From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  1 00:27:11 2005
From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg)
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 00:27:11 -0000
Subject: Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <dmk7ps+3puu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dmlg0v+pu6q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at s...> wrote:
>
> Valerie:
> > One line that bugged me was when Moody/Barty says to Harry ?I?ll 
show 
> > you mine if you show me yours?.  Whaaat??!?!! Aside from sounding 
> > like a sexual innuendo, it seemed to imply that V had given Harry 
the 
> > dark mark in the cemetery. Weird, I thought.
> 
> SSSusan: 
> And when I heard that line, I thought it was Barty speaking to 
*Snape,* 
> knowing he, too, would have had a Dark Mark on his arm.  I didn't 
> quite "get" why he said that to Harry, either.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan
>


I too paid careful attention to this moment in my latter viewings of 
the film because it was so confusing. The camera starts out on Snape 
at that point, and Crouch's  sight line appears to be directed toward 
Snape as well, or at least at the beginning of the line. But then the 
focus shifts to Harry, due to Dumbledore's yanking Harry's arm into 
the shot and the camera's shift to the right. Poor directing? Poor 
editing? At any rate, it is quite ambiguous.

Lorel






From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Dec  1 02:53:50 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 02:53:50 +0000
Subject: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <dml4ut+4kmr@eGroups.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051130171647.00b04da0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051130213012.00b1c4c0@plum.cream.org>

At 21:18 30/11/2005 , Jen replied:

>Richard,

I'm beginning to feel a bit anxious about all these messages addressed 
specifically to me - I am, of course, always happy to answer, being the 
naturally loquacious (!) :-)  type I am, but that doesn't mean that nobody 
else can chip in. I'm getting the feeling that I'm having a personal 
conversion with Jen here (and with Steve in the other thread) with an 
audience. Does nobody else have anything to say? :-)

This one might elicit some responses, though...

<snip>

>Maybe there are only 3 main threads that have to be worked in to make this 
>a reasonable story. Umbridge/Harry, Harry's dreams/legilmens with Snape to 
>stop LV and then the build-up to the showdown at the MOM, resulting in 
>Sirius' death. Does that sound workable?

My latest reply to Steve in the parallel thread presents my views on some 
aspects of what you're asking about: there is certainly a self-contained 
story to be told.

However, as you said, much of the book is devoted to the underlying plot of 
the series as a whole and filling in lots of gaps in the back-story, while 
paving the way for future events.  One of the reasons why I disliked OotP 
as a book is because many of those details seemed to be a bit forced. This 
is even more pronounced in HBP, which is primarily about Tom Riddle's 
youth: everything else in the story acts as a scaffold on which to hang 
that back-story: HBP will therefore be even more difficult to make into a 
self-contained film *about Harry*. But we won't worry about HBP for a 
while. Let's get back to OotP.

Here are some of my thoughts about OotP's contents  (in no particular order):

Pieces of information not directly related to the immediate plot (political 
intrigue), which could potentially wait until the movie in which they're 
resolved:

- Petunia knows more about the magical world than she's letting on
- MWPP & Co as teenagers
- Luna and her mysterious ways (which MUST have a payoff in Book Seven!)
- details about Regulus (assuming he's "R.A.B.")
- Potential fireworks in the Weasley-Prewitt background

Things which don't specifically take the plot forward, but deserve mention:
- Harry-Seamus tensions (and Neville's support)
- Quiddich try-outs
- F&G testing products
- Phineas Nigellus

Things which can easily be left out:
- All but one DADA class
- Quidditch (it's what happens *after* matches, rather than during them, 
that's important, and even then, not to the main plot as such)
- SPEW
- Careers advice
- Most of Capslock!Harry (Please!)
- Hogwarts Express
- Potions lessons
- Teacher inspections
- Letter from Percy (?)

Stuff that can be re-written:
- COMC classes become just one, about Thestrals
- Two stays at 12GP at beginning become one (not sure about Xmas visit) - 
main purpose is to see the tapestry and discuss its contents
- Umbridge arrives at Hogwarts as High Inquisitor from the outset
- Room of Requirement (not sure it's needed; no Dobby anyway)
- Get rid of Kreacher; his main role in the plot is to mislead Harry at the 
end: this can be Mrs Black's portrait
- Cho limited to one intimate conversation (apart from DA)
- Dept. of Mysteries could be limited to JUST the prophecy and veil rooms 
(no universe, time-turner, etc rooms)

Stuff which must stay, and why (if not obvious):

- Dementor attack (explained elsewhere)
- visiting MoM & hearing (mirror of visit to Diagon Alley in PS/SS)
- 12GP (setting up Harry and Sirius & explaining his background)
- detention (could be just one) (Umbridge's cruelty)
- Harry & F&G disqualified from Quidditch (leads to their Grand Departure)
- Sirius in fireplace at least once (mirror of GoF, sets up the climax)
- at least two DA meetings (plus setup)
- Hagrid's tale & Grawp (much as I dislike the idea, but we know it's included)
- attack on Arthur, St Mungo's, (mainly to get Neville's family background)
- Occlumency plus pensieve (perhaps just one scene)
- meeting in Dumbledore's office & his "disappearance" (he has to leave)
- F&G's Big Departure (with or without swamp) :-)
- flying Thestrals to London
- prophecy room
- veil room :-(
- Harry-Bellatrix (crucio attempt)
- fight in the Atrium
- Dumbledore's debriefing (pensieve prophecy & explanation of Neville's 
connection to it, Voldemort's mind connection, not sure about confirming 
Snape's loyalty - it seems we're meant to know as little about him as 
possible for now; *definitely* no recap of the last five years!)

Last shot: freeze frame of Daily Prophet announcement admitting that 
Voldemort's back, fading to end credits

Plus
misc. scenes of Dumbledore's pointed ignoring of Harry during the year
misc. visions of the black door and round room
It seems that Firenze's important...
OWLs (short montage of taking exams)

Have I missed anything? I really can see all of that fitting into the 
target 2.5 hour running time.

<snip>

>If you can't get Jo to tell you what matters most (just what shouldn't 
>happen) you have no compass and you have to fly blind.

Quite. All they can do is write a first draft, on which presumably JKR 
gives her comments (which I can imagine are along the lines of "You can't 
do THAT!", "What's happened to Scene X? It's important!"), so then they go 
off and write a second draft and try to find out just WHY Scene X is 
important ("it has an impact on book seven" - "so we'll put it into film 
seven" - "no!") and so on, and so forth.

As for Capslock!Harry, I suspect that he'll largely fall by the wayside, 
and the moments when he loses his cool will be largely understandable. I'd 
like Angry!Harry to be there for the the debriefing scene, though.

Anyway, it's taken forever to write all of that, so I shall shut up now. 
Can someone please make a note of this message number, and quote it back to 
me when OotP comes out, so that everyone here can have a hearty laugh at my 
expense, about just HOW wrong I got the production team's view of OotP? I 
probably won't remember by that stage (I'm sure I did something similar 
about GoF when it went into production, but there's no way I'm going to 
battle with Yahoo! to try to find it...)

--
Richard, off to bed



From rmieure at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  1 01:28:50 2005
From: rmieure at yahoo.com (Robin Mieure)
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:28:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <20051130234145.34358.qmail@web52901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20051201012851.30258.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com>

Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:
>>> One line that bugged me was when Moody/Barty says to Harry 
?I?ll show you mine if you show me yours?.
Whaaat??!?!! Aside from sounding like a sexual innuendo, it seemed 
to imply that V had given Harry the dark mark in the cemetery. 
Weird, I thought. <<<

Maybe the misdirection was meant to throw off those HP fans that 
only watch the movies??  It was made known that Snape was a Death 
Eater, but maybe those poor souls haven't put two and two together.
  
"rmieure"





From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 00:39:20 2005
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 16:39:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adaptation
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051129120714.00b16ae0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <20051202003921.75197.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes, Richard, other people do have things to say - but we're just trying to keep up with you!  I've been trying to follow the rule of reading before responding to make sure somebody else hasn't made your point.  I've finally caught up, and I don't think anyone has made this particular point yet, although I think Sherry Gomes touched upon it.
  
Richard <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:
    Well, I had a problem with the Harry-Sirius relationship in the *book* anyway, mainly between the end of PoA and the start of GoF. Why Harry considers Sirius a more important correspondent for advice than Dumbledore is something which always baffled me. How they became so close (as far as Harry is concerned) despite spending just a few moments together feels 
strained to me.
  My take on this has always been similar to kids who grow up not knowing one parent.  The absent parent is idolized (we see Harry do this constantly with James), and the lack of closeness is excused by the enforced absence.  Harry knows that he *should* love his godfather, and so he does.  He understands that Sirius can't be with him because he's a fugitive.  He makes up all sorts of excuses for Sirius, and imagines what it would be like if they could be together with no real idea of what Sirius is like as a person.  In short, Harry loves the *idea* of Sirius.
   
  Sirius, meanwhile, is also role-playing.  Harry is his godson, and while he doesn't really *know* Harry, he knows he should feel protective and caring toward him.  Both of them are motivated by the relationship as it *should* be, and neither of them realizes or cares that there is no background intimacy to support the relationship.
   
  My two knuts.
   
  The Other Sherry
   


"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire



		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less

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




From poppytheelf at hotmail.com  Fri Dec  2 02:34:25 2005
From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:34:25 -0000
Subject: Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051130123507.00b16cf0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dmobrh+bf6t@eGroups.com>

Valerie wrote:

<<One line that bugged me was when Moody/Barty says to Harry "I'll show 
you mine if you show me yours."  Whaaat??!?!! Aside from sounding like 
a sexual innuendo, it seemed to imply that V had given Harry the dark 
mark in the cemetery. Weird, I thought.>>

I found that line to be very odd as well.  In the book, Wormtail 
pierces the *crook* of Harry's *right* arm.  The Dark Mark is on the 
*forearm* of the Death Eater's *left* arm.  Since they aren't on the 
same arm or even on the same place on the arm, I don't see how the 
moviemakers could have determined there's a parallel based on the 
information presented in the books.  Moreover, if this is supposed to 
be an intimation that Harry is going to join forces with Voldemort by 
the end of the series, the moviemakers (IMO, anyway) have completely 
misunderstood JKR's central message.

It may have just been an attempt to jam two pieces of information into 
a compressed time period, however - in one sentence, we learn that 
Barty Jr. was a Death Eater and Dumbledore becomes aware that Harry was 
cut (and presumably that his blood was used in the potion that 
rejuvenated Voldemort, although that's a bit of a stretch based on the 
information presented, IMO).

~Phyllis






From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec  2 02:37:34 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:37:34 -0000
Subject: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051130213012.00b1c4c0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dmoc1e+ka94@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
>
> At 21:18 30/11/2005 , Jen replied:
> 
> >Richard,
> 
Thank you for such a detailed list of predictions concerning OOTP. 
It was a tour de force and I will remember the number for future 
reference. It left me with a few thoughts I want to run past fellow 
list members. I am starting to get the hang of adapting something as 
massive as HP and it hit me (in the way that directors can highlight 
something by using negative space) that what we get with the films 
may be a mixture of things (nods to action/adventure, creative bits, 
etc.) but buried at the heart of it all is what Jo considers vital 
to her story. She won't tell the writers where to go, but she won't 
let them violate the story either. She is so irritating that way! 
But what we have to do now it seems is look at the films and see 
what's there and what's not. You mentioned in your earlier post that 
there'd likely be no need for Kreacher or Dobby in OOTP and I 
wondered why until I dabbled in logic (not a big skill in the 
wizarding or muggle world). Dobby/Winky were completely absent from 
GOF. What else is missing, now I am thinking, what other clues can 
we gather from what is there. The obvious come to mind immediately:

Harry must still have his showdown. He keeps getting some kind of 
practice in each film.
DD faltered, he's not all-knowing and all-seeing, not the saviour of 
the wizarding world (although it seems he faltered a film too 
early...) 
Snape's loyalties are muddled. Although he didn't get the screen 
time I'd like to have seen, there were definite points where his 
loyalties were questioned (Sirius in the fire:You never stop being a 
death eater, the pensieve scene, Karkarov showing his dark mark to 
Snape in the closet)

There are lots more interesting clues, I am sure, but I can't 
continue just now. Anyone, please feel free to add to it. 
JenD







From jlnbtr at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 02:43:11 2005
From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:43:11 -0000
Subject: I finally saw GoF
Message-ID: <dmocbv+lhbs@eGroups.com>

So today I finally got to see GoF. I'm still not sure how I feel about 
it. The kids acted much better than in the first 2 movies, that's for 
sure. I did not like Dumbledore in this movie, he just didn't act very 
Dumbledore-like, he didn't seem kind, gentil or sweet like I think 
he's in the books.

Voldemort was pretty scary. I went with my 11 year old cousin and she 
had to close her eyes, good thing it got a PG13.

I loved Viktor Krum, kudos to the guy who played him, exactly as I 
pictured him. Fleur wasn't as pretty as I thought she was described, 
and her being part veela should have been mentioned. Isn't she 
supposed to be like 18? she looks 14!!

And the elves, why wasn't Dobby there? andhow about Winky?

Juli







From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 04:21:58 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:21:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP actors and their hair!
In-Reply-To: <d4.34989b2b.30bf1d20@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BFB53616.17D4%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> Fleur has been in other films too,  but you're right,
> she's no Veela.  Where was her "long silvery sheet of  hair"?  That could have
> been accomplished with a wig, like the Malfoys  (didn't Draco's wig look silly
> at the Quidditch World Cup?  Not at all like  his hair texture.  Wonder why
they did that?)  Ah well, there are tons  of things we can pick at.

I was thinking of Hagrid?s line: (paraphrasing) Yes, I combed my hair...YOU
might try it now and again, Harry?.
I love that they threw that in, tying into the books where Harry?s hair is
supposed to be all sproingly and unruly. However, his hair looked quite
nicely coiffed in most all of the GOF scenes. I didn?t think I?d like the
long locks, but I did! POA was the only movie where the director
(hair/make-up artist?) tried to make his hair stick up. How hard would it
have been to mousse his hair all these films to stick up everywhere?
Dan is to start filming HP in February. As he just got his hair cut pretty
short, I?m assuming that means he will have short hair again in OotP, as per
POA? 
And the first film is the only one where Hermione?s hair was remotely bushy.
These seem like things they could?ve easily addressed, to remain true to
character description in the books.
And yes, Tom?s wig...puleez! I don?t know if HE didn?t want to grow his hair
out for the movie, but for however many tens of thousands of pounds he?s
getting for his Draco role, you?d think they?d make him. I really think they
should give him a long blond wig like his dad. Wouldn?t that look great!?!
OK, enough of my ranting over something as highly significant as hair...!
Valerie





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




From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 04:30:42 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 23:30:42 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP actors and their hair!
References: <BFB53616.17D4%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <226001c5f6f9$293fbde0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

I seem to recall reading something about not wanting to mess with the peroxide so much anymore - and he didn't have all that much screentime in GoF anyway.

Michelle

"He who follows truth too closely at the heels might get kicked in the teeth."
-Sir Walter Ralegh 1552-1618
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Valerie Flowe 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 11:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] HP actors and their hair!

  And yes, Tom?s wig...puleez! I don?t know if HE didn?t want to grow his hair
  out for the movie, but for however many tens of thousands of pounds he?s
  getting for his Draco role, you?d think they?d make him. I really think they
  should give him a long blond wig like his dad. Wouldn?t that look great!?!
  OK, enough of my ranting over something as highly significant as hair...!
  Valerie

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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 04:36:25 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:36:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Setup for OOTP
In-Reply-To: <dmkmfd+vnrk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFB53979.17D9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> <snip>
> ...I am beginning to wonder if she is in some way distancing herself from the
> films. I saw nothing of her during all the opening hoopla and I know her hubby
> was ill, but 
> still, it seemed unnaturally quiet from her. I do understand the forces that
> move film-making may be too strong even for her to sway one way or another.
> J
> 
> Did anyone else see the Dan/Martha Stewart interview a few weeks back? It was
> funny; Martha asked if Dan sees a lot of JKR and he replied that he?s only
> talked to her about 5 times. Martha was surprised. She said ?OH, I thought
> you?d practically be LIVING with her!? Dan laughed at that and said ?THAT
> would be a weird relationship! She?s married!?
> 
> So I guess the fact that JKR isn?t that attached to the actors means that she
> IS pretty hands-off with the film projects. I wonder if that?s a Warner Bros.
> Thing? Or maybe someone thought she was being too hands-on and discouraged her
> from hanging around? Or maybe she simply has more of a life than Harry Potter,
> Harry Potter, Harry Potter? Writes her books, then carries on with her day?
> Valerie



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 04:56:18 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 23:56:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051130213012.00b1c4c0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BFB53E22.17DB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 11/30/05 9:53 PM, "Richard" <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:
> OK, that?s it! Richard gets my vote for directing the next HP film!
> He?s got it all figured out down to the closing shot. :-)
> 
> All I know is, I will be really disappointed if they decide to drop the
> Snape/marauders/Pensieve backstory. At SOME point in this series they need to
> explain why Snape has been so nasty to Harry all this time!
> And I wonder if they?ll make Sirius grouchy, petulant, insensitive to Harry as
> he appears in OotP???
> I know there is so much detail to get into this film, but I just love that
> whole marauder storyline. It?s past history, but ties in substantially to
> current day HP, imo.
> 
> Valerie
> 
> BTW, pardon my ignorance but what does the following mean??? I don?t get it:
> Capslock!Harry
> Allcaps!Harry



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 05:10:20 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:10:20 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <20051130234145.34358.qmail@web52901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFB5416C.17E1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 11/30/05 6:41 PM, "Mike Daron" <mike4521daron at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hello Valerie. this mike4521daron at yahoo.com my favorite line is when moody
>     change malfoy into a ferrit and started bouncing around when mrs mcgongall
> anyhoo
> 
> Wasn?t that Draco-into-ferret beautifully executed!?! The ferret in the pants
> was a bit over the top, imo, but I loved Moody yelling ?Is that a threat?! I
> can tell you stories about your father that would curl even your greasy hair!?
> HA HA!!
> 
> And then when Moody had a dead ferret hanging from his belt at the yule ball.
> Nice touch!!
> 
> Valerie



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




From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 05:15:29 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 00:15:29 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Moody's comment
References: <BFB5416C.17E1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <22ba01c5f6ff$69ee85a0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

Wasn't that a sporran over a kilt? I think sporrans are usually made of badger pelts....

Michelle

"He who follows truth too closely at the heels might get kicked in the teeth."
-Sir Walter Ralegh 1552-1618
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Valerie Flowe 

  > And then when Moody had a dead ferret hanging from his belt at the yule ball.
  > Nice touch!!
  > 
  > Valerie


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 05:16:09 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:16:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <20051201012851.30258.qmail@web52202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFB542C9.17E3%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 11/30/05 8:28 PM, "Robin Mieure" <rmieure at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> >>> it seemed to imply that V had given Harry the dark mark in the
>>>> cemetery. 
> Weird, I thought. <<<
> 
> Maybe the misdirection was meant to throw off those HP fans that
> only watch the movies??  It was made known that Snape was a Death
> Eater, but maybe those poor souls haven't put two and two together.
>   
> "rmieure"
> 
> I think the director might?ve clarified some of that by having Snape pull back
> his sleeve and show Karkaroff HIS dark mark too (in that scene where Harry is
> passing by what looks to be in the hallway but then oddly becomes Snape?s
> potions storeroom which is supposed to be in his dungeon classroom. Huh?)
> And as someone mentioned in an earlier post, Harry?s expression could?ve been
> much more dramatic when he first hears in the Pensieve scene that Snape was a
> death eater. That was, after all, a huge revelation!
> Valerie



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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 06:50:25 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 06:50:25 -0000
Subject: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <BFB53E22.17DB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dmoqrh+kt6i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...>
wrote:
>
> > 
> > Valerie
> > 
> > BTW, pardon my ignorance but what does the following mean??? 
> > I don?t get it:
> > Capslock!Harry
> > Allcaps!Harry

bboyminn:

Capslock!Harry and Allcaps!Harry means that HARRY IS SHOUTING ALL THE
TIME!!!!!

Just passing it along.

Steve/bboyminn







From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 07:03:13 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:03:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adaptation
In-Reply-To: <20051202003921.75197.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFB55BE1.17EF%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/1/05 7:39 PM, "Sherry Garfio" <sgarfio at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Yes, Richard, other people do have things to say - but we're just trying to
> keep up with you!  I've been trying to follow the rule of reading before
> responding to make sure somebody else hasn't made your point.  I've finally
> caught up, and I don't think anyone has made this particular point yet,
> although I think Sherry Gomes touched upon it.
>   
> Richard <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:
>     Well, I had a problem with the Harry-Sirius relationship in the *book*
> anyway, mainly between the end of PoA and the start of GoF. Why Harry
> considers Sirius a more important correspondent for advice than Dumbledore is
> something which always baffled me. How they became so close (as far as Harry
> is concerned) despite spending just a few moments together feels
> strained to me.
>   My take on this has always been similar to kids who grow up not knowing one
> parent.  The absent parent is idolized (we see Harry do this constantly with
> James), and the lack of closeness is excused by the enforced absence.  Harry
> knows that he *should* love his godfather, and so he does.  He understands
> that Sirius can't be with him because he's a fugitive.  He makes up all sorts
> of excuses for Sirius, and imagines what it would be like if they could be
> together with no real idea of what Sirius is like as a person.  In short,
> Harry loves the *idea* of Sirius.
>    
>   Sirius, meanwhile, is also role-playing.  Harry is his godson, and while he
> doesn't really *know* Harry, he knows he should feel protective and caring
> toward him.  Both of them are motivated by the relationship as it *should* be,
> and neither of them realizes or cares that there is no background intimacy to
> support the relationship.
>    
>   My two knuts.
>    
>   The Other Sherry
> 
> 
> Interesting points, Sherry.
> Sirius slips up a lot in OotP, showing his true colors in spite of his good
> intentions (selfish, self-pitying, alcohol-abusing, insensitive (to young
> Snape, young Lupin and Harry. Even Kreacher). So why do I love his character
> so??? :-)
> He?s intriguing. Dark. Tortured. And yet still, in the end, risks his life to
> save Harry at the ministry. His loyalty to James and Lily (and thus Harry)
> leave you feeling that in spite of all of his faults, he has strong moral
> fiber. Turning to the ?light side? going against the Black clan; surviving 12
> years in Azkaban without going insane like most do. Yeah, I like him. ARE THEY
> EVER GOING TO BRING HIM BACK OR WHAT???!!!
> 
> That said, I was always a bit sad to see Lupin leave at the end of POA. He and
> Harry really bonded and he (more than Sirius) seemed to be the kind-hearted,
> confidante, substitute parent role model that Harry had craved/deserved all
> his life. I find it unfortunate that JKR dropped that nice relationship in
> OotP and certainly in HBP. Lupin appears here and there with no more major
> bonding with Harry. Sad.
> And now Harry?s even lost Dumbledore. What?s the poor boy to do?!
> 
> Valerie



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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  2 07:11:34 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:11:34 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <dmoqrh+kt6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFB55DD6.17FD%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Thanks...I still don?t get it though. I don?t picture Harry as shouting all
the time??? Except in extreme moments of  pain when he?s being crucio?d or
other such torture. Hmmm; dunno.
Val~

On 12/2/05 1:50 AM, "Steve" <bboyminn at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...>
> wrote:
>> >
>>> > > 
>>> > > Valerie
>>> > > 
>>> > > BTW, pardon my ignorance but what does the following mean???
>>> > > I don?t get it:
>>> > > Capslock!Harry
>>> > > Allcaps!Harry
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> Capslock!Harry and Allcaps!Harry means that HARRY IS SHOUTING ALL THE
> TIME!!!!!
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> 
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
> from posts to which you're replying!
> 
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
> HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
> 
> 
>   
> 
>  
>  SPONSORED LINKS 
>           
>   Harry potter 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Harry+potter&w1=Harry+potter&w2=Entertain
> ment+movie&w3=Entertainment+new+york&c=3&s=71&.sig=ZAl4cTCXvEkQl10dHW8d9w>
> Entertainment movie
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Entertainment+movie&w1=Harry+potter&w2=En
> tertainment+movie&w3=Entertainment+new+york&c=3&s=71&.sig=s1o3cm_Hbs6KQzKJiTnJ
> rQ>    Entertainment new york
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Entertainment+new+york&w1=Harry+potter&w2
> =Entertainment+movie&w3=Entertainment+new+york&c=3&s=71&.sig=k6CHZMPGuVvJo8t7r
> aUpmA>           
>  
>  
> 
>  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> 
> *  Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie> "
> on the web. 
> *   
> *  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 susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Fri Dec  2 13:23:00 2005
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 13:23:00 -0000
Subject: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <BFB55DD6.17FD%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dmphrk+mfpd@eGroups.com>

Valerie:
> > > BTW, pardon my ignorance but what does the following mean???
> > > I don?t get it:
> > > Capslock!Harry
> > > Allcaps!Harry
 
bboyminn:
> > Capslock!Harry and Allcaps!Harry means that HARRY IS SHOUTING ALL 
> > THE TIME!!!!!

Valerie:
> Thanks...I still don?t get it though. I don?t picture Harry as 
> shouting all the time??? Except in extreme moments of  pain when he?s 
> being crucio?d or other such torture. Hmmm; dunno.


SSSusan:
Just get out your copy of OotP and start near the beginning... or when 
Harry get to 12 GP.  He *is* shouting a lot; I mean, literally, there 
are lots of all-caps lines right there in Jo's text. :-)

Siriusly Snapey Susan







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec  2 13:47:19 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 13:47:19 -0000
Subject: Moody's comment
In-Reply-To: <BFB542C9.17E3%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dmpj97+sqnr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:"
SNIPPED lots right here....
> > 
> > I think the director might?ve clarified some of that by having 
Snape pull back
> > his sleeve and show Karkaroff HIS dark mark too (in that scene 
where Harry is
> > passing by what looks to be in the hallway but then oddly 
becomes Snape?s
> > potions storeroom which is supposed to be in his dungeon 
classroom. Huh?)
> > And as someone mentioned in an earlier post, Harry?s expression 
could?ve been
> > much more dramatic when he first hears in the Pensieve scene 
that Snape was a
> > death eater. That was, after all, a huge revelation!
> > Valerie

That's always been one of the difficulties in the films. Clues are 
given but the narrative that makes them huge and important is 
missing and I think the film makers and screen writers try to keep 
important things in but connections are lost. Then the faithful 
audience of readers has to say "oh yeah!" rather than information 
being explicit. It seemed to be the worst with POA in the Shrieking 
Shack and when Harry saw the patronus on the lake. A few simple 
lines of dialogue added here and there could have made those scenes 
so much better connected to the narrative. 
JenD
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>







From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 17:30:11 2005
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:30:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adaptation
In-Reply-To: <BFB55BE1.17EF%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20051202173012.39137.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>

Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> replied to me:
    Sirius slips up a lot in OotP, showing his true colors in spite of his good intentions (selfish, self-pitying, alcohol-abusing, insensitive (to young Snape, young Lupin and Harry. Even Kreacher). So why do I love his character so??? :-)
   
  He?s intriguing. Dark. Tortured. And yet still, in the end, risks his life to save Harry at the ministry. His loyalty to James and Lily (and thus Harry) leave you feeling that in spite of all of his faults, he has strong moral fiber.
   
  Yes, and after I wrote my last post, I started pondering Sirius's behavior in OotP with regard to Harry as well.  Sirius's feelings toward Harry are further complicated by his relationship with James.  He loves Harry not only because he's supposed to as his godfather, but also because Harry is a substitute for James.  Sirius hasn't really had to come to terms with James's death until OotP.  He was locked up in Azkaban immediately after James's death, and spent most of his term there focused on his own innocence (to keep himself sane) and Peter's treachery.  I'm sure he spent a lot of time agonizing over the deaths as well, but not in a coming-to-terms sort of way due to the presence of the dementors, and in any case he hasn't been in his normal life without James, which is where people really come to terms with the death of a loved one (doing "normal" things and feeling the absence of the dead person who should be there).  In GoF, he was on the run and using Harry as a substitute
 for James, and therefore still did not have much time to deal with James's death.
   
  There are several occasions in OotP where Sirius expects Harry to behave like James, and finally he voices this when he tells Harry that he's not so much like his father after all.  Ouch.  I wondered when I read that if he's trying to goad Harry into living up to his expectations of being a replacement for James, or if it's an "a-ha" moment for Sirius where he finally realizes that Harry is NOT James and that this is an unfair expectation.  I still haven't decided; maybe it's both.  As for risking his life to rescue Harry at the Ministry, was he really rescuing Harry, or was he trying to make up for what happened to James?
     
  That said, I was always a bit sad to see Lupin leave at the end of POA. He and Harry really bonded and he (more than Sirius) seemed to be the kind-hearted, confidante, substitute parent role model that Harry had craved/deserved all his life. I find it unfortunate that JKR dropped that nice relationship in OotP and certainly in HBP. Lupin appears here and there with no more major bonding with Harry. Sad. And now Harry?s even lost Dumbledore. What?s the poor boy to do?!

  Amen to that!  Unfortunately, I think that Sirius's death and Lupin's absence are both part of the stripping away of Harry's support system like in most archetypal fantasy hero coming-of-age stories (Luke Skywalker, Frodo, etc).  The final blow is Dumbledore's death.  Even Snape, who antagonizes Harry but has always been there to save his butt in a pinch, is gone now, presumably turned enemy.  These events force Harry to grow up and take his place as hero.
   
  Sherry Garfio
  AKA The Other Sherry
   


"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire



__________________________________________________
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 eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Fri Dec  2 18:36:46 2005
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:36:46 -0000
Subject: Setup for OOTP
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051130143807.00b18e30@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dmq47u+kv6t@eGroups.com>

Richard <hp at p...> wrote:

> Things which can easily be left out:
> Most of Capslock!Harry (Please!)

I strongly disagree, I like Capslock Harry. One of the things I'm most
looking forward to is Harry wrecking Dumbledore's office. I think it's
important to show that Harry is a Human Being who has faults so I want
to see him yell at people who don't deserve it as well as those like
Dumbledore who do.

> Room of Requirement (not sure it's needed
> no Dobby anyway) 

The Room of Requirement as such isn't necessary but the DA certainly
is because we need to show Harry is becoming a leader, and where
better for them to meet than that room.

> Hagrid's tale & Grawp (much as I 
> dislike the idea, but we know it's
> included) 

We do? How do we know it's included?

> Stuff which must stay 
> Harry-Bellatrix (crucio attempt) 

Yes I agree, we must see that and I hope like the in the book the
curse is not a complete failure, it was good enough to make her scream
and stop with that stupid baby talk. 

Eggplant 

 







From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 19:25:17 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 19:25:17 -0000
Subject: 3rd time's a charm- I've finally got some questions
Message-ID: <dmq72t+5guv@eGroups.com>

Ok, now that I've seen the film for a 3rd time, and my "puppy love" of 
the film is finally beginning to wear off a bit, I have gained a bit 
of a more objective view.  Don't get me wrong, I still LOVE this film, 
and will be getting it the very first day it comes out on DVD, but I'm 
not going to see it in the theatres again this go round. (Yes, I've 
finally had enough GoF!)

Some questions, and I would appreciate help if you've got it: 

Maybe this is a stupid one, but I was wondering, for the Priori 
Incantatem, why were Harry's parents older than they have been when we 
have seen them in earlier films?  In the Mirror of Erised (CoS), his 
parents were youthful, as if they were the age that they were when 
they died. Maybe I'm missing what the Priori Incantatem is?

What was the deal with the mermaid in the stained glass window that 
was animated in the prefects bathroom?  Was there a purpose to her in 
the book that I have forgotten?  Or was she just a piece of obligatory 
CGI, like it seems to me?  She bugged me because she was distracting 
from the cuteness of Myrtle teasing Harry, and him discovering the 
clue.

And to make a comment- I loved the second task, my only quibble with 
it is the "precious things" to be saved.  They looked a little scary, 
like they were dead or something.  I didn't even recognize Hermione, 
or Cho.  When I read the book, I imagined them to be sweetly sleeping-
like, heads lolled to the side, gently bobbing in the currents, 
dribbles of bubbles escaping their mouths like itty snores.  (I think 
it was described pretty closely to that!) This scene gave me a bit of 
a jolt.

I think I had some more questions, but I've forgotten them, I guess.  
I'll post them if I remember.

-Lauren






From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 20:22:08 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 20:22:08 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore Vs. Sirius (was: Adaptation)
In-Reply-To: <20051202173012.39137.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dmqadg+vdtk@eGroups.com>

I believe that Harry confides in Sirius more, and seems to feel more 
close to Sirius than Dumbledore for many complicated reasons like 
those mentioned below and also because, Sirius *belongs* to Harry.  
Sirius has no family.  Dumbledore has to run a school, and cannot 
publicly take Harry's side for everything.  He has to be fair, and 
in being fair, he can't allow himself to be too close to Harry, 
because it would be tough to be objective.  (Which could give a bit 
of insight to the much debated "manhandling" of Harry by 
Dumbledore).  Dumledore isn't always at Harry's disposal for advice, 
like Sirius is.  What else is Siruis doing, besides hiding?  Plus, 
Dumbledore keeps company with some very mixed characters.  I would 
trust him, but we've seen how certain people that Dumbledore 
associates with are questionable.

In addition, Dumbledore's agenda with LV is a much bigger one than 
that of Harry.  His dislike for LV is for many reasons, not 
necessarily mostly for the death of James & Lilly, like it is for 
Harry & Sirius.

Just my opinion,
Lauren


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Sherry Garfio <sgarfio at y...> 
wrote:
>
> Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...> replied to me:
>     Sirius slips up a lot in OotP, showing his true colors in 
spite of his good intentions (selfish, self-pitying, alcohol-
abusing, insensitive (to young Snape, young Lupin and Harry. Even 
Kreacher). So why do I love his character so??? :-)
>    
>   He?s intriguing. Dark. Tortured. And yet still, in the end, 
risks his life to save Harry at the ministry. His loyalty to James 
and Lily (and thus Harry) leave you feeling that in spite of all of 
his faults, he has strong moral fiber.
>    
>   Yes, and after I wrote my last post, I started pondering 
Sirius's behavior in OotP with regard to Harry as well.  Sirius's 
feelings toward Harry are further complicated by his relationship 
with James.  He loves Harry not only because he's supposed to as his 
godfather, but also because Harry is a substitute for James.  Sirius 
hasn't really had to come to terms with James's death until OotP.  
He was locked up in Azkaban immediately after James's death, and 
spent most of his term there focused on his own innocence (to keep 
himself sane) and Peter's treachery.  I'm sure he spent a lot of 
time agonizing over the deaths as well, but not in a coming-to-terms 
sort of way due to the presence of the dementors, and in any case he 
hasn't been in his normal life without James, which is where people 
really come to terms with the death of a loved one (doing "normal" 
things and feeling the absence of the dead person who should be 
there).  In GoF, he was on the run and using Harry as a substitute
>  for James, and therefore still did not have much time to deal 
with James's death.
>    
>   There are several occasions in OotP where Sirius expects Harry 
to behave like James, and finally he voices this when he tells Harry 
that he's not so much like his father after all.  Ouch.  I wondered 
when I read that if he's trying to goad Harry into living up to his 
expectations of being a replacement for James, or if it's an "a-ha" 
moment for Sirius where he finally realizes that Harry is NOT James 
and that this is an unfair expectation.  I still haven't decided; 
maybe it's both.  As for risking his life to rescue Harry at the 
Ministry, was he really rescuing Harry, or was he trying to make up 
for what happened to James?
>      
>   That said, I was always a bit sad to see Lupin leave at the end 
of POA. He and Harry really bonded and he (more than Sirius) seemed 
to be the kind-hearted, confidante, substitute parent role model 
that Harry had craved/deserved all his life. I find it unfortunate 
that JKR dropped that nice relationship in OotP and certainly in 
HBP. Lupin appears here and there with no more major bonding with 
Harry. Sad. And now Harry?s even lost Dumbledore. What?s the poor 
boy to do?!
> 
>   Amen to that!  Unfortunately, I think that Sirius's death and 
Lupin's absence are both part of the stripping away of Harry's 
support system like in most archetypal fantasy hero coming-of-age 
stories (Luke Skywalker, Frodo, etc).  The final blow is 
Dumbledore's death.  Even Snape, who antagonizes Harry but has 
always been there to save his butt in a pinch, is gone now, 
presumably turned enemy.  These events force Harry to grow up and 
take his place as hero.
>    
>   Sherry Garfio
>   AKA The Other Sherry
>    
> 
> 
> "Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims 
are identical and our hearts are open."
>     -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
> 







From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 20:23:13 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 15:23:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd time's a charm- I've finally got some questions
References: <dmq72t+5guv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005301c5f77e$39699d50$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

Lauren,

Regarding the parents: Priori Incantatem shows a shadow of the last spell performed, then the next-to-last, and on like that. So James and Lily would be shown at the moment they died.

