From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  1 02:29:58 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 02:29:58 -0000
Subject: Chamber of Secrets
In-Reply-To: <c9gdds+69c6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9gpn6+jd3v@eGroups.com>


  I don't seem to remember that.  Perhaps you are doing like I do in 
sometimes getting what is in the books and the movies mixed up.  One 
example, I thought for the longest time that "Get the mail, 
Dudley."  "Make Harry get it!"  "Get the mail, Harry!"  "Make Dudley 
get it!"  "Hit him with your Smelting stick, Dudley!" was in the 
first movie. 

  Then again (for me, at least), it could be a bad combination of 
Potteritis and senility;-).

  Brian:-)


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "annelilucas" <annelilucas at y...> 
wrote:
> I was rewatching CoS the other day and I think I noticed a change 
from
> the version I saw in the cinema.  At the beginning there's a scene
> where Dobby drops a cake on that woman's (don't know her name) 
head. 
> This is followed by Uncle Vernon fitting bars to Harry's window.  
I'm
> sure I remember there being a scene between these where Vernon 
dragged
> Harry up to his room.  I didn't notice any other differences, but I
> hadn't seen it for ages.  Does anyone know whether the (UK) video
> version is different from the cinema one?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Anneli




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Jun  1 11:20:42 2004
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 11:20:42 -0000
Subject: Rickman  Interviews
Message-ID: <c9hoqa+8o35@eGroups.com>

I've noticed a real lack of interviews with Alan Rickman.  Does 
anyone know why? Not any from Maggie Smith either.  I did see a 
couple of interviews with Maggie Smith for other movies where she 
commented that she had very little to do in this one. Has anyone else 
seen any for Rickman?
Potioncat




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jun  1 13:44:09 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 13:44:09 -0000
Subject: Hermione Granger and the Prisoner of Azkaban
In-Reply-To: <c9fftc+rp8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9i179+5gmb@eGroups.com>

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<Ali>But, my biggest problem with the film was (IMO) the enhanced 
role of Hermione. She seemed to take the lead in so many things. In 
the book Hermione becomes a bit of a wreck, in the film she takes 
the lead in a lot of the action</Ali>

Yes, and no.

The "yes" bit that got under my skin was when Time-Travel!Hermione 
and Time-Travel!Harry went back to fix events. In the book (and the 
film) Hermione repeatedly drums it into Harry that they cannot 
interact with themselves: "Professor McGonagall told me what awful 
things have happened when wizards have meddled with time. Loads of 
them ended up killing their past or future selves by mistake!" Thus, 
when Time-Travel!Harry chooses to step forward and conjure up an 
amazing Patronus, it is a really astonishing moment. But in the 
film, Time-Travel!Hermione has already thrown stones into Hagrid's 
hut as an alert to her non-time-travel self, and she has made 
werewolf calls to distract Lupin. So in the film TimeTravel!Harry's 
Patronus is only the third intervention with the non-time-travel 
characters. In CoS she took Dumbledore's words, now Harry's thunder, 
what next?

The "no" bit that got under my skin was Hermione's storming out of 
Divination. Here's the book:

"Oh, for goodness' sake!" said Hermione loudly. "Not that ridiculous 
Grim again!"
Professor Trelawney raised her enormous eyes to Hermione's face. 
Parvati whispered something to Lavender, and they both glared at 
Hermione too. Professor Trelawney stood up, surveying Hermione with 
unmistakable anger.
"I am sorry to say that from the moment you have arrived in this 
class my dear, it has been apparent that you do not have what the 
noble art of Divination requires. Indeed, I don't remember ever 
meeting a student whose mind was so hopelessly mundane."
There was a moment's silence. Then --
"Fine!" said Hermione suddenly, getting up and cramming Unfogging 
the Future back into her bag. "Fine!" she repeated, swinging the bag 
over her shoulder and almost knocking Ron off his chair. "I give up! 
I'm leaving!"
And to the whole class's amazement, Hermione strode over to the 
trapdoor, kicked it open, and climbed down the ladder out of sight.

Now, though it's not explicit in the text, I get the impression that 
Hermione has got the upper hand here. She's clearly not mundane, so 
it is Hermione's interjection and Hermione's departure that stayed 
with me as the powerful elements of the scene. But in the film 
Professor Trelawney is given a different rebuttal to say. She is 
given far more eloquence, and hence it looks like Hermione is 
defeated and leaves in a sulk. Perhaps Cuaron's personal beliefs 
prevented him portraying Hermione's quest against Divination as a 
victory.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  1 14:21:13 2004
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 14:21:13 -0000
Subject: Hermione Granger and the Prisoner of Azkaban
In-Reply-To: <c9i179+5gmb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9i3cp+dbjp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan" <v-tregan at m...> 
wrote:
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> <Ali>But, my biggest problem with the film was (IMO) the enhanced 
> role of Hermione. She seemed to take the lead in so many things. 
In 
> the book Hermione becomes a bit of a wreck, in the film she takes 
> the lead in a lot of the action</Ali>
> 
> Yes, and no.

> 
> Now, though it's not explicit in the text, I get the impression 
that 
> Hermione has got the upper hand here. She's clearly not mundane, 
so 
> it is Hermione's interjection and Hermione's departure that stayed 
> with me as the powerful elements of the scene. But in the film 
> Professor Trelawney is given a different rebuttal to say. She is 
> given far more eloquence, and hence it looks like Hermione is 
> defeated and leaves in a sulk. Perhaps Cuaron's personal beliefs 
> prevented him portraying Hermione's quest against Divination as a 
> victory.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dumbledad.

I am sorry to have to disagree with you, Dumbledad, but when I first 
read PoA, long before any HP movies were released, I took from the 
scene  a sense of profound frustration and defeat on Hermione's 
part, because she was the only one to see what a fraud Professor 
Trelawney was (little did she know!), and everybody else, 
particularly Lavender Brown and her friends, thought Trelawney was 
oh so wonderful.  

I haven't seen the movie of PoA yet, but from your remarks, it seems 
that Cuaron has interpreted the scene the same way I did.

Haggridd




From faura2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  1 15:16:01 2004
From: faura2002 at yahoo.com (faura2002)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 15:16:01 -0000
Subject: PoA tomorrow!
Message-ID: <c9i6jh+112u1@eGroups.com>

delurking to tell you that PoA will be shown in the Philippines 
starting tomorrow! yey!

actually, it had an advance screening last saturday, may 30. see what 
one of the major newspapers here had to say. 

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

!


follow the link:

http://www.inq7.net/ent/2004/may/31/ent_4-1.htm


CHEERS!

faura





From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jun  1 15:55:53 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 16:55:53 +0100
Subject: Snape, Lupin, and the map
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B0D4FD@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
|
S
P
A
C
E

So, were there any bits of the PoA film that you felt were better than
the book? I've always felt that there was something wrong with the scene
where Snape confiscates the Marauder's Map from Harry, and then lets
Lupin walk away with it (see the thread starting with post 96041 on
HPfGU for more details
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/96041
http://tinyurl.com/33apa ). But the film handled it perfectly, Lupin
stressed to Snape that to take it back would have been a challenge to
Lupin's authority; he played the whole scene more aggressively than in
the book. Gone is the "looking around cheerfully" of the book. Gone is
the "I need a word about my vampire essay".

Cheers,

Dumbledad.



From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jun  1 16:15:28 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 16:15:28 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_PoA_Predictions_based_on_Cuar=F3n=92s_existing_films_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <asjbdo+l2fg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ia30+7u77@eGroups.com>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

If you made any predictions about the PoA film, how did you do? Mine 
go back to message 4490 of December 2002 and I didn't do that well:

http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/message/4490
http://tinyurl.com/2wg9o

Here goes:

<Dumbledad>prediction number one: the central character of the PoA 
film will be Lupin, not Harry or Sirius</Dumbledad>
Nope, I got that one wrong, though we've noted Hermione's inflated 
role.

<Dumbledad>prediction number two: Cuar?n will make many more changes 
to the book, including the addition of material (probably about 
Lupin). </Dumbledad>
Yes, there's the Lily reference from Lupin and lots of extra stuff 
for Hermione.

<Dumbledad>prediction number three is that romantic relationships in 
PoA will be invented, exaggerated, and played to the full. 
</Dumbledad>
I'd love to say yes (he did play up the Hermione / Ron relationship) 
but to be honest, it was less than I was expecting based on my own 
prediction.

<Dumbledad>Prediction number four (well it's a hope more than a 
prediction): there will be very few computer generated effects in 
PoA. </Dumbledad>
Sadly wrong.

<Dumbledad>prediction number five: PoA will use innovative camera 
techniques to give a very intimate feel to the film. </Dumbledad>
True but backwards, the lighting and the cinematography did seem 
more interesting, but the result was more panoramic and less 
intimate.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.





From tin_kim924 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  1 17:15:21 2004
From: tin_kim924 at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Tin=20Samson?=)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 18:15:21 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA tomorrow!
In-Reply-To: <c9i6jh+112u1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040601171521.92449.qmail@web42006.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- faura2002 <faura2002 at yahoo.com> wrote: 

> delurking to tell you that PoA will be shown in the
> Philippines 
> starting tomorrow! yey!

this is also my first post here.  hi, glad to see
someone else from the philippines! =D

i'm SOOOO excited to see poa!!!! =D =D =D  

> actually, it had an advance screening last saturday,
> may 30. see what 
> one of the major newspapers here had to say. 

actually, there was another premiere (at eastwood
city) yesterday (may 31) which i was supposed to have
gone to, but a few days before that, i found out we
were going out of town.  a bit bummed, but i had fun
at the trip, and i figured waiting just a few more
days wouldn't hurt me. ;p

> http://www.inq7.net/ent/2004/may/31/ent_4-1.htm

thanks for the link!

i'm not reading any spoilers and film reviews until
after i watch the film hehehe, so i'm saving all these
links and emails from the group.

oh, can anyone pls give me links to pics from the
premiere at new york, london, and any other premiere? 
thank you!!

tin =)

________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Tue Jun  1 23:29:34 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 00:29:34 +0100
Subject: My PoA Review - SPOILERS
Message-ID: <v01540b00bce2b4e6d0b6@[217.154.249.113]>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

PoA is my favourite of the books so far, so my expectations were high; but
I was optimistic because of the appointment of Cuaron. A bit of a mixed
reaction; I'm adding my comments to GulPlum's post (nice to see you back,
btw), as he is the one with whom I most closely agree. When all I can add
to his post is the dreaded 'me too', I have snipped.

>Talking of that clockface, the idea of "time" is omnipresent throughout
>this film. From clocks and watches, and people looking at them, to a
>persistent chiming of the hours, it's ladled on perhaps just a little *too*
>thickly, but it does have the effect of constantly taking up the tension,
>notch by notch.

I liked it. I even heard a ticking clock throughout one sequence (forgotten
which).

>
>Another persistent presence throughout the film is the Whomping Willow.
>Slightly re-imagined since CoS (and all CGI as far as I could tell apart
>from the roots), its appearance and behaviour better meet my expectations;
>it's at last more "whompy" rather than simply bashing away and looks more
>willowy, for starters!

I *really* liked this. A grumpy tree with attitude; nicely interpreted.
Watch especially what happens when a bird gets close...

(snip)

>The acting, overall, was significantly superior to the first two films.
>Radcliffe's motor acting has improved immeasurably, but his line delivery
>and emotional "centre" still requires some work.

Agreed. I wanted a more extreme emotion when he blew up Aunt Marge, and can
only attribute this to Cuaron, as DR is, I think, perfectly capable of a
furious stare...we saw it several times in PS and CoS.

Girl-power Hermione was, I felt, somewhat overdone. As has already been
pointed out, the girl was going to pieces throughout the book because of
all the extra classes, but it just wasn't in evidence in the movie. The
famous punch was a little extreme, though it is canon. Why did Cuaron wimp
out on the most violent thing that she did in the book? When Snape is
knocked out in the Shrieking Shack, it's Harry who does it in the movie,
though in the book it's Harry, Ron and Hermione together. (I noticed, btw,
that 'Expelliarmus' now does what it is supposed to do, unlike in
CoS...though Harry's Expelliarmus knocks out Snape altogether, when all of
the others simply disarm)

(snip some comments about Lupin)
>I'd love to hear Cuaron's rationale for
>dressing him like a 1945 demobbed junior officer (complete with pencil
>moustache and brogues) and giving him a penchant for listing to 1940s (?)
>records on a wind-up gramophone - including during the Boggart class! Weird!

I *really* liked the idea of the Boggart class set to Lupin's own music;
but that whole scene wasn't snappy enough for me. After the intial
explanation, there should have been a very fast turnover of students facing
the Boggart, as in the book, with the Boggart rapidly changing shape as
each student came forward. Instead, it was very jolting, with the Boggart
hanging around waiting for each student to decide what he/she thought of as
the most scary form it could take. And why was Harry allowed to confront
it? It took the form of a Dementor, of course, and in the later explanation
scene, Lupin said that he hadn't let Harry confront it (huh?) because he
thought that Voldemort would emerge....so did Lupin not notice that it was
a Dementor, not Voldemort? Just didn't add up. The final bit, however, was
brilliant; Lupin's moonBoggart was Riddikulused into a balloon which farted
its way across the room; very funny. But then we were left with a backwards
image of Harry looking at the cupboard...  his scar was on the wrong side
of his forehead (I had heard that that cropped up somewhere, but never
thought I would notice it in the first showing). It was extremely obvious.
(mental note to check  next time whether we were supposed to be seeing
Harry's reflected image in the door of the cupboard).

>Other than that, though, there is a significant amount of join-the-dots to
>be done while watching this movie. Those who've read the book won't have
>any trouble, of course, but for those depending exclusively on the movie to
>explain what's going on (and why), there are just a few too many holes.

Hear hear. And it's seriously frustrating.

>At no point is any connection made between the authors of the map (Messrs
>M,W,P&P) and Sirius, James, Lupin and Pettigrew. This would not have been
>difficult (personally, I'd have inserted it at the end when Harry gets the
>map back - this obviates the need for any lengthy explanations about what
>else the foursome may have got up to).

Exactly. This was the thing that bothered me most. When Snape caught Harry
with the map and Lupin confiscated it, it was extremely clear that Snape
didn't know how to work it but Lupin did. All that it would have taken was
a question from Harry to Lupin; 'how is it that you know how the Map
works?' to make things clearer. An additional minute (?) of screen time.

One nice bit, though, and it answers Tim's question; Lupin keeps the Map
because, as he says, as DADA teacher, items possibly full of dark magic are
really his area of expertise.

I liked the way they created the Map as a multi-layered, self-folding
paper. I have wondered how it was going to be done, since you can write
stuff like that without worrying too much about the visuals, but how do you
show a map which apparently portrays all floors of a multi-storey castle?
Cleverly done.

(snip)
>It's never made clear that MWPP & Snape were class contemporaries.
(snip)

Towards the end, Harry talks about Sirius and Lupin being his dad's best
friends, but there's no way of knowing how he knew that.

>
>Although Sirius mentions Lupin's having forgotten to take his "potion",
>it's not given a name, nor is it stated that Snape had any hand in
>preparing it

One very brief mention of the potion, which came out of nowhere. And it
would have been so easy to have had Lupin drinking the potion during one or
preferably all of the scenes that he had, with a couple of passing
comments.

>Once the stag appears, therefore, there is no reason to make a
>connection between it and James.

In the book, the connection was made plain *after* Harry's successful
Patronus, which created a nice 'oh yeah' moment. There should have been a
similar one in the movie.

And speaking of Patronuses; in the movie lesson with Lupin, Harry made two
attempts, and the second one was successful. It was made to look way too
easy, even with the comments about advanced magic. The point in the book
was that, until he finally produced the successful Patronus to protect
himself and Sirius and Hermione, he had never done it before.

So on balance, a curate's egg of a movie. I will certainly see it again,
probably many times before it disappears from the cinemas; but I won't
brave the crowds again till half-term week is over.

Final point; I did like the end titles this time around. No extra scenelet
a la CoS, but a nice little touch at the very end.

Cheers,
Nicholas

Phoned the cinema today to get showtimes for the weekend. Calm, unemotional
voice giving all timings, followed by a panicky 'would customers PLEASE
note that ALL seats for today, June 1st, are SOLD OUT!!!'
They have ten performances today, and that's not the largest multiplex in
the area...





From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com  Wed Jun  2 00:14:05 2004
From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (irene_mikhlin)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:14:05 -0000
Subject: Why Cloves is still a muppet
Message-ID: <c9j64d+r5ts@eGroups.com>

I understand the need for reasonable screen time. OK, some lines have
to go. But why replace perfectly good  JRK lines with some of the
"original" idiocy, why?
The most blatant case was in the Shrieking Shack. The dialog was
reduced to bare bones. However, they still found the time for Sirius
to tell   Snape "go and play with your chemistry set". Sirius is a
pure-blood wizard, how would he know anything about muggle toys?

Irene




From surreal_44 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 05:19:47 2004
From: surreal_44 at yahoo.com (Krissy)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 05:19:47 -0000
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9gajs+qtj8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9jo1j+sj3r@eGroups.com>

I really feel the need to address this topic, because as a writer of 
fanfiction and also as a roleplayer it's a rather sore subject. I
sometimes appear curt when I write, so please take what I write with a
small grain of salt, because it may come across as insulting, and I'm
not trying to.  :)

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"<carolynwhite2 at a...>
wrote:

<snip>
>>What slightly worries me is that Jo is apparently very pleased with
the way this film stays close to the emotional truth of POA, when it
seemed to me to skim very lightly over the top of it. 



 Why in the world would it worry you that the author of the series
that we all adore so much is happy with the movie? She is the one with
the insight into the characters. She knows their motivations, what
they feel, and what makes them tick. She knows how the series is going
to end, and she has a good idea of how to accomplish it in her next
two books. 

If she is happy with the movie, I think it's silly and selfish of
people to nit-pick the hardwork that many people have put into trying
to  visually create the world of Harry Potter. Just because it isn't
what -you- envisioned doesn't mean that it's wrong. 

I understand the frustration of seeing a beloved book shredded when
it's put on-screen (*note "Little Women" with Winona Ryder), and
everyone is free to their own opinion. If the author is happy with the
movie, perhaps we should try to look at it from -her- perspective and
maybe then we will see what JKR sees.

Repectfully,

~Krissy







From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 09:36:44 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 09:36:44 -0000
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9jo1j+sj3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9k73c+l22n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Krissy" <surreal_44 at y...> wrote:

> --- In HPFGU 
Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> <snip>
> >>What slightly worries me is that Jo is apparently very pleased 
with the way this film stays close to the emotional truth of POA, 
when it seemed to me to skim very lightly over the top of it. 
> 
> 
Krissy:
>  Why in the world would it worry you that the author of the series
> that we all adore so much is happy with the movie? > 
(snip)
> If she is happy with the movie, I think it's silly and selfish of
> people to nit-pick the hardwork that many people have put into 
trying to  visually create the world of Harry Potter. Just because it 
isn't what -you- envisioned doesn't mean that it's wrong. 
> 

Carolyn:
You have misunderstood my point. Jo is obviously entitled to her 
opinion, the same as everyone else & more so, since she is the 
creator. Her endorsement of the movie was depressing to me because it 
stressed yet again, how she wished her books and characters to be 
viewed - fairly simplistically, if the evidence of this movie is any 
guide. 

As a writer yourself I understand you may have strong views on this, 
but IMO a reader/viewer's interpretation of what they are presented 
with is just as valid as the creator's. The genie is really out of 
the bottle once a work is made public. Authorial intent is 
interesting to know about, but becomes just part of the jigsaw that 
adds up to an ongoing response to a particular work (which can change 
over time).

As an adult I found more in POA than I found reflected in this film, 
and so I am disappointed. Jo's reported opinions form part of that 
temporary disappointment for me, but in a curious way just add to the 
appeal of the larger series. We appear to have a writer who is trying 
to control the interpretation of her works, faced by millions of out-
of-control readers with their own widely-diverging opinions. A very 
21st century media phenomenon.

As to whether it is right to criticise all the 'hardwork' that has 
gone into the movie, perhaps it is worth remembering that the one and 
only reason WB have created the film is to make truckloads of money 
out of a largely captive global audience. If anything, this means 
their efforts should be more closely scrutinised, not less.

Carolyn





	
	






From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Wed Jun  2 09:46:42 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:46:42 +0100
Subject: Does JKR like the films (was Re: POA - Movie Review ...)
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B0D690@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,
 
I think JKR is above the base motives that the rest of us may succumb
to, but if I was her I'd rave about the films until long after the
seventh was released, thus helping to secure even more dosh for myself
and my offspring. There's a lovely quote somewhere (which I cannot find
now, so I may be misremembering it) from Philip Pullman on his
ambivalence about the His Dark Materials trilogy being made into a film.
I think he alluded to an embarrassingly large sum of money helping to
quell his qualms.
 
Cheers,
 
Dumbledad.


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




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Jun  2 13:22:14 2004
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 13:22:14 -0000
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9jo1j+sj3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9kka6+irjv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Krissy" <surreal_44 at y...> wrote:
> I really feel the need to address this topic, because as a writer 
of 
> fanfiction and also as a roleplayer it's a rather sore subject. I
> sometimes appear curt when I write, so please take what I write 
with a
> small grain of salt, because it may come across as insulting, and 
I'm
> not trying to.  :)

I certainly don't see the way you've written here as insulting at 
all.  However, I also write fanfic, and original stuff and I have to 
say that to imply the stories belong only to Jo is naive.   The 
stories belong to her until they are published.  After that, they are 
the property jointly of her and the reader.  That's true of any 
story. It is no longer yours once you publish, or in the case of 
fanfic, upload.

This is similar to ongoing rows you get in fanfic groups over 
reviews - usually started when someone gets a review they do not 
like.  A kind of "how dare they not love my vision!" thing. The 
writer then  proceeds to justify themselves with "That is not what I 
meant!".  Please note, I am not for a moment suggesting you do this!  
However, while it is admirable for Jo to defend the movies (and 
considering the prices at stake, she'd better) it does not win the 
argument.  She can't be seen to get in a public row with Warners.  
Neither would win. 

For me, and a good many other fans, the backstory issue of MWPP and 
Snape is a central subplot of the book and series.  The character of 
Severus Snape and his behaviour in certain episodes of the book is 
also pivotal and for a good many fans may well be the reason why they 
love this particular book more than any of the others. 

I'm not for a moment saying that all good fans should boycott this 
movie. I'd recommend all fans go and see it - there is a good deal to 
feel very pleased about.  There is however, for me, a bloody huge gap 
between what the movie delivered and my expectations of it. 

It's not down to production.  It's not down to acting (I'm not 
impressed by Rickman's performance in this film, but given that his 
role was subjected to chainsaw massacre can we blame him?).  It is 
down to the screenplay - which has been written by someone who for me 
does not understand the book.

You can screenplay "difficult" books in the fantasy genre.  The LOTR 
trilogy has proved that.  There were cuts made from book to movie and 
changes too that infuriated the purists.  However no one can doubt 
that Jackson was true to the spirit of the books, and the emotional 
centre is still strongly there.  

Not so with POA.


> 
> --- In HPFGU-
Movie at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"<carolynwhite2 at a...>
> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> >>What slightly worries me is that Jo is apparently very pleased 
with
> the way this film stays close to the emotional truth of POA, when it
> seemed to me to skim very lightly over the top of it. 

I hate to utter this heresy, but I feel she can sometimes be 
irritatingly asinine.  First of all to quote Mandy Rice "She would 
say that, woudn't she" - Jo's not going to diss the movie, whatever 
she may chose to think about it.  

Secondly, she is either not able to fully read back her own work in a 
detached way, or millions of readers of that scene have totally 
misunderstood what was going on.  I don't think the movie does 
justice to the emotional rendering of the book.  this is the first 
book where Harry begins to discover something of his mysterious 
past.  And I'm sorry, for me this movie just didn't cut it.  It was 
half there - it could have been all there.  Easy - cut the crap with 
singing toads and spend that five minutes with an explanation of 
the "Prank".  Curtail the hippogryph flight and lets have Snape going 
ballistic at the end.  

Highlight the fact that Harry helps Sirius escape and loses the 
chance of a loving home!  It was there, but not adequately stressed.  
What did we get instead?  Wonderwoman!Hermione practically running 
the show.  I love her character, but it was talked up out of all 
recognition.

> 
> 
> 
>  Why in the world would it worry you that the author of the series
> that we all adore so much is happy with the movie? She is the one 
with
> the insight into the characters. She knows their motivations, what
> they feel, and what makes them tick. She knows how the series is 
going
> to end, and she has a good idea of how to accomplish it in her next
> two books. 
> 
> If she is happy with the movie, I think it's silly and selfish of
> people to nit-pick the hardwork that many people have put into 
trying
> to  visually create the world of Harry Potter. Just because it isn't
> what -you- envisioned doesn't mean that it's wrong. 

That's fine, except I don't fully buy that she is totally satisfied.  
And I still believe the fans have some strong entitlement here. The 
book would not have been filmed to this budget, or level of 
production value if it had not been a best seller.  So to some 
extent, it is the fans that bought the movie. It would not have been 
made unless it was a major seller. 

June








From hpfgu_list_elves at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 13:44:08 2004
From: hpfgu_list_elves at yahoo.com (hpfgu_list_elves)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 13:44:08 -0000
Subject: MESSAGE - Chicago Tribune interview request
Message-ID: <c9klj8+to4@eGroups.com>

Hi there!

NOTE: discussion of the following that 
does not involve canon should as always take 
place only on OTC.

An interview request from the Chicago Tribune
has arrived here at Hexquarters and we are
looking for all adult (18 or over) HPfGU 
members who are residents of Chicago.  Please 
contact us at 

HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com
(minus the extra space)

ASAP for the chance to talk to the reporter 
before the very tight deadline (Wednesday, 
June 2nd). We will do our best to hook you 
up with the reporter before the window of 
opportunity closes. Please be sure to 
include your name as well as your telephone 
number and we'd appreciate knowing the Yahoo 
ID associated with your membership here.

Because the article is going to be about 
Harry Potter's mass appeal, how he's a kid 
adults can relate to, the adult/universal 
themes that can be found in the books, etc., 
be advised that you probably should prepare 
brief answers to these:

- Why does Harry Potter appeal so much to 
grown-ups?

- Why do you, personally, like the series 
so much?

- Your age, place of residence, profession 
(also of interest: married or unmarried, 
has kids or not)

On the off chance that the reporter asks 
for concise and quotable sound bites from 
non-Chicago residents too, we'd like to 
ask for everyone's input. If you have ever 
written (or have the time now to write) 
answers to the above questions, please 
email them to us at 

HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com
(minus the extra space)

as soon as you can.  If any of you out 
there are willing and able, we hope you 
will participate...and really, this is surely 
one of our favorite topics here at HPfGU.

This message might seem slightly unusual, but 
it seems to be a great opportunity to publicise 
our group and we are sure that many of our 
members will welcome the chance to be involved.

Thank you very much! We now return you to 
the regularly scheduled programming of 
merrily meandering discussion threads.

:) Penapart Elf
for the List Admin Team

REMINDER: discussion of the above that does 
not involve canon should as always take place 
only on OTC 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter).




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 13:56:48 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 13:56:48 -0000
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9kka6+irjv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9kmb0+k1i9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
<june.diamanti at b...> wrote:

(snip June's other points)
> > (Krissy wrote in reply to Carolyn):
> >  Why in the world would it worry you that the author of the series
> > that we all adore so much is happy with the movie? She is the one 
> with the insight into the characters. She knows their motivations, 
what they feel, and what makes them tick. She knows how the series is 
> going to end, and she has a good idea of how to accomplish it in 
her next two books. 
> > 
> > If she is happy with the movie, I think it's silly and selfish of
> > people to nit-pick the hardwork that many people have put into 
> trying to  visually create the world of Harry Potter. Just because 
it isn't what -you- envisioned doesn't mean that it's wrong. 
> 
(June's reply)
> That's fine, except I don't fully buy that she is totally 
satisfied.  
> And I still believe the fans have some strong entitlement here. The 
> book would not have been filmed to this budget, or level of 
> production value if it had not been a best seller.  So to some 
> extent, it is the fans that bought the movie. It would not have 
been made unless it was a major seller. 
> 

Carolyn:
June, thankyou for your robust comments, which I agree with in their 
entirety. I just wanted to straighten out the attribution in the last 
part of your post (see above). The final remarks you were responding 
to were Krissy's, definitely not mine!

It adds to my gloom if Jo went along with this movie just because it 
will make her more money as Tim suggested earlier; I really hope not. 
I can understand your point that she might find it difficult to be 
seen to argue with WB in public. OTOH, she has been constantly public 
in her approval of Kloves, and her enjoyment in working with him, 
which she didn't have to be unless she meant it. Possibly the 
relationship has got too cosy.

On the earlier two movies, I thought that the books were much more 
simplistic in style compared to the later ones, so it was vaguely 
understandable that the resulting movies looked like they did 
(although someone imaginative could have done so much better). 

But for POA, a pivotal book in many senses, to again be treated in 
such a simplistic way, with all the key exposition, character 
development etc cut out, in favour of Hermione being swung around by 
a tree.. sorry, I exaggerate..but..

IMO, the resulting film would disappear without trace if it had to 
stand on its own merit, and wasn't associated with this famous series.

Carolyn




From diana at slashcity.com  Wed Jun  2 14:23:56 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:23:56 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
References: <c9k73c+l22n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <062f01c448ad$4f2874d0$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

> Carolyn:
>
> As a writer yourself I understand you may have strong views on this,
> but IMO a reader/viewer's interpretation of what they are presented
> with is just as valid as the creator's. The genie is really out of
> the bottle once a work is made public. Authorial intent is
> interesting to know about, but becomes just part of the jigsaw that
> adds up to an ongoing response to a particular work (which can change
> over time).

<nodding>  This is very true.  For example, when I was in high school here
in the US, we read and analyzed in depth all the layers to Hemingway's "The
Old Man and the Sea", how it symbolized so many things, was an allegory
about Jesus, among other things, etc.  And then I read an interview where
Hemingway was asked about the symbolic meaning of the story and he had
shrugged and said, "It's just a story about a man and a fish."  Now, I think
he was being a little disingenuous about that and expect that he was writing
about man vs the elements, but did he mean to put all the other symbolism
into it?  Did Melville or Coleridge intend their stories to be so full of
symbolism and deep layers, or were they just writing rollicking sea stories?
Is that something that we, the reader, have interpreted into the story,
based on our own feelings and lives?  I know that even as a fanfiction
writer, I get emails saying they liked this symbolism or that parallel - a
lot of times I didn't consciously write that and don't see it myself until
it is pointed out, but that doesn't make my readers' opinions and
interpretations any less valid.

Diana W.





From tmarends at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 15:37:10 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 15:37:10 -0000
Subject: What I would like to see
In-Reply-To: <c9kmb0+k1i9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ks76+f46r@eGroups.com>

As much as I enjoy the films, and am looking forward to Friday so I 
can see this current one, the books do tend to reach a reader on a 
more personal level than the films do.  In contrast, LoTR films, by 
being true to the spirit of the 1200+ page novel, really deliver an 
emotional punch.  The main problem with the HP series, IMHO, is that 
we don't know where we're going yet.  We still have two more novels 
to go.  All the films would be much better if they were following the 
emotional core of the book series, but we don't know what the true 
emotional core is until the series is finished.  I think they may 
have started the films too soon.  Now, I like Dan, Emma, Rupert, and 
the rest.  So, what I would like to see... in about 15 years or so, 
is a 7 year TV series, or a complex mini-series (filmed over a 7 year 
period).  Follow the series from beginning to end with the same group 
of actors.  This would allow to follow more closely, not only the 
events in the books, but also the emotional overtone.  Not to 
mention, it'd give us a chance to find out more details than are even 
in the books.  Anyhow... that's what I'd like to see.

Tim




From crussell at arkansas.net  Wed Jun  2 16:12:01 2004
From: crussell at arkansas.net (bugaloo37)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 16:12:01 -0000
Subject: FILM: PoA Review - MINOR SPOILERS
In-Reply-To: <c9g4el+fsv3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ku8h+k01h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> <Snip>
> I think that the only thing saving the Harry/ Hermione ship now is 
>that JKR wasn't necessarily referring to that as the foreshadowing 
>of events. Also, the Ron and Hermione relationship seen in this film 
>is actually not that dissimilar to all the arguing and banter they 
>share in OoP - so perhaps it doesn't foreshadow anything.
> 

If the fate of the H/Hr ship depended on one movie, I might agree 
with you, but since it does not, IMO, I think your claim is a little 
presumptious.  I have not seen the movie, but I have read many 
reviews of it.  Some of the reviews I have read, have stated that the 
R/Hr ship in the movie, is more or less relagated to little more than 
comic relief-which is all well and good, since these characters are 
supposed to be only 13 years old.  However, the relationship of Harry 
and Hermione is shown as being more mature, caring and supportive- a 
friendship that is growing stronger and closer.  Speaking only for 
myself, this H/Hr shipper is glad to know that the H/Hr relationship 
has not been trivialized as the R/Hr ship, according to the reviews I 
have read here and elsewhere, has.  As for the foreshadowing, does 
anyone out there really seriously think that the importance of any 
particular ship is worth foreshadowing?  IMO, there are far more 
serious aspects of the HP series that are far more worthy-such as the 
survival of Harry and the destruction of Voldemort and how it will be 
achieved.  IMO, the media and WB have put a great deal of emphasis on 
the "shipping" aspects of this movie and only give slight attention 
to its deeper signifigance as far as Harry is concerned.  Again, IMO, 
this can be seen as a money making ploy and little else. After all, 
how interested would a 12 year old or younger be in Harry's psyche 
and how its effected with all the new information he gathers in POA?

Bugaloo37






From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 17:25:01 2004
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 17:25:01 -0000
Subject: PoA - Sets New Box Office Record - Biggest Opening Day
Message-ID: <c9l2hd+8c5e@eGroups.com>

The Prisoner of Azkaban opened in 535 locations on Monday and made ?5.03m.

According to the Screen Daily website it had the biggest opening day
and biggest single day takings in the UK. 

Full Story - BBC News-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3770075.stm

Looks like another Billion in the Bank for Warner Brothers.

bboy_mn




From Snarryfan at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 17:12:40 2004
From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 17:12:40 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?POA__reviews,_spoilers_(again+infos_sur_la_version_fran=E7aise)?=
Message-ID: <c9l1q8+qv6o@eGroups.com>

*
*
*
*
*
*
Still the time to go away
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
First, the frenchs infos(about the dub).I'll wrote it in french, if 
you want an english version...



Ils ont gard? le 'arr?tez de vous disputer comme un vieux couple!' 
*grin*

C'est peut-?tre moi, je n'ai pas regard? la version doubl? depuis un 
moment, mais j'ai l'impression qu'ils ont chang? celle qui double 
Hermione. On s'y habitue. Quand Snape/Rogue dit 'Potter', on 
entend 'Pottah'. Et je crois que c'est tout.


Now, what I disliked:

SuperHermione. Or she worked out during the Time-turner using, or 
Harry is lighter that than we thought.

When Draco mocked them near the Shack, Hermione answers and I swear, 
Ron looked *shy*! And he didn't understand that it's Harry under the 
Cloack, no again, Hermione is the Know-it-all.

So, when Snape makes this line, it's nearly suportable to hear Ron 
say: he's right, you know.

Evidently, Kloves didn't seem useful to precise that Sirius tried to 
kill Snape, and that it could explain why he hate him. Nor every 
thing about the Marauder.

I liked :

The scene with the Gryffindors boys, 

the DADA lesson : Lupin for the music, and it's really funny with the 
spider. Snape when he made magically turn the page in Ron's book 
until the famous 394 because he's too slow, and he didn't say 
anything. And he explains! (the name come from...)

Snape protecting the childrens. From the beginning (he make them fall 
when Lupin attack to avoid the claws) to the end (he hold Ron and 
stops Hermione when she try to follow Harry )

"What are you doing?" "trying to save you!" "...Thank you."

Snape wanted warn Harry about Black.

The big, fast, dialogue between Snape/Sirius/Remus. I didn't catch 
every thing, but that:

Remus:"Severus, stop being stupid"
Sirius:" He can't, it's stronger than him!"
Remus:"Sirius!"

A parent trying to stop two kids :D


And I think I found the bit who worried Jo. It can't be Lupin/Lily, 
because the scene is from Kloves, not Cuaron.

But when Snape try to stop Sirius, for two seconds, we have the POV 
of Snape, and it's strange. A bit yellow, and round, like watching 
the scene behind a lense. A bit blurred, too. (Please! not the 
Vampire!Snape theory!)


I think it's all.

Christelle
 





From juli17 at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 18:15:44 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:15:44 -0400
Subject: A&E Reminder
Message-ID: <1E9504F6.3C778AA8.0004E520@aol.com>

This has probably been posted, but I thought I'd post a reminder. A&E is airing two HP-related specials tonight, one about JK Rowling's rise to fame as an author (Biography) at 8pm, and one about the making of POA ("The Magic Touch of Harry Potter") at 9pm. These are the PST times (I'm in California) so check your local listings to verify times in other time zones. 

Julie 




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Wed Jun  2 20:21:26 2004
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 08:21:26 +1200
Subject: Question on the PS Movie DVD
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040603081858.02945020@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

Hi there

Can anyone tell me where I can find the deleted scenes for the PS/SS film 
(I think there are some) on the 2nd disk?  Had a good look at it last 
night, but didn't find anything even though I accessed parts I had missed 
before.

Thanks, Tanya




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun  2 20:40:11 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:40:11 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question on the PS Movie DVD
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.2.20040603081858.02945020@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040602213129.009c51c0@plum.cream.org>

At 21:21 02/06/04 , Tanya Swaine wrote:
>Hi there
>
>Can anyone tell me where I can find the deleted scenes for the PS/SS film
>(I think there are some) on the 2nd disk?  Had a good look at it last
>night, but didn't find anything even though I accessed parts I had missed
>before.

This has been asked (and responded to) several times before. ;-)

It's pretty complicated and you have to go through several hoops to get 
there. Several web sites have published the set of actions you need to 
take, and here's a copy & paste form one of them:

1. On the Opening screen on Disc two, select Diagon Alley (Hedwig)

2. Put the selector on Gringotts, then press down selecting the key, click 
to get to the Gringotts area then select the coins and click.

3. You should be back at the main page for Diagon Alley, go to Ollivander's 
and have fun selecting your wand (which ones you select is irrelevant but 
your *third* choice, whichever it is, will be the "correct" one).

4. Go back to the main screen and select the wand and click, getting to the 
classrooms.

5. Select Transfiguration (the cat), then hit down to select the owls on 
the torch, then hit up to select the H on the shield. Click OK.

6. At Fluffy, select the Flute and click.

7. At the Keys, select the Silver one in the middle with a bent wing (it's 
the only one that is completely over the door in the background).

8. At the Bottles select the round one with the yellow liquid.

9. Select the Red stone in the mirror to get to "your heart's desire". 
You're through to the seven deleted scenes.

Phew! No wonder they changed things for CoS! ;-)




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Wed Jun  2 20:42:48 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:42:48 -0000
Subject: Sister? Yeah, right
Message-ID: <c9le48+m54i@eGroups.com>

Can't believe I'm sticking my nose into something that's absolutely 
none of my business...But you know how Dan recently declared Emma was 
like a sister to him? Well, on danradcliffe.com there are photos from 
the UK premiere (in the uk premiere gallery)of Dan and Emma holding 
hands with their fingers interlaced. Too, too cute. Sister? 
hmhmmmmmmmm.

Feeling like and old gossipy woman now, and can't keep my mouth shut 
all the same...bleach

Sophia




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 20:48:11 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <c9le48+m54i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040602204811.25816.qmail@web80306.mail.yahoo.com>


--- sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:

---------------------------------
Can't believe I'm sticking my nose into something
that's absolutely 
none of my business...But you know how Dan recently
declared Emma was 
like a sister to him? Well, on danradcliffe.com there
are photos from 
the UK premiere (in the uk premiere gallery)of Dan and
Emma holding 
hands with their fingers interlaced. Too, too cute.
Sister? 
hmhmmmmmmmm.

Feeling like and old gossipy woman now, and can't keep
my mouth shut 
all the same...bleach

Sophia

I saw some discussion of that somewhere, I forget
where.  Basically people were saying that the press is
reading too much into it, that they were just holding
hands for a second and everyone is making a big deal
of it.  Me, I think it would be sweet if there was
something between them.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 21:06:07 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 17:06:07 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question on the PS Movie DVD
Message-ID: <149.2ac8add0.2def9b3f@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/2/2004 1:51:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
hp at plum.cream.org writes:

>>It's pretty complicated and you have to go through several hoops to get 
there. Several web sites have published the set of actions you need to 
take, and here's a copy & paste form one of them:

1. On the Opening screen on Disc two, select Diagon Alley (Hedwig)

2. Put the selector on Gringotts, then press down selecting the key, click 
to get to the Gringotts area then select the coins and click.

3. You should be back at the main page for Diagon Alley, go to Ollivander's 
and have fun selecting your wand (which ones you select is irrelevant but 
your *third* choice, whichever it is, will be the "correct" one).

4. Go back to the main screen and select the wand and click, getting to the 
classrooms.

5. Select Transfiguration (the cat), then hit down to select the owls on 
the torch, then hit up to select the H on the shield. Click OK.<<

You can possibly skip those first few steps if you have a computer with a dvd 
player. Just left click (with windows) to bring up the menu, then go to 
"titles" and scroll down to one of the titles in the 70's. That should bring you up 
to somewhere around one of the following steps. (thus skipping the annoying 
diagon alley parts). Or if you want to skip it altogether you can rent the VHS 
and just fast forward to the end. 


>>Phew! No wonder they changed things for CoS! ;-)<<

No kidding! Entertainment Weekly actually named the SS/PS DVD as one of the 
'worst of the year' because of the headache to get to those deleted scenes.I 
guess someone at Warner Brothers got the point.

-Rebecca



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




From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 21:07:23 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 17:07:23 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right
Message-ID: <193.2a59ff94.2def9b8b@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/2/04 1:50:07 PM, gcrumpac at pacbell.net writes:


> I saw some discussion of that somewhere, I forget
> where.? Basically people were saying that the press is
> reading too much into it, that they were just holding
> hands for a second and everyone is making a big deal
> of it.? Me, I think it would be sweet if there was
> something between them.
> 

There's been a lot of discussion about this on the Leaky Cauldron comment 
boards ;-) I take it all with a grain of salt, they are rather young. But I had 
to laugh at the one picture of the after party after the NY premier where Emma 
looks to be holding Dan up as they are dancing <g> I don't think we can attach 
photos to this list, so I can't attach it. It's on one of   the professional 
photo image pages like Rex or IPhoto, I believe. It's quite funny actually ;-) 
He is practically laying on her shoulder and she is holding him up. Either he 
dances strangely or he was really, really tired <g>.
Cindy


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Jun  2 21:16:50 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 17:16:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] What I would like to see
Message-ID: <12b.430726c3.2def9dc2@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/2/2004 9:11:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
tmarends at yahoo.com writes:
>>So, what I would like to see... in about 15 years or so, 
is a 7 year TV series, or a complex mini-series (filmed over a 7 year 
period).  Follow the series from beginning to end with the same group 
of actors. <<

The problem with this is that the production values would be too low. It 
wouldn't have to be a mini-series to be better, it wasn't just length that made 
them cut things from the books (obviously if you look at CoS, there are some 
scenes that are left in that seem less important than those left out, and it 
wouldn't have taken more than a minute for Dumbledore to explain that Snape hated 
James Potter), what made the LOTR films so wonderful is that they had a 
directer and writers that LOVED the books. The Harry Potter movies aren't really put 
together that way, its the studio finding a directer and writer and just sort 
of putting them together and handing them the book. 

What *I* hope happens is that 10 or 20 years from now some kid that grew up 
loving the books will go out and made his own versions of the movies, meaning 
the same directer for all 7 films (as exhausting as that would be), and the 
directer having a hand in the screenwriting (as Peter Jackson did for LOTR). At 
this point the movies haven't been a 'labor of love', but more 'let's make some 
MONEY', which isn't *horrible*, considering that's why most movies are made, 
but it would be nice to see a directer who sought out the studio asking to 
make the movies, rather than the other way around. (and its interesting to think 
there might be some 12-year-old out there who will grow up to make beautfiul 
versions of the books).

-Rebecca
PS. By the way, I personally think that in order to make a good film out of a 
good book things HAVE to be changed, that's part of why the first two movies 
seemed sort of awkward in places, they were *too* faithful. I haven't seen PoA 
yet, but the interviews with Cuaron where he talks about changing more than 
Columbus did with the previous two made me more excitied for it. But I'll see 
what I think come Friday...


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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Wed Jun  2 23:46:04 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 23:46:04 -0000
Subject: Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <193.2a59ff94.2def9b8b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9lors+9p5l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> There's been a lot of discussion about this on the Leaky Cauldron 
comment 
> boards ;-) I take it all with a grain of salt, they are rather 
young. But I had 
> to laugh at the one picture of the after party after the NY premier 
where Emma 
> looks to be holding Dan up as they are dancing <g> I don't think we 
can attach 
> photos to this list, so I can't attach it. It's on one of   the 
professional 
> photo image pages like Rex or IPhoto, I believe. It's quite funny 
actually ;-) 
> He is practically laying on her shoulder and she is holding him up. 
Either he 
> dances strangely or he was really, really tired <g>.
> Cindy
> 

I have often wonder what these comment boards are as I never can see 
them and TLC and Mugglenet are sites I peek at daily. So do you have 
the link to the photo pages. I would like to see it. I looked at 
pictures on TLC, danradcliffe.com and mugglenet and didn't see this 
one. There are some really cute ones of Dan and Emma and Rupert too 
on danradcliffe.com. I saw a really cute one from a link off 
mugglenet of Emma while she is signing autographs. I think a fan must 
of said something funny because she is laughing but just looks so 
cute. Would not blame her or Dan if they liked the other as more than 
sister-brother. Not to join the gossip here but - that was how my 
hubby and I started - just really good friends, "he is kind of like a 
brother to me", nearly 21 years later... Hmmm. 

As for Rupert he is nice looking young man too but I don't really 
like his new hairstyle. Reminds me too much of the 70s. Guess that's 
showing my age but what the hey. I didn't really like the style back 
then either. Some men look nice with long hair but Rupert, just oh I 
don't know how to put it. He is still a nice looking young man but 
the style is too girlie.

Theresa




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 23:51:28 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 16:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <c9lors+9p5l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040602235128.53556.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Theresa <anmsmom333 at cox.net> wrote:

I have often wonder what these comment boards are as I
never can see 
them and TLC and Mugglenet are sites I peek at daily.
So do you have 
the link to the photo pages. I would like to see it. I
looked at 
pictures on TLC, danradcliffe.com and mugglenet and
didn't see this 
one. There are some really cute ones of Dan and Emma
and Rupert too 
on danradcliffe.com. I saw a really cute one from a
link off 
mugglenet of Emma while she is signing autographs. I
think a fan must 
of said something funny because she is laughing but
just looks so 
cute. Would not blame her or Dan if they liked the
other as more than 
sister-brother. Not to join the gossip here but - that
was how my 
hubby and I started - just really good friends, "he is
kind of like a 
brother to me", nearly 21 years later... Hmmm. 

As for Rupert he is nice looking young man too but I
don't really 
like his new hairstyle. Reminds me too much of the
70s. Guess that's 
showing my age but what the hey. I didn't really like
the style back 
then either. Some men look nice with long hair but
Rupert, just oh I 
don't know how to put it. He is still a nice looking
young man but 
the style is too girlie.

Theresa

Hee!  I love Rupert's new look -- all my college
boyfriends had long hair, so I guess it's just my
personal standard.  Actually I saw a poll on some site
and people are about 50/50 on whether they love it or
hate it.  Must be a Weasley thing -- the Phelps twins'
hair has grown quite a lot, too.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 00:32:26 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 20:32:26 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sister? Yeah, right
Message-ID: <145.2b0e8cdf.2defcb9a@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/2/04 4:47:00 PM, anmsmom333 at cox.net writes:


> I have often wonder what these comment boards are as I never can see
> them and TLC and Mugglenet are sites I peek at daily.
> 

On The Leaky Cauldron, at the bottom of each news item on   the main page is 
a link to Comments. Just click on that and a pop up appears that has the 
comments in it. Scroll to the bottom of the pop up and you can add your own comment 
;-)

As for the photo I described, hmm, I don't recall exactly where it is.   The 
Rex Photo page has tons of photos of both premieres, but I can't recall if it 
was on there.
http://www.rexfeatures.com/
I guess I can upload the photo to the files section of this list ;-)
There are other party shots as well - the ones of Alan Rickman dancing were 
quite popular over on the Leaky boards <g>
With all the   press recently, it's hard to keep up with everything that is 
coming out. Just today on danradcliffe.com and leaky, there is a link to an 
interview Dan did with a magazine called NME - a music mag, I believe. And boy do 
I feel old! The interview is much different than most he gives. It talks all 
about the guitar music he likes and at one point, he says that he hates pop 
music and even believes that shops that sell it should be fined ;-) 
Gotta love that teenage rebellion ;-)
It's a little jarring to hear him talk about Sid Vicious and heroin 
addiction, etc. ;-)
There are also some nice shots of him with a guitar - goodness, they are 
growing up so fast and are making me feel so old!
Back to the pic - I checked the rules for the list and nothing is said about 
attachments or uploading pictures to the files - if there is no rule against 
it, I can upload this one to the photo section.
Cindy


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun  3 00:35:33 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 01:35:33 +0100
Subject: PoA Shipping (was ... Review - MINOR SPOILERS)
In-Reply-To: <c9ku8h+k01h@eGroups.com>
References: <c9g4el+fsv3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040603000612.00995700@plum.cream.org>

At 17:12 02/06/04 , bugaloo37 wrote:

>If the fate of the H/Hr ship depended on one movie, I might agree
>with you, but since it does not, IMO, I think your claim is a little
>presumptious.

The claim wasn't mine, but I'll defend it. I don't normally participate in 
shipping debates because, well, for one thing I'm not really that 
interested (most blokes aren't really into it) and secondly, in the books, 
there are no real indications one way or the other with regard to R/Hr or 
H/Hr (or, at the very least, conflicting signals).

Ships evolve if they are to be realistic. In that sense, one HP book or 
movie certainly isn't enough to indicate one way or another how things are 
going to turn out in the end, which is what we're talking about. The 
movies, on the other hand, and certainly CoS to a small extent, and PoA 
most definitely, aren't hedging their bets at all.

>I have not seen the movie, but I have read many reviews of it.  Some of 
>the reviews I have read, have stated that the R/Hr ship in the movie, is 
>more or less relagated to little more than comic relief-which is all well 
>and good, since these characters are supposed to be only 13 years old.

Not strictly true. The chemistry between the characters (note, I'm not 
talking about the actors!) is not just comic relief at all. The chemistry 
usually *shows* itself in comic ways, but we are clearly meant to see that 
chemistry.

>However, the relationship of Harry and Hermione is shown as being more 
>mature, caring and supportive- a friendship that is growing stronger and 
>closer.

Exactly. The H/Hr (and Hr/H even more so) relationship throughout all three 
movies has been on a straight line showing a deepening friendship, respect 
and trust. Nothing more. The same is NOT true of Hermione and Ron (or 
vice-versa). Hermione and Ron are playful towards and about each other in a 
way that Harmione and Harry are not.

>Speaking only for myself, this H/Hr shipper is glad to know that the H/Hr 
>relationship has not been trivialized as the R/Hr ship, according to the 
>reviews I
>have read here and elsewhere, has.

Neither relationship has been "trivialised". Both relationships are 
*different*, based on a different kind of chemistry between the characters, 
on a different level.

>As for the foreshadowing, does anyone out there really seriously think 
>that the importance of any particular ship is worth foreshadowing?

As I said above, "foreshadowing" isn't a helpful way to look at it. What is 
not only important, but actually a necessity, is to show a realistic 
"evolution". And I for one see the movies showing distinct evolutionary 
paths for these relationships.

>IMO, the media and WB have put a great deal of emphasis on the "shipping" 
>aspects of this movie and only give slight attention to its deeper 
>signifigance as far as Harry is concerned.

The reason the media, etc, have put a great deal of emphasis on this 
subject is because the FANS do! And the media do it to the actors as well 
as the characters. Personally, every time an interviewer asks members of 
the cast if they have girl/boyfriends, I want the reply to be "none of your 
business".

>Again, IMO, this can be seen as a money making ploy and little else. After 
>all,
>how interested would a 12 year old or younger be in Harry's psyche and how 
>its effected with all the new information he gathers in POA?

Most (older) teenagers, never mind 12 year-olds,  aren't really interested 
in analysing that aspect. They are, however, interested in the characters' 
romantic attachments - look at any TV teenage soap opera to see how much 
time is devoted to psychological analysis and how much to romantic 
inter-relationships. So don't blame the media, blame the shallowness of the 
target audience.

As for the movie-makers, they have to satisfy both those with an interest 
in "deeper" aspects of the running plotlines, AS WELL as the romantic 
stuff, which is an integral part of being a teenager. They would be 
irresponsible if they did NOT address this aspect.




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Thu Jun  3 00:52:21 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 19:52:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sister? Yeah, right
References: <20040602235128.53556.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c44905$07a75f10$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>


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


  Hee!  I love Rupert's new look -- all my college
  boyfriends had long hair, so I guess it's just my
  personal standard.  Actually I saw a poll on some site
  and people are about 50/50 on whether they love it or
  hate it.  Must be a Weasley thing -- the Phelps twins'
  hair has grown quite a lot, too.>>


  And the guy who plays Percy too... Chris Rankin,
  isn't that his name?  His hair was pretty long
  too (and rather curly also). Rupert's hair doesn't
  bother me too much.  I did not like it at the US
  premiere.  It looked too girly, like someone curled
  it around his eyes, but he looked fine at the UK
  premiere and I like it in the movie too. JMO.
  Kimberly



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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 00:53:22 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:53:22 -0000
Subject: Sleepless in Sweden
Message-ID: <c9lsq2+8otg@eGroups.com>

OK, so it's 2.30 a.m. here in Gothenburg (the sky is already 
brightening a little this far north)and I can't sleep. Instead of 
doing something soothing, I'm at my computer getting excited about 
clips from the movie which I have yet to see as it does not premiere 
here until next week, June 9th. So can I just say that of all the 
clips I've seen so far, my favorite is by far and away the one where 
Snape catches Harry with the Marauder's map. (I've commented on this 
before, but bear with me, I have no other forum for expressing my 
delight...)I like it so much I can barely sit still, as though 
dancing around would be more appropriate, or perhaps howling my 
approval. I love the way the map looks and I think the footprints are 
a clever twist well suited for the screen (rather than the labelled 
dots of canon, although that could have been made to work too). I 
love how Harry's footprints waver and hesitate as he twists around to 
catch a glimpse of Peter or watch for Snape. I love how Rickman takes 
Snapes loathing to new heights and most of all, I love Harry's 
completely useless attempt at sounding offhand in declaring the map 
a "spare bit oc parchment" and the way he c-r-i-n-g-e-s at having to 
read the Marauder insult and then changes tack halfway through and 
delivers it as though from himself with deifance scantily masked as 
you-asked-for-it innocence. Also, I love the way Snape 
anunciates "little" in  "Why, you insolent little..." (Wouldn't you 
love to know what the next word would have been?)It passes quickly, 
but so much happens on and beneath the surface in a short space of 
time and the exchange in it's briefness is so real and satifying and 
well played. Ahhhhhhhhhhh.....(goes into transports of delight) It 
bodes so well to me...

BTW, have you all seen the multitude of reveiws up at 
www.rottentomatoes.com I'm as pleased to read positive reviews of the 
movie as though someone was complimenting my boyfriend (if I had one)
Call me nuts, I'm soooo enjoying these weeks leading up to the 
premiere. Better get it while I can.

Sophia






From twinslove at mindspring.com  Thu Jun  3 00:55:37 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 19:55:37 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right
References: <193.2a59ff94.2def9b8b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002201c44905$7c392340$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>


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

  > 

  There's been a lot of discussion about this on the Leaky Cauldron comment 
  boards ;-) I take it all with a grain of salt, they are rather young. But I had 
  to laugh at the one picture of the after party after the NY premier where Emma 
  looks to be holding Dan up as they are dancing <g> I don't think we can attach 
  photos to this list, so I can't attach it. It's on one of   the professional 
  photo image pages like Rex or IPhoto, I believe. It's quite funny actually ;-) 
  He is practically laying on her shoulder and she is holding him up. Either he 
  dances strangely or he was really, really tired <g>.
  Cindy>>

  Cindy, I'd like to see the picture.  You can't attach to the list, but I think you can upload to a file within yahoogroups
  HPFGU-Movie or can you either send it to me privately or the link to the list?  I am just curious. 
  Thanks,
  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 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 hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun  3 01:22:52 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 02:22:52 +0100
Subject: PoA Movie: A few more observations (Minor SPOILERS)
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040602201937.00980f00@plum.cream.org>

Instead of spoiler space, a bit of seemingly OT (OK, "seemingly" is REALLY 
tenuous) :-) waffle...

When I last posted on Monday evening, I said I was planning to see the 
movie again yesterday. As it happens, I had a heavy movie day, but no HP. I 
saw Troy, which was another stupendously-directed movie based on classic 
piece of writing (hey, you don't get more classic than Homer!) which was 
dreadfully adapted. (OK, that's a really tenuous connection to PoA, but a 
better connection to the Potterverse is that Menelaus was played by Brendan 
Gleeson, soon to become  our very own Mad Eye Moody - bloody brilliant 
choice, BTW!)

I cleansed my palate with Almodovar's latest, La Mala Educaci?n ("Bad 
Education"), a story with at least two timelines, all about school friends 
surrounded by blokes wearing robes... The main star of this film is one 
Gael Garc?a Bernal, who was one of the stars of... Y tu Mama Tambien, which 
as we all know was the previous work of one Alfonso Cuaron. So on my return 
home I had to watch the DVD of that...

Today I went to see Mr Cuaron's latest oeuvre, which is what we're here to 
talk about (right now PS/SS is running on the DVD at the other side of the 
room and I'm shuddering)... And thus I have gone full circle. ;-) Oh, and 
I've also leafed through my copy of PoA and listened to the soundtrack (in 
fact, I did both at the same time), so I'm now a bit clearer on a few details.

Some of these comments are stuff I wanted to say on Monday but didn't get 
around to, and some of them are replies to comments made by others without 
quoting the originals. These comments are more rambling than my previous 
offering, although I'm going to steer clear of any obvious spoilers.

Having watched Y Tu Mama Tambien again last night, the smutty part of my 
brain couldn't shake the feeling that Cuaron was trying to tell us 
something with the opening sequence of PoA: a teenage boy practicing his - 
ahem - "wandwork" under the bedclothes at night... :-) (those who've seen 
the movie will know that the scene doesn't play exactly as per the book)

I'm now 98% certain (it was about 50% on Monday; I won't be able to be any 
more certain until I have a DVD and can watch in slo-mo) that the show 
Dudley is watching on TV in the Dursleys' living room is "The Generation Game".

If I'm right, someone on the production team is being very, very clever by 
suggesting it to Cuaron (he wouldn't know the show from Adam). The 
reference is, of course, completely lost on all non-Brits and the title of 
the show - the only element of any significance - can have meaning only to 
those who know the book.

(For more about this show, see e.g. 
http://www.ukgameshows.com/atoz/programmes/g/generation_game/ - when *did* 
Jim Davidson host the show? - it was a fairly clear shot of his mug that 
first got me onto this.)

Of course, it's a pity that as they have a TV (in fact, multiple TVs) on 
during the scene, they didn't follow the book more closely and have the 
news on (with or without sound) the news report about Sirius's escape. Yet 
another lost opportunity.

Several people have pointed out as a continuity error the fact that Harry's 
scar appears over his left (rather than right) eyebrow during the Boggart 
DADA class. I was 90% sure of this on Monday, but now it's 100% (I paid 
attention while watching the movie today) - sorry would-be eagle-eyes, 
there's nothing wrong with the shot or makeup - the shot is a reflection in 
the wardrobe mirror. True, this is complicated a little by the fact that 
the camera then appears to go "through" the mirror and the image loses the 
imperfections of the sides of the antique mirror, but technically it 
remains a mirror image.

A few comments on Super!Hermione: I think I'm going to have to defend her 
just a *little*. Because of the insertion of the Firebolt stuff at the end 
rather than in the middle, we lose the book's "insufferable Hermione" 
phase, which whilst it could have acted as a counterweight to "know-it-all 
Hermione", would have given her even more of a function in the movie, and 
made her out to be even more insufferable. Yes, Hermione had a significant 
part to play in the denouement, but then she had to, as she was the one in 
possession of the Time-Turner. As for her breaking of the "rules" of the 
Time-Turner, I didn't see that as a problem. The injunction had been (not 
only in the movie, but in the book as well) not to be SEEN. There was no 
specific injunction against interacting with the past - in any case, this 
would be completely pointless. So she throws the stones and throws a 
wolf-call - big deal. In a way, what she's doing, as the "experienced" 
Time-Turner user, is indicating to Harry that it's possible to help their 
past selves, which is ultimately what he has to do with the Patronus.

Some have complained of a change in attitude in her departure from 
Trelawney's class. I must disagree. Yes, Trelawney is just a little more 
eloquent here than she is in the book, and I loved her last words to 
Hermione, accusing her not of being "mundane" but of having a "heart that 
is as dried as the pages of the books to which you so desperately cleave" 
is, from her perspective, true. The way I read the scene in the book, 
Hermione is exasperated and insulted. Trelawney's new lines insult not only 
her, but the books to which she *does* cleave. Hermione's motives for 
leaving remain the same.

Indeed, I see PoA!Hermione very much in the line already established: she's 
good with the books, but as herself admits by implication towards the end 
of PS/SS, there's more to skill as a great wizard (and great person) than 
books and study - she is basically insecure and needs the certainly that 
books and those in  authority give her to remain stable. Hence also her 
unwillingness to disparage teachers regardless of her liking for them as 
people. Trelawney, however, has gone a step too far by questioning the 
validity of books and intellectual prowess.

In a way, Trelawney (and what she stands for) is an anti-Hermione: 
intuition -v- intellect, skill -v- learning, etc. Hermione is willing to 
admit to her preference, but she is not willing to have it disregarded 
completely.

There have been complaints about the messy uniforms in this movie (yes, 
this *is* a Hermione point). The messy uniforms are quite subtle, actually. 
In Snape's class (and Trelawney's first class as well), the kids are 
properly dressed, although not every top shirt button is done up. For 
Hagrid's lesson, however, they let themselves go - I actually liked this 
subtle hint at the pupils' attitutes towards their teachers. I also liked 
the fact that, just as in all schools I've seen, while pupils have to wear 
the same uniform, they underline their individuality by each tying their 
tie in some original fashion (regardless of the tidiness or otherwise of 
the rest of their attire). I found this a refreshing change from 
Columbus's  lines of Hogwarts pupils lines up with perfectly (and 
identical) straight ties, with the exception of Ron, who almost always had 
*something* wrong with his shirt or cloak.

What I *do* object to, though, is that Hermione has her shirt-tails fully 
out of her skirt for a lesson. I just don't see that in Hermione's 
character, regardless of the teacher.

this post is getting long enough, so I'll end with a reflection on what I 
would have done with the script in a couple of instances. I've spent a bit 
of time thinking about the list of (IMO) important stuff left out of the 
movie which I posted, and I've come to the realisation that most of these 
could have been fixed very simply (and perhaps even more dramatically than 
in the book), and this makes me very angry indeed. If I could come up with 
the following scenario(s), then the very highly-paid Kloves & Co certainly 
should have done.

1. Identification of James & Co as "Messrs MWPP" and of the stag Patronus 
as James.

a) When Sirius tells Ron that Scabbers is Peter, one extra line of 
dialogue: "You called that rat 'Scabbers'? Well, we knew him as 'Wormtail'" 
(rest of dialogue as per screenplay, perhaps with all references to 'Peter' 
being replaced with 'Wormtail' - also foreshadowing GoF).
b) When they're in the tunnel and Sirius is telling Harry that "I could 
live with the tail..." he could finish off with something like "... but I 
don't know if I'd have liked to be known as 'Padfoot' for the rest of my 
days" (a slight foreshadowing/mirroring of GoF and OotP).
c) When Harry has his final chat with Lupin and has the first sight of the 
names on the map since finding out Sirius's and Peter's aliases and Lupin's 
"condition", Harry comes to the realisation *himself* of who the authors of 
the map are, with dialogue along the lines of "Of course! Wormtail... 
Padfoot.... You're Moony! My Dad was Prongs! He transformed into a stag! My 
Patronus....! so *that's* how you knew how to operate the Map - You 
co-wrote it!" - just to make sure even the youngest members of the audience 
have got the message, but without bashing them on the head with it (the 
book is just a bit *too* heavy with this info).

Were those three extra lines added to the script, I would have been much 
happier about this movie. Whilst I'm not a huge Snape-fan, I do understand 
his importance to the overall plot but, again, one extra line from him when 
he faces Sirius would have saved the day, and established that they were in 
the same year. As has been said, the quartet of actors don't in any way 
appear to be the same age and this fact NEEDED to be stated in the script. 
I could have lived without specific mention of the Prank, but something 
like "you and your friends insulted me too many times when we together in 
class. Revenge is sweet", would have been sufficient for me. Especially 
when delivered by Rickman.

And the same goes for the other issues I raised. One, or at most two, lines 
would have been sufficient to establish each of the relevant facts and 
background.

I'm prepared to sacrifice the entirety of Snape's outburst in the 
Infirmary, but I would have expected just a little more in the Shrieking 
Shack. As I've said several times over the last year or so since casting 
was confirmed, I've been looking forward to Rickman and Oldman chewing the 
scenery from around each other. This was a wonderful opportunity, and now 
it's lost. I just hope there's more in the Deleted Scenes on the DVD when 
it eventually surfaces...

I had planned to say a lot more, but I've got carried away (as usual) and 
hope to have more to say tomorrow (if anyone wants to hear it). 



From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun  3 01:39:36 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 02:39:36 +0100
Subject: The Map in PoA (was :Sleepless in Sweden)
In-Reply-To: <c9lsq2+8otg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040603023015.00986db0@plum.cream.org>

Sorry for the short post. Should make up for the long one I just sent. :-)

At 01:53 03/06/04 , sophiamcl wrote:

<snip>

>I love the way the map looks and I think the footprints are
>a clever twist well suited for the screen (rather than the labelled
>dots of canon, although that could have been made to work too).

<snipperama>

If you like the footprints, I suggest you stay and watch the end credits. 
Apart from having a chance to hear the wonderful music again, the credits 
are done as the Map, and you get to see a lot more of it, including a set 
of footprints pointing your gaze in the right direction (you have to watch 
beyond the main acting credits, with just one or two names per screen). 
There's a wonderful moment where the shoe-footprints become naked feet and 
gradually change into a dog's paws. :)

And to repeat what Nick said, I say to you and everyone else, stay until 
the very end - while there's no extra clip tagged on, the credits end in a 
more than appropriate manner... (though I don't know how many people will 
have the patience to sit it out - it is a LONG list!).




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 01:54:55 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 21:54:55 EDT
Subject: Pictures
Message-ID: <53.d6f1712.2defdeef@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/2/04 6:27:42 PM, twinslove at mindspring.com writes:


> ? Cindy, I'd like to see the picture.? You can't attach to the list, but I 
> think you can upload to a file within yahoogroups
> ? HPFGU-Movie or can you either send it to me privately or the link to the 
> list?? I am just curious.
> 

Well, I went to the group home page and I don't think members are allowed to 
create albums or add photos ;-) I can't seem to find the 'add photo' or 
'create album' link. This is strange - I've done it before on other lists.
Well, if anyone can point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it.
I was going to create an album for POA premier pics.
Cindy


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Thu Jun  3 02:10:00 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 21:10:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right
References: <c9le48+m54i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c4490f$e303f140$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sophiamcl 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 3:42 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right


  Can't believe I'm sticking my nose into something that's absolutely 
  none of my business...But you know how Dan recently declared Emma was 
  like a sister to him? Well, on danradcliffe.com there are photos from 
  the UK premiere (in the uk premiere gallery)of Dan and Emma holding 
  hands with their fingers interlaced. Too, too cute. Sister? 
  hmhmmmmmmmm.>>

  I saw those pictures the night after the UK premiere, and I thought
  either the photographer really liked them or there is more to it than
  Dan and Emma are letting on.  And truth be told, they are teenagers
  who can be friends one minute and dating the next minute. It was
  cute on Regis and Kelly... he really blushed when Kelly asked him
  about him and Emma, and even then he swore they were just friends...
  "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK premiere.
  I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-)  

  Kimberly

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




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Thu Jun  3 02:31:12 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:31:12 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah, right
References: <c9le48+m54i@eGroups.com> <002f01c4490f$e303f140$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <001f01c44912$d6bdf9f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>



>
>   I saw those pictures the night after the UK premiere, and I thought
>   either the photographer really liked them or there is more to it than
>   Dan and Emma are letting on.  And truth be told, they are teenagers
>   who can be friends one minute and dating the next minute. It was
>   cute on Regis and Kelly... he really blushed when Kelly asked him
>   about him and Emma, and even then he swore they were just friends...
>   "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK premiere.
>   I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-)
>
>   Kimberly


What I find interesting is that there is a parallel here between these
pictures and what Rits Skeeter does to H/Hr in GoF.  The media are going to
be hanging on to this Dan/Emma idea and look very closely at them any time
they appear in public.  In a video I saw of the premier, the cameraman
zoomed in to a close up of their hands.  Nothing subtle there.

I just hope someone advises Dan and Emma to keep there hands to themselves
when the press is around, if they aren't together, or want people to think
they aren't.

Joj





From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 03:22:49 2004
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:22:49 -0000
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9kmb0+k1i9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9m5i9+k3pt@eGroups.com>

Just to note that we are having a lively discussion of the movie on 
Harry Potter for Grownups over 40...beware, however, that it's a 
bunch of old timers, who object to referring to Ms. Rowlings as "Jo", 
since we don't know her personally.

HPFGUover40 at yahoogroups.com




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun  3 03:36:21 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 20:36:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sleepless in Sweden
In-Reply-To: <c9lsq2+8otg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040603033621.78770.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>

Sophia, I forget, are you American or Canadian or British?  You certainly sound like a native English speaker.
 
I agree, I am enjoying these days of anticipation!  If it's any consolation, even though I am in the USA, I am not seeing POA until June 8 (I've got a "date" with my 3-year-old son, wanting to avoid the crowds and so avoid opening day).  Meanwhile my husband is growing quite tired of hearing every night that we've got to watch Entertainment Tonight or A&E special or some HP related something!
 
Gretchen


sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:

OK, so it's 2.30 a.m. here in Gothenburg (the sky is already 
brightening a little this far north)and I can't sleep. 


Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/

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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun  3 03:50:12 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 20:50:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9m5i9+k3pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040603035012.1965.qmail@web80303.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey, thanks for the info!  I'm an ancient broad and probably on too many mailgroups already (between nursing mommies and Harry Potter, I get probably 200 e-mails a day) but count me in.  thanks
 
Gretchen C.
Ancient HP fan born in 1960

susanmcgee48176 <Schlobin1 at aol.com> wrote:
Just to note that we are having a lively discussion of the movie on 
Harry Potter for Grownups over 40...beware, however, that it's a 
bunch of old timers, who object to referring to Ms. Rowlings as "Jo", 
since we don't know her personally.

HPFGUover40 at yahoogroups.com

Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/

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




From SHENmagic at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 05:58:13 2004
From: SHENmagic at aol.com (SHENmagic at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 01:58:13 EDT
Subject: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
Message-ID: <82.d76b9a8.2df017f5@aol.com>


Re: POA - Movie Review - Does Contain Spoilers
junediamanti" <june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk writes: 
<snip>

> For me, and a good many other fans, the backstory issue of MWPP and
> Snape is a central subplot of the book and series.? The character of
> Severus Snape and his behaviour in certain episodes of the book is
> also pivotal and for a good many fans may well be the reason why they
> love this particular book more than any of the others.
> <snip>? There is however, for me, a bloody huge gap
> between what the movie delivered and my expectations of it.
> 
> S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
June, I agree 100%. I was heartbroken.   The backstory of MWPP and James' 
Animagus being a stag, are so central and stirring and contributed so much to the 
roller coaster of POA that it is my favorite of the books and left way too 
big a gap, way   too crucial to leave out. Not once did Harry question how Remus 
knew it was a Map, knew how to work it. and especially in Harry's last scene 
with Remus,   perfect opening for Moony to reveal the MWPP to Harry.   In fact 
there were several moments when I thought he was about to.

I hated the entrance to the Gryffindor common rooms being on the end of the 
staircase, instead of in a corridor.

And there were two very jarring moments:   Hermione saying "she'd forgetten a 
were wolf would be running right at them (tho it was brilliant of her to 
mimic a werewolf cry, especially as it was mentioned earler that   that would 
distract a werewolf--not that that was any part of any werewolf lore I'm familiar 
with). The worst jar was that awful (and totally unnecessary) move of 
Dumbledore thumping not once, but twice on Ron's injured leg!!


There was much I did love --Harry's first flight on Buckbeak was an especial 
delight, as was Buckbeak himself. All of Sirius' scenes with Harry, especially 
his farewell. The werewolf was horrifying.   There were lots of lovely 
details in the background that are worth a second, and third viewing. All of Remus' 
scenes with Harry were wonderful though too short, I felt. Except the first 
Boggart one--why did Remus wait so long to jump in front of Harry and stop the 
Boggart before it became a Dementor?

This was a far superior movie to the other two--except in plot unfoldment. 
Too many gaps and leaps. Many of my clients are dyslexic- some haven't read the 
books, but will see the movie. Feels like anyone who hasn't read the books 
will come up short.   On the whole, mixed reaction, much to delight in, much to 
mourn.
Ayleyaell
SHENmagic


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




From SHENmagic at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 06:05:49 2004
From: SHENmagic at aol.com (SHENmagic at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 02:05:49 EDT
Subject: POA-Movie Review-DOES contain SPOILERS (More)
Message-ID: <e6.5062b9a2.2df019bd@aol.com>


Carolyn writes:


> But for POA, a pivotal book in many senses, to again be treated in
> such a simplistic way, with all the key exposition, character
> development etc cut out, in favour of Hermione being swung around by
> a tree.. sorry, I exaggerate..but..
> 
Thanks Carolyn, I'd forgotten that! Hermione lifting Harry up by one Arm for 
several revolutions of the tree which was adroit enough to squash a bird on 
the wing. Then both of them, conveniently deposited into the small opening--no 
that didn't work for me at all. How much trouble would it have been to have (a 
marvelously cast) Crookshanks press the knot?
Ayleyaell
SHENmagic
> 
> 



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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 07:13:03 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 07:13:03 -0000
Subject: Sleepless in Sweden
In-Reply-To: <20040603033621.78770.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9mj1v+3vok@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Gretchen Crumpacker 
<gcrumpac at p...> wrote:
> Sophia, I forget, are you American or Canadian or British?  You 
certainly sound like a native English speaker.

OH, thankyou! I'm Swedish actually, born and bred. However, I 
spent five years of my life in Provo, Utah studying and working, 
so English doesn't feel much like a foreign language anymore. 
Besides, although I did not grow up around my father, he is 
American, so that was always an extra incentive for me start 
learning the language early on. 

I admire your self-discipline. I don't think I could wait if the movie 
was out, although I managed to hold off until an evening 
showing on the release day even though there was one at 9a.m.

Sophia




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Jun  3 11:43:33 2004
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:43:33 -0000
Subject: Help with A & E show
Message-ID: <c9n2t5+ebg7@eGroups.com>

Hi,
Does anyone know if A&E will be showing the 2 specials about Harry 
Potter again?  My VCR let me down!
Potioncat




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 12:37:30 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 12:37:30 -0000
Subject: webclips vs. movie
Message-ID: <c9n62a+48jv@eGroups.com>

Here is a question for someone who has both seen the movie and is 
familiar with the PoA movie-clips available on fandango.com and 
movies.yahoo.com 

Is the hippogriff-clip and the marauder's map-clip edited at all, or 
do the scenes occur just like that in the movie? They both give me a 
distinct sense that there are a couple of lines missing in the middle 
of them. For instance, it seems to me Snape will say something more 
between the ominous "Potter" and asking about the map. Also, I get 
the impression something happens between Harry being volunteered to 
approach the hippogriff and his actually petting its beak that is not 
shown in the clip, but will (hopefully) be in the movie. (Does Harry 
get to bow to Buckbeak? I would love that.)Anyone?

Sophia






From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Jun  3 13:05:15 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:05:15 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister?  Yeah right
Message-ID: <1ed.223c66d5.2df07c0b@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/3/2004 6:25:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
  Can't believe I'm sticking my nose into something that's absolutely 
  none of my business...But you know how Dan recently declared Emma was 
  like a sister to him? Well, on danradcliffe.com there are photos from 
  the UK premiere (in the uk premiere gallery)of Dan and Emma holding 
  hands with their fingers interlaced. Too, too cute. Sister? 
  hmhmmmmmmmm.>>

  I saw those pictures the night after the UK premiere, and I thought
  either the photographer really liked them or there is more to it than
  Dan and Emma are letting on.  And truth be told, they are teenagers
  who can be friends one minute and dating the next minute. It was
  cute on Regis and Kelly... he really blushed when Kelly asked him
  about him and Emma, and even then he swore they were just friends...
  "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK premiere.
  I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-)  

  Kimberly


Thanks for pointing out those pics!  Too cute!  And there are several where 
they're looking at each other in a not-really-sibling fashion, heehee.  Very 
cute.  


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  Thu Jun  3 13:06:46 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:06:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA Preview -- contains spoilers
Message-ID: <1df.222cae2a.2df07c66@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/3/2004 6:25:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
Gretchen C.
Ancient HP fan born in 1960
Gotcha beat by ten years, sweetie!!  heehee  I didn't know there was a HP4GU 
over 40 -- I'll have to check that one out!



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


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




From CoyotesChild at charter.net  Thu Jun  3 13:08:07 2004
From: CoyotesChild at charter.net (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 08:08:07 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Help with A & E show
In-Reply-To: <c9n2t5+ebg7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000101c4496b$d41c76a0$6401a8c0@Einstein>

>Hi,
>Does anyone know if A&E will be showing the 2 specials about Harry 
>Potter again?  My VCR let me down!
>Potioncat

Iggy here:

A&E usually shows some of the bios from the week over the weekend.  You
can check their listings for then.  (Fortunately, I have a DVR, and
managed to snag both of them.)

Iggy McSnurd







From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun  3 13:22:45 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 14:22:45 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] webclips vs. movie
In-Reply-To: <c9n62a+48jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040603141434.009c0160@plum.cream.org>

At 13:37 03/06/04 , Sophia wrote:
>Here is a question for someone who has both seen the movie and is
>familiar with the PoA movie-clips available on fandango.com and
>movies.yahoo.com

I deliberately kept myself away from clips and interviews, etc, other than 
official trailers until I saw the movie, so I hadn't seen the clips before, 
but I have now. ;-)

>Is the hippogriff-clip and the marauder's map-clip edited at all, or
>do the scenes occur just like that in the movie? They both give me a
>distinct sense that there are a couple of lines missing in the middle
>of them.

Your instincts are correct.

>For instance, it seems to me Snape will say something more between the 
>ominous "Potter" and asking about the map.

Yes, inter alia, he asks what he's doing out of bed. (I won't reveal 
Harry's answer, but it made me laugh - typical teenager reply.)

>Also, I get the impression something happens between Harry being 
>volunteered to approach the hippogriff and his actually petting its beak 
>that is not shown in the clip, but will (hopefully) be in the movie. (Does 
>Harry get to bow to Buckbeak? I would love that.)

Yes, he gets to bow. There's a fairly significant cut after "don't be shy".

I hope that helps. :-)





From crussell at arkansas.net  Thu Jun  3 18:46:44 2004
From: crussell at arkansas.net (bugaloo37)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 18:46:44 -0000
Subject: PoA Shipping (was ... Review - MINOR SPOILERS)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040603000612.00995700@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9nrmk+2bjh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com,bugalo37 wrote: 

> >However, the relationship of Harry and Hermione is shown as being 
>>more mature, caring and supportive- a friendship that is growing 
>>stronger and closer.
> 

GulPlum wrote:
> Exactly. The H/Hr (and Hr/H even more so) relationship throughout 
all three 
> movies has been on a straight line showing a deepening friendship, 
respect 
> and trust. Nothing more. The same is NOT true of Hermione and Ron 
(or 
> vice-versa). Hermione and Ron are playful towards and about each 
other in a 
> way that Harmione and Harry are not.
> 

now me (bugaloo37):

Now let me see if I get this straight:  in the above mentioned quote 
you give the impression that the H/Hr ship is a ship "in motion" - 
not stagnate in the least, but progressing- on a friendly basis, of 
course.  With this, I agree.  For the record, I have never stated 
that there is any "romance" per say in POA, book or movie, between 
Harry and Hermione-just a wonderful,caring friendship which has 
proven helpful to Harry not once but many times.  What I take offence 
to is the implication, that by end of this series ( and there are two 
more books and 4 more movies to go, by the way), it is an 
impossibility that the warm, caring friendship could develop into 
romance.  The only person who knows that is JKR and her clues are 
ambiguous at best.  I just believe it is a bit too soon to be ringing 
the death nell on any ship.  My second objection to the above quote 
is the use of the word "playful" when speaking in terms of the R/Hr 
ship.  My definition of playful is an interchange between two or more 
people that gives pleasure to one or both parties.  When in canon or 
in the movies for that matter, have either Ron or Hermione derived 
pleasure from their "playful" bickering?  I am afraid I just do not 
see it.  Now back to the issue of "progressing" relationships, the 
R/Hr ( from what I have read) has progressed only in their ability to 
tick each other off- and also to feel some awkwardness when close to 
or touching each other.  This ship has all the signs of teenage angst 
and insecurity but very little if any depth.  When talking in terms 
of the long haul, I do not see the ship ever progressing beyond 
perhaps some handholding ( without pulling away, of course) and maybe 
some light snogging (something we will not be required to witness, 
hopefully). Also when you stated all the positive aspects of the H/Hr 
ship(deep friendship, respect,and trust) and stated they were not in 
the R/Hr ship, I was wondering- is that supposed to be a good point?

bugaloo37-HMS PumpkinPie sail on!!!




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 18:55:06 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 18:55:06 -0000
Subject: webclips vs. movie
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040603141434.009c0160@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9ns6a+vehh@eGroups.com>

> I deliberately kept myself away from clips and interviews, etc, 
other than 
> official trailers until I saw the movie, so I hadn't seen the clips 
before, 
> but I have now. ;-)
> 
> Your instincts are correct.

Ah, the virtue of self-restraint. I have a hard time staying away 
from spoiler material, but haven't worried too much about it since 
I've felt that the full movie-experience is a completely different 
animal altogether than clips. However, maybe I should try it for the 
next one (meaning: the day I manage that is the day pigs fly)

 >For instance, it seems to me Snape will say something more between 
the  ominous "Potter" and asking about the map.
 Yes, inter alia, he asks what he's doing out of bed. (I won't reveal 
 Harry's answer, but it made me laugh - typical teenager reply.)

(rubbing hands): Ah, very good. Lovely.
 
 >Also, I get the impression something happens between Harry being 
 >volunteered to approach the hippogriff and his actually petting its 
beak that is not shown in the clip, but will (hopefully) be in the 
movie. (Does Harry get to bow to Buckbeak? I would love that.)
> 
> Yes, he gets to bow. There's a fairly significant cut after "don't 
be shy".

Yessssss, the bow is in. Beautiful and most excellent. Only five more 
days to go for me.

> I hope that helps. :-)

Definitely. Your info has brightened my evening considerably! 
Thankyou!

Sophia




From celticangel at thebuffysite.com  Thu Jun  3 18:57:40 2004
From: celticangel at thebuffysite.com (celticangel1976)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 18:57:40 -0000
Subject: POA Review - No Spoilers
Message-ID: <c9nsb4+3d0k@eGroups.com>

Ok all, I'm back. Would have posted last night but got caught in a 
massive thunderstorm and had to spend the night at my mom's so just 
got home.

No spoiler review:  Thumbs Up!  Curon is not my fav director, his 
scene changes are annoying, but he did breath new life into the 
movies.  The magic feels much more natural in this than the others.  
Other than feeling a bit rushed and a little choppy, it was really 
good.  

For a detailed and spoilery review go here 
http://www.livejournal.com/users/celticangel76

CelticAngel
(who goes to see it again tomorrow wearing her Slytherin t-shirt and 
wrist band!)





From a1304256 at cc.aoyama.ac.jp  Thu Jun  3 10:22:25 2004
From: a1304256 at cc.aoyama.ac.jp (kumikotakasaki)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 10:22:25 -0000
Subject: hi
Message-ID: <c9mu51+ac5d@eGroups.com>

I'm a 18 year old girl in Japan, and I reallly like Harry potter. 
Hope to exchange E-mail with all of you!!!!!!





From ladilyndi at yahoo.com  Thu Jun  3 19:10:12 2004
From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (ladilyndi)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 19:10:12 -0000
Subject: End of Credits (was:  The Map in PoA )
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040603023015.00986db0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9nt2k+firh@eGroups.com>

I don't think what I write is a spoiler but more of an anticipator 
with no actual mention of events, but just in case someone disagrees 
with me, here it is:

















I agree that waiting until the very end is definitely worth it.  I 
think less than 10 of us waited and while the kids didn't seem to get 
it, all 3 adults thought it was absolutely brilliant.  It may have 
been that the kids thought it was over before it really was and 
missed a crucial piece.  While the wait is very long and I wondered 
whether it was worth it while waiting, I'm glad I didn't miss it as 
it would not have been the same hearing about it rather than 
experiencing it.

The clip of Lockhart at the end of CoS was cute but if I had never 
actually seen it, I could have pictured it.  With PoA, it's an 
experience.  

Lynn

Personal P.S.  Hi GulPlum, you may not remember me from the OT list 
but you were a great help to us when we prepared to head over to 
England last June.  You were absolutely correct about NTL too.  LOL


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> <snip>
> And to repeat what Nick said, I say to you and everyone else, stay 
until 
> the very end - while there's no extra clip tagged on, the credits 
end in a 
> more than appropriate manner... (though I don't know how many 
people will 
> have the patience to sit it out - it is a LONG list!).





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 22:38:29 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 22:38:29 -0000
Subject: Reviews: isn't it odd...
Message-ID: <c9o995+rhlm@eGroups.com>

At the risk of sounding terribly simplistic, how is it that an 
actor's performance can come off so differently to different viewers? 
I have been reading quite a few reviews for PoA(as I mentioned in en 
earlier post)on the net and, as might be expected, some love it, some 
hate it, some are undecided. That's all fine and good, the perception 
of an individual is always a unique blend, so our tastes must differ. 
Yet it amazes me that one critic can call a performance deadly dull 
and another call the same performance brilliant. Are there no 
criteria for what makes a good performance? Does it mean the positive 
review "gets" the performance or that the negative review dispenses 
with the errors that spring from good will? Any takers? I'd love to 
hear what other listees think on this topic.

Also,where most positive reviews proclaim PoA far superior to PS and 
CoS, I was really surprised to find house-hold name movie critic 
Roger Ebert less enthusiastic about this one whereas he apparently 
raised the first two films to the skies...Go figure. I suppose 
ultimately we're all just judging for ourselves...

Sophia






From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 23:34:03 2004
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 23:34:03 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah right
Message-ID: <BAY7-F84acAMIaCCPEH00056a63@hotmail.com>

I saw those pictures the night after the UK premiere, and I thought
>   either the photographer really liked them or there is more to it than
>   Dan and Emma are letting on.  And truth be told, they are teenagers
>   who can be friends one minute and dating the next minute. It was
>   cute on Regis and Kelly... he really blushed when Kelly asked him
>   about him and Emma, and even then he swore they were just friends...
>   "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK premiere.
>   I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-)
>
>   Kimberly
>
>
>Thanks for pointing out those pics!  Too cute!  And there are several where
>they're looking at each other in a not-really-sibling fashion, heehee.  
>Very
>cute.
>
>
>Lynda
>* * *

I read somewhere in an interview with Emma, she said she had a crush on 
someone....The article said she had found love with a cast member....I hope 
it is Daniel, they are both young, but that would be so sweet....they really 
suit each other....On another note, I actually think Hermione will end up 
with Harry, dont know why I think that,because all evidence points to 
Hermione and Ron, but I just have a feeling


ml

jo
x

_________________________________________________________________
Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger




From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun  4 02:03:03 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 03:03:03 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews: isn't it odd...
In-Reply-To: <c9o995+rhlm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040604001613.00982ea0@plum.cream.org>

At 23:38 03/06/04 , Sophia wrote:

>At the risk of sounding terribly simplistic, how is it that an
>actor's performance can come off so differently to different viewers?

<snip (regretfully)>

Putting aside all the reviews from people who don't know what they're 
talking about (i.e. people for whom a cute face and/or smile is enough to 
be smitten by a performance), judging children's performances is 
exceptionally subjective. For instance, unlike (seemingly) most of the 
cinema-going population, I was never particularly impressed with Haley 
Osment in "The Sixth Sense". I was, on the other hand, very pleasantly 
surprised by his turn in "A.I.", for which he was generally derided. To 
quote you, further along, "go figure". :-) I feel very strongly that any of 
the main actors in "Stand By Me" 18 years ago (and especially both River 
Phoenix and Wil Wheaton) deserved Oscar nominations far more than Osment 
did for The Sixth Sense.

Now, I don't know other people's criteria, but for me (as a pretty crap 
actor), any film performance should be judged on four criteria (and I don't 
make allowances for kids, which a lot of critics do): line delivery, 
movement, being a passive presence in a scene, and emotional "truth".

In case anyone has the wrong idea, I don't actually look at a performance 
analytically in that way - it's when a shortcoming in any of those areas 
doesn't jump out of the screen at me that I consider a role to have been 
well played. As far as the HP movies go, Dan's movement in the first two 
struck me as particularly fake, and as I said elsewhere, he has a problem 
with his line delivery in that he strives to enunciate every single word 
perfectly which gives the impression that the words are studied rather than 
spontaneous. In this respect, Emma in PoA was absolutely magnificent, 
delivering her lines in an absolutely naturalistic fashion.

Dan says that he looked forward to working with Oldman, who's a bit of an 
idol - well, he could certainly learn something about line delivery from 
him! :-)

The only moment in PoA which I found utterly cringeworthy - and I'm 
absolutely certain that some people will disagree with me - are the first 
shots of Harry's "breakdown" after the Three Broomsticks revelations (I'll 
keep this a little vague to keep it spoiler-free). What should have been 
one of the emotional cores of Harry's journey fell flat because poor Dan, 
while he did the "angry" bit very well a moment later, couldn't just sit 
there and do "upset". As soon as he had words to say (incidentally, one of 
the very few moments in the movie when we have an extreme close-up of a 
speaking character's face - bloody brilliant!), he was OK. But sitting 
there and sobbing simply didn't cut it for me. On first viewing, I thought 
I was cringing from sympathy (no 13 year-old boy wants to be seen sobbing), 
but on the second viewing, I knew that it was the performance of the 
sobbing rather than the sobbing itself. :-)

>Also,where most positive reviews proclaim PoA far superior to PS and
>CoS, I was really surprised to find house-hold name movie critic
>Roger Ebert less enthusiastic about this one whereas he apparently
>raised the first two films to the skies...Go figure. I suppose
>ultimately we're all just judging for ourselves...

I didn't read any reviews until today (I generally avoid reading reviews of 
"big" movies until I've seen them) very largely because I knew that I'd be 
participating in various threads just like this one, and wanted whatever 
comments I've had to make be my own rather than influenced by others. I've 
spent a large part of this evening trawling through various professional 
reviews. I'm happy to note that of 66 reviews catalogued on 
rottentomatoes.com, 58 are positive. I've only read a handful of them (and 
several of the negative ones are unavailable) but those who actively 
dislike the movie appear not to have understood it (the patronising 
attitude of Rex Reed in the New York Observer put me off doing more than 
skimming through it, and although  he calls it the "silliest" HP adventure 
in the opening paragraph, he never actually says what was so silly about it).

It's been a *long* time since I've read any of Ebert's, but apart from his 
conclusion, I must say that he was pretty positive about PoA (***1/2 is by 
no means "poor" by his standards).  (BTW 
http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/cst-ftr-potter03f.html for those who 
want to see it).

Although his conclusions in one respect agree with mine (the plot leaves 
too many things unexplained), in another we disagree entirely, namely his 
implication that "joyously leaping through a clockwork plot" should be a 
positive attribute! The fact that this film is not a simple run-though of a 
simple plot is very much to its credit, and I really can't see why he 
should want to hold this against it.

He's clearly (to me, at least) not read the books, and like many reviewers, 
he wants - and expects! - the kids to keep their innocence. As we know, 
part of the appeal for a lot of us here is precisely that the kids 
gradually *do* lose it! I suspect that Ebert's in for a major shock when he 
sees GoF (regardless of how faithful it is to the tone of the book).

I therefore think that the main reason that Ebert prefers the first two 
movies is that the kids are still very much kids in them and perhaps he 
prefers his kids' movies that way? (As implied above, I've not read enough 
Ebert to know his attitude on this subject; he's  better known to me, and 
on this side of the Pond generally, as a cinephile and "film expert" rather 
than as a critic.)

Furthermore, and I may be completely wrong on this, but the general view I 
get of American mass media is that loss of innocence is generally limited 
to loss of *sexual* innocence. The fact that this series, even 5/7 through 
as it currently is with the books, has only gone as far as one off-page 
fairly innocent kiss (and no further) for the main character, is being much 
less "sexual" than the US market would expect. One aspect of this 
expectation is the preponderance of the media (and fans'!) interest in 
shipping (although to be fair, this is fairly heavy in the UK media as 
well). (I repeat, this is a perception I have, and it's probably not 
entirely correct.)

So, after that very long-winded trip around the neighbourhood, I suppose I 
can understand those critics who might prefer the first two movies, as they 
*are* simplistic kids' movies and leave very little to the imagination and 
even less for the viewer to put together in their own head. If one goes 
into PoA with that expectation, one is going to be disappointed. 
Regrettably, though, on the other hand, the complex multi-threaded plot of 
the book has been simplified just a little too much to be a proper 
"grown-up" movie, which is perhaps a criticism in its own right.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who is surprised to find that he's spent over 3 hours 
composing the above!





From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun  4 02:09:01 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 03:09:01 +0100
Subject: PoA: New incantations
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040604030306.0099a7a0@plum.cream.org>

I recall from back when CoS came out, that someone was collecting new 
incantations from the movies not present in the books.

I note only three newcomers this time around, so here they are if anyone's 
interested:

Lumos Maxima (does that *really* need a translation?)
Arresto Momentum (ditto; BTW I wonder why they didn't simply re-use the 
established "Immobilus")
Bombarda (ditto again - although I'm tempted to describe its effects as 
"Alohomora with attitude"). :-)

Have I missed any?





From PenapartElf at aol.com  Fri Jun  4 05:16:58 2004
From: PenapartElf at aol.com (PenapartElf at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 01:16:58 EDT
Subject: Chicago Tribune's Red Eye - cover story on us adult Potter-heads
Message-ID: <11.2b1f4d30.2df15fca@aol.com>

Hello!

As a follow up to that call for Chicago residents 
available for interview, here are a couple of links 
for your reading pleasure.

http://www.redeyechicago.com

(picture of cover:
Big Harry Deal: The little wiz is all grown-up -- 
and so are a lot of Potter-heads.)

http://www.redeyechicago.com/cover.htm

(teaser for the cover story, a mention of HPfGU 
and quote from our own Anandini!  I'm afraid that 
not being a resident of Chicago myself, as of this 
moment, I've no idea who else has been quoted 
by the reporter.)

Apologies in advance to those who may not see 
this before the website changes over from 
Thursday's edition to Friday's.  As soon as I figure 
out how to upload a copy of the materials (hopefully 
will find a copy of the article online sometime soon) 
to our files section here, I will do so.

Thanks to all of you who participated!

:) Penapart Elf



From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun  4 05:35:22 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 01:35:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews: isn't it odd...
Message-ID: <db.c346abe.2df1641a@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/3/2004 7:06:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
hp at plum.cream.org writes:
>>For instance, unlike (seemingly) most of the 
cinema-going population, I was never particularly impressed with Haley 
Osment in "The Sixth Sense". I was, on the other hand, very pleasantly 
surprised by his turn in "A.I.", for which he was generally derided. <<

I adored the Sixth Sense, but felt the same way about his performance. There 
was nothing at all lacking in it, but it wasn't *amazing* in any respect. I 
always thought it could have just been good casting-all they needed was a sullen 
kid and he would give a "sullen-kid" performance without having to act that 
much. However, when I saw A.I., I was amazed, that was a fantastic perfomance, 
but since that movie got mixed reviews and didn't do so well at the box 
office, it was ignored.

>>As far as the HP movies go, Dan's movement in the first two 
struck me as particularly fake, and as I said elsewhere, he has a problem 
with his line delivery in that he strives to enunciate every single word 
perfectly which gives the impression that the words are studied rather than 
spontaneous.<<
I've more noticed that with Emma's acting. I can see why they cast her, 
over-acting works for Hermione at first. For half of the first movie her 
personality is supposed to come off a little pushy and bossy, but as soon as she 
*wasn't* the 'are-you-sure-that's-a-real-spell' Hermione, her acting didn't change 
that much, she was still overactng. Looking back on the first two movies, I go 
back and forth on Dan, sometimes I think he's doing a wonderful job, and in 
other scenes he's too bland, almost like he's underacting a little (which *sort 
of* works for Harry). The only one out of the three who comes off natural is 
Rupert, and that's the character that's getting downplayed (of course).
I'm happy to hear that Emma has improved with the new directer (and age, I 
assume). As for Dan and his fake-crying, crying is one thing, but *sobbing* 
would be quite difficult to fake and make it look real, especially for a teenage 
boy.

>>I suppose I 
can understand those critics who might prefer the first two movies, as they 
*are* simplistic kids' movies and leave very little to the imagination and 
even less for the viewer to put together in their own head. If one goes 
into PoA with that expectation, one is going to be disappointed. <<

Yes, but *why* would you, especially as a critic, go to a movie 
hoping/expecting it to be simplistic? (not saying that I don't agree with you, I just don't 
understand the mentality of some of the critics). I'm sure most adults would 
prefer a less "kiddie" movie, as would most kids come to that (children are 
smarter than people give them credit for). I think the only audience that will 
be lost at a much thicker plot are very small children (like 3-6) who wouldn't 
be getting that much out of it either way, and the small percentage of s
lightly older children who haven't read the books. I find it sort of silly that a 
critic would be upset that the movie gave more than they expected, that's 
supposed to be a good thing.

-Rebecca (who will be seeing it tomorrow!)


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




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 04:54:24 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 04:54:24 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
Message-ID: <c9ova0+m663@eGroups.com>

Spoiler below -  


Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly enjoyed 
the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  

"Brooke"





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  4 10:53:56 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 10:53:56 -0000
Subject: Reviews: isn't it odd...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040604001613.00982ea0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9pkc4+rj4q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> At 23:38 03/06/04 , Sophia wrote:

AAAAARGH! I spent a while writing a reply only to obliterate it with 
one false move...That is the one big drawback with electronic 
documents. They're just so fragile--constantly teetering on the brink 
of destruction, plus they require complicated apparatus if anyone is 
to read them. At least with a book all you need is eyes. (Although 
come to think of it, they are also complicated apparatus, but at 
least you don't need a socket to use them. Ah, wrong again...:-)Well, 
I'll give it one more go to reply.

> Putting aside all the reviews from people who don't know what 
they're talking about (i.e. people for whom a cute face and/or smile 
is enough to be smitten by a performance)

commence soul-searching sequence...processing...beep:To be fair, I 
can't swear to not being one of them, at least where Dan is 
concerned. You correctly guessed that it was the reviews of his 
performance that got me thinking in the first place, though Emma and 
Rupert are in the mix too. I think I can spot when an actor fails to 
give a grounded performance or when the delivery of a line rings fake 
or a gesture screams "stage-direction", but I can also enjoy a less-
than-perfect performance if I am charmed by a charming face. I could 
tell Dan didn't manage every scene equally well in PS, but that 
didn't keep me from walking out of the theatre wishing I could take 
him home with me and make sure he got a nice childhood, for I thought 
him the most charming little boy I had ever seen. Besides, at the 
time I was newly besotted with anything Potter, having only just 
discovered the delights of the WW.

I'll reserve my judgment on PoA until I've seen it, but chances are 
I'll be so delighted with just seeing everybody on screen again, I 
won't care about the performances--that'll come later when the dust 
has settled. I will say however, that I worry about Rupert. He was by 
far the best of the trio, I thought, in PS. He seemed completely 
natural to me, and his lines sounded like the came from Ron rather 
than from the script. (My favourite moment with him being when he 
says "shut-up, Harry" who's laughing at him for getting smacked by a 
broom. Rupert does this little embarrassed thing with his hands that 
seemed absolutely right.)Therefore, I was sorry to see how Ron's part 
was simplified (yes, it's the word of the day)and trivialized in the 
CoS script and possibly by Columbus's direction. Though I will say in 
Rupert's defence that he did everything that he was asked to do well. 
The only problem was that he was asked to do nothing more than make 
funny faces and act scared. The awkward moment with Hermione at the 
end though indicated, I thought that this boy is capable of much 
better. Which brings me to why I'm worried.

I had hoped that with a new director Rupert might get to come into 
his own. However the clips (again with the clips...as it's all I have 
to go by)I found that what littleI saw of Ron did not work so well 
for me. His line delivery rang with a jarring fake-ness to me. Also, 
he said in an interview that he found acting quite easy, which makes 
me think his heart isn't in it. Pity...Maybe he got tired of standing 
in Dan's towering shadow in the media and resigned himself to the 
backseat completely.

> spontaneous. In this respect, Emma in PoA was absolutely 
magnificent, 
> delivering her lines in an absolutely naturalistic fashion.
> 
Glad to hear it, I'll look forward to seeing her prformance, 
particularly since she's singled out in several reviews for her 
improvement. I thought her alright in PS and annoying in CoS. I 
didn't understand where she was going with the part at all, if 
anywhere, and coulnd't stand the ubiquitous lip-pouting. Which may 
perhaps be blamed in part on script and direction.

> cinema-going population, I was never particularly impressed with 
Haley Osment in "The Sixth Sense". I was, on the other hand, very 
pleasantly surprised by his turn in "A.I.", for which he was 
generally derided. 

I liked him in both and thought he was stunning in A.I.,which by the 
way I found a profoundly disturbing film. A Kubrik story with 
Speilberg sensibilities is absolutely torture. At least Kubrik has 
the sense to deliver his twisted stories with detachment. Speilberg 
is all heart and identification and it just doesn't work with Kubrik 
characters. I was truly horrified at the thought of Haley pining away 
for his mom to in that pod for 2000 years. My skin crawls writing of 
it. His quest was in every way heart-breaking.

> Now, I don't know other people's criteria, but for me (as a pretty 
crap actor), any film performance should be judged on four criteria 
(and I don't  make allowances for kids, which a lot of critics do): 
line delivery, movement, being a passive presence in a scene, and 
emotional "truth".

Good list. I'll have to remember that.
 
I'd like to say more, but I'll get back to it later. Have to bake a 
cake for a nice old man... 

Sophia




From celticangel at thebuffysite.com  Fri Jun  4 13:25:49 2004
From: celticangel at thebuffysite.com (celticangel1976)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:25:49 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9ova0+m663@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9pt8t+c3qd@eGroups.com>

I agree with you Brooke.  While I think Gambon does a fine job in 
his own right, he's not Dumbledore.  There's an innocence (for lack 
of a better word) to Dumbledore that is missing in this movie.  He's 
always described as being so sweet and grandfatherly and by looking 
at him you'd never guess he's the powerful wizard that he is.  I 
don't get this at all with Gambon.  But I think part of that isn't 
just the actor, but the new "look" of Dumbledore as well.  Sadly, 
Harris just WAS Dumbledore for me and Gambon just isn't.

CelticAngel


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Brooke" <sbchavez2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> Spoiler below -  
> 
> 
> Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly 
enjoyed 
> the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
> Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
> moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
> part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
> Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  
> 
> "Brooke"




From celticangel at thebuffysite.com  Fri Jun  4 13:34:36 2004
From: celticangel at thebuffysite.com (celticangel1976)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:34:36 -0000
Subject: Reviews: isn't it odd...
In-Reply-To: <c9pkc4+rj4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ptpc+rm1b@eGroups.com>

While there might be a set list of things that reviewers look for, 
whether or not they see those things in a movie is all up to 
personal opinion.  That's why there's so many movie reviewers.  
Someone somewhere is bound to see it the same way you do so you can 
always quote them to give the movie a favorable review.  :)

For me, I have to believe the character.  I have to be pulled into 
the movie and forget that it's, say, Alan Rickman, and totally 
believe it's Snape.  The Trio are getting much better, but there are 
still areas where they need work.  Overall, though, I'd say that yes 
they were great.  But if you want to break it down scene by scene 
that's another thing entirely.  I totally agree with whoever said 
Dan doesn't do upset well.  The crying sounded so strained and fake 
it was indeed cringeworthy.  But I really think to make yourself cry 
believably on screen or stage is either a gift you're born with or 
something that takes years to master.

I had a friend of mine who hasn't read the books, only seen the 
movies saying I was being too critical about things that were left 
out.  No matter how I tried to tell him that these things were 
important for future events in the movies/books he didn't get it.  I 
think there will always be two groups for reviewers of these 
movies.  Those that have read the books, and those that haven't.  
Lots of subgroups in there as well, but you get my meaning.

CelticAngel




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Fri Jun  4 13:55:46 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:55:46 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah right
In-Reply-To: <BAY7-F84acAMIaCCPEH00056a63@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEEEIDCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


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



  I read somewhere in an interview with Emma, she said she had a crush on
  someone....The article said she had found love with a cast member....I
hope
  it is Daniel, they are both young, but that would be so sweet....they
really
  suit each other....On another note, I actually think Hermione will end up
  with Harry, dont know why I think that,because all evidence points to
  Hermione and Ron, but I just have a feeling >>

  Almost like it is a red herring?  I think that is what everyone who is a
H/H shipper feels too.  Like Ron and
  Hermione are too obvious.  I guess time will tell.

  Kimberly






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




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Fri Jun  4 14:01:41 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 15:01:41 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sister? Yeah right
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B4B48C@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,
 
I a way it would be sweet, but in another way it may be bad. If Emma and
Daniel have struck up a romantic liaison at the age of 13 (is Daniel
14?) it is unlikely to last, and from what I remember of teenage
relationships, may end with them no-longer being able to maintain a
friendship. That would hurt the later films.
 
Cheers,
 
Dumbledad.


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




From crussell at arkansas.net  Fri Jun  4 14:22:42 2004
From: crussell at arkansas.net (bugaloo37)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 14:22:42 -0000
Subject: Reviews: isn't it odd...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040604001613.00982ea0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9q0ji+3sib@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> Furthermore, and I may be completely wrong on this, but the general 
>view I get of American mass media is that loss of innocence is 
>generally limited to loss of *sexual* innocence. The fact that this 
>series, even 5/7 through as it currently is with the books, has only 
>gone as far as one off-page fairly innocent kiss (and no further) 
>for the main character, is being much less "sexual" than the US 
>market would expect. One aspect of this expectation is the 
>preponderance of the media (and fans'!) interest in shipping 
>(although to be fair, this is fairly heavy in the UK media as 
> well). (I repeat, this is a perception I have, and it's probably 
>not entirely correct.)
> 

For once, I am inclined to agree with you.  The term "loss of 
innocence" is seldom used in the US to refer to anything other than 
loss of one's virginity.  When refering to the loss of innocence as 
it pertains to ones loss of security-the realization of ones 
vulnerability, and the realization that adults do not have all the 
answers, I guess this is basically referred to as just "growing up"  
I cannot think of any other terms used in these situations.  The fact 
that Americans, of which I am one, seem to be more interested in the 
teenage love/hate relationship of Ron and Hermione than in the 
disintegration of Harry's belief system, which imo, begins in book 3 
and then begins to accelerate through the 4th and 5th, leaving him an 
emotional wreck by the end of book 5, shows a lack of understanding 
of the movie going public and definitely, I hope, draws a line 
between those who have read and those who have not.  I must confess, 
I am a shipper which I have revealed in earlier posts. However, let 
it never be said that that is my main line of interest in the HP 
series.  With a BA in psychology and an "almost" MEd in counseling, 
Harry's mental development and how he copes with the tragedies that 
surround him are of vital interest to me.  Sad to say, I have to 
agree with you when you say that this not the case for the majority 
of the movie going or to some extent even the book reading public.

bugaloo37 who would love to give Harry the support he's needing at 
the end of book 5




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Fri Jun  4 13:51:50 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:51:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews: isn't it odd...
In-Reply-To: <c9o995+rhlm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEAEIDCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


  -----Original Message-----
  From: sophiamcl [mailto:sophiamcl at hotmail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 5:38 PM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reviews: isn't it odd...


  At the risk of sounding terribly simplistic, how is it that an
  actor's performance can come off so differently to different viewers?
  I have been reading quite a few reviews for PoA(as I mentioned in en
  earlier post)on the net and, as might be expected, some love it, some
  hate it, some are undecided. That's all fine and good, the perception
  of an individual is always a unique blend, so our tastes must differ.
  Yet it amazes me that one critic can call a performance deadly dull
  and another call the same performance brilliant. Are there no
  criteria for what makes a good performance? Does it mean the positive
  review "gets" the performance or that the negative review dispenses
  with the errors that spring from good will? Any takers? I'd love to
  hear what other listees think on this topic. >>

  You know, I stopped reading the reviews, because some of them ticked me
off.  Like the one
  reviewer said Dan was boring as always but luckily he is surrounded by a
brilliant cast including
  the other two kids. Out of all the reviews I have read, good and bad, Dan
has been mentioned as
  the most improved of the three, and I guess I felt a little protective of
him.  Also, one of them, it
  may have been this same reviewer, said all the kids have clearly outgrown
their roles and shouldn't
  play the parts anymore.  I wanted to smack him, ask him if he has kids
around this age, because
  the trio were filming this movie around the same age as Harry would have
been in the books.  I
  guess I don't mind them criticize the movie, but I hate when it seems like
personal attacks on
  children.  I know as an actor, you are putting yourself out there to be
criticized, but it still bothers me.


  Also,where most positive reviews proclaim PoA far superior to PS and
  CoS, I was really surprised to find house-hold name movie critic
  Roger Ebert less enthusiastic about this one whereas he apparently
  raised the first two films to the skies...Go figure. I suppose
  ultimately we're all just judging for ourselves... >>

  This amazed me as well, Sophia!  I read it, because like you said,  Ebert
is a household name
  in at least the US.  He gave it an ok review, but I was surprised he said
it was not as good as
  the other two.  He was the first one to say that actually.  BTW, the
critic on Good Morning America
  said it was a great movie, and better than the other two.  I bought my
tickets yesterday for a 1 o'clock
  showing on Saturday.  I am going with my 14 & 12 year old sisters.  Then I
am taking my son and
  daughter on Wednesday.  I was suppose to take them this weekend, but of
course, their dad decides
  this is the weekend for a visit.  LOL!  I couldn't wait until Wednesday!
:-)

  Kimberly



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




From SnapesRaven at web.de  Fri Jun  4 15:00:26 2004
From: SnapesRaven at web.de (SnapesRaven)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:00:26 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
References: <c9ova0+m663@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002501c44a44$abad4f30$0202a8c0@henrike>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
+
S
P
O
I
L
E
R


Good evening!

I think the same. I didn't like this new acting style very much either. In my opinion even his voice isn't as kind and simply *knowing* as Dumbledore's voice before. I think this and the somewhat stricter features are what I dislike most about Gambon as DD.
Richard Harris R.I.P.


SnapesRaven

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brooke 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 6:54 AM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gambon as Dumbledore - Movie Spoiler


  Spoiler below -  


  Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly enjoyed 
  the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
  Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
  moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
  part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
  Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  

  "Brooke"





  ________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



   



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




From SnapesRaven at web.de  Fri Jun  4 15:03:46 2004
From: SnapesRaven at web.de (SnapesRaven)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:03:46 +0200
Subject: Ravens everywhere!!
Message-ID: <002e01c44a45$22a760d0$0202a8c0@henrike>

Good evening...

just wanted to give vent to my happiness at seeing sooo many ravens like myself in teh 3rd movie...!
; )

*g* I think even though ravens are often seen as an indication for nearing death it's pretty cool to see so many relatives there *hehe*. I just wonder why they were at Buckbeak's would-be execution even though there was no one killed. But never mind. 


SnapesRaven
*fluttering back onto the Hogsmeade signpost, croaking happily*
: )




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




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Fri Jun  4 13:12:01 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:12:01 -0000
Subject: Two Thumbs up!  was: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9ova0+m663@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9psf1+qlh5@eGroups.com>

Spoilers below
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
> "Brooke" wrote:
> Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly enjoyed 
> the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
> Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
> moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
> part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
> Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  


I too just saw a special screening last night.  You not in NYC by 
chance are you? 
I agree with the speed at which Michael Gambon as Dumbledore spoke 
and moved, but I thought the whole movie moves at an incredibly fast 
pace so it worked for me. 

I, who knows the story inside-out (like most of us here) was 
overwhelmed by the sheer volume of detail in the film. It is truly 
spectacular. Every scene has multiple actions taking place at the 
same time and it's hard to know what to what to look at times.  More 
than once I was caught looking at some wonderful detail in the back 
ground and missed a crucial moment in one of the leads.  Multiple 
viewings are definitely in order. Oh, what a shame. ;-) 

It is a beautiful and exciting film. The magic is seen to be normal 
part of the Wizarding World, with things constantly moving, witches 
and wizards using magic in their daily lives, magical signs and 
writing on walls and floors. It is more how I imagined it to be, 
rather than the in first two films where the magic was always this 
special event.  The characters a growing beautiful, both emotionally 
and physically. A lot of the minor characters get to speak.  We see 
other sides of Neville and Draco, as well as more if the Weasley 
twins.  

My only complaint is the Shrieking Shake scene, which has been 
stripped down to its bare minimum.  I think it really short changes 
the depth of the relationship between Remus and Sirius. It is my 
favorite scene in the book so I imagine I'm prejudiced about it, but 
the reason I love it is because of the enormous depth of the betrayal 
and misunderstanding which existed between these two men for 12 
years. Their discovery of truth in the Shack and the reuniting of the 
two great friends that are Remus Lupin and Sirius Black.  It moved me 
to tears when I first read it. Peter Pettigrew, a fantastic Timothy 
Spall, is also short changed.  You barely get to see and hear his 
explanation for his betrayal and you don't feel the depth of the 
moment of his begging for his life with Sirius and Remus standing 
reading to kill him.  It's in the movie, but so fast and sudden that 
you don't get that level of humiliation that was actually difficult 
to read at times in the book.

Also they cut my favourte line in the book! When Black jumps on 
Buckbeak and says to Harry' "You are truly your father's son, Harry." 
Why? It could have been in there. Ah well, it goes to show we all see 
different things as special. 

The performances are all wonderful. Oldman, Thewlis, Spall and 
Thompson are all perfect.  So is Julie Christie as Rosmarta. 

It is great.  Go see it.  I'm going again ASAP.

Cheers Mandy






From CoyotesChild at charter.net  Fri Jun  4 15:20:03 2004
From: CoyotesChild at charter.net (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 10:20:03 -0500
Subject: More HP sightings on TV
Message-ID: <000401c44a47$6cb85650$6401a8c0@Einstein>

Iggy here.
 
Just wanted to let anyone out there that gets Cartoon Network know that
they will be showing red-carpet interviews with PoA cast members during
different segments on "Cartoon Cartoon Fridays" airing tonight.  (They
show their Friday night cartoon lineup, and have different "fun
segments" between the shows.)
 
Stars shown in the commercials were Dan, Emma, Rupert, and Alan. but
that doesn't mean that they won't have others as well.  (And they're
also likely to show a clip or two from the movie, but don't quote me on
that.)
 
Iggy McSnurd
 
 


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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Fri Jun  4 15:52:22 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More HP sightings on TV
In-Reply-To: <000401c44a47$6cb85650$6401a8c0@Einstein>
Message-ID: <20040604155222.27161.qmail@web80303.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Iggy McSnurd <CoyotesChild at charter.net> wrote:
> Iggy here.
>  
> Just wanted to let anyone out there that gets
> Cartoon Network know that
> they will be showing red-carpet interviews with PoA
> cast members during
> different segments on "Cartoon Cartoon Fridays"
> airing tonight.  (They
> show their Friday night cartoon lineup, and have
> different "fun
> segments" between the shows.)
>  
> Stars shown in the commercials were Dan, Emma,
> Rupert, and Alan. but
> that doesn't mean that they won't have others as
> well.  (And they're
> also likely to show a clip or two from the movie,
> but don't quote me on
> that.)
>  
> Iggy McSnurd

Yep, I saw the ads for that.  We're definitely going
to watch.  My son watches Cartoon Network every day
when we get home, and they've been showing some good
POA trailers too.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun  4 16:06:36 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 12:06:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More HP sightings on TV
In-Reply-To: <20040604155222.27161.qmail@web80303.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000401c44a47$6cb85650$6401a8c0@Einstein>
    <20040604155222.27161.qmail@web80303.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1298.4.47.27.218.1086365196.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Gretchen Crumpacker said:

> Yep, I saw the ads for that.  We're definitely going
> to watch.  My son watches Cartoon Network every day
> when we get home, and they've been showing some good
> POA trailers too.

Approximately what time does this start?  I'll have to set my VCR.

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 gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Fri Jun  4 16:19:01 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 09:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More HP sightings on TV
In-Reply-To: <1298.4.47.27.218.1086365196.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <20040604161901.32766.qmail@web80305.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dina Lerret <redina at silverbloom.net> wrote:

> Approximately what time does this start?  I'll have
> to set my VCR.
> 
> Dina

We're on the West Coast, and for us it starts at 7
p.m.   Usually East Coast times match.  Unfortunately
it's going to be the sort of thing where the Harry
Potter stuff is interspersed between cartoons and
other stuff.  But we're watching anyway!

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 18:49:16 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 18:49:16 -0000
Subject: I saw it!
Message-ID: <c9qg7c+fgf0@eGroups.com>

Wow, what a GREAT MOVIE.  Long time lurker, had to be a poster for 
this one.  If I hadn't had all four of my kids with me, I would have 
sat there and watched it all again.  I have this feeling I missed so 
much, so many little details that make a movie so wonderful.

I do have a question for those that have seen it.  My 5 yr old 
daughter was whispering, "I'M TIRED"  over and over at the point 
where H and Hr fly up on Buckbeak and rescue Sirius.  What was the 
spell Hr used to break open the door?  I missed it!

Also, there's nothing spectacular when the movie is over, but it's 
worth watching the credits, just to see the effects and what 
the "feet" on the map are doing.  My kids thought it was great.

I can't wait to see it again!

Alora




From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 19:33:35 2004
From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 19:33:35 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <002501c44a44$abad4f30$0202a8c0@henrike>
Message-ID: <c9qiqf+5jo0@eGroups.com>


> 
> Good evening!
> 
> I think the same. I didn't like this new acting style very much 
either. In my opinion even his voice isn't as kind and simply 
*knowing* as Dumbledore's voice before. I think this and the 
somewhat stricter features are what I dislike most about Gambon as 
DD.
> Richard Harris R.I.P.
> 
> 
> SnapesRaven
> 
>   Spoiler below -  
> 
> 
>   Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly 
enjoyed 
>   the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
>   Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast 
and 
>   moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed 
the 
>   part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
>   Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  
> 
>   "Brooke"
> 
> 
> 
> 

Jason:
   I never bought the Richard Harris dumbledore. He wasnt funny 
enough. The new DD is funnier, but less awe inspiring. Mostly what i 
picture when i read the books is Ian McKellens Gandalf. Any scene 
involving Gandalf talking to a hobbit in LOTR seems like DD talking 
to one of the kids. He's funny, he's powerful, he's large and in 
charge! :-) 
]




From djs504 at lycos.com  Fri Jun  4 20:04:27 2004
From: djs504 at lycos.com (DEBRA JO SMITH)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:04:27 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1957 HP Fan
Message-ID: <AJFPHPNFDOCAIMAA@mailcity.com>


I've got the HP fan that was born in 1960 beat: I have born in 1957.
Debby


____________________________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10



From sherriola at earthlink.net  Fri Jun  4 20:50:03 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 14:50:03 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9pt8t+c3qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002501c44a75$83c8f1f0$0400a8c0@pensive>

I agree.  and gambon's voice and way of speaking isn't right either.  His
voice is very nasal sounding.  I was disappointed in him as Dumbledore.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: celticangel1976 [mailto:celticangel at thebuffysite.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 7:26 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore - Movie Spoiler


I agree with you Brooke.  While I think Gambon does a fine job in 
his own right, he's not Dumbledore.  There's an innocence (for lack 
of a better word) to Dumbledore that is missing in this movie.  He's 
always described as being so sweet and grandfatherly and by looking 
at him you'd never guess he's the powerful wizard that he is.  I 
don't get this at all with Gambon.  But I think part of that isn't 
just the actor, but the new "look" of Dumbledore as well.  Sadly, 
Harris just WAS Dumbledore for me and Gambon just isn't.

CelticAngel


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Brooke" <sbchavez2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> Spoiler below -  
> 
> 
> Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly 
enjoyed 
> the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
> Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
> moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
> part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
> Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  
> 
> "Brooke"




________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 patnkatng at cox.net  Fri Jun  4 19:31:55 2004
From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 19:31:55 -0000
Subject: Chicago Tribune's Red Eye - cover story on us adult Potter-heads
In-Reply-To: <11.2b1f4d30.2df15fca@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9qinb+6619@eGroups.com>


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, PenapartElf at a... wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> As a follow up to that call for Chicago residents 
> available for interview, here are a couple of links 
> for your reading pleasure.
> 
> http://www.redeyechicago.com
> 
> (picture of cover:
> Big Harry Deal: The little wiz is all grown-up -- 
> and so are a lot of Potter-heads.)
> 
> http://www.redeyechicago.com/cover.htm
> 
> (teaser for the cover story, a mention of HPfGU 
> and quote from our own Anandini!  I'm afraid that 
> not being a resident of Chicago myself, as of this 
> moment, I've no idea who else has been quoted 
> by the reporter.)
> 
> Apologies in advance to those who may not see 
> this before the website changes over from 
> Thursday's edition to Friday's.  As soon as I figure 
> out how to upload a copy of the materials (hopefully 
> will find a copy of the article online sometime soon) 
> to our files section here, I will do so.
> 
> Thanks to all of you who participated!
> 
> :) Penapart Elf

Here's the new link.  You have to register (it's free) to see it.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/arts/chi-
040603dpallages,1,2923951.story

Or:  http://tinyurl.com/2ljr6

Katrina





From celare_ulace at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Jun  4 19:53:29 2004
From: celare_ulace at yahoo.co.uk (celare_ulace)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 19:53:29 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9qiqf+5jo0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9qjvp+3jaa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jason" <shrtbusryder2002 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Good evening!
> > 
> > I think the same. I didn't like this new acting style very much 
> either. In my opinion even his voice isn't as kind and simply 
> *knowing* as Dumbledore's voice before. I think this and the 
> somewhat stricter features are what I dislike most about Gambon as 
> DD.
> > Richard Harris R.I.P.
> > 
> > 
> > SnapesRaven
> > 
> >   Spoiler below -  
> > 
> > 
> >   Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly 
> enjoyed 
> >   the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
> >   Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast 
> and 
> >   moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed 
> the 
> >   part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
> >   Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  
> > 
> >   "Brooke"
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> Jason:
>    I never bought the Richard Harris dumbledore. He wasnt funny 
> enough. The new DD is funnier, but less awe inspiring. Mostly what 
i 
> picture when i read the books is Ian McKellens Gandalf. Any scene 
> involving Gandalf talking to a hobbit in LOTR seems like DD 
talking 
> to one of the kids. He's funny, he's powerful, he's large and in 
> charge! :-) 
> ]



I always thought canon DD oscillated a bit between Venerable-Wiseman 
and Quirky-Yet-Endearing-Eccentric; personally I would have likened 
him more to Merlin from T.H.White's 'The Sword in the Stone' than 
Gandalf. 
Either way, I found Gambon a big disappointment - he was neither 
charismatic nor sympathetic - I thought he all but phoned in his 
performance. Nitpicking rather, but that post-rescue: 'Yes, we did 
it, Professor,' 'Did what? Goodnight.' line was IMO a big mistake. 
It drove a wedge between DD and Harry which simply makes no 
canononical sense. Perhaps handled better it wouldn't have bothered 
me quite so much, but it was my least favourite moment in a film I 
really loved (close second, OT, was the Harry/Mr Weasley scene -
clunky, characterless and knocked my high opinion of Mark Thomas' 
acting ability).








From bd-bear at verizon.net  Fri Jun  4 21:19:51 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 21:19:51 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9pt8t+c3qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9qp1n+6jr4@eGroups.com>

>>>"celticangel1976" <celticangel at t...> wrote:

There's an innocence (for lack of a better word) to Dumbledore that 
is missing in this movie.  He's always described as being so sweet 
and grandfatherly and by looking at him you'd never guess he's the 
powerful wizard that he is.  I don't get this at all with Gambon.  
But I think part of that isn't just the actor, but the new "look" of 
Dumbledore as well.  Sadly, Harris just WAS Dumbledore for me and 
Gambon just isn't.<<<

I'm a newbie to the list who has read all the books multiple times 
(except the last one, which I will be re-reading shortly) and just 
saw the movie today and I want to say I whole-heartedly agree with 
you. I didn't feel Gambon captured the whimsical, good-humored, wise 
nature of DD. I didn't feel he was warm and grandfatherly, as you 
said, nor did I feel he was the greatest wizard of all time. I also 
don't know why there had to be costume changes and such. Do you 
think DD, after 150+ years would suddenly change his habits?

I'll miss Richard Harris' DD.

Barbara
aka bd-bear





From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Fri Jun  4 20:56:47 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 20:56:47 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <002501c44a75$83c8f1f0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <c9qnmf+o47r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> I agree.  and gambon's voice and way of speaking isn't right 
either.  His
> voice is very nasal sounding.  I was disappointed in him as 
Dumbledore.

  Pesonally I thought he was delightful. Not that I didn't like 
Richard Harris' version but he played up D's age and wisdom. Gambon 
on the other hand plays up D's energy and whimsicallity. Both 
perfectly acceptable takes on the character IMO.





From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Fri Jun  4 21:32:16 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 14:32:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9qnmf+o47r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040604213216.39399.qmail@web80314.mail.yahoo.com>


--- rowena_grunnionffitch 
>   Pesonally I thought he was delightful. Not that I
> didn't like 
> Richard Harris' version but he played up D's age and
> wisdom. Gambon 
> on the other hand plays up D's energy and
> whimsicallity. Both 
> perfectly acceptable takes on the character IMO.

I think maybe a lot of Richard Harris' performance was
due to the fact that he was already in failing health.
 I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm very interested
to see Gambon's take.  The critics certainly love him
-- I don't think I've read a review that didn't say he
was great.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From bd-bear at verizon.net  Fri Jun  4 21:36:01 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 21:36:01 -0000
Subject: The Map in PoA (was :Sleepless in Sweden)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040603023015.00986db0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <c9qq01+4i52@eGroups.com>

>>>GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:

And to repeat what Nick said, I say to you and everyone else, stay 
until the very end - while there's no extra clip tagged on, the 
credits end in a more than appropriate manner... (though I don't 
know how many people will have the patience to sit it out - it is a 
LONG list!).<<<

I usually stay through the credits for every movie I see, but I was 
too disappointed in this one to care much past the cast. Can you e-
mail me off-list and tell me what was there? I'm hoping it was 
something akin to the way the actual book ended on the train. My e-
mail is bd-bear at verizon.net. Thanks!

Barbara
aka bd-bear





From tzakis1225 at netzero.com  Fri Jun  4 22:11:06 2004
From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 22:11:06 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing in PoA Movie
Message-ID: <c9qs1q+s8pj@eGroups.com>

Spoiler Space
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
OK, I just got back from seeing the movie with my 9y/o.  Overall I 
was very happy with the film, except for the Shreiking Shack scene, 
where they totally dropped the ball, IMHO.   

I don't have anything else to say that hasn't already been said 
better by others as far as reviewing the movie.  I just wanted to add 
a couple of observations to the list of possibilities of what JKR was 
referring to when she said there was foreshadowing in the movie 
(besides the hints at a R/H ship that are very evident here).

In the first Divinations class, Trelawney turns her gaze on Ron and 
seems a little shocked and says something to the effect of "Your aura 
is positively pulsing".  Hints at Seer Ron??

I'm going to preface this by saying that I absolutely hate the 
Vampire Snape theory, but when he enters the room to teach DADA for 
Lupin the first thing he does is cover the windows so no light gets 
in.  Granted he does proceed to show something on some sort of 
projector but my first thought was that the Vampire Snape theorists 
are gonna love this.  

Others have written about the scene when Lupin talks to Harry about 
Lily.  Seemed to me that there was more than friendship, at least on 
Lupin's part.

Lastly, in the Shreiking Shack, Snape refers to Lupin and Sirius as 
bickering like an old married couple.  The Remus/Sirius shippers will 
love that(and the hug).

Demetra (who is prone to motion sickness and probably should not have 
seen the movie in an IMAX theater)  




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Fri Jun  4 22:40:58 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 16:40:58 -0600
Subject: HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9qg7c+fgf0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003401c44a85$0215deb0$0400a8c0@pensive>

Hi everyone,

Ok, I'd better do this first.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E


I went to see the movie today with my best friend, her three boys, ages 10
to 14, and a friend of the boys.  My friend and I are in our 40's.  We were
all disappointed in the movie, except the boys' friend, who had not read the
books and so was unfamiliar with the story.  Here are some of our
observations.

None of us liked Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore.  It just felt unreal and
didn't seem to carry off the character of Dumbledore.  We were all concerned
that the relationship between the marauders wasn't really brought out, or
even the fact that the marauders were who they were.  But that's been
mentioned here before.  The lack of the Quidditch cup was disappointing,
too.  And the Firebolt!  That was so important in the book with it being
confiscated and everything.  This way, it appeared that they lost the one
match, and that was it for Quidditch for the rest of the year.  We were also
disappointed that it was never mentioned why the marauders learned to
transform into animals, and that James was a stag.  It was also odd that
when Harry conjured his patronus at the end, it did not charge the
dementors, as it does in the books.  It was computer generated, so that
should have been easy to do.

We all agreed about the actors.  We thought that Hermione's character was a
little over the top, and Emma Watson seemed to be overdoing it a bit.  We
actually liked Dan's way of being understated in his portrayal of Harry.
Until they do a movie of OOTP, and we get into Harry's temper, that's really
how Harry is.  Unlike what some others have said, I like how Dan speaks his
lines.  Sometimes, when he is being interviewed, he can be a little hard to
understand, so having him speak clearly and kind of laid back is nice.
Ron's part seems to be getting smaller and smaller all the time, doesn't it?
We all wished we could have seen Snape lose his ever-present cool, either in
the shack or in the hospital wing!  

For me personally, I had a few different observations.  I am blind, so I
don't get a visual sense out of movies.  I felt the sound in this one could
have been better.  There were times when the dialog was hard to hear or
understand.  Especially, in the shrieking shack ... it had a kind of echo to
the sound, and it was difficult to hear what everyone was saying.  And I'd
be curious to know what people thought of the dementor scenes.  In the book,
whenever Harry is around a dementor, he hears the murders of his parents.
However, in the movie, we just get annoying music.  It didn't make the
dementors seem very scary to me without hearing what Harry hears.  But
maybe, that's just me.

However, lest you think we all totally disliked it ... we loved Buckbeak,
Professor Trelawney, Lupin and Sirius.  The moments between Harry and Sirius
were especially touching, as well as the scenes between Harry and Lupin.  I
loved how the twins still finish each other's sentences and speak the same
things at the same time!

Well, this has been way longer than I expected.  I am sorry.  Overall, I
enjoyed it, but I didn't think it was as good as the previous two, from a
story and plot viewpoint.  But then, as POA is my favorite of the books,
it's probably understandable that the movie just doesn't measure up for me.
I would like to go see it again, because I'm sure I will enjoy it more if I
do.

Sherry




From caroline.bulcke at telenet.be  Fri Jun  4 22:46:03 2004
From: caroline.bulcke at telenet.be (Caroline Bulcke)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 00:46:03 +0200
Subject: PoA
References: <c9qs1q+s8pj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004a01c44a85$bd5cae10$3b6ce0d5@sn4097187063>

<possible spoiler>
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*




OK, I just got back from PoA and I LOVED it. the details are just perfect and the way it's all filmed.....wonderful!!
IMO, the scene in the Shrieking Shack was a bit .... I dunno, that could have been better. Snape could have been angrier, and also the rest seemed to be 'solved' too quickly there. 
I loved snape in the granny outfit! :-)
One more minus : dumbledore. too swift, too quick,....also the make up....not as good as with Harris. 
I loved the way the Whomping Willow was filmed with the birds and the leaves, I loved the dementors passing the flowers that died instantly, the filming through the clock, etc. The kids are also so much better in this movie. Gary Oldman...just perfect as Sirius, and the same goes for Lupin. As I said : One GREAT movie!

hey, did anyone else spotted Ian Brown of the band the Stone Roses as a punter in the Leaky Cauldron? 

I can't wait to see the movie again!!!

goodnight!

caroline

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




From hermione81 at free.fr  Fri Jun  4 23:24:17 2004
From: hermione81 at free.fr (Hermione81)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 01:24:17 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Michael Gambon as DD + about the shot through
	the clock tower and the ticking sounds (SPOILERS)
In-Reply-To: <1086387144.1945.15200.m14@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCE6D141.183D%hermione81@free.fr>

Hi everyone!


*Warning: this contains some spoilers*


Wow, so many posts lately on this list, it's getting really tough to follow!
:)

OK, so here is Mathilde from Paris, saw PoA twice on its opening day here
(Wednesday), and really, really, really loved it. I started typing my own
review, but haven't yet found the time to complete and send it here;
however, I just wanted to send a quick (...) post about three points:

1/ Michael Gambon as Dumbledore: I am very surprised to read so many
complaints about him here. As for me, I never quite bought Richard Harris as
DD. Don't get me wrong, he was very nice, but far too much like a very nice
and sweet old grand-father...he didn't have the charisma and subtle
craziness I like so much in book!Dumbledore.
Michael Gambon, on the other hand, just *is* Dumbledore (at least for me).
He's so perfect. He has the energy and playfulness of the deliciously
excentric but oh so wise wizard... Just fantastic.
Well, anyway it's all a matter of taste, and I don't like to compare those
two actors, but if I had had to chose between Harris and Gambon, for me it's
Gambon all the way! ;)

2/ something totally different... I remember someone (can't remember who,
sorry, I'm on digest diet, and I'm too lazy to try and track it down, but it
was posted a couple of days ago by someone from England, I think) wondering
about that marvelous travelling through the clock tower in the Time-Turner
sequence (well, actually, there are two travellings, 'framing' the whole
Time-Turner sequence) had been made.
Now, I can't quite answer that question as it is far too technical for me
(could ask my dad, though, he's a cinematographer). BUT: I think you might
be interested in knowing that PoA is on the cover of this month's American
Cinematographer. Inside the mag is a very nice and interesting story about
Michael Seresin's (amazing) work on the movie. It's really great; I haven't
had the time to read it seriously yet, but I had a quick look, and it's
quite worth the read, I think. Seresin explains his choices in terms of
light and framing, and also talks about how they treated the CG sequences
and all... If anyone on the list is interested, I could send them the story
via e-mail (I have it scanned and saved to my hard drive as a PDF file).
Actually, I would love to upload it somewhere on the list's server so that
anyone could go and check it out as they will, but I don't know if that's
possible? Maybe one of the Elves could 'enlumos' me about that?

3/ someone else (or was it the same person as in 2?) was also wondering
which sequence had ticking sounds all the way through it ?well, it is
actually (what else!) the Time-Turner sequence.  :)  You can hear ticking
virtually all the way through, be it in the music or just as a very remote
background sound... It's quite brilliant. Well, the whole sequence was
brilliant, as was the music. I loved the bit when Hermione turns the TT and
we see everything that happened in the course of the past three hours in
fast rewind... Anyone noticed the guy whose mummy-like bandages were removed
by Madame Pomfrey? That was hilarious! :)))

Ah, well. I think I'll have to see the movie a few more times... I'll
probably go again on Monday. Can't wait to see it again! I also LOVED the
ending credits, it was so cute...and what a nice and sweet final touch.

What a wonderful, beautiful, and surprisingly moving movie! I'll try and
post my (very long) review over the week-end; although many have already
done so, I feel like I have to post what I thought of it. I just have to. I
loved the movie too much to not be a poster this time.  :)


Mathilde








From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 23:24:30 2004
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 23:24:30 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  New Look + Review
In-Reply-To: <c9pt8t+c3qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9r0be+s83f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "celticangel1976"
<celticangel at t...> wrote:
> I agree with you Brooke.  While I think Gambon does a fine job in 
> his own right, he's not Dumbledore.  
> 
> There's an innocence (for lack of a better word) to Dumbledore that 
> is missing in this movie.  He's always described as being so sweet 
> and grandfatherly and by looking at him you'd never guess he's the 
> powerful wizard that he is.  I  don't get this at all with Gambon.  
> 
> But I think part of that isn't just the actor, but the new "look" of 
> Dumbledore as well.  Sadly, Harris just WAS Dumbledore for me and 
> Gambon just isn't.
> 
> CelticAngel

bboy_mn:

Richard Harris has a certain natural charisma to him that has carried
him through this acting career. This is also a charisma we would
expect Dumbledore to have, and that allowed Harris to portray
Dumbledore very well.  Regardless of how lightly he plays Dumbledore,
and underlying essense comes through.

One thing I whole heartedly agree on is Gambon/Dumbledore's new look;
atrocious. Dumbedore is an old, wise, and respected wizard who holds
may other promenent and prestigious positions as well has
headmastership of the school. I really don't see him dressing in old
burlap sacks and tying his beard with a rubber band. He looks more
like a scruffy bum of a wizard than a powerful wizard known to and
respected by the entire wizard world. It's hard to maintain an aura of
dignity when every wizard on the street dresses better than he does.

Also, as someone else pointed out, while his speech doesn't come
abnormally fast, it doesn't have that slow reflective quality that
Harris brought to the role. That reflective and introspective quality
is what gives 'whatever actor' a sense of a deep thinker and deep wisdom.

That said, I have no problem with Gambon as Dumbledore, and in the
next movie, the staging and costumes might be different. 

My overal view of the film was that Curon made it much smoother. Time
is compressed reasonably well and the transitions are smoother. With
Columbus, CoS was filled with very quick jump cuts, Curon was smoother
and less jarring. 

I have no problems with the rewrite, all the right things were said to
the right people, even if occassionally by the wrong person (with
regard to the book). But, I am still critical of the lack of scene and
character development. As with all the movies, a few more minutes of
movie would have fleshed it out nicely. It would have provide time to
build a characters motivation, rather than leaving the viewer to
assume it.

The movie is visually wonderful. The countryside of Scotland is breath
taking. The overal color and texture is extremely pleasing.

My main complaint is the same one I had with all the movie, they cut
it short to please the 'bean counters' at the sacrifice of pleasing
the audience and fulfilling the movies potential.

That's all for now.

bboy_mn




 





From diana at slashcity.com  Fri Jun  4 23:39:40 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 19:39:40 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1957 HP Fan
References: <AJFPHPNFDOCAIMAA@mailcity.com>
Message-ID: <03be01c44a8d$8b68c580$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

From: "DEBRA JO SMITH" <djs504 at lycos.com>
> 
> I've got the HP fan that was born in 1960 beat: I have born in 1957.
> Debby

And I have you both beat - I was born in 1956.  <g>

Diana W.




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 23:46:26 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 23:46:26 -0000
Subject: POA Reaction In Brief....
Message-ID: <c9r1ki+m6fc@eGroups.com>

If it were me, I would just avoid all reviews until seeing the film 
but....for some of y'all who'll refuse to do that...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E

LIKED:
The New Dumbledore...I've noticed most of you have the opposite 
opinion, but I always imagined him as sarcastic and a little crazy, 
like Gambon's Dumbldore...Never feeble and simply wise, like Harris 
(RIP) played him.

The look (more darkly gothic), pacing (great transitions), and 
details (magic in the back)....A+++ in my book. :-D As a huge critic 
of the first two, for those very reasons, I am more than pleased 
with this. :-D

The Time-Turner...The first cool object from the story realized as 
such in the film.

The Weasley Twins 

Trelawny...airly sarcastic...Loved her. :-)

The whomping willow...Kill those birds!!

The slash scar detail on Lupin's face...

Harry's mussed hair

The sexual metaphors...Seemed like Cuaron was flipping off those who 
assumed he'd put some Y Tu Mama in it...so he did. ("You've got to 
stroke it!!") :-)

Buckbeak...He's the antithesis of Stone's Firenze.


DISLIKED
Lupin's werewolf...A skinny mutant??? Huh?

A line Harry gave about living in a cottage in the country with 
Sirius...He sounded just a little too much like Lego...umm...Orlando 
Bloom's Paris telling his stolen woman he'd hunt rabbit for 
her...bleeeh.

Harry's lip over-trembling in a poignant scene in the snow...Maybe 
he was cold??

The Shrieking shack scene. It was a bit clunky. Although seriously 
(no pun intended) I don't know how he could have possibly pulled 
that off seemlessly...

Okay these three are really nit-picky, because I honestly believe if 
he'd included everything, it would have been too long and would have 
ultimately hindered the film. And of course, EVERYTHING from the 
books can't be in the movies. However, for me, these were missed 
most...

No, flashback of what happened that fateful night when Pettigrew cut 
off his finger...

No, picture of Harry's parents with Sirius

No, explanation of the meaning of Padfoot, Moony, Wormtail, and 
Prongs...(though, I do believe Cuaron's inclusion of it was treat 
for the fans, only :-)


Overall it was faaar anad away superior to the the first two, which 
got a mediocre ** stars a piece, from me. 

This one gets ***1/2 out of 5. 

I'm seeing it again this weekend.  :-D




From diana at slashcity.com  Sat Jun  5 00:39:37 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 20:39:37 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers
References: <003401c44a85$0215deb0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <041601c44a96$78619f30$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

Just having got back from the movie, these were my impressions:

Overall, I liked it.  It felt more like a grown-up movie rather than
appealing to the kiddies, and the magic was down-played instead of "oh,
gosh, magic!"

Spoiler space
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Things I really liked:
The twins - like the way they look with the longer hair.  Suddenly, all the
fanfiction about the Weasley twins makes sense.  Yum!  *g*

Sirius and Harry's moment together outside the Whomping Willow.  I really
felt the emotion in that scene.  Considering that most of the rest of the
movie seemed to be on speed, that moment of contemplation and quiet talk was
nice.

The humor - the lines "Professor Lupin is having a really bad night" from
Harry and Snape's comment about Sirius and Remus bickering like an old
married couple made everyone around me laugh.  And Hermione popping up with
Ron trying to figure out where she came from - that was a nice running joke.
And Sirius telling Harry that James said he should stay Padfoot permanently,
and Sirius saying he wouldn't mind the tail but couldn't take the fleas -
LOL!

Hagrid's suit - that was just as ugly as I imagined it from the book.

The acting - I think it was better than in the past movies, improving with
age.  I mostly liked Thewlis as Lupin, although he acted a little
punch-drunk during the boggart scene.  I particularly liked his scenes with
Harry: on the bridge and at the end.

Snape-in-a-dress - particularly when he looked so confused.  What can I
say - I'm a pervert.  (Anyone really surprised by that?)

The Knight bus - what a scream!  I loved that part.

Things I was ambivalent about:
Michael Gambion as Dumbledore.  I liked some of the quirkiness he brought to
the role, but I didn't get a sense of either great wisdom as I did from
Richard Harris, nor of power that you get from Gandalf's portrayal in LOTR.

The change in costuming - it really doesn't matter to me what they're
wearing, but I didn't feel as much cohesiveness with them out of uniform for
most of the movie.  And where is Harry getting clothes that fit him from?

Marge blowing up - while I like that bit, it did seem to drag while she was
inflating.  I'd rather that they sped up the whole thing, and save the
screen time for more important scenes.

Trelawney - I liked Emma Thompson in the role, but again, there wasn't a
chance to develop the character.  Hermione's outburst seems a bit much given
that we hardly get to see Trelawney's phoney act - she acts a bit like she's
having a temper-tantrum because she's been insulted (which is what Lavender
and Parvati think, but we know differently).

The werewolf - okay, while it was a cool looking creature, I thought
werewolves were supposed to look more like wolves, otherwise why the need to
have ways to spot the differences between wolves and werewolves.  I would
think "walking around on two hind legs and looking like a skinny, hairy,
naked man" would be quite evident.  No way I'd confuse that with a wolf.
Now, Sirius as Padfoot - *that* I would confuse with a wolf.


Things I didn't like:
Flitwick - why on earth did they change him?  I wanted to break into "We
represent the Lollypop League" when I first saw him.

The Shrieking Shack scene - why on earth did they leave out the history of
the Marauders?  Someone who hasn't read the books would have no idea why
Sirius was a dog, or Peter a rat, and James as a stag is never mentioned, so
the whole power behind the stag patronis and Harry thinking it is his dad is
lost.  You get no sense of the closeness of the three, and why it was such a
betrayal on Peter's part - all that's said is that he followed Sirius around
a lot.  Sounds more like a stalker than a good friend.  And the back-story
between Snape and Sirius - it gives me a bad feeling for what they're going
to leave out in films 4 & 5 if they're not going to touch on the animosity
between Snape and Sirius.  Snape just comes out as looking vindictive for no
reason.  I would rather cut out the ride-the-whomping-willow scene to
include the most dramatic scene in the whole series (in my opinion).

The hospital scene - okay, I admit I'm a Snape fan, but there's more than
just the anticipation of Snape tearing up the scenary from that scene.
Snape's triumph turning into disappointment, the looks exchanged between him
and Dumbledore, the sense of dynamics between the characters changing -
gone.

Ron's attack - why did they leave that out?  It was a perfect opportunity to
show how murderous Black is and that he's gotten into the castle more than
once.  Instead they have Ron dreaming about spiders making him tap-dance?
Huh?

Super-Hermione - I like the character, but honestly, if she gets any bigger
of a part, they might just as well rewrite it to be The Girl Who Lived.
Doesn't anyone else think around there?  What would they do without the
"brightest witch of your time"?  And speaking of the last bit, about halfway
through the movie, the people sitting in front of me started saying "wimpy
wimpy wimpy" every time we saw Draco or Ron and "hefty hefty hefty" every
time we saw Hermione.  It would have been annoying if it hadn't been damn
funny...

The Firebolt - I'm less concerned about this missing bit than the shack and
infirmary scenes, but I thought the way it stresses the dynamics of the
Golden Trio was important.

Harry's crying scene - that seemed so false to me (and not just Dan's
attempt to act like he was crying).  Harry may not be the Angry-Young-Man
that he is in book 5, but I just don't see him running off to indulge in
tears like that.  Furius and upset enough to cry and yell at the same time,
but not boo-hooing cause his widdle feewings are hurt.

Okay, I think that's my take on it for now.  Will have to see it again to
absorb more of the movie - there was so much going on in it.

Diana W.





From Snarryfan at aol.com  Fri Jun  4 22:42:53 2004
From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 22:42:53 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing in PoA Movie
In-Reply-To: <c9qs1q+s8pj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9qttd+erjq@eGroups.com>

> Spoiler Space
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> Demetra: 
> I just wanted to add a couple of observations to the list of 
> possibilities of what JKR was referring to when she said there 
> was foreshadowing in the movie (besides the hints at a R/H ship 
> that are very evident here).


*grin* Ron imitating Malfoy : "it's too late, they'll cut it..."

 
> In the first Divinations class, Trelawney turns her gaze on Ron and 
> seems a little shocked and says something to the effect of "Your 
aura 
> is positively pulsing".  Hints at Seer Ron??



Good one, but it's Kloves's work, not Cuaron. But Kloves knows one or 
two things, so...


 
> I'm going to preface this by saying that I absolutely hate the 
> Vampire Snape theory, but when he enters the room to teach DADA for 
> Lupin the first thing he does is cover the windows so no light gets 
> in.  Granted he does proceed to show something on some sort of 
> projector but my first thought was that the Vampire Snape theorists 
> are gonna love this.  


I thought to the projector too. I'm not a fan of the vampire theory, 
but there is something else, and I think that is the clue. For two 
seconds, in the Shack, we have Snape's POV, and it's strange, like if 
Snape saw the world trough a lens.

 
> Others have written about the scene when Lupin talks to Harry about 
> Lily.  Seemed to me that there was more than friendship, at least
>on Lupin's part.


Again, Kloves's work, not Cuaron. And yeah, friendship. Or else, she 
saw the 'beauty' of Snape :D



Christelle





From nacetroy at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  4 23:12:40 2004
From: nacetroy at hotmail.com (etlrideryh36)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 23:12:40 -0000
Subject: Intro - POA  Review/Rant  **Spoilers**
Message-ID: <c9qvl8+4cbc@eGroups.com>

Hi, just joined this sister list and HpfGU.  My apologies if I am 
posting in a clumsy way.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S



Saw the premier last night and must say I was drawn in at first but 
then became increasingly disappointed with how the movie was handled.

The darker feel was nice, but I think the director went far too much 
for flash and lacked very good background or character development.  
I understand the overacting comments in some of the posts/reviews but 
believe the main actors did well or have come along nicely.  Except 
for Gambon as Dumbledore ? there is not the same kind of
gentleness 
that Harris had.

Mostly, I find myself unsatisfied with the utter lack of key 
information.  Sure the target audience has most likely read the book 
at least once?but I argue that that is all the more reason to
create 
a logical, flowing story in the movie.  While the feel was nicely 
dark, there was a lack of the quaint and innocent aspects that are in 
the book.  If these were better developed in the movie, it would make 
the dark parts all the more thrilling.  I believe for the future 
films to be successful, the producers and screenwriter will have to 
translate the complexities of the story to the movie.  After this bit 
of a let down, I at least can console myself by re-reading the 
book!  : )

"etlrideryh36"




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 00:51:25 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 00:51:25 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9pt8t+c3qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9r5ed+vp3s@eGroups.com>

CelticAngel <celticangel at t...> wrote:
> I agree with you Brooke.  While I think Gambon does a fine job in 
> his own right, he's not Dumbledore.  There's an innocence (for 
> lack of a better word) to Dumbledore that is missing in this movie.  
> He's always described as being so sweet and grandfatherly and by 
> looking at him you'd never guess he's the powerful wizard that he 
> is.  I don't get this at all with Gambon.  But I think part of that 
> isn't just the actor, but the new "look" of Dumbledore as well.  
> Sadly, Harris just WAS Dumbledore for me and Gambon just isn't.

I will learn to like Gambon in the role, don't get me wrong, it will 
just take some getting used to.  The movie is great, I wish they 
hadn't cut it so short though.  It moves so fast it almost feels a 
little rushed.  I wish they had gone into more of the relationship 
with Sirius, Remus, Peter and James.

"Brooke"




From hmtomcat at sbcglobal.net  Sat Jun  5 01:00:05 2004
From: hmtomcat at sbcglobal.net (TJ Mallon)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 20:00:05 -0500
Subject: PoA Review
Message-ID: <mailman.15.1576048047.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

Spoiler Space
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
 
*
 
I went to a midnight showing this morning.  Theater was packed with mostly
teenagers and their parents.  Quite a few people were dressed up in wizards
hats and/or Hogwarts robes.  One kid, whom everyone kept calling "Harry"
when he walked by, was completely dressed up in the school uniform,
including sweater, house tie, robe and Harry's glasses.  Despite all the
noise before the movie started, everyone did settle down and watched the
movie (I've been in movies where noise from the audience has distracted from
the movie - try watching Return Of The Jedi back in 1983 in a theater full
of Army basic trainees who would not shut up)
 
Since it was mostly an older audience, most of them caught the symbolism of
the very first scene of Harry "playing" under the covers with his wand and
that brought a chuckle to many.  As well as the hug between Sirius and Lupin
the shack and Snape's comment about an old married couple.
 
I don't know about everyone else, but watching on a regular movie screen, I
got dizzy watching the Knight Bus sequence (I can only imagine how the
person who said they watched it in IMAX felt).  Actually, that was perfect
because that's the impression I felt I should get from the description in
the book.
 
Something felt off about Arthur telling Harry about Sirius - someone
mentioned the actor playing Arthur seeming off in his delivery.  I'm not
quite sure if that's it, but the scene just didn't feel right to me.
 
I don't remember it raining in the book during the train ride (I could only
remember it raining at Hogwarts when they arrive in GoF and I haven't
consulted PoA book yet - too busy catching up on the sleep I missed last
night), but I suppose it was an artistic choice to highlight the gloomy
nature of this movie.
 
Michael Gambon as Dumbledore - I know most of the reviews in
newspapers/magazines have been praising him, but his characterization just
does not grab me the way Richard Harris' did.  He didn't seem as warm and
endearing as RH.  And what was with the beard in a ponytail thing?  I don't
remember Dumbledore doing that in the books and I thought it just looked
funny.  It was harder to focus on the character when I was shaking my head
over his appearance.
 
David Thewlis was a fine addition as Lupin, except I thought his mustache
looked funny.  I thought there was something more than friendship there - at
least on his side - when he was talking about Lily.  I didn't like how it
was never really made clear how close Lupin was to James.  
 
Poor Maggie Smith.  She had a "blink and you'll miss her" role in this
movie.  Heck, Alan Rickman had more to do in the last movie and I thought he
had been shortchanged there.  McGonagall fared even worse than that this
time.
 
Poor Alan, as well.  I hope for his sake he hasn't read the book and
realizes how much meaty material he missed out on in this movie (PoA and
OotP probably provide the most Snape for the money in the books and after
this movie, I shutter to think how much they will cut in the OotP movie re:
his character) - I don't want Alan to decide he's not getting enough to do
since he's one of my favorite actors and the one about whose casting I was
most enthusiastic before the first movie.  Snape has such a pivotal role in
the whole ending and he comes off as almost an afterthought.  From watching
to movie, I'm not sure what was the purpose of seeing him the Shrieking
Shack to begin with.  He had nothing to do but get knocked out and step out
of character to overtly protect the kids.  He was excellent in the DADA
class (that scene and the deleted scene of the potions class from PS/SS come
closest in the movies to capturing Snape's caustic snark from the books) and
everyone was laughing loud and long at the boggart scene.  Anyone else
notice how long Alan had to stand there in that dress?  For someone who in
the books always tried to be nice to Snape no matter what, Lupin almost
purposely in the movie seems to leave Boggart Snape in his form longer than
necessary.  I do wish we could have seen the potions class with the
Shrinking Solution to get an idea of Neville's fear of Snape - nothing in
any of the movies has suggested the level of fear of Snape that Neville
showed when simply saying his name to Lupin - it seemed like it came out of
left field, since we didn't get an idea of it in the previous movies either.
Surely it wouldn't have added too much extra time to the movie.
 
Also, Lupin's statement that he thought the boggart would turn into
Voldemort did not make sense since Harry started to face it and the boggart
quite obviously turned into a dementor.
 
Most of the Weasleys - Molly, Percy, Ginny and the twins - all have blink
and you'll miss them roles as well (actually, Ginny did in the book as well,
so that's probably not unexpect as the others).  We did get one "I'm the
Head Boy" line from Percy, but without his strutting pomposity, the
significance is lost.  The twins only seemed to exist in this movie to give
Harry the Marauders' Map.  However, I don't recall in the books them being
aware that Harry even has an Invisibility Cloak - can't you imagine them
trying to borrow it all the time if they did?  Plus, with them knowing Harry
has the cloak, their motivation for giving him the map (that they felt bad
because he couldn't get into Hogsmeade) is lost.
 
I kept waiting for one of the twins to say that Oliver was trying to drown
himself in the shower during the hospital scene after the Quidditch match.
Gone and apparently forgotten.  *Shakes head*  And I thought the telling of
what happened to Harry's broom fell flat.  They brought out the pieces of
the broom too soon, which took away the feeling that Ron and Hermione were
afraid to break his heart by telling him what happened to his believed
broom.  Also, I didn't like the look of the Firebolt at the end.  Compared
to it, the Nimbus looked like a work of art.  I thought the Firebolt was
ugly and I was expecting that it would be sleek and beautiful from the
description in the book.
 
Emma Thompson as Sybil provided much-needed comic relief in this darker
movie, but her prophecy scene just seemed stuck in there without
explanation.  Without reading to the book, would everyone really have
understood the connection between her prophecy and Peter?  The shortchanging
of the whole Shrieking Shack scene doesn't help either, as we don't really
get a clear idea of what Peter really did and how closely tied to Voldemort
he is.  Plus, the lack of explanation of her second accurate prophecy
doesn't allow for foreshading of the revelation of the content of the first
prophecy in OotP.  How many people spent years between PoA and OotP
speculating as to the content of her first prophecy?  Shouldn't they be
catering to all movie goers and not just those who have read the books.
Rather poor of them to just assume everyone has read the books.  My mother
hasn't, so these nuances that I point at as missing she doesn't even realize
they're not there, so I don't think she's getting the full experience.
 
Hermione was a little too obvious letting her time turner hang out in
various scenes.  This is not an unknown wizarding device, so I would think
there would be at least a few students (like Draco) who would recognize what
she had if they saw it.  And I didn't get the sense that she was falling
apart under the strain of all the courses she was talking.  In the book,
both her striking Draco and leaving Trelawney's class came off as much about
her finally snapping under the strain as about her feelings about Draco and
Sybil's class.  Here, they both seemed to come a little bit out of left
field.  Her characterization was the biggest departure in the movie from the
book but for one thing - the Shrieking Shack scene.
 
*Sigh* The Shrieking Shack scene.  The climax of the story and it fell so
flat.  Again, would it have added too much extra time to show the following
-
1) How Sirius knew Peter was alive.  We saw the photo of the Weasleys from
the Daily Prophet earlier in the movie, so it would have only taken two
extra lines to explain.  "How did you know?"  "I saw his picture with that
family in the Daily Prophet"
2) The who and why of Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs and the Marauders'
Map.  If I hadn't read the book many times, I would not have understood the
significance of the stag Patronus.  Plus, it isn't explained earlier in the
movie how Lupin knew 1) that it was a map and 2) how to work it.  I'm
curious to talk to my mother, who loves the movies but I previously said has
never read the books, and see if she understood any of the subtext after
seeing this movie.   Maybe I ought to buy her a copy of PoA so she can see
what she's missing.
3) Connected with #2 above, Snape got really short shrift in this scene.
Okay, we get the idea that he strongly dislikes Lupin (from the scenes of
Snape finding Harry with the map - listening between the lines, I got the
impression he knew Lupin's connection to the map, even without the
"manufacturers" line - and his comments to Dumbledore after Sirius got into
the castle) and we got that he *hates* Sirius from his few lines in the
shack, but WHY?  I guess everyone behind the scenes figured that with
Dumbledore telling Harry how James saved Snape's life not being in the PS/SS
movie, they could skip in this movie why it had been necessary for James to
do so by ignoring the prank.  And although it is clear that Lupin, Sirius
and James were friends with Peter as a kind of tagalong, we're never given
the idea that all five characters are so closely tied together from being in
the same year at school to the prank.  And if we're correct about Snape
being the one who warned Dumbledore that the Potters were in danger .... I
know a lot of people who have read the books have tried to draw parallels
between MWPP, Lily, Snape and the present generation - from watching the
movies, you'd never guess there might be a parallel to be drawn.
4) It's never explained how Sirius escaped from Azkaban and how he didn't go
insane.  Again, a few lines could have added so much explanation.
5) Too much, too soon.  I didn't like how Harry saw Peter Pettigrew on the
map.  Would it really have hurt to have Snape catch him coming back from
Hogsmeade like in the book and thus finding the map, rather than catching
Harry in the hall at night looking for the supposedly dead Peter?  One of
the reasons PoA is my favorite book is because it keeps the suspense going
right up until Lupin says that Scabbers is Peter in the Shrieking Shack
(it's also at the end of a chapter in the book, so it's a nice little
cliffhanger going into the next chapter).  I remember thinking "Holy s**t!!*
the first time I read the book - that whole twist is why PoA is still my
favorite book of the series.  I had not seen that coming and until that
point, had never even suspected Sirius might be innocent (although when I
went back, I could see the subtle clues throughout).  However, the surprise
is taken away in the movie.  Oh, Harry saw a dead person on the map.  Since
this comes after the Hogsmeade visit where Harry overheard the story of
Peter's death, it's painfully obvious at this point that Sirius is innocent
of at least one of the crimes he supposedly committed and perhaps more.
YAWN.  That little revelation kills much of the suspense of the first
run-through of the Shrieking Shack scene and Harry ends up coming off as a
bit of a dunce for not realizing that perhaps it was Peter that Sirius was
after, not him.  Also, with Harry being the one who saw Peter on the map and
not Lupin, we lose the explanation of why Lupin ended up in the shack, as
well as the explanation of how Snape ends up there.  Remember, the shack
does not show up on the map, so he couldn't have seen Sirius on the map.  It
would have worked better if they'd gone with the book, had Snape catch Harry
coming from Hogsmeade then calling Lupin, then have Lupin see Peter on the
map heading for the Whomping Willow and then Snape following with the
Wolfsbane potion after seeing Lupin on the map.
6) Forgive me for the "let's abuse Snape" attitude, but I would have loved
to see the mobilicorpus scene.  I'm sure, given the mood of the audience in
the theater, that would have brought a big laugh, not to mention lending
credence to the emnity between Sirius and Snape.
7) What was the point of the fight between Moony and Padfoot and Snape
having to protect the Trio?  I didn't think it added anything to the story
(didn't Lupin just run off in the book?) and his standing in front of the
Trio was a bit overt for Snape, who is supposed to be a spy.  Spy=covert.
DUH!  It's a wonder Snape hasn't gotten himself killed in the movie universe
for being such a lousy spy.  And it's never explained how everyone got
rounded up and ended up in the infirmary - especially since Harry and Sirius
were separated from Snape, Ron and Hermione in the movie (they were all
together by the lake in the book).  What did Snape do, take Ron and Hermione
to the infirmary then head out looking for Harry and Sirius (or worse, send
Fudge and MacNair out after them)?  
8) Since Fudge was (presumably, since it's not really made clear in the
movie) still around, it didn't make sense for that long goodbye between
Harry and Sirius since Sirius really needed to get out of there as soon as
possible with Buckbeak.  They were supposed to be trying to escape, not get
caught again.
9) I would have loved to have seen Alan Rickman play Snape's blow-up when he
realizes that Sirius escaped again.
10) On further reflection, I didn't like Harry getting the Firebolt at the
end instead of at Christmas (when I first heard about it, I didn't think it
was that big a deal).  That's part of the overall mystery leading up to the
fact that Sirius is in fact innocent and we miss all that, not to mention
that it would have provided a hidden clue that Sirius really did care about
Harry and did not want to hurt him.  Plus, then we could have gotten a brief
scene on the train at the end with Sirius explaining about the Firebolt and
Ron getting Pigwidgeon since it was Sirius' "fault he no longer has a rat".
 
>From a critical standpoint, I would say this was a better movie than the
first two.  However, for me personally, since PoA is my favorite book, I
missed a lot of the things that makes it my favorite book.  I would have
rather had a movie which was just as long as the first two which explained
some of the plot holes rather than seeing how much truly important stuff got
left hanging.
 
Tracy
 
 
 
 


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





From monkshoodgardens at cox.net  Sat Jun  5 01:02:27 2004
From: monkshoodgardens at cox.net (MonkshoodGardens@cox.net)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 18:02:27 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 1957 HP Fan
References: <AJFPHPNFDOCAIMAA@mailcity.com> <03be01c44a8d$8b68c580$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <063501c44a98$c56ee4c0$6501a8c0@PaulaHP>


  > Debby:
  > I've got the HP fan that was born in 1960 beat: I have born in 
  > 1957.
  
  Diana W.:
  <And I have you both beat - I was born in 1956.  <g>

  
  And I have you all beat...I was born in 1952 :)

  Paula





From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 00:56:11 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 00:56:11 -0000
Subject: Two Thumbs up!  was: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9psf1+qlh5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9r5nb+cs41@eGroups.com>

Mandy:
> I too just saw a special screening last night.  You not in NYC by 
> chance are you? 
> <snip> 
> My only complaint is the Shrieking Shake scene, which has been 
> stripped down to its bare minimum.  I think it really short- 
> changes the depth of the relationship between Remus and Sirius. 
<snip>


Mandy, we saw the screening in Denver.  Lucked out at the last 
minute and didn't have to fight the crowds or anything.  

I also loved the part from the book in the Shrieking Shack and I 
guess was a little disapointed that not enough was told about the 
relationship between the 4 friends.  I loved, loved, loved Gary 
Oldman as Sirius.  Maybe in the dvd there will be additional scenes 
that didn't make the feature film.  

Can't wait to see the movie again and again!

"Brooke" 




From bethz1 at rcn.com  Sat Jun  5 01:14:44 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:14:44 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers
References: <003401c44a85$0215deb0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <005601c44a9a$7ca2ce80$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at earthlink.net>

> Well, this has been way longer than I expected.  I am sorry.  Overall, I
> enjoyed it, but I didn't think it was as good as the previous two, from a
> story and plot viewpoint.  But then, as POA is my favorite of the books,
> it's probably understandable that the movie just doesn't measure up for
me.
> I would like to go see it again, because I'm sure I will enjoy it more if
I
> do.

I had the same experience...POA is my favorite of the books and I wasn't
overly thrilled with the movie, but my sister was quick to point out that
that
was only because it was my favorite book and she would probably feel the
same way after GOF.  :-)

But I will be seeing it at least 3 more times, so we'll see if grows on me
more.
I thought it was a good movie and better than the previous two, but I just
wish
they hadn't taken so much 'important' stuff out.

Beth





From artsylynda at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 01:19:05 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:19:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] YAY!  I've seen it!!
Message-ID: <155.3690dd35.2df27989@aol.com>

I've been reading through some of the posts on here, and I've read lots of 
reviews, and I have to say, in my own, not humble at all opinion, Dan, Emma and 
Rupert have matured into their roles, matured as actors, and have "become" 
Harry, Hermione and Ron -- and I thought they were perfectly cast to start with.  
Rupert did a wonderful job whenever he had a scene -- he's not mugging for 
the camera in this one.  Emma was very natural and did a great job, but it 
bothered me that she not only had some of Ron's lines, but some of Harry's as 
well!!  Ah well, blame the screen writer.  Dan, dear Dan, and yes, I'm prejudiced 
(I'd adopt that kid in a heartbeat), showed a wide range of emotions quite 
well, I thought.  The person who said his crying didn't sound natural -- when I 
lost my mother, I cried exactly like Dan was crying, gutwrenching sobs, anger, 
grief, fear, all that mixed in together.  And I was an adult (25) when she died 
(she died the day before we would've gotten home to visit -- we lived 500 
miles from them -- I kicked myself for years for not getting home a day sooner. . 
. .)  I think we view actors' performances based on our own emotional 
history.  If we've had serious grief or serious shocks in our lives, tremendous ups 
and downs, as Harry has, then Dan's performance probably seems brilliant to us 
(it does to me).  If you're younger, haven't been through so much trauma, then 
it probably doesn't ring true.  But it did ring true to me.  

Visually, Cuaron has created a masterpiece.  I'm an artist (sculptor) and the 
use of color to set the mood is absolutely brilliant.  The little touches 
like Beaky dragging a talon in the water -- superb.  And Harry's joy in flying -- 
very much the Harry I know and love from the books.  I wish they'd done some 
things differently -- the Patronus should've been the stag, not the shield, 
IMO, but the Dementors flying instead of gliding made the shield make more 
sense.  I didn't like the goggles in the Quidditch game -- they distracted the eye 
from Harry's expressions, IMO.  The robes themselves were pretty cool.  I 
wouldn't have thougth the Seeker would be "# 7" since he's so important to the 
team -- that was a surprise.

I'm hoping Dan gets an Oscar nomination -- there are other young performers 
who've done work that didn't impress me as much who got nominated, and some 
even won (Tatum O'Neill, for instance -- she was wonderful in "Paper Moon" but 
didn't need to show the extremes of emotion and so forth that Dan does here).  I 
read somewhere Cuaron is interested in coming back for book 5 or 6 (I think 
it was -- maybe it was 6 or 7?).  I'd love to see him take on the stories that 
are even darker than this one.

I had planned all along to see the film at least 5 times in theaters, and I 
am a busy person and live a long way from theaters.  Now I'm wondering how many 
times I can squeeze it in before it leaves the theaters!  The film was so 
visually rich, it will take many viewings to see everything.


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  Sat Jun  5 01:23:48 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:23:48 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gambon as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <1ce.22cf5ff1.2df27aa4@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/4/2004 6:26:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
Just saw a special screening this evening and we thoroughly enjoyed 
  the movie, however I have a little problem with Gambon as 
  Dumbledore.  Visually he looks the part, but he talks too fast and 
  moves too fast.  Richard Harris as Dumbledore better portrayed the 
  part as described in the books.  He created the "presence" of 
  Dumbledore.   Did anyone else feel this way, or am I nuts?  

  "Brooke"
Dumbledore is described as being full of energy in the books.  It took me a 
while to get used to him, and I do miss Richard Harris (I preferred his white 
beard to Gambon's gray one, for one thing, and Harris's robes were much more 
Dumbledore than Gambon's, IMO).  He doesn't "twinkle" like Harris, either, but 
after a while, I decided he was okay -- just different.  Harris was perfect -- 
Gambon has big shoes to fill.  I don't understand why they replaced the Fat 
Lady, although the one they had was a kick.  I can't see the old one doing the 
kind of things this one did, not with the style this one has.  She was a hoot.  
;->


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  Sat Jun  5 01:24:59 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:24:59 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Ravens everywhere!
Message-ID: <48.2cb27c7f.2df27aeb@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/4/2004 6:26:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
*g* I think even though ravens are often seen as an indication for nearing 
death it's pretty cool to see so many relatives there *hehe*. I just wonder why 
they were at Buckbeak's would-be execution even though there was no one 
killed. But never mind
Okay, American farm girl here (middleaged, but you can't take the girl off 
the farm, sorry!) -- I thought they were crows, and that it was very funny 
Hagrid had a scarecrow that was totally ineffectual, heehee



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  Sat Jun  5 01:28:35 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:28:35 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Two Thumbs up!!
Message-ID: <117.33b77be4.2df27bc3@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/4/2004 6:26:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I, who knows the story inside-out (like most of us here) was 
overwhelmed by the sheer volume of detail in the film. It is truly 
spectacular. Every scene has multiple actions taking place at the 
same time and it's hard to know what to what to look at times.  More 
than once I was caught looking at some wonderful detail in the back 
ground and missed a crucial moment in one of the leads.  Multiple 
viewings are definitely in order. Oh, what a shame. ;-) 

It is a beautiful and exciting film. The magic is seen to be normal 
part of the Wizarding World, with things constantly moving, witches 
and wizards using magic in their daily lives, magical signs and 
writing on walls and floors. It is more how I imagined it to be, 
rather than the in first two films where the magic was always this 
special event.  The characters a growing beautiful, both emotionally 
and physically. A lot of the minor characters get to speak.  We see 
other sides of Neville and Draco, as well as more if the Weasley 
twins.  
I gasped at the stuff in the background -- did you see that giraffe??  My 
goodness, the DETAILS!!  Definitely a multiple viewing movie!!

I have two questions.  Who's the heavyset black boy who has several lines 
(not Dean Thomas, and I didn't think it was Lee Jordan), and who's the other 
Slytherin with Malfoy in a couple of scenes?  He wasn't with "just" Crabbe and 
Goyle -- in one or two scenes it was Crabbe (or Goyle, can't think which at 
present) and this other kid.  Why?  Does anyone know?

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


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




From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 01:40:45 2004
From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 01:40:45 -0000
Subject: HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers
In-Reply-To: <003401c44a85$0215deb0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <c9r8at+7gid@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Ok, I'd better do this first.
> 
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
> 
> However, lest you think we all totally disliked it ... we loved 
Buckbeak,
> Professor Trelawney, Lupin and Sirius.  The moments between Harry 
and Sirius
> were especially touching, as well as the scenes between Harry and 
Lupin.  I
> loved how the twins still finish each other's sentences and speak 
the same
> things at the same time!
> 

Hello.  I also saw the movie this afternoon only I was extremely 
disappointed with Lupin.  Why in the world did they have him yell at 
Harry after the Snape incident when Harry was roaming the hall with 
the map?   That was totally unlike Lupin in the book.  In this movie 
he had a very snotty personality so unlike the caring Lupin we fell 
in love with in the book.  Also, he is supposed to be poor. He did 
not come across as poor at all. There did not seem to be any close 
connection between Lupin and Harry. David Thewlis just did not do 
Lupin justice IMO.  Another thing that totally bothered me regarding 
Lupin was the fact that he did not wear wizard robes at all 
throughout the movie.  He wore a muggle suit, which does not make any 
sense.  Didn't mean to go on and on about poor Lupin but he is one of 
my favorite characters and I felt like the movie was ruined only 
because of him.  I wanted to cry in the theatre!! :-(   

Diana
 




From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 02:01:06 2004
From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 02:01:06 -0000
Subject: Two Thumbs up!!
In-Reply-To: <117.33b77be4.2df27bc3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9r9h2+7iol@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 6/4/2004 6:26:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> > 
> I have two questions.  Who's the heavyset black boy who has several 
lines 
> (not Dean Thomas, and I didn't think it was Lee Jordan), and who's 
the other 
> Slytherin with Malfoy in a couple of scenes?  He wasn't with "just" 
Crabbe and 
> Goyle -- in one or two scenes it was Crabbe (or Goyle, can't think 
which at 
> present) and this other kid.  Why?  Does anyone know?
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg, OoP

I was wondering the same things. I thought that maybe the black boy 
was Lee Jordan. I mean they changed so many other characters 
(Flickwick, Tom) why not Lee?  Which makes me wonder why they did 
change Tom's character.  He now looks like an unintelligent Ogre and 
that is not who Tom is supposed to be. They should have just used the 
same Tom from the first movie. It made it seem so unbelievable that 
that character could run the Leaky Cauldron.  

As for the other kid my guess is Theodore Nott. 

Diana






From jazmyn at furrystuff.com  Sat Jun  5 02:12:36 2004
From: jazmyn at furrystuff.com (mynti_pernworld)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 02:12:36 -0000
Subject: Not all reviews are good ones..
Message-ID: <c9ra6k+4sfe@eGroups.com>

Spolier space:





  


 


 


 







I was rather disappointed in POA.  I disliked the 'Tim Burton' feel to
the movie, it didn't feel right.  I didn't like all the deviations
from the books and how too much time was wasted on flashy special
effects that could have been used to make the movie feel less rushed.
They could have spent far less time on the Knight Bus and I could have
inflated Aunt Marge faster with a bike tire pump.

All the changes from the books were almost like they were written by
Snape (where in the book did he face off against the werewolf, being
as he was out cold at the time??), then the movie was edited by
Crookshanks, who removed half the movie and buried what was left over
in his litterbox for a week.  I left the theater wondering if I should
ask for my money back.  For those who have not seen it, wait and rent
it later, unless all you want to see is what Buckbeak looks like when
eating a dead ferret..

I still like Harry Potter, but someone get RID of this new director!!!

Jazmyn




From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 02:22:15 2004
From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 02:22:15 -0000
Subject: Not all reviews are good ones..
In-Reply-To: <c9ra6k+4sfe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9raon+4q1r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mynti_pernworld" <jazmyn at f...> 
wrote:
> Spolier space:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was rather disappointed in POA.  I disliked the 'Tim Burton' feel 
to
> the movie, it didn't feel right.  I didn't like all the deviations
> from the books and how too much time was wasted on flashy special
> effects that could have been used to make the movie feel less 
rushed.
> They could have spent far less time on the Knight Bus and I could 
have
> inflated Aunt Marge faster with a bike tire pump.
> 
> All the changes from the books were almost like they were written by
> Snape (where in the book did he face off against the werewolf, being
> as he was out cold at the time??), then the movie was edited by
> Crookshanks, who removed half the movie and buried what was left 
over
> in his litterbox for a week.  I left the theater wondering if I 
should
> ask for my money back.  For those who have not seen it, wait and 
rent
> it later, unless all you want to see is what Buckbeak looks like 
when
> eating a dead ferret..
> 
> I still like Harry Potter, but someone get RID of this new 
director!!!
> 
> Jazmyn

Yeah!! I agree with you.  Did anyone notice the changes they made to 
Hogwarts itself?  I mean the Great Hall was tiny and it didn't have 
the magic feel to it like in the other movies. It seems scruffy, like 
a castle with not enough magic in it.  The Leaky Cauldron had the 
same feel.  I even didn't like the way the grounds were set up. The 
lake that Harry was supposed to look over at the end and see himself 
was more like a little dirty pond that only appeared when it rained.  
I felt jarred throughout the movie because it was like I didn't know 
where I was. I was like, "Wait, this isn't the Hogwarts I know and 
love."  Someone pointed out the countryside was beautiful, which it 
was, and that is not what I am complaining about. 

Also, since when can the dementors fly?  I thought they just glided a 
bit.  I also didn't realize that Harry played Quidditich way above 
the clouds. Hmm...  Extremely disappointed here.

Diana




From tin_kim924 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 02:47:13 2004
From: tin_kim924 at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Tin=20Samson?=)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 03:47:13 +0100 (BST)
Subject: hagrid's hut, set/location (Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  New Look + Review)
In-Reply-To: <c9r0be+s83f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040605024713.6841.qmail@web42007.mail.yahoo.com>

 --- Steve <bboy_mn at yahoo.com> wrote: 

> One thing I whole heartedly agree on is
> Gambon/Dumbledore's new look;
> atrocious. Dumbedore is an old, wise, and respected
> wizard who holds
> may other promenent and prestigious positions as
> well has
> headmastership of the school. I really don't see him
> dressing in old
> burlap sacks and tying his beard with a rubber band.

yeah, i found that really weird, the tied beard
thing!!!

> That said, I have no problem with Gambon as
> Dumbledore, and in the
> next movie, the staging and costumes might be
> different. 

just want to say something about hagrid's hut...
somehow it bothered me that his hut looked different
(wasn't it?) and that it was so much further from
hogwarts than it was in the two previous movies.  i
remember from CoS that his hut was very close to
hogwarts in one of the scenes where the 3 kids visit
him.

actually, a lot of hogwarts looked different.  did
they use the same sets or locations?

oh and in SS and CoS, i don't remember the gryffindor
room entrance and portrait being by those moving
stairs!!  did anyone notice that?

those things kinda bothered me, that a lot of things
weren't consistent with the previous 2 films... i
guess i'm being narrow-minded.  but... eh... *shrug*


________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html



From Taykimson at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 03:23:23 2004
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com (Taykimson at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 03:23:23 -0000
Subject: POA Review - No Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9nsb4+3d0k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9rebb+111bs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "celticangel1976" 
<celticangel at t...> wrote:

  Curon is not my fav director, his 
> scene changes are annoying, but he did breath new life into the 
> movies.  The magic feels much more natural in this than the 
others.  
> Other than feeling a bit rushed and a little choppy, it was really 
> good.  
> 

My reply (Taykimson):
I agree - the scene changes kept throwing me for a loop...and it was 
definetely choppy.  At one point, I asked myself, OK, what happens 
next?  Of course this is not because I didn't know (I've read the 
book many, many times), I just kind of got lost with the rapid scene 
changes (with no transition).





From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 02:54:28 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 19:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not all reviews are good ones..
In-Reply-To: <c9ra6k+4sfe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040605025428.8056.qmail@web14202.mail.yahoo.com>

--- mynti_pernworld <jazmyn at furrystuff.com> wrote:
> Spolier space:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was rather disappointed in POA.  I disliked the
> 'Tim Burton' feel to the movie, it didn't feel right.  
> I didn't like all the deviations from the books and 
> how too much time was wasted on flashy special effects 
> that could have been used to make the movie feel less 
> rushed.  They could have spent far less time on the 
> Knight Bus and I could have inflated Aunt Marge faster 
> with a bike tire pump.
> 
> <snip> 
> 
> I still like Harry Potter, but someone get RID of
> this new director!!!


 I agree 100%...I was very disappointed with the
movie.
I will not see it again..
The first two movies I was able to suspend reality..
They did not seem like movies...It felt like I was at
Hogwarts. This time I didn't get that feeling....I
just sat there watching "a movie"...I could not get 
into it at all.

 Please someone...bring back Columbus as director....


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


	
		
 




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 03:40:28 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 03:40:28 -0000
Subject: Not all reviews are good ones..
In-Reply-To: <20040605025428.8056.qmail@web14202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9rfbc+ljp4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Barb <goalieracer at y...> wrote:
> --- mynti_pernworld <jazmyn at f...> wrote:
> > Spolier space:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I was rather disappointed in POA.  I disliked the
> > 'Tim Burton' feel to the movie, it didn't feel right.  
> > I didn't like all the deviations from the books and 
> > how too much time was wasted on flashy special effects 
> > that could have been used to make the movie feel less 
> > rushed.  They could have spent far less time on the 
> > Knight Bus and I could have inflated Aunt Marge faster 
> > with a bike tire pump.
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > 
> > I still like Harry Potter, but someone get RID of
> > this new director!!!
> 
> 
>  I agree 100%...I was very disappointed with the
> movie.
> I will not see it again..
> The first two movies I was able to suspend reality..
> They did not seem like movies...It felt like I was at
> Hogwarts. This time I didn't get that feeling....I
> just sat there watching "a movie"...I could not get 
> into it at all.
> 
>  Please someone...bring back Columbus as director....
> 
> 
> =====
> Elen sila lumenn omentielvo.  Aa' menle nauva calen ar' ta hwesta 
e' ale'quen le.


Two things. It IS a movie.
And...A movie should not be a a retread of the book.

Okay, three things. :-)
Though not perfect, I obviously loved it.




From Taykimson at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 03:47:05 2004
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com (Taykimson at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 03:47:05 -0000
Subject: Music
Message-ID: <c9rfnp+5ble@eGroups.com>

Spoiler Space:



















I missed the music from SS and CoS as well.  It seemed liked 
the "theme music" was only played twice...and the new music...was 
well, at best "grating and jarring", and at worst "stop, just stop, 
please stop, your making it hard for me to focus..."




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 03:35:59 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 03:35:59 -0000
Subject: Another observation -   SPOILER
Message-ID: <c9rf2v+qd09@eGroups.com>

Did anyone else get the feeling that the entire movie could have 
happened in  3 days instead of a school year?  It didn't "feel" like 
they were at school like the previous 2 movies did.  





From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sat Jun  5 04:11:38 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:11:38 -0000
Subject: POA  Review/Rant  **Spoilers**
In-Reply-To: <c9qvl8+4cbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9rh5q+n9tt@eGroups.com>

>>>"etlrideryh36" <nacetroy at h...> wrote:

Mostly, I find myself unsatisfied with the utter lack of key 
information.  Sure the target audience has most likely read the book 
at least once?but I argue that that is all the more reason to
create a logical, flowing story in the movie.  While the feel was 
nicely dark, there was a lack of the quaint and innocent aspects 
that are in the book.  If these were better developed in the movie, 
it would make the dark parts all the more thrilling.  I believe for 
the future films to be successful, the producers and screenwriter 
will have to translate the complexities of the story to the movie.  
After this bit of a let down, I at least can console myself by re-
reading the book!<<<

I wholeheartedly agree. . .the lack of "fun," "innocent" scenes 
really took away from the feel of Hogwarts for me.

I have my own rant to add, so here's some. . .

SPOILER SPACE

S


P


O


I


L


E


R


SPACE

Hope I put in enough space. . . :^)

Other people have wrote about this disappointment more succinctly 
and more eloquently, but I have to add my rant and I'll give 
specifics. I saw the movie today and was very disappointed. I love 
the books, LOVE them, and I don't think there's anything that had to 
be changed. I understand truncating a movie to fit in a 2-2 1/2 hour 
period, but there were things that were changed that I didn't see 
the need for. I didn't feel like the same fun and excitement of 
being at Hogwart's was included, as it was in the first two 
movies. . . even though things are getting harder for Harry each 
year and his life is in jeopardy, I still felt the third book 
included the fun and joy of life at school, the Hogsmeade trips, 
etc. Maybe I'm nitpicking but there were just so many things I think 
could have been done to stay true to the book but they were 
rewritten and I just don't get why!

Here are the things that bugged me, in no particular order:

1--It isn't supposed to be revealed that Peter is Scabbers until 
everyone's in the Shrieking Shack, NOT when Harry or Lupin are 
looking at the map!
2--The Boggart never assumes the shape of the Dementor in the first 
DADA class, Lupin steps in front of Harry before that happens. In 
the movie, we see a Dementor.
3--Marge flying off into the sky?! It's not enough for a movie that 
she's blown up like a blimp and floating on the ceiling, they had to 
have her fly off in the sky?
4--Harry seems more reckless with the Invisibility Cloak on his trip 
to Hogsmeade. If anyone had seen him when he wasn't supposed to be 
there, he would have been expelled.
5--Harry finds out about Sirius being his Godfather by standing in 
the room that the Profs. are talking in, instead of sitting with Ron 
and Hermione. And what was with Harry going off and crying?!
6--There is NO indication in the book of anything romantic between 
Ron and Hermione. I got the hints of Ron's embarrassment with 
Hermione in 2 & 3, but I figured it was typical boy pre-pubescent 
embarrassment, not a romantic thing. That didn't get hinted at until 
GoF and even then, very slightly. I winced when they held hands 
briefly and when Hermione held onto Ron after they thought Buckbeak 
had been killed.
7--Where was all the anger and resentment between R & H over the 
cat/rat thing? The one or two snipes they made at each other didn't 
seem enough to me.
8--No explanation of Hermione taking tons of classes and simply 
appearing or disappearing from Ron & Harry's side. The thing with 
Ron saying, did you see where she came from was dumb, IMO, because 
she never came to class late. She'd just disappear when Harry and 
Ron thought they were all walking together. I had to explain this 
whole storyline to my husband (who hasn't read the books) and make 
clear why DD would know Hermione had a Time Turner.
9--What about all of Trelawney's bogus predictions and stuff? 
Hermione storming out kind of made her look like a spoiled brat, 
without showing the kind of nonsense that she put up with from 
Trelawney. And as someone else mentioned, she's characterized in the 
book as falling apart under the strain, constantly sitting with tons 
of books, etc. None of that was portrayed.
10--In the scene with Lupin taking the map from Harry, when Lupin 
said don't go wandering around the castle because I'll know about 
it, why didn't Harry say, "What do you mean, it's just an old piece 
of parchment?" In the book, Lupin doesn't say this to Harry and we 
don't find out until later that he co-wrote it. Which brings me to 
my next point. . .
11--There's no explanation why Snape wants the revenge on Sirius 
(doesn't he say "Revenge is sweet" or something to that effect when 
he finds them all in the shack?). Is it ever explained in the first 
two movies (or in this movie) that Sirius played a dangerous joke on 
Snape and that's why Snape hates him and James and the others? In 
the book, the map insults Snape as if it knows him. That gives us 
the sense of the animosity between them and Snape, but we don't 
really understand that in the movie.
12--Harry & Hermione aren't supposed to see themselves leave the 
hospital ward. Ron isn't supposed to see anything, and DD is 
supposed to lock them in so Snape can't accuse Harry of helping 
Sirius escape.
13--I didn't like the set change at all. Again, I don't know why 
there had to be one, unless the director and set designers felt 
compelled to add their creativity to the movie, but the set was 
different in CoS. The Whomping Willow was closer to the castle, the 
grounds were lush and green and mostly level and Hagrid's house was 
not down some far sloping hill.
14--I didn't like Padfoot. I pictured him as a very large, fluffy 
bear-like dog, not a skinny, rabid wolf-like dog. The largeness is 
what made him scary in the book. But maybe that's just me.
15--Should have shown Sirius' supposed attack on Ron and Scabbers' 
supposed death. Scabbers showing up at Hagrid's was not as 
surprising since we didn't know he was presumed dead, we just 
thought he was missing and Ron was paranoid. And although Sirius is 
an escaped murderer to everyone that heard of him, his various 
attacks and entries into the castle really solidified people's fear 
of him. As DD says, he didn't act like an innocent man. Nothing of 
that in the movie.

Lastly, I do not like Gambon as the new DD. I know Richard Harris 
couldn't help dying (not trying to be funny or disrespectful), but I
think when playing a character that is clearly written in a book, 
the actor shouldn't put his own special spin on it. Where was the
whimsical DD, all-knowing, good-humored, etc. that Richard Harris 
captured so perfectly? I didn't get the feeling from Gambon's
portrayal that DD is the greatest wizard of all time. 

And I don't understand why a director and/or screenwriter have to 
put their own spin on a perfectly good story. A great story. They
made Hermione more aggressive in parts, Harry dumber in parts, Ron 
had some one-liners and frightened looks, but otherwise. . . Too
little of Hargrid, McGonagall and Quidditch.

I'm just very disappointed. Maybe my hopes were up too high, but I 
wanted to see a book I loved come to life. I still haven't seen 
that. And as I read the reviews from other people, I find there was 
almost NOTHING I liked. Is that awful of me? I guess I just pictured 
it in my head one way and don't like much deviation from that. 
Changing who said what, changing the attitudes of certain 
characters, their screen time, etc., just didn't sit well with me. I 
fear for the next movie. It's much more complex, and I don't know if 
they can capture that on film, if they couldn't even explain the 
whole Marauder thing sufficiently in this one!

I'm sure there were other things that bothered me. . .as I said, it 
was hard to find something I liked. But if I didn't cover them, I'm 
sure someone else will mention them.

Barbara, aka bd-bear
(who has read and reread the books at least 3 times now and is going 
to have to go read PoA to get the "taste" of the movie out of my
head)




From sweetongoo at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 04:18:21 2004
From: sweetongoo at yahoo.com (Ashley)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:18:21 -0000
Subject: Alfonso the quick change artist
Message-ID: <c9rhid+2ruc@eGroups.com>

After waiting and anticipating the new movie, the day finally came 
last night where I could actually see it. Getting to the movie 
theater after a long day of work, I wait in line for about two 
hours to get a good seat among my many Harry Potter fan friends.
The movie begins and my adrenaline rushes, it's time to see the new 
characters on the big screen. By the middle of the movie, I feel 
like I could explode. So many details left out to spare the length  
of the movie. And not to mention, did anyone notice that Hagrid's 
hut all of a sudden appeared down a big hill? Quidditch cut short, 
and the Shrieking Shack cut short. Is it just me, or was it a 
dissapointment to anyone else?
At least I know that the true Harry will lie within the books I 
know so well.
SweetOnGoo







From tmarends at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 04:21:30 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:21:30 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing in PoA Movie
In-Reply-To: <c9qs1q+s8pj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9rhoa+io9g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "demetra1225" <tzakis1225 at n...> 
wrote:
> Spoiler Space
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> 
> 
> Others have written about the scene when Lupin talks to Harry about 
> Lily.  Seemed to me that there was more than friendship, at least 
on 
> Lupin's part.
> 
> Demetra (who is prone to motion sickness and probably should not 
have 
> seen the movie in an IMAX theater)

I picked up on this too.  I think this is the thing that struck me 
the most because JKR has said there's something to Lily's eyes before.

Tim
Who loved the film and will see it several more times in the theater 
before adding it to my DVD collection. 




From wandlimb1959 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 04:20:39 2004
From: wandlimb1959 at yahoo.com (wandlimb1959)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:20:39 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing in PoA Movie
In-Reply-To: <c9qttd+erjq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9rhmn+5evb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "evita2fr" <Snarryfan at a...> 
wrote:
> > Spoiler Space
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > Demetra: 
> > I just wanted to add a couple of observations to the list of 
> > possibilities of what JKR was referring to when she said there 
> > was foreshadowing in the movie (besides the hints at a R/H ship 
> > that are very evident here).
> 

Here's my two knuts... kind of off the wall. When Ron was eating the 
enchanted candy, the animal sound he made was a lion's roar. Suppose 
he is a lion animagus? That would be some spooky foreshadowing, if 
put in inadvertantly.

--Karla





From diana at slashcity.com  Sat Jun  5 04:27:19 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 00:27:19 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Foreshadowing in PoA Movie
References: <c9rhoa+io9g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <05ab01c44ab5$64a1fc50$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

From: "Tim" <tmarends at yahoo.com>
> > Spoiler Space
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> >
> >
> I picked up on this too.  I think this is the thing that struck me
> the most because JKR has said there's something to Lily's eyes before.
>
> Tim
> Who loved the film and will see it several more times in the theater
> before adding it to my DVD collection.


Why do I feel the urge to break out singing "he has her eyes - the boy has
Lily's gre-en eyes".  Okay, it's "girl" and "hazel" in the musical, but
still, every time someone mentions Harry having Lily's eyes, I have to
restrain myself.  <g>

Diana W.





From Taykimson at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 04:36:54 2004
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com (Taykimson at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:36:54 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
Message-ID: <c9ril6+3mtt@eGroups.com>

My introduction to HP was the SS movie.  I saw it on HBO I believe.  
I was hooked and stopped whatever I was doing if the movie was on.  
Finally I got fed up with trying to catch the movie on TV and I 
bought the DVD.  

The timing worked out well, because CoS was released a few weeks 
later - again I enjoyed the movie and watched it a second time in 
the theater...and finally (again ;-) ) I wised up and said hey - 
there are books out there that I can read for more information.

I was amazed at how closely the first movie followed the book...the 
second movie as well (but the first one was about as literal as one 
can get).  Of course I read books 3 and 4 and was pleased when a few 
weeks later the announcement for book 5 was made.

Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read PS/SS 
and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - where 
you happy with the adaptation?




From editor at texas.net  Sat Jun  5 04:32:40 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 23:32:40 -0500
Subject: Typo in the Credits!
Message-ID: <002901c44ab6$47c03a60$c259aacf@texas.net>

This is what being a LOON gets you.

In the cast list--the "cast in order of appearance" list that has everyone,
they misspelled Parvati's last name. It said "Patel," not "Patil." Unless
their name was "Patel" in the UK, I think this is a fairly egregious typo on
their part.

~Amanda
(Yes, I'm an editor, why do you ask?)
----------------------------
Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.




From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Sat Jun  5 05:56:27 2004
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 05:56:27 -0000
Subject: My own review
Message-ID: <c9rnab+td5b@eGroups.com>

imamommy:



S
P
O
I
L
E
R



I saw the movie last night, and I have mostly praise, but mixed 
reviews.  (Can you handle reading yet another review?)

I liked the overall effect.  I felt very much like Harry was feeling 
more and more alienated.  I loved the parts that showed them being 
teens; the candy in the dorm room, Hermione's comment about her 
hair.  

What I liked, and some others apparently didn't, was that the film 
had more of an artsy feel to it.  It was Hogwarts, but Hogwarts was 
different because of Harry's point of view.  I thought it a more 
visually stimulating and symbol- rich interpretaion.

Somebody thought the Great Hall got smaller; perhaps Cuaron did this 
to acheive the effect of Harry getting bigger???

I thought the boggart!dementor in DADA could have come off if 
Lupin's (later) line was that he didn't think Harry could drive it 
off or make it funny, but alas... that was a weak spot.  

I also think SOMEWHERE could have been two lines of dialogue about 
who wrote the map. 

Fred and George?  in a word, brilliant.

Buck beak was very well realized, and almost made up for
Werewolf!Lupin.

Van Helsing has much better CGI werewolves. 

Somebody commented that Harry produces a corporeal patronus on his 
second try, but he doesn't.  He simply achieves enough of one to 
keep his boggart off, and Prongs does not ride until the lake scene.

A much more sensual, touchy-feely movie overall.  I particularly 
noticed the moment where Hermione grabs onto Ron, and Harry grabs 
onto Hermione.  I think we shippers may go on debating a little 
while longer.  

I did miss Snape coming unglued at the end.  But I loved the hallway 
scene. 

The pace was definitely faster, but that was not necessarily a bad 
thing.  I tried to watch CoS today, and I've always thought it 
dragged, but after PoA it was insufferable.  I don't think it has to 
do so much with the length of the movie as the pacing.

Thanks for reading my review, I've enjoyed yours.

imamommy

PS--Did anyone notice that a Tess Cuaron was the baby in the 
painting?  and a certain Nigel Grint was credited with being a 
chaperone.






From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Sat Jun  5 06:12:12 2004
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 06:12:12 -0000
Subject: Two Thumbs up!!
In-Reply-To: <c9r9h2+7iol@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ro7s+oghq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana_Sirius_fan" 
<siriuslove71 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> > In a message dated 6/4/2004 6:26:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> > HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> > > 
> > I have two questions.  Who's the heavyset black boy who has 
several 
> lines 
> > (not Dean Thomas, and I didn't think it was Lee Jordan), and 
who's 
> the other 
> > Slytherin with Malfoy in a couple of scenes?  He wasn't 
with "just" 
> Crabbe and 
> > Goyle -- in one or two scenes it was Crabbe (or Goyle, can't 
think 
> which at 
> > present) and this other kid.  Why?  Does anyone know?
> > 
> > Lynda 
> > * * *
> > ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg, OoP
> 
> I was wondering the same things. I thought that maybe the black 
boy 
> was Lee Jordan. I mean they changed so many other characters 
> (Flickwick, Tom) why not Lee?  Which makes me wonder why they did 
> change Tom's character.  He now looks like an unintelligent Ogre 
and 
> that is not who Tom is supposed to be. They should have just used 
the 
> same Tom from the first movie. It made it seem so unbelievable 
that 
> that character could run the Leaky Cauldron.  
> 
> As for the other kid my guess is Theodore Nott. 
> 
> Diana

imamommy:

I checked IMDB, and Warwick Davis is credited as a wizard (not as 
Prof. Flitwick).  Did they just change his character's look?  or was 
he supposed to be a different wizard?  Also, they have Bronson Webb 
listed as Slytherin Boy, and Ekow Quartey and Rick Sahota as Boys 
1 & 2, respectively.  Lee Jordan is not listed.  

