I think i understand

[Estama02 at 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]