The mermaid: that was meant to be a hint to Harry about the egg. She had more play in the book.

The hostages: I thought they looked like wax images and were terribly cheesy. Very disappointing.

Michelle, who is going to see it a second time next Thursday!
"He who follows truth too closely at the heels might get kicked in the teeth."
-Sir Walter Ralegh 1552-1618
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: laurenmcoakley 

  Maybe this is a stupid one, but I was wondering, for the Priori 
  Incantatem, why were Harry's parents older than they have been when we 
  have seen them in earlier films?  In the Mirror of Erised (CoS), his 
  parents were youthful, as if they were the age that they were when 
  they died. Maybe I'm missing what the Priori Incantatem is?

  What was the deal with the mermaid in the stained glass window that 
  was animated in the prefects bathroom?  Was there a purpose to her in 
  the book that I have forgotten?  Or was she just a piece of obligatory 
  CGI, like it seems to me?  She bugged me because she was distracting 
  from the cuteness of Myrtle teasing Harry, and him discovering the 
  clue.

  And to make a comment- I loved the second task, my only quibble with 
  it is the "precious things" to be saved.  They looked a little scary, 
  like they were dead or something.  I didn't even recognize Hermione, 
  or Cho.  When I read the book, I imagined them to be sweetly sleeping-
  like, heads lolled to the side, gently bobbing in the currents, 
  dribbles of bubbles escaping their mouths like itty snores.  (I think 
  it was described pretty closely to that!) This scene gave me a bit of 
  a jolt.

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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 20:35:42 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 20:35:42 -0000
Subject: 4th viewing...
Message-ID: <dmqb6u+iarh@eGroups.com>

I saw GoF for the fourth time today.  It was still just as 
breathtaking and terrifying again, especially with LV at the end.  I 
caught myself holding my breath again!  This time, I was able to 
watch it without thinking, "That wasn't in the book!"  *LOL*  Now 
that I have gotten past the "they chopped up my story" feeling, I 
love it even more.  

Things that annoy me:  MOANING MYRTLE.  (WHY does she get so much 
time on screen?  I know she is important, but she is more irritating 
on film than in the book! Keep her in the movie, but for heaven's 
sake make it shorter!)  Beauxbatons and Durmstrang only being 
boys/girls schools.  What, other countries don't have mixed sex 
witches and wizards? Odd.  

Things I love:  The Yule Ball!  I'll bet that was a lovely set.  The 
humor of the movie also.  SNAPE, the scene stealer!  He's so 
perfect.  And, you have to admit, Gleeson as Moody is soooooo 
goood.  I also love the details of the sets, down to the last little 
thing.  I'm starting to notice more stuff like props, and that's 
what makes the HP films so good.  When they do details for 
something, they do details.   

All in all I loved it again.  I hope to make it back again next 
week.  I only have so many days before the kids will be out for 
Christmas break, and then I will have to take them with me again! 
*L* 

Alora 






From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 21:20:06 2005
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 13:20:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] HP actors and their hair!
In-Reply-To: <BFB53616.17D4%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20051202212006.51644.qmail@web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:        [Giving the post a major haircut - snip, snip!]
    
  And yes, Tom?s wig...puleez! I don?t know if HE didn?t want to grow his  hair out for the movie, but for however many tens of thousands of  pounds he?s getting for his Draco role, you?d think they?d make him. I  really think they should give him a long blond wig like his dad.  Wouldn?t that look great!?!
    
  akh pipes up:
  
  I won't quibble with the questionable quality of his hair (alliteration  - with q's no less!  but I digress...) in GOF.  However, I  think it may not have been Tom Felton's choice.  I saw him in a  recent interview and he's already experiencing some receding  hairline.  Bless his heart, I think they started him on wigs  because there's evidence he may lose his hair before the series is  over.  Bald Draco is definitely not in the book!
  
  akh, who is grateful women (as a rule) don't experience male-patterned baldness.  We have enough issues already...


		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Personals
 Single? There's someone we'd like you to meet.
 Lots of someones, actually. Yahoo! Personals

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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 21:53:01 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 21:53:01 -0000
Subject: HP actors and their hair!
In-Reply-To: <20051202212006.51644.qmail@web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dmqfnt+kfl8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at y...> 
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:        [Giving the post 
a major haircut - snip, snip!]
>     
>   And yes, Tom?s wig...puleez! I don?t know if HE didn?t want to 
grow his  hair out for the movie, but for however many tens of 
thousands of  pounds he?s getting for his Draco role, you?d think 
they?d make him. I  really think they should give him a long blond 
wig like his dad.  Wouldn?t that look great!?!
>     
>   akh pipes up:
>   
>   I won't quibble with the questionable quality of his hair 
(alliteration  - with q's no less!  but I digress...) in GOF.  
However, I  think it may not have been Tom Felton's choice.  I saw 
him in a  recent interview and he's already experiencing some 
receding  hairline.  Bless his heart, I think they started him on 
wigs  because there's evidence he may lose his hair before the 
series is  over.  Bald Draco is definitely not in the book!
>   
>   akh, who is grateful women (as a rule) don't experience male-
patterned baldness.  We have enough issues already...


While we are on the subject of hair, I was looking closely at Rita's 
(aka Miranda Richardson) hair while she was in the broom cupboard 
with Harry.  It looks as though she dyed her hair that blonde color, 
doesn't it?  But then, they can make wigs look amazingly like your 
own hair in the movies.  "Alias"  anyone?  ;)  And I noticed, for 
the first time, Cedric's hair standing up after Rita ruffles it up.  
Cute!  

Alora 






From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Thu Dec  1 23:06:42 2005
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 23:06:42 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd time's a charm- I've finally got some
 questions
In-Reply-To: <dmq72t+5guv@eGroups.com>
References: <dmq72t+5guv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p06110402bfb52e86c355@[217.154.252.53]>

>Lauren said:-
>
>And to make a comment- I loved the second task, my only quibble with
>it is the "precious things" to be saved.  They looked a little scary,
>like they were dead or something.  I didn't even recognize Hermione,
>or Cho.  When I read the book, I imagined them to be sweetly sleeping-
>like, heads lolled to the side, gently bobbing in the currents,
>dribbles of bubbles escaping their mouths like itty snores.  (I think
>it was described pretty closely to that!) This scene gave me a bit of
>a jolt.

The recent 'Making of...' programme on British TV (one whole hour, 
amazingly!) dwelt at length upon the filming of this sequence. Dan 
Radcliffe actually  did all of the swimming that you saw Harry doing 
in the movie in short 15- to 20-second bursts, with scuba divers 
standing by to shove a regulator (breathing apparatus) into his mouth 
when needed. When it came to tying up the four hostages underwater, 
however, it was felt that it would be too dangerous; so they used 
dummies. Any diver will tell you, however, that shapes are distorted 
and colours are  bleached under water, and Caucasian skin looks 
lifeless. The 'hostages' did look odd, but not necessarily 
unrealistic.

Cheers,
Nicholas



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec  2 23:42:29 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 23:42:29 -0000
Subject: 3rd time's a charm- I've finally got some questions
In-Reply-To: <p06110402bfb52e86c355@[217.154.252.53]>
Message-ID: <dmqm55+pc9i@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, nicholas dean <nicholas at a...> 
wrote:
>
> >Lauren said:-
> >
> >And to make a comment- I loved the second task, my only quibble 
with
> >it is the "precious things" to be saved.  They looked a little 
scary,
> >like they were dead or something.  I didn't even recognize 
Hermione,
> >or Cho.  When I read the book, I imagined them to be sweetly 
sleeping-
> >like, heads lolled to the side, gently bobbing in the currents,
> >dribbles of bubbles escaping their mouths like itty snores.  (I 
think
> >it was described pretty closely to that!) This scene gave me a 
bit of
> >a jolt.
> 
> The recent 'Making of...' programme on British TV (one whole hour, 
> amazingly!) dwelt at length upon the filming of this sequence. Dan 
> Radcliffe actually  did all of the swimming that you saw Harry 
doing 
> in the movie in short 15- to 20-second bursts, with scuba divers 
> standing by to shove a regulator (breathing apparatus) into his 
mouth 
> when needed. When it came to tying up the four hostages 
underwater, 
> however, it was felt that it would be too dangerous; so they used 
> dummies. Any diver will tell you, however, that shapes are 
distorted 
> and colours are  bleached under water, and Caucasian skin looks 
> lifeless. The 'hostages' did look odd, but not necessarily 
> unrealistic.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicholas

First time through, I too, thought the hostages looked like bad wax 
musuem manaquins, but the next time, I looked at them more as "in 
suspended animation" which they'd have had to be, to last 
underwater. It didn't seem so jarring. I was thoroughly impressed 
with the sequence and relieved that it didn't last as long as it did 
in the book. The shark was very realistic by the way. Made me jump.
JenD
>








From winnifredburkle at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  2 22:33:17 2005
From: winnifredburkle at yahoo.com (winnifredburkle)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 22:33:17 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is looking for more First years!
Message-ID: <dmqi3d+rq1e@eGroups.com>

Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is looking for more First 
years!




Are you a good roleplayer who posts actively (at least once a day)? 
Are you interested in Hogwarts?
Then I have the perfect RPG for you, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft 
and Wizardry, which needs more First Years. Its hosted on an 
established RP forum. I as the GM control NPC's and plot, which is 
moving very quickly.
The RP moves on a scedule of Free Time (for socializing, exploring, 
Quidditch Practice), Class Time, and Night Time. There is a Waiting 
List for the next semester of First Years as I want a diverse group 
of First Year characters.
Please check it out if you are interested. You register at the RP 
forum here:
http://shadowclaw.proboards24.com/index.cgi
and then post your bio here:
http://shadowclaw.proboards24.com/index.cgi?
board=hogwarts&action=display&thread=1132081299

All Houses are open and Houses are assigned based on what you 
decribe your characters personality to be. The insertion of a new 
character would be easy-the third wek in February, a Sorting 
Ceremony will occur to bring your character into play during the 
last two weeks of the holiday.TA positions are also avaliable. Email 
me for more information at winnifredburkle at yahoo.com.
Seryna









From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Dec  3 05:38:57 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 00:38:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Adaptation
In-Reply-To: <20051202173012.39137.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFB699A1.1826%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/2/05 12:30 PM, "Sherry Garfio" <sgarfio at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip> There are several occasions in OotP where Sirius expects Harry to
> behave like James, and finally he voices this when he tells Harry that he's
> not so much like his father after all.  Ouch.  I wondered when I read that if
> he's trying to goad Harry into living up to his expectations of being a
> replacement for James, or if it's an "a-ha" moment for Sirius where he finally
> realizes that Harry is NOT James and that this is an unfair expectation.
> 
> [Valerie]
> I took that as Sirius just being insensitive. I believe it was an a-ha moment
> for Sirius, but I don?t think he realized that he was being unfair to Harry.
> If you recall him and Molly got into it, over that subject. Molly could
> clearly see what Sirius was doing, and yet Sirius was still trying to replace
> his buddy James, with Harry. He?s emotionally immature, not surprising
> considering what he?d endured in AzK.
> 
> [Sherry] 
> As for risking his life to rescue Harry at the Ministry, was he really
> rescuing Harry, or was he trying to make up for what happened to James?
> 
> [Valerie]
> Hmmm...intriguing question. I believe that he wanted to help Harry out of
> loyalty to his friend James. Though I?m sure he spent every waking moment in
> Azkaban agonizing over his ill-fated choice to make Wormtail holder of the
> Fidelis. Guilt is a powerful motivator.
>      
> [Sherry]  
> Unfortunately, I think that Sirius's death and Lupin's absence are both part
> of the stripping away of Harry's support system like in most archetypal
> fantasy hero coming-of-age stories (Luke Skywalker, Frodo, etc).  The final
> blow is Dumbledore's death.  Even Snape, who antagonizes Harry but has always
> been there to save his butt in a pinch, is gone now, presumably turned enemy.
> These events force Harry to grow up and take his place as hero.
> 
> [Valerie] 
> I just hope the 7th book doesn?t get tooo LOTR! Will Ron come to save the day
> like Samwise? I keep thinking and thinking on how JKR is going to end the HP
> series......but yes, I know, that?s another chat group! :-) 



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




From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  3 11:41:16 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 11:41:16 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
Message-ID: <dms08s+58o4@eGroups.com>

Hello All,

I had an interesting conversation with my brother-in-law the other day 
that really got me thinking.  He says he feels JK Rowling is Anti-
American because American actors are not allowed to be in the films.  
Also, he noted there were no American characters.  Anyway, I can't see 
why that would be, and I'm sure someone out there has a logical reason 
for me.  

Also- please forgive me if this has already been discussed, as I am 
relatively new to this group.

Thanks, 
Lauren







From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Dec  3 12:10:03 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 12:10:03 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <dms08s+58o4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051203115732.00b508e0@plum.cream.org>

At 11:41 03/12/2005 , laurenmcoakley wrote:
>Hello All,
>
>I had an interesting conversation with my brother-in-law the other day
>that really got me thinking.  He says he feels JK Rowling is Anti-
>American because American actors are not allowed to be in the films.
>Also, he noted there were no American characters.  Anyway, I can't see
>why that would be, and I'm sure someone out there has a logical reason
>for me.

Ask your friend the reverse question: why *should* there be any American 
characters in a story based entirely in the UK? If your friend can come up 
with a convincing reason, we can start talking.

The same question goes for the actors: with so many good (and even great) 
British actors, why should the production team consider looking to the USA 
for talent? (Completely apart from the purely practical issue that HP 
shooting schedules are incredibly long and, apart from cameos, require 
actors to be available over a period of over 9 months, which is impractical 
is people have to travel from the other side of the Atlantic rather than up 
the English motorway.)

(Before anyone else raises it, Zoe Wanamaker is technically American as she 
was born in the USA and is a US citizen, but has lived for most of her life 
in the UK - as did her father, late noted film-maker and motive force 
behind the recreation of Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, Sam Wanamaker. Her 
career is UK-based and she took on British citizenship some time ago. She 
is a "name" in the UK and is known to a wide cross-section of the British 
population thanks in part to starring in a couple of popular British TV 
shows, whilst I suspect that she is all but unknown to the US audience.)

>Also- please forgive me if this has already been discussed, as I am
>relatively new to this group.

It's been discussed several times in the past, but not recently.

--
Richard, who's far too busy to respond to the great many interesting posts 
and only caught this one on his way out, but hopes to do some writing this 
evening.



From paulined at optushome.com.au  Sat Dec  3 12:42:37 2005
From: paulined at optushome.com.au (Pauline)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 23:42:37 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <dms08s+58o4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20051203233013.02053008@mail.optushome.com.au>


>Also, he noted there were no American characters.  Anyway, I can't see
>why that would be, and I'm sure someone out there has a logical reason
>for me.
>
>Also- please forgive me if this has already been discussed, as I am
>relatively new to this group.
>
>Thanks,
>Lauren

Oh for goodness' sake.  Your brother in law sounds extremely arrogant and 
parochial to me.  Why on earth would he only think of Americans?  Why would 
anyone even think there should their be Americans in Harry Potter?  There 
are other many other countries in the world.  You don't hear New 
Zealanders, South Africans,  Canadians, Japanese, Germans, Italians etc etc 
etc etc going on about JKR being against their countries.

I think it has worked very well to keep to the true nationalities of the 
characters.  What is wrong with British actors anyway?? I think they have 
been cast extremely well, and can hardly be considered inferior to actors 
from other western nations.

Pauline  (not British, but Australian and prepared to forgive JKR for not 
putting  Steve Irwin in charge of Magical Creatures)


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




From lorelei3dg at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  3 13:42:00 2005
From: lorelei3dg at yahoo.com (lorelei3dg)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 13:42:00 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <dms08s+58o4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dms7b8+93fg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laurenmcoakley" 
<laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
> 
> I had an interesting conversation with my brother-in-law the other 
day 
> that really got me thinking.  He says he feels JK Rowling is Anti-
> American because American actors are not allowed to be in the 
films.  
> Also, he noted there were no American characters.  
> 
> Thanks, 
> Lauren
>

I agree with the other replies that the lack of American actors makes 
a lot of sense given the setting of the story. As far as no American 
characters, GoF had a mention of Americans at the QWC - a group with 
a banner entitled "Salem Witches Institute," IIRC. For those who want 
to include the US in the story, I've always seen that as a sign that 
there are probably magical schools in America and worldwide. Why 
would JKR spend time writing about those, though, when they are not 
part of her own world and definitely not important to her story?






From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Sat Dec  3 14:39:28 2005
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 08:39:28 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20051203233013.02053008@mail.optushome.com.au>
Message-ID: <mailman.22.1576048067.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>



-----Original Message-----
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Pauline
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 6:43 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?

<snip>

Pauline  (not British, but Australian and prepared to forgive JKR for not 
putting  Steve Irwin in charge of Magical Creatures)

*********************

HA!  Oh, man, that gave me a visual!  So the question is, would Hagrid love
his exuberant love for animals/reptiles or would he be totally exasperated
with it?

Rae







From sherriola at earthlink.net  Sat Dec  3 16:02:33 2005
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 08:02:33 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <dms08s+58o4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002001c5f822$f9949d10$0400a8c0@pensive>

I had an interesting conversation with my brother-in-law the other day 
that really got me thinking.  He says he feels JK Rowling is Anti-
American because American actors are not allowed to be in the films.  
Also, he noted there were no American characters.  Anyway, I can't see 
why that would be, and I'm sure someone out there has a logical reason 
for me.  

Also- please forgive me if this has already been discussed, as I am 
relatively new to this group.

Thanks, 
Lauren


Sherry:

I'll just add a little to what others have said already.  i am American, and
I read constantly.  many of the books i read, even series longer than the HP
books, have only Americans as characters.  it seems silly to accuse JKR of
being anti-American because her books are about the UK, and her characters
are from the UK.  As for the actors, i was relieved to hear that she wanted
only UK actors, because it makes sense for authenticity and all that.

Sherry




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Dec  3 16:12:29 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 16:12:29 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <002001c5f822$f9949d10$0400a8c0@pensive>
Message-ID: <dmsg5d+38ei@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" <sherriola at e...> 
wrote:
>
> I had an interesting conversation with my brother-in-law the other 
day 
> that really got me thinking.  He says he feels JK Rowling is Anti-
> American because American actors are not allowed to be in the 
films.  
> Also, he noted there were no American characters.  Anyway, I can't 
see 
> why that would be, and I'm sure someone out there has a logical 
reason 
> for me.  
> 
> Also- please forgive me if this has already been discussed, as I 
am 
> relatively new to this group.
> 
> Thanks, 
> Lauren
> 
> 
> Sherry:
> 
> I'll just add a little to what others have said already.  i am 
American, and
> I read constantly.  many of the books i read, even series longer 
than the HP
> books, have only Americans as characters.  it seems silly to 
accuse JKR of
> being anti-American because her books are about the UK, and her 
characters
> are from the UK.  As for the actors, i was relieved to hear that 
she wanted
> only UK actors, because it makes sense for authenticity and all 
that.
> 
> Sherry
> 
Just another little bit, too, didn't JKR want actors from the UK to 
benefit from this long, long series? Keep it home-grown kind of 
thing? And it hasn't stopped Americans,(and Mexicans!) from 
benifitting. Just not before the camera. I personally would not want 
to see (no matter how wonderful a child actor he is)Haley Joel 
Osmant (or any other American boy, nothing against Haley, he's a 
great actor) as Harry. It would distract from the story because I'd 
be listening for the proper accent, mannerisms, etc. How well did he 
fake it? Sad, but I would!
JenD







From saitaina at frontiernet.net  Sat Dec  3 16:26:40 2005
From: saitaina at frontiernet.net (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 08:26:40 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
References: <dmsg5d+38ei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c5f826$57e37fa0$01fea8c0@domain.invalid>

Divided into two sections because it's really two separate things.

The Books:  As someone pointed out, there ARE American's in the book, at least three of them if I remember the scene.  Granted they are easily over looked but they stand/sit next to a giant sign for the "Salem Witch's Institute".  

There is no other reason/use for American's to be in the book unless you want to see the American President of Magic talking with the Minister of Magic....  

We American's do tend to keep things to our selves a bit, not to mention we like to 'support our own', so it would make a great deal of sense for our magical children to go to school here, and since the books are based on a UK boarding school, there would be no reason for a cross over between the two countries.

Also, Harry hasn't seen a whole lot of the Wizarding World as a whole, he sees bits and pieces as needed but I'm sure there are whole sections he hasn't seen, so you never know, we probably have American's and other nationalities running around they just don't pop up where Harry is.

The Movies:

Even if we had American's in the books, they probably would have been cut from the movie.  *grins*  I myself would have loved to see the Salem Witches Institute girls but *shrugs* I care more for the plot.

As for actors, the UK has many, many wonderful and talented actors...most of whom we import from time to time so why stick our own over there when they have such a talent pool to draw from?  There's no American characters, and I'm sure the British can do a better accent then we can so we might as well use the natives.

So no, I don't think JKR or Harry Potter is Anti-American, I think she's just a woman proud of her country and writing what she knows best, the home she lives in.  Can't fault her for that.
Saitaina
----
Ah, it's just one of those days isn't it? Where everything is going wrong and your friends die. Damn I hate those days.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

Language colours perception; it simplifies and solidifies the impressionistic sea of sensory perception whereon we drift with such a deplorable sense of direction. It paints the chaotic world onto a canvas small enough to fit inside our inadequate human minds, using simple strokes we recognise, words we know. Language powers the filing system of our memory: 'boxes' that way, 'foxes' somewhere else entirely (unless, of course, they're foxes in boxes, in which case it should be filed under 'Animal Cruelty').  -Retreat, Act I: Ocupation

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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  3 19:34:06 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 19:34:06 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <001e01c5f826$57e37fa0$01fea8c0@domain.invalid>
Message-ID: <dmsrve+a04e@eGroups.com>

Bottom line is, it's HER story and she can do whatever she wants with 
it!  I personally love the fact that it is only UK actors.  There's 
nothing worse than an American actor trying to put on a fake accent! 
Ugh!  To my knowledge, Gwyneth Paltrow is the only one that has even 
come close.  I want the "real deal"  when I see Harry Potter.  It's 
all about a different country and culture to me, and that's one of the 
things I love about it.  That, and the fact that the kids are very 
real kids, some of them mostly unknown.  

Alora :)






From hp at plum.cream.org  Sat Dec  3 19:48:46 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 19:48:46 +0000
Subject: GoF: Another little tidbit
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051203194039.00b14ed0@plum.cream.org>

I saw the first 20 minutes or so again earlier today (I arrived at the 
cinema early to see something else because I'd got the times wrong) and as 
usual, I caught something I'd not noticed before.

Just for a change, I won't give full details. But the next time anyone sees 
it, pay attention right at the very beginning: as the snake slithers 
through the graveyard, look out for the gravestone on the left (I could 
swear the camera actually takes trouble to show it more clearly than it 
would normally need to) before the camera pans up and over the Riddle 
mausoleum.

Not earth-shatteringly interesting, just a nice touch.

--
Richard, wondering if anyone else has noticed (but not mentioned it)



From JLen1777 at aol.com  Sat Dec  3 16:39:59 2005
From: JLen1777 at aol.com (JLen1777 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:39:59 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American?
Message-ID: <240.2c92ca0.30c3245f@aol.com>

 
<snip>
Pauline  (not British, but Australian and prepared to forgive JKR  for not 
putting  Steve Irwin in charge of Magical  Creatures)






Rae:
HA!  Oh, man, that gave me a visual!  So the question is,  would Hagrid love
his exuberant love for animals/reptiles or would he be  totally exasperated
with it?
 
 
 
 
Jaimee:
That gave me quite a chuckle!  I think Hagrid and Irwin both show a  complete 
adoration for animals, and I could see them discussing ways to feed a  
flobberworm or blastended skrewt. Yeah, I definitely think they would get on  quite 
well.
 
And as far as not having American characters, well why should she feel it  
necessary to write about Americans?  I think that is part of the reason  other 
nations see us as arrogant.  If there were any Americans, we'd  probably be in 
Slytherin  (lol).  And as far as hiring American actors  for British parts, 
well that just leads right into our arrogance again...Why,  when there are so 
many talented Brit actors, should an American get the  part?  Well...because 
he/she is American, and isn't that the way everyone  should be?
 
Jaimee -- who is offended that noone thought of allowing Jeff Corwin to  help 
Hagrid and Irwin... that's a slap in the face to Americans AND Nova  
Scotians...  ;)



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






From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  3 23:38:35 2005
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 15:38:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fahrenheit in GOF
Message-ID: <20051203233835.65113.qmail@web30312.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

My friend Wendy and I went to GOF at the IMAX in Chicago yesterday (my third viewing of the movie, her second).  She had mentioned on the way there that she was bugged by the mention of Fahrenheit temperatures on the radio in the opening scene.  (I have to confess that I had paid no attention to what was announced on Frank Bryce's radio.)
   
  I listened harder this time, and indeed the announcer mentions that the temperature is 61 degrees Fahrenheit.  I don't know that I would have been bothered by it, even if I'd heard it, because I don't instantly think, "Wait a minute, Great Britain uses centigrade, not Fahrenheit."  So, the questions are:
   
  1) Were you/would you be bothered by this?
   
  2) Is the Fahrenheit temperature used in UK broadcasts?
   
  3) If not, is the announcer saying something different in the UK version of the movie?
   
  Enquiring minds want to know...
   
  akh, who's grateful to her friend Wendy that she's given her an excuse NOT to clean the living room right now

		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Personals
 Single? There's someone we'd like you to meet.
 Lots of someones, actually. Try Yahoo! Personals

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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Dec  4 00:00:57 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 19:00:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
In-Reply-To: <dmsg5d+38ei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFB79BE9.183E%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

Case in point; last night I was watching ?Cold Mountain? and while Renee
Zellweiger had a great southern accent, I winced at Nicole Kidman?s mediocre
one! Jude did pretty good though, being a Brit!
But I agree that it is disturbing when the viewer gets caught up in a bad
accent job. It detracts from the authenticity. And not everyone is a Meryl
Streep!
I?m American and I think a big part of the charm of HP, for me, is the
accents. It?s all so British. And I love hearing the interviews as well.
No reason a t?all to bring any ?foreigners? into the wizarding world. :-)

Val 


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Dec  4 00:08:37 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 19:08:37 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF: Another little tidbit
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051203194039.00b14ed0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BFB79DB5.1840%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/3/05 2:48 PM, "Richard" <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:

> I saw the first 20 minutes or so again earlier today (I arrived at the
> cinema early to see something else because I'd got the times wrong) and as
> usual, I caught something I'd not noticed before.
> 
> Just for a change, I won't give full details. But the next time anyone sees
> it, pay attention right at the very beginning: as the snake slithers
> through the graveyard, look out for the gravestone on the left (I could
> swear the camera actually takes trouble to show it more clearly than it
> would normally need to) before the camera pans up and over the Riddle
> mausoleum.
> 
> Not earth-shatteringly interesting, just a nice touch.
> 
> --
> Richard, wondering if anyone else has noticed (but not mentioned it)
> 
> OK, Richard, I?m going to my 3rd viewing in half and hour, so I?ll keep my
> eyes open. Also, I heard on Pottercast that there is something funny (?!?!?)
> in the graveyard scene. When V forces Harry to bow, there is a Death-Eater
> clapping in glee in the background. :-)
> I?m taking my 8 year old, a bit reluctantly. She really wants to see it. I
> spoke to 2 other 8 year old (boys) today and they said they didn?t think it
> was that scary. Guess it depends on the fear tolerance. I may end up
> regretting it and having my girl sleep with me at night for the next 3 months!
> :-)
> 
> Valerie, who still wants to catch GOF on Imax but thought that would
> DEFINITELY be too scary for the little one!



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Dec  4 00:24:36 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 00:24:36 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Fahrenheit in GOF
In-Reply-To: <20051203233835.65113.qmail@web30312.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051203235739.00b7c820@plum.cream.org>

At 23:38 03/12/2005 , AnitaKH wrote:

><...> the announcer mentions that the temperature is 61 degrees 
>Fahrenheit.  I don't know that I would have been bothered by it, even if 
>I'd heard it, because I don't instantly think, "Wait a minute, Great 
>Britain uses centigrade, not Fahrenheit."  So, the questions are:
>
>   1) Were you/would you be bothered by this?

If you hadn't mentioned it, I wouldn't have thought there was something 
wrong. Being a modern kind of bloke, I don't understand Fahrenheit and 
thought that he says "25 degrees, or 61 Fahrenheit". But now I've checked 
and 61F should be 16C, so now it is indeed bothering me. :-) Thank you for 
adding something more for me to pay attention to when I next see the movie, 
as I may have mis-heard!

>   2) Is the Fahrenheit temperature used in UK broadcasts?

Depends on the broadcast(er); while you assume correctly that we use 
Celcius as our main gauge, Fahrenheit equivalents frequently get mentions, 
especially when drawing attention to extreme or unusual temperatures. Some 
announcers (especially on radio stations/shows with an "older demographic") 
tend to do so as a matter of course.

Also, for some reason, a lot of people (both your average Joe on the street 
and professional announcers) use C when talking cold temperatures but 
prefer F when it's hot - perhaps because it sounds more impressive that 
way, e.g. "it's 90 degrees out there" sounds so different to "... 32 ..." 
(on the two days of the year, if we're lucky, that our temperatures get 
anywhere close to that kind of heat), and conversely "the temperature 
tonight will drop to 2 below" sounds so much better than "... 28...". In 
other words, listening to British weather forecasts takes a bit of getting 
used to. :-)

(My thanks to http://www.wbuf.noaa.gov/tempfc.htm)

(we're the same with linear measurements: most people - myself included - 
tend to talk miles rather than kilometers when they're big, but millimeters 
rather than fractions of an inch when they're small.)

>   3) If not, is the announcer saying something different in the UK 
> version of the movie?

See above. I shall check the next time see I the movie (probably Monday or 
Tuesday, which will be my 8th complete viewing, and probably the last for a 
while). But I wouldn't expect them to make different recordings of 
something so inconsequential as the voice on the radio Frank is listening to.

--
Richard, who'd hoped to do some catching up this evening but has got busy 
with something else.




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Dec  4 00:57:17 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 00:57:17 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF: Another little tidbit
In-Reply-To: <BFB79DB5.1840%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051203194039.00b14ed0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051204003751.00b80810@plum.cream.org>

At 00:08 04/12/2005 , Valerie Flowe wrote:

(Incidentally, Valerie, can you please check the setting on whatever 
program you're using to post messages: lots of strange characters are 
showing up, but more annoyingly than that, all of your contributions appear 
as "quoted text", so it's not immediately apparent which contributions are 
yours and which are the "actual" previous post you're quoting)

> > OK, Richard, I?m going to my 3rd viewing in half and hour, so I?ll keep my
> > eyes open. Also, I heard on Pottercast that there is something funny 
> (?!?!?)
> > in the graveyard scene. When V forces Harry to bow, there is a Death-Eater
> > clapping in glee in the background. :-)

Indeed, I hadn't noticed that before I'd heard the Leaky Pottercast. I did, 
however, catch Voldemort's "crucioff" (!?!?), "switching off" the curse the 
very first time I saw it, and burst out laughing, much to my consternation, 
and that of the rest of the audience.

> > I?m taking my 8 year old, a bit reluctantly. She really wants to see it. I
> > spoke to 2 other 8 year old (boys) today and they said they didn?t think it
> > was that scary. Guess it depends on the fear tolerance. I may end up
> > regretting it and having my girl sleep with me at night for the next 3 
> months!
> > :-)

Well, part of the rationale behind the PG13 rating on your side of the 
Atlantic (or the equivalent 12A over here) is that parents should know the 
tolerance levels of the children in their charge and be able to judge 
whether or not they can manage whatever is on the screen. Different 
children have different triggers and different tolerance levels: for 
instance, I'll never forget going to see CoS with my two nephews (the first 
time they'd seen it, the fourth time for me), and I thought the younger one 
(4 at the time) would have a bad reaction to Riddle or the Basilisk (he's 
very protective and I thought he'd have a problem with a monster going 
after his hero). He didn't have the slightest problem with those.

But whenever Lucius Malfoy turned up (before saying or doing anything), he 
immediately started shaking (for the  first appearance, I had to take him 
outside, he took it so badly)! He's got over it since then, though (and 
although he's looking forward to seeing HP4, he much prefers Spider-Man 
nowadays).

BTW his favourite sequence from the three HP movies they've seen (they're 
going to see GoF tomorrow) is Hagrid's "sorry about that" when he knocks 
down the shack door at the beginning of PS/SS - whenever they visit me and 
I put it on for them, they have to re-watch his entrance at least 4-5 times 
(rather handily, it's a chapter point on the DVD). :-)

> > Valerie, who still wants to catch GOF on Imax but thought that would
> > DEFINITELY be too scary for the little one!

I caught PoA on IMAX (with a bunch of HPFGUers) and was staggeringly 
under-impressed. Maybe the VERY high technical specs at my local cinema 
have spoiled me, but I couldn't really tell that much difference, so I 
doubt I'll be making the effort for GoF

--
Richard, who really should be doing other things right now!



From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Dec  4 15:33:31 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:33:31 +0000
Subject: Clues 'n' stuff
In-Reply-To: <dmq72t+5guv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051204143326.00b0b520@plum.cream.org>

Replies to a couple of separate threads.

1. Lauren:

>for the Priori Incantatem, why were Harry's parents older than they have 
>been when we have seen them in earlier films?

I don't think they appeared that much older. In any event, five years have 
passed since they filmed the bits for PS/SS and time certainly hasn't been 
kind to Adrian Rawlins (who actually looks very different to his appearance 
as James). I've had a "thing" (ahem) :-) for Geraldine Somerville since 
before Cracker and since PS/SS she's had a baby (one of the reasons why 
she's not been working) which I understand was quite difficult. The 
ethereal effects didn't do their appearance any favours, either.

>What was the deal with the mermaid in the stained glass window that
>was animated in the prefects bathroom?

She had several functions. As other people have pointed out, she had a 
narrative role in the book, and was a clue here, but she also had a 
symbolic meaning. One of the continuing themes of the series (and GoF in 
particular) is that reputations and the legends that grow up around them 
can be somewhat different to reality: here we have a traditional beautiful 
mermaid with flowing hair, but when we see what mermaids actually look 
like, they're fearsome, ugly creatures. Also, Harry doesn't have any 
trouble being undressed in front of her, but it's a different matter with 
Myrtle.

>I loved the second task, my only quibble with it is the "precious things" 
>to be saved.  They looked a little scary, like they were dead or 
>something.  I didn't even recognize Hermione, or Cho.

I agree. Although others have made valid excuses for what they might look 
different under water, I think the SFX team simply did a bad job on the 
models.

2. JenD:

>One of the difficulties in the films is thaty clues are given but the 
>narrative that makes them huge and important is missing and I think the 
>film makers and screen writers try to keep important things in but 
>connections are lost. Then the faithful audience of readers has to say "oh 
>yeah!" rather than information
>being explicit. It seemed to be the worst with POA in the Shrieking Shack 
>and when Harry saw the patronus on the lake. A few simple lines of 
>dialogue added here and there could have made those scenes so much better 
>connected to the narrative.

As I've said before, there is no reason for the movies to offer the same 
clues or in the same order as the books, or to reveal their significance at 
the same moment in the narrative. For instance, GoF has one purely 
cinematic running clue which couldn't work in a book: the fact that both 
Barty Jr. and Mad-Eye have a nervous tick with their tongue (which Barty 
Sr. notices just after the second task, and is why Jr. has to kill him). 
Similarly, in PoA there's the stone hitting Harry on the head and the 
wolf-call, which are explained little later on.