Hope that helps!





From clshannon at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 06:14:07 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 02:14:07 EDT
Subject: POA - spoiler alert - long
Message-ID: <137.2fc0e35e.2df2beaf@aol.com>

Spoiler Space coming.























Sigh. Well, I think my head is going to explode! Not only did I have the 
extreme pleasure of seeing the movie today finally, but I get home and there are 
tons of messages I want to respond to, but I also want to organize my thoughts 
and rebuttals and disagreements with the negative posts ;-)

First of all - Dumbledore.
I was never really fond of Harris' portrayal. I didn't mind him in the first 
film, but in COS, it was obvious that he was dangerously frail. My heart ached 
to watch him and listen to that tremulous voice - now I don't know for sure 
if he was 'doing' that voice on purpose or not. I know that part of canon 
Dumbledore is that he 'appears' to be a really old man, but is in fact, very sharp. 
Well, for me, in COS, he was just frail but with none of the strength or 
indeed, none of the manipulative cuss we came to know in OOTP. He is rather a 
mercenary in that book, which means that he has that trait in him from the start. 
Even he admits it in OOTP - he made mistakes, chief among them trying to 
preserve Harry's childhood by not bothering him with bad news - well, by OOTP, he 
realizes what a bad choice that was. Harry never had a childhood to begin with 
and Dumbledore wanted to give him one, belatedly, by letting him enjoy his 
time at Hogwarts. But gee, the kid fought Voldie in the first two years and 
almost died both times - was he really having a chance at an innocent childhood? I 
think not. So Dumbledore should have sucked it up and told the kid what he 
needed to know.
Sorry, got off track - but to get back on - I just can't see Harris' 
portrayal being that person who is wise and whimsical, yet also manipulative and 
cunning. 
Here's an example of how I measure this - remember when the first two movies 
came out and some folks were complaining that Dumbledore didn't start the 
feast with those nonsense words like in the book? Well, I was relieved that that 
wasn't in the first two movies because the way Harris was portraying him, it 
would have been jarringly incongruous for McGonagall to stand up and say, 'and 
now Headmaster Dumbledore wants to say a few words' to be followed by him 
saying things like 'bubblesqueak'. It just didn't fit. 
After seeing POA, I could imagine Gambon doing that in his opening speech and 
then a few seconds later, giving the warning about dementors and being stern 
and serious - convincingly. Maybe it's just different takes on different 
actors; it's just my opinion ;-)
 
Also, in COS, I always cringe when Harris stiltingly delivers those lines to 
Harry at the end, 'Harry, I want to thank you, Harry, for defending me in the 
chamber' - (maybe not totally accurate at the end of the sentence, but I want 
to point out the beginning). - It's Columbus' fault for not making him drop 
the second Harry - it's awkward structure and not at all natural sounding. It 
jars me every time I see the movie. Sometimes I think Columbus was afraid to 
actually 'direct' Harris ;-)
I liked Gambon's Dumbledore. He was more like the way I saw him in my mind in 
the books (not that that is my only criteria for liking something   in the 
films because I am one of those folks who clearly separates the mediums of books 
and films and the different techniques and requirements in both). But I did 
enjoy Gambon's take on a more energetic, fiesty Dumbledore. And for those that 
insist on something's similarity to canon as being the ruler for whether or 
not it can be good <g>, canon Dumbledore is a bit fiesty, a bit silly sometimes, 
manipulative, deceptive (he lies to suit the cause with no compunction at 
all) and a powerful wizard. I thought Gambon did an admirable job.

Whew, sorry, didn't mean to go on and on on   that one topic!

Anyway, I have noticed folks mentioning the pacing of POA and comparing it to 
COS, stating that COS was better paced. Now, I am confused - I was around 
when folks were criticizing COS for being plodding, which I agreed with. It was 
slow - the scenes were slow. I mean, did Herbology have to be that long or in 
fact, did we even need that class other than to show off the mandrakes? I 
didn't think so. Mandrakes could have been shown briefly later on to explain how 
the frozen students would be cured - if they couldn't give up making a cute 
animatronic special effect. Or why   show them at all, just mention that is what 
will cure the students. Personally, I could have lived without the whole 
herbology class scene ;-) This is just one example, I won't go into a whole thing on 
COS right now.
One person said that the pacing in the opening scenes of POA was too slow and 
others said it was too fast - I guess perceptions are individual ;-)
I read one comment where they were confused with the scene transitions in POA 
because it seemed like just one scene after another with no continuity. 
Funny, that was the big complaint about COS -and I think it was true of COS, but 
not POA. COS did seem like set piece after set piece with no real strong 
narrative thread. Remember all the discussion and complaining about how the scenes 
that were cut from COS EXPLAINED the plot and without them, we were left 
wondering what the heck was going on? 
COS was choppy to a great extent - no scene transitions, just scene from book 
followed by scene from book. I got no sense of what Harry was really going 
through, no sense of his pain from the ostracizing he suffered from the other 
students. And by cutting explanatory scenes like the one of the three kids in 
the hospital wing while they discuss the heir of Slytherin, etc, made it 
confusing. At least that was what a majority of folks discussed for the last 2 years 
;-)
Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy the first two films, but there were always 
moments I would cringe and wish for an editing machine or a chance to have an 
actor change a line reading, etc. 
POA has a strong narrative thread - there is one goal here, find Sirius and 
keep him from killing Harry. During the course of this, other things are found 
out and subsequently other things need to be done (teach Harry to protect 
himself from Dementors, Black is Harry's godfather and responsible for the 
Potters' deaths, or so everyone thinks and the ultimate revelation of the truth about 
Black, Pettigrew and Lupin.) The only subplot is Buckbeak, but even he is 
related to the main plot of saving Sirius. 
As for transitions in POA - just to take an example off the top of my head - 
I have only seen it once today and my brain is rather overwhelmed with it - 
they seemed to actually leave classes and then go somewhere. I know that sounds 
silly, but there is a fluidity to a lot of the action. It just doesn't stop 
after a point is made and then cut to everyone in a different scene thru -out 
the movie. It may do that once in a while just because the movie does take place 
over a year, not 2 hours in real time <g>, but on the whole, I had fewer 
jarring moments of scene changes in this movie - for example, when Ron and Harry 
leave Divination and walk out - we see them going down the spiral staircase (a 
real sense of place which I didn't really get in COS) and then when they find 
the ball, Harry says they should take it back, Ron says no way, Harry seems a 
bit put out when he says, 'fine' or whatever. He goes back - we follow him, we 
are with him - he goes back into the classroom, we are hitching a ride on the 
camera and it gives it an intimate feel. Then we have Trelawney startle him - 
no cuts, she comes into the scene and we are still there with Harry. She has 
her vision, he is freaked out and he leaves.   More fluidity, I don't know how 
else to explain it ;-)

Also, about Hogwarts itself. I really got the feeling that it is 1000 yrs. 
old, as it says 'in the books'. It looked lived in, shabby in parts, knicked 
furniture, floors rubbed smooth by thousands of feet, a bit worn at the edges. It 
no longer looked like the Warner Brothers version of Harry Potterland, newest 
amusement park. As much as I loved the colors in the first two, I think the 
washed out, muted colors are more realistic and used to great advantage in   
this movie. Harry is maturing, his world is no longer the idealistic, 'oh my 
look, I really am not a worthless orphan being raised by horrible people, I'm a 
wizard like in   fantasy books and here's the castle'. That was fine for the 
first two books, he was still retaining some of that innocence. 
But remember that the theme of POA is that the monsters aren't snakes and 
spiders and things that can be killed with swords, they are the demons inside and 
Harry's got plenty of demons ;-) Not only that, he is now a teenager, with 
all   the requisite anger and rebellion and questioning of authority and 
struggle to figure out one's identity. Harry is smack in the middle of what all 
teenagers go thru, but add to it all the extra baggage that being Harry Potter 
means and you have one messed up kid ;-) I hope there are wizard shrinks, he is 
gonna need one!

So, the look of the movie fit the theme. And I loved all the activity in a 
lot of scenes - the landscape is real, it's alive and like someone else pointed 
out somewhere, the magic is just inherent and matter of fact. Not something to 
point a camera at and wonder in wide mouthed astonishment at. Incidental, 
secondary actions in scenes involved normal magic -stirring coffee with a finger 
controlling the spoon, chairs putting themselves back onto the tables in The 
Leaky Cauldron, etc. 
The ghosts on horseback galloping thru the dining hall and the kids not even 
flinching and we aren't even supposed to be really concentrating on the horses 
because the kids are saying lines - we aren't directed to 'look at this 
magic' like in the first two. 
And like I said, it did work for the first two films because we were being 
introduced to the world (although I think it could have stopped after the first 
film and perhaps not been so much that way in the second). 
I liked the dirty clothes, the wrinkles, the palpable sense that these people 
really do live in this big, drafty, dirty castle.

I really need to wrap this up - sorry, but there is so much to say about POA, 
I was stunned, almost speechless, by the humor, the acting, the look of the 
movie, the mise en scene, so to speak. This was a film, a real grown up movie 
and I for once won't have that slight sense of shame in admitting I am a grown 
woman who loves HP and ownsthe first two movies ;-) 

Sure, there were plot points left out - there always will be. And I do wish 
they had just taken a few   seconds to explain the nicknames of the marauders a 
bit clearer and not have them uttered in the midst of that emotional shack 
scene. But Cuaron says in the newest issue of EW that he felt (or he and Kloves 
and Rowling or whatever) that the history of the marauders would better be 
explained in a later movie. So it's not abandoned, just delayed. 
Also, I love Alan Rickman's portrayal of Snape and several people have said 
he got shortchanged because we don't get his later scene in the hospital wing - 
well, I'm philosophical about those things. Sometimes scenes in books don't 
translate well to screen and Snape does get to rant quite a bit at the end of 
GOF, so maybe we'll see that ;-) 

I think they will have to somehow explain why Snape hates Harry to much at 
some point because Snape, ultimately, is a much more important character than, 
say, Malfoy, who I really believe was written as a one dimensional bully. Snape 
will have an impact on the ultimate battle in this book/movie series and if 
they want to pull off OOTP's Snape and Harry scenes with the Occulemency (I 
hope I spelled that right!), they will have to fill in some history for Snape and 
the Marauders.

Oh, by the by, I am watching this Cartoon Network thing with mini interviews 
with the cast and Dan just talked about scars that Harry gets while fighting 
the dragon in the first task of GOF - it sounded like he had already filmed it, 
which would confirm what he said in another interview that they are filming 
the ending of GOF first. He was excited about the gashes he gets from the 
dragon across his shoulder and back ;-)
Typical teenage boy,   uh - loves the blood <g>

Anyway...sorry for such a long post and I congratulate anyone who got this 
far! 
All   in all, I was blown away by POA. I never laughed so hard at a HP movie 
and the humor and delivery of lines was dry and witty, not juvenile and silly. 
Dan is quite the dry wit, I must say - his delivery of lines such as 'Thanks 
Ron' on the train, after Ron describes Sirius as a maniac out to kill Harry 
(or something like that), was very droll and well done. Ditto Harry's reaction 
to Ron's nightmare, Harry's response to Aunt Marge about 'oh, I was beaten 
every day' at St. Brutus School - very understated and funny. No mugging or 
vamping to get laughs for this kid ;-)
Ron's forecast in divination - 'you'll be suffering, but you'll be happy 
about it'. Perfect delivery, perfect reactions. 
I am sure I have tons more to comment on, but I definitely need to shut up 
now. 
Amazing film and I can't wait to see it again and I really can't wait for the 
DVD ;)
Cindy


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




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 06:49:52 2004
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 06:49:52 -0000
Subject: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
Message-ID: <c9rqeg+ao9o@eGroups.com>

Michael Gambon's Dumbledore seems to be the big controversial casting this time around, 
but to tell you the truth, I like him a lot. Richard Harris's DD always seemed like a 
stereotype of an old, wizened wizard to me. It was too much Merlin and not enough 
humor.
The playful, ageing hippie Dumbledore as played by Gambon is much closer to how I 
imagined him, and it reinforces DD's status as one of the greatest living wizards. Think 
about it-when you meet very intelligent people, they are almost always kind of offbeat, or 
even weird. I say this with the highest regard-I'm not trying to make fun. I am naturally 
attracted to people who don't swim well in the mainstream, and have a lot of friends who 
are naturally offbeat.
In my experience, it's been true. The more intelligent you are, the more you walk to the 
beat of a different drummer. To play DD as Gambon does reinforces this connection 
betwen being intellectually superior and, well,  kind of weird.


On another topic:
Another possible book 6-7 clue in the movie. In the scene where Harry is crying under his 
invisibility cloak and Hermione comforts him, when Harry says somethig about Sirius 
betraying his parents, you can see Ron in the background looking kind of dejected and left 
out. Could this be forshadowing?
My partner has been theorising that Ron will betray Harry in book 6 or 7. Maybe not a 
permanent or fatal betrayal, but a betrayal nonetheless. Jealousy, and a desire to break out 
of his family's being poor will contribute to this. Percy succumbs to similar feelings, 
combined with a drive for power, in book 5. Even the last name, Weasley, suggests this as 
a possibility. The American Heritage dictionary tells us that to 'weasel out' is "to back out 
of a situation or commitment in a sneaky or cowardly manner" (I must admit I've wondered 
about the name Weasley for a long time, it seems at this point to run counter to much of 
the name irony in the books. Maybe we just havent seen it become accurate yet). 

Tyler






From barbienut75 at earthlink.net  Sat Jun  5 06:14:28 2004
From: barbienut75 at earthlink.net (jennifer massey)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 01:14:28 -0500
Subject: I must say...I liked it.
Message-ID: <001301c44ac4$5db38cb0$f301aec7@yourus67pi6luv>

I was not disappointed in the movie, the main reason being, I did not go in expecting it to be just like the book, movies never are. I'd like for someone to point out ONE book, that was exactly word for word, just like the book.

I treat books and movies as two diffrent stories.....therefore I do not get dissapointed. And I can enjoy them both for what they are.


"jennifer massey" 







From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 07:35:34 2004
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 07:35:34 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans (Movie Spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <c9ril6+3mtt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9rt46+oeh8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:
<snip>

> Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
> first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
> movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read PS/SS 
> and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - where 
> you happy with the adaptation?

I read the books (several times) before I saw the movies. 

In PS/SS I was disappointed with a few of the items that were left 
out: the other two centaurs with their cryptic remarks ("Mars is 
bright tonight"); Dumbledore's take on death ("...the next 
adventure"); Charlie's "jolly bunch" of friends who take Norbert; 
that Neville isn't on detention with them; how there was more focus 
on Seamus than on Neville; and WHY the hell are the Slytherins in ALL 
of the same classes with the Gryffindors?. But, overall I loved how 
it captured the enchantment Harry felt about the Wizarding World, and 
I am able to watch it over and over.

COS maintains the visual beauty of Hogwarts, yet it feels choppy - 
like there is always action happening and no lulls between scenes. 
The flying car scene is ridiculous, as is how long the spiders chase 
the boys. I like how the whole Tom Riddle thing is handled, and 
Gilderoy Lockhart is handled well too(and even though Kenneth 
Brannagh has the chutzpah to play his character, I don't think he'd 
really be attractive to 12 yr. old girls in his classes - don't send 
me Howlers on this now!!); I like how we get a glimpse of herbology. 
I'd love to see more of what happens in class - esp. Potions!
It always feels too long though, and for me to watch it all without 
falling asleep during part is hard - if there were more canon in it 
and less "movie" effects, the movie would flow better. And why did 
they EVER cut the scene in Knockturn Alley out of the movie? It's 
brilliant! (I liked on TV that they added it in a couple of weeks 
ago.)

POA - I love the colors and that they're outdoors more.

WHAT HAPPENED TO WINNING THE QUIDDITCH CUP??????????????????????

I think that a lot was left out that makes this book the best of the 
series as far as plot twists goes. Things aren't explained well, or 
by the right people. Why didn't we see more of our dear Snape?????

I did love the scene with the 3rd yr. Gryffindor boys eating 
the "animal noise" candy. I thought it was a lovely touch to see them 
young and innocently having a bit of fun. It's how dorm life would be 
at times, and it was a nice addition.

The dear twins (becoming foxy young lads, eh?) weren't allowed near 
enough screen time - their characters are HILARIOUS!!! and it would 
be nice to have more of that.

Trelawney - awesome. Although she said the prophecy WRONG!! I read it 
as a foreshadowing of the plot twist in GOF with Crouch. The way it's 
said in the movie doesn't give that.

Not enough of the anger between Ron and Hermione and how she's 
cracking up under the strain of studying.

I realize it's impossible to translate everything from a book onto 
the screen, but I wonder how much from the books that is being left 
out is important?

What's up with Lupin's speech about Lily? Where did Cuaron get all 
that from, eh?

I did enjoy the film, and will need to see it again to absorb it all.

Who was that other kid with Draco? It's always Crabbe and Goyle in 
the books, and it wasn't in the film. Grr. . . 

HedwigsTalons





From tin_kim924 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 08:39:09 2004
From: tin_kim924 at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Tin=20Samson?=)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 09:39:09 +0100 (BST)
Subject: videos of hp interviews, features and specials
Message-ID: <20040605083909.85325.qmail@web42006.mail.yahoo.com>

hi!

i'm not sure if this is appropriate for this group, i
apologize, but i'd like to ask a big favor from some
of you here.  i'm so stupid i wasn't alert for tv
appearances esp. as the opening of hp came closer.  (i
just joined the group a few days ago, even if i've
been an hp fan even before all the hp hype. =)  i've
read all books, and seen all movies already. 
disappointed and not impressed wtih the third
movie...)

anyway, i was hoping i could pleeease ask help from
some of you here who have recorded most of the cast
interviews, and hp news bits, features and specials. 
even from the past years from the past two movies.  i
would reallyyyy love a copy of those shows you have. 
i will pay for whatever cost.  please email me
privately in my email add tin_kim924 at yahoo.com. 
please, i hope i get replies.  

i only have a few that i've caught on tv.  and even on
the today show (june 4), i saw the emma watson
interview, unfortunately, i wasn't able to record it,
grrr.)

hope to hear from some of you here who can help me
with the videos, thank you so much! =)

tin =)

________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html



From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Sat Jun  5 09:20:29 2004
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (dan)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 09:20:29 -0000
Subject: POA music, Cauron, werewolf
Message-ID: <c9s38t+uu8t@eGroups.com>

Thank goodness Williams wrote some original, different music for this 
one - some nice renaissance pieces, some good jazzy stuff for the 
Knight Bus, some waltz for Marge's expansion, and so forth. Not that 
kitschy drivel he plastered all over the action scenes in 
Philospher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets (especially music for the 
scenes with Voldyspirit in the forest or Quirrelmort at the mirror). 
Williams AND Columbus is a scary combination. I worry how dreadfully 
Newell and Williams will schmaltz it up. But Cauron, at least, has 
given the fellow some wise instruction, and Williams ended up having 
to actually produce almost an entire new score. With the right 
direction, John Williams CAN write good music, it seems. Jackson made 
Howard Shore up his level of invention in the same way, I might add.

Thank goodness Cauron went hand-held appropriately. The movie didn't 
look like a series of wizard photographs, as the first two did (with 
the one exception of the parts inside Riddle's diary, which were all 
that was good about CoS). Too wide a shot at the Dursleys feels too 
comfortable, too predictable, to expository. POA, unlike the first 
two after school specials, created a mysterious, rambling Hogwarts, 
instead of Disneywarts, partly through camera work and partly through 
set design. And the Hogwarts Express was no longer a too-precious, 
spotless tourist train, but a functioning, worn delivery mechanism 
for rambunctious students with portable power devices. Fits my vision 
of the books fine, and looks reasonably like a passenger train 
running between Manchester and London, say. And POA had, of all 
things, realistic weather - good, variagated skies, unlike the 
fabulously blue Greek ones Columbus apparently imported.

Cauron appears to have wanted to break clealy with some of the worst 
aspects of Columbus' Disneywarts as well. He dispensed with goofy 
pristine (read, artificial) lawns (pristine lawns, I submit, are 
anathema to any witch not in the St. Mungo's outpatient program for 
wannabe muggle lawn-competition winners), he jumped on opportunities 
to play up the humourous potential of the Whomping Willow and other 
Hogwarts features, which I take as a sign of his having digested and 
processed enough of POA to feel confident taking such liberties. 
Columbus, in contrast,always seemed afraid of stepping out of the 
line he conjured, which was clearly the result of an inadequate 
understanding of the material. I won't go on and on about how much 
better a film POA is than the first two, speaking as both a Rowling 
freak and as a cinema buff. (My favourite directors are Tarkovsky, 
Kurosawa, and Herzog.) But, put bluntly, Cauron's film has beauty and 
vision, where Columbus' efforts had adequacy (or not).

Finally, Cauron did state that the werewolf was deliberately less 
scary, less exaggeratedly animated than we might expect, in deference 
to the kids (as he put it) or to the ratings boards (as I expect he 
might have meant).

Dan





From clio44a at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 11:26:26 2004
From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 11:26:26 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
In-Reply-To: <c9ril6+3mtt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9sal2+m1sa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:
> My introduction to HP was the SS movie. 

Congratulations! Better late than never.

[snip]
> Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
> first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
> movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read 
PS/SS 
> and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - 
where 
> you happy with the adaptation?

To sum it up, yes, I was happy with the first movies. not extremely 
so, but I was.

Before the first movie came out I was a not already a Harry Potter 
fan, but a Harry Potter fanatic, Regular reader of HPfGU and all. 
Still am.

When the adaptation of the fist book came out, I was amazed. Not by 
the adaptation, but by scenery. It felt so great to really SEE 
Hogwarts and all its inhabitants brought to life. The beautiful sets 
and costums still awe me. Of course they couldn't include every 
single line from the book. I noticed the differences in the theater, 
but it didn't bother me too much. I really was dissappointet with 
Dan Radcliffe's acting skills. They have greatly improved now, but 
in the 1st movie it was obvious that he was cast for the looks, not 
the acting.

The second movie I was actually satisfied with. The 2nd book is IMHO 
the weakest of the series and the movie irons out some of the plot's 
weaknesses. Kenneth Brannagh acting did wonders to that cartoonish 
Lockhart character from the books. 
i had been looking forward to the opening scene at Hogwarts when 
Snape catches Ron and harry outside the Great Hall ("Where is 
Snape?" "Maybe he is sick?" "Maybe he got fired!" "Maybe he is 
standing right behind you two."). What a pity that it didn't make it 
into the movie, but what can you do. It is beyond my understanding 
that they kind of kept that scene, but  exchanged Snape for Filch, 
who marches Ron and Harry to Snape's office. Unneccessary and not 
logic. What really dissappointed me though was the extremely 
shortend backstory of Ginny's possession and the dead roosters.     

So in general I was happy with the movies when they first came out. 
There was some minor dissappointment, but not more than what was to 
be expected in a movie based on a novel.
Azkaban is the first movie, that really dissapointed me. Don't get 
me wrong, the acting skills of the kids have improved, the plot 
flows better, the landscape is great, I loved the whomping willow's 
antics. Just, what happened to the background story? Where did the 
Wolfsbane potion go, and the Fidelus, the secret keeper switch, and 
the animagus story, the 'Prank', and the creation of the map?

Which non-reader really understood that that friggin radiant deer 
was supposed to be James-the-stag, Harry's spiritual strenght and 
Patronus?


"Prongs rode again tonight"? certainly not in my movie theater. 

Clio,
who won't go to see the GoF because she fears they will leave out 
Snape-the-spy to simplify the plot.




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 11:30:51 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 07:30:51 EDT
Subject: Movie impressions of POA--spoilers /(other posts) [long]
Message-ID: <12e.436178af.2df308eb@aol.com>

There is such a surge in posts today that I decided to just respond to 
several posts in just one messege and include my individual thoughts here as well.
Firstly....
S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E
I went and saw PoA today at a late showing with a good friend of mine and her 
boyfriend (he's read the books, she hasn't but loved the first two movies). 
PoA is my definite favorite of the books so I didn't even attempt to keep away 
from spoilers, and had read quite a few fan reviews and quite a few regular 
reviews before seeing the movie. From what some people were going on about, I 
expected the Shrieking Shack scene to be awkward and rushed, and that Snape's 
relationship with Lupin/Sirius/James wasn't really explained, and that Hermione 
was some sort of Super!Hermione. Honestly, I didn't really find this to be the 
case. Despite the number of times I've read PoA, and how much I adore the 
book, I was able to detatch myself from it and enjoy the movie as just a movie. 
>From that point of view, I absolutely loved it, and as a movie I thought it was 
amazingly done and about ten times better than CoS. Anyway, on to the other 
messeges:

In "Re: [HPFGU-Movie] HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers" Diana W 
wrote:
>>Marge blowing up - while I like that bit, it did seem to drag while she was
inflating.  I'd rather that they sped up the whole thing, and save the
screen time for more important scenes.<<
Personally, I didn't really like that scene very much at all, but I didn't 
like it in the book either (especially *visualizing* it), so that didn't 
surprise me. It did get a bit long, but I doubt they could have shaved more than 30 
seconds off of it, and that really wouldn't make much of a difference.

>>Hermione's outburst seems a bit much given
that we hardly get to see Trelawney's phoney act - she acts a bit like she's
having a temper-tantrum because she's been insulted <<
I liked Emma Thompson quite a bit in that scene, but Hermione doesn't seem as 
upset as she was in the book, I really wish they had given her a bit of 
dialogue instead of having her just leave.

>>Flitwick - why on earth did they change him?  I wanted to break into "We
represent the Lollypop League" when I first saw him.<<
Agreed. What was with that? He looked fine in the first two movies, the new 
hair and all that just looked odd, and it was too far from how he looked before 
to really believe its the same person. I wish I knew the reasoning behind 
that.

>>You get no sense of the closeness of the three, and why it was such a
betrayal on Peter's part - all that's said is that he followed Sirius around
a lot.  Sounds more like a stalker than a good friend.  And the back-story
between Snape and Sirius - it gives me a bad feeling for what they're going
to leave out in films 4 & 5 if they're not going to touch on the animosity
between Snape and Sirius.  Snape just comes out as looking vindictive for no
reason.<<

I heard a lot about this before I saw the movie, and I think the movie shows 
the animosity better than people are giving it credit for. True, its *very 
clear* in the book, and its sort of drilled into our heads, but it wasn't 
completely absent from the movie. The whole "strutting" line still made it in, which 
says very clearly that Snape knew James when he was in school and that he 
didn't like him. Now if he knew James, he had to know Sirius and Lupin. When he 
bursts in at the shack, its very clear that the three of them know each other 
(and since Sirius has been in jail for 12 years it would have to be from some 
time ago), and its clear that Sirius and Snape *dislike* each other. Yes, no one 
says why, but do they need to? Its subtle, but I think enough of it is there 
for the audience to put the pieces together. 
As for Peter, I thought his betrayal was rather clearly said in the shack, 
but I would like to take this moment to say I really disliked the Three 
Broomsticks scene. Although it was a nice touch to have him there in the cloak rather 
than under the table, I thought the conversation there was lacking. Its never 
stated how *close* Sirius and James were, in the book it goes on about how 
they were always together and were like brothers and all that, which is why its 
so horrific for Harry to hear. Obviously you could guess that they were close 
(by Sirius being Harry's godfather), but it was less dramatic. 

>>The hospital scene - okay, I admit I'm a Snape fan, but there's more than
just the anticipation of Snape tearing up the scenary from that scene.
Snape's triumph turning into disappointment, the looks exchanged between him
and Dumbledore, the sense of dynamics between the characters changing -
gone.<<

It would have been a wonderful scene to see....apparently Steve Kloves isn't 
an Alan Rickman fan. )o;

>>Ron's attack - why did they leave that out?  It was a perfect opportunity 
to
show how murderous Black is and that he's gotten into the castle more than
once.  Instead they have Ron dreaming about spiders making him tap-dance?
Huh?<<

I thought the dream was quite funny, that scene sort of took me by surprise, 
Harry's reaction to him was fantastic. I'm sort of confused about Black's 
second attack being left out though, since I know I've seen pictures of Ron and 
others in their pajamas, one of the trading cards even features it. I guess it 
got cut out for some reason (time? pacing?), hopefully it'll resurface on DVD.

>>Harry may not be the Angry-Young-Man
that he is in book 5, but I just don't see him running off to indulge in
tears like that.  Furius and upset enough to cry and yell at the same time,
but not boo-hooing cause his widdle feewings are hurt.<<
It might have worked if the Three Broomsticks scene hadn't been so diluted. 
The way it was written in the movie was far less emotional, making Harry's 
reaction a little odd.

Sherry wrote (later in the same thread):
>>The lack of the Quidditch cup was disappointing,
too.  And the Firebolt!  That was so important in the book with it being
confiscated and everything.  This way, it appeared that they lost the one
match, and that was it for Quidditch for the rest of the year.<<

I expected that since the other two movies only had one quidditch scene as 
well. IMO, I'm fine with there being only one, two in the same movie would get 
sort of redundant and boring (it works in the books of course since the 
quidditch scenes are further apart, in a movie they couldn't be more than an hour or 
so apart). AND if they are only going to show one match, then the Quidditch 
Cup sub-plot doesn't work, as does the Firebolt coming at Christmas. If it came 
at Christmas it would call attention to the fact that they only show one 
quidditch match, since you'd see Harry get it, but never use it. It works better at 
the end of the film, even if that means the confiscation sub-plot had to go.

Cindy wrote in "POA - spoiler alert - long"
>>Anyway, I have noticed folks mentioning the pacing of POA and comparing it 
to 
COS, stating that COS was better paced. Now, I am confused - I was around 
when folks were criticizing COS for being plodding, which I agreed with. It 
was 
slow - the scenes were slow. I mean, did Herbology have to be that long or in 

fact, did we even need that class other than to show off the mandrakes?<<

I found the pacing for PoA to be quite refreshing, actually. The scenes 
seemed to flow into eachother better, rather than from going abruptly from one 
scene to the next with no dialogue or anything to tie the two together.
AND I completely agree with you about the mandrake scene in CoS. Aside from 
being slightly amusing, the scene is almost completely pointless. Mandrakes 
could have (and was) explained adequately later on in the film when Mrs. Norris 
is petrified. Those 2-3 minutes spent in Herbology could have been used 
furthing the plot (such as the library scene that was cut out, much more important 
than a greenhouse scene IMO).

>>on the whole, I had fewer 
jarring moments of scene changes in this movie - for example, when Ron and 
Harry 
leave Divination and walk out - we see them going down the spiral staircase 
(a 
real sense of place which I didn't really get in COS) and then when they find 

the ball, Harry says they should take it back, Ron says no way, Harry seems a 

bit put out when he says, 'fine' or whatever. He goes back - we follow him, 
we 
are with him - he goes back into the classroom, we are hitching a ride on the 

camera and it gives it an intimate feel.<<

I noticed this as well, it seems more natural, more like a real school than 
just a movie. CoS, for the most part, had nothing to tie scenes together, every 
scene seemed individual from the one before it, it was far too choppy and 
awkward. 

>>Also, about Hogwarts itself. I really got the feeling that it is 1000 yrs. 
old, as it says 'in the books'. It looked lived in, shabby in parts, knicked 
furniture, floors rubbed smooth by thousands of feet, a bit worn at the 
edges. It 
no longer looked like the Warner Brothers version of Harry Potterland, newest 

amusement park.<<
That was definitely evident. Did anyone else catch a glimpse of the tables in 
the great hall? They really look like kids use them every day (covered in 
scratches and graffti and all), I read that Cuaron encouraged the extras to write 
on the tables (or something along those lines), to make it more like a real 
school. I really like little things like that, the Hogwarts of the first two 
movies felt too "movie-ish".

Tracy wrote in "PoA Review"
>>1) How Sirius knew Peter was alive.  We saw the photo of the Weasleys from
the Daily Prophet earlier in the movie, so it would have only taken two
extra lines to explain.  "How did you know?"  "I saw his picture with that
family in the Daily Prophet"<<
Sirius, of course, always knew that Peter was alive, but an explanation of 
how he knew where Peter was would have been helpful. I can buy no explanation of 
how he escaped Azkaban (since they didn't really play up the "dark magic" 
aspect of it, people escape from jail a lot in movies, they don't always stop to 
explain how), but him knowing where Peter was needed *some* explanation.

>>5) Too much, too soon.  I didn't like how Harry saw Peter Pettigrew on the
map.  Would it really have hurt to have Snape catch him coming back from
Hogsmeade like in the book and thus finding the map, rather than catching
Harry in the hall at night looking for the supposedly dead Peter? <<

Well, Harry not seeing Peter on the map in the books has been debated a lot, 
so I think it was a welcome addition to the movie (Harry shrugs it off, after 
all). Since they combined two Hogsmead visits into one, having Snape catch 
Harry wouldn't have worked the same way (it would be too much of an emotional 
shift, IMO). 
Also, having Harry see Peter on the map earlier in the film gave him a reason 
to suspect Lupin / Sirius might be telling the truth (notice how Ron and 
Hermione just stare at him), otherwise it would have seemed odd at that moment for 
him to attack Snape.

>>his standing in front of the
Trio was a bit overt for Snape, who is supposed to be a spy.  Spy=covert.
DUH!  It's a wonder Snape hasn't gotten himself killed in the movie universe
for being such a lousy spy. <<
At this point in the books Voldemort is hiding off somewhere in Albania, 
believed by most to be gone for good, so Snape is nothing more than a teacher. And 
just because he hates Harry doesn't mean he wants to see him get eaten by a 
werewolf. Snape may be a jerk, but he's not evil or cowardly. Him, as the adult 
in the situation, stepping in front of the kids was the natural thing to do.

>>8) Since Fudge was (presumably, since it's not really made clear in the
movie) still around, it didn't make sense for that long goodbye between
Harry and Sirius <<
But remember, they flew to a different part of the school first, and after 
that its only a minute or so before Sirius takes off. Fudge didn't know where 
they were at that point.

>>9) I would have loved to have seen Alan Rickman play Snape's blow-up when 
he
realizes that Sirius escaped again.<<
(see above), I think we all would have loved to see that. I guess it must 
have been pacing or something, but I doubt many would be thinking about *that* 
while watching Alan Rickman do an excellent angry fit.

Diana wrote in "Re: HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers":
>>I also saw the movie this afternoon only I was extremely 
disappointed with Lupin.  Why in the world did they have him yell at 
Harry after the Snape incident when Harry was roaming the hall with 
the map?   That was totally unlike Lupin in the book<<
Was it? I thought it was rather close to the book myself:
[PoA, chpt 14, page 289-90, us hb edi]
"We've met," He said shortly. He was looking at Harry more seriously than 
ever before.
"Don't expect me to cover up for you again, Harry. I cannot make you take 
Sirius Black seriously. But I would have thought that what you hear when the 
dementers draw near you wold have had more of an effect on you. Your parents gave 
their lives tokeep you alive, Harry. A poor way to repay them -- gambling 
their sacrifice for a bad of magic tricks."
Maybe he's not yelling in the book, but the meaning is the same, its still 
just as harsh. 

Anyway, as I said above, I thought PoA was a definite improvement over CoS 
and even SS/PS (which doesn't have any major flaws). Although I enjoyed it the 
first few times I saw it, I can hardly stand to watch CoS now. The acting is 
fine, and many of the scenes are done very well, but so much of it is awkward 
and unreal that it makes me cringe to watch it. For example: in the bookstore 
its made very clear that the store is crowded due to Lockhard's book-signing, 
yet later when the kids approach Lucious the background is *dead silent*. The 
store is supposed to be "mad", yet you can't hear anyone talking in the 
background, not even distantly. Add that to the fact that its odd that the kids would 
stand there and let themselves be insulted and the scene is almost unbearable. 
(I could give another example, but this post is long enough as it is). What I 
was most pleased with with PoA is how natural it felt. The kids interact with 
each other like regular teenagers (like Harry's conversation with Seamus 
about the Fat Lady, or Hermione imitating Professor Trewlawny), the movie felt 
less "scripted". I feel sort of bad for Columbus, though. I think with the first 
two movies there was an enormous pressure to make them successful, and he 
probably was told to stay as close to the books as possible. Now that the series 
is established, the studio might have given Cuaron a bit more artistic license. 
I really don't think the lack of imagination in the first two films is 
entirely Columbus' fault, this one was done in more time, with more money, and when 
the kids were settled into their roles (by this logic though, GoF should be 
just as good as PoA and I doubt it will).
Over than above, what I liked:
-The amount of humor, especially the bits that weren't from the book
-Gary Oldman's performance; i knew I was going to like it (being a huge GO 
fan and all), but it exceeded my expectations
-Lupin; about halfway through the film I completely forgot about my 
misgivings about David Thewlis and didn't remember them until the credits. He was 
excellent, especially his last speech to Harry as he's packing up. Very well done.
-The new Fat Lady; I was sure I was going to hate her (since I thought the 
original one was just fine), but she was actually pretty funny
-Arthur. Yes, I know he was barely in the movie, but I thought he had 
improved (not sure how exactly, i just like his "look" better), he came off as too 
goofy in CoS
-Hermione appearing in all her classes; it made for a great running joke with 
Ron

What I didn't like:
-Padfoot. In general he was fine, but I wish they'd had a real dog, at least 
for *some* of the scenes. He looked a little too fake, and he wasn't big 
enough (the book clearly states a "bear-like" dog, this one looked too much like 
the drawings in the US books, which I've never liked)
-Hermione's punch. Maybe I'd just seen it too many times in the trailer and 
in clips and all that, but it just seemed out of place. There wasn't enough 
provacation, and Draco turned snively far too fast. I know he's a wimp, but he's 
not *that* much of a wimp
-I was sorely disappointed that Harry never looked up Sirius' photo in his 
album. That was one of my favorite parts of the book since it really brought 
home the fact that Sirius was James' friend. It would have been nice to see the 
contrast between the Sirius screaming in the posters and a laughing, normal 
looking Sirius in the album
-Harry's reaction to the dementers; the first time on the train was done 
well, but after that we never hear more of his parents screaming, and I didn't buy 
that Harry would stay on the broom that long with dementer's swooping around 
him.


-Rebecca (sorry for the length)


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




From annelilucas at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Jun  5 12:18:39 2004
From: annelilucas at yahoo.co.uk (annelilucas)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 12:18:39 -0000
Subject: a few things about POA (spoilers)
Message-ID: <c9sdmv+sbp1@eGroups.com>

I've seen the film twice now and I really enjoyed it.  Although there
were several things that I think could've been done a lot better, most
of them have already been discussed so I won't bother bringing them up
again.

A few people have mentioned not liking superwoman!Hermione.  I think
that the superwoman stuff pretty much balances out the
patheticgirly!Hermione moments.  She hides her face in Ron or Harry's
chest several times - why does this always happen in films? it really
bugs me this "i'm an emotional woman and cannot deal with this
situation" versus "i'm a strong man and will protect/comfort you". 
There are much fewer female characters than male and Hermione is the
only one with any amount of screen time.  I'm having difficulty
formulating sentences as I haven't had enough sleep, but what I'm
trying to say is something to do with it being good for kids that
there is a strong female character with traits that are not
stereotypically female.

Does anyone know why Crabbe/Goyle (don't know which is which)
disappears halfway through the movie?  The character who replaces him
is part of Malfoy's gang in early scenes, but then gets promoted.  Did
the original actor have an accident or something?

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I only just noticed that
Dan Radcliffe has blue eyes.  I wonder what implications this has for
the theories about the importance/symbolism of the colour green.

Finally, and I think very importantly: what the hell is going on in
the DADA class when Parvati spells the boggart?  It is turned from (in
my opinion) a not-at-all scary snake into a enormous horrible, freaky
clown jack-in-the-box.  How, by any stretch of the imagination could
this be considered to be funny?!  Yes I have a thing about clowns, but
surely there are many less creepy things the boggart could've turned
into?  Does anyone agree?  Am I overreacting here? 

I am fully aware that I have probably just babbled nonsense for
several paragraphs, and if so I'm sorry and can only say that it made
sense when it was in my head.

Anneli




From jessicaiseman at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 12:10:15 2004
From: jessicaiseman at yahoo.com (jessicaiseman)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 12:10:15 -0000
Subject: POA Impressions Spoilers
Message-ID: <c9sd77+908e@eGroups.com>

Ok, I just thought I'd post my impressions of POA, both as a movie 
and as an interpretation of the book.  I'm not going to comment on 
what I see as foreshadowing until later (when I see if I'm actually 
right, cause I hate to be wrong).  So here we go!

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

OK as a movie itself, POA is great.  If you'd never read the books, 
I really think you'd like it alot.  Its a lot more grown up than the 
first two movies and they don't try to throw too much information at 
you, and you get a lot more backstory on Harrys parents and how they 
died, etc.

But....
I think as an interpretation of the books it is a complete failure.  
They leave out so much important information, For example the exact 
identity of Moony, Padfoot, Wormtail and Prongs.  The Secret Keeper 
spell is never even mentioned. They just say that Sirius was one of 
the few people who knew where the Potters were hiding.  PUH-LEASE :)
There is no Cho or Cedric Diggory mentions (and I sincerely hope 
that actor who was playing the Hufflepuff seeker in the Quidditch 
scene isn't who they chose to play Digory in #4).  I was really 
hoping to see more of Diagon Alley in this case.  

The Knight Bus was pretty good, at least it was funny.  And the aunt 
marge scene was funny too. But I wish that Sirius had been more of a 
dog.  ( He really doesn't even look like the pictures in the 
American book as I've heard some people say, he looks more like a 
wolf.)  I wanted more relationship between Sirius, Lupin, James, and 
Wormtail...and I really wish you had heard more than just a scream 
when Harry passes out from the dementors.  

I like the more assertive Hermione in this movie, but I wish there 
had been more scenes with Trelawny so we understood more about why 
she storms out of the room.  I miss the second Quidditch match 
because I was so looking forward to seeing Draco smashed by Harry's 
Patronus.  

I don't really like the new Dumbledore, but I think its because you 
don't see enough of him.  Its almost like he's avoiding Harry 
because he only shows up twice...

They don't explain the passage under the Whomping Willow or the 
Shrieking Shack properly.  

And I could go on all day, but I'll quit here (because I'm tired of 
typing).  So overall, its a good movie but a bad rendition of the 
book.  

Thank you (takes a small bow)

Jessica





From jessicaiseman at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 12:19:05 2004
From: jessicaiseman at yahoo.com (jessicaiseman)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 12:19:05 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
In-Reply-To: <c9sal2+m1sa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9sdnp+13l7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "clio44a" <clio44a at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:
> > My introduction to HP was the SS movie. 
> 
> Congratulations! Better late than never.
> 
> [snip]
> > Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
> > first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
> > movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read 
> PS/SS 
> > and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - 
> where 
> > you happy with the adaptation?
> 


I was more than satisfied with SS and CoS (more so with SS, but I 
think mainly because it was just so cool to see everything like 
Hogwarts and Diagon Alley for real).  They have their problems and I 
understand it is difficult to interpret a book into movie format and 
for all that they can be forgiven.  But PoA really left me feeling 
disappointed.  I will continue to see the following movies (and 
praying that they get it right next time) but I cringe to think of 
what they will leave out next time.  Meanwhile I will be ardently 
hoping for a wonderful book #6 from JKR to soothe my aching soul...
Jessica





From Taykimson at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 13:04:46 2004
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com (Taykimson at yahoo.com)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 13:04:46 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
In-Reply-To: <c9sdnp+13l7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9sgde+cpiq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jessicaiseman" 
<jessicaiseman at y...> wrote:

snip:
 Meanwhile I will be ardently 
> hoping for a wonderful book #6 from JKR to soothe my aching soul...


LOL! - Yes, me too.




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sat Jun  5 13:46:21 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 07:46:21 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
In-Reply-To: <c9ril6+3mtt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003201c44b03$7d8accd0$0400a8c0@pensive>

Actually, I did enjoy the first two movies, precisely because they followed
the story of the books so well.  even the few things that were changed were
acceptable, because they made sense from a translation of print to film
standpoint.  Except that I didn't like the end with Quirrel, because I got
the impression that the viewer was supposed to think Harry killed Quirrel,
and I didn't like that.  He was only 11 at the time.  But I guess that's my
big disappointment with the third movie.  I believe someone else has
mentioned how well Peter Jackson stayed true to Tolkien in the Lord of the
Rings, even thought quite a few things were changed for the sake of being
put into film.  But we still knew we were seeing Tolkien's masterpiece and
dream come to life.

sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com [mailto:Taykimson at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 10:37 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans


My introduction to HP was the SS movie.  I saw it on HBO I believe.  
I was hooked and stopped whatever I was doing if the movie was on.  
Finally I got fed up with trying to catch the movie on TV and I 
bought the DVD.  

The timing worked out well, because CoS was released a few weeks 
later - again I enjoyed the movie and watched it a second time in 
the theater...and finally (again ;-) ) I wised up and said hey - 
there are books out there that I can read for more information.

I was amazed at how closely the first movie followed the book...the 
second movie as well (but the first one was about as literal as one 
can get).  Of course I read books 3 and 4 and was pleased when a few 
weeks later the announcement for book 5 was made.

Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read PS/SS 
and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - where 
you happy with the adaptation?




________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 editor at texas.net  Sat Jun  5 14:06:43 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 09:06:43 -0500
Subject: Amandageist's review
Message-ID: <001c01c44b06$56734b60$1159aacf@texas.net>

If anyone's interested after the plethora of reviews, my impressions after
one seeing (must take children now, will see it again).

R
A
I
N
S

A

L
O
T

I
N

S
C
O
T
L
A
N
D

Bottom line? I have no problem with adaptations; it just seems to me that
the screenwriter sacrificed plot development for humor, and Cuaron
sacrificed it for atmospherics, and between the two, a lot got lost in the
translation.

Not to say it was *all* bad, but I certainly don't think it's the best one
of them all. I'm not particularly looking forward to sitting through it
again with the kids. Specifics follow:

The pace was too fast. I felt bombarded. There was no time to digest
anything, it was like eating a five-course meal in fifteen minutes.

I *love* book Lupin; I find him compassionate, sympathetic, warm, sensitive.
Which makes it so odd that I didn't warm to the movie Lupin at all; he was
not a sympathetic character for me, I didn't develop any attachment to him,
there was no emotional response. This may be because there were so many
little interactions between him and Harry in the books, that the movie could
not accommodate, and it is the "built up" relationship that I respond to.

I had had my doubts about Gary Oldman's casting. No more. He was superb.

Buckbeak is not a computer generated creature. No, they went out and found a
hippogriff. That was *amazing.*

I fail to understand why it helped this movie to have things like a
welcoming choir, at the expense (assuming time was the factor) of critical
plot material:
--nobody mentions that Snape also knew Lupin and Black at school
--nobody mentions why Lupin knows the map is a map
--the only mention of the the wolfsbane potion was in a shouted comment by
Sirius, when he was restraining Lupin; audience is left thinking Dumbledore
really *did* put the school at risk by having a werewolf on staff with no
means of controlling it.
--why did Snape appear at the Willow hard on the heels of Lupin? there was
no explanation of why he was following him
--there was no explanation of why Snape hated Black so; this is a bit
crucial to the plot, and the character development of both.
--we are left hanging with respect to Harry's attack on Snape; in the
absence of the infirmary scene, we do not hear Snape excusing it as the
confundus charm.
--why did Prongs appear when Dying!Harry saw it, but not when Later!Harry
was casting the spell?
--why did Prongs appear at *all*, if they cut everything else out about the
Map and the history of the Marauders?

The total lack of any emotion from the executioner made the execution scene
less than believable. There needed to be anger there, or disgust, or
disappointment, or something, to explain why the hell he'd chop a pumpkin in
half. It looked thrown in as a quick fix to explain what they'd seen before,
not a convincing replay of something that logically already happened.

I'm getting a little tired of Hermione getting all the good lines.
Especially when Rupert Grint is turning out to be the best actor of them
all.

My children do fake crying every single day better than Dan Radcliffe can.

After the Boggart scene, in the later conversation with Lupin, why did Harry
say he thought of Voldemort first? He manifestly didn't, or Voldemort would
have appeared. In the movie, Harry *does* face the boggart and so we know
exactly what his reaction was.

I thought it was stupid beyond words to make Lupin's boggart the actual
moon, behind clouds. Why not just tattoo "werewolf" on his forehead? I
considered that change a bit insulting to the intelligence of the audience.

I did love the deflating balloon. I do not understand why they didn't
destroy the boggart instead of just putting him back in the cupboard.

I didn't think the substitution of the corridor encounter for Snape's office
was effective. Nothing about the dialogue, but it's so out of character for
Snape NOT to dock Gryffindor points for Harry being out of bed at night,
much less to not give him a detention for insulting him (even if it was just
the map).

Lastly, I didn't even realize that *was* Flitwick.

~Amanda
-----------------------
Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sat Jun  5 14:14:49 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:14:49 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans (Movie Spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <c9rt46+oeh8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003301c44b07$7732f8e0$0400a8c0@pensive>

I would agree about COS, but I thought my reaction was just because that is
my least favorite of the books, so naturally, I wouldn't like the movie as
well.  

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: hedwigstalons [mailto:hedwigstalons at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 1:36 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans (Movie
Spoilers)


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:
<snip>

> Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
> first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
> movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read PS/SS 
> and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - where 
> you happy with the adaptation?

I read the books (several times) before I saw the movies. 

In PS/SS I was disappointed with a few of the items that were left 
out: the other two centaurs with their cryptic remarks ("Mars is 
bright tonight"); Dumbledore's take on death ("...the next 
adventure"); Charlie's "jolly bunch" of friends who take Norbert; 
that Neville isn't on detention with them; how there was more focus 
on Seamus than on Neville; and WHY the hell are the Slytherins in ALL 
of the same classes with the Gryffindors?. But, overall I loved how 
it captured the enchantment Harry felt about the Wizarding World, and 
I am able to watch it over and over.

COS maintains the visual beauty of Hogwarts, yet it feels choppy - 
like there is always action happening and no lulls between scenes. 
The flying car scene is ridiculous, as is how long the spiders chase 
the boys. I like how the whole Tom Riddle thing is handled, and 
Gilderoy Lockhart is handled well too(and even though Kenneth 
Brannagh has the chutzpah to play his character, I don't think he'd 
really be attractive to 12 yr. old girls in his classes - don't send 
me Howlers on this now!!); I like how we get a glimpse of herbology. 
I'd love to see more of what happens in class - esp. Potions!
It always feels too long though, and for me to watch it all without 
falling asleep during part is hard - if there were more canon in it 
and less "movie" effects, the movie would flow better. And why did 
they EVER cut the scene in Knockturn Alley out of the movie? It's 
brilliant! (I liked on TV that they added it in a couple of weeks 
ago.)

POA - I love the colors and that they're outdoors more.

WHAT HAPPENED TO WINNING THE QUIDDITCH CUP??????????????????????

I think that a lot was left out that makes this book the best of the 
series as far as plot twists goes. Things aren't explained well, or 
by the right people. Why didn't we see more of our dear Snape?????

I did love the scene with the 3rd yr. Gryffindor boys eating 
the "animal noise" candy. I thought it was a lovely touch to see them 
young and innocently having a bit of fun. It's how dorm life would be 
at times, and it was a nice addition.

The dear twins (becoming foxy young lads, eh?) weren't allowed near 
enough screen time - their characters are HILARIOUS!!! and it would 
be nice to have more of that.

Trelawney - awesome. Although she said the prophecy WRONG!! I read it 
as a foreshadowing of the plot twist in GOF with Crouch. The way it's 
said in the movie doesn't give that.

Not enough of the anger between Ron and Hermione and how she's 
cracking up under the strain of studying.

I realize it's impossible to translate everything from a book onto 
the screen, but I wonder how much from the books that is being left 
out is important?

What's up with Lupin's speech about Lily? Where did Cuaron get all 
that from, eh?

I did enjoy the film, and will need to see it again to absorb it all.

Who was that other kid with Draco? It's always Crabbe and Goyle in 
the books, and it wasn't in the film. Grr. . . 

HedwigsTalons





________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 nacetroy at hotmail.com  Sat Jun  5 15:10:43 2004
From: nacetroy at hotmail.com (etlrideryh36)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:10:43 -0000
Subject: Another observation -   SPOILER
In-Reply-To: <c9rf2v+qd09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9snpj+j64c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Brooke" <sbchavez2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> Did anyone else get the feeling that the entire movie could have 
> happened in  3 days instead of a school year?  It didn't "feel" 
like 
> they were at school like the previous 2 movies did.

Yes, definitely, very good point.  I did not get the feel of the kids 
being in school.  Sure, they showed some classes and walking around 
the castle, but it didn't have that rhythm (excitement of school 
starting, interest turning into drudgery of classes, school breaks, 
etc.) that is so ingrained in real school-- which the first two films 
did get.  It felt more like Harry, Hermione and Ron went to "Camp 
Scary Hillside" than Hogwarts.




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 15:52:42 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:52:42 -0000
Subject: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
In-Reply-To: <c9rqeg+ao9o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9sq8a+ad90@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Hewitt" <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> Michael Gambon's Dumbledore seems to be the big controversial 
casting this time around, 
> but to tell you the truth, I like him a lot. Richard Harris's DD 
always seemed like a 
> stereotype of an old, wizened wizard to me. It was too much Merlin 
and not enough 
> humor.
> The playful, ageing hippie Dumbledore as played by Gambon is much 
closer to how I 
> imagined him, and it reinforces DD's status as one of the greatest 
living wizards. Think 
> about it-when you meet very intelligent people, they are almost 
always kind of offbeat, or 
> even weird. I say this with the highest regard-I'm not trying to 
make fun. I am naturally 
> attracted to people who don't swim well in the mainstream, and 
have a lot of friends who 
> are naturally offbeat.
> In my experience, it's been true. The more intelligent you are, 
the more you walk to the 
> beat of a different drummer. To play DD as Gambon does reinforces 
this connection 
> betwen being intellectually superior and, well,  kind of weird.
> 
> 
> On another topic:
> Another possible book 6-7 clue in the movie. In the scene where 
Harry is crying under his 
> invisibility cloak and Hermione comforts him, when Harry says 
somethig about Sirius 
> betraying his parents, you can see Ron in the background looking 
kind of dejected and left 
> out. Could this be forshadowing?
> My partner has been theorising that Ron will betray Harry in book 
6 or 7. Maybe not a 
> permanent or fatal betrayal, but a betrayal nonetheless. Jealousy, 
and a desire to break out 
> of his family's being poor will contribute to this. Percy succumbs 
to similar feelings, 
> combined with a drive for power, in book 5. Even the last name, 
Weasley, suggests this as 
> a possibility. The American Heritage dictionary tells us that 
to 'weasel out' is "to back out 
> of a situation or commitment in a sneaky or cowardly manner" (I 
must admit I've wondered 
> about the name Weasley for a long time, it seems at this point to 
run counter to much of 
> the name irony in the books. Maybe we just havent seen it become 
accurate yet). 
> 
> Tyler

Wow!

Great post and theory!! Make a lot of sense...

@)---/----daughter




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 17:41:28 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 10:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Another observation -   SPOILER
In-Reply-To: <c9rf2v+qd09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040605174128.45429.qmail@web40502.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brooke <sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Did anyone else get the feeling that the entire
> movie could have 
> happened in  3 days instead of a school year?  It
> didn't "feel" like 
> they were at school like the previous 2 movies did. 


Yes! That is exactly how I felt! I really think that
having Halloween and Christmas in the first to films
gave you a sense of time and time passing better than
that stupid clock. 
Also, I love how it was changed to have Hermione storm
out the same day as everything happened when in
reality she stormed out around Easter and then all the
action and Buckbeak's execution were during their
exams, so at least a month apart. 
I don't want to get into all of my complaints because
many of you have already expressed them better than I
could but the one thing I've been saying about the
movie is that every scene is amazing, but instead of
being a fluid movie its more like snippets of a movie
all thrown together with really random little
interlude scenes.  Because looking at the clips on the
internet, I still think they're brilliant, but a bunch
of good scenes haphazardly strewn together is not a
movie. 

I gave the biggest compliment I can give a movie to
Return of the King, saying that after 3 and a half
hours I wasn't bored and could have watched it over
again immediately. I give the biggest insult I can
give to PoA because for the entire movie I was bored
and knew that if, at any point in the movie, I had
left the theatre I wouldn't have looked back or cared
what happened for the rest of the film.

~Katie, who is hugely disappointed.


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From clshannon at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 17:48:48 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:48:48 EDT
Subject: Observation, not really spoiler
Message-ID: <8b.cb546fb.2df36180@aol.com>

Something I find curious ;-)
When I first joined the many lists discussing HP, it was right around when 
COS opened in theaters and I remember wading through much disgruntled 
conversation about how the movie didn't follow the book enough, or what was left out, or 
what was done wrong. 
Now I am reading comments from people saying COS did such a better job of 
'sticking to the book' compared to POA - hmm. 
I guess by the time GOF comes out, there will be talk of how much better POA 
stuck to the book <g>
Some say that Columbus was too slavishly devoted to the books, yet at the 
time COS came out, many were grumbling about how the plot was too hard to follow 
because of things he 'left out'. I guess it's impossible to make everyone 
happy, but these contradictions are curious to me. I wonder if   the folks who 
grumbled about COS are the same ones who are now saying it did a better job of 
sticking to the book than POA ; -)

I won't go into a whole thing about different mediums and how the technique 
is different for each, but I will say that I loved POA because of what it is - 
a film, not a book. I read all four LOTR books after seeing the first two 
movies and was amazed at the differences - things that would never work in a film 
were left out or outright changed, and I mean drastically. The LOTR were less 
a filming of the books than they were a filming of the 'spirit' of the books. 
Yet, so many people use them as an example of 'how to make a movie from a 
book'. Well, I would say that the Potter films are much closer to 'actually 
filming the books' than the LOTR are - by a long shot. 
But I think POA is the first one to be a 'real film' and not just a series of 
episodic scenes connecting point A to point B from the books. POA is a filmic 
representation of the spirit of the book, while also maintaining the 
storyline that is necessary in order to bring it to life.

Just my 2 cents ;-)
Cindy


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




From jmmears at comcast.net  Sat Jun  5 18:32:12 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:32:12 -0000
Subject: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
In-Reply-To: <c9rqeg+ao9o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9t3jc+ahqa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Hewitt" <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:

 
> On another topic:
> Another possible book 6-7 clue in the movie. In the scene where 
Harry is crying under his 
> invisibility cloak and Hermione comforts him, when Harry says 
somethig about Sirius 
> betraying his parents, you can see Ron in the background looking 
kind of dejected and left 
> out. Could this be forshadowing?
> My partner has been theorising that Ron will betray Harry in book 
6 or 7. Maybe not a 
> permanent or fatal betrayal, but a betrayal nonetheless. Jealousy, 
and a desire to break out 
> of his family's being poor will contribute to this. Percy succumbs 
to similar feelings, 
> combined with a drive for power, in book 5. Even the last name, 
Weasley, suggests this as 
> a possibility. The American Heritage dictionary tells us that 
to 'weasel out' is "to back out 
> of a situation or commitment in a sneaky or cowardly manner" (I 
must admit I've wondered 
> about the name Weasley for a long time, it seems at this point to 
run counter to much of 
> the name irony in the books. Maybe we just havent seen it become 
accurate yet). 


The trouble with this theory is that JKR seems to reject it outright 
on her website.  If you go to the "other stuff" section, click 
on "characters" and go to "Some random facts about the Weasley 
family", you'll see her say:

In Britain and Ireland the weasel has had a bad reputation as an 
unfortunate, even malevolent animal.  However, since childhood I 
have had a great fondness for the family mustelidae; not so much 
malignant as maligned, in my opinion.

She goes on to say that she's very fond of redheads as well as 
weasels, so while another author may very well choose a name 
like "Weasley" to indicate a "bad" character,  JKR has pretty much 
told us that she won't take that path.

Jo Serenadust, defending Weasleys since 2001




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 18:40:25 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 14:40:25 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] a few things about POA (spoilers)
Message-ID: <62.3f30ee47.2df36d99@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/5/2004 5:19:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
annelilucas at yahoo.co.uk writes:
>>She hides her face in Ron or Harry's
chest several times - why does this always happen in films? it really
bugs me this "i'm an emotional woman and cannot deal with this
situation" versus "i'm a strong man and will protect/comfort you". <<
But book Hermione does that as well, at least occasionally. I know when her 
and Harry get out of the tunnel into the shreiking shack, she's grabbing his 
arm hard enough to be hurting him. I think they were all equally upset by 
buckbeak's "death", she just showed it more than them.

>>Finally, and I think very importantly: what the hell is going on in
the DADA class when Parvati spells the boggart?  It is turned from (in
my opinion) a not-at-all scary snake into a enormous horrible, freaky
clown jack-in-the-box.  How, by any stretch of the imagination could
this be considered to be funny?!  <<

Completely agree with you! The snake wasn't half as scary as that creepy 
looking Jack in the Box, which everyone in the room laughed at. Assuming it was a 
set piece (and not CGI), I would be afraid just shooting around that thing.


-Rebecca


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




From jmmears at comcast.net  Sat Jun  5 18:49:58 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:49:58 -0000
Subject: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
In-Reply-To: <c9t3jc+ahqa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9t4km+83f4@eGroups.com>


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Hewitt" <tahewitt at y...> 
> wrote:

> > On another topic:
> > Another possible book 6-7 clue in the movie. In the scene where 
> Harry is crying under his 
> > invisibility cloak and Hermione comforts him, when Harry says 
> somethig about Sirius 
> > betraying his parents, you can see Ron in the background looking 
> kind of dejected and left 
> > out. Could this be forshadowing?


I should also have said (in my earlier post) that I thought this 
scene was a real low point in the movie for me.  I realize that it 
was meant to be a touching moment, but it was just irritating, 
mawkish and OOC for Harry to sit and weep in front of his friends.  
I can't really fault Daniel Radcilffe for not being able to bring 
this off, though, because IMO he should never have been asked to do 
something so unHarrylike (yes, it's a word.  I just created it :P)).

Jo S., who did like the movie, but has a fair few gripes 
 







From afolcfkajl at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 19:28:23 2004
From: afolcfkajl at aol.com (afolcfkajl at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:28:23 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Observation, not really spoiler
Message-ID: <55.59412218.2df378d7@aol.com>


Well, I guess I'll put my two cents in. I have all five books in hard cover 
and own both the DVD of the first two movies. I am a Potter fan. :-) I went 
yesterday night to the movies  expecting to be entertained, and I was.  I enjoyed 
POA immensely. I will go to see it again before its run in the theaters end, 
and I  will buy the DVD.  Was it perfect? No. Did I miss the parts  of the 
book that were  left out? Yes.  Did certain scenes not live up to the vision that 
I had in my head while reading the book? Yes. But I recognize the fact that 
the books and movies are two different genres and thus they cannot, IMHO, be 
clones of each other. I enjoyed POA for what it was, a film that gave me a 
glimpse into a world and people I've grown to know and care about.  Long live Harry 
Potter movies. :-) 

Ketsia


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




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 19:37:44 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 12:37:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <c9t4km+83f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>

I think the way I saw the movie had a huge impact on
my reaction to it so I have a challenge for everyone
that really enjoyed it. When you see it again, I want
you to take someone who is willing to go and is
interested in seeing the movie but HAS NOT read the
books. Having seen it with my best friend, who was
really excited about sharing the experience with me
even though she doesn't really like reading so hasn't
gotten into the books, gave me a very different
perspective than if I had seen in alone or with other
Potterholics. Seeing it with her caused me to spend
the entire movie thinking, "It is so choppy there is
no way she is understanding any of this."  After the
movie she actually had to ask me whether or not Sirius
Black was guilty because the Shrieking Shack scene
moved so quickly that she couldn't follow what was
going on. I honestly felt like if I had cash on me I
should give her her money back because it was a total
waste for her because the plot wasn't well enough
developed for someone without the knowledge from the
books to get anything out of it. 

This perspective of the movie makes me say that it is
not a movie that can stand alone because without the
information from the books the plot makes no sense.
It's not very good as a book adaptation and it's
horrible as a movie on its own because it makes no
sense.

I really think before people say it's a good movie
they need to hear the perspective of someone who does
not have the prior knowledge from the books. So
seriously, take someone who hasn't read them and see
what they think.

~Katie


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From amani at atlanticbb.net  Sat Jun  5 19:44:00 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:44:00 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
References: <c9sq8a+ad90@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c44b35$737035a0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Hewitt" <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> On another topic:
> Another possible book 6-7 clue in the movie. In the scene where 
Harry is crying under his 
> invisibility cloak and Hermione comforts him, when Harry says 
somethig about Sirius 
> betraying his parents, you can see Ron in the background looking 
kind of dejected and left 
> out. Could this be forshadowing?
> My partner has been theorising that Ron will betray Harry in book 
6 or 7. Maybe not a 
> permanent or fatal betrayal, but a betrayal nonetheless. Jealousy, 
and a desire to break out 
> of his family's being poor will contribute to this. Percy succumbs 
to similar feelings, 
> combined with a drive for power, in book 5. Even the last name, 
Weasley, suggests this as 
> a possibility. The American Heritage dictionary tells us that 
to 'weasel out' is "to back out 
> of a situation or commitment in a sneaky or cowardly manner" (I 
must admit I've wondered 
> about the name Weasley for a long time, it seems at this point to 
run counter to much of 
> the name irony in the books. Maybe we just havent seen it become 
accurate yet). 

Taryn:
Well, JKR commented on Ron's surname on her site. To quote:

"Ron was the only one of three major characters whose surname never changed; he has been 'Weasley' from start to finish. In Britain and Ireland the weasel has a bad reputation as an unfortunate, even malevolent, animal. However, since childhood I have had a great fondness for the family mustelidae; not so much malignant as maligned, in my opinion."

http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=7 (that's the text only version)

--Taryn

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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 19:55:02 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:55:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: PoA-In defense of Gambon, forshadowing, etc. !!small spoilers!!
Message-ID: <ea.503c108a.2df37f16@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/5/04 12:30:34 PM, jmmears at comcast.net writes:


> I should also have said (in my earlier post) that I thought this
> scene was a real low point in the movie for me.? I realize that it
> was meant to be a touching moment, but it was just irritating,
> mawkish and OOC for Harry to sit and weep in front of his friends.?
> I can't really fault Daniel Radcilffe for not being able to bring
> this off, though, because IMO he should never have been asked to do
> something so unHarrylike (yes, it's a word.? I just created it :P)).
> 

I disagree - I think it was clever of them to have him crying while still 
under the cloak because crying IS a difficult thing to do convincingly and this 
way, we can hear it, but not really see it. I didn't find this awkward at all, 
the sobbing wasn't wailing or particularly loud (at least in the theater where 
I was <g>). Once the cloak is off, he's not sitting there weeping - he's 
upset, but not holding his head in his hands and shaking with sobs or anything 
that dramatic. He is sufficiently in control to talk to Hermione and then get 
angry over what he's heard.

Cindy


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




From tzakis1225 at netzero.com  Sat Jun  5 20:00:24 2004
From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:00:24 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9t8oo+lsrb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Wolber <katydid3500 at y...> 
wrote:
> [snip] Having seen it with my best friend, who was
> really excited about sharing the experience with me
> even though she doesn't really like reading so hasn't
> gotten into the books, gave me a very different
> perspective than if I had seen in alone or with other
> Potterholics. Seeing it with her caused me to spend
> the entire movie thinking, "It is so choppy there is
> no way she is understanding any of this."  [snip]

Demetra:
This is exactly what I was thinking during the Shreiking Shack and 
final scenes.  Up until that point I kept thinking that they could 
fill in the blanks and fill the gaping plot holes during those 
scenes.  That never happened and that is why after liking the movie, 
even loving quite a few parts, I left the theater vaguely 
disappointed.  How could they have totally dropped the ball in what 
should have been absolutely brilliant on screen.  What a waste of 
tremendous talent.  There were sparks of it there, Oldman in 
particular was fantastic.  But really, did we need that much time on 
the Knight Bus, watching Marge blow up, shots of the Whomping 
Willow?  A couple more minutes in the Shreiking Shack explaining what 
the hell was going on was sorely needed, IMHO.  

In yesterday's Chicago Tribune there was a quote from Steve Kloves 
who said that in the first two movies Chris Columbus (who read the 
books and loved them) kept putting things back in the film because 
they were parts of the book that he liked.  Kloves said he thought 
that Cuaron's having never read the books served the film well 
because he had no compunction about cutting stuff out.  IMHO, they 
needed a happy medium between the two, because with the background 
stuff they cut out of PoA, it just didn't make a whole lot of sense.

I saw the movie yesterday with my 9 y/o, and we both love the books.  
Next week we are going again with my husband who hasn't read any of 
the books but has seen the movies.  It will be interesting to hear 
his perspective.  I suspect he'll like the movie, but he will not 
have figured out that Sirius, Lupin, James, Peter and Snape were all 
classmates or even that Sirius and Snape have hated each other for 
years.    




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 20:26:48 2004
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040605202648.85632.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com>



Kathryn Wolber <katydid3500 at yahoo.com> wrote:
I think the way I saw the movie had a huge impact on
my reaction to it so I have a challenge for everyone
that really enjoyed it. When you see it again, I want
you to take someone who is willing to go and is
interested in seeing the movie but HAS NOT read the
books. 

akh:  Your timing is good here; I just had breakfast with some friends who saw the movie last night, and one of them has not read any of the books.  He has seen the previous two movies, and, as an aside, loved Sorcerer's Stone and didn't care for Chamber of Secrets.

Brad thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and he felt he followed the plot with very few exceptions.  Interestingly, this is the movie that has motivated him to read the books, since he does feel he missed some points, not having read the book.  His plan is to read the book, then see the movie again.

Obviously, this experience doesn't cause me to revise my opinion of the movie.  My SO also hasn't read the books, so I will get yet another chance to see if the "uninitiated" can follow the plot as presented in the movie, when I can get him to see it. (He's child-phobic, so he wants to wait until he's practically the only person in the theatre.  It'll be a long wait!)

 

akh

 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

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




From bethz1 at rcn.com  Sat Jun  5 20:28:47 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 16:28:47 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] A challenge for people who really liked the movie
References: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000401c44b3b$b4c130d0$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kathryn Wolber" <katydid3500 at yahoo.com>

> I really think before people say it's a good movie
> they need to hear the perspective of someone who does
> not have the prior knowledge from the books. So
> seriously, take someone who hasn't read them and see
> what they think.
>
> ~Katie

Actually, my sister and I (who have both read the books) went to the
midnight show on Thursday with our two best friends (who have not read the
books, but they have seen the previous two movies) and our friends liked it
more than we did.  With POA being my favorite book I thought it was good,
but I don't think I would have been overly thrilled with any version of the
movie (I'm very protective of that book for some reason), but my sister
thought it was 'ok' and our friends were both like 'It was REALLY good' and
they understood what was going on.

But with each movie I've watched thinking that people who have never read
the books would never understand what is going on, but they always do.  My
brother, my dad, my mom and my two friends have never read the books and
understand what is happening in the movies (my sister and I ask them A LOT
of questions to make sure.  :-)).  I don't know, I think I always think that
they won't understand, because I keep thinking that important plot moments
from the book are excluded from the movies and make it more confusing; and
maybe since that throws me off I'm missing the replacements that they put
into the movie. (if that makes any sense).

Beth





From ekrbdg at msn.com  Sat Jun  5 20:47:40 2004
From: ekrbdg at msn.com (Kimberly)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 16:47:40 -0400
Subject: PoA Review ---> LOVED it !!
Message-ID: <003201c44b3e$58f62b40$bbe0f943@hppav>

*SPOILER ALERT*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I just returned from seeing the movie and my immediate reaction is "I want to see it again !!!!!!!!!!!!".        I've read many reviews of those that didn't care for the way it was done and quite frankly, I just don't have that same feeling.      I absolutely adored the emotion and energy behind many of the scenes and even my children (6, 9, 10), only one of which read the book, had no trouble following the pace.    Yes, there were times it went from one location to the next with little transition but I felt enough information was given to follow along.     

My favorite part/sequence had to be seeing the Time Turner events materialized.     Reading it wasn't as vivid to me as seeing it !!    I LOVED where Time Turner!Hermione threw the pebbles into Hagrid's hut.    Just being able to see all of that played out was worth the price of the ticket.    

The most emotional scene for me was when Harry and Sirius are at the lake and Time Turner!Harry and Time Turner!Hermione show up.    The dementor scene is phenomenal and held my every attention !   I was pulled completely into it and at parts could hardly watch even though I knew the ending already !     The soul sucking, WOW !!     Just as I imagined !!    Yes, I know that it's not mentioned in canon that the dementors fly but in the movie it felt totally right.     All in all, a big moment in the movie.

Fred and George, fantastic bit of acting, really !    As someone else already mentioned, it was quite amusing to witness them "talking in turn".    The Marauder's Map couldn't have been done any better.   Yes, I thought they could have at least mentioned who the Marauder's were but suffice it to say, I was more than pleased at the outcome none the less.     When Snape confiscated the map and Harry did the part about, "....presents his compliments to Professor Snape and begs him to keep his abnormally large nose out of other people's business." I was positively gleeful !    

Buckbeak- Fantastic !!!

Professor Trelawny- Enjoyable, much better than her canon character but still not one of my favorites, I'd just as well to do without her except that she comes into play more so later on.    

The scene at the Dursleys, to me, other than the purpose of the really cool Knight Bus scene... I felt the time spent at the Dursleys was wasted.     What was the point really ?    Harry's bedroom reminded me of the inside of the house on Willy Wonka and the Chocolate factory.    The interior of his room just didn't coincide with the rest of the dwelling, not even the materials it was made of.    It was more than "we've been burdened with Harry, let's give him much less", it was the feel of his room was different than the rest of the house.   Anyway, I could have done without the whole Dursley scene... Marge blowing up came way too fast and was over in a flash.   

The Knight Bus was such fun !    What a ride !!!!!     

Having viewed the trailers and reading reviews did nothing to prepare me for this movie.... I thought it was very well done and that Cuaron was brilliant at creating a visual for book #3.    The detail was endless... seeing the water droplets on the playground equipment before the Knight Bus comes, the dementors fingers, the scene where the boys are in their dormitory playing around, the Boggart, etc.    All of it seemed so real !!    Oh, I forgot to say that I got quite a chuckle out of Hermione when she said, "Is that really what my hair looks like from the back ?".    I liked how they added in bits of typical teen behaviors.    Great to see our characters growing and changing but also remaining the same.    

Can you tell I loved this movie ???     So glad I get to share it with you all... I came home and tried to explain to my husband (who hasn't read or watched any of the series) which proved pointless.     He just had no idea.    

Kimberly

The circles of women around us weave invisible nets of love 
that carry us when we're weak and sing with us when we're strong. 


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.698 / Virus Database: 455 - Release Date: 6/2/2004

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




From bethz1 at rcn.com  Sat Jun  5 21:02:29 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 17:02:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: HPFGU-Movie impressions of POA--spoilers
References: <c9r8at+7gid@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004b01c44b40$69cd7840$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Diana_Sirius_fan" <siriuslove71 at yahoo.com>

> >
> > S
> > P
> > O
> > I
> > L
> > E
> > R
> > S
> > P
> > A
> > C
> > E
> >
>
> Hello.  I also saw the movie this afternoon only I was extremely
> disappointed with Lupin.  Why in the world did they have him yell at
> Harry after the Snape incident when Harry was roaming the hall with
> the map?   That was totally unlike Lupin in the book.

I was happy with Lupin.  I thought he had a lot of compassion with Harry
when it was appropriate, but in the book I read it as he does practically
yell
at Harry after the Snape incident.  JK Rowling uses words like 'shortly' and
'he was looking at Harry more seriously than ever before' and then he left
Harry 'feeling worse by far than he ever had in Snapes office'...so I always
read it as he was getting pretty upset with Harry.  But maybe its just the
way I
read it and I also liked 'movie Lupin' more than I like 'book Lupin', so
maybe I'm
a wee bit biased.  :-)

Beth





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sat Jun  5 21:07:21 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 16:07:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] a few things about POA (spoilers)
References: <62.3f30ee47.2df36d99@aol.com>
Message-ID: <001601c44b41$17f5f910$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>


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


  >>Finally, and I think very importantly: what the hell is going on in
  the DADA class when Parvati spells the boggart?  It is turned from (in
  my opinion) a not-at-all scary snake into a enormous horrible, freaky
  clown jack-in-the-box.  How, by any stretch of the imagination could
  this be considered to be funny?!  <<



  LOL.  I just returned from seeing the movie, and when the scene happened, my 14-year old sister
  turned to me and said "that jack-in-the-box would have scared me way more than the snake."
  It certaining was scary to me!

  Kimberly 



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




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 19:19:24 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 19:19:24 -0000
Subject: POA Spells and things/spoiler
Message-ID: <c9t6bs+k168@eGroups.com>

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

I missed Crookshanks...the few showings weren't enough (and that cat 
WAS Crookshanks). I will assume that since the cat had no part of 
helping Padfoot, all those speculations about being an animagus can 
now be tossed out the window (I was among those who believed).

Bothersome.  Harry and Hermione are being taken for a ride of the 
Whomping Willow.  Fine.  And we didn't understand why it didn't 
attack them when they came out again, until later when we see Lupin 
use the Immobilus spell.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm....didn't Hermione use that in COS/movie, with the 
pixies?  Did she forget it?  Are we suppose to forget that she used 
it, or knew it?  

Someone said they didn't like the Aunt Marge thing - I found it 
hilarious, especially the buttons hitting Dudley.  The theater 
breaks up when it happens.  Dudley really doesn't do that much in 
the movies against Harry - but we all know him from the books and so 
love to see him get his come uppance - except for the fact that it 
really didn't seem to bother him whatsoever.

All for now...

Kathy





From sweetongoo at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 13:33:50 2004
From: sweetongoo at yahoo.com (Ashley Hawkins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 06:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I must say...I liked it.
In-Reply-To: <001301c44ac4$5db38cb0$f301aec7@yourus67pi6luv>
Message-ID: <20040605133350.6025.qmail@web52201.mail.yahoo.com>



jennifer massey <barbienut75 at earthlink.net> wrote:
I was not disappointed in the movie, the main reason being, I did not go in expecting it to be just like the book, movies never are. I'd like for someone to point out ONE book, that was exactly word for word, just like the book.

I treat books and movies as two diffrent stories.....therefore I do not get dissapointed. And I can enjoy them both for what they are.


"jennifer massey" 


I believe that The Princess Bride was pretty close to word for word and scene to scene. But it has been awhile since I've read the point, so I may be wrong..but I think I remember them being quite the same!

SweetOnGoo


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

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





From sweetongoo at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 13:41:08 2004
From: sweetongoo at yahoo.com (Ashley)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 13:41:08 -0000
Subject: Another observation -   SPOILER
In-Reply-To: <c9rf2v+qd09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9sihk+9chb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Brooke" <sbchavez2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> Did anyone else get the feeling that the entire movie could have 
> happened in  3 days instead of a school year?  It didn't "feel" 
like 
> they were at school like the previous 2 movies did.

I got that feeling as well. I also felt as if the 'class' of 
Hogwarts was ripped to shreds. And I thought that when you get older 
the 'classier' things get, but maybe others don't share that 
opinion. Sure good music...with voices...might seem to bring the 
castle in a more awake atmosphere, but the suspense of the whole 
situation was not there (for me at least.)
SweetOnGoo





From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 18:48:07 2004
From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (madam_author)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:48:07 -0000
Subject: Observation, not really spoiler
In-Reply-To: <8b.cb546fb.2df36180@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9t4h7+nvif@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> Something I find curious ;-)
> When I first joined the many lists discussing HP, it was right 
around when 
> COS opened in theaters and I remember wading through much 
disgruntled 
> conversation about how the movie didn't follow the book enough, or 
what was left out, or 
> what was done wrong. 

Well, personally, I liked Both SS and CoS when they came out. I had 
a few nitpicky things but on the whole I thought they were well 
done. There were small details that were left out that I would have 
preferred to keep in, but overall the important things were there. 
PoA however, was a comlete disappointment.  It wasn't small details 
that were missing it was chunks that were missing from the plot 
which left many important things unanswered. Gone were the 
discoveries we made about James' and Severus' animosity, gone was 
the true import of the prophecy (in fact-gone was the real prophecy 
itself), gone were important developments in Harry's character with 
regards to his parents and hearing their dying moments.
 
> But I think POA is the first one to be a 'real film' and not just 
a series of 
> episodic scenes connecting point A to point B from the books. POA 
is a filmic 
> representation of the spirit of the book, while also maintaining 
the 
> storyline that is necessary in order to bring it to life.


I don't think they stuck to the spirit of the book *at all*. Instead 
they took the plot, cut it apart and the put it back together with 
huge pieces missing. 
What was even more disappointing to me is the fact that I could see 
the potential in the movie, it *could* have been better! The 
director has a beautiful style, but it went to waste because so much 
else was lost.

Madam_Author

PS-did it bother anyone that no one dressed in robes? It didn't 
bother me too much, but I think it took away from the "magic" 
atmosphere the first two movies had.





From pmk856 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 18:38:29 2004
From: pmk856 at yahoo.com (pmk856)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:38:29 -0000
Subject: POA Review - No Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <c9rebb+111bs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9t3v5+oq9n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "celticangel1976" 
> <celticangel at t...> wrote:
> 
>   Curon is not my fav director, his 
> > scene changes are annoying, but he did breath new life into the 
> > movies.  The magic feels much more natural in this than the 
> others.  
> > Other than feeling a bit rushed and a little choppy, it was 
really 
> > good.  
> > 
> 
> My reply (Taykimson):
> I agree - the scene changes kept throwing me for a loop...and it 
was 
> definetely choppy.  At one point, I asked myself, OK, what happens 
> next?  Of course this is not because I didn't know (I've read the 
> book many, many times), I just kind of got lost with the rapid 
scene 
> changes (with no transition).

Just wanted to delurk and chime in - all those "fade to black" I kept 
thinking - that's where they'll put the commercial when it gets to TV.

PK






From lorna at cybernt.net  Sat Jun  5 13:57:16 2004
From: lorna at cybernt.net (Lorna Timbah)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 13:57:16 -0000
Subject: My POV on PoA + DD, foreshadowing, spoilers... long
Message-ID: <c9sjfs+qir9@eGroups.com>

*
*
*
*
*
spoilers
*
*
*
*
*






I finally watched PoA today, and my thoughts about Gambon playing 
Dumbledore is mixed. I agree that he reinforces a more intellectual 
side of DD, but what's more obvious to me is that his portrayal 
doesn't quite have that closeness and warmth that I would expect DD 
to have, especially when he was interacting with Harry and Hermione 
just before the time turning. He lacks that twinkling in his eyes 
when he purposely gave H & H tips on how to go about solving their 
problems. Or probably it's just the camera angle.

But oh my, the foreshadowing is almost very telling. The ones that 
caught me most are two scenes:
1) When Harry was figuring out the best memory he could have to 
conjure his Patronus, he mentioned that it was not really a memory, 
but some feeling or impression strong enough, that, in the end helped 
him do his charm.
2) When Sirius tells Harry all he needed to held his hand to Harry's 
heart just before Sirius leaves with Buckbeak.
These brought my thoughts back to OotP, when, before Harry fainted, 
he had wished himself that he would rather just die so he could be 
with Sirius. I'm not going to explain any more, but I think most of 
us who watched it could guess that those tidbits of info are defining 
the strength that Harry has and need to use in order to defeat LV at 
the end.

More on the movie:
The whole 'shipper thing... I suppose it can't be ignored. I couldn't 
help giggling together with the crowd as we looked at 
Ron<Hermione<Harry group hug *giggles*. Then, there was the chat 
between Hermione and Ron after they came out of the Whomping 
Willow... "they're gonna chop it off" "no they won't" "yes they 
will"... back and forth... awww :)
I love the pace of the movie, from start to finish. I'm impressed 
that they managed to squeeze so much info into one short 2-hr-plus 
movie. I don't mind that the movie lacks what some might call fun and 
innocent elements. The movie feels just right to me because the 
emotions are still there.
The actors, needless to say, are fabulous.

I missed McGonagall, Sir Cardogan, and Flitwick's old looks. I don't 
get this Tom guy in the Leaky Cauldron (is he suppose to be like 
that?). Ron can be quite ridiculous at times, not quite like I 
remembered him from the books. The Gryffindor entrance is 
confusing... it's not suppose to be so obviously near the stairs, 
isn't it? I'm a little dissapointed they didn't explain 
Lupin/Sirius/James/Snape relationship, but I assume they'll do it in 
the next movie. I don't mind the Dursley scene that short, or 
Quidditch for that matter since the more important part is how Harry 
is affected by the Dementors. I am amazed with the hippogriff 
introduction, much better than I've imagined. Thank God no Cho, and 
Cedric can wait for the next film.

Still, PoA creates a less perfect world, a world that makes sense. I 
honestly loved the new Hogwarts and the atmosphere of 9-3/4. Such a 
contrast compared to the SS and CoS movies, they make me wish that 
magic is real. PoA on the other hand makes me *feel* that magic *is* 
real. MoviePoA is different from BookPoA, but the essence are still 
there.

My final thoughts --  I wonder how other non-HP-reading viewers would 
think... were they able to grasp the storytelling, coz I honestly 
think the movie is so fast-paced that they'd probably be lost 
somewhere through the story. The most evident question I assume 
they'll pose is, "How did Lupin know it's the Marauder's Map?"

"Lorna Timbah"




From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Sat Jun  5 14:44:00 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:44:00 -0000
Subject: hagrid's hut, set/location (Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  New Look + Review)
In-Reply-To: <20040605024713.6841.qmail@web42007.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9sm7g+jggm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Tin Samson <tin_kim924 at y...> 
wrote:

> just want to say something about hagrid's hut...
> somehow it bothered me that his hut looked different
> (wasn't it?) and that it was so much further from
> hogwarts than it was in the two previous movies.  i
> remember from CoS that his hut was very close to
> hogwarts in one of the scenes where the 3 kids visit
> him.

   I thought it seemed farther too. And the ground around Hogwarts 
seems to have suddenly become much steeper and hillyer than it used 
to be. And where did that covered bridge come from? I like it but 
surely it wasn't there before???

> oh and in SS and CoS, i don't remember the gryffindor
> room entrance and portrait being by those moving
> stairs!!  did anyone notice that?

   Well they are 'moving' stairs ;) Actually that could explain a 
lot. Maybe some of the staff amuse themselves over the summer break 
by reconfiguring the castle and grounds?


"rowena_grunnionffitch"




From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 18:12:02 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:12:02 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
Message-ID: <c9t2di+km50@eGroups.com>

Been lurking on the HPFGU lists for some time, but have never posted 
before.  Now find that two of my favorite things--Harry Potter and 
bulldogs!--have come together, and I can't find the information I'm 
looking for ANYWHERE.  Does anyone here know who the bulldog in the 
PofA movie is?  Where does he come from, whom does he belong to, who 
is his trainer?
Thanks!
PG 





From Resqgal911 at msn.com  Sat Jun  5 14:19:03 2004
From: Resqgal911 at msn.com (Tammy Bianchi)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 10:19:03 -0400
Subject: POA intervue - Is Dan going drag?
References: <c9rhoa+io9g@eGroups.com> <05ab01c44ab5$64a1fc50$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <BAY4-DAV47Fu2mlWRFQ00017ea5@hotmail.com>

Check out the interview on this page.

http://www.foxnews.com/access/video.html<http://www.foxnews.com/access/video.html>


Scroll down to the Foxlife section.  There are 3 different HP related videos.  In one of them the interviewer asks Dan what he has planned after HP.  He says something completely different.  The interviewer suggests drag, and Dan ways sure, maybe drag!  

Squee!

"Tammy"










From holbroal at mcmaster.ca  Sat Jun  5 21:16:24 2004
From: holbroal at mcmaster.ca (xenologue)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:16:24 -0000
Subject: PoA - my thoughts (long; spoilers)
Message-ID: <c9td78+bpa6@eGroups.com>


First post.  Needed to talk about the movie so here I am.  

I love the fact that the nature of the Internet meant I could go 
online at 2 am last night after seeing the movie and read reviews, 
both professional and amateur, to help me process and find words for 
the experience I just had.  I honestly did not expect to be as wound 
up about it as I was.  I'll try to put words to the reasons for that, 
and mention a few things about the movie, although some of them have 
been mentioned by other writers here.  Kudos to so many of you for 
being able to express yourselves so eloquently and find the perfect 
phrases to describe what I was thinking.  I'm sure I'll have 
forgotten things about the movie that I'd like to comment on, 
although your comments have prodded my aging memory.

Spoilers Ahoy!


Where I come from, fan-wise: I have read all 5 books and love the 
series, but often forget details and plot points even after having 
read a book a couple of times.  I don't know the books backwards and 
forwards.  I do often wonder what it would be like to have been 8 or 
9 or 10 years old when the first book came out.  I'd be so much 
crazier for the series than I am.  That's why I just think it's 
awesome to see the young kids ? and even some of the older ones
-- 
wearing their costumes to the theatre.  I find it very touching 
actually.  More power to them!

I never go into a movie expecting it to be the same as the book.  
When it is the same, I'm usually delighted; when it strays, I always 
hope it strays in a direction I can accept logically and 
cinematographically.  If it doesn't, I have to chalk it up to the 
director's own interpretation and hope other people liked it.  I came 
in expecting certain parts of the book to be chopped for brevity (I 
realized ahead of time without seeing any spoilers that it would be 
most convenient to have only one Hippogriff, for instance).  

I'm also influenced by a certain affection for the character actors 
and for the visual representation of the series as provided by Chris 
Columbus.  Their acting abilities or occasional lack thereof aside, 
DR, EW and RG are appealing young people who, IMO, were well cast.  I 
admit to a degree of distant personal affection and compassion for 
them as they grow up alongside, and in some ways irretrievably 
connected to, these characters who have worked their way so quickly 
into popular conscience.  It is interesting to me, in particular, to 
see the development of the characters in both written and visual 
format through the physical, emotional and mental processes of 
puberty and adolescence, such a highly charged period in anyone's 
life.  

What I was not expecting, and was therefore jarred by, was the 
disregard Cuaron seemed to have for the Potter universe as 
interpreted by Chris Columbus.  I have not seen any of Cuaron's other 
work although I am aware of it. I guess I expected he would just 
conform more or less to the "look" of the Potterverse that I thought 
had already been "established".  It was both disappointing and 
liberating/edifying to see that in fact, nothing need 
be "established" at all and that the other directors can and will 
have their own take on it.  I may have not agreed with the way 
everything was done, but this is movie itself is strong support for 
one of the most important principles of literature, illustrated so 
well by Orson Scott Card in his introduction to his 1991 revised 
edition of the great novel Ender's Game: "If the story means anything 
to you at all, then when you remember it afterward, think of it, not 
as something I created, but rather as something that we made 
together."

Some comments have been made here which mercifully put words to what 
I wanted to say about the tone of the first two movies, in their 
presentation of Hogwarts, Hogwarts express, the school grounds, etc., 
namely that Columbus' Hogwarts was like "Disney Hogwarts", a 
precious, tidy, blue-skied representation of Potter's world.  I 
couldn't agree more.  At the same time, to some degree I LIKED that 
about the first two films.  It was simplistic but it was easy to 
swallow.  The score followed a similar pattern... cute little tunes 
as well as some adequately swelling numbers to go with Quidditch, or 
to introduce the Hogwarts castle.  I suppose the 12 year old in me 
thrilled to that.  It was clean, understandable and comfortable.  The 
characters' emotions were not very subtly expressed in my opinion, 
and I usually like a little subtlety in films, but again... it was 
fine for the purposes as I saw them.

The departure from that tidiness is what startled me immediately 
about PoA. Actually the VERY first thing that startled me was 
something I thought only I was seeing.  I thought I must be a bit 
sick to be seeing a play on sexual imagery in the very first scene 
but apparently I'm not the only one!  Perhaps you can understand why, 
having just eaten my dinner while watching the comparatively squeaky-
clean CoS, I felt just a tad scandalized by what Cuaron was doing 
with that scene.  Because it leapt out at me so vividly I didn't 
think it was a subtle play *at all*, even though I know it's going to 
fly right over the heads of many audience members.

DR's expression of Harry's rage, kicking things in his room, 
immediately threw me and moved me at the same time.  I remember the 
uncontrollable rages of early adolescence (oh wait, I still have 
those) and immediately felt compassion and sympathy.  So between 
these two scenes it was clear right away that the emotional tone had 
been kicked up a significant notch from the first two films.  

I think that the rather pneumatic Aunt Marge scene was overkill, 
badly paced, unsatisfying; but then, I have no special feeling for 
the first few chapters of PoA anyway.  Still, the direction of DR 
near the still, wet playground took my breath away.  I wish I were a 
film major so I would understand better why that was so captivating.  
The Knight Bus... eh.  I never found that part of PoA interesting at 
all, so I wasn't expecting anything, but both my filmgoing friend and 
I hated the little talking Jamaican (?!) head.  Zooming through the 
traffic was a little fun though, and it gave opportunity for some 
crazy direction that confirmed this movie was going to be its own 
animal.

So much for squeaky clean: Check out the new Leaky Cauldron.  It 
really does look leaky.  And gross.  And grimy.  And it didn't sit 
well with me.  I found the new Tom silly and contemptible.  Watching 
his antics in offering Harry crumpets and tea distracted from what 
Fudge was supposed to be telling Harry.  Fudge as a character was 
well-acted but I object strongly to his subdued wardrobe.  But hey, 
that's me.  I also really disliked the direction of the Mr. 
Weasley/HP interaction, which I found boring and drawn-out, 
especially since I personally liked Mr. Weasley so much in CoS. ("And 
who are you?")

I hear EW loves cats.  I couldn't help thinking of that as she 
cuddled Crookshanks.  
 
The Dementors: Because they flew, they did not move as I imagined 
them to.  I heard mutters of "Ringwraiths" all around me.  But they 
did the job... they were scary.  

Cuaron directs character interaction in a highly intimate way that is 
very appealing to me.  For example, Harry coming to his senses on the 
train seat with Hermione kneeling quietly beside him is visually and 
emotionally touching.  I believe Cuaron said how much he enjoyed 
directing EW and he did, indeed, do a good job with her.  

Lupin: Hated the `stache, but he grew on me very very quickly,
which 
I think is the sign of a talented director: to make you appreciate 
his way of seeing things even when it doesn't agree with your own.  
IMO Thewlis managed to convey the kindliness and meekness that I 
associate with the character.

I don't know whether it's just me being too drawn in to the 
Potterverse on an emotional level, or Cuaron's direction, but there 
were so many scenes that were, as I said, so intimately and 
touchingly directed that I wished I were there.  The addition of the 
boys' dorm scene with their animal-sound candies was amusing but left 
me with a strange feeling I've only just been able to identify: 
jealousy.  There are all the boys having a grand old time and 
somehow, being a girl, I felt shut out of it.  So again, I'm either 
crazy or that's some darned fine direction.

New Dumbledore: I never thought Harris' Dumbledore was anywhere near 
twinkly and mischievous enough, so I'm very happy with Gambon's DD.  
Someone here described him as the "ageing hippy" and I thought that 
was perfect.  Again, though, at least for me, it took a little bit of 
mental adjustment to accept that THIS Dumbledore was going to wear 
rings and tie his beard in a ponytail even though the last one 
didn't.  That's my problem, not Cuaron's.  

So the grounds didn't look like they were professionally maintained 
by Greensleeves' Lawn and Garden Care?  Again, that took some getting 
used to.  Where was my comfortable, nicely kept Hogwarts?  All grown 
up, I guess, away from the more simplistic Crayola-coloured world of 
SS and CoS.  

Things I adored:

-Harry riding the Hippogriff: thrilling and breathtaking.  I, too, 
loved the effect of Buckbeak trailing a claw in the lake.

-Quidditch in the driving rain.  The kids actually painting their 
faces instead of just waving tidy flags as in the previous two 
films.  I don't necessarily think Cuaron doesn't care for Quidditch, 
but I thought he did well with the bit he had, especially since it 
was visaully such a departure from the previous presentations of 
Quidditch.

-Professor Trelawney. It is so thrilling to have a scene directed 
almost exactly as I pictured it from the book, and Emma Thompson is 
perfect casting IMO.  Again with Cuaron's intimate direction: did 
anyone else find the Emma/Emma scene thoroughly enjoyable?

-Magic blended in incidentally in scenes rather than becoming the 
focus of it.  Someone else pointed out, for instance, the giraffe 
running throught the pictures on the staircases and ghosts galloping 
randomly through the Great Hall.  That seems more in keeping with a 
world in which magic is part of everyday life.  I never could accept 
the gasps of wonder from Harry's first year class as they moved into 
the castle for the first time in Columbus' SS: "The paintings are 
talking!"  Duh.  Don't your paintings talk at home? (granted, some of 
those kids were likely to be from Muggle families, but not all of 
them)

-Throwaway lines, casual instead of in-your-face.  "She's still doing 
that.  Every year.  And she-" "She can't sing-" "Exactly."  

-The SFX in the use of Hermione's TT in the Hospital Wing.  I am 
speechless.  Beyond cool.

-The Marauder's Map.  Seamlessly incorporated into the film and 
beautifully produced.

I can't write much more than this because it seems awfully rude of me 
to write such a long first post. But I'll just say one more thing 
about the characterization of Hermione, which seemed at first 
haphazard to me: One minute she's burying her face in Ron's neck, the 
next she's punching Malfoy in the face.  Then she's athletically 
dodging the Whomping Willow, then she's screaming her head off as it 
flails her around, then she's grabbing Harry with supergirl strength 
and tossing him deftly into the hollow under the Willow.  Then she's 
burying her face in Harry's shoulder murmuring, "That was so scary."  
What the heck?!  After giving it some thought, though, I realize the 
feelings evoked from me besides initial confusion and objection were, 
once again, compassion and sympathy.  She IS the brightest witch of 
her time and a strong personality, but not superhuman.  I play co-ed 
recreational ice hockey and am pursuing a PhD, but I like to be held 
and comforted by a male friend as much as the next girl when I'm 
upset.  At least in my view, it's not a contradiction, it's just 
life.  Rejecting a source of comfort is not necessarily an act of 
strength, nor is accepting or seeking one out an act of weakness.  
(That said, I still think the way the "That was so scary" scene was 
directed was awfully pat.  It fit in with Cuaron's intimate 
direction -- sorry for overusing the term intimate but it's the best 
one -- but I'd expect more creativity in his presentation of that).  
Overall, Hermione is one of the reasons I wish this series had been 
around when I was a preteen and young adolescent, and Cuaron in no 
way diminished her character in my view.  

I am going to see it again.  Soon.  I do express my sympathy to those 
who were so bitterly disappointed with the film. I know how that 
feels.  Just stay true to your personal interpretation ? nobody
can 
ever take that away from you.

-- Xenologue





From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Sat Jun  5 14:38:02 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:38:02 -0000
Subject: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  Movie Spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9qjvp+3jaa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9slsa+j3np@eGroups.com>

 "celare_ulace" wrote:
> I always thought canon DD oscillated a bit between Venerable-
> Wiseman and Quirky-Yet-Endearing-Eccentric; personally I would 
> have likened him more to Merlin from T.H.White's 'The Sword in 
> the Stone' than Gandalf. 

   Good comparison. 

> Either way, I found Gambon a big disappointment - he was neither 
> charismatic nor sympathetic - I thought he all but phoned in his 
> performance. Nitpicking rather, but that post-rescue: 'Yes, we did 
> it, Professor,' 'Did what? Goodnight.' line was IMO a big mistake. 
> It drove a wedge between DD and Harry which simply makes no 
> canononical sense. Perhaps handled better it wouldn't have bothered 
> me quite so much, but it was my least favourite moment in a film I 
> really loved 

  Really? I loved that line. I took it not only as a gentle tease, 
but a reminder that they mustn't talk about what they've done. The 
fact that Hermione and Harry go in to do the exact same thing to poor 
Ron suggests to me that they took it in the same light.

"rowena_grunnionffitch" 




From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Sat Jun  5 21:37:54 2004
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:37:54 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Typo in the Credits!
Message-ID: <BAY7-F72eRlE2x0c9Bc0005bff0@hotmail.com>

No in the uk, they are also known as Patil, not Patel....


ml

jo


>From: "Amanda Geist" <editor at texas.net>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: <the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com>, 
><HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>,<HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Typo in the Credits!
>Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 23:32:40 -0500
>
>This is what being a LOON gets you.
>
>In the cast list--the "cast in order of appearance" list that has everyone,
>they misspelled Parvati's last name. It said "Patel," not "Patil." Unless
>their name was "Patel" in the UK, I think this is a fairly egregious typo 
>on
>their part.
>
>~Amanda
>(Yes, I'm an editor, why do you ask?)
>----------------------------
>Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo




From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 15:34:56 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 08:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Not all reviews are good ones..
In-Reply-To: <c9rfbc+ljp4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040605153456.26049.qmail@web14205.mail.yahoo.com>


--- daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com>
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Barb
> <goalieracer at y...> wrote:
> > --- mynti_pernworld <jazmyn at f...> wrote:
> > > Spolier space:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
<snip>
> > 
> > 
> >  I agree 100%...I was very disappointed with the
> > movie.
> > I will not see it again..
> > The first two movies I was able to suspend
> reality..
> > They did not seem like movies...It felt like I was
> at
> > Hogwarts. This time I didn't get that feeling....I
> > just sat there watching "a movie"...I could not
> get 
> > into it at all.
> > 
> >  Please someone...bring back Columbus as
> director....
>

> 
> Two things. It IS a movie.
> And...A movie should not be a a retread of the book.
> 
> Okay, three things. :-)
> Though not perfect, I obviously loved it.

True it is a movie....and I was NOT expecting a
re-read
of the book....but to me the magic of the first two
movies was missing...(and I am not referring to spells
etc) It just seemed like any other movie...with
nothing
of the specialness that I loved in the first two
movies. I was able to lose myself in the first two..
not this time...
This movie was choppy..it did not have much a flow to
it....The one thing I did enjoy was the enchanted
ceiling in the scene where the students were sleeping
in the great hall...


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


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 




From alina at distantplace.net  Sat Jun  5 21:41:17 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:41:17 -0000
Subject: POA Spells and things/spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9t6bs+k168@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9telt+ubel@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Lady Pensieve" 
<ladypensieve at y...> wrote:
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> 
> I missed Crookshanks...the few showings weren't enough (and that 
cat 
> WAS Crookshanks). I will assume that since the cat had no part of 
> helping Padfoot, all those speculations about being an animagus 
can 
> now be tossed out the window (I was among those who believed).
<snip> 
>Kathy

Actually, Crookshanks isn't an animagus and Rowling has confirmed he 
is, in fact, half-kneazle. Those animals are in "Fantastic Beasts 
And Where To Find them." 

Alina.




From alina at distantplace.net  Sat Jun  5 21:38:19 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:38:19 -0000
Subject: My love/hate relationship with the movie
Message-ID: <c9tegb+8rih@eGroups.com>

When I first came out of the theatre, I must say I was rather 
satisfied with the movie. 

I thought the scene where Harry flies on Buckbeak was breathtaking. 
I enjoyed the way Cuaron portrayed the trio as growing more and more 
comfortable with each other despite the usual awkwardness with the 
opposite sex at their age. I was delighted with the movie's further 
exploration into time paradoxes during the time-travel scenes and 
not limiting itself just to what happened in the books. I thought 
the portrayal of Malfoy as all talk but easily frightened away when 
his bullying doesn't have the desired effect was very funny.

A few hours later, I was sitting at home and a sudden epiphany hit 
me: as a compliment to the books it was great... as a movie it was 
horrible! Cuaron decided to go for a very fast-paced movie (I 
completely agree with someone else's comment that it seems to have 
happened in three days on a year). I understand the need to cut out 
many scenes that do not further the plot in order to fit the movie 
into a reasonable time slot, but they cut out things absolutely 
neccessary to the plot too!! 

Why does Harry take two minutes to switch between hating Sirius to 
hating Peter without knowing or bothering to ask what exactly either 
of them has to do with his parents' death! Why doesn't Remus tell 
Harry that his father was an animagus too, much less mention that 
his form was a stag! Why doesn't Harry ask why his patronus, usually 
just a shield of light, suddenly took the form of an animal! Why 
doesn't Harry delve deeper into the relationship between Sirius, 
Remus and his father, all he gets are bits and pieces and I'm not 
sure I would've inferred they were my dad's best friend if it was 
me, but somehow he does. 

Cuaron leaves in key scenes and phrases but strips them of key 
explanations. And honestly, couldn't we see at least a little more 
of Hogsmeade? 

What I wouldn't give for this to be a 3 hour movie with all of the 
above included. My only hope is that the DVD will have it all in 
deleted scenes and extended versions, etc. 

It must be terribly alienating to that portion of the audience which 
hasn't read the books and only follows the movies. 

So, to be honest, I'm glad the next movie will have a new director. 
And I'm still not sure why JKR would allow all these important 
things to be cut out of the story, surely she could see what the 
movie was missing if Cuaron couldn't. 

"Alina"




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 21:56:36 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:56:36 -0000
Subject: My love/hate relationship with the movie
In-Reply-To: <c9tegb+8rih@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9tfik+rrbd@eGroups.com>

alina at d... wrote:
> 
> What I wouldn't give for this to be a 3 hour movie with all of the 
> above included. My only hope is that the DVD will have it all in 
> deleted scenes and extended versions, etc. 
> 
 
I wouldn't get your hopes up too much.  According to an article in 
the new "Entertainment Weekly", most of the cut stuff was never 
filmed.  Kloves and Curaon cut most of the "un-necessary scenes" 
before they began filming.  The DVD is probably not going to have 
much in the way of deleted scenes, unfortunately.

Diana L.
dianasdolls




From hpforme123 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 21:56:47 2004
From: hpforme123 at yahoo.com (Samantha)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:56:47 -0000
Subject: Typo in the Credits!
In-Reply-To: <BAY7-F72eRlE2x0c9Bc0005bff0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <c9tfiv+pmtr@eGroups.com>

If this had been mentioned, please forgive me, I am new here.

I did not notice the typo in the credits, but how about the typo on 
the Maraurder's map???!!!!

MoonEy??????

Moony....NO E.  Drove me crazy on the official HP web site and still 
did in the movie.

Is it spelled with an E in the UK version on the book, because in 
the US version there is no E?

A small thing that made me cringe.  If I were JKR (I only wish) that 
would really bother me.

~Samantha~





From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 22:15:50 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 22:15:50 -0000
Subject: Not all reviews are good ones..
In-Reply-To: <20040605153456.26049.qmail@web14205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9tgmm+sdse@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Barb <goalieracer at y...> wrote:
> True it is a movie....and I was NOT expecting a
> re-read
> of the book....but to me the magic of the first two
> movies was missing...(and I am not referring to spells
> etc) It just seemed like any other movie...with
> nothing
> of the specialness that I loved in the first two
> movies. I was able to lose myself in the first two..
> not this time...
> This movie was choppy..it did not have much a flow to
> it....The one thing I did enjoy was the enchanted
> ceiling in the scene where the students were sleeping
> in the great hall...

See, I completely disagree. To me, the first two movies were as 
magical as an old smelly gym sock. The only thing magical was the 
acting. They were boring and overly precious. 

I have major problems with scene deletions in PoA, but I can do 
nothing but give my most grateful thanks to Alfonso Cuaron by making 
Hogwarts and the wizarding world come to life. For the first time, I 
felt like I really was there, and not watching a movie. He didn't oh 
and ah and pee his pants over every little magical thing we 
encountered - they were THERE, and his treating them as just 
average, normal things was what made them perfect. Like the guy 
stirring his drink at The Leaky Cauldron, it was just a part of the 
scenery. And I also feel Cuaron eeked out superb performances from 
all of the cast.

Still, I would like to grab him by the shoulders, shake him 
violently and ask him, "What oh what happened in the Shrieking 
Shack?"

- Annalisa




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sat Jun  5 22:19:26 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 17:19:26 -0500
Subject: I finally saw it...
Message-ID: <004701c44b4b$2c9550f0$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>



I was probably the last one to see the movie on the list, but I just got back about 20 minutes ago so here is
my take...

First off, whomever said there was something to see after the credits was wrong... We waited through it all,
and I didn't see a dang thing!  Ugh...

Anyway, I went to see the movie with my 14-year old & 12-year old sister.  Ryan, the older one, has read all the
books, but the 12-year old has not.  I had my problems with the movie, like most, but some parts that really bothered
people on this list did not phase me.  Both of my sisters liked the movie, but my 14-year old and I had to explain
some things to my youngest sister as there were some major plot holes, I thought.  

The Dursley's scene kind of bothered me.  First of all, I didn't think the Dursleys were as "mean" towards Harry
as they come off in the books and in the first two films,  and it seemed to jump very quickly from Aunt Marge's
arrival to her being blown up.  I did like the use of the two televisions though.  LOL!  Very Dudley!  I liked the 
more angry Harry too.  His little snide comments and attitude.

The purple bus ride was great fun!  I enjoyed that very much and I love that shrunken head!

The Leaky Cauldron scene was a little weird.  First, when did the Minister have an office in the Leaky Cauldron?
And Arthur's "talk" with Harry was a little odd.  There was no suspense in the story of Sirius.  It was like right
away "hey, he is after you". 

The Quidditch scene bothered me some... I don't know why, but I didn't like him way up in the clouds.  I guess I
thought since it is a game, he should be down with the crowd.  And it came on so quickly... And I would have liked
to see how exactly Dumbledore saved Harry.  You know, we are always use to seeing the conclusion of the matches,
at least I'd like to see it.  I really wish they would have shown the scene in which Malfoy and his gang came out
a Dementors, and Harry throws a spell at them.

Some of the scenery bothered me as I didn't like how they did some major changes to the castle and outside parts.
And I agree it didn't feel like a whole school year passed.  I did enjoy the whomping willow scene though, however,
didn't Ron actually break his leg in the book?  

As far as the actors go, I have to say I liked them all.  I like Sirius a lot, and GO did a great job portraying him.  
I found some of his scenes with Harry very tender, and he was a little wacky with the rat.  I was disappointed we
did not see more of the rat and the cat, after all, I thought the cat had a more important role in the book.  I like
Lupin very much, and again, thought his scenes were equally as tender with Harry.  Dumbledore did not bother
me in the least, however, I still prefer Richard Harris.  He just had that twinkle in his eye that made him special to
me.  I didn't find Hermione to be "Super Hermione" as a lot of you felt she had become.  Yes, she took charge in
some scenes, but I didn't find her overbearing or annoying whatsoever, and I loved her comment about her hair. 
I don't know how anyone can say the Ron and Hermione scenes was foreshadowing them together later in
the books, because Hermione seemed to be holding on or "connecting" to both boys.  I have to say I found Ron to be
very cute in this movie though, and I loved how Hermione kept calling him "Ronald".  I also laughed hard when Ron
had his dream about spiders.  I thought the trio was great in the movie as was all the supporting actors.  

I was a little annoyed with the Fat Lady's portrait being ripped to pieces.  I think the better scene would have been
when Sirius crept up to Ron's room to get Scabbers and Neville lost the password.  They could have actually combined
the scene somehow.  I liked the Shrieking Shack scene, however, I agree it was too short and I felt Pettigrew's 
transformation back to a rat and him running away was a bit too quick.  I think they really dropped the ball on explaining 
more about the map, the makers, their friendships, and Snape's hatred for them all.  I thought the 
dementors were rather cool, but it bugged me that they didn't seem "posted" at the gates like I thought they were 
in the book.  It was very much just floating around from afar.  

You know, a lot of the reviews said this was the best movie of the three, and I agree to some extent.  However, I 
know that I am going to get rotten tomatoes thrown at me here, but I actually think I prefer Chris Columbus' more 
"true to the book" movies that "true to the main story" format on Alfonso Cauron.   I did like some of the colors
and visual affects better than the first two movies and I liked the overall acting of the cast in this movie, but there
was a lot left out that I felt should have been in there.  And I did not like the Firebolt scene at the end!  Ugh...

Ok... that is it for now... I am sure more will pop up as I read more reviews and comments.  I am taking my son to see
it on Wednesday.  



*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Twice Loved ~ Twice Blessed ~ Twins Love
mom to Jasper & Ashlynn (10/8/98)
http://twinslove.virtualave.net
AIM: Twinslove2
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*


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




From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 22:33:57 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 22:33:57 -0000
Subject: PoA - my thoughts (long; spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <c9td78+bpa6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9thol+amsd@eGroups.com>

Great review, and I especially enjoyed what you had to say about 
Hermione and Dumbledore. I too felt that, as much as I loved Richard 
Harris, he was just too reticent to be Dumbledore. The guy's 
supposed to be whacky. He's supposed to be the type of person who 
loves getting weird socks for Christmas. Can you imagine Richard 
Harris belting away the Hogwarts School Song? No, you can't!

I am immensely frustrated by the elimination of important back story 
in the Shrieking Shack. My disappointment is simply increased 
because the rest of the movie is SO good. If Columbus had done the 
movie and left out the same amount of info, I would have been sad 
but at the same time though - "What did I expect?" But Cuaron's PoA 
deserved a much better Shrieking Shack scene at the heart of the 
movie, and I hope he realizes it.

-- Annalisa




From alina at distantplace.net  Sat Jun  5 22:45:06 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 22:45:06 -0000
Subject: noting some more inconsistencies
Message-ID: <c9tidi+icgs@eGroups.com>

I just thought of us. It has bothered me from the beginning that 
when Wormtail transformed into a rat his clothes didn't go with him 
(but notice how they were on him when he transformed from rat to 
human). In the books, IIRC, the clothes go with the animagus. The 
main reason this bothers me, however, isn't that it contradicts that 
book, but that surely a set of extra  clothes would have been proof 
of Sirius' and the Trio's story and a contradiction to Snape's story 
(albeit, the movie decided not to show that all these people had 
stories they wanted to prove to Fudge). To me, the whole botching of 
the end of the movie is just starting to reek of incompetence on the 
part of Cuaron. 

As an extra note, I also don't like that he chose to make a 
hairless, humanoid werewolf whereas book 5 clearly tells us that 
werewolves look just like wolves with 5 minor differences. 




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 23:01:46 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 23:01:46 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c9tjcq+2t3n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Wolber 
<katydid3500 at y...> wrote:
> I think the way I saw the movie had a huge impact on
> my reaction to it so I have a challenge for everyone
> that really enjoyed it. When you see it again, I want
> you to take someone who is willing to go and is
> interested in seeing the movie but HAS NOT read the
> books...
> 
> ~Katie
> 
> 
> 	
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://messenger.yahoo.com/


Premiere night, I went with someone who had only read the first 
book. She loved it and understood it...Though, I do have pretty 
intelligent friends. ;-)

This is criticism I keep hearing. People who haven't read the books 
won't understand...That is B.S. 

If you don't understand, it's because you like to have things 
spelled out...Explicitly and to the point of condescension, like 
Columbus' films, where people repeat everything slowly, mutiple 
times, with dramatic pause for extra emphasis...

Those films were geared so that EVERYONE, even the slowest of the 
slow, could comprehend...

Cuaron, on the other hand trusts his audiences' intelligence...Great 
example, Harry's floating Aunt...Columbus would've zoomed in on her, 
like Columbus did Qurrill after Hermione set Snape on fire, 
virtually SCREAMING at the audience "HE'S THE ONE!!". It would've 
been nice if he'd trusted us to figure that out.

Cuaron, however, trusted we would see Harry's aunt floating in the 
background and got a GENUINELY funny moment. :-)

I think, that's where Cuaron's film succeeded the most. People acted 
like the would if this were REAL LIFE. No one would stand around 
looking googly-eyed while dog slobber dripped on them...No one, 
would do the slow-clap for man who's only truly loved by a minority 
of the student body... And most importantly wizards and witches 
weren't AMAZED by magic, like in Columbus' films. It was as much a 
part of their world as our world's trivalities are ours'. 

Okay, I'm rambling. I'm done. :-)

@)--/---
daughter




From alina at distantplace.net  Sat Jun  5 23:08:49 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 23:08:49 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <c9tjcq+2t3n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9tjq1+6lv1@eGroups.com>

> This is criticism I keep hearing. People who haven't read the 
books 
> won't understand...That is B.S. 
> 
> If you don't understand, it's because you like to have things 
> spelled out...Explicitly and to the point of condescension, like 
> Columbus' films, where people repeat everything slowly, mutiple 
> times, with dramatic pause for extra emphasis...
> 
> @)--/---
> daughter

I'm not sure I agree with you. Oh certainly some things people can 
understand. Like it's enough to hear Ron saying that Ancient Ruins 
is at the same time as Divinations for people to understand why 
Hermione had the time-turner without an explanation. But I don't see 
why Cuaron expected people to realize that James as an animagus who 
transformed into a stag through the information they received in the 
movie. Same goes for the Sirius/Peter-betrayal of the Potters bit. 
Even if Cuaron didn't want to get into explaining Secret Keepers, 
could he at least leave in the fact that the Potter home was a 
location hidden from Voldemort and Peter divulged it? Because I 
don't see how that can be inferred from the movie either.

Alina.




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 23:21:10 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 23:21:10 -0000
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
Message-ID: <c9tkh6+g9e8@eGroups.com>

Okay.

So, here are the criticisms I've heard and/or read most frequently 
and my answers to them:

- "[who/whatever] from the book was not in the movie

Get over it. It's a movie not a book.

- it moved too fast

You're too slow...

No, seriously it's made for multiple viewings. What you missed this 
time, you'll pick up on in the future. I, for one, like movies where 
I see new things upon each viewing.

- the werewolf looked terrible

I agree. The werewolf was crappy.

- Columbus was better

I disagree. His overbright, "Let me point out everything because my 
audience it too stupid to get it on its' own" style wawas awful. I 
really despise being spoken down to.

- it was too dark

I've always seen Harry Potter books as being very gothic. With it's 
humor derived from the dangerous mishaps of other students, and 
broad, dry, British humor...This is the first film to capture that, 
instead of turning it into the Scooby-Doo Mysteries.

- Harry's crying scene was silly

I agree. He looked very silly here.

- "Why did Cuaron add [who/whatever], it wasn't in the book."

It's called imagination people, of which Columbus had none. Again, a 
book is not a film, a film is not a book.

- people who haven't read the book won't understand the significance 
of The Marauder's, etc...

That will be in The Goblet of Fire...Too much exposition equals = 
craptactular Scooby-Doo ending.  Inferring all this with Lupin's 
lines, and the nicknames being on the map, etc...Just leaves more 
(hints) to discover on future viewings of the film.


@--/---
daughter




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 23:18:37 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 19:18:37 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <a0.e8231b0.2df3aecd@aol.com>

When I first saw the movie last night (yes I've already seen it a second 
time), I went with a good friend who loved the first two movies but hasn't read 
any of the books. When we came out of the theater she said she loved the movie, 
and thought it was much better than the first two. I asked her if she 
understood it without reading the book (she gave me quite a strange look at this, as 
though I thought she was daft or something), and her answer was yes. I erased 
the book from my mind for the most part when I was watching the movie, and I 
honestly think that a non-book fan would be able to follow it if they were 
paying attention (just my opinion though, I understand that not everyone *loved* 
the movie).


-Rebecca


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 23:37:31 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 19:37:31 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <ba.58083239.2df3b33b@aol.com>


S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

In a message dated 6/5/2004 4:27:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
alina at distantplace.net writes:

>>But I don't see 
why Cuaron expected people to realize that James as an animagus who 
transformed into a stag through the information they received in the 
movie. <<

They wouldn't, but its not *essential* to the plot that they do. 

>>Same goes for the Sirius/Peter-betrayal of the Potters bit. 
Even if Cuaron didn't want to get into explaining Secret Keepers, 
could he at least leave in the fact that the Potter home was a 
location hidden from Voldemort and Peter divulged it? Because I 
don't see how that can be inferred from the movie either.<<

I might be wrong here, but didn't Lupin specifically say something along 
those lines? Right after Harry's "You betrayed my parents!" line, Lupin says it 
was Peter who did that, not Sirius. Then when Peter turns up, there's more 
discussion of it, including the whole "you should have realized if Voldemort didn't 
kill you, we would." line. AND of course there's the foreshadowing with 
Trelawny's prophecy of "he who betrayed his friends".


-Rebecca


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun  5 23:40:58 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 19:40:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] noting some more inconsistencies
Message-ID: <ea.503e4139.2df3b40a@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/5/2004 3:46:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
alina at distantplace.net writes:

>>I just thought of us. It has bothered me from the beginning that 
when Wormtail transformed into a rat his clothes didn't go with him 
(but notice how they were on him when he transformed from rat to 
human). In the books, IIRC, the clothes go with the animagus. <<
I agree with you there, and it didn't make sense in the reality of the movie 
either. Obviously Peter had those clothes when he changed into a man from 
Scabbers, so where did they come from if clothes disappear when an animagus 
transformes? AND we see Sirius transform (off-screen, but nearby), and there's no 
pile of Azkaban robes anywhere. That, and what was Peter trying to do with 
Lupin's wand? It wouldn't make much sense if you needed a want to transform into an 
animal, since Sirius does it without a want. I guess they were going for 
dramatic effect there.

-Rebecca


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




From alina at distantplace.net  Sat Jun  5 23:49:22 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 23:49:22 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <ba.58083239.2df3b33b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9tm62+cojt@eGroups.com>

> >>Same goes for the Sirius/Peter-betrayal of the Potters bit. 
> Even if Cuaron didn't want to get into explaining Secret Keepers, 
> could he at least leave in the fact that the Potter home was a 
> location hidden from Voldemort and Peter divulged it? Because I 
> don't see how that can be inferred from the movie either.<<
> 
> I might be wrong here, but didn't Lupin specifically say something 
along 
> those lines? Right after Harry's "You betrayed my parents!" line, 
Lupin says it 
> was Peter who did that, not Sirius. Then when Peter turns up, 
there's more 
> discussion of it, including the whole "you should have realized if 
Voldemort didn't 
> kill you, we would." line. AND of course there's the foreshadowing 
with 
> Trelawny's prophecy of "he who betrayed his friends".
> 
> 
> -Rebecca

Yes, but knowing that Peter somehow betrayed the Potters doesn't 
explain what exactly he did that constitutes a betrayal. Personally 
I find it important that he divulged their location to Voldemort, 
because if you think about it, simply being Voldemort's servant can 
constitute as a betrayal in and of itself. Telling Voldemort, "My ex-
best friends whom you want to kill live there," is a quite a bit 
more grievous an offense.

It was also not mentioned that Pettigrew murdered 13 muggles to 
escape Sirius, which I think portrays him in an entirely different 
light than that in which he appears in the movie.

I've seen people argue that even if it wasn't explained in POA, 
they'll just put it into GOF, but if they have to fill up GOF with 
POA explanations, how are they going to find space to explain GOF 
events?

Alina.




From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Sun Jun  6 00:21:01 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 00:21:01 -0000
Subject: Explication (was: A challenge for people who really liked the movie)
In-Reply-To: <c9tm62+cojt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9to1d+ecle@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, alina at d... wrote:

> I've seen people argue that even if it wasn't explained in POA, 
> they'll just put it into GOF, but if they have to fill up GOF with 
> POA explanations, how are they going to find space to explain GOF 
> events?

   In OOP of course. And all the explication they can't fit into OOP 
will go into the sixth movie, and all the explication that can't fit 
into that one will be moved to the seventh....and then we'll have an 
eighth movie full of all the things they didn't get around to 
explaining in the first seven - Harry Potter: the Appendices ;D 




From diana at slashcity.com  Sun Jun  6 00:22:31 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:22:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
References: <c9tkh6+g9e8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <0ab901c44b5c$5c4e3440$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

From: "daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com>
>
> - people who haven't read the book won't understand the significance
> of The Marauder's, etc...
>
> That will be in The Goblet of Fire...Too much exposition equals =
> craptactular Scooby-Doo ending.  Inferring all this with Lupin's
> lines, and the nicknames being on the map, etc...Just leaves more
> (hints) to discover on future viewings of the film.
>

Why should it be explained in The Goblet of Fire?  The plot points about the
Marauders - them changing into animagi to keep Lupin company, Peter's
betrayal of them, and the whole prank have nothing to do with the plot in
The Goblet of Fire.  Lupin isn't in GOF, and Sirius' place in it is to offer
Harry advice, not explain what happened in the last year.  "Harry, remember
your DADA teacher last year?  The one who changed into a werewolf?  Well,
what we didn't tell you last year is that we all learned to be animagi so
that we could keep him company - that's why I'm a dog and Peter's a rat -
and your father was a stag, so that Patronus you saw was a representation of
your dad.  Cool, huh?  Oh, and Snape hated me because I tricked him into
going to the Shack when Remus was there and he nearly got killed, only James
saved him, and that's why Snape owes your father a life-debt, and that's why
he keeps saving your life even though he hates you and, in fact, the
Marauders and Snape had an on-going feud.  What's this got to do with the 3
challenges?  Nothing, just thought you might want to know.  Oh, it might
help you figure out that Rita Skeeter is also an unregistered animagi, but
they'll probably cut that from the plot, too, so never mind."

Diana W.





From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 00:39:05 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:39:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA - my thoughts (long; spoilers)
Message-ID: <11b.32e1e9ec.2df3c1a9@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/5/04 2:30:26 PM, holbroal at mcmaster.ca writes:


> -Magic blended in incidentally in scenes rather than becoming the
> focus of it.? Someone else pointed out, for instance, the giraffe
> running throught the pictures on the staircases and ghosts galloping
> randomly through the Great Hall.? That seems more in keeping with a
> world in which magic is part of everyday life.? I never could accept
> the gasps of wonder from Harry's first year class as they moved into
> the castle for the first time in Columbus' SS: "The paintings are
> talking!"? Duh.? Don't your paintings talk at home? (granted, some of
> those kids were likely to be from Muggle families, but not all of
> them)
> 

Thank you for expressing   what I was thinking so well! I was thinking the 
same thing about the first two movies - why are a   lot of the kids so amazed by 
things at Hogwarts? Aren't most of them from magical families? And I never 
could understand why Ron didn't know more about things when he got to school - 
he is a pureblood wizard. He should not have been surprised by anything other 
than dispelling any lies that the twins told him beforehand (like how they told 
him that to be sorted, one has to wrestle a troll <g>). 
You hit the nail on the head for me about the inherent magic in this movie - 
it's just there, no head turning, no gawking, it's part of their lives and 
they are used to it.
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 00:58:53 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:58:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <141.2b5732e7.2df3c64d@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/5/04 4:27:13 PM, alina at distantplace.net writes:


> Oh certainly some things people can
> understand. Like it's enough to hear Ron saying that Ancient Ruins
> is at the same time as Divinations for people to understand why
> Hermione had the time-turner without an explanation.
> 

But Hermione did explain the time turner to Harry just before they winked out 
in the hospital wing. She tells him that McGonagall gave her one at the start 
of term so that she could take more classes. 
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 01:19:04 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 21:19:04 EDT
Subject: EW article
Message-ID: <11a.333007f9.2df3cb08@aol.com>

Just to take a breather from the reviews and such...I read the article in the 
new Entertainment Weekly and there were some different tidbits ;-)
One thing that made me laugh was Alfonso's take on Rupert:
"Rupert is not with us. He is in a happier place, called Rupertland. He's a 
little like Chauncey Gardiner from Being There. Is he a genius...or is he a 
fool?"
Rupertland, lol! That is too cute.
A few other interesting things from the article. We have all heard how Dan 
watched Y Tu Mama Tambien when he found out Cuaron was directing POA, but this 
article mentions that..'producer Heyman subbed for Radcliffe's father, who was 
too embarrassed to watch the film with his son.' <g> 

Some things about the filming of GOF were mentioned as well, including the 
fact that Dan just completed scuba diving lessons for a month of underwater 
shooting in June. So, we know the first and second tasks are in the movie ;-)
The first task is the dragon and I think they've already filmed it because 
Dan did an interview recently where he talked about the gashes he gets on his 
shoulder and back during the dragon confrontation.

It's an interesting article and refreshing to read some different things. 
With all the press for the movie, we tend to hear the same things over and over.
I chuckled when I read the opening paragraph about how someone on the set was 
teaching Dan how to belly dance ;-) Now there's a talent that Harry hasn't 
used yet!
Cindy


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




From Taykimson at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 01:43:04 2004
From: Taykimson at yahoo.com (Taykimson at yahoo.com)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 01:43:04 -0000
Subject: EW article
In-Reply-To: <11a.333007f9.2df3cb08@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9tsr8+dus5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> Just to take a breather from the reviews and such...I read the 
article in the 
> new Entertainment Weekly and there were some different tidbits ;-)


I read that article as well, didn't it also mention that Dan 
Radcliffe had filled out around the shoulders?  I take that to 
mean "more buff."  It is fun to watch the actors grow up - today I 
watched SS again, and it almost feels like there is a different boy 
in that movie than PoA...not a younger DR, but a different person 
altogether.




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 01:48:51 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 21:48:51 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: EW article
Message-ID: <1c0.1a12c256.2df3d203@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/5/04 6:44:50 PM, Taykimson at yahoo.com writes:


> I read that article as well, didn't it also mention that Dan
> Radcliffe had filled out around the shoulders?? I take that to
> mean "more buff."? It is fun to watch the actors grow up - today I
> watched SS again, and it almost feels like there is a different boy
> in that movie than PoA...not a younger DR, but a different person
> altogether.
> 
> 

yeah, I seem to remember the article mentioning his shoulders ;-) 
If you really want a shock, watch him in the BBC's David Copperfield, which 
was his very first acting job and before SS/PS. He was probably about 10.   And 
he was adorable ;-) 
Cindy


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




From teshara at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 01:33:44 2004
From: teshara at yahoo.com (Chelle)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 01:33:44 -0000
Subject: Amandageist's review
In-Reply-To: <001c01c44b06$56734b60$1159aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <c9ts9o+kvi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:
> If anyone's interested after the plethora of reviews, my impressions
after
> one seeing (must take children now, will see it again).
> 
> R
> A
> I
> N
> S
> 
> A
> 
> L
> O
> T
> 
> I
> N
> 
> S
> C
> O
> T
> L
> A
> N
> D
> 
 
> I fail to understand why it helped this movie to have things like a
> welcoming choir, at the expense (assuming time was the factor) of
critical
> plot material:

::snippy for space use::

I really likes the chior and the children randomly practicing
insturments in the background of the school for me. It always bothered
me that the only thing to do at Hogwarts after your core classes were
done was Quidditch. (Expecially those of us who watched sports in
school but never played, the music department was where it was at.) In
Book 5 theres the Gobstones Club, the Fashion Club and a few more. It
makes sense to show other things than Quidditch.
I agree with Flitwicks appearence change. It was a bit abrupt, but at
least he dosn't look like Dumbledore at the tail end of a shrinking
spell anymore :)

~ Chelle





From katroshka at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 01:59:18 2004
From: katroshka at hotmail.com (katroshka)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 01:59:18 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's hut, set/location (Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambon as Dumbledore  -  New Look + Review)
In-Reply-To: <c9sm7g+jggm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9ttpm+i57l@eGroups.com>

Tin Samson <tin_kim924 at y...> wrote:
> > just want to say something about Hagrid's hut...
> > somehow it bothered me that his hut looked different
> > (wasn't it?) and that it was so much further from
> > Hogwarts than it was in the two previous movies.  I
> > remember from CoS that his hut was very close to
> > Hogwarts in one of the scenes where the 3 kids visit
> > him.

"rowena_grunnionffitch" <G3_Princess at M...> wrote:
>    I thought it seemed farther too. And the ground around Hogwarts 
> seems to have suddenly become much steeper and hillyer than it used 
> to be. And where did that covered bridge come from? I like it but 
> surely it wasn't there before???


I think that Hagrid's hut looked mostly the same, we just got to see 
different angles. In the book it is once described as a wooden house. 
The big change was definitely location. I really like the changes to 
the landscape and castle, with the exception of the great hall, which 
seemed small and dingy. In the book it did say that near the castle 
the landscape became much rougher and hillier.... not in those words, 
but I remember something to that extent. I found the landscape really 
breathtaking. One change I really hated was the new fat lady.... 
yuck! Not at all like I got from the book.

"katroshka" 




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 04:10:20 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 04:10:20 -0000
Subject: IMAX
Message-ID: <c9u5fc+f7a1@eGroups.com>

has anyone seen POA on the big screen yet?  Wondered how it seemed 
as opposed to regular screens

Kathy




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sun Jun  6 04:24:24 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 04:24:24 -0000
Subject: Observation, not really spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9t4h7+nvif@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9u69o+sqaq@eGroups.com>

>>>"madam_author" <kateydidnt2002 at y...> wrote:

> PS-did it bother anyone that no one dressed in robes? It didn't 
> bother me too much, but I think it took away from the "magic" 
> atmosphere the first two movies had.

Yes, and it also bothered me that they put the kids in sloppy 
clothes and modern clothes. Isn't the wizarding world different from 
the real world of 2004? When the first book described wizards and 
the things that Uncle Vernon would cringe at, one of the things that 
was mentioned is the clothing they wore that was somewhat old-
fashioned and not like the usual London fashions. Making the 
costumes more like real-world London 2004 is not in keeping with the 
book!

Barbara, aka bd-bear
One of the PoA-Movie Haters




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 05:03:30 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 05:03:30 -0000
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <0ab901c44b5c$5c4e3440$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <c9u8j2+d04r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana Williams" <diana at s...> 
wrote:
> From: "daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at y...>
> >
> > - people who haven't read the book won't understand the 
significance
> > of The Marauder's, etc...
> >
> > That will be in The Goblet of Fire...Too much exposition equals =
> > craptactular Scooby-Doo ending.  Inferring all this with Lupin's
> > lines, and the nicknames being on the map, etc...Just leaves more
> > (hints) to discover on future viewings of the film.
> >
> 
> Why should it be explained in The Goblet of Fire?  The plot points 
about the
> Marauders - them changing into animagi to keep Lupin company, 
Peter's
> betrayal of them, and the whole prank have nothing to do with the 
plot in
> The Goblet of Fire.  Lupin isn't in GOF, and Sirius' place in it 
is to offer
> Harry advice, not explain what happened in the last year.  "Harry, 
remember
> your DADA teacher last year?  The one who changed into a 
werewolf?  Well,
> what we didn't tell you last year is that we all learned to be 
animagi so
> that we could keep him company - that's why I'm a dog and Peter's 
a rat -
> and your father was a stag, so that Patronus you saw was a 
representation of
> your dad.  Cool, huh?  Oh, and Snape hated me because I tricked 
him into
> going to the Shack when Remus was there and he nearly got killed, 
only James
> saved him, and that's why Snape owes your father a life-debt, and 
that's why
> he keeps saving your life even though he hates you and, in fact, 
the
> Marauders and Snape had an on-going feud.  What's this got to do 
with the 3
> challenges?  Nothing, just thought you might want to know.  Oh, it 
might
> help you figure out that Rita Skeeter is also an unregistered 
animagi, but
> they'll probably cut that from the plot, too, so never mind."
> 
> Diana W.

 See how awkward that would have been at the end of Azkaban?? :-)

Okay, being serious now...Of course it wouldn't all be explained, 
but I'm sure there will be more in Goblet, I've read that soewhere 
in fandom...

But I for one, had I not read the books, would have loved the 
eventual revelation, that would come with multiple viewings, of who 
Wormtail, Prongs, Padfoot, and Moony are and the fact that Lupin can 
read the map, because he helped make it...:-) 

Imagine that "Aha!" moment.

@)--/----
daughter




From nostrebor at runbox.com  Sun Jun  6 04:25:22 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 00:25:22 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX
References: <c9u5fc+f7a1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <02b501c44b7e$4a3d4b70$e2e2b9cd@user7i1hr4si1m>

s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
Yes - today, in fact. I'm glad we already saw it on the regular screen
before seeing it on IMAX. My dd, 7, knew what was coming and I kept watching
her to see how she was doing - loving it - but did cover her eyes at the
clown (we both hate clowns). Gawd that is a nasty looking clown and even
more so on IMAX! We didn't sit in the back but rather close - great for
flying. When he left the house, it was like you were in the room with them.
I may have seen something on IMAX a long time ago, but certainly not a
movie - especially a Terrific one like this (we absolutely love the movie -
saw it 3 times already). Next time, we'll go see it at the drive-in (along
w/Scooby-Doo 2).
The difference is like this: I saw the Red Hot Chili Peppers and I had 3rd
row tickets, I also saw many other concerts and sat way back. You're not up
close & personal being way back - it's Much More fun in the thick of it all!
Jodi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lady Pensieve" <ladypensieve at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 12:10 AM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX


> has anyone seen POA on the big screen yet?  Wondered how it seemed
> as opposed to regular screens
>
> Kathy
>




From mhuber92211 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 05:18:52 2004
From: mhuber92211 at yahoo.com (Matt Huber)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 22:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX
In-Reply-To: <c9u5fc+f7a1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040606051852.14335.qmail@web14523.mail.yahoo.com>

I have seen it in both formats and the Imax is substanially better!  The mood of the film is much more real and the dementor on the train scene is incredible!

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

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




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 05:43:59 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 05:43:59 -0000
Subject: EW article
In-Reply-To: <11a.333007f9.2df3cb08@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9uauv+kdcg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> Just to take a breather from the reviews and such...I read the 
article in the 
> new Entertainment Weekly and there were some different tidbits ;-)
> 
> Cindy
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This line, from the article, makes me afraid and hopful:
"The franchise's screenwriter Steve Kloves may not return..."

Ideally, a passionate fan who is also a talented writer and director 
a'la Peter Jackson would take over both duties, with similar 
results...But, well, we know that's a fantasy. :-)

@)--/---
daughter




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 05:54:42 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 05:54:42 -0000
Subject: Kloves or Cuaron??
Message-ID: <c9ubj2+d17g@eGroups.com>

Just a question for those who hated the film...
Do you blame Stephen Kloves or Alfonso Cuaron?? If both, who do you 
blame more??

Personally, I've always found his scripts to be too bloated with 
uneeded book product placement instead of focusing on his biggest 
lacking element: CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.

In the first film, I found Snape's character lacking a sense of 
earned hatred from the trio, like in the novel.

The second, I haven't seen in a while, so I'll have to think on that 
one...

This time, I think we all agree, the Marauders plotline suffered 
(though I still think [hope] it will be in Goblet).

Ideally, as I mentioned in another post. Someone who was passionate 
for the books and equally talented as a director and writer (like P. 
J.) would take over and knock it out of the park. :-D

Of course, all fans still wouldn't be pleased, but the majority like 
those of The Lord of the Rings, would. ;-)

@)--/---
daughter




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jun  6 07:59:15 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 07:59:15 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <c9t2di+km50@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9uisj+heqp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "persephonegladrags"
<JTallulahmae at a...> wrote:
> Been lurking on the HPFGU lists for some time, but have never posted 
> before.  Now find that two of my favorite things--Harry Potter and 
> bulldogs!--have come together, and I can't find the information I'm 
> looking for ANYWHERE.  Does anyone here know who the bulldog in the 
> PofA movie is?  Where does he come from, whom does he belong to, who 
> is his trainer?
> Thanks!
> PG

His name is Ripper and he belongs to Aunt Marge. Read the first
chapter of PoA to find out.

karen




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jun  6 08:19:40 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 08:19:40 -0000
Subject: Typo in the Credits!
In-Reply-To: <002901c44ab6$47c03a60$c259aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <c9uk2s+o5fh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:
> This is what being a LOON gets you.
> 
> In the cast list--the "cast in order of appearance" list that has
everyone,
> they misspelled Parvati's last name. It said "Patel," not "Patil."
Unless
> their name was "Patel" in the UK, I think this is a fairly egregious
typo on
> their part.
> 
> ~Amanda
> (Yes, I'm an editor, why do you ask?)
> ----------------------------
> Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.

You are right, it should be Patil, that is the way it is spelled in
the books.  oops!

karen




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Jun  6 10:26:27 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 11:26:27 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA Movie: A few more observations (Minor SPOILERS)
Message-ID: <v01540b04bce89f98a7d1@[217.154.249.241]>

O
B
L
I
G
A
T
O
R
Y

S
P
O
I
L

E
R

S
P
A
C
E


>From GulPlum:-

>Several people have pointed out as a continuity error the fact that Harry's
>scar appears over his left (rather than right) eyebrow during the Boggart
>DADA class. I was 90% sure of this on Monday, but now it's 100% (I paid
>attention while watching the movie today) - sorry would-be eagle-eyes,
>there's nothing wrong with the shot or makeup - the shot is a reflection in
>the wardrobe mirror. True, this is complicated a little by the fact that
>the camera then appears to go "through" the mirror and the image loses the
>imperfections of the sides of the antique mirror, but technically it
>remains a mirror image.

Thanks for clarifying. The possible explanation only occurred to me the
next day as I was composing my post to the list. Saw the film again on
Friday; I don't know how I missed it the first time....vaguely recall
people moving in front of me around that time. Anyway; the scene is
unusually constructed; the camera goes into the mirror at the beginning,
and comes out of it at the end (I think I have that the right way
round...:-) )

I noticed a number of 'reflection' shots this time around; in the Boggart
class, of course; in a window at one stage; when Harry is flying on
Buckbeak, he sees his reflection in the lake...must take notes next time as
it seems to be a motif through the first part of the film.
Harry-Attempting-To-Understand-His-Own-Inner-Nature?

Possibly.

Cheers,
Nicholas





From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 10:38:03 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 06:38:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <46.501d90d9.2df44e0b@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/5/2004 4:50:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
alina at distantplace.net writes:

>>but knowing that Peter somehow betrayed the Potters doesn't 
explain what exactly he did that constitutes a betrayal. Personally 
I find it important that he divulged their location to Voldemort, 
because if you think about it, simply being Voldemort's servant can 
constitute as a betrayal in and of itself. Telling Voldemort, "My ex-
best friends whom you want to kill live there," is a quite a bit 
more grievous an offense.<<

But it *was* in there. In the Three Broomsticks, McGonagall explains that 
Sirius was one of the few people who knew where the Potter's were, and he told 
Voldemort that. When the betrayal is switched from Sirius to Peter, the basis of 
it remains the same. Is it necessary to explain it a second time? (its what 
people have been saying in some of the other posts about Cuaron being able to 
trust the audience more than Columbus, everything doesn't need to be beaten 
into the viewers).

>>It was also not mentioned that Pettigrew murdered 13 muggles to 
escape Sirius, which I think portrays him in an entirely different 
light than that in which he appears in the movie.<<
I don't think it throws him in a "completely different light" at all. The 
main idea is still there: fear of Sirius Black. Instead of the focus being on him 
"killing 13 people with one curse", it was on the fact that he somehow 
managed to escape from Azkaban and that all was left of Peter was a finger. The fear 
was still there, that's what's important about it (I assume they cut the 
muggle-deaths from it to make the scene less confusing for non-book fans).

>>I've seen people argue that even if it wasn't explained in POA, 
they'll just put it into GOF, but if they have to fill up GOF with 
POA explanations, how are they going to find space to explain GOF 
events?<<
Personally, I don't think all of this *needs* to be explained. Yes, it would 
be nice to see on screen the story behind the map, and the story of all of 
them becoming Animagi, but its not necessary to the story. Audiences accepted 
McGonagall as an animagi without explaining her personal reasons why she became 
one, so why is it *necessary* for the movie to explain why Sirius would become 
one? As for Lupin and Sirius knowing how to use the map, if we accept that 
Fred and George figured it out, why can't we accept that other "troublemakers" 
figured it out? Again, its an interesting bit of backstory, but its not 
essential to understanding the plot, nor is it a plot hole, its just something that's 
hinted at, but not said. 



-Rebecca


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




From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 07:03:59 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 03:03:59 EDT
Subject: One more opinion (spoilers)
Message-ID: <129.43350659.2df41bdf@aol.com>

I just saw POA, and I'd like to add my opinion to several points already 
addressed,
in no particular order.
Daniel's acting: Wonderful! I think he's really grown into the character, and 
his
acting here made me feel I was watching Harry Potter. The only slip up to me
was the crying scene, and it wasn't the muffled crying that bothered me. It 
was
the quick jump to extreme anger and the threat to kill Sirius that didn't 
quite 
come off as genuine. 
Hermoine: I didn't find Hermoine overbearing at all. She seemed right in 
character, and Emma's portrayal has always been spot on to me. IMO,
Hermoine has dramatic flair, and she is quite pushy as we all know <g>
and that's how Emma plays her. Perfectly, in my opinion.
Screentime of Ron vs Hermoine: Yes, Ron had less screentime here,
but I certainly don't see Hermoine taking over the series in any way.
Harry was still the center of the story. And remember, Hermoine missed
a good deal of the action in CoS because she was petrified. I really
think the directors have followed the books fairly closely regarding 
the size of Ron and Hermoine's roles in each story. 
Gambon vs Harris: I think each brings a different strength to Dumbledore.
Harris brought out his warmth and wise twinkle in his eye, and Gambon
brings out his eccentricity and playfulness. As it has worked out, the
two actors embody Dumbledore well at the different times in the saga. 
In the early books Dumbledore was more of a grandfatherly figure to 
Harry, and in the later books he becomes a bit more distant and his
actions and intentions more ambiguous. So Gambon taking over (sad
as the circumstances are) happens at the right time I think.
The new characters: I thought they were all well-cast. Lupin especially.
Like all of us, I form a picture of a character in my mind when I read
a book, but I don't usually set it so deep in stone that I can't revise it
to fit the actor who eventually portrays the character. So far I haven't
had a problem seeing all the actors in the Harry Potter movies as
the characters, and Lupin in no exception. But that's me ;-)
Hogwarts School: I think too that the setting has evolved in this movie
away from the brighter and comforting interior and grassy grounds 
of the first two movies, to the more worn, realistic interior and the 
rougher, hilly exterior grounds we get in POA. Yes, it doesn't look
quite the same, but it does work as a reflection of Harry's growing
maturity and his gradual loss of naivete about the world around him. 
Kind of like he's tossing away the rose-colored view he first had of
the wizarding world--i.e., starting to see that it's not all black & white,
pure evil versus untarnished good, but even wizards come in varying 
shades of gray. (Which will of course will become much more apparent
to him in later books/movies!)
Time-turner sequence: This was the most brilliant part of the film, and
I didn't even notice that clock ticking! I'll have to listen for it next time.
General flow of the movie: I did find a few of the scene transitions to be
a bit choppy, something I didn't notice in the other two (despite CoS
having some slightly tedious stretches). Even with the whomping willow
bits showing the change of seasons, it did seem like the school year 
jumped along in fits and starts this time in comparison. Still, it didn't 
detract from my enjoyment of the movie.
The magic throughout: I agree that the magic was used very effectively
in this movie. It seemed a natural part of the landscape at Hogwarts,
unheeded by the students and teachers. And there were a lot of wonderful
touches, like the giraffe gliding through the portraits, and the portraits 
complaining to Harry about interrupting their sleep (and later to Snape, 
who had a wonderful reaction ;-).
Missing scene: I'm not talking about missing moments from the book that
could or should have been in the movie, but what happened to the scene
with Harry and Hermoine talking in the snow? You know, the one that 
was a publicity print (the one that is my wallpaper right now!). It must have
been cut, because I certainly didn't see it. I guess that will be one cut 
scene that should show up on the DVD release!
Following the book word for word versus a more open interpretation: It 
seems fans will complain equally about either method! As for me, I can
enjoy a movie either way, as I've enjoyed all three movies so far. I 
don't find it at all *necessary* that a movie slavishly copy its source 
material. I guess that's a matter of personal preference.
Reading the book versus not having read the book: I think POA is 
equally enjoyable either way. From previous posts, it seems clear 
those who haven't read the book are able to follow the plot of POA.
Those who have read the book know that some plot points in the
book are missing (as I did), but that doesn't have to detract from
the enjoyment. At least for me it doesn't. So I know that there's even
more to it than is obvious on the screen. I still enjoy the fact that I
get to see so much of POA realized, see the people and places 
of my imagination take shape before me. The parts that didn't make
it to the screen--they're still there, in the book, and in my mind! I can 
fill in the blanks, and I'm not bothered by doing so. Again, that's just 
me. 
Final analysis: POA wasn't perfect. There were some bits that could
have been better, as there were in PS/SS and in CoS. But it was 
darned enjoyable nonetheless. 
The next movie: I already can't wait! Even if it doesn't turn out "perfect"
either, I wouldn't for a second miss Daniel's ever more seamless 
transformation into Harry Potter, and all the other wonderful portrayals
of Hermoine, Ron and the various Weasleys, Snape, Hagrid, and on
and on. (Oh, and Jason Isaacs will be back as the deliciously nasty
Lucius Malfoy, yay!).
So thank you, JK Rowling for the books, and thank you, cast, crew, 
and various directors for the movies that just add delicious icing to the
memorable HP saga. I'm happy that more of both are still to come!
Julie 


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





From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 10:58:32 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 06:58:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Amandageist's review
Message-ID: <da.c5edc3c.2df452d8@aol.com>


S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Amanda wrote:
>>I fail to understand why it helped this movie to have things like a
welcoming choir, at the expense (assuming time was the factor) of critical
plot material:<<

The choir was far too short for it to really effect anything else in the 
plot. I thought it added a little bit of atmosphere, making Hogwarts feel more 
like a school.

>>--nobody mentions that Snape also knew Lupin and Black at school<<
Yes, but its clear that they know each other, and from Snape's words about 
James (in the hallway scene), its an easy leap to guess they were classmates 
(since he talks about James at school, and not quite in a teacher-student way).

>>--nobody mentions why Lupin knows the map is a map<<
So? Do they need to? Like I said in a previous post, if Fred and George 
figured it out, then why is it implausible that anyone else could? Its only because 
we know there's more backstory does it seem like the backstory is needed.

>>--the only mention of the the wolfsbane potion was in a shouted comment by
Sirius, when he was restraining Lupin; audience is left thinking Dumbledore
really *did* put the school at risk by having a werewolf on staff with no
means of controlling it.<<
But the potion was mentioned, so the audience doesn't have to think that.

>>--why did Snape appear at the Willow hard on the heels of Lupin? there was
no explanation of why he was following him<<
Yes, that didn't make sense at all. As far as the movie goes, its like Snape 
saw Lupin taking off outside and just decided to start stalking him.

>>--there was no explanation of why Snape hated Black so; this is a bit
crucial to the plot, and the character development of both.<<
That they hate each other is important to the plot, but *why* isn't that 
necessary (from a movie point of view at least). The prank is not the only reason 
they hate each other anyway, they hated each other LONG before that, and for 
reasons not much deeper than why Harry and Draco hate each other (different 
people who got off on the wrong foot, then it grew sourly from there, like most 
schoolage enemies).

>>--why did Prongs appear when Dying!Harry saw it, but not when Later!Harry
was casting the spell?<<
I guess it was just the angle of the camera. Sort of odd though.

>>--why did Prongs appear at *all*, if they cut everything else out about the
Map and the history of the Marauders?<<
Because Patronus' take a form. Harry didn't think to himself "hmm, my 
father's animagus is a stag, so I should do a stag patronus." It just happened (like 
Hermione's less-significant otter form, or Cho's swan form). Yes, the 
significance is not explained, but if Prongs hadn't appeared then people would be 
complaining about *that*.

>>I didn't think the substitution of the corridor encounter for Snape's 
office
was effective. Nothing about the dialogue, but it's so out of character for
Snape NOT to dock Gryffindor points for Harry being out of bed at night,
much less to not give him a detention for insulting him (even if it was just
the map).<<
I agree with you there. Snape let him go *far* too easily. 


-Rebecca


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




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Jun  6 12:33:46 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 13:33:46 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I finally saw it...
Message-ID: <v01540b07bce8bd458f64@[217.154.249.241]>

Kimberley said:-

>First off, whomever said there was something to see after the credits was
>wrong... We waited through it all,
>and I didn't see a dang thing!  Ugh...

That was my post; read it again. Then go and see the movie again and
*listen* carefully.

Cheers,
Nicholas





From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 12:05:36 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 12:05:36 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <c9uisj+heqp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9v1ag+j469@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Gary Sapp & Karen J.S." <karen-
gary at w...> wrote:
> His name is Ripper and he belongs to Aunt Marge. Read the first
> chapter of PoA to find out.
> 
> karen

Thank you, Karen.  I've read all the books (twice) and know
about Ripper. I should have been more specific:  Who PLAYED
Ripper?  The movie credits list Gary Gero as the animal
coordinator, but, sadly, the bulldog doesn't have a credit.

Thanks,
PG




From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 12:05:55 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 12:05:55 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <c9uisj+heqp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9v1b3+i46n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Gary Sapp & Karen J.S." <karen-
gary at w...> wrote:
> His name is Ripper and he belongs to Aunt Marge. Read the first
> chapter of PoA to find out.
> 
> karen

Thank you, Karen.  I've read all the books (twice) and know
about Ripper. I should have been more specific:  Who PLAYED
Ripper?  The movie credits list Gary Gero as the animal
coordinator, but, sadly, the bulldog doesn't have a credit.

Thanks,
PG




From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 12:12:18 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 12:12:18 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <c9v1b3+i46n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9v1n2+njc9@eGroups.com>

Well, now, nothing like a little redundancy!  Sorry about the double 
post.  

PG




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 12:12:24 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 12:12:24 -0000
Subject: EW article -David Copperfield & DR
In-Reply-To: <1c0.1a12c256.2df3d203@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9v1n8+3if8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
 > yeah, I seem to remember the article mentioning his shoulders ;-) 
> If you really want a shock, watch him in the BBC's David 
Copperfield, which 
> was his very first acting job and before SS/PS. He was probably 
about 10.   And 
> he was adorable ;-) 
> Cindy
 

I just watched "David Copperfield" and Daniel Radcliffe is indeed 
absolutely adorable in this movie!  It was quite bizarre to see a 
black-eyed Madame Hooch verbally abusing Harry Potter!  And then to 
see Professer McGonagall give Harry Potter a bath!  It was quite 
strange...but I got used to it before the scene was over.  

Daniel was cute as button and he played the shirtless, hungry, dirty 
waif quite sweetly...I wanted to jump into the movie and buy him a 
sandwich and some clothes!  LOL  And, of course, his eyes were as 
startlingly blue then as they are now.  My two children both have 
amazing blue eyes as well and even though I see their eyes every 
day, it always amazes me how very blue blue eyes can be when I see a 
pair on screen.  I suppose that's why a lot of popular actors have 
blue eyes - because they look spectacular on film!

He was quite cute in it and it must have been an interesting filming 
experience for him, seeing it was his first one.  I wonder why I've 
never seen him talk about it in all those many interviews he's 
given.  I know, I know, all the interviewers want to hear about 
Harry Potter, but still, Maggie Smith and Zoe Wannamaker were in 
this movie with him.  

Diana L.
dianasdolls    





From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 14:26:16 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 07:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA - my thoughts (long; spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <11b.32e1e9ec.2df3c1a9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040606142616.29622.qmail@web14207.mail.yahoo.com>

<snip>
--- clshannon at aol.com wrote:
  I> never could accept
> > the gasps of wonder from Harry's first year class
> as they moved into
> > the castle for the first time in Columbus' SS:
> "The paintings are
> > talking!"  Duh.  Don't your paintings talk at
> home? (granted, some of
> > those kids were likely to be from Muggle families,
> but not all of
> > them)

That part I accepted without even thinking...When I
got to high school...I had the same gasp and looks of
wonder.It was totally different than anything I had
seen to that point in my life. The rooms were round
with no interior walls...(which meant if I was bored
in math class I could listen to the history class
right
next to me <g>),wall to wall carpeting...it looked
more
like a house than school....
There was a lounge for the older kids...bean bag
chairs
pop machines and music...That was something I never
would have expected in school...
I wandered around for the first couple weeks in awe...
So I could very see where the 1st years reactions
came from...I am sure that Hogwarts is very different
experience than what most of the wizarding kids came
from..with maybe the exception of the Malfoys....and
otheres of their "status".


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


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 14:33:25 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:33:25 -0000
Subject: PoA Movie: A few more observations (Minor SPOILERS)
In-Reply-To: <v01540b04bce89f98a7d1@[217.154.249.241]>
Message-ID: <c9v9vl+oduh@eGroups.com>

You are so right about the wrong side of the scar scene.  I noticed 
it at the time because I had read the spoilers, however, in the 
movie I thought it might have been a reflection.  But now you 
explained it perfectly.   Thank you!











--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, nicholas at a... wrote:
> O
> B
> L
> I
> G
> A
> T
> O
> R
> Y
> 
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> 
> E
> R
> 
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
> 
> 
> From GulPlum:-
> 
> >Several people have pointed out as a continuity error the fact 
that Harry's
> >scar appears over his left (rather than right) eyebrow during the 
Boggart
> >DADA class. I was 90% sure of this on Monday, but now it's 100% 
(I paid
> >attention while watching the movie today) - sorry would-be eagle-
eyes,
> >there's nothing wrong with the shot or makeup - the shot is a 
reflection in
> >the wardrobe mirror. True, this is complicated a little by the 
fact that
> >the camera then appears to go "through" the mirror and the image 
loses the
> >imperfections of the sides of the antique mirror, but technically 
it
> >remains a mirror image.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying. The possible explanation only occurred to 
me the
> next day as I was composing my post to the list. Saw the film 
again on
> Friday; I don't know how I missed it the first time....vaguely 
recall
> people moving in front of me around that time. Anyway; the scene is
> unusually constructed; the camera goes into the mirror at the 
beginning,
> and comes out of it at the end (I think I have that the right way
> round...:-) )
> 
> I noticed a number of 'reflection' shots this time around; in the 
Boggart
> class, of course; in a window at one stage; when Harry is flying on
> Buckbeak, he sees his reflection in the lake...must take notes 
next time as
> it seems to be a motif through the first part of the film.
> Harry-Attempting-To-Understand-His-Own-Inner-Nature?
> 
> Possibly.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicholas




From alina at distantplace.net  Sun Jun  6 16:29:38 2004
From: alina at distantplace.net (alina at distantplace.net)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 16:29:38 -0000
Subject: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <c9ubj2+d17g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9vgpi+4ffj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> Just a question for those who hated the film...
> Do you blame Stephen Kloves or Alfonso Cuaron?? If both, who do 
you 
> blame more??
> 


I blame JKR for allowing them to do this to her work! Surely she 
could've done something to stop this... or make this better. For 
goodness' sake, couldn't she at least point out to Cuaron that 
wizards don't wear muggle clothes? (although I thought she should've 
pointed that out from the start).

Alina who likes the movie less and less the more she thinks about it.




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 18:07:25 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 11:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <c9vgpi+4ffj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040606180725.26277.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>


--- alina at distantplace.net wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com,
> "daughterofthedust" 
> <daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:
> > Just a question for those who hated the film...
> > Do you blame Stephen Kloves or Alfonso Cuaron?? If
> both, who do 
> you 
> > blame more??
> > 
> 
> 
> I blame JKR for allowing them to do this to her
> work! Surely she 
> could've done something to stop this... or make this
> better. For 
> goodness' sake, couldn't she at least point out to
> Cuaron that 
> wizards don't wear muggle clothes? (although I
> thought she should've 
> pointed that out from the start).
> 
> Alina who likes the movie less and less the more she
> thinks about it.

I don't think you can really blame JKR because she
doesn't have creative control over the movies. When
she gave them the rights she just said that they
couldn't be cartoons and she wanted a British cast. It
seems like the close collaboration with Colombus on
the first 2 movies was more of a courtesy extended by
Columbus than a necessity.  I'd rather have her worry
about finishing book 6 and be less than pleased with
the movies than have her spend alot of time
controlling the movies and have to wait an eternity
for the next book. 
Personally, I blame both Cuaron and Kloves. I think
they both had some really good ideas, but that they
also had a certain disregard for the world setup but
JKR in the books and by ignoring that have allienated
the fans.  I can understand some creative freedom in
the area of inclusion of unnecessary scenes and the
creation of new creatures like dementors, but I think
that if JKR has given a spell or explanation of
something that it should be honored. For example, why
did they have to create Bombardo when Alohamora would
have done the job just fine? And why couldn't the
professors wear robes? Why did the prophecy need to be
changed? It was just unnecessary. So I blame them
both.

~Katie



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 18:23:54 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 14:23:54 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: EW article -David Copperfield & DR
Message-ID: <158.36d03064.2df4bb3a@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/6/04 5:24:54 AM, dianasdolls at yahoo.com writes:


> He was quite cute in it and it must have been an interesting filming
> experience for him, seeing it was his first one.? I wonder why I've
> never seen him talk about it in all those many interviews he's
> given.? I know, I know, all the interviewers want to hear about
> Harry Potter, but still, Maggie Smith and Zoe Wannamaker were in
> this movie with him.?
> 
> 

I have been wanting to hear him talk about that movie for a long time ;)
As well as Maggie Smith and Zoe Wanamaker. There is an article I found a long 
time ago   about Bob Hoskins, who played McCawber and he had some lovely 
things to say about Dan. I noticed in the premier photos for London that Hoskins 
was there with his family. Guess they are Potter fans ;-)

And I agree about David Copperfield - it's a wonderful adaptation and even at 
4 hours, they left   things out ;-) I've read that book more than once and it 
is impossible to include everything - something that we all know about 
adapting books to   movies <g>
And I certainly agree that Dan was adorable in that movie and I too, wanted 
to reach into the screen and take him away from all those horrible, abusive 
people! My goodness, it was heartbreaking. He sure has experience playing an 
abused orphan, now doesn't he? ;-)
Cindy


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




From tzakis1225 at netzero.com  Sun Jun  6 18:41:10 2004
From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 18:41:10 -0000
Subject: IMAX
In-Reply-To: <c9u5fc+f7a1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c9vog6+kpep@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Lady Pensieve" 
<ladypensieve at y...> wrote:
> has anyone seen POA on the big screen yet?  Wondered how it seemed 
> as opposed to regular screens
> 

Demetra:
I inadvertently saw it on the IMAX screen on opening day.  I bought 
tickets online and just thought they were more expensive because I 
was buying them online (I'm pretty dense sometimes, I know).

We were sitting very close, third row I think.  Not because we got 
there late, we were there 35 minutes before it started. But there 
were large groups in which one or two people went ahead and claimed 
an entire row.  Naturally there were no ushers around, probably 
because it was a 12:30 show on Friday.  Anyway, seeing 95% of the 
movie on the IMAX screen was great.  There were a couple of times I 
thought I was gonna hurl though - the shots of the rolling hills, 
flying, etc.  Even though I'm prone to motion sickness, I don't think 
it would have affected me if I wasn't so close to the screen.  My 
husband and I saw Return of the King on the IMAX screen (sitting 
second row from the back) and I had no problems with that at all.  




From diana at slashcity.com  Sun Jun  6 20:54:14 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 16:54:14 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
References: <20040606180725.26277.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0dd101c44c08$6dd2d700$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

From: "Kathryn Wolber" <katydid3500 at yahoo.com>

> I don't think you can really blame JKR because she
> doesn't have creative control over the movies. When
> she gave them the rights she just said that they
> couldn't be cartoons and she wanted a British cast. It
> seems like the close collaboration with Colombus on
> the first 2 movies was more of a courtesy extended by
> Columbus than a necessity.  I'd rather have her worry
> about finishing book 6 and be less than pleased with
> the movies than have her spend alot of time
> controlling the movies and have to wait an eternity
> for the next book.

Then her agent did her a disfavour.  Other writers have specified that they
want creative control over their movies - and they get it if the studios
want the book bad enough.  At that point, JKR was doing well enough that she
didn't *have* to have the money - she could have held out longer than Warner
Brothers and company.  She could have even insisted on waiting till the
books were all finished if she wanted creative control but didn't want to
take time out from her writing.  The books are only getting more popular, on
their own, without the movies, so waiting wouldn't have hurt her - it would
have kept WB from cashing in on the current wave, so I imagine they would
have folded sooner than she.

Diana W.





From thekrenz at msn.com  Sun Jun  6 13:26:10 2004
From: thekrenz at msn.com (thekrenz)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 13:26:10 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing in PoA.......possible  spoilers.
Message-ID: <c9v61i+6i37@eGroups.com>

First let me say the I did enjoy PoA, even if it was not as true to 
the book as I had hoped.  I will just have to return to the "movie" 
in my mind the next time I read PoA.  Amazingly, that "movie " is 
very by the letter!








I have seen PoA twice now, and there is one line in the early part of 
the show that rattled me each time I heard it.  As the Hogwarts' 
Express is leaving the station, Molly chases after it quite 
frantically to give Scabbers to Ron and says "DON'T lose him!"
Nos, I realize this may only be a hint at what will transpire later 
in this particular film, but I wonder if it is possible that Molly 
may have known more about Scabbers than the rest of us.  It is 
difficult for me to believe that Peter would keep the animagus form 
of a rat for the entire twelve years since he framed Sirius.  I 
wonder if Molly saw him transform from one form to another at some 
point.  

Any thoughts?

Cyndi





From katroshka at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 15:13:09 2004
From: katroshka at hotmail.com (katroshka)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 15:13:09 -0000
Subject: JK Rowling's favorite
Message-ID: <c9vca5+t8iq@eGroups.com>

I was just visiting JK Rowling's official website, and she said that 
POA is her favorite of the movies. Mine, too, actually! 





From katroshka at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 15:22:20 2004
From: katroshka at hotmail.com (katroshka)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 15:22:20 -0000
Subject: Amandageist's review
In-Reply-To: <da.c5edc3c.2df452d8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c9vcrc+p3h9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, patientx3 at a... wrote:
> 
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> 
> >>--why did Snape appear at the Willow hard on the heels of Lupin? 
there was
> no explanation of why he was following him<<
> Yes, that didn't make sense at all. As far as the movie goes, its 
like Snape 
> saw Lupin taking off outside and just decided to start stalking him.


But in the great hall after Sirius attacked the Fat Lady, Snape 
mentions to Dumbledore that he warned him that a member of the staff 
might help Sirius, then when they meet up in the Shrieking Shack, he 
said something like, 'meeting up with old friends, Remus?' It was 
probably way different than that, but it was clear that he was and 
had been suspicious of Lupin for quite some time. 





From metslvr19 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 19:54:41 2004
From: metslvr19 at yahoo.com (Laura)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 19:54:41 -0000
Subject: Another Review
Message-ID: <c9vsq1+b5sk@eGroups.com>

I apologize for starting my own thread, but everything seems to be 
lapsing into specific little arguments, so I thought I'd just add 
all of my opinions at once.  That way you won't all be horribly 
annoyed by me posting 500 messages to different threads.  =)

I apologize for the length.  I had a lot to get out.  =)

As a summary, I think Cuaron is much better with imagery, Columbus 
better at story-telling.  Or maybe that would be his screenwriter?  
Or are they the same person?  OK, I'm confusing myself.  I 
originally liked the movie, because it's Harry Potter and all and I 
was so excited to see it.  But the more I think about it, the less I 
like it.

I did like some things.  The dementors were incredible.  I loved the 
scenes in the beginning, with the Fat Lady trying to sing and the 
kids complaining about how horrible she is.  The scene with the boys 
in their dormitory playing with food that apparently makes you make 
animal noises seemed slightly....random.  But I absolutely LOVED 
those two scenes, they added so much personality.  It's the kind of 
thing we don't even see in the books, but it shows little character 
quirks and tidbits of life at Hogwarts and how, even though they 
spend most of their time fighting evil, they really just are a bunch 
of boys.  It was cute to see them goofing off together and being 
friends.  Reminded me of fanfiction a little bit.  =)  

I also loved the Time Travel sequence.  I thought that was done very 
well.  ("Does my hair really look like that from the back?")  The 
werewolf imagery was a little disappointing, but I can understand if 
it was done that way to seem less scary for younger children.  (I 
still don't have to like it though.  *evil grin*)

Alright, I'll admit it.  I was bothered by the new scenery.  I do 
think that, in most cases, it was better than the older scenery, but 
I was bothered by the fact that it was new.  I mean, haven't MOST 
people who are watching this movie watched the first two?  And now 
everything is "magically" different.  What?  All of a sudden the 
exterior of the castle is different.  All of a sudden the grounds 
have sloping lawns.  All of a sudden there's this weird bridge thing 
in the middle of nowhere.  Where did all this stuff COME from?  I 
think these things will start to grow on me, but as I was watching 
the movie I was very disconcerted by it.

Similarly, I was bothered by the fact that The Fat Lady was a 
different person in different clothing in a different portrait in a 
different location of the castle.  In some cases I can see why they 
were tempted to change the scenery to something better, but why 
here?  Where is the advantage?  I just don't get it.

Some people have mentioned pretty trivial things, and I'll be no 
different.  For exmaple, the fact that the dementors don't fly in 
the books is a valid point, but not terribly important to the 
story.  I do, however, think that there were some huge 
inconsistencies, missed opportunities, and gaping plot holes.  So 
here are my suggestions.  In order of importance, from least to 
most.  Obviously some of my criticisms are rather trivial, minor 
things that were left out that weren't really necessary for the 
plot, but I just think they'd add to the movie.  So here we go:

We had like 5 minutes of Aunt Marge, 10 minutes of the Knight Bus 
(was that shruken head thing annoying to anyone else?), 5 minutes of 
some horribly cheesy over-dramatized "I'm king of the world!" scene 
with Harry riding Buckbeak, and another 10 with Harry, Hermione, and 
the WHomping Willow...OK guys, let's just chop each of those down to 
a minute each, and we've got 26 more minutes of film where we can:

-provide some comic relief with Sir Cadogan.  Every once in awhile 
you see him in the background, but we never get to interact with him.

-2 words: Quidditch Cup.   

-more clearly explain why Hermione is so stressed.  Her actions in 
Divination and with Malfoy seem completely OOC otherwise.

-more cleary show how no one will believe HRH and Snape being 
supermad about Sirius getting away (I just wanted to see Snape 
really mad.  And that makes no sense unless you include the whole 
sequence about how he was supposed to get an Order of Merlin and all 
that.)

-show the transition of time a little more smoothly.  It almost 
seemed to me as if the movie took place in 2 days.  So this is a 
pretty trivial complaint, but I was a little thrown off by that.

-give Trelawney some screen time.  What about all of the death 
threats she throws at Harry?  What about all of the snickering Ron 
and Harry do in her class?  I think she was a wonderful in the 
movie, but you don't get any kind of sense of how much of a fraud 
she is or how she continues to predict Harry's death, etc.  Without 
those details, it makes Hermione look, as someone else has 
mentioned, like a spoiled brat.  I was also looking forward to the 
crystal ball scene, where Ron goes, "It's obvious what this means.  
There's going to be loads of fog tonight."  OK, so I'm biased (that 
is one of my all-time favorite lines from the books), but I thought 
that a lot of the experience of the Divination class was left out.

-show Patronuses (Patroni?) how they're supposed to look, as 
animals.  I was incredibily dissapointed the first time I saw Harry 
do the spell.  Then, it was if, at the end of the movie, someone 
poked either the director or the screenwriter and said, "psst, 
that's not how it works."  So they randomly threw in the stag image 
in the last scene, leaving people like us disconcerted and people 
who hadn't read the books wondering what the heck that was all about 
it and why it never appeared in previous scenes where the Patronus 
was conjured.  (Or maybe the special effects guy is just a Potter 
fan and took it upon himself to add that without consulting anyone 
else, in which case I applaud him.  =P)

-get the prediction right.  Yes, it's better to "interpret" the 
books than copy them directly to the movies, but in this case I 
think a word-for-word rendition would have been wonderful.

-explain SOMETING about the James/Remus/Sirius/Peter/Snape thing.  
ANYTHING.  AHHHH.  Sorry, I just felt that absolutely NONE of that 
was explained.  No one tells us who created the Maurader's Map.  No 
one tells us about the prank.  We get very little to no sense of the 
relationship between the 5 of them.  And just a minor little rant, 
but when Lupin was talking to Harry (well, first off it sort of 
irked me that they were always randomly strolling the grounds or 
walking around the in Apparently-not-Forbidden Forest when they have 
these deep and meaningful chats), Lupin basically says, "Ah youre 
mother Lily.  She was such a sweet, kind woman.  She was a beautiful 
woman, inside and out.  She had such a capacity to make everyone 
feel wonderful  *deep sigh*  Oh.  And James.  Yeah, he was cool 
too."  What?!  Do we have any canon to support that Lily even knew 
that Remus was a werewolf?  Because to me, that was definitely what 
he was insinuating.

-SHOW HOW SIRIUS BREAKS INTO GRYFFINDOR TOWER WITH A KNIFE! 

*ahem*

So.  I agree with what someone else has said before.  It's a great 
movie, but a horrible rendition of the book.

I'm sorry to be so critical.  Maybe I've been unnecessarily harsh.  
In time, the movie will most likely grow on me.  But my intial 
impression was that of disappointment.

-Laura





From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 19:46:33 2004
From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 19:46:33 -0000
Subject: Chocolate!
Message-ID: <c9vsap+a8ss@eGroups.com>

OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I 
shared mine with hubby) I think this has Cult Film potential (like 
Rocky Horror). Lights for Lumos, chocolate for Dementors......

*****\(@@)*****
Dudemom_2000 





From shydi60 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 17:11:37 2004
From: shydi60 at yahoo.com (shydi60)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 17:11:37 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Poster and Arthur's Discussion With Harry Scene
Message-ID: <c9vj89+gu3g@eGroups.com>

I could not take my eyes off of the poster of Sirius Black mugging 
and screaming in the scene where Arthur is telling Harry not to go 
looking for Sirius, no matter what.  I think it took away from the 
seriousness of that conversation and I was glad when Arthur moved 
Harry away into a darker corner.  That poster was a riot!  I was 
laughing so hard at it, I was almost crying.

"shydi60" 




From diana at slashcity.com  Sun Jun  6 21:04:50 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:04:50 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Chocolate!
References: <c9vsap+a8ss@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <0e3601c44c09$e97f0990$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

From: "dudemom_2000" <dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com>

> OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I
> shared mine with hubby) I think this has Cult Film potential (like
> Rocky Horror). Lights for Lumos, chocolate for Dementors......
>
> *****\(@@)*****
> Dudemom_2000

What a great idea!  I'm taking some friends to see it next weekend -
semi-Potter fans, but mostly just SF/Fantasy film nuts.  And we've done
Rocky Horror together - it'd be a hoot!  (Need to think of more ideas
now...)






From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 21:14:17 2004
From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:14:17 -0000
Subject: Chocolate!
In-Reply-To: <0e3601c44c09$e97f0990$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <ca01f9+d8c9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana Williams" <diana at s...> 
wrote:
> From: "dudemom_2000" <dudemom_2000 at y...>
> 
> > OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I
> > shared mine with hubby) I think this has Cult Film potential 
(like
> > Rocky Horror). Lights for Lumos, chocolate for Dementors......
> >
> > *****\(@@)*****
> > Dudemom_2000
> 
> What a great idea!  I'm taking some friends to see it next 
weekend -
> semi-Potter fans, but mostly just SF/Fantasy film nuts.  And we've 
done
> Rocky Horror together - it'd be a hoot!  (Need to think of more 
ideas
> now...)

*****\(@@)/*****

On the chat today someone also said Howl with Hermione!

Dudemom_2000




From HMaffioli at cox.net  Sun Jun  6 21:24:35 2004
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 14:24:35 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Chocolate!
References: <c9vsap+a8ss@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00bb01c44c0c$aa5481c0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: dudemom_2000 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 12:46 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Chocolate!


  OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I 
  shared mine with hubby) I think this has Cult Film potential (like 
  Rocky Horror). Lights for Lumos, chocolate for Dementors......

  *****\(@@)*****
  Dudemom_2000 



  I am coordinating a trip of over 200 elementary school children to see the film next Friday.  We are having a costume contest and the most popular prize that we have announced (including book, puzzles, journals, etc.) is the giant bars of chocolate.  I also plan on bringing jelly beans with home made Berate Bott's labels for all of my own students.


  Heather

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




From katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 21:23:51 2004
From: katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com (katiecannon2000)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:23:51 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <ba.58083239.2df3b33b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca0217+c5gn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, patientx3 at a... wrote:
> 
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> S
> 
AND of course there's the foreshadowing with 
> Trelawny's prophecy of "he who betrayed his friends".
> 
> 
> -Rebecca

Oh--is *that* what she said?  I think Emma Thompson is a brilliant 
actress, but her portrayal of Trelawny was too much nerd and not 
enough flaky.

--kc, loving the book, liking the movie b/c it's better than no Harry 
Potter movie at all

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





From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Sun Jun  6 21:55:59 2004
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:55:59 -0000
Subject: Chocolate!
In-Reply-To: <c9vsap+a8ss@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca03tf+9d9j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "dudemom_2000" 
<dudemom_2000 at y...> wrote:
> OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I 
> shared mine with hubby) 



Hershey's--no nuts.  Well, maybe except for one nut...me (wouldn't 
take m&m's like Hubby and the kids because the chocolate had to be a 
flat candy bar.)



>I think this has Cult Film potential (like 
> Rocky Horror). Lights for Lumos, chocolate for Dementors......
> 
> *****\(@@)*****
> Dudemom_2000


Hmmm...one of those annoying lazer pen lights for when Sirius has 
his soul sucked out.  Wait, I think those are illegal in theaters.  
Nevermind.  

Toad (who must have her Hershey's upon every re-read of PoA)





From katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 21:57:21 2004
From: katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com (katiecannon2000)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:57:21 -0000
Subject: Retro '70's Clothes
Message-ID: <ca0401+u1es@eGroups.com>

Maybe it's just that I was a child during the first Hippie Years, but 
I found the long hair and retro-seventies look quite distracting.  I 
know much criticism is launched at Columbis for his Disney-esque 
portrayal, but it does seem as if the concept of the School Robes 
might have helped this film.  (At one point in ABC's showing of COS, 
hosted by DR, EW & RG, EW says something about it being much more 
casual--that she was in jeans...)

I can't help but think of how when various movies come on TV today, I 
immediately know they were filmed in the '80's.  I am afraid that the 
succumbing to popular clothing on the kids in POA will date the film 
immensely.  Why the need to have them in other than school uniforms, 
other than the new director's attempt to be hip?

When Hermione says "Is that how my hair looks from the back?" I could 
only think "Thank God!! and someone should tell the Weasley Twins and 
Ron how their's must look, too!!"  When one of the twins first walked 
into the Leaky Cauldron (Evidently and without reason, Now Under new 
Management!) I thought it was Charlie Weasley (you know, the one 
actually described as having long hair)

Without going into the missing plot elements, I thought the drastic 
change in costuming did a disservice to the future 
longitivity/watchability of the film.




From anuchillinz22 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 21:56:20 2004
From: anuchillinz22 at yahoo.com (anuchillinz22)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:56:20 -0000
Subject: Clue about thestrals in PoA
Message-ID: <ca03u4+olnd@eGroups.com>

Hey, sorry if this was mentioned before, but did anyone notice the 
horseless carriage that Fudge came out of when he was at Hogesmeade 
going into Madam Rosmerta's. I didn't realize that it must have been 
a thestral carriage till Fudge was trying to avoid stepping on a 
pile 
of something that I guessed must have been thestral dung...? Am I 
totally off here, or did anyone else see this?
~Kat






From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 22:12:34 2004
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:12:34 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Clue about thestrals in PoA
Message-ID: <BAY7-F75XOIRUlRWXop0001f084@hotmail.com>

Oh my god, I didn't notice that.....I wish I had though. A horseless 
carriage, it probably was a thestral....I am going to watch the film again, 
just so I can see that part...


ml

jo
x


>From: "anuchillinz22" <anuchillinz22 at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Clue about thestrals in PoA
>Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:56:20 -0000
>
>Hey, sorry if this was mentioned before, but did anyone notice the
>horseless carriage that Fudge came out of when he was at Hogesmeade
>going into Madam Rosmerta's. I didn't realize that it must have been
>a thestral carriage till Fudge was trying to avoid stepping on a
>pile
>of something that I guessed must have been thestral dung...? Am I
>totally off here, or did anyone else see this?
>~Kat
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger




From HimemyaUtena at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 22:17:03 2004
From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:17:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <119.33d23c90.2df4f1df@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/5/2004 7:53:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
daughterofthedust at yahoo.com writes:
If you don't understand, it's because you like to have things 
spelled out...Explicitly and to the point of condescension, like 
Columbus' films, where people repeat everything slowly, mutiple 
times, with dramatic pause for extra emphasis...

Those films were geared so that EVERYONE, even the slowest of the 
slow, could comprehend...
I think that the film is perfectly understandable in and of itself. Yes, 
that's true. And I don't think anyone would deny that. But people just seeing the 
film will be missing quite a bit of what i feel is important information from 
the books, and therefor the overall story. There's no telling how this will 
effect future films. The loss of a rather large chunk of the Marauders history 
is regrettable. PoA is, I feel, the Marauders story more than anything else. 
Part of the charm and tragedy of their story is the group of friends they used 
to be, and what they all have become. And that got entirely lost. 

I think if I were watching the movie and hadn't read the films that I would 
question how both Lupin and Sirius knew how the map worked, or that Sirius even 
knew which map was being referred to.

Oh, by the way, I really did like the film. Just missed the background info.

~~Adrianna~~


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




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sun Jun  6 22:19:27 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:19:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <20040606180725.26277.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEBHHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Kathryn Wolber [mailto:katydid3500 at yahoo.com]

I blame both Cuaron and Kloves. I think
they both had some really good ideas, but that they
also had a ________certain disregard________ for the world setup but
JKR in the books and by ignoring that have allienated
the fans. <<<

You hit the nail on the head here. I wonder what the majority of the HP fans
around the world really think. Personally, I would be really offended if I
was JKR. I don't know how much input she was allowed to have on the movies,
but if I put my blood, sweat and tears into a beautiful fictional
masterpiece, I would not want some movie to be loosely based on it. I would
want my masterpiece brought to life as close to my original work as
possible. I really do think they had a disregard for her vision, and that in
itself offends me.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From hgranger919 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 22:35:09 2004
From: hgranger919 at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: My Only Big Complaint
Message-ID: <20040606223509.19958.qmail@web51807.mail.yahoo.com>

Count me as one who loved the Prisoner of Azkaban. I
love Cuaron's
vision and agree with the two young kids who sat next
to me and loudly
told their mother during the credits that it was the
best film of the
three.

I also loved Michael Gambon. Remember in the
Philosopher's Stone when
Harry asks Percy if Dumbledore is mad? Percy replies
"Mad?" ... "He's a
genius! Best wizard in the world! But he is a bit mad,
yes." In Gambon,
I see all of those qualities: genius, best wizard in
the world, and
definitely a big mad. I also remember when the first
film came out, many
hated Richard Harris' performance; said he was too
remote and not at all
kindly. I suspect we'll all come to like Gambon.

My big complaint? Not nearly enough screen time for
Julie Christie as
Madame Rosmerta!

Hermione aka Suzanne, both born on September 19


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




From nostrebor at runbox.com  Sun Jun  6 22:43:46 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:43:46 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Chocolate!
References: <ca03tf+9d9j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01a201c44c17$bc5ae9d0$735dc043@user7i1hr4si1m>

Ummm, we only had Reese's peanut butter cups - and lollipops Saturday at the
IMAX and dd of course brought her wand. When we first saw it at 11:59 on
June 3, we brought Bertie Botts and Ice Mice. When we saw it Friday at 11:30
am - we brought Acid Pops and Drooble's.
Jodi
P.S. By the way, if you're a homeschooler or a teacher and have your
Border's discount card - you can buy Harry Potter candy and on the receipt
you'll see a discount!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jksunflower2002" <mkeller01 at alltel.net>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 5:55 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Chocolate!


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "dudemom_2000"
> <dudemom_2000 at y...> wrote:
> > OK. Who brought chocolate to eat during the Dementor scenes??? (I
> > shared mine with hubby)
>
>
>
> Hershey's--no nuts.  Well, maybe except for one nut...me (wouldn't
> take m&m's like Hubby and the kids because the chocolate had to be a
> flat candy bar.)
>




From hgranger919 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 22:40:04 2004
From: hgranger919 at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 15:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
Message-ID: <20040606224004.45996.qmail@web51804.mail.yahoo.com>

>>>From:   Kathryn Wolber [mailto:katydid3500 at yahoo.com]
I blame both Cuaron and   Kloves. I think
they both had some really good ideas, but that they
also had a ________certain disregard________ for the world setup but
JKR in the books and by ignoring that have allienated
the fans.   <<<

Barbara:
> You hit the nail on the head here. I wonder what the majority of the HP fans
> around the world really think. Personally, I would be really offended if I
> was JKR. I don't know how much input she was allowed to have on the movies,
> but if I put my blood, sweat and tears into a beautiful fictional
> masterpiece, I would not want some movie to be loosely based on it. I would
> want my masterpiece brought to life as close to my original work as
> possible. I really do think they had a disregard for her vision, and that in
> itself offends me.


MessageInteresting, as Ms. Rowling is on record as saying the Prisoner of Azkaban is her favorite film of the three made so far.
 
Hermione aka Suzanne




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sun Jun  6 22:49:25 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:49:25 -0400
Subject: More reviews
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEBHHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEBIHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

Sorry for the cross-post, but I wanted to let any of you who were as
disappointed in POA as I was know that there are some reviews from people on
IMDb (Internet Movie Database) that understand what we are feeling! Just go
to http://imdb.com/title/tt0304141/usercomments and you'll see a bunch of HP
fans who feel as we do, that POA was a sad interpretation of the book, and
an interpretation is what I was looking forward to, not a good or artistic
movie.

Barbara
aka bd-bear
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze80gd4/




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sun Jun  6 22:53:26 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:53:26 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More reviews
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEBIHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBEEBJHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Barbara D. Poland-Waters [mailto:bd-bear at verizon.net]

an interpretation is what I was looking forward to, not a good or artistic
movie.<<<

I meant to say, not JUST a good or artistic movie.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Sun Jun  6 22:55:05 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:55:05 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <20040606224004.45996.qmail@web51804.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBKEBJHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Suzanne Chiles [mailto:hgranger919 at yahoo.com]

Ms. Rowling is on record as saying the Prisoner of Azkaban is her favorite
film of the three made so far.<<<

I've read that. . .that's why I said I would be offended if ~I~ was JKR. I
don't know why she liked it so much, esp. since it was so different from the
first two. Makes me wonder if she had any problems with the way the first
two were made, and/or if she just feels her books are her books and a movie
is a movie, like many of the people on this list who enjoyed the movie have
said.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From afolcfkajl at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 22:55:24 2004
From: afolcfkajl at aol.com (afolcfkajl at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:55:24 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX
Message-ID: <25.490f7f9c.2df4fadc@aol.com>

95% of the film?
Does the IMAX format cut off some parts of the film?
I was thinking of seeing it on IMAX for the third time. My nephew will be  
visiting next week, and being the good aunt that I am, LOL, I will do the  
supreme sacrifice and  take him to see it. 
P.S. I thought the film was great when I first saw it, and enjoyed it even  
more the second time around. 
In a message dated 6/6/2004 2:42:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
tzakis1225 at netzero.com writes:

Anyway, seeing 95% of the 
movie on the IMAX screen was great.  There  were a couple of times I 
thought I was gonna hurl though - the shots of  the rolling hills, 
flying, etc.  Even though I'm prone to motion  sickness, I don't think 
it would have affected me if I wasn't so close to  the screen.  My 
husband and I saw Return of the King on the IMAX  screen (sitting 
second row from the back) and I had no problems with that  at all.  




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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Sun Jun  6 23:09:20 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 16:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEBHHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040606230920.64310.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>

Jo's been quoted, though, as saying she loves POA.  Anytime a book is adapted into a movie, compromises have to be made and major factors cut, even if the author him/herself is the one writing the screenplay.  I think of John Irving's adaptation of his novel "The Cider House Rules" for the screen, which won him an Oscar.  Major parts of the book were cut, including a very central character, but it was necessary, and worked for the best.  That movie didn't feel the same way as the book, and probably POA won't either (I'm probably the only HP fan on earth who hasn't seen it yet), but you gotta do what you gotta do.  Just my $0.02.

"Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-bear at verizon.net> wrote:>>>From: Kathryn Wolber [mailto:katydid3500 at yahoo.com]

I blame both Cuaron and Kloves. I think
they both had some really good ideas, but that they
also had a ________certain disregard________ for the world setup but
JKR in the books and by ignoring that have allienated
the fans. <<<

You hit the nail on the head here. I wonder what the majority of the HP fans
around the world really think. Personally, I would be really offended if I
was JKR. 


Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/

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




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 23:15:51 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 16:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <0dd101c44c08$6dd2d700$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <20040606231551.12022.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Diana Williams <diana at slashcity.com> wrote:
> From: "Kathryn Wolber" <katydid3500 at yahoo.com>
> 
> > I don't think you can really blame JKR because she
> > doesn't have creative control over the movies.
> When
> > she gave them the rights she just said that they
> > couldn't be cartoons and she wanted a British
> cast. It
> > seems like the close collaboration with Colombus
> on
> > the first 2 movies was more of a courtesy extended
> by
> > Columbus than a necessity.  I'd rather have her
> worry
> > about finishing book 6 and be less than pleased
> with
> > the movies than have her spend alot of time
> > controlling the movies and have to wait an
> eternity
> > for the next book.
> 
> Then her agent did her a disfavour.  Other writers
> have specified that they
> want creative control over their movies - and they
> get it if the studios
> want the book bad enough.  At that point, JKR was
> doing well enough that she
> didn't *have* to have the money - she could have
> held out longer than Warner
> Brothers and company.  She could have even insisted
> on waiting till the
> books were all finished if she wanted creative
> control but didn't want to
> take time out from her writing.  The books are only
> getting more popular, on
> their own, without the movies, so waiting wouldn't
> have hurt her - it would
> have kept WB from cashing in on the current wave, so
> I imagine they would
> have folded sooner than she.
> 
> Diana W.

I don't think it's just that she didn't get creative
control, I think it's that she didn't *want* it. She
said she wants to write other things after Harry so I
don't think she wants much control of the movies
because it would hinder her writing of anything, not
just of Harry. It's like someone else said (sorry I
don't remember who, there have been soooo many posts I
can't keep track) that the books are her story so
she's not too concerned about the movies. I think as
long as the story isn't totally butchered(they make
Harry a girl, Snape nice and move Hogwarts to the
South Pole) she isn't going to have many complaints
because books are her medium and she knows she's not a
film maker so she's content with focusing on the books
and lets someone else deal with the movies.

~Katie


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 23:42:21 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 23:42:21 -0000
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <0ab901c44b5c$5c4e3440$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <ca0a4t+s5p9@eGroups.com>

Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone who wants to 
know about the Marauders can damn well read the books." None of the 
Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I have never 
seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of the 
information that was in the book - that's why English teachers 
always tell their students that they can't get away with just 
watching the movie.

So what you do is, if you're interested in the movie, read the book 
too. If you don't care, then you don't read the book and you haven't 
missed anything important. What's the problem with that?

Incidentally, I find it comical that people are second-guessing 
JKR's feelings on PoA. Just because you didn't like the movie or 
didn't think it had enough "important" information doesn't mean 
she's wrong. She's the author! Surely she knows better than we do 
what will be necessary in the future.

--Anna




From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Jun  6 23:52:02 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 19:52:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
Message-ID: <1e1.227c910b.2df50822@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/6/2004 11:33:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
katydid3500 at yahoo.com writes:

Personally, I blame both Cuaron and Kloves. I think
they both had some really good ideas, but that they
also had a certain disregard for the world setup but
JKR in the books and by ignoring that have allienated
the fans.  
Personally, I think you may be exaggerating by saying that PoA
has "alienated the fans." I suspect most of fans are quite fine with
the movie, and are willing to separate it from the book and take it
for what it is. I am, as clearly is JK Rowling, as well as quite a few
who have posted their opinions of the movie here. I don't begrudge 
anyone their opinions, negative or positive, but let's not lump HP fans 
together under one banner.
Julie 


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




From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  6 23:54:16 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 23:54:16 -0000
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <ca0a4t+s5p9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca0ar8+r4in@eGroups.com>



  Excellent!

  I just got back from my 2nd veiwing of POA and thoroughly enjoyed 
it as an extra to the book. It was the movies that introduced me to 
the books and I knew not to expect the whole book in the film.  I 
will not be surprised if we get yet a whole new batch of readers as a 
result of the POA movie.

  Brian:-)   

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "saintbacchus" 
<saintbacchus at y...> wrote:
> Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone who wants to 
> know about the Marauders can damn well read the books." None of the 
> Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I have never 
> seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of the 
> information that was in the book - that's why English teachers 
> always tell their students that they can't get away with just 
> watching the movie.
> 
> So what you do is, if you're interested in the movie, read the book 
> too. If you don't care, then you don't read the book and you 
haven't 
> missed anything important. What's the problem with that?
> 
> Incidentally, I find it comical that people are second-guessing 
> JKR's feelings on PoA. Just because you didn't like the movie or 
> didn't think it had enough "important" information doesn't mean 
> she's wrong. She's the author! Surely she knows better than we do 
> what will be necessary in the future.
> 
> --Anna




From merrperr at pacbell.net  Sun Jun  6 23:53:55 2004
From: merrperr at pacbell.net (merrperr)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 16:53:55 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
References: <ca0a4t+s5p9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00aa01c44c21$87006bc0$58d17443@perry>

Anna:
>>  Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone who wants to 
  know about the Marauders can damn well read the books." None of the 
  Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I have never 
  seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of the 
  information that was in the book - that's why English teachers 
  always tell their students that they can't get away with just 
  watching the movie.

  So what you do is, if you're interested in the movie, read the book 
  too. If you don't care, then you don't read the book and you haven't 
  missed anything important. What's the problem with that?

  Incidentally, I find it comical that people are second-guessing 
  JKR's feelings on PoA. Just because you didn't like the movie or 
  didn't think it had enough "important" information doesn't mean 
  she's wrong. She's the author! Surely she knows better than we do 
  what will be necessary in the future. <<

  --



  Amen.  After reading some of the emails before I saw the film, I was beginning to have my doubts about whether I would like it.  But I saw it this morning and loved it.  I have decided that if you go to the film and analyze it to death rather than just sitting back and enjoying it for what it is, then you miss out on a really good time!

MP




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Jun  6 23:59:42 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 00:59:42 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Clue about thestrals in PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca03u4+olnd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607005838.0099fa30@plum.cream.org>

At 22:56 06/06/04 , anuchillinz22 wrote:
>Hey, sorry if this was mentioned before, but did anyone notice the
>horseless carriage that Fudge came out of when he was at Hogesmeade
>going into Madam Rosmerta's. I didn't realize that it must have been
>a thestral carriage till Fudge was trying to avoid stepping on a pile
>of something that I guessed must have been thestral dung...? Am I
>totally off here, or did anyone else see this?

Badly spotted, I'm afraid. There is absolutely, 100%, a horse harnessed to 
the carriage. It's either grey or white (difficult to tell with all that snow).

I had the same feeling after my first viewing of the movie and checked on 
my second. However, what is worth pointing out during that sequence for 
those who may have missed it, though, is Hagrid and the carriage door 
(amusing rather than interesting)... :-)




From juli17 at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 00:01:32 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:01:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
Message-ID: <8a.cc34e71.2df50a5c@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/6/2004 1:54:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
diana at slashcity.com writes:

Then her agent did her a disfavour.  Other writers have specified that they
want creative control over their movies - and they get it if the studios
want the book bad enough.  At that point, JKR was doing well enough that she
didn't *have* to have the money - she could have held out longer than Warner
Brothers and company.  She could have even insisted on waiting till the
books were all finished if she wanted creative control but didn't want to
take time out from her writing.  The books are only getting more popular, on
their own, without the movies, so waiting wouldn't have hurt her - it would
have kept WB from cashing in on the current wave, so I imagine they would
have folded sooner than she.

Diana W.
Her agent didn't do JKR a disfavor. She made her own decision, which was
that she didn't want more creative control than she already has (and she 
does have some). She's more than willing to separate her books from the 
movies. That's her choice and her right. As for the money, she has more 
than plenty, as you say. I'm sure she sold the rights to the movies as much
for the fans as anything. I for one am immensely grateful that she did, and
that she had no interest in holding out until all the books were finished. The
actors have come to represent the characters for me. JKR seems to feel
the same way about them. 
Julie 


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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Mon Jun  7 00:06:49 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:06:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I finally saw it...
In-Reply-To: <v01540b07bce8bd458f64@[217.154.249.241]>
References: <v01540b07bce8bd458f64@[217.154.249.241]>
Message-ID: <2146.4.47.27.232.1086566809.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>


Borrowing spoiler space.

>   >>  >   >>  > S
>   >>  >   >>  > P
>   >>  >   >>  > O
>   >>  >   >>  > I
>   >>  >   >>  > L
>   >>  >   >>  > E
>   >>  >   >>  > R
>   >>  >   >>  >
>   >>  >   >>  > S
>   >>  >   >>  > P
>   >>  >   >>  > A
>   >>  >   >>  > C
>   >>  >   >>  > E
>   >>  >   >>


nicholas at adelanta.co.uk said:
> Kimberley said:-
>
>>First off, whomever said there was something to see after the credits was
>>wrong... We waited through it all,
>>and I didn't see a dang thing!  Ugh...
>
> That was my post; read it again. Then go and see the movie again and
> *listen* carefully.

You mean Radcliffe saying the line of 'mischief managed' and the
credits/map closing?  If that was all, I was kind of disappointed because
some posts made it out to be more than that.

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 hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 00:19:55 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 01:19:55 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEBHHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
References: <20040606180725.26277.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607010649.009ad900@plum.cream.org>

At 23:19 06/06/04 , Barbara D. Poland-Waters wrote:

<snip>

>I wonder what the majority of the HP fans
>around the world really think. Personally, I would be really offended if I
>was JKR.

<snip>

Well, JKR is on record as stating that PoA is her favourite of the three to 
date, so she's hardly "offended". I think it's quite ungracious of you to 
feel that she should think the same way you do.

As for what the majority of fans around the world think, judging by the 
reaction here, it's about 70/30 in favour (that's far from being a 
scientific analysis and I remain open to correction on that point).

As only Mods can create polls on this group, in order to satisfy Barbara's 
and my curiosity (among others) may I ask that one is created along the 
following lines:

Overall, did you like PoA the Movie?
(possible answers:)
a) Yes
b) Yes, despite the plot holes
c) No
d) No, because of the plot holes

I think those options cover the basic variations of opinions voiced here 
thus far...

