[HPFGU-Movie] Re: Messrs M, W, P & P

[GulPlum]

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