As for the significance of the stag (and authorship of the Map), I said 
when PoA came out that this could be dealt with in GoF during a Harry-Sirus 
bonding moment (in fact, it could have been the basis of their bonding). 
However, in retrospect, Harry-Sirius bonding was really unimportant to 
GoF's narrative while the Harry-Sirius relationship is central to OotP 
(duh!), as is the Patronus (if not its form), this would be a good place to 
bring up the issue. Similarly, I remember when PS/SS came out, some people 
were up in arms that we didn't get find out how Ron acquired Scabbers: it 
wasn't necessary, but it *was* mentioned in PoA where it *was* important.

Because *everything* in the movies is important, the clues (and red 
herrings) cannot be presented in the same way or given the same weight. I 
would also point out that most of the smaller clues in the books are only 
recognisable as such on second and subsequent readings: why should the 
movies be any different?

--
Richard, glad the list is quieter on Sundays




From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 17:17:31 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 12:17:31 EST
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
Message-ID: <296.103a049.30c47eab@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/4/2005 4:12:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< Subject: Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American? >>


I really don't see the reason for American actors in these films. There are 
plenty of American films and books that do not include Europeans. The main 
point of these stories, I think, is that they are shared among people and connect 
in some shape or form no matter where you are. I don't mean to offend, but I 
find that line of questioning rather petty. Just enjoy the stories!

Jade



From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  4 18:07:48 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:07:48 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
Message-ID: <dmvb9k+vi3e@eGroups.com>

Hello All,

I have never received such a response to anything I have written on 
here before!  I just want to clarify that I am an ABSOLUTE lover of 
the Harry Potter franchise- books, films, actors, whatever- you name 
it, I love it.  (I wouldn't belong to this group and a few others, 
wouldn't have had a Harry Potter Party the night the film opened, and 
then took the group to see it at midnight!!)  It never had occured to 
me that JK Rowling or Harry Potter could be Anti-american prior to 
this conversation with my brother in law.  And while I wholeheartedly 
disagree with him, I don't know much about this debate, and was just 
looking to the group for some facts to throw in his face.  I really 
didn't mean to be offensive to anyone involved in the magical world of 
Harry Potter.  We are all passionate about Harry here- no doubt about 
that!!

Lauren






From saitaina at frontiernet.net  Sun Dec  4 18:26:16 2005
From: saitaina at frontiernet.net (saitaina at frontiernet.net)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:26:16 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dmvb9k+vi3e@eGroups.com>
References: <dmvb9k+vi3e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051204182616.atcio10m86wwokkg@webmail.frontiernet.net>

Lauren, I didn't find the question insulting, I understood what you 
were asking/looking for in regards to the question and your 
brother-in-law.  I hope my previous email on the subject helped you 
some, I was sick when I wrote it so I'm not sure if my brain was 
working right and am too afraid to go back and look *grins*.

If your brother in law still thinks that JKR is anti-American, I 
recomend showing him some other British made films or books...there are 
no American's in some of those too.  *winks*

Saitaina





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sun Dec  4 18:53:56 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 18:53:56 -0000
Subject: Clues 'n' stuff
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051204143326.00b0b520@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dmve04+fija@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
>
> Replies to a couple of separate threads.
> 
>> As I've said before, there is no reason for the movies to offer 
the same 
> clues or in the same order as the books, or to reveal their 
significance at 
> the same moment in the narrative. 

Yo Richard,
I do understand that films do not work the same way as the written 
word, but what I was trying rather clumsily to say is that sometimes 
the "clues" the HP series or the BIG moments are there but they can 
just seem to *pop* out of nowhere, no context. Granted there was no 
need for, at least the film maker didn't see any need to reference 
WMPP very clearly in POA, to get his story across, but I sure would 
have relished hearing someone tell Harry his father always 
transformed into a stag. It can seem abrupt and truncated not to 
hear about these bits of information, no matter how handily the need 
for them can be explained away. But do you agree for better or worse 
that the stuff we see on the screen is essential to the
advance of JKR's narrative? Down to the absolute bone 
perhaps but the important stuff nevertheless? 
JenD (not wanting the list to ever be quiet!)
> --
> Richard, glad the list is quieter on Sundays
>







From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 18:59:06 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 13:59:06 EST
Subject: Setup for OOTP
Message-ID: <86.3553f295.30c4967a@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/3/2005 4:11:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< I strongly disagree, I like Capslock Harry. One of the things I'm most
 looking forward to is Harry wrecking Dumbledore's office. I think it's
 important to show that Harry is a Human Being who has faults so I want
 to see him yell at people who don't deserve it as well as those like
 Dumbledore who do.>>

Ohhh I SO hope they show that. OOTP is all around much more of an emotional 
impact than the previous 4. I really hope that the filmakers and Daniel will 
pay attention to that emphasis. I have watched his interviews in the past where 
he said he liked the fact of his character growing and changing which gives 
him the challenges he needs to breakthrough. We'll see.
 
<< Room of Requirement (not sure it's needed
 no Dobby anyway) 
 
 The Room of Requirement as such isn't necessary but the DA certainly
 is because we need to show Harry is becoming a leader, and where
 better for them to meet than that room. >>

While it might be plausible to leave out the DA, it can get complicated for 
this group leads into Half Blood Prince. Harry has this small brave following 
to go against the Death Eaters in the 6th book. If the DA is left out 
completely, I would be quite baffled as to how to remedy that situation to include 
those specific characters. This is the same concern I had with leaving out the 
fact that Harry gave the Weasley twins the Tri-Wizard money to start their joke 
shop, which in effect, lead to Fred and George having the means to leave 
Hogwarts in OOTP.

 
 << Stuff which must stay 
  Harry-Bellatrix (crucio attempt) 
 
 Yes I agree, we must see that and I hope like the in the book the
 curse is not a complete failure, it was good enough to make her scream
 and stop with that stupid baby talk. 
 
 Eggplant 
  >>


I certainly hope to see that as well. Emphasizing the fact that you have to 
"mean it" with these curses.

Jade



From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 19:03:35 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:03:35 EST
Subject: 3rd time's a charm- I've finally got some questions
Message-ID: <1a9.4474518a.30c49787@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/3/2005 4:11:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< What was the deal with the mermaid in the stained glass window that 
 was animated in the prefects bathroom?  Was there a purpose to her in 
 the book that I have forgotten?  Or was she just a piece of obligatory 
 CGI, like it seems to me?  She bugged me because she was distracting 
 from the cuteness of Myrtle teasing Harry, and him discovering the 
 clue. >>


I simply took this is as a kind of a predisposed clue for the audience? At 
that point, no one knew (audience who haven't read the book) what the next 
challenge was.

Jade



From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 19:28:11 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 14:28:11 EST
Subject: More on Gambledore + the score (was: GOF - Starjackson's View)
Message-ID: <c4.340ddc0d.30c49d4b@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/2/2005 7:06:27 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< SSSusan:
 I've stated here and elsewhere that I preferred Harris' portrayal to 
 Gambon's, as well.  However, I have to say after watching GoF for the 
 4th time last night (and I was the ONLY person in the theater -- 
 *that* was a wacky feeling!), that Gambon is growing on me.  I 
 thought, not just the comment about being sorry he'd put Harry in 
 terrible danger, was good, but the whole dormitory scene was good.  
 He seemed quite believable to me when he touched Harry on the side of 
 the head and reinforced to Harry that he has *friends* at Hogwarts.
 
 I also liked his Cedric speech very much, and a few other random 
 moments, such as when he said, "Miss Granger, what are YOU doing 
 here?" <g> >>


Well if you're in the boat of a few, I'll join you. I find that Gambon is 
also growing on me, but not just from GoF. I actually liked some of the qualities 
in PoA. Especially his comment towards the end of PoA to Hermione and Harry 
when Harry said "We did it," to which Dumbledore said "Did what? Good night." 
Makes me smile every time I think of that bit. I will always love Richard 
Harris, but I also like Gambon. I was taken a bit aback with the shaking Harry 
scene in GoF though. However, the rest of the film didn't display anything of that 
sort. I think it was something Gambon wanted to try. 

Hopefully, he has received enough reviews (from fans and such) that he'll 
concentrate more on the milder calmer side of Dumbledore in this next film. It's 
not easy taking over a character that someone had previously set in stone. He 
will always get the "not as good as Harris" even if he did straight book to 
film persona.

Just my two cents.

Jade



From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 20:36:01 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 15:36:01 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] 3rd times the charm -- finally have questions
Message-ID: <26e.15b4c08.30c4ad31@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/3/2005 7:11:07 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


What  was the deal with the mermaid in the stained glass window that 
was  animated in the prefects bathroom?  Was there a purpose to her in 
the  book that I have forgotten?  Or was she just a piece of obligatory  
CGI, like it seems to me?  She bugged me because she was distracting  
from the cuteness of Myrtle teasing Harry, and him discovering the  
clue.
 
In the book, it's a PAINTING of a mermaid that's animated.  I  rather liked 
the stained glass in the film this time (the one from the wall that  looked as 
if it was crying was very effective!)

And I LOVED Myrtle's scene with Harry!  She was SO  FUNNY!  I saw an 
interview with Dan Radcliffe (done in Australia) where the  interviewer asked him 
about his "topless" scene and Dan said the thing that  unnerved him was when Mike 
Newell told Shirley (who plays Myrtle) to "stroke his  egg" -- heeheehee!  Dan 
is SUCH a great interview!   LOL!
 



And to make a comment- I loved the second task, my only quibble  with 
it is the "precious things" to be saved.  They looked a little  scary, 
like they were dead or something.  I didn't even recognize  Hermione, 
or Cho.  When I read the book, I imagined them to be  sweetly sleeping-
like, heads lolled to the side, gently bobbing in the  currents, 
dribbles of bubbles escaping their mouths like itty  snores.  (I think 
it was described pretty closely to that!) This  scene gave me a bit of 
a jolt.


I don't know why Hermione's had what looked like such LONG hair,  when the 
"real" Hermione's hair barely touches her shoulders!  They were  creepy looking, 
but I think that was quite intentional on the filmmakers'  parts.  Their very 
stiffness was weird, but they WERE wax dummies!   What I don't understand is 
why ALL of them had to learn scuba diving, when they  were only shown breaking 
the surface of the water!  Must be one of those  cut scenes, maybe?  But they 
don't wake up until they surface, so why  bother with the scuba lessons for 
Emma, Rupert and Katie?  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Dec  4 23:40:09 2005
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 18:40:09 EST
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American?
Message-ID: <f6.5de69c8c.30c4d859@aol.com>

 
Julie:
I totally agree that there is no reason for American witches/wizards to  be
in the Harry Potter books. We have occasional mention of wizards  existing
in other countries, including the USA, but they aren't involved in the  story
(other than the more local European witches/wizards from Beauxbaton  and
Durmstrang), so there's no reason for anything other than the minor 
references we've seen so far. 
 
As for the movies, Richard wrote:
 
The same question goes for the actors: with so many good (and even great)  
British actors, why should the production team consider looking to the USA  
for talent? (Completely apart from the purely practical issue that HP  
shooting schedules are incredibly long and, apart from cameos, require  
actors to be available over a period of over 9 months, which is impractical  
is people have to travel from the other side of the Atlantic rather than up  
the English motorway.)


 
Julie:
You are correct that there are many, many fine British actors so  there's  
no reason to cast Americans, or Australians, or anyone of other  English
speaking countries in the movies. Your practical issue though is  really
not an issue. After all, a great variety of British actors relocate to the  US
periodically to film American movies. As do Australians. Actors of  all
three nationalities have relocated for long periods of time to many  other
countries--New Zealand for the Lord of the Rings movies being a prime
example. Given the ease of air travel, it's not always even a  question
of relocating for long periods of time. 
 
Just noting ;-)
 
Julie 



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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Dec  5 01:20:59 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 01:20:59 +0000
Subject: Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <BFB699A1.1826%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <20051202173012.39137.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>

In my role as someone sensitive to the rules of this place who isn't in a 
position to enforce them, I'd remind people that this list is about the HP 
movies, not the books. Let's keep discussions on topic, please. For that 
reason, I'm not going to address most of the discussion over the last few days.

> > [Sherry]
> > Unfortunately, I think that Sirius's death and Lupin's absence are both 
> part
> > of the stripping away of Harry's support system like in most archetypal
> > fantasy hero coming-of-age stories (Luke Skywalker, Frodo, etc).  The final
> > blow is Dumbledore's death.  Even Snape, who antagonizes Harry but has
> > always been there to save his butt in a pinch, is gone now.

Well, duh! Harry's journey is an archetypal one, and part of that is 
specifically that he has to lose his mentors, while becoming one to others. 
But ultimately he must face his nemesis alone.

> > [Valerie]
> > I just hope the 7th book doesn't get tooo LOTR! Will Ron come to save the
> > day like Samwise?

That's part of the archetype as well (LOTR is one of miriad possible 
examples). Immediately before the end, Harry will have to doubt himself and 
*someone* will have to bring him back to his task. It doesn't necessarily 
have to be Ron, though, as Harry has several journeymen: Hermione, Neville, 
Luna, Ginny and even Snape (!) although he'll probably have a different 
role to play in the final showdown.

Anyway, that said...

I'm a bit concerned that while I raised Harry's relationship to Sirius, 
most of the conversation here has been Sirius's relationship with Harry. Of 
course Sirius feels close to Harry for miriad reasons we all know and which 
I won't go into, and is protective of him. It is absolutely no surprise 
that Sirius wants to have a relationship.

The point I was making is why Harry should feel anything for Sirius at the 
end of PoA. He's spent the months since he first heard of him despising the 
man. In one moment in the shack, the relationship does an about-turn (which 
is fine as such), but what gets me is the depth of Harry's affection for 
Sirius *at that moment*. Several non-HP-reading people I know came out of 
PoA and asked not "who wrote the map?" or "why a stag?", but "why does 
Harry suddenly like Sirius so much?". The second question frequently was 
"how much of the book's dialogue was overlooked from that relationship?", 
because the change simply didn't work (the answer is, there's more dialogue 
in the film than the book).

At the same time, the significant relationship Harry's built up with Lupin 
over the months all but disappears. Just because Sirius has a legal "claim" 
to Harry doesn't explain why Harry should immediately fall for his charms 
while side-lining Lupin. As far as I'm concerned, this is somewhat fixed in 
that the final scene with Lupin (both in the book and film) are more 
touching and seem more intimate than the scene with Sirius, but 
nevertheless, to get back to where all this started, it doesn't explain why 
Harry should consider Sirius to be a better correspondent in GoF than Lupin 
- or, for that matter, Dumbledore, who presumably knows more than anyone 
what's going on, and is more readily to hand.

Of course, the subsequent story might have been a bit different... :-)

In any event, it's interesting that Harry should choose to build a 
relationship with the impetuous, irresponsible, slightly unhinged one, 
rather than the quiet, studious  and gentle one...

And from elsewhere, on a different topic but connected to this one, 
bringing me back to more appropriate subject-matter for this list, this 
from Jen:

>I do understand that films do not work the same way as the written
>word, but what I was trying rather clumsily to say is that sometimes
>the "clues" the HP series or the BIG moments are there but they can
>just seem to *pop* out of nowhere, no context. Granted there was no
>need for, at least the film maker didn't see any need to reference
>WMPP very clearly in POA, to get his story across, but I sure would
>have relished hearing someone tell Harry his father always
>transformed into a stag.

That didn't have any relevance to the immediate story. Besides, it's not 
really a "clue" in the traditional sense: it's an independent fact which 
has a serendipitous resonance, but isn't connected to the issues at hand in 
PoA. As I said at the time, the movie had two major items to reveal, which 
were integral to the narrative: Pettigrew was a rat (in more ways than 
one), and Sirius was innocent. The MWPP back-story was not directly 
relevant to those issues, except to add colour to the relationship: what 
was important was to show that a relationship had existed and how close it 
had been. This can be (and was, IMO) more effectively portrayed by some 
decent acting rather than through the recitation of any number of facts 
from the MWPP back-story.

>  It can seem abrupt and truncated not to hear about these bits of 
> information, no matter how handily the need for them can be explained 
> away. But do you agree for better or worse that the stuff we see on the 
> screen is essential to the
>advance of JKR's narrative? Down to the absolute bone perhaps but the 
>important stuff nevertheless?

Not essential to advance JKR's narrative, but essential to each individual 
movie's narrative. That, I think, is the most important thing to bear in 
mind when watching the movies and what they choose to show. Of course, the 
final movie's narrative (and plot, two words which many people take to be 
synonyms but which aren't) will be the cumulation of all which has 
preceded, and thus the individual movies need to lay down a certain number 
of facts which will work towards that resolution, but considering, as far 
as we know (YET again) the production team doesn't know for a fact which of 
those facts and elements will come into play, it's difficult for them to 
"edit" the individual narratives successfully.

Incidentally, I can't believe that it struck me only this moment that the 
ideal way/place to establish as succinctly (if not as obviously) as 
possible the related issue of the Map's authorship is not through 
expositionary dialogue at all: assuming that Snape's Pensieve scene makes 
it into OotP (and I can't see it not doing so), simply have WMPP use their 
noms-de-plume while sitting under the tree (which they sort-of do in the 
book anyway). Not only that, but perhaps have them using the map as well 
(just to dot the 'i's and cross the 't's).

No need for extra writing, no need for unwieldy exposition, no need for 
extra screen-time. The Map had been established in PoA as a tool of 
adventure and mischief; if done correctly, it can be established here, in 
only its second major appearance, as a more sinister object, for more 
sinister uses by the unlikable quartet. Actually, the more I think about 
it, the more I like it. :-)

--
Richard, making a mental note to expand on this issue quite seriously when 
OotP comes out, assuming that the scene works the way I imagine it.



From sherriola at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  5 01:39:10 2005
From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 17:39:10 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <009601c5f93c$b1842a70$0400a8c0@pensive>

Richard
The point I was making is why Harry should feel anything for Sirius at the 
end of PoA. He's spent the months since he first heard of him despising the 
man. In one moment in the shack, the relationship does an about-turn (which 
is fine as such), but what gets me is the depth of Harry's affection for 
Sirius *at that moment*. Several non-HP-reading people I know came out of 
PoA and asked not "who wrote the map?" or "why a stag?", but "why does 
Harry suddenly like Sirius so much?". The second question frequently was 
"how much of the book's dialogue was overlooked from that relationship?", 
because the change simply didn't work (the answer is, there's more dialogue 
in the film than the book).

At the same time, the significant relationship Harry's built up with Lupin 
over the months all but disappears. Just because Sirius has a legal "claim" 
to Harry doesn't explain why Harry should immediately fall for his charms 
while side-lining Lupin. As far as I'm concerned, this is somewhat fixed in 
that the final scene with Lupin (both in the book and film) are more 
touching and seem more intimate than the scene with Sirius, but 
nevertheless, to get back to where all this started, it doesn't explain why 
Harry should consider Sirius to be a better correspondent in GoF than Lupin 
- or, for that matter, Dumbledore, who presumably knows more than anyone 
what's going on, and is more readily to hand.



Sherry now:

I'll make a crack at explaining it.  both Lupin and Dumbledore are
professors, teachers of Harry's not personally close enough.  Suddenly, in
Sirius, Harry has someone he can think of as all his.  his thinking at the
beginning of GOF the book, since the movie didn't bring this out, was that
he wanted someone like a parent.  Neither Lupin nor Dumbledore filled that
role for him.  Hmmm, how to explain it?  Sirius is his father's best friend,
even closer than Lupin.  He has a link to the parents Harry desperately
wants.  He offers Harry a home, Harry's own home, a place where he would be
wanted and loved.  Harry's longed for that.  Neither Lupin nor Dumbledore
would offer him that.  And even though Sirius can't follow through at the
time, Harry has that dream.  It's so hard to find the right words to explain
it, because it's something I understood instinctively.  much of my affection
for Sirius is based on my instinctive sympathy with Harry's reaction to him.
Sirius would have been all his, his godfather and guardian, the one his
parents appointed for him, the one his parents wanted for him.  his
relationship with Lupin, though warm and wonderful is still too much teacher
and student for him to feel parental toward him.  And Lupin drops out of his
life in the whole year between the end of POA and the beginning of OOTP.
Whereas Sirius has been in touch.  Sorry, it makes perfect sense to me, and
I don't think i've helped clarify it for you.  

Sherry




From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Dec  5 01:44:36 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 01:44:36 +0000
Subject: American Actors
In-Reply-To: <f6.5de69c8c.30c4d859@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051205012123.00b2d8d0@plum.cream.org>

Julie replied to my notes about the practical issues of American actors 
appearing in HP:

>Your practical issue though is  really not an issue. After all, a great 
>variety of British actors relocate to the  US periodically to film 
>American movies. As do Australians. Actors of  all three nationalities 
>have relocated for long periods of time to many  other countries--New 
>Zealand for the Lord of the Rings movies being a prime example. Given the 
>ease of air travel, it's not always even a  question of relocating for 
>long periods of time.

The point I was trying to make is that unlike, say, most of the LOTR guys, 
who decamped to New Zealand for 18 months' fairly solid work (within the 
movie-making definition of "solid", of course), :-) most adults involved in 
an HP movie would be required to make several *short* appearances over a 
period of 9 or 10 months. Gambon mentioned somewhere along the line that he 
was present for several periods of no more than 2-3 days at a time over the 
whole schedule (while appearing on stage in London for some of it). 
Clemence Poesy came to the UK on six different occasions over that time 
(while making another film in France).

I don't know if you've ever flown across the Atlantic, but it's not quite 
as easy as you make out;  sure, the *flying* bit is easy, but the rest 
isn't. So my comment remains: why *bother* having an actor flying halfway 
around the world for 2-3 days when someone who could do the job just as 
well (if not better) lives an hour's car journey away? (Or, in Clemence's 
case, 3 hours by train, pretty much door-to-door.)

--
Richard, 45 minutes from Leavesden



From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Dec  5 02:14:51 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 02:14:51 +0000
Subject: OOTP
In-Reply-To: <dmq47u+kv6t@eGroups.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051130143807.00b18e30@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051204162510.00b1ac70@plum.cream.org>

Eggplant replied to mine:

>Richard wrote:
>
> > Things which can easily be left out:
> > Most of Capslock!Harry (Please!)
>
>I strongly disagree, I like Capslock Harry. One of the things I'm most
>looking forward to is Harry wrecking Dumbledore's office. I think it's
>important to show that Harry is a Human Being who has faults so I want
>to see him yell at people who don't deserve it as well as those like
>Dumbledore who do.

As I said before, I too want to see Angry!Harry in Dumbledore's office: 
this is a very different relationship to the debriefing scenes in other 
episodes and I'm hoping that Dan and Gambon can pull off the one ranting, 
and other sitting there stock-still and passive. Although I have my doubts.

The main reason I'd like a limit on Capslock!Harry is similar: I simply 
don't think Dan can pull off Harry being seriously unlikeable without 
undermining the viewers' sympathy. Much as readers are encouraged to 
dislike Harry's excesses during the book, we understand part of what he's 
going through and empathise with his predicament. If his energy and rage is 
less petulant, he can still be a believable teenager without alienating the 
audience.

>The Room of Requirement as such isn't necessary but the DA certainly
>is because we need to show Harry is becoming a leader, and where
>better for them to meet than that room.

Of course the DA is important. Where did you get the idea I might feel 
otherwise? (my list of required scenes included two DA lessons, plus the 
setup meeting). The point of that item is I'm trying to find a way to write 
Dobby out of the story. I'd like to see something like the Map showing 
Harry the existence of an unplottable room or something like that. I'm not 
sure there's a need for the room itself to be inherently magical in a 
magical castle. (This has repercussions in HBP, of course, as that's where 
Malfoy fixes the cabinet, and that needs to be shown.)

> > Hagrid's tale & Grawp (much as I dislike the idea, but we know it's
> > included)
>
>We do? How do we know it's included?

Heyman said various things during GoF-related events. Reported here, 
http://tinyurl.com/82hvr , for instance.

And, eslewhere, from Valerie:

 > OK, that's it! Richard gets my vote for directing the next HP film!
 > He's got it all figured out down to the closing shot. :-)

Thanks for the vote (for what it's worth) but that final comment should 
speak volumes: I have no desire to direct OotP (or any other HP movie; 
indeed any other movie at all), but I would LOVE to edit it. I suspect that 
if it does fall down, it'll fall in the editing, and I have some very 
specific ideas (many, many more than I have voiced).

As for my last shot idea, I'd like to return to PoA for a moment: a lot of 
people disliked the PoA freeze-frame ending. All the other HP movies 
(including GoF) have gone down the cliched Hollywood route of zooming out 
towards the sky which, frankly, bores me. As (pretty much by definition) 
the last shot is the last thing most viewers will remember, I've always 
been a great lover of ending movies on freeze-frames, especially if the 
resolution of the film can be summed up in a single shot: OotP, the 
narrative of which is all about the Ministry admitting that Voldemort is 
back and entering the fight, is a perfect example. I'm prepared to bet, 
though, that we'll get some kind of receding horizon *yet again*. (YAWN.)

 > All I know is, I will be really disappointed if they decide to drop the
 > Snape/marauders/Pensieve backstory. At SOME point in this series they 
need to
 > explain why Snape has been so nasty to Harry all this time!

Indeed, but is that point *NOW* (i.e. OotP)? Seeing as we don't have the 
full story of the Pensieve scene (at least not to my satisfaction), I can't 
help feeling that we have more to come. Snape's and WMPP's back-story is 
fragmented over the course of the series, and it's possible that the 
movie-makers are keeping it all back to make a single storyline of it at 
the climax. A different kind of satisfaction to being drip-fed the 
information, but still satisfying.

The main reason I think that the Pensieve scene deserves to be kept in OotP 
is the fact that WMPP & Co are the same age as Harry (which is not a 
situation we've been in before with the pieces of information we've had), 
not to mention that Sirius & James being revealed to be jerks (not 
*entirely* unlike Harry in his fifth year, which in turn is the main reason 
why Petulant!Harry must remain) is important to Harry's development. So 
it's largely about the sequence's symbolic rather than narrative importance.

 > I know there is so much detail to get into this film, but I just love that
 > whole marauder storyline. It's past history, but ties in substantially to
 > current day HP, imo.

See my other post (most of which is about something else) for some of my 
thoughts on the issue. However, I do feel that some HP fans over-estimate 
the importance to "current" events of some of the aspects of the MWPP 
relationship.

--
Richard, who's only got another 40 or so posts to read to have caught up



From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Dec  5 03:13:23 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:13:23 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <009601c5f93c$b1842a70$0400a8c0@pensive>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051205023122.00b1a100@plum.cream.org>

At 01:39 05/12/2005 , Sherry Gomes wrote:

><...> Both Lupin and Dumbledore are
>professors, teachers of Harry's not personally close enough.  Suddenly, in
>Sirius, Harry has someone he can think of as all his.  his thinking at the
>beginning of GOF the book, since the movie didn't bring this out, was that
>he wanted someone like a parent.  Neither Lupin nor Dumbledore filled that
>role for him.

Why not? Sorry, I don't buy the "he's a teacher, he's not all mine" 
argument. Neither from a lit-crit standpoint, nor from a 15 year-old's. (I 
don't know why, but I feel compelled to admit that I know exactly what that 
15 year-old felt like, I was there, in very similar personal - if less 
dramatic - circumstances.)

Dumbledore is the next best thing to a parent Harry's had for the last four 
years. He's been close, available and fairly open (as far as Harry knows). 
He's in charge of the battle against Voldemort. Yes, he's busy, but Harry's 
having dreams about ol' Voldy and he doesn't think that Dumbledore *might* 
be interested? (As it happens, he is, as he later admits that Sirius told 
him all about it). Dumbledore is in the best position to help Harry; he's 
free, he's respected and he knows more than most about everything that's 
been going since Voldy's downfall. Sirius is in hiding somewhere far away, 
has limited access to current information and knows virtually nothing about 
what's happened for the last 14 years. A month earlier, at the end of PoA, 
he didn't even know Snape was a Hogwarts teacher, despite having visited 
the grounds on several occasions. So he's not even particularly observant.

Rationally, whom does Harry contact? The one who doesn't know what's going on.
Emotionally, who is he close to? Someone he first met a month earlier, who 
admittedly gave him his Firebolt as 14 years-worth of birthday presents, 
who slashed the Fat Lady's portrait to pieces and caused the suspension of 
Quidditch, who isn't in a position to tell him a great deal about his dad 
other than in letters (not that Harry actually asks him anything about his 
dad - and nor does Sirius volunteer anything - which is meant to be the 
reason for their closeness).

Oh no, the old guy who's guided him through his adventures and kept him 
safe, who's allowed him to break more than a few rules, who gave him his 
dad's invisibility cloak and knew his dad very well, who bent the rules to 
get him on the Quidditch team and provided him with his first broom, and 
knows pretty much everything that's going on isn't a good substitute parent 
or advisor. No way.

Oh, we (and Harry) forgot. The plot demands that Harry have as little 
contact with Dumbledore as possible (the other way around is permissible).

>And Lupin drops out of his life in the whole year between the end of POA 
>and the beginning of OOTP. Whereas Sirius has been in touch.  Sorry, it 
>makes perfect sense to me, and I don't think i've helped clarify it for you.

Sorry, but the only reason why Sirius is in Harry's life in GoF is because 
Harry invites (or drags) him into it. Sirius writes to Harry only because 
Harry writes to him first. Would Lupin have reacted much differently? I 
suspect not.

To drag this subject back to the movies, though, I think both PoA and GoF 
did a marvellous job with the relationship. As I mentioned earlier, there's 
actually more dialogue in the film than in the PoA book around the 
beginning of the relationship, and there's a subtle implication that 
there's been more conversation between Harry and Sirius between the end of 
the shack scene and moving into the tunnel (the book gives the impression 
that we witness every moment from entering the shack up to and beyond 
Lupin's transformation), which makes the birth of the relationship more 
believable.

In GoF, the relationship is presented in more natural terms, as if it's not 
to the exclusion of any other: writing to Sirius about the dream is 
Hermione's idea rather than Harry's (with an implication that there's been 
other Harry-Sirius correspondence that we don't know about because it's 
inconsequential to the plot), there's only the one contact in the fire, and 
Harry's "support group" remains more or less the same it's always been. 
Building on this relationship in OotP, especially given Harry's alienation 
from Dumbledore, becomes natural and believable, even without the dramatic 
hospital scenes from the end of Book-GoF.

--
Richard, desperately trying to limit book-discussion mode. 



From juli17 at aol.com  Mon Dec  5 06:56:33 2005
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:56:33 -0000
Subject: American Actors
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051205012123.00b2d8d0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dn0ob1+irqi@eGroups.com>


>
> Julie replied to my notes about the practical issues of American 
actors 
> appearing in HP:
> 
> >Your practical issue though is  really not an issue. After all, a 
great 
> >variety of British actors relocate to the  US periodically to film 
> >American movies. As do Australians. Actors of  all three 
nationalities 
> >have relocated for long periods of time to many  other countries--
New 
> >Zealand for the Lord of the Rings movies being a prime example. 
Given the 
> >ease of air travel, it's not always even a  question of relocating 
for 
> >long periods of time.

Richard:
> The point I was trying to make is that unlike, say, most of the 
LOTR guys, 
> who decamped to New Zealand for 18 months' fairly solid work 
(within the 
> movie-making definition of "solid", of course), :-) most adults 
involved in 
> an HP movie would be required to make several *short* appearances 
over a 
> period of 9 or 10 months. Gambon mentioned somewhere along the line 
that he 
> was present for several periods of no more than 2-3 days at a time 
over the 
> whole schedule (while appearing on stage in London for some of it). 
> Clemence Poesy came to the UK on six different occasions over that 
time 
> (while making another film in France).
> 
> I don't know if you've ever flown across the Atlantic, but it's not 
quite 
> as easy as you make out;  sure, the *flying* bit is easy, but the 
rest 
> isn't. So my comment remains: why *bother* having an actor flying 
halfway 
> around the world for 2-3 days when someone who could do the job 
just as 
> well (if not better) lives an hour's car journey away? (Or, in 
Clemence's 
> case, 3 hours by train, pretty much door-to-door.)
> 
> --
> Richard, 45 minutes from Leavesden
>

Julie:
Actually I have flown across the Atlantic, over half a dozen times. 
>From Los Angeles. That's about 11 1/2 hours to London direct. (New 
York is much easier, at a bit less than 7 hours.) I personally find 
it quite tedious, though if I could fly first class, as I'm sure most 
actors do, I'd probably find it more enjoyable! And there is that jet 
lag factor, true. So no, it's not just an easy hop, skip and jump. 

But the point I was making is that this wouldn't be a really major 
issue against hiring an American actor. If said actor was deemed 
perfect for the part (say Kathy Bates as Umbridge--just as an 
example, not a statement on her suitability), then it could easily be 
worked around. Though agreed there might not be that many American 
actors who'd *want* to play a character who's in all seven movies 
(like Dumbledore) if it meant traveling back and forth so often over 
a ten? year period. 

OTOH, Johnny Depp lives in France. He did a credible J.M. Barrie. How 
about him as Bill Weasley, with his hair dyed red ;-)

Julie
(still not advocating American actors in Harry Potter roles, only 
noting that nationality shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of 
casting any movie role. Or where would Hannibal Lector be--er, who 
would be Hannibal Lector, that is!)






From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  5 11:48:07 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 11:48:07 -0000
Subject: Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051205023122.00b1a100@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dn19dn+e0pl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
Sherry Gomes wrote:
> ><...> Both Lupin and Dumbledore are
> >professors, teachers of Harry's not personally close enough.  
Suddenly, in Sirius, Harry has someone he can think of as all his.  
his thinking at the beginning of GOF the book, since the movie 
didn't bring this out, was that he wanted someone like a parent.  
Neither Lupin nor Dumbledore filled that role for him.

Richard replied: 
> Why not? Sorry, I don't buy the "he's a teacher, he's not all 
mine" argument. Neither from a lit-crit standpoint, nor from a 15 
year-old's. (I don't know why, but I feel compelled to admit that I 
know exactly what that 15 year-old felt like, I was there, in very 
similar personal - if less dramatic - circumstances.)
> Sorry, but the only reason why Sirius is in Harry's life in GoF is 
because Harry invites (or drags) him into it. Sirius writes to Harry 
only because Harry writes to him first. Would Lupin have reacted 
much differently? I suspect not.

Diana L. chimes in:
First off, I'm not surprised that the movie had Hermione suggest 
that Harry write to Sirius instead of Harry thinking of it himself 
as in the book.  Why?  Because it was an excellent way to say in 
shorthand that Harry is still adjusting to the idea that he has an 
adult wizard (who IS not Dumbledore or a teacher) that he can 
confide in like a parent.  The movie just did not have the time the 
book had to say the same thing - that Harry is still wrapping his 
mind around him having a father-figure.
To address Sherry's comments, Harry's possessive feelings about 
Sirius feel right to me as well - Harry hasn't had someone who cares 
only about him since he was a year old so I wouldn't blame him for 
enthusiastically embracing the idea when Sirius' innocence and 
relationship to him and his parents became known to him.  
As for your argument that Harry dismissing Lupin (I'll get to 
Dumbledore in a moment) as a father-figure for him isn't plausible, 
well, it takes two to form a close relationship and Lupin repeatedly 
distances himself from Harry in this regard.  Think about his scenes 
with Harry in the PoA movie (and in the book, I should add).  Lupin 
does not tell Harry that he was very close friends with his dad 
until well into the film, even though he knows that Harry would have 
LOVED to have known this earlier and heard anecdotes about his 
parents from him.  The movie has Lupin talking eloquently about Lily 
and James to Harry, but Lupin keeps himself emotionally distant from 
Harry in an effort not to forge a closer bond with him.  I would 
surmise that Lupin's speech to Harry as he packs to leave at the end 
gives us the reason why he remains distant from Harry - he's a 
werewolf and an outcast from most of the WW.  Lupin would not want  
Harry to come to rely on him as a parental figure when his 
association with Harry would and could be disastrous for Harry from 
many different perspectives.  Lupin has no home (Anyone think he has 
a permanent home?  Anyone?), no money, no job and he's feared and 
despised by most of the WW, so he has nothing to offer Harry in the 
way of stable fatherly figure.  Lupin gives Harry his friendship, 
but nothing more parental than that.  Sure, Sirius is a prisoner on 
the run, but he has money, a place to live and he's just biding his 
time until he's found innocent and can come out in the open, taking 
Harry in to live with him when that happens.  From the movie it is 
apparent to me that Lupin keeps himself emothionally distant from 
nearly everyone, and that's probably for his own emotional health as 
well as the health and well-being of other people.  
Harry dragged Sirius into his life? Do you really think so?  GoF as 
a movie does not let us know how many letters have been exchanged 
between Sirius and Harry over the summer, though we know from the 
books several letters have been exchanged.  I see no reason not to 
project that same scenario onto the movie.  Would Lupin have written 
Harry back if he'd written to him? Probably, but Lupin didn't invite 
that kind of close relationship with Harry in PoA, so Harry wouldn't 
think to write to him, would he?  Notice that he doesn't even 
consider writing to any of his *teachers*, even though he's known 
(and knows he can trust) McGonagall and Flitwick for several years 
now.  To Harry, Lupin's in the same category as his other 
professors, which is where Lupin placed himself on purpose.  Sirius, 
on the other hand, had already invited Harry to come live with him 
within an hour or two of Harry finding out he was innocent.  In GoF, 
Sirius risked capture (and, by extrapolation, his very soul) to talk 
to Harry in that fire just so he could warn Harry about Karkaroff.  
Sirius would love to be Harry's surrogate father and conveys that 
desire to Harry by the way he talks to him nearly from the very 
first time he meets him face to face.  
I should add that I really wanted Lupin to become Harry's father-
stand-in while reading PoA and GoF and OotP and HBP, but then 
realized that Lupin isn't going to encourage that kind of 
relationship for many reasons.  

