I thought I had it bad paying 11 dollars for the ticket!  WHew, 
15 plus parking!  They gouge you any way they can't, don't they?  I 
know what you mean about the "It's Harry Potter!"  I have all the US 
editions, and the UK ones, and then I wanted the "adult covers", 
too.  My husband looks at me as though to say, "Why?"  and I always 
say, "Because it's Harry Potter!!"  :D

Alora :)




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 17:35:30 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Wow!!
In-Reply-To: <ces155+10at4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040805173530.80464.qmail@web53209.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Brooke <sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Well, this Texan  now living in Colorado should feel very fortunate! 
> Here in Denver we have an IMAX that shows regular features and it's 
> only a few minutes from my house.  We saw POA and Spiderman 2 within 
> a few weeks of each other.  Can't say enough about how great it is!  
> I highly recommend the drive and extra price to get to one if you 
> can.

Yes, I saw PoA at this IMAX too!  It was so awesome!  And if you have an
Entertainment book, there are coupons in there for Regal Entertainment Group,
which United Artists belongs to.  We got in for $6.50 apiece.  The coupon says
$5.50 for their regular screens, but somewhere in the fine print it says you
can use it for an IMAX feature for an extra surcharge (which turned out to be
$1).  People in other locations might want to check any movie coupons they
have.  And pay attention to what company ultimately owns the theatre you want
to go to - it wasn't at all obvious that my coupon was for United Artists.

Sherry


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 17:50:24 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HP3
In-Reply-To: <BD372449.13A2%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040805175024.16852.qmail@web53210.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:
> I noticed that HP3 is starting to leave theatres now. Anyone else noticed
> that in their towns?

Just to show you all what a geek I am, I have statistics.  The weekend of July
24, PoA was showing in 1008 theatres in the US.  Last weekend (Harry's
birthday!), it was down to 605.  So yes, it is starting to leave theatres.  I
got these numbers from Yahoo Movies, and I was tracking it to see if Harry's
birthday had any effect on the box office, but it didn't, at least not in the
US.  The receipts per theatre were about the same for both weekends, though, so
at least the theatres that are still showing it seem to be pretty full.

And for the people who mentioned "It's Harry Potter" as a valid reason for
spending extra money, I totally agree.  I have the US and UK versions of the
books too, and I bought a Canadian DVD of the first film, just so I could hear
them say "Philosopher's Stone" 3 times.

Sherry


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com



From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 17:50:15 2004
From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 17:50:15 -0000
Subject: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <cerkkr+etr1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cets0n+t6i9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" 
<nearlyheadlessryan at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laniw01" <lani.wright at v...> 
> wrote:
> > On a separate but related thread, Iggy wrote: "I'd like to see
> > Dame Judi Dench as Umbridge"
> 
> Has anyone considered Kathy Bates for Delores Umbridge?. Since the 
> very first time I read the description given to Umbridge, Kathy 
Bates 
> has been at the front of my mind to play the part. She fits the 
> descrition pretty well and can play sweet and evil with the best of 
> them.    -NearlyheadlessRyan


We did discuss this briefly a week or two ago - IMO, Kathy Bates 
would do an excellent job. I keep thinking of her in Stephen 
King's "Misery" - perfect goody-two-shoes mannerisms, chilling fervor 
in her beliefs, her intensity. Actually, I might even be afraid of 
Bates' Umbridge!!

Lorel




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 17:59:14 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <cets0n+t6i9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040805175914.23654.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>

--- lorelei3dg <lorelei3dg at yahoo.com> wrote:
> We did discuss this briefly a week or two ago - IMO, Kathy Bates 
> would do an excellent job. I keep thinking of her in Stephen 
> King's "Misery" - perfect goody-two-shoes mannerisms, chilling fervor 
> in her beliefs, her intensity. Actually, I might even be afraid of 
> Bates' Umbridge!!

How about Lenny Henry for Kingsley Shacklebolt?  He did the voice of the
shrunken head on the Knight Bus, and is married to Dawn French (PoA's Fat
Lady), so he already has HP connections.  Here's a photo:

http://www.comedycv.co.uk/lennyhenry/

Sherry


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 



From OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM  Thu Aug  5 18:25:31 2004
From: OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM (OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:25:31 -0000
Subject: TLC reports WB confirms Ralph Fiennes as You Know Who!
In-Reply-To: <cerpdc+lg4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cetu2r+3f8p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
> Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, and 
> Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.
> 
> They are both fantastic. They keep raising the bar with all these 
> truly great British actors cast in these films.  I wanted Miranda 
to 
> play Bellatrix but she will be a phenomenal Rita.  And I imagined a 
> much older man as Voldemort, but who's to say that LV didn't choose 
> to regenerate himself into a young mans body at the end of GoF.  
> 
> Can't wait!  Roll on movie 4!
> 
> Mandy

Since this announcement I went back to look at the pictures of other 
actors/actresses that will be in GoF.  For the most part I agree, 
although I had pictured Moody a little more haggard, I wonder if 
Brendan Gleason will slim down for the role.  The actress slated for 
Madam Maxime, I had pictured her more stocky but elegant. Big women 
are beautiful too! I don't particularly like the pinched nosed look 
too much like McGonagall.
I definitely see Ralph Fiennes as LrdV and Miranda Richardson with a 
little more gawdy makeup will do great a Rita Skeeter.
Can't wait I also hope they do the Yule Ball scene.





From OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM  Thu Aug  5 18:32:34 2004
From: OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM (OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:32:34 -0000
Subject: Naming He-who-must-not-be-named
In-Reply-To: <002501c47791$65e22820$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <cetug2+9418@eGroups.com>


> Taryn:
> I believe it's Dumbledore that explains that Tom Riddle worked so 
much with dark magic and transifugration in his search for power and 
immortality after he left school that he caused his own physical 
deformation. But someone correct me if I'm wrong; my books are under 
a pile of several other things that I don't really have the energy to 
move at the moment. ^_^;
> 


Opti93-you are indeed correct, I believe in CoS DD talks about the 
fact that no one equated Lrd V with the handsome young Tom Riddle.





From Martina.Frost at azwebmail.midwestern.edu  Thu Aug  5 18:48:01 2004
From: Martina.Frost at azwebmail.midwestern.edu (Martina )
Date: Thu,  5 Aug 2004 11:48:01 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting suggestions for OOtP
Message-ID: <200408051148.AA246284956@azwebmail.midwestern.edu>

... Is she British?

Martina

>> Has anyone considered Kathy Bates for Delores Umbridge?.  
             




From Martina.Frost at azwebmail.midwestern.edu  Thu Aug  5 18:54:09 2004
From: Martina.Frost at azwebmail.midwestern.edu (Martina )
Date: Thu,  5 Aug 2004 11:54:09 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Shrunken Heads (Was: Casting suggestions for OOtP
Message-ID: <200408051154.AA857276464@azwebmail.midwestern.edu>

>How about Lenny Henry for Kingsley Shacklebolt?  He did the voice of the
>shrunken head on the Knight Bus, 

Speaking of "shrunken heads" ...

During our discussions about Cuaron's version of HP3, some people on this forum did not care for him bringing a Mexican influence into the movie by adding the shrunken head in the Knight Bus.

I started re-reading OOtP again and just this morning got to the part where Harry first arrives at Grimault Place 12 -- low and behold, there in the hallway on the wall apparently are several shrunken heads of former house elves! (can't give you the page number, I am reading it on audiotapes - tape 2, side 1).  I had not remembered that connection before.

Martina


 
             




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Aug  5 19:04:37 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:04:37 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Casting suggestions for OOtP
Message-ID: <147.3028bc10.2e43dec5@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/5/04 12:01:48 PM, Martina.Frost at azwebmail.midwestern.edu 
writes:


> ... Is she British?
> 

No, Kathy Bates is American. She has been mentioned numerous times during 
these discussions for Umbridge on every HP forum imaginable ;-) But alas, she is 
not British, so she is not eligible. Personally, as much as I love her work, I 
am glad for the rule. I am too distracted by folks trying to do accents not 
their own, especially Americans doing any sort of British accent. Very few do 
it well, so it mars the performance for me ;-)
Cindy


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




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  5 20:06:02 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:06:02 -0000
Subject: Shrunken Heads (Was: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <200408051154.AA857276464@azwebmail.midwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <ceu3va+nr3f@eGroups.com>

> Speaking of "shrunken heads" ...
> 
> During our discussions about Cuaron's version of HP3, some people on
this forum did not care for him bringing a Mexican influence into the
movie by adding the shrunken head in the Knight Bus.

I didn't really mind the shrunken head, but it was the Jamaican accent
I could have done without.  I just don't invision many house elves
having a Jamaican accent(hee hee).  I thought the Jamaican accent
was over the top, just like the hunch back inn keeper.  I expect to
see those elements in Scooby Doo, not Harry Potter.

This is off the topic, but I wondered what everyone thought of the new
Dumbledore?  I just couldn't get into him being Dumbledore, but that
may be because Richard Harris was so perfect (especially the voice). 
The new one seemed a little to short and heavy.




From linda_gaunt at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Aug  5 23:32:09 2004
From: linda_gaunt at yahoo.co.uk (Linda Gaunt)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:32:09 -0000
Subject: HP3
Message-ID: <ceug1p+d5of@eGroups.com>

On my weekly e-mail from Odeon Cinemas, I noticed that HP3 was only 
showing until Tuesday 3rd August.

Roll on November, when the DVD comes out!




From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Aug  6 05:19:14 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 01:19:14 -0400
Subject: Showtime's HP:POA "underwear" interview vid
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040806005800.04401430@mail.silverbloom.net>

Awhile back, I was trying to remember a Showtime quote where they said 
'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was coming commando to a theater 
near you' and then I couldn't find it (not surprising) on my tapes.

I found it but lacked the time and resources (computer issues) to upload 
the clip then.

http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/?M=D
(file named hpoashwx.rm  ~2.7megs)

Right click on file and 'save as'.  File format is Real media: 
http://forms.real.com/real/player/blackjack.html
(lists both Windows and Mac)

Interviews with Cuaron, Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson during the POA PR 
junkets.  Topics included 'if you could be an animagus...', physical 
demands of their roles, and Dementor underwear.

The actual ending quote by Showtime: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of 
Azkaban--commando and beyond--in theaters now.

Evidently, my memory botched up the quote but I also recorded this at 4am = 
half-asleep.

Dina
-- 
Mirrormere @ http://avia.silverbloom.net/mirror/
  ^-large archive for LOTR FPS or RPS, HP & Oz fanfic
LOTR RPS @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LOTR_RPS
My bunniqula blog @ http://archive.nu/bunniblog/




From stargaz77 at aol.com  Fri Aug  6 04:18:45 2004
From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 04:18:45 -0000
Subject: He Who Must Not Be Named Has Been Named
In-Reply-To: <cerpdc+lg4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cev0r5+p92r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> According to the Leaky Cauldron Warner Bros., has confirmed that 
> Ralph Fiennes has officially joined the cast as Lord Voldemort, and 
> Miranda Richardson at Rita Skeeter.
> 
> They are both fantastic. They keep raising the bar with all these 
> truly great British actors cast in these films.  I wanted Miranda 
to 
> play Bellatrix but she will be a phenomenal Rita.  And I imagined a 
> much older man as Voldemort, but who's to say that LV didn't choose 
> to regenerate himself into a young mans body at the end of GoF.  
> 
> Can't wait!  Roll on movie 4!
> 
> Mandy


I am excited about this as well, they already have such an 
outstanding cast already. But as far as Fiennes playing Voldemort, 
well look what they did as far as makeup is concerned to Gary Oldman 
as Sirius Black, I would never 
have recognized him.  Actually, I kinda hope they leave Voldemort 
good looking, it would kind of add to Voldemorts charisma in 
brainwashing his followers.

Celestina





From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 13:33:30 2004
From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 13:33:30 -0000
Subject: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <20040805175914.23654.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cf01ba+cal4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Garfio <sgarfio at y...> 
wrote:

> 
> How about Lenny Henry for Kingsley Shacklebolt?  He did the voice 
of the
> shrunken head on the Knight Bus, and is married to Dawn French 
(PoA's Fat
> Lady), so he already has HP connections.  Here's a photo:
> 
> http://www.comedycv.co.uk/lennyhenry/
> 
> Sherry


Arrgh, the server failed when I answered this the first time, so I 
apologize for any repetition, even if paraphrased. Anyway, I checked 
out the picture and Lenny Henry does appear to have the "presence" 
I'd always thought KS would have. 

Lorel





From OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM  Fri Aug  6 15:09:46 2004
From: OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM (OPTI93 at YAHOO.COM)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 15:09:46 -0000
Subject: Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <200408051148.AA246284956@azwebmail.midwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <cf06vq+o152@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Martina " <Martina.Frost at a...> 
wrote:
> ... Is she British?
> 
> Martina
> 
> >> Has anyone considered Kathy Bates for Delores Umbridge?.

No Kathy Bates is not British, but is a phenomenal actress she won an 
Oscar for her portrayal in the movie Misery--let me tell you as a 
Stephen King fan for years she had Nailed that role, she fit the 
character to the tee! When I think of all the books that I have read 
that have been made in to the movies her portrayal always stands out 
as the benchmark.




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Aug  6 15:15:43 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:15:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: He Who Must Not Be Named Has Been Named
Message-ID: <20040806151543.BDJO1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

 From: "celestina707" <stargaz77 at aol.com>
I am excited about this as well, they already have such an 
outstanding cast already. But as far as Fiennes playing Voldemort, 
well look what they did as far as makeup is concerned to Gary Oldman 
as Sirius Black, I would never 
have recognized him.? Actually, I kinda hope they leave Voldemort 
good looking, it would kind of add to Voldemorts charisma in 
brainwashing his followers.

[from Valerie]
I never envisioned Voldemort as good-looking or charismatic. I thought of him 
as terrorizing people into following him, rather than charming them.
Wonder if they'll give Fiennes scary red glowing contact lenses? Or guess they 
could do that digitally?  I liked the idea of that aging rock-star guy from 
"Love Actually" playing Voldie. He stole that show!
Now, Sirius I always had in my mind as good-looking, in spite of his 
present-day emaciated demeanor. Though I LOVE Gary Oldman as an actor, I wasn't 
particularly attracted to him on film with his mottled face and icky black 
teeth. I somehow envisioned Johnny Depp in that role with his shaggy dark hair 
and "grunge" good looks! I know, I know...not a Brit.  :-)



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




From dk59us at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 17:33:57 2004
From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 17:33:57 -0000
Subject: Shrunken Heads, Hunchbacks  and Dumbledores
In-Reply-To: <ceu3va+nr3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf0fe5+hh81@eGroups.com>

cincimaelder wrote:
> I didn't really mind the shrunken head, but it was the Jamaican
accent
> I could have done without.  I just don't invision many house elves
> having a Jamaican accent(hee hee).  I thought the Jamaican accent
> was over the top, just like the hunch back inn keeper.  I expect to
> see those elements in Scooby Doo, not Harry Potter.

Eustace_Scrubb:
Well, I don't think a Jamaican accent's any less appropriate than
whatever the CG-Dobby's accent was in the CoS movie.  Making Tom the
innkeeper a hunchback _was_ about the most foolish thing in PoA,
though.  I was waiting for him to tell Harry to "walk this way..."
Then we could have had Dan Radcliffe doing "Hang on!  If I could walk
_that_ way..."
(Never mind!)

> This is off the topic, but I wondered what everyone thought of the 
> new Dumbledore?  I just couldn't get into him being Dumbledore, but 
> that may be because Richard Harris was so perfect (especially the  
> voice).  The new one seemed a little to short and heavy.

Eustace_Scrubb again:
I thought Michael Gambon was fine, in so far as he was in the movie at
all.  I especially liked his parts at the beginning and end of the
time turning.  I really wished they'd included the bit with him, Fudge
and Snape in the hospital wing, though.  Richard Harris was OK with
me, too, although in CoS you could tell he wasn't at all well.  

I see that Gambon is on for GoF, at least according to IMDB, and I
trust we see a good deal more of Dumbledore in that--it certainly
seems to me he has some crucial bits, no matter how much they cut.

I can't see either Harris or Gambon as the Dumbledore of the battle in
the Ministry in OoP, though...apparating in and turning the tide for
the Order, then confronting You-Know-Who...perhaps Gambon will grow
into it by the time OoP is filmed.

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 20:59:35 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 20:59:35 -0000
Subject: Shrunken Heads, Hunchbacks  and Dumbledores
In-Reply-To: <cf0fe5+hh81@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf0rfn+s8uf@eGroups.com>

> Making Tom the 
> innkeeper a hunchback _was_ about the most foolish thing in PoA,
> though.  I was waiting for him to tell Harry to "walk this way..."
> Then we could have had Dan Radcliffe doing "Hang on!  If I could
walk

mae now:
I know your reference, Young Frankenstein, and I thought the same
thing.  Can you believe nobody stopped him from doing that?  I can't
believe nobody had enough sense to say, "whoa, what a minute, we can't
do this, it's silly!"

> I really wished they'd included the bit with him, Fudge
> and Snape in the hospital wing, though.  

mae again:
I agree with that.  I think the movie was good, but really lacked
many of the critical parts of the book.  I think the 1st and 2nd movie
stayed more faithful to the books.  I think the 3rd movie was more
artistic, but needed more of the HP world than we got to see.  Now if
a movie had both of those elements...(maybe GoF will!)  I know the
movies for are for those who haven't read the books, but they are also
for the ones who have.  Those who have are the crowd who will see the
movie more than once.  I think someone posted that Cuaron didn't read
the books until after directing the movie (a little backwards there),
and if that's true, that's just wrong!
 
> I see that Gambon is on for GoF, at least according to IMDB, and I
> trust we see a good deal more of Dumbledore in that--it certainly
> seems to me he has some crucial bits, no matter how much they cut.

mae:
I think your right.  With Hogwart's hosting the tri-wizard, they will
have to have him in a great many scenes.

> 
> I can't see either Harris or Gambon as the Dumbledore of the battle
in
> the Ministry in OoP, though...apparating in and turning the tide for
> the Order, then confronting You-Know-Who...perhaps Gambon will grow
> into it by the time OoP is filmed.

mae:
Really?  I could have seen Harris doing it because one doesn't need to
be physically powerful to be a good wizard.  I guess I'll get used to
Gambon, but that voice that Richard Harris had....




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 21:02:53 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:02:53 -0000
Subject: He Who Must Not Be Named Has Been Named
In-Reply-To: <20040806151543.BDJO1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cf0rlt+1pti@eGroups.com>

>  From: "celestina707" <stargaz77 at a...>
> I am excited about this as well, they already have such an 
> outstanding cast already. But as far as Fiennes playing Voldemort, 
> well look what they did as far as makeup is concerned to Gary
Oldman 
> as Sirius Black, I would never 
> have recognized him.  Actually, I kinda hope they leave Voldemort 
> good looking, it would kind of add to Voldemorts charisma in 
> brainwashing his followers.
> 
> [from Valerie]
> I never envisioned Voldemort as good-looking or charismatic. I
thought of him 
> as terrorizing people into following him, rather than charming them.
> Wonder if they'll give Fiennes scary red glowing contact lenses? 

mae now:
I agree with this, I think he has to resemble a snake (although I hope
it's not as overstated as Peter in PoA).




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  7 03:10:09 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:10:09 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
Message-ID: <cf1h6h+mpak@eGroups.com>

 Three words, fellow fans.

 Exactly. Like. Canon.

 I've been reading all these posts of late praising Harris'
Dumbledore, and I have to wonder...Did these people see the same films
I did?
 
 Are they simply used to him because he was first?
 
 Is it because he was a legendary actor who died?

 Some combination of more than one of the previous guesses?

 Because, really, Gambon IS just like canon. 

 He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard, but
he IS supposed to appear batty to his opponents, folks. The
rubber-band seems right to me.

 He's clever, self-aware, and sarcastic....The time-turner scene and
the Buckbeak escape scene. Need I say more?

 And then there's Harris.  

 I'm not trying to insult a dead legend here, folks. I'm just stating
facts as I see them.  Harris played Dumbledore as a generic, wise,
old, wizard.

 Gambon played Dumbledore as established in Rowling's books. 

 Down to the silly rubberband.  ;-)


  






From stargaz77 at aol.com  Sat Aug  7 03:58:03 2004
From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:58:03 -0000
Subject: He Who Must Not Be Named Has Been Named
In-Reply-To: <20040806151543.BDJO1210.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cf1k0b+kcrt@eGroups.com>

snip

 Though I LOVE Gary Oldman as an actor, I wasn't 
> particularly attracted to him on film with his mottled face and 
icky black 
> teeth. I somehow envisioned Johnny Depp in that role with his 
shaggy dark hair 
> and "grunge" good looks! I know, I know...not a Brit.  :-)
> 
> 

Oh geez, I'm not the only one who thought Johnny Depp would have made 
a great non Brit Sirius~! I too didn't find Sirius very attractive 
either, but in PoA movie, he wouldn't be.  Hope in GoF we see him 
cleaned up a bit. Gary Oldman is a wonderful actor and not bad on the 
eyes either!




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  7 11:27:22 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 11:27:22 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf1h6h+mpak@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf2eaq+c050@eGroups.com>


>  Are they simply used to him because he was first?

mae now:
I do think this is part of it.  It's hard to switch from one to the
other after 2 movies have passed.  I must admit, I liked Harris's
voice most of all, and think the dialogue is where he truly excelled.

>  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard,
but

mae again:
I thought Harris conveyed this eccentricity too.  I think in PoA there
was more opportunity to display this with the whole time turner scene.
 To me, there where times in PoA when DD came across as a little angry
when he was not supposed to be.   I think had Harris survived to make
the 3rd movie, he would have done just as well as Gambon, if not
better.  




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  7 11:31:00 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 11:31:00 -0000
Subject: He Who Must Not Be Named Has Been Named
In-Reply-To: <cf1k0b+kcrt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf2ehk+8irt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "celestina707" <stargaz77 at a...>
wrote:
> snip
> 
>  Though I LOVE Gary Oldman as an actor, I wasn't 
> > particularly attracted to him on film with his mottled face and 
> icky black 
> > teeth. I somehow envisioned Johnny Depp in that role with his 
> shaggy dark hair 
> > and "grunge" good looks! I know, I know...not a Brit.  :-)
> > 
> > 
> 
> Oh geez, I'm not the only one who thought Johnny Depp would have
made 
> a great non Brit Sirius~! I too didn't find Sirius very attractive 
> either, but in PoA movie, he wouldn't be.  Hope in GoF we see him 
> cleaned up a bit. Gary Oldman is a wonderful actor and not bad on
the 
> eyes either!

mae:
I really like Oldman as Sirius.  I too thought that he had to look
pretty bad after all that time in Azkaban.  I think the gross teeth
bit when he smiled was taken directly from the book (don't have it
with me so I can't produce the page number).  I look forward to seeing
him cleaned up in GoF.




From stargaz77 at aol.com  Sat Aug  7 14:40:27 2004
From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:40:27 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2eaq+c050@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf2pkr+7665@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cincimaelder" 
<cincimaelder at y...> wrote:
> 
> >  Are they simply used to him because he was first?
> 
> mae now:
> I do think this is part of it.  It's hard to switch from one to the
> other after 2 movies have passed.  I must admit, I liked Harris's
> voice most of all, and think the dialogue is where he truly 
excelled.
> 
> >  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard,
> but
> 
> mae again:
> I thought Harris conveyed this eccentricity too.  I think in PoA 
there
> was more opportunity to display this with the whole time turner 
scene.
>  To me, there where times in PoA when DD came across as a little 
angry
> when he was not supposed to be.   I think had Harris survived to 
make
> the 3rd movie, he would have done just as well as Gambon, if not
> better.

I remember reading somewhere last year,when PoA began filming, that 
Gambon had never read the books before being cast, and still hadn't 
when he showed up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read 
the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel is 
the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup and 
wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive fan 
base this series has, especially a crucial character such as 
Dumbledore. Hopefully Gambon has had time to read the books this time!


Celestina




From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  7 16:52:13 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 09:52:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2eaq+c050@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040807165213.70054.qmail@web14205.mail.yahoo.com>

  Are they simply used to him because he was first?
  
  That may be a part of it. But to me Harris portrayed
  Dumbledore the way I had always imagined him to be.
  From his mannerisms to his voice. I always imagined
  Dumbledore as appearing to be a doddering old fool
  who appeared not to know what was going on. When in
  reality he was wise and knew a heck of alot more
than  
  people thought he did. That is a perfect disguise to
  fool one's enemies.
    I just don't think Gambon came across like that.

> >  He's eccectric....People complain about the
> rubber-banded beard,
  
  Again,Harris was definately eccentric. While the 
  beard on Gambon was really annoying...it had nothing
  
  to do with his performance(or lack of) as
Dumbledore.
  Gambon was adequate as Dumbledore..but not good.(in 
  my opinion anyway).          


=====
Elen sila lumenn omentielvo.  Aa' menle nauva calen ar' ta hwesta e' ale'quen le.


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From tmarends at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  7 17:21:36 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:21:36 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf1h6h+mpak@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf3330+ndc2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> 
>  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard, 
but
> he IS supposed to appear batty to his opponents, folks. The
> rubber-band seems right to me.
> 


I thought it was more like a small piece of string tied around the 
beard, and I believe Harris' Dumbeldore had the same thing in at 
least one scene in one of the previous films... I'll have to watch 
them again and look for it.

Tim




From suzchiles at pobox.com  Sat Aug  7 17:58:55 2004
From: suzchiles at pobox.com (suzchiles at pobox.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 10:58:55 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2pkr+7665@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000001c47ca8$35bdd600$0400a8c0@domain.actdsltmp>

Richard Harris never read the books either ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/11/07/richard_harris_2001_interview.shtm
l

Suzanne


> 
> I remember reading somewhere last year,when PoA began filming, that 
> Gambon had never read the books before being cast, and still hadn't 
> when he showed up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
> asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read 
> the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel is 
> the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup and 
> wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
> opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive fan 
> base this series has, especially a crucial character such as 
> Dumbledore. Hopefully Gambon has had time to read the books this time!
> 
> 
> Celestina




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  7 21:34:45 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:34:45 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
Message-ID: <cf3htl+963a@eGroups.com>

If you want spoilers, head on over to Leaky for en exerpt from the 
script for GoF! Also, a few blurry snapshots from filming (amazing 
that this news is hitting us already). 

I've got some comments on the script, so read no further if you 
prefer the surprise in nov. next year
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
OK. Abt the pictures--Apparently Harry's hair is lying flat again. 
Pity. I so liked that detail in PoA--Harry's unruly hair. Looks like 
we're back to the PS/CoS hairstyle...

Enough with plumping up Hermione's part already. Now she's in the 
tent with the champions! Give me a break. Although I can see that the 
scene conveniently crunches some important plot-points together, so 
I'm sure I'll be fine with it once I see it all in context.

Get the feeling hero-harry is back too, at least in this scene. 
Although not mentioned in the script, I sure hope we get to see a bit 
of numbness and fear on his face entering the arena. I like Harry as 
a hero, but it's his frailties that makes him a hero. There's no need 
for courage where there is no fear.

Sophia




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Aug  7 22:06:31 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:06:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Sirius
In-Reply-To: <cf2ehk+8irt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3ACAA7.13EF%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

mae:
I really like Oldman as Sirius.  I too thought that he had to look
pretty bad after all that time in Azkaban.  I think the gross teeth
bit when he smiled was taken directly from the book (don't have it
with me so I can't produce the page number).  I look forward to seeing
him cleaned up in GoF.

