POA Review/Rant **Spoilers**

[Barbara]

>>>"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)