Richard wrote:
> Dumbledore is the next best thing to a parent Harry's had for the 
last four years. He's been close, available and fairly open (as far 
as Harry knows).  He's in charge of the battle against Voldemort. 
Yes, he's busy, but Harry's having dreams about ol' Voldy and he 
doesn't think that Dumbledore *might* be interested? (As it happens, 
he is, as he later admits that Sirius told him all about it). 
Dumbledore is in the best position to help Harry; he's free, he's 
respected and he knows more than most about everything that's 
> been going since Voldy's downfall.  <snip)

> Rationally, whom does Harry contact? The one who doesn't know 
what's going on. Emotionally, who is he close to? Someone he first 
met a month earlier, who admittedly gave him his Firebolt as 14 
years-worth of birthday presents, who slashed the Fat Lady's 
portrait to pieces and caused the suspension of Quidditch, who isn't 
in a position to tell him a great deal about his dad other than in 
letters (not that Harry actually asks him anything about his 
> dad - and nor does Sirius volunteer anything - which is meant to 
be the reason for their closeness).
> Oh no, the old guy who's guided him through his adventures and 
kept him safe, who's allowed him to break more than a few rules, who 
gave him his dad's invisibility cloak and knew his dad very well, 
who bent the rules to get him on the Quidditch team and provided him 
with his first broom, and knows pretty much everything that's going 
on isn't a good substitute parent or advisor. No way.

Diana L. replies:
It will most likely change slightly in the sixth film, but it is 
obvious from previous films that Harry doesn't see Dumbledore as a 
father figure, but rather as an authority figure and, later, a 
mentor.  Mentor and father-figure aren't the same things as a father-
figure is regarded as someone who loves and supports you 
irregardless of your failings while a mentor is regarded as a guide 
and teacher who teaches you the correct path at the same time 
pointing out your mistakes so you can fix them.  A mentor also 
implies some emotional distance and objectivity.  If Harry ever 
thought of Dumbledore as a father-figure then why wouldn't he have 
told Dumbledore about every Voldemort dream he'd had right after 
he'd had them?  Why would Harry purposely not confide in DD in CoS 
when DD'd asked Harry if he had anything to tell him in his office 
after McGonagall had found him next to petrified Finch-Fletchly?  
Harry's fear and awe of DD plays into why he doesn't see him as a 
father-figure.  Harry sees DD as a powerful wizard with a lot of 
responsibilities on his shoulders and too many times sees his own 
troubles as being beneath DD's notice.  Dumbledore would most likely 
welcome a closer relationship with Harry, if Harry was so inclined, 
but Harry's not so DD doesn't push it.  It's not until HBP that DD 
begins to forge a closer emotional relationship to Harry - actially 
making DD's feelings of respect and love for Harry known to him.   

Diana L. (hoping what I've written makes sense since I'm about to 
fall asleep at my keyboard)






From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Dec  5 12:39:12 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 12:39:12 -0000
Subject: Harry and Sirius/New thougths
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dn1cdg+9oia@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:

SNIP here of Richard discussing the leaving out of expository 
details in regards to "the stag":

That  it's an independent fact which has a serendipitous resonance, 
but isn't connected to the issues at hand in PoA. As I said at the 
time, the movie had two major items to reveal, which were integral 
to the narrative: Pettigrew was a rat (in more ways than one), and 
Sirius was innocent. The MWPP back-story was not directly relevant 
to those issues, except to add colour to the relationship: what was 
important was to show that a relationship had existed and how close 
it had been. This can be (and was, IMO) more effectively portrayed 
by some decent acting rather than through the recitation of any 
number of facts from the MWPP back-story.

Now me:
I understand the reasons for leaving out the connection between 
Harry and the stag but what seems to abrupt is that we readers are 
accustomed to the occasional emotional payoff in the series.  
Learning that his dad transformed into a stag would have been a 
sweet little emtional payoff (might have resulted in some decent 
acting too!)and it wouldn't have cost the film maker all that much. 
But I digress.

NEW THOUGTHS
I saw GOF yesterday and I wanted to share some new things that 
occured to me. First, I couldn't get a look at that tombstone
mentioned earlier. Tried but it escaped me. But the thing that did 
hit me,and do not laugh at me anyone of you all, but a central theme 
or motif seems to be that things are not what they seem. In so many 
ways!  It came to me when they discovered the real Moody in that 
trunk with so many levels. It paralleled the tent in the the 
beginning!! Harry looks at the tent and can't see how they'll all 
stay there and when he goes in, viola! A great big spacious 
wonderful place to stay. Then very neatly at the end, there is that 
trunk that opens up to be a tremendous space. Then I got to thinking 
how this theme can be used throughout the film, with people. Moody 
is not what he seems. DD in a way is not what he seems, the head, a 
person in control of things. Snape has never been what he seems 
exactly. Karkarov acts the part of the head of a school, but he's a 
death-eater. Lucius Malfoy is not a respectable member of society 
that he seems. I know this list can go on. Situations are not what 
they seem. The tournament is a cover for a plot to obtain Harry for 
the Dark Lord.  And I realize with delight that this is exactly what 
Jo had been trying to say in the written narrative. The film maker 
in his own way has done her a great deal of justice.

Another thing, in this dicussion of film economy (I don't know if 
that's a concept or not) but economy of action, exposition and all, 
it occured to me yesterday, watching DD and Harry together in the 
dorm, that when DD puts his hand to Harry's cheek, I hadn't noticed 
this before but Dan kind of leans into it just a little but enough. 
As if he relished the contact. (I do not recall DD ever touching 
Harry with that level of almost tenderness at this point) And it 
seems that this might be a stand in for the hug we all wanted 
(emotional payoff again) to see from Molly. The scene accomplished 
many things, why not that too? 

I am spent from all my many revelations. 
JenD






From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Dec  5 13:40:22 2005
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:40:22 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American + Dan in the dormitory scene
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051203115732.00b508e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dn1g06+4rae@eGroups.com>

Richard wrote:
> (Before anyone else raises it, Zoe Wanamaker is technically 
> American as she was born in the USA and is a US citizen, but has 
> lived for most of her life in the UK - as did her father, late 
> noted film-maker and motive force behind the recreation of 
> Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, Sam Wanamaker. Her career is UK-based 
> and she took on British citizenship some time ago. She is a "name" 
> in the UK and is known to a wide cross-section of the British 
> population thanks in part to starring in a couple of popular 
> British TV shows, whilst I suspect that she is all but unknown to 
> the US audience.)


SSSusan:
I was not aware that Zoe Wanamaker was born in the USA, but 
your "defense" ("explanation"? choose your favorite word) gave me 
great glee.  Why?  Because I've LOOOOOONG wanted Anjelica Huston to 
be cast as Bellatrix Lestrange.  Knowing about JKR's (appropriate) 
insistence upon an authentically British cast, I didn't think it 
could ever happen.  However, like Zoe W., Anjelica spent, according 
to IMDB, "most of her childhood overseas, in Ireland and England," so 
maybe that would be good enough??

Please?  Pretty please, whoever's casting OotP? :-)


JenD wrote:
>>>Another thing, in this dicussion of film economy (I don't know if
that's a concept or not) but economy of action, exposition and all,
it occured to me yesterday, watching DD and Harry together in the
dorm, that when DD puts his hand to Harry's cheek, I hadn't noticed
this before but Dan kind of leans into it just a little but enough.
As if he relished the contact. (I do not recall DD ever touching
Harry with that level of almost tenderness at this point) And it
seems that this might be a stand in for the hug we all wanted
(emotional payoff again) to see from Molly. The scene accomplished
many things, why not that too?<<<

SSSusan:
I'd like to commend JenD for catching this and for excellently 
phrasing what it was about Dan's movement in the Harry-DD dormitory 
scene which made it so effective.  It *was* a touching moment, and 
Dan's part in it I hadn't fully taken in.  Thinking back on it (I've 
seen GoF 4 times now, so at least I'm able to pull up some strong 
images), it seems to me that Dan both leans into DD's hand *and* 
closes his eyes ever so briefly.  These two small gestures really did 
add to the emotional impact.

I still missed the Molly hug (Molly-lover that I am), *but* seeing's 
how I had been afraid (esp. after Cuaron's/Kloves' Super!Hermione in 
PoA) that they'd give the hug to *Hermione,* I am quite content with 
the stand-in they selected.

Siriusly Snapey Susan







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  5 14:13:37 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:13:37 -0000
Subject: Harry and Sirius/New thougths
In-Reply-To: <dn1cdg+9oia@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn1huh+c2bm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> wrote:
>> Another thing, in this dicussion of film economy (I don't know if 
> that's a concept or not) but economy of action, exposition and all, 
> it occured to me yesterday, watching DD and Harry together in the 
> dorm, that when DD puts his hand to Harry's cheek, I hadn't noticed 
> this before but Dan kind of leans into it just a little but enough. 
> As if he relished the contact. (I do not recall DD ever touching 
> Harry with that level of almost tenderness at this point) And it 
> seems that this might be a stand in for the hug we all wanted 
> (emotional payoff again) to see from Molly. The scene accomplished 
> many things, why not that too? 


Ohhh, I haven't caught that yet!  I will definitely be looking for it 
at my next viewing, that's for sure.  

Alora 






From starjackson1 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  5 16:41:54 2005
From: starjackson1 at yahoo.com (starjackson1)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 16:41:54 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
Message-ID: <dn1qki+qpb7@eGroups.com>

I just wanted to mention that the HP series is set in Britian and 
Scotland, so the main characters in the stories should be played by 
British actors.  It just makes sence. And it is well worth 
remembering that, when the script did call for characters from other 
lands -such as Bulgaria and France - actors from those countires 
where chosen for the roles (Krum and Flur). If there had been an 
American character in one of the HP books, I can assure you that an 
American actor would have been found to play the part.

No one mentioned this point - but JKR characters in the HP series 
come from various ethnicities!  Today Great Britian is made up of 
Indians, Chinese, Africans, etc.  And JKR has made the school 
population of Hogwarts reflect this face of Britian. I love this 
aspect of the books! And all of these actors are also British as 
well - in keeping with the casting decision to have British actors 
play the British roles.

In light of the above facts, it seems strange to me that anyone 
would criticize JKR or the movies for leaving any ethnic group out.









From schumar1999 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  5 22:39:52 2005
From: schumar1999 at yahoo.com (Marianne S.)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 22:39:52 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn1qki+qpb7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn2fjo+2sh8@eGroups.com>

There has been an American Actor in a Harry Potter movie.

Verne Troyer (AKA Mini-Me in those Austin Powers movies)
played the Goblin Griphook in the PS/SS movie. 

Maybe because it was for a non-human character, this was
OK? I don't think Goblin is an ethnicity. 

Marianne S.






From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 01:42:40 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 01:42:40 -0000
Subject: GoF in IMAX
Message-ID: <dn2qag+rppl@eGroups.com>

Last Saturday I went to see GoF in IMAX in Seattle, but the afternoon 
show and first evening show were both sold out!  My 12-year-old son 
and his two friends were mightily disappointed as we had driven over 
an hour, taken five different freeways and paid $8 to park - then no 
movie!  

I had tried to see it the opening weekend when the movie came out and 
it had sold out then as well.  From now on I'm not going to bother 
driving to the theater unless I have already purchased the tickets 
online at least a couple days in advance!  I never thought it would be 
this difficult to get to see in IMAX!

I'll be going this Thursday with a friend of mine who's a newly minted 
fan of the books.  She's just finished OotP (after reading the it and 
the previous four one after the other) and will be starting HBP 
shortly (she has to finish her book-club's book first, much to her 
consternation, LOL).  

This time I have list of stuff to look for, including the mystery 
tombstone in the graveyard scene, Harry leaning into DD's touch in the 
dormitory scene and other tidbits that have been discussed on the 
list.  At least the screen is so darn large that I shouldn't have 
trouble seeing any detail.  And this time my tickets have already been 
purchased as I'm not going to be disappointed again!  

Diana L. (who can hardly wait to see the first task in IMAX)
"You tell those spiders, Ron." - Harry






From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Tue Dec  6 02:12:35 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:12:35 EST
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
Message-ID: <9e.330bf9fa.30c64d93@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 12/5/2005 5:54:03 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Hello  All,

I have never received such a response to anything I have written  on 
here before!  I just want to clarify that I am an ABSOLUTE lover  of 
the Harry Potter franchise- books, films, actors, whatever- you name  
it, I love it.  (I wouldn't belong to this group and a few others,  
wouldn't have had a Harry Potter Party the night the film opened, and  
then took the group to see it at midnight!!)  It never had occured to  
me that JK Rowling or Harry Potter could be Anti-american prior to  
this conversation with my brother in law.  And while I wholeheartedly  
disagree with him, I don't know much about this debate, and was just  
looking to the group for some facts to throw in his face.  I really  
didn't mean to be offensive to anyone involved in the magical world of  
Harry Potter.  We are all passionate about Harry here- no doubt about  
that!!

Lauren



I apologize for my last post. I had actually gotten through a chat with a  
similar line of questioning shortly before responding to this subject. Needles  
to say the chatter I was debating with was rather obnoxious about inclusion of 
 American actors in everything for some odd reason. I know you didn't mean to 
 offend. When I said it was petty, I did not mean you. I hope you know that.  
Anyway, I hope you received enough info to reason with your  brother-in-law.
 
Jade
 
Proud member of Gryffindor House


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




From sweetnightingale at sbcglobal.net  Tue Dec  6 03:37:31 2005
From: sweetnightingale at sbcglobal.net (Sharon Hawkinson)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:37:31 -0600
Subject: GoF in IMAX
References: <dn2qag+rppl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003b01c5fa16$63d057b0$210110ac@621B10B>

Hi Diana,

I went a week ago yesterday to see GOF in IMAX. I figured I wouldn't be able to get in unless I ordered my ticket in advance. Those IMAX shows can really fill up fast, especially when it's a popular movie like this.

You'll absolutely LOVE it! I'm telling you, in that first task when those dragons roar, the sound quality is awesome! You'll feel like you're right in the middle of it.

Hugs!
Sharon

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






From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 07:54:37 2005
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 07:54:37 -0000
Subject: GoF: Another little tidbit
In-Reply-To: <BFB79DB5.1840%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dn3g3t+1ul6@eGroups.com>


Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
> But the next time anyone sees it, pay attention right at 
> the very beginning: as the snake slithers through the 
> graveyard, look out for the gravestone on the left (I 
> could swear the camera actually takes trouble to show it 
> more clearly than it would normally need to) before the 
> camera pans up and over the Riddle mausoleum.
>  
> Not earth-shatteringly interesting, just a nice touch.


I saw GoF again today and looked out for this.  It looked like the 
neighbouring gravestone said .....agall to me.

"lily_paige_delaney"





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Dec  6 12:32:52 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 12:32:52 -0000
Subject: More parallels
In-Reply-To: <dn1g06+4rae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn40dk+efjq@eGroups.com>

Hi there again, movie fans,
I have thought of more parallels and "things aren't what they seem" and 
whilst I know these are obvious, I want to put them out there and 
further acknowledge the poetry of this film. 

There are two really big "not what they seem" things, the mankey old 
boot and the tri-wizard cup and they are again in parallel. The boot 
begins the thing, the cup ends it. I have to contrast this with POA and 
tell you, I did understand that film as well. I couldn't see where 
Cuaron was going with his material. Is there some thread there that I 
am missing? Was it more than a lot of beautiful film pieced together 
with some necessary plot bits? I know he was creative with cues like 
the stone hitting Harry and the wolf call so I know he had a plan. I 
just do not understand it. Knowing that GOF has a plan, follows the 
book in so many important ways was a great thing to see. I think this 
one, for all the things I miss (there are many but alas I digress 
again) is the closest to what Harry is about.
Running to make lunches!
JenD






From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Dec  6 13:50:43 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 08:50:43 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] American actors in HP
Message-ID: <284.147f18b.30c6f133@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/6/2005 7:54:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


There has been an American Actor in a Harry Potter  movie.

Verne Troyer (AKA Mini-Me in those Austin Powers  movies)
played the Goblin Griphook in the PS/SS movie. 

Maybe  because it was for a non-human character, this was
OK? I don't think Goblin  is an ethnicity. 

Marianne S.




I thought that was what's-his-name who plays Flitwick in both  parts?  The 
guy who played "Willow"?  Rats, my brain just died, can't  think of his name 
right now.
 
The only American "actor" I know of in the films is the girl who  played 
Susan Bones in the first two films, who is Chris Columbus's daughter.  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Dec  6 13:54:35 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 08:54:35 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GoF: Another little tidbit
Message-ID: <2b6.18f1e10.30c6f21b@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/6/2005 7:54:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I saw  GoF again today and looked out for this.  It looked like the  
neighbouring gravestone said .....agall to  me.

"lily_paige_delaney"




Okay, I admit I've been busy and have skimmed through the posts  here from 
time to time, but this caught my eye.  I remember reading  someone's post about 
SOMETHING interesting on some "OTHER" tombstone in what,  the opening 
sequence?  Someone please tell me what to look for (and what it  is I'm supposed to 
see!!! so I don't miss it!) since I'm planning to TRY to see  it in IMAX on 
Thursday (if the winter storm warning turns out to be nothing. .  .argh)
 
I did notice Dan's very subtle reaction to Dumbledore's touching  his cheek 
when I saw it the first time -- the kid has grown so much as an actor,  and I 
always thought he was good anyway.  

Can't wait to see it again!  YAY!  Thanks in advance for the help!
 

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 16:23:55 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 16:23:55 -0000
Subject: the Diary
Message-ID: <dn4dur+2m2t@eGroups.com>

Has anyone else been over to the Tom Riddle Diary?  How creepy is 
that?!  I went to it this morning, but it remembered my name three 
hours later when I came back!  So creepy, and just like in the movie.  
Let me know what you guys think

Alora :)







From sharon8880 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 17:34:13 2005
From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:34:13 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dmvb9k+vi3e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4i2l+663g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laurenmcoakley" 
<laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
>
> SNIP It never had occured to 
> me that JK Rowling or Harry Potter could be Anti-american prior to 
> this conversation with my brother in law.  And while I wholeheartedly 
> disagree with him, I don't know much about this debate, and was just 
> looking to the group for some facts to throw in his face.  SNIP SNIP> 
> Lauren
>

As someone already said, Verne Troyer was in the first film.  Also, let 
your brother-in-law know that Chris Columbus, who directed the first 2 
films is American.  He had his daughter play Susan Bones in the these 2 
films also.  Even though she didn't have a speaking part, she did get a 
fair amount of camera shots.  So there's a second American in the films.

Also, a few people talked about the accents.  I saw a film that Alan 
Rickman was in where played a doctor who did the first heart transplant 
in the US.  I can't remember the name of it off the top of my head, but 
I do remember him having an AWFUL, HORRIBLE US southern accent.
Sharon






From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 17:56:58 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 17:56:58 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn2fjo+2sh8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4jda+gn02@eGroups.com>

I thought that role was also played by Warwick Davis!  It WAS Verne 
Troyer?  How interesting!  Well I could certainly mention this to my 
brother-in-law to shut him up!  (In addition to the other good points 
mentioned!)

And to add- I actually believe that House Elf, Goblin, Giant, Troll, 
and Werewolf would be considered ethnicities in the wizarding world.  
Maybe they aren't all human, but I don't know if they are "animal"?

If that makes any sense!?!

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marianne S." <schumar1999 at y...> 
wrote:
>
> There has been an American Actor in a Harry Potter movie.
> 
> Verne Troyer (AKA Mini-Me in those Austin Powers movies)
> played the Goblin Griphook in the PS/SS movie. 
> 
> Maybe because it was for a non-human character, this was
> OK? I don't think Goblin is an ethnicity. 
> 
> Marianne S.
>







From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 18:14:06 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:14:06 -0000
Subject: American Actors
In-Reply-To: <dn0ob1+irqi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4kde+hr17@eGroups.com>

Julie-

I understand your point, which is what was making me have a little 
difficulty in my argument with my brother-in-law.  I'm not positive, 
but I thought I saw on one of the HP fansites that if you are ever 
interested in being in a HP film, and you aren't British, you 
shouldn't even bother, because you would not be considered based on 
that fact.  I think the general opinion is that a role should go to 
whomever is best suited for it.  Of course that means different 
things, like who can they afford, or if they have the right "look", 
or accent or whatever.  And of course that could mean that they want 
British actors (nothing wrong with that!)  BUT Maybe if that 
statement hadn't been made, my brother-in-law wouldn't believe that 
the franchise is Anti-American.

And side note to the argument...
And before I even brought up Chris Columbus being involved with the 
films, he merely said, "Well our money seems to be good enough 
though!" (in reference to the American producer).  And I wouldn't 
mention CC's daughter as well, because it could seem that she only 
got to be in it because her pop is putting up big dough, and yes, it 
wasn't even a speaking part.  I have had many arguments with my 
brother in law, on many subjects, and I just don't think this would 
help my cause out too much.  But that you all, for mentioning it!

Lauren


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "juli17ptf" <juli17 at a...> wrote:
>SNIP
> Julie:
> Actually I have flown across the Atlantic, over half a dozen 
times.  From Los Angeles. That's about 11 1/2 hours to London 
direct. (New York is much easier, at a bit less than 7 hours.) I 
personally find it quite tedious, though if I could fly first class, 
as I'm sure most actors do, I'd probably find it more enjoyable! And 
there is that jet lag factor, true. So no, it's not just an easy 
hop, skip and jump. 
> 
> But the point I was making is that this wouldn't be a really major 
> issue against hiring an American actor. If said actor was deemed 
> perfect for the part (say Kathy Bates as Umbridge--just as an 
> example, not a statement on her suitability), then it could easily 
be worked around. Though agreed there might not be that many 
American actors who'd *want* to play a character who's in all seven 
movies (like Dumbledore) if it meant traveling back and forth so 
often over a ten? year period. 
> 
> OTOH, Johnny Depp lives in France. He did a credible J.M. Barrie. 
How about him as Bill Weasley, with his hair dyed red ;-)
> 
> Julie
> (still not advocating American actors in Harry Potter roles, only 
> noting that nationality shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of 
> casting any movie role. Or where would Hannibal Lector be--er, who 
> would be Hannibal Lector, that is!)
>







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 18:15:57 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:15:57 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn4jda+gn02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4kgt+697u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laurenmcoakley" 
<laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
>
> I thought that role was also played by Warwick Davis! 


It is played by Warwick Davis, I just looked it up on IMDB to be sure 

Alora ;)







From BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 18:46:57 2005
From: BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com (bamajenny12)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 12:46:57 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the Diary
References: <dn4dur+2m2t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <027301c5fa95$84e37f20$6101a8c0@launchmodem.com>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: alora67 


  Has anyone else been over to the Tom Riddle Diary?  

  Jenny now:
  Where is the diary?
  Thanks!

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




From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 19:57:22 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 19:57:22 -0000
Subject: the Diary
In-Reply-To: <027301c5fa95$84e37f20$6101a8c0@launchmodem.com>
Message-ID: <dn4qf2+454d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "bamajenny12" <BamaJenny12 at y...> 
wrote:
>   Jenny now:
>   Where is the diary?
>   Thanks!


Jenny, I am having problems with my computer and it is running soooo 
slow.  Go over to the Leaky Cauldron, and it has the link for you.  
It's really cool!

Alora 






From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Tue Dec  6 20:15:53 2005
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 20:15:53 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn4jda+gn02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4rhp+v8f4@eGroups.com>

Actually Verne Troyer is the little goblin that takes them to the 
vault and Warwick Davis is the one behind the desk. I don't know what 
they named them in the film nor on IMDB (which by the way is often 
incorrect but I digress) so Verne Troyer was in the film. I have also 
heard that Chris Columbus's other children are here and there as 
extras (like in Diagon Alley) and Alfonso's wife and baby are in the 
picture to the left of the fat lady in POA. So yes previous directors 
used a little liberty. I have also heard there are other pictures of 
friends of the directors and the crew throughout the films. 

I believe that the producers are not really anti-American, they just 
want to keep the film authentically British and therefore and 
choosing British actors for the roles. I have heard several 
interviews with David Heyman, where he has stated that England has a 
pool of wonderful actors and since the books are British, he will be 
choosing British actors. I don't think it is a slight at all. The man 
lived here for 16 years and worked in Hollywood so I seriously doubt 
that he is anti-American. He is just trying to make the films have 
the British feel that the books do. In many cases, we Americans don't 
know the actors as they are from the theatre or British television. I 
had never heard of the gentleman that played Barty Crouch Jr but boy 
did I love him. He was so creepy in the trial scene and again when DD 
and company cornered him - I was thinking "throw him to the 
dementors". Anyway, I just wanted to say as an American who was 
actually born in the UK - I have no issues with them keeping British 
actors because I believe thusfar they have done a wonderful job of 
choosing them. And I look forward to Imelda as Umbridge - I would not 
have liked Kathy Bates - she is not short and falsely sweet enough to 
be believeable for me and Imelda is. Plus she is a brilliant actress. 
Now if in the future they do cast an American, I have no issues with 
that. I just hope they can pull off an authentic accent. Anyway, I 
probably didn't help you with your "discussion with the brother-in-
law" but at least you do know there were some non-Brits in the films 
just not speaking (well except for "key please from Verne).

Theresa
Who also feels Gambon is growing on her - though I miss Richard Harris

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laurenmcoakley" 
<laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
>
> I thought that role was also played by Warwick Davis!  It WAS Verne 
> Troyer?  How interesting!  Well I could certainly mention this to 
my 
> brother-in-law to shut him up!  (In addition to the other good 
points 
> mentioned!)
> 
> And to add- I actually believe that House Elf, Goblin, Giant, 
Troll, 
> and Werewolf would be considered ethnicities in the wizarding 
world.  
> Maybe they aren't all human, but I don't know if they are "animal"?
> 
> If that makes any sense!?!







From BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 20:34:14 2005
From: BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com (bamajenny12)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 14:34:14 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
References: <dn4rhp+v8f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <031b01c5faa4$77187800$6101a8c0@launchmodem.com>



  <laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
  >
  > I thought that role was also played by Warwick Davis!  It WAS Verne 
  > Troyer?  How interesting!  Well I could certainly mention this to 
  my 
  > brother-in-law to shut him up!  (In addition to the other good 
  points 
  > mentioned!)
  > 
  Now Jenny:
  Ask your B-I-L what he would have thought about having
  a British Dirty Harry? Or a British Rambo? It is the
  same thing...British author + British setting + British
  story = Use British actors. If JKR lived in Connecticut
  and wrote the story about Greenwich School of Witchcraft
  and Wizardry, then yes, it should be American actors.
  But since JKR lives in the UK, that is where she set the
  books. I don't understand even where your B-I-L is coming
  from on this argument. It seems so logical that I never
  expected to see American actors.


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




From schumar1999 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 21:23:30 2005
From: schumar1999 at yahoo.com (Marianne S.)
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 21:23:30 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn4kgt+697u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn4vgi+93hv@eGroups.com>

You couldn't have been looking at IMDB for GRIPHOOK the Goblin because that
was indeed Verne Troyer, not Warwick Davis. He plays FLitwick and the
Bank Teller, but not the Goblin that escorts Harry and Hagrid to the vault.
THAT, again, was the American Verne Troyer. 


laurenmcoakley wrote:
> >
> > I thought that role was also played by Warwick Davis! 
> 
> 
> It is played by Warwick Davis, I just looked it up on IMDB to be sure 
> 
> Alora ;)
>


And yes, Chris Columbus had ALL his kids play bit parts in the movies he directed. 
One of themwas in one of the moving portraits on the walls in the school. 
But I believe thediscussion is about American Actors playing speaking 
roles that are important to the plot. I am an American, and I certainly don't 
mind if all those parts are played by Brits when they are able to find British 
Actors who fit the roles so well. 






From sgarfio at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  6 23:54:39 2005
From: sgarfio at yahoo.com (Sherry Garfio)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 15:54:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <dn4rhp+v8f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051206235439.52940.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>

Theresa <anmsmom333 at cox.net> wrote:
    <SNIP>
  In many cases, we Americans don't know the actors as they are from the theatre or British television. I 
had never heard of the gentleman that played Barty Crouch Jr but boy did I love him. He was so creepy in the trial scene and again when DD and company cornered him - I was thinking "throw him to the dementors". 
   
  I actually see this as an advantage for American viewers.  We don't know these actors, so we have no preconceptions of them from different characters we've seen them play!  I doubt you could have been rooting for the dementors to take Jr away if he had played your favorite character in a TV show you've watched religiously for several years.  I find it very distracting to see an actor I'm very familiar with, playing a role unlike his previous roles.
   
  Meanwhile, for Lauren's brother-in-law, HP is not anti-American; it's just that America is beside the point in Harry's world.  We Yanks don't like to think of ourselves as being on the sidelines.  But in most of the world, we are.  I think it is childish and arrogant to expect that America is the center of the universe and therefore anything that doesn't represent us as such must be "anti-American".
   
  The Other Sherry
   


"Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if our aims are identical and our hearts are open."
    -- Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire



		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less

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




From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Tue Dec  6 23:59:44 2005
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:59:44 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
In-Reply-To: <20051206235439.52940.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.23.1576048067.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

Not to mention, there's a world of difference between being "Anti-American"
and "Pro-British."  One doesn't necessarily follow the other.

Rae

-----Original Message-----
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Sherry Garfio
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 5:55 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP

    <SNIP>
   
  Meanwhile, for Lauren's brother-in-law, HP is not anti-American; it's just
that America is beside the point in Harry's world.  We Yanks don't like to
think of ourselves as being on the sidelines.  But in most of the world, we
are.  I think it is childish and arrogant to expect that America is the
center of the universe and therefore anything that doesn't represent us as
such must be "anti-American".
   
  The Other Sherry
   







From agdisney at msn.com  Tue Dec  6 23:29:07 2005
From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 18:29:07 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the Diary
References: <dn4dur+2m2t@eGroups.com> <027301c5fa95$84e37f20$6101a8c0@launchmodem.com>
Message-ID: <BAY108-DAV15B15F7F637D0C49559D84CF400@phx.gbl>


    From: alora67 


    Has anyone else been over to the Tom Riddle Diary?  

   Andie:

  Yes I was just there.  It is spooky.  It really seems like
  Tom Riddle is answering your questions.




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






From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Wed Dec  7 13:13:57 2005
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 13:13:57 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn4i2l+663g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn6n6l+uu4m@eGroups.com>

Sharon:
> Also, a few people talked about the accents.  I saw a film that Alan 
> Rickman was in where played a doctor who did the first heart 
> transplant in the US.  I can't remember the name of it off the top of 
> my head, but I do remember him having an AWFUL, HORRIBLE US southern 
> accent.


SSSusan:
LOL!  This was Something the Lord Made.  And if you thought Rickman's 
accent was awful in that, then *don't* watch Judas Kiss or Dark Harbor 
or even the segment of Die Hard where he pretends to be an American.  
Believe me, his accent was much *improved* in StLM.  

Saddest part for me, a *huge* Rickman fan, is that when he tries to do 
an American accent, he tends to lose some of that wonderful plumminess 
in his voice.  (Think the "DON'T lie... to me" line from the potions 
storage cupboard in GoF. :-))

Siriusly Rickman!Snapey Susan








From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Dec  7 13:47:40 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 13:47:40 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn6n6l+uu4m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn6p5s+fngi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at s...> wrote:
SNIP> 
> SSSusan:
> LOL!  This was Something the Lord Made.  And if you thought 
Rickman's 
> accent was awful in that, then *don't* watch Judas Kiss or Dark 
Harbor 
> or even the segment of Die Hard where he pretends to be an 
American.  
> Believe me, his accent was much *improved* in StLM.  
> 
> Saddest part for me, a *huge* Rickman fan, is that when he tries 
to do 
> an American accent, he tends to lose some of that wonderful 
plumminess 
> in his voice.  (Think the "DON'T lie... to me" line from the 
potions 
> storage cupboard in GoF. :-))
> 
> Siriusly Rickman!Snapey Susan

I have wondered, if you SSusan know, just what kind of accent is 
Alan Rickman doing for Snape? Is it just a middle of the road 
British accent, an "acting British" accent (the plumminess comes to 
mind) or something else? I have seen him in other British things and 
I love the accents he's used in them(the film where he was the 
hairdresser comes to mind, but alas the name of said film does 
not) . He seems very comfortable switching British accents. I feel 
very sorry for most actors who have to take on a Southern American 
accent. It's the easiest to caricature and therefore the easiest to 
mangle. 
JenD, speaking to herself in her own genuine Southern accent...
>







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  7 14:46:05 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 14:46:05 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn6p5s+fngi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn6sjd+1nn9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> wrote:
 
> I have wondered, if you SSusan know, just what kind of accent is 
> Alan Rickman doing for Snape? Is it just a middle of the road 
> British accent, an "acting British" accent (the plumminess comes to 
> mind) or something else? I have seen him in other British things and 
> I love the accents he's used in them(the film where he was the 
> hairdresser comes to mind, but alas the name of said film does 
> not) . He seems very comfortable switching British accents. I feel 
> very sorry for most actors who have to take on a Southern American 
> accent. It's the easiest to caricature and therefore the easiest to 
> mangle. 
> JenD, speaking to herself in her own genuine Southern accent...


I have to agree with you there, he does a wonderful job switching 
accents.  But then, I could listen to AR read off the phone book, I 
like him so much ;).  And, yes, that southern accent is so hard to 
pull off. I have yet to hear a really good one, even from an American 
actor.  I'm from Texas, so I should know!*LOL* I also have relatives 
in Georgia and that's a whole 'nother ball of wax, that is!! O_O

Alora :)







From whoknowzindeed at googlemail.com  Wed Dec  7 14:59:31 2005
From: whoknowzindeed at googlemail.com (whoknowzindeed)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 14:59:31 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
References: <20051206235439.52940.qmail@web53204.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <010601c5fb40$caf41640$be954c51@gateway>

The Other Sherry:
>>  Meanwhile, for Lauren's brother-in-law, HP is not anti-American; it's just that America is beside the point in Harry's world.  We Yanks don't like to think of ourselves as being on the sidelines.  But in most of the world, we are.  I think it is childish and arrogant to expect that America is the center of the universe and therefore anything that doesn't represent us as such must be "anti-American". <<
   
  
I thought this post (below) was very gracious - not something, as someone who is English, I would have expected to read written by an American.  I wish that more Americans had your attitude.  

I too see no reason why American actors should be involved in something which is 'so' British, and my only peeve with the books is that aside from the first book, the girls' toilets are continually referred to as the "girls' bathroom".  

Bathrooms have baths in them, public toilets are toilets, not bathrooms.

I am sure there are plenty of American films to go round, so having a British film with British actors is a very nice change.

:O)

"whoknowzindeed" 






From whoknowzindeed at googlemail.com  Wed Dec  7 15:18:05 2005
From: whoknowzindeed at googlemail.com (whoknowzindeed)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 15:18:05 -0000
Subject: American Actors in HP - Ethnicities in HP
References: <43962604.446597e5.38c6.4fd1SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <023001c5fb42$9c07d720$be954c51@gateway>


Rae:
>>Not to mention, there's a world of difference between being "Anti-American" and "Pro-British."  One doesn't necessarily follow the other.>>

  
Someone should tell George Bush that ... *don't get me started* .........