[from  Valerie]
I've just started re-reading GOF, so don't quite recall all the
details...but isn't Sirius living in a cave eating rats the whole time?
Don't know how cleaned up he'll be? Then in OOP he's living in a room with
Buckbeak. I mean, how good can he smell having Buckbeak as a roommate?!?!
:-)
I do love Oldman though. No complaints with him, though someone had
mentioned that his accent was inconsistent. (different genres of british)




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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Aug  7 22:10:28 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:10:28 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than
	Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2pkr+7665@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3ACB94.13F0%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "celestina707" <stargaz77 at aol.com>

I remember reading somewhere last year,when PoA began filming, that
Gambon had never read the books before being cast, and still hadn't
when he showed up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had
asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read
the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel is
the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup and
wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my
opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive fan
base this series has, especially a crucial character such as
Dumbledore. Hopefully Gambon has had time to read the books this time!

[from Valerie]
I think that if they had shot that last scene when Dumbledore was explaining
things to Harry, as he did in SS and COS, one would've gotten a more
"sensitive" view of Dumbledore, thus tying him in more with Harris. This
Dumbledore didn't seem to have too much emotional attachment to Harry, and I
had NO idea what he was talking about half the time. He does do flaky well!
Is it in GOF or OOP when he becomes stand-offish to Harry because he doesn't
want Voldemort to catch on to the Order's plans against him?



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Aug  7 22:11:54 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 18:11:54 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than
	Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf3330+ndc2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3ACBEA.13F1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Tim" <tmarends at yahoo.com>

I thought it was more like a small piece of string tied around the
beard, and I believe Harris' Dumbeldore had the same thing in at
least one scene in one of the previous films... I'll have to watch
them again and look for it.

Yes, it even seemed to have a bead dangling from it, no? Very hippy. Didn't
bother me too much; just somewhat irrelevant, IMO. 


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




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  8 00:37:54 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 18:37:54 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2eaq+c050@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007901c47cdf$f3094a00$0400a8c0@pensive>

Yes, when I first heard that Harris had been cast as Dumbledore, I was
ecstatic.  Because of his voice!  I don't give a fig either way about an
actor's fame, but Richard Harris's voice was so Dumbledore for me.  He
conveyed that character exactly the way I wanted to see him.  In fact,
gambon was so opposite, that I didn't feel I was hearing Dumbledore, but
just some actor.  His voice was terrible for the part.  Sigh.  well, harries
did a good job for the time he had.  I think even his illness added to the
effect, making his voice even a little huskier, if that's the right word.
For me, Gambon didn't convey the wise and comforting side of Dumbledore, and
you have to have all of it, not just the quirky.  I felt Harris did fine in
presenting the strangeness of Dumbledore.

Sherry
email and MSN messenger:
sherriola at earthlink.net 

-----Original Message-----
From: cincimaelder [mailto:cincimaelder at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 5:27 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris
Was...



>  Are they simply used to him because he was first?

mae now:
I do think this is part of it.  It's hard to switch from one to the
other after 2 movies have passed.  I must admit, I liked Harris's
voice most of all, and think the dialogue is where he truly excelled.

>  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard,
but

mae again:
I thought Harris conveyed this eccentricity too.  I think in PoA there
was more opportunity to display this with the whole time turner scene.
 To me, there where times in PoA when DD came across as a little angry
when he was not supposed to be.   I think had Harris survived to make
the 3rd movie, he would have done just as well as Gambon, if not
better.  




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________
 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  8 00:41:38 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 18:41:38 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf2pkr+7665@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007a01c47ce0$7826e530$0400a8c0@pensive>

I saw an interview with Richard Harris, in which he said his granddaughter
would never have forgiven him if he hadn't taken the part.  I think he cared
about the part, wanted to please her, and the millions of fans, and he
learned about Dumbledore, so he could portray him.  I remember, when I first
saw the first movie, as each actor entered the scene and spoke their first
lines, I would simply laugh delightedly, because every one of them fit
exactly my impression of their characters, especially Hagrid, Dumbledore an
Snape.

Sherry
email and MSN messenger:
sherriola at earthlink.net 

-----Original Message-----
From: celestina707 [mailto:stargaz77 at aol.com] 
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 8:40 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris
Was...


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cincimaelder" 
<cincimaelder at y...> wrote:
> 
> >  Are they simply used to him because he was first?
> 
> mae now:
> I do think this is part of it.  It's hard to switch from one to the
> other after 2 movies have passed.  I must admit, I liked Harris's
> voice most of all, and think the dialogue is where he truly 
excelled.
> 
> >  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard,
> but
> 
> mae again:
> I thought Harris conveyed this eccentricity too.  I think in PoA 
there
> was more opportunity to display this with the whole time turner 
scene.
>  To me, there where times in PoA when DD came across as a little 
angry
> when he was not supposed to be.   I think had Harris survived to 
make
> the 3rd movie, he would have done just as well as Gambon, if not
> better.

I remember reading somewhere last year,when PoA began filming, that 
Gambon had never read the books before being cast, and still hadn't 
when he showed up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read 
the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel is 
the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup and 
wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive fan 
base this series has, especially a crucial character such as 
Dumbledore. Hopefully Gambon has had time to read the books this time!


Celestina




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________
 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 




From cowardly_heroic at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 01:47:52 2004
From: cowardly_heroic at yahoo.com (Patty Satjapot)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 20:47:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <007901c47cdf$f3094a00$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <003c01c47ce9$b86c8380$19aa4942@patty>

When I first saw Harris as Dumbledore, I thought that his mannerisms and
his voice was the equivalent to what every powerful, compassionate, and
wise leader would sound like.  The way he breathed his words and the
rhythm of his speech was perfect.  He had the type of voice and command
of speech of a leader I would not mind following, the type of reassuring
quality of someone I could believe in.  He may not have been whimsical
or playful enough, but he knew how to captivate his audience with very
little special effects.  Gambon, during his quirky and sometimes random
monologues, wasn't really able to capture my attention fully, and I had
thought that Cuaron kind of thought that too since he would always use
special effects to make Gambon's words be more mystical and surreal.  
 
Patty  


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




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 11:26:23 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:26:23 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <cf3htl+963a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf52kv+21u4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...>
wrote:
> If you want spoilers, head on over to Leaky for en exerpt from the 
> script for GoF! Also, a few blurry snapshots from filming (amazing 
> that this news is hitting us already). 
> 
 
> OK. Abt the pictures--Apparently Harry's hair is lying flat again. 
> Pity. I so liked that detail in PoA--Harry's unruly hair. Looks
like 
> we're back to the PS/CoS hairstyle...
> 
> Enough with plumping up Hermione's part already. Now she's in the 
> tent with the champions! Give me a break. Although I can see that
the 
> scene conveniently crunches some important plot-points together, so 
> I'm sure I'll be fine with it once I see it all in context.

> Sophia

Thanks for the tip! When I checked it out they also had a link to
mugglenet which had pictures from the same day, and were clearer.  I
am right with you with the hair issue.  I really liked Harry's look
with the wild hair.  To me, that's an important detail.  Harry is not
supposed to look perfect.  With Daniel being so good looking, I
thought it really gave him more of a Harry look.

Looks like it might be "Hermione Granger and the Goblet of Fire".  I
really love the Hermione character, but let's not overdo it!  PoA was
Hermione's main book, she had a huge role in the end, but okay, let's
move on now.  3 things stuck me in that scene.  1)  Hermione
shouldn't be in the tent.  In the book the fact that there was no
conversation made it much tenser.  2) They don't need to intimate
about Krum and Hermione, the surprise at the ball is more fun.  3) I
absolutely love the character of Rita Skeeter, but now I'm worried
they will overdo that as well.

Ah well, you're probably right, they need to condense so much that
they have to combines things in the scenes.  
 
MAE (hoping the GoF movie will be at least 3 1/2 hours long and
hopefully longer)




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 12:43:33 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 12:43:33 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(not!)
In-Reply-To: <007a01c47ce0$7826e530$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <cf575l+uhsg@eGroups.com>

up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
> asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read 
> the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel
is 
> the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup and 
> wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
> opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive
fan 

Argggg!  That makes me mad,  "just go with what you feel...."  No
wonder he didn't seem like DD.  Perhaps if Cuaron knew what the
character was, it would have come off better.  Isn't that what the
director's supposed to do.  Good thing so many others in the cast
already knew who their characters were.  

MAE




From stargaz77 at aol.com  Sun Aug  8 15:36:49 2004
From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:36:49 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(not!)
In-Reply-To: <cf575l+uhsg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf5hah+je25@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cincimaelder" 
<cincimaelder at y...> wrote:
> up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
> > asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't 
read 
> > the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel
> is 
> > the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup 
and 
> > wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
> > opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive
> fan 
> 
> Argggg!  That makes me mad,  "just go with what you feel...."  No
> wonder he didn't seem like DD.  Perhaps if Cuaron knew what the
> character was, it would have come off better.  Isn't that what the
> director's supposed to do.  Good thing so many others in the cast
> already knew who their characters were.  
> 
> MAE



Lets hope that Gambon has gotten some feedback from someone or read 
some fan posts that there were many fans who were not too pleased 
about his interpretation of Dumbledore. Maybe just maybe he will go a 
little more in debth in GoF.  We have a new director, who I hope will 
stay truer to the books than Cuaron.  Does anyone know if Mike Newell 
has been interviewed, has he read any of the books or is familiar 
with the franchise?? 

Celestina




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 17:30:56 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 17:30:56 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(not!)
In-Reply-To: <cf5hah+je25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf5o0g+2lbo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "celestina707" <stargaz77 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cincimaelder" 
> <cincimaelder at y...> wrote:
> > up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He had 
> > > asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't 
> read 
> > > the books) to which Cuaron replied to "just go with what you feel
> > is 
> > > the character".  Gambon then "found" the character after makeup 
> and 
> > > wardrobe. Sigh. That is not doing the character justice, in my 
> > > opinion, escpecially with the mass world wide appeal and massive
> > fan 
> > 
> > Argggg!  That makes me mad,  "just go with what you feel...."  No
> > wonder he didn't seem like DD.  Perhaps if Cuaron knew what the
> > character was, it would have come off better.  Isn't that what the
> > director's supposed to do.  Good thing so many others in the cast
> > already knew who their characters were.  
> > 
> > MAE
> 
> 
> 
> Lets hope that Gambon has gotten some feedback from someone or read 
> some fan posts that there were many fans who were not too pleased 
> about his interpretation of Dumbledore. Maybe just maybe he will go a 
> little more in debth in GoF.  We have a new director, who I hope will 
> stay truer to the books than Cuaron.  Does anyone know if Mike Newell 
> has been interviewed, has he read any of the books or is familiar 
> with the franchise?? 
> 
> Celestina


Wow, 

Well, I guess I'll just have to be alone on this one. :-)

Harris came off as feeble and ill as he actually was, to me (I even
asked my companion at one of the screenings "Is he ill?").

Sometimes, I think some fans can get so caught up on whether or not
the makers of the movie have read the books, they themselves forget
what was in the book.

Regardless of whether Gambon read or didn't read it (apparrently
Harris didn't either). I still believe his characterization was spot on.

Harris seemed every bit the "generic wizard", to me. *shrug*

Gambon actually was Dumbledore.

I'm sure it was just pictured differently for different people, when
reading. 

I, myself, didn't picture a raspy-voiced old man, looking like death
warmed over.

I pictured, an older man, who still looked full of enough life, that
he could believeably scare Voldemort. 

And the caring about Harry thing? I thought that was a bit over-done 
ESPECIALLY in front of the other students in the previous film. I
believe Dumbledore would have more tact than that.

I'd site specific descriptive phrases from the books, but alas, I've
loaned them off.

Perhaps, I'm just fond of his characterization, because his makes a
more memorable impact on screen than, Harris'.

Again, there are wizards a'plenty, in moviedom. Many are just like
Harris' Dumbledore. Perhaps, I was just happy to FINALLy see one that
different. *shrug*

@)--/---
daughter

~~~A book is not a film. A film is not a book.~~~






From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 18:09:47 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 18:09:47 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
Message-ID: <cf5q9b+hrrh@eGroups.com>

 ...At least not yet. :-)

 Hey,

 I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are both a
series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?

------------------------------------------------------------------

 LOTR

 --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-fan
of the books.
 ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
something of a scholar of Tolkien
 --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
achieved legendary reknown.
 ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the films
were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).

End result: 
Academy awards
cross-over acceptance
critcal acclaim
and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who miss Tom
Bombadill...

----------------------------------------------------------------- 

 Harry Potter

 --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
extremely stilted manner
 --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
 --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
production for that all-mighty dollar.
 --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval (this is
both a good and bad thing to me) 
 --- the books haven't even all been written yet 

End Result:
the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but so far? 
oodles of money has been made
reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each film
the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
but they are just kids...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)
 
 But I'm beginning to believe that, at least this time around Harry
Potter simply won't be done in manner befitting it's massive
popularity...Or perhaps it has? :-)

 What do you think?

 Why were the LOTR films so successful? Are there lessons the Potter
crew can use?
 
 Is it going well enough for you?

 For me, the answer is yes, but barely...I think it is getting better,
but I think because it's still so new, and the focus is on the
all-mighty dollar instead of maintaining the magic of the books...

 I'm not holding my breath. 

 Personally, I think they should have waited (but "the almighty green"
beckoned) until the whole series had been complete for a while and
found ONE quality director with love for the source.  

  *crossing my fingers for Mike Newell, but not confident in the
limited abilities Kloves has already shown*

 @)--/---
 daughter

 ~~~A book is not a film. A film is not a book.~~~



 




From ozorbust.2426283 at bloglines.com  Sun Aug  8 19:03:23 2004
From: ozorbust.2426283 at bloglines.com (ozorbust.2426283 at bloglines.com)
Date: 8 Aug 2004 19:03:23 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(yes!)
Message-ID: <1091991803.1383843573.3868.sendItem@bloglines.com>

daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Well, I guess
I'll just have to be alone on this one. :-)

For what it's worth, I agree
with you. I don't have the exact quote but one of the books described Dumbledore
as very old but moving as if with great energy. Harris's Dumbledore looked
like a gust of wind could blow him over. Gambon on the other hand is playful,
yet serious and strong when need be. The time turner sequences in particular
are perfectly played.

There is one thing I don't like about Gambon's performance:
the Irish accent. I believe it's supposed to be a tribute to Harris (who was
Irish but as far as I can tell didn't use the accent in his Dumbledore). I
don't claim to be an expert on Irish accents but Gambon's sounds fake and
irritating. "I didn't expect him to liinger.." Ugh. Get rid of that and the
rest will be fine.


Manda
who's been watching Gambon in "The Singing
Detective" recently. It's interesting but decidedly not for younger audiences.

--
http://www.jenesaisoz.com



From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Aug  8 19:21:53 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:21:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(not!)
Message-ID: <127.47a92b27.2e47d751@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/8/04 10:37:16 AM, daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:


> 
> Well, I guess I'll just have to be alone on this one. :-)
> 
> Harris came off as feeble and ill as he actually was, to me (I even
> asked my companion at one of the screenings "Is he ill?").
> 

Well, you aren't alone on this <g> I agree with everything you said, 
including how Harris was rather a 'generic' wizard. I particularly thought he looked 
and sounded feeble in COS, unfortunately, he was ill at the time. 
The scene at the end of COS with Harry is particularly difficult for me - he 
repeats Harry's name so many times in his speech that I was wondering if he 
was forgetting the character's name. That is a case where Columbus should have 
directed him better. There's no need to say a person's name so many   times 
while addressing him, it's awkward.
My acid test, however, was in the first film. I remember reading that folks 
were disappointed that Dumbledore didn't start his speech at the feast with the 
nonsense words like in the book. Remember those words he says right after McG 
says, 'and now Headmaster D. would like to say a few words.' 
Well, while watching the movie, I couldn't imagine Harris' version of 
Dumbledore saying that. He wasn't playing the 'dotty' side of D at all, he was all 
wise and stately. I don't think he ever really got that other side of D. that is 
in the books; that of an outwardly eccentric man who is really powerful 
underneath, etc.

I thought Gambon captured that bizarre side to Dumbledore more than Harris. 
And the books certainly give enough evidence that Dumbledore does act a bit 
strangely ;-)

Cindy


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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Aug  8 20:56:14 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:56:14 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <007a01c47ce0$7826e530$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <cf641e+84jb@eGroups.com>

Celestina wrote:  I remember reading somewhere last year,when PoA 
began filming, that 
> Gambon had never read the books before being cast, and still hadn't 
> when he showed up for his first day of filming as Dumbledore. He 
had 
> asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read 
> the books) > 

I don?t know where the info came from that Cuaron had not read the 
books, I don't think that's right. I heard him say in several 
interveiws that once he had read the PoA script--and loved it--he 
wnet on to read the cooresponding book, was hooked and read all of 
them. There is no way Cuaron could have made the movie he made 
without being thouroughly familiar with HP. As for Gambon, I haven't 
a clue.

Sophia




From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Aug  8 22:50:16 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 18:50:16 EDT
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
Message-ID: <1e5.273601e4.2e480828@aol.com>

MAE wrote:

> Looks like it might be "Hermione Granger and the Goblet of Fire".  I
> really love the Hermione character, but let's not overdo it!  PoA was
> Hermione's main book, she had a huge role in the end, but okay, let's
> move on now.  3 things stuck me in that scene.  1)  Hermione
> shouldn't be in the tent.  In the book the fact that there was no
> conversation made it much tenser.  2) They don't need to intimate
> about Krum and Hermione, the surprise at the ball is more fun.  3) I
> absolutely love the character of Rita Skeeter, but now I'm worried
> they will overdo that as well.

I'm rereading GoF right now, and I have to point out that Hermione 
has quite a large role in the first half of the book, right up to the first
task. Remember that Ron isn't talking to Harry during a good portion
of the first half, and it is Hermoine who is by Harry's side helping him
figure out how to survive that first task. I'm not sure why she's in the
tent for that scene, but she makes more sense than Ron, if someone
else must be there. 

During my reread I also noticed that there was virtually no hint of R/H
until the Victor Krum asked Hermione to the Yule Ball, whereupon 
Ron got bent out of shape. Odd, that. (While the movie PoA provided
obvious hints of R/H, the book PoA provided less if any hint). From the
books, up until the Yule Ball I would have assumed H/H was the more
likely possibility, based on Hermoine's devotion to Harry in the first half
of GoF (along with her devotion to him throughout the books).

Julie
(back to reading GoF)


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




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug  8 23:49:07 2004
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:49:07 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(yes!)
In-Reply-To: <1091991803.1383843573.3868.sendItem@bloglines.com>
Message-ID: <cf6e5j+b35j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ozorbust.2426283 at b... wrote:
> daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Well, I guess
> I'll just have to be alone on this one. :-)
> 
> For what it's worth, I agree
> with you. I don't have the exact quote but one of the books 
described Dumbledore
> as very old but moving as if with great energy. Harris's Dumbledore 
looked
> like a gust of wind could blow him over. Gambon on the other hand 
is playful,
> yet serious and strong when need be. The time turner sequences in 
particular
> are perfectly played.
> 
> Manda

And another one in the pro-Gambon camp speaks out...
Some examples of the lines that formed my image of Dumbledore: 

"Nitwit! Oddment! Blubber! Tweak!"
Then Percy's comment that Dumbledore is a genius, but yes, a bit mad.
Then COS, and Dumbledore's line about our choices rather than our 
abilities showing who we truly are (and there's no doubt in my mind 
that Gambon would have done that as well as Harris did.)
In GOF, it's the (probably off-colour) joke about the troll, the hag 
and the leprechaun who walked into a bar, Harry's realisation (for 
the first time in four years) that Dumbledore is an old man, the 
flash of triumph and the show-off with Fudge.

Sure, Dumbledore is about wisdom, bravery and gentleness, but also 
and even more, playfulness, humour and subversion (though there's no 
proof, I'm convinced that he was the Headmaster to introduce Muggle 
Studies at Hogwarts), not to mention a huge amount of battiness. At a 
couple of occasions McGonagall is rather exasperated with him. What 
he uses to hide his power is eccentricity, not advanced age. In fact, 
he's always seemed to me as if he's very much in contact with his 
inner child, and, in opposite to Fudge, he's not the least concerned 
with his own importance. It's Dumbledore's playful, rebellious, 
twinkling, wacky spirit that I feel was missing from the first two 
films. Not through some lack in the acting abilities of Mr Harris, I 
hasten to add -- it's just that his vision of Dumbledore was 
different from mine.

When it comes to leaving out Harry's heart-to-heart with Dumbledore, 
it was not so much left out IMO as split up and moved to Sirius and 
Lupin. Leaving canon aside for a moment, I felt that was a neat way 
to point out (by showing, not by telling) that the greatest gift 
Harry received in POA was getting to know two former personal friends 
of his parents, grownups that he could trust and turn to for help and 
advice. The fastest broomstick in the world pales in comparison.

Alshain




From stargaz77 at aol.com  Mon Aug  9 03:52:29 2004
From: stargaz77 at aol.com (celestina707)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 03:52:29 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(yes!)
In-Reply-To: <cf6e5j+b35j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf6sdt+c5db@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" 
<alshainofthenorth at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ozorbust.2426283 at b... wrote:
> > daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> > > 
> . Harris's Dumbledore 
> looked
> > like a gust of wind could blow him over. Gambon on the other hand 
> is playful,
> > yet serious and strong when need be. The time turner sequences in 
> particular
> > are perfectly played.


Celestina:

Gee, I never got that impression. Harris was wearing beautiful robes 
that if anything made him look dignified and you felt you were in the 
presence of someone extraordinary.


> > 
> > Manda
> 
> And another one in the pro-Gambon camp speaks out...
> Some examples of the lines that formed my image of Dumbledore: 
> 
> "Nitwit! Oddment! Blubber! Tweak!"
> Then Percy's comment that Dumbledore is a genius, but yes, a bit 
mad.
> Then COS, and Dumbledore's line about our choices rather than our 
> abilities showing who we truly are (and there's no doubt in my mind 
> that Gambon would have done that as well as Harris did.)
> In GOF, it's the (probably off-colour) joke about the troll, the 
hag 
> and the leprechaun who walked into a bar, Harry's realisation (for 
> the first time in four years) that Dumbledore is an old man, the 
> flash of triumph and the show-off with Fudge.
> 
> Sure, Dumbledore is about wisdom, bravery and gentleness, but also 
> and even more, playfulness, humour and subversion (though there's 
no 
> proof, I'm convinced that he was the Headmaster to introduce Muggle 
> Studies at Hogwarts), not to mention a huge amount of battiness. At 
a 
> couple of occasions McGonagall is rather exasperated with him. What 
> he uses to hide his power is eccentricity, not advanced age. In 
fact, 
> he's always seemed to me as if he's very much in contact with his 
> inner child, and, in opposite to Fudge, he's not the least 
concerned 
> with his own importance. It's Dumbledore's playful, rebellious, 
> twinkling, wacky spirit that I feel was missing from the first two 
> films. Not through some lack in the acting abilities of Mr Harris, 
I 
> hasten to add -- it's just that his vision of Dumbledore was 
> different from mine.


Celestina:

I disagree. The playfull, rebellious, twinkling spirit was in his 
eyes and his speach, which came across beautifully in both SS and CoS.
> 


> When it comes to leaving out Harry's heart-to-heart with 
Dumbledore, 
> it was not so much left out IMO as split up and moved to Sirius and 
> Lupin. Leaving canon aside for a moment, I felt that was a neat way 
> to point out (by showing, not by telling) that the greatest gift 
> Harry received in POA was getting to know two former personal 
friends 
> of his parents, grownups that he could trust and turn to for help 
and 
> advice. The fastest broomstick in the world pales in comparison.
> 
> Alshain

Celestina:  

I do agree with you here.  This is the reason PoA was my favorite of 
all the series so far.  However, the original point I was trying to 
make is that, aside from seeing Gambon show the quirky eccentric side 
of Dumbledore, we didn't get to see him interact with Harry in the 
way that satisfied those of us who loved Harris's  grandfatherly 
interaction he had with Harry. If a scene like that HAD been done, 
then many of us who didn't exactly take to Gambon may have had a 
change of heart. But on another point, after watching PoA over 10 
times, I still cannot see Gambon's Dumbledore as the "only one he 
ever feared".  Not even close. JMO.

Celestina

  






From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Mon Aug  9 08:44:09 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 08:44:09 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf5q9b+hrrh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7dgp+ab0o@eGroups.com>

>  Hey,
> 
>  I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are both a
> series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  LOTR
> 
>  --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-fan
> of the books.
>  ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
> respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
> something of a scholar of Tolkien
>  --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
> achieved legendary reknown.
>  ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the 
films
> were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).
> 
> End result: 
> Academy awards
> cross-over acceptance
> critcal acclaim
> and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who miss 
Tom
> Bombadill...
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> 
>  Harry Potter
> 
>  --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
> extremely stilted manner
>  --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
>  --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
> production for that all-mighty dollar.
>  --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval (this 
is
> both a good and bad thing to me) 
>  --- the books haven't even all been written yet 
> 
> End Result:
> the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but so 
far? 
> oodles of money has been made
> reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each 
film
> the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
> but they are just kids...
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>  
>  I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)



lotr:
A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
films.

hp:
A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)




From mail at bertcoules.co.uk  Mon Aug  9 09:23:34 2004
From: mail at bertcoules.co.uk (Bert Coules)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 09:23:34 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf3htl+963a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7fqm+o008@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> 
wrote:

> If you want spoilers, head on over to Leaky for en exerpt from the 
> script for GoF!

I just tried to find this, but couldn't access the main site.  Do I 
have the correct URL?  http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org ?

Many thanks,

Bert




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 11:16:08 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:16:08 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf7fqm+o008@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7mdo+ldo1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Bert Coules" <mail at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > If you want spoilers, head on over to Leaky for en exerpt from
the 
> > script for GoF!
> 
> I just tried to find this, but couldn't access the main site.  Do I 
> have the correct URL?  http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org ?
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Bert

Wow, I was able to get there before.  Here is the mugglenet info, but
it does not have the script.
http://www.mugglenet.com/mediasp/2004/august/gofsetpics.shtml

MAE




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 11:34:03 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:34:03 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <1e5.273601e4.2e480828@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cf7nfb+dli9@eGroups.com>

--- to survive that first task. I'm not sure why she's in the
> tent for that scene, but she makes more sense than Ron, if someone
> else must be there. 
> 

mae now:
You're right about her having a big role, especially in the beginning.
 But I really don't like them changing the tent scene.  I guess I'm
just too hooked on the books.  I don't like them varying too much from
them.  I liked the 3rd movie, I do think it was well done for the most
part, but I really do not like when they wonder from the book too much
(ie.  the hunchback: HP humor is not campy or gaudy, Harry sneaking
magic at the beginning to practice, etc.)  I guess I shouldn't assume
too much from that one little scene in Gof that may even end up on the
editing room floor.  I guess they do have to condense a lot into a
short time (hopefully not too short).  I really do love Hermione.  I
just want the focus to be on Harry.  I don't mind if they have to
change the books a little so that the movies make sense, as long as
they keep the essence of the books.  


> During my reread I also noticed that there was virtually no hint of
R/H
> until the Victor Krum asked Hermione to the Yule Ball, whereupon 
> Ron got bent out of shape. Odd, that. (While the movie PoA provided
> obvious hints of R/H, the book PoA provided less if any hint). From
the

mae again:
I know what you mean.  I remember being surprised they hinted at it in
the CoS movie too.  

> Julie
> (back to reading GoF)

Hard to put it down, even when you're rereading it, isn't it?  When I
read it again, my husband told the kids, "we've lost your Mom to HP
again".  