(For the record, a) and c) are addressed at those who like or dislike 
Cuaron's "vision" regardless of the limitations of the script.)





From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun  7 00:23:53 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:23:53 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040607010649.009ad900@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBGEBMHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]

Well, JKR is on record as stating that PoA is her favourite of the three to
date, so she's hardly "offended". I think it's quite ungracious of you to
feel that she should think the same way you do.

As for what the majority of fans around the world think, judging by the
reaction here, it's about 70/30 in favour (that's far from being a
scientific analysis and I remain open to correction on that point).<<<

Sorry you feel I am being ungracious, I am just stating my opinion that if
it was ME who worked so hard on creating such a beautiful, visionary world,
I would be offended to have people change it so drastically to make a movie
that appeals to the masses.

As far as your estimate of 70/30 in favor of the movie, I don't know about
that. I am subscribed to a few lists and have also been reading the comments
on IMDb, and it seems about 50/50.

Barbara
aka bd-bear
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze80gd4/




From siskiou at vcem.com  Mon Jun  7 00:31:41 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:31:41 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040607010649.009ad900@plum.cream.org>
References: <20040606180725.26277.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>
 <4.2.0.58.20040607010649.009ad900@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <1817773696.20040606173141@vcem.com>



Hi,

Sunday, June 6, 2004, 5:19:55 PM, hp at plum.cream.org wrote:

> As only Mods can create polls on this group, in order to satisfy Barbara's
> and my curiosity (among others) may I ask that one is created along the
> following lines:

> Overall, did you like PoA the Movie?
> (possible answers:)
> a) Yes
> b) Yes, despite the plot holes
> c) No
> d) No, because of the plot holes

> I think those options cover the basic variations of opinions voiced here
> thus far...


I think an option along the lines of:

e) Yes, despite characterization
f) No, because of characterization

would be a good thing.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun  7 00:57:43 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 19:57:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
References: <ca0ar8+r4in@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003001c44c2a$70fea310$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brian 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 6:54 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing Frequently Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....




    Excellent!

    I just got back from my 2nd veiwing of POA and thoroughly enjoyed 
  it as an extra to the book. It was the movies that introduced me to 
  the books and I knew not to expect the whole book in the film.  I 
  will not be surprised if we get yet a whole new batch of readers as a 
  result of the POA movie.

    Brian:-)>>


  I saw it a second time today too, without kids, and I have to say I
  enjoyed it very much this time around. I think next time with GoF comes
  out, I will not read any reviews from list members until after I see
  the movie.  When I went to see it, I looked for all the critical things
  others kept pointing out.  Like you, the movies is what introduced me
  to the books.  

  Kimberly   




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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 01:10:29 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 02:10:29 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Observation, not really spoiler
In-Reply-To: <c9u69o+sqaq@eGroups.com>
References: <c9t4h7+nvif@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607014759.0098c600@plum.cream.org>

(I'm working my way through two days' worth of posts in reverse order. I'm 
not picking on anyone. Honest.)

<snip>

>Isn't the wizarding world different from
>the real world of 2004? When the first book described wizards and
>the things that Uncle Vernon would cringe at, one of the things that
>was mentioned is the clothing they wore that was somewhat old-
>fashioned and not like the usual London fashions. Making the
>costumes more like real-world London 2004 is not in keeping with the
>book!

So what if it's not in keeping with one of the miriad details of the books? 
In any case, it's long been argued in the fandom that the wizarding world's 
complete ignorance of Muggle fashions is illogical: Hogwarts has several 
pupils from Muggle backgrounds (or part-Muggle backgrounds) - of the five 
boys in Harry's dorm, both Harry and Dean knew nothing else until they 
turned up at Hogwarts (and Seamus is half-and-half but it seems to me for 
various reasons - though this is arguable - he lived mainly in the Muggle 
world).

In any case, the Muggle-borns would introduce a fairly constant influx of 
new fashions into Hogwarts, so the pupils at least would have some idea of 
what was "normal". And as Hogwarts has always had an influx of 
non-pure-bloods, this kind of information should be carried from generation 
to generation.

Furthermore, people from e.g. the Accidental Magic Reversal Squad would 
surely have some knowledge of the Muggle world as they interact with it on 
a routine basis, and so the complete isolation of the wizarding world's 
sense of fashion is just slightly incomprehensible.

In any case, of all the details which *have* to be left out of the books in 
order to make sensible movies which aren't completely overblown, this is 
one aspect which can be quite easily removed. Although I miss Fudge's 
bowler (green or otherwise) which has been replaced with what looks like a 
Trilby, I'm prepared to live with it, as long as he remains pompous and 
officious (which he has done).

Nevertheless, one of the things I *really* disliked about Columbus's 
costuming choices was to give all the kids a uniform of white shirts and 
House ties and scarves. This was just a little too far in the opposite 
direction. 



From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 01:22:48 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 18:22:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <1e1.227c910b.2df50822@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040607012248.85463.qmail@web40507.mail.yahoo.com>



> In a message dated 6/6/2004 11:33:49 AM Pacific
> Daylight Time, 
> katydid3500 at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> Personally, I blame both Cuaron and Kloves. I think
> they both had some really good ideas, but that they
> also had a certain disregard for the world setup but
> JKR in the books and by ignoring that have
> allienated
> the fans.  

--- juli17 at aol.com wrote:
 Personally, I think you may be exaggerating by
> saying that PoA
> has "alienated the fans." I suspect most of fans are
> quite fine with
> the movie, and are willing to separate it from the
> book and take it
> for what it is. I am, as clearly is JK Rowling, as
> well as quite a few
> who have posted their opinions of the movie here. I
> don't begrudge 
> anyone their opinions, negative or positive, but
> let's not lump HP fans 
> together under one banner.

Ok, so maybe I shouldn't use absolutes, it has
alienated some of the fans because I know I'm not the
only person who feels this way. Better? And please do
not, and this is directed at everyone who is
disagreeing about the movie, act like those of us who
did not like the movie are just stubborn or too
unintelligent to seperate the book from the movie
because I know a number of us can and have done that
and still think the movie stinks. So please stop
treating us like we're juvenile and just wanted a
movie that was line for line from the book, because I
for one did not, I just wanted a movie that I felt did
justice to a book that I really love, which for me,
this movie did not.

~Katie



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From afolcfkajl at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 01:40:16 2004
From: afolcfkajl at aol.com (afolcfkajl at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 21:40:16 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms...
Message-ID: <8b.cca5f2b.2df52180@aol.com>

 
Well said.  I enjoyed the move immensely (I  have all five books  in hard 
cover and read the books prior to any of the movies coming out). When I  go to 
see a movie that has been adapted from a novel, I do not go in expecting  it to 
be a clone of said novel. As long as it stays true to the spirt of the  novel, 
which IMHO POA did, I could care less if it parrots everything in the  novel. 

Ketsia
 
In a message dated 6/6/2004 8:38:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
merrperr at pacbell.net writes:

Anna:
>>  Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is:  "Anyone who wants to 
know about the Marauders can damn well read  the books." None of the 
Marauders background is vital to the plot.  In fact, I have never 
seen a good literary adaptation that  contained all of the 
information that was in the book - that's why  English teachers 
always tell their students that they can't get  away with just 
watching the movie.






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




From jmmears at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 01:41:28 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 01:41:28 -0000
Subject: Question for Pre-Nov 2001 HP Fans
In-Reply-To: <c9ril6+3mtt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca0h48+mdqm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Taykimson at y... wrote:

<snip> 
> Anyway...the movies introduced me to the books.  Azakaban is the 
> first movie in which I had read the book prior to seeing the 
> movie...and I was quite dissapointed.  For those who had read 
PS/SS 
> and CoS before seeing the movie, how did you feel initially - 
where 
> you happy with the adaptation?


I'd read the first four books 2 or 3 times (at least) and had 
listened to both audio versions before seeing the first film.
I think that my first reaction to the SS/PS film was to be thrilled 
at finally "seeing" the characters, Hogwarts, Diagon Alley, and 
relieved that it hadn't been *totally* screwed up.  After all, we'd 
been hearing horror stories for a year or more about moving the 
story to an American high school (complete with cheerleaders), 
casting Haley Joel Osment as Harry, and all sorts of odd things that 
made me very apprehensive about the final product.

However, after repeated viewings the first two movies just didn't 
hold up very well for me.  I found that the script was full of weak 
jokes that the writer substituted for JKR's own (superior) wit and 
that the only one of the trio who seemed at all natural in his part 
was Rupert Grint.  Poor Daniel Radcliffe seemed particularly stiff 
(but so adorable, I just couldn't be too critical at the time).

Based on this experience, I prepared for viewing POA by making a 
real effort to *not* re-read the book during the year leading up to 
the premiere.  This was made considerably easier by the fact that 
OOP came out a year ago, so I could easily focus on that.

Anyway, I did enjoy POA much more than the first two, although I 
still have major issues with the script.  I loved the look, the 
music, the humor, and most of all the improved performance of Daniel 
Radcliffe, who apparently just needed the right director to bring 
out a more believable Harry.  Given that GOF's script is still a 
Steve Kloves product, I'll probably use the same strategy beginning 
next winter and hope that there'll be a new writer in time for the 
fifth movie.  I just have to keep telling myself that the movies 
have nothing whatsoever to do with the "real" story, and I hope I'll 
be able to enjoy them on their own terms. 

Jo Serenadust




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun  7 01:44:26 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 21:44:26 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Kloves or Cuaron??
In-Reply-To: <20040607012248.85463.qmail@web40507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBEEBPHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Kathryn Wolber [mailto:katydid3500 at yahoo.com]

And please do not, and this is directed at everyone who is
disagreeing about the movie, act like those of us who
did not like the movie are just stubborn or too
unintelligent to seperate the book from the movie
because I know a number of us can and have done that
and still think the movie stinks. So please stop
treating us like we're juvenile and just wanted a
movie that was line for line from the book, because I
for one did not. . .<<<

The first and second movies were missing key scenes that I enjoyed in the
books too, but I did feel that they still explained the story and captured
the feel of Hogwarts. This movie just did not do that, in my opinion. I know
that the movie can't be the same as the book, word-for-word, scene-by-scene,
but this one left out scenes I was dying to see come to life, and put things
in that were unnecessary.

>>>I just wanted a movie that I felt did
justice to a book that I really love, which for me,
this movie did not.<<<

Exactly how I feel too.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 01:45:49 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 02:45:49 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked
  the movie
In-Reply-To: <c9tm62+cojt@eGroups.com>
References: <ba.58083239.2df3b33b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607021839.009b1ce0@plum.cream.org>

At 00:49 06/06/04 , alina at distantplace.net wrote:

<snip>

>... knowing that Peter somehow betrayed the Potters doesn't
>explain what exactly he did that constitutes a betrayal. Personally
>I find it important that he divulged their location to Voldemort,
>because if you think about it, simply being Voldemort's servant can
>constitute as a betrayal in and of itself. Telling Voldemort, "My ex-
>best friends whom you want to kill live there," is a quite a bit
>more grievous an offense.

It was made clear that the betrayal consisted of telling Voldemort where 
they were. McGonagall says that this was Sirius's presumed crime, and in 
the Shack, Sirius and Lupin make the same point about Peter.

>It was also not mentioned that Pettigrew murdered 13 muggles to
>escape Sirius, which I think portrays him in an entirely different
>light than that in which he appears in the movie.

I'll be honest. I find it difficult to express my pleasure (if that's the 
right word) at the fact that the 13 Muggles have been written out of the 
back story. On loads of different levels, of which two follow.

Something I dislike about most modern action/horror/killer/thriller movies 
is that too much importance is put on numbers of victims. It's resulted in 
most Hollywood "killer on the loose" type movies being ONLY about serial 
killers, as if one grueseome murder isn't crime enough - it's got to be 
six, seven, or, 13...

The fact that this movie has "relegated" Sirius's presumed crime to one of 
betrayal and because of *THIS* he's one of the most feared and fearful 
wizards alive, underlines this aspect of the plot. After all, the story IS 
about trust and betrayal, NOT murder.

I would, perhaps, have liked an extension of the resolution of what 
actually happened to the fact that Peter was prepared to frame one of his 
would-be best friends into the bargain, but even that is enough to dilute 
the importance of the theme of betrayal, so perhaps it shouldn't have been 
raised.

Furthermore, I'm very glad that the Fidelius wasn't brought into the 
equation either. Because that implies some kind of special betrayal, which 
removes it one step further from reality. The straightforward betrayal of 
one's friends to the "enemy", regardless of the circumstances and the level 
of secrecy involved, is crime enough and needs no further elaboration. And 
THAT is enough to be thrown into a dark hole, which I fervently believe not 
only in the context of PoA or even the Potter series as a whole, but as a 
basic premise of real life.

>I've seen people argue that even if it wasn't explained in POA,
>they'll just put it into GOF, but if they have to fill up GOF with
>POA explanations, how are they going to find space to explain GOF
>events?

I do agree with you on that one, though. Incidentally, I've seen that 
statement in a few places now, but can somebody actually show where it came 
from ("Cuaron said it" is not enough. I'd like to know where and when, and 
to whom) - only then will I take it on board.




From cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 01:37:15 2004
From: cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com (cocaine_nights1980s)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 01:37:15 -0000
Subject: Goblet of Fire Movie
Message-ID: <ca0gsb+peh4@eGroups.com>

Hey,

Ok I just think that I figured it out.
A few weeks ago the people who play the Dursleys were complaining in 
a news report at www.imdb.com that they will not be in Goblet of 
Fire because the filmmakers are gonna start the movie with Harry at 
school. Another thing is that they are sort of filming Goblet of 
Fire back to back with P.O.A. And the movie ends with Harry at 
school, see what I'm getting at? No?

Well here is one more thing, the POA movie felt like it only 
happened within a couple days and the filmmakers on GOF said that 
there will be some changes to the story beginning with the changes 
in the POA movie.

So what I'm saying is this, maybe GOF is gonna start where POA left 
off, like it is going to be the next day after he got the Firebolt. 
So these 2 movies are going to be like The Matrix and Lord of The 
Rings, one story but cut in parts.
Just an inkling, but a terrible one if that is what they are going 
to do.
-

"cocaine_nights1980s" 




From editor at texas.net  Mon Jun  7 01:58:16 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:58:16 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
References: <ca0a4t+s5p9@eGroups.com> <00aa01c44c21$87006bc0$58d17443@perry>
Message-ID: <004b01c44c32$e6b7d6a0$a759aacf@texas.net>

> Anna:
> >>  Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone who wants to
>   know about the Marauders can damn well read the books." None of the
>   Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I have never
>   seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of the
>   information that was in the book - that's why English teachers
>   always tell their students that they can't get away with just
>   watching the movie.
<etc.>

MerrPerr:

>   Amen.  After reading some of the emails before I saw the film, I was
beginning to have my doubts about whether I would like it.  But I saw it
this morning and loved it.  I have decided that if you go to the film and
analyze it to death rather than just sitting back and enjoying it for what
it is, then you miss out on a really good time! <


Excuse me. I did not go to the movie to analyze it. I went to the movie and
watched it. None of my problems with it were "it didn't follow the
book"---most of my problems were "it didn't work well within its own
parameters." What I commented on were things that stuck out to me as I *was*
simply sitting back and attempting to enjoy it for what it was.

What it was, to me, was a noble attempt, not completely successful. That
doesn't mean I went in with guns a-blazin'. It means that for some people,
the movie didn't sing. I don't have to use the book at all to say that.

~Amanda






From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 02:01:20 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 03:01:20 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] noting some more inconsistencies
In-Reply-To: <ea.503e4139.2df3b40a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607025526.009c1100@plum.cream.org>

At 00:40 06/06/04 , patientx3 at aol.com wrote:

<snip>

>Obviously Peter had those clothes when he changed into a man from
>Scabbers, so where did they come from if clothes disappear when an animagus
>transformes? AND we see Sirius transform (off-screen, but nearby), and 
>there's no pile of Azkaban robes anywhere.

That, I agree with. It irritated me no end. Not only is it inconsistent 
with what the movie shows about Animagus transformations, but it leaves 
Peter's clothes there to be discovered, providing evidence (though clearly 
not proof) that there's something to Sirius & Lupin's (and the kids') 
version of what happened.

>That, and what was Peter trying to do with Lupin's wand? It wouldn't make 
>much sense if you needed a want to transform into an  animal, since Sirius 
>does it without a want. I guess they were going for dramatic effect there.

For one thing, he did so in the book. ;-) For another, the movie goes to 
some lengths to indicate that a magical person needs their wand (I'll have 
more to say on this elsewhere). A wizard's first instinct is to make sure 
he has a wand with him, and that makes him a dangerous person. By 
implication, Wormtail is now without a wand and needs to seek a source of 
power elsewhere...





From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 02:32:53 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 22:32:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Goblet of Fire Movie
Message-ID: <1dc.235730a7.2df52dd5@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/6/04 7:29:53 PM, cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com writes:


> A few weeks ago the people who play the Dursleys were complaining in
> a news report at www.imdb.com that they will not be in Goblet of
> Fire because the filmmakers are gonna start the movie with Harry at
> school.
> 

I think I just answered a similiar post on another list - I hope it wasn't 
this one!
Anyway, it wasn't stated in that article that GOF is definitely starting with 
Harry at school. It said, 'either at school or at the Burrow', so we could 
get him at the Burrow and then a few minutes of the World Cup, etc.
I am sure the script is finished since they are filming, but until we hear 
any inside reports, we don't know whether the film will start with the school or 
the Weasley home.
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 02:35:21 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 22:35:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
Message-ID: <15d.36f59535.2df52e69@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/6/04 7:26:27 PM, hp at plum.cream.org writes:


> I do agree with you on that one, though. Incidentally, I've seen that
> statement in a few places now, but can somebody actually show where it came
> from ("Cuaron said it" is not enough. I'd like to know where and when, and
> to whom) - only then will I take it on board.
> 
> 

It's in the current issue of Entertainment Weekly.

"The most provocative deletion for fans: the backstory of the Marauder's Map, 
Harry's magical guide to Hogwarts. The filmmakers believed the details would 
work better in a future film."

Cindy


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




From ekrbdg at msn.com  Mon Jun  7 02:52:32 2004
From: ekrbdg at msn.com (Kimberly)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 22:52:32 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sirius Black Poster and Arthur's Discussion With Harry Scene
References: <c9vj89+gu3g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <017c01c44c3a$7c600c20$47d6f943@hppav>

 and Arthur's Discussion With Harry Scene


> I could not take my eyes off of the poster of Sirius Black mugging
> and screaming in the scene where Arthur is telling Harry not to go
> looking for Sirius, no matter what.  I think it took away from the
> seriousness of that conversation and I was glad when Arthur moved
> Harry away into a darker corner.  That poster was a riot!  I was
> laughing so hard at it, I was almost crying.
>
> "shydi60"

*Kimberly's comment*
I agree, I loved the poster, he was just too funny !      BUT, did it appear
to
anyone else that Arthur kept looking directly AT the camera ?    The first
time
I thought it was my imagination, the second time, I thought, "Is he looking
at
the camera ?" and then by the third time I was pretty positive he indeed was
looking right at the camera.    Did anyone else notice it ?     It was
really
bugging me...!

Kimberly


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.698 / Virus Database: 455 - Release Date: 6/2/2004




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 03:04:33 2004
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <1086567834.1761.12886.m13@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040607030433.2427.qmail@web51704.mail.yahoo.com>

Anna wrote:

Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone
who wants to 
know about the Marauders can damn well read the
books." None of the 
Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I
have never 
seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of
the 
information that was in the book - that's why English
teachers 
always tell their students that they can't get away
with just 
watching the movie.

So what you do is, if you're interested in the movie,
read the book 
too. If you don't care, then you don't read the book
and you haven't 
missed anything important. What's the problem with
that?

Incidentally, I find it comical that people are
second-guessing 
JKR's feelings on PoA. Just because you didn't like
the movie or 
didn't think it had enough "important" information
doesn't mean 
she's wrong. She's the author! Surely she knows better
than we do 
what will be necessary in the future.


ME:

Thank You,Thank You,Thank You!!!
I've been a little amazed (but mostly annoyed) at some
of the very negative posts about PoA, especially those
that second guess JKR. Thanks for expressing exactly
what I'v been feeling.

Love the film or hate it, fine. Everyone is entitled
to their own opinion. Whats been annoying is the 'I'm
right, and everyone else, includung JKR is wrong' tone
to several posts lately.  



Film adaptations of books are, to me, like
translations of literature. Something is inevitabally
changed. Things are lost, other things are gained.
Some translations seem flat, others result in new
works of art.
Lets imagine you have a poem and need to translate it
from, say, Spanish to English. There are a couple of
things that could be done.

One way is to keep the rhyme scheme, line and syllable
count, etc. the same as the original. Meaning may take
a second place,  but the sound and look of the poem
will carry through in this case.

Another way is to go for as literal a translation as
possible. Rhyme scheme, etc. is secondary to capturing
the exact meaning of what was originally written as
accurately as you can.

A third way is to try to capture the spirit and
feeling of the poem as best as possible. Line length
and syllables, exact meaning, etc. may be changed
some, but the translation remains true to how the
original poem feels.

Not think about the Harry Potter films. I would argue
that Chris Columbus used the second method I listed
above. Alfonzo Cuaron used the third. In the case of
these films, Cuaron's translation resulted in a new
work of art with its own identity. Columbus'
translations are pretty good at being translations,
but are not new works of art.

Tyler


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From jeanico at securenet.net  Mon Jun  7 03:28:05 2004
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 03:28:05 -0000
Subject: Question about the crystal ball scene
Message-ID: <ca0nc5+9hr0@eGroups.com>

I just got back from vacation, so didn't have too much time to go 
through all the posts. I saw the film for the second time today (the 
first time was at the actual premiere in New York, which was 
amazing), and I was wondering who's face it is that we see in the 
crystal ball, calling out Harry's name? Anyone recognize who it is?
Thanks!
Nicole
PS: I loved the movie, by the way. So much eye candy! such 
cinematography! and that scene with Harry on Buckbeak... my absolute 
best goosebump moment, that was! I think that I learned the trick to 
loving these HP movies... don't compare the films to the books, 
whatever you do. Just go with an open mind and enjoy the movie for 
what it is. Pure magic and much needed fantasy!      




From nostrebor at runbox.com  Mon Jun  7 03:40:57 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:40:57 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about the crystal ball scene
References: <ca0nc5+9hr0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <0b6a01c44c41$4058e790$735dc043@user7i1hr4si1m>

It's Sirius's face.
Jodi
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jeanico2000" <jeanico at securenet.net>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 11:28 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about the crystal ball scene


> I just got back from vacation, so didn't have too much time to go 
> through all the posts. I saw the film for the second time today (the 
> first time was at the actual premiere in New York, which was 
> amazing), and I was wondering who's face it is that we see in the 
> crystal ball, calling out Harry's name? Anyone recognize who it is?
> Thanks!
> Nicole
> PS: I loved the movie, by the way. So much eye candy! such 
> cinematography! and that scene with Harry on Buckbeak... my absolute 
> best goosebump moment, that was! I think that I learned the trick to 
> loving these HP movies... don't compare the films to the books, 
> whatever you do. Just go with an open mind and enjoy the movie for 
> what it is. Pure magic and much needed fantasy!      
> 



From heidi at blaydz.com  Mon Jun  7 03:43:37 2004
From: heidi at blaydz.com (Heidi)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 03:43:37 -0000
Subject: quick question
Message-ID: <20040607034345.E37D1E0D50@mail02.powweb.com>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-movie/attachments/20040607/30684999/attachment.ksh>

From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun  7 03:46:38 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 03:46:38 -0000
Subject: Observation, not really spoiler
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040607014759.0098c600@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <ca0oeu+r8o0@eGroups.com>

>>>GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:

So what if it's not in keeping with one of the miriad details of the 
books? In any case, it's long been argued in the fandom that the 
wizarding world's complete ignorance of Muggle fashions is 
illogical: Hogwarts has several pupils from Muggle backgrounds (or 
part-Muggle backgrounds) - of the five boys in Harry's dorm, both 
Harry and Dean knew nothing else until they turned up at Hogwarts 
(and Seamus is half-and-half but it seems to me for various reasons -
though this is arguable - he lived mainly in the Muggle world).<<<

Nothing is illogical, per se, because this is a different world, a 
fantasy world, that JKR has created. I mean, it's also illogical 
that someone could "ride" a broom (nevermind the flying part, but 
sitting on a long thin handle without getting a major wedgie or 
injuring some important parts?), but I suspend disbelief because of 
the story. I also suspend disbelief about their wardrobe and just 
take for face value that JKR says people tend to dress differently 
in the wizarding world. Some of the kids may have grown up as 
Muggles, but perhaps once they realize they're wizards, they change 
their attitudes about clothing, or maybe being wizards and witches 
makes them different right off, less interested in the popular 
fashions of the time.

Ultimately my complaint remains the same. I wanted the movie to be 
more faithful to the book. It didn't need things added or changed (I 
was willing to accept minor deletions for time concerns).  I like 
the world JKR created just fine and think a movie created with all 
the details and nuances she created would have been great to see.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 04:06:06 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 04:06:06 -0000
Subject: IMAX Version
Message-ID: <ca0pje+ejqa@eGroups.com>

Don't know if this was brought up yet...too many posts to read.  I 
was told there was something special at the end of the credits - 
only there wasn't.  Saw it again today at the IMAX screen, and the 
end does have Harry saying "Mischief Managed.  Nox" and the lights 
go out.

By the way - if you can see it on th IMAX screen DO!  It is awesome -
 and you can see things so much clearer - and hear them better as 
well.  No arguements about what Sirius said to Lupin...it's crystal 
clear.

New IMAX fan

Kathy




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun  7 05:12:21 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 01:12:21 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] new group
In-Reply-To: <c9dbms+94oj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCE97174.D33%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "linda_gaunt" <linda_gaunt at yahoo.co.uk>

following coments for blue eyed hunks my daughter has started a new
group dedicated to dan and elijah in the actors and actresses
category you can find it at
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/blueeyedhunks

That's fantastic! Thanks for sharing. :-)
bewitchedbyHPandenchantedbyEW



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




From Tasukibeth1 at cs.com  Mon Jun  7 05:12:18 2004
From: Tasukibeth1 at cs.com (Tasukibeth1 at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 01:12:18 EDT
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <1db.23569906.2df55332@cs.com>

I have been on this group for over a year now, and have been looking forward 
to PoA as much as you all have. Quite frankly, I am glad I didn't read these 
reviews before I went. I loved the movie, and was depressed to open my mail and 
read this stuff, which has ranged from intelligently analytical to just plain 
catty.

So for some much-needed contrast, and to speak up for the quiet minority who 
LIKED the movie, I am going to point out things that I enjoyed:

(1) The computer graphics were seamless. The first two movies, especially 
SS/PS, were loaded with seriously crappy CG. The bathroom fight with the troll 
and (shudder) the rogue bludger incident were so badly done that the children 
looked like ragdolls on strings. This movie had  DR & EW battered by the 
whomping willow quite well, and the scene where Harry fell from his broomstick was 
very real to me - I got a bit of vertigo watching him fall. And buckbeak was 
breathtaking. Fabulous.

(2) I was personally stunned by the scene in the park in the beginning of the 
movie as Harry was leaving home. It was, down to the last blade of grass, 
identical to the mental picture I had of the park that played to prominently in 
OoTP. I could just picture Harry in that park, hiding from the Dursleys and 
egging Dudley on for a fight. I know it was unintentional, but it still gave me 
the chills.

(3) I LIKED that the dementors flew. Yeah, it took me by surprise. Yeah, I 
thought it was a little wierd at first. But once I just bought into it, I had no 
problem with it. And the scene where they chased him through the sky was very 
claustrophobic, like being stuck in the ocean surrounded by jellyfish. The 
fact that they menaced him, even in the air, gave a sense of hopelessness - like 
you can't escape them no matter where you are.

(4) I LIKED the stuff that was added purely for the movie. The shrunken head 
and aunt Marge floating over town in the night were FUN and it kicked off the 
show with some giggles. I thought the animal candies were FUN! These are boys, 
for crying out loud, having some laughs together after summer vacation. 
Remember how excited you were to see your friends again when school began? The 
scene was a good example of what young wizards do to goof off and be stupid. It's 
better than Tee-Peeing peoples cars, for goodness sake. 

(4) I'm not sure what was up with the car alarm, but I laughed out loud, 
along with the rest of the sold-out theatre.

(5) I LOVED BUCKBEAK. I loved the bird-of-prey sounds he made, his eyes, his 
beak. He was very frightening to behold - one bite and he looked like he could 
have snapped your arm off! The frightened children were hilareous, and 
Hagrid's obliviousness to their fear was even better. And I don't know if the "King 
of the world" homage was intentional or not, but I don't care, I LOVED IT! It 
exemplified, as someone on this board wrote, Harry's exhilaration of flight. 
For just a second, there was no Sirius black, no Draco, no Dursleys. Just 
flight. It was brilliant.

(6) I liked how this director FINALLY made Hagrid BIIIIIGGGGGG! Did you 
notice? Hagrid was much, MUCH bigger. He actually looked like the half-giant he was 
always supposed to be.

(7) I had no problem with the creative interpretation on Lupin's werewolf. I 
like that he DIDN'T look like a dog; he is NOT a dog, after all! He is 
a....thingy...a monster, a creature. He is not a dog and therefore shouldn't look 
like one.

(8) I don't care if they got a new fat lady. She was a riot!

(9) While the history of the Marauders was left out (one thing that I wasn't 
nuts about), most anyone with a brain in their head can deduce by the 
attitudes of Remus and Lupin that they obviously knew what the map was and what it 
did. I watched the movie with my SO who had not read the books, and when I 
brought it up in the post-movie discussion, he said that he pretty much caught onto 
that right away without being told.

(10) The tap-dancing spiders dream was a scream, and the way Harry handled it 
was hilareous. It was well, placed, too, coming right off of a serious scene. 
The contrast was well done.

(11) I like that the children didn't wear their robes to Hogsmead. Robes = 
uniform. It would be completely illogical for them to wear their uniforms 
outside of school. 

(12) I had no problem with SuperHermione, Remember, she was *written* to be 
that way, much to the schagrin of the HPFGU Book group. Hermione is perfect - 
that's how she was written. Take it up with the author if you don't like it. 
She always says the right thing, does the right thing, shows up at the right 
time. She's Hermione, That's just what she does.

(13) The time-turning was stunning. I loved watching the flight backwards 
through time. Way cool.

(14) And FINALLY, I loved the "flogging the dolphin" reference in the opening 
credits with Harry under the covers. It was ***cute***, people! A little blue 
humor never hurt anyone. The boy is thirteen, for Chrissakes.  

Okay, so that's my 2 pence. And while there were things here and there that I 
did miss, I found that they didn't bother me so badly that I would hate the 
movie because of them. I hope there is an extended-version DVD with more stuff 
in it - I'm all over that.

B


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




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Mon Jun  7 05:23:37 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 05:23:37 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <c9v1ag+j469@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca0u4p+58as@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "persephonegladrags"
<JTallulahmae at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Gary Sapp & Karen J.S." <karen-
> gary at w...> wrote:
> > His name is Ripper and he belongs to Aunt Marge. Read the first
> > chapter of PoA to find out.
> > 
> > karen
> 
> Thank you, Karen.  I've read all the books (twice) and know
> about Ripper. I should have been more specific:  Who PLAYED
> Ripper?  The movie credits list Gary Gero as the animal
> coordinator, but, sadly, the bulldog doesn't have a credit.
> 
> Thanks,
> PG

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I couldn't find anything either but
there is an email for the UK office, maybe they could tell you the
dog's name.

http://www.birdsandanimals.com/contact_us.htm

karen




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 05:27:00 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 01:27:00 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <142.2b5fbd7c.2df556a4@aol.com>

Well, you won't have to dodge any fruit thrown by me ;-) 
I concur with everything you said in the post and thanks for putting it so 
concisely - my brain is rather fried lately ;-)
A few things I want to add - I never laughed so much during a HP movie - the 
humor was dry, well timed and perfectly performed. Even some background sight 
gag type humor had be laughing and believe me, I don't laugh out loud easily 
;) Example - Hagrid taking the whole carriage door off and then just standing 
there wondering what to do with it. I like subtle, dry humor and this was that 
- we aren't supposed to focus on him, there is other action going on, but 
there he is, off to the side of the frame, quietly pondering the door. not doing 
some slapsticky Jim Carrey thing with the door. Loved that sort of thing all 
thru-out the movie. 
Also, I don't think anyone's mentioned the music when Harry first starts his 
Buckbeak ride, while they are still on the ground. I must admit that I am 
notoriously deaf to music while watching movies. Often I buy the soundtrack and 
wonder where the heck all that music was when I had watched the movie ;-)
But that rousing drum beat, sounding almost like an angry tribe getting ready 
for war, was the perfect way to start the heart pumping. I felt like I was on 
the damn hippogriff, my heart pounding along with the music and when he 
finally takes off and the music changes, well...I was almost breathless. And of 
course, as others have said, the cgi work was flawless, incredible.

Anyway, wanted to chime in and agree with you about all the points you 
mentioned. I had been anticipating this movie for so long and was exhilariated when 
I left the theater - only to come home to wade thru quite a few negative 
posts, some bordering on downright nasty. Well, I had to step away from the 
messages for awhile. I wasn't going to let it ruin the joy I felt while watching the 
movie and afterwards.

On another note - watched Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper's review show and 
they both praised it quite highly - citing things like the improved look, 
acting, special effects. Roeper even went so far as to say that even if one hadn't 
read any of the books or seen the first two movies, this movie stands alone as 
a great movie   by itself. 
I was glad to hear them both say, chiefly Ebert, that he hopes the whole cast 
stays- he said that the kids would only be about 19 when the last movie was 
shot. He said he was used to the kids and would be interested to see how they 
mature and how they play the characters all the way through. Yea ;-)

Cindy


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




From anita_sathe at persistent.co.in  Mon Jun  7 05:10:21 2004
From: anita_sathe at persistent.co.in (lumos28)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 05:10:21 -0000
Subject: A question about dementors
In-Reply-To: <ca0a4t+s5p9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca0tbt+n3n6@eGroups.com>


Hi all,

Its been a while since I read the books. But something's been 
bothering me like hell. Do the dementors really SOAR across the sky 
as it has been shown in the movie? I always thought they used to 
glide...

Sorry if this is a repeat post.


Thanks,
Anita





From djs504 at lycos.com  Mon Jun  7 05:45:01 2004
From: djs504 at lycos.com (DEBRA JO SMITH)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:45:01 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crystall Ball Scene
Message-ID: <FFCEHDHKHLPLIMAA@mailcity.com>

The face in the crystal ball is Sirius Black. At least that is who it looked like to me.

Debby

From: "jeanico2000" <jeanico at securenet.net>
Who's face it is that we see in the crystal ball, calling out Harry's name? Anyone recognize who it is?
Thanks!
Nicole


____________________________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10



From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 07:49:14 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 07:49:14 -0000
Subject: noting some more inconsistencies
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040607025526.009c1100@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <ca16lq+mefq@eGroups.com>


[me, previously]:
>>That, and what was Peter trying to do with Lupin's wand? It 
wouldn't make much sense if you needed a want to transform into an 
animal, since Sirius does it without a want. I guess they were going 
for dramatic effect there.<<

GulPlum responded:

>>For one thing, he did so in the book. ;-) For another, the movie 
goes to some lengths to indicate that a magical person needs their 
wand (I'll have more to say on this elsewhere). A wizard's first 
instinct is to make sure he has a wand with him, and that makes him a 
dangerous person. By implication, Wormtail is now without a wand and 
needs to seek a source of power elsewhere...<<

::embarrassed look:: I guess he does do that in the book...but he was 
*chained* to Ron at that point, so I guess it made more sense there. 
Maybe it just didn't visually work for me, he seemed to be reaching 
for the wand and pointing it at himself, instead of just running away 
once he had his chance. BUT, thank you for reminding me that he did 
that in the book, I was worried they were trying to make it look like 
he needed a wand to transform, which would have been just silly.


-Rebecca





From dizymisslizzy at attbi.com  Mon Jun  7 06:53:06 2004
From: dizymisslizzy at attbi.com (Liz Martin)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 06:53:06 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <142.2b5fbd7c.2df556a4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca13ci+tab2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> Well, you won't have to dodge any fruit thrown by me ;-) 
> I concur with everything you said in the post and thanks for putting
it so 
> concisely - my brain is rather fried lately ;-)
> A few things I want to add - I never laughed so much during a HP
movie - the 
> humor was dry, well timed and perfectly performed. Even some
background sight 
> gag type humor had be laughing and believe me, I don't laugh out
loud easily 
> ;) Example - Hagrid taking the whole carriage door off and then just
standing 
> there wondering what to do with it. I like subtle, dry humor and
this was that 
> - we aren't supposed to focus on him, there is other action going
on, but 
> there he is, off to the side of the frame, quietly pondering the
door. not doing 
> some slapsticky Jim Carrey thing with the door. Loved that sort of
thing all 
> thru-out the movie. 
> Also, I don't think anyone's mentioned the music when Harry first
starts his 
> Buckbeak ride, while they are still on the ground. I must admit that
I am 
> notoriously deaf to music while watching movies. Often I buy the
soundtrack and 
> wonder where the heck all that music was when I had watched the
movie ;-)
> But that rousing drum beat, sounding almost like an angry tribe
getting ready 
> for war, was the perfect way to start the heart pumping. I felt like
I was on 
> the damn hippogriff, my heart pounding along with the music and when he 
> finally takes off and the music changes, well...I was almost
breathless. And of 
> course, as others have said, the cgi work was flawless, incredible.
> 
> Anyway, wanted to chime in and agree with you about all the points you 
> mentioned. I had been anticipating this movie for so long and was
exhilariated when 
> I left the theater - only to come home to wade thru quite a few
negative 
> posts, some bordering on downright nasty. Well, I had to step away
from the 
> messages for awhile. I wasn't going to let it ruin the joy I felt
while watching the 
> movie and afterwards.
> 
> On another note - watched Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper's review
show and 
> they both praised it quite highly - citing things like the improved
look, 
> acting, special effects. Roeper even went so far as to say that even
if one hadn't 
> read any of the books or seen the first two movies, this movie
stands alone as 
> a great movie   by itself. 
> I was glad to hear them both say, chiefly Ebert, that he hopes the
whole cast 
> stays- he said that the kids would only be about 19 when the last
movie was 
> shot. He said he was used to the kids and would be interested to see
how they 
> mature and how they play the characters all the way through. Yea ;-)
> 
> Cindy
> 
I agree I thought the actors were much more at ease with their
character reaction to things. I thought it was interesting how Ron was
acting toward Hermione about his leg, very similar to how Draco was
treating his arm injury fake or not. They were both over dramatizing
about what was or could happend to their injured limb. 

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





From bethz1 at rcn.com  Mon Jun  7 11:16:13 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:16:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JK Rowling's favorite
References: <c9vca5+t8iq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000601c44c80$d7f57890$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "katroshka" <katroshka at hotmail.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 11:13 AM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] JK Rowling's favorite


> I was just visiting JK Rowling's official website, and she said that
> POA is her favorite of the movies. Mine, too, actually!

After viewing it a second time, it is also my favorite.  I can't wait to see
it in the movies again; we saw SS 5 times and COS 3 times, so I'm hoping to
see this one more than 5 times, but I'll have to wait and see if anyone else
is game for that.  :-)

Oh, and my brother (who has never read the books) saw POA for the first time
last night and already agrees that it is the best of the three.  He said it
was a very good movie.

Beth





From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 11:57:08 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 11:57:08 -0000
Subject: 2nd Viewing Review of PoA (long)
Message-ID: <ca1l6k+fqng@eGroups.com>

After seeing the movie for the second time today I have come to the 
conclusion that you MUST SEE THE MOVIE TWICE before you decide you 
dislike the movie.  I'm going to skip around a bit, so forgive the 
rambling.  I just don't want to forget anything I want to say about 
the movie so I'm writing it as I think of it.

  When I saw the movie on Friday, I came away from the theater a 
little bit dispirited.  It was mostly because of the huge changes in 
the look of Hogwarts.  I had a tough time truly concentrating on the 
movie when I was mentally going "...but, Hagrid's Hut doesn't look 
like that...how'd Ron and Harry EVER drag their trunks up to 
Hogwarts in CoS if the whomping willow was THAT far away from the 
castle?" etc., etc..  
   But the second viewing on Sunday was so much more enjoyable that 
it changed my view of the movie in several ways.  First, I stopped 
caring about the changes in scenery and just enjoyed the movie.  
Second, I was able to appreciate the performances of the main actors 
more.  And third, I was able to really tune into the dialog in 
important scenes and realize that not quite as much detail was left 
out, especially in the shrieking shack scene, as I had originally 
thought.  
   To me, the overall look of the film reflected Harry's darkening 
mood - much darker than year 1 or year 2.  There are moments of 
happiness for Harry in this movie (and the book), to be sure, but 
Harry goes through an emotional wringer throughout this year at 
Hogwarts.  If you look at the book (which I'm in the midst of re-
reading yet again), Harry rides a rollercoaster of emotion 
throughout the school year.  He jumps from anger to fear to sadness 
to happiness to embarassment and back again faster than the blink of 
an eye - not just once but in several cycles throughout the year.   
   Let's face it, Harry's pysche takes a beating and I saw that 
expressed in the film by the shabbier and less 'golden' appearance 
of everything to do with the wizarding world.  The color scheme was 
bleaker, with rain more often and more prominent than in previous 
films.  The Knight Bus was undoubtedly shabby looking inside, 
chandelier or not.  Hogwarts was rockier, hillier and looked much 
older and in crumbling condition than in the two earlier movies.  
The great hall looked smaller to us because it would look less 
grandiose to Harry, whose beginning to fully understand that the 
Wizarding World has serious problems of it's own.  And Harry's mood 
is gloomy under the surface on many occasions because he is hurting 
badly.  He misses his parents deeply because as he becomes a 
teenager, he realizes how much he needs them.  Harry truly values 
his two best friends as they are the biggest reason he loves being 
at Hogwarts, and to hear that his parents' best friend betrayed them 
to their deaths at the hand of Voldemort shakes him up badly.  His 
running away from The Leaky Cauldron and crying on the rock was a 
believable behavior to me and I thought Daniel Radcliffe's 
performance of it was excellent.  His anger and hatred of this false 
friend that killed his parents was spot on for Harry's deepening 
emotional turmoil over the death of his parents.      
   Several scenes in the movie were downright invigorating.  Harry's 
ride on Buckbeak was exciting and, IMO, an example of one of Harry's 
all-to-brief highs in a year full of so many low points.  Another 
such scene was where Harry ran after the werewolf!Lupin and Sirius; 
exciting for us and very brave...and very stupid...of Harry, but it 
is just SO Harry in behavior.  
   The attack on Harry and Sirius by the Dementors at the lake was 
thrilling...and quite frightening as it should be.  The way the 
scene was played out with the Dementors taking turns in sucking the 
life out of each of them was truly horrifying.  The way Harry's POV 
on both sides of the lake were filmed were also very well done.  
Harry's sudden realization that he himself had cast the Patronus to 
save his past self and Sirius could be seen in Dan Radcliffe's face -
 a great performance!  And Emma Watson's facial reaction and 
comments while she watched Harry and Sirius being attacked was also 
very well done.  I was very pleased and touched by this scene, even 
more so on the second viewing.    
   Some of the scenes that were considered throwaway I considered a 
fleshing out of important, previously missing details in earlier 
movies.  Such as the scene with the animal-sound candies in Harry's 
dorm room.  That was a great way to show Harry and Ron familiarly 
interacting with other students beyond just the trio.  Harry's 
talking back to Snape by asking Snape to lower his wand in the 
hallway, refuting his father's strutting behavior, and the way he 
read the insults of Snape off the Marauder's Map finally showed some 
of that backbone and feistiness evident with his interactions with 
Snape in the books.  Harry is not a doormat and is not actually 
afraid of Snape and this scene displays those qualities quite well.  
    As for the Shrieking Shack scene...it was much better on the 
second viewing.  To be honest, there is a lot of movement during the 
scene that makes it hard to concentrate on exactly what is being 
said by Lupin and Black.  I ignored the movement of the shack itself 
and Pettigrew's scrambling to conentrate on the dialog the second 
time.  A lot of the details of Pettigrew's betrayal and Black's 
closeness to Lily and James is revealed.  Black does say that he 
would have died rather than deliver the Potters to Voldemort.  And 
several other shorthand clues are in the scene that reveal how close 
Lupin, Black and James must have been.  Lupin's and Black's 
brotherly hug revealed their closeness, along with Snape's 
comment "an old married couple".  Lupin's efforts to stop Black from 
from saying things to incite Snape to kill him and Lupin's quick 
abandonement of those efforts definitely imply that Lupin knows 
Black and Snape well enough to know that their animosity toward each 
other can't be settled reasonably with conversation.  The body 
language of Snape, Black, Lupin and Pettigrew implied an intense 
familiarity with each other.  Harry is very observant and could read 
that body language quite easily - he read Pettigrew's quite easily 
in the book.  I think the director felt the audience could read it 
as well.  Snape's comment about revenge and Black's insult of 
Snape's deduction skills imply a lengthy past history.  While the 
nitty-gritty details weren't given, we know from what is in the 
scene that their history (and bad blood) with each other is quite 
deep yet still fresh in their minds.  Much was cut, but so much is 
still in there, just not spelled out so obviously with lengthy 
dialog.  
   I LOVED the way the Maraurder's Map was potrayed in the movie!  
It seemed so perfect.  I stayed through the end credits twice and 
really looked at the Marauder's Map.  The walls of the castle are 
actually written latin words, which to me ARE the written-out spells 
that the marauders wrote to make the map work.  And the way it 
folded up and out with different flaps and little paper staircases 
for different floors was a great way to turn a 2-D piece-of-paper 
into a realistic 3-D magical item.  
   I admit I didn't love the werewolf, as I found it a quite bizarre 
looking thing that looked nothing like a wolf.  But, since Sirius 
was portrayed as looking like a big black wolf-dog (not like the 
enormous black Lab I'd imagined while reading the books), a fight 
between two similar looking wolves would have been hard to follow 
for many movie-goers.  It did the job just fine nonetheless as there 
was nothing remotely cuddly about this werewolf.  Harry's comment 
about "Lupin's having a really rough night." was perfectly placed as 
it reminded everyone that that terrifying creature is actually a 
very kindly man most of the time.   
     Who wouldn't be happy with all the touchy-feely scenes amongst 
the trio?  Harry leans on Herimone, who leans on Ron when they think 
Buckbeak's been killed (reportedly an homage to Curaon's previous 
movie, "Y tu mam? tambi?n".)  Harry shields Hermione from the 
werewolf when he believes they're about to be killed in the forest.  
Hermione tends to Ron's leg (while he plays it up to get her 
attention and sympathy) outside the whomping willow.  Ron and 
Hermione hold hands during a frightful moment when they fear for 
Harry as he approaches Buckbeak.  Hermione and Harry hold hands 
while they run through the forest on the way to save Sirius (and his 
past self) from the Dementors.  Hermione grabs onto and steps in 
front of Harry after Harry steps in front of Ron in the Shrieking 
Shack.  These scenes showing the closeness, physical and emotional, 
of the trio were a nice touch and, for me, explained and emphasized 
Harry's deep feeling of anger toward the close friend that had 
betrayed his parents.  I also LOVED Ron's reaction when Hermione 
asked "Would you like to move a bit closer?" and Ron at first 
thought she meant move closer to each other instead of to the 
Shrieking Shack.  It was priceless and emphasized Ron's increasing 
crush on Hermione and how befuddled he'd actually be if they both 
acknowledged their crushes and, goodness forbid!, acted upon it.  A 
great foreshadowing to Ron's inept handling of Hermione's feelings 
with regards to the Yuletide Ball in GoF.  I must also add it was a 
very nice change from the physical remoteness between the characters 
in previous movies.  Harry only touching Ginny's hand inside the 
Chamber of Secrets instead of shaking her and then lifting her up to 
lean on his shoulder like in the book is the most glaring example I 
can think of.  
   The new Dumbledore was not Richard Harris, that's true, but I 
though Gambon did a great job with the part.  His Dumbledore is 
sprightly and smart with a bit of an unexpected edge, like I 
imagined the Dumbledore in the books.  By the next movie, I know I 
will like this new Dumbledore even more.
   Emma Thompson as Trelawney did a great job with a diffult part.  
Trelawney is a fraud, but she had to be presented as though she's 
just a bit overeager in her efforts to succeed at everyday 
divination so that everyone in the audience would not hate her 
instantly.  I think Thompson achieved that balance nicely.  I do 
have a quibble in that the prophecy was not word for word from the 
book.  It really should have been, with no excuses being acceptable, 
IMO.  Daniel Radcliffe's reaction to the prophecy was very well done 
as well - very close to Harry's reaction in the book.  As for why 
they cut Harry telling Dumbledore about it later, we may find out in 
a future movie, I hope.   
   I did think that Malfoy was portrayed as too much of wimp in this 
movie.  Granted, he did back away from Hermione's wand in the book, 
but he did not back down from her slap, nor was he crying as he 
left.  The fact they substituted a punch (with his heading hitting 
the stone behind him for extra punishment) was an interesting 
choice, but I felt it was overdoing it.  Just a slap first with 
Hermione then pulling her wand out like in the book would have been 
the better choice, in my opinion.  Malfoy is a git, but if he's 
reduced to a cowardly, quivering mass too easily, it takes away from 
Harry's triumphs over him in later movies.  That said, Malfoy's 
reaction to the invisible!Harry's attacks on Malfoy and his cronies 
at the Shrieking Shack was very funny, even without the accidental 
exposure of Harry's floating head as in the book. 
   Other things I liked was the whomping willow with attitude.  It 
doesn't like birds, dead leaves, melting snow, people...or anything 
actually.  A great protective device for a hidden tunnel, for sure.  
I also liked the larger Hagrid - he looks more like a part giant in 
this movie.  And I liked the rich, moving backgrounds in nearly 
every scene, flying birds/bats, detailed moving paintings, very 
active ghosts, magic in action everywhere - and all of it almost 
completely ignored by the characters because it's part of their 
everyday world.  I also liked the time-turner sequence with the 
blurred images of past events whizzing around Harry and Hermione in 
the infirmary.  And Dumbledore's last line "Did what?  Goodnight!" 
is just priceless!  Exactly like the Dumbledore described in the 
books, IMO.  Buckbeak was rendered terrifically in the movie - for 
an all CGI creature it looked amazingly real!  Buckbeak was an 
endearing character in his own right, which was an unexpected 
treat.  
   There were some things I didn't like, though, which I must 
mention.  Where was the sneakascope?  Harry has it in his hand as he 
goes up the stairs just before the Fat Lady's painting is discovered 
slashed.  The sneakascope is pictured and named in a deluxe sticker 
book tied to the movie, but not explained/shown in the movie.  Where 
were the additional arguments between Ron and Hermione about 
Crookshanks and Scabbers?  I know a scene with Hermione in pigtails 
and pjs and Ron in a sleepshirt arguing over the cat and the rat was 
filmed in the Gryffindor common room, but it was not in the movie.  
Where was the Quidditch Cup?  That same sticker book has a Quidditch 
Cup pictured (not drawn, but PHOTOGRAPHED and described), but no 
sign of it, not even a passing mention, in the movie.  Perhaps these 
are deleted scenes on the DVD?  One can only hope.   
    I wish the scene with Sirius attacking Ron's bed in the dorm 
room was also included, as it was quite startling in the book and 
reinforced the characters' (and the reader's) view of Black as 
guilty of the crimes for which he was imprisoned.  At the same time 
it also presented the first flaw in the story of Black's crimes 
because if he was really a lunatic murderer out to kill Harry why 
didn't he just kill Ron, then kill Harry and whoever else stood in 
his way?   
    I also wished that Harry had told Stan Shunpike his name was 
Neville Longbottom, like in the book.  Another part I missed was the 
evidence of Hermione's increasing stress from her over-the-top 
school work.  In the book, Hermione was humbled and made human by 
her biting off more than she could chew, like everyone has done at 
least once in their lives.  
    As for the Firebolt's introduction at the end of the 
movie....I'm divided about it.  I can understand WHY they did that, 
I really can as it was unimportant to the main story revolving 
around Black, Lupin, Harry and his parents, but still...in the book, 
it was a joyful moment for Harry followed quickly by anger, 
resentment and sadness when it was confiscated.  And I liked the 
mystery surrounding who had sent him the Firebolt in the book, 
whereas in the movie, Harry knows right away who'd sent it to him.  
The Firebolt had to be in the movie because it's important for the 
fourth movie, so it was tacked on at the end.  Ultimately, I guess 
all I can really say is that at least it's IN the movie.   
    All in all I liked the movie very much.  It had verve and 
movement that fit in nicely with the amped up pacing.  It was 
different from the book, but I can accept it as a unique 
interpretation of PoA that stays true to the spirit of the book.  In 
time, after multiple viewings, I'll probably find even more hidden 
treasures (and hidden annoyances) like in the other movies, but it 
will always be a movie I'll watch over and over again with 
pleasure.    

Diana L.
dianasdolls
      
      




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 13:14:24 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 13:14:24 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA
Message-ID: <ca1png+59um@eGroups.com>

As I was watching PoA the second time, I paid special attention to 
anything that might be a possible foreshadowing of future events in 
book 6.  Most are probably not important, but as we won't know which 
are and which aren't until the release of book 6...so here they are 
in no particular order:

Foreshadowing?

1. Dumbledore's line to Snape about letting Harry sleep in the Great 
Hall.  He says something like "Let him sleep and dream for he can 
build his own world in his dreams - he can swim the deepest ocean or 
soar over the highest cloud."  That's not word for word, but close. 

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could it foreshadow a mental war that 
Harry wages with Voldemort in his very dreams?  We know dreams have 
been very important for Harry because he's been having actual mental 
contact with Voldemort through his dreams for years.  Could Harry 
possibly strike a real blow against Voldemort using just his dreams? 

2. Ron's line "I'm not going back up there!" to a rather surprised 
(hurt?) Harry when Harry proposes they take Trelawney's crystal ball 
(that Hermione knocked down the stairs) back to her.

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could Ron inadvertently betray Harry by 
not being the backup he needs at a critical moment?  Could Ron 
refuse to revisit a place that Harry then visits alone resulting in 
a horrible injury/experience for Harry that Ron then feels guilty 
for forever?  Could this signal a separation in 
friendship/closeness/physical proximity between Ron and Harry for a 
large part of book 6?  

3. The framing of Harry alone on the left side of Hagrid and Ron and 
Hermione together on the right of Hagrid as Hagrid throws stones 
into the lake while discussing Buckbeak's sentence of death. 

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could Harry be on his own for most of 
book 6 due to a break/argument/physical separation from both 
Hermione and Ron?  Could Ron and Hermione's growing attaction to 
each other make Harry feel left out and excluded from their 
friendship?  Could Ron and Hermione getting together as a couple 
make Harry feel hopelessly alone and separate from everyone because 
he has no girlfriend, no parents and no godfather?  

4. The arrangement of Sirius and Harry as they lay on the ground by 
the lake after the dementor's attack on them has ended and after 
Harry faints.  They are lying in exactly the same position, head 
slightly to one side, legs bent, arms out, only they are turned 180 
degrees from each other.  

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could this be a way to show that Harry 
and Sirius are similar and await a similar fate, such as Harry going 
to Azkaban or being accused of a murder?  Could this be a way to 
show that Harry and Sirius are like yin and yang, two halves of a 
whole, complimentary, but different, wherein Harry, at a similar 
crucial moment, makes a different choice than Sirius because he knew 
Sirius had made the wrong choice the first time?  Or will Harry make 
the same choice because of the similar poses?  Maybe it's just great 
cinematograhy.  :)

5. Trelawney's line to Ron "Your aura's pulsing, my dear.  Are you 
in the beyond?" as Ron was trying to read Harry's tea leaves.

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could Ron be a seer and Trelawney saw 
this gift in his aura [as several posters have already speculated]? 
Could Ron visit the beyond, meaning does he briefly die and come 
back?  Or could he die and not come back. (I hope not for Harry's 
sake.)  Could Ron's pulsing aura be a sign of an important, yet 
still undisclosed, role he must play in helping Harry defeat 
Voldemort?    

6.  Lupin's comments about Lily's kindness and ability to see the 
good in people, no matter what was on the outside, while talking to 
Harry on the covered bridge.  And Lupin's comments about Lily being 
an exceptional witch while also commenting that James had a penchant 
for trouble.  Also, Lupin's comments about Harry giving James a run 
for his money [as an excellent wizard] right after Harry fights the 
boggart dementor.

What it *might* foreshadow:  Many think this indicates that Lupin 
was in love with Lily, and that's a possiblity.  But I have some 
more ideas.  Could it mean that Lily saw past JAMES' flaws, because 
Harry finds out some very unpleasant things about his dad in book 
6?  We've already seen a hint of this in Snape's memory of James in 
book 5.  Could the comments about Lily and James being 
exceptional/great wizards be a build up to some previously unknown 
skill/gift that Harry has that makes the difference in the battle 
with Voldemort?  Could Lupin's comments about Harry being as least 
as good as or possibly better than his dad indicate Harry making a 
different choice than his dad made at a crucial moment that changes 
Harry's fate?  

7.  Malfoy's comment of "I'll get that jumped-up mudblood 
Granger..." as he runs away after Hermione punched in the face.  

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could this indicate that Malfoy 
greviously injures or harms Hermione in some way in book 6?  Could 
it indicate that Malfoy attempts revenge on Hermione but it rebounds 
onto himself in a horrible way?  Could Malfoy's attempt at revenge 
against Hermione end up rebounding on Ron, Harry, Neville or some 
other character by mistake?

8.  Harry's exuse to Snape that he was 'sleepwalking' in the hallway 
when Snape caught him with the Marauder's Map.

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could this throwaway line indicate that 
Harry does some real sleepwalking in book 6?  Perhaps some 
sleepwalking while Harry's being controlled by Voldemort?  

9.  Sirius Blacks comments to Harry right before he escapes on 
Buckbeak.  Mainly his statement that the people Harry loves will 
always be "right here" in Harry's heart.

What it *might* foreshadow:  This definitely foreshadows the death 
of Sirius in book 5 and Harry's subsequent realization [with Luna 
Lovegood's insight] that Sirius will always be there for him, only 
just out of sight, but never out of mind and heart.  As for book 6 
foreshadowing, it's been speculated on the main list that Harry's 
ability to love and be loved by others will ultimately defeat 
Voldemort.  I see no reason to disagree with that theory.  

10.  Ron's comments to Hermione beside the whomping willow about how 
his leg might need to be "chopped" because of the bite injury 
inflicted by dog!Sirius.  

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could Ron lose a leg in book 6?  Could 
Ron losing a leg be the only way Harry regains his position as 
Gryffindor seeker?  [just kidding]  :)

11.  The blatant emphasis on Harry's eyes resembling Lily's eyes as 
pointed out by both Lupin and Sirius.  Not a new foreshadowing, by 
any means, but more emphasized in this movie than ever before.

What it *might* foreshadow:  Could Harry's eyes indicate that Harry, 
while outwardly appearing to be like his dad (overall resemblence, 
knack for getting into trouble, skill at Quidditch, etc.), is 
actually much more like his mother.  And that being like his mother 
more than his father saves him from Voldemort or some other villian 
in book 6?  Is there something significant about Lily's eyes with 
regards to performing magic that has yet to be explained, but 
ultimately means that Harry has a weakness/strength because of those 
eyes.  Could Harry having his mother's eyes mean that someone we've 
previously not met steps forward in book 6 to claim him as a 
relative only because this person recognizes Lily's eyes?  This 
seems unlikely as James and Lily were well known after Harry 
Potter's unexpected defeat of Voldemort the night Lily and James 
died, but you never know - the new person could be a muggle 
unfamiliar with Harry Potter's fame in the Wizarding World.  Though 
Petunia and Dumbledore would have known about them for sure, which 
makes the last speculation very unlikely.   

If I think of more, I'll put them in another post.  Speculate away!

Diana L.
dianasdolls





From jjpandy at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 12:59:07 2004
From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 12:59:07 -0000
Subject: I liked the movie too (reasons why)
Message-ID: <ca1oqr+p7cb@eGroups.com>

First-time poster here (I am a frequent lurker, occasional poster on 
HPforGrownups). 

So glad to read some recent messages about people LIKING the movie.  
I loved many of the changes.  
Students out of uniform -  If you recall, the kids didn't wear their 
uniforms at the end of SS (Hermione in a sweater and skirt combo)and 
to me that detail jumped out in the SS movie because they had been in 
their uniforms most of the movie until then.  PoA was more 
realistically done - kids don't wear their uniforms during their free 
time, but they did wear them during school hours.
Real dorm life - hanging out with your friends and having fun - that 
is what school is all about.  Glad to see Harry having fun at school.
More outdoor scenes - loved it and the whomping willow made me laugh -
 it had a personality!  And the audience roared when the poor bird 
became an explosion of feathers!
The closeness of friends!  Harry, Ron, and Hermione are very real 
teenagers in the movie.
I am so glad the twins were still the ones to give the map to Harry.  
I missed them in the other 2 movies!
Only 2 things I really wished were in the movie: 1) some revelation 
that Lupin was Moony (having read the book so much, I don't know how 
easy it is to figure out) and 2) I really missed Snape's temper 
tantrum when Sirius' escape at the end is discovered!

JJPandy





From jmmears at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 14:32:52 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:32:52 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <1db.23569906.2df55332@cs.com>
Message-ID: <ca1uak+mi6k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Tasukibeth1 at c... wrote:
> I have been on this group for over a year now, and have been 
looking forward 
> to PoA as much as you all have. Quite frankly, I am glad I didn't 
read these 
> reviews before I went. I loved the movie, and was depressed to 
open my mail and 
> read this stuff, which has ranged from intelligently analytical to 
just plain 
> catty.
 
Well, if you've been on this group for over a year you surely didn't 
expect everyone to agree on the movie, did you <g>?  It would be 
awfully boring (IMO) if we did, and this is actually a discussion 
group so there wouldn't be much to discuss if everyone were limited 
to squeeing about how much they simply loved *everything*.  In 
fairness, I don't think I've seen anyone be just plain "catty" and 
even the most critical reviewers seemed to agree on things like how 
well Buckbeak was done, and the wonderful scene with the boys eating 
sweets in Gryffindor Tower.  There's really no need to feel 
depressed.

Tasukibeth1 wrote:
 
> (7) I had no problem with the creative interpretation on Lupin's 
werewolf. I 
> like that he DIDN'T look like a dog; he is NOT a dog, after all! 
He is 
> a....thingy...a monster, a creature. He is not a dog and therefore 
shouldn't look 
> like one.


That's perfectly true.  However, since the scene where Snape assigns 
an essay on werewolves with particular emphasis on How To Identify a 
werewolf, it was a bit silly to have a werewolf that couldn't 
possibly be confused with a wolf or a dog.  Requiring that the film 
maintain it's own internal logic doesn't seem unreasonably picky to 
me.



Tasukibeth: 

> (12) I had no problem with SuperHermione, Remember, she was 
*written* to be 
> that way, much to the schagrin of the HPFGU Book group. Hermione 
is perfect - 
> that's how she was written. Take it up with the author if you 
don't like it. 
> She always says the right thing, does the right thing, shows up at 
the right 
> time. She's Hermione, That's just what she does.


I have to disagree with your statement that Hermione was "written" 
to be perfect in POA.  I purposely avoided re-reading PoA during the 
lead up to the movie, because I didn't want to be bothered with a 
lot of nit-picky changes in the book details popping up while I 
watched it, and I wanted to enjoy the film on it's own merits.  The 
problem is that POA movie Hermione is so utterly different from PoA 
book Hermione, and that impression is unescapable no matter how long 
ago you read the book.  Hermione spends almost the entire book on 
the verge on a nervous breakdown due to her timeturner-aided, 
overwhelming schedule.  She alienates classmates, misses classes, 
can't fight her boggart during the final exam, and is estranged from 
Harry and Ron for several weeks during the term (Firebolt and 
cat/rat fight).  Her heightened stress level was key to the scene 
when she smacked/punched Malfoy.  She's quite imperfect in the book.

Movie PoA Hermione is beautiful, handles everything with aplomb, is 
smarter, stronger and more agile than Harry.  It's fine to enjoy 
this alternate version of her, but she bears almost no resemblence 
to canon Hermione and I don't think it's unfair that some fans have 
a problem with this.


Jo S.





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Jun  7 14:37:35 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:37:35 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I liked the movie too (reasons why)
In-Reply-To: <ca1oqr+p7cb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40C50A4F.30506.113A74E@localhost>

On 7 Jun 2004 at 12:59, jjpandy wrote:

> So glad to read some recent messages about people LIKING the movie.  
> I loved many of the changes.  
> Students out of uniform -  If you recall, the kids didn't wear their 
> uniforms at the end of SS (Hermione in a sweater and skirt combo)and 
> to me that detail jumped out in the SS movie because they had been in 
> their uniforms most of the movie until then.  PoA was more 
> realistically done - kids don't wear their uniforms during their free 
> time, but they did wear them during school hours.

Well, the thing is - at some schools, some boarding schools, kids 
*do* wear their uniforms during a lot of their free time - and the 
more traditional the school the more likely this is. Hogwarts has 
always struck me as a very traditional place.

The kids not wearing the uniforms outside school hours isn't a huge 
problem for me personally - but it's not unrealistic for them to 
wear out of those times - I've got nothing against the change, but 
I don't think this is inherently more realistic.

I haven't seen PoA yet, because it's not out here until Thursday - 
but what I've seen in shorts and previews, my problems with the 
uniforms are not so much that I don't like them - I do. Nor is it 
with the fact that they don't always wear them. It's that the 
uniforms have changed - not incredibly, but noticeably. This is the 
third movie in a series and I would have preferred it to remain 
fairly visually consistent with the first two films. Schools - 
especially traditional schools - don't change their uniforms that 
often (the school I attended hasn't made a major change in a 
century now). One change I don't *really* have a problem with, 
because that could happen - but I now worry that every future 
director will feel they have carte blanche to make any changes they 
like - and a different uniform (even subtly different) every year 
would get annoying.

Something I think many fans may be unfamiliar with - especially 
American fans - is that Britain has a very long and very large 
tradition of 'school stories'. Stories set in boarding schools 
mostly. These school stories form a massive literary genre with its 
own conventions, and JKR draws on these conventions heavily in 
writing her books - Hogwarts has a lot of influence from the 
schools in these stories.

And quite a lot of fans in Britain and the Commonwealth are 
familiar with these stories - probably not so much children, but 
people in their late twenties or older - many of them will know at 
least some of these stories. And for quite a number of these adult 
fans part of the reason Harry Potter appeals to them is because it 
*does* follow those conventions, it does fit into that genre.

The first two films, for all their faults, also fitted into the 
genre pretty well - the uniforms, the way the classrooms look, etc. 
>From what I've seen of PoA (and I'm reserving final judgement on 
this until Thursday when I see it), I'm relly not sure it's 
followed those conventions as well - and I think that's largely 
down to the director. His background means he's not likely to be 
that familiar with the genre, if at all, and he won't understand 
why certain things might be important to some people and so he 
makes decisions that they don't like that much.

I'm not saying he should have stuck slavishly to the genre - but I 
think quite a few fans aren't even aware that the genre exists, and 
if they don't know that, some of the reasons some people don't like 
the film may not be that intelligible, because people won't 
understand why seemingly irrelevant details such as a uniform and 
clothing *matter* to some people. It matters to some of us because 
part of the reason Harry Potter appealed to some of us was because 
it is a 'traditional British school story' at its core. It has a 
lot more to it as well - but for those of us who grew up reading 
the hundreds of books written in that style it's very much there.

For me, part of the reason Harry Potter appealed to me when I first 
encountered it was because Harry's joy at discovering Hogwarts was 
so familiar to me, based on my own experiences winding up at a 
school which was in the very traditional British model at 13, after 
years of reading about such schools. Those feelings - of the type 
of school Hogwarts is portayed as being matter to me. And the first 
two movies really did do quite a good job of showing that 
resonance. I'm just not sure that PoA will from what I've seen so 
far. It may be a better film in so many other ways - but if it 
doesn't have that, it's not the same for me, personally.

And strange as it may seem to you - issues like the kids not 
wearing their uniforms outside of school hours matter - because in 
those books, in the books that belong to that genre, in the vast 
majority of cases, the kids *do* wear their uniforms outside school 
hours. That's a feature of the genre - it's not universal but it is 
commonplace.

So on one level, that does matter to me.

I don't expect everybody to agree - but I do hope that people can 
be at least aware of the genre of schools stories and the influence 
it has on some people's perceptions here.

The one bright spot for me - the ray of hope I suppose - is that 
JKR is very obviously aware of the genre in her writing, and knows 
it's "rules" and chose to use them. And she likes this film - so 
that makes me hope it won't be as bad as I fear.

It's not that I'm going to hate the film - I very much doubt I 
will. From what I've heard, I think I'm likely to agree with far 
more of the new decisions than I disagree with. But this is a real 
issue - and I just think many fans don't understand why it is - 
especially, as I say, the American fans, who are much less likely 
to have had any real exposure to this genre (and younger fans, even 
in the UK and the Commonwealth aren't that likely to have it 
either).


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 ExSlytherin at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 14:57:00 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:57:00 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Poster and Arthur's Discussion With Harry Scene
In-Reply-To: <017c01c44c3a$7c600c20$47d6f943@hppav>
Message-ID: <ca1vns+aaa4@eGroups.com>

> *Kimberly's comment*
> I agree, I loved the poster, he was just too funny !      BUT, did 
it appear to anyone else that Arthur kept looking directly AT the 
camera ?    The first time I thought it was my imagination, the 
second time, I thought, "Is he looking at the camera ?" and then by 
the third time I was pretty positive he indeed was looking right at 
the camera.    Did anyone else notice it ?     It was really bugging 
me...!


Mandy here:
Yes but it is part of Curon's desire to keep us, the audience, as 
eavesdroppers peeping in on the action.  Arthur is explaining the 
situation to Harry trying to keep form anyone else hearing him, 
moving thought the pillars, looking over his shoulder, nervously 
looking towards us who are a peeping tom in the scene. 

Curon did it many times in the film, starting at the very beginning 
with the tiny light flashing in the distance slowly getting closer 
and the camera moving through Harry's bedroom window to spy on him 
doing something he shouldn't.  Letting us watch the Gryffindor boys 
bonding in their dorm and then having the camera slowing pulling out 
of the window to illustrate to us that we are outsiders looking into 
the world.  Again, on the Hogwarts Express when Harry say's "Is he 
really asleep because I have to tell you something?" then he closed 
the door on us, again shutting us out.  Even at the very end after 
all the credits have rolled, you hear Harry's voice saying "Mischief 
managed.....Nox." The credits slowly disappear and then the screen 
goes black, finally shutting us out for the last time.





From nostrebor at runbox.com  Mon Jun  7 15:07:11 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 11:07:11 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
References: <1db.23569906.2df55332@cs.com>
Message-ID: <006901c44ca1$1db8c330$8b498741@user7i1hr4si1m>

Hi B,
My replies in line below
Jodi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Tasukibeth1 at cs.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>


*snip*
> This movie had  DR & EW battered by the
> whomping willow quite well, and the scene where Harry fell from his
broomstick was
> very real to me - I got a bit of vertigo watching him fall. And buckbeak
was
> breathtaking. Fabulous.

I did feel a bit ill watching that on IMAX

*snip*

> (4) I LIKED the stuff that was added purely for the movie. The shrunken
head
> and aunt Marge floating over town in the night were FUN and it kicked off
the
> show with some giggles. I thought the animal candies were FUN! These are
boys,
> for crying out loud, having some laughs together after summer vacation.
> Remember how excited you were to see your friends again when school began?
The
> scene was a good example of what young wizards do to goof off and be
stupid. It's
> better than Tee-Peeing peoples cars, for goodness sake.

When we go see it next (our fourth time, we'll go to the drive-in) I want to
pay particular attention to Seamus (must be my imagination that he sounds
like a monkey but looks more like a chicken - but I loved it anyway!)

> (4) I'm not sure what was up with the car alarm, but I laughed out loud,
> along with the rest of the sold-out theatre.

Two of the 3 shows we were at were sold out!

> (5) I LOVED BUCKBEAK. I loved the bird-of-prey sounds he made, his eyes,
his
> beak. He was very frightening to behold - one bite and he looked like he
could
> have snapped your arm off! The frightened children were hilareous, and
> Hagrid's obliviousness to their fear was even better. And I don't know if
the "King
> of the world" homage was intentional or not, but I don't care, I LOVED IT!
It
> exemplified, as someone on this board wrote, Harry's exhilaration of
flight.
> For just a second, there was no Sirius black, no Draco, no Dursleys. Just
> flight. It was brilliant.

Frightening yes, but beautiful!

> (8) I don't care if they got a new fat lady. She was a riot!

Dawn French - she was on a PBS show...I forget the title, but I think it was
something like The Vicar of something-or-other. A funny lady.





From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 15:20:01 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:20:01 -0000
Subject: Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
Message-ID: <ca2131+ald8@eGroups.com>

I loved they way Curon has begun to bring teen sexuality into the 
film, with the funny and obvious allusion in the beginning with Harry 
hiding under his bed sheets in the middle of the night playing with 
his wand, and the wonderfully satisfied grin on his face after he 
finally was able to successfully produce 'Lumos maxima'.  The sweet 
Ron/Hermione hand holding moment.  And the parallel between Ron and 
Draco, both milking sympathy from Hermione and Pansy, by telling them 
that their respective hand and leg might be in need chopping off.  

But that aside I have a question about the delightful moment in the 
film when HRH are standing on top of the hill about to watch Buckbeak 
get the chop.  Hermione buries her head in Ron's shoulder with her 
arms around his neck, and Harry gently puts his arms around Hermione 
and then the three of them hug in a very tender way.  

Is this is a nod to Curon's film Y Tu Mama Tambien?  I know that Y Tu 
Mama is a story of seduction between two teen boys and older woman, 
so it would fit, and Curon seems to be naughty enough to do something 
like that.  Who out there who has seen Y Tu Mama help with this one?

I'm renting the DVD this week, but I'm curious to see if anyone else 
has noticed this.

Cheers mandy





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun  7 15:42:10 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 11:42:10 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DR roles
In-Reply-To: <1c0.1a12c256.2df3d203@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCEA0512.D4A%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: clshannon at aol.com

If you really want a shock, watch him in the BBC's David Copperfield, which
was his very first acting job and before SS/PS. He was probably about 10.
And 
he was adorable ;-)
Cindy


<from bewitchedbyhp>

anyone know how an American can get a view of BBC's David Copperfield with
DR? Would love to see it!



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




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Mon Jun  7 15:35:54 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:35:54 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B4B96A@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,
 
<Mandy>I have a question about the delightful moment in the film when
HRH are standing on top of the hill about to watch Buckbeak get the
chop.  Hermione buries her head in Ron's shoulder with her arms around
his neck, and Harry gently puts his arms around Hermione and then the
three of them hug in a very tender way.  

Is this is a nod to Curon's film Y Tu Mama Tambien?  I know that Y Tu
Mama is a story of seduction between two teen boys and older woman, so
it would fit, and Curon seems to be naughty enough to do something like
that.  Who out there who has seen Y Tu Mama help with this one?

I'm renting the DVD this week</Mandy>
 
Boy Mandy, you are in for a shock. The tone of the scene you describe in
PoA, and the tone of the triangle in Y Tu Mama Tambien are too different
for it to be a cross-reference (unless there are some very weird scenes
on the PoA cutting room floor). I cannot find the interview now, but
Cuaron described PoA as a movie about a boy entering adolescence, and
YTMT as a movie about a boy(s) leaving adolescence. I think that's the
best way to think about the relationship between the movies.
 
Cheers,
 
Dumbledad.


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




From tzakis1225 at netzero.com  Mon Jun  7 16:22:14 2004
From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:22:14 -0000
Subject: IMAX
In-Reply-To: <25.490f7f9c.2df4fadc@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca24nm+7ci8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, afolcfkajl at a... wrote:
> 95% of the film?
> Does the IMAX format cut off some parts of the film?

Demtera:
Sorry, I was not clear.  No, nothing gets cut off.  I meant that 95% 
of the time I really enjoyed seeing it on the big screen.  But the 
shots of the hilly landscapes and the flying scenes got me a little 
queasy.  Then again, I turn shades of green on kiddie amusement park 
rides.  




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 16:47:53 2004
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:47:53 -0000
Subject: A diversion
Message-ID: <ca267p+9vtb@eGroups.com>

Here's something to take your mind off of PoA, if only for a few minutes:

A couple of months ago, I posted to this list about a project titled 'Wizard People, Dear 
Reader', wherein a comedian replaced the dialog from the first Harry Potter film. I also 
included the link to where the new soundtrack could be downloaded. At the time, our 
ever-watchful list elves, fearful of promoting something which could be illegal, pulled the 
post. I sent a message discussing copyright violation as artistic expression, etc. and a 
couple of days later, got permission to repost. I, however, got busy and never did repost 
it.

Well, today's New York Times has an article on 'Wizard People, Dear Reader'. They discuss 
it much better than I could, so here's the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/07/movies/07POTT.html

And, as long as I'm on the subject, here's where you can get the new soundtrack for 
yourself:
http://www.illegal-art.org/index.html

Tyler




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 16:57:23 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:57:23 -0000
Subject: A challenge for people who really liked the movie
In-Reply-To: <20040605193744.59528.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ca26pj+k66o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Wolber <katydid3500 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> I really think before people say it's a good movie
> they need to hear the perspective of someone who does
> not have the prior knowledge from the books. So
> seriously, take someone who hasn't read them and see
> what they think.
> 
> ~Katie
> 
I guess it all depends on who you go with.  I too went with a friend 
who enjoyed the first two films, but doesn't like to read... He LOVED 
POA and had no problem following.  He realized Black was innocent 
when Peter showed up on the map.  None of it was lost on him.  I 
think with continued viewing, you will find that it's all there 
(well, mostly)... just more subtle.

Tim




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 17:50:00 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 18:50:00 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca2131+ald8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607172124.009bfd00@plum.cream.org>

At 16:20 07/06/04 , Mandy wrote:

<snip>

>... I know that Y Tu
>Mama is a story of seduction between two teen boys and older woman,
>so it would fit, and Curon seems to be naughty enough to do something
>like that.  Who out there who has seen Y Tu Mama help with this one?

In plot terms, there's not that much similarity between YTMT and PoA, but 
in terms of filmic style, it's very clear that these two movies are by the 
same person. If one really has to look for a plot similarity, though, both 
films are intrinsically about friendship and trust and the breakdown of 
that trust. The two male protagonists of YTMT are very close friends and 
they both fall for the woman at the same time. BTW she's not *that* much 
older than they are (this isn't "The Graduate" - she's under twice their 
age) :-). Their adventures strain their friendship and their trust in each 
other (there's a particular - notorius - scene later in the movie which 
does this very symbolically as well as the literal breakdown).

You're not alone in seeing the opening sequence of PoA as imbued with 
innuendo - but there is absolutely *nothing* subtle or sub-textual about 
the sexual content of the opening sequence of YTMT! (I know people who were 
quite shocked by this.)

However, the way in which it's shown is very similar - we come into the 
room from outside (while hearing the sound from within) and then back out 
again, like a voyeur, as if we're not really supposed to be witnessing the 
scene.

Cuaron's penchant for hand-held photography is even more abundant in YTMT, 
though, which serves the slightly intrusive nature of our witnessing this 
story very well.

Of course, the lush green Scottish pastures are replaced by the arid 
expanses of Mexican desert, so we have a completely different colour 
palette, but the interior scenes are shot very similarly (Julio wandering 
around his home is very similar to Harry at the Durselys'.)

Another point of similarity is Cuaron's eye for the minutiae of teenage 
life: we understand what these people's lives are like from a series of 
vignettes of them just *living*, which is something I certainly got from 
from PoA as well.

I'm unlikely to say anything else of a constructive nature without 
including spoilers for YTMT, so I'll shut up here, but I'd be happy to 
continue this conversation once you've seen it. (BTW I recall that there 
was some debate when it came out, that it may have an NC-17 rating in the 
USA - this would have been a major stupidity!)

One way or another, I'd recommend this movie to anyone who hasn't been 
completely mind-numbed by regular Hollywood fare and doesn't give up at the 
first sign of a little naked flesh.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who seems to have a busy evening ahead sifting through 
hundreds of PoA-related messages on various lists...



From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 17:50:50 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:50:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: DR roles
Message-ID: <1e.2b65287c.2df604fa@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/7/04 8:36:09 AM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net writes:


> 
> anyone know how an American can get a view of BBC's David Copperfield with
> DR? Would love to see it!
> 
> 

It's available on Amazon on DVD. www.amazon.com.
Also, it was shown here in the states when it was first produced, as part of 
the Masterpiece Theater program.
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 17:54:13 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:54:13 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <c.2b04ef6f.2df605c5@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/7/04 7:37:05 AM, jmmears at comcast.net writes:


> That's perfectly true.? However, since the scene where Snape assigns
> an essay on werewolves with particular emphasis on How To Identify a
> werewolf, it was a bit silly to have a werewolf that couldn't
> possibly be confused with a wolf or a dog.? Requiring that the film
> maintain it's own internal logic doesn't seem unreasonably picky to
> me.
> 

My impression of Snape's lesson was that they learn to idenify a werewolf 
when he is in his 'human' form, going by clues of his behavior or appearance. 
This would make sense then for Hermione to solve the mystery before she ever sees 
Lupin change into wolf form. I thought that Snape was talking about clues 
such as disappearing during the full moon, physical injuries indicative of one's 
roaming around as a wolf and killing prey, etc., even weakness after the full 
moon phase. Things like that.
But that's just me ;-) 
Cindy


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




From moonmint17 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 17:22:46 2004
From: moonmint17 at yahoo.com (moonmint17)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:22:46 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <1db.23569906.2df55332@cs.com>
Message-ID: <ca2896+pbh5@eGroups.com>

Forgot to mention - The Fat Lady.  Oh, I adored Dawn French as the 
fat lady!  (OF course I think Dawn French is fabulous to start with, 
so that may color my perception.)  But I can just see the fat lady 
being SUCH a character, I thouroughly enjoyed the portrayal of her.  





From moonmint17 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 17:15:51 2004
From: moonmint17 at yahoo.com (moonmint17)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:15:51 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <1db.23569906.2df55332@cs.com>
Message-ID: <ca27s7+df8n@eGroups.com>

Hi!  
Coming out of lurkdom to reply.  

I found the movie to be a very enjoyable experience  No, it didn't 
slavishly follow the book, but as a movie it stood on it's own very 
well.  I also laughed much more during this movie - the humor felt 
more real to me.

A few of my favorite moments:
The Harry in the corridor scene with Snape and Lupin scene - such 
nice undercurrents going on there.  (And Rickman just makes watching 
mean, nasty Snape soooo much fun)  

The whole shrieking shack - obviously things were left out to make it 
a tight piece of cinema, but that moment between Sirius and Remus 
just before they embraced- lovely.  And the whole scene just worked 
for me - that mix of confusion and anger and friendship.  

The moments between Proffessor Lupin and Harry, and between Harry and 
Sirius.  (Umm, yea I like the emotional stuff)  

The moment that very nearly broke my heart:  Sirius holding Remus as 
he transformed.  Whatever exactly you think their relationship was 
(and boy, the film hinted at romance around the edges, didn't it?)  
that was such a powerful image of love and friendship. 

As far as smart and tough Hermione, well all I really have to say is 
that I was once a smart teenage girl.  And I wish there would have 
been more Hermione type characters on the screen, and far 
less "disposable girlfriends"  (You know, the ones that just sit and 
scream, and the next movie are nowhere to be found)    So, I must 
confess I reveled in the way Hermione was portrayed in this movie. 

Peppermint 





From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 17:31:42 2004
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 10:31:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <003001c44c2a$70fea310$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <20040607173142.76822.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

 
Thank you all, very much!!! You know, I also was kind of frustrated for all the bad things the "fans" were saying about the movie.  Everyone has the right for their own opinions, granted.  But, hey, the movie was great.  As since the beginning of the production, Alfonso & Co said that this was going to be an adaptation of the book, not the book itself.  I guess they did it marvelously.  
 
Yesterday was my third time that I've watched the movie and I really enjoy it.  And I too got into Harry Potter because of the movies.
 
Betsy







		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

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





From jjpandy at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 14:33:31 2004
From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:33:31 -0000
Subject: Another Review
In-Reply-To: <c9vsq1+b5sk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca1ubr+4k1i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Laura" <metslvr19 at y...> wrote:

> "-show Patronuses (Patroni?) how they're supposed to look, as 
> animals.  I was incredibily dissapointed the first time I saw Harry 
> do the spell.  Then, it was if, at the end of the movie, someone 
> poked either the director or the screenwriter and said, "psst, 
> that's not how it works."  So they randomly threw in the stag image 
> in the last scene, leaving people like us disconcerted and people 
> who hadn't read the books wondering what the heck that was all 
about 
> it and why it never appeared in previous scenes where the Patronus 
> was conjured.  (Or maybe the special effects guy is just a Potter 
> fan and took it upon himself to add that without consulting anyone 
> else, in which case I applaud him.  =P)"
> 
> > -Laura

Laura, I will only respond to one of your comments.  Harry's Patronus 
finally took corporeal form because he was finally fighting real 
dementors (instead of boggarts) AND he had the huge emotional 
rush/incentive to make it work this time - thus a more powerful 
Patronus.  I believe Hermione also says to Harry (while waiting for 
his "dad" to appear) that a Patronus takes " a really powerful 
wizard" which foreshadows Harry's talent because he then produces 
that wonderful Patronus.  Also, in the book, we do not know the shape 
of Harry's Patronus until that scene as well.  In the book, the shape 
was left a mystery to us after Harry sent one at the dementors who 
were really Malfoy and company (although Lupin was shaken by what he 
saw which in retrospect meant that at least he saw the formation 
of "Prongs" that no one else did).

Respectfully,
JJPandy (who loves both the book AND the movie for what they are)





From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 17:25:40 2004
From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:25:40 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <5b.5085e459.2df5ff14@aol.com>

B: 


> 
> (9) While the history of the Marauders was left out (one thing that I wasn't 
> 
> nuts about), most anyone with a brain in their head can deduce by the 
> attitudes of Remus and Lupin that they obviously knew what the map was and 
> what it 
> did. I watched the movie with my SO who had not read the books, and when I 
> brought it up in the post-movie discussion, he said that he pretty much 
> caught onto 
> that right away without being told.
> 
> 


Yes-it is clear that Lupin knew about the map and how to work it.  What 
bothered me was that Harry never asks "How did you know this was a map and how did 
you know how to work it?".  During both map scenes I wasn't the only one in 
the theatre who was thinking "turn around and ask, you idiot!"    


> 
> (14) And FINALLY, I loved the "flogging the dolphin" reference in the 
> opening 
> credits with Harry under the covers. It was ***cute***, people! A little 
> blue 
> humor never hurt anyone. The boy is thirteen, for Chrissakes.  

Well...I didn't think about 'flogging the dolpin' myself 0.0 

One thing did bother me about the 'under the covers' scene, though...  Later 
on when Harry is running away he points his wand at Uncle Vernon and Uncle 
Vernon reminds him that he's not allowed to do magic outside of school...

...however, in the opening scene what is Harry doing? Practicing Magic!   

I mean, I know writting an essay doesn't provide for a cool and funny 
opening...but unless there was a new Educational Degree saying under age wizards can 
do magic in the dead of night under a blanket, then there's something wrong 
with this. 


I also have to point out the Firebolt.   Now, I didn't really have a problem 
with the the non-canon arrival (though I have to admit that during the time 
turning scene I was thinking "wait a moment...what happened to the firebolt?").  
 I just don't think enough emphasis was put on it.  True, they were all 
talking about how it was the best broom ever, etc..etc...,  but the broom just came 
out of nowhere, where in the book there was lots of build up so you really 
knew this was the best broom out there.   


I just have three more things to point out that aren't really problems with 
the movie or incredibly important, but I'm bringing them up anyway. 

1) Lupin's Phonograph.   I just had to giggle-not only at his urge for battle 
music, but his choice of battle music. 

2) Pavarti's Boggart.  That was Pavarti, right?  Personally, I thought the 
Jack in the Box was a LOT scarier than the snake XP 

3) Ron agreeing with Snape.  In the DADA class when Snape calls Hermione an 
insufferable know-it-all, Ron says "He's got a point.".  Personally, I wanted 
Ron to trash talk Snape, lol. 


Overall though, despite a few irksome problems and the not including of some 
scenes I reallly would've liked to see, I enjoyed the movie and can't wait for 
the DVD *prays there is lots more extra Severus* 

~Cassie~ 


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





From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 18:23:16 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:23:16 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit
  thrown)
In-Reply-To: <c.2b04ef6f.2df605c5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040607190526.00a08720@plum.cream.org>

At 18:54 07/06/04 , Cindy wrote:

>My impression of Snape's lesson was that they learn to idenify a werewolf
>when he is in his 'human' form, going by clues of his behavior or appearance.
>This would make sense then for Hermione to solve the mystery before she 
>ever sees Lupin change into wolf form. I thought that Snape was talking 
>about clues
>such as disappearing during the full moon, physical injuries indicative of 
>one's
>roaming around as a wolf and killing prey, etc., even weakness after the full
>moon phase. Things like that.
>But that's just me ;-)

No it most definitely is not! I felt the same way all along. In fact, ever 
since the book (regardless of the actual text during the essay-setting). It 
would be pointless for Snape to hint at the kids' attempting to identify a 
werewolf in animal form, as it would be extremely unlikely for them to have 
the opportunity to see Lupin in that sate. However, given that, as is 
generally accepted, he wants the kids to work out who (or what) Lupin is, 
it makes sense for the topic to be about recognising a werewolf when in 
human form.

Furthermore, in the book, Lupin and Hermione's conversation is about 
recognising his human form, so whether or not this is *all* the essay 
covered, it was certainly part of it.

In a way, what surprised me most about the Movie!Werewolf was how 
*un*humanoid it looked! Note that during the lesson, the slides which Snape 
shows include three different visions of werewolves - all of them humanoid.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's having a distinct sense of deja vu at having 
already posted to make those points, but can't find it - so apologies for 
any possible repetition.




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 18:57:19 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 18:57:19 -0000
Subject: Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
In-Reply-To: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B4B96A@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <ca2dqf+j2k8@eGroups.com>

 > Dumbledad.
> Boy Mandy, you are in for a shock. The tone of the scene you 
describe in PoA, and the tone of the triangle in Y Tu Mama Tambien 
are too different for it to be a cross-reference (unless there are 
some very weird scenes on the PoA cutting room floor). I cannot find 
the interview now, but Cuaron described PoA as a movie about a boy 
entering adolescence, and YTMT as a movie about a boy(s) leaving 
adolescence. I think that's the best way to think about the 
relationship between the movies.
  

Mandy again:
Oh good!  I can't wait. I do know enough about Y Tu Mama to know how 
much more of an adult sexual story it is, as apposed to innocent 
young teen yearnings in PoA.  Just the rating of Y Tu Mama is enough 
to show that. (It's unrated in the states, which is what they give to 
movies when the filmmakers don't want to risk an x rating.)  

But it has been mentioned a couple of times here in NY that that 
particular scene could be seen as an innocent, young teen nod to the 
adult trio in Y Tu Mama.  I was wondering if it could be a inside 
joke from Curon, who in the beginning, when he first got the job of 
directing PoA, got at lot of slack for taking on another film, all be 
it with a very different tone, with a 2 boy and 1 girl love triangle.

Just a thought, cheers Mandy





From shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com  Mon Jun  7 18:46:45 2004
From: shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com (shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:46:45 -0400
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <OF88CB4F86.3B1A4F40-ON85256EAC.0063DC8D-85256EAC.0067288A@EU.novartis.net>


I am a first timer to posting, but after having seen the movie on Friday
and reading the post's (or most of them) I have to say I agree with most
points.

I think the movie would do good to stand alone if you had never read the
books, but unfortunately most, if not all of us have not only read them, we
have memorized them and so we feel a bit cheated out of things we would
have liked to have seen.

To that end, my problems were only the following:

The quiddich being final being cut, would have been nice to see Harry throw
the patronus at Malfoy and finally win the cup

The relationship with Diggory being explained as there will be animosity in
GoF that I thought should be shown where the roots come from.

The tension between Hermoine and Harry and Ron is never developed and that
was one of the plot points I liked in the books, the fact that they grow so
far apart and then come together,  in the movie the scabbers/crookshank
fight is barely an argument

I too had problems with the relationship between the "Marauders" and Snape
not fully explained as the tension between Snape and Black continues in the
next 2 books

 I also thought that maybe the story of how Black, Potter and Pettigrew all
became illegal Animagus to be with Lupin should be explained to show the
bond they had and also to give an idea in GoF of why Hermoine will think
that Rita Skeeter may be one, it's her past experience here that I believe
leads her in part to find that out.

All in all I loved the film, I think the kids are great, Gary Oldman was
terrific as I knew he would be and though Lupin is not how I pictured him
when I read the book, he was great as well, wise and caring and yet fun.

The great thing is, I can read the books over and over and see the "movie"
in my head as I would like it to be and  no-one can make criticisms to it
there!






From juli17 at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 19:10:22 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:10:22 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <29C20991.19A9C2A7.0004E520@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/7/2004 10:32:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jmmears at comcast.net writes:

> 
> Tasukibeth1 wrote:
>  
> > (7) I had no problem with the creative interpretation on Lupin's 
> werewolf. I 
> > like that he DIDN'T look like a dog; he is NOT a dog, after all! 
> He is 
> > a....thingy...a monster, a creature. He is not a dog and therefore 
> shouldn't look 
> > like one.
> 
> 
> That's perfectly true.  However, since the scene where Snape assigns 
> an essay on werewolves with particular emphasis on How To Identify a 
> werewolf, it was a bit silly to have a werewolf that couldn't 
> possibly be confused with a wolf or a dog.  Requiring that the film 
> maintain it's own internal logic doesn't seem unreasonably 
> picky to 
> me.
>


I didn't find this illogical, since I assumed Snape was 
teaching them how to identify a possible werewolf 
*before* it changed, or perhaps by its sound, its
effect on the surrounding environment, etc, so one
could avoid confronting it. Once it's in its werewolf 
form *and* in sight, you'd be able to identify it most
easily by the fact that it's the thing trying to rip 
your throat out!

Julie 



From glpm93 at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 18:38:13 2004
From: glpm93 at aol.com (G Miller)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 18:38:13 -0000
Subject: Observation, not really spoiler - missed potential
In-Reply-To: <c9t4h7+nvif@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2cml+5173@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "madam_author" 
<kateydidnt2002 at y...> wrote:
Snip 
> What was even more disappointing to me is the fact that I could see 
> the potential in the movie, it *could* have been better! The 
> director has a beautiful style, but it went to waste because so 
much else was lost.

Now me:
I agree with most of the above paragraph.  I liked the movie with the 
new look and the Dementors flying.  And I did not go to do a 
movie/book analysis (I analyzed COS too much and when I left the 
theater, I found I didn't really like it, so I was determined not to 
do the same thing this time).  However, afterwards I began thinking 
that there were a few places that tweaking it slightly (or not 
tweaking it as much as they did) would have made it even better.  To 
me, it was a good movie, but it had the potential to be a really good 
(or great) movie. 
There were some places where a few more seconds of explanation or a 
minute or two extra in a scene could have helped without adding too 
much to the overall length (Dare I say that maybe Columbus should 
have taken a little heavier hand as producer).  But I think I can 
best sum up my thoughts on the missed potential by relating two 
unrelated scenes that were added to the movie.  By doing this, a big 
HUH? could have been avoided and Harry would have looked better 
during the Time Turner sequence.  
(I have tried to go through as many posts that I could, so if this 
has already been thought of, I apologize)
The main scene I am talking about is the Hermione howl.  The big HUH? 
comes from the fact that it was stated earlier that a werewolf would 
only respond to the call of one of it's own.  It is quite obvious 
that it is someone pretending to howl, so why did Lupin respond??  
Does Hermione have some werewolf in her?  Maybe that's the
revelation for book 6 & 7
..  I don't think so.  Also, Harry just 
seems to be along for the ride during the Time Turner sequence.  Up 
until the Patronus, Hermione is figuring out everything.  But what if 
the scene had gone something like this:
Harry & Hermione see Lupin getting ready to attack in-the-past 
Harry.  Harry gets a look of realization on his face as he reaches 
into his pocket and pulls out some candies like the ones in the dorm 
scene where they are making animal noises.  Harry looks down and, 
sure enough, one of them says wolf.  He pops it in his mouth and howls
like a wolf, which Lupin then responds.  

Although this makes Harry save himself twice, at least he has a 
little dignity back and there is no HUH?.  

All-in-all, the movie met my expectations, but after watching it, I 
felt it did not live uo to it's potential.  

glpm93
I was unable to see POA until Sun night because of certain conditions 
my daughter had to fulfill prior to being able to watch POA (Is your 
room clean?), so when I saw it, there were only about 50 people in a 
fairly large theater.  I do not know if this affected my level of 
enjoyment because there was very little crowd reaction to feed on. 





From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 19:13:56 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:13:56 -0000
Subject: Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
Message-ID: <ca2epk+rjmj@eGroups.com>

Was anyone else offended by Ron's statement to Hermione "He's got a 
point" after Snape publicly humiliated her by calling her 
an 'insufferable know it all'?

Completely out of character for Ron.  There is no way he would kick a 
friend while she was down like that.  Not to mention she would have 
lynched him for it after class for it and not talked to him until he 
apologized.

I think I remember correctly that that comment is something Harry 
thinks in his head about Hermione, after Snape's humiliating remarks 
in the book. (Although I may be mixing it up with another scene) But 
Harry or Ron would never have said anything like that to her face. 

It would have been better to have given the line to one of the other 
kids in the class, Dean, Seamus, Pavarti or Pansy to illustrate that 
the rest of the class agrees with Snape, and they don't like her for 
it, but not our Ron. Damn! That hurt when I heard it.

Cheers Mandy





From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 19:22:15 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:22:15 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <ca0u4p+58as@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2f97+ervo@eGroups.com>

Karen,
Great help; thank you so much!  I've written to them to ask.  (And, 
yes, we bulldog-owners are perhaps even more "obsessive" about 
bullies than we Harry Potter fans are about HP ;-) ).
Appreciate the info...  
PG

> Sorry for the misunderstanding, I couldn't find anything either but
> there is an email for the UK office, maybe they could tell you the
> dog's name.
> 
> http://www.birdsandanimals.com/contact_us.htm
> 
> karen




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 19:32:35 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:32:35 -0000
Subject: 2nd Viewing of PoA  and a bit of werewolf
In-Reply-To: <ca1l6k+fqng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2fsj+9ndc@eGroups.com>

Go up the thread and read the post it's very good, but too long to 
repeat here.

I absolutely agree.  The first time I saw it I was distracted by the 
fact I had read the book so much and new the story so deeply.  I 
couldn't focus on the main action, and was looking for everything all 
at once.  I too left the theater dazed and confused.  My friends were 
asking me all sorts of questions about the book, so all I did was 
say 'Well, in the book this...' and 'Ah, yes they left that out.' 
Instead of enjoying the film for what it is, a film.  The second time 
I say it on Sat, it was fantastic.  A whole difference experience.  
The film just swept over me and I loved it.  I left the theater with 
the beautiful images in my head and the joy of what I had just seen. 


I loved the Werewolf.  Imo it's the first time I've seen a werewolf 
on screen that actually looked like it was a creature that had just 
transformed from a human.  Its lack of hair gave it that eerie, human 
quality and it could walk on two legs if it wanted.  I loved the 
sound of Lupin panting as he watched the moon appear in horror, and 
Sirius holding him and coaching him with his hand on Lupin heart, 
telling him to remember the man he was inside as he transformed.  
Great stuff.





From crussell at arkansas.net  Mon Jun  7 19:35:24 2004
From: crussell at arkansas.net (bugaloo37)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:35:24 -0000
Subject: Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <ca2epk+rjmj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2g1s+ceuv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> Was anyone else offended by Ron's statement to Hermione "He's got a 
> point" after Snape publicly humiliated her by calling her 
> an 'insufferable know it all'?
> 

I was offended and I am not really a Ron fan.  I am; however, a 
strong Hermione fan and for that reason I found the comment offensive 
and unneccessary.  I was also rather suprised by the complete 
turnaround from canon in which Ron defends Hermione to Snape and 
receives detention for it.  You have to wonder what was the purpose 
of not only removing Ron's defense line but actually changing it into 
a insult.  Quite a strange script alteration for a screenwriter and 
director who are doing their best to promote the R/Hr ship.

bugaloo37 




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 20:00:15 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:00:15 -0000
Subject: Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <ca2g1s+ceuv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2hgf+kv9f@eGroups.com>

Simple.  There was no time to put him in detention.  LOL  Who knows 
what the heck is going on with this screenwriter.
Marci

"bugaloo37" <crussell at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> 
wrote:
> > Was anyone else offended by Ron's statement to Hermione "He's got 
a 
> > point" after Snape publicly humiliated her by calling her 
> > an 'insufferable know it all'?
> > 
> 
> I was offended and I am not really a Ron fan.  I am; however, a 
> strong Hermione fan and for that reason I found the comment 
offensive 
> and unneccessary.  I was also rather suprised by the complete 
> turnaround from canon in which Ron defends Hermione to Snape and 
> receives detention for it.  You have to wonder what was the purpose 
> of not only removing Ron's defense line but actually changing it 
into 
> a insult.  Quite a strange script alteration for a screenwriter and 
> director who are doing their best to promote the R/Hr ship.
> 
> bugaloo37




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 20:15:50 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:15:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
Message-ID: <1dc.2364f3b7.2df626f6@aol.com>

Actually, I have read a few reviews on websites (please don't ask me to 
reference them, I've read so many reviews in the last week that my brain is fried <
g>), wherein the critic did cite that the scene on the hillside between the 
three of them is a mini homage to Y Tu Mama Tambien - a much   more innocent 
one, but still Cuaron's own little salute to his own movie ;-)
Of course, this was the critic's opinion - we don't know if anyone has 
confirmed it with Cuaron.
Cindy


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




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 20:19:06 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:19:06 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Poster and Arthur's Discussion With Harry Scene
In-Reply-To: <ca1vns+aaa4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2ijq+ojdc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mandy" <ExSlytherin at a...> wrote:
> > *Kimberly's comment*
> > I agree, I loved the poster, he was just too funny !      BUT, 
did 
> it appear to anyone else that Arthur kept looking directly AT the 
> camera ?    The first time I thought it was my imagination, the 
> second time, I thought, "Is he looking at the camera ?" and then by 
> the third time I was pretty positive he indeed was looking right at 
> the camera.    Did anyone else notice it ?     It was really 
bugging 
> me...!
> 
> 
> Mandy here:
> Yes but it is part of Curon's desire to keep us, the audience, as 
> eavesdroppers peeping in on the action.  Arthur is explaining the 
> situation to Harry trying to keep form anyone else hearing him, 
> moving thought the pillars, looking over his shoulder, nervously 
> looking towards us who are a peeping tom in the scene. 
> 
> Curon did it many times in the film, starting at the very beginning 
> with the tiny light flashing in the distance slowly getting closer 
> and the camera moving through Harry's bedroom window to spy on him 
> doing something he shouldn't.  Letting us watch the Gryffindor boys 
> bonding in their dorm and then having the camera slowing pulling 
out 
> of the window to illustrate to us that we are outsiders looking 
into 
> the world.  Again, on the Hogwarts Express when Harry say's "Is he 
> really asleep because I have to tell you something?" then he closed 
> the door on us, again shutting us out.  Even at the very end after 
> all the credits have rolled, you hear Harry's voice 
saying "Mischief 
> managed.....Nox." The credits slowly disappear and then the screen 
> goes black, finally shutting us out for the last time.

You said that perfectly!

Marci




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 20:24:49 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:24:49 -0000
Subject: Goblet of Fire Movie
In-Reply-To: <ca0gsb+peh4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2iuh+qohk@eGroups.com>

Tbat's just not possible.  The seasons DID change in POA.  The Willow 
dumped all it's leaves, shook off snow, bloomed.  Don't you think the 
reason there are no Dursley's in GOF is because nothing important 
happens there??  AND didn't I hear that they were starting just 
before the Quidditch World Cup?  I'm sure I remember hearing QWC was 
going to happen.

Tim

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cocaine_nights1980s" 
<cocaine_nights1980s at y...> wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Ok I just think that I figured it out.
> A few weeks ago the people who play the Dursleys were complaining 
in 
> a news report at www.imdb.com that they will not be in Goblet of 
> Fire because the filmmakers are gonna start the movie with Harry at 
> school. Another thing is that they are sort of filming Goblet of 
> Fire back to back with P.O.A. And the movie ends with Harry at 
> school, see what I'm getting at? No?
> 
> Well here is one more thing, the POA movie felt like it only 
> happened within a couple days and the filmmakers on GOF said that 
> there will be some changes to the story beginning with the changes 
> in the POA movie.
> 
> So what I'm saying is this, maybe GOF is gonna start where POA left 
> off, like it is going to be the next day after he got the Firebolt. 
> So these 2 movies are going to be like The Matrix and Lord of The 
> Rings, one story but cut in parts.
> Just an inkling, but a terrible one if that is what they are going 
> to do.
> -
> 
> "cocaine_nights1980s"




From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 19:58:49 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 12:58:49 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]  (Spoilers) Some POA comments- dislikes
In-Reply-To: <ca2dqf+j2k8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000801c44cc9$d9dc7de0$6400a8c0@Desktop>

Hi all,

After watching Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban last night, I
realized that I really did not like this movie.  I absolutely love the books
and enjoy the first two movies yet this is my favorite book (perhaps the
problem).  I felt that this movie had almost come from Cliff notes rather
than the original book- most of the major plot points without a lot of
detail.  I felt that not only did I need to read the book in order to follow
the logic of the movie but the main characters had to as well.

Here are my reasons for dislike:

1)       Lupin and Black treat the Marauder's Map like common knowledge and
no one questions their insight.  Black knows instantly which map Harry and
Lupin are referring to in the Shrieking Shack.  Lupin, as stated in earlier
posts, does not explain his detailed knowledge of this map (we can surmise-
so can Harry but he would question).  Lupin never questions Harry where he
got it- out of character and pointless to exclude- even if Harry does not
answer.  The whole thing seems out of character.

2)       The impression I got from the post time-turner scene in which Harry
and Hermione deny weirdness to Ron- this belittles their relationship.
Throughout the movies the three of them are best friends and do not
purposely keep secrets from one another once two know.  Harry and Hermione
may have later told Ron but that was not my impression.  Therefore, I feel
this scene was not loyal to the characters (book or movie).

3)       The very weak (ongoing?) fight between Ron and Herminie- I kept on
forgetting that they should be mad at each other because I did not feel it
from the characters.  I am not asking for 5 minutes of screen time at once
but the inclusion of the fight seems almost as an afterthought inserted post
initial screening.  These are two 13 year olds, hormonally volatile, yet
they cannot hold a grudge?

4)       I felt the whole movie was rushed.  This is not necessarily a bad
thing but things jumped too quickly for no apparent reason other than
keeping the movie to a reasonable length.  

5)       I understand that things from the book must be cut in order to keep
the movie to a reasonable time, however, I would rather have more plot
details than extra character build up or stunning visuals neither which
effect the plot/timeline.  I really enjoyed the dorm scene with Harry, Ron,
and their dorm mates, but it was pointless other than making us laugh.  I
would have rather had more time in the Shrieking Shack than that scene.  It
is also true of the miscellaneous ghost appearances; these had no point and
would have made great backdrops to plot advancing scenes rather than
visually stunning interludes.  The time spent showing the Whomping Willow
attacking birds, while funny and foreshadowing, could have been backdrop as
well, rather than wasted minutes alone.  Cuaron seems to have added scenes
just make us laugh meanwhile cutting scenes that are not just necessary for
this film but for the whole series (DD explaining to Harry the good he did).

6)       I did enjoy some of the visuals, but they seemed to be gratuitous
at times.  Some of the scenes however, were entirely too gritty for me.  The
Dursley and Leaky Caldron segments appear to be filmed on entirely different
type of film than the rest of the movie.  It was gritty and shaky- artsy if
you will and I did not enjoy it so much as it did not seem to have a point.
This technique is usually used to illustrate a specific point, recreating
historical footage/home movies, to depict dirty environments, etc.  It could
have been used nicely in the dirty Leaky Caldron but the prior use of it at
the Dursley's ruined the effect.

7)       The movie made several scenes just about humor yet it left out one
of the funniest scenes in the movie, the attempt by Malfoy and Co to scar
Harry by dressing as Dementors.  Harry of course responds with a Patronus,
which is meant to show that Malfoy is not just an innocent target of Harry's
but a co-belligerent.  This could have been done outside of a Quidditch
match and been just as funny.

8)       The end Patronus scene was visually weak, the stag almost an
afterthought.  I would have enjoyed seeing the stag chase away Dementors
much more than another bird being whacked by the Whomping Willow or the end
flight scene.

9)        The Freeze Frame ending.  Personal pet peeve.

 

            Overall, the film felt as if Cuaron or the scriptwriter had
personal things they felt should be in the movie regardless of their
relevance or their cost to plot advancement.  It angers me that Cuaron felt
(as stated in another post) that the Marauder's Map should be explained in
GoF.  That book is longer yet and now it has to include more bits of book 3?
A visually stunning movie is great but I would rather have a good plot with
necessary details.

 

Trevor 



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





From themaidenpersephone at hotmail.com  Mon Jun  7 20:06:47 2004
From: themaidenpersephone at hotmail.com (Persephone)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:06:47 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
In-Reply-To: <ca1png+59um@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2hsn+89nk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <dianasdolls at y...> wrote:
> As I was watching PoA the second time, I paid special attention to 
> anything that might be a possible foreshadowing of future events 
in 
> book 6.  Most are probably not important, but as we won't know 
which 
> are and which aren't until the release of book 6...so here they 
are 

While I would love to have more clues to fodder on, I must disagree 
the foreshadowing that you mention. I doubt that Ms Rowling would 
have supplied foreshadowing clues in PoA. And no one but she knows 
the ending.  

While I can not decide whether or not I like the movie 
yet ......grin......... I must say that the movie is an adaptation 
of the movie and Cuaron had creative liberties and should be seen as 
such and not a true rendition.  If anything, that will get us into 
trouble if we start seeking clues from PoA movie.  

My non-Harry Potter roomie did understand all the major points of 
the movie.  She correctly understood the Stag produced in the 
patronum, and when quizzed she understood the whole map/friend 
quadrant as well.  Her complaint was that she despises the new DD, 
she did not like the new set, her complaint too smalll; and she 
disliked the new costume.  If fact she made me watch CS and SS over 
to make me agree over the weekend.

Persephone





From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 20:09:33 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:09:33 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <ca2epk+rjmj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c44ccb$5971f890$6400a8c0@Desktop>

The book specifically states, " It was a mark of how much the class loathed
Snape that they were all glaring at him, because every one of them had
called Hermione a know-it-all at least once, and Ron, who told Hermione she
was a know-it-all at least twice a week, said loudly, 'Your asked us a
question and she knows the answer!  Why ask if you don't want to be told?'"
(Pg 172 US hard back). 

 

Not only is the movie comment out of character with the book Ron but also
out of character with the much more infatuated with Hermione movie Ron.  It
was a cheap attempt at humor.

 

Trevor 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mandy [mailto:ExSlytherin at aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 12:14 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron! Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA

 

Was anyone else offended by Ron's statement to Hermione "He's got a 
point" after Snape publicly humiliated her by calling her 
an 'insufferable know it all'?

Completely out of character for Ron.  There is no way he would kick a 
friend while she was down like that.  Not to mention she would have 
lynched him for it after class for it and not talked to him until he 
apologized.

I think I remember correctly that that comment is something Harry 
thinks in his head about Hermione, after Snape's humiliating remarks 
in the book. (Although I may be mixing it up with another scene) But 
Harry or Ron would never have said anything like that to her face. 

It would have been better to have given the line to one of the other 
kids in the class, Dean, Seamus, Pavarti or Pansy to illustrate that 
the rest of the class agrees with Snape, and they don't like her for 
it, but not our Ron. Damn! That hurt when I heard it.

Cheers Mandy




________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
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12982j5o2/M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups
/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1086722060/A=2178650/R=0/SIG=14drisgb3/*http:/www.house
holdfinance.com/ln/TrackingServlet?cmd_MediaCode=&fc=APS&mkt=000&mc=01PSYAYA
004001B220000U0300L0030000000000&dest=HOME_PAGE> click here


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2178650/rand=824665333> 

 

  _____  

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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 



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




From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun  7 21:08:20 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:08:20 EDT
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:=20[HPFGU-Movie]=20Re:=20Foreshadowing=20of=20?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?book=206=20in=20PoA=A0=20AND=20IMHO?=
Message-ID: <1e4.223ec4e8.2df63344@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/7/04 2:04:09 PM, themaidenpersephone at hotmail.com writes:


> While I would love to have more clues to fodder on, I must disagree
> the foreshadowing that you mention. I doubt that Ms Rowling would
> have supplied foreshadowing clues in PoA. And no one but she knows
> the ending.?
> 

Ms.   Rowling didn't say she provided any fodder for foreshadowing. She said 
that while watching the movie, she got goosebumps because of some 
'inadvertent' foreshadowing by the director and/or screenwriter. So she was taken by 
surprise that they unknowingly put some things in that perhaps foreshadow events in 
books 6 and 7.
These inadvertent foreshadowing events are what folks are speculating on ;-)
Cindy


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




From spaebrun at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 20:59:30 2004
From: spaebrun at yahoo.com (spaebrun)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:59:30 -0000
Subject: 2nd Viewing of PoA  and a bit of werewolf
In-Reply-To: <ca2fsj+9ndc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2kvi+l0f5@eGroups.com>

Mandy wrote:
> 
> I loved the Werewolf.  Imo it's the first time I've seen a werewolf 
> on screen that actually looked like it was a creature that had just 
> transformed from a human.  Its lack of hair gave it that eerie,
human 
> quality and it could walk on two legs if it wanted.  I loved the 
> sound of Lupin panting as he watched the moon appear in horror, and 
> Sirius holding him and coaching him with his hand on Lupin heart, 
> telling him to remember the man he was inside as he transformed.  
> Great stuff.

Reed:
Yes, I liked the werewolf, too. Of course, it was ugly and weird and
really sort of ... 
appalling, but that was *right*. I read an opinion stating that they
chose the 'hairless 
design' to make it less scary and I absolutely disagree. This mixture
of wolf and human 
was much more creepy for me than a large wolf with big teeth. You see
immidiately that 
this is no natural creature but a disfigured human who has
(temporarily) lost his mind. It 
reminds you that being a werewolf is a terrible illness, quite
different from being an 
animagus like Sirius, who in his dog form looked fierce, but like a
'proper' animal. 
I also liked the scene between Sirius and Lupin before the
transformation and the way he 
and Hermione tried to talk to the werewolf. It made you think of
Lupin inside, struggling to 
control the werewolf instincts and failing... horrible.
When I watched the movie, a few people were giggling during the
werewolf fight and I 
have to admit that it *did* look a bit strange, but the above
arguments outweigh that for 
me. 
I think they did a very good job at showing Lupin's tragedy in this
regard - I felt really 
sorry for him in his leaving scene, too.

Reed (who came out of the movie torn and is looking forward to a
second viewing which 
will improve the experience as people here assure her ;) )





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun  7 21:09:47 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:09:47 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
References: <OF88CB4F86.3B1A4F40-ON85256EAC.0063DC8D-85256EAC.0067288A@EU.novartis.net>
Message-ID: <001401c44cd3$e1acdfb0$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


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

  The quiddich being final being cut, would have been nice to see Harry throw
  the patronus at Malfoy and finally win the cup>>

  This is the biggest scene in the book that I would have liked to have seen in the movie.  Anything that
  gets Draco!  First, I love Tom Felton as Draco.  He is just so good at being a nasty little *ss!  It would
  have been great to see Harry knock him down a few pegs along with Hermione punching him.

  I also thought that maybe the story of how Black, Potter and Pettigrew all
  became illegal Animagus to be with Lupin should be explained to show the
  bond they had and also to give an idea in GoF of why Hermoine will think
  that Rita Skeeter may be one, it's her past experience here that I believe
  leads her in part to find that out.>>

  I think maybe this should have been explained too.  My youngest sister, who had not read the book,
  was a little puzzled by this so I had to explain the reasoning behind it.  She thought Sirius' dog was
  another form or a werewolf.  

  Kimberly


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




From jmmears at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 21:13:25 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:13:25 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <c.2b04ef6f.2df605c5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca2lpl+9sk2@eGroups.com>

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

I wrote: 
? However, since the scene where Snape assigns
> > an essay on werewolves with particular emphasis on How To 
Identify a
> > werewolf, it was a bit silly to have a werewolf that couldn't
> > possibly be confused with a wolf or a dog.? Requiring that the 
film
> > maintain it's own internal logic doesn't seem unreasonably picky 
to
> > me.


Cindy replied:
> My impression of Snape's lesson was that they learn to idenify a 
werewolf 
> when he is in his 'human' form, going by clues of his behavior or 
appearance. 
> This would make sense then for Hermione to solve the mystery 
before she ever sees 
> Lupin change into wolf form. I thought that Snape was talking 
about clues 
> such as disappearing during the full moon, physical injuries 
indicative of one's 
> roaming around as a wolf and killing prey, etc., even weakness 
after the full 
> moon phase. Things like that.
> But that's just me ;-) 


Well, obviously it wasn't just you <g>. One reason I think that 
Snape was alluding to the werewolf's appearance in it's "wolf" form 
was the passage from OOP, chapter 28, when James, Sirius, Remus, and 
Peter are leaving their OWL exam and talking about question 
10, "five signs that identify the werewolf".  Lupin jokes about the 
werewolf "..sitting on my chair. Two:  He's wearing my clothes..etc"
At that point, Pettigrew says: "I got the snout shape, the pupils of 
the eyes, and the tufted tail....".  Obviously, PP is ignoring the 
jokes and taking the question seriously, so the DADA exam seems to 
be asking about the werewolf after transformation.  However, my main 
reason for assuming this was from Chapter 9, POA when Snape 
asks, "Which of can tell me how we distinguish between the werewolf 
and the true wolf?"  Hermione then replies, "the werewolf differs 
from the true wolf in several small ways.  The snout of the werewolf-
--."  At which point, Snape cuts her off and calls her 
an "insufferable know-it-all".  I really can't recall if Hermione 
begins her description of the differences in the film though.  I'll 
be sure to listen for it next time <g>. 


Of course, in the movie the slides we see Snape show the class seem 
to be showing humanoid figures, so maybe you are right about 
identifying the werewolf in human form.   In the book they 
are definately talking about the wolf form on the OWL exams, since 
it seems that there are no physical identifiers when in human form.  
Still, I suppose I should know by now not to try to understand the 
movies by using the books ;-).

Jo Serenadust, who is beginning to think that being too into the 
books is a real disadvantage in enjoying the movie.. 




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 21:48:25 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:48:25 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  -JKR said they were in PoA!
In-Reply-To: <ca2hsn+89nk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2nr9+p2gj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Persephone" 
<themaidenpersephone at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <dianasdolls at y...> 
wrote:
> > As I was watching PoA the second time, I paid special attention 
to 
> > anything that might be a possible foreshadowing of future events 
> in 
> > book 6.  Most are probably not important, but as we won't know 
> which 
> > are and which aren't until the release of book 6...so here they 
> are 

Pershephone replied:
> While I would love to have more clues to fodder on, I must 
disagree 
> the foreshadowing that you mention. I doubt that Ms Rowling would 
> have supplied foreshadowing clues in PoA. And no one but she knows 
> the ending.  
> 

I looked for foreshadowing in the movie for this reason - JK Rowling 
herself said in at least one interview (A&E's "The Magic of Harry 
Potter" for one) that she got 'goose bumps' while watching certain 
scenes in the movie because they foreshadow events that happen in 
book 6.  She attributed these foreshadowings to the director, 
Alfonso Curaon.  She also commented that after the 6th book is 
published, readers will view the PoA movie again and believe 
(wrongly, according to JKR) that those foreshadowings were 
deliberately placed into the movie.  Curaon's response was that the 
books are 'intuitive' and he created this movie based on his 'feel' 
of where the books were going, not on any supplied hints or 
information (from JKR or otherwise) about upcoming events in the yet-
to-be completed 6th book.  

Diana L.
dianasdolls   




From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 21:57:34 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 21:57:34 -0000
Subject: JKR's comments on the movie
Message-ID: <ca2oce+7cp9@eGroups.com>

This has been brought up, but I'd specifically like to apply what 
she's had to say to everyone's criticisms of the film.

I, too, was pretty upset about the deflated Shrieking Shack scenes, 
though in my case, that was the only objections to the film; I 
simply don't care very much about stupid little things such 
Hermione's shirt tails being untucked, or there only being one 
Quidditch scene, or Lupin having a mustache. That stuff is 
immaterial to my movie-watching experience.

Now, JKR, as we all know, is very blunt. I highly doubt she would 
give a good opinion of the movie just because Warner Brothers told 
her to. Therefore, my concerns over the Shrieking Shack scenes being 
cut -- which were only partially because of the effect it had on the 
plot of the movie, but instead focused mainly on whether this would 
prove disastrous for the plot of the overarching series -- are 
considerably calmed by the fact that she has shown no qualms over 
them. Personally, I would very much like to hear her say something 
specifically on those scenes. But I have some faith in her opinion.

-- Annalisa




From themaidenpersephone at hotmail.com  Mon Jun  7 22:11:36 2004
From: themaidenpersephone at hotmail.com (Persephone)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 22:11:36 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  -JKR said they were in PoA!
In-Reply-To: <ca2nr9+p2gj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2p6o+gob8@eGroups.com>

 
> Pershephone replied:
> > While I would love to have more clues to fodder on, I must 
> disagree 
> > the foreshadowing that you mention. I doubt that Ms Rowling 
would 
> > have supplied foreshadowing clues in PoA. And no one but she 
knows 
> > the ending.  
> > 
> 
> I looked for foreshadowing in the movie for this reason - JK 
Rowling 
> herself said in at least one interview (A&E's "The Magic of Harry 
> Potter" for one) that she got 'goose bumps' while watching certain 
> scenes in the movie because they foreshadow events that happen in 
> book 6.  

Well, good then, I stand humbly corrected and gladly I might add.  I 
need a fix to get me through to book 6.....(big grin).

Persephone





From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 22:26:27 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 22:26:27 -0000
Subject: JKR's comments on the movie
In-Reply-To: <ca2oce+7cp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca2q2j+m67o@eGroups.com>

"Annalisa Moretti" <grianne2 at y...> wrote:
  
> Now, JKR, as we all know, is very blunt. I highly doubt she would 
> give a good opinion of the movie just because Warner Brothers told 
> her to. Therefore, my concerns over the Shrieking Shack scenes 
being 
> cut -- which were only partially because of the effect it had on 
the 
> plot of the movie, but instead focused mainly on whether this 
would 
> prove disastrous for the plot of the overarching series -- are 
> considerably calmed by the fact that she has shown no qualms over 
> them. Personally, I would very much like to hear her say something 
> specifically on those scenes. But I have some faith in her opinion.
 
I agree with you.
JK Rowling would not say she loved the film if she did not.  She 
might say she 'liked' it or that she liked the acting or the sets, 
but I highly doubt she would enthuse over this film as much as she 
had if she really didn't like it.  
In an interview I had read, Alfonso Curaon originally wanted to cut 
Professor Trelawney entirely out of the movie.  JK 
Rowling 'suggested' that that was NOT a good idea and she 'advised' 
him strongly against it due to Trelawney's importance in later books 
(at least through book 5, so far).  And the director also had wanted 
tiny people jumping on piano keys to accompany the Hogwarts choir 
scene.  JKR nixed that and told Curaon flat out that there were NO 
tiny people in the Harry Potter universe.  
If something is important to future plots or to her over-riding 
vision of the world she alone created, then Rowling does speak up 
and will tell the director so.  It stands to reason then that if a 
vital detail important to books 6 & 7 was in the PoA book, but left 
out of the PoA movie, she would have objected to it's exclusion 
quite strongly.  She has two more books yet to write, so she would 
understandably be very protective of her creations and how much of 
the central narrative thread and purpose of the story was retained 
in the films based on those books.      

Diana L.
dianasdolls




From smholden at earthlink.net  Mon Jun  7 22:31:23 2004
From: smholden at earthlink.net (Sara Holden)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:31:23 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <000d01c44ccb$5971f890$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <000001c44cdf$2ad0c700$0201a8c0@holden1>

Trevor wrote:
> The book specifically states, " It was a mark of how much the 
> class loathed Snape that they were all glaring at him, 
> because every one of them had called Hermione a know-it-all 
> at least once, and Ron, who told Hermione she was a 
> know-it-all at least twice a week, said loudly, 'Your asked 
> us a question and she knows the answer!  Why ask if you don't 
> want to be told?'" (Pg 172 US hard back). 
> 
>  
> 
> Not only is the movie comment out of character with the book 
> Ron but also out of character with the much more infatuated 
> with Hermione movie Ron.  It was a cheap attempt at humor.
> 

But it states right there in the book that Ron calls Hermione a
"know-it-all" twice a week.  What's the difference who says it?  Yes, in
the book Ron defends her, but why he does it seems more like only he can
call her names.  I found it very hypocritical of Ron to defend her from
Snape's name-calling, when Ron does it himself.

Personally, I thought it was fitting because Ron, in the book, does call
her a "know-it-all" and at least twice a week.  Here in the movie, he's
just agreeing to what Snape says.

Sara





From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 22:44:01 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:44:01 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <000001c44cdf$2ad0c700$0201a8c0@holden1>
Message-ID: <001401c44ce0$edebb7d0$6400a8c0@Desktop>

It was out of character of Ron to vocally agree with Snape- even if they
believe the same thing.  Ron's indignation at Snape's comment is priceless,
his movie snide was cheap.

 

Trevor

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sara Holden [mailto:smholden at earthlink.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 3:31 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron! Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA

 

Trevor wrote:
> The book specifically states, " It was a mark of how much the 
> class loathed Snape that they were all glaring at him, 
> because every one of them had called Hermione a know-it-all 
> at least once, and Ron, who told Hermione she was a 
> know-it-all at least twice a week, said loudly, 'Your asked 
> us a question and she knows the answer!  Why ask if you don't 
> want to be told?'" (Pg 172 US hard back). 
> 
>  
> 
> Not only is the movie comment out of character with the book 
> Ron but also out of character with the much more infatuated 
> with Hermione movie Ron.  It was a cheap attempt at humor.
> 

But it states right there in the book that Ron calls Hermione a
"know-it-all" twice a week.  What's the difference who says it?  Yes, in
the book Ron defends her, but why he does it seems more like only he can
call her names.  I found it very hypocritical of Ron to defend her from
Snape's name-calling, when Ron does it himself.

Personally, I thought it was fitting because Ron, in the book, does call
her a "know-it-all" and at least twice a week.  Here in the movie, he's
just agreeing to what Snape says.

Sara




________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
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=1291qfbes/M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups
/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1086733653/A=2178649/R=0/SIG=14dcd1v5j/*http:/www.house
holdfinance.com/ln/TrackingServlet?cmd_MediaCode=&fc=APS&mkt=000&mc=01PSYAYA
004001B220000U0300L0050000000000&dest=HOME_PAGE> click here


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2178649/rand=950866414> 

 

  _____  

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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun  7 23:29:12 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:29:12 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in
  DADA
In-Reply-To: <000001c44cdf$2ad0c700$0201a8c0@holden1>
References: <000d01c44ccb$5971f890$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040608001209.009cb4f0@plum.cream.org>

At 23:31 07/06/04 , Sara Holden wrote:

<big snip>

>Personally, I thought it was fitting because Ron, in the book, does call
>her a "know-it-all" and at least twice a week.  Here in the movie, he's
>just agreeing to what Snape says.

There's a huge difference. As it happens, I don't have a problem with Ron's 
comment at that point (although it comes across slightly maladroitly, I 
take him to be whispering his comment to Harry), but I disagree with your 
rationale.

The fact is that Hermione is a friend, Snape is, well, not. I don't know 
what your schooldays were like, but in mine, as a matter of principle, one 
did not vocally agree with a disliked teacher, even if what he said was 
true. And *absolutely* not if he was slagging off a friend.

Ron is entitled to slag off Hermione all he wants to her face or to Harry. 
He should never, ever, indicate agreement with Snape over her.

On the other hand, to disagree with Trevor's position, I think it would 
have been equally wrong character-wise for Ron to defend Hermione to Snape 
at that point, seeing as he's not too keen on her because of their ongoing 
disagreement over Crookshanks/Scabbers. (Yes, I'm aware that this 
disagreement is only sketched in the movie, whereas we're bludgeoned over 
the heads with it in the book, but it's there.)

--
gulPlum AKA Richard, who's still having trouble catching up



From joj at rochester.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 00:56:40 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 20:56:40 -0400
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <000d01c44cf3$75b35f30$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

5 things I loved about PoA.

1.  Daniel Radcliffe, Daniel Radcliffe, Daniel Radcliffe!  I thought he did a fantastic job!  He had a presence in this movie that he didn't have in the previous two.  I loved the anger, the mischievousness, the not over the top sadness.  That's book Harry to me.  I also couldn't help noticing that he's growing into a very good-looking young man, as well.  ;D

2.  Emma Watson.  She toned it down and was much more natural in this one.  Hermione is my second favorite character, (after Harry) so I was glad to not be annoyed by her in this one.  ( I actually have two small gripes about Hermione, but they have nothing to do with Emma) .

3.  Harry's joy.  He had moments of great fun and joy in this one.  The scene with the candy in the dorm and the flying scenes with him whooping it up. I just loved how he grabbed the broom at the end and raced outside to ride it.  We've never seen that Harry in the movie before. 

4.  Harry interacting with the other boys in his class.  I mentioned the candy scene, but also the fat lady scene, Harry was talking to Seamus (right?).   It wasn't always H/R/H.

5.  Gary Oldman.  He was very good as well.  Sirius isn't one of my favorite characters( I didn't really mourn for him in OotP, as much as for Harry's loss), But Gary did a great job.  I just wish we'd gotten to see more of him!


5 things I didn't love about PoA.

1.  Ron.  Not so much Rupert Grint, but (even in the books) I don't think Ron's ever matched the level of greatness he reached during the chess match.  Things only go down hill from here for him too. (The jealousy against Harry in GoF, and his  almost absence in OotP)  Rupert was better, but did grate on me a few times.  (Any time he does the high squeaky voice it grates on me)

2.  Peter Petigrew.  He should have looked like a pathetic man, not a half man/half rat.  Sirius wasn't looking or acting like a dog!
I hope he will improve in GoF!

3.  I didn't like the music played during the Marge blowing up scene, and I really disliked the talking head thing on the night bus. 

4.  Hermione picking up Harry and throwing him into the hole in the Whomping Willow.  I mean, come on!  I realize this isn't a realistic movie to begin with, but no one in the Potterverse has super powers!

5.  Malfoy was just too wimpy.  

I really liked this movie a lot.  I didn't like every single thing in it, but I don't like every single thing in the books either.  (I usually skip the Quidditch scenes)  I cannot wait to see this again!  I think I'll go Thursday!

Joj




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




From chthonicdancer at hotmail.com  Tue Jun  8 01:21:47 2004
From: chthonicdancer at hotmail.com (chthonia9)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 01:21:47 -0000
Subject: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
Message-ID: <ca34bb+mbf7@eGroups.com>


I have deeply conflicting feelings about this film.

I saw it in a sold-out family-owned cinema with a wonderful audience 
who laughed and cheered at all the right places, and I loved every 
minute of it.  Yes, there were things that I missed ? the old 
locations; Harry asking Lupin how he knew how to work the map; the 
explanation of who made the map (though I can accept the argument 
that several posters have made about that not really being 
necessary); Hermione being stressed; and Draco, well, not whimpering ?
 but these were more than outweighed by what they did well.

The acting was improved; the Marauder's Map was simply awesome (and 
using it for the credits was inspired), as was Buckbeak; the Knight 
Bus was as crazy as it was in the book; the final scene with the 
Dementors and Prongs was visually stunning; and the Divination 
Classroom set was perfect ? I'd never really pictured it in the book, 
and having it on tiers like that made complete sense.  (Does anyone 
know where the staircase leading to it was filmed, by the way?)  Even 
the script seemed less clunky than in the previous movies, and I 
thought the way they changed it in the Shrieking Shack to make it 
seem that Sirius and Lupin were going to kill Harry was a good 
adaptation to the movie medium.

What really stood out for me, though, was the cinematography and the 
symbolism (and no, I *don't* mean the opening scene ;)  The way the 
camera dove into Harry's eye as he was fainting
 the close-up of 
Lupin's eye transforming
 the snowy owl swooping down into the 
suddenly-snowy valley
 that light-after-darkness shot of the snow 
melting off the snowdrop
 Harry's moment of pure exhilaration when 
riding Buckbeak
 as someone else has said, at that moment he is free 
from the Dursleys, from Malfoy, from the worry of Sirius, from the 
rules that keep him bound to the school when everyone else is able to 
visit Hogsmeade.  It worked perfectly for me, especially with 
Buckbeak showing the same joy by trailing his talon in the water.

I was also impressed by the way everything froze as the Dementors 
approached ? it really worked as a visual equivalent of the feelings 
they induce in the book, so that in the Quidditch scene we could have 
the same gradual awareness of their presence that Harry did, and it 
also made an effective build-up to their appearance by the lake. And 
the constant subtle references to time ? that guy in the pub reading 
Steven Hawking's book (though I did think it looked a bit odd to see 
a Muggle book there), the shot of Harry behind the clock face, the 
massive pendulum (I was half-way through the movie before I twigged 
to its connection with the time-travel theme) and, of course, the 
ticking in the time-turner scene.

However, I'm left feeling rather
 empty, rather as I did when I 
resurfaced from OotP and felt it slipping through my mental fingers.  
Perhaps that's because ? as others have said ? there was more 
emphasis on plot and witty dialogue and artistry than on 
characterisation.  Or perhaps it's just a sign that what I *really* 
love about the Potterverse is not so much the source material (much 
as I love the books and the characters), but the community that has 
grown up around it.  

I knew the books reasonably well when I saw the first two movies, but 
it was the CoS movie that brought me into the fandom.  Since then 
I've learned to become obsessive about small details through spending 
far too much time reading and writing fanfic.  I would have expected 
that to make me more annoyed about the things they changed in the 
film, but oddly enough I think it made it easier for me to accept 
them.  I've read a number of beautifully written HP fanfics that have 
a very dark tone, so the feel of Cuaron's take on the Potterverse was 
not as much of a shock to me as I suspect it would have done had I 
only known JKR's work.

But ultimately, what disappoints me about the film is that it does 
feel more like fanfic than canon.  There were scenes - such as the 
train rattling Harry's room at the Leaky Cauldron; the boys' antics 
with the animal-sweets, seen through lashing rain; the brightness of 
Harry's wand in the dark corridor (and I loved the paintings moaning 
about not being able to sleep!) ? that made me feel I was *there* in 
a way the other movies didn't.  Yes, I was there ? but `there' wasn't 
always the world of JK Rowling that I've come to love.

Three reasons for this, I think:

1) The change in location
So many images in the first film were exactly how I'd imagined them.  
Alnwick castle made a good Hogwarts. Glencoe was an impressive 
settling, and perhaps this new vision of Hogwarts might have worked 
if the other hadn't become embedded, but ? having established the 
look of the place ? why change it?  They didn't change the actors who 
play the characters (well, not the major ones) ? why do they think 
that continuity of the locations that `play' the places is less 
important?

2) The clothes
I was apprehensive about this ever since I saw the first publicity 
pics.  It didn't bother me as much as I'd feared while I was actually 
watching the film, but I think it did subconsciously affect my 
response.  There was so much time when the characters were shown not 
looking like wizards that it took a lot of the magic away for me.  I 
expect that was the intention, to give us the sense that these were 
normal people and their lives were not focussed on magic but on the 
same struggles with self and others that we all face.  Fair enough, 
it's an interesting interpretation ? but in JKR's world, wizards wear 
robes, just as they carry wands and ride broomsticks.  It's all part 
of the way she's drawing on the stereotypical images of witches and 
wizards and giving them a little humorous twist.

3) The *dirt*
Yes, the train rattling past the Leaky Cauldron gave a powerful sense 
of place, but in the book Harry's room felt cozy ("a comfortable-
looking bed, some highly polished oak furniture, a cheerfully 
crackling fire"), a safe haven after his flight from his relatives, 
the wizarding authorities and that creepily mysterious black dog.  I 
suppose the grim surroundings were supposed to be symbolic of a world 
that suddenly seems more difficult, but for me that made the darkness 
inevitable, whereas what I respect about the books is that they bring 
the reader into a world that looks bright and safe on the surface but 
gradually reveal that to be an illusion.  The bright scenes in this 
film (the Hippogriff lesson, Dumbledore's welcoming speech) stood out 
like beacons of hope in the darkness, but I can't help feeling that 
the graininess of the corridor-at-night scene and the terror of the 
Dementor on the train would have been even more effective had they 
contrasted strongly with a film and a castle that was light and 
welcoming in the daytime.

And, yuck, did anyone else notice the yellowing grimy patches on the 
walls of the train carriages?  Or the filthy state of Hermione's pink 
top?  (perhaps from the Whomping Willow, but I don't recall her 
rolling in the dirt)  Several posters have praised the film for its 
depiction of magic as an unremarkable feature of everyday life.  I 
heartily agree ? but it *is* a feature of everyday life in the 
Potterverse.  They *do* have cleaning and repairing spells.  Magic is 
their technology ? if Cuaron was making it look run-down to depict a 
non-technological world as realistic, then it is a clich? unworthy of 
the brilliance of so much of the film.

The Potterverse is not safe.  But nor is it squalid.


Having said all that, I remain deeply impressed by the film.  I saw 
it twice within 48 hours and was enthralled both times, whereas I saw 
CoS for the second time after a gap of three weeks and found myself 
getting bored in the second half.  I loved the soundtrack to PoA ? I 
don't think I even remembered the one for CoS. This movie had depth 
and beauty.  I just wish it could have had more of a canon feel.

There seems to have been a dichotomy set up by some previous posters: 
Columbus' slavish adherence to the books vs Cuaron's artistry.  I 
really hope that it is a false dichotomy, that it *is* possible to 
make a film that is intelligent and beautiful and also faithful to 
the feel as well as the themes of the books ? and that one, if not 
all, of the future directors will be willing and able to make it 
happen.

~Chthonia~

(Resurfacing in honour of the new movie, with apologies if anyone is 
offended by the length of this post)





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Tue Jun  8 01:36:01 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 20:36:01 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <000d01c44cf3$75b35f30$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIECEIHCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


  -----Original Message-----
  From: joj [mailto:joj at rochester.rr.com]




  5 things I didn't love about PoA.

  1.  Ron.  Not so much Rupert Grint, but (even in the books) I don't think
Ron's ever matched the level of greatness he reached during the chess match.
Things only go down hill from here for him too. (The jealousy against Harry
in GoF, and his  almost absence in OotP)  Rupert was better, but did grate
on me a few times.  (Any time he does the high squeaky voice it grates on
me) >>

  See, I liked Rupert best in this movie.  Now Ron, the character in the
book, does tick me off in GoF, but... Rupert had me in stitches during the
dream
  about the spiders. I just thought he was so adorable in this film.

  2.  Peter Petigrew.  He should have looked like a pathetic man, not a half
man/half rat.  Sirius wasn't looking or acting like a dog!
  I hope he will improve in GoF! >>

  Well, the difference between Pettigrew and Sirius is that Sirius hasn't
lived the last 12 years as a dog.  Pettigrew had to be a constant rat for
the last 12
  years.  The only thing that bothered me about Pettigrew is how he changed
back to a rat and left his clothes, when he originally transformed he had
  clothes on.  Does that make sense?

  5.  Malfoy was just too wimpy. >>

  I agree, he was too wimpy, but isn't he like that in the books too?  He's
always had a big mouth, but when it comes to taking action, he is a wimp.

   I agree with you on the 5 things you did like.  When I saw it with my
14-year old sister, I leaned over to her and said "hasn't he gotten cute",
  meaning Dan Radcliffe.  She said he was "ok", but when I told her that he
was the 2nd richest kid in Britain, she said "well, he is kind of cute."
  LOL!  Ah... teenagers!

  Kimberly






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




From editor at texas.net  Tue Jun  8 02:09:25 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:09:25 -0500
Subject: Question in quidditch scene
Message-ID: <00a801c44cfd$a1d8e6c0$a259aacf@texas.net>

S
O
M
E
T
I
M
E
S

A

W
A
N
D

I
S

J
U
S
T

A

W
A
N
D

A question: the second time I saw the movie, during the Quidditch game, as
they panned across the Gryffindor stands--for a flash, less than a second,
in a gap between people, I saw a black form far off. It was not repeated.
Did anyone else with sharper eyes catch this? Was it Sirius in dog-form,
come to watch the game?

If so, I don't see why they kept that in, since the effect of his appearance
is now triggered by the cloud-Grim, and he does not later mention having
seen Harry fly.

~Amanda
Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.




From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 02:23:58 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:23:58 -0000
Subject: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
In-Reply-To: <ca34bb+mbf7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca37vu+94cu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chthonia9" 
<chthonicdancer at h...> wrote:
> 1) The change in location
> So many images in the first film were exactly how I'd imagined 
them.  
> Alnwick castle made a good Hogwarts. Glencoe was an impressive 
> settling, and perhaps this new vision of Hogwarts might have 
worked 
> if the other hadn't become embedded, but ? having established the 
> look of the place ? why change it?  They didn't change the actors 
who 
> play the characters (well, not the major ones) ? why do they think 
> that continuity of the locations that `play' the places is less 
> important?

Mm, but you see, what you thought was the ideal image of certain 
places, some didn't. To me, the sets of the first two movies seemed 
too neat and tidy, too cartoonish. They didn't represent the way I 
interpreted JKR's world, at all. To you, they did. But Columbus's 
vision of the world, and yours, was just as much interpretation 
(like "fanfic", as you put it, which I think is a good analogy) as 
Cuaron's or mine.

All movies adaptations can't help but be sort of like fanfic. It can 
never be more than an interpretation of a source, no matter how 
faithful the directors, writers, etc, try to be.

-- Annalisa




From Tasukibeth1 at cs.com  Tue Jun  8 02:27:06 2004
From: Tasukibeth1 at cs.com (Tasukibeth1 at cs.com)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 22:27:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <8e.ce44358.2df67dfa@cs.com>

IAmLordCassandra at aol.com writes:

> Yes-it is clear that Lupin knew about the map and how to work it.  What 
> bothered me was that Harry never asks "How did you know this was a map and 
> how did 
> you know how to work it?".  During both map scenes I wasn't the only one in 
> the theatre who was thinking "turn around and ask, you idiot!" 

Beth says:
You know, in the final Harry/Lupin scene, where Lupin was walking away for 
the last time and Harry was watching him from the top of the stairs, I expected 
Harry to shout out to him at the last moment "How did you know it was a map?" 
and Lupin to turn around and smirk, saying "I helped write it, of course. 
Along with your father (wink)" When that didn't happen, I was actually stunned. I 
couldn't believe such a perfect opportunity was not used. Ah, such is life.

*ahem* I still liked it, though! LOL I can't change my stance now that I 
started a thread ;-P

Beth


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




From 12499 at msn.com  Tue Jun  8 01:59:39 2004
From: 12499 at msn.com (pitaprh)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 01:59:39 -0000
Subject: Choppy - Spolier
Message-ID: <ca36ib+kd3l@eGroups.com>

I found the movie to be quite choppy.  It was as though they took the 
most important scenes from POA, filmed them and then lined them up 
and showed them.  They scenes did not flow - they would cut from one 
right to another with out them being tied together.  For example, 
when Harry cannot go to Hogsmeade he is left standing by himself in 
the garden (for lack of a better word cant think right now what that 
is called ) and the next scene is is with Lupin on the bridge - how 
did he get there?  Where did they meet up?  Add 2 minutes where Lupin 
walks up behind him and says "I hear you can't go - lets walk" then 
it would have made sense.  Many of the scenes were like that cut from 
one go to another with no explanation of how we got there.  There 
seemed to be alot of lack of explanation.  The map, the authors of 
the map, Prongs, the permission slip in the 2nd scene, Trelawney's 
prediction - Harry never meets with DD to tell him what she said.  I 
liked it, but would have liked a little more detail.  

"pitaprh"




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 02:40:13 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 22:40:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
References: <ca37vu+94cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001101c44d01$ed1244c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


"
<chthonicdancer at h...> wrote:
> 1) The change in location
> So many images in the first film were exactly how I'd imagined
them.
> Alnwick castle made a good Hogwarts. Glencoe was an impressive
> settling, and perhaps this new vision of Hogwarts might have
worked
> if the other hadn't become embedded, but - having established the
> look of the place - why change it?  They didn't change the actors
who
> play the characters (well, not the major ones) - why do they think
> that continuity of the locations that `play' the places is less
> important.

The only two places this "grime" bothered me was in Harry's room at the
Leaky Cauldron and Dumbledore's fingernails.  I also hated the rubberband in
Dumbledore's beard.  WTF?

Joj, who still loved the movie :P







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 02:44:22 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:44:22 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing, still no ticking
Message-ID: <ca3966+fllg@eGroups.com>

I just saw PoA for the second time in the same theatre as before, 
and I have yet to hear ticking in the time turner scene. 

I hadn't heard it the first time, so I was really, really paying 
attention and the only time I heard it was when the scene is almost 
over and Hr grabs Harry's hand and says, "Come one!"  Then they run 
for the hospital wing and we fly through the loudly ticking clock.

Am I missing something here?  There was NO ticking!  Could it be the 
theatre I am going to?  I'm so annoyed!  I know I don't have a 
hearing problem.  ALso, there was no "DOlby THX surround sound" logo 
type thing before PoA started, could that have anything to do with 
it?  *sniff*  I want to hear the ticking...

Alora




From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 02:49:48 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:49:48 -0000
Subject: Choppy - Spolier
In-Reply-To: <ca36ib+kd3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca39gc+ugkh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "pitaprh" <12499 at m...> wrote:
> For example, 
> when Harry cannot go to Hogsmeade he is left standing by himself 
in 
> the garden (for lack of a better word cant think right now what 
that 
> is called ) and the next scene is is with Lupin on the bridge - 
how 
> did he get there?  Where did they meet up?  Add 2 minutes where 
Lupin 
> walks up behind him and says "I hear you can't go - lets walk" 
then 
> it would have made sense.  

Hm. While I dislike the removal of key scenes such as the background 
of the Shrieking Shack sequence, I think you're looking for 
something to complain about here. There is no need to show that sort 
of stuff, and few books or movies do. It's up to the viewer or the 
reader to use his or her imagination to fill in the blanks. 

For example, in PoA, the book, Chapter 9, Grim Defeat, ends with 
Harry being shown his the shards of his Nimbus 2000. The next 
chapter begins with us being informed Harry is going to stay in the 
hospital wing for the rest of the weekend. We don't see Harry's 
immediate reaction to the destruction of his broom; instead we see 
his feelings a little later. I'm sure if you look through any of the 
HP books, and any book or any movie at all, you'll find plenty of 
example such as that. The mere fact that you were easily capable of 
coming up with something to fill in the missing scene shows how 
completely unnecessary it was to show that scene. It doesn't mean 
it's choppy.

Now the Shrieking Shack? Yeah, that was quite choppy.

-- Annalisa




From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Tue Jun  8 04:33:35 2004
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (dan)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:33:35 -0000
Subject: I liked the movie too (reasons why)
In-Reply-To: <ca1oqr+p7cb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca3fj0+u7mu@eGroups.com>

"jjpandy" wrote:

> More outdoor scenes - loved it and the whomping willow made me 
laugh -
>  it had a personality!

Yes, it did, and Columbus gave the Flying Ford Anglia a personality 
too, moreso than the book. So, that wasn't just Cauron. Also, didn't 
Columbus add the uniform house crests that have become fan standard? 
There seems to be a fair bit of revisionist criticism mixed into some 
of the fan reviews. The movie critics are certainly more fond of this 
movie that the first too, that's for sure. See rottentomatoes.com.

> And the audience roared when the poor bird 
> became an explosion of feathers!

And the audiences I shared the movie with loved the shrunken head, 
all of the Knight bus, loved the "When did she get here? Did you see 
her come in?" lines of Ron, loved the animal-sound candies, loved 
Boggart!Snape, the talking heads at the Three Broomsticks, and so on. 
No, they didn't laugh at the immense Jack-In-The-Box, because it was 
intentionally transitional, was intended to be unsettling to us, but 
not to the wizard kids. It's a quotidian cinematic tool - make the 
audience aware of something foreboding before the characters pick up 
on it. By the way, I don't recall there being anything actually laugh 
funny in the Columbus travesties. Nor, in fact, do I recall there 
being anything creepy in his failed attempts. It was all just CG 
sugar. But Harry at the curb was as unsettling in the movie as in the 
book. What a memorable scene!

As well, thematically the book makes a point to state that the Muggle 
world is informed about Sirius' escape too, and the narrator does 
comment on the proximity of the magical and Muggle worlds, when Harry 
stays at the Leaky Cauldron. So, any overt reflection of Real World 
London in early movie scenes is canon. Perhaps the sense of grime 
some complained about is just that - downtown London. As I said 
before too, the train wasn't the Santa Claus Express, but a pretty 
fair example of a train running, say, between Manchester and London, 
like the one on which our author found her story.

Now I think of it, that's one thing all the movies haven't had to 
deal with yet at any length - the interface between magical and 
Muggle worlds. Though Rowling does write about it often, if briefly, 
she doesn't force the point, as yet. (I suppose, in a way, the 
offhand reference to Grindelwald and 1945 in Philosopher's Stone 
hangs like a Damocles' Sword, or something like that, over the books.)

> Only 2 things I really wished were in the movie: 1) some revelation 
> that Lupin was Moony (having read the book so much, I don't know 
how 
> easy it is to figure out)

This is a very interesting, and oft repeated, point that bears some 
examination, on a couple of levels. First, Cauron (and Kloves?) seem 
to be taking the lead from Jo herself, in leaving some things 
unquestioned, unexplained, unexplicated. The mysterious non-
appearance, or non-significance of the appearance of, Peter Pettigrew 
on the map, before Harry gets it, is completely inadequately 
discussed on the Lexicon. As is how the twins Weasley learned how to 
use it. Debates raged, and still rage, with each bit of information 
Rowling let slip, about the relationships of MWPP and their time at 
school and after. The very questions that perplex readers of the 
books are reflected in Cauron's (Kloves'?) handling of scenes. Looked 
at this way, it is a pretty fair reflection of the style of the books.

Second, what would be gained by this knowledge, thematically? Between 
the overheard conversation at the Three Broomsticks and the Shrieking 
Shack scene, and the conversation between Sirius and Harry just 
before the werewolf transformation, is there anything missing other 
than the connection to the map? Add Lupin's apparent knowledge about 
how the map works, and there's even less unspoken.

Dan, who loved the movie as cinema and as HP theorist and fan




From 12499 at msn.com  Tue Jun  8 04:36:29 2004
From: 12499 at msn.com (pitaprh)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:36:29 -0000
Subject: Choppy - Spolier
In-Reply-To: <ca39gc+ugkh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca3fod+1s73@eGroups.com>

> 
> Hm. While I dislike the removal of key scenes such as the 
background 
> of the Shrieking Shack sequence, I think you're looking for 
> something to complain about here. There is no need to show that 
sort 
> of stuff, and few books or movies do. It's up to the viewer or the 
> reader to use his or her imagination to fill in the blanks. 
> 
> For example, in PoA, the book, Chapter 9, Grim Defeat, ends with 
> Harry being shown his the shards of his Nimbus 2000. The next 
> chapter begins with us being informed Harry is going to stay in the 
> hospital wing for the rest of the weekend. We don't see Harry's 
> immediate reaction to the destruction of his broom; instead we see 
> his feelings a little later. I'm sure if you look through any of 
the 
> HP books, and any book or any movie at all, you'll find plenty of 
> example such as that. The mere fact that you were easily capable of 
> coming up with something to fill in the missing scene shows how 
> completely unnecessary it was to show that scene. It doesn't mean 
> it's choppy.
> 
> Now the Shrieking Shack? Yeah, that was quite choppy.
> 
> -- Annalisa

I think you misunderstood my point.   What I am refering to is more 
of an editing issue.  I found that the choppy-ness took away from the 
story.  Many people have commented how fast the movie went - I 
believe that is because it ran from scene to scene.  There was no 
flow what-so-ever.  The only time the movie flowed was at the end, 
starting at the point where buckbeak was going to meet his end.  That 
is when the movie really got good.  I didn't think the shreiking 
shack was choppy at all.  It may have been missing key information 
you wanted to hear, about how they were all friends in school, why 
snape was so angry etc - I agree that info should have been in there 
too,  but the scene itself flowed.  JK does an amazing job of tying 
everything together in her books.  She leaves no stone unturned.  A 
perfect example is the scene you mention above - he is shown his 
broken broom and then the next chapter starts with him being in the 
hospital a week.   If the next chapter started with it being 
Christmas and him getting his firebolt, you would be left wondering 
how we got from him in the hospital to it being Christmas.  That is 
how this movie made me feel.  How did we get from scene A to scene B?




From jeanico at securenet.net  Tue Jun  8 04:47:20 2004
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 04:47:20 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing, still no ticking
In-Reply-To: <ca3966+fllg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca3gco+1ofk@eGroups.com>

Wow... the ticking was very clear to me and saw the movie twice in 
two different cinemas. I like the added touch it gives. Lots of 
references to time in this movie.
Nicole
Who is next planning to see it on an IMAX screen! Can't wait!    




From moonmint17 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 05:15:22 2004
From: moonmint17 at yahoo.com (moonmint17)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 05:15:22 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca2lpl+9sk2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca3i1a+r07b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" <jmmears at c...> wrote:
> Still, I suppose I should know by now not to try to understand the 
> movies by using the books ;-).
> 
> Jo Serenadust, who is beginning to think that being too into the 
> books is a real disadvantage in enjoying the movie..

No, I don't think so - I love the books, but I've almost always liked 
books better than any movie that was based upon them.  However, just 
as we have to have suspension of disbelief to enjoy any movie or 
theatre, we have to be willing to "let go" of the expectations of 
canon a bit to enjoy the movies.




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jun  8 11:16:33 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:16:33 -0000
Subject: Y Tu Mama reference in PoA
In-Reply-To: <1dc.2364f3b7.2df626f6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca476h+sv70@eGroups.com>

Hi All,

Cindy:
> the scene on the hillside between the 
> three of them is a mini homage to Y Tu Mama Tambien - a much   
> more innocent one, but still Cuaron's own little salute to 
> his own movie 

The Cuaraon reference I did enjoy (which has been discussed here I 
think, though I cannot find it) is the statues around the fountain 
leading to that amazing wooden covered bridge. They were each of an 
eagle eating the snake with a claw grasping it, which is the coat of 
arms of Mexico!

Cheers,

Dumbledad.





From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 11:47:23 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:47:23 -0000
Subject: I liked the movie too (reasons why)
In-Reply-To: <ca3fj0+u7mu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca490b+pq24@eGroups.com>

Dan Wrote:

>>By the way, I don't recall there being anything actually laugh
funny in the Columbus travesties.<<

Humor is subjective of course, but I thought PS/SS, had a few rather 
funny moments. Those being the "she needs to sort out her priorities" 
line (really obvious, I know, but Rupert Grint says it so perfectly). 
Then there's the look Hermione gives Ron after he says "This is 
light." I thought that was rather funny too. I can't really remember 
anything that good in CoS (although I might be the only one who liked 
the "follow the butterflies" line...I've heard others complain about 
it).

 >>Nor, in fact, do I recall there being anything creepy in his 
failed attempts. It was all just CG sugar. But Harry at the curb was 
as unsettling in the movie as in the book. What a memorable scene!<<

Nothing *creepy*, perhaps (although the books didn't really provide 
any opportunites like PoA did), but he did manage a few 
emotional/atmospheric scenes (the mirror of erised scene comes to 
mind, when I watched that scene for the first time after reading PoA, 
I got choked up, and I'm REALLY not the type that cries at movies). 

 
Dan (in response to Lupin et al not being revealed as the writers of 
the map):
>>what would be gained by this knowledge, thematically? Between 
the overheard conversation at the Three Broomsticks and the Shrieking 
Shack scene, and the conversation between Sirius and Harry just 
before the werewolf transformation, is there anything missing other 
than the connection to the map? Add Lupin's apparent knowledge about  
how the map works, and there's even less unspoken.<<

I agree completely. Although the four people in the audience 
unfamiliar with the books miss out on hearing that Harry's father and 
his friends wrote the map, that in it of itself does not drastically 
change the movie. Its hinted at, so its there, just very subtle (its 
not as though they made it out that Lupin and Sirius don't know 
anything about the map at all, the only thing that's changed the 
revelation of that, which we already know anyway, and those who don't 
can still follow the story with no problem).


-Rebecca (who also appreciated PoA as good cinema)




From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 13:23:14 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:23:14 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca3i1a+r07b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4ek2+4kie@eGroups.com>

  However, just 
> as we have to have suspension of disbelief to enjoy any movie or 
> theatre, we have to be willing to "let go" of the expectations of 
> canon a bit to enjoy the movies.

  My feelings exactly.  How many of us had played the visual we had 
set up for the movie in our minds many times before seeing the film?  
Some of the reponses I've seen here bring back memories of almost a 
year ago when OOP was released.  Once again, we had played an idea in 
our minds of what to expect and when it did not live up to that idea, 
we did not always respond too well (yet after six readings of OOP, I 
see that it is filled with many jewels). 

  My main hope for the Azkaban movie is that it has the same effect 
on others that the first two films had on me, getting me curious 
about the books and therefore, reading (and re-reading) them and 
learning the real story of Hogwarts.

  Brian:-)     




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 14:02:44 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 14:02:44 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing, still no ticking
In-Reply-To: <ca3gco+1ofk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4gu4+blf6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
> Wow... the ticking was very clear to me and saw the movie twice in 
> two different cinemas. I like the added touch it gives. Lots of 
> references to time in this movie.
> Nicole
> Who is next planning to see it on an IMAX screen! Can't wait!


I've talked to my hubby about the ticking, and he says I need to try 
it at another theatre.  The one I am at doesn't have the surround 
sound (and it's older) and he said that's probably why I am not 
hearing it.  He works in the video/film industry, so I will taek his 
advice and see it AGAIN, somewhere else.  What a chore, right?!  Hehe

Alora




From jjpandy at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 15:10:08 2004
From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:10:08 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
Message-ID: <ca4ksg+nsum@eGroups.com>

Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair 
throughout the entire movie?!

JJPandy  :)





From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 15:28:57 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:28:57 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <000d01c44cf3$75b35f30$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <ca4lvp+hpod@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joj" <joj at r...> wrote:
> 5 things I loved about PoA.
> 
> 1.  Daniel Radcliffe,... I also couldn't help noticing that he's 
growing into a very good-looking young man, as well.  ;D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are going to 
be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to see Dan 
and Emma act it out on the screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5.  Malfoy was just too wimpy.  




But Malfoy is a wimp. Like all bullies he is a coward, why else does 
he need Crabbe&Goyle with him? He doesn't have the guts to fight one 
to one.





From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 15:29:19 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:29:19 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca4ksg+nsum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4m0f+7k61@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" <jjpandy at y...> wrote:
> Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair 
> throughout the entire movie?!
> 
> JJPandy  :)

I too was very pleased! Now if only he could have green eyes, too :) 
Well, as long as they don't make it to obvious he doesn't, all will 
be well.

-- Annalisa




From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 15:43:35 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:43:35 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca4m0f+7k61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4mr7+n40h@eGroups.com>


  I definitely thought that this was one of the improvements in this 
film.

  Brian:-)



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Annalisa Moretti" 
<grianne2 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" <jjpandy at y...> wrote:
> > Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair 
> > throughout the entire movie?!
> > 
> > JJPandy  :)
> 
> I too was very pleased! Now if only he could have green eyes, 
too :) 
> Well, as long as they don't make it to obvious he doesn't, all will 
> be well.
> 
> -- Annalisa




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 15:51:53 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:51:53 -0000
Subject: 2nd viewing, still no ticking
In-Reply-To: <ca3966+fllg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4nap+nltf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> I just saw PoA for the second time in the same theatre as before, 
> and I have yet to hear ticking in the time turner scene. 
> 
> I hadn't heard it the first time, so I was really, really paying 
> attention and the only time I heard it was when the scene is almost 
> over and Hr grabs Harry's hand and says, "Come one!"  Then they run 
> for the hospital wing and we fly through the loudly ticking clock.
> 
> Am I missing something here?  There was NO ticking!  Could it be 
the 
> theatre I am going to?  I'm so annoyed!  I know I don't have a 
> hearing problem.  ALso, there was no "DOlby THX surround sound" 
logo 
> type thing before PoA started, could that have anything to do with 
> it?  *sniff*  I want to hear the ticking...
> 
> Alora

There is definately ticking.  I bought the soundtrack, and the first 
time I heard that song I thought there was something wrong with my 
car because of all the ticking.  I think the reason you're not 
hearing it is because it fits so well in the scene.  You hardly 
notice any music in this film... except the Aunt Marge Waltz.  That's 
very noticable.




From jjpandy at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 16:33:06 2004
From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:33:06 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <000d01c44cf3$75b35f30$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <ca4po2+tugf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joj" <joj at r...> wrote:

>  "snip, snip"
> 4.  Harry interacting with the other boys in his class.  I 
mentioned the candy scene, but also the fat lady scene, Harry was 
talking to Seamus (right?).   It wasn't always H/R/H.
> 
JJPandy's response to "Good" #4:
Yes, I noticed too that Harry interacted with other students in the 
Fat Lady scene that you already mentioned.  I also noticed when HRH 
are walking through the courtyard (Harry is dressed all in black), 
Harry turns to acknowledge a student that he passes.  For some 
reason, that jumped out at me, and maybe a sign that the actors were 
very comfortable in their roles.  Was this action directed or 
improvised by Daniel?


> >"snip, snip" 
> 2.  Peter Petigrew.  He should have looked like a pathetic man, not 
a half man/half rat.  Sirius wasn't looking or acting like a dog!
> I hope he will improve in GoF!
> 
JJPandy's Response to "Bad" #2
I thought that the acting of Peter was fantastic.  Remember that 
Peter had been a rat for 12 years!  I imagined it would take him a 
while to remember how to act human!

> 


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




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 16:38:36 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:38:36 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca4lvp+hpod@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4q2c+ouf4@eGroups.com>

"mcmaxslb" <McGregorMax at e...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joj" <joj at r...> wrote:
> > 5 things I loved about PoA.
> > 
> > 1.  Daniel Radcliffe,... I also couldn't help noticing that he's 
> growing into a very good-looking young man, as well.  ;D
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are going 
to 
> be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to see 
Dan 
> and Emma act it out on the screen
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 5.  Malfoy was just too wimpy.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But Malfoy is a wimp. Like all bullies he is a coward, why else 
does 
> he need Crabbe&Goyle with him? He doesn't have the guts to fight 
one 
> to one.

You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's 
the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing them 
permanently.

M.




From judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Jun  8 14:05:45 2004
From: judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk (judy_magic333)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 14:05:45 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotton fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca3i1a+r07b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4h3p+g5v5@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "serenadust" <jmmears at c...> 
wrote:
> > Still, I suppose I should know by now not to try to understand 
the 
> > movies by using the books ;-).
> > 
> > Jo Serenadust, who is beginning to think that being too into the 
> > books is a real disadvantage in enjoying the movie..

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "moonmint17" <moonmint17 at y...> 
wrote:
> No, I don't think so - I love the books, but I've almost always 
liked 
> books better than any movie that was based upon them.  However, 
just 
> as we have to have suspension of disbelief to enjoy any movie or 
> theatre, we have to be willing to "let go" of the expectations of 
> canon a bit to enjoy the movies.


First of all -- hi, I am a newbie (sort of) and have decided that I 
wanted this to be my first post here.  To introduce myself, my name 
is Judy and I used to subscribe to this egroup when I lived in North 
Carolina about a year ago.  At the end of last November, I moved to 
Scotland to get married and am very happy here (though I miss some 
things about the US, of course).  Now, with POA premiering and me 
having some time to give to the egroups (this one and the Over 40 
one), I was happy to be able to re-subscribe.

Anyway, I am one of the few who have not seen POA yet, even though it 
premiered here eight days ago.  My husband and I decided to wait 
until the theater was less crowded to go see this movie, and I am 
hoping that this Saturday will work out for us.  In the meantime, I 
have been reading all the reviews of the movie, both positive and 
negative, and (unlike others) I am glad I am.  To tell you the truth, 
I am more suspicious of a "I just *love* this movie!" type of review 
than a negative one.  I just love the books, and I do not consider 
comparing the movies to them to be a bad thing, unlike others who 
have posted here.  And, I would like to address this issue in two 
ways.  First -- as imperfect as the SS/PS movie was, I really liked 
it and thought it did somewhat of an affectionate tribute to the 
book.  Harry is my favorite character and I have great sympathy for 
him (knowing what it is like to be in an emotionally abusive family 
situation), and I like the awkward way that DR portrayed him.  Plus, 
I thought Richard Harris was *great* as DD, and so I will be the 
first to admit that I will be going into POA with a definite 
bias . . . for which I will *not* apologize.  

Second, I have seen the Lord of the Rings movies mentioned here, and 
I am glad.  I, myself, saw these movies before reading the trilogy -- 
which I am doing as I speak -- and I love the movies, especially 
RotK.  I am also enjoying the books a lot, though I have no problem 
with the changes Peter Jackson made for the movies.  I thought Peter 
did an excellent job and kept to the spirit of the book trilogy.  I 
have spent time on a LOTR site, reading both positive and negative 
comments about the movies, and it just seems to me that most of the 
negative comments are rather petty and "majoring on minors".

Having said that . . . I must confess that I have great misgivings 
about the POA movie.  Yes -- like many others here, POA is my 
favorite of the HP books.  And, I feel that Cuaron leaving out 
significant parts of the story does the HP universe a great dis-
service.  Okay, so there are the time limits, but I think it is a 
matter of priorities, and I don't agree with Cuaron's/Kloves' 
priorities.  I am entitled to my opinion, though it won't have any 
affect on how the movies are done.  And, I must admit that I am 
baffled that JKR considers this her favorite of the HP movies.  
Unlike others, I am not inclined to show blind faith for JKR, no 
matter how much I admire her books and what she has achieved.  I 
don't intend to go into the theater predisposed to dislike POA, but I 
will be cautious in how I judge it, that's all.  No matter how I end 
up feeling about the movie, I am just glad that I have the POA book 
(as well as the other four) close at hand to reassure me that I don't 
have to accept story revisionism.  

I suppose I will offend the movie lovers by my comments and get some 
rotten fruit thrown at *me*, but I felt that my thoughts about this 
are just as valid  And, I don't think it is fair to label those who 
give the movie a negative review as being not a "true fan" or 
something.  This is a place where we should be free to express all 
range of views, being civil and disagreeing repectfully with those of 
different views . . . even if we can't understand the reason for the 
opposing view.  Having the opportunity to discuss the movies and 
books like this is one of the great things about *being* a Harry 
Potter fan, imo.

Judy    





From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Tue Jun  8 13:55:23 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:55:23 -0500 
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0663@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Persephone:
My non-Harry Potter roomie did understand all the major points of 
the movie.  She correctly understood the Stag produced in the 
patronum, and when quizzed she understood the whole map/friend 
quadrant as well.  Her complaint was that she despises the new DD, 
she did not like the new set, her complaint too smalll; and she 
disliked the new costume.  If fact she made me watch CS and SS over 
to make me agree over the weekend.




      Gina's first post here:
            I enjoyed the movie, but I agree with your friend on the set and
all. Why do directors always seem to ruin movies      trying to outdo each
other?  Everyone LOVED the first two movies so why change the castle and
grounds that we were so   familiar with? It is understandable why they
changed DD, but why Fudge and Flitwick? I was afraid this would happen
before long. They always change the scenery and characters and that is when
they ruin the movie IMO! We all feel lost      in the WW and after seeing
two movies and reading five books I feel most of us were too comfortable
there to have so      many changes. I really hope the do not blow it on GoF
changing things and making the movie to short.
 
            On a positive note I LOVED how much more magical this film
seemed and the great creatures!
 
            Gina - who cannot help but remember Hagrid's cabin the way it
was and how this new DD does not have the twinkle    in his eyes I have come
to love so much. Sean Connery with a long beard would have been a great
replacement!




From allison_m_otto at lycos.com  Tue Jun  8 17:53:38 2004
From: allison_m_otto at lycos.com (allison_m_otto)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:53:38 -0000
Subject: Trelawney in POA - SPOILERS
Message-ID: <ca4uf2+ck29@eGroups.com>

Spoiler space . . .





*





*





*





*




*




I don't think anyone's brought this up:

Is Cuaron suggesting that Trelawney is an Animagus?

When Harry goes in to return the dropped crystal ball, the grey cat 
is sitting prominently on Trelawney's chair.  I couldn't 100% see 
past her, but when Trelawney appeared *out of nowhere* and stood 
talking to Harry, it didn't appear that the cat was there anymore.  
And did Trelawney's hacking sound like a cat coughing up hairballs to 
anyone else?

-Allison





From ccneppl at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 17:33:53 2004
From: ccneppl at yahoo.com (ccneppl)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:33:53 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca4ksg+nsum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca4ta1+v2ds@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" <jjpandy at y...> wrote:
> Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair 
> throughout the entire movie?!

Yes!!!!
I can't tell you how glad I was.  That's my favorite characteristic 
about Harry's appearance, and they finally got it right.  His hair 
should be totally out of control.

Now if only they could get Hermione's hair to be as crazy as it's 
supposed to be....





From juli17 at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 19:05:09 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:05:09 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <0AD385AE.23D01C37.0004E520@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/8/2004 12:38:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, blackgold101 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's 
> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start 
> wearing them 
> permanently.
> 
> M.


I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
as far as I can tell. 

I'm actually thinking Dan could be the next Hugh 
Grant, the way his face is shaping out, but that
could just be me ;-)

Julie 



From juli17 at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 19:05:13 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:05:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <48AD5288.0C903109.0004E520@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/8/2004 12:38:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, blackgold101 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's 
> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start 
> wearing them 
> permanently.
> 
> M.


I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
as far as I can tell. 

I'm actually thinking Dan could be the next Hugh 
Grant, the way his face is shaping out, but that
could just be me ;-)

Julie 



From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 19:07:46 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:07:46 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca4ta1+v2ds@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca52q2+5j97@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "ccneppl" <ccneppl at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" <jjpandy at y...> wrote:
> > Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy 
hair 
> > throughout the entire movie?!
> 
> Yes!!!!
> I can't tell you how glad I was.  That's my favorite 
characteristic 
> about Harry's appearance, and they finally got it right.  His hair 
> should be totally out of control.
> 
> Now if only they could get Hermione's hair to be as crazy as it's 
> supposed to be....

I've got to second the messy hair issue.  I love it, too!  But then, 
I have a thing for messy bed hair on guys ;).  I don't know how they 
could do Hermione's hair bushy, without it looking like it did in 
the first movie, which was awful.  It was just crimped!  UGH.  I can 
deal with it the way it was for PoA

Alora




From juli17 at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 19:04:13 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:04:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <28EA51C2.694EF8BB.0004E520@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/8/2004 12:38:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, blackgold101 at yahoo.com writes:

> 
> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's 
> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start 
> wearing them 
> permanently.
> 
> M.


I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
as far as I can tell. 

I'm actually thinking Dan could be the next Hugh 
Grant, the way his face is shaping out, but that
could just be me ;-)

Julie 



From editor at texas.net  Tue Jun  8 19:17:53 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:17:53 -0000
Subject: Question about the map
Message-ID: <ca53d1+4avb@eGroups.com>

T
A
P

D
A
N
C
E

G
O

A
H
E
A
D

Movie Fact: Lupin knows the map is a map and what it does.
Movie Fact: Sirius also knows this, because he also (in the Shack) 
talks about it as if he knows exactly what it is and what it does.

Question within the movie parameters, then: Why did Lupin tell Harry 
that keeping the map was bad, reason being that the map would provide 
Black the means to get to Harry, when Black knew all the secret 
passages and entrances it shows, already?

~Amanda




From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 19:25:33 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:25:33 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0663@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <ca53rd+r1e5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" 
<ginamiller at j...> wrote:
>       Gina's first post here:
>             I enjoyed the movie, but I agree with your friend on 
the set and
> all. Why do directors always seem to ruin movies      trying to 
outdo each
> other?  Everyone LOVED the first two movies so why change the 
castle and
> grounds that we were so   familiar with? It is understandable why 
they
> changed DD, but why Fudge and Flitwick? 

Huh? Who loved the first two movies? I certainly didn't. Neither did 
most people I know. I wasn't satisfied with the bubblegum fantasy 
land sets of the Columbus's wizarding world and I don't think JKR 
was, either. They simply weren't true to the book.

Now I don't know why they changed Flitwick, though since we only see 
him for about a matter of two minutes it's nothing that's breaking 
my heart. Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's 
nothing to change. He's not precisely as he is in the book, but 
then, a lot of things aren't - Harry's eyes aren't green, his hair 
isn't black, Hermione doesn't have buck teeth, Ron doesn't have 
freckles, the school robes in none of the movies look anything like 
they are supposed to in the book ... etc.

Gina - who cannot help but remember Hagrid's cabin the way it
> was and how this new DD does not have the twinkle    in his eyes I 
have come
> to love so much. Sean Connery with a long beard would have been a 
great
> replacement!

I apologize, but Gambon is 10x the Dumbledore Harris was. He's wise 
and humorous and wacky, just the way DD should be. Sean Connery as 
DD would make me sick. For one thing, he'd try to take the whole 
franchise over, as he did with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, by 
bullying the producers and waving his enormous ego around. Sean 
Connery, amazingly, is NOT the most appropriate person to play any 
role calling for an aged man in the general location of the British 
isles.

-- Annalisa




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 19:29:45 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:29:45 EDT
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:=20[HPFGU-Movie]=20Re:=20Foreshadowing=20of=20?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?book=206=20in=20PoA=A0=20AND=20IMHO?=
Message-ID: <32.48fb4a9e.2df76da9@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/8/04 12:27:27 PM, grianne2 at yahoo.com writes:


> Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's
> nothing to change. He's not precisely as he is in the book, but
> then, a lot of things aren't
> 

I do agree with the rest of your post, but I thought I should point out that 
Fudge was in COS, in the scene in Hagrid's hut when Ron and Harry are hiding 
under the cloak. And he was played by the same actor, the wonderful Robert 
Hardy (of All Creatures Great and Small fame) <g>
Cindy


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




From editor at texas.net  Tue Jun  8 19:46:00 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:46:00 -0000
Subject: Playing Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <ca53rd+r1e5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca551o+lbc0@eGroups.com>

Annalisa:

> I apologize, but Gambon is 10x the Dumbledore Harris was. He's wise 
> and humorous and wacky, just the way DD should be. Sean Connery as 
> DD would make me sick. For one thing, he'd try to take the whole 
> franchise over, as he did with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, 
by 
> bullying the producers and waving his enormous ego around. Sean 
> Connery, amazingly, is NOT the most appropriate person to play any 
> role calling for an aged man in the general location of the British 
> isles.

Two words.

Peter O'Toole.

I wanted him from the first. Alas, they did not consult me before 
miscasting it. Either time.

~Amanda




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Tue Jun  8 20:25:52 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:25:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
References: <28EA51C2.694EF8BB.0004E520@aol.com>
Message-ID: <001401c44d96$ce817400$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


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



  I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
  has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
  Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
  the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
  tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
  not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
  as far as I can tell. >>

  ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys grown the most
  during their teenager years where girls grown more in the pre-teen years?  I
  think Dan will continue to get taller when Emma will stop growing soon.  Of
  course, most of us think he is becoming too cute, but we all have different
  tastes!  :-)
  Kimberly *remember Kelly from Regis and Kelly telling Emma how cute Dan has become.





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




From jeanico at securenet.net  Tue Jun  8 20:41:39 2004
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 20:41:39 -0000
Subject: Daniel's looks...
In-Reply-To: <ca4q2c+ouf4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca58a3+fnsb@eGroups.com>

> > 
snip>  
> > 
> 
> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  
He's 
> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing 
them 
> permanently.
> 
> M.

Having had the great pleasure of meeting and speaking with Daniel in 
person, I agree with the majority: He is one good looking guy! He 
looks younger in person and a bit different from the onscreen Harry, 
who is gorgeous too (but in a quieter, more Melancholic kind of 
way). Daniel Radcliffe can light up a room with his smile and charm. 
And those amazing blue eyes! Anyway, Emma is still the smallest of 
the group, delicate and petite, so it's hard to say how tall any of 
them is going to be (though Rupert is the tallest of the 3 and 
appears to be growing fast). Elijah Wood has finished growing, so I 
don't think the comparison stands.
Just my 2 cents worth!
Nicole        




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Tue Jun  8 21:04:51 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 17:04:51 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca4h3p+g5v5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEHOHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: judy_magic333 [mailto:judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk]

I just love the books, and I do not consider  comparing the movies to them
to be a bad thing, unlike others who have posted here.  And, I would like to
address this issue in two  ways.  . . Plus,  I thought Richard Harris was
*great* as DD, and so I will be the first to admit that I will be going into
POA with a definite bias . . . for which I will *not* apologize.<<<

Thank you, Judy, for your brave and bold post. I am usually very forthright
with my opinions, which I have been in saying I didn't like POA, but it
seems the people who did like the movie are very critical of us who did not
like the movie, saying you can't compare the books to a film etc.

>>>. . . I don't agree with Cuaron's/Kloves' priorities.  I am entitled to
my opinion, though it won't have any affect on how the movies are done.
And, I must admit that I am baffled that JKR considers this her favorite of
the HP movies.  Unlike others, I am not inclined to show blind faith for
JKR, no matter how much I admire her books and what she has achieved.<<<

I may be the one who mentioned not understanding how JKR can like this movie
so much (to which I received comments from people saying, basically, how
dare I second guess what she likes), so I know just how you feel.

>>>. . .I don't think it is fair to label those who give the movie a
negative review as being not a "true fan" or something.  This is a place
where we should be free to express all range of views, being civil and
disagreeing repectfully with those of different views . . . even if we can't
understand the reason for the opposing view.<<<

Absolutely. I haven't criticized anyone for their liking of the movie
(although I feel I, and others, have been criticized for not liking it). I
prefer to spend my time debating the good and bad of the movie, not who's
right and who's wrong.

BTW, in re-reading POA, I have noticed that not everything I thought was
misrepresented in the movie was in fact misrepresented. For example, I
thought the whole intro-to-Buckbeak scene was different, but it's very
similar (up until the ride over the ocean). And I had mentioned in a
previous post that Harry was very reckless with the Invisibility Cloak when
he was in Hogsmeade, but in rereading POA, I see that he didn't even take it
the first time he snuck into Hogsmeade. If that's not reckless, I don't know
what is! But I still dislike minor changes, esp. when it didn't seem time
was a concern (the twins telling Harry about the map after seeing him in his
Invisibility Cloak, instead of just stopping him in the hall, talking to
Lupin on a bridge (?!) instead of his office, etc.).

JMO, don't curse me for it!

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Tue Jun  8 21:08:56 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 17:08:56 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Trelawney in POA - SPOILERS
In-Reply-To: <ca4uf2+ck29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBKEHPHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: allison_m_otto [mailto:allison_m_otto at lycos.com]

Spoiler space . . .





*





*





*





*




*

When Harry goes in to return the dropped crystal ball, the grey cat
is sitting prominently on Trelawney's chair.  I couldn't 100% see
past her, but when Trelawney appeared *out of nowhere* and stood
talking to Harry, it didn't appear that the cat was there anymore.
And did Trelawney's hacking sound like a cat coughing up hairballs to
anyone else?<<<

I noticed that too. Of course, in the book, she is described as looking to
Harry like a "large, glittering insect," but we already have an insect
animagus in the 4th book. I did see a correlation though, esp. with her
hacking cough.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 21:12:19 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:12:19 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca4q2c+ouf4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5a3j+g8m4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" <blackgold101 at y...> wrote:
> "mcmaxslb" <McGregorMax at e...> wrote:
> >  Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are going 
to be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to see 
Dan and Emma act it out on the screen!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's 
> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing them 
> permanently.
> 
> M.



If you read what I wrote a little more closely you will see that I 
said "in another couple of years". Both Dan and Emma are just 
fourteen and they have some growing to do yet. Oh, and Dan is about 
half a head taller that Emma now.










From judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Jun  8 21:38:14 2004
From: judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk (judy_magic333)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:38:14 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEHOHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <ca5bk6+78ud@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-
bear at v...> wrote:
> Thank you, Judy, for your brave and bold post. I am usually very 
forthright
> with my opinions, which I have been in saying I didn't like POA, 
but it
> seems the people who did like the movie are very critical of us who 
did not
> like the movie, saying you can't compare the books to a film etc.

Judy:
Thank you, Barbara, for your kind post.  Afterwards, I figured that I 
hd stepped on some toes and would get some responses accordingly.  
What I said wasn't with any particular post in mind, as I have read 
quite a few over the past few days, so it got to the point when I 
just wanted to express my feelings here.  There are those who will 
undoubtedly say that I am being presumptuous because I have not seen 
the film.  Perhaps, but that hasn't kept me from getting impressions 
about the movie and things that have been said here, which I wanted 
to comment about.  In spite of how I came across, I will honestly try 
my best to go into the movie theater with an open mind (except about 
Richard Harris being the DD I prefer -- I have seen and read enough 
to be able to reach this conclusion with certainty).  



> I may be the one who mentioned not understanding how JKR can like 
this movie
> so much (to which I received comments from people saying, 
basically, how
> dare I second guess what she likes), so I know just how you feel.

Judy:
That's exactly the kind of thing that bugs me, and I have seen the 
same thing with hard-core Tolkein fans.  Neither Tolkein nor Rowling 
(as well as those who think we should never question anything they 
say or write) are better than any of us, and so I feel we have just 
as much right to our opinions as them.  Those who disagree are free 
to to respond civilly or just ignore us.  But, one side has no right 
to judge and label the other -- and this goes both ways. 



> Absolutely. I haven't criticized anyone for their liking of the 
movie
> (although I feel I, and others, have been criticized for not liking 
it). I
> prefer to spend my time debating the good and bad of the movie, not 
who's
> right and who's wrong.

Judy:
That's the impression I am getting, from what I have read.  People 
can disagree about liking or not liking the movie without being put 
down the way some have.  Like, I remember the comment that those who 
wanted more of an explanation in the movie of things going on were 
just wrong and stupid and lazy.  That made me do a slow burn, let me 
tell you.  That's the kind of judging that should not be done here.  
We can agree to disagree, okay?  The biggest bone of contention seems 
to be the Shrieking Shack scene, and it seems to me that the majority 
feels that this wasn't done properly.  This makes me sad, as this is 
a core part of POA, imo.


> BTW, in re-reading POA, I have noticed that not everything I 
thought was
> misrepresented in the movie was in fact misrepresented. For 
example, I
> thought the whole intro-to-Buckbeak scene was different, but it's 
very
> similar (up until the ride over the ocean). And I had mentioned in a
> previous post that Harry was very reckless with the Invisibility 
Cloak when
> he was in Hogsmeade, but in rereading POA, I see that he didn't 
even take it
> the first time he snuck into Hogsmeade. If that's not reckless, I 
don't know
> what is! But I still dislike minor changes, esp. when it didn't 
seem time
> was a concern (the twins telling Harry about the map after seeing 
him in his
> Invisibility Cloak, instead of just stopping him in the hall, 
talking to
> Lupin on a bridge (?!) instead of his office, etc.).
> 
> JMO, don't curse me for it!


Judy:
I will not be ridiculous and say that the movie should follow the 
book all the way down the line -- of course not.  And, I imagine that 
it will take more than one viewing to take it all in.  But, the 
impression I have (and I should have stated this in my first post) is 
that -- unlike the LOTR movies and Peter Jackson -- POA doesn't 
really capture the spirit of the book, and I think that is really 
unfortunate.  And, that Cuoron also stuck in some subtle sexual 
innuendo makes me cringe, to be perfectly honest with you.  That's 
not what I want to see in the Harry Potter universe.  This is 
certainly not in the books, right?  There is a way to handle this 
kind of content without being a censor, but I would contend that 
Couron's way ain't it.  Again, jmo.

I wish that JKR had had more creative control and input in the 
movies.  But, she chose to distance herself from that, so we are 
stuck with what we have been given.  And, she will undoubtedly take 
the big box office figures as approval of POA and doing more like 
that.  *sigh*  I sure wish what we fans say could be looked at, at 
least, by JKR . . . . . . .

  




From HimemyaUtena at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 22:11:04 2004
From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 18:11:04 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about the map
Message-ID: <1e6.224d61ad.2df79378@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/8/2004 3:20:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
editor at texas.net writes:

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

Question within the movie parameters, then: Why did Lupin tell Harry 
that keeping the map was bad, reason being that the map would provide 
Black the means to get to Harry, when Black knew all the secret 
passages and entrances it shows, already?
I assumed it was because it would tell Black exactly where Harry was at any 
given time and if anyone was around him who could assist in protecting him.

~~Adrianna~~


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




From jmmears at comcast.net  Tue Jun  8 22:11:56 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 22:11:56 -0000
Subject: Playing Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <ca551o+lbc0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5djc+vdpc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:

> 
> Two words.
> 
> Peter O'Toole.
> 
> I wanted him from the first. Alas, they did not consult me before 
> miscasting it. Either time.
> 
> ~Amanda

I was about to say the same thing, Amanda.  Peter O'Toole would have 
been a fabulous Dumbledore.  In fact, after Harris' death, his 
family publically lobbied the producers to cast him in the part, 
since he and RH were old drinking buddies.  It's really too bad they 
didn't since I'm sure he could have told the younger cast members 
some pretty hair-raising stories about himself and Harris in their 
younger days (would have been a real education for the kids, too 
<g>).

Actually, I think that may be the reason that he didn't get the 
part.  It may be that his present health isn't much better than 
Harris, based on their similar ages and ::ahem:: history.  It's 
possible that the producers wanted to cast someone robust enough to 
be reasonably expected to survive till the last movie is finished.

Jo S. who still thinks that O'Toole's performance in "My Favorite 
Year" proves what a fabulous Dumbledore he would have been (although 
Gambon did a fine job, IMO).




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 22:23:05 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 22:23:05 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5bk6+78ud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5e89+kf32@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "judy_magic333" 
<judy_magic333 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Judy:
> I will not be ridiculous and say that the movie should follow the 
> book all the way down the line -- of course not.  And, I imagine 
that 
> it will take more than one viewing to take it all in.  But, the 
> impression I have (and I should have stated this in my first post) 
is 
> that -- unlike the LOTR movies and Peter Jackson -- POA doesn't 
> really capture the spirit of the book, and I think that is really 
> unfortunate.  And, that Cuoron also stuck in some subtle sexual 
> innuendo makes me cringe, to be perfectly honest with you.  That's 
> not what I want to see in the Harry Potter universe.  This is 
> certainly not in the books, right?  There is a way to handle this 
> kind of content without being a censor, but I would contend that 
> Couron's way ain't it.  Again, jmo. <<
> 

I whole heartily disagree.  I think the spirit of POA was intact, 
much more so than PS/SS or COS.

Tim




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Tue Jun  8 22:24:05 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 22:24:05 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?
In-Reply-To: <ca2f97+ervo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5ea5+md74@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "persephonegladrags"
<JTallulahmae at a...> wrote:
> Karen,
> Great help; thank you so much!  I've written to them to ask.  (And, 
> yes, we bulldog-owners are perhaps even more "obsessive" about 
> bullies than we Harry Potter fans are about HP ;-) ).
> Appreciate the info...  
> PG
> 
Glad that the info was helpful, let us know if you get a name.
As for the obsessive stuff, I understand.  I'm one wishes that JKR
would have used a British Shorthair rather than an American Shorthair
for Prof. McGonagall...:)

Karen






From hgranger919 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 22:29:47 2004
From: hgranger919 at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
Message-ID: <20040608222947.53621.qmail@web51808.mail.yahoo.com>

MessageI agree with Tim. And I have actually seen the movie. :-)
 
Suzanne
  

I whole heartily disagree.  I think the spirit of POA   was intact, 
much more so than PS/SS or COS.

Tim

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger

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




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Tue Jun  8 22:29:54 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 18:29:54 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about the map
In-Reply-To: <1e6.224d61ad.2df79378@aol.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEIGHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com [mailto:HimemyaUtena at aol.com]


S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

**********Question within the movie parameters, then: Why did Lupin tell
Harry
that keeping the map was bad, reason being that the map would provide
Black the means to get to Harry, when Black knew all the secret
passages and entrances it shows, already?*********

I assumed it was because it would tell Black exactly where Harry was at any
given time and if anyone was around him who could assist in protecting
him.<<<

That does make sense. As I was reading POA last night, it did occur to me
that all of the teachers and students at Hogwarts who think Black can't get
in to the castle, and Harry's safe as long as he stays there, don't know
about the passages that the Marauder's and the Weasley twins know about.
(They also don't know that even though the Whomping Willow "guards" another
passageway, Black knows how to get past it.) The only one who knows is Lupin
(who also knows about Black being an Animagus). If he truly believed Black
was guilty of the crimes he was imprisoned for, isn't he doing a disservice
to Harry by not telling DD everything? He's the only one who knows that
Black can change into   a dog and knows about entries into the castle!

Unless he suspects Black was innocent, but I don't think there's evidence
for that in the canon.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Tue Jun  8 22:41:50 2004
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 22:41:50 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's appearance in POA movie
Message-ID: <BAY7-F12eDIe1525BS60000711a@hotmail.com>

Yes I was really happy at last Harry has messy hair, as he should do...also 
I don't know if any of you noticed, but was Dan Radcliffes hair darker? In 
the first two films, his hair is a normal brown and not black as it should 
be, but in this film, it looks darker....what did you guys think?


ml,


joanna
x


>From: "jjpandy" <jjpandy at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's appearance in POA movie
>Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:10:08 -0000
>
>Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair
>throughout the entire movie?!
>
>JJPandy  :)
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger




From doliesl at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 22:49:39 2004
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (Dolies)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5e89+kf32@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040608224939.22204.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>

> > Judy:
> > that -- unlike the LOTR movies and Peter Jackson -- POA doesn't 
> > really capture the spirit of the book, and I think that is really 
> > unfortunate.  And, that Cuoron also stuck in some subtle sexual 

Tim wrote: 
> I whole heartily disagree.  I think the spirit of POA was intact, 
> much more so than PS/SS or COS.

I second that. I thought POA has brilliantly captured the spirit of the
book. PS/COS felt like this embarassing theme park stage acted that is
so fake and empty. But in POA JKR's world has FINALLY come alive and
all the characters feel much more real and alive. Alfonso's
interpretation is so full of live that I feel like breathing and
venturing into a world where magic wieved with daily life so naturally,
just like how the book feels like. The characters are constantly doing
something even when the camera was not focused on them. I'm amazed by
how Alfonso paid attention to details: such as in the DADA boggart
class when Lupin asked the class of nervous kids to form in one line,
Draco and his Slytherin gangs kept shoving and pushing other unwilling
students to the front, while the Gryfinddors, being true to their house
spirit, all didn't mind being at the front. Also how Lupin packed up so
fast as he knows exactly what few possession he has and where they go
at the end, like he's so used to move around. Just these little subtle
details that added depth and richness to the film that I appreciate a
lot. That's why I think Alfonso has a very good understanding of the
world and the themes. He was RIGHT ON in putting things in that
actually foreshadow the future books by his intuition about where the
book would go. So I think he is obviously on the right track. 

As for the robes/uniform thing, I remember reading an interview with
Alfonso where he mention it is JK Rowling who told him about that kids
wear their own clothes when it's not class time. Sorry I cannot find
that article right now. 

D



From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 23:01:28 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 23:01:28 -0000
Subject: You. Must. Read. This. :-D  It's FUNNY!!!
Message-ID: <ca5gg8+p6lj@eGroups.com>

My thanks to cleolinda...Love the new movie of hate it, she nailed 
the wonderful parody.

I give you...Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in 15 Minutes:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/m15m/2237.html

Enjoy!

@)--/---
daughter




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Tue Jun  8 19:25:34 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:25:34 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about the map
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0676@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

 
Amanda:
> Movie Fact: Lupin knows the map is a map and what it does.
> Movie Fact: Sirius also knows this, because he also (in the Shack) 
> talks about it as if he knows exactly what it is and what it does.
>
> Question within the movie parameters, then: Why did Lupin tell Harry 
> that keeping the map was bad, reason being that the map would provide 
> Black the means to get to Harry, when Black knew all the secret 
> passages and entrances it shows, already?


Gina:

Amanda, I think he meant because the map shows where people
are. Yes, he already knew about the passages, but with the map he would
always know where Harry was and what direction he was headed.
Does that help?




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Tue Jun  8 19:43:06 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:43:06 -0500 
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0677@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Annalisa:
Huh? Who loved the first two movies? I certainly didn't. Neither did 
most people I know. I wasn't satisfied with the bubblegum fantasy 
land sets of the Columbus's wizarding world and I don't think JKR 
was, either. They simply weren't true to the book. <snip>
________________________________________________________
 
Gina responds:
    Apparently a lot of people did because the first one pulled in more than
this one dollar wise and the second one was really close.
 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
 Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's 
nothing to change. He's not precisely as he is in the book, but 
then, a lot of things aren't - Harry's eyes aren't green, his hair 
isn't black, Hermione doesn't have buck teeth, Ron doesn't have 
freckles, the school robes in none of the movies look anything like 
they are supposed to in the book ... etc.  <snip>
________________________________________________
 
Gina responds:
    Where were you when CoS came out? Fudge most certainly WAS in that movie
and he was definitely not played by the same actor.
 
 
 


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





From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Tue Jun  8 19:44:48 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:44:48 -0500 
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?RE=3A_=5BHPFGU-Movie=5D_Re=3A_Foreshadowing_of_?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?book_6_in_PoA=A0_AND_IMHO?=
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0678@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>


In a message dated 6/8/04 12:27:27 PM, grianne2 at yahoo.com writes:


> Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's
> nothing to change. He's not precisely as he is in the book, but
> then, a lot of things aren't
> 

I do agree with the rest of your post, but I thought I should point out that

Fudge was in COS, in the scene in Hagrid's hut when Ron and Harry are hiding

under the cloak. And he was played by the same actor, the wonderful Robert 
Hardy (of All Creatures Great and Small fame) <g>
Cindy


If that is true then I stand humbly corrected, but he did not look or speak
like the same actor at all.
Gina
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164330/rand=555877366> 
 


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





From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Tue Jun  8 19:50:28 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:50:28 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Playing Dumbledore
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0679@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Annalisa:

> I apologize, but Gambon is 10x the Dumbledore Harris was. He's wise 
> and humorous and wacky, just the way DD should be. Sean Connery as 
> DD would make me sick. For one thing, he'd try to take the whole 
> franchise over, as he did with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, 
> by bullying the producers and waving his enormous ego around. Sean 
> Connery, amazingly, is NOT the most appropriate person to play any 
> role calling for an aged man in the general location of the British 
> isles.

Amanda:
> Two words.
>
> Peter O'Toole.
>
> I wanted him from the first. Alas, they did not consult me before 
> miscasting it. Either time.


      
      There are lots of people that share the O'Toole opinion and I am one
of them. I don't think Gambon is horrible, but he is not Richard Harris. He 
is too stern and silly - more like a crazy old man. Harris could appear 
stern but with an obvious hint of a smile in his eyes. He gave the air of someone wise and kind, but that could be dangerous when need be.
         Gina







From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Tue Jun  8 23:43:06 2004
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:43:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 933
Message-ID: <8.4f2215bb.2df7a90a@aol.com>

In a message dated 06/06/2004 4:25:19 PM Central Daylight Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Yes, that didn't make sense at all. As far as the movie goes, its like 
> Snape 
> saw Lupin taking off outside and just decided to start stalking him.
> 

Actually it did.  The audience learns that Snape doesn't trust Lupin during 
the scene in the Great Hall after the fat lady is attacked.  And we'd already 
seen Snape "patrolling" (for want of a better word) the hallway when Lupin took 
the map from Harry. Its not that great a leap to believe that he saw Lupin 
leave the school in the middle of the night and decided to follow him. 

Melissa


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




From siskiou at vcem.com  Wed Jun  9 00:07:26 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 17:07:26 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA AND IMHO
In-Reply-To: <32.48fb4a9e.2df76da9@aol.com>
References: <32.48fb4a9e.2df76da9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <191246389.20040608170726@vcem.com>



Hi,

Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 12:29:45 PM, clshannon at aol.com wrote:

> I do agree with the rest of your post, but I thought I should point out that
> Fudge was in COS, in the scene in Hagrid's hut when Ron and Harry are hiding
> under the cloak. And he was played by the same actor, the wonderful Robert
> Hardy (of All Creatures Great and Small fame) <g>
> Cindy

I was so surprised to see Robert Hardy in the HP movies, and
could swear he has not changed much at all since he appeared
as Siegfried in  All Creatures Great and Small :)

In fact, at first I thought it couldn't possibly be him.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From siskiou at vcem.com  Wed Jun  9 00:34:05 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 17:34:05 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca5a3j+g8m4@eGroups.com>
References: <ca4q2c+ouf4@eGroups.com> <ca5a3j+g8m4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <636581753.20040608173405@vcem.com>



Hi,

Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 2:12:19 PM, McGregorMax at ec.rr.com wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" <blackgold101 at y...> wrote:
>> "mcmaxslb" <McGregorMax at e...> wrote:
>> >  Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are going
> to be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to see
> Dan and Emma act it out on the screen!
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> > > 
>> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  He's
>> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's
>> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing them
>> permanently.
>> 
>> M.