;-/

"whoknowzindeed"







From nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  7 19:37:46 2005
From: nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com (ereshkigal_doom)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 19:37:46 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn4i2l+663g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn7dma+4b1d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sharon" <sharon8880 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Also, a few people talked about the accents.  I saw a film that Alan 
> Rickman was in where played a doctor who did the first heart 
transplant 
> in the US.  I can't remember the name of it off the top of my head, 
but 
> I do remember him having an AWFUL, HORRIBLE US southern accent.
> Sharon
>
That's why people like me from the UK are quite relieved that the 
makers of the Harry Potter movies have a rule about only selecting UK 
actors. Not all actors can do good accents, even if they are good 
actors otherwise. 

I love the character 'Spike' in Buffy the Vampire, and I think the 
actor that plays him is really good, but the British accent, IMHO, is 
not that convincing. Dick Van Dyke's performance as a cockney in Mary 
Poppins is still mocked in the UK, 50-odd years after the release of 
the movie!

I doubt if I would notice the errors in Rickman's US accent, but 
Americans certainly seem to! Imagine a whole movie of actors whose 
accents are just off enough to be distracting. It would not affect the 
American audience, because the differences would be subtle, but UK 
audiences would not take the movie seriously. 






From swartell at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  7 20:06:26 2005
From: swartell at yahoo.com (Sue Wartell)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 12:06:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn7dma+4b1d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051207200626.87793.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com>



--- ereshkigal_doom <nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Imagine a whole movie of actors whose 
> accents are just off enough to be distracting. 

I actually thought that Michael Gambon's accent
slipped a few times during GoF.  I have only seen the
movie once (so far), so I might have mis-heard strong
emotion as a change in accent.  However, it was
extremely jarring to me (a non-UK citizen/denizen),
and one of the several reasons I was not well
satisfied with Gambon's Dumbledore in this film.  

Sue



		
__________________________________________ 
Yahoo! DSL  Something to write home about. 
Just $16.99/mo. or less. 
dsl.yahoo.com 




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Dec  7 21:16:49 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 21:16:49 -0000
Subject: Accents matter
In-Reply-To: <dn7dma+4b1d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn7jg1+u17g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "ereshkigal_doom" 
<nonnymouse_X at h...> wrote:
>Lotsa snips:
> 
> I doubt if I would notice the errors in Rickman's US accent, but 
> Americans certainly seem to! Imagine a whole movie of actors whose 
> accents are just off enough to be distracting. It would not affect 
the > American audience, because the differences would be subtle, 
but UK  audiences would not take the movie seriously.
I interject:
When you are familiar with an actor and you know they are doing an 
accent, you listen very carefully. Meryl Streep, whom I adore, had 
quite a reputation for being able to carry off various accents. I 
remember seeing her a looong time ago in a film called "Plenty" and 
her only so-so British accent really distracted me, an American. I 
don't know if you were on the list when the second HP film came out 
but people were really caught up in how badly the accents matched 
some of the characters. All the sudden Draco (supposedly from one of 
the better wizards families) sounded as if he were from the East End.
JenD






From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Thu Dec  8 00:35:58 2005
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:35:58 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn6p5s+fngi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn7v5e+u41t@eGroups.com>

SSSusan:
> > Saddest part for me, a *huge* Rickman fan, is that when he tries 
> > to do an American accent, he tends to lose some of that 
> > wonderful plumminess in his voice.  (Think the "DON'T lie... to 
> > me" line from the potions storage cupboard in GoF. :-))

JenD:
> I have wondered, if you SSusan know, just what kind of accent is 
> Alan Rickman doing for Snape? Is it just a middle of the road 
> British accent, an "acting British" accent (the plumminess comes 
> to mind) or something else? I have seen him in other British 
> things and I love the accents he's used in them(the film where he 
> was the hairdresser comes to mind, but alas the name of said film 
> does not) . He seems very comfortable switching British accents. I 
> feel very sorry for most actors who have to take on a Southern 
> American accent. It's the easiest to caricature and therefore the 
> easiest to mangle. 
> JenD, speaking to herself in her own genuine Southern accent...


SSSusan:
I'm afraid, as a Yank, I know *nothing* about different British 
accents, so I can't speak to what Rickman's "doing" in Snape.  (In 
fact, I thought he was just doing his natural voice!)  There are 
some folks on OTC who've talked about this kind of thing before, but 
I know nothing. :-|

I *do* know, however, the name of the film you're thinking of:  Blow 
Dry.  I love that movie, and his role of Phil Allen.

Siriusly Snapey Susan








From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec  8 02:09:58 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 02:09:58 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn7v5e+u41t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dn84lm+10mq9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at s...> wrote:
>
> SSSusan:
> > > Saddest part for me, a *huge* Rickman fan, is that when he 
tries 
> > > to do an American accent, he tends to lose some of that 
> > > wonderful plumminess in his voice.  (Think the "DON'T lie... 
to 
> > > me" line from the potions storage cupboard in GoF. :-))
> 
> JenD:
> > I have wondered, if you SSusan know, just what kind of accent is 
> > Alan Rickman doing for Snape? Is it just a middle of the road 
> > British accent, an "acting British" accent (the plumminess comes 
> > to mind) or something else? I have seen him in other British 
> > things and I love the accents he's used in them(the film where 
he 
> > was the hairdresser comes to mind, but alas the name of said 
film 
> > does not) . He seems very comfortable switching British accents. 
I 
> > feel very sorry for most actors who have to take on a Southern 
> > American accent. It's the easiest to caricature and therefore 
the 
> > easiest to mangle. 
> > JenD, speaking to herself in her own genuine Southern accent...
> 
> 
> SSSusan:
> I'm afraid, as a Yank, I know *nothing* about different British 
> accents, so I can't speak to what Rickman's "doing" in Snape.  (In 
> fact, I thought he was just doing his natural voice!)  There are 
> some folks on OTC who've talked about this kind of thing before, 
but 
> I know nothing. :-|
> 
> I *do* know, however, the name of the film you're thinking of:  
Blow 
> Dry.  I love that movie, and his role of Phil Allen.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan

SSSusan (determined this time to get all the "S"s in!)
I believe that film (Blow Dry) was set up north, in Yorkshire. I 
really appreciate when a film in set in England or the UK has 
identifiable accents. I know Brits do too (there was a previous post 
that mentioned how important the correct accent is to Briish film 
goers). I think it's not as important in America and to Americans.
 
But back to Mr. Rickman, his Snape seems almost Shakespearean. Is 
that the correct word? Very classical if a little over the top, for 
effect. Pity he didn't have more to do this film. Sort of makes you 
look forward to Occlumency lessons, next film.
JenD

>







From jheiler at sympatico.ca  Thu Dec  8 20:31:47 2005
From: jheiler at sympatico.ca (jeanico2000)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:31:47 -0000
Subject: Details...
Message-ID: <dna57j+preo@eGroups.com>

I read a few posts here about all the wonderful details that fans have 
been noticing in GOF. Besides the amazing ensemble acting and Daniel 
Radcliffe's fabulous performance, this film has really pleased me the 
most out of all the HP movies so far (I've seen it twice now on IMAX, 
worth every penny, and twice on a regular screen). 
My daughter, who is 20 and just as big a Potter fan as I am, noticed a 
whole lot of details that I missed and that I have to look out for 
when we see the film again! Has anyone else noticed that when the trio 
finds Neville on the stairs after Moody's class and he then follows 
Moody to have tea, the image in the stained glass window that 
is 'crying rain' is actually Neville's face? My daughter pointed this 
out to me ("what mum... you mean you didn't notice that?" LOL and 
bless her!), along with a ton of other things (I hadn't even noticed 
that Nagini was moving around on the big WB sign at the start of the 
movie!). She also pointed out that there is a copy of HP and the GOF 
on the table in the common room when Harry is speaking with Sirius' 
head in the fireplace... I missed that too. I guess I'll just have to 
go back and see GOF again (and again... and again...)!        






From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec  8 23:12:44 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:12:44 -0000
Subject: Details...
In-Reply-To: <dna57j+preo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnaelc+jc7l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jheiler at s...> 
wrote:
>
> I read a few posts here about all the wonderful details that fans 
have been noticing in GOF. Besides the amazing ensemble acting and 
Daniel Radcliffe's fabulous performance, this film has really 
pleased me the > most out of all the HP movies so far 

I interject:
I have to agree, this film is well-structured. After I got over the 
fact that it doesn't look like the book in many respects, after 
people convinced me that books and film are different and accomplish 
their tasks differntly, ahem, well, I began to see the film for its 
own merits and now I see the poetry in it.
SNIP

Has anyone else noticed that when the trio 
> finds Neville on the stairs after Moody's class and he then 
follows 
> Moody to have tea, the image in the stained glass window that 
> is 'crying rain' is actually Neville's face? My daughter pointed 
this out to me 
Me again:
I thought that was a very cool touch but I didn't connect it with 
Neville's face per se. Will study that moment next viewing.
SNIP
 that Nagini was moving around on the big WB sign at the start of the
> movie!).
 
(Bless that snake's heart. She does get around...)
SNIP
She also pointed out that there is a copy of HP and the GOF 
> on the table in the common room when Harry is speaking with 
Sirius' 
> head in the fireplace...
That's truly interesting. Will look for that as well.

Enough reason to see it again. Whew!
JenD






From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Fri Dec  9 07:32:49 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 02:32:49 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <20051207200626.87793.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFBE9D51.18F1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/7/05 3:06 PM, "Sue Wartell" <swartell at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I actually thought that Michael Gambon's accent
> slipped a few times during GoF.  I have only seen the
> movie once (so far), so I might have mis-heard strong
> emotion as a change in accent.  However, it was
> extremely jarring to me (a non-UK citizen/denizen),
> and one of the several reasons I was not well
> satisfied with Gambon's Dumbledore in this film.
> 
> Sue


What nationality is Brendan Gleeson (Moody/Crouch)? He sounded Irish. I was
wondering if that was real, or put on.
Valerie



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




From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Dec  9 10:12:30 2005
From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (Rebecca Williams)
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 10:12:30 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <BFBE9D51.18F1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20051209101231.36663.qmail@web25305.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>



Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:    On 12/7/05 3:06 PM, "Sue Wartell" <swartell at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I actually thought that Michael Gambon's accent
> slipped a few times during GoF.  I have only seen the
> movie once (so far), so I might have mis-heard strong
> emotion as a change in accent.  However, it was
> extremely jarring to me (a non-UK citizen/denizen),
> and one of the several reasons I was not well
> satisfied with Gambon's Dumbledore in this film.
> 
> Sue

  Becky says:
  I agree with you Sue, I did notice his accent slipping a few times. The thing is he is English but for some reason is doing an Irish accent. Apparently he told the directors 'I eel that Dumbledore would be Irish'. I don't agree with him at all. I don't imagine Dumbledore would be Irish at all. I do not like Michael Gambon as Dumbledore - he is too dramatic and too angry. His interpretation of the character is all wrong. Richard Harris had the quirky, gentle, kind and slightly amused Dumbledore to a tee. I miss him.
  




 


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger  NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail 

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






From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 14:01:09 2005
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 06:01:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <BFBE9D51.18F1%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20051209140109.52334.qmail@web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:        What nationality is Brendan Gleeson (Moody/Crouch)? He sounded Irish. I was
  wondering if that was real, or put on.
  Valerie
  
  
  
akh responds:
  
  Brendan Gleeson, like Michael Gambon, is Irish.  He talked in a  recent interview (Gleeson, that is) about his school teachers in  Dublin.  Sounds like a dead giveaway to me!
  
  akh, who is hopelessly behind the curve in keeping up with both these posts and the HPFGU main posts!  Help!!!


			
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
 Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping 

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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Dec  9 14:00:48 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 09:00:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Details
Message-ID: <1fa.1667228c.30cae810@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/9/2005 7:25:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

>>I read a few posts here about all the wonderful details that  fans have 
been noticing in GOF. Besides the amazing ensemble acting and  Daniel 
Radcliffe's fabulous performance, this film has really pleased me  the 
most out of all the HP movies so far (I've seen it twice now on IMAX,  
worth every penny, and twice on a regular screen).  <<
I'm planning to see it in IMAX next week -- what other details did  you 
notice that I should look for?


>>Has anyone else noticed that when the trio 
finds  Neville on the stairs after Moody's class and he then follows 
Moody to  have tea, the image in the stained glass window that 
is 'crying rain' is  actually Neville's face? <<
I noticed the crying face, but did NOT notice it was  Neville's!!!  Now that 
you mention it, it does resemble him!  I'll  look at it again more closely 
next time!  Thanks for pointing that  out!

>>(I hadn't even noticed 
that Nagini was moving around on the  big WB sign at the start of the 
movie!).<<]
She was????  Yikes, I need to see the movie again  SOON!
 

>>  She also pointed out that there is a copy of HP and the GOF 
on the table  in the common room when Harry is speaking with Sirius' 
head in the  fireplace...<<
 
You're kidding, a copy of JKR's book there?  That's just weird  (and 
amazing!)  
 

>>  I missed that too. I guess I'll just have to 
go back and see GOF again  (and again... and again...)!    <<
 
Me too!  Okay, so what else should we look for?  Someone  mentioned a certain 
gravestone, but didn't say what to look for on it.  I  was SUPPOSED to go see 
the film yesterday in Imax, but we had a heavy winter  storm hit us, so my 
friend and I very INTELLIGENTLY stayed home instead of  driving the 90+ miles 
each way to the Imax!  I need a GoF movie fix - tell  me more!!!!  (Yeah, I've 
seen it 3 times on a regular screen, but missed  all those details you 
mentioned!!)    



Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/



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




From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 15:04:13 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 15:04:13 -0000
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <dnc6dd+o7nd@eGroups.com>

I understand that the movie is different to the book and all that, but
it is still suppose to be based on the book and its characters,I think. 
I don't want to be dramatic, but when I saw the movie I was sad
because there was no Dumbledore in it, there was some hippie jumping
around, screaming all the time, attacking Harry, and afraid of the the
little sparks that came out of the goblet of fire when the champions
were selected.
Since I read HBP I was wondering how would I feel when I see the HP
word without Dumbledore, more specific, Hogwarts without Dumbledore,
after seeing GoF I know how it feels.
OK, probably I'm really naive, but I cant believe that such a BIG
fandom like HP's cant find a way to at least show WB that we don't
like at all Michael Gambon as Dumbledore and that we think the they
are killing him way before movie 6. Does anybody here knows about and
email or a page that we could post what we think about this and be
heard by WB executives? Anybody has some idea how can we get the
attention from WB?
Can you picture Gambon playing the powerful Dumbledore that fight
Voldermot in the MoM in OoTP?, or can you picture Gambon accepting
stoically his amount of guilt in Sirius death and making the mistake
of not telling Harry about the prophecy earlier?. I definitely can
picture Harris doing all of that, and Gambon performance only makes
Harris death all more sad.
I  think was somebody in a comment at Mugglenet that said that the
only thing good about Gambon as Dumbledore is that we are gonna see
him get killed in HBP movie. I was deppresed for days after reading
HPB, but if I see Dumblerore played by Gambon fall of the astronomy
tower, I may don't even get sad at all.

Sionwicth
"Never insult Albus Dumbledore in front of me" PS/SS. 






From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 16:21:56 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:21:56 -0000
Subject: Gravestone and book
Message-ID: <dncav4+l9uf@eGroups.com>

Okay, I saw the film for the 5th time yesterday, but I could not read 
the gravestone at all!  Anyone care to share with me what it says?  
And, boy, do I wish I had known about the book before I went, I would 
have looked for it.  I'll have to do that on the next viewing... ;)

Alora 






From nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com  Fri Dec  9 17:15:34 2005
From: nonnymouse_X at hotmail.com (ereshkigal_doom)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:15:34 -0000
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <dnc6dd+o7nd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnce3m+ae1b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sionwitch" <sionwitch at y...> wrote:
> I  think was somebody in a comment at Mugglenet that said that the
> only thing good about Gambon as Dumbledore is that we are gonna see
> him get killed in HBP movie. I was deppresed for days after reading
> HPB, but if I see Dumblerore played by Gambon fall of the astronomy
> tower, I may don't even get sad at all.
> 
> Sionwicth
> "Never insult Albus Dumbledore in front of me" PS/SS.
>
I really don't see much problem with Gambon as Dumbledore. I think he 
did a pretty good job in that I didn't notice his performance at all. 
He was just Dumbledore. But then, I've only seen the film once.






From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Fri Dec  9 17:45:10 2005
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:45:10 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dn84lm+10mq9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dncfr6+s7f7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> wrote:
snip
> SSSusan (determined this time to get all the "S"s in!)
> I believe that film (Blow Dry) was set up north, in Yorkshire. I 
> really appreciate when a film in set in England or the UK has 
> identifiable accents. I know Brits do too (there was a previous post 
> that mentioned how important the correct accent is to Briish film 
> goers). I think it's not as important in America and to Americans.
>  
> But back to Mr. Rickman, his Snape seems almost Shakespearean. Is 
> that the correct word? Very classical if a little over the top, for 
> effect. Pity he didn't have more to do this film. Sort of makes you 
> look forward to Occlumency lessons, next film.
> JenD
> 

ME: Actually as an American it does bother me when someone "fakes" a 
Southern accent. I have many family members from Texas to Alabama and 
when an actor attempts to do a Southern accent I hear it right away. It 
sometimes makes a serious film funny to me when they do that.

As for Alan Rickman - after the first film I even hear him when I read 
the books whereever Snape speaks. I think he is wonderful even if he 
is "a little over the top" at times - that makes him more Snape like to 
me. One of my favorite scenes in all the films with him is the night 
time stroll in POA. I love the way he ask "Lupin, out for a little 
stroll in the moonlight". The emphasis on moonlight was great.

Theresa







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec  9 18:29:27 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 18:29:27 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter: Anti-American clarification
In-Reply-To: <dncfr6+s7f7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dncie7+h8cf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at c...> 
wrote:
> ME: Actually as an American it does bother me when someone "fakes" 
a > Southern accent. I have many family members from Texas to 
Alabama and > when an actor attempts to do a Southern accent I hear 
it right away. It > sometimes makes a serious film funny to me when 
they do that.

You know, I live in a place where there are few Southerners, and all 
these folks hear is "Southern." It's good to know there are people 
that do hear the difference between Texas and Alabama. Most 
Americans I have met just think we are funny and are all like 
the "Dukes of Hazzard!"

> 
> As for Alan Rickman - after the first film I even hear him when I 
read 
> the books whereever Snape speaks. I think he is wonderful even if 
he 
> is "a little over the top" at times - that makes him more Snape 
like to 
> me. 

The "over the top" wasn't a dig. Just a description. You know, the 
most pompous of Shakespeareans. Perfect for Snape.


One of my favorite scenes in all the films with him is the night 
> time stroll in POA. I love the way he ask "Lupin, out for a little 
> stroll in the moonlight". The emphasis on moonlight was great.
> 
> Theresa

I love the fruitiness of Rickman's accent! I can just hear him say 
those words you mentioned. If you have followed earlier notes in 
this thread, you remember we were all gushing over him earlier!
JenD
>








From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 19:42:03 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:42:03 -0000
Subject: Petition to fire Gambon
Message-ID: <dncmmb+hn5o@eGroups.com>

To all who think that Michael Gambon performance of Dumbledore was not
true to the Dumbledore from the books, you can now do something about
it. There is a petition form that will be sent to JKR and Warner to
let them know that we want that to change.
Check this link http://freewebs.com/firegambon/
And see for yourself how Mr Gambon express himself about his rol as
Dumbledore, and if you are outrage about it, please sign and help to
make a difference.

Sionwicth
"Never insult Albus Dumbledore in front of me" PS/SS.






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 20:08:35 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:08:35 -0000
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <dnc6dd+o7nd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnco83+9pfa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sionwitch" <sionwitch at y...> wrote:
>
> ...edited... 
> I don't want to be dramatic, but ... I was sad ... there was
> no Dumbledore in it, there was some hippie jumping around, 
> screaming all the time, attacking Harry, and afraid of the 
> little sparks that came out of the goblet ...
> ...edited...
> ...edited...
> Can you picture Gambon playing the powerful Dumbledore that 
> fight Voldermot in the MoM in OoTP?, or can you picture Gambon 
> accepting stoically his amount of guilt in Sirius death and 
> making the mistake of not telling Harry about the prophecy 
> earlier?. I definitely can picture Harris doing all of that,
> and Gambon performance only makes Harris death all more sad.
> ...edited...
> 
> Sionwicth
> "Never insult Albus Dumbledore in front of me" PS/SS.
>

bboyminn:

While I am not particularly fond of Gambon as Dumbledore, I can live
with it. I think I would personally prefer Partick Stewart (Captain
Picard - Star Trek NG) who I think has both the ability to express
power and the quiet dignity necessary to create a believable
Dumbledore. None the less, the die (an actor) is cast, and is likely
there for the long haul.

As a further note, we must make some allowances for Gambon's portrayal
of Dumbledore. Ultimately, all he can do is read the script and follow
the Director. I'm sure he has some say, and some suggestions, for his
portrayal, but ultimately it is the Director's responsibility to get
it right.

It seems important to the story that Dumbledore NOT start shouting at
Harry. In fact in most cases, Harry finds Dumbledore's calm quiet
intense stare far more guilt inducing that any shouting. In most
cases, we see Harry wishing Dumbledore would shout at him; it would be
much better than those cold accusing eyes. I think this calm intensity
is what Harris brought to the roll. He seems like the kind of guy that
could indeed make people quail and cower with nothing more than a glance. 

Perhaps Gambon could do the same thing if he were given the proper
direction. Perhaps in some sense, he is playing Dumbledore differently
that Harris on purpose, so that, in a sense, he makes the roll his own
rather than merely an extension of Harris's version of Dumbledore.
BUT, and this is a very big BUT, his primary obligation is to play his
role independant of Harris, and to be true to the character as he
lives in the books. To do the opposite of Harris, in a sense, is to
still let Harris dictate Gambon's version of Dumbledore. It's the
books he needs to stay true to, but that is very hard if he has never
read the books. 

Since he hasn't read the books, Gambon is completely dependant on the
writer and the director, to create the character for him. So, while we
may not like Gambon's portrayal, let's remember that he doesn't create
that portray by himself. 

Personally, I'm voting for Peter Jackson (LotR-movie, King Kong) to
direct the final book. That man knows how to get to the heart of a
story. Not just to the central theme or central story thread, but to
the heart of the story.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn






From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 21:00:02 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 21:00:02 -0000
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <dncr8i+2204@eGroups.com>

bboyminn said:
"Perhaps Gambon could do the same thing if he were given the proper
direction. Perhaps in some sense, he is playing Dumbledore differently
that Harris on purpose, so that, in a sense, he makes the roll his own
rather than merely an extension of Harris's version of Dumbledore.
BUT, and this is a very big BUT, his primary obligation is to play his
role independant of Harris, and to be true to the character"..edited..

Sionwitch: 
Im sure that is has to do with the director, but Gambon said tha he is
playing himself, he is not olny playing a diferent Dumbledore as
Harris's, but he is not acting at all. I dont know if you read the
interview in wich he says all this things, if not here is the link
http://news.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=2223942005

You say that he must be true to the character,I agree with that, but I
didnt see nothing about the Dumbledore from the books in the GoF movie.

If it was the director fine, but we dont have to worry about it
because in the OoTP movie is gonna be a new director, but if it has to
do with Gambon, we may worry because as long as I know he is comming
back and, unless he change a lot his characterization, he wont be
believable as Dumbledore,IMO.

Sionwitch.






From agdisney at msn.com  Fri Dec  9 21:38:45 2005
From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera)
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 16:38:45 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: About Gambon as Dumbledore
References: <dnce3m+ae1b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BAY108-DAV8C905B7672E59424DF74DCF450@phx.gbl>




  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com<mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>, "sionwitch" <sionwitch at y<mailto:sionwitch at y>...> wrote:
  > I  think was somebody in a comment at Mugglenet that said that the
  > only thing good about Gambon as Dumbledore is that we are gonna see
  > him get killed in HBP movie. I was deppresed for days after reading
  > HPB, but if I see Dumblerore played by Gambon fall of the astronomy
  > tower, I may don't even get sad at all.
  > 
  > Sionwicth

  I really don't see much problem with Gambon as Dumbledore. I think he 
  did a pretty good job in that I didn't notice his performance at all. 
  He was just Dumbledore. But then, I've only seen the film once.

  Andie
  I agree.  Gambon as Dumbledore leaves a lot to be desired.  I do not
  like his take on Dumbledore at all.  I see DD as a mentor and authoritative
  figure, not some raving person who physically attacks Harry and has an
  attitude problem.  Maybe if Gambon read the books he would understand
  what DD is like and then play him correctly.  Just MHO.






  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com<mailto:HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com>
  ____________________________________________________________
   
  Yahoo! Groups Links



   





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




From surreal_44 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  9 22:51:39 2005
From: surreal_44 at yahoo.com (Krissy)
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 22:51:39 -0000
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-DAV8C905B7672E59424DF74DCF450@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <dnd1pr+v1kl@eGroups.com>

I really don't see a problem with Gambon as Dumbledore. People expect
him to be another Richard Harris, and he isn't. I prefer this
Dumbledore, who is much more vital than Harris ever was.


Don't get me wrong, Richard Harris was fine as Dumbledore but half the
time I watched him I was worried he was going to keel over in the
middle of the scene, or I got bored waiting for him to spit out the
words. Harris' Dumbledore was not twinkling, sweet or fascinating. I
am well aware of course that Harris was struggling with his health,
which is partially to blame.


Honestly though, I did not miss him in PoA, and I thought he was fine
in GoF. I think the main problem is the script. I would take up my
issues with the scriptwriter rather than Gambon. It would be helpful
if Gambon reads the books, but if he hasn't, that's fine too.


In PoA I thought Gambon was brilliant. He was exactly how I thought
Dumbledore would be; mischevious and brilliant. In GoF he was off, but
I rather doubt that it's Gambon's fault. The script just wasn't that
well written for Gambon.


Then again, maybe it's foreshadowing for OtP. To say that Gambon
should be fired is simply silly.


Gambon is different, and I think it's for the better.






From dzny72 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 10 15:13:37 2005
From: dzny72 at yahoo.com (dzny72)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:13:37 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon
Message-ID: <dnerb1+vli3@eGroups.com>

As I was reading the posts regarding the firing of Gambon for his 
portrayal of Dumbledore, I had a thought that needed to be shared.  
What if we sign this petition, they actually fire Gambon, and then they 
hire someone even worse (in our opinions) to play Dumbledore?  I guess 
we should decide which is worse:  Gambon continuing as Dumbledore or 
the possibility of someone being cast that is even less the character 
we need him to be.  Maybe we should petition that Gambon should be 
required to read the material that his script is based on in order to 
get a better idea of who his is prtraying and the emotions behind his 
actions.  I think I might be satisfied with a better Gambon than a 
worse unknown.

Hope that made sense, I know I was slightly rambling. . . 

Marlo 







From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 10 17:21:56 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:21:56 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon
In-Reply-To: <dnerb1+vli3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnf2rk+ep1b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "dzny72" <dzny72 at y...> wrote:
>
> As I was reading the posts regarding the firing of Gambon for his 
> portrayal of Dumbledore, I had a thought that needed to be shared.  
> What if we sign this petition, they actually fire Gambon, and then they 
> hire someone even worse (in our opinions) to play Dumbledore?  I guess 
> we should decide which is worse:  Gambon continuing as Dumbledore or 
> the possibility of someone being cast that is even less the character 
> we need him to be.  Maybe we should petition that Gambon should be 
> required to read the material that his script is based on in order to 
> get a better idea of who his is prtraying and the emotions behind his 
> actions.  I think I might be satisfied with a better Gambon than a 
> worse unknown.
> 
> Hope that made sense, I know I was slightly rambling. . . 
> 
> Marlo
>
Sionwitch:
Marlo, I agree with you there, maybe if Gambon were directed better
and be ask to act more like the Dumbledore from the books he would be
just fine. Today I was watching the PoA DVD and Gambon is really good
in it, he really has the playful and mischievous Dumbledore
characterization there. But then yousee him in GoF screaming and
jumping around, and I wonder why such a change form the Dumbledore
from PoA?. I can only think of the director, because I think the
script was written for the same person, so the only answer would be
the director. I only can hope that the new the director and the next,
direct Gambon to be like in PoA. I will write to the person who
started the petition to ask her if she can change it  to ask Gambon to
act more like the Dumbledore from the books.
Sionwitch






From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sat Dec 10 18:07:28 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:07:28 EST
Subject: About Gambon as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <1c9.3687a008.30cc7360@aol.com>

My apologies. My previous post has the digest as the subject line. I meant to 
put Re: Gambon as Dumbledore. I've got to work on that....

Jade



From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Sat Dec 10 18:02:27 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:02:27 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 1347
Message-ID: <239.35bca7c.30cc7233@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/10/2005 5:34:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

<< OK, probably I'm really naive, but I cant believe that such a BIG
 fandom like HP's cant find a way to at least show WB that we don't
 like at all Michael Gambon as Dumbledore and that we think the they
 are killing him way before movie 6. Does anybody here knows about and
 email or a page that we could post what we think about this and be
 heard by WB executives? Anybody has some idea how can we get the
 attention from WB? >>

What's this "we" business? I'm ok with Gambon. However, I'm hoping perhaps 
that WB can catch wind that they need to veer Gambon back towards the DD in the 
books. There is chance for that. However, I do not dislike Gambon "at all." 
There are instances where I liked and disliked this new Dumbledore. I am quite 
aware he is no Harris, and he will never be Harris even if he followed book 
Dumbledore to the T.

<<Can you picture Gambon playing the powerful Dumbledore that fight
Voldermot in the MoM in OoTP?, or can you picture Gambon accepting
stoically his amount of guilt in Sirius death and making the mistake
of not telling Harry about the prophecy earlier?. I definitely can
picture Harris doing all of that, and Gambon performance only makes
Harris death all more sad.>>

Yes. This DD has some fire in him that can, in my opinion, give a good -vs- 
show between the two. As so pointed out in the GoF film, DD had told Harry in 
the end that he had placed him in great danger. Maybe there will be changes in 
the next film. Hopefully enough of these opinion are flying around to take 
notice. Until then, I will wait for the next film (  impatiently ;)  ).

Jade




From joj at rochester.rr.com  Sat Dec 10 18:38:34 2005
From: joj at rochester.rr.com (joj)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 13:38:34 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: petition to fire Gambon
References: <dnf2rk+ep1b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c5fdb8$ed6312b0$4a36cc45@bumbargey3ogmz>


> Sionwitch:
> Marlo, I agree with you there, maybe if Gambon were directed better
> and be ask to act more like the Dumbledore from the books he would be
> just fine. Today I was watching the PoA DVD and Gambon is really good
> in it, he really has the playful and mischievous Dumbledore
> characterization there. But then yousee him in GoF screaming and
> jumping around, and I wonder why such a change form the Dumbledore
> from PoA?. I can only think of the director, because I think the
> script was written for the same person, so the only answer would be
> the director. I only can hope that the new the director and the next,
> direct Gambon to be like in PoA. I will write to the person who
> started the petition to ask her if she can change it  to ask Gambon to
> act more like the Dumbledore from the books.
> Sionwitch


I wonder how different his performance would be if he'd been cast since the
first movie.  Whatever you think of Chris Columbus, he was very faithful to
the books.  If CC had directed Gambon for the first two movies, Gambon
probably would have gotten a more faithful picture of book Dumbledore.
Gambon started with Cuaron, who wasn't as faithful. The  other actors
(Coltrane, Smith , Rickman ect...) had already gotten a handle on their
characters, no matter how closely they read the books.  I just wonder if
Gambon would have a better instinct for Dumbledore had it happened that way.

Anyways, Gambon didn't bother me that much, but then again, I'm not a huge
Dumbledore fan to begin with.

Joj




From hpfgu at jdbailey.com  Sat Dec 10 23:46:11 2005
From: hpfgu at jdbailey.com (Jason in Alaska)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 14:46:11 -0900
Subject: Bring me the head...
In-Reply-To: <1134221601.1155.52194.m16@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1134221601.1155.52194.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <66ad60b3f362202325a95dc8b47ab820@jdbailey.com>

There's been a lot of talk about firing Gambon. I agree that I don't 
like his portrayal of Dumbledore in the latest film....but does the 
fault lie with him? Here are the people that deserve slaps, wedgies, 
howlers or envelopes of bubbertubber puss:
- Wardrobe, for dressing DD as though he is about to go to bed. A what 
the heck is up with the ponytail holder on the beard....that MUST go. I 
find it highly distracting, visually speaking.
- Makeup, for letting Hermione look cute all along. There was no magic 
transformation at the Yule Ball.
- Makeup, for never messing up Harry's hair enough
- Makeup, for what they did to Flitwick...for two movies he is balding, 
bearded and has white hair; then magically his aging is reversed, his 
hair turns black and he wears a groomed mustache.
- Writer, for misportraying several key characters.
	* Hermione - She knows WAY too much about the wizarding world that 
would not have been in books (the whole mudblood thing)
	* Hermione - She has know fear of speaking Voldie's name. I found that 
a significant growth in her when she starts using it in OotP
	* Dubledore - Angry DD is way out of character...you can probably 
count on one hand the number of times DD expresses exasperation with 
Harry...but you never see him as unglued as he was in GoF movie
	* Snape - I think he was perfectly cast, but he is too cold and 
calculating ... there isn't enough venom. Let's face it, in several 
books Snape almost busts blood vessels over things not working out the 
way he planned. It's like Gambon is playing Snape and Rickman is 
playing DD.
- Casting, for not casting Jim Dale as Aunt Marge :) I love his Aunt 
Marge voice.
- Director/Producer, for not having DD portrayed properly

I'm sure this list could go on, but I've run out of steam. I think they 
the producers were smart to get rid of Cuzon who killed the third movie 
for me. To this day I've only watched it once even though I own the DVD 
(I watched the bonus material, but not the movie).

Jason




From carla68 at adelphia.net  Sun Dec 11 17:19:56 2005
From: carla68 at adelphia.net (Carla)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 12:19:56 -0500
Subject: Bring me the head
In-Reply-To: <1134300449.470.12724.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <AGEOIDPAAKHAFELMGBGFEEAJCKAA.carla68@adelphia.net>


Jason in Alaska said:

There's been a lot of talk about firing Gambon. I agree that I don't 
like his portrayal of Dumbledore in the latest film....but does the 
fault lie with him? Here are the people that deserve slaps, wedgies, 
howlers or envelopes of bubbertubber puss:

(snip)

- Makeup, for what they did to Flitwick...for two movies he is balding, 
bearded and has white hair; then magically his aging is reversed, his 
hair turns black and he wears a groomed mustache.

ME: I COULDN'T agree more. I can not BEAR to look at mini-Hitler! It is so
distracting. I miss original recipe Flitwick!

	* Snape - I think he was perfectly cast, but he is too cold and 
calculating ... there isn't enough venom. Let's face it, in several 
books Snape almost busts blood vessels over things not working out the 
way he planned. It's like Gambon is playing Snape and Rickman is 
playing DD.

ME: You took the words right out of my mouth!
I anticipate every scene w/ Alan Rickman, and DO appreciate his skill w/
Snape. But I agree that we were cheated out of seeing him flip his wig, as
it were, at the end of PoA.
As for Dumbledore, it takes power away from his character to have him react
so loudly and aggressively, especially w/ the selection of Harry as a
Champion. It was not yet revealed how or why he was selected, so the scene
actually called for grave concern, as depicted in the book.  Dumbledore's
composure is such a barometer of a situation, that when he has cause to
"freak", then the viewer will know that that dung has indeed hit the fan.

~Carla

________________________________________________________________________


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




From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Dec 11 22:20:35 2005
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:20:35 EST
Subject: Bring me the head...
Message-ID: <2b4.2178dbb.30ce0033@aol.com>

 
Jason wrote:

There's been a lot of talk about firing Gambon. I  agree that I don't 
like his portrayal of Dumbledore in the latest  film....but does the 
fault lie with him? Here are the people that deserve  slaps, wedgies, 
howlers or envelopes of bubbertubber puss:

<snip list of potential slappees, etc>

 
Julie now:
I have a better idea. Why don't we all just lighten up a bit? They  are
only movies. (And, yes, even the HP books are only books.)  Should
we take this all seriously enough that we'd actually try to get  an actor 
FIRED if we don't agree with his interpretation of a character? (This
isn't directed at you, Jason, but a question to the list in general.)
 