MAE (trying to control my critisism of anything that varies from the
books)




From mail at bertcoules.co.uk  Mon Aug  9 11:34:08 2004
From: mail at bertcoules.co.uk (Bert Coules)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:34:08 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf7mdo+ldo1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7nfg+fe91@eGroups.com>

MAE,

Can you confirm that the site is down?  Thanks for the new link, but 
it was the script excerpt I was interested in.

Bert




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 11:37:32 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:37:32 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf7dgp+ab0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7nls+c7k1@eGroups.com>

> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)

I just wondered why you thought Oldman is just in it for the money. 
Is it something he said in an interview?  I just saw the movie again
yesterday (had to take my friend before it left the theaters).  I
really liked Oldman in the movie.  Thewlis was wonderful too.  When I
first saw him I thought "that's not how I imagined Lupin", but once he
started acting he was completely Lupin.  I really liked the scenes
with he and Harry.




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Mon Aug  9 11:45:14 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:45:14 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!!
References: <cf7nfg+fe91@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c47e06$561ea910$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

> 
> Can you confirm that the site is down?  Thanks for the new link, but 
> it was the script excerpt I was interested in.
> 
> Bert

Yes, they are down, but this also has the script. 

http://www.iharrypotter.net/

Joj




From caroline.bulcke at telenet.be  Mon Aug  9 11:51:11 2004
From: caroline.bulcke at telenet.be (caroline.bulcke at telenet.be)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 11:51:11 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as 
    Respectfully Done as LOTR
Message-ID: <W520618063290021092052271@asteria.telenet-ops.be>

I read in an interview with Oldman that there were three reasons why he had taken on the part : 
- he wanted to work with Cuaron
- he wanted to be in a film his sons could watch
- and then there also was the financial reason.

Also, I read in another interview that he had landed a role in the new batman movie because of his part as sirius black...otherwise they would never have thought of him for the batman film (in which he plays an inspector of some sort) And I heard he will voice one of the animated characters in the new Star Wars film as well.

bye,
Caroline
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht ----- 
Van : cincimaelder [mailto:cincimaelder at yahoo.com]
Verzonden : maandag , augustus 9, 2004 11:37 AM 
Aan : HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp : [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR

> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)

I just wondered why you thought Oldman is just in it for the money. 
Is it something he said in an interview? I just saw the movie again
yesterday (had to take my friend before it left the theaters). I
really liked Oldman in the movie. Thewlis was wonderful too. When I
first saw him I thought "that's not how I imagined Lupin", but once he
started acting he was completely Lupin. I really liked the scenes
with he and Harry.



________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
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 cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 12:02:08 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:02:08 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf7nfg+fe91@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf7p40+u2p9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Bert Coules" <mail at b...> wrote:
> MAE,
> 
> Can you confirm that the site is down?  Thanks for the new link, but 
> it was the script excerpt I was interested in.
> 
> Bert

When I tried this morning I couldn't get into it either.
MAE




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  9 13:29:42 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:29:42 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf7dgp+ab0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c47e14$eebf59e0$0400a8c0@pensive>

LOTR went through several not so great movie adaptation, before Peter
Jackson came along.  There was a cartoon called the hobbit that wasn't bad,
if you were a kid.  There was a sequel to that, that picked up somewhere in
the middle of LOTR, so it wouldn't have made a bit of sense to anyone.  In
between those, there was a live action movie that covered the story in one
and a half books, left you hanging and never came back to finish the story.
By all accounts, it was not very well done, and nobody really liked it much.
I can't remember now, it's been so long since I've seen it.  By the time
Jackson decided to do the LOTR movies, he and all the crew were committed to
the idea of making it as true to the books and the spirit of Tolkien's
vision as possible, while still doing a job that was more practical for a
movie.  There were things I didn't like in the LOTR movies, because i've
read the books dozens of times, but they make sense from point of view of a
film.  Ok, not all of them make sense, but most do.  There wasn't the sense
that Jackson and the rest didn't know or care about the characters or story.
If you watch the DVD with the commentaries, you gain an incredible respect
for how hard they worked to bring middle earth to life and to stay true to
Tolkien.

Maybe, the HP movies started out as a way to cash in on the popularity of
the books, and all we who love the books wanted the movies, too.  it might
need to wait a decade or two to have some new director come up, someone who
loves the stories and who will make a series true to books and their world.
One thing is that we don't know the end yet, so I think, having an overall
picture might make a series of films better.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: cgahnstrm [mailto:christin.gahnstrom at telia.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 2:44 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as
Respectfully Done as LOTR


>  Hey,
> 
>  I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are both a
> series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  LOTR
> 
>  --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-fan
> of the books.
>  ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
> respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
> something of a scholar of Tolkien
>  --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
> achieved legendary reknown.
>  ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the 
films
> were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).
> 
> End result: 
> Academy awards
> cross-over acceptance
> critcal acclaim
> and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who miss 
Tom
> Bombadill...
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> 
>  Harry Potter
> 
>  --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
> extremely stilted manner
>  --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
>  --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
> production for that all-mighty dollar.
>  --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval (this 
is
> both a good and bad thing to me) 
>  --- the books haven't even all been written yet 
> 
> End Result:
> the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but so 
far? 
> oodles of money has been made
> reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each 
film
> the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
> but they are just kids...
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>  
>  I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)



lotr:
A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
films.

hp:
A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________
 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 




From mail at bertcoules.co.uk  Mon Aug  9 14:03:16 2004
From: mail at bertcoules.co.uk (Bert Coules)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:03:16 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <001601c47e06$561ea910$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cf8074+b7a5@eGroups.com>

> Yes, they are down, but this also has the script. 
> 
> http://www.iharrypotter.net/

Thank you, Joj.

Bert




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 16:13:21 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 16:13:21 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf8074+b7a5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf87r1+2f47@eGroups.com>

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire shooting script as of July 30,
2004: The First Task

-begin-


HERMIONE
That's it.
(to Harry)
Harry. That's it!
(hurrying off)
Of course the incantation will
have to be rather powerful and
you'll have to leave a window open...

Harry watches Hermione go MUTTERING off, then turns, looks for Cho.
Gone. He frowns, then passes out of FRAME, the CAMERA moving toward a
WINDOW...

EXT. HOGWARTS CASTLE - LATE AFTERNOON

...and through, soaring over the grounds to the dense trees of the
Forbidden Forest, circling the CRIMSON GLOW of the clearing, where
newly erected STANDS teem with students...

EXT. ARENA STANDS - LATE AFTERNOON

...descending into the clearing itself, where Fred & George conduct a
few last minute transactions...

FRED
Step up mates! Who fancies a
flutter on tonight's bloodbath?

GEORGE
Smart money's on Krum to survive!

FRED
One'll get you ten if Potter
dies. OW!

Hermione POPS George hard in the arm, glowering disapprovingly as...

GEORGE
We'd cut Harry in, of course...

...the CAMERA tracks back with her into a TENT, where...



INT. TENT - LATE AFTERNOON

...Harry paces. Hermione snaps shut the flap.
Smiles nervously.

HERMIONE
How're you feeling? OK?

Harry nods. Hermione glances about.
Fleur sits in stony silence. Krum
lies on a bench. Diggory paces.

HERMIONE
The key is to concentrate. After that, you just have to...

HARRY
Battle a dragon.

HERMIONE
Right...Oh, Harry!

Overcome, she throws her arms around him, when -- FLASH! -- Rita
Skeeter strolls
in, PHOTOGRAPHER in tow.

RITA SKEETER
Young love. How stirring. If things go
unfortunately tonight, you two may even
make the front page.

HERMIONE
You.

RITA SKEETER
Oh don't even start, you silly girl. I
can tell you where it'll end.

KRUM
You haff no business here. The tent is for
champions. And...friends.

Everyone turns, stunned to hear Krum speak. Skeeter studies him
appraisingly (as does Hermione), then smiles thinly.

RITA SKEETER
No matter. We got what we wanted.

As she exits, Dumbledore enters from the opposite end. With him are
Karkaroff and Madame Maxime and Barty Crouch.

DUMBLEDORE
Good evening, Champions.
(as they assemble)
You've waited. You've wondered.
And now the moment is here. A
moment only you four can fully
appreciate. Which begs the
question: Why are you here,
Miss Granger?

HERMIONE
Oh. Sorry. I'll. Just. Go.

DUMBLEDORE
(as she exits)
Barty.

Barty Crouch steps forward with a SMALL BAG of PURPLE SILK. SMOKE
weeps from the bag's SEAMS while its belly WRITHES with some sort of
interior activity. Crouch seems at great pains to simply keep the bag
in his hands.

BARTY CROUCH
Surely it's been ... agonizing ...
for you all... speculating...
these many weeks as to just what it
is that awaits you tonight. Within
this bag lies the answer...

As Crouch fumbles with the bag, Rita clucks her tongue softly as she
MURMURS to the phlegmatic photographer.

RITA SKEETER
Oh, Barty, what a magnificent
ruin you've become. And to think
you almost ruled the world. Of
course, that was before. Then the
cookie crumbled. I'll never forget
forget the day it happened. It's
quite remarkable to see a man
lose everything in the blink of
an eye. To see him...
(a hard smile)
...completely lose his grip.

As Crouch gains some dominion over the bag, he holds it out before a
wary Fleur.

BARTY CROUCH
Miss Delacour, if you will...

FLASH! The photographer steps forward to capture the moment and Moody
is revealed, having heard Rita's every word.

Fleur swiftly withdraws her hand from the squirming silk and finds a
tiny MODEL of a DRAGON bearing the number "2." It pads angrily over
her palm, lets out a TINY PUFF of SMOKE.

BARTY CROUCH
The Welsh Green. Mr. Krum...

Krum reaches in, draws "3."

BARTY CROUCH
The Chinese Fireball...

Then Cedric: "1"

BARTY CROUCH
The Swedish Short-Snout. Which leaves...

HARRY
The Horntail.

Dumbledore's eyes darken as they peer into Harry's palm. The
miniature Horntail rears up angrily, lets out a ROAR and emits a TINY
BALL of FIRE.

BARTY CROUCH
These represent four very real
dragons, each of which has been
given a golden egg to protect.
Your objective is simple: Collect
the egg. This you must do, for
each egg contains a clue, without
which you cannot hope to survive
the next task. Any questions?

The Champions stand mute.

DUMBLEDORE
Very well. Good luck to you all.
Mr. Diggory, at the sound of the
cannon, you may pro--

KA-BLOOM! Filch fires a SMALL CANNON a tad early, causing all present
to nearly jump out of their skins.

Cedric stares at the tiny dragon in his hand, then closes his fingers
over it and strides away. CAMERA RISES behind the remaining TRIO as
Cedric exits...rising higher as the nseen crowd ROARS...rising into
the peak of the tent where the canvas undulates with the FLAMES that
FLICKER beyond...cycling slowly back down to...

Harry. Standing alone. As he begins to move, CAMERA tracks after,
following him through the tent and into...

INT. ARENA - LATE AFTERNOON

...the ROARING arena, where HUNDREDS of SCREAMING FACES wheel above
him and THREE MASSIVE BANNERS hang TATTERED and SMOKING. Only the
banner opposite, emblazoned with the HOGWARTS CREST, is wholly
intact. Then...

A FIREBALL BURSTS through the center of it and the banner
DISINTEGRATES, revealing...the Horntail. Yellow eyes blzing. Spiked
tail punishing the ground where a GLIMMERING GOLDEN EGG lies. Harry
points his wand to the sky:

HARRY
Accio Firebolt!

Instantly, CAMERA CRANES high, soaring above the clearing and the
forest that contains it, leaving the shrieking voices behind, finding
Hogwarts Castle on the horizon. A PINPRICK appears in the sky,
lengthening, drawing closer in a RUSH of AIR. And then...Harry's
FIREBOLT streaks into view.

CAMERA CRANES DOWN, plummeting back into the abyss of SCREAMING
VOICES, tracking the broom right into...

Harry's hand.
Instantly, Harry ROCKETS into the air, clothes snapping, hair
fluttering off his SCAR.

Engraged, the Horntail's head swivels, yellow eyes tracking Harry's
every move. As Harry DIVES...

...the Horntail SPITS forth a BLAZING ROPE of FIRE. Harry swoops,
streaking under the flames, straightens out, DIVES again, then looks
down and...

...sees the dragon's SPIKED TAIL lashing up like a whip.
Harry rolls sideways, strangling the Firebolt's handle as the
dragon's tail whistles past and a GUST of WIND buffets him.

Rolling upright, Harry jets away, dodging one volley of FIRE after
another, then loops down and ...finds himself heading directly at the
Horntail. Furious, the dragon rises up, sends forth an errant BLAST
of FIRE and, for the briefest of moments, leaves the golden egg
exposed.
-end-





From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Aug  9 17:29:52 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 13:29:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!!
Message-ID: <ae.5ed0f969.2e490e90@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/9/04 5:03:43 AM, cincimaelder at yahoo.com writes:


> When I tried this morning I couldn't get into it either.
> MAE
> 
> 

Well, the page is back(The Leaky Cauldron), but is anyone else still showing 
the comments sections as containing 0 comments? I know that's not true ;-) 
Just a few days ago, each topic had several comments attached. 
Hmm, I wonder if the comment section is having troubles.
Cindy


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




From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Mon Aug  9 18:23:20 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:23:20 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <001d01c47e14$eebf59e0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <cf8feo+ku3p@eGroups.com>

You make good point Sherry. 

I don't think the Harry Potter films will ever be done as good as 
Peter Jackson did with LOTR, unless WB wises up a bit and things are 
done differently. Like some People pointed out PJ, Fran and Philippa 
where and are real fans of the book and are devoted to it. 
Another thing that I think was genius of them was to bring in the two 
illustrators of the books to the project, that way people who had 
read the illustrated versions could find a bit that in the films. 

The problem with the HP movies as many has pointed out is the 
directors not only doesn't have any personal connection to the 
stories, but also that they have changed directors. IMO that ruins 
the whole thing, because different directors have different ways of 
looking at things and you lose the feeling that they belong together.

Like I have said before I think they should make extended versions of 
these films as the books become longer as PJ did with LOTR. The 
extended versions make so much more sense then the cinema versions 
plus that they are truer to the book. Like I pointed out before my 
version of OotP is about 840 pages and my version of LOTR is 1064. 
The difference is not that big and even as PJ divided if into three 
movies he still made the extended versions that where truer to the 
book and made more sense. If WB with cast and crew are going to stay 
remotely true to the story, IMO they either have to make them longer, 
divide them or make extended versions. 

My opinion
Pernille

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> LOTR went through several not so great movie adaptation, before 
Peter
> Jackson came along.  There was a cartoon called the hobbit that 
wasn't bad,
> if you were a kid.  There was a sequel to that, that picked up 
somewhere in
> the middle of LOTR, so it wouldn't have made a bit of sense to 
anyone.  In
> between those, there was a live action movie that covered the story 
in one
> and a half books, left you hanging and never came back to finish 
the story.
> By all accounts, it was not very well done, and nobody really liked 
it much.
> I can't remember now, it's been so long since I've seen it.  By the 
time
> Jackson decided to do the LOTR movies, he and all the crew were 
committed to
> the idea of making it as true to the books and the spirit of 
Tolkien's
> vision as possible, while still doing a job that was more practical 
for a
> movie.  There were things I didn't like in the LOTR movies, because 
i've
> read the books dozens of times, but they make sense from point of 
view of a
> film.  Ok, not all of them make sense, but most do.  There wasn't 
the sense
> that Jackson and the rest didn't know or care about the characters 
or story.
> If you watch the DVD with the commentaries, you gain an incredible 
respect
> for how hard they worked to bring middle earth to life and to stay 
true to
> Tolkien.
> 
> Maybe, the HP movies started out as a way to cash in on the 
popularity of
> the books, and all we who love the books wanted the movies, too.  
it might
> need to wait a decade or two to have some new director come up, 
someone who
> loves the stories and who will make a series true to books and 
their world.
> One thing is that we don't know the end yet, so I think, having an 
overall
> picture might make a series of films better.
> 
> Sherry
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cgahnstrm [mailto:christin.gahnstrom at t...] 
> Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 2:44 AM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as
> Respectfully Done as LOTR
> 
> 
> >  Hey,
> > 
> >  I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are 
both a
> > series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >  LOTR
> > 
> >  --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-
fan
> > of the books.
> >  ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
> > respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
> > something of a scholar of Tolkien
> >  --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
> > achieved legendary reknown.
> >  ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the 
> films
> > were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).
> > 
> > End result: 
> > Academy awards
> > cross-over acceptance
> > critcal acclaim
> > and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who 
miss 
> Tom
> > Bombadill...
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> > 
> >  Harry Potter
> > 
> >  --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
> > extremely stilted manner
> >  --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
> >  --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
> > production for that all-mighty dollar.
> >  --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval 
(this 
> is
> > both a good and bad thing to me) 
> >  --- the books haven't even all been written yet 
> > 
> > End Result:
> > the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but 
so 
> far? 
> > oodles of money has been made
> > reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each 
> film
> > the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
> > but they are just kids...
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >  
> >  I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)
> 
> 
> 
> lotr:
> A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
> films.
> 
> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________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!
> 
> Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the 
List
> Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> 
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  9 18:31:01 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:31:01 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf8feo+ku3p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004201c47e3f$06afcb00$0400a8c0@pensive>

That's a good point about the extended versions of LOTR.  There were things
in the first two movies, that didn't make sense, or seemed that too much was
left out, but after viewing the extended versions, it all came together, and
often important information was filled in, which made the story fuller and
more understandable for someone who hadn't read LOTR.  and made those of us
who had feel better to have more of the important info put back in.

Hopefully, this can happen with the HP movies from now on, because there is
so much in each one.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Pernille [mailto:bolle17 at frisurf.no] 
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 12:23 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as
Respectfully Done as LOTR


You make good point Sherry. 

I don't think the Harry Potter films will ever be done as good as 
Peter Jackson did with LOTR, unless WB wises up a bit and things are 
done differently. Like some People pointed out PJ, Fran and Philippa 
where and are real fans of the book and are devoted to it. 
Another thing that I think was genius of them was to bring in the two 
illustrators of the books to the project, that way people who had 
read the illustrated versions could find a bit that in the films. 

The problem with the HP movies as many has pointed out is the 
directors not only doesn't have any personal connection to the 
stories, but also that they have changed directors. IMO that ruins 
the whole thing, because different directors have different ways of 
looking at things and you lose the feeling that they belong together.

Like I have said before I think they should make extended versions of 
these films as the books become longer as PJ did with LOTR. The 
extended versions make so much more sense then the cinema versions 
plus that they are truer to the book. Like I pointed out before my 
version of OotP is about 840 pages and my version of LOTR is 1064. 
The difference is not that big and even as PJ divided if into three 
movies he still made the extended versions that where truer to the 
book and made more sense. If WB with cast and crew are going to stay 
remotely true to the story, IMO they either have to make them longer, 
divide them or make extended versions. 

My opinion
Pernille

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> LOTR went through several not so great movie adaptation, before 
Peter
> Jackson came along.  There was a cartoon called the hobbit that 
wasn't bad,
> if you were a kid.  There was a sequel to that, that picked up 
somewhere in
> the middle of LOTR, so it wouldn't have made a bit of sense to 
anyone.  In
> between those, there was a live action movie that covered the story 
in one
> and a half books, left you hanging and never came back to finish 
the story.
> By all accounts, it was not very well done, and nobody really liked 
it much.
> I can't remember now, it's been so long since I've seen it.  By the 
time
> Jackson decided to do the LOTR movies, he and all the crew were 
committed to
> the idea of making it as true to the books and the spirit of 
Tolkien's
> vision as possible, while still doing a job that was more practical 
for a
> movie.  There were things I didn't like in the LOTR movies, because 
i've
> read the books dozens of times, but they make sense from point of 
view of a
> film.  Ok, not all of them make sense, but most do.  There wasn't 
the sense
> that Jackson and the rest didn't know or care about the characters 
or story.
> If you watch the DVD with the commentaries, you gain an incredible 
respect
> for how hard they worked to bring middle earth to life and to stay 
true to
> Tolkien.
> 
> Maybe, the HP movies started out as a way to cash in on the 
popularity of
> the books, and all we who love the books wanted the movies, too.  
it might
> need to wait a decade or two to have some new director come up, 
someone who
> loves the stories and who will make a series true to books and 
their world.
> One thing is that we don't know the end yet, so I think, having an 
overall
> picture might make a series of films better.
> 
> Sherry
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cgahnstrm [mailto:christin.gahnstrom at t...] 
> Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 2:44 AM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as
> Respectfully Done as LOTR
> 
> 
> >  Hey,
> > 
> >  I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are 
both a
> > series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >  LOTR
> > 
> >  --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-
fan
> > of the books.
> >  ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
> > respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
> > something of a scholar of Tolkien
> >  --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
> > achieved legendary reknown.
> >  ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the 
> films
> > were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).
> > 
> > End result: 
> > Academy awards
> > cross-over acceptance
> > critcal acclaim
> > and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who 
miss 
> Tom
> > Bombadill...
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> > 
> >  Harry Potter
> > 
> >  --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
> > extremely stilted manner
> >  --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
> >  --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
> > production for that all-mighty dollar.
> >  --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval 
(this 
> is
> > both a good and bad thing to me) 
> >  --- the books haven't even all been written yet 
> > 
> > End Result:
> > the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but 
so 
> far? 
> > oodles of money has been made
> > reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each 
> film
> > the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
> > but they are just kids...
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >  
> >  I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)
> 
> 
> 
> lotr:
> A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
> films.
> 
> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________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!
> 
> Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the 
List
> Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> 
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________
 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Aug  9 18:32:09 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:32:09 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...(yes!)
In-Reply-To: <cf6sdt+c5db@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf8fv9+8n31@eGroups.com>

Ok, I just have to make a few comments here. First I actually have 
loved both portrayals. I know that sounds fickle but what can I say. 
When I saw PS/SS I thought Richard Harris was perfect. Especially at 
the Halloween feast when he hollars 'silence!'. So after that film I 
was perfectly content. Then I saw him on a talk show where he cough 
quite a bit and seemed to just not be well. Of course he passed away 
not long after. And then CoS came out and I remember thinking as we 
were walking to our car, I thought you didn't notice how fraile DD 
was until GoF so I thought he really must not have been well during 
the filming. I loved Richard Harris in every film I ever saw him in 
but seriously you could tell he was not feeling well in CoS. When I 
heard that Michael Gambon was cast, I set out to find out about him 
because despite my feelings about CoS - I wanted someone who would be 
close to Harris' portrayal. First I was happy they chose another 
Irishman (yes Gambon is also Irish so his accent was not a tribute to 
Harris). Then I watched a few of his films - some I had seen before 
some I had not. And thought well he seems to be an excellent actor, I 
mean the man has acted in a variety of films. He was weird in Toys, a 
snooty rich man in Gosford Park and creepy evil in Open Range (that 
one actual made me nervous about him playing DD). Then I heard the 
trio all saying he was excellent that he was not Harris and he had 
made it his own. So I went to the theater NOT expecting Harris and 
was pleasantly surprised to find I rather liked his portrayal. Yes I 
do still love the way Harris played DD in PS/SS but I really think 
Gambon is the way I pictured DD while reading the books. He is an 
old, wise wizard who is slightly eccentric but you can feel the power 
the man has. The scene after the time turner was great as well. I 
love the mischievous look in his eyes as he says 'did what?' and you 
know he *knows* what they are talking about. Oh and I can better 
picture his DD in the Ministry scenes in OotP. Especially Harry's 
trial. So basically, yes I do like both but I think Gambon is closer 
to *my* Dumbledore than Harris was.

Oh, and I second the comment about Cuaron reading the books. He has 
stated in numerous interviews that he was 'ignorant' of Harry Potter 
until he received the script. He was intrigued after reading the 
script so he read the book and fell in love with the 'universe' so he 
went back and read the rest of the books. This was all before filming 
began. As for Harris, I remember hearing him say he didn't read the 
books and I don't think Gambon has either. But neither has Tom Felton 
and he plays an excellent Draco. He said he might read them when he 
finishes playing Draco. But personally, if I was going to play a 
character, I would read the books first.

Theresa






From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Aug  9 18:39:21 2004
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:39:21 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf7dgp+ab0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf8gcp+10fns@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cgahnstrm" 
<christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:
> >  Hey,
> > 
> >  I know no one's really comparing the two, but since they are 
both a
> > series of films based on popular fantasy novels, let's shall we?
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >  LOTR
> > 
> >  --- an obsessed filmmaker, writer, and producer who was an uber-
fan
> > of the books.
> >  ---a tight-knit crew and actors who were also committed and
> > respectful to the source material, like Christopher Lee, who was
> > something of a scholar of Tolkien
> >  --- source material that has beeen around long enough to have
> > achieved legendary reknown.
> >  ---Tolkien is now long gone and unable to have input on how the 
> films
> > were done (though I heard his family was none too happy).
> > 
> > End result: 
> > Academy awards
> > cross-over acceptance
> > critcal acclaim
> > and very few fandom quips except those nit-picking idiots who 
miss 
> Tom
> > Bombadill...
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
> > 
> >  Harry Potter
> > 
> >  --- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
> > extremely stilted manner
> >  --- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
> >  --- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
> > production for that all-mighty dollar.
> >  --- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval 
(this 
> is
> > both a good and bad thing to me) 
> >  --- the books haven't even all been written yet 
> > 
> > End Result:
> > the jury's still out since the films haven't been completed, but 
so 
> far? 
> > oodles of money has been made
> > reviews have been mixed but getting successively better with each 
> film
> > the acting has been nowhere near the quality of that in LOTR
> > but they are just kids...
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >  
> >  I'm sure more could be added...Have at it if you will. :-)
> 
> 
> 
> lotr:
> A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
> films.
> 
> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)

At the end of the day, every actor in the business works for money 
and has a career to think of. Let's not overestimate the dedication 
of the LotR actors, please. That was a function of how long the cast 
were involved with the thing.If you're working on a project for three 
entire years, in contrast to acting in four films in one year, you're 
bound to have time to grow a lot more attached to it.

Personally I rather want my actors talented than dedicated. Viggo 
Mortensen, who everyone keep gushing about, took the role mainly 
because his son was a fan and convinced him that this would be the 
greatest thing since sliced bread. Have I seen any complaints about 
his lacking dedication? 

But hey, what do I know? I'm just one of those nit-picking idiots who 
complain about the Scouring of the Shire, after all.

Alshain, thinking nitpickers can be found in other fandoms than LotR. 
It's stones and glass houses, friends. 




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Aug  9 18:40:59 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 18:40:59 -0000
Subject: HP3
In-Reply-To: <ceug1p+d5of@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf8gfs+beh2@eGroups.com>

I find this rather odd that everyone is saying in their cities HP3 is 
leaving the theaters. Here in the sunny Phoenix Valley, I have not 
really noticed that. Sure it is not on many screens but I still see 
it at several theaters and in fact on the 30th of July it opened at 
the local IMAX for the first time. I of course had to see it again on 
a *really big* screen and went this past Friday evening and the place 
was packed. I don't think there were very many empty seats except 
maybe in the first two rows. I really loved it IMAX style by the way, 
except even though I was 2/3 of the way back and in the center (the 
box office guy said they were his favorite seats) I still got 
slightly nauseated during the bus scene but I took of my glasses and 
I was fine. If IMAX was not so pricey I would go again ($14 for 
adults and $11 for kids hurts the pocketbook a bit). What a wonderful 
way to see a full length film and especially notice little things you 
don't see at a regular theaters. Like Harry's tears and man I never 
notice that many scars on Remus - I saw some of them but not all the 
new ones the morning after the shack scene. Anyway, I just wanted to 
say that where I live HP3 is still very much alive in our theaters. 
Maybe not as many screens or showings but it is still there at least 
at the ones near my house and the IMAX.