> If you read what I wrote a little more closely you will see that I
> said "in another couple of years". Both Dan and Emma are just
> fourteen and they have some growing to do yet. Oh, and Dan is about
> half a head taller that Emma now.


Uh, what's the point?

Where does it say in the books that Harry is supposed to be
gorgeous (or Hermione, for that matter), or that Harry is taller than Hermione?

And shipping H/Hr, for reasons of wanting to see the
*actors* together??


-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 00:50:24 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 00:50:24 -0000
Subject: Addressing  Frequently  Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....
In-Reply-To: <20040607030433.2427.qmail@web51704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ca5msg+83i9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> Anna wrote:
> 
> Forget Goblet of Fire. The correct answer is: "Anyone
> who wants to 
> know about the Marauders can damn well read the
> books." None of the 
> Marauders background is vital to the plot. In fact, I
> have never 
> seen a good literary adaptation that contained all of
> the 
> information that was in the book - that's why English
> teachers 
> always tell their students that they can't get away
> with just 
> watching the movie.
> 
> So what you do is, if you're interested in the movie,
> read the book 
> too. If you don't care, then you don't read the book
> and you haven't 
> missed anything important. What's the problem with
> that?
> 
> Incidentally, I find it comical that people are
> second-guessing 
> JKR's feelings on PoA. Just because you didn't like
> the movie or 
> didn't think it had enough "important" information
> doesn't mean 
> she's wrong. She's the author! Surely she knows better
> than we do 
> what will be necessary in the future.
> 
> 
> ME:
> 
> Thank You,Thank You,Thank You!!!
> I've been a little amazed (but mostly annoyed) at some
> of the very negative posts about PoA, especially those
> that second guess JKR. Thanks for expressing exactly
> what I'v been feeling.
> 
> Love the film or hate it, fine. Everyone is entitled
> to their own opinion. Whats been annoying is the 'I'm
> right, and everyone else, includung JKR is wrong' tone
> to several posts lately.  
> 
> 
> 
> Film adaptations of books are, to me, like
> translations of literature. Something is inevitabally
> changed. Things are lost, other things are gained.
> Some translations seem flat, others result in new
> works of art.
> Lets imagine you have a poem and need to translate it
> from, say, Spanish to English. There are a couple of
> things that could be done.
> 
> One way is to keep the rhyme scheme, line and syllable
> count, etc. the same as the original. Meaning may take
> a second place,  but the sound and look of the poem
> will carry through in this case.
> 
> Another way is to go for as literal a translation as
> possible. Rhyme scheme, etc. is secondary to capturing
> the exact meaning of what was originally written as
> accurately as you can.
> 
> A third way is to try to capture the spirit and
> feeling of the poem as best as possible. Line length
> and syllables, exact meaning, etc. may be changed
> some, but the translation remains true to how the
> original poem feels.
> 
> Not think about the Harry Potter films. I would argue
> that Chris Columbus used the second method I listed
> above. Alfonzo Cuaron used the third. In the case of
> these films, Cuaron's translation resulted in a new
> work of art with its own identity. Columbus'
> translations are pretty good at being translations,
> but are not new works of art.
> 
> Tyler
> 

Gracias' Senor.  :-D

That was well-put and a great analogy. I feel the same way.

@)--/---
daughter




From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Wed Jun  9 01:01:08 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 01:01:08 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
In-Reply-To: <ca53rd+r1e5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5ngk+3o7t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Annalisa Moretti" 
<grianne2 at y...> wrote:
 
> I apologize, but Gambon is 10x the Dumbledore Harris was. He's wise 
> and humorous and wacky, just the way DD should be.

   Understand this, I loved Richard Harris dearly in everything he 
ever did and whatever way he played Dumbledore was *fine* with me. 
BUT I must agree that Gambon's got the whimsical quality you see in 
the books but not in Harris' portrayal.

 Sean Connery as 
> DD would make me sick. For one thing, he'd try to take the whole 
> franchise over, as he did with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, 

   As one of the maybe five or ten people on the planet who actually 
liked LEG I'm not sure I'd have a problem with that. However I agree 
Sean would not have made a good Dumbledore...much too sexy ;). Tom 
Baker on the other hand....well maybe he'd have been a little *too* 
wacky and humorous. 





From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Wed Jun  9 01:06:44 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 01:06:44 -0000
Subject: Playing Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <ca551o+lbc0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5nr4+d02f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:

> Two words.
> 
> Peter O'Toole.

  Well he certainly has the blue eyes - wrong nose though. Still 
Peter O'Toole would have done nicely. Maybe he wasn't interested or 
not available. I believe he's been busy upstaging everbody else 
in 'Troy' without half trying. The advantages of classical training 
and long experience. 




From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Wed Jun  9 01:11:51 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 01:11:51 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of book 6 in PoA  AND IMHO
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0677@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <ca5o4n+qbib@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" 
<ginamiller at j...> wrote:

>  Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's 
> nothing to change. He's not precisely as he is in the book, but 
> then, a lot of things aren't - Harry's eyes aren't green, his hair 
> isn't black, Hermione doesn't have buck teeth, Ron doesn't have 
> freckles, the school robes in none of the movies look anything like 
> they are supposed to in the book ... etc.  <snip>
> ________________________________________________
>  
> Gina responds:
>     Where were you when CoS came out? Fudge most certainly WAS in 
that movie
> and he was definitely not played by the same actor.

  I'm pretty sure he was, though Robert Hardy had a very different 
look in that movie, the hair mostly I think. Still that voice is near 
unmistakeable. 




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 01:12:38 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 01:12:38 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5bk6+78ud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca5o66+7nvd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "judy_magic333" 
<judy_magic333 at y...> wrote:

> I wish that JKR had had more creative control and input in the 
> movies.  But, she chose to distance herself from that, so we are 
> stuck with what we have been given.  And, she will undoubtedly 
take 
> the big box office figures as approval of POA and doing more like 
> that.  *sigh*  I sure wish what we fans say could be looked at, at 
> least, by JKR . . . . . . .

On JKR, this is her favorite film of the three.

As for listening to the fans...Which ones?? The ones who loved it, 
hated it, or loved parts and hated parts??...

The rest of what you had to say sounded great (despite the fact that 
I disagree) but this last part comes off as a brash generalization.


@)--/---
daughter




From Ladycat16 at aol.com  Wed Jun  9 00:08:13 2004
From: Ladycat16 at aol.com (Ladycat16 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 20:08:13 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
Message-ID: <c0.ec4094d.2df7aeed@aol.com>

I haven't finishing reading these posts, but I'm really bad with remembering 
what I want to say especially after reading posts of the same subjects. 


Sara says:
But it states right there in the book that Ron calls Hermione a
"know-it-all" twice a week.? What's the difference who says it?? Yes, in
the book Ron defends her, but why he does it seems more like only he can
call her names.? I found it very hypocritical of Ron to defend her from
Snape's name-calling, when Ron does it himself.



Ladycat16 says: (my reply)

I think it's the matter of who it is coming from, yes I agree that it's kind 
of hypocritical of him, but coming from other students it really isn't as bad 
as coming from a teacher. My friends called me a know-it-all for awhile, and I 
brushed it off. However, coming from a teacher especiall a teacher that 
everyone despises then I feel it only fitting that she is defended even if it is 
about someone else who calls her one. 

In the movie though I was kind of shocked, and in away offended. I mean yes 
everyone was probably thinking that, however did they really have to change the 
way the approached that scene. I kind of found the "humor" (which my 
boyfriend said it was)  almost distasteful. 

Tiffany aka Ladycat16 


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





From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  9 02:10:40 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
In-Reply-To: <001101c44d01$ed1244c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <20040609021040.83082.qmail@web80314.mail.yahoo.com>

Saw the movie this morning for the first time . . . yah, it was sure grittier.  Dumbledore's fingernails did bug me.  Bob Dylan was wearing his nails the same way (long, nasty & yellow) in the mid to late '70s.  Perhaps it's some weird Dylan tribute?  He's the only guy I've ever seen wear his nails that way apart from the new Dumbledore.
 
Gretchen

joj <joj at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
The only two places this "grime" bothered me was in Harry's room at the
Leaky Cauldron and Dumbledore's fingernails. I also hated the rubberband in
Dumbledore's beard. WTF?

Joj, who still loved the movie :P

Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/

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




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 02:18:47 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 22:18:47 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
References: <c0.ec4094d.2df7aeed@aol.com>
Message-ID: <009001c44dc8$18f4f080$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>






Ladycat16 said:
I think it's the matter of who it is coming from, yes I agree that it's kind
of hypocritical of him, but coming from other students it really isn't as
bad
as coming from a teacher. My friends called me a know-it-all for awhile, and
I
brushed it off. However, coming from a teacher especiall a teacher that
everyone despises then I feel it only fitting that she is defended even if
it is
about someone else who calls her one.

In the movie though I was kind of shocked, and in away offended. I mean yes
everyone was probably thinking that, however did they really have to change
the
way the approached that scene. I kind of found the "humor" (which my
boyfriend said it was)  almost distasteful.

Joj says:
I really didn't like that line, but it got a big laugh in the theater I was
in. I wonder why they chose to have Ron say something the exact opposite of
what he said in the book?  Ron speaking back to Snape is brave, Ron agreeing
with Snape is not.  What is Kloves problem with Ron?

Joj, who loved the movie, but missed the R/H fight over Scabbers being eaten
when the power went off in the theater.





From joj at rochester.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 02:32:48 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 22:32:48 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's appearance in POA movie
References: <BAY7-F12eDIe1525BS60000711a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <009c01c44dca$0e417580$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joanna Barra"


> Yes I was really happy at last Harry has messy hair, as he should
do...also
> I don't know if any of you noticed, but was Dan Radcliffes hair darker? In
> the first two films, his hair is a normal brown and not black as it should
> be, but in this film, it looks darker....what did you guys think?


I didn't notice his hair was darker, it just wasn't laying down flat, all
nice and shiny like before.  The lighting and rooms and such were darker
too.  Harry also wore a lot of dark clothes.  No red or green sweaters this
time. :D

Speaking of Dan, does anyone else think he looks older in the movie than in
real life?  All these interviews lately, done when he was older than when he
shot the movie, and he looked younger.  I couldn't believe how much older he
looked in PoA than in CoS.

Joj





From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Jun  9 02:48:41 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 22:48:41 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's appearance in POA movie
Message-ID: <b4.2d0c422b.2df7d489@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/8/04 7:36:26 PM, joj at rochester.rr.com writes:


> Speaking of Dan, does anyone else think he looks older in the movie than in
> real life?? All these interviews lately, done when he was older than when he
> shot the movie, and he looked younger.? I couldn't believe how much older he
> looked in PoA than in CoS.
> 
> 

I said the exact same thing to my friend after seeing the movie and the 
interviews, etc. I think it has to do with the hair. It was shorter on the sides 
for the movie, giving it that almost spiky look to the top that we all are so 
glad of for Harry ;-) Once he let it grow on the sides and back again, he looked 
almost the same as he did for the COS premier a few years ago. I remember 
thinking when   I saw the premier footage - gee, he looks younger here than in 
the movie ;-)

I also agree about the color - the overall tones used in POA were darker, 
which may have made his hair look darker than in the previous movies. Lighting is 
an amazing thing in films - it's one of those things that most people don't 
really notice all that much, but can have a profound effect on the finished 
product.
Cindy


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




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Wed Jun  9 01:23:17 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:23:17 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5o66+7nvd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000001c44dc0$592f7b00$0400a8c0@pensive>

I agree with you on this, even though I am one who didn't like the movie.
We cannot influence the author, nor should we.  If an author was that
fickle, then she could never see her own vision played out in her story.  On
the other hand, I don't agree with people who say those of us who don't like
the movie are second guessing the author or not being fair to her or
something like that.  after all, if you write a book, make a movie, sing or
write a song, paint a great picture, and if you present it to the world, you
expect and are hoping for the public to love it as you do.  If they don't,
you have to be strong in your belief of it, so that doesn't sway you.  On
the other hand, the fans, each have his or her own individual focus or way
of interpreting what they see or hear, and will either be with the creator
or not.  It's just the nature of creativity.  You present it to the world,
knowing that everyone will see it differently.  Those who love and those who
don't like this movie, have legitimate feelings, because it's all in what
the individual is seeing or getting out of it, what they bring to it.  Both
sides have said they love this book, so we all had expectations.  some were
met, some were not.  It doesn't make any of us wrong.  we just have
different opinions.

Ok, that's all too deep.  sorry about that.  I bet JKR would love all this
debate, if she was to read it all!  She seems to like knowing how much
theorizing and friendly arguing goes on over her creation.  after all, if
we're all talking about it, we must be loving it!

Sherry

-----Original Message-----
From: daughterofthedust [mailto:daughterofthedust at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 7:13 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "judy_magic333" 
<judy_magic333 at y...> wrote:

> I wish that JKR had had more creative control and input in the 
> movies.  But, she chose to distance herself from that, so we are 
> stuck with what we have been given.  And, she will undoubtedly 
take 
> the big box office figures as approval of POA and doing more like 
> that.  *sigh*  I sure wish what we fans say could be looked at, at 
> least, by JKR . . . . . . .

On JKR, this is her favorite film of the three.

As for listening to the fans...Which ones?? The ones who loved it, 
hated it, or loved parts and hated parts??...

The rest of what you had to say sounded great (despite the fact that 
I disagree) but this last part comes off as a brash generalization.


@)--/---
daughter




________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 joj at rochester.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 03:40:43 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 23:40:43 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] You. Must. Read. This. :-D  It's FUNNY!!!
References: <ca5gg8+p6lj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00d701c44dd3$8b515d20$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>




> My thanks to cleolinda...Love the new movie of hate it, she nailed 
> the wonderful parody.
> 
> I give you...Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in 15 Minutes:
> http://www.livejournal.com/community/m15m/2237.html
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> @)--/---
> daughter

Thanks!  That was hysterically funny!  Are there ones for SS/PS and CoS too?




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Wed Jun  9 05:52:49 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 05:52:49 -0000
Subject: You. Must. Read. This. :-D  It's FUNNY!!!
In-Reply-To: <ca5gg8+p6lj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca68jh+j0b3@eGroups.com>

>>>"daughterofthedust" <daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:

My thanks to cleolinda...Love the new movie of hate it, she nailed 
the wonderful parody.
 
I give you...Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in 15 Minutes:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/m15m/2237.html<<<

I don't know who cleolinda is, but this is hilarious! Really 
highlights some of the goofs and the things that were shortened for 
time. Is she on this list?

Barbara
aka bd-bear






From surreal_44 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 06:36:38 2004
From: surreal_44 at yahoo.com (Krissy)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 06:36:38 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5bk6+78ud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca6b5m+7nn2@eGroups.com>

"Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-bear at v...> wrote: 

<snipped>

>> I may be the one who mentioned not understanding how JKR can like 
this movie so much (to which I received comments from people saying, 
basically, how dare I second guess what she likes), so I know just how
you feel.<<

And also snipped from Judy's post:  "judy_magic333" <judy_magic333 at y...>
 
>> That's exactly the kind of thing that bugs me, and I have seen the 
same thing with hard-core Tolkein fans.  Neither Tolkein nor Rowling 
(as well as those who think we should never question anything they 
say or write) are better than any of us, and so I feel we have just 
as much right to our opinions as them.  Those who disagree are free 
to to respond civilly or just ignore us.  But, one side has no right 
to judge and label the other -- and this goes both ways. 

I was one of the people who was a bit upset by the 'second-guessing'
from some fans of the author, not so much that people disagree with
her, but the fact that they say they are baffled, confused, or in some
peoples' cases (who haven't posted on this forum but others), insulted
that JKR enjoyed the movie has me all worked up.

It is perfectly fine to have your own opinions of a movie, book,
sculpture, painting, or any other creative work. It's when you say
that the creator is basically wrong in their perspective that bugs me.
Perhaps that is what other people meant to say, but instead they got
riled up and wrote insulting things.

If JKR is happy with the movie, then I am satisfied that it met -her-
requirements. Fan opinions matter, but the creator's opinion is of
greater import, simply because it is -her- vision. Not mine, not
yours, and not the guy next door's vision.  :) 

I personally enjoyed the movie, and for the parts that I missed on the
big screen, I am hoping for some delectable scenes to be added into
the DVD, which is why I haven't gone raving mad about the changes to
the story.  :)

To sum it up, I apologize on behalf of anyone who snapped insults at
people who didn't like the movie, but I must assert that it -is-
indeed wrong and thoughtless to second guess the creator of a project.

Barbara: <snipped>

>>I haven't criticized anyone for their liking of the movie
(although I feel I, and others, have been criticized for not liking 
it). I prefer to spend my time debating the good and bad of the movie,
not who's right and who's wrong.<<

In defense of some people, I have read posts here and on other forums
that absolutely trash the film, nitpicking everything from the castle
to the clothes to the actors' ability to act. I'm not talking nice,
well thought-out posts that state an opinion in a kind manner, I am
talking about complete shredding of everything.

That kind of post can really put those who liked the movie on edge. As
has been mentioned many times in this post, and in both Barbara and
Judy's posts, kindness in expressing an opinion really goes a long way.

Sorry to have babbled on for so long, and hopefully I haven't insulted
anyone.  :)


~Krissy




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 09:51:37 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:51:37 -0000
Subject: Fear the grime, not the Grim! -DDs finger nails
In-Reply-To: <20040609021040.83082.qmail@web80314.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ca6mj9+o0g7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Gretchen Crumpacker 
<gcrumpac at p...> wrote:
> Saw the movie this morning for the first time . . . yah, it was 
sure grittier.  Dumbledore's fingernails did bug me.  Bob Dylan was 
wearing his nails the same way (long, nasty & yellow) in the mid to 
late '70s.  Perhaps it's some weird Dylan tribute?  He's the only 
guy I've ever seen wear his nails that way apart from the new 
Dumbledore.
 

I was a bit startled when I saw Dumbledore's long, yellow (and 
dirty) nails, but then a thought occured to me... Dumbledore is a 
genius, or at least we're told several times that he's the 
greatest/most powerful wizard of his time.  A lot of extremely smart 
people don't concern themselves with issues of physical appearance.  
I can remember a documentary about geniuses I'd watched a few years 
ago and there was one super-smart guy who only had a couple 
different outfits, but both in triplicate so he didn't have to think 
at all about putting an outfit together, I think it might have been 
Albert Einstein.  
Proper nail care may be something Dumbledore just doesn't think 
about because he's so busy thinking about too many other more 
important things, such as running the school, the Order of the 
Phoenix, answering Fudge's many owls and, of course, protecting 
Harry from Voldemort.  For all we know, he might magically trim his 
nails and just be too pre-occupied to remember to do it more than 
every six months.    

Diana L.
dianasdolls




From incognicat at hotmail.com  Wed Jun  9 05:15:19 2004
From: incognicat at hotmail.com (incognicat)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 05:15:19 -0000
Subject: Just an inkling about boggarts (spoiler material here)
Message-ID: <ca66d7+hdi@eGroups.com>


 I've seen people wondering why Pavarti thought the clown was funny 
versus the boggart/snake.  Pavarti's clown is pretty freaky, but I 
think it's the clown from the sweetshop in Hogsmede.  When they pan 
across the shop, it's sitting in a glass case in the middle of the 
floor.  So MAYBE that's why she thinks it's funny.  It creeped me 
out more than the dementors though.  Heh.
 
 ~Kat






From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 11:38:25 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:38:25 -0000
Subject: Trashing the films - SS/PS & CoS
Message-ID: <ca6srh+9sm0@eGroups.com>

I've read a lot of posts and critic reviews ripping SS/PS and CoS to 
shreds after PoA came out.  It amazes me, frankly, as I still love 
watching these two movies.  

I enjoyed all three movies and will continue to watch them again and 
again.  I have posted in the past that there are two short scenes 
that bug me in CoS and one scene in SS/PS, but I can easily overlook 
those scenes because I enjoy the movies regardless of my personal 
opinion on those specific scenes.    

Poor Chris Columbus has really taken a beating in the press and, 
well, basically, everywhere for his "slavish devotion" to the books 
and his "golden-hued" & "Disneyfied" image of Hogwarts.  But I like 
the first two movies the way they are.  They are a great 
introduction to the wizarding world of Harry Potter and sparkle each 
in their own way.  

PoA was also a great film, and after my initial shock at the shake-
up of past locations and appearances in the first two films, I've 
come to enjoy and appreciate the third film as much as the first 
two.  

Was every single detail exactly perfect in all the movies according 
my personal vision?  No, of course not, but then I didn't make these 
movies.  I'm watching other peoples' visions up on the screen.  I've 
accepted that and have enjoyed watching other people's 
interpretations of the books.  

If we all had our way, the books would come to life and act 
themselves out in every detail in a 30-hour movie.  There are scenes 
in the book which I would love to see enacted in a movie by the 
actors I've come to accept as the characters (Radcliffe as Harry, 
Watson as Hermione, Grint as Ron, Smith as McGonagall, etc.) 
complete with top-notch special effects, but I know that is not 
going to happen because it's just not realistic.  Besides, I've been 
pleasantly surprised, occasionally astounded, by creative choices 
Chris Columbus, Cuaron and screen-writer Kloves made in the movies 
that I would never even have considered.  

I'm also sure that, unless a banjo-playing monkey comes in to fight 
the dragon on Harry's behalf, I'll most likely like Mike Newell's 
vision of GoF as well.  After all, it's all Harry Potter in the 
end.... :)

Diana L.
dianasdolls



 




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 11:47:44 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:47:44 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <636581753.20040608173405@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <ca6td0+g8ub@eGroups.com>

> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" <blackgold101 at y...> 
wrote:
> >> "mcmaxslb" <McGregorMax at e...> wrote:
> >> >  Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are 
going
> > to be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to 
see
> > Dan and Emma act it out on the screen!
 

M. wrote:
> >> You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  
He's
> >> the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And 
he's
> >> actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing 
them
> >> permanently.
> >> 
> >> M.

Marci replied:
> > If you read what I wrote a little more closely you will see that 
I
> > said "in another couple of years". Both Dan and Emma are just
> > fourteen and they have some growing to do yet. Oh, and Dan is 
about
> > half a head taller that Emma now.
> 
Susanne wrote: 
> Uh, what's the point?
> 
> Where does it say in the books that Harry is supposed to be
> gorgeous (or Hermione, for that matter), or that Harry is taller 
than Hermione?
> 
> And shipping H/Hr, for reasons of wanting to see the
> *actors* together??

There is no point.  It's just the appreciation of physical beauty 
and the underlying subconcious awareness of facial symmetry (which 
creates physical beauty) that is an inherent trait in all human 
beings.  This inherent trait is an instinctual preference based on 
survival of the fittest because facial symmetry is indicative of a 
healthy specimen worth reproducing with as your offspring has a 
greater chance of survival and carrying on the species. 

See, it always comes back to sex, doesn't it?  <g>

Diana L.



 




From judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun  9 11:50:40 2004
From: judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk (judy_magic333)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:50:40 -0000
Subject: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca5o66+7nvd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca6tig+cnpu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:

> On JKR, this is her favorite film of the three.

Judy:
Yes, I have seen here that JKR said that, and -- as I said -- I am 
baffled.  Maybe, after seeing POA, I will have an idea of where her 
head is at.  

> As for listening to the fans...Which ones?? The ones who loved it, 
> hated it, or loved parts and hated parts??...

Judy:
Why, a good cross-section of opinions, of course.  It is only fair 
for her to hear a balance of the whole range of opinions, if 
possible.  I think what fans think should matter, but that's just 
me.  And, I have *not* said that she is duty-bound to "change" her 
writing accordingly.  That is *totally* up to her, being the writer 
and owner of the franchise, and I am a big believer in individual 
freedom.  

> The rest of what you had to say sounded great (despite the fact 
that 
> I disagree) but this last part comes off as a brash generalization.

Judy:
Thank you for being so nice while disagreeing.  I hope others here 
who disagree with me will be the same way.  As for "brash 
generalization", I didn't mean what I said to come across that way.  
I hope that what I said above clarifies what I meant.  

Finally -- I see that some still are choosing to judge me because I 
have not seen POA, as if I have no right to comment until I have seen 
the movie.  Granted, my comments are based on what has been said 
here.  Am I not allowed to comment based on that?!?  *sigh*  I don't 
know when I will be seeing the movie -- it's a matter of finding the 
block of time to go -- but I will *definitely* be seeing it, and then 
make comments on what I have seen.  If some think that my comments 
are unworthy of notice until then, suit yourself.  We are all adults 
here, and have the right to decide for ourselves, after all.  





From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 12:09:16 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 12:09:16 -0000
Subject: Question about the map -book
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEIGHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <ca6ulc+7jri@eGroups.com>

"Barbara D. Poland-Waters" wrote:
<snip>
 >>>isn't he [Lupin] doing a disservice
> to Harry by not telling DD everything? He's the only one who knows 
that
> Black can change into   a dog and knows about entries into the 
castle!
> 
> Unless he suspects Black was innocent, but I don't think there's 
evidence
> for that in the canon.

Well, in the book, Lupin blames himself for not telling Dumbledore 
everything about Black (and James and Peter) being an animagus, the 
Marauder's Map and the secret passageways because of a very selfish 
reason he had for keeping quiet.  Lupin didn't want Dumbledore to 
know that Lupin had betrayed his trust in allowing him to attend 
Hogwarts by running around all night with three other students 
he'd 'corrupted' into being rulebreakers with him.  He didn't want 
Dumbledore to be disappointed in him.  
Lupin treasured Dumbledore's trust and faith in him and hated to 
lose it if he thought there was the slighest possibility that giving 
up this information might not be worth it (i.e. Black wasn't using 
that past info at all).  Until Lupin saw Peter Pettigrew on the Map, 
he did think Black was guilty of killing James and Lily and of 
attempting to kill Harry, so his withholding of this vital 
information from Dumbledore was very, very self-serving, which could 
have cost Harry his life if Black hadn't actually been innocent.  
It's because of this that I think Dumbledore makes no effort to 
convince Lupin to stay as the DADA teacher or even consider 
defending Lupin's superior teaching skills to the many parents who 
would protest a werewolf teaching their children.  I believe it's 
also why Lupin keeps himself emotionally distant from Harry 
throughout PoA and OotP.  Though, I think Lupin's 'little talk' with 
the Dursleys at the end of OotP (oh, I really hope that's in the 
movie!) may be the beginning of Lupin forgiving himself for his 
selfishness.  Part of his emotional distance is also due to his 
shame at being a werewolf, but I think a lot of it is guilt at 
himself for placing his own reputation with Dumbledore above the 
life of the child of one of his dearest friends.  
The emotional distance was also maintained in Thewlis' protrayal of 
Lupin in the movie.  Lupin kept himself within the role of teacher 
to Harry and only slightly broke out of it when he talked to Harry 
about Lily and James in the covered bridge scene, which wasn't in 
the book.  There were no hugs, no deep, meaningful talks about what 
was going on in Harry's life like there was between Harry and Sirius 
in OotP, even though Lupin knew James nearly as well as Sirius did.  
I wonder how different Lupin would be as a character if he tried to 
assume the role Sirius had had in Harry's life?   

Diana L.





From judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun  9 13:51:13 2004
From: judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Judy=20Tait?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:51:13 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I LIKED IT (bracing for rotten fruit thrown)
In-Reply-To: <ca6tig+cnpu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040609135113.93371.qmail@web25401.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

In all fairness to those who like the movie, I feel I should also say this -- from the descriptions and comments I have read here about the sequence where Harry meets Buckbeak and then their flight together, I feel pretty sure I will like it.  If this sequence is as I am picturing it, I will give Cuoron credit for getting that right.  As I have had flying dreams in the past, I think I can imagine how Harry is feeling, and it's likely that I will share that feeling while I watch this sequence.
 
Who knows?  I may find some other things I like about the movie.  We'll see . . .   
 
Judy

judy_magic333 <judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "daughterofthedust" 
<daughterofthedust at y...> wrote:

> On JKR, this is her favorite film of the three.

Judy:
Yes, I have seen here that JKR said that, and -- as I said -- I am 
baffled.  Maybe, after seeing POA, I will have an idea of where her 
head is at.  

> As for listening to the fans...Which ones?? The ones who loved it, 
> hated it, or loved parts and hated parts??...

Judy:
Why, a good cross-section of opinions, of course.  It is only fair 
for her to hear a balance of the whole range of opinions, if 
possible.  I think what fans think should matter, but that's just 
me.  And, I have *not* said that she is duty-bound to "change" her 
writing accordingly.  That is *totally* up to her, being the writer 
and owner of the franchise, and I am a big believer in individual 
freedom.  

> The rest of what you had to say sounded great (despite the fact 
that 
> I disagree) but this last part comes off as a brash generalization.

Judy:
Thank you for being so nice while disagreeing.  I hope others here 
who disagree with me will be the same way.  As for "brash 
generalization", I didn't mean what I said to come across that way.  
I hope that what I said above clarifies what I meant.  

Finally -- I see that some still are choosing to judge me because I 
have not seen POA, as if I have no right to comment until I have seen 
the movie.  Granted, my comments are based on what has been said 
here.  Am I not allowed to comment based on that?!?  *sigh*  I don't 
know when I will be seeing the movie -- it's a matter of finding the 
block of time to go -- but I will *definitely* be seeing it, and then 
make comments on what I have seen.  If some think that my comments 
are unworthy of notice until then, suit yourself.  We are all adults 
here, and have the right to decide for ourselves, after all.  




________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. 


		
---------------------------------
  Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now

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




From poppytheelf at hotmail.com  Wed Jun  9 13:51:32 2004
From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 13:51:32 -0000
Subject: Convention Alley Update and Upcoming Deadlines
Message-ID: <ca74l4+sg2e@eGroups.com>

Convention Alley is the very first conference devoted to grown-up
Harry Potter fans to be held in Canada. This HPfGU-sponsored event
will be held at the University of Ottawa in Ottawa, Ontario, from
July 30 to August 1, 2004.

In addition to guest speakers and programming sessions presented by
fans from both the academic and non-academic worlds, the conference
will feature directed discussion groups as well as informal
opportunities for participants to get to know one another and to
enjoy the city of Ottawa. The conference includes a banquet for all
participants to celebrate Harry's birthday on July 31st followed by a
viewing of the new Prisoner of Azkaban movie.

Steve Vander Ark will present the keynote address "The Hidden
Message: It's All About Lee Jordan" at Saturday's birthday banquet.
His address will discuss some of the problems of overanalyzing the
Harry Potter books, and he will offer suggestions on how to
distinguish red herrings from true clues. Steve is the creator and
editor of the Harry Potter Lexicon website, a comprehensive reference
tool on the Potterverse extensively used by both fans and scholars.

Dr. Judith Robertson will present "What Happens to Our Wishes:
Magical Thinking in Harry Potter" at the Sunday luncheon. Her
presentation will focus on the elements in the Harry Potter series
that make these books so vividly compelling to young readers. Dr.
Robertson is an Associate Professor at the University of Ottawa, and
has written over twenty articles and chapters that have appeared in
peer-refereed sites in children's literature, English education,
curriculum theory and teacher education.

The conference will also feature a silent auction to benefit
ALSOcares, a small non-profit community family literacy program in
the Canadian communities of Lowertown/Sandyhill/Vanier. ALSOcares
provides a Reading and Parents Program for families with children
under 6 years of age that is designed to improve literacy for both
the children and their parents. Items to be auctioned include a
quilted wall hanging by Nancy Carstensen and some of the many
gorgeous conference decorations. We are still seeking additional
donations for the auction to benefit this worthy cause. If you are
interested in contributing, please contact the Convention Alley
Planning Committee at: hpottawa @ yahoo.no (without the spaces).

There are also some upcoming deadlines we would like to remind you
about:

(1) The form to reserve a room at the University of Ottawa residence
must be received by the residence by June 30, 2004.
(2) The vendor agreement is also due by June 30, 2004. For more
information on becoming a Convention Alley vendor, please visit:
http://www.conventionalley.org/vendors.html .
(3) The deadline for sponsors to have their advertisement included in
the conference programme is June 30, 2004. For information on
available sponsorships, please visit:
http://www.conventionalley.org/sponsorships.html .

For more information or to register for the conference, please visit:
http://www.conventionalley.org/ .

DISCLAIMERS: This conference is an unofficial event and is not
endorsed or sanctioned by Warner Bros., the Harry Potter book
publishers or J.K. Rowling and her representatives.

This conference also has no affiliation with HP Education Fanon, Inc.

~Phyllis Morris
2004 Convention Alley Planning Committee





From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 15:34:39 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:34:39 -0000
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <636581753.20040608173405@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <ca7amf+vnks@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at v...> wrote:> 
And shipping H/Hr, for reasons of wanting to see the
> *actors* together??
>  Susanne





 I ship H/Hr because I read the books. 




From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Wed Jun  9 17:59:07 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:59:07 -0000
Subject: Not our Ron!  Ron humiliating Hermione in DADA
In-Reply-To: <c0.ec4094d.2df7aeed@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ca7j5b+47r9@eGroups.com>

> Sara says:
> But it states right there in the book that Ron calls Hermione a
> "know-it-all" twice a week.? What's the difference who says it?? 
Yes, in the book Ron defends her, but why he does it seems more like 
only he can call her names.? I found it very hypocritical of Ron to 
defend her from Snape's name-calling, when Ron does it himself.

> Ladycat16 says: (my reply)
> I think it's the matter of who it is coming from, yes I agree that 
it's kind 
> of hypocritical of him, but coming from other students it really 
isn't as bad 
> as coming from a teacher. <snip>



Mandy here:
Exactly.  It's one thing to call you friend a 'know it all' to her 
face, when it's your friend and she also knows it to be true.   But 
quite another to say it out loud, in front of a class after a teacher 
has publicly humiliated your friend in a way that should never of 
happened.  It's kicking the girl while she was down, plain and simple.
Mandy





From ExSlytherin at aol.com  Wed Jun  9 18:09:50 2004
From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:09:50 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <009c01c44dca$0e417580$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <ca7jpe+ku7j@eGroups.com>

 > Joj wrote:
> Speaking of Dan, does anyone else think he looks older in the movie 
than in real life?  All these interviews lately, done when he was 
older than when he shot the movie, and he looked younger.  I couldn't 
believe how much older he looked in PoA than in CoS.


Mandy here:
There was about 18 months between filming PoA and CoS and 18 months 
in the life of a young teen boy can bring huge changes.  I remember 
being away from my younger brother for 18 months when he was 14-16 
years old. When I left he was a 5'6" boy and when I came back he was 
a 6'2" man.  Very shocking.

I think he looks older in the movie because he Harry is much more 
serious than Dan.  Not to mention Harry lives with enormous trials 
and tribulations that the actor is not.  Dan, in real life, comes 
across as charming, sweet and very self-effacing. A true gentleman in 
the making.  But then Dan is sitting on the edge of adulthood and 
hasn't started to rebel yet.  Wait until drugs and sex join the rock 
and roll that's already in his life.  But for now he's standing on 
stable ground, at least stable ground for a child movie star.





From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Wed Jun  9 18:29:07 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:29:07 -0500 
Subject: clues from the movie
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0682@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Okay guys I went and saw the movie for time number three last night and
these are the things I find myself pondering:
 
1)    I am certain of my Snape/.Vampire theory. They left out the line where
Lupin asks Harry about the vampire essay and I think they did that because
with Snape closing the windows in the class and walking around at night it
would be TOO obvious.
2)    I am with those wondering if Hermione is a werewolf, but I would come
near thinking she is a wolf animagus.  
3)    What did Lupin tear up and throw in the fire when he was leaving?
4)    I find the way Hermione was looking at Harry as he talked of living in
the country very amusing. My SO who was with me looked at me and said, "why
don't they kiss and get it over with?" and he does not even know what
shipping is!
 
I would like to put an end to the theory of Trelawney being the grey cat
because if you look closely when they first enter the classroom you can see
the cat next to the door and her at the front of the class at the same time.
 
Feel free to burst bubbles or punch holes as you will or just debate or
agree!
 Gina - who LOVES this list!
 
Gina A. Miller
 


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




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Wed Jun  9 19:11:50 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 15:11:50 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
References: <28EA51C2.694EF8BB.0004E520@aol.com> <001401c44d96$ce817400$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <00a301c44e55$9e4f4b80$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Julie:
  I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
  has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
  Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
  the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
  tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
  not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
  as far as I can tell. >>

Kimberly:
  ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys grown the most
  during their teenager years where girls grown more in the pre-teen years?  I
  think Dan will continue to get taller when Emma will stop growing soon.  Of
  course, most of us think he is becoming too cute, but we all have different
  tastes!  :-)
  
Taryn:
I'll bet Dan will have a growth spurt soon. I can vividly remember being in 7th grade and girl were the taller breed. Then we came back for 8th grade and all the guys towered over us. So I'd be willing to bet that Dan will end up taller than Emma.

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

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




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 20:30:03 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 20:30:03 -0000
Subject: Daniel's looks...
In-Reply-To: <ca58a3+fnsb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca7s0b+skm2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
> > > 
> snip>  
> > > 
> > 
> > You people are unbelievable.  LOL Dan is gonna be gorgeous???  
> He's 
> > the next Elijah Wood and Emma will tower over him.  LOL  And he's 
> > actually better looking with the glasses.  I say start wearing 
> them 
> > permanently.
> > 
> > M.
> 
> Having had the great pleasure of meeting and speaking with Daniel 
in 
> person, I agree with the majority: He is one good looking guy! He 
> looks younger in person and a bit different from the onscreen 
Harry, 
> who is gorgeous too (but in a quieter, more Melancholic kind of 
> way). Daniel Radcliffe can light up a room with his smile and 
charm. 
> And those amazing blue eyes! Anyway, Emma is still the smallest of 
> the group, delicate and petite, so it's hard to say how tall any of 
> them is going to be (though Rupert is the tallest of the 3 and 
> appears to be growing fast). Elijah Wood has finished growing, so I 
> don't think the comparison stands.
> Just my 2 cents worth!
> Nicole

You all do know that I was not a bit serious, right?  LOL  But Emma's 
got 3 more years of growing and Dan and Rupert have closer to 10.  No 
fair.  LOL

Marci




From celticangel at thebuffysite.com  Wed Jun  9 20:54:01 2004
From: celticangel at thebuffysite.com (celticangel1976)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 20:54:01 -0000
Subject: clues from the movie
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0682@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <ca7td9+tkuf@eGroups.com>

> 1)    I am certain of my Snape/.Vampire theory. They left out the 
line where
> Lupin asks Harry about the vampire essay and I think they did that 
because
> with Snape closing the windows in the class and walking around at 
night it
> would be TOO obvious.

Ok, other than the fact that JKR has said herself that Snape is NOT 
a vampire (check her website), here's some flaws in your theory.  In 
the first two movies, we see Snape out in the daylight.  Quidditch 
anyone?  As for shutting the shutters in the DADA class.  He's about 
to use a projector.  You can't do that with the lights on.  Since 
there's not exactly a switch to flip to turn the lights off in the 
classroom, he closes the shutters.  Same thing a teacher with 
windows in their classroom would do in the real world if about to 
use a projector.  Close the blinds.

CelticAngel




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Wed Jun  9 21:00:01 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:00:01 -0500 
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: clues from the movie
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0685@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

> 1)    I am certain of my Snape/.Vampire theory. They left out the 
line where
> Lupin asks Harry about the vampire essay and I think they did that 
because
> with Snape closing the windows in the class and walking around at 
night it
> would be TOO obvious.

Ok, other than the fact that JKR has said herself that Snape is NOT 
a vampire (check her website), here's some flaws in your theory.  In 
the first two movies, we see Snape out in the daylight.  Quidditch 
anyone?  As for shutting the shutters in the DADA class.  He's about 
to use a projector.  You can't do that with the lights on.  Since 
there's not exactly a switch to flip to turn the lights off in the 
classroom, he closes the shutters.  Same thing a teacher with 
windows in their classroom would do in the real world if about to 
use a projector.  Close the blinds.
CelticAngel
 
      
      Gina again:
               Fair enough and if JKR said "No" flat out then that is
probably true, unless she is having to outright lie       to keep from
telling people the end of her story. I would like to point out though that
Snape's classroom is in the dungeon and he IS the potions instructor and as
Lupin said a very good one to be able to make the werewolf potion so who is
to say he cannot make a potions to allow himself out for brief periods in
the sunlight? He is not out all that much when you think about it.
 
 
      




________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/
<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
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12903m5gs/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups
/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1086900910/A=2164331/R=0/SIG=11eaelai9/*http:/www.netfl
ix.com/Default?mqso=60183351> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164331/rand=649746219> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun  9 20:02:03 2004
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 21:02:03 +0100 (BST)
Subject: disappointment and delight
Message-ID: <20040609200203.57914.qmail@web25105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

The first time I saw POA I was bitterly disappointed. The second time I was
thrilled to bits.

I was disappointed the first time because my vision of Harry Potter is that
these books are so sublime, so vast in their emotional impact (on me
anyway), and provide such an overwhelmingly rich spiritual experience that
the film medium could probably never convey that. When I read the books, and
particularly the (spiritual) climax, I'm transported into a state of intense
and pure joy, because I recognise the liberating symbolism in the story.

To understand my point fully I refer you to my article "Harry Potter -
Christian Rosycross in Jeans", filed on the main site at   . My contention
is that each book symbolises the liberation of the soul returning to the
original spirit. Each book takes place on a successively higher plane of
life. The first book represents the physical plane (the visible world of
solids, gases and liquids), the second represents the etheric plane (the
plane of life-forces) and the second the astral plane, the plane of emotions
and desires. 

In the beginning of the book we see Harry having no control over his
emotions, with the result that he inflates his aunt. And the dementors have
a powerful effect on him, as we all know. During the year he learns to
resist the dementors. Lupin tells Harry that what he's really afraid of is
fear of fear itself. Fear is the most powerful emotion of all and Harry's
quest is to build up the inner strength to be able to repel the attacks of
the dementors. 

The dementors to me symbolise not only fear and depression, but in fact the
astral plane is brimming with all sorts of vile forces that feed on people
who are on the same emotional level. These dementors or demonic forces seek
to possess people to make them carry out acts of horrendous violence and
unspeakable acts of extreme depravity. An example. There was a BBC World
Service broadcast the other day about the massacres in Rwanda 10 years ago.
Some of the people who did the killing were interviewed and they expressed
the experience that they were "possessed by devils" as they put it. That's
the truth about the dementors. We, all of us human beings, exude emotional
energy which is absorbed by living accumulations of energy. After a time, as
is the natural property of astral matter, these accumulations of energy
start to develop a consciousness and a strong desire for self-preservation
and growth. The grosser the emotional level, the more energetic the fight
for emotional food. And their way of obtaining food is to possess people who
are prone to emotions of hatred and violence.

What I'm saying is that when terrorists for example carry out heinous acts
of murder and destruction, they are being possessed by living astral
monsters that humanity in general has created by radiating negative
emotions. That's why terrorists are totally immune to reason; they are
possessed by Molochs who have no conscience and feed on death, destruction
and bloodshed. 

Then along comes Harry Potter. Harry is the absolute opposite of the astral
forces that are creating so much terror in our millennium. As I've pointed
out on the main group so often, and again in my article, Harry is the symbol
for the divine spark that we have in our heart. His father was a stag. The
stag symbolizes the longing from that imperishable spark to return to its
Creator. Harry is the part within each of us that is born when we decide
once and for all to answer the call for the lost child of the original
spirit to come home. When we hand over the control of our life to Harry
within us, he will begin to clean up our emotional life, just like Jesus
cleared the temple. Of course he will be confronted by the evil within us
and around us. At first they will cause him to lose consciousness and they
will suck out all our positive emotions. But gradually Harry will gain
strength; our inner divine being will learn to overcome fear and all
negative emotions. 

Then one day, when the time is right, Harry will win the final battle
against the astral vampires that hover around us. One day they will go for a
concerted attack. A hundred (symbol for totality) astral dementors gather
and attack the only begotten Son within us. What does he do? He invokes his
father. With all his concentration on the Holy longing in his heart, the
thirst for the Living Undying Spirit, he calls up the highest astral force
attainable by a human being: the yearning for the Spirit. And this supreme
and supernal force drives all evil powers away for ever. Harry is liberated
from the earthly astral plane.

This is the background of my thoughts when I read the following immortal
lines: "...he thought he saw a silvery light, growing brighter and brighter
[...]The blinding light was illuminating the grass around him... The
screaming had stopped, the cold was ebbing away... Something was driving the
dementors back...the air was warm again."`

and 

"'EXPECTO PATRONUM!' he yelled. And out of the end of his wand burst, not a
shapeless cloud of mist, but a blinding, dazzling silver animal.[...]He saw
it lower its head and charge at the swarming Dementors [...]It wasn't a
horse. It wasn't a unicorn either. It was a stag. It was shining brightly as
the moon above.[...]it stared at Harry with its large, silver eyes. Slowly
it bowed its antlered head. And Harry realised... 'Prongs, ' he whispered."

I just can't express the power that I perceive in these words. In them is
contained the Way for humanity to free itself from all violence, wars, and
hatred. In them is the way for the "insginificant" single tiny human being
to defeat the combined forces of evil should they choose to attack him or
her. Even if the entire collective army of demons should attack us, we could
easily chase them all away if we have in our heart that true longing for
God, emanating from the inner sanctuary in the heart. That is what Harry
Potter means to me! 

I hope I have succeded to some extent in explaining to you how disappointed
I was in the film realisation of the above description of the stag in
Rowling's own words. I know that many of you were disappointed as well. 

In addition I experienced many of the disappoinments that other members have
expressed so elegantly, and I share many of the joys as well. The trouble is
that despite the many posts warning that we shouldn't have the book in mind
when seeing the film, I couldn't help having it in mind. I just wasn't
capable of wiping the book from my consciousness. It's not a mental memory
really; it's like an emotional memory. The book version of POA is just so
breathtakingly sublime I'm not able to ignore that.

So when I saw the film the second time I knew what to expect and this time I
could sit back and enjoy it all without reservation. 

Buckbeak's ride alone is worth the price of the ticket. To see that clumsy
beast gallopping along through the trees and then suddenly its magnificent
wings unfold and the hippogriff taking off is, to me, one of the greatest
moments in film viewing. And then that brilliant accompanying music of John
Williams! I've got the CD and am listening to it right now. As Rowling puts
it, "it makes my heart swell like a balloon" to hear that glorious evocative
music. First that wild drumming to accompany the beast's run up, and then
that swelling, ascending music which conveys so thrillingly the rising up
into the sky, with that glorious scenery and that wonderful feeling of
freedom Harry visibly experinces.

And I love everything all you other fans love about it.

Hans in Holland

Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com




From shawnw24 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 20:08:03 2004
From: shawnw24 at yahoo.com (Shawn&Emma Welling)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: I really liked the film
In-Reply-To: <1086743561.1657.36560.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040609200803.85678.qmail@web40410.mail.yahoo.com>


Being a former amature film maker, I liked the cuts.  I liked the way the director put the movie together.

yes their where changes but "star trek" everything was changed and we all grew to like it.  The next movie does not have this man at the helm and its a harry by himself advanture.

So I liked it a lot, happy to have it in my collection.  happy to pay to see it again, any price.

Shawn


Thank you,
T. Shawn Welling
My Home Page, My research, Erdology, and Library
www.tswelling.com   

My Research q and a email group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tswelling/ 

My Erdology Research A Question and Answer email group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Erdology/ 

______
"To announce that there must be no criticism 
of the president, or that we are to stand by the 
president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic 
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the 
American Public." - Theodore Roosevelt a republican

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





From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 20:01:58 2004
From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (Julie Howard)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <00a301c44e55$9e4f4b80$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <20040609200158.92450.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>

Taryn Kimel <amani at atlanticbb.net> wrote:
Julie:
  I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
  has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
  Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
  the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
  tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
  not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
  as far as I can tell. >>

Kimberly:
  ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys grown the most
  during their teenager years where girls grown more in the pre-teen years?  I
  think Dan will continue to get taller when Emma will stop growing soon.  Of
  course, most of us think he is becoming too cute, but we all have different
  tastes!  :-)
  
Taryn:
I'll bet Dan will have a growth spurt soon. I can vividly remember being in 7th grade and girl were the taller breed. Then we came back for 8th grade and all the guys towered over us. So I'd be willing to bet that Dan will end up taller than Emma.


I think this is a different Julie.  However, I agree.




From CMeehan1 at aol.com  Wed Jun  9 21:33:22 2004
From: CMeehan1 at aol.com (CMeehan1 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:33:22 EDT
Subject: Book 6 Clue - Here's my guess...
Message-ID: <1cf.231c7699.2df8dc22@aol.com>

Sorry if I'm repeating what someone else has said but here is my idea of what 
JKR saw in the movie that may be a clue for book 6

When Harry returns the crystal ball he sees Sirius in the crystal ball.  I 
think Harry is going to communicate with Sirius via a crystal ball in book 6.  
That is how people communicate with the dead right?  JKR has hinted that we 
will see Sirius again...

What do you think?

Caroline


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Wed Jun  9 21:55:21 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:55:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Book 6 Clue - Here's my guess...
In-Reply-To: <1cf.231c7699.2df8dc22@aol.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEKEJICHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>



That is certainly a possibility.  I always thought maybe his portrait will
show up in the "House of Black" where
the Order is located, and Harry will have his chance to talk with Sirius
again.  I guess I was under the assumption
from book 5 that each deceased family member had a portrait there.  Didn't
Phineas have one in Harry and Ron's
room?  Just a thought.

Kimberly
  -----Original Message-----
  From: CMeehan1 at aol.com [mailto:CMeehan1 at aol.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 4:33 PM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Book 6 Clue - Here's my guess...


  Sorry if I'm repeating what someone else has said but here is my idea of
what
  JKR saw in the movie that may be a clue for book 6

  When Harry returns the crystal ball he sees Sirius in the crystal ball.  I
  think Harry is going to communicate with Sirius via a crystal ball in book
6.
  That is how people communicate with the dead right?  JKR has hinted that
we
  will see Sirius again...

  What do you think?

  Caroline


  [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 sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Wed Jun  9 22:21:01 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:21:01 -0000
Subject: Late in the game--my PoA late night ramblings
Message-ID: <ca82gd+7nm6@eGroups.com>

Well, I can't imagine coming up with something that hasn't already 
been said,and I purposely avoided reading the detailed discussions on 
PoA as the Swedish release drew closer. Well, now it's here, and I've 
seen it. Tomorrow I'm writing Cuaron a letter, and it's not, I repeat 
not a howler. How b-e-a-u-t-i-f-u-l was that? What a ride! We could't 
have asked for more. Alfonso really managed to translate Potter magic 
to the screen, and it's the first time we've seen it done. Let's hope 
it's not the last. Sure, I can think of a few detail-gripes but how 
could I expect not to have any? C'mon! That was Harry, folks. That 
was grimy ol' crumbling Hogwarts in all it's glorious detail. And 
that was most definitely the wicked, vengeful whonping willow.That 
was Harry's world. I have offically been completely taken in--I'm 
buying it lock stock and barrel.Those dementors made my skin crawl, 
and I'm never frightened by such things normally, I was quite 
suprised at myself.Oh, and I absolutely bought Harry's sobs too, no 
question (aimed at those of you who didn't, though you're perfectly 
entitled not too...)it was quite heart-wrenching. The girl next to me 
exclaimed "oh, he's crying" as though she would have liked to comfort 
him. (Didn't you just think someone ought to have given Harry a big 
hug somewhere at the end of it all? Let's hope Mrs. Weasly's hug is 
left in in GoF. I thought that was a tremendous pay-off to wait until 
the end of no 4, but I won't get in to that now)Well, you and me 
both, sister. And don't get me started on the photography. I drank in 
that grainy look like someone on the verge of dying of thirst. The 
photography, that camera--don't get me started. I don't even know 
where to begin. There's so much to say, and so little point in saying 
it, I mean now.But I'm sure I will once I've had a good nights 
sleep.  
BTW, without having read any comments on what the two foreshadowings 
of 6 and 7 were, here's my two knuts (wild guessing)

1)draco says something about giving Hermione her comuppance--I could 
see that
2)Harry losing his glasses at the whomping willow. I don't mean THAT 
will be in book 6 or 7, but Rowling has said that Harry's eyes were 
his great weakness, which I take to mean at least in part the fact 
that he's helpless without them. That may play a part later on. 
 G'night folks (though I don't see how I shall be able to sleep...)

Sophia
 




From siskiou at vcem.com  Wed Jun  9 22:53:23 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 15:53:23 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <ca7amf+vnks@eGroups.com>
References: <636581753.20040608173405@vcem.com> <ca7amf+vnks@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <971862625.20040609155323@vcem.com>



Hi,

Wednesday, June 9, 2004, 8:34:39 AM, McGregorMax at ec.rr.com wrote:

>  I ship H/Hr because I read the books.

I was replying to someone who said the following:
> Yeah and in another couple of years both he and Emma are going
> to be gorgeous. One of the reasons that I'm shipping H&Hr is to see 
> Dan and Emma act it out on the screen!

It was attributed to you, so I apologize if you didn't write
this.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From joj at rochester.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 23:15:21 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:15:21 -0400
Subject: Where were they?
Message-ID: <000a01c44e77$a33f35c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

I was just thinking, what happened to the scene where Harry is looking into a fire and says, "he was right there, he was close enough to touch"?  I remember there was a debate about if Dan said he or she and who he could have been talking about.  We also didn't see McGonnagal with her hair down (as we saw in a picture) or Ron and Hermione fighting with Rons hair all crazy and Hermiones hair in braids.  I guess we'll have to wait until the DVD comes out.

Joj

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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Wed Jun  9 23:31:01 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:31:01 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] clues from the movie
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0682@jismsg01.jis.nash
 ville.org>
References: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0682@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040609192136.03fcc070@mail.silverbloom.net>

At 06/09/2004 02:29 PM, Miller, Gina (JIS) wrote:

>1)    I am certain of my Snape/.Vampire theory. They left out the line where
>Lupin asks Harry about the vampire essay and I think they did that because
>with Snape closing the windows in the class and walking around at night it
>would be TOO obvious.

It was already pointed out JKR said 'no' and the shutters were closed for 
the projection.


>2)    I am with those wondering if Hermione is a werewolf, but I would come
>near thinking she is a wolf animagus.

I believe JKR referenced, if a character was to become an animagus, they'd 
take on their corporeal patronus shape (e.g. Harry = stag, Hermione = otter).

However, I did this 'outline' for an odd bit of speculation:
[[
Even if it the comparison to 'own kind' was drawn, Hermione is a female
muggleborn while Remus is a halfblood male.  Other than both having
magical blood, it still doesn't make sense.  Unless, you speculate on the
comment JKR made about the POA movie hinting at future books.  This may be
true or something done to hype up the movie for additional viewings.

If you go with the former (excuse the incorrectly structured outline -
over eight years later, I've forgotten how to do the buggers :-\ ):

   I) Hermione becomes a werewolf.
      A) Hermione is attacked by Lupin.
         1) Lupin is not forced into this situation.
            a) Unlikely based on events and consequences in POA.
            b) Some fanfic's plotline to 'ship' Remus/Hermione.
         2) Lupin is forced into this situation.
            a) Trapped and the wolfsbane potion is not administered.
            b) Hermione volunteers to become one as a defense tactic.
               i) Makes no sense because she's effective as a witch, unless
she finds herself in a situation that prevents magic.
      B) Hermione is attacked by another werewolf.
         1) Flashback to the OOTP St. Mungo's scene depicting another
'victim' of a werewolf attack.
            a) Voldemort has recruited other magical beings because of the
Ministry's lack of foresight on equality.
  II) Hermione does not become a werewolf.
      A) Hermione howling does not tie into any future books.
         1) Instead, some fanfic folk could make some pervy remarks/stories.
      B) The script adaptation has its flaws.
III) Dina has no idea what the heck she's talking about.
]]


>3)    What did Lupin tear up and throw in the fire when he was leaving?

When I was released from my last job, I ripped up and disposed of notes and 
extraneous paperwork I would no longer need.  Clean up the clutter.


>4)    I find the way Hermione was looking at Harry as he talked of living in
>the country very amusing. My SO who was with me looked at me and said, "why
>don't they kiss and get it over with?" and he does not even know what
>shipping is!

Not a Harry/Hermione 'shipper.

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 sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 10 00:01:28 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:01:28 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca4ksg+nsum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca88co+4c0j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" <jjpandy at y...> wrote:
> Is anyone else as happy as I am that Harry FINALLY has messy hair 
> throughout the entire movie?!
> 
> JJPandy  :)

Yes, yes, yes and yes!!!! I love it! That's just how Harry should 
look! However, I fear for the future state of Harry's hair (if I may 
be so nitpicky. You've all seen the mop Dan's been sporting in 
interviews for the release. Well, that's perfectly fine for Dan, no 
problem, but it's not Harry-hair. OK, so why am I worried? Dan said 
in a recent interview that he had filmed some scenes for GoF already 
(but maybe--hope dawns, they weren't anything to do with the final 
vut, maybe they were more, like screentest thingies....) That would 
imply that his hair will at least be no shorter in the film than it 
is at present, and it's way too long for Harry, especially in the 
back. (Nit-pick, nit-pick...) Oh, how could Newell ever live up to 
Cuaron? Then on the other hand, I knew very little of Cuaron before 
he got involved in HP and he turned out a bit of alright...(still 
floating happily in the premier-daze haveing only just seen it for 
the first time and had to go online to reserve tickets so I can see 
it again this weekend.)Remember how we all worried over the switch 
from Columbus, well a lot of us, anyway. 

Out of curiosity: Listees who disliked Cuaron's take on the WW, did 
you prefer Columbus or do you think both directors did Rowling wrong? 
(It would be impossible to do entirely right by her, I admit.)

Sophia




From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Thu Jun 10 00:07:27 2004
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:07:27 -0500
Subject: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
References: <20040609200158.92450.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005601c44e7e$ea7cf4c0$210110ac@TALLC>

> Julie:
>   I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
>   has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
>   Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
>   the earlier films. >>
>
> Kimberly:
>   ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys 
> grown the most during their teenager years where girls grown more 
> in the pre-teen years?  


Ok, I'm totally lost on this comparison to EW - and maybe for that reason
the line, "he is definately no Elijah Wood" comes across as slightly
insulting, since EW is an incredible actor.

Rae





From grianne2 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 01:55:47 2004
From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 01:55:47 -0000
Subject: Cuaron talks about movie cuts
Message-ID: <ca8f33+8jov@eGroups.com>

www.the-leaky-cauldron.org has posted a transcript of Cuaron's 
appearance on FOX News. ALSO, Cuaron will be on Charlie Rose 
TONIGHT, and hopefully he will talk more on this subject.

Here's two important pieces (LV is Linda Vester by the way, not Lord 
Voldemort ^_-):

LV: You know there were certain things, though, that are a little 
bit different. Is it true that you had to ask, or at least wanted to 
ask, JK Rowling ? you know, for instance, on changing what the kids 
wore ? you know, is it okay if they wear their street clothes ? 

AC: That was her idea. 

LV: Really? That was her idea? She told you?

AC: Yeah.

LV: And it's really true that she said, look, don't be too literal 
with the book.

AC: Yeah. What she said is she didn't want it to be literal. She 
said be faithful to the spirit of the book, but don't be literal. 
And together with that she said, you know, I think that the uniforms 
are really good, but they shouldn't wear the uniforms unless they 
are doing academic things. You know, when they are doing things in 
their personal lives they should wear their street clothes.

---

And:

Audience Member: I noticed, um, there was lots of foreshadowing in 
the third book that kind of leads to the fourth book and explains it 
a little better and I noticed that it was kind of left out. 
Particularly at the end of the third movie and I was curious if that 
was deliberate, or like how the fourth movie will be, especially 
because there's going to be a new director.

AC: Well, yeah, what happened is that you have to discriminate a lot 
when you are doing an adaptation. And we decided to just adapt 
everything that was relevant to the theme of a kid growing into a 
teenager. And pretty much we had to leave everything else, whatever 
didn't stick to that theme, we had to let it go. And that was one of 
those things. And yes, I know, it's setting up for the fourth one, 
but in the fourth one they are taking elements of the third to do 
the set up for the fourth.

---

All in all, very interesting! And it seems many of the Shrieking 
Shack scenes that are gone will show up in the fourth movie.

If only GoF was two movies though. How are they going to fit all of 
that in there?

-- Annalisa




From juli17 at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 02:02:58 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:02:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <a9.59d28912.2df91b52@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/9/2004 5:33:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net writes:

> Julie:
>   I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
>   has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
>   Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
>   the earlier films. >>
>
> Kimberly:
>   ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys 
> grown the most during their teenager years where girls grown more 
> in the pre-teen years?  


Ok, I'm totally lost on this comparison to EW - and maybe for that reason
the line, "he is definately no Elijah Wood" comes across as slightly
insulting, since EW is an incredible actor.

Rae



We were doing a comparison of physical features, refering to an original 
post comparing the looks of Dan and Elijah. It had nothing to do with
either's acting ability. (BTW, I think Elijah is a very good actor, and
based on POA, Dan is turning into a very good one too.)
 
Julie


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




From juli17 at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 02:04:21 2004
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:04:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <198.2aa36619.2df91ba5@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/9/2004 2:32:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
drjuliehoward at yahoo.com writes:

Julie:
I don't really think he's the next Elijah Wood. Elijah
has those huge eyes and still looks like a little boy.
Dan's face has already thinned out and matured from
the earlier films. And I don't think Emma will ever
tower over him. I don't know how tall Dan is, but he's
not particularly short, nor Emma particularly tall,
as far as I can tell. >>

Kimberly:
ITA Julie.  He is definately no Elijah Wood, and don't all boys grown the most
during their teenager years where girls grown more in the pre-teen years?  I
think Dan will continue to get taller when Emma will stop growing soon.  Of
course, most of us think he is becoming too cute, but we all have different
tastes!  :-)

Taryn:
I'll bet Dan will have a growth spurt soon. I can vividly remember being in 
7th grade and girl were the taller breed. Then we came back for 8th grade and 
all the guys towered over us. So I'd be willing to bet that Dan will end up 
taller than Emma.


I think this is a different Julie.  However, I agree.


 
I am a different Julie. I just recently started posting here :-)
 
Julie Two, from California 


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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 02:49:51 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:49:51 -0000
Subject: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca88co+4c0j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca8i8f+s1s4@eGroups.com>

>> Out of curiosity: Listees who disliked Cuaron's take on the WW, 
did 
> you prefer Columbus or do you think both directors did Rowling 
wrong? 
> (It would be impossible to do entirely right by her, I admit.)
> 
> Sophia

Sophia,

I think both directors did a good job.  As you said, they can't do 
completely RIGHT by the books, but I love all three movies and I 
think they did the best they could.  Heck, I'm just so excited they 
were even made into movies, I will forgive a few left out things!  I 
have to say, however, I LOVE the way Cuaron directed the kids, and I 
love the darker, grittier take on it.  

Alora :)




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 03:16:26 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:16:26 EDT
Subject: IMAX
Message-ID: <d2.ed8d33d.2df92c8a@aol.com>

I went to see POA at an IMAX theater and I can't recommend it more highly. 
Although I absolutely adore the movie, one of my minor quibbles with it after 
the first viewing in a regular theater was the almost too washed out, murky 
scenes in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning and the somewhat grainy texture 
to the film - also the problems I had hearing it sometimes. 
Well, I am happy to say it is not the film, it is just the screen or even the 
prints that are sent to regular theaters - the IMAX version is incredibly 
clear and much brighter. You can see minute details on faces, backgrounds, etc. 
And the colors in the Cauldron scenes aren't as washed out as I thought.
My friend Cindy and I kept commenting on   this while watching. We noticed so 
many more things and even heard more things than we did the first and second 
(for her) times.
I was afraid that the big screen would give me vertigo in some scenes, but I 
think that's only films made especially for IMAX, like skydiving or race car 
driving or other things where the camera follows people off cliffs or something 
;) 
I never experienced that queasy feeling while watching the IMAX version - 
just the pure pleasure of an immense screen and incredibly clear picture. 
So, if you can get to an IMAX theater, do so!
Cindy


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




From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Thu Jun 10 02:39:08 2004
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:39:08 -0000
Subject: Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Latin
Message-ID: <ca8hkc+u7ov@eGroups.com>

Well, I've finally seen POA and can't resist sharing my thoughts,
even if they are a bit 
belated. In the last couple of weeks I did a POA re-read, so some of
these things are 
thoughts I had on rereading that were reinforced by the movie. Here
they are, 
randomly generated by my brain but ordered more or less by occurrence
in the 
movie:

Question: Could anyone see what book the wizard who was stirring his
cup in the 
Leaky Cauldron was reading?

Thought: I was struck anew, especially after seeing David Thewlis's
Lupin, at how 
_damaged_ ? ravaged, even ? the Marauders are ? the ones
that aren't dead, that is. 
Sirius's damaged-ness is much-discussed, but Lupin's really brought
home to me the 
poignancy of the whole situation of the characters who are Harry's
parents' age. I 
know Lupin's physical scars and his threadbareness come from his
lycanthropy, but 
they speak so eloquently of what it means to be a survivor of the
first Voldemort era. 
And these guys are only in their mid-thirties! My age or a little
younger, and I'm the 
same age as JKR. (Sobering thought on both counts.) Anyway, it made
me reconsider 
how the adult perspective ? ours and the characters' ?
operates in POA and later 
books.

Thought: In Lupin's Boggart lesson, I really liked the bit where
Lupin wasn't looking 
and suddenly turned around to find Harry at the front of the line.
But didn't it deflate 
things a bit that the Boggart!Dementor was already up and hovering in
front of  
everyone in the class before Lupin noticed? It rather undoes his
contention that he 
was afraid the class would see Voldemort.

Thought: I have believed since the first time I read the time turner
scene where DD is 
in Hagrid's hut, stalling for time, that DD is in a different
relationship to time than the 
other characters, time-turned or otherwise. Now, I've read many
splendidly logical 
explanations about how DD could/must have known what HH were up to
without 
having time-traveled himself, but I think the _literary_ impression
that DD has access 
to knowledge of a kind not available to any other character is
strongly reinforced by 
the screenplay. I was reminded of DD telling Harry "I don't need a
cloak to be 
invisible": there is a lot we don't know yet about DD's powers to
move in time and 
space. Will have to mull this some more.

Question: A movie-only thing: Lots of reviews have remarked on this,
but _how_ 
exactly did they manage to make the werewolf look so cheesy when they
did such a 
good job with Buckbeak?! About the latter, I agree with whoever said
it here: I _want_ 
one! I love the way he lies in the pumpkin patch with his front claws
crossed.

Thought: As others have noted, Harry's patronus appears as a stag
only from the 
perspective of the Harry who's being saved, not the Harry who's
casting it (which is a 
switch in emphasis from the book, where Harry is clearer about what
the patronus 
was when it gallops back to him after he's cast it). While I prefer
the book version, the 
film version is an interesting choice, as it seems to suggest
something about Harry's 
fantasy of being rescued by his dad. I haven't worked out the
nuances; it just seems 
to me that Cuaron made quite a deliberate choice of how to understand
how Harry 
understands the patronus. It's all complicated, of course by the
omission of the 
Prongs identification from the movie. 

Observation: I sat through to the very end of the credits, going
crosseyed trying to 
read the text on the Map. The recurring phrase used as filler for the
buildings all over 
the map is "Maraudere est audere omnibus": "to maraud is to be bold
in all things"! 
Words to live by. (Or die by, if you're Sirius.)

Carin





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 04:33:27 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 04:33:27 -0000
Subject: Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Latin
In-Reply-To: <ca8hkc+u7ov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca8oan+1fav@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "carin_in_oh" <aldhelm at e...> 
wrote:
> Question: Could anyone see what book the wizard who was stirring 
his
> cup in the 
> Leaky Cauldron was reading?


Wasn't it "A Brief History of Time", by Stephen Hawking?

Alora




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 04:41:06 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:41:06 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Latin
Message-ID: <130.3016a45c.2df94062@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/9/04 9:31:18 PM, aldhelm at earthlink.net writes:


> Question: Could anyone see what book the wizard who was stirring his
> cup in the
> Leaky Cauldron was reading?
> 

"A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking.

<<<<
aldhelm at earthlink.net says:

Thought: As others have noted, Harry's patronus appears as a stag
only from the
perspective of the Harry who's being saved, not the Harry who's
casting it (which is a
switch in emphasis from the book, where Harry is clearer about what
the patronus
was when it gallops back to him after he's cast it). While I prefer
the book version, the
film version is an interesting choice, as it seems to suggest
something about Harry's
fantasy of being rescued by his dad. I haven't worked out the
nuances; it just seems
to me that Cuaron made quite a deliberate choice of how to understand
how Harry
understands the patronus. It's all complicated, of course by the
omission of the
Prongs identification from the movie.
******
You know, I thought about it this afterwards as well. Although it is possible 
and even plausible that it was a deliberate choice by Cuaron to not portray 
the patronus as a stag when timetravel Harry does it, I was thinking also that 
it could be because we see it from his perspective and it is the big glowing 
light that is pushing the dementors away. From the other Harry's viewpoint (the 
one in the original time frame), it appeared as a stag - maybe it just 
depends on which side you are looking at it - Timetravel Harry is seeing it (as are 
we) from the back.
Hmm, I don't know - but it was something that I noticed and wondered about.

But I agree with the rest of your post- I have long thought that Dumbledore 
knows a lot of things he isn't revealing. Plus he's a manipulative cuss ;-)
And the Marauders are indeed ravaged by their trials and tribulations. I 
loved Lupin's look- ragged cloak, tatty clothes and even the scars. And when he is 
supposed to look bad at the end after the transformation and return to school 
(when he is packing to leave), he really looks bad (pale, drawn face, etc.)

Cindy


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




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Thu Jun 10 04:48:00 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:48:00 +1000
Subject: POA, First Impressions
In-Reply-To: <ca8oan+1fav@eGroups.com>
References: <ca8hkc+u7ov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40C874A0.20481.52DF1B@localhost>

I'm just home from having seen 'Prisoner of Azkaban' which 
opened in Australia today. I'm just going to put some of my 
impressions down.

First of all, let me say that I did enjoy the film. I think 
it was an excellent piece of work by all concerned. Better 
than the first two? Not sure yet - I don't want to make a 
judgment based on only one viewing when I've seen the other 
two multiple times.

I was glad to see that a few of the changes made in this 
film weren't anywhere near as noticeable as I feared they 
would be based on still shots and previews I'd seen 
previously - in particular, the uniforms and the appearance 
of the classrooms.

Let me make it quite clear that I think the uniforms in this 
film are much closer to how I originally visualized Hogwarts 
robes, than those that appeared in the previous two films. 
On that level, I think they are an improvement. What 
concerned me though, when I first saw them, was that this is 
the third film of a series - and changing the uniform has 
continuity implications - I hope to eventually be able to 
watch seven films together as a series - and for that to 
happen, there needs to be as much consistency as possible.

Fortunately the changes weren't as noticeable as I feared 
when I first saw still images. So that concern has been 
greatly alleviated.

Same when it comes to the school - with the exception of 
that pendulum (and the bridge) Hogwarts still seemed close 
enough to what we saw in the first two films that I could 
easily accept that we were simply seeing different parts of 
the same school. The bridge isn't too much of a concern 
either in that regard - the pendulum does change things a 
little bit more than I personally would have liked.

The kids not wearing uniforms - this did concern when I 
first heard about it, but as it was, again, not a huge 
concern as it turned out - it came pretty close to the point 
it could have annoyed me but it didn't *quite* cross it.

The film did seem a little rushed at the start - but I'm OK 
with that, I'd rather they cut a bit there and have more 
time for the school.

Overall - great, I'm impressed - but there are a few 
niggling nitpicks.

Things I really liked... Lupin - nothing like I imagined, 
but I prefer the movies version greatly. He just seemed so 
much to me the type of man who could be trusted - and that's 
how Lupin seems to me in the book. But his standout scene 
for me is when he tells Harry off for risking his own safety 
- to me that is such a critical scene, which I was worried 
would be cut - it wasn't, and it was done perfectly. Lupin 
is angry - but he's still obviously caring about Harry - and 
he's saying what he is saying very much for Harry's own good 
- at least as he sees it.

And Snape.

I have issues about Snape. A couple of the things he has 
done quite simply anger me greatly. But for various reasons, 
I find myself *really* wanting to believe the best when it 
comes to Snape. I want to believe that when it really comes 
down to the really important things, Snape *will* do what is 
right - that he will do his duty.

And so the scene where after emerging from the tunnel under 
the whomping willow, and he sees Lupin coming towards the 
children and himself is really one of my favourites. Snape 
placing himself between the children and danger. Shielding 
them with his body - and that is what he is doing. I'm 
hoping JKR had influence in that.



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


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




From doliesl at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 05:15:12 2004
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:15:12 -0000
Subject: Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Lat
In-Reply-To: <ca8oan+1fav@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ca8qp0+args@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "carin_in_oh" <aldhelm at e...> 
> wrote:
> > Question: Could anyone see what book the wizard who was stirring 
> his cup in the Leaky Cauldron was reading?
> 
>Alora: 
> Wasn't it "A Brief History of Time", by Stephen Hawking?


And that Wizard is played by Ian Brown, lead singer of the British
band The Stone Roses. I read that from a magazine (Tokion) interview
where Ian Brown mentioned about his cameo playing a Bohemian wizard at
the Leaky Cauldron.

 D.




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 10 05:54:27 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 01:54:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Fear the grime, not the Grim! -DDs finger
	nails
In-Reply-To: <ca6mj9+o0g7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCED6FD2.E06%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>


I was a bit startled when I saw Dumbledore's long, yellow (and
dirty) nails, but then a thought occured to me... Dumbledore is a
genius, or at least we're told several times that he's the
greatest/most powerful wizard of his time...
Diana L.
dianasdolls

[from bewitchedbyHP]

Isn't Dumbledore supposed to be about a 1,000 years old? (I may be
exaggerating a bit there!) But if he is so old, it may stand to reason that
his nails are long, yellow and grimy...



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




From Lynx412 at AOL.com  Thu Jun 10 04:47:18 2004
From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:47:18 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs...
Message-ID: <139.301584f4.2df941d6@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/10/2004 12:38:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com writes:

> Wasn't it "A Brief History of Time", by Stephen Hawking?
> 

       Yep.

       Cheryl, back after hiatus


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





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 10 06:09:38 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:09:38 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry's appearance in POA movie
In-Reply-To: <ca7jpe+ku7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCED7362.E08%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Mandy here:
...But then Dan is sitting on the edge of adulthood and
hasn't started to rebel yet.  Wait until drugs and sex join the rock
and roll that's already in his life.  But for now he's standing on
stable ground, at least stable ground for a child movie star.


[from bewitchedbyHP]
I was reading some article from the DanRadcliffe.com site today, which was
all about Dan's penchant for punk rock music. Wonder how long it'll be
before he starts getting tattoos, piercings and ratty clothes?! I mean, if
he went from having a crush on Cameron Diaz (America's sweetheart), to that
scary-looking punk chick Brody Doyle...?! Although maybe it's in his
contract that he can't alter his looks too much? One can only hope. He's so
darn cute in his current clean-cut look.
:-)



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




From bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 06:42:16 2004
From: bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com (bewitchedbyhp)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 06:42:16 -0000
Subject: confused on some details...
Message-ID: <ca8vs8+gi7d@eGroups.com>

How is it that Lupin ends up at the Shrieking Shack instead of 
staying in and taking his potion, knowing that it was a full moon 
that night? Did he hear Ron screaming while being dragged off 
by Sirius the dog? I can buy that Snape was lurking after him 
trying to bust him at helping out Sirius. Any thoughts?

bewitchedbyHP





From bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 07:26:47 2004
From: bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com (bewitchedbyhp)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:26:47 -0000
Subject: musings on Lupin and Sirius
Message-ID: <ca92fn+g1bs@eGroups.com>

Re: Lupin. Even though I pictured Lupin to be a pale, scrawny 
man and Thewles (sp?) was very tall and rather healthy looking, I 
thought his portrayal of Lupin was outstanding. Look at how well 
he delivers his lines. Just the right inflection, pauses, at the
right 
moment. A definite professional. Where can I see more of his 
work?
Oh, and wasn't it so cool how he waved his hand to unlock the 
trunk or to have his belongings pop neatly into the suitcase? 
Nice effects...
Someone mentioned earlier that they didn't like the fact that 
Lupin looked 1940's in his attire, 'stache, choice of old-timey 
music. Then how the kids were dressed in contemporary attire. 
But then you look at McGonagall and she looks to be from the 
late 1800's. That's what I think is so brilliant about the HP 
storyline. You really have no clue when this is supposed to be 
taking place!

Still a bit bummed that Gary Oldman didn't get more airtime. He's 
another acting genius! Last week I saw "True Romance" again. 
He steals the show. He is such an amazing chameleon in every 
role he plays. Sirius figures so little in GOF, then returns very 
prominently in OOP. But I'm afraid by then Oldman will be off 
somewhere else and not reprise the Sirius Black role. That'd be 
a bummer.

bewitchedbyHP





From bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 07:12:16 2004
From: bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com (bewitchedbyhp)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:12:16 -0000
Subject: innuendoes?!
Message-ID: <ca91kg+anu0@eGroups.com>

OK, after seeing POA 3x I cannot in any way see where there is a 
sexual reference in the opening scene. How can Harry practicing 
his charms and incantations under the covers be misinterpreted 
as him "flogging his dolphin"?!? I don't know guys...I think you're 
really reaching on that one! I mean, it's not as though this were 
Shrek 1 or 2 which is rife with adult humor.
And regarding the homage to "Y Tu Mama Tambien" when H, R, 
H are hugging during the Buckbeak demise scene...how does 
that spell "Menage a Trois"? It's just 3 close friends feeling 
terrible that their friend Hagrid is losing Buckbeak. Ron doesn't 
even flinch when Hermione throws herself into his arms; he is 
so equally distraught over the Buckbeak event. I think it's a 
beautiful moment of the trio pictured on film. Not everything is 
about sex, ya'll!

bewitchedbyHP

PS. Speaking of sex...I could be wrong, but when Harry turns 
around and looks at/acknowledges someone sitting by the 
fountain...I could've sworn that was supposed to be Cho.  It 
looked like a girl with long black hair. Isn't she mentioned a 
couple of times in POA as Harry's crush? If anyone sees the 
movie again, let me know...





From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 10 08:32:11 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 04:32:11 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Cuaron talks about movie cuts
In-Reply-To: <ca8f33+8jov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEMGHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Annalisa Moretti [mailto:grianne2 at yahoo.com]

AC: Yeah. What she said is she didn't want it to be literal. She
said be faithful to the spirit of the book, but don't be literal.
. . .

AC: Well, yeah, what happened is that you have to discriminate a lot
when you are doing an adaptation. And we decided to just adapt
everything that was relevant to the theme of a kid growing into a
teenager. And pretty much we had to leave everything else, whatever
didn't stick to that theme, we had to let it go. And that was one of
those things. And yes, I know, it's setting up for the fourth one,
but in the fourth one they are taking elements of the third to do
the set up for the fourth.<<<

Here's what I don't get. . .what is the point of sticking to the "theme"
when the books are so much more than that? There's a whole storyline and
intricate plot that JKR created. That's what I missed in the movie the most.
Being faithful to the spirit of the book just wasn't enough for me, I wanted
the story told the way it's told in the book. This was more than just the
story of a kid growing up. . .maybe that's the underlying message or
whatever, but does that mean you should throw away the details that made the
POA story so complicated and wonderful to read?

Barbara
bd-bear




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 10 08:44:16 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 04:44:16 -0400
Subject: Columbus vs. Cuaron (WAS Harry's appearance in POA movie)
In-Reply-To: <ca88co+4c0j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBEEMHHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: sophiamcl [mailto:sophiamcl at hotmail.com]

Listees who disliked Cuaron's take on the WW, did
you prefer Columbus or do you think both directors did Rowling wrong?<<<

I'm one of the (unpopular) posters who didn't like PoA very much (not at
all, actually). I have both of the first movies on DVD and although I am
always disappointed that not everything can be depicted in a 2-hour movie, I
feel Columbus did a better job of portraying the WW. Or maybe I'm just used
to his portrayal, maybe that's why I didn't like PoA. I don't like change in
general, but to change what, to me, was "the look" that the WW would have in
movies (and in my mind), didn't make sense. On the other hand, I'm willing
to admit that even though I've read the books multiple times, I don't recall
off the top of my head if there is anyplace in canon that describes the
Hogwarts grounds as being lush, green, well-manicured, etc. But Columbus'
view fit my internal image pretty well.

Barbara
bd-bear




From bethz1 at rcn.com  Thu Jun 10 12:06:13 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:06:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures,Prongs perspective, and Latin
References: <ca8hkc+u7ov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003201c44ee3$5364bc70$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "carin_in_oh" <aldhelm at earthlink.net>

>Thought: In Lupin's Boggart lesson, I really liked the bit where
>Lupin wasn't looking and suddenly turned around to find Harry
>at the front of the line.  But didn't it deflate things a bit that the
>Boggart!Dementor was already up and hovering in front of
>everyone in the class before Lupin noticed? It rather undoes his
>contention that he was afraid the class would see Voldemort.

My sister and I thought the same thing when we first saw the movie,
and it just did not make sense to us.  But the 2nd time we saw the
movie I thought Lupin told Harry (I don't remember the exact quote)
that he didn't realize it was going to turn into a dementor, but that he
thought that it would be Voldemort.  So, he saw that it was a dementor
after he had already stepped in front of Harry, but when he first saw
Harry at the front of the line he thought that Voldemort was going to be
there.  That's what I got from it anyway.  The first time I saw the movie we
got stuck sitting in the 3rd row, so the sound was terrible and I missed
a lot of stuff that was said, but then I sat in the back for the 2nd viewing
and a lot of lines were a lot clearer to me.

Beth





From katherine.coble at crgibson.com  Thu Jun 10 12:46:50 2004
From: katherine.coble at crgibson.com (katherine.coble at crgibson.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:46:50 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX
Message-ID: <ECB767884CB8464B9A382DB2E8BB39C8033B2FB6@teserver01.treat.net>

For those who have seen both versions (as I intend to do...)

Is the IMAX print the full version of the film, or have they had to cut it
to 120 minutes to fit the IMAX projection system?



> ----------
> From: 	clshannon at aol.com
> Reply To: 	HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Sent: 	Wednesday, June 9, 2004 10:16 PM
> To: 	HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: 	[HPFGU-Movie] IMAX
> 
> I went to see POA at an IMAX theater and I can't recommend it more highly.
> 
> Although I absolutely adore the movie, one of my minor quibbles with it
> after 
> the first viewing in a regular theater was the almost too washed out,
> murky 
> scenes in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning and the somewhat grainy
> texture 
> to the film - also the problems I had hearing it sometimes. 
> Well, I am happy to say it is not the film, it is just the screen or even
> the 
> prints that are sent to regular theaters - the IMAX version is incredibly 
> clear and much brighter. You can see minute details on faces, backgrounds,
> etc. 
> And the colors in the Cauldron scenes aren't as washed out as I thought.
> My friend Cindy and I kept commenting on    this while watching. We
> noticed so 
> many more things and even heard more things than we did the first and
> second 
> (for her) times.
> I was afraid that the big screen would give me vertigo in some scenes, but
> I 
> think that's only films made especially for IMAX, like skydiving or race
> car 
> driving or other things where the camera follows people off cliffs or
> something 
> ;) 
> I never experienced that queasy feeling while watching the IMAX version - 
> just the pure pleasure of an immense screen and incredibly clear picture. 
> So, if you can get to an IMAX theater, do so!
> Cindy
> 
> 
> [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
> click here	
>  	
> 
>    _____  
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------- 
 This e-mail and any attachments may contain information which is
confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. The
information is solely intended for the named addressee (or a person
responsible for delivering it to the addressee). If you are not the intended
recipient of this message, you are not authorized to read, print, retain,
copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail
and delete it from your computer.



From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Thu Jun 10 14:08:10 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:08:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] confused on some details...
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A068C@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

How is it that Lupin ends up at the Shrieking Shack instead of 
staying in and taking his potion, knowing that it was a full moon 
that night? Did he hear Ron screaming while being dragged off 
by Sirius the dog? I can buy that Snape was lurking after him 
trying to bust him at helping out Sirius. Any thoughts?

bewitchedbyHP
 
 
      Gina:
      I say he had been watching Pettigrew on the map and when the saw ALL
of them head that way he ran without thinking   about his potion. I imagine
him putting on a record and when he gets back to his chair lifts his potion
to take a     drink and sees all the figures on the map enter the shrieking
shack -spills his potion and runs for it!

Gina - with her crazy visions...



________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/
<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
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129uf2ges/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups
/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1086941344/A=2164331/R=0/SIG=11eaelai9/*http:/www.netfl
ix.com/Default?mqso=60183351> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164331/rand=101352531> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Thu Jun 10 14:16:50 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:16:50 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] confused on some details...
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A068C@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <002401c44ef5$938aaeb0$0400a8c0@pensive>

In the book, that's what happened.  He was sitting in his office, looking at
the map.  he saw the trio.  Then he saw Sirius and Peter.  He just took off!
Can't blame him.  I think I'd run off too, if I suddenly saw someone I
thought had been dead for 12 years, and my other friend, whom everyone
believed was out to kill a boy.  No wonder he forgot.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Miller, Gina (JIS) [mailto:ginamiller at jis.nashville.org] 
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:08 AM
To: 'HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] confused on some details...


How is it that Lupin ends up at the Shrieking Shack instead of 
staying in and taking his potion, knowing that it was a full moon 
that night? Did he hear Ron screaming while being dragged off 
by Sirius the dog? I can buy that Snape was lurking after him 
trying to bust him at helping out Sirius. Any thoughts?

bewitchedbyHP
 
 
      Gina:
      I say he had been watching Pettigrew on the map and when the saw ALL
of them head that way he ran without thinking   about his potion. I imagine
him putting on a record and when he gets back to his chair lifts his potion
to take a     drink and sees all the figures on the map enter the shrieking
shack -spills his potion and runs for it!

Gina - with her crazy visions...



________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/
<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
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129uf2ges/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups
/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1086941344/A=2164331/R=0/SIG=11eaelai9/*http:/www.netfl
ix.com/Default?mqso=60183351> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164331/rand=101352531> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


[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 amani at atlanticbb.net  Thu Jun 10 14:53:16 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:53:16 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Latin
References: <ca8hkc+u7ov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005d01c44efa$aa968c00$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Carin:
Thought: I was struck anew, especially after seeing David Thewlis's
Lupin, at how 
_damaged_ - ravaged, even - the Marauders are - the ones
that aren't dead, that is. 
Sirius's damaged-ness is much-discussed, but Lupin's really brought
home to me the 
poignancy of the whole situation of the characters who are Harry's
parents' age. I 
know Lupin's physical scars and his threadbareness come from his
lycanthropy, but 
they speak so eloquently of what it means to be a survivor of the
first Voldemort era. 
And these guys are only in their mid-thirties! My age or a little
younger, and I'm the 
same age as JKR. (Sobering thought on both counts.) Anyway, it made
me reconsider 
how the adult perspective - ours and the characters' -
operates in POA and later 
books.

Taryn:
I got the EXACT same feeling. Just the increasing prominence of the scratches across Lupin's face were enough for a physical reminder, but just the emotional weight that's on him and the rest of his generation. I cried when that full moon came out, because all I could think of was how much crap he had to have in his life and why did he have to have this one horrible thing that he couldn't control at all. He really is a very tragic character.

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

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




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 16:28:09 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:28:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX
Message-ID: <15b.3741447a.2df9e619@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/10/04 6:49:36 AM, katherine.coble at crgibson.com writes:


> Is the IMAX print the full version of the film, or have they had to cut it
> to 120 minutes to fit the IMAX projection system?
> 
> 

Going on my memory, it seemed to be the full version. I had only seen it once 
before, but I didn't notice anything missing in the IMAX version.
Cindy


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




From editor at texas.net  Thu Jun 10 17:01:37 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:01:37 -0000
Subject: POA, First Impressions
In-Reply-To: <40C874A0.20481.52DF1B@localhost>
Message-ID: <caa45h+vive@eGroups.com>

Shaun Hately:

> And Snape.
> 
> I have issues about Snape. A couple of the things he has 
> done quite simply anger me greatly. But for various reasons, 
> I find myself *really* wanting to believe the best when it 
> comes to Snape. I want to believe that when it really comes 
> down to the really important things, Snape *will* do what is 
> right - that he will do his duty.
> 
> And so the scene where after emerging from the tunnel under 
> the whomping willow, and he sees Lupin coming towards the 
> children and himself is really one of my favourites. Snape 
> placing himself between the children and danger. Shielding 
> them with his body - and that is what he is doing. I'm 
> hoping JKR had influence in that.

Bravo. Echoes from Texas. I have always felt that, along with 
everything else happening with Snape in the Shack, that when he 
realized the children were there, he fully believed they were in 
danger and his actions were protective of them. Hey, they happened to 
also involve catching one of his old school nemeses, but still. His 
anger in the book that the kids don't appreciate what he's doing is 
genuine. 

~Amanda





From celticangel at thebuffysite.com  Thu Jun 10 17:17:01 2004
From: celticangel at thebuffysite.com (celticangel1976)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:17:01 -0000
Subject: confused on some details...
In-Reply-To: <002401c44ef5$938aaeb0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <caa52d+rbq5@eGroups.com>

> How is it that Lupin ends up at the Shrieking Shack instead of 
> staying in and taking his potion, knowing that it was a full moon 
> that night? Did he hear Ron screaming while being dragged off 
> by Sirius the dog? I can buy that Snape was lurking after him 
> trying to bust him at helping out Sirius. Any thoughts?
> 
> bewitchedbyHP


Yes, Lupin see Peter and Sirius on the map and runs for the shack.  
As for Snape, he goes to Lupin's office to give him the potion 
(because Snape is the one that makes it, something they don't show 
in the movie) and when he gets there he finds Lupin gone, sees the 
map, sees who's on it and runs for the shack. 

This is really my only major complaint witht he movie, the lack of 
explanations during the Shrieking Shack scene.

CelticAngel




From bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 17:39:45 2004
From: bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com (bewitchedbyhp)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:39:45 -0000
Subject: Thoughts incl. Damage, Boggart, Time, Creatures, Prongs perspective, and Lat
In-Reply-To: <005d01c44efa$aa968c00$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <caa6d2+sjdd@eGroups.com>


> Taryn:
> I got the EXACT same feeling. Just the increasing prominence 
of the scratches across Lupin's face were enough for a physical 
reminder, but just the emotional weight that's on him and the 
rest of his generation. I cried when that full moon came out, 
because all I could think of was how much crap he had to have 
in his life and why did he have to have this one horrible thing that 
he couldn't control at all. He really is a very tragic character.


[bewitchedbyHP]
In the film when Harry is looking at that funny drawing that Draco 
made for him, Snape is going on about werewolves. He says 
that you can either become one from choice (being a 
shape-shifter or animagus like Sirius, Peter, James) or being 
bitten by one. Do I have that right? I believe that the book states 
that Lupin got bitten by a wolf, thus it wasn't his choice to turn into 
a werewolf.  That is indeed a tragic life. Imagine falling in love 
with him, only to find that in your bed during a full moon! :-0

In relation...don't you think Dumbledore is a bit reckless for a 
headmaster of a kids school? He hires a werewolf and a former 
death eater, kooky Trelawny of dubious talents,  (and later looney 
Mad Eye Moody) for teachers, and then he sends Harry and 
Hermione, a couple of 13 year olds to tangle with volatile 
Hippogriffs, werewolves and a murderer. Not to mention the evil 
Basilisk in COS. Why doesn't the all powerful Dumbledore step 
in and save the day? Guess it wouldn't be called "Harry Potter 
and the...", then?!? Gotta love JKR!  :-)




From bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 17:56:55 2004
From: bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com (bewitchedbyhp)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:56:55 -0000
Subject: Crookshanks
Message-ID: <caa7d7+c02g@eGroups.com>

Loved him! Check out how he is staring at Harry when he wakes 
up on the train after his first encounter with the dementor.

Now, this should probably be under the book chat, but...at the 
end of POA (the scene which they SHOULD've left in IMO), 
Sirius's letter states "Crookshanks took the order to the owl 
office for me. I used your name, but told them to take the gold 
from my own Gringott's vault..." Huh? How does that work? Did 
the cat walk into the office and hand over the note? How credible 
is a cat when it comes to banking transactions? Or, as someone 
had earlier suggested, is Crookshanks a shape-shifter? 
Possible foreshadowing?
So, supposedly Harry wrote a note, sent along with 
Crookshanks, to send an owl to  Gringotts asking that money be 
taken out of Sirius Black's bank account to go buy a super 
expensive broom for Harry.  
Or am I just being too darn literal as this is a fantasy novel?!?!? 
:-)




From hermione81 at free.fr  Thu Jun 10 19:29:46 2004
From: hermione81 at free.fr (Hermione81)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:29:46 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Live chat with Chris Rankin on CBBC today + News
	about Cedric Diggory being cast (?)
In-Reply-To: <1086861038.601.85108.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCEE834A.19C6%hermione81@free.fr>

Hey everyone!


CBBC hosted a live chat with Chris Rankin today from 7 to 8 pm GMT. I was
online, and it was quite cool! Some of the questions were interesting, and
Chris' questions were really good.
(I think that with my 23 years I must have been the oldest one connected, it
seemed like everyone else was in their teenage years.)

I was lucky enough to get three of my own questions answered, here they are
with Chris' answers:

- If you had to play a HP baddie (other than Voldemort), which one would you
prefer, and why?
- I think I've answered this one before 47 times ha ha! It would have to be
Tom Riddle. He's a typical film bad guy! Pure evil!

- If the Weird Sisters were to be played by a rock/pop band, which band
would you choose?
- Fantastic question! I think for true comedic value the Weird Sisters
should be played by... The Darkness. And not just because they're local!

- Whom would you like as a director for Order of the Phoenix if it gets
done? What about Tim Burton?
- I think Tim Burton would be fantastic, although Terry Gilliam was at the
premiere for POA, and I'm wondering if that has anything to do with Order of
the Phoenix. Would be cool if he did it. I'm a big Monty Python fan!


(The funniest thing is, I've spent the past two months telling everyone
around me that the Darkness just *have* to play the Weird Sisters in GoF!
:)))  )


There will be a transcript on the CBBC website, I think. Then you will all
be able to see other interesting stuff he said... Oh, one other thing I do
remember: when asked which position he would like to have on a Quidditch
team, he answered "substitue"! :)

BBC Newsround will also be having a special interactive chat about PoA
tomorrow, Friday 11, from 5.35pm. Check bbc.co.uk/newsround for more info.
By the way, it is said there that Cedric Diggory is to be played by Robert
Pattinson (there's a news tidbit with a pic -he looks quite handsome, but
it's difficult to judge by just a profile headshot).


Cheers,
M.


PS to those who mailed me about the American Cinematographer article: sorry
if I didn't get back to you yet, it's been a busy week (a good advice: don't
decide to completely re-organize your room the same week a HP movie opens,
especially if to do so you have to break down a mezzanine and de-construct
and re-construct shelves. Not a good plan. At all!) and I've had problems
with my email server. I'll try and send it again tonight.




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 21:40:57 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:40:57 -0000
Subject: Everything I needed to know I learnt from POA
Message-ID: <caakh9+mqs7@eGroups.com>

Since other listees have been posting their 
thoughts/reactions/criticism about POA, i couldn't resist adding in 
my own two cents to the convo.  I saw POA on Friday (opening night 
here in the States) and afterwards went out of town, during which 
time i could sit and think about the movie, and avoid the temptation 
to see it once again.

Reading other's criticisms of the film made me think about my 
biggest bug-bear as far as POA was concerned.  When I first read POA 
years ago, here's the clear vision I had in my mind of the big grand-
finale patronus scene across the lake: (keep in mind I had full 
cinematography and camera angles -- the whole works -- planned out 
in my mind)

TimeTurner!Harry sees himself and Sirius across a LARGE LAKE (not a 
little pond) being surrounded by hundred of Dementors which glide ON 
THE GROUND around them slowing draining harry and sirius of power.  
TT!Harry looks around desperately for his "father" to appear when 
suddenly the epiphany strikes him.  The camera then zooms on Harry 
as he bellows "Expecto Patronum" followed with a shot of a dazzling 
white light blasting forth from his wand which forms a large silvery 
stag that proceeds to gallop full force across the lake.  Another 
shot at TT!Harry's astonished, breathless face.  The camera follows 
the beautiful galloping stag as great billowing silver clouds 
surround its hooves (which just skim the surface of the water).  As 
the stag approaches the opposite bank of the lake, it lowers its 
head menacingly and charges the dementors, circling the unconscious 
Harry and Sirius.  The dementors scatter, and the stag canters back 
on the surface of the water to TT!Harry (another shot of his 
breathless face) and apon coming face to face with him, Harry 
reaches out and touches the stag's nose, as it evaporates into a 
beautiful silvery mist.  

That's all I wanted.  I had this vision in my mind ever since I 
first read the books.  Heck, this was the scene that made POA my fav 
of the 5 novels!  But...as anyone who has seen the movie knows, this 
was definetly not what happened.  There was no stag, no lake and no 
nose patting.  For some reason though, when i left the movie theater 
I have to say, I absolutely LOVED the movie and wished that Cuaron 
would direct the next movie too.  Even with all the movies faults 
Cuaron did one thing very well -- he stuck to the SPIRIT of JKR's 
books brilliantly.  There was the perfect amount of bizarre 
irreverence going on in the background of an otherwise serious (no 
pun intended) story that mirrored the tone of the book better than 
Columbus could ever hope to have done.  

So how did POA teach me everything i need to know?  Here it comes:  
The more exacting I am about anything (in other words, the more 
expectations I have) the more likely I am to be disappointed.  
Moral?  You can't always get what you want, but when you think about 
it, maybe what you have isn't so bad afterall.  Cuaron and kloves 
are still not mind readers -- this is just their interpretation.  If 
you really hated this movie, I wouldn't recommend seeing the others -
- cuz I can guarantee you're gonna hate them too.  And as long as 
the films don't make JKR go all JD Salinger on us, I hope they 
continue to improve them and keep making them too.  

just my two cents, 
draco382   




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Jun 10 21:55:33 2004
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:55:33 -0000
Subject: musings on Lupin and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <ca92fn+g1bs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <caalcl+d0nh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "bewitchedbyhp" 
<bewitchedbyhp at y...> wrote:
> Re: Lupin. Even though I pictured Lupin to be a pale, scrawny 
> man and Thewles (sp?) was very tall and rather healthy looking, I 
> thought his portrayal of Lupin was outstanding. Look at how well 
> he delivers his lines. Just the right inflection, pauses, at the
> right 
> moment. A definite professional. Where can I see more of his 
> work?

Alshain:
IMDB lists them here: http://imdb.com/name/nm0000667/

 
> Still a bit bummed that Gary Oldman didn't get more airtime. He's 
> another acting genius! Last week I saw "True Romance" again. 
> He steals the show. He is such an amazing chameleon in every 
> role he plays. Sirius figures so little in GOF, then returns very 
> prominently in OOP. But I'm afraid by then Oldman will be off 
> somewhere else and not reprise the Sirius Black role. That'd be 
> a bummer.

It definitely would. I'm hopeful, though - he's going to be in GoF 
(*tries desperately not to imagine all Oldman's GoF scenes ending up 
on the floor in the editing room because of time concerns*) and by 
the interviews he's given, it doesn't look like he's eager to be shot 
of the project. Two of them here: 
http://www.sundayherald.com/42114
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7434-1126475,00.html

hope this helps,
Alshain




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 23:16:27 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:16:27 -0000
Subject: Cuaron talks about movie cuts
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEMGHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caaq4b+3uu2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-
bear at v...
> wrote: This was more than just the
> story of a kid growing up. . .maybe that's the underlying message 
or
> whatever, but does that mean you should throw away the details 
that made the
> POA story so complicated and wonderful to read?
> 
> Barbara
> bd-bear

The details were in there, they just weren't obvious like in the 
Columbus films. 

For me, that makes it the better film. I prefer discovering new 
nuances, touches, and revelations with each viewing, instead of 
pointedly having it spelled out for me. 

And I don't buy the "it's a kids' movie" arguement by any 
stretch...Dark Crystal, Iron Giant, and Watership Down are also for 
kids...But those films are handled with respect for under-aged 
audience's ability to deduce things. ;-)


@)--/---
daughter




From daughterofthedust at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 23:34:12 2004
From: daughterofthedust at yahoo.com (daughterofthedust)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:34:12 -0000
Subject: innuendoes?!
In-Reply-To: <ca91kg+anu0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <caar5k+c0sf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "bewitchedbyhp" 
<bewitchedbyhp at y...> wrote:
> OK, after seeing POA 3x I cannot in any way see where there is a 
> sexual reference in the opening scene. How can Harry practicing 
> his charms and incantations under the covers be misinterpreted 
> as him "flogging his dolphin"?!? I don't know guys...I think 
you're 
> really reaching on that one! I mean, it's not as though this were 
> Shrek 1 or 2 which is rife with adult humor.
> And regarding the homage to "Y Tu Mama Tambien" when H, R, 
> H are hugging during the Buckbeak demise scene...how does 
> that spell "Menage a Trois"? It's just 3 close friends feeling 
> terrible that their friend Hagrid is losing Buckbeak. Ron doesn't 
> even flinch when Hermione throws herself into his arms; he is 
> so equally distraught over the Buckbeak event. I think it's a 
> beautiful moment of the trio pictured on film. Not everything is 
> about sex, ya'll!
> 
> bewitchedbyHP
> 
> PS. Speaking of sex...I could be wrong, but when Harry turns 
> around and looks at/acknowledges someone sitting by the 
> fountain...I could've sworn that was supposed to be Cho.  It 
> looked like a girl with long black hair. Isn't she mentioned a 
> couple of times in POA as Harry's crush? If anyone sees the 
> movie again, let me know...



Cuaron, himself, has implied that these scenes are indeed rife with 
sexual subtext...And not, just to be "dirty" but to serve the film's 
main theme of Harry becoming a teen...What do barely teenaged boy 
wizards do?? Play with their wands. :-)

He also admitted to putting the homage to Y Tu Mama (Which Daniel 
Radcliffe has seen!), in the movie as well...

As for the girl by the fountain? That's Angelina Johnson with a 
snazzy new hairstyle. Cho wasn't even cast for this film, but she 
will be in Goblet.

Hope that helps. :-)

@)--/---
daughter




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 10 23:41:36 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: innuendoes?!
In-Reply-To: <caar5k+c0sf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040610234136.81793.qmail@web80314.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes, I agree with this.  I don't think anyone means to
suggest that Harry is *actually* doing something, um,
untoward in that scene, but the metaphor is far too
strong!  When I told my husband that the movie opens
with Harry hiding under the covers experimenting with
his wand, he laughed so hard.

Gretchen

--- daughterofthedust <daughterofthedust at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Cuaron, himself, has implied that these scenes are
> indeed rife with 
> sexual subtext...And not, just to be "dirty" but to
> serve the film's 
> main theme of Harry becoming a teen...What do barely
> teenaged boy 
> wizards do?? Play with their wands. :-)
> 
> He also admitted to putting the homage to Y Tu Mama
> (Which Daniel 
> Radcliffe has seen!), in the movie as well...
> 
> As for the girl by the fountain? That's Angelina
> Johnson with a 
> snazzy new hairstyle. Cho wasn't even cast for this
> film, but she 
> will be in Goblet.
> 
> Hope that helps. :-)
> 
> @)--/---
> daughter
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~--> 
> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/U4IolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> 
> 
>
________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-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> 
>  
> 


=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 10 23:56:07 2004
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:56:07 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
Message-ID: <BAY7-F23LAqKlwPqzre0000f0e9@hotmail.com>

Very true, if Crookshanks was just a cat!!!!, but he is part Kneazel,(read 
magical creatures and where to find them) so that would be why he has very 
high intelligence for a feline and he can tell when people are not being 
true (Harry and Ron cheating on their divinations homework GoF C14, sorry I 
cant recall the page), not to mention the fact he knew straight away that 
scabbers was not really a rat......




ml

joanna
x





>From: "bewitchedbyhp" <bewitchedbyhp at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
>Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:56:55 -0000
>
>Loved him! Check out how he is staring at Harry when he wakes
>up on the train after his first encounter with the dementor.
>
>Now, this should probably be under the book chat, but...at the
>end of POA (the scene which they SHOULD've left in IMO),
>Sirius's letter states "Crookshanks took the order to the owl
>office for me. I used your name, but told them to take the gold
>from my own Gringott's vault..." Huh? How does that work? Did
>the cat walk into the office and hand over the note? How credible
>is a cat when it comes to banking transactions? Or, as someone
>had earlier suggested, is Crookshanks a shape-shifter?
>Possible foreshadowing?
>So, supposedly Harry wrote a note, sent along with
>Crookshanks, to send an owl to  Gringotts asking that money be
>taken out of Sirius Black's bank account to go buy a super
>expensive broom for Harry.
>Or am I just being too darn literal as this is a fantasy novel?!?!?
>:-)
>

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar  get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 10 23:55:54 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:55:54 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: innuendoes?!
Message-ID: <c6.2d1d5925.2dfa4f0a@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/10/04 4:42:40 PM, gcrumpac at pacbell.net writes:


> Yes, I agree with this.? I don't think anyone means to
> suggest that Harry is *actually* doing something, um,
> untoward in that scene, but the metaphor is far too
> strong!? When I told my husband that the movie opens
> with Harry hiding under the covers experimenting with
> his wand, he laughed so hard.
> 

And David   Letterman recently quipped in his opening monologue:
"In the new Harry Potter movie, Harry is a teenager and gets into trouble for 
spending too much time with his wand." ;-))
As to the homage to Y Tu Mama Tambien, I believe someone said that just 
because the two boys and a girl were touching and comforting each other, it didn't 
mean it was like that movie. Well, a homage is not a replication of a scene 
from another movie; it's more like a tip of the hat done with suggestion and 
vaguely similar themes or design. That scene of the kids when Buckbeak is 
'executed' is just them being upset and sort of hugging one another for comfort - 
they are not engaging in foreplay and therefore not in the same subject matter as 
Y Tu Mama Tambien.
As for the origination of the statement that that scene is a homage to Y Tu 
Mama, it is in more than one review that I have read, including the one in 
Entertainment Weekly. 

As to the whole theme of innuendos and adolescence, even JKR acknowledges it 
in the books with Harry's crush on Cho, Ron and Hermione bickering, etc. It's 
a fact of life and even though the majority of the public and publishing 
industry thinks these are children's books, by the time Book 7 comes out, the 
characters will be 17 yrs. old and I doubt they are neutered before then <g> I 
don't know how realistic JKR intends to be, but if she ignores the whole issue, 
the books will definitely be fantasy. Besides, the themes are these books are 
extremely dark (a lot of children's literature is) and it would be hypocritical 
to include deaths, betrayal, loss, fear, vengeance, tyrannical evil despots 
who want to rule the world, etc...and then ignore the natural process of sexual 
attraction and burgeoning sexuality of the characters ;-)
She has poor Harry fight for his life from the age of 11 on - the least she 
could do is give him some action in the love department later on ;-)
Cindy


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




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Fri Jun 11 02:46:02 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:46:02 -0400
Subject: Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
Message-ID: <001501c44f5e$3c85d360$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

I just watched the movie again today (for the second time) and I have some more thoughts.  :-)

5 more things I loved about PoA.

1.  How Sirius attacked Ron and pulled him into the Whomping Willow.  I also like how Harry attacked Sirius by grabbing him by the throat and throwing him to the floor.  Go Harry!

2.  How Mrs. Weasley was with Harry in the Leaky Cauldron.  She touched his face and looked him in the eyes, and gave him her full attention, even though it was only for about 20 seconds.  

3.  When Hermione hugged Ron and then Harry leaned in and hugged Hermione.  I thought it was a very touching moment between the three.  We haven't seen that kind of closeness before between them in the movies.

4.  That Harry got some of the funniest lines.  I particularly like when he insults Snape and his sarcasm with the Dursley's.

5.  I loved the patronus at the end.  It wasn't just like in the book, but I think visually it would have looked stupid to have the stag running around in a circle, butting the demetors away.  I thought it was very well done and powerful in the movie.  

5 more things I didn't love about PoA.

1.  Professor Trelwney's prophesy.  It was just like Cate Blanchett's character in The Lord of the Rings.  The deep voice mixed with their own.  I couldn't understand either one of them.  I did like how she coughed up the fake fur ball at the end of it though.

2.  Hagrid crying over Buckbeak at the lake.  A couple people even snickered at this part in the theater I was in.  It was just dreadful.

3.  Mrs. Weasley running after Ron on the train with Scabbers, and making a point to tell him not to lose him.  Why would she say that?  Really dumb.

4.  Outside of the Whomping Willow, when Ron tells Hermione his leg might have to be chopped off.  It seemed a real awkward scene to me, and he repeated it twice.  For some reason, that scene just didn't work for me.  

5.  My number 5 for love was the patronus.  What I didn't love was that we didn't see Hermione's reaction to it.  Then they cut right to them flying on Buckbeak and Harry explaining to Hermione that it was him, not his father who did it.  It made sense in the book because Hermione wasn't there, but in the movie, she watched him do it.  It was a "duh" moment for me.  

Joj

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




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Fri Jun 11 02:49:51 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:49:51 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 5 things I loved  and didn't love about PoA
References: <ca7amf+vnks@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001f01c44f5e$c4e8d590$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>




> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at v...> wrote:>
> And shipping H/Hr, for reasons of wanting to see the
> > *actors* together??
> >  Susanne
>
>
>  I ship H/Hr because I read the books.


Me too.  My husband , who hasn't read the books, thought H/H were going to
get together, based on the movies.  I told him, no it was R/H.  Then OotP
came out, and I was converted to H/H.  Dan and Emma have great chemistry,
but I want H/H because of the books!

Joj





From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 02:52:16 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 02:52:16 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, couple observations
Message-ID: <cab6p0+t6p1@eGroups.com>

Hey, all.

I went to see PoA for the third time and saw a couple of things I 
hadn't seen, but maybe some of you have.

First, some people have said Harry's scar is in the wrong place at 
certain times.  I watched this time and I think I know why.  Cuaron 
does these "fly through" moves with the camera, like in the boggart 
scene (and the clock, several times).  If you notice, he moves the 
camera through the wardrobe, more than once, and we get a "flipped" 
view.  Does that make sense? I'm not good at movie production 
lingo.  Anyway, suffice it to say the scar is in the right place, 
we're just looking at it from the opposite angle.

Second, in the time turner scene, when Harry produces the patronus, 
you can see the head of the stag pulsing about three times out of 
the end of Harry's wand.  I hadn't noticed it before and it was cool 
to see it.  

Another observation:  Ron just doesn't seem to have a really 
important part in the movie.  Maybe it's just me, but it seems that 
throughout most of the movie, he's comic relief.  I guess I just 
want more for him.  It should be interesting to see how he plays 
jealous/hurt!Ron for GoF.  I hope his part is much meatier!  

Thanks for listening....hmmm, maybe I should go ONE MORE TIME....

Alora ;)







From nostrebor at runbox.com  Fri Jun 11 03:06:54 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:06:54 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, couple observations
References: <cab6p0+t6p1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <041e01c44f61$27de0420$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>

Replies in line ~Jodi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "alora" <chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:52 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, couple observations


*snip 
> First, some people have said Harry's scar is in the wrong place at 
> certain times.  I watched this time and I think I know why.  Cuaron 
> does these "fly through" moves with the camera, like in the boggart 
> scene (and the clock, several times).  If you notice, he moves the 
> camera through the wardrobe, more than once, and we get a "flipped" 
> view.  Does that make sense? I'm not good at movie production 
> lingo.  Anyway, suffice it to say the scar is in the right place, 
> we're just looking at it from the opposite angle.

This is probably a reflection you are seeing, mirror image

> Second, in the time turner scene, when Harry produces the patronus, 
> you can see the head of the stag pulsing about three times out of 
> the end of Harry's wand.  I hadn't noticed it before and it was cool 
> to see it.  

If you have IMAX in a 50 mile radius - go see it! So cool!

> Thanks for listening....hmmm, maybe I should go ONE MORE TIME....

We are - fourth time will be at the drive-in! Yeah~!
 
> Alora ;)




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 03:12:58 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:12:58 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, couple observations
In-Reply-To: <041e01c44f61$27de0420$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>
Message-ID: <cab7vq+mq0f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jodi Robertson" 
<nostrebor at r...> wrote:

> This is probably a reflection you are seeing, mirror image
> 

Yes! Mirror image, thank you.  I knew I wasn't explaining it right.


> > Second, in the time turner scene, when Harry produces the 
patronus, 
> > you can see the head of the stag pulsing about three times out 
of 
> > the end of Harry's wand.  I hadn't noticed it before and it was 
cool 
> > to see it.  
> 
> If you have IMAX in a 50 mile radius - go see it! So cool!

OoOOhhh, well!  Now I HAVE to see it again.  I think there's an IMAX 
in Dallas, I will have to check. 

> We are - fourth time will be at the drive-in! Yeah~!


You still have a drive in near you?!  Cool!  They ripped down most 
around here years ago. 

Alora




From nostrebor at runbox.com  Fri Jun 11 03:23:13 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:23:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, couple observations
References: <cab7vq+mq0f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <04af01c44f63$6f7aec60$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>

The Pontiac Silverdome, former home of the Detroit Lions (they ain't using
it for anything LOL! - no really it does get used) - the drive-in is fairly
new, having drive by it sometimes several times a day and finally noticing
the sign saying they now have a drive-in. It has 3 screens.

$7.75 Adults
$6.25 Student w/ ID
$4.50 Children 7-12 & Sr.
Chrildren under 7 Free
***Movies showing June 4 - June 10***
      Screen 1 Screen 2 Screen 3
      The Day after Tomorrow - PG-13
      Runtime: 2 hrs. 9 min.  Shrek 2 - PG
      Runtime: 1 hr. 38 min. Harry Potter
      and the Prisoner of Azkaban - PG
      Runtime: 2 hrs. 27 min.
      Man on Fire - R
      Runtime: 2 hrs. 31 min. Envy - PG-13
      Runtime: 1 hr. 39 min.  Scooby-Doo 2:
      Monsters Unleashed - PG
      Runtime: 1 hrs. 38 min.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "alora" <chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, couple observations


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jodi Robertson"
> <nostrebor at r...> wrote:
>
> > This is probably a reflection you are seeing, mirror image
> >
>
> Yes! Mirror image, thank you.  I knew I wasn't explaining it right.
>
>
> > > Second, in the time turner scene, when Harry produces the
> patronus,
> > > you can see the head of the stag pulsing about three times out
> of
> > > the end of Harry's wand.  I hadn't noticed it before and it was
> cool
> > > to see it.
> >
> > If you have IMAX in a 50 mile radius - go see it! So cool!
>
> OoOOhhh, well!  Now I HAVE to see it again.  I think there's an IMAX
> in Dallas, I will have to check.
>
> > We are - fourth time will be at the drive-in! Yeah~!
>
>
> You still have a drive in near you?!  Cool!  They ripped down most
> around here years ago.
>
> Alora
>
>
>
>
> ________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 nostrebor at runbox.com  Fri Jun 11 03:25:38 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:25:38 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, couple observations
References: <cab7vq+mq0f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <04bb01c44f63$c5e36ff0$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>

Also it is the only drive-in anywhere near me that I know of.
Jodi



From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun 11 04:21:13 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:21:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, couple observations
In-Reply-To: <04af01c44f63$6f7aec60$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>
References: <cab7vq+mq0f@eGroups.com>
    <04af01c44f63$6f7aec60$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>
Message-ID: <1353.4.47.27.201.1086927673.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Jodi Robertson said:

>       Runtime: 1 hr. 38 min. Harry Potter
>       and the Prisoner of Azkaban - PG

The movie should have a runtime of at least two hours and nineteen
minutes.  Looks like about forty minutes was axed?

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 nostrebor at runbox.com  Fri Jun 11 04:50:26 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:50:26 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, couple observations
References: <cab7vq+mq0f@eGroups.com>    <04af01c44f63$6f7aec60$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m> <1353.4.47.27.201.1086927673.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <063b01c44f6f$9eaa6db0$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>

No Dina - my message came through as text only, and I copy & pasted from the
Silverdome's website. HPIII runtime is 2 hours 27 minutes. Sorry - didn't
intend to scare people.
Jodi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dina Lerret" <redina at silverbloom.net>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, couple observations


> Jodi Robertson said:
>
> >       Runtime: 1 hr. 38 min. Harry Potter
> >       and the Prisoner of Azkaban - PG
>
> The movie should have a runtime of at least two hours and nineteen
> minutes.  Looks like about forty minutes was axed?
>
> Dina




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Fri Jun 11 05:32:19 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 05:32:19 -0000
Subject: Cuaron, Columbus, who to blame and a little foreshadowing
Message-ID: <cabg53+qfh3@eGroups.com>

Hope you all do not mind me combining a few comments here. Just I was 
gone from the computer Friday thru Sunday and it took me until today 
to catch up to the topics. Whew what a task but it was enjoyable. 
First of all, I did enjoy the movie. Saw it on the 23rd (sneak 
preview) and on opening day (the 4th). I think it gets better with 
multiple viewings. But, I am happy to read conflicting reviews 
because though I liked it, I disliked certain things and like another 
member stated - when something is your favorite you nicpic more and I 
loved POA the book best out of JK's works thus far. So 2 minutes 
after I left the first time I did sound like those of you who did not 
like it but I had taken 3 boys (8, 9 and 12) and they liked it. The 
12 year old and I have discussed it since and his first point to me 
was well Kloves and JK write to each other and he asks her before he 
cuts anything out of the script. To which I said - where did you hear 
that and he promptly pulled out disk 2 of COS and played the 
interview of JK and Kloves. And he was right, she says that they 
email each other and he said he asks her if something should be left 
in for further referrence. They also said "They" were about 1/2 way 
along writing POA and she said it was coming along nicely. So I think 
she still has her fingers in the pie so to speak. With that said, 
maybe it was not as butchered as we think. Still, I am deeply wounded 
that the marauder's map and the animagi pieces and the 12 muggles 
killed were never mentioned. I thought they really added to the book. 

Now as for Cuaron vs. Columbus... I have enjoyed all three movies. I 
believe that Columbus was good for the first book to film as that was 
a fondation book and it really was a family oriented storyline which 
Columbus is excellent for bringing to screen. I think for COS - in 
some areas he cut things that should not have been - I wanted the 
Borgins-Malfoy interaction - showed how slimy Draco's dad is. In fact 
if you play all of the 'deleted' scenes - they would not have even 
add 15 minutes to the film so why leave them out. I especially liked 
the Justin saying he is muggleborn and the library scene extended. 
Now since POA is in fact beginning to not really be a kiddie book - I 
mean really how is a 6 year old going to fully understand the 
psychology behind the dementors? My 9 year old just reread POA for 
school this year and he said to me that he never realized they caused 
you to have "Daymares" (his word = Non sleeping nightmares). I also 
wanted to see more than close ups so I was thankful for Cuaron's wide 
angles. One thing I loved about POA is something I enjoyed in the 
Little Princess, his imagery and subtext. It is fantastic and I liked 
how you would see something and later on go "oh that was why that was 
there earlier." So in my opinion both directors were great and I am 
glad Columbus did #1 and Cuaron #3, not sure how Mike Newell will be 
as one of the things great about Columbus and Cuaron is their 
childlike qualities, which come out in the films. I do not think 
Newell has done any children's movies so I am a bit nervous.

Now as for a bit of foreshadowing...someone has mentioned that Cuaron 
said their was a tip of the hat to Y Tu Mama Tambien and people are 
guessing in is the 3 way hug for the trio. What if that is what he 
was doing there and JK knew he was tipping the hat there and it was 
also foreshadowing something. If that is true, I am worried for the 
trio. For those of you who have not see YTMT, the boys are best 
friends from childhood, they meet an older woman and go for a car 
trip. As it progresses they get to know her and both fall in love 
with her - however, she did not seem to really want either of them 
(you realize why later-don't want to spoil it) but in the meantime 
the boys become rivals for her love and it drives a wedge into their 
friendship. I hope I am wrong because I would be so sad would that 
happen to them. But it was a thought I had while trying to catch up 
to all the post.

As for Ron being a seer - I could see that. He is the typical person 
to possess a talent, not realize it nor utilize it.

The prediction of Lupin loving Lily...I just cannot imagine. But 
maybe he did. I tend to think she was more a sister to him because 
even if he did love her, I don't think he is the type to tell Harry, 
he used to secretly love his mom. It would serve no purpose to tell 
him and might even hurt his feelings, so I don't see JK putting that 
in her books. I tend to see her as a confidant and advice giver for 
him from his comments to Harry. Maybe Lupin tried to kill himself and 
she stopped him. It's a thought anyway.

Anyhoo, sorry this is long and may be choppy...just got back today 
from a one day business trip from Phoenix to Los Angeles (left at 6 
am and returned at 7 pm) and I am tired (well my eyes are at least.)

Continue to poist - both positive and negative reviews - I think they 
are great and no one with get tomatoes thrown by me. The banter is 
why I joined these groups in the first place. Where else can you 
maturely discuss something, have oppossing opinions and no one 
chastizes anyone's point of view. I cannot say the same for my 
hubby's discussion groups - they call each other names (like that was 
really stupid, brainless moron etc). I love that we are grown ups who 
love HP and can debate peacefully. So banter on my friends.

PS: that link to POA in 15 min was hillarious, Thanks for sharing. I 
especially liked the referrence to Dory in Finding Nemo - "Seamonkeys 
stole my money". Thanks for sharing that.

Theresa




From SnapesRaven at web.de  Fri Jun 11 06:58:08 2004
From: SnapesRaven at web.de (SnapesRaven)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 08:58:08 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
References: <caa7d7+c02g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c44f81$7493b830$0202a8c0@henrike>

Good morning!

Bewitchedbyhp wrote:
"So, supposedly Harry wrote a note, sent along with 
Crookshanks, to send an owl to  Gringotts asking that money be 
taken out of Sirius Black's bank account to go buy a super 
expensive broom for Harry." 

Now me:
I wondered about that one, too. 
I thought it almost impossible to work but apparently ot has. I think it's VERY strange to have another person without obvious permission take money from another person's bank account. However, perhaps Sirius' being Harry's godfether has got something to do with it so Harry is able to... but no. I find this strange, indeed. 
I'd appreciate productive conclusions...
: )


SnapesRaven



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




From hmkinney at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 16:04:41 2004
From: hmkinney at yahoo.com (Heather)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:04:41 -0000
Subject: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <000b01c44f81$7493b830$0202a8c0@henrike>
Message-ID: <cacl6p+t2k5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "SnapesRaven" <SnapesRaven at w...> 
wrote:
> Good morning!
> 
> Bewitchedbyhp wrote:
> "So, supposedly Harry wrote a note, sent along with 
> Crookshanks, to send an owl to  Gringotts asking that money be 
> taken out of Sirius Black's bank account to go buy a super 
> expensive broom for Harry." 
> 
> Now me:
> I wondered about that one, too. 
> I thought it almost impossible to work but apparently ot has. I 
think it's VERY strange to have another person without obvious 
permission take money from another person's bank account. However, 
perhaps Sirius' being Harry's godfether has got something to do with 
it so Harry is able to... but no. I find this strange, indeed. 
> I'd appreciate productive conclusions...
> : )

Harry had nothing to do with the ordering of the Firebolt. Sirius 
wrote out the order, gave it to Crookshanks, he delivered it, the 
money was taken from his Gringotts account to pay for the Firebolt, 
and it was then delivered to Harry, who didn't even know who it was 
from (remember?). I assume that the store and Gringotts both did not 
care WHO the money came from. The store selling the Firebolt is like 
any other business and they just want the money. And the goblins at 
Gringotts probably don't give a darn about Sirius Black. And perhaps 
it's not so odd in the wizarding world to receive an order delivered 
by a cat. Not that different from getting mail from an owl, now is 
it? 

-Heather





From sharon8880 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 17:08:49 2004
From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:08:49 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, couple observations
In-Reply-To: <04bb01c44f63$c5e36ff0$0a9fa504@user7i1hr4si1m>
Message-ID: <cacov1+v14c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jodi Robertson" <nostrebor at r...> 
wrote:
> Also it is the only drive-in anywhere near me that I know of.
> Jodi

I don't know what you consider to be "anywhere near me", but there is 
the Ford-Wyoming drive-in theater in Dearborn (10 screens, old 
fashioned drive-in experience).  I saw it there last Saturday.  That 
was my 2nd view.  My first was the midnight showing at the Star 
Fairlane.  One thing I noticed during the drive-in viewing is that 
the silvery title of HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN was cut 
out.  I have tickets to see it at IMAX at Henry Ford-Greenfield 
Village next.  Hoping to be as enchanted with it there as everyone 
else who has posted here has been.
Sharon





From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Fri Jun 11 20:07:36 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Funny coincidence
In-Reply-To: <cacov1+v14c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040611200736.36792.qmail@web80304.mail.yahoo.com>

You guys would probably appreciate this: I'm a
paralegal, and we're working on some big project
involving powers of attorney (POA) . . . and now
everytime I see that on a memo, it sort of freaks me
out for a second -- like, why are they writing about
Prisoner of Azkaban at the office?

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From amani at atlanticbb.net  Fri Jun 11 20:05:42 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:05:42 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
References: <001501c44f5e$3c85d360$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <009201c44fef$7a8f3480$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Joj:
5 more things I didn't love about PoA.

<snip>

4.  Outside of the Whomping Willow, when Ron tells Hermione his leg might have to be chopped off.  It seemed a real awkward scene to me, and he repeated it twice.  For some reason, that scene just didn't work for me.  

Taryn:
Aw, really? I loved that little bit. I just thought it was an adorable R/Hr moment with Ron doing the whole joking-in-a-serious-tone type of thing.

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

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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun 11 20:47:53 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:47:53 -0400
Subject: Songvid: Mad World (POA video spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.2.20040608213916.04006ca0@mail.silverbloom.net>
References: <6.0.3.0.2.20040608213916.04006ca0@mail.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20040611162557.04268be0@mail.silverbloom.net>

The vid will remain in draft form until the DVD comes out, but for those 
into HP songvids, I finished the first draft.  Video is from Prisoner of 
Azkaban and song is Gary Jules' Mad World.  Thanks to Louie for a Sirius 
scene suggestion.

http://archive.nu/bunniqula/vids/?M=D
First file: hpmdwrld.rm  (~4.7megs)  Real media format (www.real.com).
Right click file and 'save as'.

After awhile, you start counting 'circles' in the movie (e.g. crystal 
balls, cups, glasses, eyes, fade transitions, gears, planets and 
whatnot).  Hm, the basics of editing aesthetics: motion, colors, 
shapes/motifs, etc.

Dina


At 06/08/2004 11:06 PM, Dina Lerret wrote:
>With the heavy raining and my internet connection being knocked down, I had
>a couple hours to burn, so I started tinkering with a copy of POA.
>
>I was using an... 'unofficial' release as a placeholder until I could buy
>the DVD.  After reading some article about Daniel Radcliffe watching Donnie
>Darko and then the movie recently playing in the background, I evaluated
>the song, Mad World.

-- 
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 saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 21:49:49 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:49:49 -0000
Subject: Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <001501c44f5e$3c85d360$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cad9dt+7g2e@eGroups.com>

Joj didn't like:

<<
2.  Hagrid crying over Buckbeak at the lake.  A couple people even 
snickered at this part in the theater I was in.  It was just 
dreadful.
>>

A couple of people laughed at my screening, too (it was at 10:00, so 
no kiddies). Which is weird, because I thought it was rather 
touching. Hagrid tends to annoy me because he's so emotional and 
irrational, but I think Robbie Coltrane has done a great job 
bringing out the more sympathetic side of his character. *shrug*

--Anna




From dsdavishm at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 11 21:58:30 2004
From: dsdavishm at hotmail.com (dsdavisarch)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:58:30 -0000
Subject: Titanic Reference
Message-ID: <cad9u6+ll61@eGroups.com>

I'm new to the movie list and am not too skillful with the 
searching, but have you all aready had a discussion about the 
Titanic reference when Harry was riding Buckbeak over the lake.  I'm 
sure you have because it was rather obvious.  Could someone point me 
to it?

Thanks





From hgranger919 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 12 01:01:16 2004
From: hgranger919 at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:01:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Interesting Review of HP and the Sorcerer's Stone
Message-ID: <20040612010116.16931.qmail@web51806.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes, this is a link to a review of HP and the SS/PS,
by David Edelstein
of the online magazine, Slate. I think it's quite
interesting, given
some of the comments we've had about HP and the
Prisoner of Azkaban and
how it compares to the earlier films. Be sure to read
to the 2nd page,
where he talks about possible directors for the Harry
Potter film.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2058739/

Suzanne



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From ABadgerFan2 at msn.com  Sat Jun 12 00:53:36 2004
From: ABadgerFan2 at msn.com (abadgerfan2)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:53:36 -0000
Subject: Book 6 -- when due???
Message-ID: <cadk6g+qkbn@eGroups.com>

Anyone hear anything reliable on this? Tell us what you've heard, 
and where you've heard it!  Thanks.





From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Jun 12 01:15:45 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 02:15:45 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Titanic Reference
In-Reply-To: <cad9u6+ll61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040612015905.0098f8d0@plum.cream.org>

Only time for one short post tonight. I've been trying to catch up with 
what's been going on over the last few days and hope to make some 
substantive posts over the weekend.

At 22:58 11/06/04 , dsdavisarch wrote:
>I'm new to the movie list and am not too skillful with the
>searching, but have you all aready had a discussion about the
>Titanic reference when Harry was riding Buckbeak over the lake.  I'm
>sure you have because it was rather obvious.  Could someone point me
>to it?

There's been no discussion, per se - just what is there to "discuss"? It's 
been noted several times, of course, and off the top of my head it seems as 
if most people find it a bit too cheesy. On the other hand, I thought that 
the claw-in-the-water shot was a bit OTT, but again there are those (the 
majority?) who disagree with me.

Personally, I loved it. I thought it was absolutely the right reaction 
Harry should have, to indicate among various things his ease astride 
Buckbeak and his trust in his steed. It made me think back to when I first 
learned how to ride a bicycle (which I remember very well, despite it 
having taken place 35 years and two days ago - ten points to the House of 
whoever guesses how come I'm able to be so precise :-)) - one of the first 
things I did as soon as I felt comfortable was to spread my arms wide and 
speed down the street (which was on a slight incline). Until I crashed into 
a tree, that is... :-)

I do appreciate that the whole Buckbeak sequence is slightly different to 
the book, in that Book!Harry specifically doesn't enjoy the experience, 
whilst Movie! Harry seems to take great pleasure in it. Nevertheless, it's 
a creative decision I don't consider to be of particularly great 
importance, and it's one of the few scenes in the movie when Harry appears 
to be genuinely happy (more on this in another, VERY long post I'm working 
on, provisionally entitled "Niggles, Nuggets and Other Observations").

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, off to bed 



From clshannon at aol.com  Sat Jun 12 01:41:32 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:41:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Titanic Reference
Message-ID: <6a.40a222de.2dfbb94c@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/11/04 6:18:23 PM, hp at plum.cream.org writes:


> Nevertheless, it's
> a creative decision I don't consider to be of particularly great
> importance, and it's one of the few scenes in the movie when Harry appears
> to be genuinely happy
> 

I agree. I loved that the movie allowed us to see Harry genuinely happy and 
carefree on two occasions - the Buckbeak ride and the dorm room antics with the 
candy. The poor kid goes through hell in this book and movie - he deserves to 
have a few moments of giddiness and exhilaration. And I don't care a bit if   
the book didn't have the dorm scene or if he didn't enjoy the Buckbeak ride - 
the film needed to have those scenes.
And I don't find the ride cheesy at all. I felt a real sense of his joy when 
he opens his arms wide and lets loose that joyous yell ;-) 
I don't think we really got to see Harry that happy in the first two movies - 
he smiled some and maybe laughed softly, but he never really let it loose. 
Considering everything else going in POA, not the least of which is the 
Dementors sucking every drop of joy and happiness out of him and replacing it with 
screams of his own mother's murder...he needed that release and we, as viewers, 
needed it as well - at least, I needed it ;)
Cindy


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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Sat Jun 12 02:17:55 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:17:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <cacl6p+t2k5@eGroups.com>
References: <000b01c44f81$7493b830$0202a8c0@henrike>
    <cacl6p+t2k5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1687.4.12.232.2.1087006675.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Heather said:

> care WHO the money came from. The store selling the Firebolt is like
> any other business and they just want the money. And the goblins at

Plus, it's also possible Sirius may have been... let's say overly generous
on the "price on demand".

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 nostrebor at runbox.com  Sat Jun 12 02:27:56 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:27:56 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, couple observations
References: <cacov1+v14c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005101c45024$e0fe6670$3e69a504@user7i1hr4si1m>

Hi Sharon,
The Henry Ford's IMAX is where we saw it the 3rd time! I don't know of the
Ford-Wyoming drive-in. I'll have a look-see on Yahoo. The Dome is close by
me. 10 screens - WOW!
Jodi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sharon" <sharon8880 at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 1:08 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, couple observations


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jodi Robertson" <nostrebor at r...>
> wrote:
> > Also it is the only drive-in anywhere near me that I know of.
> > Jodi
>
> I don't know what you consider to be "anywhere near me", but there is
> the Ford-Wyoming drive-in theater in Dearborn (10 screens, old
> fashioned drive-in experience).  I saw it there last Saturday.  That
> was my 2nd view.  My first was the midnight showing at the Star
> Fairlane.  One thing I noticed during the drive-in viewing is that
> the silvery title of HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN was cut
> out.  I have tickets to see it at IMAX at Henry Ford-Greenfield
> Village next.  Hoping to be as enchanted with it there as everyone
> else who has posted here has been.
> Sharon
>




From HMaffioli at cox.net  Sat Jun 12 03:04:39 2004
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:04:39 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
References: <001501c44f5e$3c85d360$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <023e01c4502a$002834e0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>

Joj:
4.  Outside of the Whomping Willow, when Ron tells Hermione his leg might have to be chopped off.  It seemed a real awkward scene to me, and he repeated it twice.  For some reason, that scene just didn't work for me.  


I think AC (or SK) was trying to paralell Ron's trying to impress Hermione with the Draco/Pansy bit earlier in the film.  It seemed to me they were just saying "look at the silly things all boys do to get girls to fawn over them".

JMO~~Heather

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




From editor at texas.net  Sat Jun 12 04:11:14 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:11:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Funny coincidence
References: <20040611200736.36792.qmail@web80304.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00a801c45034$931eb080$fa59aacf@texas.net>

Gretchen:

> You guys would probably appreciate this: I'm a
> paralegal, and we're working on some big project
> involving powers of attorney (POA) . . . and now
> everytime I see that on a memo, it sort of freaks me
> out for a second -- like, why are they writing about
> Prisoner of Azkaban at the office?

And in my office they keep going on about HP....housing privatization.
*sigh*

~Amanda






From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 12 05:06:35 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 05:06:35 -0000
Subject: Books are should not be movies ( was Re: Cuaron talks about movie cuts)
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEMGHHAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cae30r+q5un@eGroups.com>

Barbara persists:

<<
Here's what I don't get. . .what is the point of sticking to the 
"theme" when the books are so much more than that? There's a whole 
storyline and intricate plot that JKR created. That's what I missed 
in the movie the most. Being faithful to the spirit of the book just 
wasn't enough for me, I wanted the story told the way it's told in 
the book.
>>

Now see, I don't get what the point is of making a movie that 
follows the book exactly. If that's what you want, why not just read 
the book again?

I'm starting to feel like I'm in Red Dwarf here. Books are not 
movies, Dave. Dave, movies are not books. They have totally 
different narrative conventions, because they are totally different 
media. I would love to give you an example of a movie that left in 
far too much of its source material, but screenwriters know 
perfectly well they can't cram in all that stuff. I can, however, 
give several examples of excellent films that weren't half as 
faithful as Kloves has been. In fact, let's take just one: Who 
Censored Roger Rabbit?

Who Censored Roger Rabbit? is the book on which Who Framed Roger 
Rabbit was based. Some of the changes Disney made include:

-Removing the toon/human racism metaphor
-Making Jessica love Roger for real
-Rewriting the entire story

In other words, all they kept for the movie were the names. Which is 
tragic, because the original plot is terrific, and Gary Wolf came up 
with all sorts of neat ways that toondom manifests itself in the 
real world - like, toons can produce doppelgangers that take those 
nasty falls for them. Roger gets murdered at the beginning of the 
book and a doppelganger is all that's left of him until the end.

Disney, it ain't. Yet, despite gutting the book and turning it into 
something it very much wasn't before, the film is still excellent. 
And Roger Rabbit fans got two fantastic stories out of it. I 
consider that a win-win situation.

--Anna




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 12 09:15:28 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 09:15:28 -0000
Subject: Titanic Reference
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040612015905.0098f8d0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <caehjg+jdbp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> Only time for one short post tonight. I've been trying to catch up 
with 
 
> Personally, I loved it. I thought it was absolutely the right 
reaction 
> Harry should have, to indicate among various things his ease 
astride 
> Buckbeak and his trust in his steed.

Agreed! Besides, if it *was* a conscious reference to another movie 
that is also part of pop-culture, I see no harm in it. The reason we 
see the conection is because there was something about that Titanic-
moment that made it defining--though I can't say offhand about what--
about hopes, dreams, leaving the old behind, whatever. It has taken 
on a life of it's own, and has become a part of movie vocabulary, 
just like that shot of the glass of water Jurassic park. A wink and a 
nod to those who get it, and yet quite satisfying in its own context 
too. I liked it, reference or no. Perhaps rhe reason some of us balk 
at it is because it may reminds us that we're watching a movie within 
a movie-universe--the meta-reference could temporarily spoil the 
magic for us since it brings us back to the real world by announcing 
its ficionality, if you will. Anyway...

>It made me think back to when I first learned how to ride a bicycle 
(which I remember very well, despite it 
> having taken place 35 years and two days ago - ten points to the 
House of 
> whoever guesses how come I'm able to be so precise :-)) - one of 
the first 
> things I did as soon as I felt comfortable was to spread my arms 
wide and 
> speed down the street (which was on a slight incline). Until I 
crashed into 
> a tree, that is... :-)

Excellent example. My guess as to why you can date the moment so 
precisely is that you received it and learned to ride it on your 
birthday and had another birthday two days ago. I'm gryffindor!


(more on this in another, VERY long post I'm working 
> on, provisionally entitled "Niggles, Nuggets and Other 
Observations").

Ah. Looking forward to it.
> --
Sophia




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 12 10:58:17 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 06:58:17 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
References: <001501c44f5e$3c85d360$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> <023e01c4502a$002834e0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>
Message-ID: <000701c4506c$2adf8c00$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Heather Maffioli"

> Joj:
> 4.  Outside of the Whomping Willow, when Ron tells Hermione his leg might
have to be chopped off.  It seemed a real awkward scene to me, and he
repeated it twice.  For some reason, that scene just didn't work for me.
>
>
> I think AC (or SK) was trying to paralell Ron's trying to impress Hermione
with the Draco/Pansy bit earlier in the film.  It seemed to me they were
just saying "look at the silly things all boys do to get girls to fawn over
them".
>
> JMO~~Heather

Yeah, I know.  It seems a cute idea on paper, but it just didn't work for me
in the movie. Kinda like the Harry crying scene.  On paper it sounds
touching, but I don't think it came off great in the movie.  JMO





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 12 20:05:08 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:05:08 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <cafnlk+apur@eGroups.com>

I've just seen PoA a second time and I think I figured out what for 
me constitutes the greatest difference PS/COS and POA. The first two 
were designed as feel-good movies. You came away feeling good, as you 
were suppposed to, and thinking that all was well with the world in a 
sense (provided one was not riled up about the the adaptation): "and 
they lived happily ever after". Even with the scary parts, I felt we 
as audience were guaranteed to remain comfortably in our seats, at a 
reasonably safe distance from the action. It is like a roller-coaster 
ride where, though you thrill as you plummet, there is the cart and 
the track to guarantee your safety. (Unless you were one of the 
people who thought it was a Sunday drive in Wisconsin kin which case 
you might see my point even more clearly.)Both PS and CoS has a 

Cuaron, on the other hand, is not safe and when he's your guide, you 
are in danger, grave danger. (This impression could be due in part to 
the material in itself naturally, nevertheless POA would have been an 
entirely different affair in Columbus' hands.)There is in Cuarons' 
vision of the WW an underlying instability, threatening to blow up in 
your face at any moment. Although I still feel without reservation 
that PoA is infinitely superior to PS CoS and is the wortk of a true 
artist, I now think I understand those who preferred fairy-tale 
Hogwarts. It was bright and beautiful and ultimately rather safe. 
Cuaron has given us the real deal ,and we are left with no choice but 
to grow up along with Harry. It's bloody brilliant.

Sophia




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 12 20:09:31 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:09:31 -0000
Subject: apologies
Message-ID: <cafntr+n4k9@eGroups.com>

Sorry about using a swearword at the end of the last post. It was of 
course meant as a reference to Ron, but as a Swede, I don't know what 
level of swearing that actually is, if it's "light" or "heavy" or how 
it really comes across--it dosn't have any such clear connotations 
for me. Just as I had clicked "send" I realized I might offend 
someone. If I did, I'm sorry.

Sophia




From shydi60 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 12 13:25:07 2004
From: shydi60 at yahoo.com (shydi60)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:25:07 -0000
Subject: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
In-Reply-To: <001101c44d01$ed1244c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <caf07j+reg4@eGroups.com>

 
> The only two places this "grime" bothered me was in Harry's room at 
the
> Leaky Cauldron and Dumbledore's fingernails.  I also hated the 
rubberband in
> Dumbledore's beard.  WTF?
> 
> Joj, who still loved the movie :P

shydi60 writes:

THANK YOU!  The rubberband in DD's beard drove me insane.  It felt 
wrong...Michael Gambon as DD felt wrong. I could not help but think 
of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I 
was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now 
there's an idea...

Di, who "liked" the movie





From shkrmkr98 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 12 19:48:46 2004
From: shkrmkr98 at yahoo.com (cristina)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 19:48:46 -0000
Subject: Titanic Reference
In-Reply-To: <caehjg+jdbp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cafmmu+ncmm@eGroups.com>

hi all, i'm coming out of lurkdom which i
haven't quite been in for long, but i figure
if there's something to say, why not? :) so...

> Sophia wrote:

>> Perhaps rhe reason some of us balk
at it is because it may reminds us that
we're watching a movie within a movie-
universe--the meta-reference could
temporarily spoil the magic for us since it
brings us back to the real world by announcing
its ficionality, if you will.

...loved this bit of analysis. it is true that
movie-going is an intensely internal and
personal experience. if one allows him/herself
to be absorbed into the film, it is hard when
something pulls you out briefly. a bizarre
example: i watched gothika at my local theatre
when i was living in france a few months ago.
well i guess the copy they were given was
bad or cheap because you could see the
microphone and even the top of the camera
sometimes. the magic was definitely gone.

/

as for the titanic reference, i don't think there
is one. i believe that having the reaction
harry did is quite normal. i think it's human
to sort of test the limits, and letting go,
whether it's bike handles, a rollercoaster,
the titanic or buckbeak, is in our natural desire
for freedom. i know i'm not the only one who
sticks her arm out of the car window and lets
the wind carry it in waves. ok, if harry had
shouted that he was king of the world, which
i'm sure a few of you feared he would (hehe),
then i can see it being a titanic reference.
other than that, i'd call it a coincidence based
on human behavior.

ciao,
cristina :)





From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 13 00:38:02 2004
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:38:02 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <cafnlk+apur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cag7la+3hut@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> wrote:
...
> Cuaron, on the other hand, is not safe and when he's your guide, you 
> are in danger, grave danger....There is in Cuarons' 
> vision of the WW an underlying instability, threatening to blow up in 
> your face at any moment.

Sophia, I completely agree. In the Aunt Marge scene, my heart was pounding with 
tension at what might be about to go wrong, even though I knew exactly what was 
going to happen. I couldn't put my finger on why, exactly; part of it was Dan's 
performance in those earliest scenes which I think were his best in the movie, but the 
unsettled feeling is characteristic of the whole film.

Carin




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 01:38:55 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:38:55 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <54.2bd78e48.2dfd0a2f@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/12/04 6:28:48 PM, aldhelm at earthlink.net writes:


> Sophia, I completely agree. In the Aunt Marge scene, my heart was pounding 
> with
> tension at what might be about to go wrong, even though I knew exactly what 
> was
> going to happen. I couldn't put my finger on why, exactly; part of it was 
> Dan's
> performance in those earliest scenes which I think were his best in the 
> movie, but the
> unsettled feeling is characteristic of the whole film.
> 

I agree and am glad someone brought up this - the whole Aunt Marge sequence 
has been sort of referred to in reviews as somewhat unnerving due to its 
resemblance to the movie Carrie and scary telekinetic powers, but also by one 
reviewer as lulling viewers into thinking this was another 'cute' Potter movie. I 
don't agree with the last part (but do agree with the Carrie vibe, it was rather 
spooky)- I remember clearly watching the movie for the first time in the 
theater and in that moment when Harry retreats to his room after the blowing up 
incident and angrily kicks the dresser, I literally was startled in my seat. It 
was as if I felt that kick myself and it was saying, 'this ain't a typical 
Potter movie'. We finally see the 'real' kid in Harry come out - the rebellious, 
angry newly blossomed teenager and it would have been a colossal mistake to 
have him not react in some way to what had happened downstairs. And I thought 
that reaction was one of the most "real" moments for Harry and subsequently, 
Dan. I really believed he was ticked off big time there ;-)

And I think that Harry has had two years to adjust to his new life as a 
wizard, which left him less shellshocked by events and able to stop repressing 
strong emotions (he was still in that somewhat shellshocked state in the first two 
movies). It was realistic for him to finally let something out.
I knew from that moment on that I was in for a different ride and I was glad 
of it...and was not disappointed in the least <g>
Cindy


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Jun 13 02:11:39 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:11:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Five more things I loved and didn't love about
	PoA
In-Reply-To: <000701c4506c$2adf8c00$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <BCF1301B.E70%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Yeah, I know.  It seems a cute idea on paper, but it just didn't work for me
in the movie. Kinda like the Harry crying scene.  On paper it sounds
touching, but I don't think it came off great in the movie.  JMO

{from bewitchedbyhp}

know what you mean. At first I thought the crying was dubbed in from another
actor (not DR). It sounded fakey. Then he quickly launched into the tirade
about killing Sirius (which I thought WAS good acting on DR's part; just not
a very smooth segue from the crying). He had a runny nose, but they
should've had some tears in his eyes/face for more realism, IMO.
Ah well, I still think his acting is much improved from the first 2 films.

I did like the Ron/Hermione cut-off leg scene, BTW. Thought it was cute how
Ron was looking for sympathy from H, in a "Feel sorry for me; I have a crush
on you" kind of way. Continuation of that "coming of age" theme of Cuaron's. 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Jun 13 02:15:34 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:15:34 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] House elves
In-Reply-To: <caf07j+reg4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF13106.E71%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

I could not help but think
of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I
was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now
there's an idea...

Di, who "liked" the movie

[from bewitchedbyHP]

speaking of house elves...has anyone heard if Dobey will be reappearing in
GOF with his new girlfriend? I'm betting they cut that out, along with the
whole SPEW storyline. I would like to see Dobey again though; loved him. And
can't wait to see Lucius Malfoy! Same actor playing him again, I hope?!?



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 02:14:25 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:14:25 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Titanic reference
Message-ID: <6b.2bd00524.2dfd1281@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/12/2004 5:25:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I loved that the movie allowed us to see Harry genuinely happy and 
carefree on two occasions - the Buckbeak ride and the dorm room antics with 
the 
candy. The poor kid goes through hell in this book and movie - he deserves to 
have a few moments of giddiness and exhilaration. And I don't care a bit if   
the book didn't have the dorm scene or if he didn't enjoy the Buckbeak ride - 
the film needed to have those scenes.
And I don't find the ride cheesy at all. I felt a real sense of his joy when 
he opens his arms wide and lets loose that joyous yell ;-) 
I don't think we really got to see Harry that happy in the first two movies - 
he smiled some and maybe laughed softly, but he never really let it loose. 
Considering everything else going in POA, not the least of which is the 
Dementors sucking every drop of joy and happiness out of him and replacing it 
with 
screams of his own mother's murder...he needed that release and we, as 
viewers, 
needed it as well - at least, I needed it ;)
Cindy

I LOVED that scene (Buckbeak and Harry) and the one where they rescued Sirius 
and Sirius and Harry squealing with glee as they flew -- "not a good way to 
sneak around" was my first thought, but I ride horses and know the joy you feel 
when you clear a jump or do a perfect *anything* on horseback -- definitely a 
"WAHOO!!" moment!  And I was delighted with the candy scene in the dorm.  
You're right, poor Harry goes through so much torment in this book and film, 
these light moments were really necessary to give the kid -- and the audience -- 
some much needed relief.  I have seen the movie twice and am not at all 
satiated yet -- gotta go see it at least 5 more times, I think!!


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


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




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 02:23:10 2004
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 02:23:10 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
Message-ID: <cagdqe+bhbc@eGroups.com>

I've now seen it twice.

Was anyone able to read the title of the book that was being read by 
a customer in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning?

I liked the "casual" use of magic throughout the film..(in the 
Cauldron seeing tea being stirred, Lupin's closing up of his 
luggage)...

I loved Lupin and I thought I would NOT like him at all. I thought 
Alan Rickman DID have a lot of space in this movie and it was 
great..I loved him in Grandma Longbottom's clothes..I loved the way 
he protected the kids from the WereWolf (despite how much he hates 
Harry -- a foreshadowing of how Dumbledore does trust him and how I 
reluctantly must agree he must be on our side..but listening to how 
he was going to let Neville poison his toad with a badly mixed 
potion..it's hard to believe..)

Gary Oldman was superb! He  brought the goodness, the madness and the 
violence of Sirius Black to life..the scene with Lupin turning into 
the werewolf was wonderful (the second time I heard Lupin 
whimpering "Padfoot...."

Timothy Spawl as Peter Pettigrew is absolutely brilliant ? his 
demonic laughter as he transforms from Peter back into Scabbers (on 
his way to join Lord Voldemort) was wonderful.

I was terribly pleased to see Hermione (Emma Watson) have more of a 
role. In the movie version of PS her role deciphering the 
potion/poisons is skipped....and in the CoS, she is petrified for a 
good chunk of time...

more soon

Susan McGee, Michigan




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Jun 13 03:39:38 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:39:38 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <cafnlk+apur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF144BA.E73%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Although I still feel without reservation
that PoA is infinitely superior to PS CoS and is the wortk of a true
artist, I now think I understand those who preferred fairy-tale
Hogwarts. It was bright and beautiful and ultimately rather safe.
Cuaron has given us the real deal ,and we are left with no choice but
to grow up along with Harry. It's bloody brilliant.

Sophia


[from bewitchedbyHP]

I agree that POA is cinematically superior to the first 2 films. I don't
really think that SS and COS were necessarily "bubblegum-Disney" though.
Granted the lawns were beautifully tended, the sun was brightly shining
(think first broom lesson scene), but there were still some dark sinister
scenes, like Valdemort ( mean, You-Know-Who!) sucking on the unicorn blood
in the foggy blue-black forbidden forest. The creepy spiders, the evil
basilisk with his eyes gouged out sniffing out Harry in the tunnel...I do
think the first 2 films were more "fantasy" films, whereas in POA, caught up
in the more realistic, "gritty" decor, makes the story seem all the more
real (Hippogriffs, werewolves and all! :-)
At first viewing, I, like others, was disturbed that Cuaron dared to change
the established set design of Hogwarts. Now, after 3 viewings, I realize
that he (or the set designer/art directors) did a much superior job in
defining Hogwarts. It doesn't bother me that we didn't see the cool sagging
bridge in the other films. Maybe it was a different part of the castle? I
like the Harry-on-Buckbeak scene because we get that wonderful bird's eye
view of Hogwarts (didn't realize they were shot at 2 different castles-can
one visit these??) The clock tower bugged some folks 'cause it was so
obviously not there in the first 2 installments. I just thought it was such
a gorgeous and powerful image, tying into the time-turner theme. Brilliant
photography, when they shot Harry through the turning cogs of the clock.
Also when Harry looks at his reflection in the rainy train window. You get
this sense of foreboding, like, "this ain't gonna be an easy year for
Harry!" Other cool camera angle was when the camera was behind the painting
as Dumbledore (grungy fingernails and all!), smoothed out the rips in the
canvas. The shooting through the Bogarts wardrobe confused me a little,
especially with the scar looking like it was applied to the wrong part of
DR's face in make-up!

My only complaint is (yeah, yeah, yeah) the lack of explanation of who the
Marauders were, and why Snape hated them so much. So many opportunities to
slip that crucial info in! Oh, and those silly shrunken Rasta heads. Totally
irrelevant, IMO.
I give it 3 stars!



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Jun 13 03:42:40 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:42:40 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] apologies
In-Reply-To: <cafntr+n4k9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF14570.E74%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>



Sorry about using a swearword at the end of the last post. It was of
course meant as a reference to Ron, but as a Swede, I don't know what
level of swearing that actually is, if it's "light" or "heavy" or how
it really comes across--it dosn't have any such clear connotations
for me. Just as I had clicked "send" I realized I might offend
someone. If I did, I'm sorry.

Sophia


Is "bloody" really a swear word? It's just so British, I don't even think of
it as such!  :-)
[bewitchedbyHP] 


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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Sun Jun 13 05:04:54 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:04:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <54.2bd78e48.2dfd0a2f@aol.com>
References: <54.2bd78e48.2dfd0a2f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1719.4.12.232.8.1087103094.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> I agree and am glad someone brought up this - the whole Aunt Marge
> sequence
> has been sort of referred to in reviews as somewhat unnerving due to its
> resemblance to the movie Carrie and scary telekinetic powers, but also by

Hm, not really scary.  I was cracking up.  It reminded me of a scene from
Willy Wonka, "Violet, you're turning violet!"  Oompa Lumpa.


> theater and in that moment when Harry retreats to his room after the
> blowing up
> incident and angrily kicks the dresser, I literally was startled in my
> was as if I felt that kick myself and it was saying, 'this ain't a typical

I winced because I've tried that and it hurts.  Don't fight with furniture
because it'll get you back... and probably in a more painful way.


> Potter movie'. We finally see the 'real' kid in Harry come out - the
> rebellious,
> angry newly blossomed teenager and it would have been a colossal mistake

I guess Harry's reaction didn't come as a surprise because I'm familiar
with OOTP, not to mention POA.  And, well, my brother has seen his sisters
throw temper tantrums. {g}

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 clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 05:25:24 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:25:24 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
Message-ID: <12f.43e9a795.2dfd3f44@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/12/04 10:06:39 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> I guess Harry's reaction didn't come as a surprise because I'm familiar
> with OOTP, not to mention POA.? And, well, my brother has seen his sisters
> throw temper tantrums. {g}
> 

Well, I wasn't referring to the books, which I have more times than I care to 
admit without feeling like I need a 12-step program. ;-) I meant to compare 
this scene of Harry kicking the furniture to the first two movies, where we 
don't really see that level of anger and frustration.
Now OOTP is one that I am hoping keeps the same actors - I would love to see 
Dan play with the anger in that one ;-)
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 05:28:11 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:28:11 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
Message-ID: <1e.2bdc18a1.2dfd3feb@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/12/04 10:06:39 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> Hm, not really scary.? I was cracking up.? It reminded me of a scene from
> Willy Wonka, "Violet, you're turning violet!"? Oompa Lumpa.
> 
> 

LOL! I haven't seen Willy Wonka, however ;-)
But to defend myself, I was referring to the glass shattering. Harry was 
rather foreboding there - the way the lights were flickering and the glass 
shattered reminded me of telekinetic powers that come alive with anger, a la Carrie 
;-)
The actual inflation scene was pretty amusing, but it didn't look like Harry 
was enjoying it, mostly because he knew how much trouble he had just gotten 
himself into <g>
Cindy


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




From terryljames at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 04:10:19 2004
From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 04:10:19 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing?  Ferrets!
Message-ID: <cagk3b+olvd@eGroups.com>

I have only skimmed the messages, so I apologize if this has already 
been said, but the thing that really popped out in my mind as 
possible foreshadowing for later books was when Hermione 
mentioned "dead ferrets".  Who do we connect with ferrets?  

Yes, Draco.  He's dead meat.  IMHO. :) 

I also agree with whoever the first person was who said that Remus 
had some sort of relationship--whether one-sided or not--with Lily.  
There was way too much of the Lily-love going on on the bridge.  





From logic_alley at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 05:15:06 2004
From: logic_alley at yahoo.com (logic_alley)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 05:15:06 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <cagdqe+bhbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cagnsq+ge7f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanmcgee48176" 
<Schlobin1 at a...> wrote:
> I've now seen it twice.
> 
> Was anyone able to read the title of the book that was being read 
by 
> a customer in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning?


I've only seen the movie once, but as it flashed by I thought it was 
a real book - maybe A Brief History of Time by Stephan Hawking?

- Logic Alley - 





From redina at silverbloom.net  Sun Jun 13 05:42:18 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:42:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <1e.2bdc18a1.2dfd3feb@aol.com>
References: <1e.2bdc18a1.2dfd3feb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1767.4.12.232.8.1087105338.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> rather foreboding there - the way the lights were flickering and the glass
> shattered reminded me of telekinetic powers that come alive with anger, a

Hm, pity Harry couldn't have done the same thing with the Fat Lady's
glass.  Maybe the Gryffindors would've gotten into the Tower quicker.

And are we being bad in not using spoiler space?

It's too late at night on the east coast.  That and Florida summertime
heat with no A/C.  It's only 90^F right now.  Calling it a night.

Dina




From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 06:52:32 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 06:52:32 -0000
Subject: Mad Magazine POA Satire
Message-ID: <cagtjg+bbqj@eGroups.com>



  Just to let you know that the Mad Magazine version of POA is out.  
It's standard Mad Magazine fare but worth the look.  There are even 
two covers to choose from.

  Brian:-)




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 08:05:41 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:05:41 -0000
Subject: Books are should not be movies ( was Re: Cuaron talks about movie cuts)
In-Reply-To: <cae30r+q5un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cah1sl+vo02@eGroups.com>

Anna wrote:
>>Now see, I don't get what the point is of making a movie that
follows the book exactly. If that's what you want, why not just read
the book again?<<

That's what I wonder too. I can understand having a few 
disappointments about the movie (I, of course, had a few as well), 
but I don't see why that has to ruin the movie. Personally, I 
approach a *compliment* to the book, not a replacement for it, and 
that made it much easier to accept the changes and enjoy the movie. 
What really confuses me, is that the movie didn't stray that far from 
the book. The things that were changed were only minor things, and 
the things that were left out (for the most part), were at least 
hinted at, which is certainly much more than other movie adaptations 
give you. 

>>I'm starting to feel like I'm in Red Dwarf here. Books are not
movies, Dave. Dave, movies are not books. They have totally
different narrative conventions, because they are totally different
media.<<

And that's just it. Perhaps I enjoyed it (I LOVED the movie) more 
because I am a movie fan as much as a book fan. A movie trying to 
follow every bit of the books would be too long (for the average 
movie-goer at least) and get too slow and eventually too complicated 
for those who haven't read the books. For those of you upset about 
the removal of the quidditch cup, think of how exhausting it would be 
to watch FOUR or even two quidditch matches in the span of 2-3 hours. 
That's just one of those things that works better in a book than it 
does on screen.
For those who were disappointed with the movie: did you read 
spoilers? I didn't bother trying to be unspoiled and read every 
review and saw every trailer/tv spot I could get a hold of. I thought 
it would be for the worse when I actually saw the movie, but it was 
for the better. Before going into the theater, I already knew all the 
major changes (and deletions) from the book and had my chance to make 
my peace with them. Waiting for something on-screen and not seeing it 
is much more disappointing that reading its not there a few weeks 
beforehand, I imagine. If you are going to see Goblet of Fire (which 
I suppose all of you are), I'd suggest reading a few fan reviews 
beforehand to get an idea of what WON'T be there.

Just a thought.


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 08:45:30 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:45:30 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <cagdqe+bhbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cah47a+oa44@eGroups.com>

Susan McGee wrote:
>>Was anyone able to read the title of the book that was being read by
a customer in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning?<<

I'm sure many others will answer this, but it was 'A Brief History of 
Time'.

>>I liked the "casual" use of magic throughout the film..(in the
Cauldron seeing tea being stirred, Lupin's closing up of his
luggage)...<<

Not to mention the ghosts doing the 'headless hunt' in the background 
several times, and the portraits in the hallway being upset about the 
wandlight. Magic seemed a lot more integrated into this film than in 
the others.

>>I loved Lupin and I thought I would NOT like him at all.<<

I was VERY unsure about him. I like Lupin a lot, and for some reason 
I always imagined him with sort of quiet good looks, even though the 
books never specify such a thing, and that was hard to get past. I 
did have faith in the casting department though, since they've been 
dead-on with the other characters, and I forced myself to keep an 
open mind. I spent the first half of the movie watching/judging his 
performance carefully, and then got so into the plot that I forgot 
about it until the very end when he was packing up. That scene, along 
with the shrieking shack, were very 'Lupin' to me, and now its hard 
to imagine anyone else in the role. He was excellent. I particularily 
liked the forties vibe they gave to his character, it seemed to fit 
for some reason.

>> I thought Alan Rickman DID have a lot of space in this movie and 
it was great..I loved him in Grandma Longbottom's clothes.<<

I adore Alan Rickman. The boggart scene was fantastic just for the 
sheer amount of time he spent standing there looking vaguely confused 
(and clutching that purse).

>>I loved the way he protected the kids from the WereWolf (despite 
how much he hates Harry -- a foreshadowing of how Dumbledore does 
trust him and how I reluctantly must agree he must be on our side<<

My take on the Snape/Harry relationship is that Snape wouldn't be 
upset at all if Harry happened to die, but he wouldn't stand by and 
let it happen. I think its sort of an unwritten rule that the 
teachers are supposed to protect the students from any 'dangers' 
(that don't befall other schools), and Snape sees it as his 
responsibility to protect any students around him, whether or not he 
DESTESTS the student in question. Its sort of how Harry saved Dudley 
from the dementers (and we all know how they feel about each other).


>>Gary Oldman was superb! He brought the goodness, the madness and the
violence of Sirius Black to life <<
Yes he was, he blew away my rather high expectations. I got chills 
when he shouted about spending 12 years in Azkaban. I especially 
liked the moment when Lupin first bursts in and they have 
the 'madness within' conversation and the hug. It really seemed like 
Lupin had actually been Sirius' friend all along (despite knowing he 
hadn't).

>>..the scene with Lupin turning into
the werewolf was wonderful (the second time I heard Lupin
whimpering "Padfoot...."<<

Is that where he says it? Several people have mentioned 
Sirius/Lupin/Peter using their nicknames in the movie, and I didn't 
hear a single usuage either time I saw the movie. Can someone tell me 
where the other times were? Or will I just have to wait for the DVD?

>>Timothy Spawl as Peter Pettigrew is absolutely brilliant<<

His rat-like body language was fantastic! As was the way he kept 
running for the door (although it bothered me that neither Sirius or 
Lupin thought to SHUT the door).

>>I was terribly pleased to see Hermione (Emma Watson) have more of a
role. <<

I've heard from a lot of people who would disagree with that, but I 
didn't really think she was exactly SUPER!Hermione myself. But she 
wasn't as bookish either, and she wasn't exhausted and stressed out 
like the Hermione of the book. She was more in the middle, which is 
not a bad thing unless she goes further away from bookish in GoF. I 
did enjoy how they gave her more to do in the time-turner sequence, 
and the non-fans I've talked to (including this unfortunate girl 
whose friends dragged her to a midnight showing on her birthday of 
all days) all mentioned that scene as being their favorite. It was 
much better done than I expected, the time-turner part of the book 
was always my least-favorite part of PoA.


-Rebecca




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 11:34:37 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:34:37 -0000
Subject: Daytime viewing
Message-ID: <cahe4d+vkhe@eGroups.com>

Just thought I'd share some of the moments from my first, and so far 
only, viewing of POA. I went with my best friends who'd just had an 
exam, and I was also at the university trying to get some of my marks 
signed. So we decided that after we were done with the 
administration, we'd go straight to the cinema. And so it happened 
that on a Friday morning, we sat down with about 101 kids and a 
couple of teenagers to watch the show. The funny thing about going to 
the cinema with kids is that they COMMENT. Man has not yet invented a 
way of stopping them doing that. I became reconciled with the 
situation and decided to enjoy their remarks. And lo.

The first surprise was when Harry set off from Privet Drive not only 
without Hedwig, but without even Hedwig's cage. The audience erupted. 
WHERE'S HEDWIG?, came the indignant cries from all over. Whispered 
answers of "must be off hunting" would not do: WHERE'S THE CAGE? 
demanded the kids. They soon got over the shock, however.

The biggest fun came when Hagrid said that Buckbeak was going to be 
killed. His hair changed colour the moment he said it, from black to 
brown, due to the ratty copy of the film that the cinema was using. 
This only added to the pandemonium that followed. Some people thought 
a crying Hagrid was impossibly funny. They started giggling. Then 
came prompt hisses from the others: "This is not funny!". More 
giggling. By that time, it was, irrevocably, extremely funny. It was 
like a house party, with everyone munching crisps in front of the 
television. We were all friends. The more people said it was not 
funny, the funnier it got. I was ashamed of myself for laughing, but 
I couldn't stop. 

We all stayed to watch the credits, and lots of people noticed the 
(supposedly) snogging couple on the map. Ooooooooh, they cried, 
oooooh, look at them! You would have thought they were showing 
explicit sex-material, instead of a pair of footprints shuffling in 
front of each other. 

It was a riot. :) But I think my next viewing will be in the evening. 
Also I plan to watch the original, English version. It's just that I 
love Hermione's dubbing voice so much. She's a girl called Luca 
Szab?, and she's a totally brilliant actress. Harry's voice is also 
one of my favourites. His voice deepened for this film, while Daniel 
Radcliffe's was already deep for Chamber of Secrets - so back then it 
was funny, cause in one language it was a little squeaky boy's voice 
that he had, and in the other, a deep voice. :)

Love, Alice





From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 13:37:05 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:37:05 -0000
Subject: House elves
In-Reply-To: <BCF13106.E71%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cahla1+rlm2@eGroups.com>

I'm sure they will have Dobby again, he was so much fun.  As far as 
Lucius Malfoy, the actor Jason Isaacs is playing the part again.  
According to IMDB (the greatest site reference site ever) he's the 
only one cast for Order of the Phoenix.  That makes me nervous that 
no one else is listed.  

Anyone else have any thoughts?






--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> I could not help but think
> of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I
> was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now
> there's an idea...
> 
> Di, who "liked" the movie
> 
> [from bewitchedbyHP]
> 
> speaking of house elves...has anyone heard if Dobey will be 
reappearing in
> GOF with his new girlfriend? I'm betting they cut that out, along 
with the
> whole SPEW storyline. I would like to see Dobey again though; 
loved him. And
> can't wait to see Lucius Malfoy! Same actor playing him again, I 
hope?!?
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 13 13:41:18 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 07:41:18 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] House elves
In-Reply-To: <BCF13106.E71%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <001f01c4514c$1baea050$0400a8c0@pensive>

I think that will depend on how important house elves are to the future of
the story.  I think they will play some kind of important role down the
line, or why else would JKR have introduced them as characters at all.  I
enjoy Dobby, though I find Winky to be an annoying little ... can't think of
a good word for her, so, just annoying.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Valerie Flowe [mailto:valerie.flowe at verizon.net] 
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 8:16 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] House elves


I could not help but think
of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I
was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now
there's an idea...

Di, who "liked" the movie

[from bewitchedbyHP]

speaking of house elves...has anyone heard if Dobey will be reappearing in
GOF with his new girlfriend? I'm betting they cut that out, along with the
whole SPEW storyline. I would like to see Dobey again though; loved him. And
can't wait to see Lucius Malfoy! Same actor playing him again, I hope?!?



[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 sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 13:43:12 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:43:12 -0000
Subject: Nearly Headless Nick
Message-ID: <cahllg+2jtr@eGroups.com>

What happened to Sir Nick?




From editor at texas.net  Sun Jun 13 13:42:02 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:42:02 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
References: <cah47a+oa44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001101c4514c$373c9ca0$9a59aacf@texas.net>

Rebecca:

> His rat-like body language was fantastic! As was the way he kept
> running for the door (although it bothered me that neither Sirius or
> Lupin thought to SHUT the door).

In the shot when they first show Sirius, following the pawprints to his feet
and moving up, you can see that the bottom of the door is pretty much not
there--most of the panels are gone, etc. I'm not sure shutting the door
would have done much.

~Amanda




From tripchick at rogers.com  Sun Jun 13 14:32:08 2004
From: tripchick at rogers.com (TripChick)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 10:32:08 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 948
In-Reply-To: <1087118770.903.60352.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <7301DE7F-BD46-11D8-A785-000A95C630B4@rogers.com>


On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 05:26  AM, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  
wrote:

I'm replying to a couple of messages from digest mode, so please  
forgive the jumping around (Hey, I'm Alfonso Cuaron too! )

> _______________________________________________________________________ 
> _
>
> Message: 1
>    Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 06:58:17 -0400
>    From: "joj" <joj at rochester.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Heather Maffioli"
>
>> Joj:
>> 4.  Outside of the Whomping Willow, when Ron tells Hermione his leg  
>> might
> have to be chopped off.  It seemed a real awkward scene to me, and he
> repeated it twice.  For some reason, that scene just didn't work for  
> me.
>>
>>
>> I think AC (or SK) was trying to paralell Ron's trying to impress  
>> Hermione
> with the Draco/Pansy bit earlier in the film.  It seemed to me they  
> were
> just saying "look at the silly things all boys do to get girls to fawn  
> over
> them".
>>
>> JMO~~Heather
>
> Yeah, I know.  It seems a cute idea on paper, but it just didn't work  
> for me
> in the movie. Kinda like the Harry crying scene.  On paper it sounds
> touching, but I don't think it came off great in the movie.  JMO
>

part of the reason it didn't work much for me either I think, is  
because we ended up only *hearing* Ron and Hermione by the last part of  
their exchange, in a voiceover because we were *watching* Harry and  
Sirius walk to a spot where they could see Hogwarts castle (Sirius  
talking about looking forward to going into it again as a guest rather  
than a prisoner) and I was already paying attention to Harry and Sirius.


******

> Message: 3
>    Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:09:31 -0000
>    From: "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at hotmail.com>
> Subject: apologies
>
> Sorry about using a swearword at the end of the last post. It was of
> course meant as a reference to Ron, but as a Swede, I don't know what
> level of swearing that actually is,

I don't think that word is *that* bad Sophia :-) I was offended. Not  
when I  see the F and S and C words regularly in some yahoo group  
posts... (not here)


>
> Message: 4
>    Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:25:07 -0000
>    From: "shydi60" <shydi60 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
>
>
>> The only two places this "grime" bothered me was in Harry's room at  
>> the
>> Leaky Cauldron and Dumbledore's fingernails.  I also hated the   
>> rubberband in
>> Dumbledore's beard.  WTF?
>>
>> Joj, who still loved the movie :P
>

I totally agree with this! Dumbledore and dirty and overly long nails?  
Euw! Unless he's the auto shop teacher.... Then again, do those nails  
remind you of the nails/talons/claws (whatever) of any particular kind  
of animal? I've thought Dumbledore was an Animagus from the first time  
I read PoA myself. Maybe he's an owl?

And the rubberband. Ugh! I think they should have made his beard more  
like the one they had on Richard Harris. I know it's not the same  
actor, but sheesh, it IS the same character. Did they have to change  
him *that* much?

*****




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 14:46:28 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 14:46:28 -0000
Subject: Details like Stan
Message-ID: <cahpc4+dij3@eGroups.com>

I didn't finish my second-viewing comments, so here goes: Here are a 
few things I really like:

Stan Shunpike is wonderful! The actors interpretation of the 
charatcter really stood out to me.(I haven't taken the time yet to 
find out the name of the actor, but I will so I can drop ?him a 
thankyou note!) Even though he had very limited screen-time, his 
character seemed rounded to me. It could havd been a throwaway-part, 
but this guy made it all his own. I truly enjoy well thought out 
performances--it's the little things that make all the difference.

I love how he reads the welcome-spiel froma tattered card and points 
to his nametag as he introduces himself (supposedly the card 
instructs him to), the little moment where he joins Harry in 
squinting at the bushes, how he makes a big deal about the weight of 
the trunk, the menacing delight in the line "he's a murderer," and, 
my absolute favorite: how he half-folds the ticket and takes a beat 
to consider Harry before giving it to him with a snazzy little 
gesture. Yesssss! Terrific. 

Other favorite moments: When Hagrid bends down to ask Harry"How am I 
doing my first day?", his face shining with anticipation and 
anxiousness for praise, and Harry, with understanding and love for 
Hagrid, gives the desired response--it feels so real to me, and says 
a bit about their relationship. (BTW I thought Robbie was better as 
Hagrid in this one than in CoS--possibly a script matter. In CoS his 
performance felt fake, as though he was impersonating himself as 
Hagrid rather than *being* Hagrid. I loved him in this one though.)

Did you notice that Buckbeak poops in Care of Mag. cre. class? The 
movie doesn't point it out, it's just a small detail to heighten the 
realism... :-)

It's been mentioned before, but when the camera slides through the 
giant clockwork in the time-turner scene, my insides melt, it's such 
a gorgeous shot, both ways.

Liked Lupin the first time, but even better the second time. So warm, 
and such a true and believable performace.


more to come...

Sophia




From HMaffioli at cox.net  Sun Jun 13 14:55:54 2004
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 07:55:54 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Prisoner
References: <cagdqe+bhbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001101c45156$87312a00$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>

Susan McGee, Michigan:
  I've now seen it twice.

  Was anyone able to read the title of the book that was being read by 
  a customer in the Leaky Cauldron at the beginning?

  I liked the "casual" use of magic throughout the film..(in the 
  Cauldron seeing tea being stirred, Lupin's closing up of his 
  luggage)...






  He is reading A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking. Evidently he is from a popular English band (Sorry I don't know who he is or what band he is from but I bet someone around here does).

  ~Heather


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 13 15:58:31 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 10:58:31 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Details like Stan
In-Reply-To: <cahpc4+dij3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELCCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


  -----Original Message-----
  From: sophiamcl [mailto:sophiamcl at hotmail.com]
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 9:46 AM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Details like Stan


  I didn't finish my second-viewing comments, so here goes: Here are a
  few things I really like:

  Stan Shunpike is wonderful! The actors interpretation of the
  charatcter really stood out to me.(I haven't taken the time yet to
  find out the name of the actor, but I will so I can drop ?him a
  thankyou note!) Even though he had very limited screen-time, his
  character seemed rounded to me. It could havd been a throwaway-part,
  but this guy made it all his own. I truly enjoy well thought out
  performances--it's the little things that make all the difference. >>

  One of my favorite scenes in the movie is the Knight Bus.  I loved Stan
Shunpike and the shrunken
  head... a little Mexican humor there.  I thought it was cute when he asked
Harry what he was
  doing on the ground.  My son and I go around doing the countdown scene
with the old lady.  I
  just thought the whole scene was fun.

  Kimberly







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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 13 16:13:38 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:13:38 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: House elves
In-Reply-To: <cahla1+rlm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEIELDCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>



Oh... I would think they would bring Dobby and Winky into GoF.  Winky is a
very important character
to the plot, isn't she?  They will probably reduced their screen time
though.  Plus isn't Dobby the
one that tells Harry about secret room in OotP?  I'd think they'd want to
keep their audience reminded
of house elves just for plot reasons in later books. Jason Isaacs has said
he makes a brief appearance
in GoF to remind of the audience of his character, because he is so
important in the 5th book.
I wouldn't get too nervous yet.  I think Dan has talked about doing the 5th
book, but not sure he'll
go on after that, but has WB come straight out and said "yes, they are doing
a 5th book".  I know
they have thought about it, but I don't think anything official has come out
yet, has it?

Kimberly
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Brooke [mailto:sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com]
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 8:37 AM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: House elves


  I'm sure they will have Dobby again, he was so much fun.  As far as
  Lucius Malfoy, the actor Jason Isaacs is playing the part again.
  According to IMDB (the greatest site reference site ever) he's the
  only one cast for Order of the Phoenix.  That makes me nervous that
  no one else is listed.

  Anyone else have any thoughts?






  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe
  <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
  > I could not help but think
  > of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I
  > was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now
  > there's an idea...
  >
  > Di, who "liked" the movie
  >
  > [from bewitchedbyHP]
  >
  > speaking of house elves...has anyone heard if Dobey will be
  reappearing in
  > GOF with his new girlfriend? I'm betting they cut that out, along
  with the
  > whole SPEW storyline. I would like to see Dobey again though;
  loved him. And
  > can't wait to see Lucius Malfoy! Same actor playing him again, I
  hope?!?
  >
  >
  >
  > [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 twinslove at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 13 16:33:51 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:33:51 -0500
Subject: Buckbeak's ride
In-Reply-To: <6a.40a222de.2dfbb94c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEIELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


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

  And I don't find the ride cheesy at all. I felt a real sense of his joy
when
  he opens his arms wide and lets loose that joyous yell ;-)
  I don't think we really got to see Harry that happy in the first two
movies -
  he smiled some and maybe laughed softly, but he never really let it loose.
  Considering everything else going in POA, not the least of which is the
  Dementors sucking every drop of joy and happiness out of him and replacing
it with
  screams of his own mother's murder...he needed that release and we, as
viewers,
  needed it as well - at least, I needed it ;) >>

  I am so glad I am not the only one that liked the Buckbeak scene.  I saw
the movie for the 3rd time yesterday (and
  last until the DVD comes out in the fall).  While watching that scene, I
just realized that it was one of my favorites.
  I love the flight along with the music, and the wonderful views of
Hogwarts and the grounds around the castle.
  Simply breathtaking...

  Kimberly


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 13 16:37:57 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:37:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Five more things I loved and didn't love about PoA
In-Reply-To: <cad9dt+7g2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEMELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


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



  A couple of people laughed at my screening, too (it was at 10:00, so
  no kiddies). Which is weird, because I thought it was rather
  touching. Hagrid tends to annoy me because he's so emotional and
  irrational, but I think Robbie Coltrane has done a great job
  bringing out the more sympathetic side of his character. *shrug* >>

  I actually thought this was very touching too.  Of course, I thought
Harry's cry scene was touching
  too, but others thought it wasn't "real" enough to them.  Oh well. :-)

  Kimberly


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 13 16:37:58 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:37:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <BAY7-F23LAqKlwPqzre0000f0e9@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>




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



Very true, if Crookshanks was just a cat!!!!, but he is part Kneazel,(read
magical creatures and where to find them) so that would be why he has very
high intelligence for a feline and he can tell when people are not being
true (Harry and Ron cheating on their divinations homework GoF C14, sorry I
cant recall the page), not to mention the fact he knew straight away that
scabbers was not really a rat......>>

Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical Creatures
and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where do I get
the book?  I don't want to buy it, just review while at the book store,
however, I have not been able to find it at any book store.  Can we read
about Crookshanks online somewhere?

Kimberly







From flitwicksman at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 18:03:27 2004
From: flitwicksman at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 18:03:27 -0000
Subject: Buckbeak's ride
In-Reply-To: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEIELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <cai4tf+r582@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" <twinslove at m...> 
wrote:
> 
>   -----Original Message-----
> 
>   And I don't find the ride cheesy at all. I felt a real sense of 
his joy
> when
>   he opens his arms wide and lets loose that joyous yell ;-)
>   I don't think we really got to see Harry that happy in the first 
two
> movies -
>   he smiled some and maybe laughed softly, but he never really let 
it loose.
>   Considering everything else going in POA, not the least of which 
is the
>   Dementors sucking every drop of joy and happiness out of him and 
replacing
> it with
>   screams of his own mother's murder...he needed that release and 
we, as
> viewers,
>   needed it as well - at least, I needed it ;) >>
> 
>   I am so glad I am not the only one that liked the Buckbeak 
scene.  I saw
> the movie for the 3rd time yesterday (and
>   last until the DVD comes out in the fall).  While watching that 
scene, I
> just realized that it was one of my favorites.
>   I love the flight along with the music, and the wonderful views of
> Hogwarts and the grounds around the castle.
>   Simply breathtaking...
> 
>   Kimberly

  I saw it for the third time myself yesterday (although I can make 
any promises that it will be the last time until the DVD) and also 
love the scene.  Yes, there were elements of E.T., Titanic, etc., but 
too me, it's Harry and Buckbeak and this is all that matters.  The 
scenery and the music were both beautiful.  

  As we were leaving after the movie, another theater had it's door 
open and the Quidditch scene was playing.  It took everything I had 
to keep from going in and watching the rest of the movie again.





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 19:57:11 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:57:11 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <001101c45156$87312a00$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>
Message-ID: <caibin+ip79@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heather Maffioli" 
<HMaffioli at c...> wrote:
>   He is reading A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking. 
Evidently he is from a popular English band (Sorry I don't know who 
he is or what band he is from but I bet someone around here does).
> 
>   ~Heather

Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory 
serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know 
that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most 
important name in physics since Einstein.

Sophia 




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 20:03:28 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 16:03:28 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
Message-ID: <80.e2bd365.2dfe0d10@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/13/04 1:00:39 PM, sophiamcl at hotmail.com writes:


> 
> Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory
> serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know
> that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most
> important name in physics since Einstein.
> 

I think she was referring to the guy stirring the coffee :-) That guy is from 
a band in England, I think his name is Ian Brown. I may be wrong, so someone 
correct me please ;-)
The book he is reading is by Stephen Hawking.
Cindy


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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 20:08:04 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:08:04 -0000
Subject: House elves
In-Reply-To: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEIELDCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <caic74+poag@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" <twinslove at m...> 
wrote:

> Oh... I would think they would bring Dobby and Winky into GoF.  
>Winky is a very important character to the plot, isn't she?  They 
>will probably reduced their screen timethough. 

Yes--but that all depends on how freely they interpret the plot. 
Since they're making it into one movie, alot will have to go, and 
probably be rewritten too.

>Plus isn't Dobby the one that tells Harry about secret room in OotP? 

Yes, and he's also the one who finds out about gillyweed and steals 
it for Harry to manage the second task in the triwiz.

> I wouldn't get too nervous yet.  I think Dan has talked about doing 
>the 5th book, but not sure he'll go on after that,

Well, not exactly. He's said that he's imagines himself playing that 
Harry while reading it, but he's not said anything either way about 
doing it.

>but has WB come straight out and said "yes, they are doing a 5th 
>book". I know they have thought about it, but I don't think anything 
>official has come out yet, has it?

Correct. I haven't heard anything official either. However, there 
have been some blurbs in the media about how Steven Kloves has been 
approached to do the script for Harry V, but may be turning it down 
in favor for another priject. (Now THAT could be really interesting. 
Who do you think might take his place if he abandoned ship?)

Sophia




From nostrebor at runbox.com  Sun Jun 13 20:11:09 2004
From: nostrebor at runbox.com (Jodi Robertson)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 16:11:09 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner -- Stephen Hawking
References: <caibin+ip79@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <359701c45182$9d394130$f900a504@user7i1hr4si1m>

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/cosmostar/html/hawking.html
The British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking (1942-) has devoted much of his life to probing the space-time described by general relativity and the singularities where it breaks down. And he's done most of this work while confined to a wheelchair, brought on by the progressive neurological disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's Disease. Hawking is the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, a post once held by Isaac Newton. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking
Includes a better picture of Stephen Hawking (while on Star Trek) plus more bio info.
Jodi

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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 20:26:31 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:26:31 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <80.e2bd365.2dfe0d10@aol.com>
Message-ID: <caid9n+570e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 6/13/04 1:00:39 PM, sophiamcl at h... writes:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory
> > serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know
> > that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most
> > important name in physics since Einstein.
> > 
> 
> I think she was referring to the guy stirring the coffee :-) That 
guy is from 
> a band in England, I think his name is Ian Brown. I may be wrong, 
so someone 
> correct me please ;-)
> The book he is reading is by Stephen Hawking.
> Cindy


oops! sorry!! Ian Brown eh? Not a clue who he is or which band he 
belongs to...

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




From doliesl at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 20:36:11 2004
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:36:11 -0000
Subject: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <caid9n+570e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <caidrr+h45m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> wrote:
> 
> oops! sorry!! Ian Brown eh? Not a clue who he is or which band he 
> belongs to...
> 

Ian Brown of the Stone Roses, I mentioned it in an old posts:
http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/message/9349


D.




From HMaffioli at cox.net  Sun Jun 13 21:04:16 2004
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 14:04:16 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
References: <caibin+ip79@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c45189$fca11100$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sophiamcl 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 12:57 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner


  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heather Maffioli" 
  <HMaffioli at c...> wrote:
  >   He is reading A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking. 
  Evidently he is from a popular English band (Sorry I don't know who 
  he is or what band he is from but I bet someone around here does).
  > 
  >   ~Heather

  Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory 
  serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know 
  that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most 
  important name in physics since Einstein.

  Sophia 


  Sorry about my poor explanation.  Yes, Stephen Hawking is the world renown theoretical physicist who has been in a wheel chair for as long as I can remember and uses a computer assisted speaking device.  He was on the Simpsons once and has been on other TV shows.

  www.imdb.com/name/nm0370071/

  ~Heather

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




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Sun Jun 13 22:22:01 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:22:01 +0100
Subject: Reflections of PoA (Spoilers)
Message-ID: <v01540b00bcf27bfa0609@[217.154.252.116]>

Are
we
still
using
spoiler
space?
J
U
S
T

I
N

C
A
S
E
.
.
.
.
I mentioned in a previous post the various 'reflections' shots in the
movie. Having now seen it again, I can compile a list. I found five such
shots, enough to make it a motif in the movie.

-On the train, after the Dementor incident, Harry stares at his reflection
in the window

-During the first flight on Buckbeak, Harry sees his reflection in the water.

-In the DADA class with the Boggart, the scene ends with Harry staring at
his reflection in the cupboard door.

-In the nighttime encounter in the corridor with Snape and Lupin, Harry
makes himself jump when he catches his own reflection in a mirror.

The four incidents foreshadow the most important 'mirror-image' scene, when
Harry comes face to face across the lake with his time-travelling
counterpart...the final reflection of the movie.

A couple of thoughts as a result of this; only one other motif occurs in
the movie with greater frequency; time. From the cuckoo clock at the
Dursleys' house and the book in the Leaky Cauldron (Yes, indeed it is 'A
Brief History of Time'), we are absolutely battered by that imagery.

Maybe one or other of these is what gave JKR 'goosebumps' when she saw the
film. Perhaps in HP6, Harry is going to be time-travelling again, and he
will come face-to-face with himself, and this time he will know from the
start what has happened. The golden rule in time travel is not to be seen;
but we are told again and again that Harry breaks the rules.

Good for Cuaron for incorporating these motifs. But unfortunate that other
missing parts of the storyline couldn't be touched on as subtly and
effectively.

Cheers,
Nicholas
And for the person who missed the ticking clock; it starts when the
time-turner spins.





From editor at texas.net  Sun Jun 13 21:44:13 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 16:44:13 -0500
Subject: Lack of tears
References: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEMELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <002001c4518f$922fdd00$2958aacf@texas.net>

Kimberly:

>   I actually thought this was very touching too.  Of course, I thought
> Harry's cry scene was touching
>   too, but others thought it wasn't "real" enough to them.  Oh well. :-)

The sound was fine. But the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem contrived.
If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have *all*
done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and frankly, that's
exactly what it looks like.

~Amanda






From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sun Jun 13 21:50:59 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 15:50:59 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <002001c4518f$922fdd00$2958aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <006301c45190$84655370$0400a8c0@pensive>

I'm one who doesn't like the crying scene because it isn't in character for
Harry.  However, I remember when my dad died, I was making a kind of sobbing
sound, but there were no tears.  the sounds were the incredible pain of the
loss, but it really hurt too much to cry for a while.  Besides, I had
responsibilities to take care of and couldn't give into it till they were
resolved and I was alone.  Sometimes, the intensity of grief can have weird
reactions.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Amanda Geist [mailto:editor at texas.net] 
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 3:44 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears


Kimberly:

>   I actually thought this was very touching too.  Of course, I thought
> Harry's cry scene was touching
>   too, but others thought it wasn't "real" enough to them.  Oh well. :-)

The sound was fine. But the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem contrived.
If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have *all*
done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and frankly, that's
exactly what it looks like.

~Amanda






________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 sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 13 21:52:01 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:52:01 -0000
Subject: more on Stan
Message-ID: <caiia1+phbh@eGroups.com>

OK, I've done a l?ttle digging now, and in case anyone wants to know: 
My favorite new minor part in PoA, Stan Shunpike is played by 23-year-
old British actor Lee Ingleby. He also had a part in Master and 
Commander which many of you may have seen. Other than that, according 
to ImdB, he's appered mostly in British tv-series and on stage.

Sophia




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 13 23:41:52 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:41:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
Message-ID: <132.2fb6cb42.2dfe4040@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/13/04 2:55:07 PM, editor at texas.net writes:


> The sound was fine. But the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem 
> contrived.
> If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have *all*
> done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and frankly, that's
> exactly what it looks like.
> 

I didn't have a   problem with the scene for a few reasons - first of all, 
from a superficial standpoint regarding the tears, etc., if you see the movie in 
IMAX, you can see his nose running, so at least there is some wetness ;-)
But from a character standpoint, I think it is in character for Harry to not 
be able to even summon tears - the sobbing is more like a deep hurt. He's not 
used to being able to just cry freely, given his childhood with the Dursleys. 
I can   imagine him sobbing quietly when he was a small child, trying not to 
make any noise or even show the effects of crying for fear of being punished.

Anyway, I guess we'll all disagree on some things - I just thought Harry was 
more angry than sad in that scene - angry that once again things were kept 
from him - knowledge about his parents. I think he's sick and tired of hearing 
things in piecemeal or by accident. He must feel frustrated and betrayed because 
so many people are keeping secrets from him, even if they feel it is for his 
own good. It would still make him angry.
Cindy


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 14 00:01:19 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:01:19 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <002001c4518f$922fdd00$2958aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELICHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


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



  The sound was fine. But the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem
contrived.
  If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have *all*
  done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and frankly,
that's
  exactly what it looks like.

  ~Amanda >>

  I understand that, Amanda, but I guess in my mind, he just wiped his tears
so that Hermione wouldn't see
  them.  It was before Hermione taking away the cloak that made it touching
for me.  Just him hearing the
  news and sobbing towards the snow, and Hermione's look of concern for her
dear friend.

  Kimberly





  ________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 twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 14 00:06:22 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:06:22 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <006301c45190$84655370$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEEELJCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


  -----Original Message-----
  From: Sherry Gomes [mailto:sherriola at earthlink.net]
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 4:51 PM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears


  I'm one who doesn't like the crying scene because it isn't in character
for
  Harry.  However, I remember when my dad died, I was making a kind of
sobbing
  sound, but there were no tears.  the sounds were the incredible pain of
the
  loss, but it really hurt too much to cry for a while.  Besides, I had
  responsibilities to take care of and couldn't give into it till they were
  resolved and I was alone.  Sometimes, the intensity of grief can have
weird
  reactions.

  Sherry >>

  You know, I cannot produce tears when I am really angry!  I went through a
lot of that when my husband
  and I split up.  It is quite annoying too. :-)

  Kimberly











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




From G3_Princess at MailCity.com  Mon Jun 14 00:23:03 2004
From: G3_Princess at MailCity.com (rowena_grunnionffitch)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:23:03 -0000
Subject: Is Hedwig A Real Owl?
Message-ID: <cair57+qa1h@eGroups.com>

   Or is she CGI, or a combination of the two? And what about 
Scabbers and Crookshanks. Sometimes Scabbers looks like a real rat to 
me and sometimes he doesn't. Crookshank is a very funy looking cat - 
but then there are some pretty funny looking cats in the RW - I know, 
I've owned several of them. ;)




From riyo at verizon.net  Sun Jun 13 18:56:13 2004
From: riyo at verizon.net (riyo)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 14:56:13 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
References: <BAY7-F23LAqKlwPqzre0000f0e9@hotmail.com>
 <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040613145330.01e67990@incoming.verizon.net>


>
>Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical Creatures
>and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where do I get
>the book?  I don't want to buy it, just review while at the book store,
>however, I have not been able to find it at any book store.  Can we read
>about Crookshanks online somewhere?
>
>Kimberly

Hi all.  New to the group but not to HPFGU.  Thought I'd help you out 
here.  If you check out the bestiary at HP Lexicon (direct link to the 
kneazle:  http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/bestiary_h-m.html#kneazle) you 
get some info on Crookshanks.

tiiana 

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





From redina at silverbloom.net  Mon Jun 14 00:33:03 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:33:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is Hedwig A Real Owl?
In-Reply-To: <cair57+qa1h@eGroups.com>
References: <cair57+qa1h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <2703.4.12.232.35.1087173183.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

rowena_grunnionffitch said:

>    Or is she CGI, or a combination of the two?

Both.


And what about
> Scabbers and Crookshanks.

Scabbers has a 'body double' as evident by a behind the scenes Dateline
segment showing Gary Oldman shaking it and some CGI stuff.  Plus, there
were some real rats involved since Rupert adopted a couple(?) 'Scabbers'
rats or so said a recent article.

Crookshanks.  Off the top of my head (hopefully *not* like Lucy Liu in
Kill Bill), real cat for all scenes shown.

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 twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 14 00:41:47 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:41:47 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is Hedwig A Real Owl?
In-Reply-To: <cair57+qa1h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELKCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>


  -----Original Message-----
  From: rowena_grunnionffitch [mailto:G3_Princess at MailCity.com]
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 7:23 PM
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Is Hedwig A Real Owl?


     Or is she CGI, or a combination of the two? And what about
  Scabbers and Crookshanks. Sometimes Scabbers looks like a real rat to
  me and sometimes he doesn't. Crookshank is a very funy looking cat -
  but then there are some pretty funny looking cats in the RW - I know,
  I've owned several of them. ;) >>

  Hedwig is real and several sites have pictures of him in a van.  I thought
I heard that Crookshanks
  was played by two cats, and they had like six rats for Scabbers, however,
some of the scenes
  with Scabbers were done with a fake rat (my guess is the part where Sirius
grabs Scabbers out
  of Ron's hands).  In one of the behind the scenes videos, you see Gary
Oldman playing with the
  fake rat.  Anyway, I am sure someone else has better history than I.

  Kimberly



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




From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Mon Jun 14 01:23:20 2004
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (dan)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:23:20 -0000
Subject: Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <002001c4518f$922fdd00$2958aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <caium8+n8q6@eGroups.com>

"Amanda Geist"  wrote:
> ...the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem contrived.
> If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have 
*all*
> done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and 
frankly, that's
> exactly what it looks like.

In contrast, take Keisha Castle-Hughes in the fine movie Whale Rider, 
in the scene where her Grandfather doesn't make it to her school 
presentation. That scene alone was probably instrumental in the Best 
Actress nomination. They were, well, real tears. No idea where she 
found that ability. If you haven't seen it, it's hard to explain. 
It's to Frodo's single tear after Gandalf's fall what Vermeer is to a 
Nike commercial.

There is some justice in the fact, however, that the scene probably 
shouldn't have taken place anyway. That kind of emotion is reserved 
for, very slightly, the end of GoF (interrupted by Skeeter's capture) 
and, of course, the lake scene at the end of OoP, which Rowling 
handles with the same fade-to-grey she uses to handle "the kiss" with 
Cho. Odd, that.

I don't think Daniel wanted to do it, actually. He seems to have some 
sensibility about the character he's played for 4 years. That might 
account for the lameness of his "crying."

Dan




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 04:33:26 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:33:26 -0400
Subject: Harry Potter movies & JKR quote
In-Reply-To: <caium8+n8q6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEEJHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

Saw a special on A&E tonight about the Harry Potter movies. There were some
interesting quotes, such as Columbus saying he had heard from lots of
children who said when they saw the first two movies they thought that was
just what they imagined Hogwarts and the WW to be. He also said he tried
very hard to stay faithful to the material and was happy that he was able to
bring the world JKR created to life.

They also showed some stuff with Cuaron and a few tidbits of JKR speaking.
What I found interesting was when JKR says "No one who has read the books
will be disappointed in this movie" meaning PoA. I am here to say I have
read the books repeatedly and I was disappointed. I wonder if she'd be
shocked to hear there are others like me who were not happy with the movie.

I'm curious to know how many others on this list were also disappointed. I
feel we've been criticized by some people on this list for disliking the
movie (some have said we can't expect a movie to be just like a book, or
they've said if JKR liked it, who are we to think she's wrong that it's the
best movie, etc.). I feel everyone has their own opinion about the movie,
but the people who liked it seem to be more vocal, and I'm wondering if it's
because those people (not singling anyone out) have not only said how much
they liked the movie, but as I said, criticized those of us for not liking
it. In contrast, I don't think many (if any at all) people who said they
didn't like the movie criticized those who liked it.

So, to satisfy my curiosity, e-mail me off-list to let me know if you were
one of the people  who was overall disappointed with the movie. I know I'm
not alone in my views because I've seen comments on IMDb that said just what
I said. But I'd like to know who on this list agrees with me as well (and I
don't want you to feel you'll be open to criticism, which is why I said feel
free to write to me off-list.

Thanks!

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 04:44:07 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:44:07 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Books are should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <cae30r+q5un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEEKHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: saintbacchus [mailto:saintbacchus at yahoo.com]

I (bd-bear) had written:

>>>Here's what I don't get. . .what is the point of sticking to the "theme"
when the books are so much more than that? There's a whole
storyline and intricate plot that JKR created. That's what I missed in the
movie the most. Being faithful to the spirit of the book just
wasn't enough for me, I wanted the story told the way it's told in the
book.<<<

Then Anna wrote:

>>>Now see, I don't get what the point is of making a movie that follows the
book exactly. If that's what you want, why not just read
the book again?<<<

bd-bear:

Actually, I am reading the book again, and I will read it and all the books
again and again and again. That doesn't mean I don't get the same thrill as
others out of seeing the story "brought to life."

