Addressing Frequently Read and Heard Movie Criticisms....

[Tyler Hewitt]

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/