Theresa




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 19:07:34 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:07:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <cf641e+84jb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040809190734.31465.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>

--- sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I dont know where the info came from that Cuaron had not read the 
> books, I don't think that's right. I heard him say in several 
> interveiws that once he had read the PoA script--and loved it--he 
> wnet on to read the cooresponding book, was hooked and read all of 
> them. There is no way Cuaron could have made the movie he made 
> without being thouroughly familiar with HP.

I was thinking the same thing.  Here's the quote I've seen most often:

I was a little surprised at the beginning. I didn't know about Harry Potter. I
knew that there were movies and about the huge success of Harry Potter, but I
had never read the books. But when I read the script, it made me want to do it
and when I read the books I thought, I have to do this movie. Its just the
material, the material is so great. 

http://movieweb.com/news/news.php?id=4032

I also saw him in an interview on Univision (Spanish-language TV network in the
US), just before PoA came out, where he not only stated that he went back and
read all the books after reading the PoA script, but he went on and on about
how complex the books are.  He said that there was so much "stuff" in PoA that
he made the decision early on to keep only what stuck to the theme of growing
up and discovering that the monsters are not under the bed, but inside of you.

Sherry Garfio
(realizing today that there is already another Sherry on the list, who has been
posting a lot lately - sorry if I have caused any confusion for anybody)


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 20:53:15 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:53:15 -0000
Subject: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
In-Reply-To: <20040809190734.31465.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cf8o7r+nmmc@eGroups.com>

> "I was a little surprised at the beginning. I didn't know about
Harry Potter. I
> knew that there were movies and about the huge success of Harry
Potter, but I
> had never read the books. But when I read the script, it made me
want to do it
> and when I read the books I thought, I have to do this movie.
It's
just the
> material, the material is so great." 

> how complex the books are.  He said that there was so much "stuff"
in PoA that
> he made the decision early on to keep only what stuck to the theme
of growing
> up and discovering that the monsters are not under the bed, but
inside of you.


I guess this clears up the question of whether he read the books or
not before directing the movie.  I still find it hard to understand
why anyone who read the books could have included that hunchback, and
I still don't think the jamaican shrunken head fit in with HP.  Also
it drove me crazy that Harry was practicing magic at the Dursleys,
outside of school.  In the books he only performs magic outside of
school accidentally or if he is in real danger.  

Seeing the 2nd thing you said... 
"he made the decision early on to keep only what stuck to the theme of
growing up and discovering that the monsters are not under the bed,
but inside of you."

Doesn't it seem like giving the audience information necessary for the
next book/movie should be important too?  Again, I just want to say
that I liked the movie, I just thought it was too short and contained
a couple of elements that shouldn't have been there.  Can you imagine
if I didn't like the movie what I might say?  

I also have to get this off my chest and say I really like the
first 2 movies as well, especially SS.  Harry could have been
a little more outspoken like he was in the books, but I though DR did
a really great job even in the 1st movie (as well the rest of the
cast).  

MAE




From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 00:48:16 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 17:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <1e5.273601e4.2e480828@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040810004816.88200.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com>


--- juli17 at aol.com wrote:

> I'm rereading GoF right now, and I have to point out
> that Hermione 
> has quite a large role in the first half of the
> book, right up to the first
> task. Remember that Ron isn't talking to Harry
> during a good portion
> of the first half, and it is Hermoine who is by
> Harry's side helping him
> figure out how to survive that first task. 

Having just re-read GoF recently, I don't have much of
a problem with this portion of the script. I agree
that it seems to emphasize Harry's temporary break
with Ron and how Hermione is the only one left
standing by him.

However, I guess we can infer from the fact that the
Champions take their dragon figurines from Mr. Crouch
that Ludo Bagman's character has been totally excised
from the film? I don't mind that much, it's better
than many other things which might have been left out
instead - though I was always curious about who they
were going to cast in that role. But since I haven't
heard anything about Ludo being cast, I guess that
pretty much proves he's out?

Lanthiriel


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 01:00:27 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 18:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf7dgp+ab0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040810010027.54894.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com>


--- cgahnstrm <christin.gahnstrom at telia.com> wrote:

> lotr:
> A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be
> a part of the 
> films.
> 
> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money
> (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat,
> pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not
> Thewlis.)

I agree with you there completely. It is very
disheartening to fans to hear the actors portraying
their beloved characters speak in such a dissmissive
manner. The cast of HP seems to want to protect
themselves against folks who might say "Why on earth
is a respected actor like yourself taking a part in a
silly children's movie? Can't you get anything better
these days?" Of course, they don't consider that -
whatever some film snobs may think - the fans
definitely do not consider them "silly children's
movies". The same kind of film snobs may have made the
same accusations of the LotR cast, but the LotR cast
never considered it that way themselves and never
sought to protect their reputations by defending their
reasons for taking on those roles. They treated the
LotR films, not as fantasy, but as serious drama with
fantastical elements. And that's a big difference.

Lanthiriel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From grapfnt at netscape.net  Tue Aug 10 01:08:05 2004
From: grapfnt at netscape.net (mindy bindy)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:08:05 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Oldman as Sirius
References: <BD3ACAA7.13EF%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <41181FF5.3000705@netscape.net>

valerie.flowe at verizon.net wrote:
> mae:
> I really like Oldman as Sirius.  I too thought that he had to look
> pretty bad after all that time in Azkaban.  I think the gross teeth
> bit when he smiled was taken directly from the book (don't have it
> with me so I can't produce the page number).  I look forward to seeing
> him cleaned up in GoF.
> 
> [from  Valerie]
> I've just started re-reading GOF, so don't quite recall all the
> details...but isn't Sirius living in a cave eating rats the whole time?
> Don't know how cleaned up he'll be? Then in OOP he's living in a room with
> Buckbeak. I mean, how good can he smell having Buckbeak as a roommate?!?!
> :-)
> I do love Oldman though. No complaints with him, though someone had
> mentioned that his accent was inconsistent. (different genres of british)
> 
> 

I thought his accent was a bit Sarf Laaandon for someone from an 
aristocratic family, but I think he did some interesting thing with 
rolled 'r's (especially saying "Your rat!"). Perhaps he was going for a 
former poshboy-trying-to-be-street thing. I rather liked it.

Lupin's accent was interesting - I was looking out for how northern he 
was going to be, and it came out exaclty like a Lancastrian trying to 
sound refined. I just hope it isn't contradicted in canon later on.

heather








From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 01:25:47 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:25:47 -0000
Subject: Oldman as Sirius
In-Reply-To: <41181FF5.3000705@netscape.net>
Message-ID: <cf986r+aohf@eGroups.com>

> > [from  Valerie]
> > I've just started re-reading GOF, so don't quite recall all the
> > details...but isn't Sirius living in a cave eating rats the whole
time?
> > Don't know how cleaned up he'll be? Then in OOP he's living in a
room with
> > Buckbeak. I mean, how good can he smell having Buckbeak as a
roommate?!?!

Later in the book he was hiding in the cave, but earlier on he was
hiding out, apparently in a warm southern beachy place, if the bird he
sent the mail to Harry with was any indication.  At one point in the
book Harry couldn't believe how different he looked.  But yes, later
he wants to be near Harry and hides in the cave and loses weight, etc
again.  Poor Sirius, he can never catch a break.

Mae




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 01:35:29 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:35:29 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <20040810010027.54894.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cf98p1+oq6u@eGroups.com>

> movies". The same kind of film snobs may have made the
> same accusations of the LotR cast, but the LotR cast
> never considered it that way themselves and never
> sought to protect their reputations by defending their

Those snobs probably don't say too much now that LotR won all those
Acedemy Awards.  I really think the cast of HP movies do a great job
as well though.    

MAE (who still thinks Harris does a better DD than Gambon.  I want to
like Gambon, really I do...)




From juli17 at aol.com  Tue Aug 10 02:39:41 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 22:39:41 EDT
Subject: The Reason the Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
Message-ID: <1ef.275caf42.2e498f6d@aol.com>



> lotr:
> A dedicated cast that are very happy and proud to be a part of the 
> films.
> 
> hp:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for 
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for 
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)

I've read nothing to indicate that the HP cast isn't very happy and
proud to be part of the HP films. Nor anything to indicate that any
of them did the HP films *primarily* for the money (after all, even
the LOTR cast didn't do their films for free, no matter how proud
they are of them!). As for doing the HP films for others besides
themselves, just because they have family/friends who love the
books and are excited at the prospect of their loved ones being
in the movies, that doesn't indicate the actors aren't doing the
movies for themselves as well. Nor that they aren't as dedicated
to giving their very best to the HP movies as the LOTR actors 
were to their films. 

Pardon all the double negatives, but please lets not assign the
actors motives and attitudes that we can't possibly know. 

Julie 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Aug 10 05:03:13 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:03:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: acting; to research or not to research
In-Reply-To: <cf8fv9+8n31@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3DCF51.1433%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at cox.net>
<snip>
But personally, if I was going to play a
character, I would read the books first.

[from Valerie]
I know! If you have source material, why not use it? If you are bringing a
literary character to life, why not discover him through the eyes of the
author/creator? You are inevitably going to put your own flavor on it
anyhow. 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Aug 10 05:27:35 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:27:35 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Oldman as Sirius
In-Reply-To: <cf986r+aohf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3DD506.1435%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "cincimaelder" <cincimaelder at yahoo.com>
<snip>
But yes, later
he wants to be near Harry and hides in the cave and loses weight, etc
again.  Poor Sirius, he can never catch a break.

[from Valerie]
I know...jeez; they could've at least given him a little love interest with
Tonks before throwing him into the otherworld behind the curtain! 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Aug 10 05:47:13 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:47:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!!
In-Reply-To: <cf87r1+2f47@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD3DD9A1.143D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Tim" <tmarends at yahoo.com>

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire shooting script as of July 30,
2004: The First Task

-snip-

[from Valerie]
THAT'S EXCITING! I could see it playing in my head, especially the firebolt
and dragon scene. Do we really have to wait a year and 1/2!?

Last night I was watching "From Hell"; the story of Jack the Ripper w/Johnny
Depp as the inspector. Ian Richardson (aka Bilbo!) played Jack the Ripper,
with much Shakespearean-classically trained flair...and Johnny's police
department friend was none other than Hagrid! First time I've seen him out
of his Hagrid-garb. He's a HUGE guy!





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




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Aug 10 06:15:33 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:15:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!!
Message-ID: <1a1.27f770e2.2e49c205@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/9/04 11:12:53 PM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net writes:


> Ian Richardson (aka Bilbo!) played Jack the Ripper,
> 

Actually, it was Ian Holm who played the doctor that the movie claimed was 
Jack the Ripper ;-)   
Cindy


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




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Tue Aug 10 07:41:56 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:41:56 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf7nls+c7k1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cf9u84+ljmd@eGroups.com>


> > hp:
> > A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or 
for 
> > their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much 
for 
> > anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)
> 
> I just wondered why you thought Oldman is just in it for the money. 
> Is it something he said in an interview?  I just saw the movie again
> yesterday (had to take my friend before it left the theaters).  I
> really liked Oldman in the movie.  Thewlis was wonderful too.  When 
I
> first saw him I thought "that's not how I imagined Lupin", but once 
he
> started acting he was completely Lupin.  I really liked the scenes
> with he and Harry.




I think Gary Oldman did very well too. He is one of the best around, 
after all, and can probably act the behind of most other actors while 
in a coma ;). Anyway, this is what I found in the July issue of 
Empire:

Q: Why did you go for the role?
A: Well, I needed the work, that's the honest answer. (To be fair he 
also goes on about liking the director, but then he says he wanted to 
do a film that his kids can see. Which, I suppose, puts him in both 
my categories.)

Q: Sirius is the villain but also something of an ambiguous sort. 
Does that make it tougher?
A: It's not All The President's Men, it's Harry Potter. You don't 
want to be too clever with it, I'm playing him as a bad guy.


Christin




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 16:29:14 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <20040810004816.88200.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040810162914.83028.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Lanthiriel S <isilvalacirca at yahoo.com> wrote:
> However, I guess we can infer from the fact that the
> Champions take their dragon figurines from Mr. Crouch
> that Ludo Bagman's character has been totally excised
> from the film?

There's no one listed on IMDB for the part.  Pity.  I always thought Kenneth
Branaugh would have been a good Ludo, but he was an outstanding Lockhart, so I
can't complain.

It also occurred to me that Hermione's part in this scene could imply that the
Yule Ball won't happen, since it reveals her relationship with Krum early.  Of
course, Ron isn't there, and he's the one who needs to see them together, so
maybe they just decided to put in a little foreshadowing that only Harry knows
about.  In the book, when Ron asks her who she's going to the ball with, she
seems to think he should know, so maybe there were signs that the boys just
didn't notice (being boys).

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 20:14:03 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (cincimaelder)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:14:03 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <20040810162914.83028.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cfbaab+ungf@eGroups.com>

> It also occurred to me that Hermione's part in this scene could 
imply that the
> Yule Ball won't happen, since it reveals her relationship with Krum 
early.  Of
> course, Ron isn't there, and he's the one who needs to see them 
together, so

> maybe they just decided to put in a little foreshadowing that only 
Harry knows
> about.  In the book, when Ron asks her who she's going to the ball 
with, she
> seems to think he should know, so maybe there were signs that the 
boys just
> didn't notice (being boys).
> 
> Sherry Garfio

I just thought of another reason for Hermione to be in the tent, 
maybe so that we know what Harry is thinking.  In the book, we read 
his thoughts, but you can't do that in the movie.  Just an idea.  I 
really hope they don't cut the Yule Ball.

I wondered what in the book leads you to believe that Hermione 
thought the boys should have known about Krum.  It could be there, I 
just don't remember.  I remember having the impression that Hermione 
thought they shouldn't be surprised she had a date, but not that it 
was Krum in particular.





From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Aug 11 10:43:48 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:43:48 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf5q9b+hrrh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfct94+16t3@eGroups.com>

daughterofthedust wrote:
>>Harry Potter

--- a scriptwriter, while a friend of the author, writes in an
extremely stilted manner
--- a succession of directors, of varying abilties and visions
--- books at the height of their popularity being rushed to
production for that all-mighty dollar.
--- J.K.'s still alive and well, to give input and approval (this is
both a good and bad thing to me)
--- the books haven't even all been written yet<<

Rebecca:
One of the biggest reasons LOTR-films are much better than the HP-
films (just my opinion of course...I love both series very much) is 
that LOTR was a director picking the subject and not the other way 
around. Peter Jackson WANTED to make the LOTR trilogy, he went out 
asking to make it, *begging* to make it. Harry Potter was the other 
way around, WB had the rights and they picked a director to film it. 
Notice that they specifically chose for money, not artistic merit 
(Chris Columbus is known for making hit movies that are only okay 
when it comes to reviews). They wanted a guarenteed hit. There was no 
way they were going to choose someone like Alfonso Cuaron with the 
first movie, (IMO) they were afraid of making the material too broad 
(not easy for children to get into), or straying from the books at 
all. 
LOTR was completely different. For all the complaining we do over the 
smallest changes, there are HUGE changes in each of the LOTR movies, 
but there were reasons behind each change. Some of the changes (or 
cuts rather) in CoS are completely insanse to me. They filmed the 
scene, it makes the movie make more sense, its not very long, why did 
they cut it out? (I'm thinking of the additional five seconds of 
Colin Creevy, the Hufflepuff conversation in the library about Harry 
being the heir of Slytherin, and Lucius Malfoy in Knockturn Alley). 
On the first two extended versions of the LOTR (and I assume on the 
third, although its not out yet), there is an explanation on the 
editing and WHY certain things were left out of the movie. Wouldn't 
it be wonderful to have something like that for the Harry Potter 
movies? (if only to know why on earth we didn't get to see Alan 
Rickman doing Snape's hospital tantrum scene in PoA).

The other thing about LOTR, was not only did Peter Jackson love the 
material, he was involved in not only the directing, but the adapting 
of the script. Each Harry Potter movie is going through three minds 
before it gets to the screen (first JKR with the original book, and 
then Steve Kloves, and finally whatever director is working on that 
movie). This is very disjointed, and I think is the reason that 
certain things get lost along the way.

As an aside, I don't think switching directors between movies is 
really that horrible. LOTR was a specific 3-part trilogy, the entire 
story takes place in the span of a year. In HP, although involved in 
an overall arc, each book has a different plot and different mood for 
the story. In that sense, the series can benefit from a different 
director for each book. Not to mention that LOTR was only 3 movies, 
and Peter Jackson was still extremely exhausted at the end of making 
them. Can you imagine a director doing all seven Harry Potter films? 
Considering the amount of special effects and child labor laws, it 
would take more than a decade to complete. 

>>But I'm beginning to believe that, at least this time around Harry
Potter simply won't be done in manner befitting it's massive
popularity...Or perhaps it has? :-)<<

'This time around' is a good point. I commented a few months back 
that the movies will most likely be remade at some point in the 
future and that version might be much better. The problem with Harry 
Potter is that its too new a series. Its first audience hasn't 'grown 
up' yet. Yes there are many adult fans, but none of us can have fond 
memories of reading it as a child. I think the artistic and true to 
the darker spirit of the books HP film will be made by someone who is 
only a child now. Someone who will *grow up* loving the books and 
WANT to someday make a movie out of it. Chris Columbus and Alfonso 
Cuaron simply cannot have that sort of attatchment to the story (I 
don't know about Columbus, but I know Cuaron hadn't even read the 
books until he was offered to direct PoA). 

>> the focus is on the
all-mighty dollar instead of maintaining the magic of the books...<<

As I said above, sometimes being stringently faithful to the 
material, does not yeild a better movie, or a movie more reflective 
of the book. The words and the scenes can stay the same while the 
spirit is lost (Chamber of Secrets was a DARK book, nothing at all 
lik the mood of the movie). Hopefully a future adaptation won't be so 
afraid of changing things if thats what it takes to make the film 
better. Getting the characters right too would be nice, just because 
a line is IN the movie doesn't make it faithful to the books if 
Dumbledore said it in the book and suddenly Hermione is saying it in 
the movie. 

>>Personally, I think they should have waited (but "the almighty 
green" beckoned) until the whole series had been complete for a while 
and found ONE quality director with love for the source.<<

I think they should have waited too. Its difficult to adapt the 
series without knowing where the series is headed. Yes, JKR can hint 
at what to leave in, but its not nearly the same as if the entire 
series was already done. Not to mention the fact that if there's long 
delay for books six and seven to come out, we'll have to deal with 
the distraction of a re-casting (maybe not for the trio, but it could 
be hard to get EVERY child actor from Seamus to Ginny, to come back 
several years later) in the last two or three movies. 
At the very least they should have found a director who is in love 
with the books and understands them better than the ones we've had. 
Then perhaps things like the character assasination of Ron and Super!
Hermione wouldn't have happened. 

hp wrote:
> A cast that seems to either be in it for the money (Oldman) or for
> their children/grandchildren/nephew/neigbur's cat, pretty much for
> anyone but themselves. (The rest. Well, maybe not Thewlis.)

Alshain replied:
>> At the end of the day, every actor in the business works for money
and has a career to think of. Let's not overestimate the dedication
of the LotR actors, please. That was a function of how long the cast
were involved with the thing.If you're working on a project for three
entire years, in contrast to acting in four films in one year, you're
bound to have time to grow a lot more attached to it.<<

Rebecca:
Indeed. Be realistic, after an actor is established, money almost 
always is a factor in whether or not they choose a script. And when 
you're dealing with a kids movie, a lot of the actors are going to be 
in it because a child in their life wants them to. That's not 
horrible either. Doing a kids movie is harder than a regular movie, 
its a longer shoot, there are more breaks (and thus more breaks in 
concentration), and many kids just aren't very polished actors. I can 
see why any actor would be hesistant about it. Especially when it 
comes to Harry Potter, since many of the roles are re-occuring, 
meaning that the actor in question has to sign up for *several* 
movies. And AS for Gary Oldman, he's sited several reasons why he 
agreed to do the movie, 'needing the work' being only one of them. 
(of course there are a few actors who are exceptions, both Emma 
Thompson and Jason Isaacs appear to have loved it, and both are eager 
to come back).

>> Personally I rather want my actors talented than dedicated. Viggo
Mortensen, who everyone keep gushing about, took the role mainly
because his son was a fan and convinced him that this would be the
greatest thing since sliced bread. Have I seen any complaints about
his lacking dedication? <<

I haven't heard any LOTR fan complain about he only agreed because of 
his son. His performance was wonderful, and that's all that matters. 
Has anyone been disappointed by any of the adult actors? (by their 
*performance*, not by the casting itself).

>>But hey, what do I know? I'm just one of those nit-picking idiots 
who complain about the Scouring of the Shire, after all.<<
Hey, she did say Tom Bombidill, which is a much smaller thing to 
complain about (-; 

>>Alshain, thinking nitpickers can be found in other fandoms than 
LotR. It's stones and glass houses, friends.<<

Whatever do you mean? No one *here* was complaining about minor 
details.... (-:






From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 17:29:17 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <20040810162914.83028.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040811172917.80143.qmail@web53503.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Sherry Garfio <sgarfio at yahoo.com> wrote:

> It also occurred to me that Hermione's part in this
> scene could imply that the
> Yule Ball won't happen, since it reveals her
> relationship with Krum early.  

I'm pretty confident that the Yule Ball will be
included. It gives the characters a chance to interact
in a way we've yet to see, and I think WB knows that
they'd have a mass riot on the part of fans if it were
left out!

Of course, WB hasn't seemed too interested in what the
fans have to say so far... But I'm still pretty
hopeful.

Lanthiriel


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Aug 11 18:13:44 2004
From: aggie at raggie.freeserve.co.uk (Jo Raggett)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:13:44 -0000
Subject: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <20040810004816.88200.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cfdnko+44sp@eGroups.com>

> > Lanthiriel
> However, I guess we can infer from the fact that the
> Champions take their dragon figurines from Mr. Crouch
> that Ludo Bagman's character has been totally excised
> from the film? > Lanthiriel


Aggie:
You scared me here as I think that Ludo Bagman's going to play an 
important part in the next books and if he's omitted from the film 
then that throws a wet blanket over my theory!! Anyway, I went 
delving and found this...



"According to the Sidney Talent Company, Australian actor Martin 
Landham has won the role of Ludo Bagman in the film version of Harry 
Potter and the Goblet of Fire"

Found at http://www.hpana.com/news.15874.html






From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 21:01:03 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <cfbaab+ungf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040811210103.22229.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com>

--- cincimaelder <cincimaelder at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I wondered what in the book leads you to believe that Hermione 
> thought the boys should have known about Krum.  It could be there, I 
> just don't remember.  I remember having the impression that Hermione 
> thought they shouldn't be surprised she had a date, but not that it 
> was Krum in particular.

Erm, I think I need to rescind that.  I looked for it this morning, and I think
what I was recalling was Hermione's "Just because it's taken you 3 years to
notice, doesn't mean nobody else has spotted I'm a girl" or something to that
effect, which is not the same thing.  After she storms off, Ginny refuses to
tell the boys who Hermione's going with.  I think I put this together with
Hermione's apparent disdain for Krum and his female entourage, and came up with
a rather liberal interpretation that's not really supported by canon.  My bad.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Aug 11 21:18:06 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:18:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gambon vs. Harris as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <1ad.2729cffc.2e4be70e@aol.com>

My biggest quibble with the two actors (other than the fact that  you don't 
get the impression Dumbledore is particularly close to Harry, which he  IS, 
according to canon), is that Gambon's hair and beard were not nearly long or  
white enough, and that his robes were not nearly grand enough.  Harris's  wig, 
beard and robes all suited canon Dumbledore perfectly, in my mind.   That said, 
what the heck was Gambon/Dumbledore talking about at times?   When he said 
that line where he made the candle flame disappear, then reappear  -- that line 
made no sense at all, in or out of context.  Are they TRYING  to make him look 
flaky (or barmy?)??  Dumbledore in canon is funny,  whimsical, sometimes even 
silly, but the Dumbledore in PoA was just goofy.   No "majesty" there, as was 
the case with Harris's Dumbledore.  I did like  the little twinkly, perky 
bits, as when he left Harry and Hermione in the  hospital wing to get started in 
the Time Turner sequence and his line after they  return.  I can accept the 
change of actors, but the change in costume, wig,  beard and sensibility is a bit 
galling.  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Aug 11 21:20:04 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:20:04 EDT
Subject: Sirius as a werewolf???
Message-ID: <1d2.28595617.2e4be784@aol.com>

I haven't seen this posted (but I travel a lot and sometimes miss  posts, so 
please forgive me if I'm in error here).  In the movie, Sirius  appears to 
have been injured by Werewolf/Remus.  So this would seem to  indicate Sirius 
would eventually become a werewolf, possibly, which is not in  canon.  Do those of 
you with some medical background (surely in a group  this size, there are 
some??) think he could have gotten that big gash in his  shoulder just from 
falling down or being thrown by the werewolf?  Just  wondering.  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 22:11:44 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:11:44 -0000
Subject: Sirius as a werewolf???
In-Reply-To: <1d2.28595617.2e4be784@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cfe5j0+3qrm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
 Do those of 
> you with some medical background (surely in a group  this size, 
there are 
> some??) think he could have gotten that big gash in his  shoulder 
just from 
> falling down or being thrown by the werewolf?  Just  wondering.  


Ohhh, ever since I noticed that in PoA Imax, I've wondered that 
myself.  Any ideas out there from anyone? *waits patiently*

Alora :)




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 22:16:45 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:16:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sirius as a werewolf???
In-Reply-To: <1d2.28595617.2e4be784@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040811221645.12846.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com>

--- artsylynda at aol.com wrote:

> In the movie, Sirius  appears to 
> have been injured by Werewolf/Remus.  So this would seem to  indicate Sirius 
> would eventually become a werewolf, possibly, which is not in  canon.  Do
> those of 
> you with some medical background (surely in a group  this size, there are 
> some??) think he could have gotten that big gash in his  shoulder just from 
> falling down or being thrown by the werewolf?  Just  wondering.  

Yeah, I wondered about that too.  I would have suspected that it was one of
those "inadvertent foreshadowing" moments if I didn't know what happens to
Sirius in OotP.  I've decided that the big gash was caused by the werewolf's
claws, just to resolve the situation in my own mind ;)

I also wondered what would happen if a werewolf were to bite an animal or an
animagus.  I presume that a werewolf biting an animal would have no special
effect, but what about a human in animal form?  An animagus supposedly keeps
his human intellect but has the physical form and limitations of an animal
(which has been discussed to death, so I won't bother).  So if Lupin had bitten
one of the other Marauders during their escapades - and it seems unlikely that
he never bit any of them in all that time - would they have become werewolves
too?  Or would their animal forms have protected them?  Clearly, in the film at
least, injuries sustained while in animal form persist when the person returns
to human form, for both werewolves and animagi.  Any guesses?