Anna:

>>>I can, however, give several examples of excellent films that weren't
half as faithful as Kloves has been. In fact, let's take just one: Who
Censored Roger Rabbit?<<<

Honestly, I don't care what comparison you want to make, my opinion is about
POA. Who knows, maybe I'd read the book you mentioned, then see the film and
be just as disappointed.

What I don't get is why the people who liked POA have such a problem with me
NOT liking it. You have your opinions, I have mine. I think some really
stupid things were added to the book unnecessarily that having nothing to do
with time constraints (shrunken heads, different Hogwarts set, different
characters speaking different lines, Quidditch flying in the clouds). I like
the books fine and didn't think anything needed to be added to the story. I
thought the first 2 movies WERE faithful to the books and I wanted to see
specific scenes I read about in POA come to life. Perhaps some of you didn't
like the first two movies, so you are happy with this movie. That's YOUR
prerogative and I am NOT going to criticize you for feeling that way.

Barbara
bd-bear




From saitaina at comcast.net  Mon Jun 14 05:35:08 2004
From: saitaina at comcast.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:35:08 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter movies & JKR quote
References: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEEJHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <005201c451d1$5ae8d6c0$6401a8c0@CPQ15165210131>

Barbra wrote:

<I feel everyone has their own opinion about the movie,
but the people who liked it seem to be more vocal, and I'm wondering if it's
because those people (not singling anyone out) have not only said how much
they liked the movie, but as I said, criticized those of us for not liking
it. >

I think, part of the problem is, a lot more peopled liked PoA then they did SS/PS and CoS.  There's vast diffrences between the two styles of film making and the recent approch seems to have been a hit with a great number of people, the same people I've seen hating the other movies.

Each of us will see something diffrent in the movies, either to like or dislike.  And while we all will disagree (even those of us who like it can't agree on everything, I hated some things and I adored the movie more then anything...and I genrally dislike PoA), I agree that it's not fair to critizie someone just for their opinions.  You're always free to express them on this list, so long as it's done in a polite, conciences manner.

Please, if you EVER feel attacked on this list unfairly, contact the elves.  No one should feel like their opinions are unwelcome.

Saitaina R. Moricia
***

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 05:46:54 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:46:54 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <1e.2bdc18a1.2dfd3feb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCF2B40E.EB4%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

In a message dated 6/12/04 10:06:39 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> Hm, not really scary.? I was cracking up.? It reminded me of a scene from
> Willy Wonka, "Violet, you're turning violet!"? Oompa Lumpa.
> 
> 

LOL! I haven't seen Willy Wonka, however ;-)


[from bewitchedbyHP]

OH! You have to rent Willa Wonka. I just saw it today with my kids! :-)
Quite the classic, although I read today that they are remaking it with
Johnny Depp. Puleassse! That's like remaking "The Wizard of Oz". 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 05:55:34 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:55:34 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daytime viewing
In-Reply-To: <cahe4d+vkhe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF2B616.EB5%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Enjoyed your witty audience-prespective review...where are you from?
[bewitchedbyHP]

From: "alice_loves_cats" <hypercolor99 at hotmail.com>
Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:34:37 -0000
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daytime viewing


Just thought I'd share some of the moments from my first, and so far
only, viewing of POA. I went with my best friends who'd just had an
exam, and I was also at the university trying to get some of my marks
signed. So we decided that after we were done with the
administration, we'd go straight to the cinema. And so it happened
that on a Friday morning, we sat down with about 101 kids and a
couple of teenagers to watch the show. The funny thing about going to
the cinema with kids is that they COMMENT. Man has not yet invented a
way of stopping them doing that. I became reconciled with the
situation and decided to enjoy their remarks. And lo.

The first surprise was when Harry set off from Privet Drive not only
without Hedwig, but without even Hedwig's cage. The audience erupted.
WHERE'S HEDWIG?, came the indignant cries from all over. Whispered
answers of "must be off hunting" would not do: WHERE'S THE CAGE?
demanded the kids. They soon got over the shock, however.

The biggest fun came when Hagrid said that Buckbeak was going to be
killed. His hair changed colour the moment he said it, from black to
brown, due to the ratty copy of the film that the cinema was using.
This only added to the pandemonium that followed. Some people thought
a crying Hagrid was impossibly funny. They started giggling. Then
came prompt hisses from the others: "This is not funny!". More
giggling. By that time, it was, irrevocably, extremely funny. It was
like a house party, with everyone munching crisps in front of the
television. We were all friends. The more people said it was not
funny, the funnier it got. I was ashamed of myself for laughing, but
I couldn't stop. 

We all stayed to watch the credits, and lots of people noticed the
(supposedly) snogging couple on the map. Ooooooooh, they cried,
oooooh, look at them! You would have thought they were showing
explicit sex-material, instead of a pair of footprints shuffling in
front of each other.

It was a riot. :) But I think my next viewing will be in the evening.
Also I plan to watch the original, English version. It's just that I
love Hermione's dubbing voice so much. She's a girl called Luca
Szab?, and she's a totally brilliant actress. Harry's voice is also
one of my favourites. His voice deepened for this film, while Daniel
Radcliffe's was already deep for Chamber of Secrets - so back then it
was funny, cause in one language it was a little squeaky boy's voice
that he had, and in the other, a deep voice. :)

Love, Alice




________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 isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 14 05:29:37 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:29:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <cah47a+oa44@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040614052937.73178.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com>

I'm new to this list so, first and foremost, a big
hello!
 
--- huntergreen_3 <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:
> >>I loved Lupin and I thought I would NOT like him
> at all.<<
> 
> I was VERY unsure about him. I like Lupin a lot, and
> for some reason 
> I always imagined him with sort of quiet good looks,
> even though the 
> books never specify such a thing, and that was hard
> to get past. ...
> 
> I forgot 
> about it until the very end when he was packing up.
> That scene, along 
> with the shrieking shack, were very 'Lupin' to me,
> and now its hard 
> to imagine anyone else in the role. 

Lupin has always been my favorite character and I had
a great deal of interest in how he would be portrayed
onscreen. I will admit (with no small amount of shame
now) that I was one of those people who wanted a
handsome actor like Jude Law or someone similar to be
cast as Lupin, and was rather disappointed at the
choice of David Thewlis. Having seen the movie twice
now, however, I can only seriously regret having ever
doubted him. He *was* Lupin for me. His gentle
mannerisms, his patience, his spirit of humor and
mischief (most apparent in the boggart scene and the
one in which he takes the Map from Snape) were just as
I had imagined Remus. I thought the scratches and the
cane he sometimes walked with were also wonderful
touches, illustrating just how much he suffered. And,
to my delight, I found him attractive too - and in a
rumpled, sorrowful way that is far more appropriate to
Lupin than Jude Law could ever have been.

> >>Gary Oldman was superb! He brought the goodness,
> the madness and the
> violence of Sirius Black to life <<
>
> Yes he was, he blew away my rather high
> expectations. I got chills 
> when he shouted about spending 12 years in Azkaban.
> I especially 
> liked the moment when Lupin first bursts in and they
> have 
> the 'madness within' conversation and the hug. It
> really seemed like 
> Lupin had actually been Sirius' friend all along
> (despite knowing he 
> hadn't).

Ah Gary. Now he I knew would be wonderful, but even so
- as you said - he was better than I could possibly
have imagined. He's scenes with Harry - talking about
the beauty of Hogwarts and later about Harry's
resemblance to James - were the most moving in the
film. And his interaction with Lupin was beautifully
portrayed. The performances of Oldman and Thewlis made
me wish desperately again - as I have often - that the
characters could have a book/film all their own.

I also must add that the music for this film is, in my
opinion, far better than the scores for the previous
two films. The medieval touches are particularly
appropriate to Hogwarts and to the dark, melancholic
feel of this film. Very beautiful.

Lanthiriel S 


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 




From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 14 05:50:41 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] more on Stan
In-Reply-To: <caiia1+phbh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040614055041.94639.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com>


--- sophiamcl <sophiamcl at hotmail.com> wrote:
> OK, I've done a lttle digging now, and in case
> anyone wants to know: 
> My favorite new minor part in PoA, Stan Shunpike is
> played by 23-year-
> old British actor Lee Ingleby. He also had a part in
> Master and 
> Commander which many of you may have seen. 

Oh my goodness, yes! I've just recently seen "Master
and Commander" and loved it so much I had to buy it -
I should have recognized him, as he has an important
part. He actually reminds me a bit, as Stan, of a
young Gary Oldman - not so much physically as in his
mannerisms and the way he says some of his lines.

Lanthiriel S


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 06:16:33 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 02:16:33 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <caibin+ip79@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF2BB01.EB7%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heather Maffioli"
<HMaffioli at c...> wrote:
>   He is reading A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.
Evidently he is from a popular English band (Sorry I don't know who
he is or what band he is from but I bet someone around here does).
> 
>   ~Heather

Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory
serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know
that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most
important name in physics since Einstein.

Sophia 

The actor is a band member, not the author! :-)
Anyone think it was not coincidence that the Time theme was yet again
reinforced in the wizard reading the Hawking's book? Brilliant subtly, if
so...





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




From hmkinney at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 14 06:27:36 2004
From: hmkinney at yahoo.com (Heather)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 06:27:36 -0000
Subject: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELECHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <cajggo+ebhs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" <twinslove at m...> 
wrote:
> 
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Very true, if Crookshanks was just a cat!!!!, but he is part 
Kneazel,(read
> magical creatures and where to find them) so that would be why he 
has very
> high intelligence for a feline and he can tell when people are not 
being
> true (Harry and Ron cheating on their divinations homework GoF C14, 
sorry I
> cant recall the page), not to mention the fact he knew straight 
away that
> scabbers was not really a rat......>>
> 
> Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical 
Creatures
> and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where do 
I get
> the book?  I don't want to buy it, just review while at the book 
store,
> however, I have not been able to find it at any book store.  Can we 
read
> about Crookshanks online somewhere?
> 
> Kimberly

It's actually called Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Just do 
a search for that and you'll find info about it, I would think. And I 
would think you could find it in major bookstores. I don't know if 
you're in the US, but here I've seen it at the larger stores like 
Borders and Barnes & Noble, but also smaller stores as well. There's 
another book too called Quidditch Through the Ages. They are both 
very thin books written by JKR for charity. They are meant to be some 
of Harry's schoolbooks.

-Heather





From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 14 06:09:38 2004
From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 06:09:38 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter movies & JKR quote
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEEJHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cajff2+93fi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-
bear at v...> wrote:
> Saw a special on A&E tonight about the Harry Potter movies. There 
were some
> interesting quotes, such as Columbus saying he had heard from lots 
of
> children who said when they saw the first two movies they thought 
that was
> just what they imagined Hogwarts and the WW to be. He also said he 
tried
> very hard to stay faithful to the material and was happy that he 
was able to
> bring the world JKR created to life.
> 
> They also showed some stuff with Cuaron and a few tidbits of JKR 
speaking.
> What I found interesting was when JKR says "No one who has read 
the books
> will be disappointed in this movie" meaning PoA. I am here to say 
I have
> read the books repeatedly and I was disappointed. I wonder if 
she'd be
> shocked to hear there are others like me who were not happy with 
the movie.
> 
> I'm curious to know how many others on this list were also 
disappointed. I
> feel we've been criticized by some people on this list for 
disliking the
> movie (some have said we can't expect a movie to be just like a 
book, or
> they've said if JKR liked it, who are we to think she's wrong that 
it's the
> best movie, etc.). I feel everyone has their own opinion about the 
movie,
> but the people who liked it seem to be more vocal, and I'm 
wondering if it's
> because those people (not singling anyone out) have not only said 
how much
> they liked the movie, but as I said, criticized those of us for 
not liking
> it. In contrast, I don't think many (if any at all) people who 
said they
> didn't like the movie criticized those who liked it.
> 
> So, to satisfy my curiosity, e-mail me off-list to let me know if 
you were
> one of the people  who was overall disappointed with the movie. I 
know I'm
> not alone in my views because I've seen comments on IMDb that said 
just what
> I said. But I'd like to know who on this list agrees with me as 
well (and I
> don't want you to feel you'll be open to criticism, which is why I 
said feel
> free to write to me off-list.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Barbara
> aka bd-bear

Hi Barbara, although I liked the movie substantially more than the 
previous two, I have a few problems with it myself.  I can certainly 
understand why some would not like it.  I would hope that you should 
be able to express your opinions freely on this list without bearing 
the brunt of critical attacks. I'd be interested in hearing about 
what you particularly didn't like.

Sienna





From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 07:58:27 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 03:58:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter movies & JKR quote
In-Reply-To: <cajff2+93fi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBMEEPHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: sienna291973 [mailto:jujupoet29 at hotmail.com]

Hi Barbara, although I liked the movie substantially more than the
previous two, I have a few problems with it myself.  I can certainly
understand why some would not like it.  I would hope that you should
be able to express your opinions freely on this list without bearing
the brunt of critical attacks. I'd be interested in hearing about
what you particularly didn't like.<<<

Thanks Sienna (beautiful name by the way, would love to name my future child
Sienne, but hubby is stuck on "Bailey"). I don't want to bore people with
another long litany of complaints and since I have already posted regarding
my disappointment, I can tell you where you can read what I've written. You
can find my comments in messages 9026, 9105, 9181, 9279 and 9357, to name a
few. You can search for those messages on the Yahoo Groups page for our
group.

Barbara
aka bd-bear




From SnapesRaven at web.de  Mon Jun 14 08:58:19 2004
From: SnapesRaven at web.de (SnapesRaven)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:58:19 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] sneaking into the cinema (was: Re: Buckbeak's ride)
References: <cai4tf+r582@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000701c451ed$be134750$0202a8c0@henrike>

Brian wrote:
As we were leaving after the movie, another theater had it's door 
open and the Quidditch scene was playing.  It took everything I had 
to keep from going in and watching the rest of the movie again.

Now me:
I would've gone inside and watched the rest again! 
*grins*

SnapesRaven



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




From snosageau at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 14 09:16:25 2004
From: snosageau at hotmail.com (snosageau)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:16:25 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <BCF144BA.E73%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cajqd9+6cir@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> I agree that POA is cinematically superior to the first 2 films. I 
don't
> really think that SS and COS were necessarily "bubblegum-Disney" 
though.


 It doesn't bother me that we didn't see the cool sagging
> bridge in the other films. Maybe it was a different part of the 
castle? 

 The clock tower bugged some folks 'cause it was so
> obviously not there in the first 2 installments. I just thought it 
was such
> a gorgeous and powerful image, tying into the time-turner theme. 

> 
> My only complaint is (yeah, yeah, yeah) the lack of explanation of 
who the
> Marauders were, and why Snape hated them so much. So many 
opportunities to
> slip that crucial info in! 


I have to agree. I felt that the writers missed something crucial in 
leaving out the background of the maurauders - i saw the movie with 
friends who haven't read the book and they didn't really get the 
stuff with Lupin and the map / Prongs at the lake / animagi stuff. I 
know that the book has to be trimmed to make a movie that doesn't go 
on for forever, but surely in the Shrieking Shack scene they 
(lupin/sirius) could have explained all the stuff to Harry? I felt 
that that scene was just too rushed. Why did Harry believe so 
suddenly that they should trust L&S about Scabbers?

My other critism is the lack of attention paid to the Scabbers story 
line (Crookshanks reactions, the reaction of the gadget [sorry been a 
while since I read the book!] that Ron bought back from Eygpt etc. 
Didn't really have any clue leading up to the finale other than Ron 
being gripey at Hermione about Crookshanks eating Scabbers.

As for the changes in the castle / the clock tower /grounds... I just 
kept telling myself the place is enchanted. The stairs move, so why 
can't the landscape? Especially all of the hills that haven't been 
there before! Can't recall HRH having to walk up hill and down dale 
to get to Hagrid's hut before!

Bec





From editor at texas.net  Mon Jun 14 09:53:12 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 04:53:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
References: <132.2fb6cb42.2dfe4040@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002001c451f5$6903a360$f258aacf@texas.net>

Amanda said originally:>
>
> > The sound was fine. But the totally dry eyes kind of made it seem
> > contrived.
> > If you're sobbing, you make *tears.* I have three children who have
*all*
> > done the fake crying for effect at one time or another, and frankly,
that's
> > exactly what it looks like.

Cindy responded:

> I didn't have a   problem with the scene for a few reasons - first of all,
> from a superficial standpoint regarding the tears, etc., if you see the
movie in
> IMAX, you can see his nose running, so at least there is some wetness ;-)

Amanda clarifies:

Just for the record, I did see it in IMAX; I went on opening night and then
I took the family (where my four-year-old made his amazing observation that
the tree should be hitting them after they came back out). I was bothered by
the scene the first time around, so I was looking fairly carefully the
second time; I saw what could be nose-running, but by itself, it didn't
"carry" it for me. His eyes didn't look teary (which they will, even if
you've just wiped the tears away).

I also found it out of character, which is possibly why I needed the
externals to make the scene work. I also didn't get a sense of the depth of
grief or rage that could produce that type of sob without tears; they
weren't racking sobs, just crying. You're correct, everything isn't going to
work for everyone; I'm just trying to figure out why this particular scene
seems to have failed so, to me.

~Amanda





From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 14 12:31:31 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:31:31 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <cajqd9+6cir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cak5r3+1bah@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "snosageau" <snosageau at h...> 
wrote:
>I felt that that scene was just too rushed. Why did Harry believe so 
> suddenly that they should trust L&S about Scabbers?

I feel that the motivation in the film for Harry isn't so much that 
he suddenly believes L&S, but a theme of the story is Harry being 
kept in the dark about so many things, and he wants to KNOW before 
proceeding. Here's his chance to get some info: Harry gives L&S a 
chance to prove their words before believing them, but when Scabbers 
turns into Peter, there's no reason to doubt their story.

> As for the changes in the castle / the clock tower /grounds... I 
just 
> kept telling myself the place is enchanted. The stairs move, so why 
> can't the landscape? Especially all of the hills that haven't been 
> there before! Can't recall HRH having to walk up hill and down dale 
> to get to Hagrid's hut before!
> 

That's a good strategy! :-) For my part, I don't mind these changes, 
I find them interesting "what-if" propositions. We're at Cuaron't 
vision of Hogwarts now--it's the same place rendered by a different 
artist, so he's going to do his own take on it, just as I hope Mike 
Newell will.

Sophia




From kirklander368 at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 14 12:06:28 2004
From: kirklander368 at hotmail.com (burnoweatherhead)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:06:28 -0000
Subject: Is Hedwig A Real Owl?
In-Reply-To: <HDEHIGDAOEAOONMOCNIEOELKCHAA.twinslove@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <cak4c4+21j7@eGroups.com>

rowena_grunnionffitch:
> Or is she CGI, or a combination of the two? >>

Kimberly:
> Hedwig is real and several sites have pictures of him in a van.  


Hedwig is a real owl. I've seen them rehearsing her with her trainer 
in one of the film locations close to where I live (the cloisters you 
see in the films).

"burnoweatherhead"




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Mon Jun 14 14:48:46 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:48:46 -0000
Subject: Fear the grime, not the Grim!
In-Reply-To: <ca34bb+mbf7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cakdse+jmd2@eGroups.com>

Hi All,

Chthonia wrote:
> What really stood out for me, though, was the cinematography 
[snip, but ...]
> if Cuaron was making it look run-down to depict a 
> non-technological world as realistic, then it is a clich? 
> unworthy of the brilliance of so much of the film.
> The Potterverse is not safe.  But nor is it squalid.

http://www.theasc.com/magazine/index.htm?june04/cover/index.html~main

http://tinyurl.com/33abw

This comes up tin the article on the PoA director of photography, 
Michael Saresin, that's just been posted on Leaky.

Here's a quote:

<American Cinematographer>
"I'm so happy with what Michael did," continues Cuaron. "He grounded 
the whole film in reality. It doesn't have a storybook kind of look; 
it's something a bit grittier." Indeed, Seresin is known for dark, 
moody features like Midnight Express, as well as other projects with 
Alan Parker (Bugsy Malone, Angela's Ashes) and Harold Becker 
(Domestic Disturbance, Mercury Rising, City Hall).
</American Cinematographer>

Cheers,

Dumbledad.




From magsthomas at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 14 14:58:44 2004
From: magsthomas at yahoo.com (magsthomas)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:58:44 -0000
Subject: Actor Portraying Cornelius Fudge -- Same Fellow
In-Reply-To: <ca5o4n+qbib@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cakef4+41pl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "rowena_grunnionffitch"
<G3_Princess at M...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" 
> <ginamiller at j...> wrote:
> 
> >  Fudge, well, we've never seen him before, so there's 
> > nothing to change. 
> >  
> > Gina responds:
> >     Where were you when CoS came out? Fudge most certainly WAS in 
> that movie
> > and he was definitely not played by the same actor.
> 
>   I'm pretty sure he was, though Robert Hardy had a very different 
> look in that movie, the hair mostly I think. Still that voice is near 
> unmistakeable.


When I saw Fudge in COS, I was disappointed by what a bland pansy he
seemed to be.  Whoever was responsible for re-envisioning the
characterization of Fudge in POA did a great job -- I could believe
this fellow as a MoM.  He's more assertive about bending the rules
(ie., punishment for magic performed outside school), yet you can
still picture him being susceptible to influencing by Malfoy, Sr.

Thomas Hardy is another reason I was pleased to see the transformation
in POA.  Having seen him in "All Creatures, Great and Small" (the TV
series based on the books by Harriott), I knew he was a good actor. 
His appearance in COS just hadn't lived up to potential... yet another
example of what happens with an alternate direction :)




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Mon Jun 14 15:22:07 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:22:07 +0100
Subject: BBC Radio 3 do the PoA music CD
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91B79@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/classical/stagescreen.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/2eozy

Today's "Stage and Screen" the film music programme on the BBC's
classical music station starts with a 10 minute piece about the PoA
soundtrack. It's mainly music rather than discussion, but there are
interesting talk snippets too.

You can listen to the programme online in the BBC's "Listen Now" tool at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio3_aod.shtml?stagescreen
http://tinyurl.com/2mga9 or directly at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/rpms/stagescreen.ram
http://tinyurl.com/3fxre You'll need to give them an hour or so from
when the programme ends (17:00 GMT 14/6/04) to put it up on the site,
currently the links still point to last week's Cole Porter programme.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.



From JTallulahmae at aol.com  Mon Jun 14 16:45:23 2004
From: JTallulahmae at aol.com (persephonegladrags)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:45:23 -0000
Subject: Who is the bulldog?  The scoop!
In-Reply-To: <ca5ea5+md74@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cakkn3+cupj@eGroups.com>

I received a very nice reply from Birds and Animals UK on the REAL 
Ripper-the bulldog.  Here it is for those who are interested.  Karen, 
thanks again for pointing me in the right direction!

PG


Ripper is played by our wonderful "team" of Bulldogs.  The team is 
made up by Jack, George, and Winston...all of whom are great, and 
they were trained by Sue and Julie.  Each of them were rescue dogs.  
They're favourite bit was being trained the "tug"!!!!
 
Whenever we have a major animal character (i.e. Ripper, Crookshanks, 
Hedwig, Fang, Mrs Norris, Prof McGonagal, etc)  we always use 
a "team" of 2-4 animals.  The reason for this is simply for the 
animals' benefit.  That way the "work" gets shared out.  The other 
wonderful thing about using a "team" is that every animal is an 
individual, and where one enjoys something another might not.  So, 
for example, we usually have one animal that is very steady and 
will "sit and stay" for long periods of time.  At the same time, 
another one would probably enjoy the action shots more and not enjoy 
sitting still for very long.  With the Cat Teams we also will have 
one that just loves being held, and that will be our "holding cat".
 
I hope this answers your question, though it be in a roundabout way.
 
Thank you,
Jen Swallow
Administrator
 
Birds & Animals UK
Leavesden Studios,
South Way,
Leavesden,
Herts. WD25 7LT
 
01923 685146
07939 035376
 
Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not 
necessarily represent those of Birds & Animals UK unless specifically 
stated. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and 
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they 
are addressed.


> Glad that the info was helpful, let us know if you get a name.
> As for the obsessive stuff, I understand.  I'm one wishes that JKR
> would have used a British Shorthair rather than an American 
Shorthair
> for Prof. McGonagall...:)
> 
> Karen




From bethz1 at rcn.com  Mon Jun 14 16:51:46 2004
From: bethz1 at rcn.com (Ms. Found in a Bottle)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:51:46 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
References: <BCF2B40E.EB4%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <001601c4522f$e1175600$6401a8c0@BethsComp>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Valerie Flowe" <valerie.flowe at verizon.net>

[from bewitchedbyHP]

>OH! You have to rent Willa Wonka. I just saw it today with my kids! :-)
>Quite the classic, although I read today that they are remaking it with
>Johnny Depp. Puleassse! That's like remaking "The Wizard of Oz".

Are they remaking Willa Wonka or is a prequel or sequel?  I thought I had
seen Willa Wonka on AMC a few weeks ago and they had a note about the
story continuing with Johnny Depp (or something like that).

I could be mistaken, but that did confuse me, because I had originally
thought
it was a remake too (was not happy about it either).

Beth





From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Mon Jun 14 17:52:11 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:52:11 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] House elves
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06B3@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

I just hope whoever directs the next movies will not change Dobby! That
would be so horrible! 
Gina
 
 
I think that will depend on how important house elves are to the future of
the story.  I think they will play some kind of important role down the
line, or why else would JKR have introduced them as characters at all.  I
enjoy Dobby, though I find Winky to be an annoying little ... can't think of
a good word for her, so, just annoying.

Sherry


I could not help but think
of Gambon's portrayal of the crazy general on the movie "Toys".  I
was waiting for an army of dazed house elves to attack.  Hmm...now
there's an idea...

Di, who "liked" the movie

[from bewitchedbyHP]

speaking of house elves...has anyone heard if Dobey will be reappearing in
GOF with his new girlfriend? I'm betting they cut that out, along with the
whole SPEW storyline. I would like to see Dobey again though; loved him. And
can't wait to see Lucius Malfoy! Same actor playing him again, I hope?!?








________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/
<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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129fosv8o/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087220490/A=2164330/R=0/SIG=11eamf8g4/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183350> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164330/rand=902752657> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Mon Jun 14 18:02:49 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:02:49 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Buckbeak's ride
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06B4@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

 I could not help but wonder if the buckbeak scene over the lake was
foreshadowing!  I am not sold on the idea, but Harry did let go and just
"fly" with buckbeak. Maybe he is so comfortable flying because he can fly
either as an animagus or simply without a broomstick!
Gina
 
  And I don't find the ride cheesy at all. I felt a real sense of his joy
when
  he opens his arms wide and lets loose that joyous yell ;-)
  I don't think we really got to see Harry that happy in the first two
movies -
  he smiled some and maybe laughed softly, but he never really let it loose.
  Considering everything else going in POA, not the least of which is the
  Dementors sucking every drop of joy and happiness out of him and replacing
it with
  screams of his own mother's murder...he needed that release and we, as
viewers,
  needed it as well - at least, I needed it ;) >>

  I am so glad I am not the only one that liked the Buckbeak scene.  I saw
the movie for the 3rd time yesterday (and
  last until the DVD comes out in the fall).  While watching that scene, I
just realized that it was one of my favorites.
  I love the flight along with the music, and the wonderful views of
Hogwarts and the grounds around the castle.
  Simply breathtaking...

  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/
<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
click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2178649/rand=330564752> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 18:09:01 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:09:01 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <20040614180901.VVAQ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> 
> From: "snosageau" <snosageau at hotmail.com>

I felt that the writers missed something crucial in 
leaving out the background of the maurauders - i saw the movie with 
friends who haven't read the book and they didn't really get the 
stuff with Lupin and the map / Prongs at the lake / animagi stuff. I 
know that the book has to be trimmed to make a movie that doesn't go 
on for forever, but surely in the Shrieking Shack scene they 
(lupin/sirius) could have explained all the stuff to Harry? I felt 
that that scene was just too rushed. Why did Harry believe so 
suddenly that they should trust L&S about Scabbers?

[from bewitchedbyHP]

I read in one of the mags that Dan's favorite POA scene is the Shrieking Shack. 
Eek! Well, he is only 14; not quite as critical in his analysis as us adults!
I keep replaying that scene in my head, to determine what and where they 
could've inserted more of the storyline. How hard would it have been to have 
Lupin looking at the map in his office; startled to see Sirius, Peter and the 
kids in the Shack, he runs off; soon thereafter Snape arrives with the 
forgotten potion, sees the map; realizes what's going down and runs off after 
Lupin. Cheap to film; only 5 minutes added to the length of the film. Instead 
they just threw in Sirius yelling "Remus, did you forget to take your potion?!" 
"Huh?! What potion?" I can hear the non-HP readers in the audience saying. 
Granted probably 75% of the audience are book fans, but still...
And I still would've liked the Harry/Dumbledore "denouement" at the end. It's 
tradition, after all. They had it at the end of SS (the "alas, earwax" scene), 
and in COS (the Gryffindor sword scene, prior to Dobby and Lucius walking in). 
That would've been an opportunity to have the new Dumbledore show a little 
grandfatherly compassion to Harry, that I feel was lacking. 





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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 14 18:25:12 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:25:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
Message-ID: <20040614182512.FPLQ6671.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> 
> From: "Ms. Found in a Bottle" <bethz1 at rcn.com>

> Are they remaking Willa Wonka or is a prequel or sequel?? I thought I had
seen Willa Wonka on AMC a few weeks ago and they had a note about the
story continuing with Johnny Depp (or something like that).

I could be mistaken, but that did confuse me, because I had originally
thought
it was a remake too (was not happy about it either).

Beth

A sequel could be OK. See what happens after Charlie takes over Wonka's 
factory. Not necessary though. Think of the sequel to "Gone with the Wind". 
Blah...

Though must say Shrek's sequel stands well on it's own. And Toy Story 2! :-)



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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Jun 14 18:35:50 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:35:50 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <20040614180901.VVAQ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cakr67+ntqk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> > 
> I read in one of the mags that Dan's favorite POA scene is the 
Shrieking Shack. 
> Eek! Well, he is only 14; not quite as critical in his analysis as 
us adults!
> I keep replaying that scene in my head, to determine what and where 
they 
> could've inserted more of the storyline. How hard would it have 
been to have 
> Lupin looking at the map in his office; startled to see Sirius, 
Peter and the 
> kids in the Shack, he runs off; soon thereafter Snape arrives with 
the 
> forgotten potion, sees the map; realizes what's going down and runs 
off after 
> Lupin. Cheap to film; only 5 minutes added to the length of the 
film. Instead 
> they just threw in Sirius yelling "Remus, did you forget to take 
your potion?!" 
> "Huh?! What potion?" I can hear the non-HP readers in the audience 
saying. 
> Granted probably 75% of the audience are book fans, but still...
> And I still would've liked the Harry/Dumbledore "denouement" at the 
end. It's 
> tradition, after all. They had it at the end of SS (the "alas, 
earwax" scene), 
> and in COS (the Gryffindor sword scene, prior to Dobby and Lucius 
walking in). 
> That would've been an opportunity to have the new Dumbledore show a 
little 
> grandfatherly compassion to Harry, that I feel was lacking. 
> 

Don't cringe too much about him liking the shack scene. I saw an 
interview with Dan and Emma and both of them said they loved the 
shrieking shack scene best of all because of the actors. So I don't 
think he liked it because it was the best done scene but because it 
has Gary Oldman, David Thewlis, Timothy Spall and Alan Rickman all in 
one room. If I remember correctly during the SS/PS special on 
Mother's Day, he mentioned during the filming of that scene he felt 
like he should just sit off in the corner and watch in awe. 
Unfortunately, that was one of the reasons I was key to see that 
scene and then I kept thinking after the first viewing - man that was 
just way too short and with brilliant actors like GO, DT, TS and AR 
they had the potential for a great rendition of the scene as played 
out in the book.

Still overall I enjoyed myself just wish as a friend on another list 
mentioned quoting Dumbledore - "we need more time".

Theresa




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Mon Jun 14 18:48:13 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:48:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter movies & JKR quote
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06B9@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

I think, part of the problem is, a lot more peopled liked PoA then they did
SS/PS and CoS.  There's vast diffrences between the two styles of film
making and the recent approch seems to have been a hit with a great number
of people, the same people I've seen hating the other movies.

Each of us will see something diffrent in the movies, either to like or
dislike.  And while we all will disagree (even those of us who like it can't
agree on everything, I hated some things and I adored the movie more then
anything...and I genrally dislike PoA), I agree that it's not fair to
critizie someone just for their opinions.  You're always free to express
them on this list, so long as it's done in a polite, conciences manner.

Please, if you EVER feel attacked on this list unfairly, contact the elves.
No one should feel like their opinions are unwelcome.

Saitaina R. Moricia
***
 
 
      I see what you mean. I liked the movie but hated the things that were
left out and/or changed. I think the reason (at least my reason) for liking
in spite of myself is because I liked POA BOOK better than the first two,
but I did not like the way the movie was DONE compared to the other two -
does this make sense? I liked the movie better because I like the book
better, but not the way the directing was done.
 
      Gina- who loves the more magical Hogwarts and creatures, but did not
like the lack of uniforms or changes of scenery!


http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina
<http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina> 

[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/
<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
click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=285832.5035993.6164948.1793556/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2178649/rand=913737539> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Jun 14 18:57:48 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:57:48 -0000
Subject: Differing Opinions (Was Re: Harry Potter movies & JKR quote)
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBMEEPHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caksfc+g2h1@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Barbara D. Poland-Waters" <bd-
bear at v...> wrote:
> >>>From: sienna291973 [mailto:jujupoet29 at h...]
> 
> Hi Barbara, although I liked the movie substantially more than the
> previous two, I have a few problems with it myself.  I can certainly
> understand why some would not like it.  I would hope that you should
> be able to express your opinions freely on this list without bearing
> the brunt of critical attacks. I'd be interested in hearing about
> what you particularly didn't like.<<<
> 
> Thanks Sienna (beautiful name by the way, would love to name my 
future child
> Sienne, but hubby is stuck on "Bailey"). I don't want to bore 
people with
> another long litany of complaints and since I have already posted 
regarding
> my disappointment, I can tell you where you can read what I've 
written. You
> can find my comments in messages 9026, 9105, 9181, 9279 and 9357, 
to name a
> few. You can search for those messages on the Yahoo Groups page for 
our
> group.
> 
> Barbara
> aka bd-bear

Oh my, Barbara please do not feel persecuted and those of you writing 
back to her don't persecute her. I understand exactly how you feel. 
Though I did enjoy POA, I did not come out of the theater going "oh 
wow" and I wish I had - POA is my favorite book. I also love reading 
differing opinions (see my comment on my post #9385) and hope you 
will continue to post yours as you have a valid point of view. I may 
not agree with everything those who did not like the movie or those 
who did like the movie (for example though I like Gambon as 
Dumbledore - I did also like Richard Harris and I wanted to pull the 
rubberband off his beard throughout the movie). My expectations were 
quite high for this one as I had heard things about how he was 
keeping the spirit of the book. So even though unlike you I liked the 
movie overall, I was disappointed with the items cut out and this one 
unlike the first two had my boys saying it seemed a little short. 
What would have an extra 15 minutes cost so we could have had a 
longer Shrieking shack scene or the Firebolt earlier in the movie 
with the train scene at the end? I loved Pigwideon in the book and 
thought he had been filmed. 
As for why I say I know how you feel...I saw Day After Tomorrow with 
this past weekend. Afterwards I was talking with friends who had seen 
it too. I was the only one that did not like it at all. I pointed out 
the hokey looking wolves (bad CGI work) and how there were 
inconsistencies. Well, the others said "What movie were you watching 
that was great." and they continued to ignore my opinions because I 
didn't like the film and they all did. That rather hurt my feelings 
so I know exactly how you all who did not like POA must feel. Anyway, 
please everyone who did or did not like the movie continue to post 
and we all can remember to value each other's opinion even if we do 
not agree. Sorry I will get off of my soapbox. Thanks.

Theresa
who is feeling rather motherly - having stopped two arguements 
between fellow co-workers today. Sorry for spreading my motherliness 
onto the list. :O)




From liz at studylink.com  Mon Jun 14 15:46:35 2004
From: liz at studylink.com (liz)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:46:35 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
In-Reply-To: <BCF2BB01.EB7%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <BCF386EA.E450%liz@studylink.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heather Maffioli"
> <HMaffioli at c...> wrote:
>> He is reading A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.
> Evidently he is from a popular English band (Sorry I don't know who
> he is or what band he is from but I bet someone around here does).

Sophia replied:
> Naw, Stephen Hawking is a nobel-prize-winning physisist, if memory
> serves me right. That is the titel of an actual book. I don't know
> that much about him, but I'm under the impression he is the most
> important name in physics since Einstein.
> 

Valerie replied
> The actor is a band member, not the author! :-)
> Anyone think it was not coincidence that the Time theme was yet again
> reinforced in the wizard reading the Hawking's book? Brilliant subtly, if
> so...

The actor is Ian Brown from The Stone Roses, an excellent English band from
the early 90's.

cheers,
Liz





From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun 14 22:31:27 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 23:31:27 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <20040614180901.VVAQ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizo
 n.net>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040614195044.00998960@plum.cream.org>

At 19:09 14/06/04 , Valerie Flowe wrote:

(erm... I'm getting confused here. Is "Valerie Flowe" just another name for 
"bewitchedbyHP"? The fact that so many people use non-standard quoting 
conventions on this group makes it difficult for me to keep up at times)

>I know that the book has to be trimmed to make a movie that doesn't go
>on for forever, but surely in the Shrieking Shack scene they 
>(lupin/sirius) could have explained all the stuff to Harry? I felt that 
>that scene was just too rushed.

My big issue with that scene, as written for the movie, is that Snape was 
very badly "written out" of the scene (and his return was even sillier - 
more on this topic in another post). As for explanations, it's clear to me 
that Cuaron was deliberately trying to keep away from long speeches of 
background exposition or flashbacks (for which I thank him).

I suspect (and this could be what he meant in the Entertainment Weekly 
interview) that Cuaron felt that it would be better for Harry to find out 
about Messrs Moon(e)y, Wormtail, Padfoot & Prongs from Sirius during GoF, 
once they've already got their relationship up and going, rather than 
diluting the impact of the news that Sirius is innocent and Ron has been 
unknowingly harbouring the real traitor. I can see a very good rationale 
for doing things that way, and in adaptational terms, there is no reason 
for the films to follow the books' revelations in the same order.

My BIG issue with the back-story is that it falls completely flat on Harry. 
During the bridge scene, when Lupin is telling Harry what a wonderful 
mother he had, Harry's face remains completely impassive. A small smile 
works across his face on the "talent for trouble" line, but otherwise there 
is absolutely no realisation on his part that someone is talking about 
knowing his parents! He's been given a load of misinformation about his 
folks in the past (died in a car crash, etc) and knows next to nothing 
about them or why they died (which he probably assumes is part of the 
reason he himself finds himself in his current predicament vis-a-vis Lord 
Thingy). This guy, the first teacher who treats him as a human being on 
equal terms instead of as a pupil, KNEW HIS PARENTS! Not only that, but he 
was a close friend of his mother's (and father's, but he doesn't make a big 
deal about that)! This is a MOMENTOUS piece of news and he just stands 
there, without any reaction whatsoever. Pur-leaze!, as the kiddies say. 
Surely Harry isn't THAT stupid? (regrettably, the book's not really much 
better in this regard)

I was really wishing for him to turn around and (hopefully) exclaim 
something like "You KNEW my mum and dad!? What were they like!? How did you 
know them?", etc., all tumbling out the way Ron (magnificently) tumbles out 
Scabbers' past in his family.

Ditto with the Marauder's Map: I didn't expect Sirius and Lupin to tell him 
the story behind it, but I *did* expect Harry during the post-Snape scene 
to ask, quite simply, how come Lupin knew it was a map.

>Why did Harry believe so suddenly that they should trust L&S about Scabbers?

He didn't. At least not before he saw Pettigrew transform. But what they'd 
said before Snape turned up was enough to give him reason to want proof 
before making up his mind either way. After all, he'd solved a mystery at 
the end of each  of the last two years where appearances had proved 
deceptive, so why not this time as well? ;-)

>How hard would it have been to have Lupin looking at the map in his 
>office; startled to see Sirius, Peter and the kids in the Shack, he runs 
>off; soon thereafter Snape arrives with the forgotten potion, sees the 
>map; realizes what's going down and runs off after Lupin. Cheap to film; 
>only 5 minutes added to the length of the film.

Yes, but completely ruining the pace. My own view is that all of that was 
unnecessary anyway - this film is a bit more subtle than the last two (and 
the book!): we've been told that the Map shows "everyone, everywhere, all 
the time", and Lupin has implied that he knows how to use it. We can 
therefore make up our own minds as to how and why he got there. As for 
Snape, whilst the movie completely did away with the Wolfsbane Potion, it 
did establish that Snape had suspicions about Lupin; he knew that Lupin was 
a werewolf and that it was a full moon. It would therefore be reasonable to 
assume that for both of these reasons, he was simply following him.

>Instead they just threw in Sirius yelling "Remus, did you forget to take 
>your potion?!"
>"Huh?! What potion?" I can hear the non-HP readers in the audience saying.
>Granted probably 75% of the audience are book fans, but still...

For the purposes of the movie, the details of the potion are ultimately 
irrelevant. It's a wizarding establishment, and having "a" potion makes 
sense. It's only the readers who know that the potion is significant, but 
seeing as it wasn't introduced into the movie, it's all a matter solely for 
the book readers.

>And I still would've liked the Harry/Dumbledore "denouement" at the end. It's
>tradition, after all. They had it at the end of SS (the "alas, earwax" 
>scene),
>and in COS (the Gryffindor sword scene, prior to Dobby and Lucius walking 
>in).
>That would've been an opportunity to have the new Dumbledore show a little
>grandfatherly compassion to Harry, that I feel was lacking.

Again, I can only surmise, but I assume that the main reason no 
Harry-Dumbledore exposition/tying up the ends tete-a-tete was included is 
because as Gambon plays Dumbledore very differently compared to Harris's, 
we needed to get used to him in the role before we had a one-on-one sequence.

In any case, he was unnecessary as all the important stuff was dealt with 
by Lupin anyway. I know that some people don't like Sirius having 
Dumbledore's "the people we love never leave us" moment, but I thought it 
was quite touching, and a hint that it was the thought of the ones he loved 
which kept him going in Azkaban.

In a way, that's what puts this film in a different category to the 
previous two (as per the title of this thread...): so much is done by 
hints, allusions and symbols rather than explicit statements. Some hints 
are just *too* vague to non-book-readers and some things which should be 
explained aren't, but that doesn't invalidate the film or its approach. It 
simply means that it's not perfect.

--
Richard AKA GulPlum, playing catch-up again!



From jmmears at comcast.net  Mon Jun 14 22:35:31 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:35:31 -0000
Subject: Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <002001c451f5$6903a360$f258aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <cal97j+i02c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:


> Amanda clarifies:
> 
> Just for the record, I did see it in IMAX; I went on opening night 
and then
> I took the family (where my four-year-old made his amazing 
observation that
> the tree should be hitting them after they came back out). I was 
bothered by
> the scene the first time around, so I was looking fairly carefully 
the
> second time; I saw what could be nose-running, but by itself, it 
didn't
> "carry" it for me. His eyes didn't look teary (which they will, 
even if
> you've just wiped the tears away).
> 
> I also found it out of character, which is possibly why I needed 
the
> externals to make the scene work. I also didn't get a sense of the 
depth of
> grief or rage that could produce that type of sob without tears; 
they
> weren't racking sobs, just crying. You're correct, everything 
isn't going to
> work for everyone; I'm just trying to figure out why this 
particular scene
> seems to have failed so, to me.


I think that you nailed the reason the scene doesn't work for me 
when you said it was out of character.  I realise that the 
screenwriter and director must have the latitude for some dramatic 
license, but for me, having the audible sobs in that scene was just 
a bridge too far. 

Harry. Does. Not. Cry. Period.
His eyes may tear up during the boggart lesson, he may be at the 
point of breaking down at the end of GoF, but he is quite the stoic 
and he would never allow anyone to hear him sob out loud, and 
*certainly* not in front of Ron (who he knows darn well is right 
there).  A Harry who would cry at that point in the story would 
never be tough enough to keep himself under control at the end of 
GoF when he actually sees a fellow student murdered.  The Harry who 
cries in POA would break down sobbing after witnessing Sirius die.
Frankly, No actor in the world could have made me believe in a 
weeping Harry at that point in his story because it simply goes 
against my own perception of who Harry is.

I realise that the scene rang true for many others who saw the 
movie, and of course, that's fine.  It's just that I like *my* Harry 
to be as tough and emotionally repressed as he is in the books, not 
emoting all over the place.  Not until, book 5, anyway.

And don't even get me started on how OOC I thought poor Ron and 
CharliesAngels!Hermione were <g>.

Jo Serenadust, praying hard for a new screenwriter for OOP




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 00:22:26 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:22:26 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <cal97j+i02c@eGroups.com>
References: <002001c451f5$6903a360$f258aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615000218.009c27e0@plum.cream.org>

At 23:35 14/06/04 , Jo Serenadust wrote:
> > Amanda clarifies:
> >
> > His eyes didn't look teary (which they will, even if you've just wiped 
> the tears > away).
> >
> > I also found it out of character, which is possibly why I needed the
> > externals to make the scene work. I also didn't get a sense of the depth of
> > grief or rage that could produce that type of sob without tears; they
> > weren't racking sobs, just crying. You're correct, everything isn't 
> going to
> > work for everyone; I'm just trying to figure out why this particular scene
> > seems to have failed so, to me.
>
>I think that you nailed the reason the scene doesn't work for me
>when you said it was out of character.  I realise that the
>screenwriter and director must have the latitude for some dramatic
>license, but for me, having the audible sobs in that scene was just
>a bridge too far.

I'd like to split hairs here. My problem with that scene is that Harry (or 
rather, Dan....) falls between two stools. He makes some whimpering noises 
which are neither the cries of anguish, hurt and loss which I could find 
believable, nor are they child-like sobbing which (and I agree with the 
ladies here on this) I don't think would be in character for Harry.

My own view is that Harry should simply have been silent. I suspect that 
this was the original plan, and the sounds were added later for whatever 
reason (presumably to give some kind of context for showing the 
snow-sprinkled rock).

>Harry. Does. Not. Cry. Period.
>His eyes may tear up during the boggart lesson, he may be at the
>point of breaking down at the end of GoF, but he is quite the stoic
>and he would never allow anyone to hear him sob out loud,

It doesn't have to be Harry for that to be true. NO 13 year-old boy would 
allow it (I was 13 once and I know exactly how it feels). I suspect that 
the *aim* was for the sounds to be "strangled" sobs, but ultimately it just 
didn't work. Considering the trouble that went into the sound effects for 
this movie, I really don't understand why they overlooked it - and it's 
such a crucial moment in Harry's emotional journey!

>I realise that the scene rang true for many others who saw the movie, and 
>of course, that's fine.  It's just that I like *my* Harry to be as tough 
>and emotionally repressed as he is in the books, not emoting all over the 
>place.  Not until, book 5, anyway.

I don't have a problem with the scene. I ONLY have a problem with the 
particular sound attributed to Harry before he actually speaks.

>Jo Serenadust, praying hard for a new screenwriter for OOP

In this instance, I don't think it was a script problem but an editing one, 
in particular sound editing. As for the screenwriter for OotP, I have a 
suggestion which a lot of people will consider strange, especially coming 
from me. I suggest that the job be given to... Chris Columbus.

Most people here know that I've been none-too-pleased with his efforts 
directing the first two HP movies, so why should I consider him for this 
job? Simply because while I think his directing is by-the-numbers and 
pretty childish, he is actually a very good screen writer. "The Goonies", 
"Gremlins" (1 & 2) and "Young Sherlock Holmes" are all well-written movies 
(and classics of their genre), and all penned by him. He has a wonderful 
sense of the anarchic and an idea of story-telling which Kloves simply 
doesn't have. I also think that he'd be reluctant to change as many of 
JKR's one-liners as Kloves does, and that's a recurring problem with the 
scripts so far.

He could provide the continuity which the HP series warrants, and as long 
as he would then hand over to a director with more visual flair than he has 
(and no penchant for screaming at the camera!), I think he could do a 
pretty good job.

(It would also have the side effect of not giving him the time to direct 
another sloppy over-sentimental movie.) :-)
--
Richard AKA GulPlum, worrying about catching up with everything else that's 
been going on on the list.



From joj at rochester.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 00:53:42 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:53:42 -0400
Subject: PoA expectations
Message-ID: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

Hi all!  I was wondering how much our expectations played a part in how much we like PoA?  I personally liked this movie very much.  It lived up to my expectations, which were very high.  PoA though, is only my third favorite book.  I'm wondering if the majority of people who were disappointed in the movie would consider PoA their favorite book?

Now, GoF is my favorite book. I am really looking forward to the graveyard scene.  It is my favorite scene in all the Harry Potter books.  I imagine I will be quite upset if they water it down.  I don't even think they can really do it justice if it's a PG movie.  I don't have strong feelings about the shrieking shack scene (although I enjoy it in the books), so I'm not too bothered by it's shortness.  I was more looking forward to the dementor scenes.  

CoS is my least favorite book (and many other peoples as well).  I didn't go in with huge expectations.  I liked it just fine.  Not quite as much as SS, but just fine.

Another thing I wonder about, is if people who were less "spoiled"  were more disappointed?  One of the scenes I was looking forward to was Harry getting his firebolt, and Hermione telling, and their rift.  I knew quite a bit before the movie came out, that scene wasn't in it.  I had time to be disappointed and then move on.  There really was no information on the specifics of the Shrieking shack scene.  Just lots of Dan talking about how much he loved those scenes.  If those who were disappointed  had a chance to get used to the changes before viewing, maybe they'd have enjoyed the movie more.  

So, were the people most disappointed in PoA those who PoA was their favorite and were less spoiled?  Or am I way off base?

Joj



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




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Tue Jun 15 01:01:21 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:01:21 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <001601c45274$47179bb0$0400a8c0@pensive>

I think you have a good point there.  POA is my favorite book of the series,
and my expectations were very high accordingly.  I was so looking forward to
seeing that story brought to life.  I'm like you about COS, and I enjoyed
the movie, because I wasn't expecting all that much.  GoF is my 3rd favorite
book, and though I tell myself I may not want to see anymore HP movies, I
will probably go when the time comes.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: joj [mailto:joj at rochester.rr.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 6:54 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA expectations


Hi all!  I was wondering how much our expectations played a part in how much
we like PoA?  I personally liked this movie very much.  It lived up to my
expectations, which were very high.  PoA though, is only my third favorite
book.  I'm wondering if the majority of people who were disappointed in the
movie would consider PoA their favorite book?

Now, GoF is my favorite book. I am really looking forward to the graveyard
scene.  It is my favorite scene in all the Harry Potter books.  I imagine I
will be quite upset if they water it down.  I don't even think they can
really do it justice if it's a PG movie.  I don't have strong feelings about
the shrieking shack scene (although I enjoy it in the books), so I'm not too
bothered by it's shortness.  I was more looking forward to the dementor
scenes.  

CoS is my least favorite book (and many other peoples as well).  I didn't go
in with huge expectations.  I liked it just fine.  Not quite as much as SS,
but just fine.

Another thing I wonder about, is if people who were less "spoiled"  were
more disappointed?  One of the scenes I was looking forward to was Harry
getting his firebolt, and Hermione telling, and their rift.  I knew quite a
bit before the movie came out, that scene wasn't in it.  I had time to be
disappointed and then move on.  There really was no information on the
specifics of the Shrieking shack scene.  Just lots of Dan talking about how
much he loved those scenes.  If those who were disappointed  had a chance to
get used to the changes before viewing, maybe they'd have enjoyed the movie
more.  

So, were the people most disappointed in PoA those who PoA was their
favorite and were less spoiled?  Or am I way off base?

Joj



[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 joj at rochester.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 01:00:52 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 21:00:52 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Prisoner
References: <20040614052937.73178.qmail@web53506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002201c45274$382b43e0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lanthiriel S"
> Lupin has always been my favorite character and I had
> a great deal of interest in how he would be portrayed
> onscreen. I will admit (with no small amount of shame
> now) that I was one of those people who wanted a
> handsome actor like Jude Law or someone similar to be
> cast as Lupin, and was rather disappointed at the
> choice of David Thewlis.

In this 30 minute special
http://www.tribute.ca/sympaticointerviews/harrypotter/index_msn.asp Chris
Columbus talks about how they very nearly cast Thewlis as Quirrell, but he
thought he looked too much like Alan Rickman.  He thought they did a great
job this time of giving him a different look so he looked like a different
person than Snape.

Does he need glasses?  I don't think they look at all alike.  Especially
with the black wig, I don't think anyone would have gotten confused.  I
guess that's why they gave Lupin the mustache and the awful hair-do.

Joj





From goalieracer at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 15 02:24:57 2004
From: goalieracer at yahoo.com (Barb)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001601c45274$47179bb0$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <20040615022457.85204.qmail@web14207.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Sherry Gomes <sherriola at earthlink.net> wrote:
> I think you have a good point there.  POA is my
> favorite book of the series,
> and my expectations were very high accordingly.  I
> was so looking forward to
> seeing that story brought to life.  I'm like you
> about COS, and I enjoyed
> the movie, because I wasn't expecting all that much.
>  GoF is my 3rd favorite
> book, and though I tell myself I may not want to see
> anymore HP movies, I
> will probably go when the time comes.
> 
> Sherry

<snip>
I also think you have a good point...although in my
case POA is my LEAST favorite book...I did go in with
high expectations of loving the movie...and was
disappointed....Maybe I expected to much....
After seeing it a second time...I liked
it a little more..One of my biggest gripes with the
movie is the change of layout on where things should
be
ie The steep hill to Hagrid's hut in this movie...It
was just totally off from the other movies....Even the
towers at Hogwart's looked different from an outside
viewing of the school.
  Each director will change things..but in my opinion,
they should at least leave the basics in tact and keep
the established scenery the same...You can add ageing
etc without a problem..but when you go from a gentle
slope to a steep slant...that is to much.
  I also hated what they did to Draco(I always liked
the character). It just doesn't fit with his image...I
cant imagine people looking up to or following someone
who is so whiny and scared....Malfoy is looked up to
(at least in his house..)and I cant see that happening
with his portraal in POA...A lot of bullies will back
down when confronted but this was extreme...


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


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 



From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 03:33:20 2004
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 03:33:20 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>

It was funny in a slapstick way. I LOVED it when MoM Fudge (and I 
did  fancy his grey pinstriped robes, although I missed the lime 
green bowler --- invoking Chamberlain, I assume ---)mentioned she had 
been found somewhere in Surrey (?) stuck in a chimney. Wonderful.

Dudley was almost unbelievably involved with food and the television 
(did everyone notice that there was a television literally two feet 
away? -- although I DO know people who have the tv on all the time 
and have one in every room, including the bathroom). I can't believe 
that any boy would be mostly oblivious to his father screaming, his 
aunt swelling and floating away....the dog barking, etc.

I was uncomfortable because we didn't see the history of Aunt Marge's 
persecution of Harry, nor did we see her being vile for a week. In 
the book, Harry tries not to provoke her, and she persecutes him and 
says horrible things about him daily. Therefore, we have a better 
appreciation about why Harry finally lost control of himself.

I loved how the lights went on and off (and later how the playground 
equipment was moving)indicating Harry was losing control.

(BTW, why did Sirius growl at Harry?-- just before Harry got on the 
Knight Bus).

BUT in the movie we did not see the continuous horribleness of Aunt 
Marge, and so I had a twinge of feeling sorry for her...it wasn't BAD 
enough in the movie (in my humble opinion) for Harry to totally lose 
it, and leave the house.

Susan







From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Tue Jun 15 03:38:23 2004
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (dan)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 03:38:23 -0000
Subject: PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <20040615022457.85204.qmail@web14207.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <calqvf+bivf@eGroups.com>

Barb <goalieracer at y...> wrote:

>   Each director will change things..but in my opinion,
> they should at least leave the basics in tact and keep
> the established scenery the same...You can add ageing
> etc without a problem..but when you go from a gentle
> slope to a steep slant...that is to much.
>   I also hated what they did to Draco(I always liked
> the character). It just doesn't fit with his image...I
> cant imagine people looking up to or following someone
> who is so whiny and scared....Malfoy is looked up to
> (at least in his house..)and I cant see that happening
> with his portraal in POA...A lot of bullies will back
> down when confronted but this was extreme...

Yunno, on the main list, there's this intense ping pong match 
regarding Harry vs. Snape, and it struck me that we are actually 
pretty lucky the whole series isn't being done by one director. 
Stylistically yes, Cauron is light years ahead of Columbus, but he 
doesn't have the homespun charm many seem to like about the first two 
films. But compare HP with the Lord of the Rings (LoTR) series - one 
director (and his two advisors) version of the books. Now, the LoTR 
fans, they were quite split on the movie and its merits - some said 
it conveyed the sense of the books, but not the look, some the look 
but not the sense, and so forth. But it's quite unfair to hold Cauron 
accountable to BOTH Columbus and Rowling, just as it is to hold 
Newell accountable to all three. Not only unfair, but what director 
worth his wages would agree to it? They might find a recent film 
school graduate willing to do that, but surely no professional 
director. And this will only be an increasing pressure as the series 
of films goes on.

I suggest we just look at the films as if they were different lenses, 
different approaches, to the HP world, as reflected so dynamically on 
these lists, knowing some will match our own reading more closely 
than others.

Regarding the bullying of Malfoy, perhaps it is just his intelligence 
showing through, in the scene with Hermione. I mean, all the boys 
there know she not only learns spell quicker than you can 
say "Quidditch", but knows a good number more than they do. And if 
she fights back, she must be really ticked, so... Let's just say I 
wouldn't want her wand pointed at me. Similarly in the snow scene 
with HP under the invisibility cloak, there's really no fighting an 
enemy you can't see, is there? Let alone one that threatens to drag 
you to the most haunted building in England. (To do who knows what 
with you...)

Dan




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 05:17:16 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:17:16 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040614195044.00998960@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BCF3FE9B.ED6%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org>

(erm... I'm getting confused here. Is "Valerie Flowe" just another name for
"bewitchedbyHP"? The fact that so many people use non-standard quoting
conventions on this group makes it difficult for me to keep up at times)

[from Valerie Flowe, aka bewitchedbyHP]
Sorry for the confusion! I have the HPFGU-Movie posts come directly to my
inbox. If I hit "reply" from there, you get my Valerie Flowe address. If I
go through YahooGroups, then I'm "bewitchedbyHP". I'll try to keep it to one
to avoid any future confusion. :-)


My BIG issue with the back-story is that it falls completely flat on Harry.
During the bridge scene, when Lupin is telling Harry what a wonderful
mother he had, Harry's face remains completely impassive. A small smile
works across his face on the "talent for trouble" line, but otherwise there
is absolutely no realisation on his part that someone is talking about
knowing his parents! He's been given a load of misinformation about his
folks in the past (died in a car crash, etc) and knows next to nothing
about them or why they died (which he probably assumes is part of the
reason he himself finds himself in his current predicament vis-a-vis Lord
Thingy). This guy, the first teacher who treats him as a human being on
equal terms instead of as a pupil, KNEW HIS PARENTS! Not only that, but he
was a close friend of his mother's (and father's, but he doesn't make a big
deal about that)! This is a MOMENTOUS piece of news and he just stands
there, without any reaction whatsoever. Pur-leaze!, as the kiddies say.
Surely Harry isn't THAT stupid? (regrettably, the book's not really much
better in this regard)
I was really wishing for him to turn around and (hopefully) exclaim
something like "You KNEW my mum and dad!? What were they like!? How did you
know them?", etc., all tumbling out the way Ron (magnificently) tumbles out
Scabbers' past in his family.

THANK YOU! That bugged me as well. I expected a lot more show of surprise
and interest when Lupin said that he knew Harry's parents. 



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




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 05:29:35 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:29:35 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <1d4.234eae0f.2dffe33f@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/14/04 10:11:36 PM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net writes:


> THANK YOU! That bugged me as well. I expected a lot more show of surprise
> and interest when Lupin said that he knew Harry's parents.
> 

I got the impression that we had only come in to the conversation after it 
had been going on for awhile - hence, avoiding the rather awkward reaction that 
Harry would have to have ;) I guess it's a matter of preference, but I don't 
think it would have worked if Harry had had to say something like, 'Oh, you 
knew my parents!?', followed by Lupin's explanation, which would have been what? 
- 'yeah, I was their friend' - seems rather superfluous to me. I just assumed 
that they had been talking for awhile when we 'eavesdrop'. It worked for me. 
Also, I think that since later we hear Harry say (in response to why he spared 
Peter), 'I didn't think my dad would have wanted his two best friends to 
become killers' - in that sentence, we are told that Harry knows that Lupin, Sirius 
and James were best friends - so we can assume that at some point Lupin told 
him.
A movie can't have every conversation between all the characters - it's not 
realistic. A shorthand has to be employed. That's the way it is with all movies 
-   off screen events are either referred to or explained otherwise in a more 
succinct way. Otherwise, we would all still be sitting in the theater 
watching the 5 day movie ;-)
Of course, I wouldn't mind taking dinner breaks for a word by word adaptation 
on screen, but they would still be filming it (imagine a 2 and half year 
shooting schedule, lol!.)
Cindy

P.S. This explanation also serves as a response to a recent post (if it was 
on this list, if not, sorry!) about how we didn't get to see Aunt Marge's 
cruelty over a week's time or even her long term abuse of Harry - well, to be fair, 
even in the book, JKR 'refers' to her past visits. We didn't read an account 
of EVERY visit by Aunt Marge. Some things have to be referred to rather than 
written out explicitly in the present tense. That's just a basic, I can't even 
explain it better. 

We accept in the books that the Potters were killed by Voldemort, but did she 
actually write that scene in detail as it happens? No, not that I remember. 
Same for Aunt Marge - we couldn't possibly have been shown in the movie every 
day of the WEEK of her latest visit, in order to establish her cruelty and 
verbal abuse. It's not plausible. The Dursley segment would have been much longer 
in order to convey a week long visit or god forbid, to actually film every day 
of her visit - yikes! I can imagine the complaining that would go on if that 
had happened. People already say that the Dursley and Knight Bus scenes took 
precious time away from other things they wanted in the film - (something I 
don't adhere to - some of my favorite moments are in those opening minutes; Harry 
kicking the dresser in anger and frustration, the wonderful interlude in the 
playground where I had a genuine sense of fear and creepiness). 

Seems that there is no way to satisfy everyone about everything ;-)


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 05:39:20 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:39:20 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <BCF403C8.ED7%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "joj" <joj at rochester.rr.com>

...So, were the people most disappointed in PoA those who PoA was their
favorite and were less spoiled?  Or am I way off base?

Joj

Hmmm...interesting question. I refused to read any spoilers before I saw the
movie. And I'm still glad that I did. I wanted to witness the movie for
myself before being swayed by anyone else's opinions of it.
I do think that POA is my favorite book, though I love them all. I really
liked the emotional overtones of it, and felt that the personal backstory
really enriched the HP series. I remember being wonderfully shocked when I
found out that the evil Sirius was Harry's godfather trying to protect him
from Peter, the real culprit. Brilliant twist of plot. Love that!
To me the next two books, GOF and POA, ramble on a bit too much.
In GOF, I think the World Cup scene went on and on. Though I love the tests,
the ball, the romance.
I liked OOP because, again, it really seemed to flesh out the storyline, and
I am fascinated by the first generation Hogwarts (that is, Remus, Sirius,
James, Lily, Peter, Severus.) I want a book all about them! But in a way, I
felt that OOP was waaaay too complicated. I find it hard to keep all the
details straight. And...yucky ending. Wahhh, Sirius, even though he was
sometimes a creep to Harry!



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 05:57:25 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:57:25 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sirius growling
In-Reply-To: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF40805.EDA%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "susanmcgee48176" <Schlobin1 at aol.com>

(BTW, why did Sirius growl at Harry?-- just before Harry got on the
Knight Bus).

I thought the same when I saw that. In the book he just stared at him.
Doesn't make sense that he'd growl menacingly



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 05:55:07 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 01:55:07 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Malfoy the wuss
In-Reply-To: <calqvf+bivf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF4077B.ED9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "dan" <lunalovegood at shaw.ca>

Regarding the bullying of Malfoy, perhaps it is just his intelligence
showing through, in the scene with Hermione. I mean, all the boys
there know she not only learns spell quicker than you can
say "Quidditch", but knows a good number more than they do. And if
she fights back, she must be really ticked, so... Let's just say I
wouldn't want her wand pointed at me. Similarly in the snow scene
with HP under the invisibility cloak, there's really no fighting an
enemy you can't see, is there? Let alone one that threatens to drag
you to the most haunted building in England. (To do who knows what
with you...)

Dan

I have to agree that they portrayed Malfoy as a total wuss. Maybe if they
had Harry's head pop out of the cloak; Malfoy get irate and run to tell
Snape, that would've been more true to character to me. Anything to get
Harry in trouble.



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 06:02:29 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:02:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <1d4.234eae0f.2dffe33f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCF40935.EDF%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: clshannon at aol.com

I got the impression that we had only come in to the conversation after it
had been going on for awhile - hence, avoiding the rather awkward reaction
that 
Harry would have to have ;) I guess it's a matter of preference, but I don't
think it would have worked if Harry had had to say something like, 'Oh, you
knew my parents!?', followed by Lupin's explanation, which would have been
what? 
- 'yeah, I was their friend' - seems rather superfluous to me. I just
assumed 
that they had been talking for awhile when we 'eavesdrop'.

Yeah, but Lupin actually says "Yes, I knew your parents" as though he were
telling Harry for the first time. That's why Dan's reaction seemed a bit
flat to me. 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 06:07:27 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:07:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <1d4.234eae0f.2dffe33f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCF40A5F.EE0%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

This is probably a rhetorical question, but during the lake scene when
Sirius's soul is getting sucked out, one sees a few sparkles of light come
out of his mouth. Then nothing (I assume  he's dead, or at least soul-dead,
at that point). Then the big deer patronus and the light goes back in his
mouth, and he gasps for breath. That's a visual for his soul, yes? Cool
effect. Scary too. 



From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 06:00:39 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:00:39 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <2d.3edeb0f2.2dffea87@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/14/04 10:56:20 PM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net writes:


> Yeah, but Lupin actually says "Yes, I knew your parents" as though he were
> telling Harry for the first time. That's why Dan's reaction seemed a bit
> flat to me.
> 

I guess it's all personal interpretation, but even that line seemed to me to 
be him reinforcing something he had already revealed ;-) 
Although, I don't recall how Harry reacts in   the book, it's been a while 
since I read it. I guess I still hold fast to Harry's rather repressed emotional 
personality due to his rather stressful and neglectful upbringing. I don't 
think he really breaks out full force until Book 5 ;)

Oh well. I loved Harry's little smile when he heard about his dad and his 
wistful, yet sad smile when he heard about Lily. I thought it was a nice moment 
and thought Dan played it just perfectly.

Perhaps we should all just agree to disagree since it doesn't seem anyone is 
going to bring anyone else over to their opinion <g>
Cindy


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




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 08:22:40 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:22:40 -0000
Subject: Daytime viewing
In-Reply-To: <BCF2B616.EB5%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cambkg+vdqk@eGroups.com>

Hungary (I'm a half-Brit, half-Hungarian cultural nightmare).
I watched the English version of POA yesterday, and loved it even 
more. The audience, this time, was full of snotty little Brit kids 
with their babysitters (children of diplomats, mostly), one of them 
apparently called Alice, just like me. It was strange being told off 
by "my" babysitter throughout the show.
The "where's Hedwig"-ing happened this time too... so maybe Harry 
really should have just lugged the cage too, full stop.
I now plan to go at 10 or 11 in the evening. I'm growing tired of the 
kids, and ever more fond of the film.

The time-symbolism gets me so much. I find myself in love with 
Alfonso Cuaron, genius if you ask me (not that anyone has). :)
Love, Alice



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> Enjoyed your witty audience-prespective review...where are you from?
> [bewitchedbyHP]
> 
> From: "alice_loves_cats" <hypercolor99 at h...>
> Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:34:37 -0000
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daytime viewing
> 
> 
> Just thought I'd share some of the moments from my first, and so far
> only, viewing of POA. I went with my best friends who'd just had an
> exam, and I was also at the university trying to get some of my 
marks
> signed. So we decided that after we were done with the
> administration, we'd go straight to the cinema. And so it happened
> that on a Friday morning, we sat down with about 101 kids and a
> couple of teenagers to watch the show. The funny thing about going 
to
> the cinema with kids is that they COMMENT. Man has not yet invented 
a
> way of stopping them doing that. I became reconciled with the
> situation and decided to enjoy their remarks. And lo.
> 
> The first surprise was when Harry set off from Privet Drive not only
> without Hedwig, but without even Hedwig's cage. The audience 
erupted.
> WHERE'S HEDWIG?, came the indignant cries from all over. Whispered
> answers of "must be off hunting" would not do: WHERE'S THE CAGE?
> demanded the kids. They soon got over the shock, however.
> 
> The biggest fun came when Hagrid said that Buckbeak was going to be
> killed. His hair changed colour the moment he said it, from black to
> brown, due to the ratty copy of the film that the cinema was using.
> This only added to the pandemonium that followed. Some people 
thought
> a crying Hagrid was impossibly funny. They started giggling. Then
> came prompt hisses from the others: "This is not funny!". More
> giggling. By that time, it was, irrevocably, extremely funny. It was
> like a house party, with everyone munching crisps in front of the
> television. We were all friends. The more people said it was not
> funny, the funnier it got. I was ashamed of myself for laughing, but
> I couldn't stop. 
> 
> We all stayed to watch the credits, and lots of people noticed the
> (supposedly) snogging couple on the map. Ooooooooh, they cried,
> oooooh, look at them! You would have thought they were showing
> explicit sex-material, instead of a pair of footprints shuffling in
> front of each other.
> 
> It was a riot. :) But I think my next viewing will be in the 
evening.
> Also I plan to watch the original, English version. It's just that I
> love Hermione's dubbing voice so much. She's a girl called Luca
> Szab?, and she's a totally brilliant actress. Harry's voice is also
> one of my favourites. His voice deepened for this film, while Daniel
> Radcliffe's was already deep for Chamber of Secrets - so back then 
it
> was funny, cause in one language it was a little squeaky boy's voice
> that he had, and in the other, a deep voice. :)
> 
> Love, Alice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________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 hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 08:37:25 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:37:25 -0000
Subject: Malfoy the wuss
In-Reply-To: <BCF4077B.ED9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <camcg5+t397@eGroups.com>

> Dan:
> 
> I have to agree that they portrayed Malfoy as a total wuss. Maybe 
if they
> had Harry's head pop out of the cloak; Malfoy get irate and run to 
tell
> Snape, that would've been more true to character to me. Anything to 
get
> Harry in trouble.

Now Alice:
I'm now wondering exactly what "wuss" means. So I'll use my own slang 
and say they portrayed Malfoy as a complete wimp. I loved that 
because it is exactly how I imagine Malfoy: big mouth, and absolutely 
NO courage. The invisible attack is really not as bad as it would 
have been for one of us, since Malfoy lives in the Wizarding World - 
he should be used to strange things happening occasionally. If he had 
any sense he might even have figured it all out. (Oh, all right, 
maybe not...) Anyway, someone on the Main List once very long ago 
posted a long-long mail in which they stated that Malfoy was Ever So 
Lame. I completely go with that. Malfoy's not a rival like we used to 
think Snape had been to MWPP (before Phoenix came out and we got to 
know more about THAT particular relationship). He's not an enemy like 
Lucius Malfoy is to the Light Side. He's just plain LAME. Which is 
why I luuuuurved it when he cringed under Hermione's wand, and fled 
after the shrieking shack incident, and whimpered whenever ANYTHING 
happened to him.

By the way, what's this paralell between Ron, Draco and chopping off 
of limbs? I laughed so hard when Ron started explaining to Hermione 
that his leg was practically done for. Ney, guys, not the best 
behaviour to learn off Draco and Pansy!

Whatever. :) Alice




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 08:49:08 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 04:49:08 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daytime viewing
Message-ID: <128.4408925b.2e001204@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 1:38:38 AM, hypercolor99 at hotmail.com writes:


> The "where's Hedwig"-ing happened this time too... so maybe Harry
> really should have just lugged the cage too, full stop.
> 

I think Hedwig just flew to London herself. I assumed that when Harry sees 
her in the office with Fudge. Now the cage...hmm, I don't know, maybe he bought 
a new one once at school ;-) 
I know in the book he is trudging the cage along, but cinematically, that 
would be have been rather awkward - I think the trunk was enough ;)
Cindy


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




From captain_suburbia at yahoo.com.au  Tue Jun 15 10:17:19 2004
From: captain_suburbia at yahoo.com.au (captain_suburbia)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:17:19 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <camibf+spmf@eGroups.com>


> BUT in the movie we did not see the continuous horribleness of Aunt 
> Marge, and so I had a twinge of feeling sorry for her...it wasn't BAD 
> enough in the movie (in my humble opinion) for Harry to totally lose 
> it, and leave the house.


Do you think so, Susan?  I thought she was absolutely repellant!! 
*Particularly* when she clicked her fingers at him.  (I worked as a
waitress while at college, so I concede that that sort of thing
*really* pushes my buttons) And if someone drew parallels between my
parentage and the breeding of a dog, well.........I have to say that I
would lose it too!  I admit, though, like other parts of the movie,
it's hard to say how much I'm taking at face value, and how much is
coloured by my knowledge of the books.  

I really enjoyed Marge's moustache - more luxuriant than Lupin's!

Burbs




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 10:38:49 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 06:38:49 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEHMHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: susanmcgee48176 [mailto:Schlobin1 at aol.com]

I was uncomfortable because we didn't see the history of Aunt Marge's
persecution of Harry, nor did we see her being vile for a week. In
the book, Harry tries not to provoke her, and she persecutes him and
says horrible things about him daily. Therefore, we have a better
appreciation about why Harry finally lost control of himself.

. . . BUT in the movie we did not see the continuous horribleness of Aunt
Marge, and so I had a twinge of feeling sorry for her...it wasn't BAD
enough in the movie (in my humble opinion) for Harry to totally lose
it, and leave the house.<<<

I was actually uncomfortable with that scene for two reasons. First, I
didn't think it was necessary for Marge to float away over the city. I think
being "blown up" and unable to come down from the ceiling is pretty horrible
enough. Second, I absolutely know this is fantasy, but. . .can you imagine
somehow, magically floating up up and away, miles above the city with no
ability to control your body? I think that's actually more scary than funny.
Very vulnerable feeling, I imagine. I know she had her memory modified
afterwards, but I still don't think it was a necessary change.

Barbara, who doesn't think MOST of Cuaron's/Kloves' changes were necessary
bd-bear




From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jun 15 11:02:36 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:02:36 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91DD1@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,
 
Barbara:
>>> I think being "blown up" and unable to come down from the ceiling is
pretty horrible enough. Second, I absolutely know this is fantasy, but.
. .can you imagine somehow, magically floating up up and away, miles
above the city with no ability to control your body? I think that's
actually more scary than funny. <<<

I found the Aunt Marge scene funny, but Barbara's point has got me
thinking. Remember this passage from GoF:
 
>>> A crowd of wizards, tightly packed and moving together with wands
pointing straight upward, was marching slowly across the field. Harry
squinted at them. . . . They didn't seem to have faces. . . . Then he
realized that their heads were hooded and their faces masked. High above
them, floating along in midair, four struggling figures were being
contorted into grotesque shapes. It was as though the masked wizards on
the ground were puppeteers, and the people above them were marionettes
operated by invisible strings that rose from the wands into the air. Two
of the figures were very small.

More wizards were joining the marching group, laughing and pointing up
at the floating bodies. Tents crumpled and fell as the marching crowd
swelled. Once or twice Harry saw one of the marchers blast a tent out of
his way with his wand. Several caught fire. The screaming grew louder.
The floating people were suddenly illuminated as they passed over a
burning tent and Harry recognized one of them: Mr. Roberts, the campsite
manager. The other three looked as though they might be his wife and
children. One of the marchers below flipped Mrs. Roberts upside down
with his wand; her nightdress fell down to reveal voluminous drawers and
she struggled to cover herself up as the crowd below her screeched and
hooted with glee.

"That's sick," Ron muttered, watching the smallest Muggle child, who had
begun to spin like a top, sixty feet above the ground, his head flopping
limply from side to side. "That is really sick. . . ." <<<
 
Having re-read that passage, is the Aunt Marge scene still funny? Less
so for me.
 
Cheers,
 
Dumbledad.
 
 


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




From snosageau at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 11:34:43 2004
From: snosageau at hotmail.com (snosageau)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:34:43 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <cak5r3+1bah@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cammsj+trjl@eGroups.com>


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

> 
> > As for the changes in the castle / the clock tower /grounds... I 
> just 
> > kept telling myself the place is enchanted. The stairs move, so 
why 
> > can't the landscape? 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sophiamcl" <sophiamcl at h...> 
wrote:> 
> That's a good strategy! :-) For my part, I don't mind these 
changes, 
> I find them interesting "what-if" propositions. We're at Cuaron't 
> vision of Hogwarts now--it's the same place rendered by a different 
> artist, so he's going to do his own take on it, just as I hope Mike 
> Newell will.
> 
> Sophia

Me again:
I can't say that I minded them, in fact the Cuaron Hogwarts is alot 
more like how I pictured Hogwarts before seeing the 1st two movies - 
wild, ancient etc.
Bec




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 11:36:19 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:36:19 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sirius growling
In-Reply-To: <BCF40805.EDA%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615122447.009dd220@plum.cream.org>

At 06:57 15/06/04 , Valerie Flowe wrote:
>From: "susanmcgee48176" <Schlobin1 at aol.com>
>
>(BTW, why did Sirius growl at Harry?-- just before Harry got on the
>Knight Bus).
>
>I thought the same when I saw that. In the book he just stared at him.
>Doesn't make sense that he'd growl menacingly

Ermm... He didn't growl. He took a few deep breaths (as if he'd just run a 
great distance) and barked twice. *Big* difference.

The thing about a dog's barking is that you don't know if it's a friendly 
barking or not before you know the dog. I am reminded of that fact as I 
type, my neighbours' three dogs are making a racket not 20 feet away from 
where I am. I can now tell their mood from the sounds they make. I couldn't 
have been able to when they first moved in. I was quite terrified of them 
at first, but now I know that despite their mean demeanour, they all have a 
rather sweet disposition. :-)





From snosageau at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 11:48:35 2004
From: snosageau at hotmail.com (snosageau)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:48:35 -0000
Subject: A question about dementors
In-Reply-To: <ca0tbt+n3n6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <camnmj+cm9d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "lumos28" <anita_sathe at p...> 
wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Its been a while since I read the books. But something's been 
> bothering me like hell. Do the dementors really SOAR across the sky 
> as it has been shown in the movie? I always thought they used to 
> glide...


I don't know. It threw me at first too that they were flying over 
Hogwarts. I'd always pictured them standing around the gates, trying 
to claw their way in. Guess we all have our own interpretations. But, 
after having had some time for reflection, I decided that I actually 
like the way that they were depicted in the movie. They seemed to be 
more oppressing/impressive the way that they seemed to hover over the 
castle. But then I was talking to a friend tonight, who said that 
they were just the way she'd kind of imagined them, so as I said, its 
all in your own perceptions....
Bec




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 12:12:15 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:12:15 +0100
Subject: Harry's reaction on the bridge (was the greatest difference)
In-Reply-To: <1d4.234eae0f.2dffe33f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615124126.0098b620@plum.cream.org>

At 06:29 15/06/04 , clshannon at aol.com wrote:

<snip>

>I got the impression that we had only come in to the conversation after it
>had been going on for awhile - hence, avoiding the rather awkward reaction 
>that
>Harry would have to have ;)

<snip>

I've said before that I made the same assumption. However, on closer 
inspection,
even the script implies that there must been have some reaction on Harry's 
part. Lupin and Hary are standing side by side, and Harry talks about what 
he hears when the Dementors are around; Lupin then makes some awkward body 
movements (nice touch) and says "the first time I saw you, I recognised you 
.... they're your mother's eyes". Then there's a beat's pause (presumably a 
space for a reaction on Harry's part), and Lupin responds to that *pause* 
(great work on Thewlis's part) with "Yes, oh yes, I knew her". This is 
*meant* to be a revelation, not only to the audience, but to Harry.

My whole issue is with what happens during that pause. Put simply, Lupin 
has nothing to respond to, as there is absolutely no change in Harry's 
expression. At that moment, his face is in full profile to us so whilst we 
can't see his eyes, he doesn't flinch, he doesn't do *anything*. He has the 
same more-or-less vacant expression he had when talking about the 
Dementors. The worst thing is that what Lupin says implies that there has 
been a reaction!

I don't deny that this must have been a very difficult scene for Dan to 
film. It's one take which lasts about a minute and a half, the focus is on 
him and he doesn't have anything to say throughout, and it's his face which 
has to do to the talking. Nevertheless, he doesn't pull if off.

I'm fully aware that what I suggested last night doesn't fit in with the 
pace, rhythm or tone of the scene as filmed, but given that poor Dan was 
unable to do the scene convincingly without words, he should have been 
given the words to do so.

<lots more snipped; slight change of subject>

>We accept in the books that the Potters were killed by Voldemort, but did she
>actually write that scene in detail as it happens? No, not that I remember.

She definitely didn't, and that's one of the mysteries left to be revealed. 
Hence so much debate when the PS/SS movie came out, because it included 
some of that scene, which JKR had to write for them. There are absolutely 
things about that night which JKR is keeping back as a surprise.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, hoping to be caught up with the list by nightfall



From dbanova at bigpond.net.au  Tue Jun 15 11:44:31 2004
From: dbanova at bigpond.net.au (banovaz)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:44:31 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <camnev+gjur@eGroups.com>

First Post, so lets hope i do this right

Having been intrigued by JKR's comments that Alfonso Cuaron's 
intuitive reading of POA had foreshadowed the narrative in books 6 
and 7, I watched with great interest and a reasonable knowledge of 
canon through to OOPT ( well who has more ?) to try and second guess 
what that foreshadowing might be.

Loved the movie ! The pace was great, loved the reworking of the 
story line to deliver a lean and very exciting story with all of the 
central threads to the story maintained. Adored the patronus !!

But my take out on the foreshadowed story line relates to the early 
scene with the Aunt Marge - and Harry's uncontrollable righteous 
anger.
It seems to me that this scene sees him breaking glasses, lights 
flickering on and off, blowing up his aunt from an apparent discharge 
of magic , Are the swings and play equipment swinging wildly around 
without reason or an aftermath of a large magical discharge from 
Harry ? is it wandless magic ? is it a magical response to 
injustice ? well really who knows but JKR, but

When Harry has righteous anger  - he can do amazing things 

He may not be able to cast an unforgiveable with his righteous anger 
as per Bellatrix Lestrange's observation in OOPT , but in this movie 
and in canon he can cast a patronus that drives away 50 + dementors 
and he can blow up a frightful aunt. ( Once he made a window 
disappear at London Zoo)

Probably drawing a long bow -  but is the power that LV knows not - 
something to do with that strength you draw upon to protect others or 
yourself from injustice and disaster ?? is it something to do with 
his righteous anger ?

Just some thoughts , but keen to test them

cheers
banovaz





From elfnorc at voyager.net  Tue Jun 15 12:12:21 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:12:21 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: A question about dementors
Message-ID: <200406151212.i5FCCLKw079092@mail6.mx.voyager.net>

I am just relistening to Order of the Phoenix on BOT and when Harry goes
after the demontors that are attacking him and Dudley the text mentions
that they soar away.  I had not remembered a reference to their soaring
before so this surprised me.
Tina

> <html><body>
> 
> 
> <tt>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "lumos28" <anita_sathe at p...> <BR>
> wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Hi all,<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Its been a while since I read the books. But something's been <BR>
> > bothering me like hell. Do the dementors really SOAR across the sky <BR>
> > as it has been shown in the movie? I always thought they used to <BR>
> > glide...<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> I don't know. It threw me at first too that they were flying over <BR>
> Hogwarts. I'd always pictured them standing around the gates, trying <BR>
> to claw their way in. Guess we all have our own interpretations. But, <BR>
> after having had some time for reflection, I decided that I actually <BR>
> like the way that they were depicted in the movie. They seemed to be <BR>
> more oppressing/impressive the way that they seemed to hover over the <BR>
> castle. But then I was talking to a friend tonight, who said that <BR>
> they were just the way she'd kind of imagined them, so as I said, its <BR>
> all in your own perceptions....<BR>
> Bec<BR>
> <BR>
> </tt>
> 
> <br><br>
> <tt>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________<BR>
> <BR>
> WARNING! This group contains spoilers!<BR>
> <BR>
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin
Files!<BR>
> <a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/</a><BR>
> <BR>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
material from posts to which you're replying!<BR>
> <BR>
> Any questions? Any problems? Contact your personal List Elf or the
List Administration Team at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com<BR>
> <BR>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com<BR>
> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> </tt>
> <br><br>
> 
> <br>
> 
> <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
> 
> <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
> <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
> <td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor</b></font></td>
> </tr>
> <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
> <td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0
cellspacing=0> <tr> <td align=center><font face=arial
size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129q62uf8/M=285832.5062450.6190004.1793556/D=groups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087386525/A=2178649/R=0/SIG=14dcd1v5j/*http://www.householdfinance.com/ln/TrackingServlet?cmd_MediaCode=&fc=APS&mkt=000&mc=01PSYAYA004001B220000U0300L0050000000000&dest=HOME_PAGE"
alt=""><img
src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ho/household/hfc_300x250_5_20_060404.gif"
alt="click here" width="300" height="250"
border="0"></a></td></tr></table> </td>
> </tr>
> <tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1
src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=285832.5062450.6190004.1793556/D=groups/S=:HM/A=2178649/rand=231113355"></td></tr>
> </table>
> 
> <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
> 
> 
> 
> <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
> 
> <br>
> <tt><hr width="500">
> <b>Yahoo! Groups Links</b><br>
> <ul>
> <li>To visit your group on the web, go to:<br><a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/</a><br> 
> <li>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br><a
href="mailto:HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com</a><br> 
> <li>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.
> </ul>
> </tt>
> </br>
> 
> <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
> 
> 
> </body></html>
> 
> 

-- 
CoreComm Webmail. 
http://home.core.com




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Tue Jun 15 12:57:33 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:57:33 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91DD1@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEICHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Tim Regan (Intl Vendor) [mailto:v-tregan at microsoft.com]

Having re-read that passage, is the Aunt Marge scene still funny? Less
so for me.<<<

In reference to your comment about how the depiction of Aunt Marge in the
PoA movie reminded you of the Muggle-attack at the Quidditch World Cup in
book 4, perhaps this is one of the things that made JKR think Cuaron was
onto something. I don't remember her exact quote, but she said something
about how some of the things he did in the movie gave her goosebumps because
it foreshadowed other things. But I don't remember if she said it
foreshadowed things the movie audience hasn't seen (i.e., books 4 and 5
included) or the book audience (i.e., unpublished books 6 & 7).

>>>From: Elfnorc [mailto:elfnorc at voyager.net]

I am just relistening to Order of the Phoenix on BOT and when Harry goes
after the demontors that are attacking him and Dudley the text mentions
that they soar away.  I had not remembered a reference to their soaring
before so this surprised me.<<<

Again, since this is depicted in the PoA movie (although I thought dementors
were supposed to glide), maybe this is another thing that JKR thought was an
inspired foreshadowing, since she would probably remember that she wrote a
line in the 5th book about them "soaring."

If I'm wrong about her quote, and she specifically refers to the unwritten
works, please correct (and forgive) me.

Barbara
bd-bear




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 13:08:59 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:08:59 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
Message-ID: <23.3ffa4e33.2e004eeb@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/14/2004 11:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I was bothered by
the scene the first time around, so I was looking fairly carefully the
second time; I saw what could be nose-running, but by itself, it didn't
"carry" it for me. His eyes didn't look teary (which they will, even if
you've just wiped the tears away).
Okay, I've read this here so many times, when I saw the movie the third time 
Monday night, I paid CLOSE ATTENTION to that scene.  I was looking for his 
nose running (poor kid, can you imagine someone LOOKING for that?? but since 
someone mentioned it, I looked for it), and in that scene, when he turns his head 
sharply up to look at Hermione while he's yelling, you can see his right cheek 
(his right, my left) was shiny wet with tears.  Not a stream or a droplet, 
nothing that subtle, but actually wet -- and how else did his nose start 
running?  He'd been crying hard in THAT take, whether he was in the others or not.  
Maybe it was the lighting, that the sheen of tears didn't show so well.  It 
certainly was the director's fault for not doing a closeup so everyone could see 
the result of Dan's hard work at crying.  What I'd like to know is, what 
happened to that cute picture of Harry looking at Hermione with that cute little 
grin on his face, from the same scene?  They're sitting there with little smirks 
on their faces, in profile, in exactly the same spot.  The pic is in the 
Lenticular Poster Book and I was looking forward to seeing what caused that smirk. 
 Maybe that was a "between shots" photo or something, just as the "Christmas 
in Hogsmeade" "Christmas card" type photo of the trio was nowhere in the film. 
 Just curious.

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


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 13:10:48 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:10:48 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
In-Reply-To: <camnev+gjur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615134031.00a03d40@plum.cream.org>

At 12:44 15/06/04 , banovaz wrote:

>First Post, so lets hope i do this right

Welcome. looks fine from here. ;-)

<snip>

>When Harry has righteous anger  - he can do amazing things

To be fair, that isn't something this film has introduced. it's been around 
all along in the books (e.g. getting onto the school roof at the beginning 
of PS/SS), and in the movies (e.g. the re-appearing glass in PS/SS).

>He may not be able to cast an unforgiveable with his righteous anger
>as per Bellatrix Lestrange's observation in OOPT , but in this movie
>and in canon he can cast a patronus that drives away 50 + dementors
>and he can blow up a frightful aunt.

I like your use of "righteous anger", which is exactly what gets Harry 
going, but an implication of the OotP significance is that Harry is unable 
to perform from hate.

The Shrieking Shack scene in this respect underlines that as well - when he 
has Sirius at his mercy and has as much hatred and anger in his heart that 
anyone can muster, he freezes.

And that is the big difference between Harry and Voldemort: whilst Lord 
Thingy is primarily moved and motivated by all the basest human instincts, 
Harry is capable of his best when acting on the most noble. Whilst 
Voldemort is at his most powerful when at his most hateful, Harry is weakest.

Harry's feats of non-deliberate magic as a child are all a defence 
mechanism: they all come out when he's being bullied, and whilst he could 
do the bullies some serious harm, all he ends up doing is scaring them. 
Harry is (thus far) simply incapable of powerful offensive magic, because 
he doesn't have it in him to summon the base feelings required to do it. 
His most impressive feat to date, which is recognised as such by pretty 
much everyone - the Patronus - is purely defensive, and a personification 
of all that is noble.

And, of course, the most significant thing about The Boy Who Lived is that 
he survived through an act of personal sacrifice, the most noble action 
anyone can take in pretty much any culture on earth.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, seriously threatening to go off-topic for this list



From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 13:15:53 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:15:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] new characters in the film
Message-ID: <1f1.22feac7f.2e005089@aol.com>

Can someone please tell me who the heavyset black boy is who has several 
lines in PoA?  He seems to be a Gryffindor.  I really like Dean and Seamus and 
they don't get that many lines (especially Dean), so who's this other kid and why 
is he getting lines Dean could have?  Also, what happened to Goyle?  In the 
snowball scene, it's Crabbe and that new boy with Malfoy.  Maybe Cuaron didn't 
think Harry could toss Goyle around so easily, since Goyle is so huge??  If 
you want to pick on a scene that's illogical, that scene is it.  No way could 
Harry race around and kick Goyle in the butt while ALSO grabbing the other boy's 
scarf and spinning him around -- the motions came from two different 
directions, and Harry would be panting with the effort, as well as probably slipping 
out of his cloak.  It's a very funny scene, but scientifically improbable, 
given there's only ONE Harry to do all those actions (but Crabbe being "pants'd" 
or however you spell that -- too funny!)  And why was Tom completely changed in 
the Leaky Cauldron?  The new guy is very funny, but the old Tom was "Tom" -- 
the new one doesn't seem like the character in the book at all.  Oh well, that 
change, like the shrunken heads, I can accept.  The heads not letting 
underage wizards in the Three Broomsticks, though -- that's where the kids go every 
Hogsmeade visit, so no way would they NOT be allowed??  And what was that guy 
in the Three Broomsticks doing with the two candles in his hand?  With three 
viewings, there's still so much detail I can't see it all (which makes it a fun 
movie and I need to see it AGAIN!)


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


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 14:34:08 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:34:08 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge
  scene
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEICHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
References: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91DD1@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615151908.009cf670@plum.cream.org>

At 13:57 15/06/04 , Barbara D. Poland-Waters wrote:

<huge snip>

>If I'm wrong about her quote, and she specifically refers to the unwritten
>works, please correct (and forgive) me.

Yes, her quote was specifically about the books. Even without looking it 
up, it would have been a bit nonsensical for her (and the fans) to make a 
big deal about Cuaron & Co making references to stuff we already know from 
the two further published books - that's what the films are *meant* to be 
doing. Especially as she used the word "inadvertently".

But it does make sense for her to say that about material she hasn't yet 
revealed to the world at large, or the film-makers in particular. She'd 
hardly be praising Cuaron's prescience for guessing at stuff the whole 
world already knows, would she?

Talking of foreshadowing, the Thestrals presumably can't be very big: the 
"horseless" carriages for the arrival at Hogwarts were pretty close 
together... :-)




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 15 14:41:54 2004
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 07:41:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] new characters in the film
In-Reply-To: <1f1.22feac7f.2e005089@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040615144154.78956.qmail@web42102.mail.yahoo.com>



artsylynda at aol.com wrote:
Can someone please tell me who the heavyset black boy is who has several 
lines in PoA?  He seems to be a Gryffindor.  I really like Dean and Seamus and 
they don't get that many lines (especially Dean), so who's this other kid and why 
is he getting lines Dean could have?  Also, what happened to Goyle?  In the 
snowball scene, it's Crabbe and that new boy with Malfoy.  Maybe Cuaron didn't 
think Harry could toss Goyle around so easily, since Goyle is so huge??  
SNIPS

akh: This is not based on anything I've read, but I generally suppose when actors like those playing Dean and Goyle disappear, it's due to personal issues (need to take school exams, health, contract, etc.)  For all we know, those lines in Trelawney's class were Dean's originally, and when he had to drop out for some reason, they were reassigned to another actor who could stay for the shoot.  If I remember correctly, the Divination scene was one of the last shot, and the scene in the movie might have been a pick-up, for that matter.

akh, who thinks Dean Thomas is just about the cutest thing on the planet, and would adopt him any day (his parents might object, though...) 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.

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




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 15:36:50 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:36:50 -0000
Subject: Daytime viewing
In-Reply-To: <128.4408925b.2e001204@aol.com>
Message-ID: <can52i+8dl5@eGroups.com>

 
> I think Hedwig just flew to London herself. I assumed that when 
Harry sees 
> her in the office with Fudge. Now the cage...hmm, I don't know, 
maybe he bought 
> a new one once at school ;-) 
> I know in the book he is trudging the cage along, but 
cinematically, that 
> would be have been rather awkward - I think the trunk was enough ;)
> Cindy

Alice:
I eventually came to the conclusion that Hedwig doesn't actually need 
a cage at Hogwarts. She flies about freely (as seen in the film too), 
lives in the Owlery, and only needs the cage at all because of 
transportation (this time solved by her flying to London herself) and 
the Dursleys. 
Also, I agree it would have made it more difficult for Harry to STOMP 
in exactly that agitated manner as he did if there was the cage to 
think about as well.
A.




From lbiles at flash.net  Tue Jun 15 16:49:37 2004
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:49:37 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing?  Ferrets!
In-Reply-To: <cagk3b+olvd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <can9b1+tqvl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "terryljames76"
<terryljames at h...> 
wrote:
> the thing that really popped out in my mind as 
> possible foreshadowing for later books was when Hermione 
> mentioned "dead ferrets".  Who do we connect with ferrets?  
> 
> Yes, Draco.  He's dead meat.  IMHO. :) 


I saw the movie opening weekend and then promptly went on vacation
for a week.  I had not read any of the reviews prior to seeing the 
movie so needless to say I have had a lot of catching up to do.  I've 
been desperately trying to get through the posts to see if anyone
else had the same thoughts before I posted my own.  

When Hermione threw the dead ferret to Buckbeak and said something 
along the lines of "here's a nice ferret for you boy" I immediately 
hoped that was the foreshadowing!  Draco, the amazing bouncing
ferret, taken care of once and for all by Buckbeak who he tried to 
have killed.  There is justice in that.

leb




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 16:51:34 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 17:51:34 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge
  scene
In-Reply-To: <calqm0+72cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>

Ahhh... I'm reading the list messages in reverse order and whilst I've 
already addressed one of the points Susan made (and others have given their 
opinion on the rest), I still want to wade in with a few comments...

At 04:33 15/06/04 , Susan wrote:
>It was funny in a slapstick way. I LOVED it when MoM Fudge (and I
>did  fancy his grey pinstriped robes, although I missed the lime
>green bowler --- invoking Chamberlain, I assume ---)mentioned she had
>been found somewhere in Surrey (?) stuck in a chimney. Wonderful.

"A little south of Sheffield, circling a chimney stack", actually. :-)

I have a little issue with that - Sheffield is about 200 miles from London.

In fact, I have several issues with the chronology of the film's opening 
sequences. I was going to save this for a later post but here goes: 
(WARNING: this is VERY sad and geeky) :-)

At the Dursleys', Dudley is watching The Generation Game on TV. This show 
went out on Saturday afternoons between around 5 and 6pm (depending on the 
season, it could have started as early as 4.45 or as late as 5.15) and 
lasted 50 minutes (the episode in the movie is hosted by Jim Davidson, who 
did so for 7 seasons between 1995 and 2002). Yes, I am VERY sad - I made a 
trip to the library specifically to check old TV schedules. :-)

So, the very latest Marge's "take-off" could be is around 6pm (and I'm 
being generous; the show has at least two rounds to go, as there are least 
two pairs of contestants involved). Some might argue that he's watching a 
recording, but this wouldn't make sense, as I can't imagine Dudley 
preferring to watch a recording of a daft game show rather than the live 
programming on a Saturday evening of the time which would be more up his 
street. ("Noel's House Party", anyone? *shudder*)

At the end of August in Surrey, it doesn't start getting dark until after 
about 7.30pm and official sunset is around 8pm. Marge takes off into dusk. 
Just after she's taken off, Harry packs his trunk. In the time it takes 
Vernon to get back to foot of the stairs, Harry is packed and on his way 
out.  Either Vernon is very slow and it takes him absolutely forever to get 
from his garden to the front of his house (we know the layout - it should 
be less than 10 seconds), or Harry is basically already packed (which is 
reasonable, as it is later implied that the Hogwarts Express leaves the 
next morning).

One way or the other, Harry leaves the house and we see Marge floating into 
the fairly light dusk. The shot changes but it's now pitch black. Sorry, 
but it takes a good half hour to get from dusk to pitch black in Southern 
England in August. Although there's a bit of a jolt with the shot change, 
it seems to pick up where the previous one left off.

Harry sits down and the wind blows through the playground and bushes (well, 
that's my interpretation; I know that some consider this a sign of Magic in 
the air), Sirius turns up and then the Knight Bus, in swift succession. 
There is no implication that any time has passed (on the contrary, various 
things imply that this is one continuous movement).

So, being generous, the night sky indicates that it must be well after 
8pm-ish, but other information points to it being no later than about 6.30.

Nevertheless, the Knight Bus picks up Harry and they speed of to London. 
Granted we don't know whereabouts in Surrey Little Whinging is meant to be, 
but even so, we're talking a distance of no more than about 30 miles. The 
bus goes at a fair whack and arrives at the Leaky Cauldron after 1am (the 
clock during the Fudge scene shows approx 1.20).

I know that in the books, the Bus goes via Aberystwyth, but no hint of its 
roundabout route is given in the movie. More than five hours (at best, 
closer to seven at worst) between Surrey and Central London is an extremely 
poor time (I've done the trip in a Muggle bus and it took just over an 
hour), and whilst I'm not claiming for a second that we see the entire 
journey, there is no implication that we're talking about quite such a long 
time. Certainly there's no implication that we're leaving the vicinity of 
London.

Talking of Muggle buses, the two we see the Knight Bus overtaking on the 
bridge (it's been a while, but that *is* Lambeth Bridge, isn't it?) are not 
real services. The N7 (the "N" denoting a Night Bus - geddit?) doesn't go 
to Kings Cross, and the 143 keeps to North London.

In other words, just *what* did they get up to for five hours that they're 
not showing us? ;-)

Anyway, back to Fudge and where all of this digression starter. He says to 
Harry that Marge was found "earlier this evening ... just South of 
Sheffield". Even Muggle trains don't get there as fast as Marge seems to 
have floated there, powered by nothing but (cold) air.

The movie thus gives conflicting impressions: if it takes some time for 
Marge to float from the Dursleys' back garden to the skies whilst remaining 
identifiable,  yet it takes her fairly little time to travel 200 miles.

Incidentally, I agree with several comments that having Marge float off 
quite such a distance isn't fair to the sprit of the Potterverse (and 
certainly not to the book): given her cries, *lots* of Muggles would have 
seen her and they'd all have needed attention from the Accidental Magic 
Reversal Squad.

>I can't believe that any boy would be mostly oblivious to his father 
>screaming, his aunt swelling and floating away....the dog barking, etc.

I think this was a fair characterisation of Dudley in purely cinematic 
terms: he's so involved in himself and his own little world that he really 
doesn't care what happens to anyone else. I think it's also a nice subtle 
message about our media-obsessed times when we are so easily distracted by 
stupid game shows (and The Generation Game really *was* stupid - and 
demeaning to its participants, if you ask me).

>I was uncomfortable because we didn't see the history of Aunt Marge's
>persecution of Harry, nor did we see her being vile for a week. In the 
>book, Harry tries not to provoke her, and she persecutes him and says 
>horrible things about him daily. Therefore, we have a better appreciation 
>about why Harry finally lost control of himself.

I thought the film summarised their attitude towards each other fairly well 
(and Petunia's attitude as well - during one of my 8 viewings, I 
concentrated solely on her throughout the scene; her waving to Marge as she 
floats away had me in hysterics). The imperious handing over of the soaking 
brolly and the way Marge simply takes over the house ordering everyone 
around makes her thoroughly unpleasant.

As for what sets Harry off, the scene remains true to one of the themes of 
the movie, which is Harry's connection to his parents. When Marge insults 
Harry, he shrugs it off with sarcastic remarks. But when she insults his 
parents, he breaks. Note that on insulting James ("he was a drunk"), all he 
does is smash her glass; on insulting Lily, Harry goes ballistic - as does 
Marge. :-)

>I loved how the lights went on and off (and later how the playground
>equipment was moving)indicating Harry was losing control.

Actually, I thought the lights were a bit OTT (the "breeze" across Harry's 
face was enough for me to indicate magical activity), but I can live with it...

>BUT in the movie we did not see the continuous horribleness of Aunt
>Marge, and so I had a twinge of feeling sorry for her...it wasn't BAD
>enough in the movie (in my humble opinion) for Harry to totally lose
>it, and leave the house.

The brief horribleness wasn't enough for you? :-) It would be very 
difficult for me to have any sympathy for Aunt Marge from the moment he 
sour face shows through the door to the moment she floats away...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, waffling on for *far* too long




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 17:30:53 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:30:53 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <3f.2d11e921.2e008c4d@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 5:29:48 AM, dbanova at bigpond.net.au writes:


> When Harry has righteous anger? - he can do amazing things
> 

It's interesting your post brought up the wandless magic Harry performs in 
POA. I was just rereading the opening part with Aunt Marge last night to verify 
something else and noticed how, after he inflates her, he rushes to the 
cupboard under the stairs to retrieve his trunk and the door blows open when he 
approaches it. JKR describes it as blowing up quite forcefully in his wake, so he 
was definitely doing a lot of wandless magic, along with the actual inflation 
of Marge ;-)

If I recall correctly, the description in the first book of wandless magic 
was about how younger wizards and witches, before attending Hogwarts and getting 
a wand, sometimes make things happen without realizing it, esp. while angry. 
Hagrid mentions this to Harry when he first meets him. I always got the 
impression that it was sort of uncontrolled because of their young age and the lack 
of training or the focus of a wand. This   may be true, but I think that in 
Harry's case, his wandless magic may be something he can learn to channel and 
control. Maybe most young kids forget the talent or lose it once they get a 
wand.   However, I did notice in the movie of POA, Lupin uses wandless magic to 
open the trunk with the dementor in it during the training session with Harry (I 
don't know if Lupin does things like this in the book), so maybe other 
wizards and witches can harness this power. Certainly Dumbledore has ;-)

Anyway, I also thought it interesting that one review I read of the   movie 
said something about how we get hints regarding how powerful a wizard Harry 
really is or will become, something that wasn't apparent in previous films. I 
wondered about that reviewer since I don't think JKR has really hinted at any 
difference in Harry's actual power - after all, his uniqueness is because he 
'survived' a direct killing curse, not because he exhibited any super power ;-)

I seem to   be rambling again ;-)
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 17:34:46 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:34:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] new characters in the film
Message-ID: <cd.f2f607f.2e008d36@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 6:30:25 AM, artsylynda at aol.com writes:


> The heads not letting
> underage wizards in the Three Broomsticks, though -- that's where the kids 
> go every
> Hogsmeade visit, so no way would they NOT be allowed??
> 

I think the head says, 'no underage wizards TODAY', so maybe it was because 
McGonagall and Fudge asked them to prohibit the kids from entering that 
particular day - because of what was discussed ;-)
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 17:43:52 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:43:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: the greatest difference
Message-ID: <e4.5090e5f8.2e008f58@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 4:36:41 AM, snosageau at hotmail.com writes:


> I can't say that I minded them, in fact the Cuaron Hogwarts is alot
> more like how I pictured Hogwarts before seeing the 1st two movies -
> wild, ancient etc.
> 

I agree, and it is definitely more real than in the first two films. I 
remember watching PS/SS for the umpteenth time and cringing when the three kids run 
out to Hagrid's hut at the end to ask him about the dragon - Hagrid is sitting 
in front of the hut playing the flute. If you watch that scene, esp. on a TV 
screen, you can see that the kids are standing in front of a projection - they 
don't appear to be outside at all. It looks rather fake. 
Also, I never got a real sense of where things were on the outside of the 
castle in the first two films - the actual paths to get places, etc. In POA, you 
get more a sense of the geography and layout of the school and the grounds. 
It's also awesome to see them running around those 'real hills and wild 
landscape' at the end, it looks dangerous and I was feeling some vertigo, just looking 
at the precipices around that place ;-) I don't think I could have even 
walked down those 'steps' to Magical Creatures Class - they were so 
steep...shudder!

Anyway, I agree that the landscape and surroundings were much more realistic 
in this one and I have no problem with the different layout since I don't 
think it was very well drawn out in   the first two films anyway. I hope that POA 
sets the standard now for future HP films regarding this particular thing 
(even if they aren't planning on filming as much in Scotland) <g>
Cindy


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 18:35:29 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:35:29 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615184459.0099e330@plum.cream.org>

At 01:53 15/06/04 , joj wrote:
>Hi all!  I was wondering how much our expectations played a part in how 
>much we like PoA?  I personally liked this movie very much.  It lived up 
>to my expectations, which were very high.  PoA though, is only my third 
>favorite book.  I'm wondering if the majority of people who were 
>disappointed in the movie would consider PoA their favorite book?

I had planned to write up some of these comments in reply to someone who 
didn't like the movie, but I'll leave that person alone and respond here 
instead.

I'm on record as saying that PoA is my favourite book (by a fairly long 
distance) and whilst I was slightly anxious about Kloves butchering the 
narrative, I had fairly high expectations because of Cuaron's involvement.

Two of Cuaron's previous English-language movies are book adaptations, both 
of which had previously been filmed, and both the books and the original 
movies are classics; I'd read the books and seen the original movies years 
and years ago. I'm talking about A Little Princess and Great Expectations. 
Cuaron's versions of these books departed from the books quite 
significantly but had a definite visual style to them which I was prepared 
to welcome.

As a result, I was prepared for some major changes to the storyline, so 
although I didn't know the specifics when I saw the movie, when they 
happened I was prepared to accept them. I had deliberately kept myself from 
seeing any of the clips, interviews or reviews in the runup to the film's 
release (nothing strange about that for me - it's my usual routine with all 
movies). However, I had seen the trailers and the Toad Chorus intrigued and 
worried me.

In a word, I went into the movie expecting and wanting to like it. It's 
clear to me that there are some people who went in with exactly the 
opposite expectation. People who wanted to dislike the movie and watched it 
with a view to finding fault. I'm not criticising people for having that 
approach, as I'm just as guilty of giving the film the benefit of the doubt 
in ways I certainly wasn't prepared to do for Columbus.

>Now, GoF is my favorite book. I am really looking forward to the graveyard 
>scene.  It is my favorite scene in all the Harry Potter books.  I imagine 
>I will be quite upset if they water it down.  I don't even think they can 
>really do it justice if it's a PG movie.

Whilst GoF isn't my favourite book, and that's not my favourite HP scene 
for several reasons (among them it's far too talky and Voldemort is too 
much of a stereotypical baddie explaining his plans to all and sundry), I 
suspect that if well adapted (we all live in hope...) and directed, there 
is no reason why it shouldn't become THE classic HP movie sequence, as in 
many respects it's the turning point of the series.

Mike Newell has my confidence, for the time being.

I do agree, however, that it will be very easy to ruin the sequence if 
killing Cedric and Wormtail cutting off his hand (probably the two scariest 
moments) aren't shown in all their goriness. Fawkes pecking out the 
Basilisk's eyes was shown in shadow to allay the kids' fears - I don't 
think that a similar ploy would work here. In terms of UK certification, I 
think the movie should forget attempting to be a PG and aim for 12A (which 
is what e.g. Spiderman got - the certification was invented for that movie 
- I thought that the impalement at the end was the main issue; if that got 
through, then Wormtail cutting off his hand should as well).

>Another thing I wonder about, is if people who were less "spoiled"  were 
>more disappointed?

I was completely "unspoiled" and it didn't disappoint me at all. I didn't 
know *what* would be changed, but I knew that some things would, and was 
prepared to accept them (and even be an apologist for them, as I have been).

>One of the scenes I was looking forward to was Harry getting his firebolt, 
>and Hermione telling, and their rift.  I knew quite a bit before the movie 
>came out, that scene wasn't in it.  I had time to be disappointed and then 
>move on.

I didn't know that the sequence would be changed/moved, but seeing as they 
did exactly what I would have done (moving it to the end and completely 
removing the sub-plot about Harry's rift with Hermione), I was quite 
pleased. :-)

>So, were the people most disappointed in PoA those who PoA was their 
>favorite and were less spoiled?  Or am I way off base?

I expect that, like most things in the HP fandom, it's very individual and 
different people had differing expectations and differing exposure to being 
spoilered, whether deliberately or accidentally. Spoilers have a multitude 
of effects - in my own case I avoid them mainly because I try my best to 
allow any film to tell me all it needs to, without the benefit of hype or 
other previous knowledge. Whilst I'd like to "un-remember" any book I've 
read before I see its movie version, I usually at least avoid looking at it 
for as long as possible.

For instance, I had a very tough time accepting The Bourne Identity last 
year - I finished reading the book on the way to the cinema and whilst the 
movie was a fairly good all-out action/adventure, it had absolutely none of 
the subtlety of the book, and indeed lost the most significant element 
which made it original: the hero is NOT a spy or assassin, but trained to 
appear to be one. What surprised me the most was that Robert Ludlum, who 
had written the book (and its two sequels) was a producer and involved in 
the script. The fact that the author had completely emaciated and gutted 
his own work made me feel that JKR has a right to feel pleased about the 
way her books are being filmed. Sure, the occasional detail is missing, but 
overall, they remain true to the events and personalities (except for 
Wimp!Ron) of her work.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, already despairing for the Bourne movie sequel



From twinslove at mindspring.com  Tue Jun 15 18:37:01 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:37:01 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] new characters in the film
References: <cd.f2f607f.2e008d36@aol.com>
Message-ID: <001401c45307$c29f9010$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: clshannon at aol.com 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 12:34 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] new characters in the film



  In a message dated 6/15/04 6:30:25 AM, artsylynda at aol.com writes:


  > The heads not letting
  > underage wizards in the Three Broomsticks, though -- that's where the kids 
  > go every
  > Hogsmeade visit, so no way would they NOT be allowed??
  > 

  I think the head says, 'no underage wizards TODAY', so maybe it was because 
  McGonagall and Fudge asked them to prohibit the kids from entering that 
  particular day - because of what was discussed ;-)
  Cindy>>


  It did say "today" at the end, because I said the same thing... that is odd that they were not allowed in
  there, and my sister promptly told me they said "today". When I saw it the second time, they clearly said
  "today".  

  Kimberly









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




From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Tue Jun 15 21:18:58 2004
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:18:58 -0000
Subject: Madam Rosmerta
Message-ID: <canp42+vodi@eGroups.com>

Ok.  She gave me the creeps.  Don't quite know how else to put it.  
The look that she and Fudge exchanged in the Three Broomsticks took 
me aback.  It was somewhat suspicious.  Like they were conspiring 
together on.....something.    Noticed it vaguely during the first 
viewing, but it really leapt out at me during the second.  

And, did anyone notice that they had Hermione make a point of 
referencing Rosmerta's effects on males?  Something along the lines 
of all boys fancy Madam Rosmerta.  Julie Christie was quite a looker-
-in her day(70's?).  She's an attractive older woman, but they 
didn't "doll" her up too much for this movie.  Of course, I am 
approaching this as a woman, so perhaps I should ask Hubby's 
opinion.  I just find it strange that they made sure to include that 
comment about her looks.   Could this be a plot point?  Perhaps in a 
future book, Rosmerta's good looks will come into play.  If so, I'm 
guessing it would have something to do with the past (marauders era.)

Toad 




From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 21:43:27 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:43:27 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91DD1@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <canqhv+ah43@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan \(Intl Vendor\)" <v-
tregan at m...> wrote:
>> I found the Aunt Marge scene funny, but Barbara's point has got me
> thinking. Remember this passage from GoF:
>  
> >>> A crowd of wizards, tightly packed and moving together with 
wands
> pointing straight upward, was marching slowly across the field. 
Harry
> squinted at them. . . . They didn't seem to have faces. . . . Then 
he
> realized that their heads were hooded and their faces masked. High 
above
> them, floating along in midair, four struggling figures were being
> contorted into grotesque shapes. It was as though the masked 
wizards on
> the ground were puppeteers, and the people above them were 
marionettes
> operated by invisible strings that rose from the wands into the 
air. Two
> of the figures were very small.... The floating people were 
suddenly illuminated as they passed over a
> burning tent and Harry recognized one of them: Mr. Roberts, the 
campsite
> manager. The other three looked as though they might be his wife and
> children. One of the marchers below flipped Mrs. Roberts upside down
> with his wand; her nightdress fell down to reveal voluminous 
drawers and
> she struggled to cover herself up as the crowd below her screeched 
and
> hooted with glee.
> 
> "That's sick," Ron muttered, watching the smallest Muggle child, 
who had
> begun to spin like a top, sixty feet above the ground, his head 
flopping
> limply from side to side. "That is really sick. . . ." <<<
>  
> Having re-read that passage, is the Aunt Marge scene still funny? 
Less
> so for me.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Dumbledad.
>  
>  
> 
> 
> Yes because the people in GoF were innocent victims while Aunt 
Marge deserved everything that happened to her.

   One of the things that I contemplate about the HP books is the 
fact that the Dursleys have yet to receive any retribution for the 
years of abuse that put Harry though.  Vernon and Petunia, hell 
Dudley too, should be in jail for what they've done. One of the 
things that I hope for in Book7 is the Dursleys finally facing some 
justice. 




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 22:03:48 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:03:48 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <canro4+v7qt@eGroups.com>

 GulPlum  wrote:
> At the Dursleys', Dudley is watching The Generation Game on TV. 
This show went out on Saturday afternoons between around 5 and 6pm 
(depending on the season, it could have started as early as 4.45 or 
as late as 5.15) and lasted 50 minutes (the episode in the movie is 
hosted by Jim Davidson, who did so for 7 seasons between 1995 and 
2002)....

Do you realize you could probably make a galleon or two if you 
decided to publish a collection of this and similar trivia in the HP-
movies? I'd buy it!

Sophia

Do you think there was any particular point to picking The Generation 
Game to play on the telly for this scene? An in-joke for those who 
can figure it out? I mean, PoA is really the beginning of "the 
generation game" for Harry...




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 15 22:06:01 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:06:01 -0000
Subject: Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040615000218.009c27e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <canrs9+3pk2@eGroups.com>

 Jo Serenadust wrote:
>>Harry. Does. Not. Cry. Period.
His eyes may tear up during the boggart lesson, he may be at the
point of breaking down at the end of GoF, but he is quite the stoic
and he would never allow anyone to hear him sob out loud, and
*certainly* not in front of Ron (who he knows darn well is right
there). A Harry who would cry at that point in the story would
never be tough enough to keep himself under control at the end of
GoF when he actually sees a fellow student murdered. The Harry who
cries in POA would break down sobbing after witnessing Sirius die.
Frankly, No actor in the world could have made me believe in a
weeping Harry at that point in his story because it simply goes
against my own perception of who Harry is.<<

Richard responded:
>>My own view is that Harry should simply have been silent.<<

I think that would have worked *much* better. I agree with Jo that 
its completely out of Harry's character to run off and cry like that 
(especially when he knows that Hermione and Ron are outside and will 
follow him). Personally, the scene didn't work on *any* level for me. 
The acting and the sound of the crying was forced (although my 
personaly preference for cinematic crying is the more dramatic silent 
tears), and the scene didn't seem emotional enough to warrent tears. 
Anger? Yes. Tears? That's a stretch. Maybe if Harry were over-
emotional would it make sense for him to break down and cry at that 
point, or if the scene were as strong as it was in the book (with the 
statement that Sirius and James were *best* friends, and the whole 
sectret-keeper thing), but as far as it went in the movie, him 
running off to be alone made sense, but not crying. 

Richard also wrote:
>>As for the screenwriter for OotP, I have a suggestion which a lot 
of people will consider strange, especially coming from me. I suggest 
that the job be given to... Chris Columbus.<<

You know, I think that's not a bad idea. Whoever they choose for 
movie five has to stay in the same adaptation style as Steve Kloves, 
and I think Columbus would do a fine job. I read or heard somewhere 
that he loves the books, and he favors keeping as much of the story 
in as possible (which is good with that long of a book, since another 
screenwriter could end up cutting it to shreads). And anything he'd 
write would be re-interpreted through a directer (and I know I'm not 
the only one hoping Cuaron will come back for OotP). Could be an 
interesting choice.


-Rebecca






From willow58 at comcast.net  Tue Jun 15 22:20:05 2004
From: willow58 at comcast.net (rdhdwldflwr)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:20:05 -0000
Subject: PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cansml+nqef@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joj" <joj at r...> wrote:
> Hi all!  I was wondering how much our expectations played a part in 
how much we like PoA?  I personally liked this movie very much.  It 
lived up to my expectations, which were very high.  PoA though, is 
only my third favorite book.  I'm wondering if the majority of people 
who were disappointed in the movie would consider PoA their favorite 
book?
> 


I didn't like the movie much.  If I had never read the book it would 
have been alright but I think they didn't explain alot for those 
people.  POA was my favorite book.  I wasn't happy with the actor who 
played Lupine, I did like Gary Oldman.  I thought he did a good job.
What happened with Crookshanks?  He was suppose to open the tree, and 
how did Lupine and Snape know (from watching the movie) that they 
were all in the Shreiking Shack?  I also didn't like the look of the 
werewolf.  And as someone else I know say, and I agreed, we thought 
Harry was going to yell "I'm on top of the world" when he was flying 
on Buckbeak.  Too Titanic.   I'm glad this guy only got to director 
(read butcher) one movie.


"rdhdwldflwr"




From siviax3 at cox.net  Tue Jun 15 21:46:45 2004
From: siviax3 at cox.net (Siviax3)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:46:45 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
References: <camnev+gjur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a401c45327$8a7a3030$3ff86944@CarolynsComp>

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: banovaz 


  [snip]

  But my take out on the foreshadowed story line relates to the early 
  scene with the Aunt Marge - and Harry's uncontrollable righteous 
  anger.
  It seems to me that this scene sees him breaking glasses, lights 
  flickering on and off, blowing up his aunt from an apparent discharge 
  of magic , Are the swings and play equipment swinging wildly around 
  without reason or an aftermath of a large magical discharge from 
  Harry ? is it wandless magic ? is it a magical response to 
  injustice ? well really who knows but JKR, but

  When Harry has righteous anger  - he can do amazing things 

  He may not be able to cast an unforgiveable with his righteous anger 
  as per Bellatrix Lestrange's observation in OOPT , but in this movie 
  and in canon he can cast a patronus that drives away 50 + dementors 
  and he can blow up a frightful aunt. ( Once he made a window 
  disappear at London Zoo)
  [snip]



Along these same lines, there's another scene that shows Harry's power, and - I think - shows Harry's potential strength.  In the Shrieking Shack, we see the Expelliarmus spell used several times, but only Harry sends a person flying across the room using that simple spell.  We do, of course, have to temper this with Snape throwing Lockhart across the room with Expelliarmus in Chamber of Secrets, but that may have simply been something that was overlooked and not thought to be important at the time.  We also have to keep in mind that in the book, it took three people saying the same spell at the same time toward the same person to knock Snape across the room, but I think in the movie it was definitely meant to show Harry's "untrained" power.

You said something also about the "power that LV knows not."  My take on that is that the power in question is Love, and Harry's capacity to feel love - or at least caring - for another.  That's what's going to be LV's downfall - compassion.

Carolyn




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 23:03:17 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:03:17 +0100
Subject: The Generation Game (was ... Aunt Marge scene)
In-Reply-To: <canro4+v7qt@eGroups.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615234234.009e9e00@plum.cream.org>

At 23:03 15/06/04 , Sophia wrote:
>  GulPlum  wrote:
> > At the Dursleys', Dudley is watching The Generation Game on TV.

<snip>

>Do you realize you could probably make a galleon or two if you
>decided to publish a collection of this and similar trivia in the HP-
>movies? I'd buy it!

Why bother? :-) There are plenty of web sites which include such nuggets 
for free (the "trivia" link on any movie's page on IMdB is a good place to 
start). Not to mention various fan sites and forums like this one, where 
obsessed fans pick apart their favoured cultural artefacts for 
cross-references. Besides, I don't want to make money, I just want to show 
off. :-)

>Do you think there was any particular point to picking The Generation Game 
>to play on the telly for this scene? An in-joke for those who can figure 
>it out? I mean, PoA is really the beginning of "the generation game" for 
>Harry...

There isn't a single doubt in my mind that the reference was deliberate. 
Cuaron is just the kind of director who'd do that kind of thing (Terry 
Gilliam, Quentin Tarantino and Tim Burton are a few others who immediately 
spring to mind).

I can just imagine the pre-production meeting with Stuart Craig (set 
designer, who happens to be British):
"So, Alfonso, what's Dudley going to be watching on TV?"
"Well, Stuart, I don't know British television shows from the nineties. Was 
there something crass and idiotic in the early evening schedules that 
someone as vapid and stupid as Dudley might watch?"
"Er, well, dinner time is too late for kids TV, but there was "Noel's House 
Party" but - hey - what about 'The Generation Game'?"
Alfonso falls off his chair laughing, crying out: "Who made it? Get clearance!"

I must admit that the first time I saw the movie, I was about 50/50 certain 
that it was TGG, but the second time (on the same day; sad? moi?) I paid 
closer attention and by the end of the scene, I was up to about 80% 
certain. By the end of the credits, I was up 99%: why else would the list 
of acknowledgments include "BBC Enterprises" (which is the part of the BBC 
which clears use of all BBC recordings for commercial use)? The only doubt 
in my mind was that Jim Davidson has done other stupid shows for the BBC.

The third time I saw the film, I was already giggling when we saw the first 
shot of the TV, as I was up to 100%. :-)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, currently running Cuaron's 'Great Expectations'  on 
the TV for background inspiration



From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 15 23:27:33 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:27:33 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Madam Rosmerta
In-Reply-To: <canp42+vodi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616001215.009c2950@plum.cream.org>

At 22:18 15/06/04 , jksunflower2002 wrote:
>Ok.  She gave me the creeps.  Don't quite know how else to put it.
>The look that she and Fudge exchanged in the Three Broomsticks took
>me aback.  It was somewhat suspicious.  Like they were conspiring
>together on.....something.    Noticed it vaguely during the first
>viewing, but it really leapt out at me during the second.

To be brutally honest, I think it was simply bad acting. I think she was 
meant to be annoyed with Fudge for the Dementors chasing her customers 
away. And that  hand gesture when she says "tell me what THIS is all about" 
is one of my biggest acting annoyances in the movie.

(To be brutally honest Part Two: I've never really rated Julie Christie as 
an actress, with the possible exception of Fahrenheit 451 - don't get me 
started on Doctor Zhivago!; she was one hell of a looker in her time, but 
that's about it - all IMO, of course.)

>And, did anyone notice that they had Hermione make a point of referencing 
>Rosmerta's effects on males?  Something along the lines of all boys fancy 
>Madam Rosmerta.

"Ron fancies her."
"No, I don't."

I think that line was meant to achieve three things. First, it mirrors 
Ron's line from CoS about Lockhart: "Mum fancies him". Second, I think it's 
setting up Ron's falling for Fleur in GoF (indicating his shallowness in 
matters of the heart). Third, I think it's a little nod to Julie Christie's 
past as one hell of a sex symbol in the 70s.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who always preferred Glenda Jackson (yes, I'm weird) :-)



From willow58 at comcast.net  Tue Jun 15 22:37:07 2004
From: willow58 at comcast.net (rdhdwldflwr)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:37:07 -0000
Subject: A question about dementors
In-Reply-To: <200406151212.i5FCCLKw079092@mail6.mx.voyager.net>
Message-ID: <cantmj+v5ec@eGroups.com>

I believe they turned into bat like creatures.  I did not like the 
way they were shown in POA or the mile high flight for the snitch 
which the dementors acting like ghosts.





From siviax3 at cox.net  Tue Jun 15 23:34:34 2004
From: siviax3 at cox.net (Siviax3)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 18:34:34 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge  scene
References: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <02ea01c45332$f2252f90$3ff86944@CarolynsComp>

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: GulPlum 


  [snip]
  One way or the other, Harry leaves the house and we see Marge floating into 
  the fairly light dusk. The shot changes but it's now pitch black. Sorry, 
  but it takes a good half hour to get from dusk to pitch black in Southern 
  England in August. Although there's a bit of a jolt with the shot change, 
  it seems to pick up where the previous one left off.
  [snip]



For whatever it's worth, I had gotten the impression that some time *had* passed between Harry leaving the house and him arriving at the park.

Carolyn  :)




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 00:16:00 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:16:00 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Reflections of PoA (Spoilers)
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bcf27bfa0609@[217.154.252.116]>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040615211444.009cd720@plum.cream.org>

At 23:22 13/06/04 , Nicholas wrote:

<big snip>

I'm a bit peeved at you, Nick. I had been planning to write up this topic 
myself, but you beat me to it. :-) Nevertheless, I still have a few things 
to add.

>-In the DADA class with the Boggart, the scene ends with Harry staring at
>his reflection in the cupboard door.

Small note: the scene also starts with a "reverse reflection" shot (it 
seems as if the camera comes from out of the wardrobe through the mirror).

<more great observations snipped>

"Reflections" seem to be one of Cuaron's stocks-in-trade. He also has a 
thing about looking at people through windows, etc., or otherwise 
physically separated from the camera, especially during intimate scenes. An 
example: one of the most intimate scenes in PoA is Harry and Lupin on the 
bridge talking about James and Lily: they are on opposite sides of the 
walkway and we're looking at them through the arches. I interpret this kind 
of shot, as I've already said elsewhere, as Cuaron's way of saying "look, 
these people are 'doing' *personal* stuff. We shouldn't really be watching 
them". (This is a far cry from Columbus's way, which is to draw in 
ultra-close and cut between the faces.)

I (re)watched Y Tu Mama the other day, and both elements recur several 
times. I'm running his version of Great Expectations (which I've not 
watched for ages) as I type and the same thing is true. There's one 
sequence in particular when Finn (aka Pip) is drawing a picture of Estella. 
We see his finished picture which is then superimposed not on Gwynneth 
Paltrow's face (which is a fairly cliched cinematic move) but on her 
reflection. (There is a theory in behavioural science that one measure of 
"beauty" is how close a face comes to being perfectly symmetrical; I think 
that was one of the points Alfonso was making here.)

I really must get my hands on A Little Princess...

Widening the "reflection" theme, PoA is full of various kinds of "pairs", 
some more subtle than others. One which jumped out at me (mainly because 
neither event appears to serve any narrative or cinematic purpose) is that 
during the COMC lesson, Malfoy munches on an apple; during the Boggart 
lesson, Lupin is eating one as well. Any theories as to a possible 
significance? Is he being Biblical ("the forbidden fruit"), or what?

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, with only 159 messages to go before being caught up 
with *this* list (and several hundred more on other lists)...



From tubadave at normalview.com  Wed Jun 16 00:24:21 2004
From: tubadave at normalview.com (Big D)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:24:21 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15B91DD1@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <cao3vl+3k30@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan \(Intl Vendor\)" <v-
tregan at m...> wrote:

> I found the Aunt Marge scene funny, but Barbara's point has got me
> thinking. Remember this passage from GoF:
>  

<snip of Muggle persecution after QWC in GoF>

>  
> Having re-read that passage, is the Aunt Marge scene still funny? 
Less
> so for me.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Dumbledad.
>  


Like most of the opening night audience that saw it with me, I found 
the Aunt Marge scene to be incredibly funny, and saw nothing 
disturbing about it at all. I would have a hard time drawing a 
parallel to the aforementioned scene from GoF, because what happened 
there was the unprovoked torture and persecution of innocent 
bystanders (the Roberts family.) What happened with Aunt Marge was 
not something that Harry did intentionally...and besides, she 
probably deserved it anyway.

Big D






From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 00:51:10 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 20:51:10 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Generation Game (was ... Aunt Marge scene)
Message-ID: <1cf.239b3180.2e00f37e@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 4:05:34 PM, hp at plum.cream.org writes:


> There isn't a single doubt in my mind that the reference was deliberate.
> Cuaron is just the kind of director who'd do that kind of thing (Terry
> Gilliam, Quentin Tarantino and Tim Burton are a few others who immediately
> spring to mind).
> 

Well, I myself had no idea what the show was, being an American who has never 
heard of Generation Game ;-) So I guess the reference was lost to some 
members of the audience. But it is a nice thought that they picked that show for the 
reasons you mentioned.
Also, I thought it was funny that Dudley is watching two   television sets 
within close proximity to one another - it was like they had two sets to cover 
his eye view if he happened to turn ;-)
All in all,I was glad to actually see a television set since in the books, 
Dudley and the rest of the family are Muggles and they do watch tv, like the 
rest of us Muggles ;-) In the first two films, their home seemed more like a set 
than a house - in this one, it looked like people actually lived there.
Cindy


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 01:25:35 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:25:35 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge 
  scene
In-Reply-To: <02ea01c45332$f2252f90$3ff86944@CarolynsComp>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616021053.009ed5e0@plum.cream.org>

At 00:34 16/06/04 , Carolyn replied to my previous post with:

>For whatever it's worth, I had gotten the impression that some time *had* 
>passed between Harry leaving the house and him arriving at the park.

I'm *really* not being argumentative here, I'm just trying to elicit an 
explanation for my own satisfaction: what gave you that impression? Yes, I 
know it's a difficult question to answer, but as I said before, there's a 
definite visual jolt between the two shots, which is the reason I agree 
that some people might infer a discontinuity. However, again the *action* 
seems fairly fluid and continuous: Harry's stride remains angry and 
defiant, his breathing is consistent from shot to shot, and I can see no 
dramatic reason for implying a pause in the action there. If he'd been 
walking for a while, his stride would have broken and his breathing would 
have slowed. This is exactly what happens when he stops and lays down the 
trunk.

To add to my previous pieces of Brit-specific trivia, the kind of housing 
estate on which the Dursleys live can generally be crossed from side to 
side fairly quickly (this isn't the USA, where there are huge spaces 
between houses). And virtually all of them have a traffic roundabout at 
their entrance. :-)

(The non-story reason for the discontinuity is glaringly obvious: the two 
sequences were not filmed at the same time, nor even on the same evening, 
but that's not what I'm talking about. Furthermore, from what I can gather 
from the set reports available online, these scenes were filmed in February 
- standing in for August. Brrrrr!) :-)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who isn't going to be able to catch up on everything 
before bedtime after all :-(



From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 01:43:27 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:43:27 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Generation Game (was ... Aunt Marge
  scene)
In-Reply-To: <1cf.239b3180.2e00f37e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616023448.00999a00@plum.cream.org>

At 01:51 16/06/04 , Cindy replied to my previous:

> > There isn't a single doubt in my mind that the reference was deliberate.
> > Cuaron is just the kind of director who'd do that kind of thing (Terry
> > Gilliam, Quentin Tarantino and Tim Burton are a few others who immediately
> > spring to mind).
>
>Well, I myself had no idea what the show was, being an American who has 
>never heard of Generation Game ;-) So I guess the reference was lost to some
>members of the audience. But it is a nice thought that they picked that 
>show for the reasons you mentioned.

I'm perfectly aware that the reference would be lost on all non-Brits (and 
a significant proportion of Brits as well, as the show isn't *that* easily 
identifiable - it's not as if they play the signature tune), which is one 
reason I went into such detail about it. I'm sure (in fact, I *know*) that 
some details and puns in the books  are lost on Brits without explanation, 
so I consider it behoves us Brits to pass on such gems. :-)

>Also, I thought it was funny that Dudley is watching two   television sets
>within close proximity to one another - it was like they had two sets to 
>cover
>his eye view if he happened to turn ;-)
>All in all,I was glad to actually see a television set since in the books,
>Dudley and the rest of the family are Muggles and they do watch tv, like the
>rest of us Muggles ;-) In the first two films, their home seemed more like 
>a set
>than a house - in this one, it looked like people actually lived there.

I wouldn't go quite that far, but I will agree that any Muggle home seems 
incomplete without a TV in evidence. :-) In this case, it helps underline 
the very "Muggleness" of the Dursleys' existence, and Dudley's in 
particular: it's interesting that he's the only one paying any attention to 
the TV (in addition to the TV taking up *all* his attention).

I only just realised while writing that sentence, that he doesn't actually 
utter a single word in the movie. He only gives a couple of grunts when hit 
by Marge's buttons, but otherwise - nada.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, in Brit trivia mode



From jmmears at comcast.net  Wed Jun 16 01:47:24 2004
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:47:24 -0000
Subject: Madam Rosmerta
In-Reply-To: <canp42+vodi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cao8rc+opeg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jksunflower2002" 
<mkeller01 at a...> wrote:
   
> And, did anyone notice that they had Hermione make a point of 
> referencing Rosmerta's effects on males?  Something along the 
lines 
> of all boys fancy Madam Rosmerta.  Julie Christie was quite a 
looker-
> -in her day(70's?).  She's an attractive older woman, but they 
> didn't "doll" her up too much for this movie.  Of course, I am 
> approaching this as a woman, so perhaps I should ask Hubby's 
> opinion.  I just find it strange that they made sure to include 
that 
> comment about her looks.   Could this be a plot point?  Perhaps in 
a 
> future book, Rosmerta's good looks will come into play. 

I'm pretty sure after 2 viewings that Hermione says that "Ron 
fancies Madam Rosmerta", and nothing about anyone else fancying her.
My interpretation is that it was referring to something that's 
heavily implied in the book.

In Chapter 10 of PoA (pg. 200, Scholastic) it says:

A curvy sort of woman with a pretty face was serving a bunch of 
rowdy warlocks up at the bar.
"That's Madam Rosmerta," said Ron.  "I'll get the drinks, shall I?" 
he added, going slightly red.

It seemed that this was how the filmmakers chose to illustrate that 
Ron has noticed the "curvy" Rosemerta and that Hermione may be 
slightly irked by this ;-).

Jo S.




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 02:41:35 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 03:41:35 +0100
Subject: More PoA details (was: I liked the movie too) (Catching up)
In-Reply-To: <ca3fj0+u7mu@eGroups.com>
References: <ca1oqr+p7cb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616024411.009dc960@plum.cream.org>

Short comments on a few issues in this excellent post from last week...

At 05:33 08/06/04 , dan wrote:

>And the audiences I shared the movie with loved the shrunken head,
>all of the Knight bus, loved the "When did she get here? Did you see
>her come in?" lines of Ron.

Something I liked about this movie was that despite book readers (or the 
eagle-eyed new viewer) knowing that Hermione had just turned up out of the 
blue, there's a nice little sequence which questions whether we're *sure* 
that it's not just a case of Ron being dumb and unobservant.

When everyone returns from the Hogsmease visit, and the Trio & co are going 
up the staircase towards the Fat Lady (who's been attacked), someone (I 
forget who) asks what all the commotion is about. Ron says "I suppose 
Neville's forgotten the password again" (assuming that Neville is in the 
crowd at the top of the stairs) - we can clearly see Neville standing right 
behind Ron, and when Neville makes some complaining remark, Ron says "oh, 
there you are".

Incidentally, that scene is representative of something else as well: 
little nods in the direction of the book fans, who think that a scene from 
the book is coming up when it's something else (in this case, the excised 
sequence about Sirius getting his paws on Neville's list of passwords). 
There are a few other scenes like that.


>By the way, I don't recall there being anything actually laugh funny in 
>the Columbus travesties.

I've been meaning to mention this point, so here's a good a place as any. 
Over the weekend, I sat down and watched the first two movies on DVD 
*properly* (as in sitting in front of the screen and not doing anything 
else), for the first time probably since I got them. Whilst I disagree that 
there are no laugh-out funny lines at all in the first two movies 
(something which has entered my family's daily activities is Hagrid's 
"sorry about that" when knocking down the hut door in PS/SS, and I still 
managed a laugh when watching it), such moments are few and far between. 
The visual gags are too slapstick for an adult audience (certainly for my 
taste), and some of the funnier lines lose some of their punch in the 
delivery. The humour in PoA, however, was perfectly timed and wonderfully 
delivered. for instance, I cannot help but smile every time I think of 
Ron's completely absurd "bad idea, bad idea - good doggie, good doggie" 
line after Lupin's transformation. And the first time I saw it, I roared 
with laughter, despite the seriousness (pun not intended) of the scene.

>Nor, in fact, do I recall there being anything creepy in his failed attempts.

Strangely enough, when re-watching CoS on Sunday, Lockhart's speech ending 
with "prepare to lose your memories" sent a real shiver down my spine which 
it had never done before. Much as I disliked Branagh's performance (I 
thought he was dreadfully mis-cast) it really brought home what a seriously 
warped person he is.

<snip>

>So, any overt reflection of Real World London in early movie scenes is 
>canon. Perhaps the sense of grime some complained about is just that - 
>downtown London.

I don't think I agree with you on that. Yes, most of central London is 
fairly grimy, but I don't think that was the point at all. As it happens, 
the Leaky Cauldron interior is no more grimy in this movie than it was in 
PS/SS. In some respects, it was even worse before, as there were definite 
cobwebs here and there. But the plaster on the walls was peeling, the 
counter was dirty and the clientele ... rough. The same goes for 
Ollivander's shop, the Gryffindor common room and dorm, and even, dare I 
say it, the Great Hall.

So I really don't understand the criticisms of how dirty the magical world 
looks in PoA. Sure, the lighting accentuates the grime a little more, but 
it was always there!

>As I said before too, the train wasn't the Santa Claus Express, but a pretty
>fair example of a train running, say, between Manchester and London,
>like the one on which our author found her story.

Actually, as any Londoner would tell you, the train Harry sees through his 
window is nothing of the sort. :-) It's a London commuter train, in the 
livery of Connex South Central (yellow with blue stripes). I doubt this was 
intentional (90% of the trains running across that particular bridge would 
be in Connex colours), but Connex is (or was) one of the most Muggle train 
companies imaginable. They were so incompetent that they had their 
franchise taken away from them (the first - and if I'm not mistaken, only - 
UK train company since privatisation to meet that fate).

When I lived in London, I had to take a Connex train every day, and I do 
recall that one day some bright spark had spray painted the word "Muggle" 
over every instance of "Connex" on display at my station. :-)

However, on the subject of trains and proximity of the magical world, 
something new in this movie is that when the Hogwarts Express is leaving 
Kings Cross, a Muggle train is perfectly visible at the next platform with 
passengers seemingly oblivious to the steam train milling around it. Now, 
*that* train (dark blue) was most likely headed for Manchester (the real 
platform 4 at which it was standing, serves those trains).

In Columbus's vision, in contrast, Platform 9 3/4 appears completely 
disconnected from the Muggle world. this actually annoyed me, as the cover 
of the British edition of PS clearly shows a standard diesel locomotive 
behind the Hogwarts Express.

>Dan, who loved the movie as cinema and as HP theorist and fan

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who always sees himself as primarily a movie fan, 
secondly a movie theorist, thirdly a HP fan and fourthly a HP theorist, and 
watches the HP movies accordingly. :-)




From editor at texas.net  Wed Jun 16 02:53:20 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:53:20 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Sirius growling
References: <BCF40805.EDA%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <004b01c4534d$15ac0a00$9559aacf@texas.net>

The McGee asked a question I'd been wondering:

> (BTW, why did Sirius growl at Harry?-- just before Harry got on the
> Knight Bus).

I had a thought. It may have been shock, on Sirius' part. They gave the line
to him later: "You do look astonishingly like James" or whatever the exact
words are. You've escaped from a high-security prison where you hung on to
your humanity because you can become an animal, and where you have no happy
thoughts to hang on to, and even if you go looking for Harry, to have him
suddenly in front of you looking *exactly* like James might provoke a
reaction. And a shocked or startled reaction from a dog would be, well, a
growl or a bark.

~Amanda, not believing she's defending anyone who dislikes Snape like Sirius
does.




From catportkey at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 01:25:08 2004
From: catportkey at aol.com (catportkey at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:25:08 EDT
Subject: visual depth
Message-ID: <86.e5fe8f8.2e00fb74@aol.com>

Visually there was more depth to POA.  Especially when it came to landscape. 
In the first two films everything seemed to be on the same plane, almost flat. 
The 3 would run out of Hogwarts and turn left, and down a gentle slope to 
Hagrid's house.
In POA it had the terrane of Scotland with hills and glens and valleys -- 
rocks and boulders jutting out of the ground -- very Stonehenge or Celtic 
feeling.  

As for the acting -- under the new Director they blossomed.  Dan wasn't just 
opening his eyes wider each time he was scared -- he was actually acting.

I felt the most important part of the story was left out.  When Lupin tells 
Harry who made the map. 

Pook


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





From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 04:02:35 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 21:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <20040616040235.2031.qmail@web40605.mail.yahoo.com>

GulPlum notes thatL

> side fairly quickly (this isn't the USA, where there
are huge spaces 
> between houses). And virtually all of them have a
traffic 
> roundabout at 
> their entrance. :-)

Huge spaces between houses? Well, between very, very
expensive houses
maybe. But on the US West coast, where I live, even
expensive homes,
costing over $500,000 each, are very often on small
lots with very
little space between the homes. I'm sure there are
parts of US where
land is cheap and the lots are huge, but that is most
certainly NOT a
true statement for much of USA.

Suzanne



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




From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Wed Jun 16 05:09:32 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:09:32 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth
In-Reply-To: <86.e5fe8f8.2e00fb74@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c45360$1d5a75d0$6400a8c0@Desktop>

I severely dislike POA the movie but I appreciate the stunning visuals and
stronger acting involved.  The visuals and acting however do not make the
movie.  They are important aspects to any movie but hopefully not the
definitive ones.  I felt that the plot was too weakened by lack of detail.
As I said before, if felt like Cliff notes made into a movie.

 

I searched for a forum to talk about this movie because I felt that it had
changed the odds of all movies being made.  After the commercial success of
the first two movies I, and most others, took for granted that all seven
movies will be made.  I am unsure whether I will be seeing the forth movie
in theaters or buying POA, I do not think I am the only one with this
dilemma.

 

Trevor 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: catportkey at aol.com [mailto:catportkey at aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 6:25 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth

 

Visually there was more depth to POA.  Especially when it came to landscape.

In the first two films everything seemed to be on the same plane, almost
flat. 
The 3 would run out of Hogwarts and turn left, and down a gentle slope to 
Hagrid's house.
In POA it had the terrane of Scotland with hills and glens and valleys -- 
rocks and boulders jutting out of the ground -- very Stonehenge or Celtic 
feeling.  

As for the acting -- under the new Director they blossomed.  Dan wasn't just

opening his eyes wider each time he was scared -- he was actually acting.

I felt the most important part of the story was left out.  When Lupin tells 
Harry who made the map. 

Pook 



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




From 12499 at msn.com  Wed Jun 16 05:59:20 2004
From: 12499 at msn.com (pitaprh)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 05:59:20 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <caonjo+8c94@eGroups.com>

GULPLUM said - 
At the end of August in Surrey, it doesn't start getting dark until 
after
about 7.30pm and official sunset is around 8pm. Marge takes off into 
dusk.

- Me - 
When he got to the park everything was wet.  Had it been raining?  
That could account for it getting darker faster?




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Wed Jun 16 06:07:57 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 06:07:57 -0000
Subject: Animals in the movie- Was-Who is the bulldog?  The scoop!
In-Reply-To: <cakkn3+cupj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <caoo3t+6jsc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "persephonegladrags"
<JTallulahmae at a...> wrote:
> I received a very nice reply from Birds and Animals UK on the REAL 
> Ripper-the bulldog.  Here it is for those who are interested.  Karen, 
> thanks again for pointing me in the right direction!
> 
> PG

> Ripper is played by our wonderful "team" of Bulldogs.  The team is 
> made up by Jack, George, and Winston...all of whom are great, and 
> they were trained by Sue and Julie.  Each of them were rescue dogs.  
> They're favourite bit was being trained the "tug"!!!!
>  
> Whenever we have a major animal character (i.e. Ripper, Crookshanks, 
> Hedwig, Fang, Mrs Norris, Prof McGonagal, etc)  we always use 
> a "team" of 2-4 animals.  The reason for this is simply for the 
> animals' benefit.  That way the "work" gets shared out.  The other 
> wonderful thing about using a "team" is that every animal is an 
> individual, and where one enjoys something another might not.  So, 
> for example, we usually have one animal that is very steady and 
> will "sit and stay" for long periods of time.  At the same time, 
> another one would probably enjoy the action shots more and not enjoy 
> sitting still for very long.  With the Cat Teams we also will have 
> one that just loves being held, and that will be our "holding cat".
>  
> I hope this answers your question, though it be in a roundabout way.
>  
> Thank you,
> Jen Swallow
> Administrator
>  
> Birds & Animals UK
> Leavesden Studios,
> South Way,
> Leavesden,
> Herts. WD25 7LT
>  
> 01923 685146
> 07939 035376
>  
> Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not 
> necessarily represent those of Birds & Animals UK unless specifically 
> stated. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and 
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they 
> are addressed.
> 
> 
Glad to have helped PG :)  For those who have been wondering about the
other animals in the film  go to this site
http://www.birdsandanimals.com/contact_us.htm

Karen




From 12499 at msn.com  Wed Jun 16 06:23:03 2004
From: 12499 at msn.com (pitaprh)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 06:23:03 -0000
Subject: Anyone seen POA at IMAX yet?
Message-ID: <caop07+jjr7@eGroups.com>

Just wondering if it is worth it to go see it at an IMAX theater?
(I have already seen it twice).




From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 06:27:08 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:27:08 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Anyone seen POA at IMAX yet?
Message-ID: <6.2bbb8bc9.2e01423c@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/15/04 11:25:06 PM, 12499 at msn.com writes:


> Just wondering if it is worth it to go see it at an IMAX theater?
> (I have already seen it twice).
> 

As I've mentioned before (and I believe some others have as well), it is 
definitely worth it! Much more detail, better color, better sound...very much 
worth it ;)
Cindy


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




From 12499 at msn.com  Wed Jun 16 06:26:56 2004
From: 12499 at msn.com (pitaprh)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 06:26:56 -0000
Subject: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <BCF40A5F.EE0%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caop7g+79d3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> This is probably a rhetorical question, but during the lake scene 
when
> Sirius's soul is getting sucked out, one sees a few sparkles of 
light come
> out of his mouth. Then nothing (I assume  he's dead, or at least 
soul-dead,
> at that point). Then the big deer patronus and the light goes back 
in his
> mouth, and he gasps for breath. That's a visual for his soul, yes? 
Cool
> effect. Scary too.

I thought the soul was sucked out only when the Dementors did 
the "kiss".  So that part of the movie somewhat confused me.  They 
weren't performing the "kiss", were they?  I don't think so.  So what 
was that?




From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 09:03:05 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:03:05 -0000
Subject: PoA expectations
In-Reply-To: <001801c45273$375858f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cap2c9+gqoq@eGroups.com>

>>I was wondering how much our expectations played a part in how much 
we like PoA? I personally liked this movie very much. It lived up to 
my expectations, which were very high. PoA though, is only my third 
favorite book. I'm wondering if the majority of people who were 
disappointed in the movie would consider PoA their favorite book?<<

PoA is *easily* my favorite book of the series, and with the new 
director and all, I went into the movie with very high expectations. 
And I felt like it met all of those. Of course, I love PoA for the 
overall plot as much as I love the little details. And the overall 
plot was there, even if a few of the details were changed or left 
out. As I said in a previous post, even the things that were left out 
(besides the quidditch cup), were hinted at. Yes, the audience is 
never *told* who the mauraders really are, but Lupin and Sirius still 
know about the map / how to use it (and a few people have said their 
nicknames slip in a few times during the SS scene...I missed that 
myself, but will take their word for it). The firebolt comes later, 
but it still comes, and its still from Sirius (even if we miss out on 
his letter, and the build-up for how *fantastic* / *expensive* the 
firebolt is). We are never told the specifics of the Sirius / Snape / 
James / Lupin relationship, but its still there. Snape still hates 
Sirius, and Sirius still acts childish about it. 

>>Another thing I wonder about, is if people who were less "spoiled" 
were more disappointed?<<

I was spoiled. I read every article, every review, watched every 
clip, every trailer and every interview I could get a hold of. I knew 
every major change before I went into the theater. And I do think 
that helped. Knowing what was left out beforehand made it less 
distracting, I knew what to expect, and was able to enjoy the movie 
without worrying if a certain scene was going to be there or not (as 
in, I didn't spend the whole movie looking forward to the Snape-
Hospital scene only to be disappointed and angry when it wasn't 
there...I was disappointed and angry a few weeks beforehand when I 
found out it wasn't there).


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 09:58:57 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:58:57 -0000
Subject: visual depth
In-Reply-To: <000f01c45360$1d5a75d0$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <cap5l1+bf1f@eGroups.com>

Trevor wrote:
>>I searched for a forum to talk about this movie because I felt that 
it had changed the odds of all movies being made. After the 
commercial success of the first two movies I, and most others, took 
for granted that all seven movies will be made.<<

I am unsure why you think PoA changed the odds of all seven movies 
being made. As far as money goes (the main consideration for making 
all of the books into movies), PoA opened higher than the other two 
(US wise SS/PS was at $90mil, CoS was at $88mil) with $92million in 
its first weekend, and had a *record* first day in the UK. And, 
according to Box Office Mojo [ 
http://boxofficemojo.com/articles/news/?id=040606bo.htm ] PoA managed 
to get a slightly higher aged audience, which is very important to 
continuing the franchise (as each book gets darker and less 
appropriate for small children). Also, the reviews for the first two 
movies were rather good (as much as I recall at least), and PoA has 
been about the same. As far as critics go, its not quite Lord of the 
Rings, but its not Cat in the Hat either. (as book adaptations go)
Fanwise, for every person that I've heard say they liked the first 
two better, there's another one saying they liked this one better. Go 
figure, I guess. Either way, most people (that I've heard from, at 
least) did not dislike PoA enough to make them not want to see Goblet 
of Fire.

Anyway, if you didn't like it because of the cuts, then you shouldn't 
go see GoF, because I'm sure it'll be much worse (cuts-wise, quality 
is still an unknown at this point). (not saying that to be 
argumentative, just suggesting you should save yourself the grief). 

Time will tell on the DVD release of PoA, but personally I think 
it'll do just as well as the first two. People are often more willing 
to buy something for their kids then they will for themself and 
children are rather indiscriminate (e.g. they are up to Beethoven 
FIVE now, and Home Alone FOUR, and children still flock to them 
despite the low production values and the completely different cast), 
so they'll want it because its Harry Potter, no matter how good or 
bad it is. 


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 10:10:16 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:10:16 -0000
Subject: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <caop7g+79d3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cap6a8+gtnj@eGroups.com>

pitaprh wrote:
>>I thought the soul was sucked out only when the Dementors did
the "kiss". So that part of the movie somewhat confused me. They
weren't performing the "kiss", were they? I don't think so. So what
was that?<<

Yeah, I thought that was a little off too. As far as the intention of 
that scene was, I think it was supposed to be his soul, but that 
doesn't quite fit with the book or the movie's own continuity. In the 
shrieking shack scene Snape mentions the Dementer's Kiss and says 
its "unbearable to witness" which fits with the descriptions of it 
from the books, but what happens to Sirius on the lake is hardly a 
kiss or unbearable to witness. Perhaps it was just his "lifeforce" or 
something of that nature leaving his body, making him just dead, 
not 'alive-but-without-a-soul'. This would fit with him waking up and 
gasping when the light goes back into his mouth. 


-Rebecca




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 10:28:27 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:28:27 -0000
Subject: Going to PoA at IMAX -an interesting experience
Message-ID: <cap7cb+ho1d@eGroups.com>

I went to see PoA the IMAX theater tonight and it was quite an 
interesting experience in several unusual ways.  

The IMAX theater had cardboard decorations on the walls going into 
the theater to make it look like stone walls and there was a string 
of lights on the ceiling that were designed to look like flames as 
well as a hanging light with blowing orange tissue flames that 
looked like a miniature version of the large flaming bowls that hang 
in the great hall in the movies.  My son went to the bathroom and 
came back laughing because the theater had the sounds of sniffling, 
crying and moaning noises along with a loud splashing noise in the 
bathroom as if Moaning Myrtle was haunting the toilets and had 
suddenly flown down one of them!  I wish I'd visited the ladies room 
to see if they were playing those noises in them too!  :(  Darn!

Once in the theater, we were treated to a short audio and visual 
presentation about IMAX, which lit up the area behind the screen so 
we could see the speakers behind it and hear the crystal clear sound 
(and was it ever!) of the speakers all over the theater.  
Immediately after this presentation ended, an audience member said 
loudly into the silence "sweet!", which made everyone laugh.  

The movie began straight away and the overall picture was much 
lighter with lots more detail visible.  For example, we could see 
the details in Harry's bedroom window immediately the first time it 
lit up.  The rainy streets of Little Whinging that Harry walks down 
after leaving the Dursleys was not nearly as dark for another 
example.  And everything *definitely* looked grittier and dirtier.  
Everything from the Leaky Cauldron to the Hogwart's Express to the 
desks in the DADA classroom to the teacups in Trelawney's class 
looked well-worn from years and years of usage.  

This is my fourth time seeing this movie, so this didn't bother me 
that much, but for about the first fifteen minutes of the movie, the 
sound syncrhonization of the movie was a tiny bit off (about 1/2 a 
second).   Amazing how we can pick up this teeny detail in sound.  

Anyway, during several scenes in the movie, the first time when 
Harry was approaching Buckbeak in the distant shot, the picture went 
blurry, but then immediately corrected itself.  It happened again 
when Harry had just fought the boggart dementor and was sitting with 
Lupin talking about his happy thought.  The screen blurred again a 
couple more times, each for only about 1/4 of a second.  I have no 
idea why it did this.

The Quidditch scene was much more enjoyable because I could see more 
details, including facial expressions, in the crowds of students, 
Dumbledore and McGonagall and in Harry's reaction to the dementors 
and Diggory's (if they admit it was him) reaction to being hit by 
lightning.  

The whomping willow attacking Harry and Hermione was even better 
visually as every little twig on that mean tree was in sharp 
detail.  And, after four viewings, I too am being to wonder how 
Hermione threw Harry into the tunnel and then threw herself into the 
tunnel afterwards...but I digress....

Then we reached the part of the movie where Snape had just come out 
of the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to yell at Harry, Hermione 
and Ron while not realizing werewolf Lupin was behind him....and the 
screen went black, yet the sounds in the movie continued, consisting 
of mostly snarling and growling.  The audience looked around and 
after about 10 seconds of this, the film stopped.  Everyone 
went "awwwwww" and one lone voice howled like a wolf....the audience 
all laughed.  The bulb must have went out on the projector because 
the next thing we saw on the screen was the shadow of a VERY large 
hand screwing in a lightbulb.  LOL  The movie started again with 
werewolf Lupin being jumped by dog Sirius to distract him from Snape 
and the trio, so we missed the werewolf giving the smackdown to 
Snape.  :(  

The movie continued on to the end with no more interruptions or 
distracting goofs.  What was surprising that no one in the audience 
was in a bad mood or fussing to the theater employees about the 
glitches in the presentation.  It truly was amazing how good a mood 
the audience members were in after so many glitches.  I know I 
didn't sweat it (it was kind of funny at times, actually), but 
usually there's at least one complainer at a movie with 
glitches....but not at this one, remarkably.  

Some observations:

>From the minute that Hermione turns the time turner in the 
infirmary, an audible, yet subtle, ticking noise was in the 
background of every scene until Harry and Hermione returned to the 
infirmary.  I noticed a lot of the sounds were much better - some of 
the dialog that seemed muffled on earlier viewings was clear as a 
bell here.  And details which were too dark to see in earlier 
viewings were also much more visible on this enormous screen.  It 
was quite easy to play "spot the fake rat" for instance.... <g>

The color scheme seemed much less bleak with the lighter look of the 
movie.  Other posters have said that the movie looks much better 
lighter and they are absolutely right!  I really noticed this time 
that the contrast between Snape's black outfit with white sleeves 
and the greyness of the Shrieking Shack and greyness of Sirius's 
clothing was so sharp it almost looked like Snape was a cardboard 
cutout inserted into the scene!  It made me think of the possible 
underlying message of this marked contrast; perhaps Snape sees 
everything in black and white and Sirius sees things with shades of 
grey?

The marauder's map at the end credits was a real treat because all 
those little details hidden in the map were easily readable.  

And I really noticed Hermione's comment in Snape's DADA class that 
werewolves only respond to the call of their own kind - emphasized 
no less by Malfoy's wolf howl in class!  Those words came back to me 
when Hermione howled to call the werewolf away from Harry.  It makes 
no sense why a werewolf would pass up a ready target (meal?) like 
Harry to go running after a different, out-of-sight target....unless 
it thought it might find....a mate?  I'm now really believing that 
Hermione might have some adventures with a werewolf in book 6 or 7.  
Hermione as a werewolf - how scary would that be?    

Another new detail I noticed due to the huge screen was Harry's 
rather upset and irritated expression to Ron when Ron refused to go 
back upstairs with Harry to return Trelawney's crystal ball.  
Harry's really annoyed and I can't see why he would be so noticably 
annoyed with Ron about such a small thing....and why Ron wouldn't 
notice this and concede to go back up the stairs with Harry.  Makes 
me really wonder.

Okay, that's my long-winded observations about a memorable 
experience at the IMAX theater.

Diana L.
dianasdolls





From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 10:47:46 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:47:46 -0000
Subject: Lack of tears
In-Reply-To: <23.3ffa4e33.2e004eeb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cap8gi+pp07@eGroups.com>

Lynda wrote:
 I paid CLOSE ATTENTION to that scene.  I was looking for his 
> nose running (poor kid, can you imagine someone LOOKING for that?? 
but since 
> someone mentioned it, I looked for it), and in that scene, when he 
turns his head 
> sharply up to look at Hermione while he's yelling, you can see his 
right cheek 
> (his right, my left) was shiny wet with tears.  Not a stream or a 
droplet, 
> nothing that subtle, but actually wet -- and how else did his nose 
start 
> running?  He'd been crying hard in THAT take, whether he was in 
the others or not.  
> Maybe it was the lighting, that the sheen of tears didn't show so 
well.  It 
> certainly was the director's fault for not doing a closeup so 
everyone could see 
> the result of Dan's hard work at crying.  

You're right Lynda, I just saw PoA on an IMAX screen and there 
*were* tears on Harry's face.  He had wet tear tracks down both 
sides of his face all the way to his mouth.  Whether or not book!
Harry would cry his eyes out, I still love this scene in the movie 
because it shows Harry veering from sad to angry in a split second, 
which is how Harry behaves for most of GoF and OotP.  Harry is so 
contained most of the time that it's nice to see a portrayal of him 
that shows his vulnerability.  

His vulnerability was also emphasized by the extreme close-up on his 
face as he watches Lupin change into a werewolf and attack his past 
self and friends by the whomping willow.  In that moment, I could 
see him realize that he had it all (leaving the Dursleys and going 
to live with Sirius)...and then lost it all in a single moment....  
A very sad moment for Harry.  

Diana L.




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 11:01:47 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:01:47 -0000
Subject: The dementor attack
Message-ID: <cap9ar+tdmn@eGroups.com>

While watching PoA for the fourth time, I was again shocked by how 
horrible the dementor attack on Sirius and Harry was.  It struck me 
how much it made me feel slightly uncomfortable - like I was 
witnessing a rape scene in a movie.  I know that is a strong 
description, but that's how it made me feel.  I don't think I was 
alone in that feeling as, oddly enough, the audience was completely 
silent during the entire event - no one made a single noise.

The addition of the dementors pulling at the faces of their victims 
just made the attack seem so much more violating than in the book.  
I'll probably always get the shivers during this scene no matter how 
many times I watch it. 

Did this scene strike anyone else that way?  

Diana L.
dianasdolls 




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 11:04:19 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:04:19 +0100
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <caonjo+8c94@eGroups.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616115148.009c5680@plum.cream.org>

At 06:59 16/06/04 , pitaprh replied to my previous comments:
>GULPLUM said -
>At the end of August in Surrey, it doesn't start getting dark until after
>about 7.30pm and official sunset is around 8pm. Marge takes off into
>dusk.
>
>- Me -
>When he got to the park everything was wet.  Had it been raining?
>That could account for it getting darker faster?

Well, it had certainly been raining earlier in the day (when Marge arrives 
at the house), but it stopped well before sundown - during dinner, the 
conservatory doors were wide open and when Marge floats through, you can 
see just a few drops left on the conservatory roof. Vernon's shoes don't 
even get wet in the garden (we see his feet when Ripper grabs him by the 
ankles).

As all the other Brits will know, that's an irrelevance anyway, because in 
our climate grey skies and rain don't necessarily go hand in hand, and 
after heavy summer rainfall (which can come of out a clear sky!), it's a 
50/50 chance that the sky will or will not clear up.

The thing, though, is that when Marge floats over the rooftops, the sky 
isn't particularly overcast, and dusk is only just beginning to fall. So my 
original comments stand.

Of course, I am completely overlooking the fact that the wetness of the 
street and playground in no way match the wetness of the Dursley house; 
whilst this is a straightforward continuity error, I prefer to think of it 
as the playground having had rain later than Privet Drive (rain can be 
*very* localised around here). :-)




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 11:50:09 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 07:50:09 -0400
Subject: POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <cap5l1+bf1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOELBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com]

I am unsure why you think PoA changed the odds of all seven movies
being made. As far as money goes (the main consideration for making
all of the books into movies), PoA opened higher than the other two
(US wise SS/PS was at $90mil, CoS was at $88mil) with $92million in
its first weekend, and had a *record* first day in the UK.<<<

That may be true, but this past weekend showed a marked drop in revenue for
POA. From IMDb (www.imdb.com):

"Although it remained at the top of the box office with $34.9 million, the
figure represented a 63 percent decline from last weekend's debut."

And from Dark Horizons (www.darkhorizons.com):

""Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban" stayed steady in the first
position quite easily, but its 62.6% drop-off from last week's record
opening isn't the greatest sign of returning audiences for the FX
spectacle."

The 2nd weekend numbers for the first two films didn't show nearly as much
decline. I got these off the Imdb as well.

PS/SS (US figures)
Opening weekend: $90,294,621
2nd weekend: $96,683,892
3rd weekend: $32,691,776

COS (US figures)
Opening weekend: $88,357,488
2nd weekend: $60,001,343
3rd weekend: $51,800,181

POA (US figures)
Opening weekend: $93,687,367
2nd weekend: $34,000,000

Personally, I think this is a clear indication that the POA film is not as
popular and has not been as well received as the first two movies. Word of
mouth does get out, and if most people truly loved POA, I don't think the
2nd weekend numbers would show such a decline. Time will tell how the movie
does overall and if the trend continues. I'll be looking for the 3rd weekend
numbers to see if a trend does exist.

Barbara
bd-bear




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 12:07:20 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:07:20 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth
In-Reply-To: <000f01c45360$1d5a75d0$6400a8c0@Desktop>
References: <86.e5fe8f8.2e00fb74@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616121821.009c4380@plum.cream.org>

At 06:09 16/06/04 , Trevor wrote:
>I severely dislike POA the movie but I appreciate the stunning visuals and
>stronger acting involved.  The visuals and acting however do not make the
>movie.  They are important aspects to any movie but hopefully not the
>definitive ones.  I felt that the plot was too weakened by lack of detail.
>As I said before, if felt like Cliff notes made into a movie.

I think that's an unfair assessment. If it were a Cliff Notes, it would 
have made certain to bash us on the head with all the plot points which 
most readers consider the most important, i.e. the back story. The 
adaptation took the bold step of recognising that this was a transitional 
book, between the fairy-tale first two and the more realistic two to follow 
(thus far), and went with it.

Sure, the movie isn't perfect and it could have made some of the back story 
points as subtly and as artfully as it made some of the immediate plot 
points. But that doesn't negate its value as a movie. Some of the plot 
points are made perhaps a little *too* forcefully, such as e.g. constant 
reminders about Scabbers, but in fairness the book is even worse in that 
respect.

One of the frequent complaints made against it is that it's choppy, and 
that is probably the one with which I disagree the most. This is anything 
but a choppy movie. The first two HP movies were just collections of scenes 
and there was no obvious link between most of them. This one takes pains to 
establish some kind of connection between almost every pair of contiguous 
scenes, either narratively, or with visuals or sound.

Bear in mind, also, that there was a *lot* more plot to fit into this one 
than either of the first two. It would have been easy just to string 
together various "highlights" the way CoS (in particular) did, but Cuaron 
and his team added in some nice touches and some much-needed respite from 
the action which held it all together.

>I searched for a forum to talk about this movie because I felt that it had
>changed the odds of all movies being made.

Why is that? (That's not a rhetorical question.) As Rebecca has already 
mentioned, PoA made a better opening than the previous two movies and 
whilst it's unlikely to make as much in the North American market over its 
run as the previous ones, it will still have made Warner Bros lots of 
money. And it is doing astonishingly well outside North America; again, 
better than the previous two.
(It should be pointed out that in North America, the movie has some strong 
competition from Shrek 2 which is targeted at exactly the same audience; 
Shrek 2 is yet to be released anywhere else.)

I get a bit peeved by the pundits and number-crunchers who concentrate so 
much on North American takings for movies. As a non-North American, I 
constantly would like to remind them that if you look at a table of the 
biggest-grossing movies (e.g. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/), 
non-US takings account for more than half of the income of almost every 
major US movie (notable exceptions are E.T. and the Star Wars movies). 
Studios and pundits therefore ignore the non-US market at their peril.

>After the commercial success of the first two movies I, and most others, 
>took for granted that all seven movies will be made.  I am unsure whether 
>I will be seeing the forth movie in theaters or buying POA, I do not think 
>I am the only one with this dilemma.

A lot of people said the same thing about PoA. And some HP fans have 
refused to see any of the movies. However, as PoA's numbers show, the 
nay-sayers are in a distinct minority. Most fans are not only going to see 
the movie in droves, but seeing it multiple times. And unless GoF is a 
complete hatchet-job, the same will true of that film. the adaptation of 
PoA was difficult enough; adapting GoF is going to need some major changes, 
which of course a significant proportion of the book's fans will not like.

Furthermore, if made properly, GoF will NOT be "a film for children which 
adults might like" but "a film for a mature audience which children might 
be able to appreciate". THAT is going to be the big deciding factor as 
whether or not further films will be made *on the same scale*. Either way, 
as long as the cast remains the same, there are enough people in the world 
who will see *any* HP movie regardless of its production values to make it 
profitable for Warner Bros and thus they will continue to rake in the 
profits, and thus the movies will continue to be made.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, still catching up....



From bd-bear at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 12:38:23 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:38:23 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040616121821.009c4380@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBGELDHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

At 06:09 16/06/04 , Trevor wrote:
>I severely dislike POA the movie but I appreciate the stunning visuals and
>stronger acting involved.  The visuals and acting however do not make the
>movie.  They are important aspects to any movie but hopefully not the
>definitive ones.  I felt that the plot was too weakened by lack of detail.
>As I said before, if felt like Cliff notes made into a movie.

>>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]

I think that's an unfair assessment.<<<

bd-bear:

I don't think it's an unfair assessment if that's how he FEELS. I felt the
same when watching the movie. I thought the plot was butchered and wished
they hadn't made so many unnecessary changes.

>>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]

Some of the plot points are made perhaps a little *too* forcefully, such as
e.g. constant
reminders about Scabbers, but in fairness the book is even worse in that
respect.<<<

This is a huge plot of the book. I don't think there are "constant
reminders" so much as a whole plot surrounding the tension between Hermione
and Ron and their pets. This was another piece mostly left out of the movie.
The two months that H & R weren't speaking was also significant (in my mind)
and I missed seeing that depicted in the movie.

>>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]

However, as PoA's numbers show, the nay-sayers are in a distinct minority.
Most fans are not only going to see the movie in droves, but seeing it
multiple times.<<<

As I mentioned in another post, the numbers actually indicate that fans
aren't as impressed with this movie as the first two. Granted, there may be
a difference between a movie released in the summer (like POA) and movies
released around Christmas (like the first two), but I still believe if fans
were so enamored of this movie, the numbers would not have dropped so
drastically. I can only speak regarding the US numbers, as I don't have
information about the second weekend in the UK. I will be interested to see
if the numbers have dropped as drastically there as they have in the US.

Barbara
bd-bear




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Wed Jun 16 12:33:01 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:33:01 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Lack of tears
References: <cap8gi+pp07@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003f01c4539f$82a2cf70$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Diana"

>
> You're right Lynda, I just saw PoA on an IMAX screen and there
> *were* tears on Harry's face.  He had wet tear tracks down both
> sides of his face all the way to his mouth.  Whether or not book!
> Harry would cry his eyes out, I still love this scene in the movie
> because it shows Harry veering from sad to angry in a split second,
> which is how Harry behaves for most of GoF and OotP.  Harry is so
> contained most of the time that it's nice to see a portrayal of him
> that shows his vulnerability.


Well, I think someone (director or someone else) has done Dan a great
disservice.  He's getting bashed all over the place for not having any tears
and he did!  It must be the lighting or something!  He made himself cry and
no one but IMAX customers are ever going to see them!  That's not right.

Joj





From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 13:22:30 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:22:30 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Animal actors
Message-ID: <1a1.25bf095d.2e01a396@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/14/2004 11:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I'm one wishes that JKR
> would have used a British Shorthair rather than an American 
Shorthair
> for Prof. McGonagall...:)
> 
> Karen
This was tacked onto the end of the post from the animal trainers about the 
bulldog.  There have been so many posts on the movie list lately that I must 
have missed this one.  How can you tell the cat was an American Shorthair rather 
than a British Shorthair?  I'm just curious -- we've always had "barn cats" 
some of which became house cats, so I don't know that much about cat breeds 
(other than the obvious ones, Siamese, Himalayan, Persian, Shorthair, Rex, that 
have obvious differences).  Thanks in advance for appeasing my curiosity!


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 Jun 16 13:33:22 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:33:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the greatest difference
Message-ID: <9d.49ae1673.2e01a622@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/14/2004 11:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
when Lupin is telling Harry what a wonderful 
mother he had, Harry's face remains completely impassive. A small smile 
works across his face on the "talent for trouble" line, but otherwise there 
is absolutely no realisation on his part that someone is talking about 
knowing his parents!
Whoa, what movie were you watching???  I've seen the film three times now.  
Each time, I've been impressed by the subtlety of that scene.  Harry DOES react 
-- his face lights up in pleasure, he does get a small smile with each 
revelation, a larger one on the "talent for trouble" line.  It struck me as Harry 
being so surprised to hear Lupin going on that way, that he was afraid to 
interrupt, that any questions might stop the flow of Lupin's memory.  How many times 
in the books has Harry asked for more information and been told he knows 
enough, or the subject been changed, so he didn't get any more information?  
Loads.  When someone is musing on memories, as Lupin was, if you interrupt their 
musings, they often stop, for whatever reason.  I saw Harry as savoring the 
moments, drinking them in with a real sense of surprise at hearing such things, 
and a real tenderness about these memories that Lupin was sharing.  It was a 
lovely scene, IMO.  Harry has NEVER demanded information on his parents from 
anyone -- I think he's been rebuffed so many times by the Dursleys telling him not 
to ask questions, that he just doesn't think about asking.  Dumbledore knew 
his parents, yet Harry's never asked him questions about them, either.

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


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




From diana at slashcity.com  Wed Jun 16 13:39:27 2004
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:39:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
References: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOELBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <0bb701c453a7$5e013dc0$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

I don't think the drop off in volume it has anything to do with popularity
of the film - we had 6 new movies open at the theaters in our area the
following weekend.  People who really want to see new releases went to see
PoA the first weekend, and the others who hate crowded theaters are waiting
till the blockbusters have all opened, then going to see PoA.

Diana Williams





From AntaresTCH at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 08:58:24 2004
From: AntaresTCH at aol.com (antarestch)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:58:24 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
In-Reply-To: <camnev+gjur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cap23g+3mqd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "banovaz" <dbanova at b...> wrote:
> > Having been intrigued by JKR's comments that Alfonso Cuaron's 
> intuitive reading of POA had foreshadowed the narrative in books 6 
> and 7, I watched with great interest and a reasonable knowledge of 
> canon through to OOPT ( well who has more ?) to try and second 
guess 
> what that foreshadowing might be.


 My thoughts on the foreshadowing took a different turn. Here are a 
few things I noticed that I think will play an important part in the 
next two books:

I noticed several threads in the movie that may have made JK 
Rowling's hair on the back of her neck stand up, if these are the 
things that she is leading to:

* Sirius says, "The ones that love us never really leave us. You can 
always find them in here." (Touching his chest.)

*Sirius to hermoine,"You really are the brightest witch of your age."

*Harry saw Sirius in the crystal ball.

Cheryl H. 

"You must choose, but choose wisely." The Ancient Knight of the 
Templar, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

"You will have to make a choice." Morpheus and the Oracle to Neo, The 
Matrix and The Matrix Reloaded.

"It is our choices that show who we are far more than our abilities." 
Albus Dumbledore.





From verosomm at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 13:27:00 2004
From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:27:00 -0000
Subject: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.2.20040613145330.01e67990@incoming.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caphr4+5v9o@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, riyo <riyo at v...> wrote:
> 
> >
> >Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical 
Creatures
> >and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where 
do I get
> >the book?  

snip

My friend wanted me to buy these for her for her birthday, so I 
might be able to shed some light on this for you... Unfortunately, 
you may not be able to "just look" as far as I know... the only 
edition of the book my local bookstores had left was the hardcover 
one that comes in a boxed set with Quidditch Through the Ages and it 
was most sealed (these books came out in the fall of 2001 and I 
don't think were ever reprinted).  The hardcover boxed set is 
$12.95, though, so it won't break the bank.  

But on amazon.com I also saw that they sell the paperback editions, 
the books separated, and used editions, so you can probably get 1 or 
both for a lot cheaper. 

Just my two knuts (so you don't waste all your Galleons)
Veronica





From siviax3 at cox.net  Wed Jun 16 09:52:57 2004
From: siviax3 at cox.net (Siviax3)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 04:52:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge   scene
References: <4.2.0.58.20040615154132.00986ac0@plum.cream.org> <4.2.0.58.20040616021053.009ed5e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <001d01c45387$b4fbd5b0$3ff86944@CarolynsComp>

 From: GulPlum 

  Carolyn replied to my previous post with:

  >For whatever it's worth, I had gotten the impression that some time *had* 
  >passed between Harry leaving the house and him arriving at the park.

  I'm *really* not being argumentative here, I'm just trying to elicit an 
  explanation for my own satisfaction: what gave you that impression? 


Perhaps I'm just better at suspending disbelief than you.  Or perhaps it's just that I don't analyze the hell out of a movie when I go to see it.  I'm just going for the entertainment value, not the potential life instruction it has.  Or perhaps it was the fact that the sky was much darker in the latter part of the shot.  Could've been anything, really.

Carolyn




From hp at plum.cream.org  Wed Jun 16 14:08:02 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:08:02 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBGELDHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040616121821.009c4380@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040616143041.0098ed90@plum.cream.org>

At 13:38 16/06/04 , Barbara D. Poland-Waters replied to my comments to 
Trevor's last post:

>At 06:09 16/06/04 , Trevor wrote:
> >I severely dislike POA the movie but I appreciate the stunning visuals and
> >stronger acting involved.  The visuals and acting however do not make the
> >movie.  They are important aspects to any movie but hopefully not the
> >definitive ones.  I felt that the plot was too weakened by lack of detail.
> >As I said before, if felt like Cliff notes made into a movie.
>
> >>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]
>
>I think that's an unfair assessment.<<<
>
>bd-bear:
>
>I don't think it's an unfair assessment if that's how he FEELS. I felt the
>same when watching the movie. I thought the plot was butchered and wished
>they hadn't made so many unnecessary changes.

Well, his feelings must be based on some kind of assessment. If it's a 
purely gut feeling, then there is no assessment to be made and discussing 
it is pointless. If he's thought about and come to a rational conclusion, 
then that assessment can be argued. I don't claim to be able to change the 
way he feels about the movie, but I can offer grounds for an alternative 
assessment, can't I? :-)

Errr... if it's a "Cliff Notes" version, then surely by definition it's 
nothing more than a list of the important events? Seeing as you're arguing 
that it left out a lot of significant facts and put in a lot of other 
spurious stuff, then surely that is the very antithesis of a Cliff Notes? :-)

> >>>From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org]
>
>Some of the plot points are made perhaps a little *too* forcefully, such as
>e.g. constant reminders about Scabbers, but in fairness the book is even 
>worse in that respect.<<<
>
>This is a huge plot of the book. I don't think there are "constant
>reminders" so much as a whole plot surrounding the tension between Hermione
>and Ron and their pets. This was another piece mostly left out of the movie.
>The two months that H & R weren't speaking was also significant (in my mind)
>and I missed seeing that depicted in the movie.

So was the fact that Hermione was frazzled from overwork, and Harry didn't 
speak to her for ages because of the Firebolt. Those elements weren't 
present in the movie, so the increased tension over their respective pets 
was all that was left. As it happens, I think that the pets issue was 
handled just right, in movie terms.

In the book, with so many sub-plots going on, the tension needed to be 
written large. In the movie, which by necessity of the medium has fewer 
sub-plots, it was enough for this element to be part of the ongoing sniping 
between Ron and Hermione, which has been building over the series. In that 
way, whilst the Scabbers sub-plot was being returned to over and again, it 
was given an understandable context within the existing relationship, 
rather than a whole new context (in the book, Scabbers becomes increasingly 
ill).

<snip>

>As I mentioned in another post, the numbers actually indicate that fans
>aren't as impressed with this movie as the first two. Granted, there may be
>a difference between a movie released in the summer (like POA) and movies
>released around Christmas (like the first two), but I still believe if fans
>were so enamored of this movie, the numbers would not have dropped so
>drastically. I can only speak regarding the US numbers, as I don't have
>information about the second weekend in the UK. I will be interested to see
>if the numbers have dropped as drastically there as they have in the US.

There are several different factors at work here. I'm not entirely up to 
date with what's going on in North America (movie-wise or otherwise) but 
from what I've read about the numbers, the big drop-off isn't a HUGE 
surprise. As I said before, one factor is that PoA has some serious 
competition and, as I understand it, the middle of June is generally a poor 
movie-going week in the USA.

A non-negligible factor is that PoA is third in a series. The only 
third-in-a-series movie to have done better on opening was LOTR:ROTK, but 
those were *very* special circumstances.

In the UK, PoA's only movie competition last week and this are Troy and The 
Day After Tomorrow (Troy came out a week before PoA,  TDAT came out on 
three days before PoA). They're not targeted at the same audience (among 
other things, Troy is eye candy for older girls who want to ogle Brad Pitt 
and Orlando Bloom in skirts; TDAT is eye candy for teenage boys who want to 
see the - crap - SFX). PoA made an extraordinary entrance into the UK 
market, not least because it opened on a holiday Monday, followed by a week 
when the kids weren't at school. Even so, UK audience figures for its 
second week didn't drop *too* dramatically (which surprises even me), down 
only by about half on that particularly strong start.

What's going to be VERY interesting in UK and European terms is when this 
week's results come in. North Americans probably won't know about this, but 
there is a ... ahem... "small" ... ;-) sporting competition going on right 
now, namely the European Football Championships. This will have a huge 
impact on movie-going in general and may or may not have an impact on PoA.

PoA has since premiered in several other countries (including Australia) 
where, again, it broke records. Seeing as the Aussies had had two weeks of 
word-of-mouth from the UK to follow, that's a pretty good indication.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, avoiding the football



From verosomm at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 14:15:01 2004
From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:15:01 -0000
Subject: Padma Patil as Gryffindor?
Message-ID: <capkl5+tvr6@eGroups.com>

OK, I just noticed this in the movie for a second or two, but 
perhaps my eyes deceived me.  In Lupin's class, when the kids are 
about to go against the boggart for the first time, near the front 
of the group are 2 Middle Eastern girls, one of whom is definitely 
Parvati, as she faces the boggart a few minutes later, and the other 
who looks similar, if not identical, to her, excepting the fact that 
the second one has a few pieces of hair pulled back in a barrette 
and Parvati has hers in a ponytail.  

The reason I did a double-take is not due to the fact that the books 
never have Ravenclaw/ Gryffindor classes together: I know the books 
are not the movies... but because Padma is wearing 
Gryffindor "accessories" (crest, tie, etc.) on her school uniform, 
just like Parvati.  At first I thought maybe the wardrobe people 
wanted to further instate the fact that the 3 houses besides 
Slytherin tend to get along (all non-Slytherins were in one bunch, 
close to Lupin; all Slytherins in their own bunch, off to the other 
side) but behind the twins and Gryffindors are quite a few kids 
wearing blue accessories (Ravenclaw colors).  

Did anyone else notice this?  Is it a movie Flint or something 
more?  I think the Patils are going to play further into Books 6 and 
7 besides just going to the Yule Ball and joining the DA in Books 4 
and 5 respectively, or at least possibly they switch places from 
time to time?  I also noticed, tying into Cuaron's intrique with 
reflections, that the Patils, for their Hogsmeade visit, are dressed 
identically, something I don't think 13-year-old girls would do in 
RL.  Also the Weasleys when they are building the snowman are at 
least wearing matching hats; I don't remember about the actual 
clothes.  I don't have too many actual theories on these issues, but 
thought they might be significant nonetheless and thought someone 
else might.

Veronica




From lunalovegood at shaw.ca  Wed Jun 16 14:58:14 2004
From: lunalovegood at shaw.ca (dan)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:58:14 -0000
Subject: visual depth
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040616143041.0098ed90@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <capn66+1q2g@eGroups.com>

GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:

> What's going to be VERY interesting in UK and European terms is 
when this 
> week's results come in. North Americans probably won't know about 
this, but 
> there is a ... ahem... "small" ... ;-) sporting competition going 
on right 
> now, namely the European Football Championships. This will have a 
huge 
> impact on movie-going in general and may or may not have an impact 
on PoA.
> GulPlum AKA Richard, avoiding the football

On day 11 (Monday)

US and Canada :  $161,963,462    44.2% 
+ Overseas:  $204,800,000    55.8% 
= Worldwide:  $366,763,462

Truthfully, the film isn't doing quite as well as expected, but is 
still comfortably between the first two movies in terms of gross. I 
suspect these figures aren't influenced as much as one might expect 
by European Football.

Dan, in Vancouver BC, watching all the EURO 2004 he can.







From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 15:58:02 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:58:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <1cb.23aa0626.2e01c80a@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/15/2004 5:45:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
Loved the movie ! The pace was great, loved the reworking of the 
story line to deliver a lean and very exciting story with all of the 
central threads to the story maintained. Adored the patronus !!

But my take out on the foreshadowed story line relates to the early 
scene with the Aunt Marge - and Harry's uncontrollable righteous 
anger.
It seems to me that this scene sees him breaking glasses, lights 
flickering on and off, blowing up his aunt from an apparent discharge 
of magic , Are the swings and play equipment swinging wildly around 
without reason or an aftermath of a large magical discharge from 
Harry ? is it wandless magic ?

I noticed too, that Dumbledore slowed Harry's fall in Quidditch with wandless 
magic.  I'm certain Harry's wandless magic will come into play in the future, 
and I think it will be a significant weapon against Voldemort.  (Then again, 
Dumbledore can do wandless magic, so maybe V can too???  Scary thought).

As for the patronus -- I was thrilled with the effect of it, but honestly, I 
wanted to see that stag tossing the Dementors around with his antlers.  The 
shape of a wizard's Patronus is an important thing, in canon, although we're 
never told the shape of Dumbledore's or Lupin's (curiously enough. . .).

I, too, wondered why the playpark equipment was moving, and wet.  It didn't 
look like it had been raining when Marge flew out the patio door (I like the 
sun porch the Dursleys had added since the last movie, didn't you?  ;->).  Since 
it was wet, and it almost looked like you could see Harry's breath when he 
was sitting on the curb, I wondered if there were Dementors around somewhere -- 
still do.  Any thoughts on why it was suddenly wet outside?  Do you think 
Harry did that too??  And why was his breath making steam just for an instant 
there (although I do remember reading it was chilly when they filmed that scene -- 
the "between scenes" photos I've seen online show Dan in a heavy coat, so 
maybe his breath showing was just a natural phenomenon, not something important 
to the film).

I dunno why Sirius chose to bark at Harry, if he just wanted to see him.  He 
did look like he was snarling, too, which would not be in character unless he 
really was a Grim.  Interesting inconsistancies.  Wish we could get Kolves and 
Cuaron to answer these questions for us!!

Lynda Sappington
Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast 
porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold 
and sterling silver.


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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 16:10:28 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:10:28 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <d6.d31efcd.2e01caf4@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/15/2004 5:45:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I also thought it interesting that one review I read of the   movie 
said something about how we get hints regarding how powerful a wizard Harry 
really is or will become, something that wasn't apparent in previous films. I 
wondered about that reviewer since I don't think JKR has really hinted at any 
difference in Harry's actual power - after all, his uniqueness is because he 
'survived' a direct killing curse, not because he exhibited any super power 
;-)

I seem to   be rambling again ;-)
Cindy
In PoA, both book and film, it's stated that "only a very powerful wizard 
could cast such a Patronus" -- in the book, he drove off over a hundred 
dementors, as I recall.  So JKR herself has already stated, in writing, that Harry is 
an unusually powerful wizard of ANY age.  Lupin also told Harry that many 
mature wizards were unable to cast a corporeal Patronus (and that's stated or 
implied during his trial in front of the Wizangamot in OoP and during his O.W.L. 
exams, as well), so Harry being able to do so since the age of 13 is highly 
significant, or so JKR tells us by repeating and reinforcing it so many times.


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 Jun 16 16:36:14 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:36:14 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <19a.25d439a8.2e01d0fe@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 5:09:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I'm sure there are
parts of US where
land is cheap and the lots are huge, but that is most
certainly NOT a
true statement for much of USA.

Suzanne
I'm sorry, I just have to comment on this.  As I sit in my house on its 2 
acre lawn, with 32 acres of pasture and crop land around it (in Ohio), horses and 
goats in the field, I'm looking across the highway at houses with 2-5 acre 
lots -- those that aren't 600+ acre farms themselves.  Those who live on the 
"right and left coasts" of the US tend to forget that the VAST MAJORITY of the 
USA is open land, where we have big yards, hundreds of acres of farmland, many 
miles between towns.  Talk to somebody from Wyoming about houses all close 
together and hear the laughter there.  Cities all across the country do have PARTS 
where the people all live on top of each other (not my cup of tea, farm girl 
me), but in actuality, the vast majority of the USA is still land-rich, and 
you don't have to be rich to have a lot of land -- it all depends on where you 
live.  And those of us who live on farms would prefer you townies to stay in 
town and not try to crowd us out, thank you very much!  Please, have a nice long 
drive across Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado -- the towns are few and far between. 
 Even driving through Ohio, Indiana and Illinios can be endlessly boring 
because it's just miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles of corn and 
soybean fields.  Yes, from Boston to New York City down to Richmond VA is vastly 
overpopulated, as is the entire coast of California.  But go inland -- and there 
are wide open spaces, one of the many joys of living in the USA.

All that said -- I'm very grateful to the Brits on here who clue us in on how 
things really are over there.  One of these days, I'll get to see it myself, 
if I'm lucky, but in the meantime, it's really nice to know which parts of the 
Potter movies show "real life in England" versus some filmmaker's imagined 
images of life in England.

And all THAT said -- I enjoyed the Aunt Marge scene -- it was laugh out loud 
funny!  I was surprised Dudley had no lines at all, but him getting hit with 
her buttons -- twice! -- was priceless! And his ignoring her "leaving" after 
all that, was very Dudley-like.  heehee


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


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




From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 16:51:24 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <20040616165124.98849.qmail@web40611.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes, but I thought we were talking about cities and
their suburban
areas, not the rural and country areas.

Suzanne

> -----Original Message-----
> From: artsylynda at aol.com [mailto:artsylynda at aol.com]

> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 9:36 AM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable
with the 
> Aunt Marge scene
> 
> 
> In a message dated 6/16/2004 5:09:38 AM Eastern
Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> I'm sure there are
> parts of US where
> land is cheap and the lots are huge, but that is
most
> certainly NOT a
> true statement for much of USA.
> 
> Suzanne
> I'm sorry, I just have to comment on this.  As I sit
in my 
> house on its 2 
> acre lawn, with 32 acres of pasture and crop land
around it 
> (in Ohio), horses and 
> goats in the field, I'm looking across the highway
at houses 
> with 2-5 acre 
> lots -- those that aren't 600+ acre farms
themselves.  Those 
> who live on the 
> "right and left coasts" of the US tend to forget
that the 
> VAST MAJORITY of the 
> USA is open land, where we have big yards, hundreds
of acres 
> of farmland, many 
> miles between towns.  Talk to somebody from Wyoming
about 
> houses all close 
> together and hear the laughter there.  Cities all
across the 
> country do have PARTS 
> where the people all live on top of each other (not
my cup of 
> tea, farm girl 
> me), but in actuality, the vast majority of the USA
is still 
> land-rich, and 
> you don't have to be rich to have a lot of land --
it all 
> depends on where you 
> live.  And those of us who live on farms would
prefer you 
> townies to stay in 
> town and not try to crowd us out, thank you very
much!  
> Please, have a nice long 
> drive across Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado -- the towns
are few 
> and far between. 
>  Even driving through Ohio, Indiana and Illinios can
be 
> endlessly boring 
> because it's just miles and miles of nothing but
miles and 
> miles of corn and 
> soybean fields.  Yes, from Boston to New York City
down to 
> Richmond VA is vastly 
> overpopulated, as is the entire coast of California.
 But go 
> inland -- and there 
> are wide open spaces, one of the many joys of living
in the USA.
> 
> All that said -- I'm very grateful to the Brits on
here who 
> clue us in on how 
> things really are over there.  One of these days,
I'll get to 
> see it myself, 
> if I'm lucky, but in the meantime, it's really nice
to know 
> which parts of the 
> Potter movies show "real life in England" versus
some 
> filmmaker's imagined 
> images of life in England.
> 
> And all THAT said -- I enjoyed the Aunt Marge scene
-- it was 
> laugh out loud 
> funny!  I was surprised Dudley had no lines at all,
but him 
> getting hit with 
> her buttons -- twice! -- was priceless! And his
ignoring her 
> "leaving" after 
> all that, was very Dudley-like.  heehee
> 
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg,
OoP
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> --------------------~--> 
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion
Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! 
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA>
/U4IolB/TM
> 
> 
>
--------------------------------------------------------------
> ------~-> 
> 
>
________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> 
> WARNING! This group contains spoilers!
> 
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the
group's 
> Admin Files! 
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20File
s/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip
unnecessary
material from posts to which you're replying!

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



 




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



From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Wed Jun 16 16:42:11 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:42:11 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: visual depth
In-Reply-To: <cap5l1+bf1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003901c453c0$df654a00$6400a8c0@Desktop>

The third movie had two popular full-length trailers (SS & CoS) and received
outstanding reviews for the most part but I felt that it failed as a movie.
I went looking for a forum and found this one to check my thinking.  I am
still worried but less so as other fans seemed to have liked it.  I think
that another massive change in style by another director will hurt the
franchise.  The movies need to compliment one another and present a full
story- this is the weakness of PoA.  I disliked PoA not because of the
detail cuts, but because I felt it was a bad movie- although visually
stunning at times.

 

Trevor 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 2:59 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: visual depth

 

Trevor wrote:
>>I searched for a forum to talk about this movie because I felt that 
it had changed the odds of all movies being made. After the 
commercial success of the first two movies I, and most others, took 
for granted that all seven movies will be made.<<

I am unsure why you think PoA changed the odds of all seven movies 
being made. As far as money goes (the main consideration for making 
all of the books into movies), PoA opened higher than the other two 
(US wise SS/PS was at $90mil, CoS was at $88mil) with $92million in 
its first weekend, and had a *record* first day in the UK. And, 
according to Box Office Mojo [ 
http://boxofficemojo.com/articles/news/?id=040606bo.htm ] PoA managed 
to get a slightly higher aged audience, which is very important to 
continuing the franchise (as each book gets darker and less 
appropriate for small children). Also, the reviews for the first two 
movies were rather good (as much as I recall at least), and PoA has 
been about the same. As far as critics go, its not quite Lord of the 
Rings, but its not Cat in the Hat either. (as book adaptations go)
Fanwise, for every person that I've heard say they liked the first 
two better, there's another one saying they liked this one better. Go 
figure, I guess. Either way, most people (that I've heard from, at 
least) did not dislike PoA enough to make them not want to see Goblet 
of Fire.

Anyway, if you didn't like it because of the cuts, then you shouldn't 
go see GoF, because I'm sure it'll be much worse (cuts-wise, quality 
is still an unknown at this point). (not saying that to be 
argumentative, just suggesting you should save yourself the grief). 

Time will tell on the DVD release of PoA, but personally I think 
it'll do just as well as the first two. People are often more willing 
to buy something for their kids then they will for themself and 
children are rather indiscriminate (e.g. they are up to Beethoven 
FIVE now, and Home Alone FOUR, and children still flock to them 
despite the low production values and the completely different cast), 
so they'll want it because its Harry Potter, no matter how good or 
bad it is. 


-Rebecca 



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




From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Wed Jun 16 17:07:53 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:07:53 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040616121821.009c4380@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <004801c453c4$7699e8b0$6400a8c0@Desktop>

Just to clarify, choppy refers to the film editing and camera movements.
The scenes are plot linked but the filming has a cheap artistic recreation
feel.  It jumped from plot point to plot point with random filler vistas
interspersed.  It made up plot irrelevant scenes to make the audience laugh
while cutting back-story and plot detail.  And it ended in a freeze frame-
the weakest of movie endings.  There is virtually no way it could have not
been a better plot than the first two.  The first story was handicapped by
introductions to the WW, the second story is a weak plot with little
character arc.  A good film is more than the sum of its parts, its movie
magic.  This film was weak because it failed to be a complete movie.  It was
disjointed and relied on a built in fan base who knew the details of the
plot prior to screening (book readers).

 

Trevor

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 5:07 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] visual depth

 

At 06:09 16/06/04 , Trevor wrote:
>I severely dislike POA the movie but I appreciate the stunning visuals and
>stronger acting involved.  The visuals and acting however do not make the
>movie.  They are important aspects to any movie but hopefully not the
>definitive ones.  I felt that the plot was too weakened by lack of detail.
>As I said before, if felt like Cliff notes made into a movie.

I think that's an unfair assessment. If it were a Cliff Notes, it would 
have made certain to bash us on the head with all the plot points which 
most readers consider the most important, i.e. the back story. The 
adaptation took the bold step of recognising that this was a transitional 
book, between the fairy-tale first two and the more realistic two to follow 
(thus far), and went with it.

Sure, the movie isn't perfect and it could have made some of the back story 
points as subtly and as artfully as it made some of the immediate plot 
points. But that doesn't negate its value as a movie. Some of the plot 
points are made perhaps a little *too* forcefully, such as e.g. constant 
reminders about Scabbers, but in fairness the book is even worse in that 
respect.

One of the frequent complaints made against it is that it's choppy, and 
that is probably the one with which I disagree the most. This is anything 
but a choppy movie. The first two HP movies were just collections of scenes 
and there was no obvious link between most of them. This one takes pains to 
establish some kind of connection between almost every pair of contiguous 
scenes, either narratively, or with visuals or sound.

Bear in mind, also, that there was a *lot* more plot to fit into this one 
than either of the first two. It would have been easy just to string 
together various "highlights" the way CoS (in particular) did, but Cuaron 
and his team added in some nice touches and some much-needed respite from 
the action which held it all together.

>I searched for a forum to talk about this movie because I felt that it had
>changed the odds of all movies being made.