Maybe it's only me, but I find the idea of a petition to get  Gambon
fired downright rude behavior. Snape-like behavior even ;-) Should  it
actually gather steam and hit the media, it would not put HP fans 
in a very good light at all. I'd reconsidering taking this route. I  really
would. 
 
JMO, of course,
 
Julie 






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




From ctmikki at sbcglobal.net  Sun Dec 11 23:23:42 2005
From: ctmikki at sbcglobal.net (Mik)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 15:23:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
In-Reply-To: <dnf2rk+ep1b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051211232342.74962.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

i have to put my two cents in:
   
  i think it's the directing, not the acting, on his part.  I think that he was told to go in the direction he's been in.  If not, he would have been corrected on set, no?  no, he's not as good as his predecessor, goddess bless him, but i think he's as close as anyone's going to get.  i think its a shame that anyone should sign a petition to get the poor guy fired.  wouldnt you feel bad signing that, knowing it was your fault he was fired????  and anyways, anytime they change people to play a character for whatever the reason, it's ALWAYS a let down, since you now have a 'character identity' with that particular actor.
   
  just my two cents.
   
  mik
   
   
   
  

sionwitch <sionwitch at yahoo.com> wrote:
  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "dzny72" <dzny72 at y...> wrote:
>
> As I was reading the posts regarding the firing of Gambon for his 
> portrayal of Dumbledore, I had a thought that needed to be shared.  
> What if we sign this petition, they actually fire Gambon, and then they 
> hire someone even worse (in our opinions) to play Dumbledore?  I guess 
> we should decide which is worse:  Gambon continuing as Dumbledore or 
> the possibility of someone being cast that is even less the character 
> we need him to be.  Maybe we should petition that Gambon should be 
> required to read the material that his script is based on in order to 
> get a better idea of who his is prtraying and the emotions behind his 
> actions.  I think I might be satisfied with a better Gambon than a 
> worse unknown.
> 
> Hope that made sense, I know I was slightly rambling. . . 
> 
> Marlo
>
Sionwitch:
Marlo, I agree with you there, maybe if Gambon were directed better
and be ask to act more like the Dumbledore from the books he would be
just fine. Today I was watching the PoA DVD and Gambon is really good
in it, he really has the playful and mischievous Dumbledore
characterization there. But then yousee him in GoF screaming and
jumping around, and I wonder why such a change form the Dumbledore
from PoA?. I can only think of the director, because I think the
script was written for the same person, so the only answer would be
the director. I only can hope that the new the director and the next,
direct Gambon to be like in PoA. I will write to the person who
started the petition to ask her if she can change it  to ask Gambon to
act more like the Dumbledore from the books.
Sionwitch





________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________



    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie" on the web.
    
    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 vincentjh at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 12 07:50:09 2005
From: vincentjh at yahoo.com (vincentjh)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 07:50:09 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
In-Reply-To: <20051211232342.74962.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dnja3h+rluo@eGroups.com>

It's highly unlikely that any petition like this would succeed. Even
if it does, I wonder who they're going to hire to replace Gamdon. We
all have our dream cast and all have our own mental pictures of how
the characters should look like. However, casting a movie is a
complicated matter and, believe it or not, there are actors who, for
various reason, would not accept the role(s) if offered. 

Personally, I don't see Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore any more
offensive than, say, Klove's cheesy lines or Dan's wooden performance
early on. It's true that he didn't read the novel. But the script and
direction alone should be sufficient for any actor to prepare for his
character. After all, the acting in a movie is based on the *script*.
If there's discrepancy between a movie character and a book character,
the writer and director should be blamed before the actor. Otherwise,
we should start a petition to fire Emma Watson because Hermione speaks
Dumbledore's lines, Rupert Grint because Ron is not brave enough, and
Alan Rickman because Snape isn't supposed to be attractive.






From louisemccabe88 at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 12 13:34:43 2005
From: louisemccabe88 at hotmail.com (louisemccabe88)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:34:43 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
In-Reply-To: <dnja3h+rluo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnju9j+c5qq@eGroups.com>


Alan Rickman because Snape isn't supposed to be attractive.

and is he not so!!!!!







From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Dec 12 13:52:02 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:52:02 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] bring me the head
Message-ID: <1c5.365a9e78.30ceda82@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/12/2005 8:33:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


>>Jason in Alaska said:

- Makeup, for what they did to  Flitwick...for two movies he is balding, 
bearded and has white hair; then  magically his aging is reversed, his 
hair turns black and he wears a  groomed mustache.

Carla: I COULDN'T agree more. I can not BEAR to look  at mini-Hitler! It is so
distracting. I miss original recipe  Flitwick!<<
Now me:  I just saw GoF for the third time yesterday (in IMAX,  YAY!) and 
noticed Flitwick's "Hitler-type" moustache has been replaced with a  larger, 
bushier one.  That's an improvement, but that bowl haircut???  (Shaved on the 
bottom in back).  What IDIOT came up with that look for  him?  The moustache is an 
improvement over the Hitler look.  I suspect  they got a lot of complaints 
about that and decided to change him "a little" as  a result.  But I guess they 
thought they couldn't go back to the first  Flitwick, who was exactly as I'd 
pictured him when reading the books.  But  JKR said in an interview she thought 
of him as just a "tiny little man" so I  suppose the new look is to make him 
look more THAT way rather than as a  potential elf or gnome or something.  JMO.
 



>>    * Snape - I think he was perfectly cast,  but he is too cold and 
calculating ... there isn't enough venom. Let's  face it, in several 
books Snape almost busts blood vessels over things not  working out the 
way he planned. It's like Gambon is playing Snape and  Rickman is 
playing DD.

ME: You took the words right out of my  mouth!
I anticipate every scene w/ Alan Rickman, and DO appreciate his  skill w/
Snape. But I agree that we were cheated out of seeing him flip his  wig, as
it were, at the end of PoA.
As for Dumbledore, it takes power  away from his character to have him react
so loudly and aggressively,  especially w/ the selection of Harry as a
Champion. It was not yet revealed  how or why he was selected, so the scene
actually called for grave concern,  as depicted in the book.  Dumbledore's
composure is such a barometer  of a situation, that when he has cause to
"freak", then the viewer will  know that that dung has indeed hit the  fan.

~Carla<<
I've read several articles now (sorry, don't know which links lead  to the 
right ones) that say they were portraying a Dumbledore who is  "weakening," 
something that isn't this apparent in canon until book 6,  IMO.  One of the "bad" 
cuts in this film was in the Pensieve scene where  they removed the part where 
DD told Harry he could no longer protect him, and  Harry said, "If not you, 
then who?" (it was in trailers, I think, or behind the  scenes shows -- I've 
seen it several times, but it isn't in the films).   THEN DD does the part where 
he sits tiredly on the steps and Harry asks what  happened to Barty Jr. after 
the trial.  (At least, this is how I think the  scenes fit together.)
 
I have a question after seeing the film again.  After the Yule  Ball, when 
Ron and Hermione are arguing, Harry comes with his full dress robes  on from 
some other hallway, looking distracted/distressed.  Then Hermione  tells both of 
the boys to go to bed (which I think was very funny and one of  Emma's better 
scenes -- she's way too over the top most of the time in this  film, I think). 
 My question:  WHERE was Harry coming from, and what  did he overhear that 
upset him?  Something's missing.  He wouldn't  know it was a problem for Hagrid 
to be a half-giant, so if he overheard that  conversation, he wouldn't be 
upset.  He saw Karkaroff and Snape's  discussion at a different point in the film, 
so that couldn't be it.  So  why did he look upset?
 
I thought it was funny that they had Madam Maxime coming on to  Hagrid so 
much (the thing she took out of his beard and put in her mouth?   What was THAT?? 
 And then she leaned in for a kiss and he missed his  chance!  LOL!) and 
didn't have them fighting.  They didn't lose  anything by dropping that storyline, 
IMO.  And Hagrid was precious in his  infatuation with her.  But I missed 
seeing her "magnificent opals" -- I  wanted to SEE opals that would look suitable 
on a half-giantess!!  Oh well.   

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Dec 12 13:58:27 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:58:27 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] bring me the head
Message-ID: <292.1e4668a.30cedc03@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/12/2005 8:33:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

>>Julie now:
I have a better idea. Why don't we all just  lighten up a bit? They  are
only movies. (And, yes, even the HP books  are only books.)  Should
we take this all seriously enough that we'd  actually try to get  an actor 
FIRED if we don't agree with his  interpretation of a character? (This
isn't directed at you, Jason, but a  question to the list in general.)

Maybe it's only me, but I find the  idea of a petition to get  Gambon
fired downright rude behavior.  Snape-like behavior even ;-) Should  it
actually gather steam and hit  the media, it would not put HP fans 
in a very good light at all. I'd  reconsidering taking this route. I  really
would. 

JMO, of  course,

Julie <<


Yup, I agree.  I've been part of "grass-roots campaigns" to  get studios to 
do something the fans wanted (to bring back a TV show that was  prematurely 
canceled) and I know that they do pay attention to the attitude of  the fandom.  
If we want them to listen to us about anything, we need to be  realistic in 
our expectations and requests (demands just get tossed in the  trash, y'know).  
Gambon is portraying Dumbledore the way the directors are  telling him to -- 
as an aging, weakening wizard, not the powerful one we've  read.  We don't know 
why they're doing this so early, although we do know  he's going to weaken 
considerably in book 6 now.  Maybe they're trying to  show non-readers what 
horrible peril Harry's in, because they're showing Harry  (in the films)  as being 
in even more peril than *we* know he is, because  his mentor is failing.  Oh 
gee, that's a poorly constructed sentence, but  I'm in a hurry here, sorry!  
Anyway, I think we can ask that Gambon read  the books, but not try to change 
the actor.  He is a VERY good actor.   Given the right direction, etc., he can 
do the job.  Let's just drop this  whole idea of replacing him.  Maybe we can 
get them to change his costumes  so he doesn't look like he's in pajamas all 
the time.  At least they  finally stopped writing "Super!Hermione"!!!  That was 
a MAJOR improvement!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From ejblack at rogers.com  Mon Dec 12 18:45:22 2005
From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 18:45:22 -0000
Subject: Back to the movie
Message-ID: <dnkgg2+u6vb@eGroups.com>

  There has been praise for the fine emsemble acting in the movie, one 
quiet moment that I particularly liked and haven't seen mentioned was 
the wonder look that passed between Snape and Harry when Dumbledore 
said that "Of course" it was the false Moody that had been stealing 
from Snape's storeroom.  Lovely, lovely bit of acting: so quiet, so 
brief yet speaking such volumes.

Jeanette







From hp at plum.cream.org  Mon Dec 12 19:30:40 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:30:40 +0000
Subject: Gambledore
In-Reply-To: <dncmmb+hn5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>

I've been extremely busy over the last week and haven't had the time to say 
anything, although I have managed to read all the posts. Although I'm going 
to address some of the comments made thus far on this topic, I'm not going 
to quote any original text, nor am I up to going through all the posts to 
establish who said what. Apologies.

Incidentally, as nobody here seems to be interested in discussing the 
movies in any depth (funny, I always thought the "GU" part of this group's 
name was meant to stand for "Grown Ups" rather than "Gambon's Useless"), 
I'll try to find the time to address some of JenD's points by email to 
avoid cluttering up the list with anything potentially meaningful.

Before I give some of my opinions, a few facts about the petition to oust 
Gambon (and petitions in general).

There are at least four different petitions demanding that Gambon be fired 
on the "Petition Spot" site alone (plus several others on other similar 
sites). I find it quite amusing (and indicative of the fandom) that none of 
the authors felt it appropriate to check what was going on before launching 
their own attempts.

The petition mentioned last week has set itself a target of 10,000 
signatories. Despite some fairly heavy plugging both here and in other HP 
forums, it had managed to collect 8 supporters in its first six days (up to 
last Friday). Having checked just now, the total remains at 8, despite more 
plugging over the weekend. The other petitions total about 150 signatories 
(I haven't looked at the details to see how many of those are the same 
people signing different petitions). This does not augur success very well, 
or indeed indicate the widespread dissatisfaction some people think it 
does. In fact, a petition calling for Robin Williams (!) to be given the 
Dumbledore role has more signatures than any of the anti-Gambon ones.

Let's think about the numbers (we are supposed to be adults, aren't we?). 
Businesses and politicians work on the assumption that for every complaint 
or petition signatory on a given topic, ten other "relevant" people feel 
the same way. Assuming that the petition *does* get its 10,000 signatories 
(by when, incidentally?), that represents about 100,000 disgruntled fans. 
Heck, let's up the ante and assume that each signatory represents a hundred 
people, so the production team is faced with a million dissatisfied 
customers. During its first weekend on release, GoF sold around 10 million 
tickets in North America alone (assuming an average ticket price of $10). 
Assuming that those 10 million tickets represent the assiduous fans, OotP 
will "only" make $90 million in its first weekend. Of course, that's on a 
further assumption that all of the signatories refuse to see the next movie 
because Gambon's in it - the petition makes no such demand of its 
signatories, and even if it did, how many people would actually see it through?

There have been dozens (if not hundreds) of online petitions relating to 
the HP movie franchise on a variety of subjects. The production team has 
taken notice of precisely none of them. Why should this one be any 
different? In any event, to my knowledge, no online petition ever has had 
any effect on its addressee's behaviour unless it's just one element of a 
wider campaign in the real world - petitions generally are not an end in 
themselves, they are just one small tool in campaigners' hands (I speak 
here as a veteran campaigner on a multitude of issues both big and small, 
all of them successful).

A nit-picky point: addressing the petition to "Warner Brothers Ltd" is 
pointless: the person ultimately responsible for hiring and firing is the 
producer, namely David Heyman. Warners are just putting up the money.

Which brings me full circle: the only way for any kind of campaign to have 
an actor fired to have an impact is to address the bottom line: what does 
the production team have to lose by pitting what appears to be a small but 
vociferous portion of the fandom against their contractual obligations 
towards Gambon, who's already signed up for OotP? Frankly, nothing. Perhaps 
a few hundred tickets to see OotP when it comes out, even if people 
remember the current scorn being poured on Gambon. Does anyone remember how 
badly Harris was accepted in some quarters when the first movie came out? 
Judging by the current flood of support for him, it seems not.

Frankly, I find the whole idea of this petition, and some of the comments 
made on this list, seriously disagreeable. They might have been amusing if 
they weren't quite so vitriolic. Some people bandy words about as if they 
didn't have a clue what they mean. The words "assault", "attack" and 
similar loaded terminology has been used about Gambon's reaction to Harry's 
name coming out of the Goblet. Come on!

As it happens, I don't much care for Gambon as a person (or rather, his 
public persona, considering I don't know the man personally), but I think 
he's streets ahead of Harris in the way he plays Dumbledore. Sure, 
Dumbledore is the old sage Harris portrayed, but he's so much more. Harris 
(who, let's remind ourselves, did not care for the role at all!) just 
played a stereotypical mage and didn't come close to showing Dumbledore's 
more wacky side. I rather like Clueless!Hippy!Gambledore: after all, 
regardless of his reputation, Dumbledore behaves fairly cluelessly 
throughout the books (that's a separate discussion which I refuse to enter 
at this stage).

The fact that Gambon doesn't take this role particularly seriously and 
hasn't bothered reading the books is neither here nor there. Neither did 
Harris, neither has Maggie Smith, nor most of the adult cast. For better or 
worse, Gambon considers this particular gig as little more than a job: he 
doesn't care for or about his character, and is doing the best he can with 
what he's given. I suspect that all the other actors in that age range are 
in the same boat. To put it briefly, no adult actor in the HP movies is 
going to be as passionate about it as some of the fans are, or want the 
actors to be.

As I've said before, I found his reaction in the Champions' room perfectly 
understandable and I can't believe that the best thing so many people can 
some up with is "that's not what he did in the book". Tough. This isn't the 
book, and this isn't book-Dumbeldore. Frankly, I find it quite admirable 
that with his directors' support (or perhaps even at their instigation) 
Gambon's prepared to take the character as far as he does from the 
stereotypical sage, and Harris's performance in particular. In many ways, 
he reminds me of Nicol Williamson as Merlin in "Excalibur", which also 
divided opinion 25 years ago.

I know some people are going to shoot me down for this and I may sound like 
a broken record, but I feel that much of the problem with the 
shoulder-grabbing sequence has nothing to do with Gambon, but with 
everyone's blind-spot-in-the-(lack-of)-acting-skills-department, young 
Master Radcliffe. I think he gets the tone of his physical and verbal 
reactions to Gambeldore quite wrong. By appearing defiant at the beginning 
of the sequence, he ends up looking scared of *Dumbeldore* rather than of 
what entry in the Tournament represents, which is what I suspect the 
intention  had been. Not to mention that this is also in the context of his 
baffling (baffled?) reaction to his name coming out of the Goblet in the 
first place. And talking of context, Dumbledore's physicality in that scene 
is part of a more general physicality among the teachers throughout the movie.

Then again, "context" doesn't seem to be a concept for which most people 
around here have any time, so I won't waste mine going into details.

I originally found it amusing, but now find it depressing, that some of the 
same people decrying Dumbledore's OOC physicality in that scene name 
Snape's physicality in the study-session scene as one of their favourite 
moments. To my recollection, Snape has never been physical with Harry or 
Ron at any point in the books, and in some respects, his whole persona in 
that scene was more OOC for Snape than anything Gambon did throughout the 
movie.

Yet I don't seem to be able to find any petitions to get Rickman kicked off 
the cast, or indeed a single word against this characterisation, anywhere 
in any of the forums I follow (and I've just looked).

So, can we have a little less of the hypocrisy, please?

--
Richard, who wouldn't be surprised if people think he sounds unhappy. 
They're right.



From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 12 19:57:35 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:57:35 -0000
Subject: Back to the movie
In-Reply-To: <dnkgg2+u6vb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnkknf+hj8f@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jeanette" <ejblack at r...> wrote:
>
>   There has been praise for the fine emsemble acting in the movie, 
one 
> quiet moment that I particularly liked and haven't seen mentioned 
was 
> the wonder look that passed between Snape and Harry when 
Dumbledore 
> said that "Of course" it was the false Moody that had been 
stealing 
> from Snape's storeroom.  Lovely, lovely bit of acting: so quiet, 
so 
> brief yet speaking such volumes.
> 
> Jeanette
>


Jeannette,

I saw that too, the second time around!  It was sort of a look 
behind Dumbledore's head that passed between them, and I found it 
funny.  Snape looking at Harry like, "You're off the hook THIS 
time"  and Harry looking at Snape, maybe thinking, "Aha!  You ARE a 
git!"  :D  Great moment, there.  

But my ALL TIME favorite Daniel moment was when he was asking Cho to 
the Ball.  His nervousness seemed so real, it takes you back to when 
you were that age and feeling so awkward and out of place.  And 
then, when she calls back "Harry"  to him, to tell him that she's 
sorry (again), the look on his face is precious.  He sprints back to 
the doorway to see if she's changed her mind, and then he's let down 
again.  Just beautifully done!

Alora 






From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 12 22:16:19 2005
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:16:19 -0000
Subject: Gambledore
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dnksrj+s2mq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
<SNIP>
> Frankly, I find the whole idea of this petition, and some of the 
comments 
> made on this list, seriously disagreeable. They might have been 
amusing if 
> they weren't quite so vitriolic. Some people bandy words about as 
if they 
> didn't have a clue what they mean. The words "assault", "attack" 
and 
> similar loaded terminology has been used about Gambon's reaction to 
Harry's 
> name coming out of the Goblet. Come on!
> 
> As it happens, I don't much care for Gambon as a person (or rather, 
his 
> public persona, considering I don't know the man personally), but I 
think 
> he's streets ahead of Harris in the way he plays Dumbledore. Sure, 
> Dumbledore is the old sage Harris portrayed, but he's so much more. 
Harris 
> (who, let's remind ourselves, did not care for the role at all!) 
just 
> played a stereotypical mage and didn't come close to showing 
Dumbledore's 
> more wacky side. I rather like Clueless!Hippy!Gambledore: after 
all, 
> regardless of his reputation, Dumbledore behaves fairly cluelessly 
> throughout the books (that's a separate discussion which I refuse 
to enter 
> at this stage).
> 
> The fact that Gambon doesn't take this role particularly seriously 
and 
> hasn't bothered reading the books is neither here nor there. 
Neither did 
> Harris, neither has Maggie Smith, nor most of the adult cast. For 
better or 
> worse, Gambon considers this particular gig as little more than a 
job: he 
> doesn't care for or about his character, and is doing the best he 
can with 
> what he's given. I suspect that all the other actors in that age 
range are 
> in the same boat. To put it briefly, no adult actor in the HP 
movies is 
> going to be as passionate about it as some of the fans are, or want 
the 
> actors to be.
> 
> As I've said before, I found his reaction in the Champions' room 
perfectly 
> understandable and I can't believe that the best thing so many 
people can 
> some up with is "that's not what he did in the book". Tough. This 
isn't the 
> book, and this isn't book-Dumbeldore. Frankly, I find it quite 
admirable 
> that with his directors' support (or perhaps even at their 
instigation) 
> Gambon's prepared to take the character as far as he does from the 
> stereotypical sage, and Harris's performance in particular. In many 
ways, 
> he reminds me of Nicol Williamson as Merlin in "Excalibur", which 
also 
> divided opinion 25 years ago.
> 
> I know some people are going to shoot me down for this and I may 
sound like 
> a broken record, but I feel that much of the problem with the 
> shoulder-grabbing sequence has nothing to do with Gambon, but with 
> everyone's blind-spot-in-the-(lack-of)-acting-skills-department, 
young 
> Master Radcliffe. I think he gets the tone of his physical and 
verbal 
> reactions to Gambeldore quite wrong. By appearing defiant at the 
beginning 
> of the sequence, he ends up looking scared of *Dumbeldore* rather 
than of 
> what entry in the Tournament represents, which is what I suspect 
the 
> intention  had been. Not to mention that this is also in the 
context of his 
> baffling (baffled?) reaction to his name coming out of the Goblet 
in the 
> first place. And talking of context, Dumbledore's physicality in 
that scene 
> is part of a more general physicality among the teachers throughout 
the movie.
> 
> Then again, "context" doesn't seem to be a concept for which most 
people 
> around here have any time, so I won't waste mine going into details.
> 
> I originally found it amusing, but now find it depressing, that 
some of the 
> same people decrying Dumbledore's OOC physicality in that scene 
name 
> Snape's physicality in the study-session scene as one of their 
favourite 
> moments. To my recollection, Snape has never been physical with 
Harry or 
> Ron at any point in the books, and in some respects, his whole 
persona in 
> that scene was more OOC for Snape than anything Gambon did 
throughout the 
> movie.
> 
> Yet I don't seem to be able to find any petitions to get Rickman 
kicked off 
> the cast, or indeed a single word against this characterisation, 
anywhere 
> in any of the forums I follow (and I've just looked).
> 
> So, can we have a little less of the hypocrisy, please?
> 
> --
> Richard, who wouldn't be surprised if people think he sounds 
unhappy. 
> They're right.
>



Alla:


Hmmmm, I think I want to respond to some of your points, Richard. 
First of all, let me state that I also find the petition of firing 
Gambon to not be quite agreeable - but that is because I find any 
type of this kind of the petition ( firing an actor) to be the waste 
of my time. JMO of course.


I think Gambon is a fine actor. I think he gets some parts of 
Dumbledore's personality really well, I think he has no clue about 
others, but of course it is not his fault - I am actually very 
surprised that people could think that it could be ANYBODY's but 
director's  and scripwriter's fault.

But having said all that, I really don't share your liking of that 
scene. I mean I do not dislike it, because I could see how 
Dumbledore's reactions could be legitimately read as fear for Harry, 
I really do.

But Dumbledore does NOT shake people, he just don't. You said that 
Dumbledore of the movie is different from the books. Absolutely, it 
is a very fair point. BUT I don't want him to be THAT different, you 
know. It is just my personal reaction.

It IS an adaptation after all, NOT an original screenplay. I guess I 
simply prefer screenwriter not to take THAT much liberties with 
characters as he did.

And you are completely right about Snape too - he IS never physical 
with the boys in the books, BUT it is much EASIER to me to see Snape 
being physical in the antagonistic contest, you know.

If Snape would decided to hug Harry and Ron in the movie, THAT type 
of physical interaction may force me to revisit my views about the 
petitions and start one ( Just kidding of course), but Snape smacking 
Harry and Ron, just feels right to me , you know - sort of logical 
progression of his personality as I see it.

Oh, and I also don't see what Dan's reactions have to do with 
Gambon's acting . IMO he should look scared of Dumbledore - because 
he does not expect such reaction from the Headmaster. I would think 
that his acting was off, if he did not look scared.

Now, Dumbledore being scared of the paper with Harry's name, THAT 
looked ridiculous to me.


JMO of course,

Alla






From lizzy1933 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 13 01:50:03 2005
From: lizzy1933 at yahoo.com (lizzie_snape)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 01:50:03 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
In-Reply-To: <20051211232342.74962.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dnl9cb+rp8s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Mik <ctmikki at s...> wrote:
>
> i have to put my two cents in:
>    
>   i think it's the directing, not the acting, on his part.  I 
think that he was told to go in the direction he's been in.  If not, 
he would have been corrected on set, no?  no, he's not as good as 
his predecessor, goddess bless him, but i think he's as close as 
anyone's going to get.  i think its a shame that anyone should sign 
a petition to get the poor guy fired.  wouldnt you feel bad signing 
that, knowing it was your fault he was fired????  and anyways, 
anytime they change people to play a character for whatever the 
reason, it's ALWAYS a let down, since you now have a 'character 
identity' with that particular actor.
>    
>   just my two cents.
>    
>   mik
>

Agreed, mik.  Newell has said he wanted to make Hogwarts more like a 
real British boarding school, hence the harsh Dumbledore and the 
study hall scene with Snape.  Unfortunately (?), Alan Rickman made 
it a humorous interlude and not at all as a nasty schoolmaster the 
way I think it was intended.  Way to go, Alan! LOL 

Lizzie   







From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Dec 13 14:13:15 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 09:13:15 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Gambledore
Message-ID: <1d6.4ae6e8b4.30d030fb@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/13/2005 7:25:51 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

I know  some people are going to shoot me down for this and I may sound like 
a  broken record, but I feel that much of the problem with the  
shoulder-grabbing sequence has nothing to do with Gambon, but with  
everyone's blind-spot-in-the-(lack-of)-acting-skills-department, young  
Master Radcliffe. I think he gets the tone of his physical and verbal  
reactions to Gambeldore quite wrong. By appearing defiant at the beginning  
of the sequence, he ends up looking scared of *Dumbeldore* rather than of  
what entry in the Tournament represents, which is what I suspect the  
intention  had been. Not to mention that this is also in the context  of his 
baffling (baffled?) reaction to his name coming out of the Goblet  in the 
first place. And talking of context, Dumbledore's physicality in  that scene 
is part of a more general physicality among the teachers  throughout the 
movie.


Richard, sometimes I wonder if we've watched the same movie.   Dan portrayed 
Harry as shocked beyond belief and scared spitless when his name  is called.  
Hermione has to urge him to get moving.  There's no  *defiance* anywhere.  I 
see him cringing when the other students call him a  cheat -- head down, 
shoulders taut, face frozen as he gulps hard while walking  through the gauntlet of 
taunting he has to bear.  He's shocked and  scared when Dumbledore shakes him 
in the Trophy Room, too, not  "defiant."  Poor Harry.  He was so enjoying 
watching the Goblet light  up, the ceremony go on, cheering for Cedric and all 
that, and then HIS name  comes out of the Goblet?  When Dumbledore got in his 
face about whether  he'd put his own name in the Goblet, Harry was vehement in 
saying he  hadn't, but it wasn't "defiance" he was showing there, either, but 
shock and  desperation.  Someone had "framed" him and he had no idea how it 
happened  or why.  He was horrified.  He expressed shock, disbelief and fear  
beautifully in his face and body language throughout the entire sequence.  
 
I admit that you, like the rest of us, have a right to your  opinion, but you 
have set yourself up as a voice of authority when it comes to  film.  I  have 
no real problem with that, because you seem to have a  far better film 
education than many of us (and have had time to see the film far  more times than 
most of us).  However, I think you just don't like Dan  Radcliffe in the role, 
so you don't see the nuances in his acting.  I think  you may have closed your 
mind to the possibility he might be showing the Harry  from canon very well 
indeed -- a boy who's been forced to be emotionally  repressed most of his life 
(with the Dursleys) and who has suffered taunts and  derision both in the 
Muggle world and the wizarding world (from the Malfoy  types), while also 
experiencing unwelcome adulation from others in the wizarding  world.  This is a boy 
who has to bear burdens most adults couldn't handle  -- and he has to do it on 
his own, for the most part.  
 
You keep saying he's "wooden" but I completely disagree.  The  only time he 
looks at all "stiff" is when he seems to be protecting himself  from an 
expected blow (emotional or physical) of some kind.  I don't see  that as "wooden" 
acting -- I see that as Dan portraying the Harry I've been  reading all these 
years, and doing it extremely well.
 
I admit, I like Dan in the role a lot.  I was totally  blown away by how 
sensitive a portrayal he did in this film.  Friends  who've seen it and aren't 
really "invested" in the films or actors told me  they think he did a fabulous 
job as well.  I just read that he's  nominated for an award for it.  I hope he 
wins it.  I can't understand  Emma being nominated for an award by the same 
people, unless there just aren't  enough young actresses to fill the categories.  
Emma was way over the top  in this film, IMO, overreacting in many scenes 
(but the one after the Yule ball  was perfect, as was her little giggle when 
entering the ball and her desperately  frightened hug of Harry before the first 
task).  But Dan -- he EARNED that  nomination.  I hope he wins it.
 
As for your thinking that "in depth" discussions need to be kept  off of this 
board -- that's just silly.  We ARE grownups, with a wide  variety of 
opinions, tastes, interests, and we discuss all of them here without  knocking anyone 
for their opinions or decrying any perceived lack of  intellectualism.  I 
enjoy reading many of your posts when you get into  technical details of how 
things are done, for instance, or theories behind  things (I can't give you 
specific examples at the moment -- I have to leave for  an appointment soon and have 
no time to research).  There's no need for  anyone to be rude to anyone else 
here.  Just post your opinions and have  fun, as the rest of us are trying to 
do.
 
JMO.  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Tue Dec 13 16:24:06 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:24:06 -0500
Subject: Gambledore
In-Reply-To: <1134476681.534.33584.m16@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1134476681.534.33584.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <8C7CE18C61B9895-1DB0-276@FWM-R09.sysops.aol.com>

Alla:
But having said all that, I really don't share your liking of that 
scene. I mean I do not dislike it, because I could see how 
Dumbledore's reactions could be legitimately read as fear for Harry, 
I really do.

I thought the scene with Dumbledore shaking Harry rather out of place but then I reread a section towards the end of the Goblet of Fire that may have given rise to this out-of-place scene. It occurs when Dumbledore saves Harry from Moody/Barty Crouch Jr. Harry describes the scene as never seeing Dumbledore in this cold shaking manner before. I'll have to find the section again and post it. I'm wondering if this scene was an attempt to add in a piece of the non-calming Dumbledore that really is in the books. Just my two cents.
 
Jade


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




From clshannon75 at sbcglobal.net  Tue Dec 13 18:30:24 2005
From: clshannon75 at sbcglobal.net (CYNTHIA L SHANNON)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:30:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Snape's behavior
In-Reply-To: <1134476681.534.33584.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051213183024.7859.qmail@web81802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I wasn't able to reply to the actual message since I
am on digest, but I did want to address the assumption
by a few posters that Snape has never been physical
with the students, especially Harry.
In OOTP, during the chapter 'Snape's Worst Memory', he
throws Harry 'from him with all his might'. Harry hits
the floor hard. Before this, Snape had grabbed Harry's
arm in a pincer like grip while still in the pensieve.

I would say  that throwing a student from him with all
his might constitutes being rather physical ;-)

Cindy
P.S. He also shakes Harry so hard in that scene that
Harry's glassses slip down his nose ;-)



From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 13 19:07:49 2005
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:07:49 -0000
Subject: Snape's behavior
In-Reply-To: <20051213183024.7859.qmail@web81802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dnn665+j0ma@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CYNTHIA L SHANNON 
<clshannon75 at s...> wrote:
>
> I wasn't able to reply to the actual message since I
> am on digest, but I did want to address the assumption
> by a few posters that Snape has never been physical
> with the students, especially Harry.
> In OOTP, during the chapter 'Snape's Worst Memory', he
> throws Harry 'from him with all his might'. Harry hits
> the floor hard. Before this, Snape had grabbed Harry's
> arm in a pincer like grip while still in the pensieve.
> 
> I would say  that throwing a student from him with all
> his might constitutes being rather physical ;-)
> 
> Cindy
> P.S. He also shakes Harry so hard in that scene that
> Harry's glassses slip down his nose ;-)
>


Alla:

Erm... YES, of course. Read this scene several times,think that Snape 
had no right to do that but I think it is a fair argument to make 
that Snape was never physical with the boys before OOP, you know.

If you read the main list, you know that I am really, really NOT 
defending Snape behaviour, almost never. :-), but don't you agree 
that circumstances of that scene were exceptionall and Snape wa never 
physical with Harry after that scene either. 

Alla






From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Mon Dec 12 21:12:51 2005
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 21:12:51 +0000
Subject: The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>
References: <20051202173012.39137.qmail@web53215.mail.yahoo.com>
 <4.2.0.58.20051204192556.00b127e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <p06110402bfc0fc16c0c2@[217.154.249.23]>

>Richard said:-
>Incidentally, I can't believe that it struck me only this moment that the
>ideal way/place to establish as succinctly (if not as obviously) as
>possible the related issue of the Map's authorship is not through
>expositionary dialogue at all: assuming that Snape's Pensieve scene makes
>it into OotP (and I can't see it not doing so), simply have WMPP use their
>noms-de-plume while sitting under the tree (which they sort-of do in the
>book anyway). Not only that, but perhaps have them using the map as well
>(just to dot the 'i's and cross the 't's).

My attention has been distracted from HPFGU-M recently by a 
discussion on another list on the subject of elements missing from 
the PoA and GoF movies, and whether or not the plotlines which do 
remain in the movies actually make sense. I mentioned the explanation 
of the identities of the writers of the Marauders' Map as an example 
of something  which was not crucial to the storyline, but which added 
immensely to the emotional satisfaction for the reader, and would 
have done the same for the movie audience. I believe it was Jen who 
said something similar on this list.

I appreciate Richard's point, above, but experience of PoA and GoF 
has shown that the directors are not keen to bring in elements which 
do not rightly belong in 'their' plots. There is some justification 
for this, since they have to condense the books so much that it would 
seem unnecessary to add irrelevant material. A scene such as you 
describe, Richard, would indeed serve the purpose of identifying MWP 
and P, but as this will be a flashback scene, the director of OoP 
will also have to ensure that it is clear that it is James, Sirius, 
Lupin and Pettigrew who are on screen....he may not want the added 
complication of their 'noms de guerre'. On the other hand, if we are 
to take GoF as a model, the director of OoP may have the same 
expectations as Newell; that pretty much everyone who will watch the 
movie will have read the book, so they don't have to be crystal clear 
about everything. As I said in my original review, I think this is a 
mistake.

On which subject; did anyone else see the article in the January 
issue of 'Empire'; 'Harry Potter and the what of huh'? where they run 
through some of the less-clear plot points of GoF for the benefit of 
those seeing the film without having read the book. Rather 
embarrasssing for the director, scriptwriter and story editor....

Glad to know that I was not the only one who thought the storytelling 
somewhat lacking...