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From pj655123 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 01:44:46 2004
From: pj655123 at yahoo.com (pj655123)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:44:46 -0000
Subject: SS question - Quirrell
Message-ID: <cfei2e+s0c9@eGroups.com>

I was watching the SS Movie today and something hit me.  I've been 
reading alot of chatter recently on the Book group about Snape being 
a "double agent" and at the end of SS [the movie] when he's at the 
mirror with Quirrell, he mentions that Snape tried to save him, and 
Snape suspected him of wrong doings, etc... now, at this point, 
Voldemort was sticking out of his head, so naturally he would have 
heard every word...so wouldn't this now put Snape in jeopardy as a 
double agent, as his "cover" is now blown? Not sure if this question 
belongs in the "movie" or the "book" group, as it overlaps both, 
but, if you have any comments, I'd like to hear them!
PH





From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com  Thu Aug 12 02:58:33 2004
From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:58:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] SS question - Quirrell
Message-ID: <129.487ac4bc.2e4c36d9@aol.com>

In a message dated 8/11/2004 9:56:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
pj655123 at yahoo.com writes:
I was watching the SS Movie today and something hit me.  I've been 
reading alot of chatter recently on the Book group about Snape being 
a "double agent" and at the end of SS [the movie] when he's at the 
mirror with Quirrell, he mentions that Snape tried to save him, and 
Snape suspected him of wrong doings, etc... now, at this point, 
Voldemort was sticking out of his head, so naturally he would have 
heard every word...so wouldn't this now put Snape in jeopardy as a 
double agent, as his "cover" is now blown? Not sure if this question 
belongs in the "movie" or the "book" group, as it overlaps both, 
but, if you have any comments, I'd like to hear them!
PH
Cassie (me) 

Here's a theory: 

At the end of PoA, Dumbledore says. 

"You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt...[snip] and I'm much 
mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter." (pg. 427) 

Snape was trying to save Harry because he owed James' a life debt.  He could 
easily say he only saved Harry's life then so he could get out of that debt.  

~Cassie~ 


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




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 03:17:40 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:17:40 -0000
Subject: Sirius as a werewolf???
In-Reply-To: <1d2.28595617.2e4be784@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cfengk+sqkd@eGroups.com>

Werewolf bites only effect humans. Now, I'm 99% sure this is 
actually in the books somewhere. However, being that there are 
thousands of pages to look through to find the quote, I'll just 
trust my memory for now. ;-) However, also... in "Fantastic Beasts 
and Where to Find Them" - Page 41 - "Humans turn into werewolves 
only when bitten." 

~Deborah


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> I haven't seen this posted (but I travel a lot and sometimes miss  
posts, so 
> please forgive me if I'm in error here).  In the movie, Sirius  
appears to 
> have been injured by Werewolf/Remus.  So this would seem to  
indicate Sirius 
> would eventually become a werewolf, possibly, which is not in  
canon.  Do those of 
> you with some medical background (surely in a group  this size, 
there are 
> some??) think he could have gotten that big gash in his  shoulder 
just from 
> falling down or being thrown by the werewolf?  Just  wondering.  
> 
> Lynda
> 
> "The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Aug 12 05:17:39 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:17:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: GoF script-exerpt!! or "Hermione Granger
	and theGoF".  Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <20040811172917.80143.qmail@web53503.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BD4075B3.1476%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: Lanthiriel S <isilvalacirca at yahoo.com>

I'm pretty confident that the Yule Ball will be
included. It gives the characters a chance to interact
in a way we've yet to see, and I think WB knows that
they'd have a mass riot on the part of fans if it were
left out!

[Valerie]
I doubt they'd leave the Yule Ball out. Especially since Cho has been cast.
They've started setting up the pre-pubescent attraction between Ron and
Hermione in POA. Certainly Cuaron thought enough of that plotline to enhance
it. Granted he's not directing GOF, but I think that "teen romance" is even
more of an important plotline in GOF than this past film. Especially if
their main target audience are teens.




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




From lani.wright at verizon.net  Thu Aug 12 05:17:04 2004
From: lani.wright at verizon.net (laniw01)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:17:04 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
Message-ID: <cfeugg+cvq7@eGroups.com>

Rebecca wrote: 

>I think the artistic and true to the darker spirit of the books HP 
film will be made by someone who is only a child now. Someone who 
will *grow up* loving the books and WANT to someday make a movie out 
of it. 

Lani: 
It would have to be in the fairly distant future, to allow enough 
time to pass between the original ("classic?") series and the
remake(s). It might have to wait for someone of the second generation 
of HP fans, even. I agree that the continuity of a single director 
who loves the story ? AND who knows how to tell a story in moving 
pictures ? would be ideal. In that context, I'm wondering if
the next iteration might be as a mini-series? Those lend themselves 
much better to long-running, episodic tales, and BBC has an 
outstanding track record of translating books and characters, at 
least in the mystery genre. (IMO, characters such as Cadfael, Miss 
Marple, Hercule Poirot, Sherlock Holmes, and Bertie Wooster leapt 
from the pages to the small screen in perfect form and in perfect 
environments.) Besides, I think a TV adaptation could be made much 
sooner than a movie remake, and I would dearly love to see Round 2 of 
the series in my lifetime!





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Aug 12 05:28:42 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:28:42 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius as a werewolf???
In-Reply-To: <cfengk+sqkd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD40784A.1477%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Scully931" <scully931 at yahoo.com>

Werewolf bites only effect humans. Now, I'm 99% sure this is
actually in the books somewhere. However, being that there are
thousands of pages to look through to find the quote, I'll just
trust my memory for now. ;-) However, also... in "Fantastic Beasts
and Where to Find Them" - Page 41 - "Humans turn into werewolves
only when bitten." 

[Valerie]
Yes, that was the whole reason why the marauders became animagi; to keep
Lupin company while protecting themselves. I'm not sure if that means a
werewolf WON"T attack an animal, or that a potential bite won't affect the
animal??
But if memory serves, Sirius was tossed roughly onto a rock or tree by
werewolf Lupin. That's probably how he got the gash. OR claws. But I don't
think he was bit.



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Aug 12 06:01:53 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:01:53 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as
	Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cfeugg+cvq7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD408011.147D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "laniw01" <lani.wright at verizon.net>
<snip>
In that context, I'm wondering if
the next iteration might be as a mini-series? Those lend themselves
much better to long-running, episodic tales, and BBC has an
outstanding track record of translating books and characters, at
least in the mystery genre.

[Valerie]
As long as it is not the WB doing a bad "Harry Potter 90210" TV show, as
that terrible (and luckily a joke!) rumor declared a month ago!
But yes, I think it will take awhile for folks to get Rupert, Emma, Dan,
Tom, etc. out of their visual minds as the personification of the HP
characters.




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor   ADVERTISEMENT
 



Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<mailto:HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
 
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .





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




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Thu Aug 12 10:59:04 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:59:04 +0100
Subject: Cuaron and the book
Message-ID: <v01540b00bd3edea1cfe7@[217.154.251.109]>

Celestina said:-

(snip)

> He had
>asked Cuaron how he intepreted the character (who also hadn't read
>the books)

On the TV special which was televised in Britain on the day on which PoA
was released, Cuaron said that he hadn't read the book before he saw the
script; but went on to say that he was then sent the book after expressing
interest in the script. He didn't actually say that he then read the book,
but he did say that he found the book so interesting that that was what
made him want to do the movie; the implication is pretty plain.

That was Cuaron talking to camera, so is reliable. I have the show on
video, and will look up his actual words if you want.

Cheers,
Nicholas





From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Thu Aug 12 10:59:06 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:59:06 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Gambon is a Better Dumbledore Than Harris Was...
Message-ID: <v01540b01bd3edffb2157@[217.154.251.109]>

>--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust"
><daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
>>
>>  He's eccectric....People complain about the rubber-banded beard,
>but
>> he IS supposed to appear batty to his opponents, folks. The
>> rubber-band seems right to me.

Then Tim:-

>I thought it was more like a small piece of string tied around the
>beard, and I believe Harris' Dumbeldore had the same thing in at
>least one scene in one of the previous films... I'll have to watch
>them again and look for it.

It's a fairly ornate piece of decorated thread, with silver stars on both ends.

Cheers,
Nicholas
who has seen the movie....well, let's just say more than a couple of times!





From sherriola at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 12 12:56:01 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 06:56:01 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be asRespectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <BD408011.147D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <002101c4806b$b9254520$0400a8c0@pensive>

I think a TV mini series could be done well with the right directors,
producers, writers.  it would make it possible to portray the full story
without annoying cuts that will probably have to come in the GOF and OOTP
movies.  I remember how much I wanted someone to make a movie of Stephen
King's the Stand.  It is my favorite of all his books, but it is so
involved, and I was afraid a feature film could never do it justice.  In the
end, they did a mini series of it, with the author very much involved in the
process, and it was wonderful.  Not unchanged, but with the characters and
true plot and story laid out thoroughly.  It could never have been done that
way in one movie.  I was glad they chose the mini series.

I think this could be the way to tell the HP story someday.  It might not be
a s dazzling as a movie in the theaters, but I think that someday, it would
be the way to go for someone who really wanted to tell the story.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Valerie Flowe [mailto:valerie.flowe at verizon.net] 
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 12:02 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be
asRespectfully Done as LOTR


From: "laniw01" <lani.wright at verizon.net>
<snip>
In that context, I'm wondering if
the next iteration might be as a mini-series? Those lend themselves
much better to long-running, episodic tales, and BBC has an
outstanding track record of translating books and characters, at
least in the mystery genre.

[Valerie]
As long as it is not the WB doing a bad "Harry Potter 90210" TV show, as
that terrible (and luckily a joke!) rumor declared a month ago!
But yes, I think it will take awhile for folks to get Rupert, Emma, Dan,
Tom, etc. out of their visual minds as the personification of the HP
characters.




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor   ADVERTISEMENT
 



Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<mailto:HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
 
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .





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




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________
 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 




From jmmears at comcast.net  Thu Aug 12 12:57:05 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:57:05 -0000
Subject: acting; to research or not to research
In-Reply-To: <BD3DCF51.1433%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cffpf1+2js0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> From: "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at c...>
> <snip>
> But personally, if I was going to play a
> character, I would read the books first.
> 
> [from Valerie]
> I know! If you have source material, why not use it? If you are 
bringing a
> literary character to life, why not discover him through the eyes 
of the
> author/creator? You are inevitably going to put your own flavor on 
it
> anyhow. 


I think the problem is that the actor's job is not to play the 
character in the book, it's to play the character in the 
screenplay.  There are often significant differences between the 
two, as the PoA movie so richly demonstrated.  It could be that the 
actor doesn't want to be put in the position of having to reconcile 
those differences, and I think that's a legitimate approach.

In effect, it's impossible to serve two masters (ie, book author vs 
screenplay/director), and that's not what the actor is being paid to 
do.

Jo Serenadust




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Aug 12 21:11:45 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:11:45 -0000
Subject: Preview of PoA DVD at Official Harry Potter site
Message-ID: <cfgmeh+64pg@eGroups.com>

Hi, I just got my Warner Bros newsletter (for once I'm happy I'm 
still signed up for that), and it had a link to a video prevew of the 
Prisoner of Azkaban dvd. 

http://l.warnerbros.1nc025.com/l/r/03PUeWeb08mRb0Evze

It has little clips of interviews and the games and stuff that are 
going to be included on the dvd. 


-Rebecca




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 03:21:27 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 03:21:27 -0000
Subject: The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cf8gcp+10fns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfhc3n+6e8d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth"
<alshainofthenorth at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cgahnstrm" 
> <christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:

> ....Personally I rather want my actors talented than dedicated. Viggo 
> Mortensen, who everyone keep gushing about, took the role mainly 
> because his son was a fan and convinced him that this would be the 
> greatest thing since sliced bread. Have I seen any complaints about 
> his lacking dedication? 
> 
> But hey, what do I know? I'm just one of those nit-picking idiots who 
> complain about the Scouring of the Shire, after all.
> 
> Alshain, thinking nitpickers can be found in other fandoms than LotR. 
> It's stones and glass houses, friends.

Eeesh, touched a nerve did I?

My apologies, but you did just prove my point...Viggo also slept with
his sword, carried it everywhere, did most of his own stunts as well
as the stuntmen in the film (there paraphrased words, not mine) and
lived like the character he was trying to embody...

If that's not dedication, I don't know what is.

Glass houses and stones don't really apply here, because my feelings
won't be hurt if you make fun of my fandom's idiosyncracies. You would
be a complete stranger who only typed his/her opinion of "my fandom"
on a group messageboard.

This is Harry Potter for Grown-Up's, right?

;-)

@)--/----
daughter




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 03:28:49 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 03:28:49 -0000
Subject: acting; to research or not to research
In-Reply-To: <cffpf1+2js0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfhchh+eqt4@eGroups.com>

Yes, that is one way to look at it. However, most actors would agree 
that given the opportunity to have such rich background for your 
character is a wonderful thing and something to be used. For 
instance, an actor playing, let's say, someone involved in the Salem 
Witch trials would be well advised to research the people and 
atmosphere of that time. That's not to say he/she would be taking 
everything and applying it *directly* to their character. More, it 
gives flavor and a layered performance. These characters were not 
made up from scratch for the screenplay. They came from something. 
And, given the opportunity to read what they actually came from is 
something I can't quite believe some do not take advantage of. My 
degree is in acting, so I understand the difference research can 
make. 

Not that any of these movie stars care what I think, but let's face 
it, some of them don't have the emotional investment in this that 
we, as fans have. We pour over every detail, wanting everything to 
be just right. (whether similar to the book or not) They show up and 
tape their part and move on to the next thing. Not saying they don't 
do a good job, but it is a job. Now, if they were given a part that 
they had dreamed of for their entire lives, or a part in a movie 
about which they felt passionate, perhaps there would be research. 
But, every actor I know, cringes when they hear someone say they 
didn't bother reading the books. 

~Deborah

> 
> I think the problem is that the actor's job is not to play the 
> character in the book, it's to play the character in the 
> screenplay.  There are often significant differences between the 
> two, as the PoA movie so richly demonstrated.  It could be that 
the 
> actor doesn't want to be put in the position of having to 
reconcile 
> those differences, and I think that's a legitimate approach.
> 
> In effect, it's impossible to serve two masters (ie, book author 
vs 
> screenplay/director), and that's not what the actor is being paid 
to 
> do.
> 
> Jo Serenadust




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 03:46:08 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 03:46:08 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - To Mae
In-Reply-To: <cf8o7r+nmmc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfhdi0+dnfm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cincimaelder" <cincimaelder at y...>
wrote:
> ...it drove me crazy that Harry was practicing magic at the Dursleys,
> outside of school.   
> 
> MAE

Personally, I think in the context of the film, the inclusion of that
was perfect. Remember, Cuaron was concerned with establishing
motivations for the characters.

What better way to demonstrate Harry's love for the magic, than to
have him taking a big risk to practice it?

Remember, as it is a movie and not a book, we don't have the benefit
of the omnipresent narrator to tell us "Harry loves magic, this much".

The scene in the beginning's purpose was two-fold, showing us Harry's
growing up and that he loves magic, quite a lot.

Practical and entertaining. :-)

@)--/---
daughter

A book is not a film. A film is not a book.




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 05:05:12 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:05:12 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - To Mae
In-Reply-To: <cfhdi0+dnfm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfhi68+qlmu@eGroups.com>

I see the point you are making. However, to me it seemed a sloppy 
bit of storytelling. It's not as though he *might* get caught if he 
does magic. He *will* get caught if he does magic. I would have 
bought it in the context of the movie if Vernon hadn't then turned 
around ten minutes later and told Harry he knew he couldn't do magic 
because he'd get thrown out of school. An omission of that line or 
of the magic would have worked. Together, they did not. (In my 
opinion.) :-)

~Deborah

> 
> Personally, I think in the context of the film, the inclusion of 
that
> was perfect. Remember, Cuaron was concerned with establishing
> motivations for the characters.
> 
> What better way to demonstrate Harry's love for the magic, than to
> have him taking a big risk to practice it?
> 
> Remember, as it is a movie and not a book, we don't have the 
benefit
> of the omnipresent narrator to tell us "Harry loves magic, this 
much".
> 
> The scene in the beginning's purpose was two-fold, showing us 
Harry's
> growing up and that he loves magic, quite a lot.
> 
> Practical and entertaining. :-)
> 
> @)--/---
> daughter
> 
> A book is not a film. A film is not a book.




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 05:09:35 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:09:35 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - Also...
In-Reply-To: <cfhi68+qlmu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfhief+oei6@eGroups.com>

Forgot a point I wanted to make - 

I think that trying to show Harry loves magic so much that he will 
risk a bit of practice does not work. He knows the consequences. If 
he does magic at home, he gets thrown out of Hogwarts. (Since 
already receiving a warning for Dobby) Do you really think he would 
risk everything he loves to do a simple spell? 

Ok, that's all. (By the way, everything I write is a respectful 
disagreement. Don't want to come across as arguing. :-) 

~Deborah

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Scully931" <scully931 at y...> 
wrote:
> I see the point you are making. However, to me it seemed a sloppy 
> bit of storytelling. It's not as though he *might* get caught if 
he 
> does magic. He *will* get caught if he does magic. I would have 
> bought it in the context of the movie if Vernon hadn't then turned 
> around ten minutes later and told Harry he knew he couldn't do 
magic 
> because he'd get thrown out of school. An omission of that line or 
> of the magic would have worked. Together, they did not. (In my 
> opinion.) :-)
> 
> ~Deborah





From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Aug 13 08:10:50 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:10:50 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - Also...
In-Reply-To: <cfhief+oei6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfht2a+27d9@eGroups.com>

cincimaelder (Mae) wrote:
> ...it drove me crazy that Harry was practicing magic at the  
>Dursleys, outside of school.

'daughter' replied:
>>What better way to demonstrate Harry's love for the magic, than to
have him taking a big risk to practice it?<<

Deborah wrote:
>>It's not as though he *might* get caught if he does magic. He 
*will* get caught if he does magic. I would have bought it in the 
context of the movie if Vernon hadn't then turned around ten minutes 
later and told Harry he knew he couldn't do magic because he'd get 
thrown out of school. An omission of that line or of the magic would 
have worked. Together, they did not. (In my opinion.) :-)<<
[she continued in a later post]:
>> I think that trying to show Harry loves magic so much that he will
risk a bit of practice does not work. He knows the consequences. If
he does magic at home, he gets thrown out of Hogwarts. (Since
already receiving a warning for Dobby) Do you really think he would
risk everything he loves to do a simple spell? <<

Rebecca:
I think the 'simple spell' might be the point. Perhaps in the 'movie 
world' of Harry Potter, students are allowed to do SIMPLE spells, 
(like Hermione being able to fix Harry's glasses in CoS) outside of 
school without getting in trouble. Remember, when Vernon says that 
line Harry is about to do some sort of violent magic, not just a 
lumos spell. It might be that ATTACKING someone outside of school is 
not allowed, but lighting your wand, or doing a 'reparo' is allowed.









From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 14:45:15 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:45:15 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - To Mae
In-Reply-To: <cfhdi0+dnfm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfik5r+108vk@eGroups.com>

> Personally, I think in the context of the film, the inclusion of 
that
> was perfect. Remember, Cuaron was concerned with establishing
> motivations for the characters.
> 
I don't agree.  I think if a director needs to stray from the book 
because something is not easily explained, then he has license to do 
so.  But I think DR is a good enough actor to get across the point 
that Harry loves magic without showing him doing it at the beginning.

I guess I'm just a purest when it comes to HP <grin>.  For me, the 
truer it stays to the books the better.  I also think it is the 
directors job to explain and show the characters motivations for 
those who haven't read the books, but it is also important to stay 
within the HP world for those who have read the books (which is 
probably the vast majority of people given how many of the books have 
sold).

MAE




From Erthena at aol.com  Fri Aug 13 16:49:28 2004
From: Erthena at aol.com (werebearloony)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:49:28 -0000
Subject: Preview of PoA DVD at Official Harry Potter site
In-Reply-To: <cfgmeh+64pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfireo+jctt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...> 
wrote:
> Rebecca Wrote
> Hi, I just got my Warner Bros newsletter (for once I'm happy I'm 
> still signed up for that), and it had a link to a video prevew of 
the 
> Prisoner of Azkaban dvd. 
> 
> http://l.warnerbros.1nc025.com/l/r/03PUeWeb08mRb0Evze
> 
> It has little clips of interviews and the games and stuff that are 
> going to be included on the dvd. 

loony:
I just got mine as well and all I can say is commentary, commentary, 
commentary!  There's going to be a commentary!!! Horray!!!  I love 
commentaries!  That has been my major qualm about the HP DVD's, I 
never knew what any of the actors, director, screenwriter, etc. 
thought about this or that part that was different from the book.  
It's also one of the things I love about the LOTR extended DVD's, I 
can hear why things are cut, what the actors were thinking and how to 
play tig! (See Fellowship of the Ring cast commentary)  Also JKR gave 
an interview for the DVD again, and there's what I think is an 
interactive timeline.  It looks so cool!  My only problem is now I 
have to rethink my decision to buy ROTK extended right away, it's 
either that or PoA right away and then the other waits for Christmas.
~~loony 




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 05:39:06 2004
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:39:06 -0000
Subject: Viktor Krum actor
Message-ID: <cfk8hq+t83j@eGroups.com>

Does anyone know where I can find  photo of the actor who has been cast as Viktor Krum 
in Goblet of Fire? I was telling a freind that the role had been cast, and we spent an hour 
online trying to find a photo with no luck.

I know I've seen a photo somewhere, but searches of The Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet 
turned up nothing. If you have a link to a photo, please post it, or if you have a phto, you 
can e-mail it to me off-list.

Thanks for your help,
Tyler




From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Sat Aug 14 04:22:21 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:22:21 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
Message-ID: <cfk41t+460c@eGroups.com>

Hi Sassy Snape - first post here, but I was wondering:

Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 

I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
(sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of the 
other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown youths 
to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need a 
big name to add to the production?

Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph Finnes, 
Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes bigger 
paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future films. 
(Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't exactly huge 
in NA or had a big part)

Let's just hope Prince Charles doesn't want to do a walk-on at one 
point...a little too trendy. Also, I am not saying these actors 
aren't good actors, just that it could pull the focus from the films.

Sassy





From scully931 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 16:31:55 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:31:55 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cfk41t+460c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cflepr+2qv4@eGroups.com>

Yes, I agree that big names sometimes pull focus. That is one reason 
so many people were against Haley Joel Osment for Harry. ("Hey, 
look! It's the kid from Sixth Sense on a broom!") I understand the 
reasoning for wanting big names in a movie. But, in this case, I 
think it's unnecessary. They don't need to sell this movie with 
anything other than the quality. If they want someone because 
they're the best actor for the role, that's one thing. And, all the 
actors are fine in their roles. I, personally have big Dumbledore 
issues, and - *not* to get into that discussion again, merely using 
it as an example - I feel they could have found someone better than 
Harris for the role by holding open calls. There are theatre actors, 
even ones unknown to us, that could act rings around a majority of 
movie stars. (Not speaking of Rickman, M.Smith, etc.) 
I do think that the big names for Harry Potter are perhaps less of 
an issue in America than Europe. Obviously, I recognized names when 
they were thrown around, but some people I couldn't really place 
until I saw a picture. I do get frustrated when I read all the posts 
of people suggesting names. I know it's all in good fun, but I 
always think, 'why does it have to be someone we know?' 

Glad to have you posting here, Sassy Snape!

~Deborah

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape" 
<onceupona_party at y...> wrote:
> Hi Sassy Snape - first post here, but I was wondering:
> 
> Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 
> 
> I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
> (sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of 
the 
> other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
> actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown 
youths 
> to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need a 
> big name to add to the production?
> 
> Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph 
Finnes, 
> Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes bigger 
> paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
> actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future 
films. 
> (Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't exactly 
huge 
> in NA or had a big part)
> 
> Let's just hope Prince Charles doesn't want to do a walk-on at one 
> point...a little too trendy. Also, I am not saying these actors 
> aren't good actors, just that it could pull the focus from the 
films.
> 
> Sassy




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Aug 15 22:33:16 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:33:16 -0000
Subject: JKR Edinburgh Book Festival quote.
Message-ID: <cfoobc+c0ns@eGroups.com>

For all of you who don't know, JKR spoke at the Edinburgh Book 
Festival today, the transcript is up at her official site:

http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80

I was reading through it and I thought this quote was rather funny.

[JKR:]' Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, 
it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. 
One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's 
really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" '

As someone who shares this opinion, guitily enough, I imagine its 
really horrifying for her to think of people being attracted to 
Lucius Malfoy of all people. 
Just thought that was amusing (o;

-Rebecca





From redina at silverbloom.net  Mon Aug 16 08:43:00 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 04:43:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: OT: ROTK EE Re: [HPFGU-Movie] The Reason Potter Films Will Never 
     Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <cfct94+16t3@eGroups.com>
References: <cf5q9b+hrrh@eGroups.com> <cfct94+16t3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1978.4.12.232.6.1092645780.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

I'm *way* behind on email.  Just a quick OT addition...

huntergreen_3 said:

> On the first two extended versions of the LOTR (and I assume on the
> third, although its not out yet), there is an explanation on the
> editing and WHY certain things were left out of the movie. Wouldn't

I've heard the EE of ROTK is going to have 50 minutes of added footage and
20 hours of additional commentary.

Then to compare HP with LOTR... The EE have spoiled me.

Dina




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 17:01:57 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:01:57 -0000
Subject: JKR Edinburgh Book Festival quote.
In-Reply-To: <cfoobc+c0ns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfqpa5+npag@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...>
wrote:
> For all of you who don't know, JKR spoke at the Edinburgh Book 
> Festival today, the transcript is up at her official site:
> 
> http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80
> 
> I was reading through it and I thought this quote was rather funny.
> 
> [JKR:]' Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, 
> it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. 
> One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know
who's 
> really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" '
> 
> As someone who shares this opinion, guitily enough, I imagine its 
> really horrifying for her to think of people being attracted to 
> Lucius Malfoy of all people. 
> Just thought that was amusing (o;
> 
> -Rebecca

I don't know about you, but I'm one of those who "loves Snape". 
However, I don't feel attracted to him, I love him as a character.  He
is such a delicious character, but if he were a real person I would
thoroughly dislike him.  But I do love Alan Rickman.  He is so good! 
I remember seeing him in Die Hard (a type of movie I hate), but I
liked that movie simply because he was such a cool bad guy in it. 
Now, if I were attracked to Harry OR Malfoy, that would be just plain
weird, given my age.  However, I do feel very Motherly towards Harry.
 




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 18:07:27 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:07:27 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book
Message-ID: <cfqt4v+9uso@eGroups.com>

Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book 

Mon Aug 16, 8:06 AM ET  


EDINBURGH, Scotland - "Harry Potter" novelist J.K. Rowling says her 
young hero will survive to the seventh book in her series about the 
young wizard, but refused to say whether he would reach adulthood. 

Rowling teased a group of fans with morsels of information as she 
gave a reading of "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" at the 
Edinburgh International Book Festival on Sunday. 

"He will survive to book seven, mainly because I don't want to be 
strangled by you lot, but I don't want to say whether he grows any 
older than that," Rowling told the youngsters. 

She encouraged the fans to try to piece together future plots for 
themselves, and urged them to focus on why Harry's nemesis, the evil 
warlock Voldemort, had not been killed. 

"There are two questions I don't think I've ever been asked and that 
I should have been asked, if you know what I mean," Rowling said. 

She told the gathering they should be asking themselves "not `why did 
Harry live' but `why didn't Voldemort die?'" 

The second question they should think about is: "Why didn't 
Dumbledore kill, or try to kill, Voldemort?" she added, referring to 
the headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. 

More than 500 people had tickets to see the author read from the 
fifth book. She is still working on the sixth book, but has already 
revealed the title: "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince." 

But she remained tightlipped about the title of her final book in the 
series. 

"I'm not going to tell you, I'm sorry. The trouble I would be in if I 
did. My agent would have me hunted down and killed," she said. 









From HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk  Mon Aug 16 18:18:17 2004
From: HPGroup at colinogilvie.co.uk (Colin O)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:18:17 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book
In-Reply-To: <cfqt4v+9uso@eGroups.com>
References: <cfqt4v+9uso@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4120FA69.40508@colinogilvie.co.uk>

Tim wrote:

>EDINBURGH, Scotland - "Harry Potter" novelist J.K. Rowling says her 
>young hero will survive to the seventh book in her series about the 
>young wizard, but refused to say whether he would reach adulthood. 
>  
>
Erm, he will survive *TO* book 7 but may or may not surive the seventh book.

-- 
Regards,

Colin





From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Mon Aug 16 18:25:59 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:25:59 -0000
Subject: ROTK EE Re: [HPFGU-Movie] The Reason Potter Films Will Never Be as Respectfully Done as LOTR
In-Reply-To: <1978.4.12.232.6.1092645780.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <cfqu7n+s253@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Dina Lerret" <redina at s...> wrote:

> Then to compare HP with LOTR... The EE have spoiled me.
> 
> Dina

I know, me too. I guess that's why I can't stand the "unfinished" 
plotlines in the HP movies. I really hope WB will open their eyes 
soon and see that they can do something like that too.

Take Care
Pernille




From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Mon Aug 16 18:43:30 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:43:30 -0000
Subject: OT: Re: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cfk41t+460c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfqv8i+i84c@eGroups.com>

You have a really good point. Not only about the money, but I think 
also the big Hollywood names takes attention away from the story. 
That's when, IMO they did wrong with Troy and right with LOTR.

I think one of the main reasons LOTR worked so well was that Peter 
Jackson and the others choose actors they thought would be perfect 
for the part even if no one had heard of them before. They had Elijah 
Wood, Viggo Mortensen and Christopher Lee in the cast, but they 
weren't word-movie star names at the time. Actors like Karl Urban and 
David Wenham were perhaps known to a wide Australian audience, but 
the wider audience had not heard about them. I think, (sertenly in my 
case), that made people see the characters and not so much the actors.
 
Troy was the right opposite for me, (and many others as I understand 
it), the big Hollywood names ruined the whole thing.

Take care
Pernille 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape" 
<onceupona_party at y...> wrote:
> Hi Sassy Snape - first post here, but I was wondering:
> 
> Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 
> 
> I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
> (sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of 
the 
> other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
> actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown youths 
> to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need a 
> big name to add to the production?
> 
> Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph 
Finnes, 
> Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes bigger 
> paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
> actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future 
films. 
> (Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't exactly 
huge 
> in NA or had a big part)
> 
> Let's just hope Prince Charles doesn't want to do a walk-on at one 
> point...a little too trendy. Also, I am not saying these actors 
> aren't good actors, just that it could pull the focus from the 
films.
> 
> Sassy




From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Mon Aug 16 18:47:08 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:47:08 -0000
Subject: OT: Re: Preview of PoA DVD at Official Harry Potter site
In-Reply-To: <cfireo+jctt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfqvfc+nba9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "werebearloony" <Erthena at a...> 
wrote:
> I can hear why things are cut, what the actors were thinking and   
> how to play tig! 
> ~~loony

OMG that was so funny! Poor Elijah didn't understand a thing.

Sorry to bother you all with moore LOTR stuff
Pernille




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 19:40:04 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:40:04 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book
In-Reply-To: <4120FA69.40508@colinogilvie.co.uk>
Message-ID: <cfr2ik+fgf9@eGroups.com>

I just copied and pasted the article as written...

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Colin O <HPGroup at c...> wrote:
> Tim wrote:
> 
> >EDINBURGH, Scotland - "Harry Potter" novelist J.K. Rowling says 
her 
> >young hero will survive to the seventh book in her series about 
the 
> >young wizard, but refused to say whether he would reach adulthood. 
> >  
> >
> Erm, he will survive *TO* book 7 but may or may not surive the 
seventh book.
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Colin




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 20:20:17 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why Harry Practices Magic - Also...
In-Reply-To: <cfht2a+27d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040816202017.84168.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>

Deborah wrote:
> >>It's not as though he *might* get caught if he does magic. He 
> *will* get caught if he does magic.
> [she continued in a later post]:
> >> I think that trying to show Harry loves magic so much that he will
> risk a bit of practice does not work. He knows the consequences. If
> he does magic at home, he gets thrown out of Hogwarts. (Since
> already receiving a warning for Dobby)

Yes, but in the CoS *movie*, he didn't get in trouble because of Dobby.  There
has never been a clear explanation in the films of how the authorities would
know that he had done magic outside of school.  At the beginning of PoA, he
feigns sleep every time Vernon comes in.  Could we assume that it's the
parent's/guardian's responsibility to police their own kids on this issue? 
Vernon knows about blowing up Aunt Marge, so he could report it.

I happen to like this scene too, so I admit that I'm inclined to defend it.  I
think a book called "Extreme Incantations" is just too funny, and goes well
with JKR's sense of humor (I wouldn't be surprised if she came up with it, and
if it were to show up as recreational reading later in the series).  This scene
of course replaces Harry's essay on the witch trials, which was very funny as
well, but would be pretty boring in a movie.  For me, this scene captures the
same feel as the essay did in the book.  It also adds a glimpse into the idea
that Harry is no longer totally intimidated by the Dursleys, which is mostly
the point of the whole first few chapters of the book.

Sherry



=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Mon Aug 16 21:13:29 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:13:29 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter terrorist scare
Message-ID: <cfr81p+6gp4@eGroups.com>

According to IMDB.com....


Security has been stepped up on the set of the new Harry Potter and
the Goblet of Fire movie after the studio where it is being shot
received a chilling terror threat. Leavesden Studio near London
answered the menacing phone call last Friday, which warned of a
brutal attack on the film's young stars. And insiders fear Al-Qaeda -
the terrorist network responsible for the September 11 attacks - are
behind the threat. A studio source says, "The caller apparently
said, 'It's payback time... this is for all you've done to our women
and kids.' The film is being made by American company Warner Bros so
it sounds like it could have an Iraq or Al-Qaeda connection." Police
and dog handlers have been drafted in to patrol the perimeter fence
and the number of security guards has been tripled. A police
spokesman says, "We are responding with extra vigilance."





From islandgirl012775 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 22:34:43 2004
From: islandgirl012775 at yahoo.com (Cheryl Hafer)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JKR Edinburgh Book Festival quote.
In-Reply-To: <cfoobc+c0ns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040816223443.7707.qmail@web13203.mail.yahoo.com>

On JK's website the door is open.........does anyone know why?

huntergreen_3 <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:For all of you who don't know, JKR spoke at the Edinburgh Book 
Festival today, the transcript is up at her official site:

http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80

I was reading through it and I thought this quote was rather funny.

[JKR:]' Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, 
it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. 
One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's 
really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" '

As someone who shares this opinion, guitily enough, I imagine its 
really horrifying for her to think of people being attracted to 
Lucius Malfoy of all people. 
Just thought that was amusing (o;

-Rebecca




________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!

Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.

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




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Aug 16 23:23:35 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:23:35 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JKR Edinburgh Book Festival quote.
Message-ID: <6a.436455b0.2e529bf7@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/16/04 3:46:10 PM, islandgirl012775 at yahoo.com writes:


> On JK's website the door is open.........does anyone know why?
> 

There is a brief excerpt from Half Blood Prince once you get through the 
obstacles. If you want the instructions, go The Leaky Cauldron site - they have 
step by step directions ;-)
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Aug 16 23:26:10 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:26:10 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter terrorist scare
Message-ID: <d1.140b2202.2e529c92@aol.com>

If you read CBBC Newsround page, they give more details. It was a hoax call 
over a week ago and none of the things in the IMDB report are true - the 
stepped up security, etc.
Go to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/default.stm

to read the correct story ;-)

I have long since stopped trusting IMDB for news and even celebrity stats. I 
know an actor whose birth year changed a few years ago and I KNOW it's wrong, 
lol! He shaved a few years off the age and added a few inches to his height - 
right ;-)
Cindy


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Aug 17 05:13:31 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:13:31 -0000
Subject: JKR's site
In-Reply-To: <20040816223443.7707.qmail@web13203.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cfs45r+q6r9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Cheryl Hafer 
<islandgirl012775 at y...> wrote:
> On JK's website the door is open.........does anyone know why?

Erm, this is something that is more appropriate being posted on OT-
Chatter or the main list (or at least under a different title on this 
list). There are explanations on how to get through the door on the 
OT-Chatter list, and a posting of the text behind it.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/23839



-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Aug 17 05:35:43 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:35:43 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cfk41t+460c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfs5ff+n69l@eGroups.com>

Sassy wrote:
>>Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing.

I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names
(sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of the
other characters were peppered with some interesting character
actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown youths
to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need a
big name to add to the production?<<

Rebecca: (welcome to the list!)
I think the 'big names' for the adult actors might just be for the 
adults dragged to the movie by their kids (as opposed the adults here 
who went to the movies quite willingly on our own). Animated movies 
do it all the time, they get big names to do voices in the movies 
when it doesn't matter either way for the kids (who are the target 
audience, except when it comes to wide appeal movies like Shrek). 
Although the British actors in the Harry Potter movies aren't quite 
Hugh Grant in recognition, people like Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith 
aren't *tiny* names. Adults can often convince their children to see 
a different movie if they really want to (I work in retail, and I've 
seen it), so if the Harry Potter films only have the books / fantasy 
film appeal, it could make less money. In any case, its just being 
nicer to the parents. And if a big(er) name is willing to be in the 
movie, why say no? Its amazing to see such a group of distinguished 
British actors in the same movie together.

>>Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph Finnes,
Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes bigger
paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these
actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future films.
(Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't exactly huge
in NA or had a big part)<<

And look what happened to her. I wouldn't worry about the budget. I 
think the budget for GoF was one of the highest *ever* approved for a 
movie. If you are worried about the special effects (which would be 
the concern with a smaller budget), I think the amount of time they 
spend on the movie is the bigger factor here. The first two had 
decent budgets, but they were done in such a short amount of time 
that there was no time for fine-tuning and getting scenes perfect 
(spending six months designing the dementers, for example). Since 
Warner Brothers is now doing 18 months between movies as opposed to 
12 months, hopefully the rest of the films will have plenty of time 
for effects (although I can't think of any major work they'd have to 
do for OotP except for the DoM scene, and the one dementor 
scene...that's certainly a piece of cake compared to GoF, which I 
imagine will be exhausting). 

Sassy:
>>Let's just hope Prince Charles doesn't want to do a walk-on at one
point...a little too trendy. Also, I am not saying these actors
aren't good actors, just that it could pull the focus from the 
films.<<

Deborah replied:
>>Yes, I agree that big names sometimes pull focus. That is one reason
so many people were against Haley Joel Osment for Harry. ("Hey,
look! It's the kid from Sixth Sense on a broom!") I understand the
reasoning for wanting big names in a movie. But, in this case, I
think it's unnecessary. They don't need to sell this movie with
anything other than the quality.<<

Rebecca:
But the actors they have gotten *have* been quality. Although I agree 
about how a really recognizable actor might get distracting (I know 
that its going to completely pull me out of the ending of GoF when 
Ralph Fiennes appears as Voldemort, all I can think about when I look 
at him is The Red Dragon, I hope he has a lot of makeup on). Amen to 
Haley Joel Osment not playing Harry, that would have been awful (I'm 
American and even I'm very much against 'Americanizing' the story in 
ANY way). 

Deborah:
>> If they want someone because they're the best actor for the role, 
that's one thing. And, all the actors are fine in their roles. I, 
personally have big Dumbledore issues, and - *not* to get into that 
discussion again, merely using it as an example - I feel they could 
have found someone better than Harris for the role by holding open 
calls. There are theatre actors, even ones unknown to us, that could 
act rings around a majority of movie stars. <<

Rebecca:
Which might be true, but remember this is a HUGE production, big-
budget and all. There is a big difference between film and stage 
acting. Someone going straight from the stage to a movie with 
children and animals and special effects may not do very well. The 
directer already has to deal with all those other factors, the adult 
actors in the film need to be experienced MOVIE actors, so they don't 
get in the way of things. If it were a low-budged, simple movie I 
could see where an inexperienced actor (inexperienced in films, that 
is) would be a better choice, but here they need someone they can 
trust.






From finwitch at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 08:12:42 2004
From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:12:42 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - Also...
In-Reply-To: <cfht2a+27d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfselq+ri8q@eGroups.com>


> Rebecca:
> I think the 'simple spell' might be the point. Perhaps in 
the 'movie 
> world' of Harry Potter, students are allowed to do SIMPLE spells, 
> (like Hermione being able to fix Harry's glasses in CoS) outside of 
> school without getting in trouble. Remember, when Vernon says that 
> line Harry is about to do some sort of violent magic, not just a 
> lumos spell. It might be that ATTACKING someone outside of school 
is 
> not allowed, but lighting your wand, or doing a 'reparo' is allowed.

You know - I think that Lumos _is_ an allowed spell.

Even if Harry was just reading a spell book... he'd still need the 
light, so... (in the books he has a Muggle Flash Light, I just wonder 
where he got it - or whether the batteries didn't run out...)

In a way, Harry can't even do his *homework* without using Lumos... 
and a Muggle would think he just has a flash light that looks like a 
stick/wand... (I wonder if Warner Bros. will make such... Pen-shaped 
flashlights already exist, and making one look like a wand isn't that 
far off...)

Finwitch





From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Aug 17 10:11:43 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:11:43 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Practices Magic - Also...
In-Reply-To: <cfselq+ri8q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfslkv+7rjm@eGroups.com>

Finwitch wrote:
>>You know - I think that Lumos _is_ an allowed spell.

Even if Harry was just reading a spell book... he'd still need the
light, so... (in the books he has a Muggle Flash Light, I just wonder
where he got it - or whether the batteries didn't run out...)

In a way, Harry can't even do his *homework* without using Lumos...
and a Muggle would think he just has a flash light that looks like a
stick/wand... (I wonder if Warner Bros. will make such... Pen-shaped
flashlights already exist, and making one look like a wand isn't that
far off...)<<

Rebecca:
Hmm, he *does* use it outside of school in OotP, and I don't believe 
that was mentioned at the hearing (I think they only mentioned the 
patronus charm). Perhaps its not strong enough magic to catch on the 
radar? Or its not worth the manpower to go after every underage 
wizard who uses lumos or reparo.
Just a thought.

-Rebecca




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 18:12:23 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] SS question - Quirrell
In-Reply-To: <129.487ac4bc.2e4c36d9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040817181223.17275.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>

--- pj655123 at yahoo.com wrote:
> I was watching the SS Movie today and something hit me.  I've been 
> reading alot of chatter recently on the Book group about Snape being 
> a "double agent" and at the end of SS [the movie] when he's at the 
> mirror with Quirrell, he mentions that Snape tried to save him, and 
> Snape suspected him of wrong doings, etc... now, at this point, 
> Voldemort was sticking out of his head, so naturally he would have 
> heard every word...so wouldn't this now put Snape in jeopardy as a 
> double agent, as his "cover" is now blown? Not sure if this question 
> belongs in the "movie" or the "book" group, as it overlaps both, 
> but, if you have any comments, I'd like to hear them!
> PH

--- IAmLordCassandra at aol.com responded:

> Here's a theory: 
> 
> At the end of PoA, Dumbledore says. 
> 
> "You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt...[snip] and I'm much 
> mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter." (pg.
> 427) 
> 
> Snape was trying to save Harry because he owed James' a life debt.  He could 
> easily say he only saved Harry's life then so he could get out of that debt. 

I add:

Also, during the whole year, Snape didn't know that Quirrell was acting for
Voldemort (or at least he could claim not to have known).  Snape could easily
claim that he thought Quirrell was acting on his own, and was protecting the
Stone from Quirrell so that he could get it himself - for Voldemort, of course.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From scully931 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 19:52:38 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:52:38 -0000
Subject: "Muggle" in dictionary
Message-ID: <cftnm6+pak3@eGroups.com>

Does anyone remember exactly what dictionary put the word "Muggle" 
in last year? I've looked through so many and can't seem to find it. 
Thanks!

Deborah




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Tue Aug 17 20:16:43 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:16:43 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cfk41t+460c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cftp3b+dnnq@eGroups.com>


Sassy Snape : 
> Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 
> I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
> (sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of 
the other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
> actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown youths 
> to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need a 
> big name to add to the production?
> Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph 
Finnes, Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes bigger 
> paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
> actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future 
films. (Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't 
exactly huge in NA or had a big part)


Mandy here:

The situation with Zo? Wanamaker as Madam Hooch was unfortunate.  
While I have no idea what actually happened I've heard it was to do 
with the fact that for the first movie the actors were all paid the 
basic wage for a film actors in the UK.  They were all asked to sign 
on to do the CoS before PS/SS was released and did so at the same or 
similar rate of pay.  When PS/SS proved to be such a success some of 
the actors asked for more money to reflect the amount grossed by the 
film makers, Warner Bros.  You make ask why didn't they think of that 
before they signed on for CoS? Unfortunately the film industry takes 
advantage of actors whenever they can as the producers are in the 
power position.  Contracts are often drawn up and signed, only to be 
re-negotiated later after the first film is deemed a success.  The 
producers do this to protect their end, leaving it up to the weaker 
actor to fight for more money.  It is why Equity exists and in fact 
Equity had to step in and fight for Dan Radcliff as he was paid 
something like 200,000 pounds for the first movie and Warner Bros., 
signed him of for CoS for the same amount (or a little more)!  This 
was clearly wrong as he is the films star, his salary should have 
increased with the sucess of the first film.  And indeed Equity re-
negotiated his salary for CoS to reflect his new position.  His new 
wage was in the region of 2 million.  Zo? Wanamaker was an 
unfortunate scapegoat for the whole affair.

 You don't have to worry about the budget, GoF is going to be the 
most expensive movie ever made.  It has a budget of 350 million or 
something crazy.  And Warner Bros can afford it, with both PS/SS and 
CoS grossing over a billion each worldwide, and PoA well on it's way 
down the same road.  The Potter franchise is a cash cow and will 
continue to be one unless there is a flop.

Warner Bros., can afford to and are willing to pay whatever they want 
for their names actors.  What is interesting is British actors do not 
expect, and are not paid the same astronomical amounts as their 
American counter parts, choosing to work for critical acclaim rather 
than money.  And we know that there are no diva antics going on in 
these films, which is more typical of American 'stars', as the 
British stars appear to be happy to work in the smallest of roles 
with very little airtime.  You can bet that if an American 'star' was 
involved, they'd be demanding their role be increased to reflect 
their 'star' status, I not saying the Americans are ungrateful, it is 
just acceptable behavior in Hollywood.  

So while we don't know if the names are being paid astronomical 
amounts (and they might be) we do know they are all very excited to 
be involved in the saga.  They know they're part of history in the 
making. The HP films are true ensemble pictures, which is rear these 
days. There has never been a project with such a large ensemble of 
well-respected and talented British thespians.  It has to be JKR's 
dream cast!






From pj655123 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 23:12:51 2004
From: pj655123 at yahoo.com (pj655123)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:12:51 -0000
Subject: SS question - Quirrell
In-Reply-To: <20040817181223.17275.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cfu3dj+5bn9@eGroups.com>

This raises the question to me now that, if Snape is a Legilimens, 
he should have been able to know that Quirrell was up to no good, 
but we don't know this of course in movie/book #1, not until book 
#5.  Interesting theory... I can't wait to see what unfolds...
PH
--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Garfio <sgarfio at y...> 
wrote:
> --- pj655123 at y... wrote:
> > I was watching the SS Movie today and something hit me.  I've 
been 
> > reading alot of chatter recently on the Book group about Snape 
being 
> > a "double agent" and at the end of SS [the movie] when he's at 
the 
> > mirror with Quirrell, he mentions that Snape tried to save him, 
and 
> > Snape suspected him of wrong doings, etc... now, at this point, 
> > Voldemort was sticking out of his head, so naturally he would 
have 
> > heard every word...so wouldn't this now put Snape in jeopardy as 
a 
> > double agent, as his "cover" is now blown? Not sure if this 
question 
> > belongs in the "movie" or the "book" group, as it overlaps both, 
> > but, if you have any comments, I'd like to hear them!
> > PH
> 
> --- IAmLordCassandra at a... responded:
> 
> > Here's a theory: 
> > 
> > At the end of PoA, Dumbledore says. 
> > 
> > "You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt...[snip] 
and I'm much 
> > mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry 
Potter." (pg.
> > 427) 
> > 
> > Snape was trying to save Harry because he owed James' a life 
debt.  He could 
> > easily say he only saved Harry's life then so he could get out 
of that debt. 
> 
> I add:
> 
> Also, during the whole year, Snape didn't know that Quirrell was 
acting for
> Voldemort (or at least he could claim not to have known).  Snape 
could easily
> claim that he thought Quirrell was acting on his own, and was 
protecting the
> Stone from Quirrell so that he could get it himself - for 
Voldemort, of course.
> 
> Sherry Garfio
> 
> 
> =====
> "Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims 
are identical and our hearts are open."
>     -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Tue Aug 17 23:15:56 2004
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:15:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SS question - Quirrell
References: <cfu3dj+5bn9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c484b0$2727d950$210110ac@TALLC>

Unless Quirrell was good enough to be able to block Snape from getting into
his mind.  Seems to me that anyone who is good enough to teach the DADA
class should be able to do that.

Rae

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "pj655123" <pj655123 at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 6:12 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SS question - Quirrell


> This raises the question to me now that, if Snape is a Legilimens,
> he should have been able to know that Quirrell was up to no good,
> but we don't know this of course in movie/book #1, not until book
> #5.  Interesting theory... I can't wait to see what unfolds...
> PH
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Garfio <sgarfio at y...>
> wrote:
> > --- pj655123 at y... wrote:
> > > I was watching the SS Movie today and something hit me.  I've
> been
> > > reading alot of chatter recently on the Book group about Snape
> being
> > > a "double agent" and at the end of SS [the movie] when he's at
> the
> > > mirror with Quirrell, he mentions that Snape tried to save him,
> and
> > > Snape suspected him of wrong doings, etc... now, at this point,
> > > Voldemort was sticking out of his head, so naturally he would
> have
> > > heard every word...so wouldn't this now put Snape in jeopardy as
> a
> > > double agent, as his "cover" is now blown? Not sure if this
> question
> > > belongs in the "movie" or the "book" group, as it overlaps both,
> > > but, if you have any comments, I'd like to hear them!
> > > PH
> >
> > --- IAmLordCassandra at a... responded:
> >
> > > Here's a theory:
> > >
> > > At the end of PoA, Dumbledore says.
> > >
> > > "You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt...[snip]
> and I'm much
> > > mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry
> Potter." (pg.
> > > 427)
> > >
> > > Snape was trying to save Harry because he owed James' a life
> debt.  He could
> > > easily say he only saved Harry's life then so he could get out
> of that debt.
> >
> > I add:
> >
> > Also, during the whole year, Snape didn't know that Quirrell was
> acting for
> > Voldemort (or at least he could claim not to have known).  Snape
> could easily
> > claim that he thought Quirrell was acting on his own, and was
> protecting the
> > Stone from Quirrell so that he could get it himself - for
> Voldemort, of course.
> >
> > Sherry Garfio
> >
> >
> > =====
> > "Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims
> are identical and our hearts are open."
> >     -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
>
>
> ________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!
>
> Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List
Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>





From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 02:52:25 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SS question - Quirrell
In-Reply-To: <001d01c484b0$2727d950$210110ac@TALLC>
Message-ID: <20040818025225.51629.qmail@web53206.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Rae Callaway <tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Unless Quirrell was good enough to be able to block Snape from getting into
> his mind.  Seems to me that anyone who is good enough to teach the DADA
> class should be able to do that.

Plus Quirrell would have had Voldemort's help.  Voldemort is an accomplished
Legilimens, so it's not too much of a stretch to suppose that he is also
skilled at Occlumency.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From rzl46 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 03:45:30 2004
From: rzl46 at yahoo.com (rzl46)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:45:30 -0000
Subject: "Muggle" in dictionary
In-Reply-To: <cftnm6+pak3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cfujcq+bc36@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Scully931" <scully931 at y...> 
wrote:
> Does anyone remember exactly what dictionary put the word "Muggle" 
> in last year? I've looked through so many and can't seem to find 
it. 
> Thanks!
> 
> Deborah

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I'm pretty sure it was the OED that 
added "Muggle".

MaggieB




From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Sun Aug 22 04:15:50 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 04:15:50 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cftp3b+dnnq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cg96lm+kg76@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> 
> Sassy Snape : 
> > Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> > acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 
> > I loved that Quirrel and Tom Riddle were not played by big names 
> > (sorry, taking this from a North American perspective)and some of 
> the other characters were peppered with some interesting character 
> > actors. I know they had some other big names for the unknown 
youths 
> > to play off of, but now the kids are names, so do we really need 
a 
> > big name to add to the production?
> > Now with bigger names for key characters (Gary Oldman, Ralph 
> Finnes, Julie Christie, Dawn French, Miranda Richardson) comes 
bigger 
> > paycheques and less of the budget for the actual film. And these 
> > actors may be in the position to ask for more money for future 
> films. (Madam Hooch thought she should get more and she wasn't 
> exactly huge in NA or had a big part)
> 
> 
> Mandy here:
> 
> The situation with Zo? Wanamaker as Madam Hooch was unfortunate.  
> While I have no idea what actually happened I've heard it was to do 
> with the fact that for the first movie the actors were all paid the 
> basic wage for a film actors in the UK.  They were all asked to 
sign 
> on to do the CoS before PS/SS was released and did so at the same 
or 
> similar rate of pay.  When PS/SS proved to be such a success some 
of 
> the actors asked for more money to reflect the amount grossed by 
the 
> film makers, Warner Bros.  You make ask why didn't they think of 
that 
> before they signed on for CoS? Unfortunately the film industry 
takes 
> advantage of actors whenever they can as the producers are in the 
> power position.  Contracts are often drawn up and signed, only to 
be 
> re-negotiated later after the first film is deemed a success.  The 
> producers do this to protect their end, leaving it up to the weaker 
> actor to fight for more money.  It is why Equity exists and in fact 
> Equity had to step in and fight for Dan Radcliff as he was paid 
> something like 200,000 pounds for the first movie and Warner Bros., 
> signed him of for CoS for the same amount (or a little more)!  This 
> was clearly wrong as he is the films star, his salary should have 
> increased with the sucess of the first film.  And indeed Equity re-
> negotiated his salary for CoS to reflect his new position.  His new 
> wage was in the region of 2 million.  Zo? Wanamaker was an 
> unfortunate scapegoat for the whole affair.
> 
>  You don't have to worry about the budget, GoF is going to be the 
> most expensive movie ever made.  It has a budget of 350 million or 
> something crazy.  And Warner Bros can afford it, with both PS/SS 
and 
> CoS grossing over a billion each worldwide, and PoA well on it's 
way 
> down the same road.  The Potter franchise is a cash cow and will 
> continue to be one unless there is a flop.
> 
> Warner Bros., can afford to and are willing to pay whatever they 
want 
> for their names actors.  What is interesting is British actors do 
not 
> expect, and are not paid the same astronomical amounts as their 
> American counter parts, choosing to work for critical acclaim 
rather 
> than money.  And we know that there are no diva antics going on in 
> these films, which is more typical of American 'stars', as the 
> British stars appear to be happy to work in the smallest of roles 
> with very little airtime.  You can bet that if an American 'star' 
was 
> involved, they'd be demanding their role be increased to reflect 
> their 'star' status, I not saying the Americans are ungrateful, it 
is 
> just acceptable behavior in Hollywood.  
> 
> So while we don't know if the names are being paid astronomical 
> amounts (and they might be) we do know they are all very excited to 
> be involved in the saga.  They know they're part of history in the 
> making. The HP films are true ensemble pictures, which is rear 
these 
> days. There has never been a project with such a large ensemble of 
> well-respected and talented British thespians.  It has to be JKR's 
> dream cast!