Why is that? (That's not a rhetorical question.) As Rebecca has already 
mentioned, PoA made a better opening than the previous two movies and 
whilst it's unlikely to make as much in the North American market over its 
run as the previous ones, it will still have made Warner Bros lots of 
money. And it is doing astonishingly well outside North America; again, 
better than the previous two.
(It should be pointed out that in North America, the movie has some strong 
competition from Shrek 2 which is targeted at exactly the same audience; 
Shrek 2 is yet to be released anywhere else.)

I get a bit peeved by the pundits and number-crunchers who concentrate so 
much on North American takings for movies. As a non-North American, I 
constantly would like to remind them that if you look at a table of the 
biggest-grossing movies (e.g. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/), 
non-US takings account for more than half of the income of almost every 
major US movie (notable exceptions are E.T. and the Star Wars movies). 
Studios and pundits therefore ignore the non-US market at their peril.

>After the commercial success of the first two movies I, and most others, 
>took for granted that all seven movies will be made.  I am unsure whether 
>I will be seeing the forth movie in theaters or buying POA, I do not think 
>I am the only one with this dilemma.

A lot of people said the same thing about PoA. And some HP fans have 
refused to see any of the movies. However, as PoA's numbers show, the 
nay-sayers are in a distinct minority. Most fans are not only going to see 
the movie in droves, but seeing it multiple times. And unless GoF is a 
complete hatchet-job, the same will true of that film. the adaptation of 
PoA was difficult enough; adapting GoF is going to need some major changes, 
which of course a significant proportion of the book's fans will not like.

Furthermore, if made properly, GoF will NOT be "a film for children which 
adults might like" but "a film for a mature audience which children might 
be able to appreciate". THAT is going to be the big deciding factor as 
whether or not further films will be made *on the same scale*. Either way, 
as long as the cast remains the same, there are enough people in the world 
who will see *any* HP movie regardless of its production values to make it 
profitable for Warner Bros and thus they will continue to rake in the 
profits, and thus the movies will continue to be made.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, still catching up....


________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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129opugpv/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087474033/A=2164330/R=0/SIG=11eamf8g4/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183350> click here


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164330/rand=961950329> 

 

  _____  

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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 



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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Wed Jun 16 18:15:02 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:15:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Daytime viewing
In-Reply-To: <128.4408925b.2e001204@aol.com>
References: <128.4408925b.2e001204@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4511.4.47.27.212.1087409702.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> I know in the book he is trudging the cage along, but cinematically, that
> would be have been rather awkward - I think the trunk was enough ;)

I was quite amused the trunk had a 'caddie' or whatever you call those
two-wheeled things for baggage. {g}  When I read the book, I was under the
impression Harry was dragging it.

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 ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Wed Jun 16 18:29:42 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:29:42 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Anyone seen POA at IMAX yet?
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06D6@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Just wondering if it is worth it to go see it at an IMAX theater?
(I have already seen it twice).
>
>
This was my first IMAX experience.  The first time we saw it we had to sit
in the very front and it was TERRIBLE because you have to look straight up.
So we went early the next night and sat in the very back and it was
AWESOME!!!! You could see everything! I took getting used to as my eyes
adjusted to the big screen, but the next day we saw it the 3rd time in a
regular theater and it was not nearly as good IMO. From now on I will be
seeing it in IMAX!
        Gina
 
 
 


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




From shawnw24 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 18:37:27 2004
From: shawnw24 at yahoo.com (Shawn&Emma Welling)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: movie weekend grosses
In-Reply-To: <1087406799.5693.63885.m22@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040616183727.16461.qmail@web40403.mail.yahoo.com>


One of the things we have to remember about the first 2 movies were that they were released when week ends were basically when people were going to go seee the movies as it was during the school year! Most theaters are doing more business during the week than they did with the first 2 and averaging about 8-9 million a day in the US! 

The other thing to look at also is that with other "sequels" there has been the same type of drop off in the first 2 weeks also if there were 6 new movies debuting the same week!

Emma 



Thank you,
T. Shawn Welling
My Home Page, My research, Erdology, and Library
www.tswelling.com   

My Research q and a email group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tswelling/ 

My Erdology Research A Question and Answer email group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Erdology/ 

______
"To announce that there must be no criticism 
of the president, or that we are to stand by the 
president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic 
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the 
American Public." - Theodore Roosevelt a republican

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 18:45:51 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:45:51 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lack of tears
Message-ID: <1e1.234881eb.2e01ef5f@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 1:28:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
His vulnerability was also emphasized by the extreme close-up on his 
face as he watches Lupin change into a werewolf and attack his past 
self and friends by the whomping willow.  In that moment, I could 
see him realize that he had it all (leaving the Dursleys and going 
to live with Sirius)...and then lost it all in a single moment....  
A very sad moment for Harry.  

Diana L.
Thanks, Diana, for backing me up on the tears.  And for those who don't 
believe Harry cries, I'll point out that scene in OotP where he goes out to the 
lake and a long span of time goes by, after which he's rubbing his face -- he was 
CRYING for pete's sake, poor kid!  Harry is a normal (as normal as he can 
manage) kid, and therefore has cried many times in his lifetime -- he's just 
never been comforted, except by Molly Weasley after the third task in GoF.  He has 
had to cry BY HIMSELF whenever he's needed to cry.  Here he went off by 
himself to cry again, under the invisibility cloak.  He didn't know where Ron and 
Hermione were -- he left them and didn't notice them when he ran out of the 
pub, remember?  He was off for a private cry, just as in GoF, when Hermione 
interrupted him.  

Anyway. . .yes, the vulnerability shown in that scene where he lost the 
chance to live with Sirius -- beautifully done!  He was so happy just a moment 
before.  This huge vacillation in his emotions and fortunes is part of the appeal 
of Harry Potter, I think -- he's a poor, abused, but still sweet-natured 
(unless you cross him, of course) orphan, also probably the most powerful wizard of 
his age with powers that surprise him when they pop out (I was just listening 
to OotP in my car where he and Dudley were attacked by Dementors in the alley 
and Harry was suprised when he said "Lumos" and his wand lit up without him 
holding it -- he still has no idea what he's capable of).  And for Dan to be 
able to shift from pure joy -- not to mention the excitement he was showing 
while expecting to see his father right before his eyes -- to seeing his hopes die 
right before his eyes. . .wow.  I've seen it three times.  Not nearly enough!!



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 Jun 16 18:49:03 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:49:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the Dementor attack
Message-ID: <d9.d326f2a.2e01f01f@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 1:28:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I was again shocked by how 
horrible the dementor attack on Sirius and Harry was.  It struck me 
how much it made me feel slightly uncomfortable - like I was 
witnessing a rape scene in a movie.  I know that is a strong 
description, but that's how it made me feel.  I don't think I was 
alone in that feeling as, oddly enough, the audience was completely 
silent during the entire event - no one made a single noise.

The addition of the dementors pulling at the faces of their victims 
just made the attack seem so much more violating than in the book.  
I'll probably always get the shivers during this scene no matter how 
many times I watch it. 

Did this scene strike anyone else that way?  

Diana L.

Yes, it's a powerful scene, even more so when Harry and Hermione are watching 
it -- and then she says "You're dying."  Oooo, gives me shivers just 
remembering it.  I read or heard Dan say in an interview that that was one of the 
scenes where he got so into it he hyperventilated and fainted.  (In another 
interview, he said he was on a table when he hyperventilated while being too "into" 
a scene, and fell off, but somebody caught him).  Him seeing himself through 
the stag was chilling too -- so tantilizing, he could NEARLY see who was there, 
but not really.  And I couldn't see enough through the stag to say whoever 
was there looked like Harry OR James -- I guess he had a better vantage point 
than I did.  ;->  Amazing scene, really.

Lynda Sappington
Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast 
porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold 
and sterling silver.



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


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




From elfnorc at voyager.net  Wed Jun 16 18:30:56 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:30:56 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Anyone seen POA at IMAX yet?
Message-ID: <200406161830.i5GIUuqY016721@mail0.mx.voyager.net>

Gina:
> This was my first IMAX experience.  The first time we saw it we had to
> sit in the very front and it was TERRIBLE because you have to look
> straight up.
> So we went early the next night and sat in the very back and it was
> AWESOME!!!! You could see everything! I took getting used to as my
> eyes adjusted to the big screen, but the next day we saw it the 3rd time 
> in a regular theater and it was not nearly as good IMO. From now on I 
> will be seeing it in IMAX!


     I feel the same way.  The first time I saw the movie it was on a
regular screen and the second time was on IMAX.  The 3rd time (hopefully
this Friday) will also be on IMAX.  You just feel like you are almost in
the movie and you see and hear so much more.

Tina




From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 16 19:01:49 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:01:49 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <1ca.23a1f46d.2e01f31d@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 1:28:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Yes, but I thought we were talking about cities and
their suburban
areas, not the rural and country areas.

Suzanne
Yeah, but you made a sweeping "general" statement about the US (>>I'm sure 
there are
> parts of US where
> land is cheap and the lots are huge, but that is
most
> certainly NOT a
> true statement for much of USA.
> 
> Suzanne<<)
which I was attempting to clarify for those who haven't been in "fly-over 
country" (the main part of the country, which is between the East and West 
Coasts, which is rarely featured in films or TV unless showing those of us who live 
in the Midwest, South or Southwest as "hicks" "rubes" or "people from Ohio" 
[pay attention to movies -- if they want someone to seem like a real ignoramus 
in the big city, that person will be from Ohio -- witness "The Out-of-Towners" 
where the people are from Ohio, as only one example).  It's actually only a 
very small percentage of the country where lots are tiny and land is expensive, 
when you consider the country as a whole.  That was my point.


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


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




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Wed Jun 16 19:20:09 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:20:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Crookshanks
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06DB@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

*       >Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical 
Creatures
> >and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where 
do I get
> >the book?  

Gina:
*      I got them off ebay! 



________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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1295ts0jn/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087480231/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=847945832> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 19:21:12 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 19:21:12 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087413672.222.73186.w19@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Overall, what is your opinion of the 
PoA movie? 

  o Yes 
  o No 
  o Yes, despite the changes to the plot and characters 
  o No, despite the changes to the plot and characters 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11799327  

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 






From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 19:22:52 2004
From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:22:52 -0000
Subject: POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <0bb701c453a7$5e013dc0$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <caq6mc+oo5k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana Williams" <diana at s...> 
wrote:
> I don't think the drop off in volume it has anything to do with 
popularity
> of the film - we had 6 new movies open at the theaters in our area 
the
> following weekend.  People who really want to see new releases 
went to see
> PoA the first weekend, and the others who hate crowded theaters 
are waiting
> till the blockbusters have all opened, then going to see PoA.
> 
> Diana Williams


I don't think the other movies had any real competition other than 
LOTR. Which is pretty major competition but, it's only one movie.
I think Goblet of Fire will be fine since I believe its scheduled 
for Nov 05. Probably a good thing since Star Wars should be the 
summer movie to beat next year... and Indy 4... maybe Austin Powers 
and the revenge of the Acid Washed Jeans? He's only got the 80s 
left, right?

I think PoA will eventually hit the 300M mark in the States and 
tally up a good 800-1B around the world.

Jason




From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 19:24:28 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 19:24:28 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087413868.128.44301.w47@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

Overall, did you like the PoA Movie? 

  o Loved it! 
  o Yes, with small reservations 
  o Yes, with large reservations 
  o No, despite a few neat touches 
  o Not at all!  


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11799332  

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 






From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 19:35:15 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 19:35:15 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087414515.179.98563.w7@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-Movie group:

In what order do you rate the first 
three HP movies (favourite first)? 

  o Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets, Prisoner of Azkaban 
  o Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, Prisoner of Azkaban, Chamber of Secrets 
  o Chamber of Secrets, Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, Prisoner of Azkaban 
  o Chamber of Secrets, Prisoner of Azkaban, Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone 
  o Prisoner of Azkaban, Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets 
  o Prisoner of Azkaban, Chamber of Secrets, Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/surveys?id=11799339  

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 






From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 19:48:28 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:48:28 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Daytime viewing
Message-ID: <20040616194829.OWBY29216.out009.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "alice_loves_cats" <hypercolor99 at hotmail.com>

I watched the English version of POA yesterday, and loved it even 
more...

[from Valerie]

Out of curiosity, is there a British version and an American version of the POA 
film? I know there are different covers on the books, but wasn't sure if 
content or spelling was changed to reflect the slight language differences. 
Anyone know?


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 19:55:00 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:55:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Malfoy the wuss
Message-ID: <20040616195500.RMUM2198.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

Now Alice:
I'm now wondering exactly what "wuss" means. So I'll use my own slang 
and say they portrayed Malfoy as a complete wimp. I loved that 

[from Valerie]
a wuss and a wimp are the same thing. :-)
And yes, Malfoy is both. He's so cute in this movie though, IMO, I just wish he 
wasn't so antagonistic to poor Harry! I guess I'm one of those silly females 
who is perpetually attracted to the "bad boys" (Draco, Lucius, Sirius, even 
Snape)! Don't mess with my Harry though! I'm going to have a hard time watching 
Umbridge abuse him in OOP.
 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 20:23:26 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:23:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's reaction on the bridge (was the greatest difference)
Message-ID: <20040616202326.WFPQ28276.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org>

<snip>

Lupin and Hary are standing side by side, and Harry talks about what 
he hears when the Dementors are around; Lupin then makes some awkward body 
movements (nice touch) and says "the first time I saw you, I recognised you 
.... they're your mother's eyes". Then there's a beat's pause (presumably a 
space for a reaction on Harry's part), and Lupin responds to that *pause* 
(great work on Thewlis's part) with "Yes, oh yes, I knew her". This is 
*meant* to be a revelation, not only to the audience, but to Harry.

[from Valerie]

This one of my favorite Lupin scenes! When Harry mentions hearing his Mom 
screaming, Lupin seems visibly disturbed. As a close past friend of Lily and 
new friend of Harry, he would be upset by this revelation. But then when Lupin 
goes on to talk about Lily in such reverent terms, you do get the impression 
that he was secretly in love with her. James, however, being more the cocky 
type, would've won her over, leaving poor Remus, heart-broken, to suffer in 
silence. 'Course, ever the romantic, I could just be reading into this! :-) 



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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 16 20:24:01 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:24:01 -0000
Subject: the greatest difference
In-Reply-To: <9d.49ae1673.2e01a622@aol.com>
Message-ID: <caqa91+e7p7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> Whoa, what movie were you watching???  I've seen the film three 
times now.  
> Each time, I've been impressed by the subtlety of that scene.  
Harry DOES react 
> -- his face lights up in pleasure, he does get a small smile with 
each 
> revelation, a larger one on the "talent for trouble" line.  It 
struck me as Harry 
> being so surprised to hear Lupin going on that way, that he was 
afraid to 
> interrupt, that any questions might stop the flow of Lupin's 
memory.  

Thankyou! I agree. Though I am not Harry and Harry not me, this is 
how I read the scene: Whenever I something I really want to hear 
unexpectedly, I tend to become very still so as not to miss a single 
thing, not wanting to ruin the moment. I felt that this was such a 
moment for Harry.

Sophia




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun 16 20:32:40 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <caq6mc+oo5k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040616203240.82283.qmail@web80308.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Jason <shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> maybe Austin Powers 
> and the revenge of the Acid Washed Jeans? He's only
> got the 80s 
> left, right?

I believe we've seen the last of Austin Powers. 
"Goldmember" killed that franchise.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Wed Jun 16 20:33:40 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:33:40 -0000
Subject: Animal actors
In-Reply-To: <1a1.25bf095d.2e01a396@aol.com>
Message-ID: <caqar4+d04g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 6/14/2004 11:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> I'm one wishes that JKR
> > would have used a British Shorthair rather than an American 
> Shorthair
> > for Prof. McGonagall...:)
> > 
> > Karen
> This was tacked onto the end of the post from the animal trainers
about the 
> bulldog.  There have been so many posts on the movie list lately
that I must 
> have missed this one.  How can you tell the cat was an American
Shorthair rather 
> than a British Shorthair?  I'm just curious -- we've always had
"barn cats" 
> some of which became house cats, so I don't know that much about cat
breeds 
> (other than the obvious ones, Siamese, Himalayan, Persian,
Shorthair, Rex, that have obvious differences).  Thanks in advance for
appeasing my curiosity!
> 
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg, OoP
> 
> 
Both breeds are stocky, solid looking cats but the American shorthair
has bands or striping whereas most British shorthairs do not.  There
is a reference in SS/PS to the cat Mrs. McGongall transforms into as
having markings that look like spectacles, but it actually called a
tabby cat. I think one of the reasons an American shorthair was used
in the film is they didn't want to use the same type of cat twice.
Mrs. Norris (who I believe is a Maine coon)has tabby markings.  This
is just my guess, but if you are interested in checking out the
differences in the breeds, go to the Cat Fancier's website for photos.
http://www.cfainc.org/breeds/profiles/british.html  This brings up the
British shorthair page but you can go back one page and find the other
breeds' links.

The first cat pictured on this page is our friend's cat Harry Potter.
We have a son of his, named Gryffindor and a little girl named
Minerva.  

Hope this helps answer your question

Karen




From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 20:36:06 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:36:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Casting Voldemort
Message-ID: <20040616203606.11085.qmail@web40609.mail.yahoo.com>

Now that filming for Goblet of Fire is underway, I'm
wondering who will
be cast as Voldemort. 

A few minutes ago, while voting in the new polls, I
took a look at an
old poll as who should be cast for Lupin, and noticed
one of the choices
was Bill Nighy. As an American, I must admit that I
wasn't aware of Bill
Nighy until I saw "Love Actually" and he was just
terrific. I then saw
him on a mini series on BBC America where he played a
newspaper
publisher and was impressed with him again. I think he
might make a very
good Voldemort. 

Any other actors who we think should be cast as
Voldemort? 

Suzanne / Hermione 
(Hey, we share the same birthday and I have been known
to be an
insufferable know-it-all)



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 20:40:04 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:40:04 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing
Message-ID: <20040616204004.NUZT1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

My thought is that the foreshadowing might be when Lupin turns into the 
werewolf and turns on H,R,H. Snape, having presumably just revived from his 
crash into the Shrieking Shack wall, jumps out in front of the kids to protect 
them. That's a definite Cuaron change from the book. What if Snape, in the end, 
is the one who saves Harry (or the trio) from Lord V? Wouldn't that be ironic?

Valerie, who is starting to feel sorry for Snape, who is so badly abused by 
Sirius and James... 


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




From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 20:41:06 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's reaction on the bridge (was the greatest difference)
Message-ID: <20040616204106.20882.qmail@web40602.mail.yahoo.com>

Very nice post, Valerie. I can imagine that once James
and Lily became a
couple, that James and Lupin decided to share with
Lily that Lupin was a
werewolf and thus Lily became the only one outside the
Maurauders to
know the truth about Lupin. Lily, being the wonderful
kind of person
that she was, warmly reaffirmed her caring and support
for Lupin. 

The more we learn about Lily, I can see why she seems
to have been so
loved. Even, secretly, by Snape I think.

Suzanne

> [from Valerie]
> 
> This one of my favorite Lupin scenes! When Harry
mentions 
> hearing his Mom 
> screaming, Lupin seems visibly disturbed. As a close
past 
> friend of Lily and 
> new friend of Harry, he would be upset by this
revelation. 
> But then when Lupin 
> goes on to talk about Lily in such reverent terms,
you do get 
> the impression 
> that he was secretly in love with her. James,
however, being 
> more the cocky 
> type, would've won her over, leaving poor Remus, 
> heart-broken, to suffer in 
> silence. 'Course, ever the romantic, I could just be
reading 
> into this! :-) 



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



From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 20:42:55 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
Message-ID: <20040616204255.10988.qmail@web40608.mail.yahoo.com>

> I believe we've seen the last of Austin Powers. 
> "Goldmember" killed that franchise.
> 
> Gretchen


We can only hope :-)

Suzanne



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



From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 20:58:31 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 20:58:31 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087419511.181.102.w85@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: Who should play Sirius Black (new &
updated choices)? 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Other, 28 votes, 25.93%  
- Daniel Day-Lewis, 12 votes, 11.11%  
- Jason Carter, 16 votes, 14.81%  
- Ralph Fiennes, 11 votes, 10.19%  
- Goran Visnjic, 3 votes, 2.78%  
- Hugh Jackson, 1 votes, 0.93%  
- Jeremy Irons, 2 votes, 1.85%  
- James Purefoy, 3 votes, 2.78%  
- Angus MacFayden, 3 votes, 2.78%  
- Viggo Mortensen, 29 votes, 26.85%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 






From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 20:58:53 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 20:58:53 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087419533.71.93368.w23@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: Who do you think should play Remus Lupin in Prisoner of Azkaban? (Choices based on discussion on this list, not actual casting information) 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Hugh Jackman (X-men, Swordfish, Kate & Leopold), 16 votes, 7.88%  
- David Bowie (Labyrinth, Zoolander), 11 votes, 5.42%  
- Christian Bale (Reign of Fire, Shaft, Captain Corelli's Mandolin, American Psycho), 19 votes, 9.36%  
- Matthew McConaughey (Reign of Fire, EdTV, Amistad, The Rebel), 6 votes, 2.96%  
- Colin Firth (Bridget Jones's Diary, Pride & Prejudice), 15 votes, 7.39%  
- Samuel West (Longitude, Iris, Notting Hill), 3 votes, 1.48%  
- Liam Cunningham (A Little Princess), 3 votes, 1.48%  
- Joseph Fiennes (Shakespere in Love, Enemy at the Gates), 14 votes, 6.90%  
- Ben Cumberbatch (Stage actor), 1 votes, 0.49%  
- Ewan McGregor (Star Wars Ep. 1-3, Moulin Rouge, Trainspotting), 55 votes, 27.09%  
- Liam Neeson (K-19, Star Wars Ep. 1, Schindler's List), 15 votes, 7.39%  
- Bill Nighy (Blow Dry, Longitude, Still Crazy, Mack the Knife), 1 votes, 0.49%  
- Sean Bean (Lord of the Rings, Don't Say a Word, Goldeneye), 16 votes, 7.88%  
- None of the above, 28 votes, 13.79%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 






From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 20:59:43 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 20:59:43 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087419584.66.91689.w40@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: Who do you think should play Sirius Black in Prisoner of Azkaban? (Choices based on discussion on this list, not actual casting information) 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Hugh Jackman (X-men, Swordfish, Kate & Leopold), 16 votes, 9.76%  
- Christian Bale (Reign of Fire, Shaft, Captain Corelli's Mandolin, American Psycho), 8 votes, 4.88%  
- Goran Visnjic (ER, Practical Magic, Rounders), 13 votes, 7.93%  
- Jason Carter (Babylon 5), 21 votes, 12.80%  
- Colin Farrell (Minority Report, Hart's War, Tigerland), 9 votes, 5.49%  
- Colin Firth  (Bridget Jones's Diary, Pride & Prejudice), 7 votes, 4.27%  
- Ralph Fiennes (The End of the Affair, The Avengers, Schindler's List, Quiz Show), 14 votes, 8.54%  
- Scott Cohen (10th Kingdom, NYPD Blue, Street Time), 4 votes, 2.44%  
- Joseph Fiennes (Shakespere in Love, Enemy at the Gates), 11 votes, 6.71%  
- Jeremy Irons (Longitude, Man in the Iron Mask, Die Hard 3), 10 votes, 6.10%  
- Ewan McGregor (Star Wars Ep. 1-3, Moulin Rouge, Trainspotting), 8 votes, 4.88%  
- None of the above, 43 votes, 26.22%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 






From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 21:01:14 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 21:01:14 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087419674.61.84665.w19@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: What do you think of the Gary Oldman 
for Sirius Black rumours? 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- I think he's been offered the part and will take it, 52 votes, 89.66%  
- I think he's been offered the part and won't take it, 1 votes, 1.72%  
- I think someone has been offered the part, 3 votes, 5.17%  
- I don't think anyone has been offered the part yet, 2 votes, 3.45%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 






From HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com  Wed Jun 16 21:00:26 2004
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 16 Jun 2004 21:00:26 -0000
Subject: Poll results for HPFGU-Movie 
Message-ID: <1087419626.101.56160.w69@yahoogroups.com>


The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.  Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: Who should play Lupin? (New and updated 
choices!) 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Ewan McGregor, 31 votes, 29.81%  
- Sean Bean, 3 votes, 2.88%  
- Colin Firth, 18 votes, 17.31%  
- Christian Bale, 6 votes, 5.77%  
- Hugh Jackman, 2 votes, 1.92%  
- Dominic Keating, 2 votes, 1.92%  
- John Hannah, 9 votes, 8.65%  
- Viggo Mortensen, 5 votes, 4.81%  
- Other, 28 votes, 26.92%  



For more information about this group, please visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie 

For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ 

 






From kelleythompson at gbronline.com  Wed Jun 16 21:08:32 2004
From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:08:32 -0000
Subject: Polls
Message-ID: <caqcsg+eghj@eGroups.com>

Hi, everyone!

I've closed out a few of the outdated polls, and Richard (Gulplum) 
has created two new ones.  If anyone else would like to suggest / 
create some polls, please just let us know!  (HPFGU-Movie-owner@ 
yahoogroups.com).

Thanks!

--Kelley 




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 21:51:13 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:51:13 -0000
Subject: foreshadowing
In-Reply-To: <20040616204004.NUZT1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caqfch+118pg@eGroups.com>

<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> My thought is that the foreshadowing might be when Lupin turns 
into the werewolf and turns on H,R,H. Snape, having presumably just 
revived from his crash into the Shrieking Shack wall, jumps out in 
front of the kids to protect them. That's a definite Cuaron change 
from the book. What if Snape, in the end, is the one who saves Harry 
(or the trio) from Lord V? Wouldn't that be ironic?
> 


Someone before me wrote (but I don't remember where) that things 
that were written into the script, such as Snape protecting the 
trio, have nothing to do with Cuaron...but the actual set up of the 
scenes is different...

Harry seeing himself reflected several times in the movie, and the 
scene with Hagrid on the lake, with Harry separate from Ron and 
Hermione...possibly a foreshadowing of his truly being alone, with 
only himself to count on...

Food for thought

Kathy




From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 21:54:54 2004
From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:54:54 -0000
Subject: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06DB@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <caqfje+1ph8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Miller, Gina (JIS)" 
<ginamiller at j...> wrote:
> *       >Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read 
Magical 
> Creatures
> > >and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  
Where 
> do I get
> > >the book?  
> 
> Gina:
> *      I got them off ebay! 
> 
> 
> 


I got mine in a little boxed set from Barnes and Noble for, I think, 
12 dollars? The paper back versions of each were only 3 dollars and 
something.




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 22:09:12 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:09:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius' soul
Message-ID: <20040616220912.BPNZ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

 From: "pitaprh" <12499 at msn.com>

I thought the soul was sucked out only when the Dementors did 
the "kiss".? So that part of the movie somewhat confused me.? They 
weren't performing the "kiss", were they?? I don't think so.? So what 
was that?

[from Valerie]
I assumed that was the "kiss", although I envisioned the dementors getting 
closer and closer with that hideous mouth of theirs(!), and then actually 
touching the person's mouth to finalize the sucking out of the soul. Ewww, 
sounds hideous, no? I think that part scared the kids in the audience more than 
the werewolf. They are used to seeing creatures in their cartoons, but not 
seeing Harry distorted like that. I think that was far more creepy.



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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun 16 22:20:02 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:20:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <20040616220912.BPNZ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040616222002.24676.qmail@web80312.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:
 I think that part scared the
> kids in the audience more than 
> the werewolf. They are used to seeing creatures in
> their cartoons, but not 
> seeing Harry distorted like that. I think that was
> far more creepy.

I don't know about older kids, but my almost
3-year-old found the wolf much scarier than the
dementors.  Perhaps because he is younger and more
literal about what scares him.  He was getting very
restless by the end of the movie, but I still didn't
think it was coincidence that he finally asked to
leave at the moment when the wolf is chasing Harry and
Hermione (right after Hermione howls to draw it away
from past Harry).

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 22:44:54 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:44:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Padma Patil as Gryffindor?
Message-ID: <20040616224454.KWXT18566.out011.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "verosomm" <verosomm at yahoo.com>
?
 I also noticed, tying into Cuaron's intrique with 
reflections, that the Patils, for their Hogsmeade visit, are dressed 
identically, something I don't think 13-year-old girls would do in 
RL.? Also the Weasleys when they are building the snowman are at 
least wearing matching hats; I don't remember about the actual 
clothes.? I don't have too many actual theories on these issues, but 
thought they might be significant nonetheless...

[from Valerie]
FYI: The Weasley twins have always been dressed identically in all 3 movies. As 
to whether or not twins that age really do dress alike?..probably not. Not the 
ones I know, anyhow. I have six yr. old identical twins and flip flop back and 
forth on that issue. As babies I did dress them identically, then I didn't (so 
as not to damage their sense of individuality! :-) Now when I buy them 
different clothes, they fight over one. So I'm going to have to go back to 
getting all clothes, backpacks,toys, etc. identical. Such a lot of fretting 
over such frivolity, no?! :-)
But to get back to the question(!), I think it is Cuaron's reflection theme 
that is causing him to dress them alike. 
That being said, I missed in the books the fact that Padma and Pavarti were 
twins. I thought they were just sisters, close in age?


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 22:55:15 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:55:15 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <20040616225515.QXQE29216.out009.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: artsylynda at aol.com
I, too, wondered why the playpark equipment was moving, and wet.? It didn't 
look like it had been raining when Marge flew out the patio door (I like the 
sun porch the Dursleys had added since the last movie, didn't you?? ;->).? 
Since 
it was wet, and it almost looked like you could see Harry's breath when he 
was sitting on the curb, I wondered if there were Dementors around somewhere -- 
still do.? Any thoughts on why it was suddenly wet outside?? Do you think 
Harry did that too??? And why was his breath making steam just for an instant 
there (although I do remember reading it was chilly when they filmed that scene 
-- 
the "between scenes" photos I've seen online show Dan in a heavy coat, so 
maybe his breath showing was just a natural phenomenon, not something important 
to the film).

Why was it dark or rainy? I figured, he'd been walking aimlessly around the 
neighborhood trying to figure out his next move; I figured it was rainy cuz it 
was England! :-)
I had a different reaction to the moving equipment. I thought it was 
foreshadowing "evil", i.e. Sirius the evil dog in the bushes scaring Harry 
right off the curb.


I dunno why Sirius chose to bark at Harry, if he just wanted to see him.? He 
did look like he was snarling, too, which would not be in character unless he 
really was a Grim.? Interesting inconsistancies.? Wish we could get Kolves and 
Cuaron to answer these questions for us!!

Isn't there a website where we, as rabid HP fans, could talk to Kloves, Cuaron, 
JKR about our reviews of the POA movie? (like they'd want to hear it!?!?)



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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun 16 22:55:58 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:55:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.
In-Reply-To: <20040616224454.KWXT18566.out011.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040616225558.232.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com>

Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
really going to happen.

http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From tmarends at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 16 23:01:38 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 23:01:38 -0000
Subject: Please tell me this isn't true.
In-Reply-To: <20040616225558.232.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <caqjgi+do13@eGroups.com>

IF you delve into that site, you'll find that it's all a parody.  
It's not happening... besides Smallville and Charmed have been 
renewed for next season.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Gretchen Crumpacker 
<gcrumpac at p...> wrote:
> Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
> really going to happen.
> 
> http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html
> 
> Gretchen
> 
> =====
> Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/




From damson_g at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun 16 23:02:31 2004
From: damson_g at yahoo.co.uk (Damson)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:02:31 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.
References: <20040616225558.232.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001401c453f6$0205c7d0$0101a8c0@RichardsPC>

No, it's a parody site.
--> http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Gretchen Crumpacker 
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.


  Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
  really going to happen.

  http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

  Gretchen

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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Wed Jun 16 23:08:24 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 16:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please tell me this isn't true.
In-Reply-To: <caqjgi+do13@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040616230824.94581.qmail@web80307.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Tim <tmarends at yahoo.com> wrote:
> IF you delve into that site, you'll find that it's
> all a parody.  
> It's not happening... besides Smallville and Charmed
> have been 
> renewed for next season.

Criminey, thank you.  Someone sent me the article and
that was all I saw -- yikes!

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 23:13:50 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:13:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Lily's loves
Message-ID: <20040616231350.VOAO15848.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: Suzanne Chiles <suzchiles at yahoo.com>

<snip>

The more we learn about Lily, I can see why she seems
to have been so loved. Even, secretly, by Snape I think.

[from Valerie]
definitely by Snape! :-) I think he must have been crushed when she made the 
comment about him washing his underwear, after James (or was it Sirius?) had 
him floating upside down. This is why I feel sorry for Snape. How horribly 
humiliating! I'm a Sirius fan, but he really starts to bug me in OOP (whiny and 
grumpy and saying mean things to Harry because Harry is not James ;-(



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 23:17:18 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:17:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Poll results for HPFGU-Movie
Message-ID: <20040616231718.RCUM29216.out009.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> 
> From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
The following HPFGU-Movie poll is now closed.? Here are the 
final results: 


POLL QUESTION: Who should play Sirius Black (new &
updated choices)? 

CHOICES AND RESULTS
- Other, 28 votes, 25.93%? 
- Daniel Day-Lewis, 12 votes, 11.11%? 
- Jason Carter, 16 votes, 14.81%? 
- Ralph Fiennes, 11 votes, 10.19%? 
- Goran Visnjic, 3 votes, 2.78%? 
- Hugh Jackson, 1 votes, 0.93%? 
- Jeremy Irons, 2 votes, 1.85%? 
- James Purefoy, 3 votes, 2.78%? 
- Angus MacFayden, 3 votes, 2.78%? 
- Viggo Mortensen, 29 votes, 26.85%? 

Viggo? REALLY!?! Loved him in LOTR, but he is so associated with Aragorn now, I 
would've had a hard time translating him into Sirius. That's what I love so 
much about Gary Oldman. He really seems to dissapear into his roles, so that 
you don't equate him with another role.



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 23:31:32 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:31:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.
Message-ID: <20040616233132.PNJR1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: Gretchen Crumpacker <gcrumpac at pacbell.net>

> Fairly OT the movies, but:? someone tell me this isn't
really going to happen.

http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

[from Valerie]
NO BLOODY WAY!!!!! (No apologies, sorry!) 
That had better be a false report! HP 90210!?!!! I do want to puke. I cannot 
believe that Warner Bros. would do such a tacky thing. Aren't they making 
enough money on the movies and associated marketing items? 
I checked on "snopes.com", the urban legends website, where they dispell myths. 
Several HP items came up, but not that. 
As an American, I can honestly say that what is so whimsical and appealing 
about HP books and movies, is the British factor. I am outraged. I must write a 
letter to the WB!


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Jun 16 23:34:37 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:34:37 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Please tell me this isn't true.
Message-ID: <20040616233437.YYNM3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "Tim" <tmarends at yahoo.com>
IF you delve into that site, you'll find that it's all a parody.? 
It's not happening... besides Smallville and Charmed have been 
renewed for next season.

[from Valerie]
Whew!!! Thank goodness!
People, are you trying to give me a heart attack?!? I must go take my blood 
pressure medication now...:-0



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




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 00:25:27 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:25:27 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEEKHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <caqodn+13mr@eGroups.com>

bd-bear writes:

<<
What I don't get is why the people who liked POA have such a problem 
with me NOT liking it.
>>

Because I don't want Warner Bros. thinking that all Harry Potter 
fans think the way you do. They'll play it as safe as they can with 
the fanbase, and I would not like to see that result in 
seven "movies" that play like crap because the studio was too afraid 
to change anything.

By the way, it frankly IS unreasonable to think that a movie will be 
just like a book. They never are. If you think that's a criticism of 
your point of view, perhaps you're taking this a little too 
personally.

--Anna




From elfnorc at voyager.net  Wed Jun 16 23:01:53 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:01:53 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20040616203606.11085.qmail@web40609.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040616203606.11085.qmail@web40609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40D0D161.4020304@voyager.net>

Suzanne Chiles wrote:

> Now that filming for Goblet of Fire is underway, I'm
> wondering who will be cast as Voldemort.


Greetings;  I thought that I had read or heard that Rowen Atkinson 
(Black Adder, Mr. Bean) was cast as Voldemort. 

Tina







From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Wed Jun 16 23:06:21 2004
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:06:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.
References: <20040616225558.232.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <015601c453f6$8ab69be0$210110ac@TALLC>

Gretchen:
> Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
> really going to happen.
>
> http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html


How could it be true when both Smallville and Charmed are renewed for the
next season.  Tom Welling & Alyssa Milano are way too busy with their own
series to start on a new one.

Rae




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 00:38:09 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:38:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting Voldemort
Message-ID: <197.2ad9d62e.2e0241f1@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/16/04 5:30:51 PM, elfnorc at voyager.net writes:


> Greetings;? I thought that I had read or heard that Rowen Atkinson
> (Black Adder, Mr. Bean) was cast as Voldemort.
> 
> 

That was discounted months ago when the rumor first surfaced. His agents and 
WB denied it. In fact, Rowan Atkinson said that he hadn't even been approached 
to be in any HP film ;-)
As for casting news and other HP related news, I can't emphasize strongly 
enough to just check The Leaky Cauldron web site once in a while. They always 
have the true news, not rumors or speculation. And I am sure that as soon as 
Voldemort is cast, TLC will post it on their site ;-)
Cindy


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




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 01:08:49 2004
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Please tell me this isn't true.
Message-ID: <20040617010849.56641.qmail@web51902.mail.yahoo.com>

Gretchen:
> Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
> really going to happen.
> 
> http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

Besides the already mentioned reasons to be skeptical, 
'tis awfully unlikely that on Tuesday the 15th a topical 
and current (and legit) news item should quote Levin 
speaking on behalf of the company that he left on Monday 
the 14th.

See http://tinyurl.com/37hvd

(aka
http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=upsell_article&articleID=VR1117906495&categoryID=14&cs=1)

Petra
a
n  :)


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



From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 02:54:45 2004
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:54:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06DB@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <20040617025445.75041.qmail@web60204.mail.yahoo.com>



"Miller, Gina (JIS)" <ginamiller at jis.nashville.org> wrote:
*       >Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical 
Creatures
> >and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where 
do I get
> >the book?  

Gina:
*      I got them off ebay! 

 

Betsy replies:

I bought them on Amazon.



________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/
<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

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1295ts0jn/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087480231/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com> click here


<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=847945832> 

  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


[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. 



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

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




From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 02:55:03 2004
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Crookshanks
In-Reply-To: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06DB@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <20040617025503.45769.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>



"Miller, Gina (JIS)" <ginamiller at jis.nashville.org> wrote: 
*       >Ok... this is driving me nuts!  I have been told to read Magical 
Creatures
> >and Where To Find Them and you'll understand Crookshanks.  Where 
do I get
> >the book?  

Gina:
*      I got them off ebay! 

 

Betsy replies:

I bought them on Amazon.



________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/
<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

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1295ts0jn/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087480231/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com> click here


<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=847945832> 

  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


[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. 




		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!

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




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Thu Jun 17 02:59:00 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 22:59:00 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Casting Voldemort
References: <20040616203606.11085.qmail@web40609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c45417$0b2d0fa0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Suzanne:
Any other actors who we think should be cast as
Voldemort? 

Taryn:
I think Jeremy Irons would play an awesome Voldemort, if only for his wonderful voice. Whoever DOES play Voldemort will be in a lot of makeup, anyway, so the important thing, physically, would be the tall, thin build, which Irons has.

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

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




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 04:16:06 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:16:06 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <caqodn+13mr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

***bd-bear writes:

What I don't get is why the people who liked POA have such a problem
with me NOT liking it.***

>>>From: saintbacchus [mailto:saintbacchus at yahoo.com]

Because I don't want Warner Bros. thinking that all Harry Potter
fans think the way you do. They'll play it as safe as they can with
the fanbase, and I would not like to see that result in
seven "movies" that play like crap because the studio was too afraid
to change anything.

By the way, it frankly IS unreasonable to think that a movie will be
just like a book. They never are. If you think that's a criticism of
your point of view, perhaps you're taking this a little too
personally.<<<

I think it's very interesting that you think I am the only person who thinks
"the way I do." Perhaps you should check out the HUNDREDS of negative
reviews on Yahoo Movies or the Internet Movie Database so you can see just
how many people wanted this movie to be more like the book. And if other
fans thought the first two movies "played like crap," why did they do so
much better in the box office in the first few weeks? (And before you
indicate competition or some such thing, ALL movies have competition
whenever they're released. Where are the numbers from the die-hard HP fans
who would go see a movie again and again and again if they liked it?)

I don't think it is unreasonable to want the movie to be more faithful to
the book. I think the first two movies were much closer to the material than
this one. At least they didn't have shrunken heads and flying dementors.

And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in regards to
liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it? So far today I've
been told by various list members than I am mean-spirited towards the movie
because I didn't like it, I don't "get subtlety," and now I'm unreasonable.
I've also been told I don't make a "rational argument" for not liking the
movie, as if I have to back of my FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with factual
information. And I'm taking these points of view personally?!

Barbara
bd-bear




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 04:41:48 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 04:41:48 -0000
Subject: Wandless magic (Was Re: foreshadowing of 6 and 7)
In-Reply-To: <1cb.23aa0626.2e01c80a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <car7ec+6e2u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
 > But my take out on the foreshadowed story line relates to the 
early 
> scene with the Aunt Marge - and Harry's uncontrollable righteous 
> anger.
> It seems to me that this scene sees him breaking glasses, lights 
> flickering on and off, blowing up his aunt from an apparent 
discharge 
> of magic , Are the swings and play equipment swinging wildly 
around 
> without reason or an aftermath of a large magical discharge from 
> Harry ? is it wandless magic ?
> 
> I noticed too, that Dumbledore slowed Harry's fall in Quidditch 
with wandless 
> magic.  I'm certain Harry's wandless magic will come into play in 
the future, 
> and I think it will be a significant weapon against Voldemort.  
(Then again, 
> Dumbledore can do wandless magic, so maybe V can too???  Scary 
thought).

In the book wandless magic (complex magic is usually implied) is 
hinted to be difficult to do for most wizards, but in PoA, that idea 
was not strickly adhered to as there were several instances of 
wandless magic not performed by Harry in the movie.  Just the 
examples I can think of are:
*the busboy at the Leaky Cauldron waves his hand to get the chairs 
to put themselves on the table.  
*Dumbledore & Lupin both light (and in Dumbledore's case, 
extinguishes) candles without wands. 
*Professer Lupin waves his hands in front of the locks on the trunk 
to open it for the boggart dementor to come out for Harry's Patronus 
lesson.
*the movie had Dumbledore not using a wand to slow down Harry's 
fall, but in the book Hermione tell Harry, "He ran out onto the 
field as you fell, waved his wand, and you sort of slowed down 
before you hit the ground."  PoA, Chpt 9.

I might have missed some instances of wandless magic, but being able 
to do magic without a wand seems common place in the movie world of 
PoA, which lessens it's emphasis, specifically in Harry's case, in 
the books.  Of course, it is indicated in the books that all wizard 
children are capable of performing wandless magic (small bursts 
anyway) without evening knowing they are - thus Colin Creevey's 
comments to Harry about doing all this weird stuff before knowing he 
was wizard upon their first meeting in CoS.  

>From my repeated reading of the books, I'm certain that only 
powerful wizards can regulary perform complex magic without using a 
wand.  What this implies of Harry's magical abilities is obvious - 
he's a very powerful wizard, but hasn't yet realized it.  It's 
repeated often that James and Lily were very smart, clever and 
powerful wizards, so it stands to reason that Harry inherited the 
best of both his parents to become an extremely powerful wizard.  
It's easy to infer that Harry is a more powerful wizrd than 
Voldemort, which is why Voldemort fears him.  And of course, Harry's 
midichlorian count is off the charts!  Ooops, wrong movie.... <g>

Diana L.
   




From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Thu Jun 17 04:58:57 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:58:57 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA for non-canon readers-- Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <001d01c45427$cc8a9b30$6400a8c0@Desktop>

I asked my niece, 13, today how she liked POA.  She read SS years a few
years ago, struggled and did not read the rest yet and she liked the first
two movies.  Her initial response, typified 13 year old, was non committal.
She then asked me if I had seen it and upon revealing that I had, she stated
that she didn't like it.  I asked her why and she pointed out the
freeze-frame ending first (I have trained her well).  She then explained
that she found it hard to follow, that it jumped from point to point.  I
asked her if she understood where the Marauder's Map came from and she had
no clue, she noted that she wished Harry would have asked Lupin.  I asked
her about the dorm scene, she responded that she didn't understand what it
had to do with the movie, although it was funny.  She did like the vistas
but didn't understand the tree scenes.  She didn't get the Firebolt scene
and said that it was randomly tacked on with no plot connection.  She then
asserted that she didn't like Daniel's acting at all, she thought Ron was
excellent.  She finds Hermione's character annoying (13-year-old girl
stuff).

 

Is this typical of non-canon readers?  Remember she had no book to compare
the movie with.

 

Trevor 



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




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 05:05:50 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 01:05:50 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA for non-canon readers-- Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <001d01c45427$cc8a9b30$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEOFHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Trevor [mailto:trevor-weiland at comcast.net]

I asked my niece, 13, today how she liked POA.. . .  I asked her why and she
pointed out the freeze-frame ending first (I have trained her well).  She
then explained that she found it hard to follow, that it jumped from point
to point.  I asked her if she understood where the Marauder's Map came from
and she had no clue, she noted that she wished Harry would have asked Lupin.
I asked her about the dorm scene, she responded that she didn't understand
what it had to do with the movie, although it was funny.  She did like the
vistas but didn't understand the tree scenes.  She didn't get the Firebolt
scene and said that it was randomly tacked on with no plot connection.

Is this typical of non-canon readers?  Remember she had no book to compare
the movie with.<<<

My husband (who is 3 times your niece's age) thought the movie was okay,
nothing spectacular. When questioned, he also didn't like the freeze frame
ending, thinking it was kind of cheesy. He followed the basic story okay but
didn't understand why Lupin knew that the map was a map. I could get more
opinions out of him, but he's sick of me taking about HP. He's NOT an
obsessed fan, like so many of us!

Barbara
bd-bear




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Jun 17 05:51:05 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 05:51:05 -0000
Subject: Padma Patil as Gryffindor?
In-Reply-To: <20040616224454.KWXT18566.out011.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <carbg9+ke0b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
snip
> That being said, I missed in the books the fact that Padma and 
Pavarti were 
> twins. I thought they were just sisters, close in age?
> 

Just thought I would give you the referrence for Padma and Parvati 
being twins. If you have the American version of GOF on pg 174 
(Chapter 12). Hermione and Harry are discussing family members and 
sorting and Harry said he thought they always went in the same house.

"Oh no, not necesarily," said Hermione. "Parvati Patil's twin's in 
Ravenclaw, and they're identical. You'd think they'd be together 
wouldn't you?"

Later Dean says something to Ron and Harry about how did they get the 
best looking girls in the year. Anyway, they are small blurbs so it 
is easy to miss them. As for dressing alike, I know a couple of twin 
ladies who still dress similar. Not identical but basically the same. 
Maybe one's dress is red and the other's is yellow but it is the same 
dress. They joined the military together as well. But I think that is 
an exception. I thought the two actresses looked cute in the film 
though but I think that is the mom in me.

Theresa




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 06:00:41 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 02:00:41 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Padma Patil as Gryffindor?
In-Reply-To: <20040616224454.KWXT18566.out011.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBKEOHHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Valerie Flowe [mailto:valerie.flowe at verizon.net]

That being said, I missed in the books the fact that Padma and Pavarti were
twins. I thought they were just sisters, close in age?<<<

Since I just read this, I thought I'd help out here.

>From GoF, pg. 174:

"Parvati Patil's twin's in Ravenclaw, and they're identical."

Barbara
bd-bear




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 02:25:35 2004
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 02:25:35 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <caqodn+13mr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <caqvev+37gq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "saintbacchus" > 
> Because I don't want Warner Bros. thinking that all Harry Potter 
> fans think the way you do. They'll play it as safe as they can with 
> the fanbase, and I would not like to see that result in 
> seven "movies" that play like crap because the studio was too 
afraid 
> to change anything.
> 
> By the way, it frankly IS unreasonable to think that a movie will 
be 
> just like a book. They never are. If you think that's a criticism 
of 
> your point of view, perhaps you're taking this a little too 
> personally.
> 
> --Anna


Oh, I see. To state your opinion as loud as possible?

OK, here is mine. I don't believe that movie should be exactly like 
the book, but I think that it is VERY reasonable to expect from the 
movie, which is adaptation of such famous book to state as close as 
possible to the original.


It is my view about all movies, which are adaptations. I've seen a 
lot and to tell you the truth, I am still yet to see the movie, which 
told the story better than the book.


I DO expect the movie to state as close as possible to the book. PoA 
failed spectacularly in that aspect, IMO.

By the way, it does not mean that I did not like the movie, I did. 
But, I liked it as  a totally different entity, which in my 
imagination had almost no relation to the PoA.


Alla





From suewartell at netscape.net  Thu Jun 17 04:04:20 2004
From: suewartell at netscape.net (swartell)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 04:04:20 -0000
Subject: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <20040616220912.BPNZ3317.out006.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <car584+21fp@eGroups.com>

Several folks have commented on the the odd way in which the dementors
seemed to be sucking something out of Sirius and Harry by the lake
near the end of the movie.  I don't think it was their souls, for a
couple reasons.

1.  The same effect was noticable when the dementor first showed up on
the train early in the movie.  In fact, the first time I saw the movie
I spent a fair amount of that scene trying to figure out what the heck
was supposed to be happening - Harry's face blurred or was dragged
towards the dementor)  Second time I saw the movie, it was with the
image of the events by the lake in mind, and so I had a better notion
of what I thought it was supposed to be showing -  I think it is
supposed to be the "feeding on the emotions" effect of the dementors,
rather than the soul-sucking.  YMMV

2.  The dementors were pulling back at that point.. perhaps just
preparatory to sweeping back in.  (I'm not 100% sure about that; it's
the memory of the scene I have, but I may have distorted it.)

3.  The camera angle made it look to me like the the point of light
being pulled out of Sirius (if that's what it was) turned into the
stag.  In fact it almost looked to me like he was exhaling the
patronus, though I knew that Harry was casting it.   And as the
patronus receded into the background, the point of
light/reflection/whatever disappeared as if Sirius sucked it back in.
 Alternatively, it was as if the brightness of the stag was reflected
in the lake just beyond Sirius and it just appeared to be coming out
of him and then returning to him.   

I found that bit visually confusing, and a bit over the top, frankly.
I never did quite decide how to interpret it.  

Sue





From trevor-weiland at comcast.net  Thu Jun 17 06:23:57 2004
From: trevor-weiland at comcast.net (Trevor)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 23:23:57 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <caqvev+37gq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002301c45433$ac59ad40$6400a8c0@Desktop>

Alla: It is my view about all movies, which are adaptations. I've seen a 
lot and to tell you the truth, I am still yet to see the movie, which 
told the story better than the book.

 

 

 

[Trevor] 

 I actually felt the film The Man in the Iron Mask was better than the book
(not saying much as it was the poorest of the three novels).  I think that
too often book adaptations aren't.  That is, they simply use the title,
theme, and characters names to advertise for an unrelated film (Starship
Troopers).  I think the problem we are facing with this film is not only
film-book loyalty but also film-series loyalty.  LOTR would have suffered
from direction, character, writer, or special effects team changes.  Peter
Jackson was brilliant in his push to film all three movies at once; it
allowed the three to seem parts of one (as the book was meant to be).  HP
films seem to suffer from internal to the medium changes as well as relying
on a overly informed fan base.  Many of us have read the books multiple
times and can quote portions- we are not an average audience.  

 

Trevor 



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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Jun 17 06:38:20 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:38:20 -0000
Subject: POA for non-canon readers-- Spoilers
In-Reply-To: <001d01c45427$cc8a9b30$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <care8s+854j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Trevor" <trevor-weiland at c...> 
wrote:
> I asked my niece, 13, today how she liked POA.  She read SS years a 
few
> years ago, struggled and did not read the rest yet and she liked 
the first
> two movies.  Her initial response, typified 13 year old, was non 
committal.
> She then asked me if I had seen it and upon revealing that I had, 
she stated
> that she didn't like it.  I asked her why and she pointed out the
> freeze-frame ending first (I have trained her well).  She then 
explained
> that she found it hard to follow, that it jumped from point to 
point.  I
> asked her if she understood where the Marauder's Map came from and 
she had
> no clue, she noted that she wished Harry would have asked Lupin.  I 
asked
> her about the dorm scene, she responded that she didn't understand 
what it
> had to do with the movie, although it was funny.  She did like the 
vistas
> but didn't understand the tree scenes.  She didn't get the Firebolt 
scene
> and said that it was randomly tacked on with no plot connection.  
She then
> asserted that she didn't like Daniel's acting at all, she thought 
Ron was
> excellent.  She finds Hermione's character annoying (13-year-old 
girl
> stuff).
> 
>  
> 
> Is this typical of non-canon readers?  Remember she had no book to 
compare
> the movie with.
> 
>  
> 
> Trevor 
> 
> 
Interesting, I spoke with a friend's 13 year old son today and got a 
different take. He has not read one of the books and only went to see 
the first movie because I took him with my sons on opening day. 
Though he is prefers LOTR's movies (again he never read the books), 
he did actually say POA was decent. That equates to not up to par 
with LOTRs but a good movie in his speak. He said he liked how the 
tree showed the seasons changing. That impressed me that a 13 year 
old would catch that. He did say it seemed rushed in some places. He 
thought the trio acted better. Especially Emma - he liked that she 
wasn't a bossy wimpy know-it-all this time. After the first film he 
asked how someone like her would be in Gryffindor. However, I was 
shocked when he said she was alright looking but too skinny. First 
boy I have heard say that. Anyway, he understood the Firebolt was 
from Sirius due to the feather but thought the ending was a bit 
silly. Not as silly as COS he said he hated the "cheering for the big 
dumb guy." Especially, after he heard me (I didn't like COS's ending 
either) say "that wasn't in the book and it detracts from Harry and 
Ron's award and what about Ginny?" He liked Trelawny, said he thought 
she would be a hillarious science or math teacher. He liked the 
dementors and the patronous. However, he did ask me why Harry changed 
his mind so quickly in the shack. He caught that they were all 
friends and assumed Lupin had seen the map before so that was why he 
knew about it. When I explained the whole marauder backstory, he 
said "hmm, they could have take on 10-15 minutes to have Remus and 
Sirius briefly mention that in the shack or had Lupin explain it 
while he was packing." He absolutely loved the Aunt Marge scene. I 
won't repeat what he said about her but he thinks she got what was 
coming to her just like Malfoy.
I then asked how did you like it compared to the first two and he 
replied "It was better but it isn't LOTR". He said he thought the 
first two movies were geared to younger kids and this one is to 
teenagers and adults. He said though the werewolf was creepy the 
scary part is the dementors sucking away your "happy thoughts" and 
little kids won't get that. I asked him what would make these better 
films and I quote "make them a little longer and tell more so I don't 
have to ask someone who read the book if I caught all of the 
storyline." He sat through the LOTRs films with no bathroom breaks 
and stayed for all of the credits. Then he said he would give it 7 
out of 10 stars (maybe 8 due to the visuals - said the tree was 
cooler this time). Oh he also said Ron needed more lines as he is 
Harry's best friend too.
Personally, I liked POA but have some nitpics about it but I have 
that with the first two as well. Being a huge fan of the books, I 
would love them to be identical to the books but alas they are not. 
My boys and muggle hubby (he is no HP fan at all and often rolls his 
eyes at me) liked the movie. The boys are 8 and 12 and said "awesome" 
when we left the theater. My hubby said he thought it was an 
improvement and not some little kid movie but he personally wouldn't 
pay full price again unless we go to the IMAX (he thinks that sounds 
cool as we have never seen a feature length film on IMAX).
Anyway, as for your question about those who don't read the books 
getting confused, I think some folks may well be. But here is an 
equivalent boy to compare your niece to
Also, I believe there are groups that didn't like the movie and those 
who did and I think that happens with every movie. 

Theresa
PS: Side note - since the first two films opened in Nov and the 2nd 
weekend was Thanksgiving in the US - did Friday's sales count for the 
weekend count? Just curious as I have several friends who go to a 
movie that day as a family tradition - stuff your face on Thursday, 
see a movie with the whole family on Friday. Oh and LOTR came out a 
month later so it wasn't really competition for the first two films.




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 06:58:28 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:58:28 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <carfek+dba6@eGroups.com>

I didn't say nobody else thinks the way you do. I believe you're 
speaking for a segment of Harry Potter fans, although the size of 
that segment really can't be determined by the number of bad reviews 
on the IMDb. That's not relevant to this discussion, though.

Yes, the first two movies were more faithful to the books. The point 
of contention is whether that makes them better, or more enjoyable, 
films. Cuaron didn't make the changes he did just to annoy you, he 
made each one for sound cinematic reasons. But in not accepting that 
books are not the same as films, you're dismissing any arguments of 
cinematic merit out of hand.

--Anna




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 07:13:08 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 07:13:08 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <caqvev+37gq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <carga4+oovr@eGroups.com>

Alla:

<<
It is my view about all movies, which are adaptations. I've seen a  
lot and to tell you the truth, I am still yet to see the movie, 
which told the story better than the book.
>>

Oh, that's an easy one. It's a Dutch film called "Character," and 
you'll find it in the foreign section.


<<
I DO expect the movie to state as close as possible to the book. PoA 
failed spectacularly in that aspect, IMO. By the way, it does not 
mean that I did not like the movie, I did. But, I liked it as  a 
totally different entity, which in my imagination had almost no 
relation to the PoA.
>>

Really? Then why do you care whether the movie stuck closely to the 
book?

--Anna




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 08:43:21 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:43:21 -0000
Subject: POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOELBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <carlj9+dsdu@eGroups.com>

Barbara D. Poland-Waters <bd-bear at v...> wrote:

>>this past weekend showed a marked drop in revenue for
POA. From IMDb (www.imdb.com):

"Although it remained at the top of the box office with $34.9 
million, the figure represented a 63 percent decline from last 
weekend's debut."
[snip]
The 2nd weekend numbers for the first two films didn't show nearly as 
much decline. I got these off the Imdb as well.

PS/SS (US figures)
Opening weekend: $90,294,621
2nd weekend: $96,683,892
3rd weekend: $32,691,776

COS (US figures)
Opening weekend: $88,357,488
2nd weekend: $60,001,343
3rd weekend: $51,800,181

POA (US figures)
Opening weekend: $93,687,367
2nd weekend: $34,000,000<<

I was aware that PoA dropped more in its second week than the 
previous two (I read it on ew.com, actually), but my point was just 
that it wasn't doing so bad that it would cancel out plans to make 
future movies. 
Its also rather difficult to compare November and June, since box 
officewise they are different months. I checked the calender for 2001 
and the 2nd weekend of PS/SS fell on Thanksgiving, which makes the 
second weekend numbers completely uncomparable (movies always have a 
spike on a holiday weekend). Thanksgiving fell on the third weekend 
of CoS, but I think your numbers are a little off on that, I just 
checked IMDB and it said CoS' 2nd weekend was 42mil, not 60mil 
(furthermore, it said its 3rd weekend was 32mil, not 51mil), so PoA 
only fell a little more than CoS, and that might have been due to 
more people seeing it during the week (because school's out), or more 
competetion (from Garfield perhaps, which made close to $20mil, CoS 
didn't have any family movie competetion its second week).
I'm guessing to get your numbers you just subtracted the first 
weekend gross from the running total listed on IMDB (is that right?), 
because that includes weekdays. Lower on the page is weekend gross' 
only, which is where I found the 42 & 32 numbers. PoA may have made 
less its second *weekend*, but if you include weekday totals it made 
almost $65mil, which is slightly better than CoS (the daily numbers 
can be found here: http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?
page=daily&id=harrypotter3.htm).
Sorry to go on and on, but for some reason I find box office scores 
to be fascinating. (really, truly and honestly not trying to attack 
you in any way).


>>Personally, I think this is a clear indication that the POA film is 
not as popular and has not been as well received as the first two 
movies. Word of mouth does get out, and if most people truly loved 
POA, I don't think the 2nd weekend numbers would show such a decline. 
Time will tell how the movie does overall and if the trend continues. 
I'll be looking for the 3rd weekend numbers to see if a trend does 
exist.<<

One things for sure: Spiderman is going to squash it, at least as far 
the US numbers go. 
I really was only talking about the money aspect of PoA, but since 
you brought it up...I have to disagree with you. I think June and 
November are different months, and Chamber of Secrets and 
Philospher's / Sorcerer's Stone were helped by less competetion and 
the beginning of the holidays. Not only that, it appears that 
Prisoner of Azkaban has had its money spread out more than the 
previous two simply because school is out and children/teenagers are 
more free to see movies on weekdays. 

-Rebecca




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 08:53:51 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 04:53:51 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
Message-ID: <14.2c2e0991.2e02b61f@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 1:44:53 AM, bd-bear at verizon.net writes:


> >>Personally, I think this is a clear indication that the POA film is
> not as popular and has not been as well received as the first two
> movies.
> 

I would have to disagree with this, if reviews are any indication. I have 
read several reviews from papers all around the world (online from links on Leaky 
Cauldron, etc.) and watched review programs on tv and the reviews are much 
higher than for the first two films. This time the reviewers are citing specific 
reasons for why it's a good film and why it's better than the first two. One 
of the reasons they give is that the first two were too slavishly adherent to 
the books, which in effect, made for poorer 'movies' since film is a different 
medium to the books. 
And Richard Roeper (along with some other reviewers that I don't have at hand 
this moment) said that the movie is understandable even if a person hadn't 
read the book, for the most part, and is an enjoyable and well crafted movie. 
Many of them even said it was first real movie in the HP franchise and has grown 
up to appeal to all ages. 

And I hate to think what it says about us as a society if we think that 93 
million in revenue over a 2 day period is a sign that the movie isn't doing well 
<g> Man, I remember when the 100 million mark for an overall run of a movie 
was a big deal, now it's a flop if it doesn't pull in 300 million.   I don't 
think we have to worry that Warners is going to be disappointed in the grosses 
;)   
Cindy


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 08:58:05 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:58:05 -0000
Subject: visual depth
In-Reply-To: <003901c453c0$df654a00$6400a8c0@Desktop>
Message-ID: <carmet+htiq@eGroups.com>

>>I think that another massive change in style by another director 
will hurt the franchise. The movies need to compliment one another 
and present a full story- this is the weakness of PoA. I disliked PoA 
not because of the detail cuts, but because I felt it was a bad movie-
 although visually stunning at times.<<

Thank you for clarifying that, I was sort of confused about what you 
meant before. I can certainly understand what you mean, switching 
directers / visual style in the middle of a series is a little 
jarring and can sometimes kill a franchise (Batman, anyone?), but 
personally I think it works for Harry Potter. I sort of wish a 
different directer had come on for Chamber of Secrets (but that's 
another post). Each book has a different feel to it, while they are 
all under the same premise, each book/movie has Harry a year older 
and the plot is different. The feel of each book is different, so it 
works if the movies are slightly different in visual style.

As far as liking the movie or not, that's personal preference. Some 
liked it, some didn't. I won't try to change your mind.


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 09:36:02 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:36:02 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <carom2+nl8n@eGroups.com>

>>I don't think it is unreasonable to want the movie to be more 
faithful to the book. I think the first two movies were much closer 
to the material than this one. At least they didn't have shrunken 
heads and flying dementors.<<

Just curious, why are the first two perceived as being *so much* more 
faithful to the books that PoA? I noticed not just you, but a lot of 
people voicing that,  I haven't read the first two as many times as 
I've read PoA, but I recall a lot of things being left out. Off the 
top of my head:
PS/SS:
-No mention of Harry's previous accidental magic before the 
disappearing glass incident
-No Draco in Diagon Alley
-Harry's birthday (appears at least) seems to have jumped to August 
31st as opposed to July 31st
-The sorting hat doesn't go in alphabetical order, but instead in 
some random order (I know this has to bother someone else), and its 
delibertations on Harry are said aloud to the whole room
-Like in the other two, there's only one quidditch scene, and thus we 
lose Referee!Snape
-No peeves, or history of magic
-Ron has detention with them instead of Neville
-No midnight duel with Draco
-No potions to get to the stone
-No explanation of why Snape hates Harry / Why he saved his life (in 
fact, no discussion of that at all)
CoS:
-Harry's birthday moves a few days from what it was in the book (it 
was always so sad to me that none of the Dursley's mentioned his 
birthday and he spent it doing chores and then being told to hide in 
his room and pretend not to exist)
-Ron's room is never shown
-No Malfoys in Knockturn Alley (having it as a deleted scene doesn't 
count)
-Hermione says DUMBLEDORE'S line
-Snape isn't the one that catches Ron/Harry after the flying car 
incident
-No mention of Filch as a squib (thus making the attack on Mrs. 
Norris rather random)
-No foreshadowing of Ginny being the one opening the chamber
-No valentine's day (my favorite line in the whole book was in that 
scene...Hermione giving Lockhard a valentine was priceless)
-Penelope is never attacked
-(i might be mistaken here) No mention of Ron burping up slugs all 
over Tom Riddle's trophy for services to the school.
-And of course the horrible 'There's no Hogwarts without you Hagrid' 
end (honestly, did they just not have any test screenings?)

And those are just off the top of my head. The previous movies DID 
change quite a bit, was it just that they didn't add very much 
either? I know that PoA changed more than the other two did, I just 
didn't notice *that* much more being gone, some things were moved 
around and others only vaguely hinted at, but they were still there. 
Just curious, maybe I'm missing something.

>>And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in 
regards to liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it? 
So far today I've been told by various list members than I am mean-
spirited towards the movie because I didn't like it, I don't "get 
subtlety," and now I'm unreasonable.
I've also been told I don't make a "rational argument" for not liking 
the movie, as if I have to back of my FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with 
factual information. And I'm taking these points of view personally?<<

But not everyone is doing that. Maybe you should address those people 
specifically instead of saying that all people who liked PoA are 
against those that didn't like it, because that's not fair at all. 


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 10:23:20 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:23:20 EDT
Subject: 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <d5.f52b5f1.2e02cb18@aol.com>

The first two times I saw the movie were on opening night and the next 
morning, both times with nearly a full theater which led to plenty of distractions 
(not to mention I spent half of the first viewing thinking to myself "I can't 
believe I'm *finally* seeing it"), this time the theater was rather quiet and 
empty as it was the middle of the day and its still playing on 3 or 4 screens 
at that theater. I still enjoyed it very much, and the quicker pace makes 
multiple viewers easier, each time I saw the movie I didn't spend the first hour 
and a half anxious for the shrieking shack scene, which I thought I would (at 
least after the first viewing). 

Some likes:
-I am not particularily fond of the inflating Aunt Marge scene (in book or 
movie form), but everything leading up to that was very well done. Others have 
pointed out how Dudley doesn't have a single line in this movie (which is sort 
of odd), and it worked very well. In typical Dudley fashion, he remains rather 
self-centered through the whole scene, first paying attention to the TV and 
food only, and when he does notice what's happening to his aunt, he stops 
caring as soon as she's out of the house again. Pam Ferris was wonderful as Marge 
too.
-I can't help it, I think Crookshanks is cute. I usually hate cats with those 
squished up faces, and he's not nearly as big as I imagined him from the book 
(I expected a huge cat, I think Mrs. Norris is bigger than film Crookshanks), 
but he's somehow just an adorable cat.
-Snape's reaction to the announcement of Professer Lupin was fantastic. He 
sllooowwlllyyy raises his hands, claps twice very quickly, and then stops. 
-Tom Felton's acting improved quite a bit between movies. He was started to 
get under my skin in CoS (that "see you at school" line was just awful), but in 
this one he really felt like a real bully. The shoving people all the time, 
and the "ahh, dementer!" were well-done, as was his discussion with Pansy about 
nearly losing his arm. His reaction at Hogsmeade (with that somehow 
appropriate fur-hat) was completely believable, especially after the third viewing, I 
can understand why he would be freaked out there, Draco is supposed to be a 
little wimpy.
-My favorite visual in the movie? Hedwig flying through the sky as it changes 
from Autumn to Winter, that was breathtaking
-I may be the only one to say this, but I liked the werewolf. The hairless 
idea was sort of interesting, you could see he was a creature, not just a wolf.
-Alan Rickman was perfect in the DADA scene, especially when he said "with 
specific emphasis on RECOGNIZING IT." I think I laughed out loud at that at 
least one of the times i saw PoA.

Some dislikes:
-Sirius the dog. For one thing, did *every* shot of him have to be CGI? Its a 
*dog* for goodness sakes, dogs are one of the easiest animals to train. And 
if it was already CGI, couldn't they have made him to the description in the 
book, rather than the drawing in the US editions. Sirius in dog-form is supposed 
to be "bear-like", that dog wasn't bearlike at all.
-As much I liked Draco more than in Chamber of Secrets, his reaction to being 
put under Hermione's wand was a little two extreme. I can understand him 
getting a little scared, but he was sniveling! It just seemed a little forced. 
-I couldn't stand the shrunken head on the Knight Bus. He *really* got on my 
nerves.
-Why do they always give Mrs. Weasley the worst lines? In CoS she had the 
"where are we going to get all this?...(dramatic pause)...Diagon Alley." and in 
PoA after handing Ron the rat she said "Don't you lose him!" which made no 
sense at all. The phrasing of it doesn't work (its phrased like she's referring to 
a little brother), and the reason behind it (to make it Ron's fault when 
Scabbers disappears and he blames it on Crookshanks) is unneeded as well. Ron 
*wasn't* careless with Scabbers, that's the point, in fact. Scabbers disappeared 
because he faked his death and ran away, not because of something Ron did. 
-I really don't like the freezeframe at the end.  I finally let myself look 
at it (the first two times I closed my eyes in horrified anticipation), and its 
about as bad as I imagined. Of course, I don't like freeze-frames on 
principal...
-Sirius telling Hermione how clever she is felt awkward and out of place. 
Hermione wasn't doing anything particularily clever (unless you count leaving 
Harry and Sirius alone for some male-bonding), so the phrase was completely out 
of left-field. Was there just some rule that every adult had to make some 
mention of Hermione's intelligence?
-What is up with Tom? Why did he go from being a normal looking wizard to 
some strange creature? Isn't he supposed to be the innkeeper? He looked like he 
wasn't all there mentally. On that note, why does Flitwick look like a Nazi 
munchkin? Even if the new look was an improvement, I wouldn't understand why one 
of the characters changed so drastically in appearence for no reason at all.

Some random observations:
-I wonder if there were a bunch of divination outtakes. In the first 
divination scene there's a second where Ron sort of cracks a smile (which is out of 
place with the scene), and then a minute or so later, Hermione cracks one too 
(almost like she's amused by Trelawnley, but a second later she has an angry 
grimace, so a smile wouldn't fit with the scene). It seems very possible that the 
kids found it hard to keep a straight face around Emma Thompson in those huge 
glasses.
-I still have not heard any usage of the Moony or Padfoot or Wormtail 
nicknames. I didn't even hear something that sounds like it could possible be one. 
Sirius only calls Lupin "Remus" and Lupin only calls him "Sirius" and they both 
call Peter, "Peter". Can someone tell me exactly where these are so I can at 
least know where to listen for it when I see the movie a fourth time?
-What took Snape so long to get to the shrieking shack? I assume that was 
just a mistake in the time-turner sequence, but they make it look like Snape went 
into the Willow less than a minute after Lupin, when there's at least two or 
three minutes between their arrivals. 

Sorry for the huge post. 


-Rebecca


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




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 12:16:34 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:16:34 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <carlj9+dsdu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBEEPAHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com]

I'm guessing to get your numbers you just subtracted the first
weekend gross from the running total listed on IMDB (is that right?),
because that includes weekdays. Lower on the page is weekend gross'
only, which is where I found the 42 & 32 numbers. PoA may have made
less its second *weekend*, but if you include weekday totals it made
almost $65mil, which is slightly better than CoS<<<

My mistake. I didn't look far enough down to see they had Weekend Gross
separate from Gross.

Barbara
bd-bear




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 12:26:27 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:26:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <14.2c2e0991.2e02b61f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEPBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

I, bd-bear, wrote:

> Personally, I think this is a clear indication that the POA film is
> not as popular and has not been as well received as the first two
> movies.


>>>Then Cindy wrote:

I would have to disagree with this, if reviews are any indication. I have
read several reviews from papers all around the world (online from links on
Leaky
Cauldron, etc.) and watched review programs on tv and the reviews are much
higher than for the first two films. This time the reviewers are citing
specific
reasons for why it's a good film and why it's better than the first two. One
of the reasons they give is that the first two were too slavishly adherent
to
the books, which in effect, made for poorer 'movies' since film is a
different
medium to the books.<<<


I don't think reviews are always the be all and end all of whether or not a
movie is good. Regardless, I never said reviewers or movie critics didn't
like the movie, I said there were loads of negative comments from fans on
the IMDb and Yahoo Movies who felt disappointed as I did. And ultimately,
whether or not the movie critics make a living at reviewing movies, their
review is still their opinion. I don't necessarily think their opinion is
any more valid than the opinions of other fans, myself included.

Barbara
bd-bear




From faura2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 12:29:30 2004
From: faura2002 at yahoo.com (faura2002)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:29:30 -0000
Subject: Casting Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <000d01c45417$0b2d0fa0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>
Message-ID: <cas2ra+106cr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" <amani at a...> wrote:
> I think Jeremy Irons would play an awesome Voldemort, if only for 
his wonderful voice. Whoever DOES play Voldemort will be in a lot of 
makeup, anyway, so the important thing, physically, would be the 
tall, thin build, which Irons has.


me:

I had wanted Jeremy to be Lupin. <sigh> Thewlis as Lupin looks so 
much like an actor in my country who was always cast as our national 
hero. It's in the moustache. hehe.

But casting Irons in whatever role in HP would be great!






From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 12:33:00 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:33:00 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <carom2+nl8n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEPBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com]

Just curious, why are the first two perceived as being *so much* more
faithful to the books that PoA? I noticed not just you, but a lot of
people voicing that,  I haven't read the first two as many times as
I've read PoA, but I recall a lot of things being left out.

<snippage of lots of examples of SS-Move being different from SS-book>

And those are just off the top of my head. The previous movies DID
change quite a bit, was it just that they didn't add very much
either? I know that PoA changed more than the other two did, I just
didn't notice *that* much more being gone, some things were moved
around and others only vaguely hinted at, but they were still there.
Just curious, maybe I'm missing something.<<<


You're absolutely right about many things being different in the first two
movies. I guess it comes down to personal preference and personal vision. I
felt the first two movies fit my vision of Hogwarts and the WW much better
than POA. And yes, I don't think they added things that were irrelevant or
completely out of place in JKR's world, like the shrunken heads.

It may also be that I saw the first movie before reading the book, and I
honestly can't tell you if I did or not. I do know that I read POA over and
over again before seeing the movie, and I really had favorite scenes and
things that I read thinking, "I can't wait to see how they show that on a
movie," and then was disappointed when the changed the scene or didn't show
it at all. Again, personal preference.


I, bd-bear, had written:

>>And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in
regards to liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it?
So far today I've been told by various list members than I am mean-
spirited towards the movie because I didn't like it, I don't "get
subtlety," and now I'm unreasonable.
I've also been told I don't make a "rational argument" for not liking
the movie, as if I have to back of my FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with
factual information. And I'm taking these points of view personally?<<


>>>From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com]

But not everyone is doing that. Maybe you should address those people
specifically instead of saying that all people who liked PoA are
against those that didn't like it, because that's not fair at all.<<<


I'm sorry, perhaps I should have been clearer when I wrote "anyone who is
pro-POA." I didn't mean to indicate that everyone has written to me with
criticism of my feelings about the movie. That certainly is not the case.
There have been people on the list who have said "to each his own" or
they're sorry I didn't like the movie but respected my feelings.

Barbara
bd-bear




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 17 13:01:24 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:01:24 -0000
Subject: Snape, Umbridge and a third viewing (Was Re: Malfoy the wuss)
In-Reply-To: <20040616195500.RMUM2198.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cas4n4+l821@eGroups.com>

Valerie:
>I guess I'm one of those silly females who is perpetually attracted 
>to the "bad boys" (Draco, Lucius, Sirius, even  Snape)! 

Alice:
Whaddya mean EVEN Snape?! C'mon. Snape has it all. :)))
[Couldn't stop myself. Sorry. :)]

Valerie:
>Don't mess with my Harry though! I'm going to have a hard time 
>watching Umbridge abuse him in OOP.

Alice: 
Uhhh, that is going to just sooo super-angsty (yes, I know there's no 
such word). I hope they make Umbridge a credible character, after 
all, being tortured by a monster isn't half as horrid as by a 
seemingly normal (if slightly toadlike) person. It makes the cruelty 
seem real. 
Oh. My. God. I have just realized I'm completely twisted after all. 
All the work I put into being normal! In vain!

By the way, I'm now over my third viewing (that's three times within 
5 days, I am going bankrupt). This time I avoided the kids, only to 
get showered by popcorn from the back every five minutes by 
TEENAGERS. I mean, HELLO. I thought people grew out of this by that 
age. I had already visualized what I'd do to the kid who was doing it 
after the show (I was fully prepared to tell him that he was useless, 
stupid and an utter loser, and was savouring the thought of this 
making him miserable for ever and ever), when I turned round and saw 
my giggling teenies. I am a coward, I will not pick on somebody who 
is almost my size. I left it at that. 

Before I go even more off-topic, I'll go over to OTChatter.
Love, Alice




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 13:42:50 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:42:50 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] animal actors
Message-ID: <79.2c4e9854.2e02f9da@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 5:03:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
Both breeds are stocky, solid looking cats but the American shorthair
has bands or striping whereas most British shorthairs do not.  There
is a reference in SS/PS to the cat Mrs. McGongall transforms into as
having markings that look like spectacles, but it actually called a
tabby cat. I think one of the reasons an American shorthair was used
in the film is they didn't want to use the same type of cat twice.
Mrs. Norris (who I believe is a Maine coon)has tabby markings.  This
is just my guess, but if you are interested in checking out the
differences in the breeds, go to the Cat Fancier's website for photos.
http://www.cfainc.org/breeds/profiles/british.html  This brings up the
British shorthair page but you can go back one page and find the other
breeds' links.

The first cat pictured on this page is our friend's cat Harry Potter.
We have a son of his, named Gryffindor and a little girl named
Minerva.  

Hope this helps answer your question

Karen

Thanks for the information.  British cats don't have stripes or swirls?  
Weird.  I did notice Mrs. Norris was a Maine Coon cat (our daughter used to have 
one -- they're very distinctive-looking cats, easy to recognize).  


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


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




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Thu Jun 17 14:15:51 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:15:51 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06E7@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

            Thank goodness! I can see them doing something that stupid
though. I love my country and all but we do have a way of taking things like
the beautiful language in Harry Potter and just making a mess of it! I
always thought that a Harry Potter series would have been great IF they
stayed 100% true to the books, but this late in the game they would have to
change the actors and that would ruin it IMO.  I do not even want to imagine
HP without Dan, Emma, and Rupert!!
Gina
 
 
No, it's a parody site.
--> http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html
<http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html> 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Gretchen Crumpacker 
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Please tell me this isn't true.


  Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
  really going to happen.

  http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html
<http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html> 

  Gretchen

[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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129l3n9gp/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087513363/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164339/rand=797999521> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From doliesl at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 15:34:46 2004
From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:34:46 -0000
Subject: Casting Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <cas2ra+106cr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <casdmm+sk3e@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" <amani at a...> wrote:
> > I think Jeremy Irons would play an awesome Voldemort, if only for 
> his wonderful voice. Whoever DOES play Voldemort will be in a lot of 
> makeup, anyway, so the important thing, physically, would be the 
> tall, thin build, which Irons has.
> 
> 
> faura2002
> 
> I had wanted Jeremy to be Lupin. <sigh> Thewlis as Lupin looks so 
> much like an actor in my country who was always cast as our national 
> hero. It's in the moustache. hehe.
> 
> But casting Irons in whatever role in HP would be great!

Well sort of...Jeremy Irons played Snape in the Comic Relief's Harry
Potter parody, and he made a fine "God I'm gorGEOUS" Snape~~  =)

D.




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 15:50:49 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:50:49 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <casekp+kk27@eGroups.com>

> 
> And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in 
regards to
> liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it? So far 
today I've
> been told by various list members than I am mean-spirited towards 
the movie
> because I didn't like it, I don't "get subtlety," and now I'm 
unreasonable.
> I've also been told I don't make a "rational argument" for not 
liking the
> movie, as if I have to back of my FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with 
factual
> information. And I'm taking these points of view personally?!
> 
> Barbara
> bd-bear

I don't think your "wrong" to dislike it... however, that's going to 
change my mind and the fact that I do enjoy this film, much more than 
the previous two.  I've already seen it twice, and plan on seeing it 
at least two more times in the theater, before buying it on DVD.  
Everybody has different tastes.  Personally, I hated Titanic.... and 
the fact that it won so many Oscars just irritates me to no end.  I 
thought The Color Purple was a far better film than Out Of Africa 
(which I fell asleep watching, it was sooooo boring).  But those are 
MY tastes.

Tim




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 16:38:29 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:38:29 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Plase tell me this isn't true
Message-ID: <d9.d48aa0d.2e032305@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/16/2004 11:02:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
really going to happen.

http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

Gretchen

How could it be true?  Tom Welling is the star of "Smallville" which is the 
WB's top series.  They wouldn't pull him off his "Clark Kent" duties.  JK 
Rowling still owns the rights to her universe, only licensed Warner Bros. to do the 
films, from things I've read here and there.  This must be a spoof kind of 
site.  What an awful idea, Americanizing Hogwarts!  Yikes!

A true-blue American who's quite fond of the Britishness of the HP world. . .
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  Thu Jun 17 16:56:21 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:56:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]wandless magic
Message-ID: <198.2af57f44.2e032735@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 6:29:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I might have missed some instances of wandless magic, but being able 
to do magic without a wand seems common place in the movie world of 
PoA, which lessens it's emphasis, specifically in Harry's case, in 
the books.  Of course, it is indicated in the books that all wizard 
children are capable of performing wandless magic (small bursts 
anyway) without evening knowing they are - thus Colin Creevey's 
comments to Harry about doing all this weird stuff before knowing he 
was wizard upon their first meeting in CoS.  

>From my repeated reading of the books, I'm certain that only 
powerful wizards can regulary perform complex magic without using a 
wand.  What this implies of Harry's magical abilities is obvious - 
he's a very powerful wizard, but hasn't yet realized it.  It's 
repeated often that James and Lily were very smart, clever and 
powerful wizards, so it stands to reason that Harry inherited the 
best of both his parents to become an extremely powerful wizard.  
It's easy to infer that Harry is a more powerful wizrd than 
Voldemort, which is why Voldemort fears him.  And of course, Harry's 
midichlorian count is off the charts!  Ooops, wrong movie.... <g>

Diana L.


I was just watching Sorceror's Stone last night and Quirrel used wandless 
magic to force Harry to come stand in front of the Mirror of Erised.  Quirrel 
also "flies" twice in the film, once in the forest when he's drinking unicorn 
blood, and in the chamber when he attacks Harry (interesting that he could 
strangle Harry, but couldn't stand the feel of Harry's hands -- the protection is 
just in his HANDS??  Odd and illogical, but I'll take it anyway. . .)

Midichlorian count??  Whassat????  (I realize it's not HP, but you DID bring 
it up and now you have me curious!)



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


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




From nansie at pioneergirl.com  Thu Jun 17 17:03:18 2004
From: nansie at pioneergirl.com (nancy c.)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:03:18 -0000
Subject: watleyreview: tell me it isn't true
In-Reply-To: <d9.d48aa0d.2e032305@aol.com>
Message-ID: <casism+6jjh@eGroups.com>

Hi, 

re: http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

It's a spoof! Like the Onion. Click on the "About the Watley Review: 
read before citing us in court" button ..... it's all parody.

Thank goodness!!

-- nancy in montana





From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 17:01:33 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:01:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
Message-ID: <77.2c2603db.2e03286d@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 5:39:32 AM, bd-bear at verizon.net writes:


> I don't think reviews are always the be all and end all of whether or not a
> movie is good. Regardless, I never said reviewers or movie critics didn't
> like the movie, I said there were loads of negative comments from fans on
> the IMDb and Yahoo Movies who felt disappointed as I did. And ultimately,
> whether or not the movie critics make a living at reviewing movies, their
> review is still their opinion. I don't necessarily think their opinion is
> any more valid than the opinions of other fans, myself included.
> 

I don't really want to get into a debate about reviewers and such, but I 
didn't say that the reviewers opinions were more valid, but they do review movies 
for a living, something none of us can claim. And I can send the urls so you 
can read the reviews for yourself, some of them are quite in depth and bring 
out points that no one on this list nor I would venture on the imdb boards has 
mentioned ;-) The reviews are for the 'film' of POA not a comparison of the 
book vs the movie.
However, I do think that there is some validity to reviews by professionals - 
you can't just discount them out of hand because you don't agree with them. 

Anyway, like I said, I don't want to get into a back and forth here. Frankly, 
it exhausts me. I loved the movie and won't apologize for it or even change 
my mind. You didn't like it and nothing I say will change your mind. So we can 
agree to disagree ;-)

Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 17:15:59 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:15:59 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <126.43a9a294.2e032bcf@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 3:37:56 AM, patientx3 at aol.com writes:


> -Sirius the dog. For one thing, did *every* shot of him have to be CGI? Its 
> a
> *dog* for goodness sakes, dogs are one of the easiest animals to train. And
> if it was already CGI, couldn't they have made him to the description in the
> book, rather than the drawing in the US editions. Sirius in dog-form is 
> supposed
> to be "bear-like", that dog wasn't bearlike at all.
> 

You know, I looked thru the book and Padfoot is never described as more than 
enormous or black dog. Personally, I didn't get the impression of him being 
bear-like while I was reading it, so I guess that just goes to show how everyone 
sees something different while reading. He seemed fine to me in the movie ;-)

***
-I really don't like the freezeframe at the end.?
**
Sigh, well, I guess I'm one of the few people who really liked that. I 
thought it was a much snappier way to end the film than a long pulling shot from the 
Great Hall to the outside. Different, visually appealing and it actually made 
my heart feel full with some of the joy that Harry must have been feeling. I 
think it's great that they focused on him at the end - they are 'his' stories, 
after all ;-)

Cindy


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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun 17 17:28:35 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 18:28:35 +0100
Subject: I think I understand...
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>

Before I get to what I think I've finally understood, I want to make a 
small digression, starting with a question.

Am I wasting my time here?

I thought that this group was set up for the discussion of the HP movies on 
an adult level. Not just as adaptations (although of course that too), but 
as MOVIES. I spent the whole of Tuesday and most of yesterday (until I 
suddenly and unavoidably had to go out) trying to discuss the movies as 
cinematic entities and have had no reaction. That worries me, and it 
saddens me. I'm not saying that I necessarily expected praise or criticism 
of my comments, but I did think there'd be some kind of reaction. The only 
reaction I had to was to some of my nit-picky comments (to which replies 
will hopefully come shortly).

I have about a dozen messages that I know I want to respond to, briefly, 
from the last couple of weeks and will browse through the rest for anything 
else. I also have one longer post lined up (a response to Barbara's 
original criticisms of the film which for some reason I didn't see until 
she pointed out the message number a few days ago).

Once I've done that, I'm going to disappear into the ether again, as people 
don't appear to be interested in an in-depth discussion of PoA as a MOVIE 
purely on its own terms without reference to the book. I think we've pretty 
much exhausted nitpicking the adaptation and I see little point in sticking 
around for more of the same. As it seems nobody (besides Dan and Nick) is 
interested in a deeper cinematographic analysis (including one downright 
dismissal of any attempt to do so - more on that in another post) there's 
little point in my spending any time writing stuff. I may as well just 
write some essays and put them on the web. I thought this was a discussion 
forum, not a place for posting essays, so I'm off.

In the meantime, here's a thought which I am surprised only occurred to me 
last night as I was falling asleep. I think I finally understand the main 
difference between PoA the Movie and PoA the Book, which has caused a 
polarisation of the fandom. Actually, it's not so much that I understand it 
(it's pretty obvious), but I have finally realised how to put it into words.

The book is essentially a mystery story. Several mysteries are introduced 
and it is those mysteries which drive the plot. The conclusion of the book, 
is, therefore, the resolution of all of those mysteries: why's Scabbers 
behaving so strangely and why did he suddenly fall ill? Why won't anyone 
tell Harry what's going on with Sirius Black? Who is Lupin and what's he 
about? How does he know about the Map? Why is Hermione so frazzled and why 
does she appear in strange places out of the blue? There are several 
others, but I'll stop there.

The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and becomes 
a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, and 
changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting adolescence.

In fact, the film completely dismisses or overlooks some of the mysteries. 
Just one example: there is no subtlety about Lupin's Boggart: it is *very* 
obviously the moon. The Hogwarts "lockdown" is cut with an image of the 
full moon and the sound of howling, just after we've been informed that 
Lupin is unwell. The werewolf lesson is painted in such broad strokes that 
the viewer would need to be a moron not to catch on. Other elements of the 
"mystery" are similarly "unmysterious".

The only major revelation left for the end is who did betray the Potters; 
the way things are set up (and regardless of the way some reviews were 
written), Sirius is *so* heavily painted as the bad guy throughout the 
movie (just as Snape was during PS/SS) that it's clear to anyone with more 
than a couple of functioning grey cells and any knowledge of storytelling 
that there's something wrong with the assumptions.

And I think that the loss of the "mystery" is the main fault line (although 
there are others) along which the fandom has split.

Personally, I see the change as Cuaron's masterstroke (his, not Kloves's: I 
do recall reading that when he was first engaged to direct, he got Kloves 
to re-write the whole thing). The way I see it, his approach was that most 
viewers will have read the book (and analysed it in great detail) and thus 
presenting the denouement as the resolution of a mystery is pointless: 
everyone already knows how the story ends, and building the movie around a 
plot twist doesn't make the movie inherently interesting to that audience. 
What he did was to delve into the sub-text of the book's plot and make 
*that* the focus of the movie.

To take an extreme example, it's as if Mel Gibson's Passion Of The Christ 
(regardless of anyone's opinion of the movie) were filmed as if *anyone* in 
the audience didn't know how it was going to end. After all, it *is* based 
on the best-selling book of all time. So it's not about how the film ends, 
it's about showing a particular vision of the journey towards that end, 
although in a religious sense, the underlying message is *all* about the 
last scene.

It's therefore perfectly valid to take the attitude with an HP movie that 
as the audience knows how it's going to end, the movie should be about the 
journey rather than the revelation. Some people don't like the way PoA's 
journey is portrayed (which is fine, even if it's an opinion I don't 
share), but the vast majority of fans who don't like the movie don't like 
it because it's not built around the last scene and its revelations.

(Talking of which, one specific comment I'll make, on a subject which has 
recently been dissected: I *like* the freeze-frame at the end. At least 
it's better than Columbus's utterly cliched reverse zooms.)

I'm on record as saying (several times, perhaps to the extent of being 
boring) that the reason I read the books in the first place was that after 
first seeing PS/SS (knowing *nothing* of significance about the plot), I 
came out wondering why Snape hated Harry but was prepared to save him. I 
saw that as a major weakness of the film, and I've said before that I see 
the non-explanation of the MWPP/Snape relationship and authorship of the 
map to be weaknesses with PoA. I have now realised that these omissions are 
deliberate - like Harry, we're set up with a situation which we have to 
accept, but we don't know the background. All of that background, I am 
sure, will come tumbling out at an the opportune moment when the plot 
twists related specifically to that background will be explained 
(presumably, book/movie seven). As I've said before, there is no intrinsic 
reason why the resolution of individual questions and mysteries HAS to 
follow the books' order.

The change in focus therefore was the foundation of the changes to the 
book's plot, and not an effect of any changes to it. *Perhaps* if Cuaron 
had decided to stick to presenting the movie as a mystery, he might have 
made a film acceptable to those who wanted to have the mysteries resolved 
in the same way as they are in the book? *Perhaps* those people would have 
felt the same satisfaction and surprise at seeing the plot twists they know 
so well resolved in the same way.

But *perhaps* Cuaron decided not to say "I'm going to assume that nobody 
knows what happens in this story and expect them to jump in surprise when 
things are explained", but say "I'm going to assume that most of the people 
who see this movie have read the book and none of the plot will surprise 
them, so I'll give them a few *different* surprises".

As the saying goes, "you can't please all of the people all of the time; 
the best you can hope for is to please some of the people some of the 
time". Personally, I think that Cuaron has decided to please himself rather 
than the "literalists", and he certainly pleased me.

Interestingly, Mike Newell is on record as saying that he sees GoF as a 
thriller. It's a fair comment and perhaps will mean that those who dislike 
PoA's change in structure from the book may well be appeased...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, expecting more reaction this time. ;-) 



From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 17:48:54 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:48:54 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
Message-ID: <8b.dac51d7.2e033386@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 10:29:54 AM, hp at plum.cream.org writes:


> 
> I thought that this group was set up for the discussion of the HP movies on
> an adult level. Not just as adaptations (although of course that too), but
> as MOVIES. I spent the whole of Tuesday and most of yesterday (until I
> suddenly and unavoidably had to go out) trying to discuss the movies as
> cinematic entities and have had no reaction.
> 

I don't think you're wasting your time Richard - I agree with 99% of what 
your post said <g> 
I too, thought we could discuss the movie on cinematic terms, but like you 
said, it's more of a 'they left that out,' type of discussion.
I won't go point by point thru your wonderful post because it would consist 
mostly of 'yes, I agree' type of answers, but I will say that your overall 
conclusion about the mystery vs coming of age story really resonanted with me. I 
am glad that you could phrase it so eloquently because I would have rambled on 
and on, never really coming to that conclusion as concisely as you did <g> 
Thank you for that post - I'm saving it ;-)

I do agree with your conclusion and thank you for illuminating it. It makes 
so much sense and gives a logical reason for the so-called changes that other 
arguments don't come close to. Cuaron and/or Kloves had reasons behind their 
decisions, reasons that make POA a film, not a reading of a book.

And finally, thank you for mentioning the freeze frame at the end! I loved 
it, as I said in another post (although it might have been to another list, my 
head is spinning with all this discussion) and my friend who saw the movie with 
me liked it as well. Much snappier, as I said before, and more befitting a 
movie about Harry Potter. They are his stories, after all, and I think COS 
specifically, forgot that at the end.   And it is certainly more inventive and 
creative than a simple pulling shot up and out of the Great Hall ;-) And I may be 
just a sap, but I actually got a small lump in my throat at the pure joy that 
Harry exhibited at the end - the kid deserved to feel like that and he took me 
right with him.

Anyway, I do hope you don't disappear into the ether. This comparison that 
you made in the post about the choices made in POA makes perfect sense to me and 
finally puts a lot of chaotic thoughts in order, at least in my head ;-)

I would love to discuss the movie   on cinematic terms - something that I 
wanted to do since I first left the theater feeling exhiliarated, which I don't 
remember feeling after seeing COS in the theater. You have the same history as 
I do in regards to this whole thing - I saw PS/SS first, then started reading 
the books. I was halfway thru POA when COS came out in the theaters. I 
finished Book 3 and 4 shortly afterwards. So, maybe we see it from a film standpoint 
more than the folks who read all 4 books at least a year before the first 
movie even came out. I don't know, I can't speak for those folks since I had the 
images of the first film in my head as I read the first book for the first 
time.
And maybe some people are just more into the artform of film than others. Who 
knows?
But I do know that I agree with you and thank you for the post ;-)
Cindy


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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 17 17:50:22 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <20040617175022.23277.qmail@web80301.mail.yahoo.com>

--- GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:
> Before I get to what I think I've finally
> understood, I want to make a 
> small digression, starting with a question.
> 
> Am I wasting my time here?

Hey, I am fairly quiet on this list, but I for one
would miss your comments.  I personally don't have
much interest in movie v. book dissections, as for me
the movies and the books are separate entities, and
like comparing apples to oranges.  Your posts have
been a bit of a breath of fresh air.  Just my two
knuts.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From sherriola at earthlink.net  Thu Jun 17 18:44:58 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:44:58 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <001e01c4549b$31fc2a10$0400a8c0@pensive>

Hi,

Even though I did not enjoy the movie, I would hate to see you leave the
list.  I like reading your comments.  This one in particular has made me
think a lot about why I didn't like the movie.  For me, I don't think the
thing about the book that caused me to love it so much was the mystery.  I
guessed pretty early on, that Sirius wasn't after Harry, though I didn't
guess about Peter till near the end.  However, for me, it was the
relationships, which is what always gets to me in any book or movie.  The
relationship between Harry and Lupin, between Harry and Sirius, between
Harry and Snape.  The relationship between the marauders and their history,
how it trickles down now to Harry's generation.  That is what made that book
magical for me, if you will excuse the bad pun.  oh yes, the relationship
between the trio, as it is strained, it survives in their love and trust in
each other.  To me, this is what the movie didn't bring out, except for the
relationship between Harry and Lupin.  As I said, the relationships are what
makes anything for me.  For example, I like the original star trek series,
strictly because I love the relationships between the characters, and I
don't care how old and dated it may look or sound today.

as far as judging POA merely as a movie, and leaving out the book factor,
ok, because of my blindness, the visual aspects of film aren't relevant to
me.  But the story is part of a film, the sound, the dialog, the music, the
way it all hangs together.  To me, leaving out book differences and sticking
strictly to the movie here are a couple things that caused me not to enjoy
the movie.  The dialog was often very hard to understand.  Especially in
scenes with several characters, like in the shrieking shack at the end.  it
seemed to jump around a lot and was hard for me to follow and understand
where it was going next.  Often the music didn't seem to fit the scene or
mood.  The dementor scenes didn't work at all for me, because we don't hear
anything that Harry is hearing.  I imagine they were wonderful visually, but
even the scary music and a sort of scream didn't make them at all chilling
or scary for me.  It all felt kind of rushed, like it happened in a couple
weeks instead of a whole school year.

there were things I liked.  In general, I liked the boggart scene.  I always
enjoy Alan Rickman as Snape, because he's so deliciously nasty.  I loved
Harry' exhilaration riding Buckbeak and the couple tender scenes between
Harry and Sirius.  I'm hoping to go to see the movie again, because I'm sure
I'll get more out of it a second time.  I will buy the DVD when it comes
out.

I hope you will not leave the list and will continue to post your thoughts
and feelings.  You bring a lot to the list, and I as one who didn't like the
film, still would not want you to leave.  

Sherry

-----Original Message-----
From: GulPlum [mailto:hp at plum.cream.org] 
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:29 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...


Before I get to what I think I've finally understood, I want to make a 
small digression, starting with a question.

Am I wasting my time here?

I thought that this group was set up for the discussion of the HP movies on 
an adult level. Not just as adaptations (although of course that too), but 
as MOVIES. I spent the whole of Tuesday and most of yesterday (until I 
suddenly and unavoidably had to go out) trying to discuss the movies as 
cinematic entities and have had no reaction. That worries me, and it 
saddens me. I'm not saying that I necessarily expected praise or criticism 
of my comments, but I did think there'd be some kind of reaction. The only 
reaction I had to was to some of my nit-picky comments (to which replies 
will hopefully come shortly).

I have about a dozen messages that I know I want to respond to, briefly, 
from the last couple of weeks and will browse through the rest for anything 
else. I also have one longer post lined up (a response to Barbara's 
original criticisms of the film which for some reason I didn't see until 
she pointed out the message number a few days ago).

Once I've done that, I'm going to disappear into the ether again, as people 
don't appear to be interested in an in-depth discussion of PoA as a MOVIE 
purely on its own terms without reference to the book. I think we've pretty 
much exhausted nitpicking the adaptation and I see little point in sticking 
around for more of the same. As it seems nobody (besides Dan and Nick) is 
interested in a deeper cinematographic analysis (including one downright 
dismissal of any attempt to do so - more on that in another post) there's 
little point in my spending any time writing stuff. I may as well just 
write some essays and put them on the web. I thought this was a discussion 
forum, not a place for posting essays, so I'm off.

In the meantime, here's a thought which I am surprised only occurred to me 
last night as I was falling asleep. I think I finally understand the main 
difference between PoA the Movie and PoA the Book, which has caused a 
polarisation of the fandom. Actually, it's not so much that I understand it 
(it's pretty obvious), but I have finally realised how to put it into words.

The book is essentially a mystery story. Several mysteries are introduced 
and it is those mysteries which drive the plot. The conclusion of the book, 
is, therefore, the resolution of all of those mysteries: why's Scabbers 
behaving so strangely and why did he suddenly fall ill? Why won't anyone 
tell Harry what's going on with Sirius Black? Who is Lupin and what's he 
about? How does he know about the Map? Why is Hermione so frazzled and why 
does she appear in strange places out of the blue? There are several 
others, but I'll stop there.

The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and becomes 
a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, and 
changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting adolescence.

In fact, the film completely dismisses or overlooks some of the mysteries. 
Just one example: there is no subtlety about Lupin's Boggart: it is *very* 
obviously the moon. The Hogwarts "lockdown" is cut with an image of the 
full moon and the sound of howling, just after we've been informed that 
Lupin is unwell. The werewolf lesson is painted in such broad strokes that 
the viewer would need to be a moron not to catch on. Other elements of the 
"mystery" are similarly "unmysterious".

The only major revelation left for the end is who did betray the Potters; 
the way things are set up (and regardless of the way some reviews were 
written), Sirius is *so* heavily painted as the bad guy throughout the 
movie (just as Snape was during PS/SS) that it's clear to anyone with more 
than a couple of functioning grey cells and any knowledge of storytelling 
that there's something wrong with the assumptions.

And I think that the loss of the "mystery" is the main fault line (although 
there are others) along which the fandom has split.

Personally, I see the change as Cuaron's masterstroke (his, not Kloves's: I 
do recall reading that when he was first engaged to direct, he got Kloves 
to re-write the whole thing). The way I see it, his approach was that most 
viewers will have read the book (and analysed it in great detail) and thus 
presenting the denouement as the resolution of a mystery is pointless: 
everyone already knows how the story ends, and building the movie around a 
plot twist doesn't make the movie inherently interesting to that audience. 
What he did was to delve into the sub-text of the book's plot and make 
*that* the focus of the movie.

To take an extreme example, it's as if Mel Gibson's Passion Of The Christ 
(regardless of anyone's opinion of the movie) were filmed as if *anyone* in 
the audience didn't know how it was going to end. After all, it *is* based 
on the best-selling book of all time. So it's not about how the film ends, 
it's about showing a particular vision of the journey towards that end, 
although in a religious sense, the underlying message is *all* about the 
last scene.

It's therefore perfectly valid to take the attitude with an HP movie that 
as the audience knows how it's going to end, the movie should be about the 
journey rather than the revelation. Some people don't like the way PoA's 
journey is portrayed (which is fine, even if it's an opinion I don't 
share), but the vast majority of fans who don't like the movie don't like 
it because it's not built around the last scene and its revelations.

(Talking of which, one specific comment I'll make, on a subject which has 
recently been dissected: I *like* the freeze-frame at the end. At least 
it's better than Columbus's utterly cliched reverse zooms.)

I'm on record as saying (several times, perhaps to the extent of being 
boring) that the reason I read the books in the first place was that after 
first seeing PS/SS (knowing *nothing* of significance about the plot), I 
came out wondering why Snape hated Harry but was prepared to save him. I 
saw that as a major weakness of the film, and I've said before that I see 
the non-explanation of the MWPP/Snape relationship and authorship of the 
map to be weaknesses with PoA. I have now realised that these omissions are 
deliberate - like Harry, we're set up with a situation which we have to 
accept, but we don't know the background. All of that background, I am 
sure, will come tumbling out at an the opportune moment when the plot 
twists related specifically to that background will be explained 
(presumably, book/movie seven). As I've said before, there is no intrinsic 
reason why the resolution of individual questions and mysteries HAS to 
follow the books' order.

The change in focus therefore was the foundation of the changes to the 
book's plot, and not an effect of any changes to it. *Perhaps* if Cuaron 
had decided to stick to presenting the movie as a mystery, he might have 
made a film acceptable to those who wanted to have the mysteries resolved 
in the same way as they are in the book? *Perhaps* those people would have 
felt the same satisfaction and surprise at seeing the plot twists they know 
so well resolved in the same way.

But *perhaps* Cuaron decided not to say "I'm going to assume that nobody 
knows what happens in this story and expect them to jump in surprise when 
things are explained", but say "I'm going to assume that most of the people 
who see this movie have read the book and none of the plot will surprise 
them, so I'll give them a few *different* surprises".

As the saying goes, "you can't please all of the people all of the time; 
the best you can hope for is to please some of the people some of the 
time". Personally, I think that Cuaron has decided to please himself rather 
than the "literalists", and he certainly pleased me.

Interestingly, Mike Newell is on record as saying that he sees GoF as a 
thriller. It's a fair comment and perhaps will mean that those who dislike 
PoA's change in structure from the book may well be appeased...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, expecting more reaction this time. ;-) 



________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 valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 18:50:46 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:50:46 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OT-Congratulations!
Message-ID: <20040617185046.XPHU6671.out003.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

This is totally off-topic, but I just had to say a big CONGRATULATIONS to all 
the football fans in England on their victory against Switzerland! Hope you go 
all the way!

Valerie Flowe
Washington, DC, USA


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 19:15:41 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:15:41 -0000
Subject: POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEPBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <casqkt+eohp@eGroups.com>

>>I don't think reviews are always the be all and end all of whether 
or not a movie is good. Regardless, I never said reviewers or movie 
critics didn't like the movie, I said there were loads of negative 
comments from fans on the IMDb and Yahoo Movies who felt disappointed 
as I did.<<

I don't put much stock in reviews either (and very often they differ 
from what actual people enjoy). However, though, as far as written 
comments from fans on IMDB and Yahoo, from what I've noticed a lot of 
the most vocal people are the people with really negative reviews 
(obviously if you're a huge fan of the book and the movie really 
disappointed you, you're more likely to write a review than someone 
who just liked the movie and doesn't feel too strongly about it). The 
user ratings are rather interesting, though. SS/PS and CoS are rated 
7.3/10 and PoA is currently rated 7.8/10. Of course, the other two 
have been out longer, and its very possible that PoA might slip with 
time (I recall it being higher right after it came out, like in the 
8's somewhere), but at the moment it appears fans do like it more 
than the other two.
If our poll here is any indication, more people liked it than didn't, 
but of course we're all on a Harry Potter discussion group, so even 
if the movie was complete crap (as I'm aware it might be to some 
people), there'd still be a number of people who liked it anyway.


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 19:26:05 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:26:05 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <126.43a9a294.2e032bcf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <casr8d+ttmr@eGroups.com>

>>You know, I looked thru the book and Padfoot is never described as 
more than enormous or black dog. Personally, I didn't get the 
impression of him being bear-like while I was reading it, so I guess 
that just goes to show how everyone sees something different while 
reading. He seemed fine to me in the movie ;-)<<

I knew I didn't imagine it (for a second there, I thought I did...), 
I remember specifically looking at the drawing in the US edition and 
being disappointed by it. Chpt 20, Pg 381: 
"As the werewolf reared, snapping its long jaws, Sirius disappeared 
from Harry's side. He had transformed. The enormous bearlike dog 
bounded forward."

I thought he looked fine, he looked real enough, I just can't stand 
it when movies use CGI when they don't have to. I'm holding out hope 
that in the next movie, when there's no heavy stunts for Sirius the 
dog to do that they use an actual dog. But I suppose they might stay 
with the CGI just for continuity. 


-Rebecca




From elfnorc at voyager.net  Thu Jun 17 18:27:58 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:27:58 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
Message-ID: <200406171827.i5HIRwOA031628@mail5.mx.voyager.net>

Greetings;  I decided to come out of mostly lurking to respond as I have
been enjoying your posts and have been too busy to write and say so. 
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to think about this through your
view point.  
     I found your discussion interesting and agree that the difference
between POA being a mystery and being a rite of passage makes sense. 
There also seems to be a large issue of peole being disappointed with
their favorite scene(s) being left out which people are reacting to.
     I share a rather different opinion than a lot of people who have
posted.  POA is not my favorite book but it is my favorite movie.  It is
the first of the 3 that has actually felt like a movie in itself to me.
 It was the first 2 that felt like cliffnote versions and I think that
was because they seemed so similar to the books to me.  
     I am enjoying the posts that don't feel this way as it is giving me
the chance to think about the movie from another perspective.      
     I did make it a point not to read POA again before seeing the movie
and that also helped.  There is no way that all of the sub-plots and
nuances of POA could have been left in and the movie not be hours
longer.  Given this, I thought Cuaron did a good job of picking out
parts of the story and doing a good job of developing those. 
     I have also gone back and am watching COS again and am realizing
that the background scenes are not as different as I had thought.  You
just don't see as much of the landscape in the foreground.  An example
of this is in the quiditch match that if you look into the distance you
do see the hills and the lake.  The area is not as flat as I would have
thought. 
     As far as GoF I think it will be even harder to make everyone (or
most people) happy.  I can see it working as a thriller but given that
it will only be one regular length movie there is going to have to be so
much left out that it can only be a part of the book.  
     In any event I do think it makes it easier if you can separate your
feelings for the books from those of any movies based on them.  I just
discovered Jane Austin and love Pride and Prejudice.  There have been 3
major adaptations of that so far.  One I can't watch because it
resembles the book so little and as a movie it doesn't work for me, the
second is OK and the 3rd was a 6 hour adaptation done by A&E.  Even with
6 hours to fill things were left out and changed but the movie works as
a movie for me all on its own.  
Tina in Michigan

  
 
> In the meantime, here's a thought which I am surprised only occurred
to me last night as I was falling asleep. I think I finally understand
the main difference between PoA the Movie and PoA the Book, which has
caused a polarisation of the fandom. Actually, it's not so much that I
understand it (it's pretty obvious), but I have finally realised how to
put it into words.<BR>
> The book is essentially a mystery story. Several mysteries are
introduced and it is those mysteries which drive the plot. The
conclusion of the book, is, therefore, the resolution of all of those
mysteries: why's Scabbers behaving so strangely and why did he suddenly
fall ill? Why won't anyone tell Harry what's going on with Sirius Black?
Who is Lupin and what's he about? How does he know about the Map? Why is
Hermione so frazzled and why does she appear in strange places out of
the blue? There are several others, but I'll stop there.<BR>
> <BR>
> The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and
becomes a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as
much, and changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting
adolescence.<BR>

> As the saying goes, "you can't please all of the people all of the
time; <BR>
> the best you can hope for is to please some of the people some of the <BR>
> time". Personally, I think that Cuaron has decided to please himself
rather <BR>
> than the "literalists", and he certainly pleased me.<BR>
> <BR>
> Interestingly, Mike Newell is on record as saying that he sees GoF as
a <BR>
> thriller. It's a fair comment and perhaps will mean that those who
dislike <BR>
> PoA's change in structure from the book may well be appeased...<BR>
> GulPlum AKA Richard, expecting more reaction this time. ;-) <BR>






From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Jun 17 20:01:32 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:01:32 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBIEODHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
References: <caqodn+13mr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040617183249.00941d60@plum.cream.org>

I said earlier that I had various "short" replies planned. This is anything 
but short. Apologies. But I just *HAD* to get the following off my chest.

At 05:16 17/06/04 , Barbara D. Poland-Waters wrote:

<snip>

>I think it's very interesting that you think I am the only person who thinks
>"the way I do." Perhaps you should check out the HUNDREDS of negative
>reviews on Yahoo Movies or the Internet Movie Database so you can see just
>how many people wanted this movie to be more like the book.

Well, all of those hundreds of people (as opposed to the thousands who 
seemed to have liked the movie) aren't here to discuss in any detail what 
they think, and we have no idea who most of them are. (As for IMdB, a lot 
of reviews on there are written deliberately to buck trends - of the dozen 
or so reviews *I* have written on that site, more than half do not actually 
represent my views, and I wrote them solely to provoke a response. I know 
for a fact that several other people have the same approach.)

However, within *this* community - all of whom are fans - according to the 
poll started yesterday evening, those who actively dislike the movie are at 
about 8% (plus another 11% with serious reservations about the movie, even 
if they liked it). Since you're so fond of the numbers, the VAST majority 
of people here liked the movie. I appreciate that this puts you in a 
significant minority and probably frustrates you, but your gross 
generalisations do have another side, and the majority of fans *here* are 
happy.

Furthermore, if you look at Rotten Tomatoes, which catalogues professional 
reviews and assigns them nothing more than a positive or negative (rather 
than attempting to assign a score the way Yahoo Movies does, which is very 
hit and miss), 163 out of 184 reviews are positive 
(http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/HarryPotterandthePrisonerofAzkaban-1132921/).

Whether or not professional reviewers' opinions are or aren't important 
(you don't seem to be able to make up your mind) and whether or not the 
vast majority of fans hail the movie (look at any of the polls not just 
here), you prefer to accentuate the negative comments, which is fair 
enough. But you cannot convince anyone that on a purely numerical basis, 
those who dislike the movie (whether or not they've read the book) are a 
majority of any kind, and in no way a significant one.

>And if other fans thought the first two movies "played like crap," why did 
>they do so much better in the box office in the first few weeks? (And 
>before you
>indicate competition or some such thing, ALL movies have competition
>whenever they're released. Where are the numbers from the die-hard HP fans
>who would go see a movie again and again and again if they liked it?)

Again, nobody here can speak for "the fans" as a general mass, but from 
comments made by the fans *here*, most people seem to have seen the movie 
twice, three times or even more (in my case, 8 1/2). We could talk about 
trends in US box office receipts and other influences which have meant that 
PoA hasn't done as well as the previous movies over time, but that would be 
pure speculation, probably best left to the professionals who do that as a 
matter of course.

On the other hand, we are in a community of about 2,300 (although the vast 
majority are inactive) fans here, so please don't try to dismiss this group 
as unrepresentative of the fandom at large. And certainly not the ADULT fandom.

>And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in regards to
>liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it?

OK, I find that comment patently unfair and verging on the personally 
insulting (I don't know if it's deliberate; I'm a little touchy right now).

I can't speak for the multitude of people who liked the movie and for their 
comments. They can speak for themselves and I can only speak for myself. I 
have devoted most of the last three days explaining my liking for this 
movie from just about every conceivable angle, in some detail. Some of my 
posts were in response to people who liked the movie, some were in response 
to people who didn't. Some were new topics. As far as I'm aware, I offended 
nobody and belittled nobody. I do not hide that I asked a few questions 
which might be a bit tough to answer.

On the other hand, your only complaint against this movie is "it wasn't 
like the book", and you've never actually gone beyond that. You've said it 
in various ways, but it's always come down to the same thing: "it wasn't 
like the book". Is it therefore little surprise that a standard response to 
your complaints was "this isn't a book" (and variations), frequently with 
detailed explanations?

If you were to be able to go beyond "it wasn't like the book", then perhaps 
others could respond to you with something other than "it's not a book".

Could you please quote any message numbers mentioning that "[you are] WRONG 
to not like it"? Because I spent a considerable amount of time this morning 
trying to find something that even implies that sentiment, but couldn't. 
I'm not claiming that nobody's said it, I just can't find it and would like 
your help.

What I have seen, though, is several people saying that it's wrong to 
expect a movie to play the same way a book reads. That is something 
entirely different. And, for the record, it *is* wrong to expect a film to 
play the same way a book reads. This is especially true of the HP series, 
where so much of the books' allure to so many people is what is usually 
referred to as "foreshadowing" (I hate that term).  Hints on the page work 
very differently from hints on the screen; furthermore, we have a single 
perspective throughout the HP series (we see the world through Harry's 
eyes, despite the presence of a narrator's voice) which simply can't work 
on screen without a few changes. And, of course, we can't hear anyone's 
thoughts (voice-overs are the bane of literary adaptations).

And then of course there's the need to excise material from a long(er) 
book. Almost every deletion is regrettable, and especially scenes, 
sequences or lines that are loved by readers. But apart from length, 
sequences also have to be cut because a movie's pace is very different to a 
book's. A book is *designed* to be read at the reader's speed and 
convenience, and importantly, passages (or words) can be re-read as often 
as wanted or necessary. A movie has to flow in time and impose its own 
pace. For instance, three Quidditch matches is PoA would make the movie 
boring. It's not a movie about Quidditch. Removing one element for time 
reasons when adapting a book as tightly plotted as PoA will frequently mean 
removing another scene because it becomes nonsense - pretty soon, whole 
sub-plots must be left on the cutting-room floor.

I could go on, but I expect that I'm being boring already.

>So far today I've been told by various list members than I am 
>mean-spirited towards the movie because I didn't like it, I don't "get 
>subtlety," and now I'm unreasonable. I've also been told I don't make a 
>"rational argument" for not liking the movie, as if I have to back of my 
>FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with factual information. And I'm taking these 
>points of view personally?!

"various list members"? So you mean someone other than myself has said 
those things? If yes, then perhaps you should realise that there might be 
something to the perception. If not, then please refrain from engaging in 
bombast and making untrue sweeping generalisations.

Yes, I said all of those things to you off-list. Please consider this a 
reply to what you write to me in response, seeing as you've brought it up 
here. Let's deal with those attributes in turn. Your overuse of bombastic 
language is one of the reasons I said that you don't appear to understand 
(or be able to use use) subtlety. Either you're not reading, not wanting to 
read, or find yourself incapable of hearing *anything* good said about this 
movie - that's why I called you mean-spiritied about it (incidentally, I 
also suggested that you've extended that mean-spiritedness to those who 
liked the movie - maybe I'm wrong, but I leave others to agree or disagree 
with that assessment).

And if you hadn't noticed, this forum is for "grown ups". Am I *completely* 
unreasonable in my expectation that people should be prepared to back up 
their "feelings" with some kind of rationalisation beyond "it's not like 
the book"? I think I do. Several people who disliked the movie to some 
degree have put forward rational explanations WHY certain things SHOULD 
have been done differently in their opinion. You have failed to do any such 
thing (some of those people I have agreed with, some not, and some I have 
yet to respond to...).

Then again, perhaps I have completely unreasonable expectations of the 
intellectual ability that is implied in the term "grown ups". In which 
case, there is even less reason for me to remain here any longer.

Nevertheless, coming up is a reply to Barbara's original list of criticisms...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who hopes he hasn't been offensive to anyone but 
doubtless will be perceived as such by some...




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 20:21:08 2004
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <20040617202108.54568.qmail@web42102.mail.yahoo.com>



GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:

Am I wasting my time here?


akh: I hope not!  I joined this group just prior to the release of POA, having been a reader and occasional contributor to the main group since before OOP was published. I expected (and still expect) a similar level of analysis regarding the movies that I've seen with the books.

I think many of us feel we have much more expertise parsing literature than we have dissecting film, especially if we majored in Liberal Arts.  That won't stop me from diving in, however!


GulPlum: 
The movie... downplays the "mystery" elements and becomes a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, and changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting adolescence.


akh: As a mystery fan, I've always enjoyed the "whodunit" aspects of the books, but I felt the growth of the series with this book was the depth of the relationships, not only Harry's, Ron's and Hermione's maturing relationship, but the revelations of the long-standing friendship between MWPP.  I agree completely that the movie chose to highlight those relationships.  I also found quite a bit of focus on the adult's past and present relationship, perhaps because I was looking for it.  Next week, I'm taking my sister to see POA, and I'll be interested to see if she picks up on as much as I did, since she hasn't read the book.

SNIP

(Talking of which, one specific comment I'll make, on a subject which has recently been dissected: I *like* the freeze-frame at the end. At least it's better than Columbus's utterly cliched reverse zooms.)

I thoroughly enjoyed both "Sorcerer's Stone" (being an American, that's the one we got) and Chamber of Secrets, but I was struck by my SO's response to CoS, since he hasn't read any of the books.  He said, "The books are a little formulaic, aren't they?"  Well, not especially, no more than Jane Austen is "formulaic."  (You'll find I find many ways to work Jane Austen into a discussion.) I think the ending was a major contributor to his statement, because although it was in the Great Hall and not at the train station, it did bespeak a similar conclusion, both visually and musically.  This break from the first two cements the break from any kind of "formulaic" representation of the books.

akh, who also took Film Studies, but doesn't remember that many centuries back to college...


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 20:26:51 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:26:51 -0000
Subject: I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <casuqb+pf64@eGroups.com>

GulPlum AKA Richard wrote:

>>Am I wasting my time here?

I thought that this group was set up for the discussion of the HP 
movies on an adult level. Not just as adaptations (although of course 
that too), but as MOVIES. I spent the whole of Tuesday and most of 
yesterday (until I suddenly and unavoidably had to go out) trying to 
discuss the movies as cinematic entities and have had no reaction. 
That worries me, and it saddens me. I'm not saying that I necessarily 
expected praise or criticism of my comments, but I did think there'd 
be some kind of reaction. The only reaction I had to was to some of 
my nit-picky comments (to which replies will hopefully come 
shortly).<<

You are certainly not wasting your time here. I, and the few others 
who have already responded, do appreciate your posts. There were a 
few I didn't respond to because I simply could not add anything to 
it, without disagreeing or adding new thoughts, there's little 
discussion. I think this list might be the closest thing you'll find 
to discussion of the movie, from what I've seen with other messege 
boards, (on those) pretty much most of the board is used up by people 
listing the differences between the book and the movie and going on 
about "how dare they do that?!" and so on. The fortunate thing about 
this list, is that everyone stays rather mature with their comments 
and there are more people who want to discuss the movie as a movie 
not just as an adaptation.

>>Once I've done that, I'm going to disappear into the ether again, 
as people don't appear to be interested in an in-depth discussion of 
PoA as a MOVIE purely on its own terms without reference to the book. 
[snip] I thought this was a discussion forum, not a place for posting 
essays, so I'm off.<<

Its up to you if you want to leave, but remember the movie JUST came 
out. When OotP first came out the list erupted in posts and it took 
some time for things to calm down and good discussions to take place. 
In a few weeks things will calm down around here, and it won't be so 
easy for posts to get swallowed.

>>In the meantime, here's a thought which I am surprised only 
occurred to me last night as I was falling asleep. I think I finally 
understand the main difference between PoA the Movie and PoA the 
Book, which has caused a polarisation of the fandom. Actually, it's 
not so much that I understand it (it's pretty obvious), but I have 
finally realised how to put it into words.

The book is essentially a mystery story. 
[snip]
The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and 
becomes a rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as 
much, and changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co 
hitting adolescence.
[snip]
Personally, I see the change as Cuaron's masterstroke (his, not 
Kloves's: I do recall reading that when he was first engaged to 
direct, he got Kloves to re-write the whole thing). The way I see it, 
his approach was that most viewers will have read the book (and 
analysed it in great detail) and thus presenting the denouement as 
the resolution of a mystery is pointless: everyone already knows how 
the story ends, and building the movie around a plot twist doesn't 
make the movie inherently interesting to that audience.
What he did was to delve into the sub-text of the book's plot and make
*that* the focus of the movie.<<

Of course, I liked the movie, so I can't speak for those who didn't, 
but I completely agree with you that changing the story structure was 
for the best. The thing that annoyed me about CoS was that while 
leaving the plot of the book in, the mood and overall feeling of the 
story was ignored (there's no setting paranoia over the school, Harry 
barely questions himself, there's no real sense of fear that the 
school may actually have to close), and it wasn't replaced with 
anything else. I suppose a lot of fans liked it because the story was 
still there, but that's all there was. It wasn't much as a film, it 
was just an adaptation. PoA was done as a *film*, which I welcomed. 
Cuaron made the focus not just the story but Harry being thirteen, 
and him being angry for the first time because the heart of the film, 
as opposed to the plot (which, as you said, most fans already knew 
anyway). 



>>Talking of which, one specific comment I'll make, on a subject 
which has recently been dissected: I *like* the freeze-frame at the 
end. At least it's better than Columbus's utterly cliched reverse 
zooms.<<

I was one of the people who mentioned not liking the freezeframe, and 
for me its more a matter of personal preference. I don't ever 
freezeframes, they always feel cheesy to me (I have a similar opinion 
about slow-motion, it very rarely feels like its being used 
effectively).

>>I'm on record as saying (several times, perhaps to the extent of 
being boring) that the reason I read the books in the first place was 
that after first seeing PS/SS (knowing *nothing* of significance 
about the plot), I came out wondering why Snape hated Harry but was 
prepared to save him. I saw that as a major weakness of the film, and 
I've said before that I see the non-explanation of the MWPP/Snape 
relationship and authorship of the map to be weaknesses with PoA. I 
have now realised that these omissions are deliberate - like Harry, 
we're set up with a situation which we have to accept, but we don't 
know the background. All of that background, I am sure, will come 
tumbling out at an the opportune moment when the plot twists related 
specifically to that background will be explained (presumably, 
book/movie seven). As I've said before, there is no intrinsic
reason why the resolution of individual questions and mysteries HAS to
follow the books' order.<<

I read the books after seeing the first movie as well, which might be 
why I can enjoy the books and movies separately. Although I don't 
think the movies have to reveal things at the same rate as the books 
(not telling who wrote the map was fine to me, because those who read 
the books know who wrote it, and those who didn't can just assume 
that 'trouble-maker' James came across it the same way that Fred and 
George did), but I disagree that we are being left in the dark 
cinematically. You said above that the directer took into account 
that most people going into the movie know what's going to happen, so 
that has to come into play here too. Clearly the audience isn't being 
put in a situation in which they don't know the background unless 
they haven't read the books, which is not typically the case. 
Certain background points aren't necessary to the plot, but revealing 
why Snape hates Harry (or at least addressing it), was a failing of 
the movie. It just doesn't make sense that Harry would spend the 
whole movie building Snape up as a villian in his mind, find out he's 
not, then not be confused about any of it. Hmm, now that I think of 
it though, they did change the initial potions scene so that it looks 
like Snape might have cause to pick on Harry, so maybe as a movie it 
works that Harry doesn't ask about Snape at the end. In PoA though, I 
think that there was enough background there to follow the plot. As 
I've said before, it was hinted at, so when the flashback scene comes 
up in OotP (if its even left in), there's enough there that it 
doesn't come out of complete left-field. 

>>The change in focus therefore was the foundation of the changes to 
the book's plot, and not an effect of any changes to it. *Perhaps* if 
Cuaron had decided to stick to presenting the movie as a mystery, he 
might have made a film acceptable to those who wanted to have the 
mysteries resolved in the same way as they are in the book? *Perhaps* 
those people would have felt the same satisfaction and surprise at 
seeing the plot twists they know so well resolved in the same way.<<

But that would have been a rather boring film. Chamber of Secrets was 
already changed into a pale re-telling of the book, personally I 
welcomed the changes. I've read PoA 3 or 4 times, watching a movie 
that didn't deviate from it at all would be boring, and the movie 
would always be a stand-in for the book, not a movie on its own.

>>As the saying goes, "you can't please all of the people all of the 
time; the best you can hope for is to please some of the people some 
of the time". Personally, I think that Cuaron has decided to please 
himself rather than the "literalists", and he certainly pleased me.<<

He pleased me as well. There will always be two schools of thought 
when it comes to book adaptations. There are those that think the 
book should be changed as-little-as-possible, that the movie is just 
a visual reading of the book, and there are those that think the 
movie should take the book as a blueprint and make a film *based* on 
it. I fall on the second side, but I'm a movie fan as much as a book 
fan, so perhaps I'm looking at it differently.

>>Interestingly, Mike Newell is on record as saying that he sees GoF 
as a thriller. It's a fair comment and perhaps will mean that those 
who dislike PoA's change in structure from the book may well be 
appeased...<<

I'm very curious to see what he'll make of it, seeing how its the 
longest book, and he's both the first directer without any previous 
children's movies and the first British director (its odd that 
they've only had North American directors so far for a British 
series, isn't it?). I'm curious, what's your take on the movie being 
made into a single film as opposed to two? (which, according to the 
recent Entertainment Weekly article, was Cuaron's insistence).


-Rebecca.






From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 20:36:05 2004
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Plase tell me this isn't true
In-Reply-To: <d9.d48aa0d.2e032305@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040617203605.3483.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com>




In a message dated 6/16/2004 11:02:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
really going to happen.

http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

Gretchen

artsylynda at aol.com wrote:How could it be true?  Tom Welling is the star of "Smallville" which is the 
WB's top series.  They wouldn't pull him off his "Clark Kent" duties.  JK 
Rowling still owns the rights to her universe, only licensed Warner Bros. to do the 
films, from things I've read here and there.  This must be a spoof kind of 
site.  What an awful idea, Americanizing Hogwarts!  Yikes!

akh: As most of you know by now, it's a humor site.  I thought I'd add their explanation, anyway, since I found it to be a total hoot:

http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html

 

 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.

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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 20:34:38 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:34:38 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBOEPBHIAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <casv8u+nspu@eGroups.com>

Barbara D. Poland-Waters <bd-bear at v...> wrote:

>>You're absolutely right about many things being different in the 
first two movies. I guess it comes down to personal preference and 
personal vision. I felt the first two movies fit my vision of 
Hogwarts and the WW much better than POA. And yes, I don't think they 
added things that were irrelevant or completely out of place in JKR's 
world, like the shrunken heads.<<

It is just preference then. I prefered the tone of PoA because it 
felt realer to me, the first two seemed too much like movies, like 
Hogwarts existed only in the movie universe. However, though, I can 
see your point, especially since the first two movies established the 
world, and the third varied from it in many ways. 

>> I do know that I read POA over and over again before seeing the 
movie, and I really had favorite scenes and things that I read 
thinking, "I can't wait to see how they show that on a movie," and 
then was disappointed when the changed the scene or didn't show
it at all. Again, personal preference.<<

Did you read spoilers at all? I've read PoA several times as well, so 
I noticed things that were changed, but reading spoilers ahead of 
time helped quite a bit. At least I didn't have to find out in the 
theater that certain things were left out.


-Rebecca




From aiphmmw at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 20:53:30 2004
From: aiphmmw at yahoo.com (Nicole)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:53:30 -0000
Subject: Some reasonsI liked POA and some why I did not.
Message-ID: <cat0ca+3s2n@eGroups.com>

Ok this one is going to be long....but since I rarely post :)

On the positive side:
1. I felt that the cinematography of this film compared to to the 
first two was much more engaging. For example....Chris Columbus is 
excellent at the "broad strokes" introducing us to the world of 
Harry and Hogwarts. Alfonso Cuaron brings you right next to the 
characters, and for those of us completely engaged in the world of 
Harry Potter moved right along instead of using beauty shots to 
establish something we are already familiar with.

2. The acting of all of the teen leads has improved. Tom Felton has 
settled into the simperingly nasty Malfoy like a natural. Rupert, 
Emma and especially have obviously been getting into their roles.

3. Even though it was a short scene I loved the Quidditch match. The 
visuals created by Cuaron were exquisite. It was dark and dreary and 
had a frantic pace only matched by the special effects.

4. The dementors. They were exactly as I had envisioned them (even 
though I try to keep my book experiences seperate from the movies.) 
They were just creepy and dark enough to scare the bejeezus out of 
me.

5. The knight bus. The knight bus would have been completely 
uneccesary except for the fact that I enjoyed the fact that it 
emphasized that there is magic in our "muggle" world every day. (and 
every time I hear a car alarm now I imagine a wizard wanding it away)


On the negative side:
1. I missed professor McGonagall. She is one of my favorite 
characters in the books and I loved her in the movies.

2. Michael Gambon. Ok I understand that he is not Richard Harris, 
and I probably would have been offended if he had tried to be. 
However I still couldn't get an emotional grip on his character. 
(Maybe I have seen the first two movie too many times)

3. As far as things being left out. Yes I would have liked to see 
more content from the books. I would have liked to see more of 
Sirius, I feel that Harry and Sirius didn't develop a sufficient 
relationship in this film that can be sustained in the next movie. 
(unless they leave Sirius out) And on this point I should say if I 
had only seen the movie and not read the books a bout three dozen 
times this would not have been an issue.



Overall I enjoyed the movie. In fact I think I like it the best 
because of its pace. I still hold the first two films in high regard 
and they will always be my favorite movies of all time (Harry Potter 
movies that is....all three and the remaining to come.)

SO here is someone who loved the movie but still has issues.


Nicole
Who has seen the movie 12 times and counting.







From aiphmmw at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 20:55:46 2004
From: aiphmmw at yahoo.com (Nicole)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:55:46 -0000
Subject: One more thing.
Message-ID: <cat0gi+uusm@eGroups.com>

Ahh yes....me again....

I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly off of this 
list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these parts. I wish 
they would read the books and understand that these "kids" grow up 
through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry supposed to look 
11?


Nicole






From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 17 21:04:32 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Plase tell me this isn't true
In-Reply-To: <20040617203605.3483.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040617210432.74694.qmail@web80311.mail.yahoo.com>

--- AnitaKH <anita_hillin at yahoo.com> wrote:

> akh: As most of you know by now, it's a humor site. 
> I thought I'd add their explanation, anyway, since I
> found it to be a total hoot:
> 
> http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html

Oh, it's like the Onion!  Surprised I'd not heard of
it before now.  I will enjoy exploring the site.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From tmarends at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 21:05:31 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:05:31 -0000
Subject: One more thing.
In-Reply-To: <cat0gi+uusm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cat12r+57g7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nicole" <aiphmmw at y...> wrote:
> Ahh yes....me again....
> 
> I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly off of this 
> list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these parts. I wish 
> they would read the books and understand that these "kids" grow up 
> through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry supposed to look 
> 11?
> 
> 
> Nicole<<<

I hadn't heard THAT comment before.  IT was obviously made from 
someone who didn't know that the kids actually grow up in this 
series.  I mean, come on... this isn't The Land Before Time 8, where 
the dinosaurs haven't changed at all... so, I guess, all 8 films take 
place in less than a year's time ;-)

Tim




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 17 21:06:39 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:06:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing.
In-Reply-To: <cat0gi+uusm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040617210639.49332.qmail@web80304.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Nicole <aiphmmw at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahh yes....me again....
> 
> I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly
> off of this 
> list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these
> parts. I wish 
> they would read the books and understand that these
> "kids" grow up 
> through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry
> supposed to look 
> 11?
> 
> 
> Nicole

Yes, they do grow up, and besides, so what.  One of
those 90210 "kids" on TV was about 30 when the series
started.  I would much rather see Harry, Ron and
Hermione look a bit older than they're meant to be
playing, rather than see new, younger actors populate
the roles.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 21:22:58 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POA Box Office Figures (was Re: visual depth)
Message-ID: <20040617212258.37255.qmail@web40603.mail.yahoo.com>


> And 
> ultimately, whether or not the movie critics make a
living at 
> reviewing movies, their review is still their
opinion. I 
> don't necessarily think their opinion is any more
valid than 
> the opinions of other fans, myself included.
> 
> Barbara
> bd-bear


Nor was J.K. Rowling's opinion of the film either, if
I remember
correctly.

Suzanne



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



From redina at silverbloom.net  Thu Jun 17 21:39:57 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:39:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <126.43a9a294.2e032bcf@aol.com>
References: <126.43a9a294.2e032bcf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1611.4.47.27.240.1087508397.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> In a message dated 6/17/04 3:37:56 AM, patientx3 at aol.com writes:
> ***
> -I really don't like the freezeframe at the end.
> **
> Sigh, well, I guess I'm one of the few people who really liked that. I
> thought it was a much snappier way to end the film than a long pulling
> shot from the
> Great Hall to the outside. Different, visually appealing and it actually
> made
> my heart feel full with some of the joy that Harry must have been feeling.
> I
> think it's great that they focused on him at the end - they are 'his'
> stories,
> after all ;-)

I'm in the camp of 'didn't like the freeze frame'.  You may have already
read my comments on Glassesreflect concerning this ending.

For those not on that group, I was glad to see Harry happy in the end but
not that enamoured with seeing his face 'smashed' into the camera.  One
reaction I was 100% sure I did have was a 'WTF' on that moment.

I would've gotten the same light-hearted joy from hearing Harry go
'yahoooo' off into the sky.  There was much motion in the camera work
throughout the film for them to just go *splat* at the end was... ick.

I almost was like 'where's the squeegee - we've got another Harry Potter
on the windshied'.

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 nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Thu Jun 17 22:41:07 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 23:41:07 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
Message-ID: <v01540b00bcf7c8811df8@[217.154.249.68]>

Well, Richard, looks like you did get some reaction this time! Enjoyed your
post, and appreciated your insights.

Yes, I am always keen to discuss the movies as movies, and have so far
enjoyed our thread about the motifs of PoA; I am currently working on
another post, comparing Cuaron's favourite imagery as seen throughout his
oeuvre. It will take a while; unfortunately, RL keeps happening!

I would be sorry to lose someone from the list who enjoys this kind of
discussion, and hope you will reconsider. The key to getting on with these
groups is sifting through to find threads which are interesting to oneself,
and not wasting time on those which can be redirected straight to the
trash. No offence to anyone; different people are interested in different
threads, and surely none of us reads everything that comes through?

My background is that I read all of the books then in print prior to seeing
PS/SS, and in fact, because I enjoyed the books so much, had absolutely no
intention of seeing the movies, as I knew they wouldn't match my vision.
But when I saw some of the stills from PS/SS, I changed my mind; Diagon
Alley and Snape were pretty much *exactly* what I had pictured. After
seeing the film, those two items remained the only things which matched my
mental pictures; but I saw, and still see, movies and books as two separate
entities and I accept each on their merits. When I read and reread the
books, 'my' Harry doesn't look like Dan Radcliffe. That's fine by me. I
think he does a good job in the movies.

Hoping for further movie techie discussions!
Cheers,
Nicholas





From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 21:58:32 2004
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing.
In-Reply-To: <20040617210639.49332.qmail@web80304.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040617215832.9667.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com>



Gretchen Crumpacker <gcrumpac at pacbell.net> wrote:
--- Nicole <aiphmmw at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly
> off of this list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these parts. I wish they would read the books and understand that these "kids" grow up through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry supposed to look 11?
> 

Gretchen responded: Yes, they do grow up, and besides, so what.  One of those 90210 "kids" on TV was about 30 when the series started.  I would much rather see Harry, Ron and Hermione look a bit older than they're meant to be
playing, rather than see new, younger actors populate
the roles.

akh chimes in: This is one of those touchy issues with me, too.  Right now, they are within 18 months of being exactly the right age, and we've seen people vastly older than the stated age play characters *cough* Alan Rickman *cough*  (BTW, I adore Alan Rickman, and I would probably accept him as Snape if he were 80.)  So what if 20-year- olds play 17?  

FWIW, if we look at the real world, kids almost the identical age vary widely in their physical maturity.  I looked 17 when I was 11, and my cousin looked 12 when she was 16.  I went to school with a pair of brothers who were half way through male-patterned baldness by the time they were 15.  We're going to believe the kids' maturation as it's depicted, whether we get movie 7 by 2008 or 2012. So there!

akh, who STILL looks 17 (in cat years, maybe)

 

  


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:02:38 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:02:38 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand
Message-ID: <1a2.25adf555.2e037d0e@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 4:22:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I may be 
just a sap, but I actually got a small lump in my throat at the pure joy that 
Harry exhibited at the end - the kid deserved to feel like that and he took 
me 
right with him.

Cindy, I couldn't agree more.  The joyful scenes of Harry on Buckbeak and 
Harry on the Firebolt lifted my heart and made me want to fly with him!  I'd jump 
up on Buckbeak (with Harry driving, of course!!) in a heartbeat!

And Richard -- your post was eloquent and I enjoy reading all the things you 
point out whenever you write about film.  You know a lot more about film 
making than I do, and I learn something in nearly every post of yours, so please 
don't disappear into the ether -- stay and fill our noggins with more good stuff 
about cinema!  I, too, came to the Potterverse after seeing the first movie, 
then the second one, and THEN reading the books a year and a half ago (and 
many many many times since then!!).  The actors in the film speak in my head when 
I read the books.  So maybe part of the problem with those of varying 
opinions is that they came to Harry's world via the books first, where those of us 
who are fans of the film may have come to Harry via film first, I don't know.

Keep those posts coming, Richard!

Lynda Sappington
Equine Art by Lynda Sappington Elegant equine art in bronze, cold-cast 
porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also jewelry with an equine theme in 14K gold 
and sterling silver.


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:03:32 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:03:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <b4.2d6e3c9f.2e037d44@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 2:41:42 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> I would've gotten the same light-hearted joy from hearing Harry go
> 'yahoooo' off into the sky.? There was much motion in the camera work
> throughout the film for them to just go *splat* at the end was... ick.
> 
> 

Different strokes for different folks, I guess ;-)
And I am sure if he had gone 'yahooo' like he did on Buckbeak, many folks 
would have said, 'gee, that was so cheesy'. 
Sometimes you just can't win ;-)
I loved the freezeframe and the Buckbeak ride <g>
Cindy


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




From astratrf at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:02:40 2004
From: astratrf at aol.com (astratrf)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 23:02:40 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <1611.4.47.27.240.1087508397.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
Message-ID: <cat7ug+epio@eGroups.com>

I loved the "Harry Potter on the windshield" idea!  I think it was 
Dana who said it?  I'm sorry, I haven't quite figured out how to snip 
posts to credit the authors.  But I agree, it brought the exhilaration 
of his flight to an abrupt end, as well as 
reminding me that it's a movie, and I can't really pass through into 
that world.  I haven't seen this option mentioned yet, but I thought 
it would have been better (just my opinion!)to have him flying giddily 
and then, just a split second before he would "crash into the camera", 
a sudden blackout, and then the credits. I would have felt less like 
his flight, and the action, stopped suddenly, and more like it 
continued but I was no longer able to see it.  I would probably have 
left the theater (3 times so far!) with a happy catch in my throat, 
rather than a bitter aftertaste at "squishedharry!"
while I'm here, I also would like to add that I don't know if Flitwick 
was changed in PoA--the actor playing the little wizard is listed in 
the credits as "wizard"--maybe he's a different character, and 
Flitwick didn't appear in this one?
Boy, I can go on and on when I don't have my family saying, "oh, no, 
not AGAIN!"
-Astra






From astratrf at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:06:26 2004
From: astratrf at aol.com (astratrf)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 23:06:26 -0000
Subject: sorry, Dina
Message-ID: <cat85i+q987@eGroups.com>

I misattributed a comment so I just want to apologize to Dina, who is 
not Dana.  when I tried to get the name off the post I was replying 
to, I lost my whole post and had to start over.  I guess I should
post 
more often so I can learn to do it properly.
-Astra (not ironing her hands but sorry all the same




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Thu Jun 17 23:10:51 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:10:51 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]wandless magic
In-Reply-To: <198.2af57f44.2e032735@aol.com>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBGEAFHJAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: artsylynda at aol.com [mailto:artsylynda at aol.com]

Quirrel also "flies" twice in the film, once in the forest when he's
drinking unicorn blood, and in the chamber when he attacks Harry
(interesting that he could strangle Harry, but couldn't stand the feel of
Harry's hands -- the protection is just in his HANDS??  Odd and illogical,
but I'll take it anyway. . .)<<<

Actually, didn't Quirrel's hands start to burn right after he was choking
Harry? Or did Harry actually grab his hand before that happened? I can't
remember how it happened in the movie (or in the book, come to think of it).

Barbara
bd-bear




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:14:09 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:14:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing.
Message-ID: <74.3dae8111.2e037fc1@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 2:04:53 PM, aiphmmw at yahoo.com writes:


> I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly off of this
> list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these parts. I wish
> they would read the books and understand that these "kids" grow up
> through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry supposed to look
> 11?
> 

Ah yes, the age thing ;-) Actually, most people do acknowledge that in the 
books, the kids age from 11 to 17. The question about the actors is that since 
each film takes over a year from actual shooting to release, that the actors 
will slowly creep up in age faster than the characters. This is true, but hardly 
a problem, at least in my opinion. As someone else said, even if they are 20, 
19 and 18 when they do the last movie, it's not that big a stretch to think 
they are all 17. And as many people have pointed out in various forms about 
this argument, there have been countless actors on TV here in the US and in films 
who play much younger ;-) The infamous Beverly Hills 90210 is a prime 
example. Those actors were much older than their characters ;-) 
Our TV Guide here in the US had an article about young stars recently on 
popular shows and not one of them was anywhere near the age of their character. 
Most were playing high school   kids and they were all in their early twenties.

The age thing   is a handle that has been tacked onto the HP movies for some 
reason and everyone from comedians to talk show hosts seem to think they have 
to make a joke about it. Last night Jay Leno said that Harry was getting so 
old that in the most recent movie his girlfriend was Demi Moore ;-)
Silly? Yep. Cheap joke? Yep, but that's popular culture for you ;-)

Personally, I hope the three actors continue - it wouldn't be a HP movie 
without them, to me at least ;-)
Cindy


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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Thu Jun 17 23:19:37 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:19:37 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <b4.2d6e3c9f.2e037d44@aol.com>
References: <b4.2d6e3c9f.2e037d44@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1649.4.47.27.240.1087514377.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> And I am sure if he had gone 'yahooo' like he did on Buckbeak, many folks
> would have said, 'gee, that was so cheesy'.

Err, Harry did go 'yahoo' at the end. {g}  Just as he did on Buckbeak.


> Sometimes you just can't win ;-)

Agreed.

Dina




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:23:44 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:23:44 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <112.33f60e4f.2e038200@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 4:21:22 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> 
> Err, Harry did go 'yahoo' at the end. {g}? Just as he did on Buckbeak.
> 

Oops, well, I guess he did ;-) It's just that we were talking about the 
freezeframe shot and I forgot the soundtrack, lol! Well, good for him though, 
goodness knows, he needed a little pure joy ;-) 
It's funny, I read a lot of fanfic and I have read many passages where the 
only real joy Harry feels is when he's flying and here we get an actual visual 
of it. Maybe that's why I loved it so much ;-)
Cindy


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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Thu Jun 17 23:39:13 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:39:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <112.33f60e4f.2e038200@aol.com>
References: <112.33f60e4f.2e038200@aol.com>
Message-ID: <1657.4.47.27.240.1087515553.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

clshannon at aol.com said:

> It's funny, I read a lot of fanfic and I have read many passages where the
> only real joy Harry feels is when he's flying

Only real joy? {g}  I don't know what fanfic you're reading but it's not
the same as what I'm reading. {nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more} 
Nothing quite like when they get older and those hormones kick in.


> and here we get an actual
> visual
> of it. Maybe that's why I loved it so much ;-)

Aye, I'm glad to see him happy after all the hardships and what not.  I
think Harry tries using flying as one of his 'happiest memories' during
the dementor training in POA.

Dina




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 17 23:42:41 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:42:41 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <b7.41ca7029.2e038671@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 4:40:29 PM, redina at silverbloom.net writes:


> Only real joy? {g}? I don't know what fanfic you're reading but it's not
> the same as what I'm reading. {nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more}
> Nothing quite like when they get older and those hormones kick in.
> 

Now, now Dina...nudge, nudge, wink, wink, indeed! I'm definitely reading the 
same fanfic as you <eg> and I am thankful for those hormones ;-)
Cindy


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




From katydid3500 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 18 00:41:18 2004
From: katydid3500 at yahoo.com (Kathryn Wolber)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing.
In-Reply-To: <74.3dae8111.2e037fc1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040618004118.8352.qmail@web40501.mail.yahoo.com>

--- clshannon at aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 6/17/04 2:04:53 PM,
> aiphmmw at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> 
> > I wanted to make an observation. Some people
> (mostly off of this
> > list) say that the "kids" are too old to play
> these parts. I wish
> > they would read the books and understand that
> these "kids" grow up
> > through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry
> supposed to look
> > 11?
> > 
> 
> Ah yes, the age thing ;-) Actually, most people do
> acknowledge that in the 
> books, the kids age from 11 to 17. The question
> about the actors is that since 
> each film takes over a year from actual shooting to
> release, that the actors 
> will slowly creep up in age faster than the
> characters. This is true, but hardly 
> a problem, at least in my opinion. As someone else
> said, even if they are 20, 
> 19 and 18 when they do the last movie, it's not that
> big a stretch to think 
> they are all 17. And as many people have pointed out
> in various forms about 
> this argument, there have been countless actors on
> TV here in the US and in films 
> who play much younger ;-) The infamous Beverly Hills
> 90210 is a prime 
> example. Those actors were much older than their
> characters ;-) 
> Our TV Guide here in the US had an article about
> young stars recently on 
> popular shows and not one of them was anywhere near
> the age of their character. 
> Most were playing high school   kids and they were
> all in their early twenties.

For an HP age reference, the girl they cast as Fleur
is 21 portraying a 17/18 year old. So they've at least
said that a 4 year age gap is acceptable. But really,
I think they're just making a big fit about nothing.
It really just depends on what the kids want to do and
I don't think age is that big of an issue.  I'm about
to turn 20 and I look almost exactly the same as I did
when I started high school at age 14. Once the actors
reach about 17 and puberty is basically done their
physical appearance shouldn't change drastically for a
few years. So as long as JKR doesn't take a huge break
after book 6 I can't see age being a problem.

~Kathryn


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



From bcbgx6 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 17 23:35:01 2004
From: bcbgx6 at yahoo.com (Brian)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 23:35:01 -0000
Subject: Movie 6 Director suggestion
Message-ID: <cat9r5+3mcm@eGroups.com>

Why not haul John Hughes out of retirement for movie six?  He and 
Chris Columbus (who will continue producing throughout the movies, I 
imagine) get along well.  If his mind still works in the same way, he 
could handle the characters' adolescence in a way that some would 
like.  He is good at minor details and, if allowed to do a bit of co-
writing, he could inject some much-needed humor into the 
screenwriting.

Just a thought.  I'm not emotionally invested in the opinion, so feel 
free to tear it apart if you want.  It would be interesting to read 
some responses.

Brian 





From clshannon at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 02:12:05 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:12:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie 6 Director suggestion
Message-ID: <1ed.23535b03.2e03a975@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/17/04 6:54:18 PM, bcbgx6 at yahoo.com writes:


> Why not haul John Hughes out of retirement for movie six?? He and
> Chris Columbus (who will continue producing throughout the movies, I
> imagine) get along well.
> 
In Fantasy Worlds Magazine No. 4, Columbus states that POA was his last 
Potter film, as producer or director. So he won't even be producing GOF.

Cindy


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




From andesr at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 18 01:44:43 2004
From: andesr at hotmail.com (Mandy)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 01:44:43 -0000
Subject: I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <catheb+i3ph@eGroups.com>

Richard:
> I thought that this group was set up for the discussion of the HP 
movies on 
> an adult level. Not just as adaptations (although of course that 
too), but 
> as MOVIES. I spent the whole of Tuesday and most of yesterday 
(until I 
> suddenly and unavoidably had to go out) trying to discuss the 
movies as 
> cinematic entities and have had no reaction. That worries me, and 
it 
> saddens me. I'm not saying that I necessarily expected praise or 
criticism 
> of my comments, but I did think there'd be some kind of reaction. 
The only 
> reaction I had to was to some of my nit-picky comments (to which 
replies 
> will hopefully come shortly).

  I mostly lurk and don't usually post, but your post put me in a 
typing kind of mood. I agree that too much time has been spent 
discussing (well arguing,really) the merits of the book vs. the 
movie. It was appropriate when the movie came out to discuss what 
was left out and what was different, but as this is a list that is 
supposed to be about the movie, it is also appropriate to move on 
from that and talk about the movie. Your post was very well thought 
out and well written. I would write more in that regard, but you did 
such a good job, I'll move on...

> Once I've done that, I'm going to disappear into the ether again, 
as people 
> don't appear to be interested in an in-depth discussion of PoA as 
a MOVIE 
> purely on its own terms without reference to the book.

  I think it would be a loss to this list if you 'disappeared into 
the ether.' You make valid and thought provoking post. I hope to 
read more of them.

> I think we've pretty 
> much exhausted nitpicking the adaptation and I see little point in 
sticking 
> around for more of the same.

  I couldn't agree more. 

 
> In the meantime, here's a thought which I am surprised only 
occurred to me 
> last night as I was falling asleep. I think I finally understand 
the main 
> difference between PoA the Movie and PoA the Book, which has 
caused a 
> polarisation of the fandom. Actually, it's not so much that I 
understand it 
> (it's pretty obvious), but I have finally realised how to put it 
into words.
> 
> The book is essentially a mystery story. Several mysteries are 
introduced 
> and it is those mysteries which drive the plot. The conclusion of 
the book, 
> is, therefore, the resolution of all of those mysteries: why's 
Scabbers 
> behaving so strangely and why did he suddenly fall ill? Why won't 
anyone 
> tell Harry what's going on with Sirius Black? Who is Lupin and 
what's he 
> about? How does he know about the Map? Why is Hermione so frazzled 
and why 
> does she appear in strange places out of the blue? There are 
several 
> others, but I'll stop there.
> 
> The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and 
becomes 
> a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, 
and 
> changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting 
adolescence.
> 
> In fact, the film completely dismisses or overlooks some of the 
mysteries. 
> Just one example: there is no subtlety about Lupin's Boggart: it 
is *very* 
> obviously the moon. The Hogwarts "lockdown" is cut with an image 
of the 
> full moon and the sound of howling, just after we've been informed 
that 
> Lupin is unwell. The werewolf lesson is painted in such broad 
strokes that 
> the viewer would need to be a moron not to catch on. Other 
elements of the 
> "mystery" are similarly "unmysterious".
> 
> The only major revelation left for the end is who did betray the 
Potters; 
> the way things are set up (and regardless of the way some reviews 
were 
> written), Sirius is *so* heavily painted as the bad guy throughout 
the 
> movie (just as Snape was during PS/SS) that it's clear to anyone 
with more 
> than a couple of functioning grey cells and any knowledge of 
storytelling 
> that there's something wrong with the assumptions.
> 
> And I think that the loss of the "mystery" is the main fault line 
(although 
> there are others) along which the fandom has split.

  I'm not sure I agree completely as I think that it isn't just the 
loss of the 'mystery' that has some of the fans disliking the movie. 
>From reading posts, it seems that they also miss the 'feel' of the 
movie. The first two movies were cleaner, golden/warm toned, more 
innocent, and seemed to include much more from the books than POA. 
While I understand why the fans who prefer SS/PS and CoS prefer them 
over PoA, I felt that this movie was a good view of HWarts and the 
WW as it was more realistic to me. I loved the silver tones of the 
movie. I totally agree that Cuaronchanged the movie from a mystery 
to more of a comming of age story. 

> Personally, I see the change as Cuaron's masterstroke (his, not 
Kloves's: I 
> do recall reading that when he was first engaged to direct, he got 
Kloves 
> to re-write the whole thing). The way I see it, his approach was 
that most 
> viewers will have read the book (and analysed it in great detail) 
and thus 
> presenting the denouement as the resolution of a mystery is 
pointless: 
> everyone already knows how the story ends, and building the movie 
around a 
> plot twist doesn't make the movie inherently interesting to that 
audience. 
> What he did was to delve into the sub-text of the book's plot and 
make 
> *that* the focus of the movie.

  This I agree with. I don't want a regurgitation of the book. I can 
read the book for that. I want the movie to show me something I 
can't get from the book. Cuaron does this for me in a good way.

> (Talking of which, one specific comment I'll make, on a subject 
which has 
> recently been dissected: I *like* the freeze-frame at the end. At 
least 
> it's better than Columbus's utterly cliched reverse zooms.)

  I agree. I felt CoS ending was very cliched and drawn out. The 
freeze-frame might not have been very original, but it was short, to 
the point and ended the movie on an up=note which is the way the 
book ends, so I have no problem with it.

 
> The change in focus therefore was the foundation of the changes to 
the 
> book's plot, and not an effect of any changes to it. *Perhaps* if 
Cuaron 
> had decided to stick to presenting the movie as a mystery, he 
might have 
> made a film acceptable to those who wanted to have the mysteries 
resolved 
> in the same way as they are in the book? *Perhaps* those people 
would have 
> felt the same satisfaction and surprise at seeing the plot twists 
they know 
> so well resolved in the same way.
> 
> But *perhaps* Cuaron decided not to say "I'm going to assume that 
nobody 
> knows what happens in this story and expect them to jump in 
surprise when 
> things are explained", but say "I'm going to assume that most of 
the people 
> who see this movie have read the book and none of the plot will 
surprise 
> them, so I'll give them a few *different* surprises".

  Which to me makes a more enjoyable movie. When I go to a movie 
that was adapted from the book, I know it's not going to be the same 
and as long as the movie is faithful to the book, then I'm good. 
That's my opinion and I know that some people on the list wanted the 
movie to be more faithful to the book and you are of course intitled 
to your opinion, I just don't agree with it.

  Thanks for your thought provoking post.

  ande





From andesr at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 18 02:12:38 2004
From: andesr at hotmail.com (Mandy)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 02:12:38 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <20040616040235.2031.qmail@web40605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <catj2m+kun0@eGroups.com>

 
> > side fairly quickly (this isn't the USA, where there
> are huge spaces 
> > between houses). And virtually all of them have a
> traffic 
> > roundabout at 
> > their entrance. :-)
> 
> Huge spaces between houses? Well, between very, very
> expensive houses
> maybe. But on the US West coast, where I live, even
> expensive homes,
> costing over $500,000 each, are very often on small
> lots with very
> little space between the homes. I'm sure there are
> parts of US where
> land is cheap and the lots are huge, but that is most
> certainly NOT a
> true statement for much of USA.


  Hi Suzanne, just a short comment about your post. I've lived all 
over the US and I must say that the West coast is in it's own little 
world in regards to the housing market. ;)

  England and how they arrange their towns is very different from 
the US. Even in the small towns of England the houses are still 
pretty close together. They don't have a lot of land there and the 
building codes are strict. In most, not all, of America once you get 
out of the city to the burbs and small towns, most houses have a 
little land. In England they have either no land or perhaps a very 
small garden area. I have spent a small amount of time touring 
around England and a lot of time touring around America and 
your 'very small space between homes' is way more than they have. 
Homes and land over there are also way more expensive than here, 
even in comparison to West coast prices. ;~)

  It is totally true about those #$#&*) roundabouts. I really don't 
like them. They are really scary, especially since the cars go the 
opposite way around the circle than we Americans. 

 ande





From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Fri Jun 18 06:50:48 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 06:50:48 -0000
Subject: I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <catheb+i3ph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cau3c8+nuuk@eGroups.com>

Wow this has been one busy list today. Cool! First I must say Richard 
I love your posts so please don't leave. People rarely respond to 
mine either and I just figure they read it and just don't have 
anything to add whether they agree with me or not. I think sometimes 
I am a little bit of a long poster. Anyway, I would love to have this 
list go from just the banter of I liked it or I didn't like it or it 
wasn't like the book. I was actually excited to see the movie 
beforehand because I had seen the visuals Cuaron uses when I 
rewatched The Little Princess around the first of May. He is very 
visual. He uses colors and lighting to make an emphasis on something 
and it really works well I think he many of the POA scenes. By the 
way, I did miss a bit of the mystery that the book had but I did 
expect it because I saw an interview with Cuaron prior and he 
mentioned they had little clues through out the movie to help you 
figure out the mysteries. Besides, I think all of the HP books are 
mysteries, JK gives clues to the endings each time and she gives red 
herrings. That is part of her appeal, at least to me it is. Also, 
just like Ande, I do not think that is the only thing separating the 
likes and don't likes. I believe that partly it is the difference in 
directing styles. Columbus makes good films but he has the softer 
family oriented touch and Cuaron who is more of an intense 
personality and that comes out in the films. The trio has stated 
numerous times that he was more intense and energetic.  I remember 
when Columbus first directed PS/SS though and people were saying he 
was great and all but they thought he was too warm and fuzzy for POA 
or GOF (OotP was not out when I heard/read those comments). I agreed 
with those posts and still do. Even the books have a different feel 
from the first two to the last three that have been released. She 
gets darker and less innocent. I personally don't think it would have 
work to have, Ande stated, a cleaner, golden/warm toned, and more 
innocent, type of setting for POA and I would not want that for the 
latter books when they are made into films either.  As for the 
endings of the films, hmm, I really did not care for the cheesy we 
love you Hagrid ending to CoS. I think that left me with a "what was 
that for" feeling when I left the theater. The freeze frame ending of 
POA at first viewing made me think "Man it's over" but then I saw the 
map and all the cute footprints and other things so it was an all 
right ending. I must say even though I like POA best, PS/SS had the 
best ending. I love the getting on the train and Harry saying he 
wasn't "really" going home. I hope GOF has a similar ending ? Malfoy 
and his cronies getting hexed is what I want to see. I loved that. 
Anyway, I would love for you to discuss the cinematography and the 
like so please stick around.

Theresa





From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 07:53:05 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 03:53:05 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
Message-ID: <8d.dbbd913.2e03f961@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 8:46:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
andesr at hotmail.com writes:

>>In most, not all, of America once you get 
out of the city to the burbs and small towns, most houses have a 
little land.<<

Actually, in Portland (which is on the west coast, mind you, not all of the 
coast is California), there are still many [older] neighborhoods with houses 
that have huge spaces between each other, particuarily on the east side (which 
is still within the city limits, Portland isn't a *huge* city, but its not 
small-town either) Its only in the last decade or so that I've seen new homes 
built very close to each other.

To keep this on topic, I, myself, didn't enjoy the Aunt Marge inflating scene 
either. Am I alone in this, or did any one else just find it grotesque? (I 
felt so in the book as well). The scene itself was a little over-the-top with 
the lights flickering and all that. Something about somebody inflating, no 
matter how nasty they are is just a horrifying visual, (I purposely DID NOT imagine 
it when I was reading the book), and I guess I'm in the minority of those who 
did not see the humor in it. (certainly plenty of people in the theater were 
laughing).


-Rebecca


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 18 13:16:19 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:16:19 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Sirius' soul
In-Reply-To: <car584+21fp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF86362.F58%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "swartell" <suewartell at netscape.net>

3.  The camera angle made it look to me like the the point of light
being pulled out of Sirius (if that's what it was) turned into the
stag.  In fact it almost looked to me like he was exhaling the
patronus, though I knew that Harry was casting it.   And as the
patronus receded into the background, the point of
light/reflection/whatever disappeared as if Sirius sucked it back in.
Alternatively, it was as if the brightness of the stag was reflected
in the lake just beyond Sirius and it just appeared to be coming out
of him and then returning to him.

I found that bit visually confusing, and a bit over the top, frankly.
I never did quite decide how to interpret it.

Sue

[from Valerie]
Fascinating observation! If that were so, then they could be implying that
Sirius, though he was 1/2 dead, was lending his power to Harry in order to
produce the patronus? Lupin already stated that it would take a really
powerful wizard to produce a big powerful patronus. That one was pretty huge
to fight off hundreds of dementors. Harry's not THAT powerful, is he? I
still think that James' 'spirit' was somehow involved in helping Harry
w/that patronus.  Perhaps it was Jame's love for Harry and Sirius that was
present in the stag patronus? I know that isn't in the book, but I like the
idea of it!





________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 valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 18 13:57:25 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:57:25 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <casekp+kk27@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCF86D05.F5B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Tim" <tmarends at yahoo.com>
Personally, I hated Titanic.... and
the fact that it won so many Oscars just irritates me to no end.  I
thought The Color Purple was a far better film than Out Of Africa
(which I fell asleep watching, it was sooooo boring).  But those are
MY tastes.

Tim

[from Valerie]
Oh my yes, tastes are different. Out of Africa is my most favorite movie of
all time! Loved Meryl Streep, the costumes and cinematography were
gorgeous...guess our differences is what makes the world go 'round. Or, what
makes wars?!!?? :-P



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 13:51:52 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:51:52 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 960
Message-ID: <55.5a4a594c.2e044d78@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 10:15:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
Actually, didn't Quirrel's hands start to burn right after he was choking
Harry? Or did Harry actually grab his hand before that happened? I can't
remember how it happened in the movie (or in the book, come to think of it).

Barbara
bd-bear
This is from the movie -- haven't read the book in a while.  His hands didn't 
start to burn until Harry grabbed his hand -- when Quirrel was strangling 
him, he had no apparent problem touching Harry's skin on his neck.  He did refuse 
to shake hands with Harry when he first met him in The Leaky Cauldron (again, 
movie, but I think something similar happened in the book, but wasn't as 
emphasized as it was in the film).

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  Fri Jun 18 13:50:03 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:50:03 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, likes and dislikes
Message-ID: <102.48150895.2e044d0b@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 10:15:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
I also would like to add that I don't know if Flitwick 
was changed in PoA--the actor playing the little wizard is listed in 
the credits as "wizard"--maybe he's a different character, and 
Flitwick didn't appear in this one?
The staff table was peopled with a lot of strangers.  No Flitwick, no Sprout, 
no Madame Hooch, no Sinestra (I suppose she's the one with the black hair and 
"swoopy" hat in the previous films), and it was painfully obvious they had 
done something to make McGonagall look extra small next to Hagric (she was foggy 
on the film, not in focus, nor was he, and they both looked "odd").  I LIKE 
Flitwick the way he's been portrayed in the previous films.  Who is the creepy 
little Nazi looking guy anyway??

And on a similar note -- I've always wondered -- is Lee Jordan in the films 
played by a boy or a girl?  Even in this film, s/he sounds and moves like a 
girl, yet in the books, he seems to be a boy??  Or am I hopelessly confused?????  
Wouldn't be the first time. . . .

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  Fri Jun 18 14:02:08 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:02:08 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <126.43a9a294.2e032bcf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCF86E20.F5C%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>


***
-I really don't like the freezeframe at the end.?
**
Sigh, well, I guess I'm one of the few people who really liked that. I
thought it was a much snappier way to end the film than a long pulling shot
from the 
Great Hall to the outside. Different, visually appealing and it actually
made 
my heart feel full with some of the joy that Harry must have been feeling. I
think it's great that they focused on him at the end - they are 'his'
stories, 
after all ;-)

Cindy

My thought on the ending was that it was a convenient way for WB or Cuaron
or whoever made that decision, to end the movie on a happy, high note to
satisfy the younger viewers. Personally it made me feel exhilirated when
leaving the theatre, though I would've liked the Sirius and Pigwidgeon
reference in the movie somewhere.

Valerie



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 13:54:09 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:54:09 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <46.511f11a9.2e044e01@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/17/2004 10:15:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Only real joy? {g}  I don't know what fanfic you're reading but it's not
> the same as what I'm reading. {nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more}
> Nothing quite like when they get older and those hormones kick in.
> 

Now, now Dina...nudge, nudge, wink, wink, indeed! I'm definitely reading the 
same fanfic as you <eg> and I am thankful for those hormones ;-)
Cindy
aha!  Recommendations???  links???  And if you're talking about Barb's, those 
I've read (and they're good reading!)

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


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




From SnapesRaven at web.de  Fri Jun 18 14:18:47 2004
From: SnapesRaven at web.de (SnapesRaven)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:18:47 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Plase tell me this isn't true
References: <20040617203605.3483.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <006501c4553f$2c017490$0202a8c0@henrike>

I think it's a big joke. It can't be true...

CAN IT??!?  *panicks!*


SnapesRaven - who sincerely hopes that Anita's right!!


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: AnitaKH 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 10:36 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Plase tell me this isn't true





  In a message dated 6/16/2004 11:02:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
  HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

  Fairly OT the movies, but:  someone tell me this isn't
  really going to happen.

  http://www.watleyreview.com/2004/061504-3.html

  Gretchen

  artsylynda at aol.com wrote:How could it be true?  Tom Welling is the star of "Smallville" which is the 
  WB's top series.  They wouldn't pull him off his "Clark Kent" duties.  JK 
  Rowling still owns the rights to her universe, only licensed Warner Bros. to do the 
  films, from things I've read here and there.  This must be a spoof kind of 
  site.  What an awful idea, Americanizing Hogwarts!  Yikes!

  akh: As most of you know by now, it's a humor site.  I thought I'd add their explanation, anyway, since I found it to be a total hoot:

  http://www.watleyreview.com/About.html




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




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Fri Jun 18 14:21:05 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:21:05 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One more thing.
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06F3@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

> I wanted to make an observation. Some people (mostly off of this
> list) say that the "kids" are too old to play these parts. I wish
> they would read the books and understand that these "kids" grow up
> through the series. Is a seventeen year old harry supposed to look
> 11?
> 
 
         Gina:  Well take me for example. I am 24 and have worked for the
government for 4 years - there are STILL people that come in wondering why I
am not in school (High School). People ask me if I am sixteen sometimes so I
could EASILY play the part of someone in high school and I am quite a bit
older than these actors.
 
         Another point is that most high school kids these days DO look
older so I think the movies will be fine and like someone else said who
would want to change them this late in the game?
 
         Gina


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 18 14:31:03 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:31:03 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BCF874E7.F5D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org>

<snip>
The book is essentially a mystery story.
<snip>
The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and becomes
a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, and
changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting adolescence.
<snip>
Personally, I see the change as Cuaron's masterstroke (his, not Kloves's: I
do recall reading that when he was first engaged to direct, he got Kloves
to re-write the whole thing). The way I see it, his approach was that most
viewers will have read the book (and analysed it in great detail) and thus
presenting the denouement as the resolution of a mystery is pointless:
everyone already knows how the story ends, and building the movie around a
plot twist doesn't make the movie inherently interesting to that audience.
What he did was to delve into the sub-text of the book's plot and make
*that* the focus of the movie.

[from Valerie]
I disagree there. It bothers me that Cuaron changed the focus from main plot
to sub plot. The "coming of age" was such a minor part of the book. In fact,
it is more apparent in GOF, than in POA, what with Harry + Cho, Ron +
Hermione, the dance, etc.
Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not be allowed
to take such liberal interpretations (IMO). I would be curious to see
statistics on how many people in the audience actually read the book, and
how many did not. There appeared to be a lot of younger kids in most of my 3
viewing audiences. They probably have not read the book, though their
parents may have read it to them.
I think the charm for many HP fans is seeing the books come to life; not
take on a new life. Masses of people ADORE JKR's stories; they don't want to
see Cuaron's story with shrunken heads and such. I just don't think one can
be separated from the other.
I personally loved the book and also loved the movie (though wish I could've
been in a test-focus group prior to release :-)
But to address the movie on it's own merit (that's what you were asking for,
yes?) I thought POA was beautifully filmed in a much more exciting, all
encompassing way than the first 2. (though I loved those too, in their own
right). The realism made me want to live at Hogwarts as a professor! (check
out the cool carvings on the wall near Trelawny's classroom. Reminded me of
the details involved in making LOTR.
The acting was very good (especially from the masters such as Thewlis,
Oldman, Gambon, Rickman, Thompson and the rat-dude whose name now escapes
me!) The kids' acting MUCH improved.
I hope they continue making the movies as long as they can. My fear is that
the public's attention and fascination will wane. (not mine, of course!)
Then if it becomes unprofitable for WB, they'll stop making them. I also
fear that POA will mark a turning point for viewing audiences. Because
probably half(?) the audience is under the age of 10, and this movie is more
scary than the other 2, I think the parents will not allow their younger
kids to view GOF. In fact, it may even have to go to PG-13, if true to the
book. So if half the audience doesn't go see the film it will certainly flop
at the box office. A dilemma. I hope they don't "Disneyfy" the next HP
movies, just to retain the younger viewing audience.







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




From chany_p at yahoo.de  Fri Jun 18 14:37:16 2004
From: chany_p at yahoo.de (chany_p)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:37:16 -0000
Subject: Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <002f01c4490f$e303f140$6501a8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <cauums+oaaa@eGroups.com>

sophiamcl:
> Can't believe I'm sticking my nose into something that's 
absolutely none of my business...But you know how Dan recently 
declared Emma was like a sister to him? Well, on danradcliffe.com 
there are photos from the UK premiere (in the uk premiere gallery)
of Dan and Emma holding hands with their fingers interlaced. Too, 
too cute. Sister? hmhmmmmmmmm.>>

Kimberly:
> I saw those pictures the night after the UK premiere, and I 
thought either the photographer really liked them or there is more 
to it than Dan and Emma are letting on.  And truth be told, they 
are teenagers who can be friends one minute and dating the next minute. 
It was cute on Regis and Kelly... he really blushed when Kelly asked 
him about him and Emma, and even then he swore they were just friends...
> "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK 
premiere.
> I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-) >> 


Maybe it will disappoint some of you but I read an article on a 
German fansite. Somebody who runs this site was able to attend the UK 
premiere and was allowed to take pictures. He wrote that this was not 
Dan's or Emma's idea. He was standing next to the potographer who 
asked them for the handholding pose. Sorry!

Ingrid 





From lkotur at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 18 17:08:26 2004
From: lkotur at hotmail.com (Damit Lazarus)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:08:26 -0000
Subject: I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <BCF874E7.F5D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cav7ia+q6li@eGroups.com>

> Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not 
be allowed
> to take such liberal interpretations (IMO). 
I agree,  The movie was 2.5 on a scale of 10 - Don't get me wrong it 
was OK but it didn't relly tell the HP / Sirius story well.

The movie was an "outline" of the story from the novel and not a 
very satisfying outline either,  Bring Back Chris Columbus!!

If the GOF is anything like POA, they won't need to finish the 
series on the Big Screen. 

Bring Back Chris Columbus!!

Hey maybe we could start a movement...

Larry





From rzl46 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 18 16:39:47 2004
From: rzl46 at yahoo.com (rzl46)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:39:47 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
Message-ID: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>

I'm new to this group.  I've searched, and I can't find that this has 
been discussed.  If it has, please take pity on a newbie and point 
her in the right direction.

I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress 
might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought and 
decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical aspects 
of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people to fix 
that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique 
combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil 
nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews.  

Thoughts?  Other suggestions?

MaggieB





From carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Jun 18 17:34:41 2004
From: carol_sutcliffe at yahoo.co.uk (hettiebe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:34:41 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cav93h+q3fo@eGroups.com>

MaggieB wrote:
> I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress 
> might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought and 
> decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical 
> aspects of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people 
> to fix that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique 
> combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil 
> nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews.  


All the time I was reading OOTP I pictured her played by Patricia 
Routledge. Julie Andrews is far to tall, slender and good-looking to 
play the toad.

"hettiebe"




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Fri Jun 18 18:04:06 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:04:06 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <BCF874E7.F5D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBGECDHJAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>From: Valerie Flowe [mailto:valerie.flowe at verizon.net]

I disagree there. It bothers me that Cuaron changed the focus from main plot
to sub plot. The "coming of age" was such a minor part of the book. In fact,
it is more apparent in GOF, than in POA, what with Harry + Cho, Ron +
Hermione, the dance, etc.

Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not be allowed
to take such liberal interpretations (IMO).

<snip>

I think the charm for many HP fans is seeing the books come to life; not
take on a new life. Masses of people ADORE JKR's stories; they don't want to
see Cuaron's story with shrunken heads and such. I just don't think one can
be separated from the other.<<<


Thanks Valerie, you have expressed exactly what I have been trying to
regarding my disliking of the movie (although I respect that you ultimately
liked the movie). You mentioned just a few of my complaints, and your
comments seem to be based on your preferences, rather than anything have to
do with canon, or some evaluation of the movie as a stand alone entity with
certain cinematic merits. That's what I have based my comments on, my
preferences. IMO that is just as valid a stance as any.


Barbara
bd-bear




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Fri Jun 18 18:42:19 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:42:19 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I think I understand...
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A06F8@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

Here! Here!
 
Gina
 
> Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not 
be allowed
> to take such liberal interpretations (IMO). 
I agree,  The movie was 2.5 on a scale of 10 - Don't get me wrong it 
was OK but it didn't relly tell the HP / Sirius story well.

The movie was an "outline" of the story from the novel and not a 
very satisfying outline either,  Bring Back Chris Columbus!!

If the GOF is anything like POA, they won't need to finish the 
series on the Big Screen. 

Bring Back Chris Columbus!!

Hey maybe we could start a movement...

Larry




________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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129rosu9q/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087665979/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164339/rand=286051964> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From Lynx412 at AOL.com  Fri Jun 18 18:50:42 2004
From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:50:42 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: I think I understand...
Message-ID: <19c.25a00764.2e049382@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/18/2004 1:56:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
lkotur at hotmail.com writes:

> The movie was an "outline" of the story from the novel and not a very 
> satisfying outline either,  Bring Back Chris Columbus!!

       Ha! You just hit on why I'm neutral about the movie. It felt 
incomplete. Yep, outline describes it very well. I was left unsatisfied.

       Cheryl


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




From vegittonomiko at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 18 19:41:28 2004
From: vegittonomiko at yahoo.com (tiiana)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:41:28 -0000
Subject: Some thoughts about the next movie
Message-ID: <cavgh8+uglc@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone.  New to the list and loving it everyday.

Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and Hermione are starting
to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes out?  Will Ron do
or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily forget about her
feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with Viktor Krum?  This
is one of my many problems with the movie and knowing what has occured
in the next book (even though I'm trying not to compare apples and
oranges here but...)  I guess between Chris Columbus, the writer and
director of GoF will need to think really hard about this because
there will be a lot of confused people wondering why Hermione is
flip-flopping on Ron.  Although I do know that some teens go out with
different individuals until they find "THE ONE" if they don't find
them right on the spot, I just think that it will not make Hermione
look to, how can I say this without offending, wholesome, monogomous,
ignore me now please because I'm rambling.




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Fri Jun 18 19:53:54 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 12:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <cavgh8+uglc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040618195354.7498.qmail@web80306.mail.yahoo.com>

--- tiiana <vegittonomiko at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone.  New to the list and loving it
> everyday.
> 
> Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and
> Hermione are starting
> to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes
> out?  Will Ron do
> or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily
> forget about her
> feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with
> Viktor Krum?  This
> is one of my many problems with the movie and
> knowing what has occured
> in the next book (even though I'm trying not to
> compare apples and
> oranges here but...)  I guess between Chris
> Columbus, the writer and
> director of GoF will need to think really hard about
> this because
> there will be a lot of confused people wondering why
> Hermione is
> flip-flopping on Ron.  Although I do know that some
> teens go out with
> different individuals until they find "THE ONE" if
> they don't find
> them right on the spot, I just think that it will
> not make Hermione
> look to, how can I say this without offending,
> wholesome, monogomous,
> ignore me now please because I'm rambling.

Well, since we're assuming there is no s-e-x involved,
monogamy isn't an issue, and certainly teens get
crushes and disillusionments moment by moment.  I
think Ron's mistake will be exactly what it was in the
book; he waits too long and assumes too much, and by
the time he acts, Hermione is spoken for as far as the
Yule Ball goes.  It will be interesting to see what
they do with it in the movie; I would like to see more
than what I've seen in the books between them. 
Hermione and Ron are just opposite enough to find each
other irresistible, in a sort of brotherly-sisterly
bickering way.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From movietosee at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 18 17:53:01 2004
From: movietosee at yahoo.com (Movies To See)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:53:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cav93h+q3fo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040618175301.3018.qmail@web90001.mail.scd.yahoo.com>

MaggieB wrote:
> I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress 
> might portray Deloris Umbridge.  


thats a tough one

"Movies To See"




From peter_jacobi at gmx.net  Fri Jun 18 19:18:11 2004
From: peter_jacobi at gmx.net (peter_jacobi.rm)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:18:11 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <carom2+nl8n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cavf5j+qfo6@eGroups.com>

I'm with bd-bear on two points (if I got her points right):

- When comparing with the other films, I also find the 
book-film differences much more disturbing in PoA. 
The *perceived* differences, not an attempt to judge 
on an objective scale.

- I was unsatified with the PoA film because of its differences.
I'm all positive towards the general arguments, that there
must be differences due to different media, but then, in nearly
all cases the film is different, but does makes sense without
reading the book. In PoA, not knowing the book, will leave you
clueless abou what's going on. And knowing the book, did leave
me disturbed about the changes.

Just my 2 Euro-Cent.

Regards,
Peter Jacobi






From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 22:42:51 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:42:51 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Some thoughts about the next movie
Message-ID: <149.2c1dff84.2e04c9eb@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/18/2004 1:02:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
vegittonomiko at yahoo.com writes:

>>Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and Hermione are starting
to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes out?  Will Ron do
or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily forget about her
feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with Viktor Krum?<<

They're not starting to notice each other quite that heavily though. The 
"noticing" is mostly subtle, the same way it is in GoF. They weren't gazing into 
each other's eyes or anything. Personally, I think it strengthens the Yule Ball 
plot, because then Ron's jealousy doesn't come out of left field. The reason 
(essentially) in the book that Hermione doesn't go with Ron is that he waited 
till the last moment to ask her. I can't see any reason why that wouldn't 
still work in the GoF movie.


-Rebecca


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun 18 23:03:48 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:03:48 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
Message-ID: <1e.2c5c189a.2e04ced4@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/18/2004 7:32:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
valerie.flowe at verizon.net writes:

>> It bothers me that Cuaron changed the focus from main plot to sub plot. 
The "coming of age" was such a minor part of the book. In fact, it is more 
apparent in GOF, than in POA, what with Harry + Cho, Ron + Hermione, the dance, 
etc. <<

He made the 'coming of age' idea prominent, yes, but it was still in the bac
kground. The whole plot was still there, its just that the more emotional 
elements were exaggerated more than the plot (which, IMO, makes for a more 
interesting movie, because there's more heart to it). I think its a matter of opinion 
whether Harry's 'coming of age' was a big part of the book or not. PoA *is* 
the first time you see Harry angry about anything. And its the first time he 
realizes/is upset about people lying to him and holding things back from him. 
That is an important part of the book. 

>>Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not be 
allowed
to take such liberal interpretations (IMO).<<

Why? If anything the popularity demands the directer to do something with the 
material besides just put it on screen because so many people know the story 
so well. In the case of the Harry Potter series, if every movie was obsessed 
with the 'wonderment' of the magical world and stuck only to plot points then 
(IMO) the movies would eventually get stale and boring. The movie has to have 
an energy of its own, separate from the book, otherwise why make a movie? Its 
never going to be better than reading the book. 

>>My fear is that the public's attention and fascination will wane.<<

Which is why the movie series needs to stay fresh. And so far, there's still 
plenty of interest, PoA (at the moment) is making more money than CoS did. 
(CoS had $148mil on day ten whereas PoA had $157mil on day ten).

>> I also fear that POA will mark a turning point for viewing audiences. 
Because
probably half(?) the audience is under the age of 10, and this movie is more 
scary than the other 2, I think the parents will not allow their younger kids 
to view GOF.<<

I worry about that too. Part of the reason the first two made so much money 
is their appeal to all ages, and as the series goes on each movie is going to 
be less appropriate for younger children. And it might be hard to lure older 
fans because of the whole "Harry Potter is only for kids" idea that a lot of 
people have. But, on the other hand, all three LOTR movies were rated PG-13 and 
there were plenty of younger kids going to those. Parents might be less 
cautious about GoF, because its Harry Potter and the 7-10 year olds will be begging 
to go. On the up side, I read a recent article that said that the average age 
for fans had gone up slightly, which hopefully means that more teenagers are 
going to see Harry Potter, which is what the series needs to continue onscreen. 
Here's hoping no studio exec tries to water down the end of GoF, because 
*that* will scare away more fans than the original ending (I know it scares me!)


-Rebecca


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




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 00:41:56 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 00:41:56 -0000
Subject: 2nd reading, 2nd viewing & IMAX
Message-ID: <cb024k+ad0l@eGroups.com>

I decided to read the book again before seeing PoA for a second 
time.  I'm going to take back my initial criticisms of the movie 
with the exception of the very fast passing of a school year. (Still 
feel like it happened in 3 days instead of an entire year) 

 I now "get" Gambon as DD; I really, really  like Thewlis as Lupin, 
I totally pictured them in my mind while reading. 
And the time turning scene had me totally on the edge of my seat.  I 
guess my first viewing I was just looking for things that I'd read 
on this site.  Won't do that again, I'll make sure to avoid any 
reviews before the next movie premiers!


Wow, IMAX was great.  We were right smack in the middle of the 
theater and the scenes were almost breathtaking.  I hope to get 
another chance to see it there!  

I stand corrected!  Great job!




From sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 00:42:59 2004
From: sbchavez2000 at yahoo.com (Brooke)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 00:42:59 -0000
Subject: 2nd reading, 2nd viewing & IMAX
Message-ID: <cb026j+g3s7@eGroups.com>

I decided to read the book again before seeing PoA for a second 
time.  I'm going to take back my initial criticisms of the movie 
with the exception of the very fast passing of a school year. (Still 
feel like it happened in 3 days instead of an entire year) 

 I now "get" Gambon as DD; I really, really  like Thewlis as Lupin, 
I totally pictured them in my mind while reading. 
And the time turning scene had me totally on the edge of my seat.  I 
guess my first viewing I was just looking for things that I'd read 
on this site.  Won't do that again, I'll make sure to avoid any 
reviews before the next movie premiers!


Wow, IMAX was great.  We were right smack in the middle of the 
theater and the scenes were almost breathtaking.  I hope to get 
another chance to see it there!  

I stand corrected!  Great job!




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Jun 19 00:47:37 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 01:47:37 +0100
Subject: Aw shucks...
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040619012417.00995740@plum.cream.org>

Thanks to everyone who said such kind things about me both on the list and 
by email. Regrettably, I can't get around to replying to them individually 
and I apologise for that.

Incidentally, I wasn't fishing for compliments (or even sympathy) with my 
comments; I was seriously wondering whether there was any point in my 
continuing to post.

In any event, the issue has become moot. For reasons completely and utterly 
unrelated to this list, but solely related to real life (what's that?) I'm 
not going to have time for the foreseeable future to participate here, not 
even to respond to several posts I *really* would like to deal with.

In this instance, "foreseeable future" means at least until the end of 
July. I *might* get a chance to read some posts and perhaps even to post 
the odd reply, as I won't be leaving base for any length of time (although 
there will be some short absences), and when at home my internet connection 
will remain available. It's just that several other things have got to take 
priority for my time and energy, and HP is one of several enjoyable 
activities which will have to take a back seat.

Please don't clog up the list or my inbox with replies to this... (For the 
record, before anyone asks; nothing's wrong, I'm just going to be very busy 
with millions of things, some of which have come out of the blue and most 
of which will be beneficial to me either in the short or long term.)

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, over but not (quite) out




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 01:10:05 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 01:10:05 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie]wandless magic (+ midichlorians)
In-Reply-To: <198.2af57f44.2e032735@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb03pd+aa7v@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
 <snip>
Diana L. wrote:
 And of course, Harry's 
> midichlorian count is off the charts!  Ooops, wrong movie.... <g>
.
Lynda responded:
> I was just watching Sorceror's Stone last night and Quirrel used 
wandless 
> magic to force Harry to come stand in front of the Mirror of 
Erised.  Quirrel 
> also "flies" twice in the film, once in the forest when he's 
drinking unicorn 
> blood, and in the chamber when he attacks Harry (interesting that 
he could 
> strangle Harry, but couldn't stand the feel of Harry's hands -- 
the protection is 
> just in his HANDS??  Odd and illogical, but I'll take it 
anyway. . .)
> 
> Midichlorian count??  Whassat????  (I realize it's not HP, but you 
DID bring 
> it up and now you have me curious!)
 

Diana L. again:

I had forgotten Quirrel's use of wandless magic in SS/PS, but, then 
wandless magic is shown much more often in the movies than in the 
books.  I believe the movie goofed up by having Quirrel only get 
burned by Harry's hands as it was all of Harry's skin that scalded 
Quirrel in the book, not just his hands.   

Midichlorian count is from the Star Wars saga.  In "Star Wars, 
Episode One: The Phantom Menace", little Anakin Skywalker (later to 
become the evil Darth Vader) is found to have an off-the-charts 
midichlorian count, which indicates he is very Force sensitive and 
very powerful in his use of the Force.  Midichlorians were described 
as sub-microscopic life forms that resided within the cells of 
living creatures.  The lifeforms acted as a sort of liasion between 
the Force and the creature they lived within, allowing that person 
to interpret the will of and to maniuplate the power of the Force.

Harry Potter is very powerful, so his midichlorian count could 
probably give Anakin Skywalker a run for his money.  <g>

I'd like to add one more point I'd left out of my earlier post.  
Part of Harry's power came from Voldemort.  I'd just reread OotP and 
Dumbledore tells Harry at the end that Voldemort gave him some of 
his powers (definite statement in OotP instead of vague 
*speculation* as in Cos) when Voldemort tried to kill Harry when he 
was a baby.  So, not only did Harry inherit power from both parents, 
he got some zapped into by Voldemort as well.  

Diana L.
  





From vegittonomiko at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 01:22:36 2004
From: vegittonomiko at yahoo.com (tiiana tiiana)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <149.2c1dff84.2e04c9eb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040619012236.61867.qmail@web90003.mail.scd.yahoo.com>

--- patientx3 at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/18/2004 1:02:17 PM Pacific
> Daylight Time, 
> vegittonomiko at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> >>Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and
> Hermione are starting
> to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes
> out?  Will Ron do
> or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily
> forget about her
> feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with
> Viktor Krum?<<
> 
> They're not starting to notice each other quite that
> heavily though. The 
> "noticing" is mostly subtle, the same way it is in
> GoF. They weren't gazing into 
> each other's eyes or anything. Personally, I think
> it strengthens the Yule Ball 
> plot, because then Ron's jealousy doesn't come out
> of left field. The reason 
> (essentially) in the book that Hermione doesn't go
> with Ron is that he waited 
> till the last moment to ask her. I can't see any
> reason why that wouldn't 
> still work in the GoF movie.
> 
> 
> -Rebecca

I agree with you here.  I can see this as a beginning
on Ron's jealousy in GoF.  I just thought it strange
that their "feelings", or lack there of, started so
soon as opposed to just going with the flow of things.
 But then again, I have to remember that these are the
movies and not the books that we are talking about.


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



From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 01:25:33 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 01:25:33 -0000
Subject: Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <149.2c1dff84.2e04c9eb@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb04md+j5q5@eGroups.com>

vegittonomiko at y... writes:
> 
> >>Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and Hermione are 
starting
> to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes out?  Will Ron 
do
> or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily forget about 
her
> feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with Viktor Krum?<<

Rebecca wrote:
> They're not starting to notice each other quite that heavily 
though. The 
> "noticing" is mostly subtle, the same way it is in GoF. They 
weren't gazing into 
> each other's eyes or anything. Personally, I think it strengthens 
the Yule Ball 
> plot, because then Ron's jealousy doesn't come out of left field. 
The reason 
> (essentially) in the book that Hermione doesn't go with Ron is 
that he waited 
> till the last moment to ask her. I can't see any reason why that 
wouldn't 
> still work in the GoF movie.
 

Diana L. chips in:

Hermione WANTED Ron to ask her to ball and when he didn't she just 
figured he was a dope and went with Viktor when he asked her to.  
Remember that in the book Ron was complaining early on that he 
wouldn't ask any girl that wasn't physically attractive.  Ron's 
words were "We don't want to end up with a pair of trolls.".  Ron 
had also forgotten that Hermione is a GIRL, as well as his friend.  
I hope the Yule Ball is in the movie, because it's going to be funny 
to watch!

Diana L.     




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 01:38:07 2004
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 01:38:07 -0000
Subject: 2nd reading, 2nd viewing & IMAX
In-Reply-To: <cb026j+g3s7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb05dv+s87g@eGroups.com>

"Brooke" <sbchavez2000 at y...> wrote:
> Wow, IMAX was great.  We were right smack in the middle of the 
> theater and the scenes were almost breathtaking.  I hope to get 
> another chance to see it there!  
> 


Agree with you about IMAX, it made such a difference...you 
didn't 'think' as much and just ENJOYED! The Buckbeak scene was 
incredible.

I think the reason so many of us felt let down after the movie is 
the same reason we felt that way about OOP - we've just waited so 
long, and then it's over...we want MORE!  We need a time turner so 
that JKR can finish the books, the kids can get these movies done 
and we can just have a marathon!!!!

UP WITH TIME TURNERS - DOWN WITH WAITING!

Kathy






From elfnorc at voyager.net  Fri Jun 18 21:20:57 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:20:57 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>
References: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40D35CB9.2030204@voyager.net>

MaggieB wrote:
> I'm new to this group.  I've searched, and I can't find that this has
> been discussed.  If it has, please take pity on a newbie and point
> her in the right direction.
>
> I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress
> might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought and
> decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical aspects
> of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people to fix
> that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique
> combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil
> nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews. 
>
> Thoughts?  Other suggestions?


I had just been thinking about this on my way to see POA today.  I had 
been thinking about the actress who played in Keeping Up Appearances.  I 
think Julie Andrews is an interesting thought.  She sure could look 
sweet and wonderful.  Is she British?

Tina in Michigan




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 02:56:51 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (coolbeans3131)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:56:51 -0000
Subject: Foreshadowing of 6 and 7
In-Reply-To: <camnev+gjur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb0a1j+hogj@eGroups.com>

 "banovaz" wrote:
 
> Having been intrigued by JKR's comments that Alfonso Cuaron's 
> intuitive reading of POA had foreshadowed the narrative in books 6 
> and 7, I watched with great interest and a reasonable knowledge of 
> canon through to OOPT ( well who has more ?) to try and second 
guess 
> what that foreshadowing might be.


I was thinking it might be when Harry's glasses get knocked off form 
the whomping willow.  Maybe JKR has written something for book 6 
where Harry loses his glasses and can't help Hermione or someone 
else.  His eyes are his weakness, she has said.  

Joj




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Jun 19 03:45:18 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 23:45:18 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <112.33f60e4f.2e038200@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BCF92F0E.F5F%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

It's funny, I read a lot of fanfic and I have read many passages where the
only real joy Harry feels is when he's flying and here we get an actual
visual 
of it. Maybe that's why I loved it so much ;-)
Cindy

How can I access HP fanfic??? Sounds fascinating.
Valerie



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




From redina at silverbloom.net  Sat Jun 19 04:03:15 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 00:03:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Fanfic Re: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd viewing, some observations,
      likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <BCF92F0E.F5F%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <112.33f60e4f.2e038200@aol.com>
    <BCF92F0E.F5F%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <1702.4.12.232.39.1087617795.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Valerie Flowe said:

> How can I access HP fanfic??? Sounds fascinating.

You're not acquainted with HP fanfic?

Hm, well, you can try the largest at http://www.fictionalley.org/

Browse around - fanfic sites can get specialized.  Until you know what's
your preference, start with the largest that has a decent collection of
fanfic, unlike the 'pit of voles'.

FictionAlley also has discussion forums pertaining to HP
books/movies/fanfic.  I think HP4GU links to FA.

I prefer having messages mailed, so I don't visit forums much.

Dina




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 05:17:23 2004
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 05:17:23 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <40D35CB9.2030204@voyager.net>
Message-ID: <cb0i93+jm7t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Elfnorc <elfnorc at v...> wrote:
> MaggieB wrote:
.
> >
> > I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress
> > might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought 
and
> > decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical 
aspects
> > of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people to 
fix
> > that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique
> > combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil
> > nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews. 
> >
> > Thoughts?  Other suggestions?
> 
> 
> I had just been thinking about this on my way to see POA today.  I 
had 
> been thinking about the actress who played in Keeping Up 
Appearances.  I 
> think Julie Andrews is an interesting thought.  She sure could 
look 
> sweet and wonderful.  Is she British?
> 
> Tina in Michigan

Yes, Julie Andrews is British.  I think she would have to play 
against type to be evil, however.  She has always portrayed a good 
character in her roles.

I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.

Haggridd




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Jun 19 14:56:48 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:56:48 -0000
Subject: Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <cauums+oaaa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb1k7g+6gu9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chany_p" <chany_p at y...> wrote:
> sophiamcl:
RE: he swore they were just friends...
> > "she is like a sister".  Yet, they seemed very close at the UK 
> premiere.
> > I think they are adorable together, so more power to them. :-) 
>> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it will disappoint some of you but I read an article on a 
> German fansite. Somebody who runs this site was able to attend the 
UK 
> premiere and was allowed to take pictures. He wrote that this was 
not 
> Dan's or Emma's idea. He was standing next to the potographer who 
> asked them for the handholding pose. Sorry!
> 
> Ingrid

My impression after seeing the two characters of Harry and Hermione 
running around in the woods, holding hands at times and clinging to 
each other at times was that this was perhaps subtle (okay, maybe 
not so subtle) foreshadowing of things to come. It's heresy I know, 
to suggest that Hermione and Ron may not end the series together, 
but it's hard to see how comfortable Harry and Hermione (Dan and 
Emma as well) seem to be together. Then, after seeing and reading 
the buzz about the two real kids, I wondered if this weren't all 
being intertwined somehow to continue the interest. But all in all, 
I must admit, Dan is growing up to be quite the heartbreaker.
Jennifer (who missed her Susan Bones this time around)




From rzl46 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 16:02:59 2004
From: rzl46 at yahoo.com (rzl46)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:02:59 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cb0i93+jm7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb1o3j+fc9u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" <jkusalavagemd at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Elfnorc <elfnorc at v...> wrote:
> > MaggieB wrote:
> .
> > >
> > > I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress
> > > might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought 
> and
> > > decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical 
> aspects
> > > of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people 
to 
> fix
> > > that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique
> > > combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil
> > > nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews. 
> > >
> > > Thoughts?  Other suggestions?
> > 
> > 
> > I had just been thinking about this on my way to see POA today.  
I 
> had 
> > been thinking about the actress who played in Keeping Up 
> Appearances.  I 
> > think Julie Andrews is an interesting thought.  She sure could 
> look 
> > sweet and wonderful.  Is she British?
> > 
> > Tina in Michigan
> 
> Yes, Julie Andrews is British.  I think she would have to play 
> against type to be evil, however.  She has always portrayed a good 
> character in her roles.
> 
> I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
> Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
> Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
> 
> Haggridd

Judy Dench would be my second choice.  I like the idea of Julie 
Andrews precisely BECAUSE she would have to play against type.  I 
think the fact that she has always (well, for the most part) played 
nice characters would make the dichotomy between how DJU looks and 
how she is even more apparant.  But, I'll admit, the playful sparkle 
that always seems to be in Judy Dench's eyes would make a lovely 
contrast as well.