Cheers,
Nicholas



From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Dec 13 21:30:34 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 21:30:34 -0000
Subject: Snape's behavior
In-Reply-To: <20051213183024.7859.qmail@web81802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dnnehq+ou0m@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, CYNTHIA L SHANNON 
<clshannon75 at s...> wrote:
>
> I wasn't able to reply to the actual message since I
> am on digest, but I did want to address the assumption
> by a few posters that Snape has never been physical
> with the students, especially Harry.
> In OOTP, during the chapter 'Snape's Worst Memory', he
> throws Harry 'from him with all his might'. Harry hits
> the floor hard. Before this, Snape had grabbed Harry's
> arm in a pincer like grip while still in the pensieve.
> 
> I would say  that throwing a student from him with all
> his might constitutes being rather physical ;-)
> 
> Cindy
> P.S. He also shakes Harry so hard in that scene that
> Harry's glassses slip down his nose ;-)
>
Yes, he's physical in OOTP but had not been up to that time
JenD







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Dec 13 21:58:49 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 21:58:49 -0000
Subject: The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <p06110402bfc0fc16c0c2@[217.154.249.23]>
Message-ID: <dnng6p+s8bs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, nicholas dean <nicholas at a...> wrote:
>Major snipping here:
Nicholas writes:> 
> On which subject; did anyone else see the article in the January 
> issue of 'Empire'; 'Harry Potter and the what of huh'? where they run 
> through some of the less-clear plot points of GoF for the benefit of 
> those seeing the film without having read the book. Rather 
> embarrasssing for the director, scriptwriter and story editor....
> 
> Glad to know that I was not the only one who thought the storytelling 
> somewhat lacking...
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicholas
>
JenD interjects:
I have to say that I felt the "Shrieking Shack" scene was the all-time 
biggest piece of Swiss cheese (aka plotholes) that I've seen so far. I 
realize there has to be some tacit agreement between rabid fans and the 
makers given that no one has said "no" to a single word (or many many 
thousands) Jo has written in ages. She writes extremely complicated and 
many-threaded plots. The best thing I have heard was a suggestion from 
Richard that the each of books would have made much better year long 
series. Then the intricacies of plot which are abundant, would have 
gotten some screen time. These books really can't be done any sort of 
justice in 2 and half hours. Given that, we have the tacit agreement 
that not everything will be on-screen, not every bit of plot displayed 
and we'll all try to play nicely with what we get. 
JenD
Who is ever so happy to see Nicholas back and still waiting for Richard 
to pop his head above ground again....







From agdisney at msn.com  Tue Dec 13 22:37:36 2005
From: agdisney at msn.com (Andrea Grevera)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:37:36 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
References: <20051211232342.74962.qmail@web81410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY108-DAV38C241A7911188F54709ACF390@phx.gbl>


  Andie
  More 2 cents:  I saw Gambonin an interview before GOF (sometime in the summer) and his words were that he wasn't going to play DD as before, he didn't like DD that way.  he did not want to play him the way the books had him:  He was not going to read the books: He was going to play DD his way.
  So no amount of directing would help someone who thought that way.

  i have to put my two cents in:
     
    i think it's the directing, not the acting, on his part.  I think that he was told to go in the direction he's been in.  If not, he would have been corrected on set, no?  no, he's not as good as his predecessor, goddess bless him, but i think he's as close as anyone's going to get.  i think its a shame that anyone should sign a petition to get the poor guy fired.  wouldnt you feel bad signing that, knowing it was your fault he was fired????  and anyways, anytime they change people to play a character for whatever the reason, it's ALWAYS a let down, since you now have a 'character identity' with that particular actor.
     
    just my two cents.
     
    mik
     
     
     
    

  sionwitch <sionwitch at yahoo.com<mailto:sionwitch at yahoo.com>> wrote:
    --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com<mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>, "dzny72" <dzny72 at y<mailto:dzny72 at y>...> wrote:
  >
  > As I was reading the posts regarding the firing of Gambon for his 
  > portrayal of Dumbledore, I had a thought that needed to be shared.  
  > What if we sign this petition, they actually fire Gambon, and then they 
  > hire someone even worse (in our opinions) to play Dumbledore?  I guess 
  > we should decide which is worse:  Gambon continuing as Dumbledore or 
  > the possibility of someone being cast that is even less the character 
  > we need him to be.  Maybe we should petition that Gambon should be 
  > required to read the material that his script is based on in order to 
  > get a better idea of who his is prtraying and the emotions behind his 
  > actions.  I think I might be satisfied with a better Gambon than a 
  > worse unknown.
  > 
  > Hope that made sense, I know I was slightly rambling. . . 
  > 
  > Marlo
  >
  Sionwitch:
  Marlo, I agree with you there, maybe if Gambon were directed better
  and be ask to act more like the Dumbledore from the books he would be
  just fine. Today I was watching the PoA DVD and Gambon is really good
  in it, he really has the playful and mischievous Dumbledore
  characterization there. But then yousee him in GoF screaming and
  jumping around, and I wonder why such a change form the Dumbledore
  from PoA?. I can only think of the director, because I think the
  script was written for the same person, so the only answer would be
  the director. I only can hope that the new the director and the next,
  direct Gambon to be like in PoA. I will write to the person who
  started the petition to ask her if she can change it  to ask Gambon to
  act more like the Dumbledore from the books.
  Sionwitch





  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com<mailto:HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com>
  ____________________________________________________________



      
  ---------------------------------
    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

      
      Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie" on the web.
      
      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   HPFGU-Movie-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com<mailto: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]




  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com<mailto:HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com>
  ____________________________________________________________
   
  Yahoo! Groups Links



   




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




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 14 00:36:12 2005
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:36:12 -0000
Subject: petition to fire Gambon/yet again!!!
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-DAV38C241A7911188F54709ACF390@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <dnnpds+5o3p@eGroups.com>

 
>   Andie
>   More 2 cents:  I saw Gambonin an interview before GOF (sometime 
in the summer) and his words were that he wasn't going to play DD as 
before, he didn't like DD that way.  he did not want to play him the 
way the books had him:  He was not going to read the books: He was 
going to play DD his way.
>   So no amount of directing would help someone who thought that 
way.


Alla:

Actually, very very few actors if any as far as I am aware and of 
course I could be wrong have the power to "direct the director". Am 
I making sense?

IMO, no matter how Gambon WANTS to play Dumbledore, he will play the 
part the way director wants him to. It is not up to him, so to 
speak. Again, as far as I know.

I mean, he can suggest something to the director, like some 
improvisations to the scene, but if director does not like it, he 
will not be allowed to play it that way.

So, whether Gambon suggested to play the scene in question that way 
or not, it HAD TO pass the approval of the director.

Alla







From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 14 03:15:33 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 03:15:33 -0000
Subject: Re-evaluating Gambon as Dumbledore
Message-ID: <dno2ol+b8tl@eGroups.com>

After seeing GoF in IMAX last Thursday, my perceptions of Michael 
Gambon's potrayal of Dumbledore in GoF have altered.

Two scenes still rankle me - the running down and physical grabbing 
of Harry after his name came out of the Goblet and Gambon's grabbing 
Barty Crouch Jr. and shaking him while asking if Moody is in the 
room.  Regardless of whether these actions are the result of the 
director, the actor, the producer or a combination of all three, 
they rob Dumbledore of unique character traits consistently present 
throughout all the books, which are the traits of politeness, 
patience and calmness regardless of what is happening from of him 
(unless it's something immediately life-threatening to someone DD 
cares about, of course).  

But...putting those two scenes aside for a moment, it was more 
evident to me while watching it on IMAX (that enormous screen makes 
a difference) that Gambon played Dumbledore as extremely stressed 
throughout the movie.  Why was he stressed?  Well, it's obvious that 
Dumbledore doesn't know who put Harry's name in the Goblet and he 
must know that someone within the castle must have done it with a 
nasty hidden agenda in mind.  Nearly all of the shots of Dumbledore, 
from the moment Harry's name comes out of the Goblet onward, show a 
man wary and very worried about what is happening as it is so 
completely out of his control.  In fact, I would go so far as to say 
that the two scenes, above, which bothered me (and many other fans) 
were the actor's/director's/producer's extrapolation of the stress 
into barely-contained panic.  Granted, Dumbledore, as presented in 
the books, is not a panicker, however, this may be the filmmaker's 
attempt to shorthand much of what occured in GoF and in preparation 
of what's coming in books 5 and 6.  

I asked myself why they would try to roughly shorthand Dumbledore's 
failing into GoF when it doesn't show up in earnest until OotP.  
Then I hit upon the answer.  In OotP, Dumbledore makes a grave 
mistake by not telling Harry everything upfront about what is going 
on with Voldemort's search for the phrophecy.  Dumbledore distances 
himself from Harry emotionally, which is another colossal mistake, 
even if he does it because he cares so much about Harry.  Well, what 
better way to explain Dumbledore making such an obviously stupid 
mistake in OotP than to have him completely stressed and worried 
throughout an entire year (during the events of GoF)?  People under 
contiuous stress tend to make less intelligent decisions.  It's more 
than possible the next director will use Gambon's perfomance in GoF 
as the perfect set-up for the withdrawn DD capable of a huge blunder 
we see in OotP. 

There's been a lot of complaints about DD's wardrobe in GoF, but I 
actually kind of like it as it's so much in the vein of wizards of 
old, like Merlin.  After all, he's 150 years old so I'm not 
surprised he'd want something quite comfortable to wear around.  If 
I live to that age, I'd probably want to wear something akin to a 
nightgown all day as well. <g> 

Anyway, the performance of Gambon was much more understandable in 
the context of the film during my last viewing.  I especially 
noticed it when DD and Harry came out in front of the stands before 
the last task.  Dumbledore's expression looked sort of like a secret 
service agent who'd gotten a tip-off about a possible hidden 
attacker in the crowd.  He looked so upset, worried, stressed and 
unhappy in that scene when he touched Harry's shoulder.  That was SO 
the DD from the books in that scene (with the "maze changes you" 
speech notwithstanding).   

I'm really looking forward to when this movie comes out on DVD 
because then I will be able to rewind and see even more details in 
all the performances.  

Diana L.
dianasdolls







From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 14 03:23:07 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 03:23:07 -0000
Subject: Harry's look at Ron after the Yule Ball & other favorite scenes
Message-ID: <dno36r+k4d3@eGroups.com>

Another scene that I really liked was when Herimone, yelling at Ron 
at the base of stairs, turns on Harry and demands of him "Where have 
you been?"  I love the change of expressions Harry goes through.  At 
first it's detached daydreaming evident on Harry's face as he's 
walking towards her, then his startled look at Hermione as she 
shouts at him and tells him to go to bed, followed by his face 
hardening as he glares up at Ron for getting him yelled-at by 
Hermione, ending with his comment to Ron as they walk up the 
stairs "What's this all about?"  LOL  Priceless!  

Another poster thought Harry looked upset over something as he 
walked toward Hermione, but to me he looks like he's daydreaming, 
lost in his own little world.  

I also love the scenes showing Harry dancing with Parvati as it's so 
charmingly awkward and funny at the same time.

Diana L.
dianasdolls








From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Wed Dec 14 04:51:16 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 23:51:16 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <p06110402bfc0fc16c0c2@[217.154.249.23]>
Message-ID: <BFC50EF4.196B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/12/05 4:12 PM, "nicholas dean" <nicholas at adelanta.co.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> that pretty much everyone who will watch the
> movie will have read the book, so they don't have to be crystal clear
> about everything. As I said in my original review, I think this is a
> mistake.
> 
> On which subject; did anyone else see the article in the January
> issue of 'Empire'; 'Harry Potter and the what of huh'? where they run
> through some of the less-clear plot points of GoF for the benefit of
> those seeing the film without having read the book. Rather
> embarrasssing for the director, scriptwriter and story editor....
> 
> Glad to know that I was not the only one who thought the storytelling
> somewhat lacking...
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicholas
> 
> Along those lines, has anyone ever come across any statistics on the surge in
> HP book sales after the associated movie is released?
> I would find this very interesting. I take so much for granted on screen
> knowing the HP books so well, that it?s hard for me to imagine how an HP book
> or movie novice could relate (or not) to the movies. It is such a sequential
> series...more and more pieces of the puzzle are revealed with each new
> installment. I couldn?t imagine not running out and buying the book right
> after the movie to get all the missing details. But then again, I?m HP
> obsessed! Maybe some folks can actually go to an HP movie, say ?OK, I have no
> clue what I just watched...whatever!!? And go about their merry way!
> Valerie
> 




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




From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 14 14:51:57 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:51:57 -0000
Subject: The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <BFC50EF4.196B%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dnpbid+4cs0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...>
wrote:
>
> On 12/12/05 4:12 PM, "nicholas dean" <nicholas at a...> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > that pretty much everyone who will watch the
> > movie will have read the book, so they don't have to be crystal clear
> > about everything. As I said in my original review, I think this is a
> > mistake.
> > 
> > On which subject; did anyone else see the article in the January
> > issue of 'Empire'; 'Harry Potter and the what of huh'? where they run
> > through some of the less-clear plot points of GoF for the benefit of
> > those seeing the film without having read the book. Rather
> > embarrasssing for the director, scriptwriter and story editor....
> > 
> > Glad to know that I was not the only one who thought the storytelling
> > somewhat lacking...
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Nicholas
> > 
> > Along those lines, has anyone ever come across any statistics on
the surge in
> > HP book sales after the associated movie is released?
> > I would find this very interesting. I take so much for granted on
screen
> > knowing the HP books so well, that it?s hard for me to imagine how
an HP book
> > or movie novice could relate (or not) to the movies. It is such a
sequential
> > series...more and more pieces of the puzzle are revealed with each new
> > installment. I couldn?t imagine not running out and buying the
book right
> > after the movie to get all the missing details. But then again, I?m HP
> > obsessed! Maybe some folks can actually go to an HP movie, say
?OK, I have no
> > clue what I just watched...whatever!!? And go about their merry way!
> > Valerie
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sionwitch now:
I have to admit that I'm an after PoA movie HP books fan. When I saw
PoA movie, I went running to the book store and read GoF, somehow PS
ans CoS movies didn't have the same effect on me.
I think that GoF movie is only completely understood for the people
who has read the books before. The story line has too many holes, most
of them at the beginning of the movie. 
First the people who has not read the books doesn't even realized the
movie has begun when Frank Brice show up, they don't have a clue who
he is and where he is. 
Then they don't understand why is Harry with the Wesleys, is he no
longer living with the Dursleys? they ask. 
Until the Hogwarts express scene they don't have a clue of what is
happening. 
I know that the book is too big to fit in a 2 hour and a half movie,
but I think they could explain better the plots in the movie. They
shouldn't assume that everybody who go to see the movie has already
read the books, because that's not true, and they are probably loosing
potential readers that may be interested in read the books is the
actually understood what is HP all about from the movies.
JMHO
Sionwitch







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 14 19:21:11 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:21:11 -0000
Subject: Harry's look at Ron after the Yule Ball & other favorite scenes
In-Reply-To: <dno36r+k4d3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnprb7+b3p0@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <dianasdolls at y...> wrote:
> ....edited..
> 
> I also love the scenes showing Harry dancing with Parvati as it's so 
> charmingly awkward and funny at the same time.
> 
> Diana L.
> dianasdolls
>

bboyminn:

Yes, I very much liked Dan's body language in the scene marching into
the ball and while dancing with Parvati. Plus, I think in his long
walk to the antechamber after his name came out of the Goblet also
very accurately reflected in body language what Harry experienced in
narrative in the books. 

His stiff awkward clumsy overly-selfconscious movement spoke volumes. 

Whether, you particularly like Dan as an actor in this movie or not,
you have to admit he has improved greatly, and certainly shows the
potential to be a great actor. 

One of the problems I have with the /short/ versions of the movies is
that so many great kid actors don't really get a chance to shine.
Seamus/Devon probably has great potential as an actor, but we really
don't get a chance to see it. In interviews he comes off as
acceptionally intelligent and sophisticated. Certainly Draco/Tom is a
very experienced actor who has made both major and minor motion
pictures and has many moving TV appearances under his belt (I would
love to see his role in 'Second Sight'). Neville/Mathew I think did a
splended job in the latest film. As a Neville fan, I like the fact
that they gave him a stronger role, and liked that he was more than up
to the task. Unfortunately, do to fake teeth and ears to make him more
Neville-like, we don't get to see that Mathew, while probably not
leading man material, is much better looking than movie-Neville.

Back to the main point, I was very impressed with Dan's ability to
express himself with his body and thought most of his body language
was dead-on.

I am anxious to see both Dan in 'December Boys' and Rupert in 'Driving
Lesson', though I have my doubt as to whether they will show up on
this side of the pond. For the record, I think Rupert did an excellent
job in 'Thunder Pants' of creating an engaging and very non-Ron
character. The movie itself was somewhat lacking, but his portrayal of
his character was excellent. Sadly, I confess that I didn't see the
moive, only the trailers which are no longer available on-line, but I
saw enough to see a completely new and very believable fun and funny
character (in the context of an otherwise absurd movie plot).

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Dec 14 23:43:31 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 23:43:31 -0000
Subject: Harry's look at Ron after the Yule Ball & other favorite scenes
In-Reply-To: <dnprb7+b3p0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnqan3+qka5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:
>
Snip:
 One of the problems I have with the /short/ versions of the movies is> 
that so many great kid actors don't really get a chance to shine.

 Jen here:
I completely agree with you there Steve! There is so much character 
development in JKR's writing and we get so little of it that we are 
forced to hang on every gesture or look or snippet of body language we 
can in order to make out what the kids are up to, how they have 
progressed in their abilities. I too thought Dan did some fantastic non-
verbal acting. That scene before the first task was agonizing! His face 
was such a mask of complete and paralyzing fear! Would I have loved to 
see more of him talking with Ron and Hermione, with Sirius, interacting 
with Rita Skeeter, Dumbledore, you name it! But you can not fault Dan 
one wit his abililty to communicate with his eyes and body language. I 
hope "December Boys" makes it over here. It would be a pleasure to see 
him get to act without the hounds of Hell (or Warner Bros.) at his 
heels. By the way, I think when Dumbledore/Gambon entered the chamber 
after Harry's name came out of the goblet, that Dan looks a bit 
defiant. But when Dumbledore/Gambon came at him full force, he seemed 
to cower. Did it look like that to you?
JenD

> Just a thought.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>








From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 03:35:54 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:35:54 -0000
Subject: Question about December Boys
Message-ID: <dnqoaq+hsn1@eGroups.com>

I've been following the interviews/info on Dan's new movie he's 
shooting right now.  Will this be released here (US) at all, do you 
think?  Or is this something we will have to wait on for DVD?  Any 
ideas?

And, yes, I have to agree with the poster that said she can't wait to 
see what Dan does without WB looming over him.  I think he has real 
potential and I am looking forward to this new movie.  If I ever get 
to see it! 

Alora







From sionwitch at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 03:40:35 2005
From: sionwitch at yahoo.com (sionwitch)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:40:35 -0000
Subject: The pensieve scenes  in OoTP movie
Message-ID: <dnqojj+76s6@eGroups.com>

In several HP fan sites, they have the following news:
"Enchantment Casting have informed various Potter sites that casting
for 'Order of the Phoenix' is near completion."
"They are in the 'very final' stages of casting young Lily, Snape,
Lupin, James, Peter and Sirius as well as others who appear in the
pensieve scenes."
Thanks God they did think the pensieve scenes are important to the plot!.
Sionwitch. 






From hp at plum.cream.org  Thu Dec 15 03:50:33 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:50:33 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question about December Boys
In-Reply-To: <dnqoaq+hsn1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051215034139.00b01b30@plum.cream.org>

At 03:35 15/12/2005 , alora67 wrote:
>I've been following the interviews/info on Dan's new movie he's
>shooting right now.  Will this be released here (US) at all, do you
>think?  Or is this something we will have to wait on for DVD?  Any
>ideas?

Just a quickie. It's coming up to 4am here and it's way past my bedtime. I 
hope to have some contributions to other threads in about 20 hours but just 
caught this before switching off the computer.

According to its IMDB page, December Boys already has a US distributor, and 
is due for release next December:

http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0465436/releaseinfo

As for Rupert's new film (mentioned by Steve in another thread to which 
I'll be responding), "Driving Lessons", it currently doesn't seem to have a 
US distributor, which will probably depend on its domestic (i.e. UK) 
success. We'll see when it comes out, and considering it doesn't even have 
a UK release date yet, it's nowhere near imminent (I'd expect it next summer).

--
Richard, knackered and off to bed



From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 03:54:58 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:54:58 -0000
Subject: Question about December Boys
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051215034139.00b01b30@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <dnqpei+5rta@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Richard <hp at p...> wrote:
> According to its IMDB page, December Boys already has a US 
distributor, and 
> is due for release next December:
> 
> http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0465436/releaseinfo

Thank you, Richard!  I forgot to check IMDB.  Silly me!  
 
> As for Rupert's new film (mentioned by Steve in another thread to 
which 
> I'll be responding), "Driving Lessons", it currently doesn't seem 
to have a 
> US distributor, which will probably depend on its domestic (i.e. 
UK) 
> success. We'll see when it comes out, and considering it doesn't 
even have 
> a UK release date yet, it's nowhere near imminent (I'd expect it 
next summer).


Definitely have to see that one, too.  I am most interested in 
seeing how Rupert does with completely different cast members, 
although isn't one of the HP cast in it?  Julie Walters?  I can't 
remember...anyway, it'll be fun to see them in completely different 
roles.

Alora 






From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 04:16:19 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 04:16:19 -0000
Subject: Opening of OotP
Message-ID: <dnqqmj+nq66@eGroups.com>

I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
buttock?"  

Do you all think they will take this part out or leave it in?  I'm 
thinking they can fit it in quickly and get Harry to #12 within the 
first 15 min at least.  What do you guys think?

Alora 






From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 04:24:14 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 23:24:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Opening of OotP
References: <dnqqmj+nq66@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <037701c6012f$69337af0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

<snerk>

I loved that!

Michelle

"He who follows truth too closely at the heels might get kicked in the teeth."
-Sir Walter Ralegh 1552-1618
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: alora67 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:16 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Opening of OotP


  I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
  everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
  buttock?" 

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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 07:15:42 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 07:15:42 -0000
Subject: Opening of OotP
In-Reply-To: <dnqqmj+nq66@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnr56u+50vf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "alora67" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
>
> I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
> everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
> buttock?"  
> 
> Do you all think they will take this part out or leave it in?  I'm 
> thinking they can fit it in quickly and get Harry to #12 within the 
> first 15 min at least.  What do you guys think?
> 
> Alora
>

bboyminn:

While I have absolutely no proof, I suspect that the opening scene
will be Harry catching up with Dudley as they walk back from the park,
which will be quickly followed by the Dementor attack, which in turn
will be quickly followed by the 'rescue'. 

I don't know if they will have much time for the /owls in the kitchen/
and Harry being expelled. Perhaps just the arrival of a single note
warning Harry of his hearing, then the rescue, and straight to
Grimmauld Place. I'm not even sure if there will be enough time for
Mrs. Figg to make an appearance. If she makes no appearance then it's
up to Dumbledore to save Harry bacon at the hearing. 

Sadly, that probably amounts to very few minutes of movie time.

Don't envy the people who have to figure all this out.

Steve/bboyminn







From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 13:59:22 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:59:22 -0000
Subject: Opening of OotP
In-Reply-To: <037701c6012f$69337af0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>
Message-ID: <dnrsrq+69d9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Michelle Chandler" 
<gardengirlgarden at y...> wrote:
>
> <snerk>
> 
> I loved that!


Michelle, I would also love to see Tonks roll her eyes at Moody, and 
him say, "I saw that!"  Hehe.  It's little things like that that make 
it so funny and endearing. 

Alora 






From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 13:58:20 2005
From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (alora67)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 13:58:20 -0000
Subject: Opening of OotP
In-Reply-To: <dnr56u+50vf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnrsps+7k33@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:

> I don't know if they will have much time for the /owls in the 
kitchen/
> and Harry being expelled. Perhaps just the arrival of a single note
> warning Harry of his hearing, then the rescue, and straight to
> Grimmauld Place. I'm not even sure if there will be enough time for
> Mrs. Figg to make an appearance. If she makes no appearance then it's
> up to Dumbledore to save Harry bacon at the hearing. 
> 
> Sadly, that probably amounts to very few minutes of movie time.
> 
> Don't envy the people who have to figure all this out.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn


Steve, 

Oh, I don't envy them at all!  Either way, they can't win.  ;)  There 
are so many good parts and only so much time.  But I would rather see 
something even quickly, than not see it at all.  I have heard no 
casting on Mrs. Figg, so I was assuming they weren't going to have her 
in OoP.  

Alora 









From jellocat at comcast.net  Thu Dec 15 14:16:50 2005
From: jellocat at comcast.net (jellocat at comcast.net)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:16:50 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 1352
Message-ID: <121520051416.29976.43A17AD2000201E20000751822069997359B0E0C0104040A06@comcast.net>


> I know that the book is too big to fit in a 2 hour and a half movie,
> but I think they could explain better the plots in the movie. They
> shouldn't assume that everybody who go to see the movie has already
> read the books, because that's not true, and they are probably loosing
> potential readers that may be interested in read the books is the
> actually understood what is HP all about from the movies.
> JMHO
> Sionwitch
> 
I have a feeling, at this point, they're not at all concerned with book sales since the two are completely different animals. Since the movie has made over 500 million worldwide I think the producers are probably dancing, singing, tap dancing and saying Hallelujah all the way to the bank. Amazing.

> > 
> > I also love the scenes showing Harry dancing with Parvati as it's so 
> > charmingly awkward and funny at the same time.
> > 
> > Diana L.
> > dianasdolls
> >
Dad did a brilliant job with his body language in this film, he really did. I love those scenes and those moments more than some of the others simply because you really get a sense of how awkward it is to be a teenager. Grint did a wonderful job at it as well. For instance, I love the little eyebrow movement Ron gives when Hermione is reading Rita's column in the Great Hall about how she's courting Krum.

> bboyminn:
> 
> Whether, you particularly like Dan as an actor in this movie or not,
> you have to admit he has improved greatly, and certainly shows the
> potential to be a great actor. 

Definitely! I think he's going to be the next... hmm... Hugh Grant, perhaps? Could Dan be that suave?

> 
> One of the problems I have with the /short/ versions of the movies is
> that so many great kid actors don't really get a chance to shine.
> Seamus/Devon probably has great potential as an actor, but we really
> don't get a chance to see it. 

I'd love to see him do more films. I think he's fantastic, as well. I also love the twins, but hard to see if they could do anything beyond the HP films. Felton is very good, as well, and Matthew, too. They've done an incredible job casting these films with unknowns. I'm highly looking forward to seeing who they find for Luna and the adult characters. I wasn't overly thrilled with Katie as Cho, but then again, she didn't have much to do in this film other than give Harry a few looks and speak a couple of lines. Love the Scottish accent, though.

> 
> I am anxious to see both Dan in 'December Boys' and Rupert in 'Driving
> Lesson', though I have my doubt as to whether they will show up on
> this side of the pond. For the record, I think Rupert did an excellent
> job in 'Thunder Pants' of creating an engaging and very non-Ron
> character. The movie itself was somewhat lacking, but his portrayal of
> his character was excellent. Sadly, I confess that I didn't see the
> moive, only the trailers which are no longer available on-line, but I
> saw enough to see a completely new and very believable fun and funny
> character (in the context of an otherwise absurd movie plot).
> 
> Steve/bboyminn

Given the immense popularity of both actors I'd be surprised if they didn't have theatrical runs in the U.S. There are trailers for Thunderpants located here: http://sitesforyou.com/thunderpants/trailer.htm. Rupert looks so different in a perm and glasses!

> Alora:
> I've been following the interviews/info on Dan's new movie he's 
> shooting right now.  Will this be released here (US) at all, do you 
> think?  Or is this something we will have to wait on for DVD?  Any 
> ideas?

I'm sure it'll definitely be released in the U.S. because of the fame of the actors. I hope so, at any rate!


> 
> 
> Definitely have to see that one, too.  I am most interested in 
> seeing how Rupert does with completely different cast members, 
> although isn't one of the HP cast in it?  Julie Walters?  I can't 
> remember...anyway, it'll be fun to see them in completely different 
> roles.
> 
> Alora 

Yes, it's Julie Walters - I can't wait to see her do this film to see her character outside of Molly Weasley!

> 
> I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
> everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
> buttock?"  
> 
> Do you all think they will take this part out or leave it in?  I'm 
> thinking they can fit it in quickly and get Harry to #12 within the 
> first 15 min at least.  What do you guys think?
> 
> Alora 

Would love to see that scene - they have to keep that part in, they just have to! <G> I wonder how much of St. Mungo's they'll keep in. Will they bring back Brannagh? Will they show us Neville's family?
> 
 "alora67" <chrisnlorrie at y...> wrote:
> >
> > I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
> > everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
> > buttock?"  

I wonder, as well, if they'll keep the scenes within the ministry with Ron yelling 'I've seen Uranus...'

jellocat





From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Dec 15 14:42:26 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:42:26 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] question about December Boys
Message-ID: <275.25f3c6d.30d2dad2@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/15/2005 8:41:43 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


I've  been following the interviews/info on Dan's new movie he's 
shooting right  now.  Will this be released here (US) at all, do you 
think?  Or  is this something we will have to wait on for DVD?  Any  
ideas?


I read somewhere that the producers had picked up a world-wide  distributor 
before they ever started shooting.  With Dan's popularity  around the world, 
they have a chance to make a good bit of money if the movie is  any good at all. 
 It's a low-budget film, so they could be looking at HUGE  profits from 
casting him (which is probably why they approached him in the first  place, in 
addition to his acting skills)!
 
I can't wait to see it!  Steve was right on in his description  of Dan's body 
language in GoF!  Well said!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From itzgoodnite at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 15 14:48:04 2005
From: itzgoodnite at yahoo.com (itzgoodnite)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:48:04 -0000
Subject: The pensieve scenes  in OoTP movie
In-Reply-To: <dnqojj+76s6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnrvn5+j5o7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sionwitch" <sionwitch at y...> wrote:
>
> In several HP fan sites, they have the following news:
> "Enchantment Casting have informed various Potter sites that casting
> for 'Order of the Phoenix' is near completion."
> "They are in the 'very final' stages of casting young Lily, Snape,
> Lupin, James, Peter and Sirius as well as others who appear in the
> pensieve scenes."
> Thanks God they did think the pensieve scenes are important to the 
plot!.
> Sionwitch.

Hello,

  I have enjoyed reading this board! 

  I HAD to delurk to comment on this new information.  Everyone says  
Harry looks like his father "except for his eyes".  Do you think 
Daniel will be playing James?  He could wear contact lenses to change 
his eye color (to another color besides blue, I suppose).  I've heard 
that he couldn't wear them when he was younger, but surely he could 
now.  He would not need to wear them but for that scene.  I just 
couldn't imagine having another actor playing Harry's father, when 
Daniel resembles him so much ;-)

Regina








From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Thu Dec 15 16:57:35 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 11:57:35 -0500
Subject: Opening of OotP
Message-ID: <8C7CFAFC82072D3-1838-27D10@mblk-r18.sysops.aol.com>

Alora:
I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
buttock?"  

Do you all think they will take this part out or leave it in?  I'm 
thinking they can fit it in quickly and get Harry to #12 within the 
first 15 min at least.  What do you guys think?


I sincerely hope they leave it in as well as the entirety of the beginning scene. I'm thinking the Dementor attack and the Dursley's, followed by the group, is important for the audience to know. The Dementors show the Ministry losing control, the Dursley's show the important aspect of Harry NEEDING to be there when Aunt Petunia gets the Howler from Dumbledore, and the group that rescues Harry from the Dursley home is an important aspect simply in informing the audience of the Order of the Phoenix and who is really involved. So, leaving this entire section out, I'm thinking, might complicate matters for the next two films following if the audience is not informed enough about OOTP, Harry's protection spell, and Ministry of Magic fumbling. Just my 2 cents.
 
Jade


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




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Thu Dec 15 20:35:11 2005
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 20:35:11 -0000
Subject: Question about December Boys
In-Reply-To: <dnqpei+5rta@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dnsk1v+me5r@eGroups.com>

Alora:
> Definitely have to see that one, too.  I am most interested in 
> seeing how Rupert does with completely different cast members, 
> although isn't one of the HP cast in it?  Julie Walters?  I can't 
> remember...anyway, it'll be fun to see them in completely different 
> roles.

SSSusan:
Yes.  Julie Walters is Rupert's driving instructor in the movie.  
Should be oodles of fun, and as I'm a big Rupert fan anyway, I do so 
hope it finds its way into a U.S. release.

Siriusly Snapey Susan







From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Dec 14 22:22:09 2005
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:22:09 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Gambledore
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <p06110401bfc6255a4278@[217.154.251.68]>

My humble tuppence on the subject of a petition to recast Dumbledore;

It will have no effect whatsoever. As others have already said, 
Gambon is committed to OoP and I imagine that, having recast once, 
the producer will not be eager to do it again just because a few fans 
say that they don't like him.

Yes, the director has to take some of the blame for the way in which 
Dumbledore is being portrayed; so does the writer. There were several 
scenes in GoF which I felt were poorly written, and most of them 
featured Dumbledore; think about the debate with Crouch, McGonagall 
et al immediately after Harry's name had come out of the Goblet; also 
the scene in Dumbledore's office before and after the Pensieve 
episode (and what on earth had they filmed in that scene that the 
director felt was so awful that it was worth that appallingly bad 
edit with which they were left when it was removed?); also 
Dumbledore's apology scene to Harry...someone else (was it 
Lupinlore?) has already pointed out how inconsistent Dumbledore 
appears in this movie. Poor writing does not help an actor to get a 
handle on his character, especially when the actor hasn't read the 
source material.

It's also important to remember that there is one other person who is 
absolutely on the side of a decent characterisation; JKR. She's not 
deeply involved with the movies, but she does watch them, and if she 
feels that something is going very wrong with a character's 
interpretation, she will say something; and experience has shown that 
the movie makers do listen...there were not, in the end, tiny people 
in PoA, which Cuaron had wanted.

Petitions are fine when it's a matter of opposition to a massive 
public project or whatever; as a protest against an individual, 
however, I find it rather rude. If you feel strongly enough about it, 
why not write direct to Gambon, in care of his agent, and explain 
your concerns, and how you would like to see the character portrayed?

It may still end up in the trash; but it is surely more upfront than 
a stab-in-the-back move like a petition. And who knows? maybe your 
letter will inspire Gambon to read the books and take a different 
tack next time around.

Cheers,
Nicholas
nicknamed The Diplomat at work; can you tell?



From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Dec 14 22:22:03 2005
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:22:03 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <dnng6p+s8bs@eGroups.com>
References: <dnng6p+s8bs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p06110400bfc6242ffc43@[217.154.251.68]>

>
>JenD interjects:
>I have to say that I felt the "Shrieking Shack" scene was the all-time
>biggest piece of Swiss cheese (aka plotholes) that I've seen so far.


Well, yes and no. Have you reread that scene recently? A lot of 
explanation was necessary at that point, but I think JKR dragged it 
out a bit too much.

The movie went to the other extreme, cutting it too much in the 
interests of dramatic tension.

I would like to have seen something halfway between what the book 
gave us and what we saw on the screen.

>
>JenD again
>Who is ever so happy to see Nicholas back


Thank you; how nice to feel that my contributions are welcome!

Cheers,
Nicholas



From nicholas at adelanta.co.uk  Wed Dec 14 22:24:58 2005
From: nicholas at adelanta.co.uk (nicholas dean)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:24:58 +0000
Subject: Interest and responses (was Gambledore)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>
References: <4.2.0.58.20051212131916.00b0d6e0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <p06110402bfc6366474aa@[217.154.251.68]>

>Richard said:-


>Incidentally, as nobody here seems to be interested in discussing the
>movies in any depth (funny, I always thought the "GU" part of this group's
>name was meant to stand for "Grown Ups" rather than "Gambon's Useless"),
>

Oi!

I don't think that this is justified. In fact, before the Gambledore 
petition thread (which I address in a separate post) I thought we 
were doing pretty well on this list with GoF discussion. Yes, there 
have been a few comments on the cuteness of the cast...this is after 
all a large and public list, and everyone is entitled to express 
their opinions, even if the men here find cuteness tiresome; but my 
computer's  'Transfer to Trash' function works very well, and 
otherwise it's been a good series of posts.

After PoA was released, I wrote a detailed account of the visual 
motifs used by Cuaron and compared them to several of his other 
movies. I thought it was pretty interesting, but when I posted it on 
this list no one, but no one, responded to or even acknowledged it.

So I took it to another list, a small, private list to which I also 
belong; and they picked up the thread and ran with it, even though 
most of the participants hadn't seen all of the Cuaron movies 
mentioned in the post. It led to an interesting discussion which I 
felt justified the time and effort of writing the essay.

On another occasion, I posted something to both lists and it was 
HPFGU-M which responded best.