Sassy here: I just worry that the financial end is causing a slight 
disloyalty to the production - for example - the Gryffindor boy who 
was given lines (like who is he - he wasn't in Harry's house from the 
start) is a way of telling the secondary characters/actors that they 
are easily replaced. 

If other non-existent characters are given lines, then the secondary 
actors (Seamus, Dean, etc) can be replaced with an interchangable 
actor. If you start mixing up faces and lines, but keep the trio, the 
fans will not be upset. I for one, was very upset that Gryffindor kid 
had lines more than once, and the Slytherin boy also received a 
considerable amount of air time. I don't mind adding background 
extras, but if the original kids are in the film , they deserve the 
lines. Don't get me wrong - I believe the talent deserves to be paid 
their worth (especially Daniel) but don't sacrifice the secondary lot 
for a name, who may also take something away from the character.

Another note - I find the Hollywoodism of the Disney films to be 
quite distracting - like name that actor - Brad Pitt, Catherine Zeta-
Jones, Demi Moore, Mel Gibson - sorry but for the most part I don't 
want to visualize the actor over the character. Put the money into 
the production and story development in the animated films.

Does anybody think eventually an animated version of the books will 
be made? (I pray the don't make it a Saturday morning cartoon)




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Aug 23 18:54:13 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:54:13 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
Message-ID: <19a.28b3c936.2e5b9755@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/22/2004 7:48:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Sassy  here: I just worry that the financial end is causing a slight 
disloyalty  to the production - for example - the Gryffindor boy who 
was given lines  (like who is he - he wasn't in Harry's house from the 
start) is a way of  telling the secondary characters/actors that they 
are easily replaced.  

If other non-existent characters are given lines, then the secondary  
actors (Seamus, Dean, etc) can be replaced with an interchangable  
actor. If you start mixing up faces and lines, but keep the trio, the  
fans will not be upset. I for one, was very upset that Gryffindor kid  
had lines more than once, and the Slytherin boy also received a  
considerable amount of air time. I don't mind adding background  
extras, but if the original kids are in the film , they deserve the  
lines. Don't get me wrong - I believe the talent deserves to be paid  
their worth (especially Daniel) but don't sacrifice the secondary lot  
for a name, who may also take something away from the  character.



I couldn't imagine why they added those two boys  either.  It annoyed me 
quite a bit that they gave lines to those boys that  could've easily been given to 
Dean or Seamus (in the case of that Gryffindor  boy), or Malfoy's usual 
cohorts in that case.  That Gryffindor boy annoyed  me -- he just didn't belong -- 
he wasn't sorted into Gryffindor in the first  movie, so he wouldn't be in 
their Divination class unless he's a transfer  student, y'know?  How dumb does WB 
think we are to be foisting strangers  off on us and expecting us to accept 
that these are third-year  Gryffindors?  argh. . . .   

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From dk59us at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 19:30:49 2004
From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:30:49 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Will Survive Seventh Book
In-Reply-To: <cfr2ik+fgf9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cgdgl9+od6u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim" <tmarends at y...> wrote:
> I just copied and pasted the article as written...
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Colin O <HPGroup at c...> wrote:
> > Tim wrote:
> > 
> > >EDINBURGH, Scotland - "Harry Potter" novelist J.K. Rowling says 
> her 
> > >young hero will survive to the seventh book in her series about 
> the 
> > >young wizard, but refused to say whether he would reach
adulthood. 
> > >  
> > >
> > Erm, he will survive *TO* book 7 but may or may not surive the 
> seventh book.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Colin

Eustace_Scrubb:
Yup, not your fault!  The headline writer didn't read the copy
carefully before writing the headline (a common problem in
journalism!)

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb
"Not useless," said the Owl.  "EUSTACE!"




From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Mon Aug 23 22:29:00 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:29:00 -0000
Subject: Money matters - IMDB.com
Message-ID: <cgdr3c+f8e1@eGroups.com>

Morton Hits Out at Oldman

British actress Samantha Morton has hit out at countryman Gary 
Oldman - for refusing to read a low-budget film script. The In 
America star, 27, has blasted big-budget actors for being swayed only 
by cash when choosing their next film role. And is furious her own 
reputation has suffered simply because she's eager to make honest and 
credible films. Morton says, "I used to be, and still am, considered 
very difficult. I think, 'What is difficult?' If I'm put in an 
uncomfortable environment, I become defensive. We really want Gary 
Oldman for a part in my next film, River Queen, but we cannot even 
get him a script because he won't read anything we send him unless we 
offer him a million. I mean, how sad is that? These actors get people 
to do everything for them and five years down the line they don't 
know how to pay their bills or even cook their own food." 

Where do I sign up for a million? Sassy




From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Tue Aug 24 01:38:23 2004
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:38:23 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cg96lm+kg76@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cge66f+uv4g@eGroups.com>

> > Sassy Snape : 
> > > Does anybody else think the movies are becoming more of a bigger-
> > > acting-names-must-be-seen-to-be-cool sort of thing. 

> > Mandy here:
>
> >  You don't have to worry about the budget, GoF is going to be the 
> > most expensive movie ever made.  It has a budget of 350 million or 
> > something crazy.  And Warner Bros can afford it, with both PS/SS 
> and 
> > CoS grossing over a billion each worldwide, and PoA well on it's 
> way 
> > down the same road.  The Potter franchise is a cash cow and will 
> > continue to be one unless there is a flop.
> > 
> > Warner Bros., can afford to and are willing to pay whatever they 
> want 
> > for their names actors.  What is interesting is British actors do 
> not 
> > expect, and are not paid the same astronomical amounts as their 
> > American counter parts, choosing to work for critical acclaim 
> rather 
> > than money.  And we know that there are no diva antics going on in 
> > these films, which is more typical of American 'stars', as the 
> > British stars appear to be happy to work in the smallest of roles 
> > with very little airtime.  You can bet that if an American 'star' 
> was 
> > involved, they'd be demanding their role be increased to reflect 
> > their 'star' status, I not saying the Americans are ungrateful, it 
> is 
> > just acceptable behavior in Hollywood.  
> > 
> > So while we don't know if the names are being paid astronomical 
> > amounts (and they might be) we do know they are all very excited to 
> > be involved in the saga.  They know they're part of history in the 
> > making. The HP films are true ensemble pictures, which is rear 
> these 
> > days. There has never been a project with such a large ensemble of 
> > well-respected and talented British thespians.  It has to be JKR's 
> > dream cast!
> 
> 
> Sassy here: I just worry that the financial end is causing a slight 
> disloyalty to the production 

imamommy chiming in:

Could we at least get a director who has read the books and is a big
fan prior to being contacted to direct a film?  I for one don't think
that either director has quite gotten it right (albeit Cuaron had a
better grip than Columbus)?




From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Tue Aug 24 01:44:15 2004
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:44:15 -0000
Subject: Miranda Richardson as Skeeter--not Bella
Message-ID: <cge6hf+rr86@eGroups.com>

imamommy:

A while back we discussed our pick for Bella Lestrange (I personally
see Anna Chancellor in the role).  Several posters were adament that
Miranda Richardson was *the* one for the part.  Now that she is cast
as Rita Skeeter, do any of those posters have any new ideas?  I'm
rather intrigued, I guess, by Bellatrix, as she is a character who is
introduced to us by her picture (much like Sirius).




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 01:59:45 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:59:45 -0000
Subject: Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <19a.28b3c936.2e5b9755@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cge7eh+sn0d@eGroups.com>

Yes, he annoyed me greatly as well. I couldn't even understand half 
of what he said anyway. Not to pick on a kid, but, he was just 
unnecessary. (<----I can never spell that word right.) My friend and 
I laughed every time he came on, because despite being the bearer of 
omens and bad news, it came across as comical to us. 

~Deborah

[snip]Lynda: That Gryffindor boy annoyed  me -- he just didn't 
belong -- 
> he wasn't sorted into Gryffindor in the first  movie, so he 
wouldn't be in 
> their Divination class unless he's a transfer  student, y'know?  
How dumb does WB 
> think we are to be foisting strangers  off on us and expecting us 
to accept 
> that these are third-year  Gryffindors?  argh. . . .   
> 
> Lynda
> 
> "The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 05:00:10 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Miranda Richardson as Skeeter--not Bella
In-Reply-To: <cge6hf+rr86@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040824050010.92860.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com>

--- elady25 <imamommy at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Several posters
> were adament that
> Miranda Richardson was *the* one for the part.  Now
> that she is cast
> as Rita Skeeter, do any of those posters have any
> new ideas?  

I vote for Helena Bonham Carter.

Sara


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush



From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 18:48:19 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:48:19 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cge66f+uv4g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cgg2hj+nmps@eGroups.com>

> imamommy chiming in:
> 
> Could we at least get a director who has read the books and is a big
> fan prior to being contacted to direct a film?  I for one don't 
think
> that either director has quite gotten it right (albeit Cuaron had a
> better grip than Columbus)?

Can we place that same order for a screenwriter plsethnx?

Marci




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 22:29:17 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:29:17 -0000
Subject: bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cgg2hj+nmps@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cggfft+nmo4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" <blackgold101 at y...> 
wrote:
 Could we at least get a director who has read the books and is a big
> > fan prior to being contacted to direct a film?  
> 
> Can we place that same order for a screenwriter plsethnx?
> 
> Marci

Yes, certainly. I'm going to compile a list of our demands and send 
them in. I expect they will be met without delay and with great 
enthusiasm. ;-)

~Deborah




From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 02:50:00 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 02:50:00 -0000
Subject: Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <19a.28b3c936.2e5b9755@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cgguoo+s7bj@eGroups.com>

Sassy wrote: 
>>I just worry that the financial end is causing a slight
disloyalty to the production - for example - the Gryffindor boy who
was given lines (like who is he - he wasn't in Harry's house from the
start) is a way of telling the secondary characters/actors that they
are easily replaced.

If other non-existent characters are given lines, then the secondary
actors (Seamus, Dean, etc) can be replaced with an interchangable
actor. If you start mixing up faces and lines, but keep the trio, the
fans will not be upset. I for one, was very upset that Gryffindor kid
had lines more than once, and the Slytherin boy also received a
considerable amount of air time. <<

Lynda replied:
>>I couldn't imagine why they added those two boys either. It annoyed 
me quite a bit that they gave lines to those boys that could've 
easily been given to Dean or Seamus (in the case of that Gryffindor 
boy), or Malfoy's usual cohorts in that case. That Gryffindor boy 
annoyed me -- he just didn't belong
[snip] How dumb does WB think we are to be foisting strangers off on 
us and expecting us to accept that these are third-year Gryffindors? 
argh. . . .<<

Rebecca:
Not to mention the fact that its rather clear in the books (and 
mostly clear in the movies...based on this mystery boy not being in 
their dorm) that Harry, Ron, Neville, Dean, and Seamus are the only 
Gryffindor students in their year. If this deviation suited some 
purpose the film, it wouldn't bother me, but as it is there's 
absolutely no point to it. The kid has more lines than Dean does, and 
they show him quite a bit more as well. During my first viewing I 
thought for a moment that they had re-cast Dean (with an exteremly 
different looking actor).
It wouldn't have been nearly as annoying if they were just 'extras' 
that didn't have lines. But this kid not only has lines, he has two 
mini-monologues. It almost makes me wonder if he's someone's son 
(like the girl playing Susan Bones being Columbus' daughter and her 
being in many classroom scenes when she wasn't a Gryffindor...at 
least she never spoke). 








From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 07:24:48 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 03:24:48 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
Message-ID: <194.2ca73445.2e5d98c0@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/24/04 7:51:46 PM, patientx3 at aol.com writes:


> Not to mention the fact that its rather clear in the books (and
> mostly clear in the movies...based on this mystery boy not being in
> their dorm) that Harry, Ron, Neville, Dean, and Seamus are the only
> Gryffindor students in their year.
> 

Well, this brings up a contradictory issue. Rowling said a long time ago in 
some interview (please don't ask me where, but the figure has been somewhat 
accepted for a while), that there were close to 1000 students at Hogwarts. I 
remember folks discussing this on a message board somewhere and trying to figure 
out how many kids were in each level, etc. Then they went on to try to figure 
out how so few teachers could handle that volume of students, how many classes 
are there per day, why aren't the dorm rooms bigger or how many are there for 
each year, and on and on.
So, although she mentions so few students in the books and it would seem that 
only Harry, Seamus, Ron, Neville and Dean are the only Gryffindors in the 
same year, it would be impossible given the total number of students she claims 
is in the school ;-)
Let's calculate based on 5 Gryffindor boys in 6th year - Harry's year coming 
up. If that was the same for the four houses, that would mean a total of 20 
boys in 6th year in the whole school. If there are an equal # of girls, then 
that makes a total of 40 students in 6th year. If that is the same number for 
each level, then that makes 280 students in all of Hogwarts. Something doesn't 
add up ;-) 
I'll look for that particular interview of hers, but if someone else finds 
it, please post the quote (if it exists - maybe I'm imagining the whole thing, 
lol!). I just tried to access the Lexicon, but it won't load. Maybe the page is 
down for some reason?
I did find one page of message board comments on Diagon Alley where someone 
quoted JKR by saying she answered a direct question as to the number of 
students as 'about a thousand'. Oh well...
Cindy


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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 12:57:43 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:57:43 EDT
Subject: New article on GoF on Veritaserum!
Message-ID: <76.400903a3.2e5de6c7@aol.com>


Did you see this article?  (the link was on Leaky, but here it  is FYI: 
_http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/08/24/moviemagic.shtml_ 
(http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/08/24/moviemagic.shtml)  )  It has a couple of errors -- 
says the kids are 15 (in real life, maybe -- wonder  if they're going to "up" 
Harry's age to make him closer to Dan's age?  Nah,  I doubt it).  The thing that 
really hit me between the eyes was where they  said BOTH Ron and Hermione are 
against Harry, even wearing "Anti-Potter  buttons."  I think this is probably 
an error in reporting, as the GoF  script snippet that was on some site 
(sorry, no link handy to share) showed  Hermione supporting Harry at the beginning 
of the First Task.  They also  mention that fans would like the movie to be 4 
hours with an intermission, and  the director says they'll get "the entire 
story in" (or words to that  effect).  We can just keep our fingers crossed that 
they go ahead and do a  good long film like the LotR films, and not worry 
about wiggly little kids  anymore!  GoF is NOT a little kids' film!!  I'm excited 
-- can't wait  to see it!  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 13:04:53 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:04:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] number of students at Hogwarts
Message-ID: <12f.49ccf891.2e5de875@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/25/2004 8:56:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

So,  although she mentions so few students in the books and it would seem 
that  
only Harry, Seamus, Ron, Neville and Dean are the only Gryffindors in the  
same year, it would be impossible given the total number of students she  
claims 
is in the school ;-)
Let's calculate based on 5 Gryffindor boys  in 6th year - Harry's year coming 
up. If that was the same for the four  houses, that would mean a total of 20 
boys in 6th year in the whole  school. If there are an equal # of girls, then 
that makes a total of 40  students in 6th year. If that is the same number 
for 
each level, then that  makes 280 students in all of Hogwarts. Something 
doesn't 
add up ;-)  
I'll look for that particular interview of hers, but if someone else finds  
it, please post the quote (if it exists - maybe I'm imagining the whole  
thing, 
lol!). I just tried to access the Lexicon, but it won't load. Maybe  the page 
is 
down for some reason?
I did find one page of message board  comments on Diagon Alley where someone 
quoted JKR by saying she answered a  direct question as to the number of 
students as 'about a thousand'. Oh  well...
Cindy



I remember reading that "1000" figure too.  I think  there are loads of other 
teachers we have not heard about (that would explain  all the strange faces 
at the teachers' table in the PoA movie, right?) and many  other classes we 
haven't heard about as well.  You'd think there'd be more  than one dorm room for 
each year's students if there are more than five per year  (boys/girls), but 
we're only told in canon that Harry's dorm room is for  "Fifth Years" -- so if 
there are two dorm rooms for Fifth Years, for instance,  they'd be "Fifth 
Years A-K" and "Fifth Years L-Z" or "Fifth Years 1" and Fifth  Years 2" or 
something like that.  I think this is just one of those places  where JKR has an 
idea in her head (1000 students) and hasn't worked it out in  print.  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From cincimaelder at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 25 16:39:29 2004
From: cincimaelder at yahoo.com (Darby)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:39:29 -0000
Subject: New article on GoF on Veritaserum!
In-Reply-To: <76.400903a3.2e5de6c7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cgifc1+n2sv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> 
> Did you see this article?  (the link was on Leaky, but here it  is
FYI: 
> _http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/08/24/moviemagic.shtml_ 
> (http://www.veritaserum.com/media/2004/08/24/moviemagic.shtml)  ) 
It has a couple of errors -- 
> says the kids are 15 (in real life, maybe -- wonder  if they're g

Lynda,

Thanks so much for pointing that out!  It got me so psyched!  I really
like the attitude of the director.  It sounds like it is very
important to him to do the book justice and keep the HP fans happy! 
Dare we hope for 4 hours of HP bliss?!  

I'm hoping the Ron and Hermione badge thing is a typo as well.  I
can't imagine this director doing something like that.  Especially
Hermione, who believed Harry from the get go, and supported him all
the way.

Yikes, a year and 2 months and counting!

Thanks again!

Darby




From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 17:19:57 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:19:57 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] number of students at Hogwarts
Message-ID: <1a8.27b27026.2e5e243d@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/25/04 6:07:10 AM, artsylynda at aol.com writes:


> I think this is just one of those places? where JKR has an
> idea in her head (1000 students) and hasn't worked it out in? print.?
> 
> 

I think many fans have accepted this theory ;-) She does make some tiny 
misktakes along the line...things like Bill and Charlie's ages, James being Head 
Boy without being a prefect, etc. The page from Diagon Alley that I found talks 
about all of these.
I certainly don't fault her - I would never be able to keep track of such a 
complicated group of characters and plot over seven books if I were writing it! 
Goodness knows, I have trouble sometimes and I'm just reading it ;-)
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Aug 25 17:26:40 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:26:40 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: New article on GoF on Veritaserum!
Message-ID: <104.4efbfeb5.2e5e25d0@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/25/04 9:41:21 AM, cincimaelder at yahoo.com writes:


> I'm hoping the Ron and Hermione badge thing is a typo as well.? I
> can't imagine this director doing something like that.? Especially
> Hermione, who believed Harry from the get go, and supported him all
> the way.
> 

I don't think it's a typo since typos are usually just misspelled words, but 
I think the journalist just misinterpreted the plot. Sort of like the whole 
'Harry chasing a dragon through a maze' thing. I've seen that in one other 
place, and the only explanation for it would be if they spiced up the first task 
and added a maze. This wouldn't seem to be good plotting to me since the third 
task already has a maze. And I doubt they combined Task 1 with Task 3 <g>.
I think reporters and such just don't get the facts straight and since we all 
know the book and events so well, we catch everything. I'm afraid we are in 
for a long period of this since the movie doesn't come out for more than a year 
and there will be other articles and 'reports' for sure ;-)
Cindy


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




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 25 22:40:58 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: New article on GoF on Veritaserum!
In-Reply-To: <104.4efbfeb5.2e5e25d0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040825224058.57882.qmail@web53208.mail.yahoo.com>

clshannon at aol.com wrote:
> I don't think it's a typo since typos are usually just misspelled words, but 
> I think the journalist just misinterpreted the plot.
<SNIP>
> I think reporters and such just don't get the facts straight and since we all

> know the book and events so well, we catch everything. I'm afraid we are in 
> for a long period of this since the movie doesn't come out for more than a 
> year and there will be other articles and 'reports' for sure ;-)

Of all the journalists out there, and all the Potterheads out there, you would
think that those two groups would intersect *somewhere*.  Do all the
Potter-literate journalists in the world work for TLC?  If I were the editor of
one of these magazines, knowing how manic HP fans are and how many of them will
buy my magazine just for the HP article, I would put my most Potter-literate
employee on it, or at least have a Potterhead (maybe my kid) read it before
it's published.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush



From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Wed Aug 25 23:04:56 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:04:56 -0000
Subject: number of students at Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <12f.49ccf891.2e5de875@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cgj5uo+h4o7@eGroups.com>

Sassy comments ***According to Steve (hp-lexicon) when he spoke at 
the Ottawa Convention Alley he believed there were be somewhere 
between 300-400 students, because when JKR saw the first film with 
the 300-400 kids she said it was exactly how she imagined it. That is 
how he arrived at how many students attended Hogwarts. Just thought I 
would share!

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
>  
>  
> In a message dated 8/25/2004 8:56:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> So,  although she mentions so few students in the books and it 
would seem 
> that  
> only Harry, Seamus, Ron, Neville and Dean are the only Gryffindors 
in the  
> same year, it would be impossible given the total number of 
students she  
> claims 
> is in the school ;-)
> Let's calculate based on 5 Gryffindor boys  in 6th year - Harry's 
year coming 
> up. If that was the same for the four  houses, that would mean a 
total of 20 
> boys in 6th year in the whole  school. If there are an equal # of 
girls, then 
> that makes a total of 40  students in 6th year. If that is the same 
number 
> for 
> each level, then that  makes 280 students in all of Hogwarts. 
Something 
> doesn't 
> add up ;-)  
> I'll look for that particular interview of hers, but if someone 
else finds  
> it, please post the quote (if it exists - maybe I'm imagining the 
whole  
> thing, 
> lol!). I just tried to access the Lexicon, but it won't load. 
Maybe  the page 
> is 
> down for some reason?
> I did find one page of message board  comments on Diagon Alley 
where someone 
> quoted JKR by saying she answered a  direct question as to the 
number of 
> students as 'about a thousand'. Oh  well...
> Cindy
> 
> 
> 
> I remember reading that "1000" figure too.  I think  there are 
loads of other 
> teachers we have not heard about (that would explain  all the 
strange faces 
> at the teachers' table in the PoA movie, right?) and many  other 
classes we 
> haven't heard about as well.  You'd think there'd be more  than one 
dorm room for 
> each year's students if there are more than five per year  
(boys/girls), but 
> we're only told in canon that Harry's dorm room is for  "Fifth 
Years" -- so if 
> there are two dorm rooms for Fifth Years, for instance,  they'd 
be "Fifth 
> Years A-K" and "Fifth Years L-Z" or "Fifth Years 1" and Fifth  
Years 2" or 
> something like that.  I think this is just one of those places  
where JKR has an 
> idea in her head (1000 students) and hasn't worked it out in  
print.  
> 
> Lynda
> 
> "The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Wed Aug 25 23:45:57 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:45:57 -0000
Subject: number of students at Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <cgj5uo+h4o7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cgj8bl+2g56@eGroups.com>

from the lexicon website:

There are actually about three hundred, it would seem, although there 
is plenty of debate on the subject. Here's the evidence from the 
books themselves: 
?	There are more or less ten students (depending on the 
vagarities of the Sorting) in each house per year, five boys and five 
girls. 
o	There are twenty broomsticks lying on the ground awaiting the 
first year Gryffindors and Slytherins for their first flying lesson, 
which bears that number out. 
o	A double class of potions--Gryffindor and Slytherin--has 
twenty cauldrons set up. 
o	For a double class of herbology--Gryffindor and Hufflepuff--
Professor Sprout has twenty pairs of earmuffs ready. 

?	If there are more Gryffindors of that year, isn't it strange 
that we haven't heard about them in four years' worth of books? Not a 
one has spoken up in class, has been part of any parties or 
activities in the common room, or anything like that. Judging by the 
numbers cited above for herbology, flying, and potions, they must not 
even be in the same classes. If there are any others, where in the 
world are they? We do have evidence of two more girls, but they have 
been awfully quiet. 
?	Assuming the ten students per house per year numbers, that 
would work out to forty students per year for a total of about 280 
students. This meshes with the several times that Harry 
sees "hundreds" of people in the Great Hall (in SS when Harry is 
Sorted and GF when he's chosen for the tournament, for example). 

hope that helps answer some questions - Sassy

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape" 
<onceupona_party at y...> wrote:
> Sassy comments ***According to Steve (hp-lexicon) when he spoke at 
> the Ottawa Convention Alley he believed there were be somewhere 
> between 300-400 students, because when JKR saw the first film with 
> the 300-400 kids she said it was exactly how she imagined it. That 
is 
> how he arrived at how many students attended Hogwarts. Just thought 
I 
> would share!
> 
>




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 26 00:49:54 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:49:54 -0000
Subject: number of students at Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <1a8.27b27026.2e5e243d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cgjc3i+knln@eGroups.com>

Yes, Cindy. I have always thought that as well. (That JKR got the 
idea of 1,000 in her head, but it didn't really work out that way.) 
And, like you said, it's not a big deal. But, I do think if she saw 
a thousand students (or if we did) very few would agree it's how 
they pictured it. Or how it's been discribed. Can you imagine how 
long each Sorting would take?! 

As for there being a lot of teachers we haven't heard about, but 
have seen in the movie... I wouldn't count on the movie to be 
explaining things for the book. I think they threw in some other 
people at that head table to make it look a certain way. And, while 
there are probably *some* teachers we've not heard of in the books, 
I seriously doubt there is a great number. 

~Deborah


> 
> In a message dated 8/25/04 6:07:10 AM, artsylynda at a... writes:

> > I think this is just one of those places? where JKR has an
> > idea in her head (1000 students) and hasn't worked it out in? 
print.?
> I think many fans have accepted this theory ;-)
> Cindy
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Aug 26 17:38:22 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:38:22 -0000
Subject: Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <194.2ca73445.2e5d98c0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cgl76e+cbt8@eGroups.com>

Rebecca previously:
> Not to mention the fact that its rather clear in the books (and
> mostly clear in the movies...based on this mystery boy not being in
> their dorm) that Harry, Ron, Neville, Dean, and Seamus are the only
> Gryffindor students in their year.

Cindy replied:
>>Well, this brings up a contradictory issue. Rowling said a long 
time ago in some interview (please don't ask me where, but the figure 
has been somewhat accepted for a while), that there were close to 
1000 students at Hogwarts. [snip] So, although she mentions so few 
students in the books and it would seem that only Harry, Seamus, Ron, 
Neville and Dean are the only Gryffindors in the same year, it would 
be impossible given the total number of students she claims is in the 
school ;-) <<

Rebecca:
In any case, no other male student is *ever* mentioned as being in 
their year besides the others in their dorm. I've heard that quote of 
hers before, and have also been confused by it (I agree with the 
notion of 280 students). Perhaps it means that the school has a 
*capacity* of 1000 students. 

>>I just tried to access the Lexicon, but it won't load. Maybe the 
page is down for some reason?<<

According to Leaky, the Lexicon is in the middle of switching over to 
a new server. So, yeah, they are down.




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 26 20:28:37 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Bigger names + bigger pay = smaller budget?
In-Reply-To: <cgl76e+cbt8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040826202837.71595.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com>

--- huntergreen_3 <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:
> In any case, no other male student is *ever* mentioned as being in 
> their year besides the others in their dorm. I've heard that quote of 
> hers before, and have also been confused by it (I agree with the 
> notion of 280 students). Perhaps it means that the school has a 
> *capacity* of 1000 students. 

It's also possible that there was a significant decrease in the birth rate
while Voldemort was in power, followed by a baby boom after his demise.  This
would make Harry's class among the smallest, and the classes starting 2 years
after his would be larger.  The classes that were nearing graduation in the
first 2 books could also be a bit larger.  Most of the kids Harry knows are
within a year of his age (except the older Weasleys and Cedric), so we would
never notice that the other classes are bigger.