MaggieB




From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 16:34:43 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:34:43 -0000
Subject: Sister? Yeah, right
In-Reply-To: <cauums+oaaa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb1pv3+5cc9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "chany_p" <chany_p at y...> wrote:
> sophiamcl:
>> Maybe it will disappoint some of you but I read an article on a 
> German fansite. Somebody who runs this site was able to attend the 
UK 
> premiere and was allowed to take pictures. He wrote that this was 
not 
> Dan's or Emma's idea. He was standing next to the potographer who 
> asked them for the handholding pose. Sorry!
> 
> Ingrid









It doesn't matter if someone asked them to hold hands as much as the 
way Dan and Emma are doing it. You see that their fingers are 
interwoven? If you know anything about body language that is 
a "couple" thing to do. Also there is a picture of Dan and Emma at 
the NYC premier and their hands are loosely clasped but Dan's thumb 
is rubbing the back of Emma's hand, also a "couple" thing.

  Considering the amount of time that these kids spend together, on 
the set, in school and in between, it shouldn't be surprising that a 
little puppy love happens. And it's cute.

  But it must be said that you don't ship real people and you don't 
ship fourteen year olds!




From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 16:45:01 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:45:01 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cb0i93+jm7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb1qid+85o4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" <jkusalavagemd at y...> 
wrote:
>> I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
> Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
> Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
> 
> Haggridd







I doubt that you could get Judy Dench. She work allot and has the 
James Bond series as well. How about Jennifer Saunders? 




From artsylynda at aol.com  Sat Jun 19 18:21:21 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:21:21 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
Message-ID: <b8.5b25f0b2.2e05de21@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/19/2004 5:01:23 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Maybe JKR has written something for book 6 
where Harry loses his glasses  and can't help Hermione or someone 
else.  His eyes are his weakness,  she has said.  

Joj





Where did she say this?  I'd love to read that  interview!  Thanks!  

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



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




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 18:29:03 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:29:03 -0000
Subject: I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cb20lf+q1pf@eGroups.com>

Oh, don't leave! Your posts are brilliant. It's to be
expected that the literalist/cinephile debate will recur
every time a new movie comes out, but it has to subside
eventually. Also, PoA is the favorite of a good chunk of
fans, so the debate about whether or not the movie lives
up to it is going to be particularly, er, lively. At the
moment, I'm finding it difficult to look at the film
objectively, because I'm ecstatic that they've decided
to make them into films and not glorified Viewmaster
slides - I kind of feel like I need to defend that point
no matter what I thought of the movie on its own.

Plus it takes some of us a little longer to see a movie
8 1/2 times while it's still in the theater. ^_~ I, for
one, will be able to contribute more substantive posts
once the movie comes out on DVD.

--Anna




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 18:52:09 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:52:09 -0000
Subject: Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <cavgh8+uglc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb220p+csfh@eGroups.com>

Okay, so, now I guess I'll reply to a thread that wasn't over 
YESTERDAY. Stupid thread view.

Anyway, I don't think that Hermione and Ron's romantic relationship 
has progressed to the point where she'd be "flip-flopping" if she 
went with someone else to the Yule Ball. Just because they're 
furtively holding hands a couple times doesn't mean their 
relationship has to progress to dating over the summer (or at all). 
It could plausibly be on hold while they work out whether or not 
they'd like to be more than friends.

Besides, even if Hermione really wanted to go with Ron, I think 
she'd go with someone else in the absence of any clue that *he* 
wanted to go with *her*. Here's the way I imagine it playing out in 
the movies: Ron actually wants to ask Hermione, but can't work up 
the nerve to do it (or possibly thinks he'd be betraying Harry). 
Since he hasn't given her any solid indication that he wants to go 
with her, she ends up going with Krum instead. The romance thread 
pauses there with Ron and Hermione unsure of what the other thinks, 
and then whoever's making movie 5 can decide whether or not they'd 
like to continue it in that movie.

It wouldn't make sense to play it exactly the way it is in the book, 
because Movie!Ron is obvious farther along, girl-noticing-wise, than 
Book!Ron (even at the end of OotP).

What do you think, sirs?
--Anna 




From saintbacchus at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 18:59:18 2004
From: saintbacchus at yahoo.com (saintbacchus)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:59:18 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cb0i93+jm7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb22e6+i3k4@eGroups.com>

Haggridd writes:

<<
I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James  
Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores  
Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
>>

Oo! I second Judy Dench. Not that it wouldn't be fun to see Julie 
Andrews playing against type, but I'm not quite seeing her playing 
someone who delights in petty, bureaucratic wickedness. Grand 
wickedness, sure...Bellatrix, maybe?

--Anna




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Sat Jun 19 20:24:33 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 20:24:33 -0000
Subject: Tattoos and other things
Message-ID: <cb27e1+2nop@eGroups.com>

I just had the question about why Gary Oldman has tattoos?  Are they
Cuaraon's idea or does he have them in real life.  I must say overall
I thought he did a good job (even though I had major misgivings about
his being cast in the part) but why did they have to make him so dirty
and scummy looking?  Now I know some will say that is part of prison
life, people get tatooed as something to pass the time but I don't see
Azkaban as a place for that, in fact there wouldn't be much
interacting between prisoners at all.  Just like some others thoughts
on this.

Second, as to Delores Umbridge, I don't know who should be cast but
Julie Andrews or Judy Dench- no way.  I just can't see either of them
doing it, they are too classy

Karen




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 22:00:27 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:00:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
References: <b8.5b25f0b2.2e05de21@aol.com>
Message-ID: <005301c45648$d46d1850$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


>
> Maybe JKR has written something for book 6
> where Harry loses his glasses  and can't help Hermione or someone
> else.  His eyes are his weakness,  she has said.
>
> Joj
>
>
> Where did she say this?  I'd love to read that  interview!  Thanks!
>
> Lynda
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs.  Figg, OoP


Here you go Lynda.  This is her exact quote.

  *  She's thrilled with Stephen Fry's taped version of the books, outraged
that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they
understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"  *

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1200-readersdigest-boquet.htm

Maybe it's not the color of his eyes that's important.

Joj





From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun 19 23:17:02 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:17:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Tattoos and other things
Message-ID: <154.38089d45.2e06236e@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/19/2004 2:12:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
karen-gary at worldnet.att.net writes:

>>I just had the question about why Gary Oldman has tattoos?  Are they
Cuaraon's idea or does he have them in real life.<<

They were Cuaron's idea.

>>  I must say overall I thought he did a good job (even though I had major 
misgivings about his being cast in the part) but why did they have to make him 
so dirty
and scummy looking?<<  

Perhaps because he's dirty and scummy looking in the books? (check out my 
post 8651 for a list of Sirius descriptions from the books). He's been living in 
the forbidden forest as a dog for nine months, of course he looks a little 
off.

>>Now I know some will say that is part of prison life, people get tatooed as 
something to pass the time but I don't see Azkaban as a place for that, in 
fact there wouldn't be much interacting between prisoners at all.<<  

I'm thinking that maybe it was done to him when he went into prison, like 
some sort of branding. Its hard to tell in the context of the movie but if you 
compare the tattoos to his 'prison number' they appear to match (at least 
partially).


-Rebecca


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 20 02:06:42 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 22:06:42 EDT
Subject: Hollywood Reporter columnist
Message-ID: <1ca.23ee6cf7.2e064b32@aol.com>

I thought this was interesting; Martin Grove, a columnist for The Hollywood 
Reporter (a well respected trade paper) has a column on the online page about 
the next Oscar race.
I clipped these two paragraphs:

***************************************
Warner Bros.' "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," directed by Alfonso 
Cuaron, attracted very favorable reviews, many of which called it the best of 
the three "Potter" films to date. Cuaron, an Oscar nominee for his original 
screenplay for "Y tu mama tambien," could get a directing nomination. 
Screenwriter Steve Kloves, who received Oscar and Golden Globes nods for adapting 
"Wonder Boys" and also got Writers Guild of America nominations for "Wonder" and 
his original screenplay "The Fabulous Baker Boys," could receive new noms for 
"Azkaban." 

John Williams' well-reviewed "Azkaban" score, too, could get nods from 
Academy and Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. voters. Williams has received so many 
Oscar and Globe nominations (along with a few wins, too) over the years that the 
list is too long to include here. It goes without saying that you're probably 
not going to lose money by betting on Williams' score to be nominated. The 
film's visual effects are obviously also good grist for the awards mill. And if 
"Azkaban" casts all the right magical spells it could conjure up both a best 
picture Oscar nomination and a best motion picture -- drama Golden Globe 
nomination. 
*******************************************

Personally, I would love to see POA get some nominations other than special 
effects or cinematography (although those would be well deserved as well). A 
best director or best picture or best screenplay nomination would sure be sweet <
g>
Cindy


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




From Lynx412 at AOL.com  Sun Jun 20 03:34:02 2004
From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 23:34:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Tattoos and other things
Message-ID: <142.2c782d61.2e065faa@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/19/2004 5:12:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
karen-gary at worldnet.att.net writes:

> Now I know some will say that is part of prison life, people get tatooed as 
> something to pass the time 

       Well, when you're locked up for twelve years for a crime you didn't 
commit, I guess you need a hobby. ;-)

       Cheryl


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




From jeanico at securenet.net  Sun Jun 20 05:10:05 2004
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 05:10:05 -0000
Subject: Hollywood Reporter columnist
In-Reply-To: <1ca.23ee6cf7.2e064b32@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb367d+ui4o@eGroups.com>

Thank you for posting this, Cindy! I agree with you 100% It would be 
wonderful to finally see a Potter movie get Academy recognition and 
POA certainly deserves it! 
Nicole




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Jun 20 05:33:27 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:33:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Tattoos and other things
In-Reply-To: <cb27e1+2nop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BCFA99E7.FA8%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: "Gary Sapp & Karen J.S." <karen-gary at worldnet.att.net>

I just had the question about why Gary Oldman has tattoos?  Are they
Cuaraon's idea or does he have them in real life.  I must say overall
I thought he did a good job (even though I had major misgivings about
his being cast in the part) but why did they have to make him so dirty
and scummy looking?  Now I know some will say that is part of prison
life, people get tatooed as something to pass the time but I don't see
Azkaban as a place for that, in fact there wouldn't be much
interacting between prisoners at all.  Just like some others thoughts
on this.

{from Valerie}

Haven't heard anything definite about the tattoos, though it is speculated
that it was Cuaron's vision. And it's not mentioned anywhere in the film. An
earlier pre-movie release post thought that the tattoo looked like prison
serial numbers? Anyhow, I think it looks cool! But you're right; somehow I
envisioned Sirius in solitary confinement for 12 years... 



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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun 20 08:02:22 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 04:02:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Hollywood Reporter columnist
Message-ID: <11.2c572817.2e069e8e@aol.com>

It *would* be nice if it got some sort of recognition from any of the major 
awards (if not the Oscars than the Golden Globes or Screen 
Actors/Writers/Directers guild), but its such a longshot. Its got two huge strikes against it 
being both a kids movie and a fantasy movie, both genres which are generally not 
taken seriously. (yes LOTR won a lot of awards, but it was completely snubbed 
on acting, and it was ignored for the most part until the third film came out). 
Personally, I would love to see a nomination for cinematography or directing, 
but I won't hold my breath. (I'm not even going to btoher hoping that Gary 
Oldman will get an acting nomination, even though I think he deserves one...its 
amazing that that wonderful of an actor has never even been *nominated*...if 
Johnny Depp got one for Pirates of the Carribean, why can't he get one for 
Harry Potter?).


-Rebecca


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




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 20 08:53:17 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 08:53:17 -0000
Subject: visual depth
In-Reply-To: <capn66+1q2g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb3j9t+fl29@eGroups.com>


> US and Canada :  $161,963,462    44.2% 
> + Overseas:  $204,800,000    55.8% 
> = Worldwide:  $366,763,462
> 
> Truthfully, the film isn't doing quite as well as expected, but is 
> still comfortably between the first two movies in terms of gross. I 
> suspect these figures aren't influenced as much as one might expect 
> by European Football.
> 
> Dan, in Vancouver BC, watching all the EURO 2004 he can.

Well I'm certainly doing all I can for the figures to rise, now 
having watched it 5 times within 8 days, all full price. I can't 
stop, and my money's running out. 

I think the movie-plot is fasinating because it WORKS without the 
book-titbits. Although it would have been interesting to see, for 
instance, Hermione and Ron falling out, it's just not necessary to 
make the story work. (Reminds me of the time when one notable 
character remarked that God wasn't included in the system, because He 
wasn't needed to make it work.)

Actually I think the small fun scenes of the book are just dead 
boring on film - they were in the previous films, for me anyway. It 
causes the story to lose its dinamics. Cuaron did an excellent job in 
not for a moment letting things get boring. It's exactly why I am 
able to watch it over and over and over and have yet to get bored in 
ANY place at all. 

But the landscape etc is breathtaking. I think I would go back and 
watch again simply to see that beauty again.

Alice




From patientx3 at aol.com  Sun Jun 20 09:02:47 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 05:02:47 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: visual depth
Message-ID: <138.3084720e.2e06acb7@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/20/2004 1:54:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
hypercolor99 at hotmail.com writes:

>>Cuaron did an excellent job in 
not for a moment letting things get boring. It's exactly why I am 
able to watch it over and over and over and have yet to get bored in 
ANY place at all. <<

Although I'm sure others will disagree, I completely agree with you. I've 
seen PoA three times already, and am planning on seeing it at least 2 more times 
before its out of theaters, and each time I have not been bored. I was sure I 
would be too since the end is my favorite part of the film, but I haven't been 
ansty or impatient waiting for that part. A lot of movies, especially those 
based on books, have a lot of 'exposition scenes' which get boring after the 
first or second viewing, so far from my perspective, every scene in PoA is 
interesting, even after you know what's going to happen.

>>But the landscape etc is breathtaking. I think I would go back and 
watch again simply to see that beauty again.<<

It certainly is. The other two just seemed like the backgrounds were an 
afterthought, there as much as the story involved (like they include the forest and 
the quidditch field, but other than that there's not much there around the 
castle). Each frame of the film was so rich, with things going on in the 
background, and a sense of realism on top of that. It was the same feeling I got when 
I saw the first Lord of the Rings, *that* sort of depth.


-Rebecca


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




From dracof24 at shaw.ca  Sun Jun 20 19:58:34 2004
From: dracof24 at shaw.ca (Aime)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 19:58:34 -0000
Subject: IMAX and Umbridge Idea
Message-ID: <cb4q9a+4i3l@eGroups.com>

Hello everyone,

Aime here, and a newbie so if someone has suggested this idea for 
Umbridge I apologize.  I did go and do some "hunting" in the 
archives on the subject.  (I feel like Hermione doing research in the 
library!)

Anywho, I think Bette Midler would also be able to pull off a wicked 
Prof. Umbridge.  She has the depth to her voice and mannerisms.  She 
would just have to work on her British acent.  She was brilliant in 
Hocus Pocus, and I hear she is pretty good in the Stepford Wives.  
Although, the person who posted about Dame Judy Dench as Prof. 
Umbridge is an excellent idea as well!

And for the IMAX experience, I've seen it twice in IMAX and won't see 
it any other way!  I loved the big swooping scenes of Bucky and also 
the whomping willow was totally amazing too!  I just wish it would be 
out already in DVD!!!

Take care everyone, may the spirits watch over you this day and 
always!
Aime





From Estama02 at aol.com  Sun Jun 20 20:23:19 2004
From: Estama02 at aol.com (Estama02 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:23:19 EDT
Subject: I think i understand
Message-ID: <161.30c4f5b3.2e074c37@aol.com>

(snip) GulPlum writes:
>The book is essentially a mystery story. Several mysteries are introduced 
>and it is those mysteries which drive the plot. The conclusion of the book, 
>is, therefore, the resolution of all of those mysteries: why's Scabbers 
>behaving so strangely and why did he suddenly fall ill? Why won't anyone 
>tell Harry what's going on with Sirius Black? Who is Lupin and what's he 
>about? How does he know about the Map? Why is Hermione so frazzled and why 
>does she appear in strange places out of the blue? There are several 
>others, but I'll stop there.
>
>The movie, on the other hand, downplays the "mystery" elements and becomes 
>a  rites of passage/character study - Cuaron has admitted as much, and 
>changed the focus from the mysteries to Harry and Co hitting adolescence.

Sorry this is a bit late, but I finally got a chance to respond and this is 
exactly the thing I found dissapointing about the movie. Cuaron stayed true to 
the spirit by showing what it was like to be thirteen and going through all 
those adolescent changes, but the part of the book he missed was this mystery 
and the conclusion of the mystery. This mystery and the way the backstory of the 
Marauders and how their story related to Harry and his generation is what 
turned me from just a person who read the Harry Potter books and thought they 
were good books to an obessed fan who can quote passages and lines. And since 
that was missing from the movie, for me personally I felt the movie was missing 
something. I still was able to enjoy it and I understand that its different for 
each person.   

Carlie


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





From elfnorc at voyager.net  Sun Jun 20 20:30:49 2004
From: elfnorc at voyager.net (Elfnorc)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:30:49 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX and Umbridge Idea
In-Reply-To: <cb4q9a+4i3l@eGroups.com>
References: <cb4q9a+4i3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40D5F3F9.3000609@voyager.net>

Aime wrote:
> I think Bette Midler would also be able to pull off a wicked
> Prof. Umbridge.  She has the depth to her voice and mannerisms.  She
> would just have to work on her British acent.  <snip>
>
> And for the IMAX experience, I've seen it twice in IMAX and won't see
> it any other way!  I loved the big swooping scenes of Bucky and also
> the whomping willow was totally amazing too! <snip> 


You are right.  Bette Midler would be perfect.  Is it a strictly British 
cast though?

Tina
PS   I have gotten hooked on IMAX as well.  





From abbid at carterassoc.com  Sun Jun 20 21:13:42 2004
From: abbid at carterassoc.com (amdorn)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:13:42 -0000
Subject: Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <cb04md+j5q5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb4um6+1lq3@eGroups.com>

> vegittonomiko at y... writes:
> > 
> > >>Just a thought if I may.  Now, in PoA, Ron and Hermione are 
> starting
> > to notice each other.  What happens with GoF comes out?  Will Ron 
> do
> > or say something stupid to make Hermione momentarily forget about 
> her
> > feelings towards him and go to the Yule Ball with Viktor Krum?<<
> 
> Rebecca wrote:
> > They're not starting to notice each other quite that heavily 
> though. The 
> > "noticing" is mostly subtle, the same way it is in GoF. They 
> weren't gazing into 
> > each other's eyes or anything. Personally, I think it strengthens 
> the Yule Ball 
> > plot, because then Ron's jealousy doesn't come out of left field. 
> The reason 
> > (essentially) in the book that Hermione doesn't go with Ron is 
> that he waited 
> > till the last moment to ask her. I can't see any reason why that 
> wouldn't 
> > still work in the GoF movie.

Just a note:  

In the movie all of the "tension" scenes are extra, as in Harry is 
not directly there.  For instance, the scene near the Shreiking shack 
is "before" Harry gets there under the cloak.  In addition, the scene 
with the hand grab is behind Harry's back.  All of these scenes are 
not in Harry's line of vision.  It is a possiblility that they 
happened but we are not privy to this information because Harry 
doesn't see it.  As far as we know in canon, Ron and Hermione might 
have had more "tense" moments during their first trip to Hogsmeade, 
we just don't get to see it.  I don't necessarily think that Hermione 
doesn't go with Ron is because he waited.  We just know that he did 
wait and Krum beat him to the punch.  We don't even know how early in 
the year Krum asked Hermione.  Could be right after the first task.  
It could have been incredibly early in the school year.  The fact is 
that Ron waited and Hermione had already been asked so we don't get 
to know if she would have said yes.  JKR wrote it like that.  I must 
admit it is a nice way to keep us on our toes.  

I will tell you I have a gut feeling as to who is going to end up 
with whom, but this is not the list for that.  Now in the next movie 
hopefully we will get more of the "out-of-Harry's view" scenes of 
Hermione and Ron.  

Amdorn






From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Jun 21 00:16:03 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 01:16:03 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] I think I understand...
In-Reply-To: <BCF874E7.F5D%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040617182822.009c8590@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040618200733.0099a4e0@plum.cream.org>

At 15:31 18/06/04 , Valerie Flowe said:

>It bothers me that Cuaron changed the focus from main plot to sub plot. 
>The "coming of age" was such a minor part of the book. In fact, it is more 
>apparent in GOF, than in POA, what with Harry + Cho, Ron + Hermione, the 
>dance, etc.

erm... I used the term "rite of passage", not "coming of age". There is a 
vast difference, although some people use them interchangeably (as various 
other replies in this thread seem indicate). One of the differences in 
particular, is that "coming of age" is the culmination of a *series* of 
rites of passage - the HP series demonstrates this succession very 
well.  I'd love to go off on a major tangent and explain in detail for 
those who don't grasp the significance, but to turn around a Lupin line 
from the movie, "perhaps during the holidays; now I have to work". :-) In 
fact, I'd welcome anyone from a behavioural sciences background (far more 
than a liberal arts one) to go into detail on the various stages of child 
development (especially boys) and the rites of passage associated with each 
in modern western societies, with specific reference to the Potterverse. (I 
don't have time to do this right now, but I'm surprised that a quick web 
search has provided no analysis of this anywhere!)

Secondly, I find it interesting that the examples you provide for the 
"coming of age" theme in GoF are all romantic/sexual. A while ago, I went 
on a major whinge about how the modern media (and, regrettably, US media in 
particular) appear to limit "coming of age" exclusively to this element of 
human development, as if "loss of innocence" is ONLY loss of *sexual* 
innocence. The HP books (and GoF in particular) are about SO much more!

Furthermore, using the term "coming of age" so loosely in HP-related 
discussion is dangerous; it has a very specific meaning within the 
Potterverse, which not accidently, we meet for the first time in GoF.

Tying up all of the above points in a pretty bow, I'd like to point out 
that GoF is NOT a "coming of age" book, or in any case, the theme is very 
much that Harry has NOT come of age. Even at a very superficial level I 
would point out that it is not by accident that only those who have "come 
of age" are entitled to enter the Tournament: Harry manifestly is not of 
age, and participates under false pretences. That is symptomatic of the 
entire book and the theme is followed through on a deeper level into every 
aspect of the plot.

In fact (and returning to what we're meant to be talking about, namely the 
movies and PoA in particular), when writing the first paragraph above, I 
had a brainwave. I  think I understand why there is no mention in the PoA 
movie of who the Marauders were or why the stag is James's Animagus shape. 
If I'm right, it makes absolutely *perfect* sense (unless I'm just 
over-rationalising). Again, I have no time to go into this, but an analysis 
of adolescent development is the key. If I'm right, and if Cuaron has had 
the impact on the development of the GoF adaptation I hope he has had, 
revelation of the Map's authorship and identifying the stag as James's 
Animagus self should come from Sirius just after "Moody" takes over 
possession of the Map.

If don't have a chance to explain all of this in detail (and even if I do) 
in the near future, I hope someone reminds me of this post when Movie!GoF 
comes out - I'd like to know if I've been proved right or wrong (I can 
accept both). If I'm right, I don't want any of the kudos: I will, however, 
hail Cuaron as an inspired genius, with a scientific knowledge of the 
teenager as deep as his emotional one.

>Because of the popularity of the HP series, a director should not be allowed
>to take such liberal interpretations (IMO).

Well, as I said when starting this thread, there are two ways to approach 
adapting a popular book. Objectively, it is as valid to say that a mystery 
novel should be filmed *solely* as a mystery, as it is to admit that 
because the plot will hold no mysteries to most of the film's viewers, 
something *else* should take priority. I wholeheartedly admit that it is a 
matter of personal opinion and preference, and nothing more.

Both approaches are satisfying in their own way, and different people will 
have different problems with each approach. But that doesn't mean that 
either approach is inherently invalid.

>I would be curious to see statistics on how many people in the audience 
>actually read the book, and how many did not. There appeared to be a lot 
>of younger kids in most of my 3 viewing audiences. They probably have not 
>read the book, though their parents may have read it to them.

I'd be interested in that analysis going one step further: the percentage 
of those who had read the books who enjoyed the movie -v- the percentage of 
people who hadn't read the books enjoying it. I'm not talking about 
*understanding* the movie, I'm talking about potentially seeing it again - 
that is where the money is; it can be fairly safely assumed that in the 
first few days of release, the vast majority of viewers were book fans.

It's highly likely that WB did just such an analysis at test screenings, 
and I expect that the results of that analysis will determine whether or 
not future directors will be allowed the kind of latitude Cuaron was given. 
In other words, WB knows it's going to alienate some proportion of the 
audience, but because it's in the business of making money, not art, 
decisions will be made on a numerical basis of which element of the 
audience is alienated least.

 From what I've seen on various movie discussion forums in which I 
participate, those who hadn't read the books seem to prefer this movie to 
the previous two. The same seems to be true of fans, at least wherever I 
participate.

In numerical terms, a few stats:
On IMDb.com, POA is rated 7.8/10 (versus 7.3 for each of the other two)
On TheNumbers.com, 8.6 (PS/SS 6.3; CoS 6.88)
On Rottontomatoes.com (professional reviews), 7.8 (versus 6.9 and 7.2),
(or by their alternative scale 88% of reviews are simply positive, versus 
78% and 82% for PS/SS and CoS respectively)
On Yahoo!Movies, B+ (both critics and users), (B and B+ from critics and 
users respectively for each of the previous two).

I suspect that the main lesson which WB will take away from the fact that 
the best-received movie appears to be doing the worst at the box office (in 
the short term at least; Spider-Man 2 is going to take away a huge 
proportion of the repeat audience) is that HP movies will not be released 
in June again... Whether or not they decide that this has anything to do 
with the "free adaptation" route remains to be seen.

>I think the charm for many HP fans is seeing the books come to life; not
>take on a new life. Masses of people ADORE JKR's stories; they don't want to
>see Cuaron's story with shrunken heads and such. I just don't think one can
>be separated from the other.

Well, that's your opinion. :-) Looking around online, the main problem the 
fans have with the film is not the presence of the shrunken heads 
(personally, I'm neither disappointed nor pleased - IMO they're probably 
one of the least important changes), but the absence of the identity of the 
Map's authors and of Harry's Patronus. If those elements had been in the 
film, I'm sure that more fans would have been happy, regardless of the 
shrunken heads.

However, as I said above, despite my initial disappointment with those 
absences, it is highly possible that these revelations are being kept back 
for a very good  reason.

>I personally loved the book and also loved the movie (though wish I could've
>been in a test-focus group prior to release :-)
>But to address the movie on it's own merit (that's what you were asking for,
>yes?)

Well, not in this thread, I wasn't. :-) But input is always welcome 
regardless of where it comes. :-)

<snip comments I can't really disagree with :-)>

>I hope they continue making the movies as long as they can. My fear is that
>the public's attention and fascination will wane. (not mine, of course!)
>Then if it becomes unprofitable for WB, they'll stop making them.

"Unprofitable" is *such* a vague term - especially given Hollywood's 
creative book-keeping. :-) I think, strangely enough, that for once WB will 
be satisfied if the movies keep up a major "buzz" on their release, and 
will expect the box office receipts to drop from film to film as a matter 
of course. A significant proportion of their income from HP comes from 
derivatives such as the merchandising and DVD sales, so the buzz is 
potentially worth more to them than simple box office numbers. And if the 
remaining movies keep to a pre-Christmas (more particularly, 
pre-Thanksgiving for North America) release schedule, the merchandising 
income will remain high (I notice that there is very little PoA merchandise 
around, and suspect a lot is being held back for the Christmas market, to 
tie in with the DVD release).

In the long term, as well, the full series will be worth more to them (box 
sets, etc)  than an incomplete one would be.

>I also fear that POA will mark a turning point for viewing audiences. Because
>probably half(?) the audience is under the age of 10, and this movie is more
>scary than the other 2, I think the parents will not allow their younger
>kids to view GOF. In fact, it may even have to go to PG-13, if true to the
>book. So if half the audience doesn't go see the film it will certainly flop
>at the box office. A dilemma. I hope they don't "Disneyfy" the next HP
>movies, just to retain the younger viewing audience.

Amen to that. I don't know enough about US movie-going trends to know what 
impact a PG-13 certificate has in general (I do know that NC-17 is a 
complete no-go for distributors, whereas in the UK some distributors 
actively seek out the equivalent 18 rating). As long as, in UK terms, the 
HP movies can be kept to a 12A rating at most (i.e. kids under 12 must be 
accompanied), the movies will continue their box office success (12A movies 
include Spider-Man, Hulk, and LOTR 2 and 3). On the other hand, aiming for 
a PG rating will require too much to be left out or watered down.

I'm sure that WB have pondered these issues, but if a PG-13 rating has the 
effect you seem to be implying, perhaps WB are hoping to capture the 
teenage audience, which may well consider HP "uncool" - the increased 
rating may make them think they might enjoy these movies. From my knowledge 
of US movie-going demographics (which I admit is extremely limited), the 
teenage audience is the one everyone is out to get, even more then the kids.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who has no time for any more posts right now



From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun 21 04:57:56 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:57:56 EDT
Subject: PoA Box Office (was Re: I think I understand...)
Message-ID: <31.496787e0.2e07c4d4@aol.com>

GulPlum wrote:
>>In numerical terms, a few stats:
On IMDb.com, POA is rated 7.8/10 (versus 7.3 for each of the other two)
On TheNumbers.com, 8.6 (PS/SS 6.3; CoS 6.88)
On Rottontomatoes.com (professional reviews), 7.8 (versus 6.9 and 7.2),
(or by their alternative scale 88% of reviews are simply positive, versus 
78% and 82% for PS/SS and CoS respectively)
On Yahoo!Movies, B+ (both critics and users), (B and B+ from critics and 
users respectively for each of the previous two).

I suspect that the main lesson which WB will take away from the fact that 
the best-received movie appears to be doing the worst at the box office (in 
the short term at least; Spider-Man 2 is going to take away a huge 
proportion of the repeat audience) is that HP movies will not be released 
in June again... Whether or not they decide that this has anything to do 
with the "free adaptation" route remains to be seen.<<

(because I love the numbers aspect so much...) In actuality, PoA is *barely* 
making less than CoS, and up until this weekend it had been making *more*. The 
estimates from this weekend are already in (estimates only, the actuals will 
be slightly higher or lower). PoA made about $17,412,000 this weekend, which 
is down 50% from last weekend. 
Some figures from day 17 of release: (US Box Office)
SS: $219million (made $23m in its 3rd weekend)
CoS: $200million (made $32m in its 3rd weekend)
PoA: $190million

A note on this is that Chamber of Secrets had the benefit of Thanksgiving in 
its third week of release, which is why its numbers were so high. Also, the 
first two movies were clearly (as far as numbers go) making less money during 
the week than PoA, which is why their weekends were so much higher even though 
the total amount made isn't much different. Spiderman 2 doesn't open until a 
week from Wednesday, leaving PoA one more weekend before it'll be crushed by it, 
I'm curious to see how this next weekend's numbers compare to CoS/SS when they
 don't have the benefit of a holiday. (and actually, since the first two 
movies had to contend with LOTR, comparing box office amounts after Spiderman 2 
opens will still be close to accurate).

>>A significant proportion of their income from HP comes from 
derivatives such as the merchandising and DVD sales, so the buzz is 
potentially worth more to them than simple box office numbers. .<<

Its my educated guess that PoA will do a lot better with rental revenues than 
the first two. Whereas June and November are close to comparable in Box 
Office Takings, rentals in November (when I'm guessing PoA will be coming out) and 
April/May (when the first two were out) are *quite* different. Late Fall/Early 
Winter is a HUGE time for movie rentals and sales, and Spring is pretty much 
the slowest time of the year. Christmas will certainly encourage more people 
to buy the DVDs. So even if PoA ends with a smaller take than the first two in 
the Box Office, DVD sales/rentals will certainly make up for it.

As far as the WB goes, considering there are two Batman movies coming out in 
the next year (Catwoman & Batman Begins), it doesn't appear they easily let go 
of their movie franchises.

>> I don't know enough about US movie-going trends to know what 
impact a PG-13 certificate has in general (I do know that NC-17 is a 
complete no-go for distributors, whereas in the UK some distributors 
actively seek out the equivalent 18 rating). As long as, in UK terms, the 
HP movies can be kept to a 12A rating at most (i.e. kids under 12 must be 
accompanied), the movies will continue their box office success (12A movies 
include Spider-Man, Hulk, and LOTR 2 and 3). On the other hand, aiming for 
a PG rating will require too much to be left out or watered down.

I'm sure that WB have pondered these issues, but if a PG-13 rating has the 
effect you seem to be implying, perhaps WB are hoping to capture the 
teenage audience, which may well consider HP "uncool" - the increased 
rating may make them think they might enjoy these movies. From my knowledge 
of US movie-going demographics (which I admit is extremely limited), the 
teenage audience is the one everyone is out to get, even more then the kids.<<


I don't think PG-13 will hurt GoF as much as it might appear. From what I've 
seen most parents are more concerned with the R rating, PG and PG-13 are 
almost interchangeable. And you're right, teenagers *are* the demographic 
everyone's out to get.


-Rebecca


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




From nemi51 at yahoo.no  Mon Jun 21 10:23:53 2004
From: nemi51 at yahoo.no (Pernille)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:23:53 -0000
Subject: PoA, have to get this of my chest.
Message-ID: <cb6cvp+ssca@eGroups.com>

 Hi,

I have only posted here once before I think, the reasons are many but 
lets get to the point.

I saw tPoA last night and there are some things I have to get of my 
chest.

#1. I liked it. I mean, filmaticly it's a good movie. If it's stands 
alone anyway.

#2. I was really disappointed and annoyed about the scenery changes. 
Because of this I don't feel like the three movies sticks together 
anymore and they are supposed to. Maybe there is some reason that I 
don't know about, but how hard is it to try and make it look at least 
similar to the last two. I mean there must be design drawing lying 
around at Warner Brothers somewhere. I would have loved this movie if 
it weren't for that.

#3. Sirius as a dog. I know this is very personal, but I didn't 
imagine Sirius as a dog like that at all. I saw him like a big black 
St.Bernard type of dog. 

#4. I liked the new casting. I did not imagine Lupin or Sirius like 
that, but the casting was good anyway. I only have a problem with the 
casting of Peter Pettigrew. I imagined him like a small and thin man. 
So Timothy Spall was all wrong for me. 

#5. I loved the animation of Buckbeak. That has really neat. :)

#6. Malfoy. What happened to him? Why is he so wimpy all of a sudden?
That isn't like Malfoy at all. He should remain proud to the bitter 
end. Like he was in the previous movies. (Man I can't believe that 
kid is 17. As old as I am).

I think that's it for now. Sorry for bothering you with my babbling, 
but as I have said two times now, I had to get this of my chest. If 
only one person reads this and agree or disagree and answers my post 
that's enough.

Thanks Pernille





From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun 21 10:56:02 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (patientx3 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 06:56:02 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA, have to get this of my chest.
Message-ID: <1a3.25dee949.2e0818c2@aol.com>

Pernille wrote:

>>#1. I liked it. I mean, filmaticly it's a good movie. If it's stands 
alone anyway.<<

Its a good thing you got *that* off your chest (o;

>>#2. I was really disappointed and annoyed about the scenery changes. 
Because of this I don't feel like the three movies sticks together 
anymore and they are supposed to. Maybe there is some reason that I 
don't know about, but how hard is it to try and make it look at least 
similar to the last two. I mean there must be design drawing lying 
around at Warner Brothers somewhere. I would have loved this movie if 
it weren't for that.<<

I think the design changes were deliberate (due to the directer changeover). 
Personally, they didn't bother me because they fit better than the previous 
scenery (and honestly, I hardly paid attention to the scenery before, the only 
thing I really noticed was the addition of the bridge).

>>#3. Sirius as a dog. I know this is very personal, but I didn't 
imagine Sirius as a dog like that at all. I saw him like a big black 
St.Bernard type of dog. <<
Eh, so did I. And its not really personal, its how he's described in the 
book. I just don't see how that size of a dog could reasonably fight a werewolf 
(or keep it in check).

>>#4. I liked the new casting. I did not imagine Lupin or Sirius like 
that, but the casting was good anyway. I only have a problem with the 
casting of Peter Pettigrew. I imagined him like a small and thin man. 
So Timothy Spall was all wrong for me. <<

He's supposed to have an appearence of someone who's recently lost  weight, 
but personally, I never thought that to necessarily mean "thin". I thought 
Timothy Spall's acting was so spot-on that it didn't really matter if he quite 
looked the part or not (sort of like Kenneth Braughn in CoS).

>>#5. I loved the animation of Buckbeak. That has really neat. :)<<

I was really pleased that they used half-animatronic and half-CGI for him, it 
really made a difference, he looked so real. 

>>#6. Malfoy. What happened to him? Why is he so wimpy all of a sudden?
That isn't like Malfoy at all. He should remain proud to the bitter 
end. Like he was in the previous movies.<<

I've always thought of Malfoy as the typical bully: proud and arrogant, but 
when it comes down to it, a complete wimp. As for the previous movies, he was 
rather wimpish in PS/SS when him and Harry are in the forest (running away 
screaming comes to mind), and my memory is less clear on CoS, but he didn't quite 
have a proud reaction after he's knocked over during the dueling club scene. 
I'll give you that they went a little too far in making Malfoy wimpy in PoA, 
but it (IMO) is in his nature...


-Rebecca

I think that's it for now. Sorry for bothering you with my babbling, 
but as I have said two times now, I had to get this of my chest. If 
only one person reads this and agree or disagree and answers my post 
that's enough.




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




From allison_m_otto at lycos.com  Mon Jun 21 13:31:19 2004
From: allison_m_otto at lycos.com (allison_m_otto)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:31:19 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cb22e6+i3k4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb6nv7+ht1j@eGroups.com>

Judi Dench would be great, or if they went for someone younger I 
could see someone like Harriet Walter (see Sense and Sensibility), 
Anna Chancellor (Pride and Prejudice, Four Weddings and a Funeral) or 
Alison Steadman - some great British actresses who can be both sickly-
sweet and really evil.

-Allison




From bd-bear at verizon.net  Mon Jun 21 14:07:31 2004
From: bd-bear at verizon.net (Barbara D. Poland-Waters)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:07:31 -0400
Subject: Clarifying My Views (WAS:  Re: Why books should not be movies)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617183249.00941d60@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEIDHJAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>

>>>GulPlum wrote:

Well, all of those hundreds of people (as opposed to the thousands who
seemed to have liked the movie) aren't here to discuss in any detail what
they think, and we have no idea who most of them are. (As for IMdB, a lot
of reviews on there are written deliberately to buck trends - of the dozen
or so reviews *I* have written on that site, more than half do not actually
represent my views, and I wrote them solely to provoke a response. I know
for a fact that several other people have the same approach.)<<<


Barbara now:

It is unfortunate that some people lack the integrity to post honest
comments, rather than trying to "buck trends." However, I assume you do not
know *everyone* who has ever posted a comment about POA on IMDb or Yahoo
Movies. And there are plenty of negative ones, which were the ones I was
referring to.


>>>GulPlum wrote:

However, within *this* community - all of whom are fans - according to the
poll started yesterday evening, those who actively dislike the movie are at
about 8% (plus another 11% with serious reservations about the movie, even
if they liked it). Since you're so fond of the numbers, the VAST majority
of people here liked the movie. I appreciate that this puts you in a
significant minority and probably frustrates you, but your gross
generalisations do have another side, and the majority of fans *here* are
happy.<<<


Now Barbara:

That's a very interesting point you make. You say the VAST majority of
people here liked the movie, according to the polls. But this list is
comprised of over 2300 people, most of whom did not respond to the poll. In
fact, my calculations show that only 3% (76 poll respondents divided by 2328
list members x 100 = 3.26%) of the list responded to your poll at all. The
definition of "majority" according to Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary is
"a number greater than half of a total." Therefore, the simple majority of
the group would be one member more than 50% of the membership (2328 list
members divided by 2 + 1 = 1165 members). Your "majority" is 68 members.
We do not really know what the "majority" of list members truly think of
this movie but we do know that your statement "a majority of the fans *here*
are happy" is VASTLY unfounded.


>>>GulPlum:

Whether or not professional reviewers' opinions are or aren't important
(you don't seem to be able to make up your mind) and whether or not the
vast majority of fans hail the movie (look at any of the polls not just
here), you prefer to accentuate the negative comments, which is fair
enough. But you cannot convince anyone that on a purely numerical basis,
those who dislike the movie (whether or not they've read the book) are a
majority of any kind, and in no way a significant one.<<<


Barbara again:

Actually what I said is this:

> I don't think reviews are always the be all and end all of whether or not
a
> movie is good. . . . And ultimately, whether or not the movie critics make
> a living at reviewing movies, their review is still their opinion. I don't
> necessarily think their opinion is any more valid than the opinions of
other
> fans, myself included.


In addition, I was stating my opinion about the movie, which is negative. I
cannot accentuate positive comments if I did not enjoy the movie.


>>>GulPlum:

Again, nobody here can speak for "the fans" as a general mass, but from
comments made by the fans *here*, most people seem to have seen the movie
twice, three times or even more (in my case, 8 1/2).

<snip>

On the other hand, we are in a community of about 2,300 (although the vast
majority are inactive) fans here, so please don't try to dismiss this group
as unrepresentative of the fandom at large. And certainly not the ADULT
fandom.<<<


Barbara:

And again, your supporting argument is that most people who have commented
on this list are fans of the movie. However, as you yourself mention, this
list has over 2300 members and the vast majority are surely inactive. (I
assume you are using "majority" with its correct definition this time?)
Although I do not "dismiss the group as unrepresentative of the fandom at
large," I do wonder what the regular lurkers and non-posters think of the
movie. However, if they all posted tomorrow that they love the movie, I
would certainly support their right to their opinions. I have no need to
impose my views on anyone.


I, Barbara, had previously written:

>And why can't anyone who is pro-POA address their comments in regards to
>liking the movie instead of why I AM WRONG to not like it?


>>>GulPlum:

OK, I find that comment patently unfair and verging on the personally
insulting (I don't know if it's deliberate; I'm a little touchy right
now).<<<


Barbara:

Guilty conscience? Perhaps my comment feels personal to you because you made
it personal when you sent me an unsolicited private e-mail calling me
mean-spirited and insulting my intelligence.


>>>GulPlum:

Could you please quote any message numbers mentioning that "[you are] WRONG
to not like it"? Because I spent a considerable amount of time this morning
trying to find something that even implies that sentiment, but couldn't.
I'm not claiming that nobody's said it, I just can't find it and would like
your help.<<<


Barbara:

This isn't canon, I don't have to support my statement with a quote. I
stated my feeling that you have attempted to tell me I'm wrong in my views
about the movie, or wrong in expressing my views without some sort of
back-up. However, I don't have to support my opinions and feelings about the
movie with proof. They are FEELINGS and OPINIONS.


>>>GulPlum:

And, for the record, it *is* wrong to expect a film to
play the same way a book reads.<<<


Barbara:

And I disagree. I don't think anyone is "wrong" in their preferences. I
fully expect a movie adaptation of a book to reflect the plotline,
characterizations and other relevant items of the book. Especially when the
movie is one of a series of movies being made to follow a series of
much-loved books, and when it is third after two movies that have already
set the scene. As my husband said, if a movie is going to diverge from the
primary plot points in a book, they should name the movie something else.
Again, that is my opinion.


>>>GulPlum:

For instance, three Quidditch matches is PoA would make the movie
boring. It's not a movie about Quidditch.<<<


Barbara now:

I find the Quidditch scenes enjoyable to watch, not to mention important in
Harry's life, which, as you mentioned, is the point of view we are seeing
things from.



I, Barbara, had written:

>So far today I've been told by various list members than I am
>mean-spirited towards the movie because I didn't like it, I don't "get
>subtlety," and now I'm unreasonable. I've also been told I don't make a
>"rational argument" for not liking the movie, as if I have to back of my
>FEELINGS and PREFERENCES with factual information. And I'm taking these
>points of view personally?!


>>>GulPlum:

"various list members"? So you mean someone other than myself has said
those things? If yes, then perhaps you should realise that there might be
something to the perception. If not, then please refrain from engaging in
bombast and making untrue sweeping generalisations.

Yes, I said all of those things to you off-list. . . .Either you're not
reading, not wanting to read, or find yourself incapable of hearing
*anything* good said about this movie - that's why I called you
mean-spiritied about it (incidentally, I also suggested that you've extended
that mean-spiritedness to those who liked the movie - maybe I'm wrong, but I
leave others to agree or disagree with that assessment).<<<


Barbara now:

You seem proud of having said those things to me, which I find very sad. I
have not directed any of my comments about POA to anyone in particular until
you came along and made it personal and you continue to do so. I have been
quite content to simply express my displeasure about the movie which this
list allows me to do. However, it is you (and a few notable others) who have
insisted that, for various reasons, I am not being reasonable in my opinion
(i.e., book does not equal movie, JKR loved it so who am I to complain,
etc.). The VAST majority of posters on this list (and I am going by actual
posts, not members) have expressed their opinions about the movie, whether
they disliked it or liked it, discussed the merits of certain scenes and the
regrettable omission of others and respected each other's views while doing
so.


>>>GulPlum:

And if you hadn't noticed, this forum is for "grown ups". Am I *completely*
unreasonable in my expectation that people should be prepared to back up
their "feelings" with some kind of rationalisation beyond "it's not like
the book"?<<<


Barbara writes:

Yes.





From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Mon Jun 21 15:20:38 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:20:38 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040617183249.00941d60@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cb6uc6+3of9@eGroups.com>


> However, within *this* community - all of whom are fans - according
to the 
> poll started yesterday evening, those who actively dislike the
movie are at 
> about 8% (plus another 11% with serious reservations about the
movie, 
even 
> if they liked it).

I usually don't post, but this I need to comment on. See, I was very
surprised to 
find out, just after PoA was released, that most people on this list
seemed to 
hate the movie, despite the fact that the reviews were (mostly) very
good. Also, 
everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) that I have spoken to in real life are
really 
fond of the film. These people range from die-hard fans to those who
haven't 
even seen the first two films, and from 15 to 35-year-olds. That made 
comments like "as one of the few who liked the film, I'd like to..."
very strange 
to me. I realize not everyone is going to find it as great as I, but
it seemed like 
maybe ten percent or so liked the film. I suppose those of us that
are satisfied 
aren't as likely to voice our opinion. 

Christin




From abbid at carterassoc.com  Mon Jun 21 15:43:08 2004
From: abbid at carterassoc.com (amdorn)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:43:08 -0000
Subject: Hollywood Reporter columnist
In-Reply-To: <11.2c572817.2e069e8e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb6vmc+4qef@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, patientx3 at a... wrote:
> It *would* be nice if it got some sort of recognition from any of 
the major 
> awards (if not the Oscars than the Golden Globes or Screen 
> Actors/Writers/Directers guild), but its such a longshot. Its got 
two huge strikes against it 
> being both a kids movie and a fantasy movie, both genres which are 
generally not 
> taken seriously. (yes LOTR won a lot of awards, but it was 
completely snubbed 
> on acting, and it was ignored for the most part until the third 
film came out). 
> Personally, I would love to see a nomination for cinematography or 
directing, 
> but I won't hold my breath. (I'm not even going to btoher hoping 
that Gary 
> Oldman will get an acting nomination, even though I think he 
deserves one...its 
> amazing that that wonderful of an actor has never even been 
*nominated*...if 
> Johnny Depp got one for Pirates of the Carribean, why can't he get 
one for 
> Harry Potter?).
> 
> 
> -Rebecca
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In response,

I must say that the possibility of HP3 getting a nomination for best 
picture is slim to nil.  Not necessarily because the film was not 
great but look at the precedence it would set.  There are still four 
more movie due out.  I truly believe that the only reason LOTR 2 did 
not get an oscar was because they were waiting for the last one to 
come out before awarding the oscar to the producers.  Now as far as 
best director oscar I can see the academy giving one to Cauron.  
Simply because they might not get another chance.  If you had a 
chance to give the oscar to someone just as deserving this year 
because next year you know that another movie in the same series will 
come out.  Why not spread the love so to speak.  The same goes with 
acting oscars.  I am not saying that currently the young actors are 
good enough for oscars but if they repeat their performances over and 
over for the next four films, get an oscar this go around, are we 
going to expect them to at least be nominated for the rest.  We are 
talking about a slippery slope.  The academy doesn't want to set a 
precedence with any movies in a series until the last movie.  No 
matter how deserving.  I gues they think that if this one was great 
then the next can only get better.  If this movie gets an oscar think 
about the pressure on the next movies to just as well.

Does that make sense?

amdorn




From adanabbett at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 15:37:46 2004
From: adanabbett at yahoo.com (Adan)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:37:46 -0000
Subject: One lurker chiming in
Message-ID: <cb6vca+d98n@eGroups.com>

As a member of a group of people referred to recently - that being a 
regular lurker not having put forth their opinion - I think it's 
time.  Among the reasons I hadn't chimed in are 1)I hadn't said 
anything, period, 2)I wanted to make sure what had been discussed and 
that took time and 3)Having read the messages, much of what I wanted 
to say had already been discussed.

It wasn't a perfect adaptation of the book, no. It didn't have 
everything that I wished to have seen because it was probably 
impossible time-wise.  I didn't really like the movie the first time 
I saw it.  But when I went a second time, this time with my boy (a 
fan) and the neighbor kids (who hadn't read the book), I just went to 
enjoy the movie. I didn't look for the differences, I just let it be 
what it was.  And, for me, that made all the difference.  I enjoyed 
it immensely, as did the rest of my 7 member party.

I loved the new setting for the castle. This was much closer to the 
Hogwarts that I see.  It seemed more real.  I loved the lushness, the 
cragginess.  It was much more the setting that I had always 
envisioned.  In order to keep out muggles, the castle appears a 
broken down ruin.  Why would some no-good land grubbing developer not 
have grabbed up that property with the perfectly low rolling hills 
and beautiful lake?  The new location isn't the end of a nice 
stroll.  And I liked how the forest just seem to envelop them.

What I really loved about all of the backdrops was how the magic was 
just there.  In the first movie, every little spell was an event, 
which I can somewhat justify since it was Harry's POV and it was all 
new to him.  CoS moved from this a little, but not enough to my 
liking. PoA, it's just everywhere and it's no big deal.  Every scene 
has so many little layers that might take me forever to appreciate 
them all.

But I'm going to try.  As I gaze into my genuine acryllic ball, I see 
an IMAX outing in my future.  And something that looks a bit like a 
DVD case.

Adan, a very wordy newbie that could have said much more but somehow 
restrained herself.





From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 16:15:56 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:15:56 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb71js+hukm@eGroups.com>

Welcome to the group Maggie... this has been discussed... and my vote 
has always been for Angela Landsbury.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "rzl46" <rzl46 at y...> wrote:
> I'm new to this group.  I've searched, and I can't find that this 
has 
> been discussed.  If it has, please take pity on a newbie and point 
> her in the right direction.
> 
> I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress 
> might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought and 
> decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical 
aspects 
> of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people to 
fix 
> that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique 
> combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil 
> nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews.  
> 
> Thoughts?  Other suggestions?
> 
> MaggieB




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 16:16:34 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:16:34 -0000
Subject: Actress for Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <cav5sj+4gj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb71l2+mcuu@eGroups.com>

Welcome to the group Maggie... this has been discussed... and my vote 
has always been for Angela Landsbury.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "rzl46" <rzl46 at y...> wrote:
> I'm new to this group.  I've searched, and I can't find that this 
has 
> been discussed.  If it has, please take pity on a newbie and point 
> her in the right direction.
> 
> I was wondering if anybody has given any thought to what actress 
> might portray Deloris Umbridge.  I've given it a lot of thought and 
> decided that I would more or less have to ignore the physical 
aspects 
> of her character and depend on the makeup and computer people to 
fix 
> that.  When I concentrated on who could portray her unique 
> combination of apparent sickly sweetness and less obvious evil 
> nature, the only person who came to mind was Julie Andrews.  
> 
> Thoughts?  Other suggestions?
> 
> MaggieB




From adanabbett at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 16:45:52 2004
From: adanabbett at yahoo.com (Adan)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:45:52 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
In-Reply-To: <d5.f52b5f1.2e02cb18@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb73c0+p10b@eGroups.com>

Patientx writes:
> Some dislikes:
> -Sirius the dog. For one thing, did *every* shot of him have to be 
>CGI? Its a *dog* for goodness sakes, dogs are one of the easiest 
>animals to train. And if it was already CGI, couldn't they have made 
>him to the description in the book, rather than the drawing in the 
>US editions. Sirius in dog-form is supposed to be "bear-like", that 
>dog wasn't bearlike at all.

Adan replies:
While Snuffles wasn't the big, hulking figure I envisioned being able 
to fight against Moony, I think this version would be more able to 
blend in and go unnoticed than some Newfoundland-ish species.  He's 
wiry and tough.  And it isn't always the size of the dog either, as 
my great aunt had some killer chihuahuas! 

Patientx:
> -Why do they always give Mrs. Weasley the worst lines? In CoS she 
>had the "where are we going to get all this?...(dramatic 
>pause)...Diagon Alley." and in PoA after handing Ron the rat she 
>said "Don't you lose him!" which made no sense at all. The phrasing 
>of it doesn't work (its phrased like she's referring to a little 
>brother), and the reason behind it (to make it Ron's fault when 
>Scabbers disappears and he blames it on Crookshanks) is unneeded as 
>well. Ron *wasn't* careless with Scabbers, that's the point, in 
>fact. Scabbers disappeared because he faked his death and ran away, 
>not because of something Ron did. 

Adan:
That line in PoA really struck me.  I don't know if it's in the book -
 I haven't thought to look when I actually have them at hand - but 
that just struck me as sort of sinister since I knew who/what 
Scabbers was.  How the Weasley's got that rat in the first place is a 
big question in my mind, and that.. well, I never thought to look at 
any of the Weasleys, especially Molly, as truly dark before. Did any 
of them know?  I will pay more in attention in future rereads.

Patientx:
> -I still have not heard any usage of the Moony or Padfoot or 
>Wormtail nicknames. I didn't even hear something that sounds like it 
>could possible be one. Sirius only calls Lupin "Remus" and Lupin 
>only calls him "Sirius" and they both call Peter, "Peter". Can 
>someone tell me exactly where these are so I can at least know where 
>to listen for it when I see the movie a fourth time?

Adan:
I believe I've read that IMAX viewers hear one name, I think Padfoot, 
during Lupin's transformation scene.  I haven't seen the movie again 
since reading that to check it though.

> -What took Snape so long to get to the shrieking shack? I assume 
>that was just a mistake in the time-turner sequence, but they make 
>it look like Snape went into the Willow less than a minute after 
>Lupin, when there's at least two or three minutes between their 
>arrivals. 

Adan:
I just thought he was eavesdropping outside the door, getting a grip 
on who/what was happening and formulating his plan.  In the book, 
didn't Snape hide out under the invisibility cloak, listening to what 
was happening for a bit, too?




From adanabbett at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 17:08:59 2004
From: adanabbett at yahoo.com (Adan)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:08:59 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] foreshadowing of 6 and 7
In-Reply-To: <20040616225515.QXQE29216.out009.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cb74nb+g9on@eGroups.com>

Valerie Flowe wrote:
> I dunno why Sirius chose to bark at Harry, if he just wanted to see 
>him.? He did look like he was snarling, too, which would not be in 
>character unless he really was a Grim.? Interesting 
>inconsistancies.? Wish we could get Kolves and Cuaron to answer 
>these questions for us!!


I just think that was used to really give a reason for Harry to fall 
back.  I mean, the boy has been up against a troll and a basilisk so 
seeing a black dog shouldn't make him trip over his trunk and pull 
out his wand.  Seeing a black dog with bared teeth and barking and/or 
growling might do it though, and if he hadn't there would have been 
no Knight Bus.  I think that Snuffles may have been watching Harry 
and knew what he needed and, being such a good doggie, did what he 
had to help that happen.

Or, he was saying, "Hi, Harry."

Adan, who wishes she spoke doggish sometimes





From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Mon Jun 21 17:24:48 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:24:48 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <MABBLPHAPNNKIOFAIDEBCEIDHJAA.bd-bear@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cb75l0+4oqs@eGroups.com>

Hi All,

Richard Gulplum said:
>>> Am I *completely* unreasonable in my expectation that people 
should be prepared to back up their "feelings" with some kind of 
rationalisation beyond "it's not like the book"? <<<

Barbara said:
>>> Yes <<<

And no.

On the one hand I find people's posts most interesting when they do 
have tons of rational debate behind them. But insight can come 
without reason. As Keat's wrote to his brother "I mean Negative 
Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in 
uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching 
after fact and reason".

I didn't like the film either. Though I've only seen it once and I 
may change my mind when I can do a side by side comparison with the 
DVDs. I did enjoy the cinematography, which Richard and others have 
discussed. I could also join in with the analysis of the acting and 
the plot additions, inclusions, and omissions. But what I'm starting 
to realise, and this is just a feeling, is that I do not like the HP 
movies anymore. I really liked the first one, in fact watching that 
with my family on the insistence of my daughter turned me onto HP in 
the first place. But then I read the books. For me it is a very rare 
movie that can stand-up to any comparison with a book you already 
love. The only movie I prefer to its book counter-part is Apocalypse 
Now, but I saw that before reading Heart of Darkness. The only book 
I loved that I felt OK with the film later was The Color Purple, and 
then I had to wait several years before I felt it was safe to watch 
the movie. It would be fun to start a thread on OT-Chatter to see if 
others have found any movie adaptations of other loved books that 
really live up to the books promise.

(I'm not going to watch LotR, my mental images of the work mean too 
much to me.)

So I think my HP film watching is doomed, PS/SS aside they are just 
never going to live up to my readings of the books, and though this 
is clearly mad, each time I go to see them I expect them too.

Another disapointment with this is that I really had done all my 
homework. I watched ad re-watched all Cuaron's films, and read A 
Little Princess and Great Expectations so that I could get a sense 
of how he approached adaptations. I would love to be able to step 
back from the movie and just see, analyse, and talk of it as an 
independent work. But I cannot, It was a disappointment.

Strangely I do not think that the same happens to play scripts. I 
have read and loved Shakespeare scripts, seen good and bad 
productions, and seen really great movie adaptations (e.g. 
Zeffirelli's and Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet are both great). 
Perhaps it is the insight into characters mental processes that make 
a good book win out over a good film.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.

PS This is all just me. If companies can make money out of films 
that disappoint Tim Regan, they should go ahead and make them ;-)





From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 17:56:46 2004
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:56:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Harry Potter & SS in ABC (again)
Message-ID: <20040621175646.69112.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey everyone:
 
I just wanted to let you know that last night while watching ABC Family I saw the commercial of Harry Potter & the Sorcerer Stone movie that it's going to be broadcasted again on July 11th at 7pm (not so sure about the hour).
 
This broadcast includes the deleted scenes.
Betsy
 
 
 

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!

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




From ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Mon Jun 21 18:59:05 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:59:05 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0705@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

>> I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
> Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
> Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
> 
> Haggridd


Gina:
  The little short lady from the movies "Poltergeist" and "Teen Witch" would
have been really good, but I think she is deceased.



________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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129f82d6k/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087749902/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164339/rand=804162284> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From spaebrun at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 19:33:27 2004
From: spaebrun at yahoo.com (spaebrun)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:33:27 -0000
Subject: Pumpkins & dubbed voices
Message-ID: <cb7d67+k5nj@eGroups.com>

Hi!

As it seems the time of the lurkers speaking up, I thought I'd throw in a few remarks as 
well.

For the record, I liked the movie, despite some complaints (all of which have already been 
addressed and discussed here) and I liked it better the second time I watched it, like 
several people here did.
In my case the reason for this (except for the big got-over-all-the-changes-and-just-
watched-what-they-did issue) was also that I watched it in German the first time and in 
English the second time. I had a striking experience there I just have to share:

I didn't plan to watch the movie in the dubbed version in the first place, but the original 
version wasn't showing in my town (really quite a shock, as I'm not really living in cultural 
backwater) and as some friends decided to go 2 days after the movie was released, I just 
*had* to join them ;-) Well, it was fair enough (though I missed Alan Rickman's voice, of 
course! You just can't copy that sound.), but I was severely disappointed by Professor 
Trelawney. I found her entrance scene quite silly, like from some over the top slapstick 
comedy. When I later read the reviews all praising Emma Thompson, I just kept wondering 
about people's taste - until I finally herded some different (more purist ;-)) friends and 
travelled to the next town for a viewing of the original version. And there I suddenly really 
enjoyed that scene. It was *funny*! It was Trelawney like I imagined her! I'd never thought 
that a voice could make such a difference, but it did. For me, it changed the entire feel of 
the scene. 
So all you Germans out there, go watch the original, it's worth it. And all you others 
beware of dubbed films in general  (though I think other nations are not quite as big 
dubbers as the Germans - thank God!)

One other remark: Has anyone wondered about the pumpkins in the final scenes? These 
scenes are supposed to take place in June, right?  Isn't that a bit early for pumpkins? I 
thought they were harvested in fall. They look really cool in the scene and it didn't really 
bother me much, but it made me wonder...

Reed    




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 21 20:18:23 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:18:23 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge
References: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A0705@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <007201c457cc$eace73c0$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Miller, Gina (JIS) 
  To: 'HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com' 
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 1:59 PM
  Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge


  >> I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
  > Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
  > Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
  > 
  > Haggridd


  Gina:
    The little short lady from the movies "Poltergeist" and "Teen Witch" would
  have been really good, but I think she is deceased.>>
  No, she is not deceased unless she died since the last time I suggested her
  for Professor Umbridge a few months back.  According IMDB, she was still
  alive at least.... Her name is... Zelda Rubinstein... IMDB says she just
  did a TV Movie (2004).  I think she would be perfect; if only she was British.

  Kimberly




  ________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/
  <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

  <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129f82d6k/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
  oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087749902/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
  etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here


  <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
  :HM/A=2164339/rand=804162284> 

    _____  

  Yahoo! Groups Links
  *         To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
  <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
  <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


  [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 ginamiller at jis.nashville.org  Mon Jun 21 20:22:24 2004
From: ginamiller at jis.nashville.org (Miller, Gina (JIS))
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:22:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge
Message-ID: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A070C@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>

                        Gina: 
                        No, I never saw your post but that is TOO funny! She
would be great - if she were British!
                        Gina
 
  >> I would like to see Dame Judy Dench (The current "M" in the James 
  > Bond movies; Queen Elizabeth in "Shakespeare in Love") play Delores 
  > Jane Umbridge.  I think she would do a splendid job.
  > 
  > Haggridd


  Gina:
    The little short lady from the movies "Poltergeist" and "Teen Witch"
would
  have been really good, but I think she is deceased.>>
  No, she is not deceased unless she died since the last time I suggested
her
  for Professor Umbridge a few months back.  According IMDB, she was still
  alive at least.... Her name is... Zelda Rubinstein... IMDB says she just
  did a TV Movie (2004).  I think she would be perfect; if only she was
British.

  Kimberly




  ________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/
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/> 
  <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
<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

 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129f82d6k/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129f82d6k/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
> 
 
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087749902/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
  etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
> 
  :HM/A=2164339/rand=804162284> 

    _____  

  Yahoo! Groups Links
  *         To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/> 
  <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
  <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> >
Service. 


  [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/
<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/
<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]



________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/
<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
 
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1290r7nfi/M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705020948:HM/EXP=1087935579/A=2164339/R=0/SIG=11e2d64in/*http:/www.n
etflix.com/Default?mqso=60183348> click here

 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5022502.6152625.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2164339/rand=820981837> 
 
  _____  

Yahoo! Groups Links
*         To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/
<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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 21 20:33:13 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:33:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA, have to get this of my chest.
References: <cb6cvp+ssca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007e01c457ce$fce1c330$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


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


  #2. I was really disappointed and annoyed about the scenery changes. 
  Because of this I don't feel like the three movies sticks together 
  anymore and they are supposed to. Maybe there is some reason that I 
  don't know about, but how hard is it to try and make it look at least 
  similar to the last two. I mean there must be design drawing lying 
  around at Warner Brothers somewhere. I would have loved this movie if 
  it weren't for that.>>

  Some of the scenery changes annoyed me as well.  I liked the bridge, however, I didn't like
  the main entrance to the front doors of Hogwarts.  I just thought the main entrance should have
  been more "grand" without the atrium surrounding it.   

  #4. I liked the new casting. I did not imagine Lupin or Sirius like 
  that, but the casting was good anyway. I only have a problem with the 
  casting of Peter Pettigrew. I imagined him like a small and thin man. 
  So Timothy Spall was all wrong for me.>>

  I liked all the casting of all characters, however, I wish Sirius'
  hair was a little longer and Lupin did not have the mustache. I
  kept wanting to get the eraser.  LOL! 

  #5. I loved the animation of Buckbeak. That has really neat. :)>>

  One of my favorite parts and I love the music!!!

  #6. Malfoy. What happened to him? Why is he so wimpy all of a sudden?
  That isn't like Malfoy at all. He should remain proud to the bitter 
  end. Like he was in the previous movies. (Man I can't believe that 
  kid is 17. As old as I am).>>

  You know I have read this several times, but when I read the books, Malfoy is just like this...
  a wimp!  I mean, when he has his gang around him, he is mean and bitter, but he turns wimp
  as soon as someone says "boo".  I thought Tom Felton was 16 years old?  I thought he said
  he was buying a car when he turned 17 in a few months, since they can't drive until they are
  17.  Who knows... I like him as Draco though, either way. :-)

  Kimberly

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




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Mon Jun 21 20:47:26 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:47:26 -0000
Subject: Nitpicks..was visual depth
In-Reply-To: <cb3j9t+fl29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb7hgu+s591@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alice_loves_cats" 
SNIP
 Cuaron did an excellent job in  not for a moment letting things get
boring. It's exactly why I am able to watch it over and over and over
and have yet to get bored in  ANY place at all. 
> 
> But the landscape etc is breathtaking. I think I would go back and 
> watch again simply to see that beauty again.
> 
> Alice

I completely agree about the scenery, it is wonderful, wild and wacky.
It catches your breath, especially in the Buckbeak flight sequences,
the feeling is expansive and joyous. It is more like the view I had
pictured in my mind, remote and untamed. I don't understand why so
many people are being so critical about this aspect.  The first two
movies had plenty of little nigglets that didn't correspond exactly to
the text.  I thought the Whomping willow was too close to the school,
it doesn't work being right outside the main entrance to Hogwarts. 
POA wouldn't work if the WW is in plain view of the castle, someone
would see the second Harry & Hermoine and spoil the whole premise.  
Same thing with Hagrid's hut, I liked it being away from the school
rather than right on the front lawn of the castle.  It just seems to
be more in character of the story and gives him space for Fang to roam
and have room for a real garden.  The Whomping willow provided some
laughs and transitioned the change of seasons too.

As for the dispute about whether a movie should be the same as a
book, here is my take on the matter.  I think it is a given that a
film is an adaptation of a story.  John Irving wrote the screen play
for Cider House Rules because he knew that certain things do not
translate well from the printed page to the movie screen (he had some
experience with this -World according to Garp).  I heard JKR say she
views this as Cuaron's vision of her story and was happy with it. 
Which helped me relax a bit about it, I actually went in expecting it
to be different and I think it helped me enjoy it more, if that makes
any sense. 

I believe it is easier to see a film first then read the book because
you have no preconceptions and can enjoy the film.  I remember when I
first saw Gone with the Wind, I was truly lost in the story.  It
wasn't until I read the book that I discovered all the subplots and
characters that didn't make the cut.  With Harry Potter, I have read
the books multiple times so I know that it can't compare with the
internal movie in my imagination.  I had my reservations about this
version because I so love this story, I wasn't thrilled with the
thought of Gary Oldham as Sirius but I managed to let go and follow
the rollercoaster ride.  It was fast and furious but funny, scary and
inventive.

I have enjoyed it so much I have seen it 3 times and plan on going
again this week.  I remember being excited about the first one, so I
saw it 3 times but Cos only twice.  I thought the ending in it
flattened the punch of the confrontation with Mr. Malfoy and Dobby
being freed.  None of them have been perfect but I do so feel like I
am "there" in this one, I actually feel I can get lost in the action
and just enjoy it.  I am sorry that others have so many problems with
it, but it may get worse with GoF-cramming it into one film is going
to mean drastic cuts.  But we have a while to wait for that one, so go
and enjoy Prisoner of Azkaban now while you can...it is great

Karen




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 21 20:48:24 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:48:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge
References: <D78EC74BB0600241A3EE06FA8E0FEA9F049A070C@jismsg01.jis.nashville.org>
Message-ID: <009b01c457d1$1b966900$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Miller, Gina (JIS) 
  To: 'HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com' 
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:22 PM
  Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Actress for Umbridge


                          Gina: 
  No, I never saw your post but that is TOO funny! She
  would be great - if she were British!
                          Gina>
  She would be PERFECT!!! When I read the books, Zelda
  Rubinstein came to mind. In the movie, 16 Candles,
  when she is walking down the chuch... well, I could
  see a wand in her hand and that pink bow on top of her
  head. LOL!  Of course, Zelda maybe too old now to
  play Umbridge, but she would have been perfect. Glad
  I am not the only one who thought of her!  :-)

  Kimberly






   

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Jun 21 20:47:46 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:47:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
Message-ID: <1d8.24943f84.2e08a372@aol.com>

I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the  film.  What 
distresses me GREATLY is that WB has done so LITTLE advertising  for it!  There 
are no ads on TV that I can see, nothing much in print,  nothing much online 
as far as ads go, and it wasn't advertised that much before  it was released 
(I did try to see the trailer at three different movies that  were SUPPOSED to 
have the HP3 trailer running before them, and not ONE of them  did!!)  
Spider-man has been advertised for MONTHS and MONTHS and has cereal  and all kinds of 
other merchandising things all over every store you go to,  months before the 
movie's release.  I had to LOOK for HP stuff (found it in  Target) and there 
wasn't nearly enough to choose from.  (I got an "Expecto  Patronum" Harry 
figure -- nothing else appealed to me, although I did get a set  of trading cards 
from the hpwizardstore.com -- I think that's the URL,  anyway).  What the heck 
is wrong with WB's ad department?!   grrrrrr.  I've been appalled at the 
small crowds when I've been to see PoA  (except for opening night, of course).  
I'm afraid they're depending TOO  much on the popularity of the books to bring 
the fans in.  They COULD make  an effort!!  argh. . . .
 
All that said -- I saw on Leaky that there's Oscar talk about the  film -- I 
said when I first saw it I saw "Oscar" written all over it.  I  sure hope it 
gets some (and that Dan gets nominated too -- I'm still blown away  by how well 
he did in this film!)

and yes -- I'm old enough to be his  grandma. . .  

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



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




From Lynx412 at AOL.com  Mon Jun 21 21:05:32 2004
From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:05:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 3rd viewing, some observations, likes & dislikes
Message-ID: <bf.414570e3.2e08a79c@aol.com>



> Patientx:
> >-Why do they always give Mrs. Weasley the worst lines? In CoS she 
> >had the "where are we going to get all this?...(dramatic 
> >pause)...Diagon Alley." and in PoA after handing Ron the rat she 
> >said "Don't you lose him!" which made no sense at all. The phrasing 
> >of it doesn't work (its phrased like she's referring to a little 
> >brother), and the reason behind it (to make it Ron's fault when 
> >Scabbers disappears and he blames it on Crookshanks) is unneeded as 
> >well. Ron *wasn't* careless with Scabbers, that's the point, in 
> >fact. Scabbers disappeared because he faked his death and ran away, 
> >not because of something Ron did. 

       I think she was implying he'd already lost Scabbers, or she wouldn't 
have had to rush up and hand him to Ron. she knew Ron whined about him, and may 
have thought Ron had been deliberately careless with him. I suspect the 
implication, given who Scabbers is/was, is that Wormtail had tried to run away, to 
better hide from Sirius. After all, Wormtail KNEW who Black was really after.

       Cheryl


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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Jun 21 21:17:50 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:17:50 -0000
Subject: PoA box office
In-Reply-To: <1d8.24943f84.2e08a372@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb7j9u+moc6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
> I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the  
film. ( snip) I  sure hope it 
> gets some (and that Dan gets nominated too -- I'm still blown 
away  by how well 
> he did in this film!)
> 
> and yes -- I'm old enough to be his  grandma. . .  
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs.  Figg, OoP
> 
> 
RE:Daniel
I am very impressed with Dan in this film as well. He inhabits 
Harry's character to the point that when I see him at public 
appearances and in photos, he's truly a different person. His body 
language, his face, it's as if he sheds the weight of the world and 
is a real kid again. He looks years younger to me! Many critics have 
commented that his acting has improved but I think he has always had 
talent and promise. Harry's a very difficult character in that 
he's "Everyman" and in COS, Chris Columbus wanted a super action 
hero and he delivered. Not much emphasis on his vulnerability. In 
POA, he did a fine job of exploring Harry's vulnerabilities when 
given the chance. There just seems to be a reticence to take these 
films where the books go without fear.
Jennifer




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 21 22:23:14 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:23:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
Message-ID: <20040621222314.PJHV1551.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: artsylynda at aol.com
I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the? film.? What 
distresses me GREATLY is that WB has done so LITTLE advertising? for it!? There 
are no ads on TV that I can see, nothing much in print,? nothing much online 
as far as ads go, and it wasn't advertised that much before? it was released 
(I did try to see the trailer at three different movies that? were SUPPOSED to 
have the HP3 trailer running before them, and not ONE of them? did!!)?

[from Valerie]
I've seen the trailer on kids-related TV quite a bit. And some bus signage.
<snip>
I had to LOOK for HP stuff (found it in? Target) and there 
wasn't nearly enough to choose from.? (I got an "Expecto? Patronum" Harry 
figure -- What the heck 
is wrong with WB's ad department?!?? grrrrrr.

[from Valerie]
You are right; there is not much merchandising. My nephew (who got me in to the 
HP series!) just turned 8, and I wanted to get him an HP T-shirt. Went to 
Target, Toys R-Us =nothing. Lots and lots of Spiderman-wear, though! 
I ended up getting him the miniature POA collectibles.


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




From gcrumpac at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 21 22:26:35 2004
From: gcrumpac at pacbell.net (Gretchen Crumpacker)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
In-Reply-To: <20040621222314.PJHV1551.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040621222635.1331.qmail@web80312.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:
 My
> nephew (who got me in to the 
> HP series!) just turned 8, and I wanted to get him
> an HP T-shirt. Went to 
> Target, Toys R-Us =nothing. Lots and lots of
> Spiderman-wear, though! 
> I ended up getting him the miniature POA
> collectibles.

The Warner Bros. website has some HP t-shirts.  My Sam
has a red one with dementors and ayellow one with
Harry playing Quidditch.

Gretchen

=====
Visit the Mr. Baby Blog:  http://gretchenb.tripod.com/mrbaby/



From joj at rochester.rr.com  Mon Jun 21 23:12:28 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:12:28 -0400
Subject: Various PoA answers
Message-ID: <002101c457e5$38e733e0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

Karen said:
The first two
movies had plenty of little nigglets that didn't correspond exactly to
the text.  I thought the Whomping willow was too close to the school,
it doesn't work being right outside the main entrance to Hogwarts

Joj says:
I agree.  I thought the Whomping Willow looked very lame in CoS.  It didn't even look like a willow!  It was much to close to the school.  The kids would be running into it on a daily basis if it were that close to the castle.  I thought it looked great in PoA, and who cares if it looks different, as long as it looks better.


Lynda said:
I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the  film.  What 
distresses me GREATLY is that WB has done so LITTLE advertising  for it!  There 
are no ads on TV that I can see, nothing much in print,  nothing much online 
as far as ads go, and it wasn't advertised that much before  it was released.

Joj:
It has been and continues to be advertised to children on Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network. My children watch these channels, and this weekend there was at least on PoA commercial in every half hour show.  I thought it was overkill frankly. There are two commercials.  One with all the light hearted, happy moments and one with the scary dark moments.  I've thought it was a mistake from the start to focus so much on the kids market.  


Jennifer said:
I am very impressed with Dan in this film as well. He inhabits 
Harry's character to the point that when I see him at public 
appearances and in photos, he's truly a different person. His body 
language, his face, it's as if he sheds the weight of the world and 
is a real kid again. He looks years younger to me! Many critics have 
commented that his acting has improved but I think he has always had 
talent and promise. Harry's a very difficult character in that 
he's "Everyman"

Joj:  
We have seen so many interviews and pictures of Dan lately and he does look very different.  The boy is almost always smiling.  Some people criticize him for being "wooden" or "expressionless".  He's never like that in person. In the movies. he's in character.  Harry isn't a happy-go-lucky kid.  I think it also has to do with being around some of the kids who tend to over act a little. 

Joj, who's only seen PoA twice and can't wait to see it in IMAX.



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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Jun 21 23:55:53 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:55:53 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <002101c457e5$38e733e0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cb7si9+5ofk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joj" <joj at r...> wrote:
> Joj:  
> We have seen so many interviews and pictures of Dan lately and he 
does look very different.  The boy is almost always smiling.  Some 
people criticize him for being "wooden" or "expressionless".  He's 
never like that in person. In the movies. he's in character.  Harry 
isn't a happy-go-lucky kid.  I think it also has to do with being 
around some of the kids who tend to over act a little. 
> 
> Joj, who's only seen PoA twice and can't wait to see it in IMAX.

I personally didn't give Dan the credit he deserves for pouring 
himself into Harry. As Harry, he even looks physically bigger and 
bulkier than Dan does. In the A&E special he remained in character 
it seemed, for his interviews during POA and it was not until I saw 
him smiling like it was Christmas at the Premier (and looking 
physically less formidable) that it hit me how totally immersed in a 
role he could become. I don't think he's going to be the Mark Hamill 
of his generation although I hope he doesn't have to play a mad ax 
murderer to make us forget Harry one day. 
jennifer




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 01:53:16 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 01:53:16 -0000
Subject: Quick PoA question..
Message-ID: <cb83ec+gcqk@eGroups.com>

I've seen the movie three times, and I can't seem to get a good 
enough (or maybe long enough?) look at the picture beside Harry's 
bed at the Dursleys.  Is that the same man playing James Potter, the 
one in the Mirror of Erised?  He looks thinner, but I can't be 
sure.  Anyone know for sure?  Thanks.

Alora




From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 02:39:20 2004
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
In-Reply-To: <1d8.24943f84.2e08a372@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040622023920.26322.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>



artsylynda at aol.com wrote:
I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the  film.  What 
distresses me GREATLY is that WB has done so LITTLE advertising  for it!  There 
are no ads on TV that I can see, nothing much in print,  nothing much online 
as far as ads go, and it wasn't advertised that much before  it was released 
(I did try to see the trailer at three different movies that  were SUPPOSED to 
have the HP3 trailer running before them, and not ONE of them  did!!)  
Spider-man has been advertised for MONTHS and MONTHS and has cereal  and all kinds of 
other merchandising things all over every store you go to,  months before the 
movie's release.  I had to LOOK for HP stuff (found it in  Target) and there 
wasn't nearly enough to choose from.  (I got an "Expecto  Patronum" Harry 
figure -- nothing else appealed to me, although I did get a set  of trading cards 
from the hpwizardstore.com -- I think that's the URL,  anyway).  What the heck 
is wrong with WB's ad department?!   grrrrrr.  I've been appalled at the 
small crowds when I've been to see PoA  (except for opening night, of course).  
I'm afraid they're depending TOO  much on the popularity of the books to bring 
the fans in.  They COULD make  an effort!!  argh. . . .

All that said -- I saw on Leaky that there's Oscar talk about the  film -- I 
said when I first saw it I saw "Oscar" written all over it.  I  sure hope it 
gets some (and that Dan gets nominated too -- I'm still blown away  by how well 
he did in this film!)

and yes -- I'm old enough to be his  grandma. . .  

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

Betsy here:  You know what? I was thinking the same thing the other day.  I mean, the Harry Potter books are famous but, come on, the marketing department has got to make great promotional campaigns, especially for a movie like this.  A big-budget movie must have an excellent and continuous presence before and after the movie is released.  I was really disappointed for this and even more, when the movie had many excellent reviews from almost everywhere.  I thought that WB will take that to increase the presence on TV and press, but I was wrong. 

I just hope that the next movie the WB executives improve the advertising & promotional campaign. And not just assumed that everyone will see the movie because they read the book.   

[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. 



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.

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




From adanabbett at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 03:19:47 2004
From: adanabbett at yahoo.com (Adan)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 03:19:47 -0000
Subject: Quick PoA question..
In-Reply-To: <cb83ec+gcqk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb88gj+7i0i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> I've seen the movie three times, and I can't seem to get a good 
> enough (or maybe long enough?) look at the picture beside Harry's 
> bed at the Dursleys.  Is that the same man playing James Potter, 
the 
> one in the Mirror of Erised?  He looks thinner, but I can't be 
> sure.  Anyone know for sure?  Thanks.
> 
> Alora

According to imdb.com it is the same guy.  Both movies, and 
uncredited CoS(perhaps cut scene?), for Adrian Rawlings, who is 46, 
for all the age-watchers out there.

Adan




From Schlobin1 at aol.com  Tue Jun 22 04:31:08 2004
From: Schlobin1 at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 04:31:08 -0000
Subject: why I was uncomfortable with the Aunt Marge scene
In-Reply-To: <canqhv+ah43@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb8cmc+t6pk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" <McGregorMax at e...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan \(Intl Vendor\)" <v-
> tregan at m...> wrote:
> >> I found the Aunt Marge scene funny, but Barbara's point has got 
me
> > thinking. Remember this passage from GoF:
> >  
> > >>> A crowd of wizards, tightly packed and moving together with 
> wands
> > pointing straight upward, was marching slowly across the field. 
> Harry
> > squinted at them. . . . They didn't seem to have faces. . . . 
Then 
> he
> > realized that their heads were hooded and their faces masked. 
High 
> above
> > them, floating along in midair, four struggling figures were being
> > contorted into grotesque shapes. It was as though the masked 
> wizards on
> > the ground were puppeteers, and the people above them were 
> marionettes
> > operated by invisible strings that rose from the wands into the 
> air. Two
> > of the figures were very small.... The floating people were 
> suddenly illuminated as they passed over a
> > burning tent and Harry recognized one of them: Mr. Roberts, the 
> campsite
> > manager. The other three looked as though they might be his wife 
and
> > children. One of the marchers below flipped Mrs. Roberts upside 
down
> > with his wand; her nightdress fell down to reveal voluminous 
> drawers and
> > she struggled to cover herself up as the crowd below her 
screeched 
> and
> > hooted with glee.
> > 
> > "That's sick," Ron muttered, watching the smallest Muggle child, 
> who had
> > begun to spin like a top, sixty feet above the ground, his head 
> flopping
> > limply from side to side. "That is really sick. . . ." <<<
> >  
> > Having re-read that passage, is the Aunt Marge scene still funny? 
> Less
> > so for me.
> >  
> > Cheers,
> >  
> > Dumbledad.
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > Yes because the people in GoF were innocent victims while Aunt 
> Marge deserved everything that happened to her.
> 
>    One of the things that I contemplate about the HP books is the 
> fact that the Dursleys have yet to receive any retribution for the 
> years of abuse that put Harry though.  Vernon and Petunia, hell 
> Dudley too, should be in jail for what they've done. One of the 
> things that I hope for in Book7 is the Dursleys finally facing some 
> justice.


****

I, too, would like to see Vernon and Petunia held accountable for 
their horrible treatment of Harry. However, I don't hold with 
humiliation....

I was absolutely fine with the Aunt Marge scene in the book because 
she was SO vile, and Harry tried SO hard not to react, but then he 
truly lost control...he didn't make a decision to humiliate Aunt 
Marge..(The Death Eaters in contrast made a decision to humiliate the 
Muggles (GoF) at the World Cup..they thought it funny...they didn't 
lose control and they had NOT been badly treated by those muggles).

I noticed in the OoP that Harry was having revenge fantasies about 
Dursley...he was fantasizing about jinxing Dudley so he couldn't 
move, and in fact was taunting and taking out his own frustration and 
anger on Dudley (based on his history of mistreatment by Dudley).

I don't think this is healthy, although totally understandable. My 
experience is that people who feel desperate and powerless are those 
who have revenge fantasies and who get back at others in 
inappropriate ways.

I really am angry at Dumbledore, and McGonagall for allowing Harry to 
be treated SO badly at the Dursleys...I'm happy that at the end of 
the OoP his friends and allies intervene with the Dursleys..but what 
took everyone so long?

Re: dementors..I loved one part of the scene in the PoA movie where 
the dementors attack HP and Sirius...the lake was exactly as I 
envisioned it..but I didn't like the dementors flying and swooping, 
in my mind I saw them amassing at the other side of the lake and 
gliding across it...

Thanks everyone for your very thoughtful responses to my posts, I 
appreciate it.

Susan




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 22 08:12:43 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 08:12:43 -0000
Subject: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <cb6uc6+3of9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb8plr+tqt3@eGroups.com>

Christin wrote:
>>See, I was very surprised to find out, just after PoA was released, 
that most people on this list seemed to hate the movie, despite the 
fact that the reviews were (mostly) very good. Also, everyone (and I 
mean EVERYONE) that I have spoken to in real life are really fond of 
the film. These people range from die-hard fans to those who haven't 
even seen the first two films, and from 15 to 35-year-olds.<<

I think the majority of the people on this list DID enjoy the movie, 
even if many of them had serious problems with it. I think its the 
perils of a discussion group, that "I liked it!" doesn't make for an 
interesting topic. I've noticed several posts that sound very 
negative but at the end (or the top), the poster says that 'despite 
that' they liked the movie. Personally I LOVED it, there are a few 
things from the book that I think would have worked in the movie, and 
a few other things that just bothered me (like Ron agreeing with 
Snape, for one), but none of those affected the movie in a 
considerable way (IMO). I saw the movie with another fan of the books 
and a fan of the movies who hadn't read the books and both of them 
liked it as much as I did. (and the few other people I've talked to, 
including one person who is not into Harry Potter AT ALL and was 
dragged to the movie by her friends, liked it as well). 
In actuality, according to the poll, most of the people on this list 
did enjoy the movie, even if they have minor or serious reservations 
about it (I know that only a small percentage of the 2,000+ members 
on the list participated in the poll, but there's no reason to think 
that this small sampling isn't accurate).


-Rebecca




From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Tue Jun 22 15:12:05 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:12:05 -0000
Subject: PoA, have to get this of my chest.
In-Reply-To: <007e01c457ce$fce1c330$a11ba8c0@KIMBERLY>
Message-ID: <cb9i85+6jnv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" <twinslove at m...> 
wrote:

> I liked all the casting of all characters, however, I wish Sirius' 
> hair was a little longer and Lupin did not have the moustache. I   
> kept wanting to get the eraser. LOL! 

I thought the same thing! That moustache was getting on my nervs. 

> I thought Tom Felton was 16 years old? I thought he said he was    
> buying a car when he turned 17 in a few months, since they         
> can't drive until they are 17. Who knows... I like him as Draco 
though, either way. :-) > 
> Kimberly 

You are right, he is not 17 yet. He'll be seventeen in September, but 
he is born in 87, as I am. Yes he is a perfect Malfoy. 

Take care, and thanks for answering 
Pernille





From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 22 15:30:57 2004
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:30:57 -0000
Subject: Pumpkins & dubbed voices
In-Reply-To: <cb7d67+k5nj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9jbh+b5ih@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "spaebrun" <spaebrun at y...> wrote:
I'd never thought 
> that a voice could make such a difference, but it did. For me, it 
changed the entire feel of 
> the scene. 
> So all you Germans out there, go watch the original, it's worth it. 
And all you others 
> beware of dubbed films in general  (though I think other nations 
are not quite as big 
> dubbers as the Germans - thank God!)

Alice:
The dubbing can make or break a movie. In Hungary, easy comedy and 
stuff intended for children is usually dubbed, while more serious 
films aren't (only later, for the video and TV). 
It's strange but has happened that I like the dubbed version of a 
film better than the original. Mostly it's because I'm not very fond 
of strong American accents in films (I find it slightly more 
difficult to understand). So usually I watch American films dubbed 
and English ones not (even if the film is dubbed, there are 1 or 2 
theatres where the original version is on show). I also have my 
favourite dubbing actors. For instance Hermione's voice I'm totally 
in love with. 
Love, Alice
(I've watched POA 6 times within 10 days - is that a record, or can 
you beat that? 4 times original, twice dubbed, by the way.)




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 15:34:50 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:34:50 -0000
Subject: Quick PoA question..
In-Reply-To: <cb88gj+7i0i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9jiq+ggqd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Adan" <adanabbett at y...> wrote:

> According to imdb.com it is the same guy.  Both movies, and 
> uncredited CoS(perhaps cut scene?), for Adrian Rawlings, who is 
46, 
> for all the age-watchers out there.


While i have always imagined Lily and James looking much younger 
than the two actors they picked to play the parts -- i truly loved 
the moving photograph -- in fact the whole scene resonated well for 
me.  Particularly Dan Radcliffe's acting as he stomps up the stairs 
and kicks his trunk -- that boy certainly seems to have warmed up 
his acting chops in this film.

my two cents,
draco382




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 15:48:12 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:48:12 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cb7si9+5ofk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9kbs+kf1f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
> I don't think he's going to be the Mark Hamill 
> of his generation although I hope he doesn't have to play a mad ax 
> murderer to make us forget Harry one day. 

I have recently read a few articles in which various actors/entities 
have commented on how Dan will find it very difficult to get work 
after HP -- even though I can understand why people would say this, 
I've honestly never been able to see the resemblance between him and 
Mark Hamill.  In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP movies 
in the same basket as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
society -- which might have been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
time trying to seperate himself from the role.  

I'm a little embarrased to say this but, I've grown so fond of all 
three of the lead HP kids I would be rather disappointed if any of 
them were forced to go the B-list movies/guest-appearances in 
sitcoms/exercise video/etc... route.  I can see Dan break out and 
make it on his own (with dignity) -- he has the talent and charm to 
do so -- does anyone else feel this way?

~draco382




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Jun 22 17:14:21 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:14:21 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cb9kbs+kf1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9pdd+89pa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> > Mark Hamill.  In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP 
movies 
> in the same basket as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
> society -- which might have been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
> time trying to seperate himself from the role.  
> 
> I'm a little embarrased to say this but, I've grown so fond of all 
> three of the lead HP kids I would be rather disappointed if any of 
> them were forced to go the B-list movies/guest-appearances in 
> sitcoms/exercise video/etc... route.  I can see Dan break out and 
> make it on his own (with dignity) -- he has the talent and charm 
to 
> do so -- does anyone else feel this way?
> 
> ~draco382

No, Star Wars and HP are certainly different but I think Dan will 
have to make an effort at some point to break away from Harry. I 
know he loves the theater and that's a wonderful place to develop 
your craft and go somewhat underground so I would be willing to bet 
he pursues stage roles once his committment to HP ends. I am sure 
this has been discussed ad nauseum, but I am hoping he stays with 
the series through what ever films they make. The movies have 
suspended so many major plot points that I see no problem with him 
continuuing as a rather larger-than-described Harry. Adults won't 
mind and children may not be able to see many more of these films. I 
truly wonder how that will be dealt with. It could force the films 
to go further in order to attract those all important 14 year old 
boys. I hope we don't see it slip into serious PG-13 or even R rated 
territory...
Jennifer
A Dan fan...




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 18:53:33 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:53:33 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cb9kbs+kf1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9v7d+gjfv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:

> I have recently read a few articles in which various 
actors/entities 
> have commented on how Dan will find it very difficult to get work 
> after HP -- even though I can understand why people would say 
this, 
> I've honestly never been able to see the resemblance between him 
and 
> Mark Hamill.  In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP 
movies 
> in the same basket as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
> society -- which might have been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
> time trying to seperate himself from the role.  
> 
> I'm a little embarrased to say this but, I've grown so fond of all 
> three of the lead HP kids I would be rather disappointed if any of 
> them were forced to go the B-list movies/guest-appearances in 
> sitcoms/exercise video/etc... route.  I can see Dan break out and 
> make it on his own (with dignity) -- he has the talent and charm 
to 
> do so -- does anyone else feel this way?
> 
> ~draco382


Hmmm, I posted on this only this morning, but Yahoo!Mort ate it.  
Annoying.  

Draco382, I agree.  This morning you mentioned that you liked the 
scene where Harry kicks the desk (?) and shows such emotion.  I also 
like the one where Aunt Marge asks him if he is still here, and he 
says "yes" in that "I dare you" sort of tone.  I loved that DR is 
really sinking his teeth into Harry's persona.  I think all three of 
the trio could do well.  COULD.  Some of it, IMO, depends on the 
vehicle they jump on next, such as movie, theatre etc.  If they get 
a good part with good writing, I don't see why all three of them 
couldn't do well.  My biggest concern is Rupert Grint, because all 
he gets right now is the comic relief parts.  Don't get me wrong, he 
does wonderful at it, but I don't want him to be typecast either, as 
the loyal, funny sidekick.  It should be interesting to see what he 
does in GoF with Ron's jealousy/attitude toward Harry.  

On the other hand, as DR has put it before, if all three of them are 
known the rest of their lives as "harry potter kids", that's fine.  
DR said he could think of a lot worse things to be famous for!  It's 
great children's literature.  

Just my two knuts worth..

Alora




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Tue Jun 22 19:10:43 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:10:43 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cb9pdd+89pa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cba07j+bca7@eGroups.com>

 --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
snip 
>In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP 
> movies 
> > in the same basket as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
> > society -- which might have been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
> > time trying to seperate himself from the role.  
snip

"susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> wrote:
> No, Star Wars and HP are certainly different but I think Dan will 
> have to make an effort at some point to break away from Harry. I 
> know he loves the theater and that's a wonderful place to develop 
> your craft and go somewhat underground so I would be willing to bet 
> he pursues stage roles once his committment to HP ends. I am sure 


ME:I would have to agree that HP and Star Wars are different but so 
are Dan and Mark. Personally I think Dan is a wonderful actor so he 
should be able to transition easier than Mark Hamill did. I just 
thought I would point out however that Mark Hamill did go on Broadway 
afterwards so stage work is not necessarily the only way to break 
away but it might work for Dan (and I think the theater in London is 
awesome - not that Broadway isn't but I have not experienced actual 
Broadway only travelling productions and I have been to the theater 
while visiting London). I also read that Mark spent some time writing 
a comic book series - no idea what it was/is called though. I do 
think Dan is a better actor than Mark though. There are so many 
scenes in the original 3rd Star Wars film that I watch now and 
think "gosh Luke that was cheesy" and that is after he had acted in 
many other things including the first two films. Whereas Dan has only 
two small films and the first two HP films under his belt and I 
already think wow he can really show emotions. His anger is much more 
believeable than Mark's ever was. As for being typecast - I think 
part of that is some producer or director taking a chance on him and 
Dan willing to take that role and thus him breaking away from the 
mold. It has happened for other actors in the past (Sean Connery 
doesn't always play a James Bond type granted he has a bit more 
experience but he didn't always.) Sometimes I wonder if this is where 
the rumor of Dan not finishing the series stems from. Maybe David 
Heyman is afraid Dan will choose not to finish the series because he 
wants to break away so he mentioned the age thing to help steer the 
blame to the filmmakers. It's a thought anyway. I hope he does 
continue the series and that he is able to do so and that he can 
continue to act in other roles or direct films or maybe start a band. 
I think he is a wonderful young man who I would have gladly adopted 
before he became famous because he is just a cool kid (to steal a 
phrase from Mr Oldman) and I would like to see him continue to 
succeed. As I wish the same for the other members of the trio. 
Personally, I think Rupert might have the most difficult time being 
typecast - he still just seems too funny in the films and though it 
would not be a bad thing (look at Robin Williams and Jim Carrey) but 
I imagine him being in amusing films and not serious ones.

Theresa
Who is jealous of the number of times Alice has seen POA having only 
seen it twice myself. But it is coming to our IMAX here soon (July). 
Yeah! 




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 20:01:56 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:01:56 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cb9v7d+gjfv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cba37k+389h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora" <chrisnlorrie at y...> 
wrote:
  My biggest concern is Rupert Grint, because all 
> he gets right now is the comic relief parts.  Don't get me wrong, 
he 
> does wonderful at it, but I don't want him to be typecast either, 
as 
> the loyal, funny sidekick.  It should be interesting to see what 
he 
> does in GoF with Ron's jealousy/attitude toward Harry.  


I hear ya -- i DO hope Kloves/director#3 will expand a bit on 
Ron/Rupert.  I understand that the nature of cinema makes it so a 
complex book character requires some "shaving down" in order to make 
the transition to screen...but I still cringe - as many of us do - 
when poor Ron is reduced to mugging.  Rupert showed brilliantly in 
POA that he was capable of some really first-rate comedy and 
subtlety -- i'm sure he could pull off angry_that_he's_poor!Ron just 
as well.

I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but since we are on the 
topic of Ron being typecast as funny sidekick, this reminded me that 
Harrison Ford was also the "funny sidekick-type" of the Star Wars 
films...now you can't tell me that he didn't make a pretty good 
career after SW!!!  

draco382




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Jun 22 20:06:03 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:06:03 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cba07j+bca7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cba3fb+6228@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at c...> 
wrote:
> 
> ME:I would have to agree that HP and Star Wars are different but 
so 
> are Dan and Mark. (snip)
 I do  think Dan is a better actor than Mark though. There are so 
many scenes in the original 3rd Star Wars film that I watch now and 
> think "gosh Luke that was cheesy" and that is after he had acted 
in many other things including the first two films. 
> Theresa
> Who is jealous of the number of times Alice has seen POA having 
only 
> seen it twice myself. But it is coming to our IMAX here soon 
(July). 
> Yeah!

Jennifer here,
I didn't mean to make a one-to-one comparison of Mark and Dan. I was 
only referring to the phenomenon of being in a really big movie and 
being (for a while anyway) instantly recognizable around the world. 
Dan was a very heart-warming little chap in "David Copperfield." He 
made my daughter sob when he showed up at Aunt Sally's barefoot and 
raggedy. I have to wonder if the directors understand what he's 
capable of. I loved the bits where he showed strong emotion and I 
just felt in my gut he had much more in him that they weren't 
prepared to use. Harry should have gotten to struggle with the 
Patronus charm longer. That would have made much more of an impact 
when he finally got it right. It would have added so much depth to 
our understanding of the turmoil of wanting to be invincible but 
being afraid you'd never hear those voices again, voices you can't 
remember ever hearing before. So I give Dan credit. He made the 
movie come alive for those of us who love the story itself. The 
scenery and the style of film-making were fabulous but, and this is 
what I think is at the crux of all this debate, I think Cuaron made 
his movie using HP as useful source material. There were several 
instances when what he did was clever, but it wasn't HP. Now I love 
the film, but I really loved the original story and would have loved 
to see it more evident in the film but, as JKR said, it was his 
baby. I just couldn't understand such things as a "Tom" that looked 
more like the uncle on Addams family than the klndly toothless 
innkeeper I had heard about. I couldn't understand why we needed the 
comic relief of the shrunken heads. I thought the original scene was 
perfectly comic as it was. I couldn't understand motivations for 
things. Why did Fudge and McGonnagal seem to be rushing to explain 
the situation to Madam Rosemerta? I knew that this book wouldn't be 
easy to adapt, but I didn't know we'd have to sacrifice so much of 
the plot and plausability. I could go on but I won't. You may have 
heard all this before. I still love the movie and will see it again. 

Jennifer, who started out cheering for Dan and ended on a slight 
rant. Apologies....




From siskiou at vcem.com  Tue Jun 22 20:19:55 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:19:55 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <cba37k+389h@eGroups.com>
References: <cb9v7d+gjfv@eGroups.com> <cba37k+389h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <32124003.20040622131955@vcem.com>



Hi,

Tuesday, June 22, 2004, 1:01:56 PM, draco382 at yahoo.com wrote:

> I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but since we are on the
> topic of Ron being typecast as funny sidekick, this reminded me that
> Harrison Ford was also the "funny sidekick-type" of the Star Wars
> films...now you can't tell me that he didn't make a pretty good
> career after SW!!!  

But they didn't take away everything *but* the comedy from
"Han Solo". He still had his brave side, and Leia wasn't
turned into the best of them all, who dragged her friends
around with her and was the only one who had a clue. ;)

Rupert did very well in the first movie, with varied
reactions and emotions. Maybe a little too well, since he
was somewhat overshadowing the hero of the films.

I thought it enlightening how much Ron was changed when he
came back in the second movie, and now in the third, and I
don't believe it's acting ability that made them cut down
Rupert so much.

In Cos, they still left him a few serious glimpses, but even
that vanished almost completely in PoA.

He is good with anything they have given him, but if he is
given nothing but one liners here and there...

And Rupert seems quiet and not the kind of guy who complains
and asks for more.
He seems happy with whatever he is given, and may not
realize how much is missing until he sees the end product, since
several scenes he is in were cut from the movie.

I'm not sure either of the three even worry about future
movies apart from HP, at this point.

They are young, and making great money, and could probably
lead comfortable lives without ever doing another film, if
they and their parents use the money wisely.

Many actors have stepped away from project foe fear of being
type cast, and found out it was a bad move, later.

Apart from silly teenage movies, there isn't really that
much out there for teenage actors, so maybe sticking with
HP would not be a bad thing for all three.

We'll just have to wait and see how they develop, and if
their acting abilities and interest grow with them into adulthood.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From f.klecka at mppl.lib.in.us  Tue Jun 22 12:45:28 2004
From: f.klecka at mppl.lib.in.us (florenceklecka)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 12:45:28 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me
Message-ID: <cb99l8+muoq@eGroups.com>

Hello all:

After reading hundreds of opinions, I've decided to add my 2 knuts. 
The main reason I joined this discussion group was because after my 
husband and I saw PoA, we sat there in disbelief, muttering, "Oh, 
*hell* no!" that this was the way to end a movie that had been at 
least a half hour too short and so different in focus, 
characterization, and "feel" of the book. I was dying to see if 
anyone else had been so disappointed. And yes, I was gratified to 
learn that there were dozens of people who had problems with the 
movie, and that we weren't insane.
I'm happy for the people who enjoyed it, and can understand why. Yes, 
there were some enjoyable parts. Yes, there *is* no funnier line 
than "You tell those spiders, Ron." And yes, it does improve on a 
second viewing, once the shock of all the unnecessary changes has 
worn off. 
But the thing that makes the movie disappointing for me is this: 
things that don't make sense. In a well-made movie, there might be 
one or two little things that make the audience (or just a nitpicking 
person like me) say "huh?" That's fine and to be expected, since 
movies are made by humans. But when it happens every few minutes, you 
start asking yourself: "This man was handed how many millions to make 
this film, and no one caught *that*? And *that*? And *that*?"
Examples: pumpkins being huge in spring/summer, long before they're 
in season; the absence of Hedwig's cage; Sirius, thrilled to see 
Harry, growling and barking at him (and yes, just about everyone on 
the planet except Cuaron can tell the difference between an angry dog 
and a friendly one); Harry (who does not cry) crying; Tom being a 
prosperous and well-dressed, professional innkeeper suddenly turning 
into Igor; Lupin inexplicably waiting endless seconds before 
realizing that Harry is next in line and has conjured up a dementor, 
then inexplicably admitting that he expected something else even more 
horrifying to the rest of the class *but not doing anything about it* 
such as, oh, I don't know, maybe skipping Harry's turn completely 
(what a great idea! Why didn't someone like J.K. Rowling think of 
that!); Harry having absolutely no curiosity about how several people 
know what the map is; shoeprints to show Pettigrew in the film, yet 
in the credits, pawprints to show Sirius; Crabbe and Goyle suddenly 
being played by different actors in different scenes, as if no one 
will notice; wand magic being performed during the summer, with no 
consequences; Pettigrew's clothes on the floor...
And yes, the list does go on. Each of these aren't so bad, but when 
they keep cropping up, it really is a distraction, to put it mildly. 
I don't like to have to *ignore* aspects of every other scene to 
enjoy a film. It's like reading great literature with typos on every 
other page. (Which reminds me: the misspelling of Moony...)

That's enough for now. By the way, I think a perfect choice for 
Umbridge would be Dawn French, but of course she's busy.... 






From clshannon at aol.com  Wed Jun 23 00:25:57 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:25:57 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Definition of a "good movie" for me
Message-ID: <1ad.253b01c1.2e0a2815@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/22/04 5:21:06 PM, f.klecka at mppl.lib.in.us writes:


> Examples: pumpkins being huge in spring/summer, long before they're
> in season;
> 

Not to be flip, but it is as 'magic' school - I had no trouble believing that 
they could have plants 'out of season' <g> I find it hard to believe that 
pumpkins in the spring would bother anyone when it seems perfectly okay to have a 
'live, rather nasty' tree on the premises, along with hundreds of other out 
of the ordinary things - as in 'magic' things ;-)
Cindy


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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 23 03:55:05 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 03:55:05 -0000
Subject: Harry's wand
Message-ID: <cbauup+qh75@eGroups.com>

I got wallpaper and screensaver pics off my PoA soundtrack, and I 
noticed on the wallpaper that Harry has a new wand.  Anyone know 
where a wand maker might have a harry wand look-a-like yet?  I have 
four wands, one that looks like Harry's first wand, but I'd like a 
wand that looks a bit like the new one.  Any ideas?

Alora




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 16:06:37 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:06:37 -0000
Subject: Quick PoA question..
In-Reply-To: <cb9jiq+ggqd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cb9led+roaq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:

> While i have always imagined Lily and James looking much younger 
> than the two actors they picked to play the parts -- i truly loved 
> the moving photograph -- in fact the whole scene resonated well 
for 
> me.  Particularly Dan Radcliffe's acting as he stomps up the 
stairs 
> and kicks his trunk -- that boy certainly seems to have warmed up 
> his acting chops in this film.
> 
> my two cents,
> draco382

I agree!  I loved that scene, too. I also loved how he answered Aunt 
Marge when she said, "Are you still here?"  and the way he 
said "YES" was right on, in character.  I think DR has really 
matured in this film, acting-wise.  Maybe the change in directors? I 
hope Mike Newell can pull an even better performance out of him in 
GoF

Alora




From bolle17 at frisurf.no  Tue Jun 22 14:59:03 2004
From: bolle17 at frisurf.no (Pernille)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:59:03 -0000
Subject: PoA, have to get this of my chest.
In-Reply-To: <1a3.25dee949.2e0818c2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cb9hfn+rtno@eGroups.com>

> Eh, so did I. And its not really personal, its how he's described 
in the 
> book. 

 Oh yeah, that's right. It's been some time since I've read the book.

>(sort of like Kenneth Braughn in CoS).

Yes that was good casting. :)

> I was really pleased that they used half-animatronic and half-CGI 
for him, it 
> really made a difference, he looked so real. 

I know :D

> I've always thought of Malfoy as the typical bully: proud and      
> arrogant, but when it comes down to it, a complete wimp. As for the 
> previous movies, he was rather wimpish in PS/SS when him and Harry 
> are in the forest (running away screaming comes to mind), and my   
> memory is less clear on CoS, but he didn't quite have a proud      
> reaction after he's knocked over during the dueling club scene. 
> I'll give you that they went a little too far in making Malfoy     
> wimpy in PoA, 
> but it (IMO) is in his nature...
> -Rebecca

I agree with what you're saying, but even in the forest scene in 
PS/SS he denies that he is scared up until the point they see 
Voldemort. That's how I see him, proud and arrogant until it really 
get's bad. In CoS he is not scared at all of Ron when he is about to 
put a spell on him. Perhaps that has something to do with Ron, Malfoy 
must know that Herminie is more powerful then him despite of her 
being a "mudblood", but to start wimping immediately is not like him.

Take Care
Pernille






From artsylynda at aol.com  Wed Jun 23 15:32:46 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:32:46 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] quick PoA question
Message-ID: <f.2ca0ee78.2e0afc9e@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/23/2004 5:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


While i have always imagined Lily and James looking much younger  
than the two actors they picked to play the parts -- i truly loved 
the  moving photograph -- in fact the whole scene resonated well for 
me.   Particularly Dan Radcliffe's acting as he stomps up the stairs 
and kicks  his trunk -- that boy certainly seems to have warmed up 
his acting chops  in this film.

my two cents,
draco382
 




Yes, that scene rings SO true!!  And I LOVED him sitting  there in an 
absolute rage yet the heartbreak showed too, in his glance at the  picture of his 
parents dancing gaily in the falling leaves.  What I DON'T  get is why they 
didn't get a man who's the right age to be James Potter and has  thick, messy dark 
hair, heavy eyebrows and a slight dimple in his chin, so  he looks like Dan!  
The hair is the biggest thing -- James' hair has never  looked like he could 
be at all related to Harry, whether it was the  "neater-haired" Harry of SS and 
CoS or the more appropriately messy-haired Harry  of PoA (and didn't they do 
a great job with his hair this time!  THAT's the  Harry I've been picturing 
all along!)  

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 Jun 23 15:39:22 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:39:22 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Various PoA answers
Message-ID: <1a8.252fa028.2e0afe2a@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/23/2004 5:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I have  recently read a few articles in which various actors/entities 
have  commented on how Dan will find it very difficult to get work 
after HP --  even though I can understand why people would say this, 
I've honestly  never been able to see the resemblance between him and 
Mark Hamill.   In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP movies 
in the same basket  as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
society -- which might have  been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
time trying to seperate himself from  the role.  

I'm a little embarrased to say this but, I've grown so  fond of all 
three of the lead HP kids I would be rather disappointed if  any of 
them were forced to go the B-list movies/guest-appearances in  
sitcoms/exercise video/etc... route.  I can see Dan break out and  
make it on his own (with dignity) -- he has the talent and charm to 
do  so -- does anyone else feel this  way?

~draco382




Oh, absolutely.  I think Dan will be a fine dramatic actor,  Emma will be an 
actress like the one in "Pirates of the Caribbean" (sorry, can't  think of her 
name) who gets lots of interesting parts.  Rupert has the  makings of a good 
actor but I know his interest is in comedy.  He does a  good job with the 
comedic things they give him.  Given a stronger role (why  oh WHY do they give 
Hermione all of Ron's good lines???), he may shine as  well.
 
As for the comparison with Mark Hamill -- Mark Hamill grew up to be  not very 
tall, not very attractive, and then his face was burned in a fire, if I  
recall correctly.  I think that was the main reason he got so little work  (but I 
could have him confused with someone else).  Honestly?  How  many actors are 
worth the kind of money Dan is right now?  Maybe a lot of  what we're hearing 
is sour grapes.  Just think if he builds a serious  acting career on top of his 
Harry Potter success.  There will be lots of  "green eyes" in the 
entertainment industry, and I don't mean Harry's!   heehee  I honestly think Dan's got 
the makings of a long-term career.   Hugh Grant better watch out!  Dan's right 
on his coat-tails, and with a  huge built-in fanbase!   
:-D
 
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 Jun 23 15:48:19 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:48:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Quick PoA question
Message-ID: <137.3088269d.2e0b0043@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/23/2004 5:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

the  whole scene resonated well 
for 
> me.  Particularly Dan  Radcliffe's acting as he stomps up the 
stairs 
> and kicks his trunk  -- that boy certainly seems to have warmed up 
> his acting chops in  this film.
> 
> my two cents,
> draco382

I  agree!  I loved that scene, too. I also loved how he answered Aunt  
Marge when she said, "Are you still here?"  and the way he 
said  "YES" was right on, in character.  I think DR has really 
matured in  this film, acting-wise.  Maybe the change in directors? I 
hope Mike  Newell can pull an even better performance out of him in  
GoF

Alora





His "Yes" to Marge was SO perfectly done.  I felt the same way  in CoS when 
he answered Vernon "I'll be staying in my room and being quiet and  acting like 
I don't exist" or whatever the line was.  Perfect  delivery.  The kids seem 
excited about having a British director.  I  hope he pulls even better 
performances out of them!
 
Lynda Sappington

_Equine Art by Lynda  Sappington_ (http://www.thesculptedhorse.com/)  Elegant 
equine art in bronze, cold-cast  porcelain, handcast paper and resin. Also 
jewelry with an equine theme in 14K  gold and sterling silver.

Lynda 
* * *
". . .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 Jun 23 15:49:55 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:49:55 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry's wand
Message-ID: <110.33acb5cd.2e0b00a3@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 6/23/2004 5:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I got  wallpaper and screensaver pics off my PoA soundtrack, and I 
noticed on the  wallpaper that Harry has a new wand.  Anyone know 
where a wand maker  might have a harry wand look-a-like yet?  I have 
four wands, one that  looks like Harry's first wand, but I'd like a 
wand that looks a bit like  the new one.  Any ideas?

Alora





I noticed Hermione's wand was also different, with vines carved in  a spiral 
along the length of it.  Much prettier than their original  wands.  Wonder why 
they changed (other than the fact that they  "could")?  Somebody must have 
been dissatisfied with the  originals.
 
 
Lynda 
* * *
". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs.  Figg, OoP


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




From twinslove at mindspring.com  Wed Jun 23 16:33:22 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:33:22 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Various PoA answers
References: <1a8.252fa028.2e0afe2a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <40D9B0D2.000001.03244@TWINKIES>

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


In a message dated 6/23/2004 5:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I have  recently read a few articles in which various actors/entities 
have  commented on how Dan will find it very difficult to get work 
after HP --  even though I can understand why people would say this, 
I've honestly  never been able to see the resemblance between him and 
Mark Hamill.   In fact, I don't think i would even put the HP movies 
in the same basket  as the Star Wars films in terms of impact on 
society -- which might have  been why Mark Hamill had such a hard 
time trying to seperate himself from  the role. >>

You know it happens more with kids in TV roles than movies, & that is
a concern some actors feel could ruin their careers.  Recently, they have
had a hard time casting the role for Superman, because certain actors
were worried that they would turn out like Christopher Reed, who did have
trouble getting roles after the original Superman movies. But look at 
Toby Maquire, who plays Spiderman, I think his career has bloosom.  It
bothers me that people label children before they have had a chance to
prove themselves. I hope that Dan proves them all wrong, because like you,
I think he has what it takes to succeed. Also, Dan has other passions
besides acting.  We may see him become another Rob Reiner (Meathead from
"All In The Family") or Ron Howard (Happy Days, etc), or he could become
a writer or more into his music.... He is so young, has his whole life in
front of him, and he has money.  He could open his own production company!
LOL!
Anyway, he could have a hard time, but he could decide to take a break
from acting for a while too. Refresh and come back strong.  I just wish 
people wouldn't label him or the other two while they are so young.  I
want all three of them to succeed!   

Kimberly

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




From shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com  Wed Jun 23 17:46:18 2004
From: shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com (shannon.koch at pharma.novartis.com)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 13:46:18 -0400
Subject: My second viewing and some things I realized
Message-ID: <OF40049195.771F9A6D-ON85256EBC.005FA730-85256EBC.00619FC7@EU.novartis.net>


Dear all,

This is my second post to the group, my first being right after I saw the
film the first time when it opened at midnight in the US and I have to say,
because I am such a fan of the book, my initial take on the film was utter
disappointment because it did not follow it the way I had always envisioned
as it was for a lot of people.  However, after reading so many posts and
taking into consideration the truth that, yes, books and movies are
different vehicles and since I saw the PS/SS without ever having read a
book and loved it so much it got me into reading the series I decided it
was only fair to give it a second viewing with the thought of only seeing
it as a movie which I did yesterday afternoon during an extended lunch
break from work.

My back story being told, I have to say going in with no expectations other
than enjoying the visual world of HP I did enjoy the movie that much more
this time and I was able to look for things I had not paid attention to the
first time that have come up on the list.

Dumbledore's nails had never registered with me the first time, but now see
them and it is a bit disturbing, however given his age and remembering how
my grandmother's nails used to look at 75 (not quite as bad, but similar) I
can forgive that, though I still am disappointed that they changed the
character so much.  I know a new actor plays him differently, but IMHO
Gambon's DD is nothing like the written character would ever be.  He does
not seem as wise as I know DD is and while I know no one will ever be
Richard Harris, the character should not be so totally different in dress
and personality as to confuse people from one film to another.

There was a lot of speculation in earlier posts on whether Trelawney was an
animagus because of the cat on the chair and her subsequent hairball cough
after delivering the prediction to Harry.  Well I stared so hard at that
scene because I never had a feeling this was true and in the very end you
can still see the back end of the cat peeking out behind her as Harry is
turning to leave so I am happy to report that she is human, not that I ever
had a doubt.  I was not sure if I saw anyone else post this yet and sorry
if you have.

The ticking during H/H time turner scene.  I think I noticed it the first
time and never made a mental note and then saw so many posts from people
who had seen it 2 -3 times and did not hear it that I started to wonder
myself, though I was totally delighted to see this time that I definitely
did hear it.  there are times when it fades out almost totally but it
always comes back.

There were other things I though could have been added as do most people,
like a better explanation of the map but those are small issues that I can
live with I guess cause I have that knowledge.

So I guess the reason I am writing is to just amend my earlier panning of
the film and to ask some of those who, like me, were disappointed  to try
to see it as I did, as just a film and see the story that Cuaron/Kloves
tell as it's own and save the movie we have in our heads for when we red
the book again.

Shannon





From draco382 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 23 19:12:26 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 19:12:26 -0000
Subject: PoA, have to get this of my chest.
In-Reply-To: <cb9hfn+rtno@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbckmq+pfeo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Pernille" <bolle17 at f...> wrote:
> I agree with what you're saying, but even in the forest scene in 
> PS/SS he denies that he is scared up until the point they see 
> Voldemort. That's how I see him, proud and arrogant until it 
really 
> get's bad. In CoS he is not scared at all of Ron when he is about 
to 
> put a spell on him. Perhaps that has something to do with Ron, 
Malfoy 
> must know that Herminie is more powerful then him despite of her 
> being a "mudblood", but to start wimping immediately is not like 
him.


I was a bit disappointed with that particular characterization of 
Draco too...I really can't seem him cowering the way he did when 
faced with the teeth-end of Hermione's wand.  Maybe on the inside, 
but not so blatently while in front of Harry, Ron, Goyle and 
Crabbe.  However...i must also say that practically ALL the people 
in the movie are VERY broad caricatures of their book-selves -- 
which is probably at the very heart of why so many listees have 
stated that they don't like the films.  

I really don't envy the production company for these films -- if 
they don't take the time to create a multi-faceted charater, they 
lose half of what makes these books so charming, and if they take 
too much time with character development, they lose half the 
audience!




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Jun 23 20:23:55 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 21:23:55 +0100
Subject: Dan Radcliffe/Mark Hamill
Message-ID: <v01540b00bcfe6031286f@[217.154.250.171]>

Yeah, well... being in Star Wars didn't do Harrison Ford any harm. Possibly
because he's a better actor than Hamill. The key point is the actors' aims
and their basic abilities. I actually think Radcliffe has the potential to
be better than both.

Even if Radcliffe stays with the entire HP series, there's no real reason
why he should be typecast, as long as he doesn't expect his post-HP career
to be made up of starring roles all the way. Let's face it, he won't need
to earn a living...he's already set up for life financially; so he can
concentrate on the things which interest him. He's said that he would like
to direct and/or write, and neither of these goals is likely to be affected
by a face that's known as being Harry Potter's.

I agree with those who have pointed out that Radcliffe actually looks quite
different to Potter, and he would be wise to maintain the differences.
Also; it may not be apparent to those of you in the US, but here in the UK,
the Trio actually keep a pretty low public profile; there have been *no*
interviews or chat-shows to coincide with the release of PoA. The one TV
programme about the making of the movie was definitely a Warner Bros effort
and I think will probably show up again on the DVD. We saw the Trio on the
news at the premiere, but other than that, absolutely nothing. I'm fairly
willing to bet that this is policy on the part of the Trio's families.
Having a high profile overseas is one thing, but when your kids attend a
normal school and you want them to have as real a life as possible, you
really wouldn't encourage media attention at home. In other words, the kids
are being as well-grounded as possible in their unusual circumstances.

Finally, look at Radcliffe's role models. Actors like Maggie Smith, Alan
Rickman, Gary Oldman and even Ken Branagh, are not 'Hollywood Stars'. They
rarely give interviews or seek publicity. They are thoroughly competent and
professional actors who show up, do a superb job in whatever they are cast;
hero, villain, leading role, cameo, you name it...and then go home and live
real lives. Theatre work in Britain is considered just as important (and by
some, far more important) than film and TV work. Surrounded by that kind of
philosophy in his working life, Radcliffe could have quite a different
approach to a 'Hollywood Star' who made the big time in one movie, or one
series, and is made to feel that he is a failure unless he maintains the
same kind of profile throughout his career. Living in Britain actually
gives him more options than he would have elsewhere.

Good luck to him!

Cheers,
Nicholas





From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Wed Jun 23 19:49:42 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 19:49:42 -0000
Subject: My second viewing and some things I realized
In-Reply-To: <OF40049195.771F9A6D-ON85256EBC.005FA730-85256EBC.00619FC7@EU.novartis.net>
Message-ID: <cbcmsm+14ne@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, shannon.koch at p... wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> This is my second post to the group, my first being right after I 
saw the
> film the first time when it opened at midnight in the US and I have 
to say,
> because I am such a fan of the book, my initial take on the film 
was utter
> disappointment because it did not follow it the way I had always 
envisioned
> as it was for a lot of people.  However, after reading so many 
posts and
> taking into consideration the truth that, yes, books and movies are
> different vehicles and since I saw the PS/SS without ever having 
read a
> book and loved it so much it got me into reading the series I 
decided it
> was only fair to give it a second viewing with the thought of only 
seeing
> it as a movie which I did yesterday afternoon during an extended 
lunch
> break from work.
> 
> My back story being told, I have to say going in with no 
expectations other
> than enjoying the visual world of HP I did enjoy the movie that 
much more
> this time and I was able to look for things I had not paid 
attention to the
> first time that have come up on the list.
> 
> Dumbledore's nails had never registered with me the first time, but 
now see
> them and it is a bit disturbing, however given his age and 
remembering how
> my grandmother's nails used to look at 75 (not quite as bad, but 
similar) I
> can forgive that, though I still am disappointed that they changed 
the
> character so much.  I know a new actor plays him differently, but 
IMHO
> Gambon's DD is nothing like the written character would ever be.  
He does
> not seem as wise as I know DD is and while I know no one will ever 
be
> Richard Harris, the character should not be so totally different in 
dress
> and personality as to confuse people from one film to another.
> 
> There was a lot of speculation in earlier posts on whether 
Trelawney was an
> animagus because of the cat on the chair and her subsequent 
hairball cough
> after delivering the prediction to Harry.  Well I stared so hard at 
that
> scene because I never had a feeling this was true and in the very 
end you
> can still see the back end of the cat peeking out behind her as 
Harry is
> turning to leave so I am happy to report that she is human, not 
that I ever
> had a doubt.  I was not sure if I saw anyone else post this yet and 
sorry
> if you have.
> 
> The ticking during H/H time turner scene.  I think I noticed it the 
first
> time and never made a mental note and then saw so many posts from 
people
> who had seen it 2 -3 times and did not hear it that I started to 
wonder
> myself, though I was totally delighted to see this time that I 
definitely
> did hear it.  there are times when it fades out almost totally but 
it
> always comes back.
> 
> There were other things I though could have been added as do most 
people,
> like a better explanation of the map but those are small issues 
that I can
> live with I guess cause I have that knowledge.
> 
> So I guess the reason I am writing is to just amend my earlier 
panning of
> the film and to ask some of those who, like me, were disappointed  
to try
> to see it as I did, as just a film and see the story that 
Cuaron/Kloves
> tell as it's own and save the movie we have in our heads for when 
we red
> the book again.
> 
> Shannon

Hey Shannon,
I am happy to hear that you liked it better the second time. I would 
have to agree with you. My first time was on the 24th of May at a 
sneak preview and in fact I wrote in my post #8756 on this list:

"I will try not spoil it for any of you but I will give you all one
piece of advice - go in thinking of seeing a great film about Harry
Potter and try not to compare it to the book like I kept doing
subconsciously - had to tell myself to stop it about half way
through - as there are LOADS of differences. Some good, some well, 
just different."

I did have some issues after I watched it the first time and had to 
reflect while the credits were running - that I knew it was not going 
to be exactly like the book so I should not have expected it to be. I 
did still enjoy it for the most part that time. And when I saw it on 
opening day - I made sure I told myself to see it as a HP film and 
not compare it. That time I thoroughly enjoyed it. Yes, I am still 
bothered by no background story on MWPP but maybe they will have some 
little blurb in #4 to say who they were. One can only hope. I know it 
always bothered me in PS/SS that Neville was not on detention - it 
was Ron and that Seamus had such a clumsy person role. He only messed 
up the feather in the book - the water to rum scene was not in my 
version of the book nor was the eyebrows line. Granted Devon is a 
neat kid but I wanted more Neville. Especially now what we know from 
OotP. I really felt sorry for him reading the first book (and yes I 
read the books and was a fan before the films). 

Anyway, I hope some of you who disliked the film will watch it again 
and even though it may not change your mind about the disappointment, 
maybe you will find something to like about it. I know I had to watch 
a version of Jane Eyre (one of my absolute favorites as a young girl) 
before I could accept Timothy Dalton as the lead. He just wasn't how 
I picture the character. I know I planned to see POA again at least 
once more in the theater as I must see it on IMAX.

Theresa





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Jun 23 20:14:38 2004
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:14:38 -0000
Subject: Dan Radcliffe/Mark Hamill
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bcfe6031286f@[217.154.250.171]>
Message-ID: <cbcobe+lgct@eGroups.com>

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

Nicholas:
> Also; it may not be apparent to those of you in the US, but here in 
the UK,
> the Trio actually keep a pretty low public profile; there have been 
*no*
> interviews or chat-shows to coincide with the release of PoA. The 
one TV
> programme about the making of the movie was definitely a Warner 
Bros effort
> and I think will probably show up again on the DVD. We saw the Trio 
on the
> news at the premiere, but other than that, absolutely nothing. I'm 
fairly
> willing to bet that this is policy on the part of the Trio's 
families.
> Having a high profile overseas is one thing, but when your kids 
attend a
> normal school and you want them to have as real a life as possible, 
you
> really wouldn't encourage media attention at home. In other words, 
the kids
> are being as well-grounded as possible in their unusual 
circumstances.

Geoff:
I thought it was time I looked in at the group - I haven't visited 
for weeks; it takes me all my time to keep up with the main group....

I would comment in respect of Nicholas' remarks that the Trio do 
appear on Newsround fairly frequently and give interviews or chat. 
For the benefit of non-UK readers, Newsround is a weekday review of 
news specifically for children and young people. It is part of the 
CBBC (Children's BBC) programmes each afternoon about 5.00 pm. I 
visit the archive from time to time at:

news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/find_out/specials/2001/harry_potter/default
.stm

It's quite worth a browse - the archive goes way back to the early 
days.




From jeanico at securenet.net  Wed Jun 23 20:30:51 2004
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:30:51 -0000
Subject: Dan Radcliffe/Mark Hamill
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bcfe6031286f@[217.154.250.171]>
Message-ID: <cbcp9r+a7ha@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, nicholas at a... wrote:
snip
> Finally, look at Radcliffe's role models. Actors like Maggie 
Smith, Alan
> Rickman, Gary Oldman and even Ken Branagh, are not 'Hollywood 
Stars'. They
> rarely give interviews or seek publicity. They are thoroughly 
competent and
> professional actors who show up, do a superb job in whatever they 
are cast;
> hero, villain, leading role, cameo, you name it...and then go home 
and live
> real lives. Theatre work in Britain is considered just as 
important (and by
> some, far more important) than film and TV work. Surrounded by 
that kind of
> philosophy in his working life, Radcliffe could have quite a 
different
> approach to a 'Hollywood Star' who made the big time in one movie, 
or one
> series, and is made to feel that he is a failure unless he 
maintains the
> same kind of profile throughout his career. Living in Britain 
actually
> gives him more options than he would have elsewhere.
> 
> Good luck to him!
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicholas

You are quite right, Nicholas... British movie actors do not usually 
have that "Hollywood Star" type mentality or approach. Makes for a 
huge difference in attitude! I've met Daniel Radcliffe in person and 
he is absolutely delightful, extremely polite and really quite 
humble. Also, on a side note, it seems to be easier for British 
movie actresses to find work, even when they get older (contrary to 
the Hollywood mentality, which worships younger, more beautiful 
women, thus making it harder for older actresses to get good movie 
roles!)
Just my 2 cents worth,
Nicole  




From dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 23 22:55:04 2004
From: dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com (Claire)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 15:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Some thoughts about the next movie
In-Reply-To: <cb4um6+1lq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040623225504.78201.qmail@web40904.mail.yahoo.com>

> In the movie all of the "tension" scenes are extra,
> as in Harry is not directly there.  

snip

> As far as we know in canon, Ron and Hermione might 
> have had more "tense" moments during their first trip
> to Hogsmeade, we just don't get to see it.  

Interesting idea! As someone who has a soft spot for
Ron and Hermione, Rowling's quote about a prophetic
Cuaron, got me thinking about these 'tense' moments.

Claire

		




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 06:00:25 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:00:25 -0000
Subject: My second viewing and some things I realized
In-Reply-To: <cbcmsm+14ne@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbdqlp+s6s9@eGroups.com>

Theresa wrote:

>>Yes, I am still bothered by no background story on MWPP but maybe 
they will have some little blurb in #4 to say who they were. One can 
only hope.<<

Here's a question I have about that (for all of you who were very 
annoyed by that being left out), is it just that they wrote the map 
that you're upset about, or the whole backstory (with the animagus 
transformations and all)? Personally, of the things that bugged me 
about the film, that was one of the smallest. I know they wrote the 
map and the movie hints at it (they didn't change it completely - 
Sirius and Lupin clearly know all about it), and in the book the fact 
that they wrote the map is slipped into the middle of the Shrieking 
Shack scene with very little emphasis (Lupin says something to the 
effect of "Of course I know how to work it, I helped write it."). Now 
if you're talking about the animagus stuff, then that I understand, 
because that's a whole chapter. Personally, I think it would have 
been awkward in the movie, and on multiple readings it felt sort of 
awkward in the book (it was just too much of a digression, in the 
middle of the heavy situation). I think part of the reason for that 
large bit of exposition (which doesn't *quite* fit into the subject 
at hand), was to have something for Snape to overhear without him 
hearing anything important.


>> I know it always bothered me in PS/SS that Neville was not on 
detention - it was Ron and that Seamus had such a clumsy person role. 
He only messed up the feather in the book - the water to rum scene 
was not in my version of the book nor was the eyebrows line. <<

To be fair, the eyebrows scene was cut out of the movie (and only 
included in the deleted scenes). Yes, it was probably for time, but 
there's a small chance the editor/directer decided it wasn't working. 
Its things like Seamus being changed so much (at least it was only 
one movie) that bother me the most. In PoA I was more bothered by the 
changes they made to Ron, like switching his 'if you want to kill 
Harry, you'll have to kill us too.', although it worked just fine, 
its one of Ron's big moments in the books; more particularily 
the 'he's got a point, you know.' line to Snape, because it was the 
OPPOSITE of his reaction in the book, and I think that reaction would 
have worked better (him speaking out of turn to Snape would have led 
into the 'ten points from Gryffindor' better). The other thing that 
bothered me was the removal of Snape's freak-out in the hospital 
wing. It made alright sense without it, but considering they have 
Alan Rickman playing Snape (and typically all Snape does is sneer, 
which is fine, but it doesn't give him much to do). It would have 
been wonderful to see Snape whipped into a frenzy like that. (that 
was one of the things I was looking forward to the most about the 
movie). 


>>Granted Devon is a neat kid but I wanted more Neville. Especially 
now what we know from OotP. I really felt sorry for him reading the 
first book (and yes I read the books and was a fan before the 
films).<<

They haven't really given him much to do, have they? One of the best 
Neville moments is in the first book (when he stands up the Malfoy 
during the quidditch match).  
On the other hand, he did get the boggart scene in PoA (even if 
losing the passwords--or rather having the passwords stolen--was cut 
out).


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 06:34:21 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:34:21 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cb99l8+muoq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbdsld+dg5l@eGroups.com>

florenceklecka wrote:

>>The main reason I joined this discussion group was because after my
husband and I saw PoA, we sat there in disbelief, muttering, "Oh,
*hell* no!" that this was the way to end a movie that had been at 
least a half hour too short and so different in focus, 
characterization, and "feel" of the book.<<

Just curious, what did you think the feel of the book was? Because 
personally, I thought it fit the overall feel of the book quite well 
(CoS, on the other hand, was butchered).

>>I'm happy for the people who enjoyed it, and can understand why. 
Yes,there were some enjoyable parts. Yes, there *is* no funnier line
than "You tell those spiders, Ron." And yes, it does improve on a
second viewing, once the shock of all the unnecessary changes has
worn off.<<

I think I liked it so much not because of the 'movie-changes' but 
because I liked the story so much. Of course, I like all aspects of 
the book (including the many things that were left out), but the core 
story was still there on screen and that was what drew me to the book 
so much (its easily my favorite of all of them).

>>But the thing that makes the movie disappointing for me is this:
things that don't make sense.<<
You know, I expected a list of really-nitpicking things, but looking 
through the things you mentioned they were things that I noticed (the 
first viewing) as well.

>>Examples: 
pumpkins being huge in spring/summer, long before they're
in season;<<
I thought of those as sort of ornamental (like they weren't 
*growing*, but just were there) 

>>the absence of Hedwig's cage;<<
When? It was there in the beginning at least, at the Dursleys.

>> Sirius, thrilled to see Harry, growling and barking at him (and 
yes, just about everyone on the planet except Cuaron can tell the 
difference between an angry dog and a friendly one);<<
Yeah, that was a little off. Someone suggested that he might have 
just been shocked by Harry's similarity to James, so I looked for 
that in my next viewing, and its definetely growling. Doesn't make 
much sense. 

>> Harry (who does not cry) crying <<
Could be a difference between movie-Harry and book-Harry, maybe movie 
Harry does cry (I agree, btw, that book-Harry wouldn't break down and 
cry like that)

>> Tom being a prosperous and well-dressed, professional innkeeper 
suddenly turning into Igor <<
What *was* that about? Not only is it inconsisent with the previous 
Tom (from PS/SS), and it doesn't make sense (for the character-
beacause Tom isn't a simpleton) and was sort of annoying.

>> Lupin inexplicably waiting endless seconds before realizing that 
Harry is next in line and has conjured up a dementor, then 
inexplicably admitting that he expected something else even more
horrifying to the rest of the class *but not doing anything about it*
such as, oh, I don't know, maybe skipping Harry's turn completely
(what a great idea! Why didn't someone like J.K. Rowling think of
that!)<<
My explanation on that was that he mistook the dementer for 
Voldemort, otherwise it doesn't make sense at all.

>> Harry having absolutely no curiosity about how several people
know what the map is <<
I don't know about that. When Lupin reveals he knows about the map 
he's in the middle of scolding Harry, so its understandable that he'd 
keep his curiosity to himself (yes, i know he didn't in the book), 
and when Sirius said something about the map, it was another tense 
situation, so it makes sense for him to not ask about it there 
either. Remember Lupin does state (in the movie) that James was a 
trouble-maker, and he knows Lupin was James' friend, so he could have 
easily just assumed that they came across the map the same way Fred 
and George did.

>> shoeprints to show Pettigrew in the film, yet in the credits, 
pawprints to show Sirius <<
Yes, but those are the credits. Could have just been for effect/just 
for fun. 

>> Crabbe and Goyle suddenly being played by different actors in 
different scenes, as if no one will notice <<
They're still being played by the same guys. (in fact there are a few 
interviews with the kid who played Crabbe on the-leaky-cauldron.org). 
Its just that they added a new member to Draco's "gang" (you can see 
Draco, Crabbe, Goyle and the new kid together in the Care of Magical 
Creatures Class scene). For some reason the new kid is there instead 
of Goyle in a few of the scenes, but he hasn't replaced Goyle.

>> wand magic being performed during the summer, with no
consequences <<
Again, I think that's the movie world being different than the book 
world. In the movie-world, perhaps its alright to do "small" spells, 
like Lumos, and Reparo (as Hermione does in CoS), just not big magic, 
such as attacking your uncle or your cousin (they frown on that sort 
of thing).

>> Pettigrew's clothes on the floor... <<
Oh, yes, what *was* that?

>>And yes, the list does go on.<<
Out of curiosity, what else was there? (aside from Flitwick being so 
changed, of course...I know he's just listed as "wizard" in the 
credits, but who else *could* he be? he's clearly a teacher, and if 
he's not Flitwick, then where'd Flitwick go?)


-Rebecca




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Thu Jun 24 07:16:41 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:16:41 -0000
Subject: Various PoA answers
In-Reply-To: <1a8.252fa028.2e0afe2a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbdv4p+uetg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
>  SNIP
> As for the comparison with Mark Hamill -- Mark Hamill grew up to be
 not very tall, not very attractive, and then his face was burned in a
fire, if I  recall correctly.  I think that was the main reason he got
so little work  (but I could have him confused with someone else). 

I think Hamil was actually in a car accident and his face was
disfigured.  He was cute in the first two movies but you can see he
looks odd in Return of the Jedi (didn't have a good plastic surgeon or
was the best they could do for him?).  I'm not sure what else may have
contributed to his difficulty in getting good roles but I think that
Dan's parents are deeply involved in managing his career, therefore
Dan will have a better chance of handling his fame in a positive way.


 Honestly?  How  many actors are worth the kind of money Dan is right
now?  Maybe a lot of  what we're hearing is sour grapes.  Just think
if he builds a serious  acting career on top of his Harry Potter
success.  There will be lots of  "green eyes" in the entertainment
industry, and I don't mean Harry's!   heehee  I honestly think Dan's
got the makings of a long-term career.   Hugh Grant better watch out! 
Dan's right on his coat-tails, and with a  huge built-in fanbase!   
> :-D
>  
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs.  Figg, OoP
> 

>A BIG YES to that!! He is the cat's meow as it is now! :)

Karen




From karen-gary at worldnet.att.net  Thu Jun 24 07:48:47 2004
From: karen-gary at worldnet.att.net (Gary Sapp & Karen J.S.)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:48:47 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbdsld+dg5l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbe110+jk0s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...>
wrote:
> florenceklecka wrote:
SNIP> 

> >>Examples: 
> pumpkins being huge in spring/summer, long before they're
> in season; <<
I thought of those as sort of ornamental (like they weren't *growing*,
but just were there) 

I didn't think about this until my third viewing but I agree with
huntergreen-Hagrid could be growing things out of season or just
logistics.  What else could they have hidden behind?
> 
> >>the absence of Hedwig's cage; When? It was there in the beginning
at least, at the Dursleys.

I thought about this on the first viewing, wondering why he didn't
have the cage with him when he left Privet Drive but I guess it was a
continuity issue.  Hedwig was in his room before he stormed out so it
would be strange for him to take an empty cage...we would be wondering
where she went.  It works better for her to show up at the Leaky
Cauldron.  One of those things that got fussed with for visual effect.

> 
> >> Sirius, thrilled to see Harry, growling and barking at him (and 
> yes, just about everyone on the planet except Cuaron can tell the 
> difference between an angry dog and a friendly one);<<
> Yeah, that was a little off. Someone suggested that he might have 
> just been shocked by Harry's similarity to James, so I looked for 
> that in my next viewing, and its definetely growling. Doesn't make 
> much sense. 

This was a definite boo boo.  Why would Sirius growl at Harry?  Guess
Cuaron thought that was the only way to make Harry act startled and
fall over.
> 
> >> Tom being a prosperous and well-dressed, professional innkeeper 
> suddenly turning into Igor <<
> What *was* that about? Not only is it inconsisent with the previous 
> Tom (from PS/SS), and it doesn't make sense (for the character-
> beacause Tom isn't a simpleton) and was sort of annoying.
> 
This was annoying, guess it was more for laughs...and the pea soup
joke was a bit dumb too.


> >> Lupin inexplicably waiting endless seconds before realizing that 
> Harry is next in line and has conjured up a dementor, then 
> inexplicably admitting that he expected something else even more
> horrifying to the rest of the class *but not doing anything about
it* such as, oh, I don't know, maybe skipping Harry's turn completely
> (what a great idea! Why didn't someone like J.K. Rowling think of
> that!)<<
> My explanation on that was that he mistook the dementer for 
> Voldemort, otherwise it doesn't make sense at all.
> 
I would have liked to have several more students to take a crack at
the dementor, the mummy would have worked better than the snake, and a
banshee would have been a jolt too.  It just felt too rushed and ended
too abruptly.

> >> Pettigrew's clothes on the floor... <<
> Oh, yes, what *was* that?

Again something done to look more dramatic for the camera, even though
Sirius transforms and has his clothes on, weren't left in a pile
somewhere.  
> 
> >>And yes, the list does go on.<<
> Out of curiosity, what else was there? (aside from Flitwick being
so changed, of course...I know he's just listed as "wizard" in the 
> credits, but who else *could* he be? he's clearly a teacher, and if 
> he's not Flitwick, then where'd Flitwick go?)
> 
> 
> -Rebecca

The professors at the the welcoming feast, didn't have the same group-
no Sprout, Madame Pince..bunch of odd ducks.  Perhaps couldn't get the
same actors to play the parts again or written out, ala Madame Hooch.
Flitwick looked strange with dark hair....not a good change.

Biggest gaps, Sirius should have said you truly are your father's son
before he flies away...was misplaced to compliment Hermione again
(Lupin had already done so).  Also wanted someone to say  Prongs rode
again last night..don't know how they would have done it but that part
always gets to me when I read the book.

Karen

who just saw PoA for the fourth time today!!




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 08:14:31 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 04:14:31 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Various PoA answers
Message-ID: <1d5.2495627e.2e0be767@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/24/04 12:49:05 AM, karen-gary at worldnet.att.net writes:


> I think Hamil was actually in a car accident and his face was
> disfigured.? He was cute in the first two movies but you can see he
> looks odd in Return of the Jedi (didn't have a good plastic surgeon or
> was the best they could do for him?)
> 

Not to encourage all this Hamill talk ;-), but the accident was actually 
before filming the second film, right after finishing Star Wars. Remember how they 
mangled Luke's face in the opening sequence of The Empire Strikes Back with 
that big snow monster whose name I can't recall now? Well, he 'recovered' in 
the film with scars on his face. I am pretty sure they did that to explain why   
Luke looked so different in the second movie ;-)
******
 Honestly?? How? many actors are worth the kind of money Dan is right
now??
****
Hmm, I just looked up that thread on The Leaky Cauldron, but the link didn't 
work to the article. I was trying to find   out the money amount that was 
stated. But from some of the comments, it sounded like he was Britain's 2nd 
richest teenager and had surpassed Charlotte Church, who was worth something like 18 
million. If he is worth a bit more than that, then he still has a ways to go 
to beat a   lot of actors ;-) There are actors here in the states who make 
that per movie and have been making that for a while ;-) 
Think Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Julia Roberts, etc.

But I agree, good for Dan ;-) I'm sure he will make even more money in the 
future. He deserves it and I hope he has a great career doing whatever he wants. 
Lucky kid <g>
Cindy


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 10:16:31 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:16:31 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbe110+jk0s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbe9lv+106tu@eGroups.com>

Karen wrote:
>>Biggest gaps, Sirius should have said you truly are your father's 
son before he flies away...was misplaced to compliment Hermione again
(Lupin had already done so). <<

Completely agree with that one! It felt so awkward and out of 
place, 'you truly are your father's son' would have worked SO much 
better. It didn't fit with the situation at all (she was just 
standing there, he had no way to know that she had anything to do 
with the rescue beyond accompanying Harry). We need a writer or 
directer who doesn't value Hermione so much, its getting a bit over-
the-top.


-Rebecca




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Thu Jun 24 10:42:13 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:42:13 -0000
Subject: quick PoA question
In-Reply-To: <f.2ca0ee78.2e0afc9e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbeb65+kpmu@eGroups.com>

 What I DON'T  get is why they 
> didn't get a man who's the right age to be James Potter



They didn't get a younger man for the same reason Lupin and Sirius are cast 
older in the film. They have to match Alan Rickman in age. The marauders are 
not in their 30's in the films, they are about a decade older. (Of course, Alan 
Rickman is nearly 60, but is obviously supposed to be 10-15 years younger in 
the film., i. e same age as the other three.)

Christin

(hasn't this been explained about 1364 times allready ? ;) )




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 12:19:34 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:19:34 -0000
Subject: Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <cb75l0+4oqs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbegsm+58f1@eGroups.com>

> Richard Gulplum said:
> >>> Am I *completely* unreasonable in my expectation that people 
> should be prepared to back up their "feelings" with some kind of 
> rationalisation beyond "it's not like the book"? <<<
> 
> Barbara said:
> >>> Yes <<<

Time Regan responded:
> And no.
> 
> On the one hand I find people's posts most interesting when they 
do 
> have tons of rational debate behind them. But insight can come 
> without reason. As Keat's wrote to his brother "I mean Negative 
> Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in 
> uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching 
> after fact and reason".

I, Diana L. would like to add:
Me too!  Reading WHY someone dislikes something is very interesting, 
which is why I'm responding to your well-thought-out post, Tim!  
Sometimes it's very difficult to put into words WHY I don't like a 
movie, but I always make an effort to try.  My husband and I are 
both huge movie buffs and we talk movies a lot.  There are movies he 
likes and I dislike and vice versa, so I have a lot of experience 
articulating why I don't like or do like a particular movie because 
we really talk about movies we disagree on, which are very few so 
far.  :)

Tim Regan again:
> I didn't like the film either. Though I've only seen it once and I 
> may change my mind when I can do a side by side comparison with 
the DVDs. I did enjoy the cinematography, which Richard and others 
have discussed. I could also join in with the analysis of the acting 
and the plot additions, inclusions, and omissions. But what I'm 
starting to realise, and this is just a feeling, is that I do not 
like the HP movies anymore. I really liked the first one, in fact 
watching that with my family on the insistence of my daughter turned 
me onto HP in the first place. But then I read the books. For me it 
is a very rare movie that can stand-up to any comparison with a book 
you already love.  <snip>
> 
> So I think my HP film watching is doomed, PS/SS aside they are 
just never going to live up to my readings of the books, and though 
this is clearly mad, each time I go to see them I expect them too.

I, Diana L., respond:
I was overwhelmed with mixed feelings about the movie the first time 
I saw it, too.  Admittedly, I came away from the movie the first 
time pretty disappointed in the changes in scenery and locations. 
And I missed the missing scenes, namely the Quidditch cup win for 
Gryffindor.  
But then I went and saw the movie a second time, and my entire 
perspective of this movie changed.  On the second viewing, I really 
enjoyed the pacing and visuals from the swooping bats that fly out 
of the Forbidden Forest to the image of Harry falling off his broom, 
and flipping over and over as he plummets, to the birds getting 
flicked out of existence by the Whomping Willow to the image of 
Harry causing all the lights to flicker off and on as he loses his 
temper and lets Aunt Marge get what she deserves.  I know that 
Gryffindor wins the Quidditch cup in the book and I didn't let the 
fact that is wasn't shown in the movie bother me when I saw it 
again.  I let myself get past my images created from the book so I 
could see the movie for what it really is, which is a collaborative 
interpretation of the book, especially the unsettled, raging-teenage 
spirit growing at the heart of the book.  
I've seen it five times in the theater so far and I like the movie 
more with every viewing.  It doesn't mean I like the book less, just 
that I've accepted the movie as a compliment to the book, but not a 
replacment for the book.  
Not everyone is going to like this movie, and that's okay.  Movie 
tastes are very personal and some movies just don't do it for 
certain people, even it every critic and all of their friends loved 
the movie.  I would be very annoyed if everyone kept insisting that 
I should just have just loved "Saving Private Ryan", for example, 
when I didn't.
I would never stop watching movie adaptations of my favorite books, 
however, because it is intriguing to see how other people, from the 
scriptwriter to the director to the actors and set decorators 
interpret something so familiar to me.  I may be disappointed with 
their results or I may be nonplused or I may adore it to pieces, but 
I will always make an effort to see the film.   
Movie adaptations are very difficult to pull off successfully 
because the filmmakers must compete with that feeling of joyful 
discovery every person who's stumbled onto a favorite book feels 
upon reading the book the first (and second) time.  It's an 
impossible goal to achieve which is why most directors and 
scriptwriters rarely try to do it and, instead, go for an 
interpretation the book or the spirit of the book according to how 
the book made them feel personally.   
I will urge people on this list to see the movie at least twice, 
because it really made a difference for me with this movie.  It's 
much more enjoyable the second time.  No one is going to talk 
themselves into liking this movie if they just don't, so I'm not 
suggesting a second viewing for that reason.  I just know from own 
experience that seeing it again helped me get past my own view of 
what I thought the movie should be so that I could enjoy the movie 
for what it is.  


Tim Regan writes:
> Another disapointment with this is that I really had done all my 
> homework. I watched ad re-watched all Cuaron's films, and read A 
> Little Princess and Great Expectations so that I could get a sense 
> of how he approached adaptations. I would love to be able to step 
> back from the movie and just see, analyse, and talk of it as an 
> independent work. But I cannot, It was a disappointment.

I, Diana L., reply:
I had watched Cuaron's "A Little Princess" once a few years ago and 
I didn't like it because of the many changes from the book.  I 
haven't seen it since then, so I most likely will give it another 
chance and watch it again.  I'll probably be over the changes and 
able to actually enjoy the movie on my next viewing.  I haven't seen 
any of his other films yet, but plan to see a few when I get a 
chance.    

Diana L.


 




From sherriola at earthlink.net  Thu Jun 24 13:39:36 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 07:39:36 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My second viewing and some things I realized
In-Reply-To: <cbdqlp+s6s9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002e01c459f0$b1e27d10$0400a8c0@pensive>

Hi,

For me, I was upset by the fact of the back story being left out.  Since
characters and relationships are what will always get me in a book or movie,
I felt very disappointed that there wasn't a few lines talking about the
friendship among the marauders and why they became animagi ... the whole
thing.  It could really have been said in a few sentences.  Unlike you, I
found the revelations about James, Sirius, Remus and Peter to be some of the
most moving in the whole series of books.  The friends becoming animagi to
help Lupin is very touching.  Their bond makes Peter's betrayal worse,
because as Sirius said, the others would have died for him.  Oh well.  Can't
change it now.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: huntergreen_3 [mailto:patientx3 at aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 12:00 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My second viewing and some things I realized


Theresa wrote:

>>Yes, I am still bothered by no background story on MWPP but maybe 
they will have some little blurb in #4 to say who they were. One can 
only hope.<<

Here's a question I have about that (for all of you who were very 
annoyed by that being left out), is it just that they wrote the map 
that you're upset about, or the whole backstory (with the animagus 
transformations and all)? Personally, of the things that bugged me 
about the film, that was one of the smallest. I know they wrote the 
map and the movie hints at it (they didn't change it completely - 
Sirius and Lupin clearly know all about it), and in the book the fact 
that they wrote the map is slipped into the middle of the Shrieking 
Shack scene with very little emphasis (Lupin says something to the 
effect of "Of course I know how to work it, I helped write it."). Now 
if you're talking about the animagus stuff, then that I understand, 
because that's a whole chapter. Personally, I think it would have 
been awkward in the movie, and on multiple readings it felt sort of 
awkward in the book (it was just too much of a digression, in the 
middle of the heavy situation). I think part of the reason for that 
large bit of exposition (which doesn't *quite* fit into the subject 
at hand), was to have something for Snape to overhear without him 
hearing anything important.


>> I know it always bothered me in PS/SS that Neville was not on 
detention - it was Ron and that Seamus had such a clumsy person role. 
He only messed up the feather in the book - the water to rum scene 
was not in my version of the book nor was the eyebrows line. <<

To be fair, the eyebrows scene was cut out of the movie (and only 
included in the deleted scenes). Yes, it was probably for time, but 
there's a small chance the editor/directer decided it wasn't working. 
Its things like Seamus being changed so much (at least it was only 
one movie) that bother me the most. In PoA I was more bothered by the 
changes they made to Ron, like switching his 'if you want to kill 
Harry, you'll have to kill us too.', although it worked just fine, 
its one of Ron's big moments in the books; more particularily 
the 'he's got a point, you know.' line to Snape, because it was the 
OPPOSITE of his reaction in the book, and I think that reaction would 
have worked better (him speaking out of turn to Snape would have led 
into the 'ten points from Gryffindor' better). The other thing that 
bothered me was the removal of Snape's freak-out in the hospital 
wing. It made alright sense without it, but considering they have 
Alan Rickman playing Snape (and typically all Snape does is sneer, 
which is fine, but it doesn't give him much to do). It would have 
been wonderful to see Snape whipped into a frenzy like that. (that 
was one of the things I was looking forward to the most about the 
movie). 


>>Granted Devon is a neat kid but I wanted more Neville. Especially 
now what we know from OotP. I really felt sorry for him reading the 
first book (and yes I read the books and was a fan before the 
films).<<

They haven't really given him much to do, have they? One of the best 
Neville moments is in the first book (when he stands up the Malfoy 
during the quidditch match).  
On the other hand, he did get the boggart scene in PoA (even if 
losing the passwords--or rather having the passwords stolen--was cut 
out).


-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 Links



 




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 16:06:03 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:06:03 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <cbdsld+dg5l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbeu5b+rrlc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...> 
wrote:
> florenceklecka wrote:
> 
> >>The main reason I joined this discussion group was because after 
my
> husband and I saw PoA, we sat there in disbelief, muttering, "Oh,
> *hell* no!" that this was the way to end a movie that had been at 
> least a half hour too short and so different in focus, 
> characterization, and "feel" of the book.<<
> 
> Just curious, what did you think the feel of the book was? Because 
> personally, I thought it fit the overall feel of the book quite 
well 
> (CoS, on the other hand, was butchered).


I snipped many of the previous comments for the sake of space, but 
let me just say I think they are all very good points.  In addition, 
I just wanted to pose one question.  It is fairly obvious that the 
movie-makers are definetly leaning Ron/Hermione.  The movie has 
become terribly coy and suggestive (and blatant) about Ron and 
Hermione "ending up together" and even in interviews, the cast now 
openly says that there is something going on with Ron and Hermione.  
Wow -- that's quite an assumption to make!  Now, I'm personally not 
shipping in one direction or another, but it surprises me that such 
a strong opinion about this would be expressed -- especially when 
JKR has a penchant for throwing her audience WAAAAY off guard at the 
last minute.  I am under the impression that the movie makers really 
don't "get" JKR and for that matter, Harry Potter at all.  

Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly 
when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron 
will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and 
Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??  Does anyone 
else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in trying 
to out-guess JKR?  

draco382 (who really does like the movie though...)  




From siskiou at vcem.com  Thu Jun 24 16:22:59 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:22:59 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should not be movies
In-Reply-To: <cbegsm+58f1@eGroups.com>
References: <cb75l0+4oqs@eGroups.com> <cbegsm+58f1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1871113248.20040624092259@vcem.com>



Hi,

Thursday, June 24, 2004, 5:19:34 AM, dianasdolls at yahoo.com wrote:

>  I just know from own 
> experience that seeing it again helped me get past my own view of
> what I thought the movie should be so that I could enjoy the movie
> for what it is.  


I've seen it three times, and unfortunately, my impression
has not improved much.

Maybe it's because my main problems were not the changed
scenery, or little inconsistencies, or leaving out large
parts of the plot, but the characterization of Harry, Ron
and Hermione.

This is just something that does not improve on second or
more viewings, and only becomes more glaring.

And I can't see a compelling reason for these changes.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From tmarends at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 16:26:17 2004
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:26:17 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <cbeu5b+rrlc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbevb9+m9uh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly 
> when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron 
> will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and 
> Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??  Does anyone 
> else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in trying 
> to out-guess JKR?  
> 
> draco382 (who really does like the movie though...)

I don't know what you were like at that age, but in my school it was 
very common to change bf/gf relationships all the time.  The person 
somebody likes at 13 isn't necessarily the one they like at 17.

I, personally, have no problem with the movies leaning towards 
Ron/Hermione.  It's sort of been pushed to give more emotion (I hope) 
to putting Krum into the mix in the next film.  And then you add Luna 
to the mix in film 5.  So it's Ron/Hermione/Krum/Luna... 

Tim




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 16:41:56 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:41:56 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <cbevb9+m9uh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbf08k+mmi9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim" <tmarends at y...> wrote:

> I don't know what you were like at that age, but in my school it 
was 
> very common to change bf/gf relationships all the time.  The 
person 
> somebody likes at 13 isn't necessarily the one they like at 17.
> 
> I, personally, have no problem with the movies leaning towards 
> Ron/Hermione.  It's sort of been pushed to give more emotion (I 
hope) 
> to putting Krum into the mix in the next film.  And then you add 
Luna 
> to the mix in film 5.  So it's Ron/Hermione/Krum/Luna... 

Oh, i absolutely agree -- teenagers are commonly very fickle about 
their relationships, and I certainly don't have any issue with that 
in HP, but that's exactly what I think has been overlooked by the 
film makers -- it just sounds like they are so darn sure that 
Hermione and Ron have "chemistry" that they have practically hooked 
the two up already (and strengthened their case by repeating it over 
and over in interviews....) -- I just feel like it will fall flat if 
at the end these two don't end up together (which is very possible) 
after building up all this *tension*!  

meh...just my ramblings...

draco382





From HMaffioli at cox.net  Thu Jun 24 17:22:33 2004
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:22:33 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Some thoughts about the next movie
References: <cb4um6+1lq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009201c45a0f$d606ddc0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>

Amdorn:
I will tell you I have a gut feeling as to who is going to end up 
with whom, but this is not the list for that.  Now in the next movie 
hopefully we will get more of the "out-of-Harry's view" scenes of 
Hermione and Ron.  


There seems to be quite a lot of contact between Ron and Hermione "off page" through out the books.  We often find that they have been in contact by post druing the summer as well as Hermione arriving at the Burrow in GOF before Harry and at GP in OOTP before Harry. 
~Heather





________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 Ali at zymurgy.org  Thu Jun 24 18:15:40 2004
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 18:15:40 -0000
Subject: Dan Radcliffe/Mark Hamill
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bcfe6031286f@[217.154.250.171]>
Message-ID: <cbf5oc+d62f@eGroups.com>

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

>>> Also; it may not be apparent to those of you in the US, but here 
in the UK, the Trio actually keep a pretty low public profile; there 
have been *no* interviews or chat-shows to coincide with the release 
of PoA. The one TV programme about the making of the movie was 
definitely a Warner Bros effort and I think will probably show up 
again on the DVD. We saw the Trio on the news at the premiere, but 
other than that, absolutely nothing. I'm fairly willing to bet that 
this is policy on the part of the Trio's families.<<<

Ali replies:

Actually, that isn't quite true. They appeared on a number of 
programmes in the UK, although admittedly their profile is kept 
lower than in the US. Dan Radcliffe did an interview on Radio 1, 
they were all interviewed for one of the Saturday Morning 
programmes, plus they all appeared on Richard and Judy. I can't 
imagine Lizo missing out on an interiew opportunity either. I'm sure 
there were more, but those are just the ones I know about. 

I do think the Trio's families do a good job in trying to give them 
as normal a lifestyle as possible, but I don't think they'd be able 
to say no to the publicity as that's a fundamental part of the film 
promotion.

Ali

Summoning you all to http://www.accio.org.uk the first Harry Potter 
conference in the UK.






From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Jun 24 18:26:22 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 18:26:22 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <cbf08k+mmi9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbf6ce+qhtj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Tim" <tmarends at y...> wrote:
> 
> > I don't know what you were like at that age, but in my school it 
> was 
> > very common to change bf/gf relationships all the time.  The 
> person 
> > somebody likes at 13 isn't necessarily the one they like at 17.
> > 
> > I, personally, have no problem with the movies leaning towards 
> > Ron/Hermione.  It's sort of been pushed to give more emotion (I 
> hope) 
> > to putting Krum into the mix in the next film.  And then you add 
> Luna 
> > to the mix in film 5.  So it's Ron/Hermione/Krum/Luna... 
> 
> Oh, i absolutely agree -- teenagers are commonly very fickle about 
> their relationships, and I certainly don't have any issue with 
that 
> in HP, but that's exactly what I think has been overlooked by the 
> film makers -- it just sounds like they are so darn sure that 
> Hermione and Ron have "chemistry" that they have practically 
hooked 
> the two up already (and strengthened their case by repeating it 
over 
> and over in interviews....) -- I just feel like it will fall flat 
if 
> at the end these two don't end up together (which is very 
possible) 
> after building up all this *tension*!  
> 
> meh...just my ramblings...
> 
> draco382

I can't help but believe there is some conspriracy to throw us all 
off. The first thing I said after seeing the movie my first time was 
"There was an awful lot of running around in the woods holding 
hands. I think it's gonna be H&H." JKR just loves to throw us off 
and she gives very obtuse clues, in the style of Dobby. No matter 
what the produces/film makers say, I think we've got surprises 
coming.
Jennifer




From clshannon at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 18:24:33 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:24:33 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
Message-ID: <1a2.25fa62a8.2e0c7661@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/24/04 9:08:27 AM, draco382 at yahoo.com writes:


> The movie has
> become terribly coy and suggestive (and blatant) about Ron and
> Hermione "ending up together" and even in interviews, the cast now
> openly says that there is something going on with Ron and Hermione.?
> Wow -- that's quite an assumption to make!? Now, I'm personally not
> shipping in one direction or another, but it surprises me that such
> a strong opinion about this would be expressed -- especially when
> JKR has a penchant for throwing her audience WAAAAY off guard at the
> last minute.? I am under the impression that the movie makers really
> don't "get" JKR and for that matter, Harry Potter at all.?
> 

Well, I can think of two reasons the movies are leaning towards Ron and 
Hermione 'dating' as it were. One, JKR said herself in an interview with Katie 
Couric that Ron and Hermione had that 'tension'.
It was during that Dateline interview with JKR in June of last year and 
Couric said something about Harry being a teenager now and having to endure spots, 
etc., and perhaps, 'snogging Hermione?' JKR replied with no small amount of 
surprise in her voice, 'Harry and Hermione?! You think so? I think Ron and 
Hermione, there's more tension there.'

Secondly, she and Steve Kloves have both said in interviews that she is 
consulted about certain things in the script - but only to the extent that she can 
veto something   if it will contradict something in the last two   books. 
Personally, I don't think the whole dating issue is going to be a big deal in 
the books, they are teenagers after all ;-) As someone else said, those 
relationships are rarely longstanding, so I think the last two books will have 
enough going on with the main plot (which is Harry's story and his battle with 
Voldemort, etc.), that the whole 'pairing up' issue will be minor, if there at 
all.
Anyway, those two reasons are why folks have been talking about Ron and 
Hermione and why the movies are leaning that way; Rowling herself has indicated 
that particular pairing, so the movies are not being presumptive or 'wrong'.
And I think the movie makers do 'get' JKR since she is at least consulted on 
the scripts to an extent.
Cindy


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




From mailowen at aol.com  Thu Jun 24 18:48:27 2004
From: mailowen at aol.com (dowen331)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 18:48:27 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter & SS in ABC/deleted scenes
In-Reply-To: <20040621175646.69112.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbf7ls+696g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Betsy Cortes <betsymarie123 at y...>
wrote:

>  
> This broadcast includes the deleted scenes.
> Betsy
>  

We were just watching the SS DVD last week with friends who hadn't
seen it before.  When we went through the deleted scenes (which I
hadn't watched in a few years), I was amazed to see the house
hourglasses in the background of one scene.  I think it was one of the
study scenes in the great hall.  Until reading OOP, those hourglasses
meant nothing, so it amazed me that the filmmakers had put them in.  I
suppose JKR had given them a heads up on it.  

DebbieO

PS:  I'm sure old-timers on this list made this observation years ago,
but it was an exciting, new, discovery for me!






From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Jun 24 19:00:36 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:00:36 -0000
Subject: My second viewing and some things I realized
In-Reply-To: <cbdqlp+s6s9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbf8ck+g3gh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...> 
wrote:
> Theresa wrote:
> 
> >>Yes, I am still bothered by no background story on MWPP but maybe 
> they will have some little blurb in #4 to say who they were. One 
can 
> only hope.<<
> 
> Here's a question I have about that (for all of you who were very 
> annoyed by that being left out), is it just that they wrote the map 
> that you're upset about, or the whole backstory (with the animagus 
> transformations and all)? Personally, of the things that bugged me 
> about the film, that was one of the smallest. I know they wrote the 
> map and the movie hints at it (they didn't change it completely - 
> Sirius and Lupin clearly know all about it), and in the book the 
fact 
> that they wrote the map is slipped into the middle of the Shrieking 
> Shack scene with very little emphasis (Lupin says something to the 
> effect of "Of course I know how to work it, I helped write it."). 
Now 
> if you're talking about the animagus stuff, then that I understand, 
> because that's a whole chapter. Personally, I think it would have 
> been awkward in the movie, and on multiple readings it felt sort of 
> awkward in the book (it was just too much of a digression, in the 
> middle of the heavy situation). I think part of the reason for that 
> large bit of exposition (which doesn't *quite* fit into the subject 
> at hand), was to have something for Snape to overhear without him 
> hearing anything important.
> 
snip
For me personally, it was ALL of the backstory of MWPP. I wanted it 
known they made the map for it showed how bright they all were. But 
mostly I wanted it known that these boys were such loyal friends that 
they would go above and beyond for one another not just the animagus 
stuff - which really shows loyalty and caring for one another but 
also the secret keeper stuff. When I read POA, my heartstrings were 
pulled when I read Sirius explaining that he suggested Peter to be 
used as a ruse and he as good as killed Lily and James himself. And I 
wanted them to mention the prank. So I guess I really wanted it 
all. ;o) However, I am in the 'loved the movie' group so this didn't 
ruin the film for me, I just wanted to see it included.

Theresa




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 18:58:18 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:58:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Dan Radcliffe/Mark Hamill
Message-ID: <20040624185818.GOLO9273.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "jeanico2000" <jeanico at securenet.net>
You are quite right, Nicholas... British movie actors do not usually 
have that "Hollywood Star" type mentality or approach. Makes for a 
huge difference in attitude! I've met Daniel Radcliffe in person and 
he is absolutely delightful, extremely polite and really quite 
humble. Also, on a side note, it seems to be easier for British 
movie actresses to find work, even when they get older (contrary to 
the Hollywood mentality, which worships younger, more beautiful 
women, thus making it harder for older actresses to get good movie 
roles!)
Just my 2 cents worth,
Nicole?

[from Valerie]
Yes, it did seems on the interviews that I've seen that Dan is a sweet, 
enthusiastic, friendly, non-pretentious, kid. How did you meet him? Are his 
eyes as intense in person? :-))))

I was also impressed with Draco (I mean, Tom!) writing fairly regularly on his 
website, and in such a conversational tone. (About wearing a white suit to the 
premier; buying CDs in New York, etc.) I wish Dan would do the same on his 
website. Much easier than responding to fan mail?! 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 19:08:17 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:08:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: My second viewing and some things I realized
Message-ID: <20040624190817.RBLE1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at aol.com>
Here's a question I have about that (for all of you who were very 
annoyed by that being left out), is it just that they wrote the map 
that you're upset about, or the whole backstory (with the animagus 
transformations and all)? Personally, of the things that bugged me 
about the film, that was one of the smallest. I know they wrote the 
map and the movie hints at it (they didn't change it completely - 
Sirius and Lupin clearly know all about it), and in the book the fact 
that they wrote the map is slipped into the middle of the Shrieking 
Shack scene with very little emphasis (Lupin says something to the 
effect of "Of course I know how to work it, I helped write it."). Now 
if you're talking about the animagus stuff, then that I understand, 
because that's a whole chapter. Personally, I think it would have 
been awkward in the movie, and on multiple readings it felt sort of 
awkward in the book (it was just too much of a digression, in the 
middle of the heavy situation). I think part of the reason for that 
large bit of exposition (which doesn't *quite* fit into the subject 
at hand), was to have something for Snape to overhear without him 
hearing anything important.


[frm Valerie]

The thing I love so much about the HP books is that with each one, they delve 
further and further into the Voldemort storyline, the parents, Sirius, Lupin, 
etc. It's a fascinating mystery that JKR takes her time in unfolding. (I can't 
wait to hear the real story behind why Snape hates Harry so much, and how he 
became a Death Eater; why Dumbledore now trusts him enough to employ him, etc.) 
That's why I dislike seeing these great storylines cut back in the films. I did 
notice that, although I would've like to have seen more background explanation 
in the film, that the younger kids in the audience were squirming and bored 
during any descriptive scenes. So again, the director  has to balance the story 
between his huge viewing audience age span (say, 4 years old to 84 years 
old?!?!) You have to admit, that's a big challenge. Eventually they'll have to 
stop trying to please and appeal to everyone and just make the darn movie loyal 
to the book.


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 19:21:21 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:21:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Definition of a "good movie" for me
Message-ID: <20040624192121.GVJL9273.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> 
> From: "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at aol.com>
>> Lupin inexplicably waiting endless seconds before realizing that 
Harry is next in line and has conjured up a dementor, then 
inexplicably admitting that he expected something else even more
horrifying to the rest of the class *but not doing anything about it*
such as, oh, I don't know, maybe skipping Harry's turn completely
(what a great idea! Why didn't someone like J.K. Rowling think of
that!)<<My explanation on that was that he mistook the dementer for 
Voldemort, otherwise it doesn't make sense at all.

- I think the intent was that Lupin was distracted with something else, didn't 
see that it was Harry's turn till the dementor came out of the wardrobe. Then 
he freaked because whether it was a dementor or Valdemort, it was infinitely 
more scary to Harry (and the rest of the students) than a huge spider or Cobra, 
or a scary, creepy clown(!?!) If he had thought about it, he probably would've 
made Harry go to the end of the line, or conveniently end the class before 
Harry had a chance to have a turn. As it was, it was just poor lesson planning 
on his part, IMO! :-)
By the way, what does Lupin say to get the dementor to go away? I didn't catch 
that in the film. Why didn't he say "Expectro patronum"? 


Out of curiosity, what else was there? (aside from Flitwick being so 
changed, of course...I know he's just listed as "wizard" in the 
credits, but who else *could* he be? he's clearly a teacher, and if 
he's not Flitwick, then where'd Flitwick go?)

- I still don't think that was supposed to be a "Hitler Flitwick". Lots of the 
teachers at the table were different. Where was the Quidditch coach? Where was 
Prof. Spout? The actors just were not available or not asked back, for whatever 
reason. Probably because they didn't have any speaking lines...

























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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 19:34:34 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:34:34 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
Message-ID: <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "Gary Sapp & Karen J.S." <karen-gary at worldnet.att.net>

I thought about this on the first viewing, wondering why he didn't
have the cage with him when he left Privet Drive but I guess it was a
continuity issue.? Hedwig was in his room before he stormed out so it
would be strange for him to take an empty cage...we would be wondering
where she went.? It works better for her to show up at the Leaky
Cauldron.? One of those things that got fussed with for visual effect.

<snip>
Karen
who just saw PoA for the fourth time today!!

[from Valerie]
Karen,
Just saw it for my 4th time as well! :-) And as others have mentioned, I enjoy 
it more and more each time. Guess all this discussion actually helps me accept 
the omissions!
It sure is an exciting movie, though, isn't it?

A couple of comments:

I still don't hear the "Padfoot" reference when Lupin is turning into the 
werewolf. I wanted to, but didn't. :-(

So is the implication that Hedwig either picked the lock on her cage and 
escaped to join Harry, OR that Harry released her before he left, so that he 
wouldn't have to carry the darn cage? That's plausible...

I still think the crying was dubbed in later, and I still didn't see any tear 
tracks on Harry's face, so I consider that a "so-so" scene. But I am more 
accepting of his nonreaction to finding out that Lupin knew his parents. (that 
did bug me lots, before). I guess the little wistful smile playing on his lips 
was very a propos for Harry's emotional state in POA. I loved the part when he 
tells Lupin that he doesn't know if his memory of his parents is real, but that 
it's all he has. Wah! Poor Harry! I wanted to hug him. (the Mom in me!) How can 
anyone, Snape, Draco, Umbridge, be so mean to him, knowing how he lost his 
parents? Sheesh! Give the poor kid a break, already!



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 19:44:44 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:44:44 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"
Message-ID: <20040624194444.MSLP18566.out011.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "draco382" <draco382 at yahoo.com>

Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly 
when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron 
will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and 
Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??? Does anyone 
else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in trying 
to out-guess JKR??

[from Valerie]
IMO, it was to get the female movie-goers. That's why they have that scene of 
Hermione touching Ron's hand, and him pulling away, in almost every trailer.  


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Jun 24 19:49:10 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:49:10 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should no
Message-ID: <20040624194910.WAGM2198.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

 From: Susanne <siskiou at vcem.com>

Maybe it's because my main problems were not the changed
scenery, or little inconsistencies, or leaving out large
parts of the plot, but the characterization of Harry, Ron
and Hermione.


[from  Valerie] 
Just curious: I can see that the movie "Super Hermione" and "Stupid Ron" would 
be a bit jarring, but in what ways do you think "Movie Harry" is so different 
from "Book Harry"?


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




From siskiou at vcem.com  Thu Jun 24 19:50:18 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:50:18 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <cbf08k+mmi9@eGroups.com>
References: <cbevb9+m9uh@eGroups.com> <cbf08k+mmi9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <23625272.20040624125018@vcem.com>



Hi,

Thursday, June 24, 2004, 9:41:56 AM, draco382 at yahoo.com wrote:

> I just feel like it will fall flat if 
> at the end these two don't end up together (which is very possible)
> after building up all this *tension*!  

But isn't this exactly what JKR is doing in the books?

Though I do agree they are getting a bit ahead of themselves
in the movies, since nothing overt has happened to show
there is "romantic" tension between Ron and Hermione until
Gof.

At the speed they are going in the movies, they'll have to
have a wedding in the the last one ;)

In the books, JKR has not let anything much happen with
their relationship by book 5 (they haven't even admitted to
each other that they are attracted). This makes me think
she isn't going to let them have a bunch of teenage crushes
and may want this to be the real thing for Ron and Hermione.

Maybe it's Harry and Ginny, who represent that part of
teenage life in HP?

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Jun 24 20:07:34 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:07:34 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbfca6+ukh9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
 SNIP> I still think the crying was dubbed in later, and I still 
didn't see any teartracks on Harry's face, so I consider that a "so-
so" scene. But I am more accepting of his nonreaction to finding out 
that Lupin knew his parents. (thatdid bug me lots, before). I guess 
the little wistful smile playing on his lipswas very a propos for 
Harry's emotional state in POA. I loved the part when he
tells Lupin that he doesn't know if his memory of his parents is 
real, but that it's all he has.  (snip)

I loathed the crying scene. I can not, for the life of me, 
understand why it was used in the state it was. The crying sounds 
like a smurf or something. I can understand extreme anger at the 
revelation of Black's role in his parents deaths but the tears don't 
fit MovieHarry, even a Harry in deepest angst. He's British for 
goodness sakes!! If this scene were constructed to demonstrate Dan's 
depth and range, it failed. And then the question "Why leave it as 
is?" Why put in the horrid crying sound? Without it, I could believe 
he was seething under his invisibility cloak. Just didn't work.
Jennifer




From siskiou at vcem.com  Thu Jun 24 20:19:59 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 13:19:59 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should no
In-Reply-To: <20040624194910.WAGM2198.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
References: <20040624194910.WAGM2198.out012.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <897293359.20040624131959@vcem.com>



Hi,

Thursday, June 24, 2004, 12:49:10 PM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net wrote:

> but in what ways do you think "Movie Harry" is so different
> from "Book Harry"?

Compared to the books, Harry does very little in this movie,
apart from conjuring the patronus.

The rest of the time, he seems almost as clueless as Ron,
and is being dragged around by Hermione, who knows a lot
more than he does.

Hermione did not only get Ron's lines, but also some of
Harry's (figuring out how to save Buckbeak and Sirius, and
getting called "a smart witch" by Sirius, where he *should*
have talked to Harry, telling him how much he was like
James. We'd already heard the smart witch line once before,
from Lupin.)  and in general, I thought all three of the
characters were very flat, with not much trio interaction to
show their closeness.

There was a lot of action and running around, but not much
in the way of character exploration.

No time for that, I guess :}

It just seemed they talked a lot more to each other in the
previous movies.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 21:11:23 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:11:23 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbfca6+ukh9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbfg1r+100lg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:

> I loathed the crying scene. I can not, for the life of me, 
> understand why it was used in the state it was. The crying sounds 
> like a smurf or something. I can understand extreme anger at the 
> revelation of Black's role in his parents deaths but the tears 
don't 
> fit MovieHarry, even a Harry in deepest angst. He's British for 
> goodness sakes!! If this scene were constructed to demonstrate 
Dan's 
> depth and range, it failed. And then the question "Why leave it as 
> is?" Why put in the horrid crying sound? Without it, I could 
believe 
> he was seething under his invisibility cloak. Just didn't work.


LMAO!!!!!  Yeah, that was a very puke-worthy scene -- "smurfy" sums 
it up very well.  This just makes me believe even more strongly that 
the film makes really didn't "get" the essence of any of the 
characters well -- they just created very cartoony, exaggerated 
versions of each one.  

I absolutely agree -- as anyone who's seen Dan in David Copperfield 
can attest, the boy CAN cry and cry believably.  On a side note -- i 
had always believed that Harry never really cried in the books until 
book 4 -- but i was wrong, he does cry even in book 1 -- but its 
written very beautifully and SUBTLEY...shame we weren't given that 
in the movie...

draco382 (picturing "Harry Smurf")




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Jun 24 22:13:47 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 22:13:47 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbfg1r+100lg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbfjmr+n6lr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> snip> I absolutely agree -- as anyone who's seen Dan in David 
Copperfield 
> can attest, the boy CAN cry and cry believably.  On a side note -- 
i 
> had always believed that Harry never really cried in the books 
until 
> book 4 -- but i was wrong, he does cry even in book 1 -- but its 
> written very beautifully and SUBTLEY...shame we weren't given that 
> in the movie...
> 
> draco382 (picturing "Harry Smurf")

The key word is SUBTLE here!! Jo is the heart and soul of discretion 
when writing about something as potentially embarrassing to a male 
child as crying. Remember how embarrassed Harry was to find tears on 
his face after falling prey to the Boggart/dementor? How he bent 
over, pretending to "do up his shoelace" to surrreptitiously wipe 
his face? Now if that had been left in, that would have been a 
killer scene for Dan. I regret the directors have all shied away 
from the emotionally charged things, which makes me puzzle even more 
as to why Alphonso Cuaron "added in" something so contrived. I have 
a bigger question, what did you think worked, if you care to discuss 
that. I want to, need to concentrate on the good about this movie. 
Jennifer




From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 22:22:44 2004
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: HP production designer to receive award
Message-ID: <20040624222244.65517.qmail@web51902.mail.yahoo.com>

In case you haven't heard yet...

HP films' production designer, Stuart Craig, 
will receive the Hollywood Film Festival's 
Hollywood Art Director of the Year Award.

For the press release, see

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040624/245494_1.html

Petra
a
n  :)


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 24 23:09:47 2004
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:09:47 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbfjmr+n6lr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbfmvr+kpe5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
 I have 
> a bigger question, what did you think worked, if you care to 
discuss 
> that. I want to, need to concentrate on the good about this movie. 
> Jennifer

I LOVED the way this movie stuck to the "spirit" of JRK's work -- 
throughout the story, JKR always stops to throw in some quirky 
little aspect of the WW (ie Neville turning into a canary, death-day 
party volleyball, puffapod seeds bursting forth when spilt, etc..) 
the list goes on; a series of bewildering, imaginative side-shows in 
the background of the main story.  THAT is one of the many reasons I 
love the series -- they are so enchanting and whimsical (albeit the 
more serious story in the forefront).  
This is the aspect of JRK's work that I think Cuaron did wonderfully 
(the talking shrunken head, Fat lady breaking the glass, singing 
frogs (even!!), whomping willow taking out the bird, spine shaped 
candles, etc)  yeah, they were mostly artistic license, but darn if 
these touches weren't entertaining -- or at least, I thought so!  
I'm actually rather sad to hear that Cuaron won't be directing the 
4th...i really liked his treatment (except for the few things...) of 
POA.

~draco382




From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Thu Jun 24 23:42:43 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:42:43 -0000
Subject: Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should no
In-Reply-To: <897293359.20040624131959@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <cbfotj+p8ns@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at v...> wrote..   
> Hermione did not only get Ron's lines, but also some of
> Harry's (figuring out how to save Buckbeak and Sirius, and
> getting called "a smart witch" by Sirius, where he *should*
> have talked to Harry, telling him how much he was like
> James. We'd already heard the smart witch line once before,
> from Lupin.)






It sounds like Cuaron made "Hermoine Granger and the Prisoner of 
Azkaban" don't it?




From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun 25 00:25:24 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:25:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: And the 'floating' missing potion scene Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 
     Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To:      <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
References:     <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <1778.4.47.27.232.1088123124.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

Valerie Flowe said:

> I still don't hear the "Padfoot" reference when Lupin is turning into the
> werewolf. I wanted to, but didn't. :-(

I haven't either.

Also, what's up with the comments about a 'missing' scene where Snape does
give Lupin his wolfsbane potion?  There's comments about how some theaters
have this on their version and others don't?

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 hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun 25 00:30:55 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:30:55 +0100
Subject: Messrs M, W, P & P
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>

This text has been written over several days and I intend to make use of it 
in various circumstances (some people may get a sense of deja vu on seeing 
these comments as I've already put them out in different forms here and 
there), so it's not necessarily going to make complete sense here in the 
context of discussions to date.

A couple of specific items before I go on. Someone (sorry, can't remember 
who) claimed that Lupin says something in the Shack about the Map's 
authorship - sorry, there's nothing of the sort.

Secondly, whilst I've not had the opportunity to see the movie in IMAX (we 
don't get it on this side of the Atlantic until mid-to-late July) :-( the 
cinema I attend has a magnificent sound system in each of its auditoria 
(THX-certified, next step down from IMAX) and despite having listened out 
for it at three different viewings (in three different auditoria), I can 
hear no trace of Lupin's saying anything approaching "Padfoot" before, 
during, or after his transformation. All I hear are grunts and several 
guttural screams. Sorry, but I think it's wishful thinking.

Something which surprised me (I have been unforgivably *S-L-O-W*!) is that 
it took eight viewings of the movie for me to realise that the PoA movie 
*completely* misses any identification of James, Sirius & co as the authors 
of the Map or that all four of them became Animagi at the same time, or 
that there was any connection between these elements, or that they were 
connected in any way to Lupin's lycanthropy.

Book readers have claimed to have seen hints or suggestions of these facts 
in the movie, but this is only because we know the background: there are no 
hints *at all* within the framework of the film itself of any of these 
issues. People have looked for hints and some have even seen (or rather, 
heard) things which I believe simply aren't there, because people 
desperately *want* the movie to have included this material in some form. 
The only reasonable extrapolation any non-book-reader could make (although 
we are not invited to do so) is to connect the name "Mooney" with Lupin. 
All the film makes clear regarding the Map is that Lupin and Sirius knew 
what it was and how it worked.

I then started wondering why the movie could have done this, because it 
struck me as much more than an oversight - this is very much deliberate! 
The fans are up in arms all over the internet about how Kloves, Cuaron & Co 
could possibly have dropped such a significant clanger, and for a huge 
proportion of fans, this is enough for them to detest this movie. But 
nobody appears to be trying to understand why the makers might possibly 
have done this. There is simply NO WAY that JKR would have allowed them to 
write a script that doesn't include something so fundamental to the ongoing 
plot without kicking and screaming. (We don't know the extent of her input 
into the movie-making process, but we do know that she has script approval 
and is consulted during script development.)

A few days ago, I had some thoughts on why this might have been done from a 
psychological perspective. More recently, however, I've re-examined the 
book (and seen the movie again...)  and I am increasingly certain that 
including that information in the *movie* at this point was simply wrong.

In the movie, the Shack scene was all about revealing Peter as a rat and 
the inter-relationships between the three surviving Marauders plus Snape 
(and how all of them connected to James), without going off onto 
explanations which aren't directly related to that central disclosure.

Including details about the back-story would have been information overload 
in what was already an information-rich scene. Non-book-reading viewers 
would be correct in leaving the cinema wondering how come Lupin and Sirius 
knew about the Map, because it is a question they are *meant* to be asking 
themselves! This way, the movie leaves such members of the audience ready 
for the revelations of the *next* movie, and hopefully already waiting for it.

Apart from the developmental reasons I gave a few days ago for those 
revelations not to be made at this stage, they give something for Harry and 
Sirius to bond over in GoF. In book-GoF, their conversations are about the 
tournament and how Harry's going to get through it. This way (in no more 
than a couple of minutes' screen time), they can talk about something that 
connects them both: James's schooldays, and *then* go into Harry's more 
immediate problems.

The audience can thus discover why they became Animagi and who MWPP were in 
the context of friendly reminiscences (and reminding us of James's presence 
in Harry's life, of which there is nothing in GoF before the 
wand-connection moment in the graveyard), rather than in the context of 
angry quid-pro-quos in the Shrieking Shack. This also permits the 
information to sink in so much more. Arguments are pretty much by 
definition irrational and lots of things are said which don't actually mean 
much. Having this information come out calmly (with, hopefully, some 
reaction from Dan for a change), even (or perhaps, especially!) given how 
plot-heavy GoF will have to be, means that the audience will have to take 
notice. This means that instead of being a *secondary* revelation (the 
primary being who betrayed the Potters), it becomes the driving force of 
Harry's relationship with Sirius.

Furthermore, GoF is the movie in which the Animagi register should be 
introduced, because it becomes a specific plot point within that 
movie/book. Introducing the term in the overloaded PoA plot makes no sense, 
because non-readers will have to be reminded of that fact when it's brought 
up with regard to Rita.

One of the most important parts of adapating a tightly-plotted book like 
PoA into a movie script is that all the plot elements must be seen in their 
mutual context, and furthermore in the context of books to come. When all 
the different plot elements are seen in context, it becomes clear that some 
elements make much better sense being included in the GoF adaptation than 
they do in PoA.

The reason why Sirius, James and Peter became Animagi is ultimately 
irrelevant to the plot of PoA. The circumstances of the Map's authorship 
are equally irrelevant. The only thing which matters is that they were four 
friends who trusted each other and (at least in Sirius's case) were 
prepared to die for each other. Introducing any details of what they got up 
to together (especially when it's something as ultimately banal and 
childish as roaming the grounds at night!), adds nothing to to the depth of 
that relationship, especially in the context of revealing a murderer.

Furthermore, this allows us to gloss over one of the fundamental 
shortcomings of the book: why the hell didn't Lupin tell Dumbledore that 
Sirius could become a dog? Especially after he'd *already* successfully 
entered the grounds? Evil!Lupin theories aside, his explanation in the book 
that he was scared of losing Dumbledore's respect and trust is so lame as 
to be laughable. If he were still 15, I could understand it. But he's not 
15 any more, there's a dangerous killer on the loose who's already breached 
Hogwarts security, and he remains silent?!? Come on! It just doesn't make 
sense!

Of course, by the time the MWPP-as-Animagi theme is explored in a later 
movie, people will have forgotten that nobody ever told Dumbledore...

(My own view is that in the book, Lupin could have told Dumbledore after 
the attack on the Fat Lady, without having had any impact on the plot at 
all - Dumbledore would have spent the remainder of the year looking for a 
dog instead of a man.)

To end, a slight tangent, if I may, talking of plot holes in the book: 
something the movie exacerbates rather than makes any attempt to hide or 
gloss over because we can see the logistics laid out in front of us, is 
something that always annoyed me about the book: if Time-Turned H&H could 
get Buckbeak out of the way while the "execution committee" was inside 
Hagrid's hut, why didn't HRH do it the first time around?

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, ending this a bit abruptly but wanting to get it out 
before leaving home for five days



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Jun 25 00:36:31 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:36:31 -0000
Subject: Inconsistencies- was Definition of a "good movie" for me
In-Reply-To: <cbfmvr+kpe5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbfs2f+ackm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> --- 
little snip there...

> I LOVED the way this movie stuck to the "spirit" of JRK's work -- 
> throughout the story, JKR always stops to throw in some quirky 
> little aspect of the WW (snip) a series of bewildering, 
imaginative side-shows in 
> the background of the main story.  THAT is one of the many reasons 
I love the series -- they are so enchanting and whimsical (albeit 
the more serious story in the forefront).  
> This is the aspect of JRK's work that I think Cuaron did 
wonderfully (the talking shrunken head, Fat lady breaking the glass, 
singing frogs (even!!), whomping willow taking out the bird, spine 
shaped candles, etc)  yeah, they were mostly artistic license, but 
darn if these touches weren't entertaining -- or at least, I thought 
so!  
> I'm actually rather sad to hear that Cuaron won't be directing the 
> 4th...i really liked his treatment (except for the few things...) 
of 
> POA.
> 
> ~draco382

I agree, Cuaron did some impressive little things that were great 
fun. I am beginning to accept the undeniable fact that despite my 
best hopes, I am never going to see an adaptation that covers even a 
modicum of what JKR set out on paper. The thing that Cuaron does 
that drives me a little nuts is going off on his own, putting stuff 
in from HIS imagination. Impolitic as it maybe, I am not half as 
interested in his imagination as I am JKR's. Chris did his share of 
this, I am not forgetting. I think that Cuaron was much more 
confident though. And his work comes off as so much more lyrical and 
fluid than Chris'. It's just, gol darn it, I had this really great 
story I read. I was prepared to have great chunks of it sliced off, 
but don't take away good stuff to put in your own stuff!! So, this 
is the last I will say on this topic. 
Jennifer 




From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun 25 00:47:59 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 01:47:59 +0100
Subject: And the 'floating' missing potion scene
In-Reply-To: <1778.4.47.27.232.1088123124.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
References: < <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
 <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040625014334.009a3a00@plum.cream.org>

At 01:25 25/06/04 , Dina Lerret wrote:

<snip>

>Also, what's up with the comments about a 'missing' scene where Snape does
>give Lupin his wolfsbane potion?  There's comments about how some theaters
>have this on their version and others don't?

Which comments? Where? this is the first I have ever heard of this, and I 
have previously had in-depth discussions about Snape's role in this movie, 
so *someone* would have brought it up by now.

I am seriously curious who is spreading this rumour and where it started. I 
believe it to be false, and my curiosity is born more from an interest in 
urban myths in general, rather than HP in particular, so all the details 
you can provide would be helpful.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, bemused but not surprised



From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun 25 00:50:22 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 20:50:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <1785.4.47.27.232.1088124622.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

GulPlum said:

> Including details about the back-story would have been information
> overload
> in what was already an information-rich scene. Non-book-reading viewers
> would be correct in leaving the cinema wondering how come Lupin and Sirius
> knew about the Map, because it is a question they are *meant* to be asking
> themselves! This way, the movie leaves such members of the audience ready
> for the revelations of the *next* movie, and hopefully already waiting for
> it.

You just said 'information overload'.  I'm left wondering how an already
information/action packed book has room for 'leftovers' from the prior
book if this is included with the GOF screen adaptation?

*I'd* get bored from listening to Sirius reminisce with Harry when GOF is
about the mystery and action. {g}

_Prisoner of Azkaban_ did deal with mystery but it also helped lay the
ground for MWPP and how this 'lost' generation still has an impact on
Harry's life.


> get Buckbeak out of the way while the "execution committee" was inside
> Hagrid's hut, why didn't HRH do it the first time around?

Evidently, even super!Hermione has limits. ;-)  Yes, the book had Harry be
the one to add 1+1=2.

Dina




From mailowen at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 00:54:31 2004
From: mailowen at aol.com (dowen331)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:54:31 -0000
Subject: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cbft47+j7fo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> Something which surprised me (I have been unforgivably *S-L-O-W*!) 
is that 
> it took eight viewings of the movie for me to realise that the PoA 
movie 
> *completely* misses any identification of James, Sirius & co as the 
authors 
> of the Map or that all four of them became Animagi at the same 
time, or 
> that there was any connection between these elements, or that they 
were 
> connected in any way to Lupin's lycanthropy.

>(large snip of excellent discourse) 
> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard, ending this a bit abruptly but wanting to get 
it out 
> before leaving home for five days

I very much appreciated your thoughts on why the animagi explanations 
could be put off to the next movie, and agree with you on the danger 
of too much information getting put into one scene.  (Watching the 
LOTR film commentaries has taught me alot about the decisions 
directors and screenwriters must make!)

However, with the elimination of the MWPP explanation, there was one 
glaring hole for me in the POA movie.  When Harry produced his 
patronus, there was no explanation given that his father had been a 
stag animagi.  As I recall, there was reference that he thought he 
saw his father, but you never learned the significance of the stag.  
For that matter, they only showed the stag once; the other patronus 
shots were that "shield" effect.  I thought that was a major flaw in 
the film, since that makes the whole patronus thing so much more 
emotional.

And by the way (picking up from another thread), I too was really 
upset that so many of Harry's lines were given to Hermione.  She did 
all the thinking and he got dragged along.  What a twisting of the 
characters!

DebbieO





From redina at silverbloom.net  Fri Jun 25 01:00:44 2004
From: redina at silverbloom.net (Dina Lerret)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:00:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] And the 'floating' missing potion scene
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040625014334.009a3a00@plum.cream.org>
References: <
    <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net><20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
    <4.2.0.58.20040625014334.009a3a00@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <1828.4.47.27.232.1088125244.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>

GulPlum said:

> Which comments? Where? this is the first I have ever heard of this, and I
> have previously had in-depth discussions about Snape's role in this movie,
> so *someone* would have brought it up by now.

I thought it a 'myth' as well.  So, I tried asking here.

Hm, more POA commercials on Comedy Central... I'm watching TV while
waiting for the internet (my connection is weather-dependent).

Hey, internet's back.  I found the comment on this entry:
http://www.livejournal.com/community/harry_potter/2301115.html

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 hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun 25 01:24:18 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 02:24:18 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbft47+j7fo@eGroups.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040625015926.009c6d50@plum.cream.org>

At 01:54 25/06/04 , DebbieO wrote:

<snip>

>[...] with the elimination of the MWPP explanation, there was one
>glaring hole for me in the POA movie.  When Harry produced his
>patronus, there was no explanation given that his father had been a
>stag animagi.  As I recall, there was reference that he thought he
>saw his father, but you never learned the significance of the stag.

Indeed, this is part and parcel of the whole MWPP story, and making that 
connection would have been senseless without the rest of the back-story. As 
I said in my long post, the problem when re-plotting a book into a movie is 
that the various threads are inter-woven, so that removing one element 
requires removing others: because we don't know that James was one of the 
Animagi, we don't know what shape he took, so we have no reason to make the 
connection. I repeat that I consider all of this to have been utterly 
deliberate.

My issue with the stag Patronus (as I've said before) is that Harry is 
given no grounds to expect that the Patronus could go beyond the "shield 
effect". I don't have a problem with taking a narrative liberty by having 
Harry produce an effective Patronus on only his second attempt (it would've 
got boring), but I do have a problem with the end of that scene when Lupin 
implies that Harry's "done it",  instead of insisting that he has a HUGE 
learning curve ahead of him before producing a "proper" Patronus.

>For that matter, they only showed the stag once; the other patronus
>shots were that "shield" effect.  I thought that was a major flaw in
>the film, since that makes the whole patronus thing so much more
>emotional.

Again, we don't (yet) know that there's an emotional connection, because 
Harry doesn't know the significance of the shape. But there will be 
opportunities for this in the future! (We already know there's going to be 
a Patronus in OotP which the movie simply cannot overlook.)

And while I'm here, a quick comment on Dina's contribution:

>You just said 'information overload'.  I'm left wondering how an already
>information/action packed book has room for 'leftovers' from the prior
>book if this is included with the GOF screen adaptation?

The concept of Animagery itself and the Animagus register will have to be 
included in GoF anyway (unless Rita's been excised from the script) to make 
the plot understandable. So why bother repeating the introduction, when it 
can be made in that context (it's more important in that context than it is 
in the context of the PoA plot anyway). Besides, I was talking about 
information overload in the *scene*, not the movie as a whole.

>*I'd* get bored from listening to Sirius reminisce with Harry when GOF is
>about the mystery and action. {g}

And Messrs MWP&P aren't mysterious? :-) Seeing as the mysteries are about 
the past even more than they are about the present, I say that makes it a 
pretty good place to reveal another mystery from the past...

Besides, what makes you think this is a going to be an action mystery, 
seeing as it's going to have a director who's forte lies in romantic 
comedies and intimate dramas? :-P

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, not being entirely serious with that last comment



From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun 25 01:31:25 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 02:31:25 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] And the 'floating' missing potion scene
In-Reply-To: <1828.4.47.27.232.1088125244.squirrel@www.silverbloom.net>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040625014334.009a3a00@plum.cream.org>
 < <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
 <20040624193434.CRQH3910.out005.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
 <4.2.0.58.20040625014334.009a3a00@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040625022725.009a0bd0@plum.cream.org>

At 02:00 25/06/04 , Dina Lerret wrote:

<snip>

>I thought it a 'myth' as well.  So, I tried asking here.
>http://www.livejournal.com/community/harry_potter/2301115.html

Thanks.

Just another case of wishful thinking, by the looks of it (or, possibly, a 
deliberate ploy to start a rumour). There were similarly people who were 
prepared to swear that they saw the Potions riddle (urgh!) in the first 
movie, despite the fact that it was never filmed and never even in the 
script...

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who started his fair share of fake rumours as a 
teenager. ;-)



From twinslove at mindspring.com  Fri Jun 25 02:11:51 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:11:51 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
References: <cbft47+j7fo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40DB89E7.000001.03680@TWINKIES>

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


However, with the elimination of the MWPP explanation, there was one 
glaring hole for me in the POA movie.  When Harry produced his 
patronus, there was no explanation given that his father had been a 
stag animagi.  As I recall, there was reference that he thought he 
saw his father, but you never learned the significance of the stag.  
For that matter, they only showed the stag once; the other patronus 
shots were that "shield" effect.  I thought that was a major flaw in 
the film, since that makes the whole patronus thing so much more 
emotional.>>

This was my biggest complaint about the movie.  I just think it was
important to include the backstory of the map and why James, 
Sirius, and Peter learned to be animagius. My youngest
sister questioned the whole scene in which Snuffles tries to control
Lupin's werewolf.  It would have been nice to see Sirius change too,
because she didn't know where the dog came from. Yes, there is 
conversation as to Sirius being a dog, but it very casual and younger
views may not have caught it. Unless you read the book, that is just a 
little confusing to an average viewer, I would think. 

And by the way (picking up from another thread), I too was really 
upset that so many of Harry's lines were given to Hermione.  She did 
all the thinking and he got dragged along.  What a twisting of the 
characters!>>

Hermione did not bother me in this movie, like it seems to have bothered
other people on this list, however, I do see their point. On twisting
of characters though, one thing I noticed that kind of bothered me was
the whole Harry and Draco "hate" relationship.  Shortly after arriving
to Hogwarts, Draco taunts Harry about the Dementors and Ron kind of 
"protects" Harry. Then later in the movie, during the Buckbeak scene,
Harry does seem to defend himself at first but then Hermione steps in
to get Harry away from Draco. Harry has always been able to handle 
himself around Draco.  I don't think he needed his friends to step in
for protection.  Just my .02

Kimberly



________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
  
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


 

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




From Lynx412 at AOL.com  Fri Jun 25 02:31:08 2004
From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 22:31:08 EDT
Subject: Umbridge casting idea...
Message-ID: <1a4.2588fed4.2e0ce86c@aol.com>

       My husband and I were discussing some of the options when he came up 
with the IDEAL choice, even if neither of us could remember her name. Just two 
lines: "You ARE the weakest link. Goodby."

       Cheryl


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 25 03:06:41 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:06:41 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why
	books should no
In-Reply-To: <897293359.20040624131959@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <BD010F01.FE7%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>


Thursday, June 24, 2004, 12:49:10 PM, valerie.flowe at verizon.net wrote:

> but in what ways do you think "Movie Harry" is so different
> from "Book Harry"?

Compared to the books, Harry does very little in this movie,
apart from conjuring the patronus.

The rest of the time, he seems almost as clueless as Ron,
and is being dragged around by Hermione, who knows a lot
more than he does.

Hermione did not only get Ron's lines, but also some of
Harry's (figuring out how to save Buckbeak and Sirius, and
getting called "a smart witch" by Sirius, where he *should*
have talked to Harry, telling him how much he was like
James. We'd already heard the smart witch line once before,
from Lupin.)  and in general, I thought all three of the
characters were very flat, with not much trio interaction to
show their closeness.

There was a lot of action and running around, but not much
in the way of character exploration.

No time for that, I guess :}

It just seemed they talked a lot more to each other in the
previous movies.

-- 
Best regards,
Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com

Yup...I see your points. Though I thought Ron and Hermione did seem very
protective of Harry, when Malfoy was abusing him. I thought that was sweet.




________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 valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 25 03:12:47 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:12:47 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] What worked in POA
In-Reply-To: <cbfjmr+n6lr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD01106F.FE8%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

I have 
a bigger question, what did you think worked, if you care to discuss
that. I want to, need to concentrate on the good about this movie.
Jennifer

[from Valerie]
Some of the more emotional scenes that I thought were well acted were the
Lupin/Harry scenes. They are my favorite. In fact, I felt there was more
chemistry between them, than Harry and Sirius. ('course Sirius was kind of
rushed in and out of the picture). The subtle facial expressions on both
Harry and Lupin's face as they are talking about Harry's parents. The way I
squirmed when Lupin was berating Harry for risking his life with the map;
how bereft Harry looked when Lupin said "I feel sure we'll meet again", then
walked out of Harry's life. Boo hoo! Very heartfelt, all that.



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 25 03:17:24 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:17:24 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP production designer to receive award
In-Reply-To: <20040624222244.65517.qmail@web51902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BD011184.FE9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

In case you haven't heard yet...

HP films' production designer, Stuart Craig,
will receive the Hollywood Film Festival's
Hollywood Art Director of the Year Award.

For the press release, see

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040624/245494_1.html

Petra
a
n  :)


[from Valerie]
Good for him!! He has some wonderful films to his credit. So is the article
saying that he will win the award specifically for POA production design? It
wasn't clear. To me, that would the ultimate dream job. Scouting out cool
movie locations, then determining how to set up the scenes to make the
script come alive. Very cool! 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 25 03:20:37 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:20:37 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why
	books should no
In-Reply-To: <cbfotj+p8ns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BD011245.FEA%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>


It sounds like Cuaron made "Hermoine Granger and the Prisoner of
Azkaban" don't it?

[from Valerie]
I'm thinking he had a crush on her! (even tho he has a gorgeous wife).
They've already stated in several articles that he intentionally expanded
her role. Why? She's a good actress, but she seemed the "hero" in this pic,
didn't she? 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Jun 25 03:48:01 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:48:01 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BD0118B1.FEB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

From: GulPlum <hp at plum.cream.org>

<snip>
Something which surprised me (I have been unforgivably *S-L-O-W*!) is that
it took eight viewings of the movie for me to realise that the PoA movie
*completely* misses any identification of James, Sirius & co as the authors
of the Map or that all four of them became Animagi at the same time, or
that there was any connection between these elements, or that they were
connected in any way to Lupin's lycanthropy.

Book readers have claimed to have seen hints or suggestions of these facts
in the movie, but this is only because we know the background: there are no
hints *at all* within the framework of the film itself of any of these
issues. People have looked for hints and some have even seen (or rather,
heard) things which I believe simply aren't there, because people
desperately *want* the movie to have included this material in some form.

[from Valerie]
I still think that the Marauder's Map plot belongs in POA, not GOF. The
official HP websiteeven has it as it's flash intro. It encompasses the whole
story (Harry getting into Hogsmeade despite Uncle Vernon's obstinance; the
whole Shrieking Shack plot unfolding, etc. I still think this would have
been the easiest solution:

Lupin: "I saw you coming Harry", he taps the Marauder's Map.
Harry: "Professor L; how did you know all about the map, anyhow?"
Lupin: "Well your Dad, Sirius, Peter and I created it when we were all
friends here at Hogwarts, mostly as a means to have free range of the castle
and get into trouble."
Harry: "Buuutt, who are Mssrs. Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs?"
Lupin: "Well us, of course! Mooney, the vampire, Padfoot the dog, Prongs the
stag, and Wormtail the rat (which, as we all know, he fulfilled his
namesake!)
Harry: "Ohhhh! Then...the stag patronus that I saw at the lake that I
thought was my Dad, was actually ME?"
Lupin: "Yes, you might say, Prongs rode again last night. He lives in you,
Harry".
Now I must skeedaddle...!"

Or something to that effect! That wouldn't have caused too many people's
heads to explode with too much info, yet it would've pleased the book fans
by completing the story. Sigh...


<snip>
if Time-Turned H&H could get Buckbeak out of the way while the "execution
committee" was inside Hagrid's hut, why didn't HRH do it the first time
around?

[from Valerie]
Because Dumbledore didn't inform them of it till later in the hospital ward?
It was his fault! But in watching the scene play itself twice, Dumbledore
seems to have clairvoyance of these events, i.e. he wants to sign his very
long name to the death warrant; he is distracting the Minister and Grim
Reaper with tales of strawberries and such, giving Buckbeak a chance to be
rescued. Then he immediately dismisses the whole execution by asking Hagrid
for Brandy.




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




From surreal_44 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 05:26:07 2004
From: surreal_44 at yahoo.com (Krissy)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 05:26:07 -0000
Subject: Love it or hate it, see it twice  Was: Why books should no
In-Reply-To: <BD011245.FEA%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbgd1f+10n3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...>
wrote:
> 
> It sounds like Cuaron made "Hermoine Granger and the Prisoner of
> Azkaban" don't it?


I disagree. I talked to my best friend in depth about it. She has not
read the books, and I explained everything to her from the book that
was not in the movie, or what they changed, and she agrees with just
about everything the Cuaron has done.

For storytelling and better flow for the movie, the two major
arguments between the Trio (the Firebolt and Scabbers being eaten)
were changed around or cut out entirely, it would not have made sense
to have Hermione be so weepy in the movie, since it's not just her
workload that has her so emotional, but the rift between herself and
her two boys. 

Also, Hermione is more mature in the fourth book, and I don't see how
they could have reconciled Weepy!Emotional!Hermione to
Mature!Hermione. I personally like what they did with Hermione; she
finally gets to show that she's not just a bossy know-it-all, and it
shows her bravery.

I honestly don't understand why people have been so upset about the
film. Aside from a brief explaination of the Map, nothing was cut from
the book that was necessary for the film. The story was fairly
fast-paced, with plenty of humor and angst to keep it entertaining.
The kid actors have only improved, and although Dumbledore's
fingernails were kind of odd, this new one is great. Different than
the original, but still great.

As much as I enjoyed the first two movies, I always find when I watch
them that I hope they end soon, since they're both so long, and
following every detail almost perfectly. I love those movies, don't
get me wrong, but Cuaron breathed new life into the films, and I think
his work should be appreciated, not picked into little shreds because
we don't like change.

Oh, and another thing; I love the soundtrack! I just bought it, and
I'm really astounded at how beautiful some of the pieces are. I'm also
amused at how many ways you can play "Hedwig's Theme".  :)


~Krissy
Who loved the movie!




From CariadMel at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 07:16:51 2004
From: CariadMel at aol.com (Annette)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 07:16:51 -0000
Subject: Umbridge casting idea...
In-Reply-To: <1a4.2588fed4.2e0ce86c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbgjh3+p22n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lynx412 at A... wrote:
>        My husband and I were discussing some of the options when he 
came up 
> with the IDEAL choice, even if neither of us could remember her 
name. Just two 
> lines: "You ARE the weakest link. Goodby."
> 
>        Cheryl
> 
> 
> ****** smile****** You mean Ann Robinson, presenter of The Weakest 
Link; yes , I think she's a good choice of character but I don't 
think she has the acting chops to carry off such a demanding part. I 
get your point tho Chreyl , she is the Queen of Mean! LOL!

Nerissa




From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 08:30:23 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 08:30:23 -0000
Subject: What worked in POA
In-Reply-To: <BD01106F.FE8%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbgnqv+2bb9@eGroups.com>

>> I have a bigger question, what did you think worked, if you care 
to discuss that. I want to, need to concentrate on the good about 
this movie. << 

-The Dursley scene was done very well at the beginning. They 
shortened it (of course), but all the best parts were left in (I was 
very worried that the breaking glass was going to be removed and we'd 
be left with ONLY the inflating part). 
-The music through the whole movie was very good. It was about time 
they changed the score around a bit (we certainly can't have the same 
music throughout the whole series)
-As others have said, the Lupin/Harry scenes were very good, as were 
the "little touches" (like the whomping willow killing birds)
-The time-turner scene was about ten times better than I thought'd 
be. With everything else that happens at the end of PoA, that bit 
sort of slips my mind when I think about the story, I didn't think 
it'd be so interesting on film (giving time-turned Harry/Hermione 
more to do was a fanatastic idea, it certainly made the time-turning 
thing more interesting).
-Having Harry get the firebolt at the end of the film worked very 
well, it was a nice ending (hopefully, though, the beginning of GoF 
features a letter from Sirius).
-Even though the prank was left out, I loved the Sirius/Snape/Lupin 
scene, the dialogue was very well done (particularily "once again 
you've put your keen and penetrating mind to the task and as usual 
come up with the wrong conclusion.").
-The humor was downplayed more, for the most part. I liked 
the "spiders want me to tapdance" joke of course, but Hermione's "Is 
that really what my hair looks like from the back?" comment was great 
as well.


-Rebecca




From hp at plum.cream.org  Fri Jun 25 11:55:36 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 12:55:36 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <BD0118B1.FEB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040625122222.00993d40@plum.cream.org>

I should have left home by now, but I really wanted to deal with this issue 
before I leave...

At 04:48 25/06/04 , Valerie Flowe wrote:

>I still think that the Marauder's Map plot belongs in POA, not GOF. The
>official HP websiteeven has it as it's flash intro. It encompasses the whole
>story (Harry getting into Hogsmeade despite Uncle Vernon's obstinance; the
>whole Shrieking Shack plot unfolding, etc. I still think this would have
>been the easiest solution:

<snip scenario>

If you look back, I made an almost identical suggestion three weeks ago (I 
can't check the message number but it was on 3rd June); thinking about how 
easy and obvious that scenario would have been to include is one of the 
things that started me wondering about just *WHY* no effort was made *AT 
ALL* to introduce any of this material. It's not a side plot and not 
irrelevant. Yet JKR allowed them to do it, which means that whatever 
reasons they had for doing this must've convinced her.

I agree with you entirely that the Map is an important element of PoA and 
you won't find me arguing against the reasons you have given (I could give 
several more). But the Map *is* there. What has been omitted is the story 
of the Map's creation, and I can see no real reason why *that* is directly 
germane to the plot. Indeed, none of the reasons you've given address that 
element. On the other hand, as I said before, there are perfectly valid 
reasons for this element NOT to be introduced in this context - it *is* all 
about context!

><snip>
>if Time-Turned H&H could get Buckbeak out of the way while the "execution
>committee" was inside Hagrid's hut, why didn't HRH do it the first time
>around?
>
>[from Valerie]
>Because Dumbledore didn't inform them of it till later in the hospital ward?

Well, he didn't inform them. He just gave them a hint. They decided what 
they had to do themselves.

>It was his fault! But in watching the scene play itself twice, Dumbledore
>seems to have clairvoyance of these events, i.e. he wants to sign his very
>long name to the death warrant; he is distracting the Minister and Grim
>Reaper with tales of strawberries and such, giving Buckbeak a chance to be
>rescued. Then he immediately dismisses the whole execution by asking Hagrid
>for Brandy.

(Side note: Dumbledore's dissembling and delaying tactics have already been 
picked apart in the context of book discussions.)

As far as we know, Dumbledore never saw the scene play itself twice, and in 
real terms, the scene only happened once anyway (although we see it from 
two different POVs). Dumbledore is delaying all the time, so whilst this 
may be an indicator to H&H2, there is no significant reason why HRH 
shouldn't have noticed it the first time around.

Sure, there are good symbolic reasons for HRH not to have released Buckbeak 
the first time around, but in terms of the plot itself, it doesn't make any 
sense. One of the reasons I raised this issue (and I really should've said 
this last time) is that when discussing the movie, several people have 
listed some of Cuaron's symbolic touches which aren't entirely in keeping 
with the facts of the Potterverse  as reasons to dislike the movie; the 
fact is that JKR does the same thing, and yet this doesn't prevent PoA 
being most readers' favourite book (including mine).

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who really does have to go now! Back on Monday/Tuesday!



From v-tregan at microsoft.com  Fri Jun 25 12:37:59 2004
From: v-tregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan (Intl Vendor))
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 13:37:59 +0100
Subject: HRH, H2&H2, and freeing Buckbeak (was RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P)
Message-ID: <502C27106D99DB478C13DEDBFD185E15C1F422@EUR-MSG-12.europe.corp.microsoft.com>

Hi All,

GulPlum AKA Richard said:
>>> Dumbledore's dissembling and delaying tactics have already been
picked apart in the context of book discussions. <<<

Dumbledad (me) replies, trying to buck-pass Yahoomort's `search':
Do you have any message numbers for that? I'd love to go back and read
it.

GulPlum AKA Richard said:
>>> Sure, there are good symbolic reasons for HRH not to have released
Buckbeak the first time around, but in terms of the plot itself, it
doesn't make any sense. <<<

Dumbledad (me) replies:
Really? I always thought that HRH could not free Buckbeak for fear of
being caught and for fear of Hagrid getting blamed for enlisting some
random pub-friend in a Hippogriff releasing scheme. It is Dumbledore
saying "you will be able to save more than one innocent life tonight"
that gives H2&H2 the idea, *and the authority*, to release Buckbeak in
spite of any obvious concerns.  ( Why he didn't use plain English and
say "Get Buckbeak when we're in Hagrid's hut and later rescue Sirius" is
beyond me, though it did make for a more nail-biting read. ) 

Cheers,

Dumbledad (who is hoping that book discussion isn't off-topic on the
movie list!)


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




From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 25 07:27:18 2004
From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 07:27:18 -0000
Subject: My second viewing and some things I realized
In-Reply-To: <20040624190817.RBLE1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbgk4m+j92g@eGroups.com>


> From: "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...>
<snip> ....the fact that they wrote the map is slipped into the 
middle of the Shrieking Shack scene with very little emphasis (Lupin 
says something to the effect of "Of course I know how to work it, I 
helped write it."). 
Now if you're talking about the animagus stuff, then that I 
understand, because that's a whole chapter. Personally, I think it 
would have been awkward in the movie, <snip> 


 
>Reply: [frm Valerie]


> So again, the director has to balance the story 
> between his huge viewing audience age span (say, 4 years old to 84 
years old?!?!) 
You have to admit, that's a big challenge. 
> 
>

Valky:

All good points and still I believe the Shreiking Shack scene was 
drastically rushed.

My Younger brother who has never read the books loved the movie and 
thats great. 

But I asked him "What did you think of Sirius at the end of the 
movie?" and "Did you want for Harry to live with him?"

His answers:

"What about Sirius? He was innocent."
"Thats it?" I asked.
"Yeah, Just that he was innocent. Why what did I miss? Oh yeah that 
he was Harrys Godfather right?"

and..

"Well Harry wanted to live with him but I dont really know....I felt 
sad that he couldn't...."

What did he miss!?!?!?

Only that Sirius was the most loyal and true friend that James ever 
had!! 
Just that he was there ready to die to avenge Harry's tragedy. 

Nothing much just what was lost in a barrage of poorly delivered 
lines and ill conceived camera angles.

I was really enjoying the movie right up till the thirty seconds 
that they crammed a pivotal event in Harrys life into with the 
camera pointing at the back of his Sirius' head!! Arrrgh!!! 

If only they could reshoot this one scene!

Ok maybe I sound a bit harsh. But to me that is the crucial event of 
Prisoner of Azkaban..... and I think it was crushed in like a bent 
spoon. 

I feel sad for those that missed the passion of that scene which can 
only be found in the original works by JK Rowling and I urge all who 
haven't felt it yet to read read read!!

Valky


Just a final note I'd like to add and thanks to pen_apart elf for 
the friendly words...

I realise after writing this that I feel a twinge of guilt for the 
makers of POA. My bitterness is maybe too direct and it is the 
longest and most difficult story yet to contain in one movie, but 
they truly reflect how I personally felt after watching the film.

 





From allisonotto at gmail.com  Fri Jun 25 14:22:00 2004
From: allisonotto at gmail.com (allison_m_otto)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:22:00 -0000
Subject: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040625015926.009c6d50@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cbhce8+c15j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
>> The concept of Animagery itself and the Animagus register will 
have to be 
> included in GoF anyway (unless Rita's been excised from the script) 
to make 
> the plot understandable. 


FYI:
Although it's not listed on the GoF page on IMDB, Rosamund Pike 
appears to have been cast as Rita Skeeter.  I think she's a bit too 
pretty, but at least we know the character is in there.

-Allison




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Fri Jun 25 15:29:00 2004
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 15:29:00 -0000
Subject: GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040625015926.009c6d50@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cbhgbs+skes@eGroups.com>

Richard aka GulPlum wrote, not altogether seriously of the 
forthcoming GoF film:

>>> Besides, what makes you think this is a going to be an action 
mystery, seeing as it's going to have a director who's forte lies in 
romantic comedies and intimate dramas? :-P<<<

Ali:

Well, I am serious: that bothers me! I don't want to suddenly find 
that GoF is about Harry fancying Cho and Ron fancying Hermione. 
These facts maybe intrinsic parts of the GoF story, but IMO at 
least, they're not *the* story.

I have to admit that I wonder how on earth they can do justice to 
the Graveyard Scene? So far, they've managed to dumbdown every scene 
in which any character is tied up or chained. How are they going to 
portray Harry being tortured? Is he just going to stand nonchantly 
against a gravestone whilst Wormtail takes a blood sample? To me, 
and I suspect many fans that graveyard scene is pivotal to the plot. 
It goes a long to explain why Harry is so angry in OoP, and of 
course why everything changes after Voldemort's rebirth.

My fear is the Graveyard scene will be changed beyond all 
recognition to ensure that WB retains their film certification. The 
scare factor seems to increase with the books, but can WB do justice 
to this, without losing those they choose to recognise as their key 
audience? Can Steve Kloves do anything with Ron but have him as a 
comic interlude? 

IMO, the romantic interchanges are funny. I enjoy the kids 
embarassment over the Yule Ball, but I am concerned that GoF, the 
film will be about the romance rather than the mystery.

Ali, the scared.







From sherriola at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 25 15:34:26 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 09:34:26 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbhgbs+skes@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003701c45ac9$e718e030$0400a8c0@pensive>

I actually think they could take the whole romance thing out of the movie.
It isn't at all important to the plot of GOF, except that Harry distrusts
Cedric because of Cho.  In fact, they could lose the whole Yule ball, I
think.  The important thing about the Yule ball is that Harry and Ron and
Rita discover about Hagrid being half giant, and Percy comes instead of Mr.
Crouch.  otherwise, it really adds nothing except in the ways of showing the
kids as growing teens with relationships and jealousies and such.  But there
is so much else in that story to tell, that the Yule ball is something I can
see them doing without.  As long as they can get Hagrid being half giant in
there somewhere.  

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Ali [mailto:Ali at zymurgy.org] 
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 9:29 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P


Richard aka GulPlum wrote, not altogether seriously of the 
forthcoming GoF film:

>>> Besides, what makes you think this is a going to be an action 
mystery, seeing as it's going to have a director who's forte lies in 
romantic comedies and intimate dramas? :-P<<<

Ali:

Well, I am serious: that bothers me! I don't want to suddenly find 
that GoF is about Harry fancying Cho and Ron fancying Hermione. 
These facts maybe intrinsic parts of the GoF story, but IMO at 
least, they're not *the* story.

I have to admit that I wonder how on earth they can do justice to 
the Graveyard Scene? So far, they've managed to dumbdown every scene 
in which any character is tied up or chained. How are they going to 
portray Harry being tortured? Is he just going to stand nonchantly 
against a gravestone whilst Wormtail takes a blood sample? To me, 
and I suspect many fans that graveyard scene is pivotal to the plot. 
It goes a long to explain why Harry is so angry in OoP, and of 
course why everything changes after Voldemort's rebirth.

My fear is the Graveyard scene will be changed beyond all 
recognition to ensure that WB retains their film certification. The 
scare factor seems to increase with the books, but can WB do justice 
to this, without losing those they choose to recognise as their key 
audience? Can Steve Kloves do anything with Ron but have him as a 
comic interlude? 

IMO, the romantic interchanges are funny. I enjoy the kids 
embarassment over the Yule Ball, but I am concerned that GoF, the 
film will be about the romance rather than the mystery.

Ali, the scared.







________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 blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 16:48:53 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 16:48:53 -0000
Subject: Mark Williams' mistake
Message-ID: <cbhl1l+6vvj@eGroups.com>

I haven't seen this posted anywhere on any boards or 
moviemistakes,etc.

Did anyone notice that in Arthur and Harry's little Sirius chat he 
said 'thirteen' years ago when you stopped you-know-who?  He should 
have said twelve.

and...

Tom the innkeeper refers to Hedwig as 'he'.

Marci




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 16:56:23 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 16:56:23 -0000
Subject: Movie marketing (Various PoA answers)
In-Reply-To: <002101c457e5$38e733e0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cbhlfn+e8k8@eGroups.com>

Lynda said:
I've just come from my 4th viewing, and I'm still wowed by the film. 
What
distresses me GREATLY is that WB has done so LITTLE advertising for 
it! There
are no ads on TV that I can see, nothing much in print, nothing much 
online
as far as ads go, and it wasn't advertised that much before it was 
released.

Joj:
It has been and continues to be advertised to children on Nickelodeon 
and
Cartoon Network. My children watch these channels, and this weekend 
there was at
least on PoA commercial in every half hour show. I thought it was 
overkill
frankly. There are two commercials. One with all the light hearted, 
happy
moments and one with the scary dark moments. I've thought it was a 
mistake from
the start to focus so much on the kids market.

Now me:

I have to say I was disappointed in the film's ad (lack thereof) as 
well.  I haven't seen a TV spot for the movie in weeks!  However, I 
watch WB Kids on Saturday mornings (for Static Shock and Yu-gi-oh) 
and that's when I'll see them the most.  Before the movie started, I 
saw most of them here and also saw some late at night.  Really late.  
I'm talking 11:00 news and late night talk show late.

And where are all the magazines with HP3 covers and articles?

I agree with Joj.  Focusing on the kids market = big mistake.

Marci




From dk59us at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 16:02:29 2004
From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 16:02:29 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
Message-ID: <cbhial+f29e@eGroups.com>

I had the chance to see POA in an IMAX this past week and noticed
something odd about the scene in which the class takes on the boggart
in the wardrobe.

Of course, Neville goes first.  Then Lupin has them line up, with Ron,
Seamus and Parvati the first three.  As Ron deals with the spider,
Seamus is visible next in line.  But then, once the spider's in roller
skates, Lupin calls Parvati up.  Seamus is no longer visible anywhere
in the later shots of the line of students.

Seems from this that they probably filmed the Seamus/banshee scene but
cut it from the theatrical version.  (Of course they also could have
changed what the boggart becomes for Seamus as they did for Parvati).

If the DVD follows the past format, we'll probably see Seamus take on
the boggart in the deleted scenes.  If instead they go the LOTR route
and put out an extended DVD, maybe we'll get an extended scene of this
class.  Since they integrated the SS deleted scenes into the ABC TV
presentation,  maybe they're thinking along those lines for the
future, instead of having a separate deleted scenes section.

Also, my son just got some POA trading cards, showing scenes from the
movie--except some show scenes that _aren't_ in the movie.  For
example, there's one with a bedraggled Maggie Smith in her nightgown
looking up at a painting.  The description on the back says that this
is the scene in which Sir Cadogan confirms that Sirius Black had the
passwords when he came in to "attack" Ron.  None of that made it into
the theatrical release, but they obviously filmed it...so again, look
for it somewhere on the DVD.

Now, if only I could find some evidence that an explanation was filmed
of who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs are...

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb





From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 17:09:03 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:09:03 -0000
Subject: 3rd viewing, likes and dislikes
In-Reply-To: <102.48150895.2e044d0b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbhm7f+qp2o@eGroups.com>

artsylynda at a... wrote:
 
> And on a similar note -- I've always wondered -- is Lee Jordan in 
the films 
> played by a boy or a girl?  Even in this film, s/he sounds and 
moves like a 
> girl, yet in the books, he seems to be a boy??  Or am I hopelessly 
confused?????  
> Wouldn't be the first time. . . .
> 
> Lynda 
> * * *
> ". . .the cat's among the pixies now." Mrs. Figg, OoP
> 
Lee Jordan was, I assume, portrayed by a boy, but uh, he wasn't in 
the POA movie.

Don't tell me I have to go see it a 6th time to find Lee Jordan! 

Marci




From blackgold101 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 18:33:49 2004
From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 18:33:49 -0000
Subject: What worked in POA
In-Reply-To: <BD01106F.FE8%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbhr6d+tph4@eGroups.com>

 Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> I have 
> a bigger question, what did you think worked, if you care to discuss
> that. I want to, need to concentrate on the good about this movie.
> Jennifer
> 
> [from Valerie]
> Some of the more emotional scenes that I thought were well acted 
were the
> Lupin/Harry scenes. They are my favorite. In fact, I felt there was 
more
> chemistry between them, than Harry and Sirius. ('course Sirius was 
kind of
> rushed in and out of the picture). The subtle facial expressions on 
both
> Harry and Lupin's face as they are talking about Harry's parents. 
The way I
> squirmed when Lupin was berating Harry for risking his life with 
the map;
> how bereft Harry looked when Lupin said "I feel sure we'll meet 
again", then
> walked out of Harry's life. Boo hoo! Very heartfelt, all that.

Me:

- The camera work.  Cuaron let the actors act.
- The twins.  It's about time!  The scene where they give Harry the 
map is hilarious.  And I can't get that "the bloke who came to fix 
the toilet" line out of my head.
- The little 'friendship' touches; the low high-5 of Harry and Ron 
after Ron's turn with the boggart, the little nudge pushing Harry 
towards Beaky, the 'boys will be boys' scene, and Hermione calling 
Ron "RONALD" worked for me.
- Michael Gambon.  Yeah, I said it.  He's more suited to this book's 
DD (and OOP DD) IMO.
- Harry/Lupin scenes
- Emma Thompson

Marci




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 18:54:17 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:54:17 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] problems with *shipping*, etc.
Message-ID: <60500CA0.2E2AFD41.0AE51F07@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/24/2004 6:14:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly
> when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron
> will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and
> Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??  Does anyone
> else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in 
> trying
> to out-guess JKR?
> 
> draco382 (who really does like the movie though...)

Honestly, I don't think it will be a problem.  How many people (raise your hands!) have become life partners with their first crush from school?  Not that many, right?  So Ron and Hermione may be an "item" for a year or two, then maybe it will be Ron and Susan Bones (for instance) and Harry and Hermione, after Harry's gone through Ginny and whoever else interests him.  Maybe they'll get back together with their school friends and become "one big happy Weasley family" (Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione) ro maybe not.  We just don't know.  And at this point, it doesn't much matter -- the teen years are a short period of life we pass through rather quickly (although it seems like forever at times).  I have no problem with R&Hermione being interested in each other in this film because Ron is so obviously jealous of her being with Krum in the 4th book -- it's a natural lead-in.  Who knows what will happen in Book 6 and 7?  Can't wait to read them!  That said, I saw the film for the 5th time last night, and must say, that stupid jack in the box really annoys me, AND it ALSO bothers me that Harry is grinning when Lupin leaps in front of him to prevent "Lord Voldemort" from appearing -- when we've already seen the Boggart turn into a Dementor!  I wish the continuity people had been more on the ball with that and the scene by the lake where Sirius opened his eyes and the next shot is obviously still unconscious.  And how that one long Buckbeak feather became a cluster of three short ones tied to the handle -- or were they tied to it to start with and I just missed it??  SO much to see in this movie!!  Anyway, all that said -- the more you watch it, the more you get out of it.  The housekeeping lady's broom sweeping things under the rug was something I caught on teh 4th viewing (up to that point I was concentrating on everything to do with Harry and whatever was closest to him rather than watching the background).  I'd love to see it a bunch more, but do need to get on with life, so I'll make myself hang on until I can see it at an IMAX in mid-July. . .I think I can wait that long to see it again, anyway!

Lynda Sappington
http://www.TheSculptedHorse.com

From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 18:54:48 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:54:48 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] problems with *shipping*, etc.
Message-ID: <5FA8003A.19FB9E9C.0AE51F07@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/24/2004 6:14:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly
> when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron
> will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and
> Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??  Does anyone
> else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in 
> trying
> to out-guess JKR?
> 
> draco382 (who really does like the movie though...)

Honestly, I don't think it will be a problem.  How many people (raise your hands!) have become life partners with their first crush from school?  Not that many, right?  So Ron and Hermione may be an "item" for a year or two, then maybe it will be Ron and Susan Bones (for instance) and Harry and Hermione, after Harry's gone through Ginny and whoever else interests him.  Maybe they'll get back together with their school friends and become "one big happy Weasley family" (Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione) ro maybe not.  We just don't know.  And at this point, it doesn't much matter -- the teen years are a short period of life we pass through rather quickly (although it seems like forever at times).  I have no problem with R&Hermione being interested in each other in this film because Ron is so obviously jealous of her being with Krum in the 4th book -- it's a natural lead-in.  Who knows what will happen in Book 6 and 7?  Can't wait to read them!  That said, I saw the film for the 5th time last night, and must say, that stupid jack in the box really annoys me, AND it ALSO bothers me that Harry is grinning when Lupin leaps in front of him to prevent "Lord Voldemort" from appearing -- when we've already seen the Boggart turn into a Dementor!  I wish the continuity people had been more on the ball with that and the scene by the lake where Sirius opened his eyes and the next shot is obviously still unconscious.  And how that one long Buckbeak feather became a cluster of three short ones tied to the handle -- or were they tied to it to start with and I just missed it??  SO much to see in this movie!!  Anyway, all that said -- the more you watch it, the more you get out of it.  The housekeeping lady's broom sweeping things under the rug was something I caught on teh 4th viewing (up to that point I was concentrating on everything to do with Harry and whatever was closest to him rather than watching the background).  I'd love to see it a bunch more, but do need to get on with life, so I'll make myself hang on until I can see it at an IMAX in mid-July. . .I think I can wait that long to see it again, anyway!

Lynda Sappington
http://www.TheSculptedHorse.com

From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 18:54:50 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:54:50 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] problems with *shipping*, etc.
Message-ID: <3E94E6A7.4E5BA905.0AE51F07@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/24/2004 6:14:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> Aren't the film makers concerned that they would like quite silly
> when making movie # 7 and inexplicably, JKR has written that Ron
> will end with Susan Bones while Harry ends up with no one and
> Hermione is engaged to Draco Malfoy (for example)??  Does anyone
> else think the movie makers are really "jumping the gun" in 
> trying
> to out-guess JKR?
> 
> draco382 (who really does like the movie though...)

Honestly, I don't think it will be a problem.  How many people (raise your hands!) have become life partners with their first crush from school?  Not that many, right?  So Ron and Hermione may be an "item" for a year or two, then maybe it will be Ron and Susan Bones (for instance) and Harry and Hermione, after Harry's gone through Ginny and whoever else interests him.  Maybe they'll get back together with their school friends and become "one big happy Weasley family" (Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione) ro maybe not.  We just don't know.  And at this point, it doesn't much matter -- the teen years are a short period of life we pass through rather quickly (although it seems like forever at times).  I have no problem with R&Hermione being interested in each other in this film because Ron is so obviously jealous of her being with Krum in the 4th book -- it's a natural lead-in.  Who knows what will happen in Book 6 and 7?  Can't wait to read them!  That said, I saw the film for the 5th time last night, and must say, that stupid jack in the box really annoys me, AND it ALSO bothers me that Harry is grinning when Lupin leaps in front of him to prevent "Lord Voldemort" from appearing -- when we've already seen the Boggart turn into a Dementor!  I wish the continuity people had been more on the ball with that and the scene by the lake where Sirius opened his eyes and the next shot is obviously still unconscious.  And how that one long Buckbeak feather became a cluster of three short ones tied to the handle -- or were they tied to it to start with and I just missed it??  SO much to see in this movie!!  Anyway, all that said -- the more you watch it, the more you get out of it.  The housekeeping lady's broom sweeping things under the rug was something I caught on teh 4th viewing (up to that point I was concentrating on everything to do with Harry and whatever was closest to him rather than watching the background).  I'd love to see it a bunch more, but do need to get on with life, so I'll make myself hang on until I can see it at an IMAX in mid-July. . .I think I can wait that long to see it again, anyway!

Lynda Sappington
http://www.TheSculptedHorse.com

From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 19:01:57 2004
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 15:01:57 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Dan Radcliffe
Message-ID: <2927128E.3C745797.0AE51F07@aol.com>

In a message dated 6/24/2004 6:14:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

> I was also impressed with Draco (I mean, Tom!) writing fairly regularly on his
> website, and in such a conversational tone. (About wearing a white suit to the
> premier; buying CDs in New York, etc.) I wish Dan would do 
> the same on his
> website. Much easier than responding to fan mail?!

Dan doesn't respond to fan mail himself - and he's filming 11 months of the year, from things I've read and heard various places.  He doesn't have the free time Tom does.  Tom's only in a few scenes.  Dan's in EVERY scene, since the stories are from Harry's POV.  What Dan does, according to DanRadcliffe.com, is write, himself, a newsletter every three months.  This and a "printed autograph" photo of him is sent to those who write him -- not personal letters.  I've read he doesn't read reviews or get on the message boards because he doesn't want his performance influenced by outside things.  I think that's a wise decision on his part.  His parents seem to be doing a spectacular job of raising him so far.

And I, too, would love to know how that other poster met him!  ;->

Lynda



From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Fri Jun 25 20:08:31 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:08:31 +0100
Subject: Powerful Harry
Message-ID: <v01540b00bd01090bf451@[217.154.255.82]>

I had meant to respond to this last week, but Life intervened, and now I
have lost the original post.

I think it was Valerie who said that Harry surely wasn't powerful enough to
conjure his own Patronus, and that James must have been there too on the
night that Harry saved himself and Sirius from the Dementors.

I don't think this is so. Harry *is* an extremely powerful wizard; by the
age of fifteen, he has seen off Voldemort on several occasions and is
teaching Defence Against the Dark Arts to his fellow-students. That's not
normal for a wizard-in-training..

Harry is unusual, because his most effective magic is instinctive. In
lessons at Hogwarts, he does okay, but not spectacularly; but when he needs
to do a certain thing and is able to draw upon his own emotional strengths
to perform the required magic, he is very powerful indeed.

This is being set up throughout the storyline, in the books and the movies.
Before Harry knows that he is a wizard, he does instinctive magic; fear
at being chased by Dudley and his bullying friends makes him leap on to the
roof; shame at his appearance when Uncle Vernon shaves off his untidy hair
makes him grow it back again overnight. It's the same instinctive magic
when Aunt Marge gets blown up after insulting James and Lily; it's a
projection of Harry's emotions.

This is a far more powerful type of magic than the tame stuff that they
learn in their lessons at Hogwarts. Hermione knows the difference between
the way that she works; via books and memorising, and the way that Harry
works; by gut feeling...and she knows that Harry's way is stronger.
Remember the scene after the chess game in PS/SS, when she tells Harry that
he is a really great wizard, and she dismisses 'books and cleverness' as
something inferior. At the end of PoA, we are told again by Hermione; only
a really powerful wizard could conjure such a successful Patronus. Harry
did it, Harry alone, fortified by desperation to save Sirius and himself,
and knowing that he did have the ability to do it.

The challenge for Harry is not so much to learn how to do magic, but how to
control the potential for magic that he has within him, and to channel his
emotions to make the magic more effective. Magic takes effort; you have to
have the desire to achieve what you are setting out to do.

So Harry's Patronus is all his own, springing from his own strength and his
own emotions. James was only there in a genetic sense.

Cheers,
Nicholas





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 19:53:43 2004
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 12:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: GoF Commences Production - principal photography is now underway
Message-ID: <20040625195343.39442.qmail@web51906.mail.yahoo.com>

In case you haven't heard...

GoF Commences Production - 
principal photography is now underway

For an official list of cast members, 
see the Warner Bros. press release at:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040625/255346_1.html

Hopefully Warner Bros. had sent out some 
good/recent pictures to accompany this 
press release so that we'll see what the 
'unknowns' look like soon! <g>

<settles in for the wait for November 2005>

Petra
a
n  :)


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



From judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Jun 25 21:12:43 2004
From: judy_magic333 at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Judy=20Tait?=)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 22:12:43 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF Commences Production - principal photography is now underway
In-Reply-To: <20040625195343.39442.qmail@web51906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040625211243.19748.qmail@web25403.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

Brendan Gleeson as Moody?  Cool!!  When I see him as the big strong friend of Mel Gibson's William Wallace in "Braveheart", I know that he can certainly look the part of Moody, LOL.
 
Judy

Petra <ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com> wrote:
In case you haven't heard...

GoF Commences Production - 
principal photography is now underway

For an official list of cast members, 
see the Warner Bros. press release at:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040625/255346_1.html

Hopefully Warner Bros. had sent out some 
good/recent pictures to accompany this 
press release so that we'll see what the 
'unknowns' look like soon! <g>

<settles in for the wait for November 2005>

Petra
a
n  :)


            
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
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 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. 


		
---------------------------------
 ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself 

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




From dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 25 22:20:05 2004
From: dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com (Claire)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 15:20:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] problems with *shipping*, etc.
In-Reply-To: <3E94E6A7.4E5BA905.0AE51F07@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040625222005.27504.qmail@web40911.mail.yahoo.com>

--- artsylynda at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/24/2004 6:14:03 PM Eastern
> Daylight Time, HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
Does anyone
> > else think the movie makers are really "jumping
> the gun" in 
> > trying
> > to out-guess JKR?

I don't think so.  Althought the shipping in the POA
movie is greater than that in the book, it doesn't
IMHO rise to anything that GOF doesn't intimate re Ron
and Hermione.  Also, I know JKR gave Columbus some
direction on where things were going so that the
movies wouldn't veer to wildly from the book, perhaps
she gave Cuaron the same? (Although that doesn't match
with her comment re Cuaron being prophetic.)

Claire - who doesn't really know who anyone will end
up with book or movie. 


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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Jun 25 23:51:49 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:51:49 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbhial+f29e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbidql+7ui6@eGroups.com>

Eustace_Scrubb wrote:
>> I had the chance to see POA in an IMAX this past week and noticed
something odd about the scene in which the class takes on the boggart 
in the wardrobe.

Of course, Neville goes first.  Then Lupin has them line up, with 
Ron, Seamus and Parvati the first three.  As Ron deals with the 
spider, Seamus is visible next in line.  But then, once the spider's 
in roller skates, Lupin calls Parvati up.  Seamus is no longer 
visible anywhere in the later shots of the line of students.

Seems from this that they probably filmed the Seamus/banshee scene 
but cut it from the theatrical version.  (Of course they also could 
have changed what the boggart becomes for Seamus as they did for 
Parvati). <<

I checked through my trading cards and on this scene, *Dean Thomas* 
is listed as being the one who turns the snake into the creepy jack-
in-the-box. That does make me wonder though, if they filmed more 
boggart encounters, but cut them out for time.


>>Also, my son just got some POA trading cards, showing scenes from 
the movie--except some show scenes that _aren't_ in the movie. For
example, there's one with a bedraggled Maggie Smith in her nightgown
looking up at a painting. The description on the back says that this
is the scene in which Sir Cadogan confirms that Sirius Black had the
passwords when he came in to "attack" Ron. None of that made it into
the theatrical release, but they obviously filmed it...so again, look
for it somewhere on the DVD. <<

Not only is that in the trading cards, but in at least one of the 
many behind-the-scenes specials I watched, there's actually a *clip* 
from this scene (its just Ron and Hermione arguing, but they're in 
their pajamas, and the scene is definitely *not* in the movie). Also, 
there's the fact that the IMDB lists an actor for Sir Cadogan, even 
though he was *barely* in the movie. It makes me wonder how much of 
that scene they filmed (if there's actually a shot of Sirius standing 
over Ron's bed or not). I'll bet the reason this scene was left out 
is less for time, and more sylistic: Cuaron wanting the first glimpse 
of the (not in pictures) Sirius Black to be in the shrieking shack. 
So that the rest of the movie is lead-up to that moment.

I kind of wonder exactly how the trading card captions were written. 
Obviously the writer had some inside info, because many of the other 
card are correct, but there's some that go against what was in the 
movie. There's another one, about Ron & Hermione fighting, which 
says "Ron retorts that a person could die being Harry's friend.", 
which I thought was very odd and was wondering how that would play in 
the movie, but of course it wasn't in the movie. And in the Sirius 
escaping card, Sirius says "You truly are your father's son Harry." 
as opposed to the awful complimenting Hermione line. IMO, it seems 
like it was originally that line (as a continuation of the 
conversation he was having with Harry), but that it was changed for 
some reason. You can't even tell who he's looking at until *after* 
the line when you see Hermione's reaction. Clearly, both Cuaron and 
Steve Kloves like Hermione/Emma Watson a little *too* much.

>>Now, if only I could find some evidence that an explanation was 
filmed of who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs are...<<

You won't. According to the Entertainment Weekly article that came 
out a few weeks ago, Cuaron *purposely* left that out, thinking it 
fit better in a later movie.(personally, it doesn't bother me that 
much, but since I've heard from so many people who were upset about 
it, I wish they would have had just ONE line about it *somewhere*).


-Rebecca
 





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 26 00:55:52 2004
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 00:55:52 -0000
Subject: OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbhgbs+skes@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbihio+nqqj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> Richard aka GulPlum wrote, not altogether seriously of the 
> forthcoming GoF film:
> 

> 
> My fear is the Graveyard scene will be changed beyond all 
> recognition to ensure that WB retains their film certification. 
The 
> scare factor seems to increase with the books, but can WB do 
justice 
> to this, without losing those they choose to recognise as their 
key 
> audience? Can Steve Kloves do anything with Ron but have him as a 
> comic interlude? 
> 
> IMO, the romantic interchanges are funny. I enjoy the kids 
> embarassment over the Yule Ball, but I am concerned that GoF, the 
> film will be about the romance rather than the mystery.
> 
> Ali, the scared.

All your fears about GoF are even more serious when OoP is 
considered.  In OoP, you have LV torturing Sirius and the attack on 
Arthur Weasley, not to mention the climactic battle in the 
Department of Mysteries.  If these scenes are given anything near 
their proper emotional weight, I see the possibility of an "R" 
rating-- a "PG-13" is practically a given.

I too am concerned about how Ron hhas been mistreated in all the 
movies.  In the book OoP, I believe that JKR tok great pains to move 
Ron out of the "sidekick" class and make him a character in his own 
right.  I think this is a pillar of the saga, this growing up of 
friends who take their own paths.  I like that JKR does not have DD 
say he gave Ron his preceptorship out of pity or charity, but 
because Harry was rather busy with the latest war brewing.  Ron will 
become ever less a foil to Harry and a wizard in his own right.

I think that JKR will have Ron see his desires from the Mirror of 
Erised come true.  I believe he will end up both Head Boy AND 
Quidditch Captain; and-- sorry, all you H/HR SHIPpers-- he will end 
up together with Hermione, too.

It is all this that I see being disregarded in the movie, keeping 
Ron in his cap and bells to caper about, mug and make one-liner 
comments.

Haggridd, whose fears about the romance in the movies have 
thankfully not yet been realized.





From siskiou at vcem.com  Sat Jun 26 01:17:57 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 18:17:57 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbihio+nqqj@eGroups.com>
References: <cbhgbs+skes@eGroups.com> <cbihio+nqqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1022680273.20040625181757@vcem.com>



Hi,

Friday, June 25, 2004, 5:55:52 PM, jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com wrote:

> In OoP, you have LV torturing Sirius and the attack on 
> Arthur Weasley, not to mention the climactic battle in the
> Department of Mysteries.  If these scenes are given anything near
> their proper emotional weight, I see the possibility of an "R"
> rating-- a "PG-13" is practically a given.

To me it seems as if violence (unless totally gratuitous and
gruesome, horror movie-style) doesn't bring the rating to an R.

That seems to be reserved mostly for sexual content.

I've been amazed at some R rated movies, wondering what
justified the R, and then seeing a movie loaded with
violence getting only a PG or PG-13.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 26 01:22:27 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:22:27 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
References: <cbidql+7ui6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006201c45b1c$0af903c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "huntergreen_3" <
> You won't. According to the Entertainment Weekly article that came
> out a few weeks ago, Cuaron *purposely* left that out, thinking it
> fit better in a later movie.(personally, it doesn't bother me that
> much, but since I've heard from so many people who were upset about
> it, I wish they would have had just ONE line about it *somewhere*).

Thanks Rebecca.  I was beginning to think I was the only one who didn't
really care they left the MWPP thing out of the movie.  It's not like they
left the Dementors out or something!

I saw the movie again last night (my third viewing, this time at the
drive-in in a thunderstorm).  I was noticing Harry's plaid pajama pants in
the PP/Mauraders map part, and something struck me.  Remember the trailer
where Harry says "He was right there, he was close enough to touch"?  That's
who he was talking about. Peter Pettigrew.  He knows he passed right by him.
He must have gone back the dormroom and woken Ron to talk after being
chastised by Lupin.  It also makes sense why Ron would pull Hermione's
sleeve when Harry was stealing her wand.  Sirius had already mentioned
Peter, so Ron was probably on alert that something wasn't right too.

Not really important, but something that jumped out at me.

Joj





From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com  Sat Jun 26 01:40:31 2004
From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 01:40:31 -0000
Subject: OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbihio+nqqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbik6f+628i@eGroups.com>

---Haggridd wrote:
...I like that JKR does not have DD say he gave Ron his preceptorship 
out of pity or charity, but because Harry was rather busy with the 
latest war brewing.  Ron will become ever less a foil to Harry and a 
wizard in his own right.


DD made Ron a prefect because he didn't want to give it to Harry and 
DD admitted that that was a mistake. Just like not telling Harry 
about the mindlink with Voldemort or the prophesy. 






 I think that JKR will have Ron see his desires from the Mirror of 
 Erised come true.  I believe he will end up both Head Boy AND 
 Quidditch Captain; and-- sorry, all you H/HR SHIPpers-- he will end 
 up together with Hermione, too.






Sorry to you but none of things will happen.  The Mirror of Erised 
does not show the future. It shows what you desire and none of those 
things have happened and they won't. Ron will not become Head Boy, he 
will not become Quidditch Captain and he will not get Hermione! You 
know why? Because the books are "Harry Potter and..." not "Ronald 
Weasley and..."




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 26 01:44:54 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (coolbeans3131)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 01:44:54 -0000
Subject: problems with *shipping*, etc.
In-Reply-To: <20040625222005.27504.qmail@web40911.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbikem+qjpf@eGroups.com>

draco382 said:
It is fairly obvious that the
movie-makers are definitely leaning Ron/Hermione. The movie has
become terribly coy and suggestive (and blatant) about Ron and
Hermione "ending up together" and even in interviews, the cast now
openly says that there is something going on with Ron and Hermione.
Wow -- that's quite an assumption to make! Now, I'm personally not
shipping in one direction or another, but it surprises me that such
a strong opinion about this would be expressed -- especially when
JKR has a penchant for throwing her audience WAAAAY off guard at the
last minute. I am under the impression that the movie makers really
don't "get" JKR and for that matter, Harry Potter at all.

Joj says:
I agree.  I think most people expected something to happen between 
R/H in book 5.  That's not what JKR did.  She has left clues for a 
lot of different ships.  I don't think R/H is a done deal.  I'm sure 
they're REALLY going to play up the R/H stuff in GoF.  What if book 
six comes out and Ron gets with Luna or Hermione gets with Harry or 
Neville Crabbe?  :0  How are they going to write their selves out of 
that hole?
 
 
Claire wrote: 
> I don't think so.  Although the shipping in the POA
> movie is greater than that in the book, it doesn't
> IMHO rise to anything that GOF doesn't intimate re Ron
> and Hermione.  

Joj:  
I think the R/H dynamic is a bit different in the movies.  Some of 
that is that both of the characters are a bit different in the 
movies.  For instance, do you think there's any chance Ron would have 
no reaction, in the books, to Hermione hugging him like she did over 
Buckbeak?  I know he wasn't concentrated on that and it was 
emotional, but he didn't even hug her back or acknowledge it in any 
way.  I can't see book Ron doing that.

Joj




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Jun 26 01:55:02 2004
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 21:55:02 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
References: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <008801c45b20$98bbebb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

From: "GulPlum"

*huge snip*
> In book-GoF, their conversations are about the
> tournament and how Harry's going to get through it. This way (in no more
> than a couple of minutes' screen time), they can talk about something that
> connects them both: James's schooldays, and *then* go into Harry's more
> immediate problems.
* more snipping*
> Introducing the term in the overloaded PoA plot makes no sense,
> because non-readers will have to be reminded of that fact when it's
brought
> up with regard to Rita.

Joj says:
I just wanted to say, I thought this was a brilliant post, and probably
right on the mark.

They have to give Gary Oldman more to do that eat chicken legs in the
cave(or where ever it will be).  There definitly needs to be more bonding
between them  Why else would TPTB say it would be more prudent to put this
infomation in a later movie?  Your idea actually makes that make sense.

"GulPlum"
> Furthermore, this allows us to gloss over one of the fundamental
> shortcomings of the book: why the hell didn't Lupin tell Dumbledore that
> Sirius could become a dog? Especially after he'd *already* successfully
> entered the grounds? Evil!Lupin theories aside, his explanation in the
book
> that he was scared of losing Dumbledore's respect and trust is so lame as
> to be laughable. >

Joj:
I agree.  It's why I can never quite trust Lupin.  He might not be evil, but
I still think there's more to him than we know about.





From siskiou at vcem.com  Sat Jun 26 02:27:44 2004
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 19:27:44 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbik6f+628i@eGroups.com>
References: <cbihio+nqqj@eGroups.com> <cbik6f+628i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1385254057.20040625192744@vcem.com>



Hi,

Friday, June 25, 2004, 6:40:31 PM, McGregorMax at ec.rr.com wrote:

> Sorry to you but none of things will happen.  The Mirror of Erised
> does not show the future. It shows what you desire and none of those
> things have happened and they won't. Ron will not become Head Boy, he
> will not become Quidditch Captain and he will not get Hermione! You
> know why? Because the books are "Harry Potter and..." not "Ronald
> Weasley and..."


You don't think any other characters story deserves
development?

Nothing about Neville, Krum, Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Percy,
Dumbledore, Snape, Lupin...?

How boring would Harry's universe be, if we didn't also
learn about the other characters populating it?

And I think it would be a great lesson to show that wishing
for something (Quidditch Cup etc.) isn't always as good and
desirable as you imagined it to be?

Maybe Ron will find out that his desires have changed
significantly over the years, and that those things don't
mean nearly as much as he thought they would?

JKR has created more than just Harry Potter. There are
plenty of other interesting characters, with their own set
of problems and backstories, and I sure hope we will find
out a lot more about them before the end of the story!

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sat Jun 26 02:35:19 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 20:35:19 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <1385254057.20040625192744@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <007201c45b26$39aa8d60$0400a8c0@pensive>

I totally agree with you.  In fact, looking at it from Harry's point of
view, he does not want to be all those things.  What he saw in the mirror
was a family, not fame and  glory.  I want to know more about other
characters besides Harry.  In fact, I'm becoming quite obsessed with the
desire to learn more about the Marauders!  A friend and I have been reading
POA again, commenting on chapter by chapter in email discussions.  Reading
the chapters in the shrieking shack has made me marvel at the friendship
those guys had and caused me to want to know a lot more about them.  I would
be disappointed if Harry gets all the glory, and none of his friends,
teachers and other associates get anything, even though they've all helped
him get this far.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: Susanne [mailto:siskiou at vcem.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 8:28 PM
To: mcmaxslb
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] OoP Fears: Ratings/Ron/Romance WAS GoF fears was
Re: Messrs M, W, P & P




Hi,

Friday, June 25, 2004, 6:40:31 PM, McGregorMax at ec.rr.com wrote:

> Sorry to you but none of things will happen.  The Mirror of Erised
> does not show the future. It shows what you desire and none of those
> things have happened and they won't. Ron will not become Head Boy, he
> will not become Quidditch Captain and he will not get Hermione! You
> know why? Because the books are "Harry Potter and..." not "Ronald
> Weasley and..."


You don't think any other characters story deserves
development?

Nothing about Neville, Krum, Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Percy,
Dumbledore, Snape, Lupin...?

How boring would Harry's universe be, if we didn't also
learn about the other characters populating it?

And I think it would be a great lesson to show that wishing
for something (Quidditch Cup etc.) isn't always as good and
desirable as you imagined it to be?

Maybe Ron will find out that his desires have changed
significantly over the years, and that those things don't
mean nearly as much as he thought they would?

JKR has created more than just Harry Potter. There are
plenty of other interesting characters, with their own set
of problems and backstories, and I sure hope we will find
out a lot more about them before the end of the story!

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





________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 amani at atlanticbb.net  Sat Jun 26 03:53:25 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:53:25 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF Commences Production - principal photography is now underway
References: <20040625195343.39442.qmail@web51906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007101c45b31$229f3200$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Petra:
For an official list of cast members, 
see the Warner Bros. press release at:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040625/255346_1.html

Hopefully Warner Bros. had sent out some 
good/recent pictures to accompany this 
press release so that we'll see what the 
'unknowns' look like soon! <g>

Taryn:
The Leaky Cauldron (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/) has pictures for anyone who's interested! Barty Crouch (Senior AND Junior), Amos Diggory, and Karkaroff are all there in (currently the second most recent news blurb.

--Taryn

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




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Sat Jun 26 03:56:41 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:56:41 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
References: <cbidql+7ui6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007901c45b31$970aa980$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Eustace_Scrubb wrote:
>> I had the chance to see POA in an IMAX this past week and noticed
something odd about the scene in which the class takes on the boggart 
in the wardrobe.

Rebecca:
Of course, Neville goes first.  Then Lupin has them line up, with 
Ron, Seamus and Parvati the first three.  As Ron deals with the 
spider, Seamus is visible next in line.  But then, once the spider's 
in roller skates, Lupin calls Parvati up.  Seamus is no longer 
visible anywhere in the later shots of the line of students.

Seems from this that they probably filmed the Seamus/banshee scene 
but cut it from the theatrical version.  (Of course they also could 
have changed what the boggart becomes for Seamus as they did for 
Parvati). <<

I checked through my trading cards and on this scene, *Dean Thomas* 
is listed as being the one who turns the snake into the creepy jack-
in-the-box. That does make me wonder though, if they filmed more 
boggart encounters, but cut them out for time.

Taryn:

Another note, The Leaky Cauldron interviewed Jamie Waylett (Crabbe) when PoA was still filming and he mentioned the boggart turning into a cha-cha dancer (...who finds that SCARY?) and a conga line starting. So it seems there ARE at least a few more boggart encounters. (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/extras/Waylett.html for the interview)

--Taryn

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




From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 26 06:18:17 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Coming of Age [was RE: I think i understand]
In-Reply-To: <161.30c4f5b3.2e074c37@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20040626061817.94051.qmail@web53504.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Estama02 at aol.com wrote:
> Cuaron stayed true to 
> the spirit by showing what it was like to be
> thirteen and going through all 
> those adolescent changes, but the part of the book
> he missed was this mystery 
> and the conclusion of the mystery. 

I really enjoyed the film - I've seen it twice now and
I think it is my favorite of the three. But I must
admit that I too was disappointed by Cuaron's emphasis
on the whole "coming of age" perspective. That wasn't
the central focus of PoA, at least not in my opinion -
as you said, it was the mystery: of Harry's parents,
their pasts, their relationships, and how that
connects to Harry's future. I don't really see a huge
focus on coming of age until OotP, and in that case
Harry's attitude is very firmly connected to the plot.

It seems that Cuaron was stuck on the idea of coming
of age after making "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and decided to
emphasize it in a film where it didn't really belong.
Of course it has a part in Harry's story, but at this
stage at least it is a minor one. I may be in the
minority, but I couldn't be less interested in Harry
and company's hormones, attitudes, or love interests.
I'm interested in the fight against Voldemort; that's
why I read the books.

Again, even this didn't spoil the movie for me.
Despite the omissions, I was very well satisfied -
especially because I felt the film contained plenty of
good performances. I just hope the whole emphasis on
"coming of age" isn't carried over and magnified even
more by Mike Newell in GoF. At least he has already
stated that he envisions it as an action film.

Lanthiriel S


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From isilvalacirca at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 26 06:55:51 2004
From: isilvalacirca at yahoo.com (Lanthiriel S)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Coming of Age [was RE: I think i understand]
In-Reply-To: <20040626061817.94051.qmail@web53504.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040626065551.80613.qmail@web53501.mail.yahoo.com>

Sad, having to reply to one's own message, but I need
to clarify something before anyone gets the wrong
idea. I just read GulPlum's discussion of this very
topic (I'm wading through a very full in-box, rather
haphazardly I'm afraid) and I just want to add that my
sense of "coming of age" is not a romantic one either,
but is connected to the range of emotions we see Harry
exhibit in OotP. I do recognize that it is a growing
theme throughout all the books, which is precisely why
I would have liked it better if Cuaron had not
directed PoA with that as his central focus. It needs
to be woven through all the films, not elevated to the
primary theme of one film alone.

Lanthiriel S

--- Lanthiriel S <isilvalacirca at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Estama02 at aol.com wrote:
> > Cuaron stayed true to 
> > the spirit by showing what it was like to be
> > thirteen and going through all 
> > those adolescent changes, but the part of the book
> > he missed was this mystery 
> > and the conclusion of the mystery. 
> 
> I really enjoyed the film - I've seen it twice now
> and
> I think it is my favorite of the three. But I must
> admit that I too was disappointed by Cuaron's
> emphasis
> on the whole "coming of age" perspective. That
> wasn't
> the central focus of PoA, at least not in my opinion
> -
> as you said, it was the mystery: of Harry's parents,
> their pasts, their relationships, and how that
> connects to Harry's future. I don't really see a
> huge
> focus on coming of age until OotP, and in that case
> Harry's attitude is very firmly connected to the
> plot.
> 
> It seems that Cuaron was stuck on the idea of coming
> of age after making "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and decided
> to
> emphasize it in a film where it didn't really
> belong.
> Of course it has a part in Harry's story, but at
> this
> stage at least it is a minor one. I may be in the
> minority, but I couldn't be less interested in Harry
> and company's hormones, attitudes, or love
> interests.
> I'm interested in the fight against Voldemort;
> that's
> why I read the books.
> 
> Again, even this didn't spoil the movie for me.
> Despite the omissions, I was very well satisfied -
> especially because I felt the film contained plenty
> of
> good performances. I just hope the whole emphasis on
> "coming of age" isn't carried over and magnified
> even
> more by Mike Newell in GoF. At least he has already
> stated that he envisions it as an action film.
> 
> Lanthiriel S
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> 




		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From patientx3 at aol.com  Sat Jun 26 08:32:57 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:32:57 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <006201c45b1c$0af903c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <cbjcbp+pkk6@eGroups.com>

Joj wrote:
>>Remember the trailer where Harry says "He was right there, he was 
close enough to touch"? That's who he was talking about. Peter 
Pettigrew. He knows he passed right by him.<<

I had forgot about that until just now when you mentioned it, you're 
right, that scene wasn't in the movie either. I don't know if it fits 
after the Peter Pettigrew scene though, because he was wearing a 
sweatshirt during that scene (I suppose if he took it off though).


-Rebecca




From verosomm at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 26 12:19:19 2004
From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:19:19 -0000
Subject: GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <003701c45ac9$e718e030$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <cbjpk7+fcrd@eGroups.com>

Actually, Sherry, another important part of the Yule Ball (although 
for the movie-only fans, might be best left out till movie 5, hence 
they forget about it and/or it needs to be repeated, similar to the 
discussion earlier about things being left out of movie 3 to put 
into movie 4 instead) is Dumbledore talking about the Room of 
Requirement (albeit he doesn't know what it's called and uses it as 
an emergency bathroom).  This triggers Harry's memory the next year 
when Dobby tells Harry about it as a place for the DA to meet, and 
makes Hermione think the idea is ok (since if Dumbledore knows 
SOMETHING about the room, it must be a real place...).

Just my opinion, based on canon, but like I said, it could be left 
out till Movie 5, and most likely will be, Yule Ball or no Yule Ball 
in Movie 4.

Veronica

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> I actually think they could take the whole romance thing out of 
the movie.
> It isn't at all important to the plot of GOF, except that Harry 
distrusts
> Cedric because of Cho.  In fact, they could lose the whole Yule 
ball, I
> think.  The important thing about the Yule ball is that Harry and 
Ron and
> Rita discover about Hagrid being half giant, and Percy comes 
instead of Mr.
> Crouch.  otherwise, it really adds nothing except in the ways of 
showing the
> kids as growing teens with relationships and jealousies and such.  
But there
> is so much else in that story to tell, that the Yule ball is 
something I can
> see them doing without.  As long as they can get Hagrid being half 
giant in
> there somewhere.  
> 
> Sherry
> 






From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sat Jun 26 14:37:34 2004
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:37:34 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <cbjpk7+fcrd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001401c45b8b$1fbda300$0400a8c0@pensive>

Oh right. I forgot that came out at the Yule ball. but it could make sense
to leave that till movie five, because people unfamiliar with the books may
not remember such a little statement from 4 to 5.  thanks for reminding me.

Sherry


-----Original Message-----
From: verosomm [mailto:verosomm at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 6:19 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF fears was Re: Messrs M, W, P & P


Actually, Sherry, another important part of the Yule Ball (although 
for the movie-only fans, might be best left out till movie 5, hence 
they forget about it and/or it needs to be repeated, similar to the 
discussion earlier about things being left out of movie 3 to put 
into movie 4 instead) is Dumbledore talking about the Room of 
Requirement (albeit he doesn't know what it's called and uses it as 
an emergency bathroom).  This triggers Harry's memory the next year 
when Dobby tells Harry about it as a place for the DA to meet, and 
makes Hermione think the idea is ok (since if Dumbledore knows 
SOMETHING about the room, it must be a real place...).

Just my opinion, based on canon, but like I said, it could be left 
out till Movie 5, and most likely will be, Yule Ball or no Yule Ball 
in Movie 4.

Veronica

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
> I actually think they could take the whole romance thing out of 
the movie.
> It isn't at all important to the plot of GOF, except that Harry 
distrusts
> Cedric because of Cho.  In fact, they could lose the whole Yule 
ball, I
> think.  The important thing about the Yule ball is that Harry and 
Ron and
> Rita discover about Hagrid being half giant, and Percy comes 
instead of Mr.
> Crouch.  otherwise, it really adds nothing except in the ways of 
showing the
> kids as growing teens with relationships and jealousies and such.  
But there
> is so much else in that story to tell, that the Yule ball is 
something I can
> see them doing without.  As long as they can get Hagrid being half 
giant in
> there somewhere.  
> 
> Sherry
> 






________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 rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Jun 26 15:26:05 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 15:26:05 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbhial+f29e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbk4id+9khs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" <dk59us at y...> 
SNIP> If the DVD follows the past format, we'll probably see Seamus 
take on
> the boggart in the deleted scenes.  If instead they go the LOTR 
route
> and put out an extended DVD, maybe we'll get an extended scene of 
this
> class.  Since they integrated the SS deleted scenes into the ABC TV
> presentation,  maybe they're thinking along those lines for the
> future, instead of having a separate deleted scenes section.
> SNIP
> Eustace_Scrubb

I don't know if this has been reported but I saw Chris Columbus on 
TV say there weren't many deleted scenes from POA, "What you see is 
what we filmed" he said. He was explaining why the DVD wouldn't have 
a whole raft of them.
Jennifer




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Jun 26 17:07:07 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 17:07:07 -0000
Subject: Coming of Age [was RE: I think i understand]
In-Reply-To: <20040626061817.94051.qmail@web53504.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbkafr+rkk9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Lanthiriel S 
<isilvalacirca at y...> wrote:
> --- Estama02 at a... wrote:
> > Cuaron stayed true to 
> > the spirit by showing what it was like to be
> > thirteen and going through all 
> > those adolescent changes, but the part of the book
> > he missed was this mystery 
> > and the conclusion of the mystery. 
> 
> I really enjoyed the film - I've seen it twice now and
> I think it is my favorite of the three. But I must
> admit that I too was disappointed by Cuaron's emphasis
> on the whole "coming of age" perspective. That wasn't
> the central focus of PoA, at least not in my opinion -
> as you said, it was the mystery: of Harry's parents,
> their pasts, their relationships, and how that
> connects to Harry's future. SNIP
> It seems that Cuaron was stuck on the idea of coming
> of age after making "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and decided to
> emphasize it in a film where it didn't really belong.
 
SNIP
I just hope the whole emphasis on
> "coming of age" isn't carried over and magnified even
> more by Mike Newell in GoF. At least he has already
> stated that he envisions it as an action film.
> 
> Lanthiriel 

Jennifer here,
You touched on an important point, Cuaron rushed the "teen age" 
thing to the point that if Mike Newell doesn't put the focus back on 
Harry and his fight with LV, we won't have anywhere to go in OOTP. 
That is the biggest reason why this movie doesn't seem true to the 
book. Forget the plot holes. Harry wasn't wrestling with his 
hormones in POA, he was fighting conflicting impulses and fears and 
very real creatures that fed on those feelings, not an easy thing to 
depict but having little to do with the trivialized notion of teen 
aged angst. I had a thought, if POA doesn't catch up to COS in 
profits, Warner might put the blame on Cuaron's less book-oriented 
adaptation, even if it gains critical acclaim and ask Mike Newell to 
stay closer to the book, if they haven't already - given the press 
about GOF being a "thriller."
Jennifer




From cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 00:59:24 2004
From: cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com (cocaine nights)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 17:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbjcbp+pkk6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040627005924.46262.qmail@web41213.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey,
i don't know if you guys watched the POA special on
A&E but there is a funny scene of Lupin as the
werewolf where he says "i'm sorry, I didn't mean to do
it, i didn't mean to do it!" or something like that.
Have you seen it? i think it was in a foreign (to
U.S.) trailer as well
:)

--- huntergreen_3 <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:
> Joj wrote:
> >>Remember the trailer where Harry says "He was
> right there, he was 
> close enough to touch"? That's who he was talking
> about. Peter 
> Pettigrew. He knows he passed right by him.<<
> 
> I had forgot about that until just now when you
> mentioned it, you're 
> right, that scene wasn't in the movie either. I
> don't know if it fits 
> after the Peter Pettigrew scene though, because he
> was wearing a 
> sweatshirt during that scene (I suppose if he took
> it off though).
> 
> 
> -Rebecca
> 
> 



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




From cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 01:09:43 2004
From: cocaine_nights1980s at yahoo.com (cocaine nights)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 18:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: another Clue to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbidql+7ui6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040627010943.99135.qmail@web41214.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey,

Speaking of those trading cards, I have one as well
that didn't make the cut of the film. It's of Madam
Rosmerta - she's holding out her hand for inspection
as Fudge and McGonagal(spelling???) look on. On the
back it says something to the effect that Madam
Rosmerta is explaining something to them about what
has been going on in Hogsmeade as of late and of the
Dementors who appear to have taken over the
surrounding lands.
Also i read that the original version of POA clocked
in at around 3 1/2 almost 4 hours, so there will be
plently of material for the DVD!
 And you're right about that scene from POA that
explains who Moony Wormtail Padfoot and Prongs were,
it's probably going to be cut into Goblet of Fire, as
it seems out of place in Order of The Phoenix.


--- huntergreen_3 <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:
> Eustace_Scrubb wrote:
> >> I had the chance to see POA in an IMAX this past
> week and noticed
> something odd about the scene in which the class
> takes on the boggart 
> in the wardrobe.
> 
> Of course, Neville goes first.  Then Lupin has them
> line up, with 
> Ron, Seamus and Parvati the first three.  As Ron
> deals with the 
> spider, Seamus is visible next in line.  But then,
> once the spider's 
> in roller skates, Lupin calls Parvati up.  Seamus is
> no longer 
> visible anywhere in the later shots of the line of
> students.
> 
> Seems from this that they probably filmed the
> Seamus/banshee scene 
> but cut it from the theatrical version.  (Of course
> they also could 
> have changed what the boggart becomes for Seamus as
> they did for 
> Parvati). <<
> 
> I checked through my trading cards and on this
> scene, *Dean Thomas* 
> is listed as being the one who turns the snake into
> the creepy jack-
> in-the-box. That does make me wonder though, if they
> filmed more 
> boggart encounters, but cut them out for time.
> 
> 
> >>Also, my son just got some POA trading cards,
> showing scenes from 
> the movie--except some show scenes that _aren't_ in
> the movie. For
> example, there's one with a bedraggled Maggie Smith
> in her nightgown
> looking up at a painting. The description on the
> back says that this
> is the scene in which Sir Cadogan confirms that
> Sirius Black had the
> passwords when he came in to "attack" Ron. None of
> that made it into
> the theatrical release, but they obviously filmed
> it...so again, look
> for it somewhere on the DVD. <<
> 
> Not only is that in the trading cards, but in at
> least one of the 
> many behind-the-scenes specials I watched, there's
> actually a *clip* 
> from this scene (its just Ron and Hermione arguing,
> but they're in 
> their pajamas, and the scene is definitely *not* in
> the movie). Also, 
> there's the fact that the IMDB lists an actor for
> Sir Cadogan, even 
> though he was *barely* in the movie. It makes me
> wonder how much of 
> that scene they filmed (if there's actually a shot
> of Sirius standing 
> over Ron's bed or not). I'll bet the reason this
> scene was left out 
> is less for time, and more sylistic: Cuaron wanting
> the first glimpse 
> of the (not in pictures) Sirius Black to be in the
> shrieking shack. 
> So that the rest of the movie is lead-up to that
> moment.
> 
> I kind of wonder exactly how the trading card
> captions were written. 
> Obviously the writer had some inside info, because
> many of the other 
> card are correct, but there's some that go against
> what was in the 
> movie. There's another one, about Ron & Hermione
> fighting, which 
> says "Ron retorts that a person could die being
> Harry's friend.", 
> which I thought was very odd and was wondering how
> that would play in 
> the movie, but of course it wasn't in the movie. And
> in the Sirius 
> escaping card, Sirius says "You truly are your
> father's son Harry." 
> as opposed to the awful complimenting Hermione line.
> IMO, it seems 
> like it was originally that line (as a continuation
> of the 
> conversation he was having with Harry), but that it
> was changed for 
> some reason. You can't even tell who he's looking at
> until *after* 
> the line when you see Hermione's reaction. Clearly,
> both Cuaron and 
> Steve Kloves like Hermione/Emma Watson a little
> *too* much.
> 
> >>Now, if only I could find some evidence that an
> explanation was 
> filmed of who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs
> are...<<
> 
> You won't. According to the Entertainment Weekly
> article that came 
> out a few weeks ago, Cuaron *purposely* left that
> out, thinking it 
> fit better in a later movie.(personally, it doesn't
> bother me that 
> much, but since I've heard from so many people who
> were upset about 
> it, I wish they would have had just ONE line about
> it *somewhere*).
> 
> 
> -Rebecca
>  
> 
> 
> 



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 02:35:06 2004
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 02:35:06 -0000
Subject: Powerful Harry
In-Reply-To: <v01540b00bd01090bf451@[217.154.255.82]>
Message-ID: <cblboq+fnsb@eGroups.com>

nicholas at a... wrote:
<snip> 
> I don't think this is so. Harry *is* an extremely powerful wizard; 
by the
> age of fifteen, he has seen off Voldemort on several occasions and 
is
> teaching Defence Against the Dark Arts to his fellow-students. 
That's not
> normal for a wizard-in-training..
> 
> Harry is unusual, because his most effective magic is instinctive. 
In
> lessons at Hogwarts, he does okay, but not spectacularly; but when 
he needs
> to do a certain thing and is able to draw upon his own emotional 
strengths
> to perform the required magic, he is very powerful indeed.

<much snipage>
 
> The challenge for Harry is not so much to learn how to do magic, 
but how to
> control the potential for magic that he has within him, and to 
channel his
> emotions to make the magic more effective. Magic takes effort; you 
have to
> have the desire to achieve what you are setting out to do.
> 
> So Harry's Patronus is all his own, springing from his own 
strength and his
> own emotions. James was only there in a genetic sense.

Diana L. responds:

Excellent post!  I couldn't have put it better myself.  I see the 
potential for Harry to surpass Dumbledore as a powerful wizard.  The 
reason I suspect Harry will end up more powerful than Dumbledore is 
how often the books have mentioned, by Dumbledore himself in fact, 
that Voldemort has more 'powers' than Dumbledore has.  A few of the 
other characters say Dumbledore is just "too noble" to use those 
those types of powers, but I'm not sure that is necessarily true.  
Voldemort showed a great deal of power (if not superior intellect) 
when duelling with Dumbledore at the MoM at the end of OotP.    
 So, if Harry not only has inherited a great deal of power from both 
parents (who were regarded as extraordinary wizards), but has also 
gained some power from Voldemort himself when Voldemort gave him his 
scar, then Harry most likely will be more powerful than Dumbledore 
by time he has matured into an adult.   

Diana L.





From editor at texas.net  Sun Jun 27 03:03:32 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 22:03:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
References: <4.2.0.58.20040624231154.009c7440@plum.cream.org> <4.2.0.58.20040625122222.00993d40@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <010101c45bf5$2663b400$ae59aacf@texas.net>

Valerie (with whom I happen to strongly agree):

> >I still think that the Marauder's Map plot belongs in POA, not GOF. The
> >official HP websiteeven has it as it's flash intro. It encompasses the
whole
> >story (Harry getting into Hogsmeade despite Uncle Vernon's obstinance;
the
> >whole Shrieking Shack plot unfolding, etc. I still think this would have
> >been the easiest solution:

GulPlum, the shy, the retiring:

> If you look back, I made an almost identical suggestion three weeks ago (I
> can't check the message number but it was on 3rd June); thinking about how
> easy and obvious that scenario would have been to include is one of the
> things that started me wondering about just *WHY* no effort was made *AT
> ALL* to introduce any of this material. It's not a side plot and not
> irrelevant. Yet JKR allowed them to do it, which means that whatever
> reasons they had for doing this must've convinced her.

Let me preface this by saying I have NOT been following everything about
this movie in detail, and I may be asking a very stupid question. But the
discussion I've seen has seemed to assume JKR had as much input,
interaction, and level of consultation on this third movie as she did on the
first. Up to GulPlum's assertion that she approved specifics of plot
manipulation.

>From what I understand, she gave Cuaron a very general guidance, but was not
involved on the sort of level that would have had her "approving" changes or
being "convinced" of anything. Can anyone point me to someplace that shows
she was a part of the development or production to this degree? Because if
she wasn't, the "JKR allowed it" is not a valid support for this omission.

~Amanda






From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Jun 27 17:08:44 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 17:08:44 -0000
Subject: Powerful Harry
In-Reply-To: <cblboq+fnsb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbmuus+96n6@eGroups.com>

---> Diana L. responds:
> 
> Excellent post!  I couldn't have put it better myself.  I see the 
> potential for Harry to surpass Dumbledore as a powerful wizard.  
The 
> re THE BIG SNIP...

Wouldn't he have to be more powerful if he is to defeat LV? 
Dumbledore, for some reason, can't or won't try to do such a thing. 
Harry is his weapon. (This is a mainlist idea that's been going 
round for a while...)> 
Jennifer




From teilani2002 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 20:43:41 2004
From: teilani2002 at yahoo.com (Susan)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 20:43:41 -0000
Subject: G4/TechTV HP PoA
Message-ID: <cbnbht+unfl@eGroups.com>

Hey all!  So last night I just happened to catch a show on G4/Tech TV 
that was all about HP PoA and the special effects that were used to 
make Harry's patronus, how they did the knight bus scene, Buckbeak, 
etc.  I don't kow if they're going to show it again, though I imagine 
they will.  Did anyone else catch this?
Susan :-)




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 27 22:54:58 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 18:54:58 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
Message-ID: <85.f62543c.2e10aa42@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/26/04 8:25:19 PM, editor at texas.net writes:


> 
> From what I understand, she gave Cuaron a very general guidance, but was not
> involved on the sort of level that would have had her "approving" changes or
> being "convinced" of anything. Can anyone point me to someplace that shows
> she was a part of the development or production to this degree? Because if
> she wasn't, the "JKR allowed it" is not a valid support for this omission.
> 

>From the Charlie Rose interview and also some magazine interviews (Premiere 
for one), Cuaron said that her   input consisted of being consulted on things 
he was planning on doing that weren't in her universe. She wouldn't actually 
approve or disapprove, but she was diplomatic enough to say, 'that doesn't exist 
in this universe' or 'that's okay for this universe' or 'that character can't 
say or do that because it contradicts something later on', etc.
Cuaron also   said in the Charlie Rose interview that she told him 'not to be 
literal to the book, but to the spirit'. He found this liberating as well as 
constricting; sort of a contradiction since one then has to figure out what 
the spirit of the book is ;-)

I have read this in more than one place and heard Cuaron say it on Charlie 
Rose. As an example of something that didn't exist in her   universe; the little 
people he wanted to be jumping on the piano keys ;-) She told him that there 
were no little people in her universe. She also vetoed a graveyard on the 
grounds of Hogwarts. 
As for the whole sticky issue of where the explanation of the Marauder's Map 
should go, no one has talked about this in interviews (other than the mention 
in EW mag about how the   details would probably be in future films), so we 
are all speculating. However, JKR has said that this is her favorite film of the 
three and she said that she couldn't imagine anyone who read the book not 
being totally happy with it. She also said she was totally happy with the movie.
This was during one of the behind the scenes specials that aired recently on 
POA - either HBO's, E!, or A&E, can't recall.
Cindy


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




From clshannon at aol.com  Sun Jun 27 22:55:44 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 18:55:44 EDT
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
Message-ID: <97.49cb0b0a.2e10aa70@aol.com>

I found this interview snippet on a live journal. It's an interview of Cuaron 
by someone named Elvis Mitchell, who is the host of a radio show somewhere in 
the US (don't really know where). It's pretty funny ;-)

*****************************************************************
Interviewer: One thing it really shows is your rapport with the actors. I 
feel like it's something you probably want to bring to the movies. It's more 
about the actors and the piece.
Curaon: [...] We were always working for the honesty of the moment, even 
though they are wizards, their emotions are very human. Fron the get-go, we 
established that kind of relationship with the actors. For instance, Professor 
Lupin, who's played by David Thewlis. We said he's your favorite gay uncle who does 
smack.
Interviewer: [laughing] I gotta read this book again!
**************************************************************************

I guess Snape's comment about Lupin and Black bickering like an old married 
couple has some validity <g>
Cindy


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




From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 22:59:12 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 15:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Powerful Harry
Message-ID: <20040627225912.75949.qmail@web40602.mail.yahoo.com>

Susanbones2003 notes:

> Wouldn't he have to be more powerful if he is to
defeat LV? 
> Dumbledore, for some reason, can't or won't try to
do such a thing. 
> Harry is his weapon. (This is a mainlist idea that's
been going 
> round for a while...)> 

Well, it has  an awful lot to do with the prophecy ...
According to the
prophecy, only Harry can kill Voldemort.

Suzanne



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



From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 23:17:34 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Messrs M, W, P & P
Message-ID: <20040627231734.99243.qmail@web40605.mail.yahoo.com>

Clshannon notes:

> are all speculating. However, JKR has said that this
is her 
> favorite film of the 
> three and she said that she couldn't imagine anyone
who read 
> the book not 
> being totally happy with it. She also said she was
totally 
> happy with the movie. This was during one of the
behind the 
> scenes specials that aired recently on 
> POA - either HBO's, E!, or A&E, can't recall.
> Cindy

I've only had the chance to see  the movie twice. I
liked it very much
the first time and loved it the second time. I want to
give a few weeks
rest and return to see it again. It's far and away my
favorite of the
three films, and it is also distinguished by being a
fine film in its
own right. I was thrilled to read that JKR loved the
film as well.

Suzanne



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



From suzchiles at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 27 23:19:13 2004
From: suzchiles at yahoo.com (Suzanne Chiles)
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Amusing comment from Cuaron
Message-ID: <20040627231913.67811.qmail@web40608.mail.yahoo.com>

Elvis Mitchell is one of the film reviewers for the
New York Times. He
also does spots on National Public Radio from time to
time.


> From: clshannon at aol.com
> I found this interview snippet on a live journal.
It's an 
> interview of Cuaron 
> by someone named Elvis Mitchell, who is the host of
a radio 
> show somewhere in 
> the US (don't really know where). It's pretty funny
;-)


Suzanne, whose car now sports this bumpersticker:
"Republicans for Voldemort"



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Jun 28 00:47:07 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 00:47:07 -0000
Subject: Powerful Harry
In-Reply-To: <20040627225912.75949.qmail@web40602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbnpqb+bsje@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Suzanne Chiles <suzchiles at y...> 
wrote:
> Susanbones2003 notes:
> 
> > Wouldn't he have to be more powerful if he is to
> defeat LV? 
> > Dumbledore, for some reason, can't or won't try to
> do such a thing. 
> > Harry is his weapon. (This is a mainlist idea that's
> been going 
> > round for a while...)> 
> 
> Well, it has  an awful lot to do with the prophecy ...
> According to the
> prophecy, only Harry can kill Voldemort.
> 
> Suzanne

Well, sure, but it's caused a lot of backward looking at the ways in 
which DD has manipulated Harry into tough spots and used him to lure 
LV out of hiding and so forth. But fear not, it's so complicated and 
convoluted that it will never be up on the screen. 
J
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




From dk59us at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 28 03:23:21 2004
From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 03:23:21 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbk4id+9khs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbo2v9+ivk7@eGroups.com>

Eustace_Scrubb wrote: 
> <SNIP> If the DVD follows the past format, we'll probably see
Seamus 
> take on the boggart in the deleted scenes.  If instead they go the  
> LOTR route and put out an extended DVD, maybe we'll get an extended
> > scene of this class.  Since they integrated the SS deleted scenes
into > the ABC TV presentation,  maybe they're thinking along those
lines for 
> the future, instead of having a separate deleted scenes section.
> > <SNIP>

Next, Jennifer:
> I don't know if this has been reported but I saw Chris Columbus on 
> TV say there weren't many deleted scenes from POA, "What you see is 
> what we filmed" he said. He was explaining why the DVD wouldn't
have 
> a whole raft of them.

Eustace_Scrubb again:
Well, that was the Warner Brothers party line on the first two movies
and why there was no "extended" DVD, something along the lines of "The
director's cut is what we released in the theaters," yadayadayada. 
Yet they had a significant number of deleted scenes on the 2nd DVD of
each.  Then when they showed SS/PS on network TV, they in fact
integrated most of those scenes into the movie.  A number of the COS
deleted scenes would have improved that movie had they been included
and maybe when that's on TV we'll get to see them.

Other posts on this thread seem to suggest that there were three or
four fairly significant scenes filmed but deleted and that there may
have been 20-30 minutes edited off.  So I'll take Chris Columbus'
statements with interest but also with a grain of salt.

At the very least, it seems that WB is missing a big opportunity for
additional revenue.

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 28 03:27:48 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 03:27:48 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <97.49cb0b0a.2e10aa70@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbo37k+u6no@eGroups.com>

Nothing to do with you posting this - I'm speaking entirely of 
Curaon's comment... I don't think it's funny. I think he brought 
some good stuff to the film. But comments like this and like having 
the kids listen to hard rock music, etc. turned Hogwarts too much 
into real life. Same with the clothes. Ok, wearing regular teenage 
clothes into Hogsmeade I could deal with. I didn't like it, but I 
could deal with it. However, attending class half dressed with their 
shirts hangin out, ties undone, etc. just looked disrespectful. Do 
they have a dress code or don't they? I thought it took away a lot 
of the magic. I imagine Cauron's Hogwarts to be one where kids 
swear, where some use drugs, sneak alcohol into their dorms
 you 
know
 like every high school in America. We want to go to Hogwarts 
because it's different there. In being "edgy" Cauron let in the real 
world. It's as bad as when Disney World let in McDonalds. 

~Deborah







--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> I found this interview snippet on a live journal. It's an 
interview of Cuaron 
> by someone named Elvis Mitchell, who is the host of a radio show 
somewhere in 
> the US (don't really know where). It's pretty funny ;-)
> 
snip
> Curaon: [...] We were always working for the honesty of the 
moment, even 
> though they are wizards, their emotions are very human. Fron the 
get-go, we 
> established that kind of relationship with the actors. For 
instance, Professor 
> Lupin, who's played by David Thewlis. We said he's your favorite 
gay uncle who does 
> smack.
> Interviewer: [laughing] I gotta read this book again!
> 
*********************************************************************
*****
> 
> I guess Snape's comment about Lupin and Black bickering like an 
old married 
> couple has some validity <g>
> Cindy
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Jun 28 06:03:00 2004
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 06:03:00 -0000
Subject: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <85.f62543c.2e10aa42@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbocak+np3c@eGroups.com>

> In a message dated 6/26/04 8:25:19 PM, editor at t... writes:
> > From what I understand, she gave Cuaron a very general guidance, 
but was not involved on the sort of level that would have had 
her "approving" changes or
 being "convinced" of anything. Can anyone point me to someplace that 
shows
 she was a part of the development or production to this degree? 
Because if
 she wasn't, the "JKR allowed it" is not a valid support for this 
omission.
> > 
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> From the Charlie Rose interview and also some magazine interviews 
(Premiere 
> for one), Cuaron said that her   input consisted of being consulted 
on things 
> he was planning on doing that weren't in her universe. She wouldn't 
actually 
> approve or disapprove, but she was diplomatic enough to say, 'that 
doesn't exist 
snip

ME: I saw this interview as well but one of the other things I 
thought of when agreeing with those saying she had input is if you 
watch the interview on the CoS DVD, it has JK and Steve Kloves and 
she talks about how they (the two of them) are working on the script 
for the third film. she mentions how they are emailing back and forth 
and are coming along nicely getting the script finished. Steve Kloves 
always states in interviews that she is his best resource. So at 
least as far as the script goes I think she has quite a bit of input. 
Now how the director wants to handle it, well I would say Cuaron in 
the above mentioned interview stated she told him yes and no on 
whether things would work a certain way. Still since she was 
surprised and got chills from some of the foreshadowing makes me 
wonder if she possibly didn't have as much input as the first film. 
Who knows but the fact she liked the film best of the 3 makes me feel 
loads better about liking the film.

Theresa




From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun 28 09:29:02 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:29:02 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbo37k+u6no@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cboocu+lfb2@eGroups.com>

Deborah wrote:

>>Nothing to do with you posting this - I'm speaking entirely of
Curaon's comment... I don't think it's funny. I think he brought
some good stuff to the film. But comments like this and like having
the kids listen to hard rock music, etc. turned Hogwarts too much
into real life.<< 

I'm sort of curious where you heard that Cuaron had the kids listen 
to hard rock music. I know that Daniel Radcliffe listened to some (to 
help him get into the mood for some of the darker scenes), but as far 
as I know, he selected all the music himself. As for Hogwarts turning 
into "real life", in what way? I thought the interactions between the 
kids (not just the trio, but *all* the young actors), was much more 
natural than it was in the first two movies. My biggest complaint 
with CoS is too many of the scenes feel forced or awkward, and by 
inviting the kids to act more like actual people (and not just 
characters saying lines), that forced feeling was excised. Just for 
example, look at the 'eat slugs!' scene in CoS, and compare it to 
Care of Magical Creatures scene (the beginning when Malfoy pretends 
to see a dementer) in PoA. (IMO), Malfoy's amusment feels real in 
PoA, whereas in CoS its obviously fake laughter.

>>Same with the clothes. Ok, wearing regular teenage
clothes into Hogsmeade I could deal with. I didn't like it, but I
could deal with it.<<

Why didn't you like it? Did you think they should wear their school 
robes into Hogsmeade? Hermione and Harry would certainly wear jeans 
when they're out of school robes (since they're both from muggle 
familes), and I don't believe Ron wears anything that fashionable 
(nor do I recall him wearing jeans at any point). The kids did wear 
regular clothes during several scenes of PS/SS, they just didn't look 
like clothes kids would actually wear (unless they were going to go 
visit their grandmother or something).

>> However, attending class half dressed with their shirts hangin 
out, ties undone, etc. just looked disrespectful. Do they have a 
dress code or don't they?<<
I don't know, do they? (j/k). If you look closely, the main scene 
with the shirts hanging out..etc, is in the Care of Magical Creatures 
class, and perhaps it *was* disrespectful. They all could have just 
assumed that Hagrid would let them get away with it. I'm guessing 
that if we saw a potions or a transfiguration class that they all 
would have looked far more presentable. Personally, I think he went a 
little too far with that (Hermione I don't believe would walk around 
with her shirt untucked), but it was all the spirit of making them 
act like *regular kids* as opposed to movie kids.

>> I thought it took away a lot of the magic. I imagine Cauron's 
Hogwarts to be one where kids swear, where some use drugs, sneak 
alcohol into their dorms
 you know
 like every high school in 
America.<<

I didn't get that at all. What gave you that perspective? Going from 
shirts untucked to doing drugs is a big leap. 
As far as the *books* go, there is some hint that "real" things like 
that may happen, we just don't see it because its a children's series.
Ex.: As for alcohol-remember Ron thought about trying Fire Whiskey in 
OotP, and all the kids drink Butterbeer which supposedly has a SMALL 
amount of alcohol in it; as for swearing in PoA, after Snape gives 
him detention Ron calls Snape *something* that we aren't privy too, 
but it was bad enough to make Hermione shout "Ron!", and although its 
not much of a word in *our* world, "mudblood" is a fairly serious bit 
of language in the magical world, and we all know how often Draco 
says it.

>> We want to go to Hogwarts because it's different there.<<
Its STILL different....they are still learning *magic*.

>> In being "edgy" Cauron let in the real world.<<
I don't agree that he was being "edgy", I think he was trying to make 
it like a real place (not real as in our reality, but real as though 
its not just "movie-land", where nothing has normal wear-and-tear, 
and the kids are one-dimensional).

>>It's as bad as when Disney World let in McDonalds.<<

Disney World let in McDonalds? (I certainly missed *that* when I was 
there....would have been a lot cheaper than any food they sell).


-Rebecca




From shawnw24 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 28 11:29:01 2004
From: shawnw24 at yahoo.com (Shawn&Emma Welling)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] comment on McDonalds
In-Reply-To: <1088415032.441.67796.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040628112901.28202.qmail@web40407.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes there are several locations especially in Animal Kingdom that do have McDonalds fries. In fact Dinoland is sponsored by McDonalds.I work at Disney, I do know that they are a huge presence there!
As for POA, I liked the fact that these kids wore jeans and such, but I do think that the classrooms should be in robes as that I believe (if I remember correctly) is the dress code
 
Emma.




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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Jun 28 11:42:51 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:42:51 -0000
Subject: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbo2v9+ivk7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbp07r+folt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" <dk59us at y...> 
wrote:
>  Jennifer:
> > I don't know if this has been reported but I saw Chris Columbus 
on 
> > TV say there weren't many deleted scenes from POA, "What you see 
is 
> > what we filmed" he said. He was explaining why the DVD wouldn't
> have 
> > a whole raft of them.
> 
> Eustace_Scrubb again:
> Well, that was the Warner Brothers party line on the first two 
movies
> and why there was no "extended" DVD, something along the lines 
of "The
> director's cut is what we released in the theaters," yadayadayada. 
> Yet they had a significant number of deleted scenes on the 2nd DVD 
of
> each.  Then when they showed SS/PS on network TV, they in fact
> integrated most of those scenes into the movie.  A number of the 
COS
> deleted scenes would have improved that movie had they been 
included
> and maybe when that's on TV we'll get to see them.
> 
> Other posts on this thread seem to suggest that there were three or
> four fairly significant scenes filmed but deleted and that there 
may
> have been 20-30 minutes edited off.  So I'll take Chris Columbus'
> statements with interest but also with a grain of salt.
> 
> At the very least, it seems that WB is missing a big opportunity 
for
> additional revenue.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Eustace_Scrubb

Eustace,
 WB is really missing out on how nuts we adults are for Harry and 
how much more they'd pull in if they did a director's cut. I didn't 
know that WB had done this song and dance about few deleted scenes 
earlier. Did you see the ABC screening of HP and the Sorcerer's 
Stone before POA came out? The deleted scenes were in and the whole 
picture made so much more sense and was so much better. What's the 
point of releasing a movie that's more like swiss cheese if you have 
the capacity easily make a better picture???




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Mon Jun 28 12:32:10 2004
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 12:32:10 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <97.49cb0b0a.2e10aa70@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbp34a+8h1k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> I found this interview snippet on a live journal. It's an interview of Cu=
aron 
> by someone named Elvis Mitchell, who is the host of a radio show 
somewhere in 
> the US (don't really know where). It's pretty funny ;-)
> 
> *****************************************************************
> Interviewer: One thing it really shows is your rapport with the actors. I=
 
> feel like it's something you probably want to bring to the movies. It's m=
ore 
> about the actors and the piece.
> Curaon: [...] We were always working for the honesty of the moment, even =

> though they are wizards, their emotions are very human. Fron the get-go, =
we 
> established that kind of relationship with the actors. For instance, Prof=
essor 
> Lupin, who's played by David Thewlis. We said he's your favorite gay uncl=
e 
who does 
> smack.
> Interviewer: [laughing] I gotta read this book again!
> *************************************************************************=
*
> 
> I guess Snape's comment about Lupin and Black bickering like an old 
married 
> couple has some validity <g>
> Cindy


I've always thought of S/L as strictly fan fic, but now I realize quite a f=
ew 
people are finding a homosexual subtext in the film. Is this imagination 
running wild, or do you think Cuar?n/Kloves are on to something that is 
allready in the books?


Christin




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Jun 28 13:02:18 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:02:18 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbp34a+8h1k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbp4sq+rfp8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cgahnstrm" 
<christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:
> I've always thought of S/L as strictly fan fic, but now I realize 
quite a f=
> ew 
> people are finding a homosexual subtext in the film. Is this 
imagination 
> running wild, or do you think Cuar?n/Kloves are on to something 
that is 
> allready in the books?
> 
> 
> Christin

I think the "old married couple" is just another example of Cuaron 
using HP as helpful source material for his vision.
J




From resqgal at gmail.com  Mon Jun 28 13:06:53 2004
From: resqgal at gmail.com (ResQgal)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:06:53 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbp34a+8h1k@eGroups.com>
References: <cbp34a+8h1k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <65617e12040628060635342471@mail.gmail.com>

What clinched it for me was the whole farewell scene.  When Lupin is
packing up his belongings.  His whole speech has homosexual
undertones.  I suppose the real question is:  Are they trying to
portray Lupin as a homosexual, or are they just trying to parallel the
prejudice against homosexuals in our world and lycanthropy in the
wizarding world.

Although, I do think many things in the movie were fairly overt.  The
whole quarreling couple line, Sirius talking about one heart (this
heart), clothing, musical tastes, posture, etc.


I've always thought of S/L as strictly fan fic, but now I realize quite a f= 
ew 
people are finding a homosexual subtext in the film. Is this imagination 
running wild, or do you think Cuar?n/Kloves are on to something that is 
allready in the books?


Christin



-- 
ResQgal

http://www.livejournal.com/users/resqgal
http://www.fanfiction.net/~resqgal
http://www.geocities.com/resqgal911



From allisonotto at gmail.com  Mon Jun 28 13:32:46 2004
From: allisonotto at gmail.com (allison_m_otto)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:32:46 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cboocu+lfb2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbp6lu+b1s5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...> 
wrote:
(snip)
If you look closely, the main scene 
> with the shirts hanging out..etc, is in the Care of Magical 
Creatures 
> class, and perhaps it *was* disrespectful. They all could have just 
> assumed that Hagrid would let them get away with it. I'm guessing 
> that if we saw a potions or a transfiguration class that they all 
> would have looked far more presentable. 


I agree (also with the parts I snipped) - I wore a uniform for all 
twelve years of elementary and high school, and by the time we were 
in high school we all knew - there were classes that you went to with 
your uniform perfect and classes that you didn't.  Some teachers 
would get angry if your skirt was too short, or your nametag had 
decorations on it (not kidding), or you were wearing the wrong shoes, 
or your sweater was off.  Other teachers, you could walk into their 
classroom and immediately strip off the sweater and roll up your 
sleeves, and they would say, "okay, it's hot, whatever" and remind us 
to re-dress before leaving their class. 

We didn't not respect those teachers; we really liked them because 
they were okay with us being comfortable in their classes.  Often 
those would be lab classes where long sleeves could get in your way - 
which is why the Care of Magical Creatures scene was okay for me, 
because it made sense that the kids would take off their outer layers 
for a lesson that involved "playing" outside.  I'm sure they all knew 
Hagrid wouldn't care.

-Allison, reliving those uniform days.




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Jun 28 13:54:52 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:54:52 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cboocu+lfb2@eGroups.com>
References: <cbo37k+u6no@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40E0AFCC.2795.1029D41@localhost>

On 28 Jun 2004 at 9:29, huntergreen_3 wrote:

> >> However, attending class half dressed with their shirts hangin 
> out, ties undone, etc. just looked disrespectful. Do they have a 
> dress code or don't they?<<
> I don't know, do they? (j/k). If you look closely, the main scene 
> with the shirts hanging out..etc, is in the Care of Magical Creatures 
> class, and perhaps it *was* disrespectful. They all could have just 
> assumed that Hagrid would let them get away with it. I'm guessing 
> that if we saw a potions or a transfiguration class that they all 
> would have looked far more presentable. Personally, I think he went a 
> little too far with that (Hermione I don't believe would walk around 
> with her shirt untucked), but it was all the spirit of making them 
> act like *regular kids* as opposed to movie kids.

Yes, except...

Look, Hogwarts is, in the books, very much modelled on the 
traditional exclusive British private school tradition. It's 
blatant, and it's obvious to anyone who knows about that tradition. 
The first two movies (for all their faults) did a very good job of 
remaining true to that tradition, and perhaps more importantly the 
very very large genre of school stories (literally hundreds of 
books) in that genre.

And in that genre, and in those schools, wearing your uniform 
correctly *is* important. I went to a school that was based on that 
tradition, so it's something I'm very attuned to - the first two 
films matched it. PoA doesn't match it very well. It's not 
disastrous - but it is jarring to people who know the British 
school story genre well, and the traditions JKR has drawn on in 
creating Hogwarts.

The scene with Hagrid's class doesn't particularly worry me - 
because Hagrid would, I think, be pretty flexible on this and the 
students would know that.

But teachers like Snape and McGonnagall would *not* be flexible on 
these points - and even in their classes, while the students aren't 
*quite* as badly dressed as they are in Hagrid's, it's sloppy 
enough to not match reality. Top buttons are done up when you wear 
a tie.

(And even if McGonnagall and Snape let it pass - there is no way on 
this earth that pompous Percy would!)

Part of the problem is this is very much a 'British' thing. 
Americans are not as likely to be as sensitive to it - and Cauron 
comes from a very different culture. To him, these things probably 
seem very minor - to someone who knows what these schools are 
really like... it doesn't 'feel' right.

> >> In being "edgy" Cauron let in the real world.<<
> I don't agree that he was being "edgy", I think he was trying to make 
> it like a real place (not real as in our reality, but real as though 
> its not just "movie-land", where nothing has normal wear-and-tear, 
> and the kids are one-dimensional).

Yeah - but the point is, he's not being 'realistic' in terms of the 
genre and the traditions of the type of school Hogwarts is as JKR 
has created it.

Look - we swore at my school. We drank (well, some of us did - I 
didn't like the taste). People smoked, we weren't little angels.

But when we were around teachers, we wore our uniform correctly. 
Shirt tucked in, tie done up, top button buttoned, socks pulled up. 
This is just the way it was. This was reality (-8

JKR has created a school very heavily moulded on British school 
traditions. Any film that isn't true to those is going to 
disappoint me. While in general I think PoA is a superior film to 
the previous two, this is one issue where I think the previous 
films did a better job. Hogwarts felt a lot more 'true' to me. True 
in the sense of being a realistic representation of the type of 
school JKR shows us in the books, and a realistic representation of 
the type of school that has appeared in literally hundreds, 
probably thousands, of British school novels in the twentieth 
century - a *massive* genre that JKR drew heavily on in 'designing' 
Hogwarts.

The trouble is, unless you're familiar with those schools through 
personal experience, or you're very familiar with the genre - you 
won't see this.

But some of us are - and many of us who are, find PoA annoying on 
these points.


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 editor at texas.net  Mon Jun 28 13:58:16 2004
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:58:16 -0000
Subject: Messrs M, W, P & P
In-Reply-To: <85.f62543c.2e10aa42@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbp85o+650g@eGroups.com>

I had said

> > From what I understand, she gave Cuaron a very general guidance, 
but was not
> > involved on the sort of level that would have had her "approving" 
changes or
> > being "convinced" of anything. Can anyone point me to someplace 
that shows
> > she was a part of the development or production to this degree? 
Because if
> > she wasn't, the "JKR allowed it" is not a valid support for this 
omission.

Cindy answered:

> As for the whole sticky issue of where the explanation of the 
Marauder's Map 
> should go, no one has talked about this in interviews (other than 
the mention 
> in EW mag about how the   details would probably be in future 
films), so we 
> are all speculating. However, JKR has said that this is her 
favorite film of the 
> three and she said that she couldn't imagine anyone who read the 
book not 
> being totally happy with it. She also said she was totally happy 
with the movie.
> This was during one of the behind the scenes specials that aired 
recently on 
> POA - either HBO's, E!, or A&E, can't recall.

I clarify:

I know that she's said she's happy with it. The point I was making 
was that the argument, "She pre-approved it so she must agree" is not 
valid. She didn't approve it before the fact. She looked at the done 
deal and liked it. But she may well be in the position many of us are-
-we liked it but would have changed things if we could have. 

All we can say with certainty is that she's not jumping up and down 
about it now that the movie's complete. We cannot argue her pre-
approval for the omission as support for it (unless we have some 
documentation that she did, in fact, provide that level of plot 
guidance).

That's all I was saying.

~Amanda





From clshannon at aol.com  Mon Jun 28 17:06:13 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:06:13 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Messrs M, W, P & P
Message-ID: <24.59e185f9.2e11aa05@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/28/04 7:32:37 AM, editor at texas.net writes:


> All we can say with certainty is that she's not jumping up and down
> about it now that the movie's complete. We cannot argue her pre-
> approval for the omission as support for it (unless we have some
> documentation that she did, in fact, provide that level of plot
> guidance).
> 

Well, I don't know where JKR could 'jump up and down' about it; I mean, what 
forum would you expect her to do that? ;-) 
She doesn't exactly make the talk show circuit. In the interview I mentioned, 
she says that she is totally happy with it and indicates that that says it 
all. Until she is interviewed again, we don't know really know if she has any 
complaints about it. She's too busy writing the next book, thank goodness <g>
As for needing documentation that she did indeed give approval or disapproval 
for certain elements that either Cuaron or Kloves wanted to do, well, no one 
can provide that. All we can do is believe Cuaron in his interview and JKR and 
Kloves in their interview on the COS DVD. I doubt that they recorded their 
conversations, so documentation doesn't even exist. I believed JKR and Kloves on 
the DVD and I believed Cuaron in his interview. I guess everyone has to 
decide if they believe them for themselves ;-)
Cindy


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




From scully931 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 28 17:20:18 2004
From: scully931 at yahoo.com (Scully931)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:20:18 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cboocu+lfb2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbpk0i+8g0r@eGroups.com>

Rebecca,

Just so you know, McDonalds at Disney World is more expensive than 
McDonalds everywhere else. So, you didn't miss anything cheap. :-)


> 
> >>It's as bad as when Disney World let in McDonalds.<<
> 
> Disney World let in McDonalds? (I certainly missed *that* when I 
was 
> there....would have been a lot cheaper than any food they sell).
> 
> 
> -Rebecca




From jayandjay22 at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 28 20:09:16 2004
From: jayandjay22 at hotmail.com (fourjays22)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:09:16 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <65617e12040628060635342471@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <cbpttc+pcah@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, ResQgal <resqgal at g...> wrote:
> What clinched it for me was the whole farewell scene.  When Lupin is
> packing up his belongings.  His whole speech has homosexual
> undertones.  I suppose the real question is:  Are they trying to
> portray Lupin as a homosexual, or are they just trying to parallel 
the
> prejudice against homosexuals in our world and lycanthropy in the
> wizarding world.

An article in my local paper -- San Francisco Chronicle -- made the 
same point about the farewell scene, noting the changes made to the 
dialogue from the book.  

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/10/DDGGG72QOK1.DTL

JKR has said Lupin's character is meant to showcase prejudice against 
the disabled.  It's interesting that Cuaron's interpretation includes 
a homosexual subtext as well.  

Here's the passage from the article:

"In the film, Lupin's close friendship with Black harbors a subtext 
made explicit by a vindictive (and somewhat queeny) Professor Severus 
Snape (Alan Rickman), who accuses the two men of being "like an old 
married couple" (a line not found in Rowling's text). Adding to 
Lupin's woes is his physical infirmity: Once a month, as regular as 
menses, he turns into a werewolf. As such, he is a pitiable creature -
- outcast, neither wolf nor man, as unlovable as the most misfit 
teenager. Cuaron emphasizes this by rendering the werewolf as a 
hairless monstrosity that can't decide whether to walk on two legs or 
four. 

The movie's penultimate scene finds Lupin hurriedly leaving Hogwarts. 
Harry wants to know why. Here, again, Cuaron pushes the envelope. In 
Rowling's "Azkaban," Lupin simply explains that Snape has outed him 
as a werewolf; in Cuaron's version, Harry's mentor replies 
ambiguously. "Someone let slip to the staff and students the nature 
of my condition," he says. "By tomorrow morning the owls will be 
arriving from parents who don't want ... well, someone like me 
teaching their children." 

The confession opens up a hundred metaphors of scapegoated otherness, 
but within the context of the film, the first that springs to mind is 
queerness: Lupin has violated the wizarding world's social norms with 
a "condition" that dare not speak its name."







From dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 28 20:23:00 2004
From: dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com (Claire)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
In-Reply-To: <cbo2v9+ivk7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040628202300.33092.qmail@web40914.mail.yahoo.com>


> Yet they had a significant number of deleted scenes
> on the 2nd DVD of
> each. 

Are there two versions on DVD of each movie?  I
haven't bought the DVD's yet, and I'm wondering if
more recent editions have different deleted scenes and
I should be looking for those.

Thanks!





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



From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 28 21:29:41 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:29:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] G4/TechTV HP PoA
Message-ID: <20040628212941.IWJB28276.out007.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "Susan" <teilani2002 at yahoo.com>
Hey all!? So last night I just happened to catch a show on G4/Tech TV 
that was all about HP PoA and the special effects that were used to 
make Harry's patronus, how they did the knight bus scene, Buckbeak, 
etc.? I don't kow if they're going to show it again, though I imagine 
they will.? Did anyone else catch this?
Susan :-)

[from Valerie]
Sounds fascinating...is this a British show? I'm not familiar with it.



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 28 21:36:15 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:36:15 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Amusing comment from Cuaron
Message-ID: <20040628213615.HERW15848.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: clshannon at aol.com
Interviewer: One thing it really shows is your rapport with the actors. I 
feel like it's something you probably want to bring to the movies. It's more 
about the actors and the piece.
Curaon: [...] We were always working for the honesty of the moment, even 
though they are wizards, their emotions are very human. Fron the get-go, we 
established that kind of relationship with the actors. For instance, Professor 
Lupin, who's played by David Thewlis. We said he's your favorite gay uncle who 
does 
smack.
Interviewer: [laughing] I gotta read this book again!
**************************************************************************

I guess Snape's comment about Lupin and Black bickering like an old married 
couple has some validity <g>
Cindy


[from Valerie]

HA HA!! Favorite gay uncle that does smack. Too funny!
So are they implying that David Thewlis is gay? Or that he just looks gay in 
this movie?! I thought that Snape comment about Sirius and Lupin bickering like 
a married couple was a bit weird. I mean, I know those 2 are paired up quite a 
bit in HP Fanfic, but I was wondering why that sort of a "gay" remark would've 
been in the POA film? Humorous yes, but weird, nontheless 



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 28 21:55:27 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:55:27 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
Message-ID: <20040628215527.JHLU24784.out014.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at aol.com>

<snip>
I don't believe Ron wears anything that fashionable 
(nor do I recall him wearing jeans at any point)...

Can anyone tell this non-Brit what a "jumper" is? Ron was referring to that in 
the COS special (wearing itchy old jumpers). And the books refer to Harry 
playing nervously with the hem of his "jumper". Is that another word for 
sweater?



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Jun 28 21:57:42 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 16:57:42 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Clues to POA deleted or extended scenes
Message-ID: <20040628215742.VPME27801.out008.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "susanbones2003" <rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu>
Did you see the ABC screening of HP and the Sorcerer's 
Stone before POA came out? The deleted scenes were in and the whole 
picture made so much more sense and was so much better. What's the 
point of releasing a movie that's more like swiss cheese if you have 
the capacity easily make a better picture???

[from Valerie]
I'm going to be bummed if one of the deleted scenes is the perfect explanation 
of the Marauder's Map. Actually I'll be thrilled that it was filmed, but bummed 
that it was cut. Ya know what I mean?!



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




From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun 28 22:05:16 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:05:16 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <40E0AFCC.2795.1029D41@localhost>
Message-ID: <cbq4ms+srde@eGroups.com>

Shaun Hately wrote:
>>The scene with Hagrid's class doesn't particularly worry me -
because Hagrid would, I think, be pretty flexible on this and the
students would know that.

But teachers like Snape and McGonnagall would *not* be flexible on
these points - and even in their classes, while the students aren't
*quite* as badly dressed as they are in Hagrid's, it's sloppy
enough to not match reality. Top buttons are done up when you wear
a tie.<<

But we didn't see any of their classes (as I said, I'm sure if we 
did, they'd be well-dressed, Snape (IMO) would *not* allow 
sloppiness). We did see DADA classes, and I can't remember if they 
were sloppy in those or not. (but if they were, it could say 
something about their relationship with Lupin).


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Mon Jun 28 22:12:19 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:12:19 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <20040628215527.JHLU24784.out014.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbq543+3npg@eGroups.com>

Valerie Flowe wrote:
>>Can anyone tell this non-Brit what a "jumper" is? Ron was referring 
to that in the COS special (wearing itchy old jumpers). And the books 
refer to Harry playing nervously with the hem of his "jumper". Is 
that another word for sweater?<<

Yes, its another word for sweater. As a fellow non-Brit, the word 
confused me the first few times I heard it as well (since I've only 
heard "jumper" used to describe a type of dress). What's funny about 
that special is that they were saying the cast was out of the "itchy 
jumpers", but Ron was certainly wearing one in every scene he was out 
of his school clothes.



-Rebecca




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Jun 28 23:33:19 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:33:19 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbq4ms+srde@eGroups.com>
References: <40E0AFCC.2795.1029D41@localhost>
Message-ID: <40E1375F.20310.383D4E@localhost>

On 28 Jun 2004 at 22:05, huntergreen_3 wrote:

> Shaun Hately wrote:
> >>The scene with Hagrid's class doesn't particularly worry me -
> because Hagrid would, I think, be pretty flexible on this and the
> students would know that.
> 
> But teachers like Snape and McGonnagall would *not* be flexible on
> these points - and even in their classes, while the students aren't
> *quite* as badly dressed as they are in Hagrid's, it's sloppy
> enough to not match reality. Top buttons are done up when you wear
> a tie.<<
> 
> But we didn't see any of their classes (as I said, I'm sure if we 
> did, they'd be well-dressed, Snape (IMO) would *not* allow 
> sloppiness). We did see DADA classes, and I can't remember if they 
> were sloppy in those or not. (but if they were, it could say 
> something about their relationship with Lupin).

We *did* see a class taken by Snape. It was a DADA class - but he 
was in there teaching, and their clothing was sloppy - not 
incredibly so, but enough that it's noticeable. And enough that 
Snape should have taken the excuse to rat the kids out (which would 
have been a waste of film time, of course, but wouldn't have been 
necessary if they'd done this 'right').

Part of the point is, though, really, that wearing a school uniform 
- shirt and tie - properly is not generally uncomfortable if kids 
are used to it. In a school where kids are expected to be neat and 
tidy and properly dressed, they will tend to stay that way.

Where I live, school uniforms are almost universal. They differ 
significantly depending on the school, but a fairly significant 
proportion - at least of the private school kids - wear shirt and 
ties.

Every day, on the train, I will typically see kids from 13 
different schools which wear shirts and ties as part of their 
uniform.

Only from *one* of those schools would I regularly see anybody 
looking as sloppy as the kids we see in PoA.

I regularly visit 9 of the schools in Melbourne that most closely 
draw upon the British traditions (for historical reasons, many of 
Australia's "top schools" are based heavily on the British model). 
I would *never* expect to see a student at one of those schools 
looking as sloppy as we see Hogwarts kids in PoA. unless they were 
actually playing something like football at the time. If they do 
get messed up - and it does happen sometimes - they will neaten 
themselves up when it's over. It's more or less instinctive. There 
are times you temporarily don't need to worry about your appearance 
so you can let it slide. But you do correct it when it's over.

With experience of wearing a tie to school at the age of 5, and 
still wearing one when I was 17, and with experience of seeing kids 
from dozens of schools where wearing ties and shirts is a normal 
part of every day life, I have to say  - the only way you'll get 
entire classes of kids looking the way they do in PoA is if the 
kids deliberately aren't wearing their uniforms properly. A shirt 
button may occasionally become undone. A tie may occasionally 
become loose, a shirt tail may certainly slip out.

But not on entire classes at a time (-8.

It looks sloppy *because* it is sloppy.

And while that's not unrealistic for some schools (as I said, I see 
one out of thirteen every day - it's my brother's old school, 
actually - where they are that sloppy), it is unrealistic and 
unlikely for the particular type of school JKR has written in the 
books, which draws on very real traditions.

And, on that point, PS, and CoS, actually got it pretty much right. 
Those kids looked realistic for that type of school.


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 valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 29 05:17:39 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 01:17:39 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <40E1375F.20310.383D4E@localhost>
Message-ID: <BD0673B3.1050%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

I think what bugs me a bit about the drastic change in attire is that when
the kids are in their "street clothes" it throws us into the Present. It's
2004; Hermione is wearing her fashion-conscious pink jacket and hiphugger
jeans; Harry has on his sweats, jeans and hip Timberland-type shoes. Whereas
in the first 2 movies, you have no clue what the time period of HP is. Even
the attire of the Dursleys in Muggleworld make it look like it could be the
50's, 70's or Present. And then of course the teachers at Hogwarts are in
garb of centuries past. To me, that makes the story more magical and
otherworldly. Making it "too too" realistic, which Cuaron may have done
here, takes away a bit of the whimsical world of witches and wizards.

Personally I like the uniforms and robes. Perhaps someone like Ron could've
had a sloppily made up tie, but Hermione is still prim and proper, even if
she is Superwoman!

My 2 knuts!
Valerie 



From surreal_44 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 29 06:03:29 2004
From: surreal_44 at yahoo.com (Krissy)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 06:03:29 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <40E1375F.20310.383D4E@localhost>
Message-ID: <cbr0nh+r00u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:

<snip>

>>Part of the point is, though, really, that wearing a school uniform
- shirt and tie - properly is not generally uncomfortable if kids
are used to it. In a school where kids are expected to be neat and
tidy and properly dressed, they will tend to stay that way.

Yes, but not only would Hagrid have probably not cared how the kids
were dressed, but his class is outdoors. Since this class takes place
on the first or second day of school (right?), that means that it was
late summer.

Although it doesn't say so in the book, I would assume that it's at
least warm out, if not hot, and the school robes probably make you
heat up. I can see people taking off their robes, unbuttoning their
shirts and loosening their ties if they can. I know I would.  :)

And I think the costumes were great! I loved the new school uniforms,
and at first the idea that the Slytherins wore Muggle-style clothes
bugged me, but if you think about it, the clothes aren't entirely
Muggle-ish. 

There's an old-fashioned sense to Draco's clothes, as if he's but
grudgingly wearing them in the first place. He looks more 1940's to me
(especially his winter outfit) than a kid from 2004. Besides, while
the Malfoy's disdain everything Muggle, who's to say that a Wizard
didn't invent pants, or that a Wizard didn't design Malfoy's outfit?  :p

Picky, picky.  :)  Also, as far as Hermione, Ron and Harry being in
street clothes, I believe JKR states that when the kids are not doing
academic activities, they wear their regular clothes and not the uniform. 




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jun 29 06:33:20 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 16:33:20 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbr0nh+r00u@eGroups.com>
References: <40E1375F.20310.383D4E@localhost>
Message-ID: <40E199D0.4558.1B8D867@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 6:03, Krissy wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >>Part of the point is, though, really, that wearing a school uniform
> - shirt and tie - properly is not generally uncomfortable if kids
> are used to it. In a school where kids are expected to be neat and
> tidy and properly dressed, they will tend to stay that way.
> 
> Yes, but not only would Hagrid have probably not cared how the kids
> were dressed, but his class is outdoors. Since this class takes place
> on the first or second day of school (right?), that means that it was
> late summer.
> Although it doesn't say so in the book, I would assume that it's at
> least warm out, if not hot, and the school robes probably make you
> heat up. I can see people taking off their robes, unbuttoning their
> shirts and loosening their ties if they can. I know I would.  :)

Actually, it's September 2nd (at least it is in the book, and 
there's no real reason to think it's different in the film) and 
they are in Scotland.

It is *not* likely that it's all that warm.

The average daily high temperature for Glasgow (nearest location I 
have data for) in September is 60F, or around 16C. Not warm at all. 

I actually don't have that much trouble with Hagrid's class though 
- it is outdoors, it is away from the Castle, it's probably fairly 
casual. I think the kids are a little too casual - especially 
Hermione after Buckbeak lands (she looks like she's been dragged 
through a bush by one foot), but OK, that's not the normal 
environment.

But the kids are sloppy when they are in the Castle. The kids are 
sloppy in Lupin's classes. 
 
> Picky, picky.  :)  Also, as far as Hermione, Ron and Harry being in
> street clothes, I believe JKR states that when the kids are not doing
> academic activities, they wear their regular clothes and not the uniform. 

No, she doesn't.

In Philosopher's Stone, p104, when Harry and Ron go to have tea 
with Hagrid, Harry wears his robes (Fang drools on them).

In Chamber of Secrets, p202, when Harry and Ron sneak out of the 
castle in the middle of the night, they are wearing their robes.

Prisoner of Azkaban, p145, when Harry sneaks off to Hogsmeade - 
he's wearing his robes. P206, outside the Shrieking Shack, Ron is 
wearing his robes.

I think that's enough to make the point. Every indication in the 
books is that under all normal circumstances during the time they 
are at school and not in their pyjamas, students wear their school 
robes.

I don't really have a major problem with them changing that for the 
movie. But it isn't from the books. It is a change.


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 patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 29 09:30:18 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:30:18 -0000
Subject: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <BD0673B3.1050%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbrcra+4bt4@eGroups.com>

Valerie Flowe wrote:
>>I think what bugs me a bit about the drastic change in attire is 
that when the kids are in their "street clothes" it throws us into 
the Present. It's 2004; Hermione is wearing her fashion-conscious 
pink jacket and hiphugger jeans; Harry has on his sweats, jeans and 
hip Timberland-type shoes. Whereas in the first 2 movies, you have no 
clue what the time period of HP is. <<

I think you may be looking too hard at their clothes. Kids have been 
wearing jeans for some time, so wearing jeans is not really specific 
to a *particular* decade (any time after 1980, I suppose). 
Personally, I had a pink jacket like that in my younger years (when I 
still liked pink), and that was about 1988, so IMO, it didn't call 
out a certain year either.

>>To me, that makes the story more magical and otherworldly. Making 
it "too too" realistic, which Cuaron may have done here, takes away a 
bit of the whimsical world of witches and wizards.<<

But, on the other hand, it doesn't make sense that Hermione and Harry 
wouldn't have average looking muggle clothes, since they're both from 
muggle familes. I guess I'm not looking for a complete fantasy 
experience from the movie, and maybe you are. Personally, I get 
pulled out of the movie when I see them wandering around in clothes 
you'd never see kids wearing (like that outfit Hermione has on the 
end of PS/SS). To me, going *too far* with the clothes would be if 
they were wearing shirts with obvious logos, or with little sayings 
on them (like 'Princess' for example), or if Harry started sagging 
his pants or something (perhaps, though, I'm thinking too American, I 
don't really know what the average British teenager would wear in 
their free time).


-Rebecca




From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 29 09:48:32 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:48:32 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <40E199D0.4558.1B8D867@localhost>
Message-ID: <cbrdtg+d9i9@eGroups.com>

Krissy wrote:
>>>Also, as far as Hermione, Ron and Harry being in street clothes, I 
believe JKR states that when the kids are not doing academic 
activities, they wear their regular clothes and not the uniform.<<<

Shaun replied:

>>No, she doesn't.
[snip book references]
I think that's enough to make the point. Every indication in the
books is that under all normal circumstances during the time they
are at school and not in their pyjamas, students wear their school
robes.

I don't really have a major problem with them changing that for the
movie. But it isn't from the books. It is a change.<<

I think what Krissy was referring to was an interview with either 
Cuaron or JKR about the PoA film. (sorry, I can't really remember the 
specifics...I'm sure someone else here rememebers this interview, I 
think I actually heard it mentioned more than once). It was either 
that the kids wear regular clothes under the robes or that they wear 
regular clothes when they aren't in class (can someone with a better 
memory help me out here?). Of course, as you said, books are books, 
movies are movies, so it doesn't matter *that* much anyway. 
AS for the book references though, I wonder if "robes" and "uniforms" 
are the same thing. I got the feeling from the books (and this is 
echoed in the first two movies), that their robes are used the same 
as a coat; ex: Harry wishes that he would have brought his robe with 
him the first time he sneaks to Hogsmeade, because he's cold (btw, 
that means, of course, that he wasn't wearing his robe *that* time). 
This is still is changed in the third movie, as when they go to 
Hogsmeade, all three of them are wearing coats.


-Rebecca




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jun 29 10:12:42 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:12:42 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <cbrcra+4bt4@eGroups.com>
References: <BD0673B3.1050%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <40E1CD3A.21277.281B329@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 9:30, huntergreen_3 wrote:

> But, on the other hand, it doesn't make sense that Hermione and Harry 
> wouldn't have average looking muggle clothes, since they're both from 
> muggle familes. I guess I'm not looking for a complete fantasy 
> experience from the movie, and maybe you are. Personally, I get 
> pulled out of the movie when I see them wandering around in clothes 
> you'd never see kids wearing (like that outfit Hermione has on the 
> end of PS/SS). To me, going *too far* with the clothes would be if 
> they were wearing shirts with obvious logos, or with little sayings 
> on them (like 'Princess' for example), or if Harry started sagging 
> his pants or something (perhaps, though, I'm thinking too American, I 
> don't really know what the average British teenager would wear in 
> their free time).

Part of the problem though, is we're not really talking about 
'average British teenagers'.

I've been planning a long, heavily referenced post for the main 
list, which looks at Hogwarts and it's influence from British 
Public School tradition. Briefly, the influence of the traditional 
British Public Schools (Public School in this sense actually refers 
to what Americans call private schools - for historical reasons, 
the terms differ) on Hogwarts is very obvious. Hogwarts, as shown 
in the novels *is* a traditional British Public School - it has its 
own unique features, as well, of course (but so do all the most 
prominent public schools). JKR has clearly deliberately built 
Hogwarts on that model - which isn't surprising because such 
schools have been the model for literally hundreds of children's 
books in Britain throughout the twentieth century).

The long and detailed post I have planned will, if I finish it (and 
I may finish it by next week, or it may take considerably longer) 
go into the links to this tradition in more detail. For the moment, 
just assume I know what I'm talking about (-8

Because of this tradition, we shouldn't be looking at Hogwarts 
students just in the context of the 'average British teenager', but 
also in the context of the 'average British teenager attending a 
Public School' and those differing contexts have specific 
implications.

One of these is that the children who attend those schools 
generally speaking do *not* dress in the same way as the average 
child.

I attended such a school in Australia (a school based heavily on 
British Public School traditions). We wore mufti - non-uniform 
clothes - fairly often (it used to be that at such boarding 
schools, uniform was worn *all* the time - but by the time, Harry 
Potter is set, a lot of such schools - though not all - would have 
been allowing non-uniform clothes outside school time). Even so, we 
looked *nothing* like the average teenagers around us - because we 
were still expected to dress as neatly as was reasonable for what 
we were doing. Shirts, and slacks. Jeans were OK on weekends 
sometimes. We were expected to dress neatly mostly by the school, 
but also by our parents. Because we didn't have the same type of 
freedom to do things during term time (at my school, even day boys 
were expected to be at the school until 6 or 7pm  at least two 
nights most weeks, and on Saturday mornings, and not to have much 
in the way of a social life outside school) you didn't worry too 
much about most of your clothing - you just let your mum buy it. 
You might choose to buy one or two outfits yourself, where you 
worried about things like fashion - but you had no real need for 
more than one or two of them.

We didn't look like average kids.

And there's no particular reason to suppose students at Hogwarts 
do.

There's also no huge reason to suppose they wouldn't - but don't 
make judgements based on the idea that you 'see them wandering 
around in clothes you'd never see kids wearing'. Because you would 
have said things like that very much about me and my friends - and 
we did wear those clothes.

A vivid memory. My first year at this type of school was when I was 
13. Now I came from a *very* different background to most of the 
kids at this school. I came from a pretty average working class 
family and we lived a fair distance from the school. On weekends I 
had always worn whatever I liked. For some reason, one day, my 
mother wanted to go shopping at a mall near my new school. She laid 
out these clothes and told me I had to wear them to go shopping 
with her. I was *horrified*. They were *nothing* like the clothes 
kids wore in my experience. I was used to jeans, a t-shirt, and 
sneakers - she'd laid out lemon coloured drill shorts, a pale 
yellow polo shirt, long grey socks that went up to my knees and 
brown leather sandals.

I only wore them because she was bigger than me (-8

The thing is, we went to this mall - and about thirty seconds after 
we'd entered it, I saw one of my new classmates - wearing pale blue 
drill shorts, a dark blue polo shirt, long socks, and sandals.

*Nobody* wore clothes like that to go shopping. Except kids who 
went to schools like mine. (After you got to about age 16 or so, it 
changed a bit, admittedly - people started to make more of their 
own choices - but up until then, it just didn't seem worth arguing 
about, or even thinking about. You wore what your mum purchased for 
you).

Hermione's parents are sending her off to a boarding school they 
know very little about, except possibly that it's the best of its 
type. The clothes she wears in the first two movies seem to fit 
quite nicely with what her mother would buy in the circumstances to 
me (-8

 

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


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




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jun 29 10:36:39 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:36:39 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <cbrdtg+d9i9@eGroups.com>
References: <40E199D0.4558.1B8D867@localhost>
Message-ID: <40E1D2D7.6343.297A345@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 9:48, huntergreen_3 wrote:

> I think what Krissy was referring to was an interview with either 
> Cuaron or JKR about the PoA film. (sorry, I can't really remember the 
> specifics...I'm sure someone else here rememebers this interview, I 
> think I actually heard it mentioned more than once). It was either 
> that the kids wear regular clothes under the robes or that they wear 
> regular clothes when they aren't in class (can someone with a better 
> memory help me out here?). 

I have vague memories of this myself - the problem is though, I've 
heard so many cases of people saying something was said in an 
interview and then nobody can find the interview that it's hard to 
know if it really did exist or not. If anyone can dredge it up, 
that would be good.

Whether they wear their regular clothes under their robes or not 
from the books is an open question.

>From Philosopher's Stone:

"Harry woke at five o'clock the next morning and was too excited
and nervous to go back to sleep. He got up and pulled on his jeans
because he didn't want to walk into the station in his wizard's
robes - he'd change on the train."

This suggests that he wouldn't be wearing the jeans if he was 
wearing the robes.

P.82

"'You'd better hurry up and put your robes on, I've just been
up to the front to ask the conductor, and he says we're nearly
there. You haven't been fighting, have you? You'll be in trouble
before we even get there!'

'Scabbers has been fighting, not us,' said Ron, scowling at
her. 'Would you mind leaving while we change?'

suggests that they have to undress somewhat to change as well.

But by Goblet of Fire, there is no mention of them separating to 
change on the train. P.151.

"Ron's bad mood continued for the rest of the journey. He didn't
talk much as they changed into their school robes, and was still
glowering when the Hogwarts Express slowed down at last and finally
stopped in the pitch-darkness of Hogsmeade station."

They could have - but by fourth year, they might not care about the 
others seeing them in their underwear perhaps - they are pretty 
close.

P. 608:

"'He'll be fine,' said Madam Pomfrey, giving Harry some pyjamas
and pulling screens around him. He took off his robes, pulled on
the pyjamas, and got into bed."

also suggests nothing under the robes.

As for wearing Muggle clothing, GoF also suggests that students 
don't wear Muggle clothing in term time:

"Harry felt a slight sense of foreboding. He had rarely seen
Mr. or Mrs. Weasley wearing anything that the Dursleys would call
'normal.' Their children might don Muggle clothing during the
holidays, but Mr. and Mrs. Weasley usually wore long robes in
varying states of shabbiness." 

really does suggest that the Weasley children only do it in the 
holidays.

> Of course, as you said, books are books, 
> movies are movies, so it doesn't matter *that* much anyway. 
> AS for the book references though, I wonder if "robes" and "uniforms" 
> are the same thing. I got the feeling from the books (and this is 
> echoed in the first two movies), that their robes are used the same 
> as a coat; ex: Harry wishes that he would have brought his robe with 
> him the first time he sneaks to Hogsmeade, because he's cold (btw, 
> that means, of course, that he wasn't wearing his robe *that* time). 
> This is still is changed in the third movie, as when they go to 
> Hogsmeade, all three of them are wearing coats.

OK - uniforms and robes do seem to be the same thing.

>From Philosopher's Stone, p. 52.

"Uniform
First-year students will require:
1. Three sets of plain work robes (black)
2. One plain pointed hat (black) for day wear
3. One pair of protective gloves (dragon hide or similar)
4. One winter cloak (black, silver fastenings)."

And Harry wishes he'd brought his 'cloak' with him when he first 
goes to Hogsmeade:

"Harry shivered; unlike the other two, he didn't have his
cloak. They headed up the street, heads bowed against the wind,
Ron and Hermione shouting through their scarves." Presumably the 
black winter cloak with silver fastenings.


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 patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 29 11:22:32 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:22:32 -0000
Subject: Amusing comment from Cuaron
In-Reply-To: <40E1D2D7.6343.297A345@localhost>
Message-ID: <cbrjdo+b1rb@eGroups.com>

Shaun Wrote:

>>And Harry wishes he'd brought his 'cloak' with him when he first
goes to Hogsmeade:

"Harry shivered; unlike the other two, he didn't have his
cloak. They headed up the street, heads bowed against the wind,
Ron and Hermione shouting through their scarves." Presumably the
black winter cloak with silver fastenings.<<

Opps...sloppy memory I suppose. I guess the word 'cloak' and 'robe' 
became the same word in my head. Again though, it really doesn't 
matter if they do were robes or muggle clothes during the school-year 
in the books, since the movies take their own artistic license. 
Dumbledore appears to be the only one really wearing *robes* as 
opposed to just a cloak over more "normal" appearing clothes. As far 
as I can remember, the books don't make any mention of the "uniform" 
of ties and slacks and skirts that they wear in the movies, nor the 
house-specific outfits either, so maybe the book kids are more 
comfortable in their robes than the movie-kids are in their uniforms 
(and thus, want to wear "street-clothes" outside of school).


-Rebecca (who can hardly remember what this thread is about any more)





From patientx3 at aol.com  Tue Jun 29 11:31:41 2004
From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:31:41 -0000
Subject: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <40E1CD3A.21277.281B329@localhost>
Message-ID: <cbrjut+99o1@eGroups.com>

Shaun wrote:

>>We didn't look like average kids.

And there's no particular reason to suppose students at Hogwarts
do.

There's also no huge reason to suppose they wouldn't - but don't
make judgements based on the idea that you 'see them wandering
around in clothes you'd never see kids wearing'. Because you would
have said things like that very much about me and my friends - and
we did wear those clothes.<<

It works both ways then...you are making a judgement about what they 
*should* look like in their off times as well. Yes, the world in the 
books are based on a particular model of school (and I agree with you 
very much on that fact), and the world in the movies is a reflection 
of that, but its a reflection only. If the directer thinks that the 
kids would dress more like regular kids in their off time, then what 
huge difference does it *really* make? 

>>Hermione's parents are sending her off to a boarding school they
know very little about, except possibly that it's the best of its
type. The clothes she wears in the first two movies seem to fit
quite nicely with what her mother would buy in the circumstances to
me (-8<<

Well, there is a chance that she could have brought along some of her 
other clothes as well, her more relaxed summer clothes (but this is 
all so rhetorical, that there's no real point in discussing it). 
What about Harry though? No one would have bought him special 
clothes, he would only have Dudley's old clothes, and those would 
most-likely (knowing Dudley) be fashionable. Really, the argument 
with Harry shouldn't be why he's in jeans, but why his clothes fit 
him (I guess that's a detail that will sadly remain ignored).


-Rebecca




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jun 29 12:02:16 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 22:02:16 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <cbrjut+99o1@eGroups.com>
References: <40E1CD3A.21277.281B329@localhost>
Message-ID: <40E1E6E8.19111.2E607FE@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 11:31, huntergreen_3 wrote:

> It works both ways then...you are making a judgement about what they 
> *should* look like in their off times as well. Yes, the world in the 
> books are based on a particular model of school (and I agree with you 
> very much on that fact), and the world in the movies is a reflection 
> of that, but its a reflection only. If the directer thinks that the 
> kids would dress more like regular kids in their off time, then what 
> huge difference does it *really* make?

By itself, none. But there's two issues that make it annoy me a 
bit.

The first is that I don't think Cauron is familiar with these 
schools, or their traditions, or the way they work (even JKR 
probably has a literary view of them - but she certainly has that). 
He's from a quite different cultural background. Without an 
understanding of the culture the school is based on, it's rather 
difficult for someone to do justice to the books in my opinion.

Cauron's strength as a director is that he does understand some 
things very well, and those things are also important in the 
context of these films - the whole idea of maturing is an important 
theme and he does understand that very well.

But if he doesn't understand the culture of the type of school, he 
can't represent it accurately.

Chris Columbus either did understand the culture, or at the very 
least he was obviously heavily advised by people who did - because 
on the school culture points, his films were very accurate.

The second issue is that Cauron was making the third film in a 
series - it wasn't a stand alone film. When something fairly major 
is changed between the second and third film of a series, it's 
quite jarring. And because Chris Columbus presented the clothing in 
a certain way, the change is quite noticeable.

It's awkward - because a different director has to have the freedom 
to change some things - otherwise there's no point in having a 
different director. But this bit just didn't work for me.
 
> >>Hermione's parents are sending her off to a boarding school they
> know very little about, except possibly that it's the best of its
> type. The clothes she wears in the first two movies seem to fit
> quite nicely with what her mother would buy in the circumstances to
> me (-8<<
> 
> Well, there is a chance that she could have brought along some of her 
> other clothes as well, her more relaxed summer clothes (but this is 
> all so rhetorical, that there's no real point in discussing it). 
> What about Harry though? No one would have bought him special 
> clothes, he would only have Dudley's old clothes, and those would 
> most-likely (knowing Dudley) be fashionable. Really, the argument 
> with Harry shouldn't be why he's in jeans, but why his clothes fit 
> him (I guess that's a detail that will sadly remain ignored).

Yes, Harry's clothing is certainly an issue.

The fact is, I don't have a major problem with the wearing of 
Muggle clothing in the third movie. This can be explained simply by 
the fact that the kids are a bit older - it's perfectly possible 
that kids who at 12 didn't bother worrying about their clothes, 
might at the age of 13.

But what we see them wearing in the first two films doesn't strike 
me as inherently unrealistic either.


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 verosomm at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 29 14:08:34 2004
From: verosomm at yahoo.com (verosomm)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 14:08:34 -0000
Subject: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <BD0673B3.1050%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbrt52+ihdc@eGroups.com>

I have to agree with Valerie here.... the clothes are much too 21st 
century to be taking place 10-11 years ago (the school year taking 
place 1993-1994).  

During that time, at least here in the states (I'm sure London 
could, literally, be worlds away, fashion-wise, at that time, so if 
it was I apologize) most of the teenage girls (I was a freshman in 
college at the time) were wearing oversized flannel shirts and baggy 
jeans with a mid or high-rise waist (not that you could see it, as 
the shirt was untucked over it), thanks to the band Pearl Jam and 
the entire grunge-music scene.  

We were NOT wearing low-rise, boot cut jeans with cute little pink 
(God forbid we wore anything in a girly color) hoodies, or in the 
case of the Patil twins, embroidered jean jackets (the fashion world 
didn't revisit the embroidery trend till the late 90's, early 
2000's).  If we wore cords (as Hermione did in the Hogsmeade scene) 
they were not fitted and boot-cut/ flared either; they were baggy, 
and we didn't carry cute purses; we carried hiking bakpacks, or 
maybe a backpack-inspired purse if we decided to "dress up".  

I don't really expect Hermione, so proper, to be wearing a flannel 
shirt and baggy jeans or carrying a huge backpack (unless it was 
filled with her books!), but the outfits she's wearing are 
definitely too futuristic for when this story is supposed to take 
place.

And the guys pretty much wore the same as us; the fashion-scene was 
very androgynous.  The were not wearing things like the cool retro-
revisited track jacket that Harry has on, and certainly not with 
dark khaki-colored chinos; definitely light-colored (stone-washed, 
but not acid-washed; that was late 80's), baggy jeans were the pants 
of choice.  

As for Ron, I thought he didn't look too fashionable for now OR a 
decade past, which would be more accurate given both his financial 
and wizarding status.  And while Harry's clothes were too "now" I 
didn't have too much of a problem with him having clothes that fit 
as maybe he decided to buy 1 Muggle outfit that fit after exchanging 
some of his Gringotts $ to pounds?  Maybe a b-day present to 
himself?  :)  Or more likely, too much to explain to the non-book-
reading audience, why his pants are 4 sizes too big.

Just My Two Knuts,
Veronica

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> I think what bugs me a bit about the drastic change in attire is 
that when
> the kids are in their "street clothes" it throws us into the 
Present. It's
> 2004; Hermione is wearing her fashion-conscious pink jacket and 
hiphugger
> jeans; Harry has on his sweats, jeans and hip Timberland-type 
shoes. Whereas
> in the first 2 movies, you have no clue what the time period of HP 
is. Even
> the attire of the Dursleys in Muggleworld make it look like it 
could be the
> 50's, 70's or Present. 




From hp at plum.cream.org  Tue Jun 29 15:16:44 2004
From: hp at plum.cream.org (GulPlum)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 16:16:44 +0100
Subject: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <40E1E6E8.19111.2E607FE@localhost>
References: <cbrjut+99o1@eGroups.com>
 <40E1CD3A.21277.281B329@localhost>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20040629131704.009938c0@plum.cream.org>

Normally, I agree entirely with most things Shaun says, but I'm afraid that 
I can't say the same thing about several comments he's made on this subject.

>I don't think Cauron is familiar with these schools, or their traditions, 
>or the way they work (even JKR probably has a literary view of them - but 
>she certainly has that). He's from a quite different cultural background. 
>Without an understanding of the culture the school is based on, it's 
>rather difficult for someone to do justice to the books in my opinion.

Sorry, but he's got a British production designer and a costume designer 
who's done most of her work in the UK (she's Dutch), and the reason they 
are there is to have input on his ideas and to take them forward, not to 
blindly follow his instructions. To say (as you later did) that Columbus 
made use of their expertise whilst implying that Cuaron didn't is simply 
unfair. Columbus is from a different cultural background again, yet you 
don't seem to question his understanding of the culture of the books.

Besides, if anything gets my goat about the uniforms in the movie series, 
it's Columbus's (and his original costume designer's - an American's) 
decision to put the kids in shirts and ties in the first place.

We can argue until the cows come home about what the books' "robes" look 
like and what's worn underneath them (the books aren't entirely 
consistent), but there is no mention of modern shirts, ties or jumpers (or 
house crests or any other identifying marks). Most book illustrations from 
various countries have the kids (Harry in particular) wearing Muggle 
teenage clothes under their robes, so the illustrators must have got that 
notion from *somewhere* (and, presumably, independently of each other).

In any case, the Muggle uniforms in the movies (the only nod towards 
"non-ordinariness" being the cloaks and gowns - neither of which meet my 
personal view of what a "robe" should be) make a mockery of insisting that 
magical folk have no idea of Muggle dress codes. So in this respect, at 
least, the movies are being consistent, in not keeping JKR's running joke 
about their dress sense.

>The second issue is that Cauron was making the third film in a
>series - it wasn't a stand alone film. When something fairly major
>is changed between the second and third film of a series, it's
>quite jarring. And because Chris Columbus presented the clothing in
>a certain way, the change is quite noticeable.

There were already a few subtle changes in the kids' clothes in CoS (note, 
British costumier), and British schools do actually change their uniform 
codes more frequently than you are implying.

For instance, I went to a boarding school which had no dress code 
whatsoever; my brother, on the hand, attended one of the top local grammar 
schools (*VERY* traditional, and one step down for the public schools 
you're talking about) and in the seven years he was there, there were three 
subtle changes in the uniforms, to the ties, jumpers and blazers (i.e. 
jackets).

Furthermore, I had reason during 1997-1999 to make frequent visits to 
Harrow School (you don't get much more traditional British Public School 
than that!) and saw pupils during lessons, after lessons and at weekends. 
During school hours, they always wore their uniforms and I can tell you for 
a fact that it was fairly rare to see a the top shirt button fastened, and 
the ties were, like in all British schools (uniform codes are almost 
universal over here), the item which pupils took great pleasure in 
personalising by knotting them according to their preference. Outside 
school hours, they wore what they wanted. As I later learned, the only rule 
was that they were not allowed to wear tops emblazoned with huge logos. The 
only time they took care to abide by the letter of the uniform code was on 
public days or when there were photographers around (this is one reason why 
you're unlikely ever to see a photograph of an untidy Harrovian). When off 
the premises, they had to have specific permission not to wear their 
uniforms (which was fairly easily given); the main reason for this (as far 
as the school was concerned) was that Harrow boys should be identifiable as 
such (which mirrors your own experience).

Between 1998 and 2001, I was also a frequent visitor at Westminster School 
(during which time they had a significant uniform change, BTW), where 
exactly the same rules and behaviour applied.

In any event, uniform codes are enforced by the Headmaster, and Dumbledore 
is hardly a traditionalist!

There is also a whole separate issue which concerns the reasons why schools 
have uniform codes in the first place. This is a knotty subject which I 
don't have time to explore in detail (and certainly don't want to get into 
an argument over - it's a fairly emotive subject), but the two most 
important reasons generally given in favour of British schools having 
uniforms are the creation of a sense of identity for the pupils of a single 
school, and saving kids from different financial backgrounds from competing 
with each other to be fashionable.  (These reasons have their downside as 
well, but that's for another time and place.)

The thing is, Hogwarts has no other schools to compete with (the only 
rivalry is inter-House, which is - regrettably - encouraged) and pupils of 
the same House generally know each other, so there is no real reason for 
distinguishing features - the books certainly don't imply any.

The only uniform requirement in the books is a *plain* (my emphasis) black 
work robe (well, three of them), a winter cloak (am I the only one who 
finds it strange that the fastenings are specified to be silver but nothing 
else beyond the colour is?), and a black pointed hat (have the hats ever 
served any function in the books - have we ever had a description of anyone 
*wearing* them?).

The robes are *work* (again, my emphasis) robes, so they're hardly designed 
to perform any kind of ritual function (such as identifying Hogwarts pupils 
when at Hogsmeade). Clearly, the requirements are practical rather than 
"tribal".

The case can therefore be made that Hogwarts doesn't actually have a dress 
code as we'd understand a uniform to imply (like the school I attended), 
and the clothing rules which are laid down aren't there to serve the 
traditional purpose of a school uniform, but to serve the practical needs 
of the pupils.

The movie universe has introduced uniforms (for better or worse - IMO, 
definitely for the worse) and has to live with that. The rules for use of 
those uniforms and how (and when) they are worn are therefore at the 
director's discretion. Arguing the case with canon, or even, perhaps, 
real-world examples, is an exercise in futility. There are traditional 
boarding schools which don't have uniform codes, so if you want to compare 
Hogwarts with anything, compare it to *them*, not Eton, Harrow and the like.

>Harry's clothing [fitting him] is certainly an issue.

Personally, I've never had a problem with Harry having clothes which fit. 
Whilst this element has been excised from the book, he gets his own room at 
the Dursleys' at the beginning of PS/SS because Vernon and Petunia are 
scared that they're being spied upon. It would therefore make perfect sense 
(although it's not mentioned) that they would equip Harry with better 
clothes because if the "spies" can see into the Dursleys' house, it stands 
to reason that they can see Harry outside. As the whole thing is about 
keeping up appearances, if they improve Harry's conditions inside the 
house, then it only makes sense that they should improve his appearance 
outside it.

I'm prepared to be corrected on this point, but I don't think there's any 
mention of Harry's outsize clothes once he is given Dudley's second 
bedroom. I realise that we don't have a scene of them all going clothes 
shopping, but it would make sense. The kinds of clothes Movie!Harry wears 
can be acquired fairly cheaply - there are no visible labels or brands - so 
there's no reason for Harry to continue having Dudley's cast-offs.

[Hagrid's lesson]

>Actually, it's September 2nd (at least it is in the book, and there's no 
>real reason to think it's different in the film) and they are in Scotland.
>
>It is *not* likely that it's all that warm. The average daily high 
>temperature for Glasgow (nearest location I have data for) in September is 
>60F, or around 16C. Not warm at all.

Your dependance on statistics here is misleading. Making a guess about the 
weather of 2nd September based on September *averages* is not fair, given 
that the weather breaks around the middle of that month and, in any case, 
does not respect month boundaries. If the *average* for the month is 16C, 
then given the weather changes about the middle of the month and it's 
noticeably cooler in the second half, then it follows that the first half 
will be warmer - you may as well include 2nd September in August averages.

The one thing one can say with certainly about Scottish weather at any time 
of year (beginning of September or otherwise) is that is it utterly 
unpredictable. One cannot say that "it's *not* likely" any more than one 
can claim that it *is*. (Old stupid joke: The British summer lasts two days 
- the question is *which* two, and one of them might well fall in December!)

If the movie chooses to show a bright, warm, day, there is no reason to 
question that on the basis of statistical probability of September as a 
whole. If you can find some stats comparing temperatures in the first week 
of September year-on-year, we can talk about reasonable expectations for 
that day.

>But the kids are sloppy when they are in the Castle. The kids are sloppy 
>in Lupin's classes.

*Some* of the kids are sloppy, *some* of the time. As far as I'm concerned, 
that's the whole point. From memory, Ron's shirt-tails hung out fairly 
frequently during the first two movies already - that's part of who 
(Movie!)Ron is!

Incidentally, however, I do agree that Hermione with her shirt completely 
untucked during the COMC lesson is entirely out of character for her, 
although I can see a rationale for doing so within the movie, to indicate 
that she's "loosened up" somewhat since the last year. Nevertheless, it 
grates on me as well.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's sure that he's made all of the above points 
*somewhere*, at *some time*, but not recently...




From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Tue Jun 29 18:27:37 2004
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas at adelanta.co.uk)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:27:37 +0100
Subject: Cuaron's motifs; Long; Spoilers
Message-ID: <v01540b01bd0762fd2e1f@[217.154.253.122]>

I mentioned a week or so ago that I wanted to explore the motifs of
Cuaron's movies, out of general interest, and also to see to what extent
the imagery used in PoA is typical of this director's work. Apologies for
the length of this post; believe it or not, it has been drastically edited!

I'm basing this on four of Cuaron's movies; that's not the full extent of
his body of work, but it does represent the films best known in the
English-speaking world. The movies are:-
'A Little Princess' (1995)...I'll refer to it as ALP
This is actually the Cuaron film with which I am most familiar, and I can
see that that is going to take some explaining. Suffice it to say that our
5-year old is a film buff, but she doesn't like to watch alone. She's quite
smart enough to realise that Dad will watch with her if it's ALP or maybe
'Fly Away Home', as opposed to, say, 'Barbie Swan Lake'. What 5-year olds
watch, they watch again and again. And so Dad watches too.

'Great Expectations' (1998) ; GE
Presumably most of you are familiar with the story. I'm a Dickens fan, but
didn't much like this film. Dickens tells harsh stories, but his work is
lightened by nice touches of humour. This movie is so busy telling the
story that it omits the humour altogether, which makes the whole thing
pretty bleak. I'll refer to the characters in this movie by their Dickens
names, as I can't remember the ones they were given in this version of the
story.

'Y Tu Mama Tambien' (2001); YTMT
Everyone who has seen it remembers the graphic sex scenes, but the point of
the movie is that it is a 'rites of passage' tale about the relationship
between two teenage boys and an 'older' woman. You really need to see this
one twice, as the final revelation of the story explains the conduct and
utterances of one of the main characters and gives a different meaning to
the second viewing.

'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban' (2004); PoA
I don't think I need to say anything about this one!

The motifs I want to look at are Colour, Water, Windows, Time  and Reflections

Colour
Colour is extremely important to Cuaron, and in two of the above movies,
ALP and GE, it is an overwhelming motif. The colour used most frequently is
green, and the associations conjured by the use of green are always
negative.

In GE, the Havisham house is surrounded by greenery, and the interiors are
also covered in twining, smothering plants. The colour dominates the house,
which is the setting for great unhappiness for everyone in it and the
protagonist, Pip.  Miss Havisham and Estella, the two main negative
characters, wear green throughout the film. Green is used so overwhelmingly
that the film almost looks as if it were shot in monochrome; green and
white.

In ALP, the boarding school is clad in bright green ivy, and the little
girls wear a green uniform. The effect is to underscore the unhappiness
experienced by the heroine as she is taken away from her familiar
surroundings (India) and from her beloved father. The green motif is
extremely prominent throughout the film, but it is leavened by positive
images, which are shown in orange/yellow; the child's doll (her last link
with her father); the Indian guy who lives next door; the flower from the
people who have shown her some kindness. When the child is abandoned in the
attic, cold and  with nothing to eat, a miracle happens, and that entire
scene is shot in orange. The orange makes all that green bearable, and it
is surprising that ALP was made before GE; the green motif in the latter is
too overwhelmingly monochrome, so that the whole effect of the humourless
storyline is utterly depressing, and the final positive ending comes almost
as a 'deus ex machina'...it seems out of place. In ALP, the orange touches
act as a signpost to the positive ending, and, for me at least, Cuaron's
use of colour in ALP works much better than it does in GE.

The use of green is much less prominent in YTMT, but it is still there. The
'heroine' carries a large green bag, which symbolises something else which
she is carrying and which makes her into an ultimately tragic figure. The
green imagery, such as it is, seems concentrated around her, and this sets
her apart from the carefree teenagers. Nicely done.

Let me say that I think that Cuaron had far less scope for his use of
colour in PoA. In the other movies, he could use it as an interior backdrop
to illustrate negative emotion pretty much wherever he wanted to; but at
Hogwarts, green means Slytherin, so you can't have lots of green rooms to
indicate Harry's interior turmoil etc. However, we all noticed that there
was a lot more action outdoors in PoA, and what is the predominant colour
of the Scottish countryside? I have to say that it took me a while to latch
on to this. As a Brit, bright green landscape is so normal that, to me,  it
doesn't stand out in any way.

I noticed too that in the COMC lesson where the kids were introduced to
Buckbeak, although it was set in the forest, the sun was shining, which
gave the overall effect as being golden, not green....Cuaron's  favourite
positive colour for the optimistic mood of the sequence.

But there are several noticeable 'green' scenes in the movie; the first one
is just a tiny touch; when Harry is in his bedroom, when the camera zooms
in on the photo of his parents dancing, look at their background. Very
poignant. The two outdoor scenes with Harry and Lupin, where they discuss,
firstly, Harry's parents, and then Harry's fear of the Dementors, are also
predominantly green, as befits their themes, and perhaps explains why they
were shot as exteriors.  In my opinion, at least one of them should have
been shot indoors, preferably with Lupin sipping his potion :-)....As the
executioner sits in the courtyard sharpening his axe, he is surrounded by
green ivy and grass. The final example is extremely noticeable; it's when
Lupin turns into a werewolf. The scene is shot in a bluey-silver light on
the green background, to illustrate the poignancy of the reunion with
Sirius; then the moon rises and suddenly, everything turns to bright
viridian...including Lupin's eyes. Do watch for it next time you see the
movie; the effect is startling.

Water
It's an important motif in all of the movies; but water isn't just
landscape. Cuaron has a thing about the tactile or sensual nature of
water...his characters touch it, interact with it, immerse themselves in
it. Examples; in GE, the early action is set in and around the ocean ; the
convict Magwitch appears first under the water, almost as a 'drowned man'
image. In the Havisham house, a fountain plays in a courtyard and Pip and
Estella drink from it (in the most sensual scene I have seen in a Cuaron
movie, bar none). In YTMT, the boys race each other underwater (competing
against each other in an alien environment), and a (green) slightly
stagnant swimming pool covered in dead leaves  marks the estrangement of
the two friends.
In PoA, you have that fountain bubbling away in the courtyard; Hagrid
paddling in the loch and skimming stones across its surface; and of course
Buckbeak dipping his claw in the lake as he flies.
Related to water is the concept of fluid motion (for want of a better
term); things flying across the sky, flapping in the wind, or floating in
the air, which crops up again and again and which also reflects emotion. In
ALP you see petals and snow floating in the air; a shawl being caught by
the wind and blowing along the ground; and, in one of the most memorable
images of the film, two little girls using their hands to make patterns in
the air, weaving them in and out of each other; quite charming. GE has many
birds in its ocean scenes, and uses swirling dead leaves to illustrate
emotional turmoil, most clearly when Pip finally achieves professional
success and comes to lay it at the feet of Estella. The leaves blow around
him as Pip hammers at Estella's door; she, of course, is no longer there.
PoA has fluid motion too; owls swooping around throughout the story, and
those flapping crows around Hagrid's hut; omens of tragedy and death. Bats
fly through the Forbidden Forest. Umbrellas blow about in the storm.
Dumbledore and Lupin light candles and open trunks with a wave of their
hands; Harry plays with the flame in the Patronus lesson.  Towards the end
of the time-turner sequence, it is the dead leaves blowing around their
feet which alert  Harry and Hermione to the presence of the Dementors.  But
the best example of fluid motion is of course the Dementors themselves. I
understand that the CGI effects for the Dementors were based on the motion
of fabric in swirling water. Oh, and one other tiny 'windblown leaves'
scene; when James and Lily dance in the picture,  the green background also
features swirling Autumn leaves around a fountain.

Windows
Someone astutely pointed out a week or so ago (sorry, I have lost the post)
that Cuaron's camera in PoA  is often on the outside looking in, separating
the audience from the characters; through the train window, the dormitory
window, Harry behind the clockface, etc. This is clearly one of Cuaron's
favourite techniques, as it can be seen in each of the three preceding
films; we see the child in ALP through her attic window;  in GE, Miss
Havisham is first shown through the bars of a gilded birdcage; and in YTMT,
we have several scenes where the leading woman is seen inside a telephone
booth, having a conversation with her husband, which appears to be about
one thing, but in fact is about something different. In PoA, Cuaron also
turns the technique around, with the camera on the inside, looking out;
under the bed in the Leaky Cauldron and in the Gryffindor dorm; inside the
Fat Lady's ruined portrait looking out at Dumbledore and the students.

Time and Reflections
The two most important and obvious motifs in PoA. I expounded on these in
my post of a couple of weeks ago, and don't intend to do so again. The
interesting thing is that, despite some small precedents (a couple of
reflections in GE, a large clock/window in ALP), these are *not* major
images in Cuaron's previous work. I am pleased by this, as I would have
been sorry to find that PoA was composed of an unoriginal litany of
standard Cuaron motifs.  In PoA, the imagery of Time and the prevalence of
reflections  are inspired by and enhance the story.

One final note; having watched all four films again in order to prepare
this post, I felt that the movie with which Cuaron had the most fun was
PoA. His sense of humour is clearly in evidence here.  I particularly like
the way in which he presents a standard scene and then turns it on its
head. Examples; to mark the passing of time, we see the Whomping Willow's
pretty-pretty twirling Autumn leaf, followed by the tree bad-temperedly
getting rid of all of its other leaves. Again, standard melting
snow/snowdrops/butterflies to show the emergence of Spring; and the tree
suddenly shrugs off its mantle of snow (with the melting snow then running
down the lens of the camera...cool!); tweeting birds flutter through the
scenery...and are then  wiped out by the tree; bats flap through the forest
and are eaten by Buckbeak. It's either Cuaron saying 'Think this is the
real world? Think again!' or  'Here is a cute Chris Columbus scene...and
I'm going to wreck it!'
I remember a magazine article pre-PoA which said something like 'The
micromanagement of the HP movies proved paradoxically to be a liberating
experience for Cuaron'. That's certainly the impression I got.

Cheers,
Nicholas





From Ali at zymurgy.org  Tue Jun 29 18:08:01 2004
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:08:01 -0000
Subject: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040629131704.009938c0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cbsb61+a8dj@eGroups.com>

GulPlum wrote:

> >Harry's clothing [fitting him] is certainly an issue.
 
I'm prepared to be corrected on this point, but I don't think 
there's any mention of Harry's outsize clothes once he is given 
Dudley's second bedroom. I realise that we don't have a scene of 
them all going clothes shopping, but it would make sense. The kinds 
of clothes Movie!Harry wears can be acquired fairly cheaply - there 
are no visible labels or brands - so there's no reason for Harry to 
continue having Dudley's cast-offs.>>>

Richard, as you're prepared to be corrected, LOON point:

GoF UK edition p. 35:

"You stand there, in the clothes Petunia and I have put on your 
ungrateful back-"

"Only after Dudley finished with them", said Harry coldly, and 
indeed, he was dressed in a sweatshirt so large for him that he had 
to roll back the sleeves five times so as to be able to use his 
hands, and which fell past the knees of his extremely baggy jeans"

Then in OoP, slightly different but:

"His jeans were torn and dirty, his T-shirt baggy and faded, and the 
soles of his trainers were peeling away from the uppers"

(P. 1, UK edition)

However much the Dursleys are keeping up appearances in other ways, 
they have *never* kept them up with regard to clothing Harry. The 
mufty clothing is an issue for me: if Harry normally wore Muggle 
clothing at Hogwarts he would have been teased about his clothing, 
and yet, the only time he is teased is when he wears a Weasley 
jumper at Christmas.

Gulplum again:

>>> Incidentally, however, I do agree that Hermione with her shirt 
completely untucked during the COMC lesson is entirely out of 
character for her, although I can see a rationale for doing so 
within the movie, to indicate that she's "loosened up" somewhat 
since the last year. Nevertheless, it grates on me as well.<<<

Ali:

Whilst this should have nothing to do with the kids scruffiness in 
the COMC filming, I wonder if they relaxed because it was so hot 
here at the time? I went to Virgina Waters to see some of those bits 
being filmed, and it was during the week when temperatures were 
soaring to the mid- 30s (centigrade). Whilst that might be not be 
high to many people, it certainly would be too British kids wearing 
clothing designed for all weathers.

Ali





From clshannon at aol.com  Tue Jun 29 18:33:32 2004
From: clshannon at aol.com (clshannon at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 14:33:32 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
Message-ID: <1ea.24303ca5.2e130ffc@aol.com>


In a message dated 6/29/04 11:08:51 AM, Ali at zymurgy.org writes:


> However much the Dursleys are keeping up appearances in other ways,
> they have *never* kept them up with regard to clothing Harry. The
> mufty clothing is an issue for me: if Harry normally wore Muggle
> clothing at Hogwarts he would have been teased about his clothing,
> and yet, the only time he is teased is when he wears a Weasley
> jumper at Christmas.
> 

I've heard folks debate this point over and over about all three movies and I 
must be   the only one who assumes that Harry just buys some clothes once he 
gets to school that fit him ;-) There must be a clothing store in Hogsmeade or 
Diagon Alley that sells Muggle clothes - I don't know, it always seemed like 
such a minor point to me. Besides, even if there isn't canonical evidence that 
those Muggle clothing stores DON'T exist, you have to look at it from a film 
point of view. Think how jarring it would be to have the star of your movie 
running around during his adventures with pants so baggy they are falling off 
and shirts whose sleeves were constantly falling below his hands <g> Not 
practical, folks, sorry. And there are some things you must sacrifice for the sake of 
the visual medium, as opposed to the imaginary   realm of the mind while 
reading ;-)

As to the whole robe thing, well, I am rereading GOF right now and it is true 
that in the books, her description of robes seems to indicate that they are 
an all encompassing garment, in other words, they are the entire garment, with 
no mention of regular pants and shirt underneath. They had to change this for 
all three movies since it was impractical, costume wise. How would such robes 
have been designed? The word robe to everyone conjures up an image of 
something that goes OVER other clothes and I think it would have looked quite funny to 
have form fitting 'robes', however well they were designed.

Cindy



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




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Tue Jun 29 20:32:36 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 16:32:36 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Amusing comment from Cuaron
References: <40E1375F.20310.383D4E@localhost> <40E199D0.4558.1B8D867@localhost>
Message-ID: <003301c45e18$37bee560$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Krissy (I think...):
> Picky, picky.  :)  Also, as far as Hermione, Ron and Harry being in
> street clothes, I believe JKR states that when the kids are not doing
> academic activities, they wear their regular clothes and not the uniform. 

Shaun:
No, she doesn't.

Taryn:
According to Cuaron, she DOES.

"What she said is she didn't want it to be literal. She said be faithful to the spirit of the book, but don't be literal. And together with that she said, you know, I think that the uniforms are really good, but they shouldn't wear the uniforms unless they are doing academic things. You know, when they are doing things in their personal lives they should wear their street clothes."

>From his interview with Linda Vester on FOX News on June 12. Transcript's at the Leaky Cauldron. (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/MTarchives/week_2004_06_06.html#004778)

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

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




From sophiamcl at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 29 20:58:32 2004
From: sophiamcl at hotmail.com (sophiamcl)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:58:32 -0000
Subject: Harry's clothes (WAS:sloppy school uniforms)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040629131704.009938c0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <cbsl5o+kvp6@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
> Personally, I've never had a problem with Harry having clothes 
which fit. Whilst this element has been excised from the book, he 
gets his own room at the Dursleys' at the beginning of PS/SS because 
Vernon and Petunia are scared that they're being spied upon. It would 
therefore make perfect sense (although it's not mentioned) that they 
would equip Harry with better clothes because if the "spies" can see 
into the Dursleys' house, it stands to reason that they can see Harry 
outside. As the whole thing is about keeping up appearances, if they 
improve Harry's conditions inside the house, then it only makes sense 
that they should improve his appearance outside it.I'm prepared to be 
corrected on this point, but I don't think there's any mention of 
Harry's outsize clothes once he is given Dudley's second bedroom. 

Alright, prepare to be corrected. But first let me state for the 
record (referring to the thread as a whole rather than Richard's post)
that I have no problem whatsoever with Harry wearing clothes that fit 
him in the movies. I think it would be rather distracting to have him 
running around in clothes much too big for him. He did in the first 
movie and that was enough. Besides, the Dudley of the movies is not 
the grotesque size he is in the books (wider than he's tall)so the 
clothes Harry wore in PS would have been Vernon's old togs.

I also feel the need to say that I have no problem with the new 
uniforms or any other continuity issues, I think the discrepancies 
are what spice the franchise up--different directors, different 
visions. How dreadful to be stuck with a single vision for the entire 
series. They all have Rowling in common and her vision is enough to 
unify the films as a septology. Bring on the discrepancies, I say!

Alright Richard, prepare to be corrected: (though this is a detail of 
distincly minor importance.) Harry does wear Dudley's old clothes 
after CoS,(though in terms of the movies, I think it entierly 
plausible and consistent that following the move to Dud's room, the 
Dursley's would take better care to dress him.) 

GoF p.35 (Bloomsbury paperback): "'You stand there, in the clothes 
Petunia and I have put on your ungrateful back-' 'Only after Dudley 
finished with them,'said Harry coldly, and indeed, he was dressed in 
a sweatshirt so large for him that he had to roll back the sleeves 
five times so as to be able to use his hands, and which fell past the 
knees of his extremely baggy jeans."

There is a reference in OotP to Harry eating at so much at a dinner 
at Grimmauld Place that even Dudleys jeans felt tight, but I'm too 
lazy to go look it up just now.

Sophia




From shawn_stang at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 29 21:13:19 2004
From: shawn_stang at yahoo.com (Stella)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:13:19 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Message-ID: <cbsm1f+qtn7@eGroups.com>

 About and hour ago Rowling Announces Title for 6th Potter Book!

what are your thoughts. Who will this be? New person? I'm so excited


 




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 29 21:42:35 2004
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (s_ings at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 21:42:35 -0000
Subject: Upcoming Convention Alley Registration Deadlines and Shop CA
Message-ID: <cbsnob+g1qs@eGroups.com>

Just a reminder that there will be no on-site registration for
Convention Alley, the HPfGU sponsored conference for grown-up Harry
Potter fans to be held at the University of Ottawa from July 30-
August 1, 2004. Online registration paid by credit card will close
on July 20th. Payment by check or money order from outside of Canada
must be received by July 1st, and Canadian checks/money orders must
be received by July 10th.

In addition, extra tickets for the birthday banquet featuring keynote
speaker Steve Vander Ark on Saturday, July 31st and the luncheon
featuring guest speaker Dr. Judith Robertson on Sunday, August 1st
are available, but must be purchased by July 1st.

Everything you need to know about registering for the conference
and/or purchasing banquet/luncheon tickets may be found here:
http://www.conventionalley.org/registration.html .

Abstracts for the programming sessions have also been uploaded and
may be seen here: http://www.conventionalley.org/programming.html .

In addition, the Convention Alley planners are pleased to announce
the availability of Convention Alley merchandise at Caf? Press.
Visit this link to shop for t-shirts and other fun products:
http://www.cafeshops.com/conalley .

Sheryll Townsend
2004 Convention Alley Planning Committee





From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 29 22:23:03 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:23:03 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
Message-ID: <20040629222303.SNMY15848.out010.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

From: "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at aol.com>
<snip>
 To me, going *too far* with the clothes would be if 
they were wearing shirts with obvious logos, or with little sayings 
on them (like 'Princess' for example), or if Harry started sagging 
his pants or something (perhaps, though, I'm thinking too American, I 
don't really know what the average British teenager would wear in 
their free time).

[from Valerie]
HIP HOP HARRY...I like it!! 8-)


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 29 22:44:07 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:44:07 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
Message-ID: <20040629224407.DJFX9273.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "verosomm" <verosomm at yahoo.com>
...the clothes are much too 21st 
century to be taking place 10-11 years ago (the school year taking 
place 1993-1994).? 

[from Valerie]
I'm curious; where does it state that the story takes place around 1994? I 
wasn't aware of that definition. 
They definitely are wearing contemporary (that is retro-70's) garb in POA. 
Personally I was  happy not to see Harry in his baggy grey elephant clothes!! 
:-) He's a cutie. I'll buy that he purchased a couple of cool outfits for 
himself (and some hair gel for that spikey look!)


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Tue Jun 29 23:05:09 2004
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:05:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Message-ID: <20040629230509.NWVP1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>

> From: "Stella" <shawn_stang at yahoo.com>
About and hour ago Rowling Announces Title for 6th Potter Book!

what are your thoughts. Who will this be? New person? I'm so excited

[from Valerie]
Wow! That IS exciting! I'm sure it's someone new. 
Or could it be Malfoy? Maybe he is really a halfling. Wouldn't that be a kick 
in Mr. Snooty's pants?!! I still keep hoping they'll develop his character 
more.
So, did they have a release date for the book???????????? 


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




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jun 29 23:57:21 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:57:21 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20040629131704.009938c0@plum.cream.org>
References: <40E1E6E8.19111.2E607FE@localhost>
Message-ID: <40E28E81.17138.72B757@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 16:16, GulPlum wrote:

> Normally, I agree entirely with most things Shaun says, but I'm afraid that 
> I can't say the same thing about several comments he's made on this subject.
> 
> >I don't think Cauron is familiar with these schools, or their traditions, 
> >or the way they work (even JKR probably has a literary view of them - but 
> >she certainly has that). He's from a quite different cultural background. 
> >Without an understanding of the culture the school is based on, it's 
> >rather difficult for someone to do justice to the books in my opinion.
> 
> Sorry, but he's got a British production designer and a costume designer 
> who's done most of her work in the UK (she's Dutch), and the reason they 
> are there is to have input on his ideas and to take them forward, not to 
> blindly follow his instructions. To say (as you later did) that Columbus 
> made use of their expertise whilst implying that Cuaron didn't is simply 
> unfair. Columbus is from a different cultural background again, yet you 
> don't seem to question his understanding of the culture of the books.

No, it's not unfair, because the judgement is based on the movies 
they have produced.

Columbus' films shows he either understood the culture, or he 
relied on people who did, because they portray the culture 
accurately. I was actually rather surprised, given his background, 
that on that specific point, such a good job was done - I dreaded 
the idea of an American director trying to portray such a school.

Cauron's films show either he didn't understand the culture, or he 
didn't rely on people who did, or he simply decided it didn't 
matter - and we can tell this because they *don't* show the culture 
correctly.

It has nothing to do with the costume designer - the designs are 
fine. It's not the clothes that are at issue - it's the way they 
are worn.
 
> Besides, if anything gets my goat about the uniforms in the movie series, 
> it's Columbus's (and his original costume designer's - an American's) 
> decision to put the kids in shirts and ties in the first place.

Yes, and I have some problems with that as well. As a purist, I'd 
have preferred if the students were in proper robes. But I think 
the choice he made actually worked rather well. It's just wouldn't 
have been my preference.

> We can argue until the cows come home about what the books' "robes" look 
> like and what's worn underneath them (the books aren't entirely 
> consistent), but there is no mention of modern shirts, ties or jumpers (or 
> house crests or any other identifying marks). Most book illustrations from 
> various countries have the kids (Harry in particular) wearing Muggle 
> teenage clothes under their robes, so the illustrators must have got that 
> notion from *somewhere* (and, presumably, independently of each other).

Yes, because they are children's book illustrators and they stick 
to the common conventions of illustrating children's books.
 
> In any case, the Muggle uniforms in the movies (the only nod towards 
> "non-ordinariness" being the cloaks and gowns - neither of which meet my 
> personal view of what a "robe" should be) make a mockery of insisting that 
> magical folk have no idea of Muggle dress codes. So in this respect, at 
> least, the movies are being consistent, in not keeping JKR's running joke 
> about their dress sense.

Yes, and as I have said on numerous occasions now, I have little 
problem with the movies choosing to show the children in muggle 
clothing on occasions. The only real reason I've mentioned is 
because some people seem to believe the books support that 
interpretation - and they don't. It is a change made for the 
movies. I don't mind the change - but I think it's worth pointing 
out that it is a change when some people seem to think it isn't.
 
> >The second issue is that Cauron was making the third film in a
> >series - it wasn't a stand alone film. When something fairly major
> >is changed between the second and third film of a series, it's
> >quite jarring. And because Chris Columbus presented the clothing in
> >a certain way, the change is quite noticeable.
> 
> There were already a few subtle changes in the kids' clothes in CoS (note, 
> British costumier), and British schools do actually change their uniform 
> codes more frequently than you are implying.

You're confused about the point I am making. I am *not* talking 
about the changes in the uniform. I am talking about the changes in 
the way the uniforms are worn.
 
> For instance, I went to a boarding school which had no dress code 
> whatsoever; my brother, on the hand, attended one of the top local grammar 
> schools (*VERY* traditional, and one step down for the public schools 
> you're talking about) and in the seven years he was there, there were three 
> subtle changes in the uniforms, to the ties, jumpers and blazers (i.e. 
> jackets).

Sure, some schools change a bit. Others don't. The school I was at 
hadn't changed its uniform (except for different shaped collars 
because they stopped making the original shirts) in over a century 
when I was there.

I don't really have a major problem with the changes to the uniform 
made in PoA, anyway - but there are a lot of schools where uniforms 
only change very slowly, and the top Public Schools tend to be 
among those. Also, the Wizarding World seems to change more slowly 
than ours.

But the point is, I'm not talking about the changes in the clothes 
- but the difference in how they are worn.

> Furthermore, I had reason during 1997-1999 to make frequent visits to 
> Harrow School (you don't get much more traditional British Public School 
> than that!) and saw pupils during lessons, after lessons and at weekends. 
> During school hours, they always wore their uniforms and I can tell you for 
> a fact that it was fairly rare to see a the top shirt button fastened, and 
> the ties were, like in all British schools (uniform codes are almost 
> universal over here), the item which pupils took great pleasure in 
> personalising by knotting them according to their preference. Outside 
> school hours, they wore what they wanted. As I later learned, the only rule 
> was that they were not allowed to wear tops emblazoned with huge logos. The 
> only time they took care to abide by the letter of the uniform code was on 
> public days or when there were photographers around (this is one reason why 
> you're unlikely ever to see a photograph of an untidy Harrovian). When off 
> the premises, they had to have specific permission not to wear their 
> uniforms (which was fairly easily given); the main reason for this (as far 
> as the school was concerned) was that Harrow boys should be identifiable as 
> such (which mirrors your own experience).

Yep, that matches my own experiences pretty closely.

The problem I have with PoA, is the *change* in how the clothes are 
worn.

They were generally worn neatly in the first two films. They are 
*not* in the third.

You're not likely to get that type of change in a single year, 
unless something has gone seriously wrong in a school (Year 5 at 
Hogwarts, I could believe it easily).

What you may get is a gradual relaxing of standards over time - a 
few students stop doing up their top button, there's no response or 
sanctions - others stop doing it. But that is going to be gradual.

The sudden change is jarring.
 
> Between 1998 and 2001, I was also a frequent visitor at Westminster School 
> (during which time they had a significant uniform change, BTW), where 
> exactly the same rules and behaviour applied.
> 
> In any event, uniform codes are enforced by the Headmaster, and Dumbledore 
> is hardly a traditionalist!

Actually, I'd dispute that. Traditionally in many Public Schools, 
primary responsibility for matters of discipline like this have 
been in the hands of the Housemasters, and I think Hogwarts uses 
that model. It's not uncommon for Headmasters to do it either - but 
it's not universal.

And McGonnagall does strike me as a traditionalist (-8
 
> The thing is, Hogwarts has no other schools to compete with (the only 
> rivalry is inter-House, which is - regrettably - encouraged) and pupils of 
> the same House generally know each other, so there is no real reason for 
> distinguishing features - the books certainly don't imply any.

Even though there's no other school like it in Britain, there are 
some overseas and they also seem to have distinctive uniforms. And 
historically, they do seem to have some competition with those 
schools - I get the impression in GoF, that competition 
historically was much more common than it is today.
 
> The only uniform requirement in the books is a *plain* (my emphasis) black 
> work robe (well, three of them), a winter cloak (am I the only one who 
> finds it strange that the fastenings are specified to be silver but nothing 
> else beyond the colour is?), and a black pointed hat (have the hats ever 
> served any function in the books - have we ever had a description of anyone 
> *wearing* them?).

It may be that the only supplier of the clothing is Madam Malkin's, 
so there's no need to make detailed specifications - my own school 
was like that when I was there, we could only get our uniform at 
two shops and they knew what brands of trousers were acceptable etc 
(parents can now buy the clothes elsewhere, but I've noticed the 
uniform list now does list the brands etc, because of that change. 
It wasn't necessary at that time.)

As to the hats, they are mentioned in Goblet of Fire, when the 
visiting students from the other two schools are arriving (which is 
probably a situation where the Hogwarts students are expected to be 
in their full uniforms and neat to boot. Ron is told to straighten 
his hat by Professor McGonnagall - and when Vitor Krum arrives a 
sixth year girl wants him to sign her hat in lipstick.

> The robes are *work* (again, my emphasis) robes, so they're hardly designed 
> to perform any kind of ritual function (such as identifying Hogwarts pupils 
> when at Hogsmeade). Clearly, the requirements are practical rather than 
> "tribal".
> 
> The case can therefore be made that Hogwarts doesn't actually have a dress 
> code as we'd understand a uniform to imply (like the school I attended), 
> and the clothing rules which are laid down aren't there to serve the 
> traditional purpose of a school uniform, but to serve the practical needs 
> of the pupils.

Yes, it could be.
 
> The movie universe has introduced uniforms (for better or worse - IMO, 
> definitely for the worse) and has to live with that. The rules for use of 
> those uniforms and how (and when) they are worn are therefore at the 
> director's discretion. Arguing the case with canon, or even, perhaps, 
> real-world examples, is an exercise in futility. There are traditional 
> boarding schools which don't have uniform codes, so if you want to compare 
> Hogwarts with anything, compare it to *them*, not Eton, Harrow and the like.

Every indication we have in my opinion indicates that Hogwarts 
should be properly compared to schools like Eton, Harrow, etc - the 
elite Public Schools. In actual fact, I think it compares best with 
the Public Schools of the 19th Century rather than than the 20th 
(and back then, many of the schools didn't have uniforms yet) As 
I've said, I'm planning a very long post looking at this issue - 
Hogwarts in terms of such schools.

It's possible that it's better compared with other schools - but I 
certainly don't see any reason to assume it must be.

> >Harry's clothing [fitting him] is certainly an issue.

You've added in [fitting him]. Personally that wasn't what I was 
talking about here. The reason I think there's an issue with 
Harry's clothing relates more to the condition than the size.
 
> Personally, I've never had a problem with Harry having clothes which fit. 
> Whilst this element has been excised from the book, he gets his own room at 
> the Dursleys' at the beginning of PS/SS because Vernon and Petunia are 
> scared that they're being spied upon. It would therefore make perfect sense 
> (although it's not mentioned) that they would equip Harry with better 
> clothes because if the "spies" can see into the Dursleys' house, it stands 
> to reason that they can see Harry outside. As the whole thing is about 
> keeping up appearances, if they improve Harry's conditions inside the 
> house, then it only makes sense that they should improve his appearance 
> outside it.

Except, as someone else has quoted, we have evidence from later 
books, that they haven't done this. Personally I think you're right 
- it would make sense if they did. But the books indicate 
otherwise.
 
> I'm prepared to be corrected on this point, but I don't think there's any 
> mention of Harry's outsize clothes once he is given Dudley's second 
> bedroom. I realise that we don't have a scene of them all going clothes 
> shopping, but it would make sense. The kinds of clothes Movie!Harry wears 
> can be acquired fairly cheaply - there are no visible labels or brands - so 
> there's no reason for Harry to continue having Dudley's cast-offs.
> 
> [Hagrid's lesson]
> 
> >Actually, it's September 2nd (at least it is in the book, and there's no 
> >real reason to think it's different in the film) and they are in Scotland.
> >
> >It is *not* likely that it's all that warm. The average daily high 
> >temperature for Glasgow (nearest location I have data for) in September is 
> >60F, or around 16C. Not warm at all.
> 
> Your dependance on statistics here is misleading. Making a guess about the 
> weather of 2nd September based on September *averages* is not fair, given 
> that the weather breaks around the middle of that month and, in any case, 
> does not respect month boundaries. If the *average* for the month is 16C, 
> then given the weather changes about the middle of the month and it's 
> noticeably cooler in the second half, then it follows that the first half 
> will be warmer - you may as well include 2nd September in August averages.

Which makes only a small difference (I did consider that and looked 
at August temperatures as well).

But please note, I am *not* basing the statement on the *average* 
September temperature - but rather on the average daily high 
temperature which is different - the average temperature is 
58F/12C.

Also, we are told about the weather that day in the book. There is 
no mention of it being unusually warm. Given we are told about the 
weather, I think we could assume that this would be mentioned.

> If the movie chooses to show a bright, warm, day, there is no reason to 
> question that on the basis of statistical probability of September as a 
> whole. If you can find some stats comparing temperatures in the first week 
> of September year-on-year, we can talk about reasonable expectations for 
> that day.

Except that the book tells us that it wasn't a bright warm day - 
the sky is grey.
 
> >But the kids are sloppy when they are in the Castle. The kids are sloppy 
> >in Lupin's classes.
> 
> *Some* of the kids are sloppy, *some* of the time. As far as I'm concerned, 
> that's the whole point. From memory, Ron's shirt-tails hung out fairly 
> frequently during the first two movies already - that's part of who 
> (Movie!)Ron is!

No, *most* of the kids are sloppy *most* of the time. The only 
student we see who is always properly dressed when we see him (and 
I looked because it would have been a travesty if he wasn't) is 
Percy.

I'm sensitive to these things - I notice them. Because I spent a 
year responsible for enforcing neatness at my school, and I was as 
anal about it as Percy would be.

I see a kid in school uniform - I instinctively analyse it for 
faults (-8. I notice if it's being worn properly.

In PS, and CoS, it nearly always was. In PoA, it nearly always 
isn't.
 
> Incidentally, however, I do agree that Hermione with her shirt completely 
> untucked during the COMC lesson is entirely out of character for her, 
> although I can see a rationale for doing so within the movie, to indicate 
> that she's "loosened up" somewhat since the last year. Nevertheless, it 
> grates on me as well.

Yes, that one is *hideous* (-8

Other points are fairly minor, really - it's just the difference 
between the first two films and the third grates on me (it's the 
change that is the main issue for me - not really how they wear the 
clothing itself).

But that particular scene seemed ridiculous - it wasn't just 
untucked - which I could just about believe - it was the way it was 
bunched up. You'd have to *work* to make things look that bad.


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 drednort at alphalink.com.au  Wed Jun 30 00:17:09 2004
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:17:09 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: sloppy school uniforms
In-Reply-To: <20040629224407.DJFX9273.out002.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <40E29325.24682.84D8E1@localhost>

On 29 Jun 2004 at 17:44, Valerie Flowe wrote:

> > From: "verosomm" <verosomm at yahoo.com>
> ...the clothes are much too 21st 
> century to be taking place 10-11 years ago (the school year taking 
> place 1993-1994).? 
> 
> [from Valerie]
> I'm curious; where does it state that the story takes place around 1994? I 
> wasn't aware of that definition. 
> They definitely are wearing contemporary (that is retro-70's) garb in POA. 
> Personally I was  happy not to see Harry in his baggy grey elephant clothes!! 
> :-) He's a cutie. I'll buy that he purchased a couple of cool outfits for 
> himself (and some hair gel for that spikey look!)

The dates the books are set in have been worked out from clues in 
the text - the most easily accessible piece of information is that 
Nearly Headless Nick died in 1492 and his 500th Death Day occurs in 
Chamber of Secrets, but there's more evidence than just that.

A timeline has also been included on one of the DVDs as a special 
feature.


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 rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Jun 30 01:17:36 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 01:17:36 -0000
Subject: Third time was the charm....
Message-ID: <cbt4bg+kc49@eGroups.com>

Okay,
I am getting the hang of POA, movie format. I saw it for the 3rd 
time and it was the best viewing yet. Things didn't jar me. The 
crying scene made more sense. The somewhat-odd pitch of the crying 
finally hit home. The first few words he speaks after Hermione 
removes the cloak are in the same pitch. Higher than normal, and 
indicative of high emotion and of the fact that he is still a boy, 
notquite a young man. The pathos of the moment was very short and 
fleeting and just enough. 

You all had alerted me of things to watch for, the smile that plays 
on Harry's lips as Lupin talks about his parents. That was 
beautiful. Subtle. Good. The music was so beautiful at those 
moments. 

I tried my best to view the last scene with Lupin as some manifesto 
for some tortured group or the other. Try as I might, I just got the 
impression that he was talking about being a werewolf. But it was 
very moving, the pain he was feeling was palpable. 

And so, thanks to all of you who had faith in this movie and kept at 
those of us who were disappointed for one reason or another. It's a 
very beautiful film completely apart from the book.

Jennifer




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 03:36:09 2004
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:36:09 -0000
Subject: Pointless question about the time turner
Message-ID: <cbtcf9+6s3i@eGroups.com>

Does anyone know why they changed the time turner from an hourglass 
to that thingie Hermione had on?  I was just wondering....I've 
always pictured a little hourglass, not the round thing.  

It doesn't affect the movie in any way, I was just wondering.

Alora :)




From penumbra10 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 04:23:04 2004
From: penumbra10 at yahoo.com (Nia)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 04:23:04 -0000
Subject: Definition of a "good movie" for me & Problems with "Ship"ping
In-Reply-To: <1a2.25fa62a8.2e0c7661@aol.com>
Message-ID: <cbtf78+am46@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, clshannon at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 6/24/04 9:08:27 AM, draco382 at y... writes:
> 
> 
> > The movie has
> > become terribly coy and suggestive (and blatant) about Ron and
> > Hermione "ending up together" and even in interviews, the cast 
now
> > openly says that there is something going on with Ron and 
Hermione.?
> > Wow -- that's quite an assumption to make!? Now, I'm
personally 
not
> > shipping in one direction or another, but it surprises me that 
such
> > a strong opinion about this would be expressed -- especially when
> > JKR has a penchant for throwing her audience WAAAAY off guard at 
the
> > last minute.? I am under the impression that the movie makers 
really
> > don't "get" JKR and for that matter, Harry Potter at all.?

To which Clshannon replied:

> Well, I can think of two reasons the movies are leaning towards 
Ron and 
> Hermione 'dating' as it were. One, JKR said herself in an 
interview with Katie 
> Couric that Ron and Hermione had that 'tension'.
> It was during that Dateline interview with JKR in June of last 
year and 
> Couric said something about Harry being a teenager now and having 
to endure spots, 
> etc., and perhaps, 'snogging Hermione?' JKR replied with no small 
amount of 
> surprise in her voice, 'Harry and Hermione?! You think so? I think 
Ron and 
> Hermione, there's more tension there.'


I would think, wouldn't you, that if JKR were writting R/Hr as a 
romantic red herring and H/Hr as the true eventual pairing, that she 
would be more inclined than not to deflect all questions which 
revealed what was truly coming in favor of her red herring. How 
stupid would that be to come out and just tell everyone what was 
going to happen when the books are so cryptic?  It would be like 
shooting oneself in the foot.  As far as I can see, JKR has told us 
precisely nothing.  The famous Katic Couric interview is classic 
deflection, answer a question with a question, then direct attention 
away from the subject at hand.

It is all in the way we, the fandom, wish to interpret what JKR has 
said.  And, just to throw a wrench in the whole thing, on the CoS 
special features disk she says that Columbus forshadowed certain 
feelings "between the three of them that belong to a slightly older 
person."  Does that mean there will be a triangle? Go figure... LOL

And, we must keep in mind that each and every film is the 
filmmakers' interpretation of the books.  I think Cuaron has done 
precisely what JKR told him to do and created a film that was "not 
too literal."  He set out to create a film which focused on Harry 
entering his teens--the problems and the solution that were both 
inside himself.  I think he used the R/Hr interactions as a 
shorthand for the romantic insecurites that are part and parcel of 
being 13.  They are almost like side comments--there is no depth or 
meaning to them and they are played for laughs. Should JKR write 
R/Hr in canon (which I really don't think she will do, BTW) the 
skeleton is in place for the filmmakers to flesh out the romance.  I 
really don't know how they will handle the Yule Brawl scene with Ron 
and Hermione however since they have given us a celluloid Hermione 
that is totally "girl power."

 As for H/Hr, on the other hand, although the relationship is as in 
the books, platonic, there is a real interconnection which can be 
easily developed into a meaningful romance should JKR write it in 
canon.  So, like in the books, I think the filmmakers have left 
things open because like us, they really don't know what's going to 
happen.

Nia




From amani at atlanticbb.net  Wed Jun 30 06:54:31 2004
From: amani at atlanticbb.net (Taryn Kimel)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 02:54:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pointless question about the time turner
References: <cbtcf9+6s3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c45e6f$1a461d80$0400a8c0@charterpa.com>

Alora:
Does anyone know why they changed the time turner from an hourglass 
to that thingie Hermione had on?  I was just wondering....I've 
always pictured a little hourglass, not the round thing.  

It doesn't affect the movie in any way, I was just wondering.

Taryn:
It did HAVE an hourglass; the hourglass was just SET INTO the turny-circle thing. That's what I saw, anyway. Does make it easier to turn.

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

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




From fionap19 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun 30 10:17:38 2004
From: fionap19 at yahoo.co.uk (Fiona)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:17:38 -0000
Subject: Life after Potter + Casting suggestions for OOtP
Message-ID: <cbu402+6eng@eGroups.com>

I've noted a few comments recently about where Dan Radcliffe's acting 
career might go after he has finished with the Harry Potter films; 
after seeing some of his excellent interviews on the web (we poor 
souls in the UK seem to see very little in the way of live interviews 
with the cast) and his superb sense of comic timing I think Dan would 
do very will in comedy.  In the UK we have a tv sitcom called "My 
Family" and the young actor, Gabriel Thompson, who plays Michael was 
supposedly "pipped at the post" for the role of Harry Potter but won 
the role of Michael instead.  His mum in the series is played by 
Madam Hooch herself Zoe Wanamaker.  I think that Dan would be superb 
in that kind of sitcom as he comes across as a very cheerful and 
mischievous person when not playing Harry.

Incidentally, the young actress who plays Janet Harper in My Family 
would, IMHO, make a superb Tonks for OOtP.  Her name is Daniella 
Denby-Ashe.

Another actress famous for her many and varied roles (including 
comedy) is Judy Cornwell (see http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0180498/) 
and I think she would make a very fine Umbridge indeed.




From phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Jun 30 12:48:33 2004
From: phil_hp7 at yahoo.co.uk (Phil Boswell)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 12:48:33 -0000
Subject: Life after Potter + Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <cbu402+6eng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbucr1+ahjt@eGroups.com>

"Fiona" <fionap19 at y...> wrote:
[snip] 
> Incidentally, the young actress who plays Janet Harper in My Family 
> would, IMHO, make a superb Tonks for OOtP.  Her name is Daniella 
> Denby-Ashe.

If it weren't for the entirely distressing fact that she's dead, my
ideal Tonks would have been Charlotte Coleman

http://uk.imdb.com/name/nm0170976/

HTH
-- 
Phil





From nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 17:08:42 2004
From: nearlyheadlessryan at yahoo.com (nearlyheadlessryan)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:08:42 -0000
Subject: Life after Potter + Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <cbu402+6eng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbus2q+k0se@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Fiona" <fionap19 at y...> wrote:
> Another actress famous for her many and varied roles (including 
> comedy) is Judy Cornwell (see http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0180498/) 
> and I think she would make a very fine Umbridge indeed.


Does anyone else think that Kathy Bates would make a great Delores 
Umbridge or is it just me???
-nearlyheadlessryan





From bigredpanda at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 17:30:51 2004
From: bigredpanda at yahoo.com (bigredpanda)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:30:51 -0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
In-Reply-To: <20040621222314.PJHV1551.out004.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <cbutcb+qq96@eGroups.com>

> [from Valerie]
> I've seen the trailer on kids-related TV quite a bit. And some bus 
signage.
> <snip>
> I had to LOOK for HP stuff (found it in? Target) and there 
> wasn't nearly enough to choose from.? (I got an "Expecto? 
Patronum" Harry 
> figure -- What the heck 
> is wrong with WB's ad department?!?? grrrrrr.
> 
> [from Valerie]
> You are right; there is not much merchandising. My nephew (who got 
me in to the 
> HP series!) just turned 8, and I wanted to get him an HP T-shirt. 
Went to 
> Target, Toys R-Us =nothing. Lots and lots of Spiderman-wear, 
though! 
> I ended up getting him the miniature POA collectibles.

Our Target had some t-shirts in the boys department.  They were 
almost hidden amongst the Spiderman and Shrek 2 shirts, but they 
were there.  I actually got one for my son and daughter in the boys 
department because apparently they assume girls won't want HP 
shirts?!  My daughter was disgusted that what was available in the 
girls department was all girly girls stuff.  Blech!

Diane in Nebraska




From dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 18:49:17 2004
From: dis_aliter_visum at yahoo.com (Claire)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 11:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 6th book.
In-Reply-To: <20040629230509.NWVP1464.out001.verizon.net@outgoing.verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20040630184917.72346.qmail@web40909.mail.yahoo.com>

> Wow! That IS exciting! I'm sure it's someone new. 
> Or could it be Malfoy? Maybe he is really a
> halfling. Wouldn't that be a kick 
> in Mr. Snooty's pants?!! I still keep hoping they'll
> develop his character 
> more.
> So, did they have a release date for the
> book???????????? 

>From Rowling:

"I shall tell you one thing without making you shift
any bricks at all: the HBP is neither Harry nor
Voldemort. And that's all I'm saying on THAT subject
until the book's published."

As reported by the leaky cauldron, from her new site.

Should we have spoiler warnings for the title?




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



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Jun 30 19:21:53 2004
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:21:53 -0000
Subject: Life after Potter + Casting suggestions for OOtP
In-Reply-To: <cbus2q+k0se@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <cbv3sh+sh0a@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "nearlyheadlessryan" 
<nearlyheadlessryan at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Fiona" <fionap19 at y...> wrote:
> > Another actress famous for her many and varied roles (including 
> > comedy) is Judy Cornwell (see 
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0180498/) 
> > and I think she would make a very fine Umbridge indeed.
> 
> 
> Does anyone else think that Kathy Bates would make a great Delores 
> Umbridge or is it just me???
> -nearlyheadlessryan

As far as I know, Kathy Bates isn't a citizen of the UK, which she 
must be in order to be a member of the cast.
Jennifer




From shawn_stang at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 30 20:19:43 2004
From: shawn_stang at yahoo.com (Stella)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 20:19:43 -0000
Subject: 6th book.
In-Reply-To: <20040630184917.72346.qmail@web40909.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbv78v+7441@eGroups.com>

I've reread her statement on the JKR website and it sounds like COS 
has clues to who it might be. I was thinking that it could be Draco, 
because in COS they thought he was the heir of Sly, but he wasn't.  

The real question about the title, is this person  really a 1/2 blood 
prince or is he just the prince of halfbloods/mudbloods? If he were 
1/2 blood prince it could be neville...
 
--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Claire <dis_aliter_visum at y...> 
wrote:
> > Wow! That IS exciting! I'm sure it's someone new. 
> > Or could it be Malfoy? Maybe he is really a
> > halfling. Wouldn't that be a kick 
> > in Mr. Snooty's pants?!! I still keep hoping they'll
> > develop his character 
> > more.
> > So, did they have a release date for the
> > book???????????? 
> 
> From Rowling:
> 
> "I shall tell you one thing without making you shift
> any bricks at all: the HBP is neither Harry nor
> Voldemort. And that's all I'm saying on THAT subject
> until the book's published."
> 
> As reported by the leaky cauldron, from her new site.
> 
> Should we have spoiler warnings for the title?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




From sychamirrana at winterchill.com  Wed Jun 30 20:49:38 2004
From: sychamirrana at winterchill.com (Sychamirrana)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:49:38 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] PoA box office
In-Reply-To: <cbutcb+qq96@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.16.1576048054.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

I found a place that I hadn't thought to look: Hot Topic. Some malls have
them (at least here on the east coast), and you can see 

The merchandise at www.hottopic.com <http://www.hottopic.com/> . Some nice
t-shirts and track jackets. They have girls and boys shirts as well.

 

Hope that helps:-)

 

~Sy

 

 

Our Target had some t-shirts in the boys department.  They were 
almost hidden amongst the Spiderman and Shrek 2 shirts, but they 
were there.  I actually got one for my son and daughter in the boys 
department because apparently they assume girls won't want HP 
shirts?!  My daughter was disgusted that what was available in the 
girls department was all girly girls stuff.  Blech!






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





From twinslove at mindspring.com  Wed Jun 30 23:15:06 2004
From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:15:06 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: 6th book.
References: <cbv78v+7441@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <40E3497A.000001.02924@TWINKIES>

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

 
I've reread her statement on the JKR website and it sounds like COS 
has clues to who it might be. I was thinking that it could be Draco, 
because in COS they thought he was the heir of Sly, but he wasn't.  

The real question about the title, is this person  really a 1/2 blood 
prince or is he just the prince of halfbloods/mudbloods? If he were 
1/2 blood prince it could be neville...>>

I thought about Neville, but I thought Neville was pure blood?  I
thought the reason Voldemort choose Harry was because he was half
blood like himself?  I guess I need to re-read the books again, 
because I am drawing a blank.  

Kimberly


 

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