I also suspect that Gryffindor and Slytherin are smaller than the other houses,
particularly Hufflepuff (although there don't seem to be an abundance of
Hufflepuffs in Harry's year, as evidenced by the 20 sets of earmuffs in
Herbology).  Since the most accurate count we have is for Gryffindor, any
estimate extrapolated from that number would be on the low side.  Still, I
can't quite come up with 1000 students.  Maybe it's capacity, as you say - in
the good ol' days before Voldemort, the school served 1000 students, and may
again someday.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From ejblack at rogers.com  Thu Aug 26 19:48:22 2004
From: ejblack at rogers.com (ejblack)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:48:22 -0400
Subject: Sorta on, sorta off topic
References: <cgl76e+cbt8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000401c48ba5$a5810fa0$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq>

     When I really like a book or movie I will play with it in my head, putting the characters in difference situations to get a feel for how well conceived they are.   I was considering the Potterverse last night and thinking how very carefully, and beautifully, constructed it was in terms of the characters that "fit" in the general feel of the place. Almost every character  or situation I thought of, from novels to plays to movies would be terriblely jarring. 

     Then it hit me, a vision: Captain Jack Sparrow, wand in one hand, wand in the other. Captain Jack Sparrow sailing the Black Pearl in search of a lost dragon's treasure.  Captain Jack Sparrow, drunk as a skunk, waving his wand in the middle of a battle and coming up with the most unexpected spells. 

    Dumbledore would love him, Snape would hate him, Hagrid would buy dangerous animals from him............

Jeanette

PS Jack Sparrow is a character from the movie "Pirates of the Caribbean"




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





From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Thu Aug 26 22:40:18 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:40:18 -0000
Subject: Rules for HP films
Message-ID: <cglosi+9k2g@eGroups.com>

All HP movies should ...

* start with the Dursleys
* end with Harry leaving on the Hogwarts Express - at the train
station
* have a segment on the train heading to Hogwarts
* have extra shots of Snape and Draco scowling at Harry
* have extra shots of Harry and Ron scowling at Snape and Draco
* have some resemblance of the books
* not contain new useless characters as additions, when actors are
already established, and JKR can do a much better job creating
characters
* leave the lines to the character saying them in the books
* have directors who have read all the books that have been published
to date
* consult fans or fan groups for approval on all drastic changes to
book canon
* don't f*** with our heads!

Ok maybe I am a tad obsessive, but I have a feeling I will be adding
more....Sassy





From scully931 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 26 23:00:27 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:00:27 -0000
Subject: Sorta on, sorta off topic
In-Reply-To: <000401c48ba5$a5810fa0$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq>
Message-ID: <cglq2b+g8pe@eGroups.com>

A vision of Jack Sparrow doing magic or just about anything else is 
a lovely thing. :-)

But, you're right, Dumbledore would love him! He'd probably hire his 
as the next DADA teacher!

~Deborah

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "ejblack" <ejblack at r...> wrote:
>      When I really like a book or movie I will play with it in my 
head, putting the characters in difference situations to get a feel 
for how well conceived they are.   I was considering the Potterverse 
last night and thinking how very carefully, and beautifully, 
constructed it was in terms of the characters that "fit" in the 
general feel of the place. Almost every character  or situation I 
thought of, from novels to plays to movies would be terriblely 
jarring. 
> 
>      Then it hit me, a vision: Captain Jack Sparrow, wand in one 
hand, wand in the other. Captain Jack Sparrow sailing the Black 
Pearl in search of a lost dragon's treasure.  Captain Jack Sparrow, 
drunk as a skunk, waving his wand in the middle of a battle and 
coming up with the most unexpected spells. 
> 
>     Dumbledore would love him, Snape would hate him, Hagrid would 
buy dangerous animals from him............
> 
> Jeanette
> 
> PS Jack Sparrow is a character from the movie "Pirates of the 
Caribbean"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ejblack at rogers.com  Fri Aug 27 01:06:11 2004
From: ejblack at rogers.com (ejblack)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:06:11 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sorta on, sorta off topic
References: <cglq2b+g8pe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c48bd2$0b85d610$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq>


But, you're right, Dumbledore would love him! He'd probably hire his 
as the next DADA teacher!

~Deborah

    Now that would be a terrifying thought! <grin>   Mind you Jack would probably slope off on some adventure within a month or so.(After having half the girls in the school in love with him and the other half ready to kill him.)

    But with the wonderful visuals in the Harry Potter films I would love to see the Black Pearl flying through the clouds chasing a dragon.

Jeanette, who has been pondering Snape's past life


  One last thing.  Obiviously my computer isn't good at reading my mind.  I meant to write "Captain Jack Sparrow, sword in one hand, wand in the other." not  "Sparrow, wand in one hand, wand in the other."

 

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




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 01:46:40 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 01:46:40 -0000
Subject: Question about JKR door...
Message-ID: <cgm3q0+gm5o@eGroups.com>

On JKR's site...

Does anyone remember exactly how long it was from the first time the 
door shut (when we got the title) to when it opened to reveal the 
couple of lines a bit ago? It shut again today and I'm curious to 
see if the time span is the same for the next time. 

Please don't tell me to search the records. Ugh! Too much work. ;-) 

~Deborah




From libtax10375 at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 27 02:54:32 2004
From: libtax10375 at earthlink.net (Leeann McCullough)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:54:32 -0400
Subject: new book 6 info
References: <1093523453.532.4212.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002d01c48be1$2ef1d680$9ec9ef04@CPQ16151965929>

I came across this sort of by accident and found it quite interesting. It
 has info they claim to be fact that I have never seen before. I hope you
 find it interesting as well.
 I tried to insert the link here, but I was threatened with a life sentence
 in Azkaban, so you will have to type it in the address bar yourself.
 http://www.pensieve.net/book6.htm
 
 Leeann-who isn't quite sure what she would see if face-to-face with a
            dementor





From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Aug 27 13:30:47 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:30:47 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] question about JKR door
Message-ID: <20.31fdabd3.2e609187@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 8/27/2004 8:44:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

On JKR's  site...

Does anyone remember exactly how long it was from the first  time the 
door shut (when we got the title) to when it opened to reveal the  
couple of lines a bit ago? It shut again today and I'm curious to 
see  if the time span is the same for the next time. 



I've been there every time someone says it's open and it's  NEVER opened for 
me!!  Grrrrrrr.  WHat's the secret to getting it  open?  The handle moves, the 
light switch goes on and off, but the "Do Not  Disturb" sign is just THERE 
every time.  grrrrrrr  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From griffin782002 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 13:40:14 2004
From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (Spiridoula)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:40:14 -0000
Subject: Sorta on, sorta off topic
In-Reply-To: <001b01c48bd2$0b85d610$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq>
Message-ID: <cgndju+8jlm@eGroups.com>

Griffin782002:
Jack Sparrow in Hogwarts? Let me think. Because he belongs to a 
group that most people are not that fond, I believe he would be 
sorted to Slytherin. Now Snape is fond of the Slytherin students, 
right? But imagine Snape's reaction if during a potions lesson, 
Sparrow's cauldron develops a leak and instead of asking help from 
the Professor or try to find a way to fix it, suddenly he stands up, 
approches the deck and grabs Snape's cauldron without even asking. I 
wonder if he would think that Harry is not that bad.

Griffin782002    




--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "ejblack" <ejblack at r...> wrote:
> 
> But, you're right, Dumbledore would love him! He'd probably hire 
his 
> as the next DADA teacher!
> 
> ~Deborah
> 
>     Now that would be a terrifying thought! <grin>   Mind you Jack 
would probably slope off on some adventure within a month or so.
(After having half the girls in the school in love with him and the 
other half ready to kill him.)
> 
>     But with the wonderful visuals in the Harry Potter films I 
would love to see the Black Pearl flying through the clouds chasing 
a dragon.
> 
> Jeanette, who has been pondering Snape's past life
> 
> 
>   One last thing.  Obiviously my computer isn't good at reading my 
mind.  I meant to write "Captain Jack Sparrow, sword in one hand, 
wand in the other." not  "Sparrow, wand in one hand, wand in the 
other."
> 
>  
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 16:07:59 2004
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:07:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] question about JKR door
In-Reply-To: <20.31fdabd3.2e609187@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040827160759.5718.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com>

--- artsylynda at aol.com wrote:
> I've been there every time someone says it's open and it's  NEVER opened for 
> me!!  Grrrrrrr.  WHat's the secret to getting it  open?  The handle moves,
> the light switch goes on and off, but the "Do Not  Disturb" sign is just 
> THERE every time.  grrrrrrr  

There's no secret to getting the door open.  The "Do Not Disturb" sign should
disappear when the door can be opened.  Maybe you need to refresh the page, or
delete your browser's cache.  You could be looking at the same cached version
of the page every time you go there.  If you don't know how to do these things,
e-mail me off list and tell me what browser you're using and I can help. 
Unfortunately, the "DND" sign is back right now, so you can't check until the
next time somebody says it's open.

Sherry Garfio


=====
"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 



From grisssara at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 29 11:16:57 2004
From: grisssara at yahoo.com (grisssara)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:16:57 -0000
Subject: About Alan Rickman?
Message-ID: <cgsdv9+90fp@eGroups.com>

Hi,
I'm new to this list, I hope I'm sending this correctly....

I stubled across of something weird on
some message board. Has Alan Rickman played
DUMBLEDORE?
What's that??? Or has he originally wanted to
play dumbledore but then they put him to play
Snape?


-Marjo




From onceupona_party at yahoo.ca  Sun Aug 29 22:36:04 2004
From: onceupona_party at yahoo.ca (Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:36:04 -0000
Subject: Scabbers
Message-ID: <cgtlok+crov@eGroups.com>

I can't see Jack Sparrow attending any class, unless they were making 
moonshine...or something similar.


OK - looking for theories on why Scabbers selected the Weasley family 
to live with as ...Scabbers...Sassy




From ejblack at rogers.com  Sun Aug 29 22:53:02 2004
From: ejblack at rogers.com (ejblack)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 18:53:02 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Scabbers
References: <cgtlok+crov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000401c48e1a$f07686d0$2680c645@blackc02b2gycq>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Severina Amadenna Salem-Snape 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 6:36 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Scabbers


  >>I can't see Jack Sparrow attending any class, unless they were making 
  >>moonshine...or something similar.
  Absolutely!


  >>OK - looking for theories on why Scabbers selected the Weasley family 
  >>to live with as ...Scabbers...Sassy

  I would say because Arthur Weasley works for the MoM.  Scabbers/Wormtail could hear what was going on re old Voldy.  Also he would influence Percy.: I am really sure Percy's behaviour has been "modified" over the years to make him a possible servant of Voldemort. 

  Jeanette





  ________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!

  Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Mon Aug 30 04:12:45 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 00:12:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Mummers' Dance (POA songvid)
Message-ID: <1088.4.47.27.220.1093839165.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Song is a butchered copy of Mummers' Dance by Loreena McKennitt.  This vid
turned out more as an exercise in editing since I hadn't done fades in
awhile. The DivX copy may be clearer for some; however, the file is much
larger.

Right click on file and 'save as':
Link: http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/hpmumdnc.rm
or http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/hpmumdnc_divx.zip

Size: ~5.1megs (RM) or ~23.1megs (ZIP/AVI)
They were exported at 640x360.

The RM file uses Real media. Personally, I use Player 8. If you don't have
Real Player installed: http://forms.real.com/real/player/blackjack.html
(Windows and Mac)

The AVI/DIVX file will require the DivX codec:
http://www.divx.com/divx/download/
(Windows and Mac)
Once you have this download, DivX files can be played under Windows Media
with the DivX codec or their player, which you can choose not to install. 
Also, the AVI/DIVX file is compressed and will need software like Winzip
(www.winzip.com).

Overall vid tone... well, this was created while I was mostly depressed
for weeks, so no cheery vid again. :-\  Must do cheery vid... I've been
thinking about Cake's Short Skirt and Long Jacket for HP.  Hmm. Err.

Dina

--
"I swear he's got a pu**y, Orlando Bloom. Either that or he's a
hermaphrodite. It's one of the two! Who the hell wants to walk
around with someone who's prettier than you if you're a woman?"
- actor, Johnny Messner  (I wonder if he reads slash fic)




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Aug 30 19:16:08 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:16:08 -0000
Subject: Mummers' Dance (POA songvid)
In-Reply-To: <1088.4.47.27.220.1093839165.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <cgvudo+jlo1@eGroups.com>

This was really cool. I had not heard this song before and I think it 
fits the mood of POA quite well. I must have watched it about 2 dozen 
times now during my lunch time, which is soon to be over. sigh! At 
least we have a three day weekend coming. Anyway, I just wanted to 
compliment you on the video. This would make a great trailer for the 
movie.

Theresa

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Dina Lerret" <redina at s...> wrote:
> Song is a butchered copy of Mummers' Dance by Loreena McKennitt.  
This vid
> turned out more as an exercise in editing since I hadn't done fades 
in
> awhile. The DivX copy may be clearer for some; however, the file is 
much
> larger.
> 
> Right click on file and 'save as':
> Link: http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/hpmumdnc.rm
> or http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/hpmumdnc_divx.zip
> 
> Size: ~5.1megs (RM) or ~23.1megs (ZIP/AVI)
> They were exported at 640x360.
> 
> The RM file uses Real media. Personally, I use Player 8. If you 
don't have
> Real Player installed: 
http://forms.real.com/real/player/blackjack.html
> (Windows and Mac)
> 
> The AVI/DIVX file will require the DivX codec:
> http://www.divx.com/divx/download/
> (Windows and Mac)
> Once you have this download, DivX files can be played under Windows 
Media
> with the DivX codec or their player, which you can choose not to 
install. 
> Also, the AVI/DIVX file is compressed and will need software like 
Winzip
> (www.winzip.com).
> 
> Overall vid tone... well, this was created while I was mostly 
depressed
> for weeks, so no cheery vid again. :-\  Must do cheery vid... I've 
been
> thinking about Cake's Short Skirt and Long Jacket for HP.  Hmm. Err.
> 
> Dina
> 
> --
> "I swear he's got a pu**y, Orlando Bloom. Either that or he's a
> hermaphrodite. It's one of the two! Who the hell wants to walk
> around with someone who's prettier than you if you're a woman?"
> - actor, Johnny Messner  (I wonder if he reads slash fic)




From vlngrrl at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 00:50:18 2004
From: vlngrrl at yahoo.com (vlngrrl)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:50:18 -0000
Subject: PoA movie vs. book
Message-ID: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>

Hello!  

I appologize if this has been discussed already (if it has, please 
point me in the right direction).  I saw PoA in IMAX when it came 
out, and was so undecided about it that I had to see it again.  I 
liked it better the second time, mainly because the first viewing 
dispelled any expectations I had for the movie.  The discrepencies 
in between the book and the movie didn't bother me as much.  
However, I hadn't read the book in a while, and had forgotten a few 
details.  

I am rereading the series now, and I am once again bothered by a 
discrepancy.  In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by 
Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with 
Padfoot and Crookshanks.  He then goes into the Shrieking Shack 
after them.  In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in 
the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared.  Harry follows 
the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.  

Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any 
cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my 
opinion) detail in the story line.  Is anybody else bothered by 
this, or does anybody have any explaination as to how this change 
had ANY positive effect to the story or why the director chose this 
means to an end?  

Again, I appoligize if this question has already been posted, and 
solved.  If this is the case, I would appreciate a nudge in the 
right direction.

Thanks!

-Sarah
(who really wishes filmmakers wouldn't take such liberties with 
beloved stories)




From rsfessler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 31 01:55:09 2004
From: rsfessler at gmail.com (Rebecca Fessler)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:55:09 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA movie vs. book
In-Reply-To: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>
References: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8940abaa0408301855269cd471@mail.gmail.com>

>> I am rereading the series now, and I am once again bothered by a 
 discrepancy.  In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by 
 Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with 
 Padfoot and Crookshanks.  He then goes into the Shrieking Shack 
 after them.  In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in 
 the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared.  Harry follows 
 the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.  
 
 Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any 
 cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my 
 opinion) detail in the story line.  Is anybody else bothered by 
 this, or does anybody have any explaination as to how this change 
 had ANY positive effect to the story or why the director chose this 
 means to an end?  >>

I'm new here, so I don't know if this has been discussed (and
answered) before, but I thought I'd offer my theory on why this might
have been done.

In the book version of the Shrieking Shack scene, Lupin explains the
backstory behind the map, so we learn that he saw Pettigrew on the
map, and we know he knows how to use the map because he was one of its
creators.  In the film, that bit of backstory was left out (a mistake,
IMO), and Lupin could not very well say he saw Pettigrew on the map
without either a) explaining how he knew about the map or b) leaving a
gaping plot hole.  As such, there has to be another way for him to
have known, and Harry pointing it out to him solves that problem.

Also, there is the 'show, not tell' theory popular with English
teachers (or with mine, at any rate) wherein it's better to show an
event than to tell about it.  If Lupin simply tells them he saw the
map, that's not as visually interesting as seeing Harry see Pettigrew
on the map.  In that way, I think it does make for better cinema.

Incidentally, when I first heard about this particular change (before
I saw the film), I was upset by it, but when I actually saw the film
itself, I thought the scene worked quite well, so I wasn't bothered by
it at all.  Just my opinion.

Hope this made some sense.

Rebecca




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 05:33:00 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:33:00 -0000
Subject: PoA movie vs. book
In-Reply-To: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ch12ic+6kl2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vlngrrl" <vlngrrl at y...> wrote:
> Hello!  
> 
> I appologize if this has been discussed already (if it has, please 
> point me in the right direction).  I saw PoA in IMAX when it came 
> out, and was so undecided about it that I had to see it again.  I 
> liked it better the second time, mainly because the first viewing 
> dispelled any expectations I had for the movie.  The discrepencies 
> in between the book and the movie didn't bother me as much.  
> However, I hadn't read the book in a while, and had forgotten a few 
> details.  
> 
> I am rereading the series now, and I am once again bothered by a 
> discrepancy.  In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by 
> Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with 
> Padfoot and Crookshanks.  He then goes into the Shrieking Shack 
> after them.  In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in 
> the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared.  Harry 
follows 
> the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.  
> 
> Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any 
> cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my 
> opinion) detail in the story line.  Is anybody else bothered by 
> this, or does anybody have any explaination as to how this change 
> had ANY positive effect to the story or why the director chose this 
> means to an end?  
> 
> Again, I appoligize if this question has already been posted, and 
> solved.  If this is the case, I would appreciate a nudge in the 
> right direction.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Sarah
> (who really wishes filmmakers wouldn't take such liberties with 
> beloved stories)

I don't know about anyone else, but as a writer myself I thought I'd 
give my take on it.

The books and the films are basically seen from Harry's POV (point of 
view).  There really aren't any scenes that Harry isn't directly 
involved in, unless you count the stuff he dreams starting in GOF.  
Now, in the books, you can get by with a lot of explianation at a 
later time by the characters involved on what they saw or did when 
Harry wasn't around.  This is what Lupin did in the book POA during 
the Shrieking Shack scene.  In the films it becomes more 
problematic.  You don't want long speeches in the films as it slows 
down the pacing.  So, you have to show Peter Petigrew on the map 
somehow, and make it believable that Harry would know who that was.  
I think the compromise they made on this account for the film 
actually works.  Harry hears the name in Hogsmeade as a friend of his 
father's... he sees the name running around on the Map one night 
quite by accident... Harry needed to be out, late at night, with the 
Map so Snape could catch him, and Lupin could rescue and then 
chastise him (that IS in the book)... and Lupin keeps the Map.  
Giving it to Harry so we could "see" it instead of Lupin (where we 
would have "heard" it) is better in the long run and really doesn't 
change the story.

Tim




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Aug 31 05:50:38 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:50:38 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: PoA movie vs. book
Message-ID: <6b.3256b4b2.2e656bae@aol.com>


In a message dated 8/30/04 10:34:41 PM, tmarends at yahoo.com writes:


> The books and the films are basically seen from Harry's POV (point of
> view).? There really aren't any scenes that Harry isn't directly
> involved in, unless you count the stuff he dreams starting in GOF.?
> Now, in the books, you can get by with a lot of explianation at a
> later time by the characters involved on what they saw or did when
> Harry wasn't around.?
> 

Thank you Tim, that is the best explanation I have ever read about this whole 
'they didn't put this in, they didn't put that in' argument that has swirled 
around since the movie came out ;-) I knew this, but could never really put it 
into a coherent explanation. 
The books are Harry's POV and that does affect any filmed version. I don't 
think most folks pause to consider the POV of a book when they see the movie.
As an example, if LOTR had been written from Frodo's point of view, we would 
have had to endure chapters and chapters of other characters 'telling' us what 
was happening all over Middle Earth. That would have been unbearable to read 
and impossible to film.

Actually, I have read the HP books more than 3 times each and I must be very 
plot impaired because I never notice things like what the original poster 
pointed out. In fact, while watching the movie, I had to ask my friend things 
like, 'was that in the book?'. Hmm, maybe it's me, but I haven't really committed 
the books to memory, although I have read them many times. I guess I 
concentrate more on the characters and Harry's psychological journey and plot points s
uch as who went where when, etc., often go right out of my head <g>.

So, thank you for putting it so succintly and coherently.   Since she used a 
limited POV (one person's - Harry's), the screenwriter must come up with more 
interesting ways of imparting information than just having someone recite what 
happened.
Cindy


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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Tue Aug 31 06:03:47 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 06:03:47 -0000
Subject: PoA movie vs. book
In-Reply-To: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ch14c3+pdol@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "vlngrrl" <vlngrrl at y...> wrote:
Snip
> I am rereading the series now, and I am once again bothered by a 
> discrepancy.  In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by 
> Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with 
> Padfoot and Crookshanks.  He then goes into the Shrieking Shack 
> after them.  In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in 
> the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared.  Harry 
follows 
> the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.  
> 
> Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any 
> cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my 
> opinion) detail in the story line.  Is anybody else bothered by 
> this, or does anybody have any explaination as to how this change 
> had ANY positive effect to the story or why the director chose this 
> means to an end?  
Snip

Well whether or not we discussed this or not (cannot remember right 
now but I thought we touched on it but didn't beat it to 
death)...anyway, I have seen POA 4 times now and have decided that in 
my humble opinion they changed this to combine a few scenes. Having 
Harry out of bed looking at the map shows visually how it works, we 
find out that Peter is still alive, and we have the Snape catching 
Harry with the map, it insults him and Remus shows up, Remus gets 
angry with Harry for wandering around with the map (he does mention 
it as a map) and Harry mentions that he saw Peter on the map and we 
learn that Remus is really bothered by that fact - at least I thought 
he looked freaked out (good job Mr Thewlis - he sure knows how to 
show emotion with his eyes). Anyway, I truly believe that when Steve 
Kloves was writing the script he was trying to condense a few scenes 
into one and show the map visually. But as I said that is my opinion 
and not really based on any facts just a gut feeling about why the 
film makers might have done this scene this way. Incidentally, I was 
not troubled by the way they handled this scene either. In fact the 
only things that really bug me are no backstory on the marauders (or 
limited story) and the werewolf was naked and had no tail - what is 
up with that? Peter even mentions in OotP OWL test he put the 'tufted 
tail'. Sorry I found it gross looking not scary at all and all the 
kids I have taken to see it have said the same thing. Why couldn't he 
have looked scary like the one in Van Helsing or even like American 
Werewolf in London. Those were some scary werewolves.

Theresa




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Aug 31 14:01:06 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:01:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA movie vs. book
Message-ID: <12b.4a64dafe.2e65dea2@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 8/31/2004 9:31:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I am  rereading the series now, and I am once again bothered by a  
discrepancy.  In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by  
Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with  
Padfoot and Crookshanks.  He then goes into the Shrieking Shack  
after them.  In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in  
the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared.  Harry follows  
the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.   

Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any  
cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my 
opinion)  detail in the story line.  Is anybody else bothered by 
this, or does  anybody have any explaination as to how this change 
had ANY positive  effect to the story or why the director chose this 
means to an end?   




That discrepancy is what led to the part of the trailers I never  understood 
until I saw the movie -- where Harry is walking around with his wand  lit in a 
dark corridor, map in hand.  It made  no sense to me.  I  think they did it 
purely because it was visually cool for him to be waking up  sleeping 
portraits.  Also, when Harry and Snape have their confrontation,  it's very good, very 
"in character" for both of them, Snape slimey and vengeful,  Harry cheeky and 
defiant -- and then Lupin comes along with quiet gentility and  rescues Harry, 
ignoring Snape's gibes at him.  I think that scene did a lot  of character 
development in a small space, plus it's visually interesting.   And the scene 
prior, where Harry is eating something (what was that?   Looked kind of like a 
granola bar???) and looking at the map, and Ron woke up  from the nightmare, 
and Harry said, "You tell those spiders, Ron" with that  little twinkle in his 
eye.  Again, not in the books, but again, very much  in character and a funny 
scene.  That and the candy scene where the boys  are trying different "animal 
sounds" candies until Harry eats the Pepper Imps (I  guess that's what caused 
the smoke to come out of his ears) were visually  interesting and funny, not at 
all in canon.  These and many other things  bothered me the first few times I 
saw the film, but then I just started enjoying  the film for itself, and I 
liked all of them.  The one discrepancy I can  think of right now that bothers 
me is that Hermione didn't think to use the  "Immobilus" charm on the tree when 
she HAD used it on the Cornish Pixies in  CoS.  And the fact they made her 
"Super Hermione" and told her repeatedly  she was so bright, and changing 
Flitwick to a weird little Hitler looking guy,  etc., etc.  And I did NOT like 
Dumbledore's robes, hair or beard!  But  other than those things and many others, I 
liked the film a lot!   heehee  Saw it for the seventh time yesterday -- one 
of those times was at  IMAX.  Way cool.  Can't wait for the DVD!  Sure wish 
they'd give  us an extended version like they did for the LotR movies!  

Lynda

"The cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,  OoP



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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Aug 31 20:22:00 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:22:00 -0000
Subject: PoA movie vs. book
In-Reply-To: <ch0i0a+4jed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ch2ml8+uspu@eGroups.com>

Sarah wrote:
>>In the book, Peter Pettigrew is discovered alive by
Lupin using the Maurader's Map after H/R/H had already met up with
Padfoot and Crookshanks. He then goes into the Shrieking Shack
after them. In the book, however, Harry tries to find Pettigrew in
the school one night after he (Scabbers) disappeared. Harry follows
the map by wandlight and appears to walk right past him.

Unlike the other discrepancies in the plot details, I don't see any
cinematic reasons for changing this pretty significant (in my
opinion) detail in the story line. Is anybody else bothered by
this, or does anybody have any explaination as to how this change
had ANY positive effect to the story or why the director chose this
means to an end?<<

Rebecca: (welcome to the list!)
I can't remember if this was specifically discussed either, I think 
it may have been touched on, but swallowed by other things. 
Others have already explained it very well, but to add one thing, I 
thought it helped the story to have Harry see Peter on the map at 
some point. That was a question that had been asked on the book list 
many times (why did Harry never see Peter Pettigrew on the map?) so 
the movie avoided the same argument with that scene. Also, it helped 
the shrieking shack explanation along, by giving Harry a reason to 
believe them. If they hadn't had that scene the shrieking shack scene 
would have been more difficult to adapt.




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 22:44:54 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:44:54 -0000
Subject: extra students
Message-ID: <ch2v16+kc6p@eGroups.com>

I rewatched film 1 today, and there is something I hadn't noticed 
before.  When Percy is leading the 1st years to the Gryffindor tower 
there are definately more than 10 students... and when they reach the 
Common Room there appears to be 12-15 students gathered around him as 
he explains where the dormitories are.  Had anyone else noticed this 
before??

Tim