The point is that somewhere out there, there is bound to be someone 
who is interested in what you have to say, and if you want people to 
respond to you, it's probably worth being part of more than one 
community.

It's a busy time of year, Richard; since GoF was released, I have 
been on two business trips of several days each, in addition to 
attending Christmas plays, Christmas concerts, two Nativities and a 
Carol Service at my kids' schools. I have done my best to keep up 
with posts, and did get involved in a fairly heavy exchange about 
movie narratives on my other list, but otherwise I don't have much 
time at the moment to respond to posts, or even to see GoF again, 
which I would like to do. I doubt that I am the only one in this 
community for whom this is true. Once Christmas is over, things will 
ease up and there will be more time available for chat groups.

Just because your kind of tech-heavy discussion of GoF hasn't 
happened here yet, it doesn't mean it isn't going to!

Cheers,
Nicholas



From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Dec 16 14:38:34 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:38:34 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Julie Walters
Message-ID: <241.3c71ca1.30d42b6a@aol.com>

 
Jellocat  wrote:  >>Julie Walters - I can't wait to see her do this film to  
see her character outside of Molly  Weasley!<<



You should rent "Calendar Girls" -- she stars in that with Helen  Mirren 
(sp?) and it's a wonderful film.  Walters looks SO DIFFERENT from  Molly, it's 
astonishing, but she has the heart of a Molly Weasley, bless  her.  ;->
 
"December Boys" opens in the US, UK and Australia in Dec.  2006.
 
Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/



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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Fri Dec 16 14:44:17 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:44:17 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] the Pensieve scenes in OoP movie
Message-ID: <b8.1be71b.30d42cc1@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/16/2005 7:21:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


I HAD to delurk to comment on this new information.   Everyone says  
Harry looks like his father "except for his  eyes".  Do you think 
Daniel will be playing James?  He could  wear contact lenses to change 
his eye color (to another color besides  blue, I suppose).  I've heard 
that he couldn't wear them when he was  younger, but surely he could 
now.  He would not need to wear them but  for that scene.  I just 
couldn't imagine having another actor playing  Harry's father, when 
Daniel resembles him so much  ;-)

Regina


That WOULD be cool, wouldn't it?  But I think I read somewhere  that they're 
casting the "young" Lily, James, Remus, Sirius and Snape, so I  guess Dan 
won't get to play two roles.  As for the contacts, I suspect Dan  may have some 
allergies of some kind that didn't allow him to wear contacts --  if he doesn't 
have allergies, why didn't they dye his hair to be black instead  of leaving 
it brown?  They bleached Tom Felton's hair platinum blond and  dyed Emma's 
blonde hair brown, so why not Dan's?  I'm allergic to lots of  things, including 
hair color and perms, and can't wear contacts anymore, so I  thought maybe Dan 
had the same problem -- allergies.  Just a thought.   But if the Pensieve 
scenes were shot at enough of a distance, it wouldn't matter  what color his eyes 
were, would it?  ;->  

Welcome to the board!  Glad you delurked!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 16 17:27:03 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:27:03 -0000
Subject: the Pensieve scenes in OoP movie
In-Reply-To: <b8.1be71b.30d42cc1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <dnutd7+p10g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
>
>  
>  
> In a message dated 12/16/2005 7:21:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
> HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> 
> I HAD to delurk to comment on this new information. Everyone 
> says Harry looks like his father "except for his  eyes".  Do
> you think Daniel will be playing James?  He could  wear contact 
> lenses to change his eye color .... ...  I just couldn't imagine 
> having another actor playing  Harry's father, when Daniel 
> resembles him so much  ;-)
> 
> Regina
> 
> 
> ...  But I think I read somewhere that they're casting the
> "young" Lily, James, Remus, Sirius and Snape, so I  guess 
> Dan won't get to play two roles.  As for the contacts, I 
> suspect Dan  may have some allergies of some kind that 
> didn't allow him to wear contacts --  if he doesn't have 
> allergies, why didn't they dye his hair to be black instead of
> leaving it brown?  ...  But if the Pensieve scenes were shot 
> it enough of a distance, it wouldn't matter  what color his 
> eyes were, would it?  ;->  
> 
> Welcome to the board!  Glad you delurked!  
> 
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"


bboyminn:
 
I read that too, but it was just general information about the
casting. I haven't read any official announcement of the fact.

As far as Dan's eyes, I don't think they will have to deal with that
issue until it become important in the books. Which given current
circumstances means not until the last book/movie. I suspect that Dan
at age 11 would have problems with contacts irritating him, that he
wouldn't necessarily have at age 16. So, until it actually becomes a
necessity to the films, I don't think they have to worry about it. At
that time they can give Dan green contacts which he will only have to
wear a few hours a day while shooting. 

Speaking of eyes, I was surprised that they didn't give Voldemort red
contact lenses in the GoF movie. Even if his eyese weren't /glowing/
red, I'm sure they could have come up with red tinted contacts. I
mean, you can get contacts that have yellow smiley faces on them,
certainly they could have found red somewhere. 

As far as Dan's hair, it is a very dark brown, and I think dark enough
that it doesn't really make a difference in terms of the authenticity
of the movies. 

Besdies given how short Dan's hair is now, I think they will, if they
haven't already, go to using wigs just as they have for Tom/Draco's hair. 

I'm really looking forward to movie 6 and 7 since Tom/Draco will
certainly have a more prominent role, and it will give actor Tom a
chance to shine and show what he can do.

As far as Dan/Harry playing the role of his father, I think with a
slightly different nose, which wouldn't be that hard, and some colored
contacts, Dan could easily play the role of his own father. Harry says
in the OWL Testing Penseive scene that he and his father are nearly
identical except for slight facial variations and eye color. I think
that would be fun for Dan; a chance to play a character with a very
different personality than Harry.

Perhaps though rather than match Harry/Dan's appearance, they are
trying to match the appearance of the actor who plays the adult James
in the movies. 

So, basically, I agree; it would be very nice, both for the actor and
for the audience, to have Dan play his own father.

Just a thought.

STeve/bboyminn







From betsymarie123 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 16 20:01:55 2005
From: betsymarie123 at yahoo.com (Betsy Cortes)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 12:01:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Opening of OotP
In-Reply-To: <8C7CFAFC82072D3-1838-27D10@mblk-r18.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <20051216200155.13552.qmail@web60214.mail.yahoo.com>

Betsy here:
   
  You know, I agree about keeping the Dursley?s in.  I think it is important because it will show how powerful Harry is and why year five is so hard and difficult.  
   
  Betsy
  

dragonjcndm2 at aol.com wrote:
  Alora:
I hope they keep the opening of OoP.  I want to see Harry rescued by 
everyone, and hear Tonks ask Moody, "Who do you know who's lost a 
buttock?"  

Do you all think they will take this part out or leave it in?  I'm 
thinking they can fit it in quickly and get Harry to #12 within the 
first 15 min at least.  What do you guys think?


I sincerely hope they leave it in as well as the entirety of the beginning scene. I'm thinking the Dementor attack and the Dursley's, followed by the group, is important for the audience to know. The Dementors show the Ministry losing control, the Dursley's show the important aspect of Harry NEEDING to be there when Aunt Petunia gets the Howler from Dumbledore, and the group that rescues Harry from the Dursley home is an important aspect simply in informing the audience of the Order of the Phoenix and who is really involved. So, leaving this entire section out, I'm thinking, might complicate matters for the next two films following if the audience is not informed enough about OOTP, Harry's protection spell, and Ministry of Magic fumbling. Just my 2 cents.

Jade


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



________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________




  SPONSORED LINKS 
        Harry potter   Entertainment movie   Entertainment new york 
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie" on the web.
    
    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. 

    
---------------------------------
  

  



 

test'; ">
__________________________________________________
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 rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec 16 23:00:34 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 23:00:34 -0000
Subject: The Marauders' Map, was Harry and Sirius
In-Reply-To: <p06110400bfc6242ffc43@[217.154.251.68]>
Message-ID: <dnvgui+pvts@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, nicholas dean <nicholas at a...> 
wrote:
>
> >
> >JenD interjects:
> >I have to say that I felt the "Shrieking Shack" scene was the all-
time
> >biggest piece of Swiss cheese (aka plotholes) that I've seen so 
far.
> 
> 
> Well, yes and no. Have you reread that scene recently? A lot of 
> explanation was necessary at that point, but I think JKR dragged 
it 
> out a bit too much.

JenD here,
That scene was very complex and timing was everything! What Snape 
heard and when he heard it was critical (to things in GOF, he can't 
know that Sirius'animagus is a dog until later) and as far as I 
could discern, the timeline of revelations was not very important to 
Cuaron. They took a scene that transpired over an hour or so in the 
book and compressed it to maybe 10 minutes. The timing of who heard 
what when could not have been respected in such an abbreviated 
scene. JKR uses long scenes with lots of dialogue and "looks" to 
convey meaning and establish relationship. Richard devalues the 
brevity of Sirius and Harry's relationship but it was established in 
the Shack and over a long conversation with plenty of opportunity 
for Harry to observe Sirius, to take in his manner and his story. It 
was such a long scene just to do the work that would normally take 
months if not years. It's to JKR's credit that we accept such an 
abbreviated demonstration in order to establish a bond necessary for 
the next book. Notice I said "book." At any rate, the abbreviated 
nature of the Shrieking Shack scene did make any bond between Harry 
and Sirius look pretty thin on the ground. Thus Richard can make his 
assertion that the relationship is not important to the narrative of 
GOF. I was bemoaning the lack of expostition in POA that made Sirius 
negligible in GOF. Hope that gives you a little something to chew on!
JenD
>  Snipped a bit here and there...
Nicholas wrote:
> The movie went to the other extreme, cutting it too much in the 
> interests of dramatic tension.
> 
> I would like to have seen something halfway between what the book 
> gave us and what we saw on the screen.

Jen Again,
Couldn't agree with you more, more Shrieking Shack would have packed 
a nice emotional punch for those of us who need that sort of thing.

Jen, running off to the mundanity of her RL...








From artsylynda at aol.com  Sat Dec 17 15:29:14 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 10:29:14 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pensieve scenes in OoP movie
Message-ID: <27f.27f3b7a.30d588ca@aol.com>

In a message dated 12/17/2005 8:44:56 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

Speaking  of eyes, I was surprised that they didn't give Voldemort red
contact lenses  in the GoF movie. Even if his eyese weren't /glowing/
red, I'm sure they  could have come up with red tinted contacts. I
mean, you can get contacts  that have yellow smiley faces on them,
certainly they could have found red  somewhere. 

As far as Dan's hair, it is a very dark brown, and I think  dark enough
that it doesn't really make a difference in terms of the  authenticity
of the movies. 

Besdies given how short Dan's hair is  now, I think they will, if they
haven't already, go to using wigs just as  they have for Tom/Draco's hair. 

I'm really looking forward to movie 6  and 7 since Tom/Draco will
certainly have a more prominent role, and it  will give actor Tom a
chance to shine and show what he can do.

As  far as Dan/Harry playing the role of his father, I think with a
slightly  different nose, which wouldn't be that hard, and some colored
contacts, Dan  could easily play the role of his own father. Harry says
in the OWL Testing  Penseive scene that he and his father are nearly
identical except for  slight facial variations and eye color. I think
that would be fun for Dan;  a chance to play a character with a very
different personality than  Harry.

Perhaps though rather than match Harry/Dan's appearance, they  are
trying to match the appearance of the actor who plays the adult  James
in the movies. 

So, basically, I agree; it would be very nice,  both for the actor and
for the audience, to have Dan play his own  father.

Just a thought.

STeve/bboyminn
 
I was surprised that they only showed a brief "snakish" look in  Voldie's 
eyes, and then they turned blue.  Why not do the red eyes??   He could "act" with 
his eyes while wearing red contacts!  Could this be a  case of someone else 
who's sensitive to contacts?  Maybe.
 
As for Dan's hair, one of my reasons for thinking he's allergic to  hair 
color is that his hair was much lighter in this film, from all the hours in  the 
chlorinated water, I'm sure.  His hair being dark brown in the other  films was 
"close enough" to black, but this time, his hair was very light.   So he's 
probably allergic, which I can understand and don't have a problem  with.  It's 
just an observation.
 
His hair will probably have time to grow out by the time they start  actually 
shooting in February.  "December Boys" is a six week shoot that's  probably 
nearly finished, since they started the week after GoF premiered.   They start 
production on OoP in January, but Dan said they start filming in  February.  
So his hair should be long enough with six weeks to grow.   I imagine they'll 
do PoA style hair, since it is so much shorter than in GoF,  which will work 
fine with a six week's growth on the length it  is.
 
I would LOVE to see Dan play James in the Pensieve scene!!!!   I sure hope 
they do that, but you may be right, they may be trying to match the  actor who 
plays his father.  Wouldn't it be fun for Dan, though, and for  the audience, 
to see him doing both roles!  Ah well, we can dream,  anyway.
 
Speaking of dreaming - we just saw King Kong last night.  THEY  had a 3 hour 
movie -- why can't WE?!?!???  I'd LOVE to see Peter Jackson  directing one of 
the films (possibly the last one so they'd have serious shots  at Oscars -- a 
series like this or LotR doesn't seem to get the "best picture"  "Best actor" 
type of Oscar nominations until the last picture, as far as I  recall).  And 
the last three films should be 3 hours!!!  Why  not?!  Where do I find David 
Heyman's address???  If enough of us  write him about this, maybe they'll pay 
attention!!!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sat Dec 17 16:57:29 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 11:57:29 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GOF eyes
In-Reply-To: <27f.27f3b7a.30d588ca@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BFC9ADA9.19E0%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> <snip> 
> I was surprised that they only showed a brief "snakish" look in  Voldie's
> eyes, and then they turned blue.  Why not do the red eyes??   He could "act"
> with 
> his eyes while wearing red contacts!  Could this be a  case of someone else
> who's sensitive to contacts?  Maybe.
> 
> Well I don?t think Mrs. Norris was wearing red contact lenses, LOL!! I?m
> assuming they colorized her eyes in post-production. If they can colorize old
> movies, not to mention do all the fantastic special effects on GOF, surely
> they could have made Ralph have those cool snake eyes like he had briefly,
> and/or colorize them red?? His scene after all was not that long. I imagine
> having to colorize Harry?s eyes a brilliant emerald green in 7 movies might be
> a bit taxing in post-production though!
> Valerie




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




From AllieS426 at aol.com  Sun Dec 18 04:38:47 2005
From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 04:38:47 -0000
Subject: speech impediment?
Message-ID: <do2p4n+6l30@eGroups.com>

I know this is probably old, old discussion, but I didn't belong to 
this group way back when...

Does Dan Radcliffe have a slight speech impediment?  I remember after 
the first movie, I was shocked that he was the one cast for the part of 
Harry since he seemed to lisp a little on words like "such" and "much" -
 or is that just a British pronunciation?  I think he does a fantastic 
job and I don't notice the speech anymore, so if it was there maybe he 
grew out of it?

Allie









From artsylynda at aol.com  Sun Dec 18 13:48:13 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 08:48:13 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] GOF eyes
Message-ID: <2a0.24e3266.30d6c29d@aol.com>

 
 
Valerie  wrote:  Well I don?t think Mrs. Norris was wearing red contact 
lenses,  LOL!! I?m
> assuming they colorized her eyes in post-production. If they  can colorize 
old
> movies, not to mention do all the fantastic special  effects on GOF, surely
> they could have made Ralph have those cool  snake eyes like he had briefly,
> and/or colorize them red?? His scene  after all was not that long. I imagine
> having to colorize Harry?s eyes  a brilliant emerald green in 7 movies 
might be
> a bit taxing in  post-production though!
> Valerie





I don't know why they would color her eyes unless they're trying to  tell us 
she isn't "just" a cat.  Were her eyes that color in the other  films?  I 
can't remember.  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From hp at plum.cream.org  Sun Dec 18 17:28:43 2005
From: hp at plum.cream.org (Richard)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:28:43 +0000
Subject: Short(ish) comments on variety of posts
In-Reply-To: <BFC9ADA9.19E0%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
References: <27f.27f3b7a.30d588ca@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20051218162550.00b42bb0@plum.cream.org>

Valerie Flowe wrote:

> > Well I don?t think Mrs. Norris was wearing red contact lenses, LOL!! I?m
> > assuming they colorized her eyes in post-production.

My own assumption is that in GoF, Mrs Norris wasn't an actual live cat, in 
which case she could have had whatever eyes they wanted. (I don't recall 
seeing her walk; whenever we saw her, she was in Fitch's arms; if we ever 
did see her walking it would have been a long or back shot, in which case 
her eye colour would have been irrelevant).

>If they can colorize old
> > movies, not to mention do all the fantastic special effects on GOF, surely
> > they could have made Ralph have those cool snake eyes like he had briefly,
> > and/or colorize them red?? His scene after all was not that long.

Some people seem to have a somewhat exaggerated idea of what SFX can do. 
Colouring eyes while allowing them to remain realistic, especially in ultra 
close-ups (of which there were several) is not going to happen just yet. At 
least not in an economically viable way.

Lynda wrote:

>I don't know why they would color her eyes unless they're trying to  tell us
>she isn't "just" a cat.  Were her eyes that color in the other  films?  I
>can't remember.

Well, sort of. In shots in which she is clearly a live cat her eyes aren't 
*quite* as red as those in which she could just be a puppet, and in most 
cases the redness can be enhanced with the right lighting (eye colour, both 
human and otherwise, differs considerably depending on light conditions).

Steve wrote:

>As far as Dan's eyes, I don't think they will have to deal with that
>issue until it become important in the books. Which given current
>circumstances means not until the last book/movie. I suspect that Dan
>at age 11 would have problems with contacts irritating him, that he
>wouldn't necessarily have at age 16. So, until it actually becomes a
>necessity to the films, I don't think they have to worry about it. At
>that time they can give Dan green contacts which he will only have to
>wear a few hours a day while shooting.

Sorry, what makes you (and others) so certain that there is something 
important about Harry's eyes being *green*? My reading of canon and the 
comment JKR once made that gets everyone on their soap-boxes about this is 
that it's important for Harry to have *distinctive* eyes, and for them to 
be the same colour as his mother's. The fact that Dan's eyes are so 
magnificently blue, as are Geraldine Sommerville's, indicates to me that 
there is no need for any trickery or otherwise noting that they may be 
green. Besides which, wouldn't it be, well, stupid, for the last movie to 
make a HUGE deal about an intrinsic attribute of Harry's appearance that's 
suddenly changed?

Incidentally, Alan Rickman wears contacts as Snape. In one of the miriad 
interviews he gave, Mike Newell admitted that he didn't realise it until 
fairly late in to the shooting schedule...

Allie wrote:

>Does Dan Radcliffe have a slight speech impediment?  I remember after
>the first movie, I was shocked that he was the one cast for the part of
>Harry since he seemed to lisp a little on words like "such" and "much" -
>or is that just a British pronunciation?  I think he does a fantastic
>job and I don't notice the speech anymore, so if it was there maybe he
>grew out of it?

Not so much "British" pronunciation, but definitely part of certain areas 
of London (and, perhaps, strangely, Scotland), where an almost whistled 
"ch" or "sh" sound is fairly prevalent. I know lots of people who don't 
have lisps who do that. It's also fairly frequently present in 
"stage-speak", because attempting to enunciate the sounds very clearly 
tends towards the whistled variation. Note also a non-standard 
pronunciation of "j", especially at the beginning of words ("joke", "just", 
etc), which is part of the same pronunciation patterns.

Without resurrecting discussions of Dan's merits as an actor, you're quite 
correct in noticing him do it more in the earlier films, where he did 
indeed try to en-un-ci-ate everything very, very precisely, rather than 
speak naturally. Tom Felton did  it a lot in PS/SS too.

The difference is particularly noticeable to me and other Polish speakers, 
as Polish (and other Slavonic languages) have two distinct sounds (and 
spellings) of both the "sh" and "j" sound, which the majority of English 
speakers can't distinguish most of the time. It's fairly easy to spot Brits 
of Slavic extraction who've learned their parents' language "artificially" 
because they pronounce both pairs of phonemes as if they were the same 
(either whistled or the more "usual" way).

Jellocat wrote:

>I think he's going to be the next... hmm... Hugh Grant, perhaps? Could Dan 
>be that suave?

Erm.... I think you have it upside-down. The majority of Grant's characters 
have been, if anything, *anti*-suave. He usually plays a bumbling oaf who 
gets the girl  despite *not* being suave (or, in some cases, being 
distinctly oleaginous).

And elsewhere, Steve said, regarding the beginning of OotP:

>While I have absolutely no proof, I suspect that the opening scene
>will be Harry catching up with Dudley as they walk back from the park,
>which will be quickly followed by the Dementor attack, which in turn
>will be quickly followed by the 'rescue'.

Strange, I seem to recall that that was *my* suggestion, after you 
suggested that the whole sequence could be dropped with no harm to the 
story... :-)

--
Richard, who's been too bloody busy for the last two weeks even to read 
most of the list, never mind posting. 



From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Mon Dec 19 00:38:12 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:38:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Short(ish) comments on variety of posts
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20051218162550.00b42bb0@plum.cream.org>
Message-ID: <BFCB6B24.19FD%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/18/05 12:28 PM, "Richard" <hp at plum.cream.org> wrote:
> 
> My own assumption is that in GoF, Mrs Norris wasn't an actual live cat, in
> which case she could have had whatever eyes they wanted. (I don't recall
> seeing her walk; whenever we saw her, she was in Fitch's arms; if we ever
> did see her walking it would have been a long or back shot, in which case
> her eye colour would have been irrelevant).
> 
>> >I don't know why they would color her eyes unless they're trying to  tell us
>> >she isn't "just" a cat.  Were her eyes that color in the other  films?  I
>> >can't remember.
> 
> Well, sort of. In shots in which she is clearly a live cat her eyes aren't
> *quite* as red as those in which she could just be a puppet, and in most
> cases the redness can be enhanced with the right lighting (eye colour, both
> human and otherwise, differs considerably depending on light conditions).
> 
> I think she is a live cat, except for when she?s petrified, of course. The
> eyes do look somewhat fakey though, so I think they are colorized. So maybe if
> Voldy?s eyes would?ve looked fake like that it?s good they didn?t try. Wonder
> if they made that conscious decision or just didn?t read the books closely
> enough?? Shame they didn?t keep them snakelike though. That was creeeepy!
> I remember the great POA effects when Lupin starts to turn into a werewolf and
> they do a close-up of his eyes changing. Well done, imo.
> Valerie
> 
> Steve wrote:
> Sorry, what makes you (and others) so certain that there is something
> important about Harry's eyes being *green*? My reading of canon and the
> comment JKR once made that gets everyone on their soap-boxes about this is
> that it's important for Harry to have *distinctive* eyes, and for them to
> be the same colour as his mother's. The fact that Dan's eyes are so
> magnificently blue, as are Geraldine Sommerville's, indicates to me that
> there is no need for any trickery or otherwise noting that they may be
> green. Besides which, wouldn't it be, well, stupid, for the last movie to
> make a HUGE deal about an intrinsic attribute of Harry's appearance that's
> suddenly changed?
> 
> JKR just made it a point to say that Harry had intense green eyes, which are
> in themselves a bit more unusual than blue eyes. Dan has such great eyes
> though, that this discrepancy doesn?t bother me.
> Valerie
> 
> 




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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Mon Dec 19 15:57:18 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 10:57:18 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Short(ish) commentary on a variety of posts
Message-ID: <c1.67bd0d9d.30d8325e@aol.com>

Mrs. Norris is a real cat -- a Maine Coon cat, to be precise, which  is an 
American breed.  I checked their website yesterday and that color eye  is not 
part of the breed standard.  She could be a unique cat with those  odd eyes -- 
I've seen cats with non-normal colored eyes, but those are REALLY  odd.  I'll 
need to watch the earlier movies to see if her eyes looked like  that in the 
others.  And I believe she's played by a male cat, actually, so  her coat is 
richer (just as Lassie was played by a male collie to have a fuller  coat).
 
No puppet could flip its tail as naturally as Mrs. Norris did in  the dancing 
scene, LOL!  I think the only "non-live cat" used was for her  petrified 
scenes.  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Mon Dec 19 19:54:13 2005
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:54:13 -0000
Subject: Pensieve scenes in OoP movie
In-Reply-To: <27f.27f3b7a.30d588ca@aol.com>
Message-ID: <do7355+3ids@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at a... wrote:
snip
> Speaking of dreaming - we just saw King Kong last night.  THEY  had 
a 3 hour 
> movie -- why can't WE?!?!???  I'd LOVE to see Peter Jackson  
directing one of 
> the films (possibly the last one so they'd have serious shots  at 
Oscars -- a 
> series like this or LotR doesn't seem to get the "best 
picture"  "Best actor" 
> type of Oscar nominations until the last picture, as far as I  
recall).  And 
> the last three films should be 3 hours!!!  Why  not?!  Where do I 
find David 
> Heyman's address???  If enough of us  write him about this, maybe 
they'll pay 
> attention!!!  
> 
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"
> 
> Read my Harry Potter fics here:  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/


Not sure if it will make a differences to them or not but here you 
are:

Heyday Films Ltd
5 Denmark St
Soho, LONDON, WC2H 8LP
United Kingdom

Phone:020 7836 6333 (within the UK)

This is the address I used to send a letter to him and actually got a 
response. Of course I was not asking for a 3 hour movie at the time, 
just congratulating him on an award. Anyway, if you wish to write 
then you now have the address. Good luck! It would be nice to see it 
at least a half hour longer. Though I liked GoF and PoA, I think just 
even 20-30 minutes added to those films would have dramatically 
improved it for me. PoA needed just a tad longer in the shack plus a 
few other tidbits added here and there and I think GoF would have 
flowed just a bit better with a few minutes of additional footage 
here and there. So write away!

PS: I think Peter Jackson would be great for film 7 - nice way to 
wrap the series up. Maybe even have him do 6 and 7.

Theresa






From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Dec 20 16:52:37 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:52:37 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Pensieve scenes in OoP movie
Message-ID: <1f3.18928ef2.30d990d5@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 12/20/2005 7:43:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:


Heyday Films Ltd
5 Denmark St
Soho, LONDON, WC2H  8LP
United Kingdom

Phone:020 7836 6333 (within the UK)

This  is the address I used to send a letter to him and actually got a 
response.  Of course I was not asking for a 3 hour movie at the time, 
just  congratulating him on an award. Anyway, if you wish to write 
then you now  have the address. Good luck! It would be nice to see it 
at least a half  hour longer. Though I liked GoF and PoA, I think just 
even 20-30 minutes  added to those films would have dramatically 
improved it for me. PoA  needed just a tad longer in the shack plus a 
few other tidbits added here  and there and I think GoF would have 
flowed just a bit better with a few  minutes of additional footage 
here and there. So write away!

PS: I  think Peter Jackson would be great for film 7 - nice way to 
wrap the  series up. Maybe even have him do 6 and  7.

Theresa



THANKS!  I'll "have a go" as the Brits say!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From marilynpeake at cs.com  Wed Dec 21 03:57:28 2005
From: marilynpeake at cs.com (Marilyn Peake)
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 03:57:28 -0000
Subject: The pensieve scenes  in OoTP movie
In-Reply-To: <dnqojj+76s6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <doajr8+lfvm@eGroups.com>


I'm so glad to hear that!  I love the pensieve scenes in the book!

Best Wishes,
Marilyn
http://www.marilynpeake.com

FREE "Online CD" ~ featuring Stargate SG-1 authors, other novelists, 
free poems, free short stories:
http://www.webspin.org/fq/fantasticqueensland.html

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sionwitch" <sionwitch at y...> 
wrote:
>
>> In several HP fan sites, they have the following news:
> "Enchantment Casting have informed various Potter sites that casting
> for 'Order of the Phoenix' is near completion."
>
>> Thanks God they did think the pensieve scenes are important to the 
plot!











From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Dec 22 05:18:38 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 00:18:38 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Mrs. Norris
In-Reply-To: <c1.67bd0d9d.30d8325e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BFCFA15E.1A55%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/19/05 10:57 AM, "artsylynda at aol.com" <artsylynda at aol.com> wrote:

> Mrs. Norris is a real cat -- a Maine Coon cat, to be precise, which  is an
> American breed.  I checked their website yesterday and that color eye  is not
> part of the breed standard.  She could be a unique cat with those  odd eyes --
> I've seen cats with non-normal colored eyes, but those are REALLY  odd.  I'll
> need to watch the earlier movies to see if her eyes looked like  that in the
> others.  And I believe she's played by a male cat, actually, so  her coat is
> richer (just as Lassie was played by a male collie to have a fuller  coat).
>  
> No puppet could flip its tail as naturally as Mrs. Norris did in  the dancing
> scene, LOL!  I think the only "non-live cat" used was for her  petrified
> scenes.  
> 
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"
> 
> My sister has a Maine Coon. Gorgeous, thick fur. They probably made Mrs.
> Norris look ?manky? like they did with Crookshanks, adding matted hair
> extensions.
> I?m wondering if Mrs. N is a kneazle (sp?) like Crookshanks? It would appear
> that she has some sort of powers because I was re-reading GOF last night and
> she was looking right at Harry through his invisibility cloak (when his foot
> was caught in the stairs ? scene not in the film). Also in SS, she always
> appears before Filch does, almost as though she is his spy. We know that Filch
> is a Squib; maybe Mrs. N is his magical sidekick, helping him bust the
> students breaking Hogwarts rules???
> Valerie




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




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Dec 22 14:18:34 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:18:34 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Mrs. Norris
Message-ID: <1fe.f57d9d6.30dc0fba@aol.com>

 
 
In a message dated 12/22/2005 8:42:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com writes:

>>We know that Filch
> is a Squib; maybe Mrs. N is his  magical sidekick, helping him bust the
> students breaking Hogwarts  rules???
> Valerie<<


Yup, that's possible!  The cat in GoF didn't look manky at  all, though.  She 
looked gorgeous -- well groomed and all  that.
 
I saw a cat on a TV show last night (a yellow cat) with rich  rust-colored 
eyes like Mrs. Norris's, so maybe it IS a natural color???   But Mrs. Norris's 
eyes are SO bright.  . . .it would be nice if we could  get someone in the 
production office to answer that kind of question!  

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/





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




From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 23 12:20:47 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 12:20:47 -0000
Subject: New Tonner Harry Potter Dolls based on Daniel Radcliffe
Message-ID: <dogq2v+qvj@eGroups.com>

Since these dolls are based upon the movie actor, I'm posting this 
info on the HPFGU-Movie list.

I collect dolls, so I was excited to find out that dollmaker Rober 
Tonner made a 17" Harry Potter doll that is actually a depiction of 
Daniel Radclffe *as* Harry Potter. The doll's eyes are blue, not 
green, because Daniel Radcliffe's eyes are blue.  

I received my dolls yesterday (an early Christmas present from my 
husband) and they are quite nice.  The doll has 14 points of 
articulation so it is very versatile for posing.  

Here's a link to Tonner's site with pictures of the dolls:

http://www.tonnerdoll.com/harrypotter.htm

I bought one doll in the Hogwarts uniform and one doll in the Yule 
Ball formal attire.  Of course the first thing I had to do when I 
got them out of the box and posed was mess up their hair!  LOL

Lots of nice details, including a real *tied* neck tie!  

Tonner is going to be making Ron and Hermione in 2006, but I don't 
know if he's basing them on Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, 
respectively, like he he did with Harry Potter.  Additional outfits 
and accessories (such as Hedwig) are supposed to be released in 2006 
as well.  Personally, I'm looking forward to the Tri-Wizard outfit 
Harry wears to fight the dragon. :)  

These dolls are available right now, so if you want one, get one 
before they're sold out.  I saw quite a few listed on eBay and many 
doll shops are offering them online.  

Diana L.










From schumar1999 at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 25 05:27:13 2005
From: schumar1999 at yahoo.com (Marianne S.)
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 05:27:13 -0000
Subject: New Tonner Harry Potter Dolls based on Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <dogq2v+qvj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dolajh+sqte@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <dianasdolls at y...> wrote:
>
> Since these dolls are based upon the movie actor, I'm posting this 
> info on the HPFGU-Movie list.
> 
> I collect dolls, so I was excited to find out that dollmaker Rober 
> Tonner made a 17" Harry Potter doll that is actually a depiction of 
> Daniel Radclffe *as* Harry Potter. The doll's eyes are blue, not 
> green, because Daniel Radcliffe's eyes are blue.  
> 

Marianne S:

Shouldn't the eyes STILL be green, though? After all, if I'm not mistaken, don't
they change the color of Daniel's eyes digitally so they appear green? 







From lizzy1933 at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 26 02:29:41 2005
From: lizzy1933 at yahoo.com (lizzie_snape)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 02:29:41 -0000
Subject: New Tonner Harry Potter Dolls based on Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <dolajh+sqte@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <donkil+s7fn@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Marianne S." <schumar1999 at y...> 
wrote:
> Shouldn't the eyes STILL be green, though? After all, if I'm not 
mistaken, don't
> they change the color of Daniel's eyes digitally so they appear 
green?
>

No, actually they don't.

Lizzie







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Dec 26 18:43:49 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:43:49 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
Message-ID: <dopdl5+c6o1@eGroups.com>

Hi fellow film lovers,
I have been reading posts from when POA was released and I am 
learning a lot about a film I formerly dismissed. Nicholas wrote 
some very interesting things about color,water,time and other motifs 
and I am starting to see why "filmistas" dislike Chris Columbus. I 
want to discus this film in conjunction with GOF but I have one 
general question about POA that I have not been able to answer. Why 
put in the "Crying Scene?" Various and sundry of you all weighed in 
back then. Most of us who are way too emotionally attached to Daniel 
(I speak for myself firstly) thought that the tears were there, that 
the emotion was believable and we worked hard to overlook the 
bizarre sound coming from under the cloak. Then there was Richard 
and a few others who didn't buy the whole premise for the scene. I 
have must say that upon contemplation I must agree. Harry didn't do 
anything like that in the book (never stopped Cuaron before, I 
realize) but the curiosity is why do it at all? Cuaron made so few 
missteps in this film. He used beautiful and creative images so 
effortlessly. He brought out the playful side of things and gave us 
a weird new hippy sheik Dumbledore. On the whole he showed himself 
to be a wonderful off-kilter fluid quirky and poetic kind of 
director. Why in the world use that dreadful scene? To what end did 
it serve? Was it an unavoidable mistake? Did it give us something 
necessary about Harry? Please, if you have any thoughts, share them.
Jen D







From myrrhmyrrh at netzero.net  Mon Dec 26 18:56:11 2005
From: myrrhmyrrh at netzero.net (myrrh321)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:56:11 -0000
Subject: New Tonner Harry Potter Dolls based on Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <dogq2v+qvj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dopecb+tt46@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" <dianasdolls at y...> wrote:
>
>> I bought one doll in the Hogwarts uniform and one doll in the 
Yule 
> Ball formal attire.  Of course the first thing I had to do when I 
> got them out of the box and posed was mess up their hair!  LOL
> 
> Lots of nice details, including a real *tied* neck tie!  
> 
> Tonner is going to be making Ron and Hermione in 2006, but I don't 
> know if he's basing them on Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, 
> respectively, like he he did with Harry Potter.  Additional 
outfits 
> and accessories (such as Hedwig) are supposed to be released in 
2006 
> as well.  Personally, I'm looking forward to the Tri-Wizard outfit 
> Harry wears to fight the dragon. :)  
> 
> These dolls are available right now, so if you want one, get one 
> before they're sold out.  I saw quite a few listed on eBay and 
many 
> doll shops are offering them online.  
> 
> Diana L.
>

LOL! I bought one of each also and did the same thing when my dolls 
arrived!!

I love Tonner dolls and own several. I was soo buzzed when I heard 
he was making GOF dolls that I  ordered mine the next day.
I got them as an early Xmas present to myself. I think they are a 
very good depiction of Dan Radcliffe as Harry.


Too bad that the ties don't go entirely around the neck though, the 
ends are connected by a plastic band with snaps. It does make for 
easy removal...I'll probably make a "real" one for my Hogwarts Harry.

I hope that Tonner does also use Rupert and Emma's likeness for Ron 
and Hermione.  I think it would be a little odd if he didn't. 

In November, to coinside with GOF being released,  FAO Schwartz had 
special party and sale of a limited edition of Harry @ Hogwarts with 
Hedwig.  
I haven't checked online but I'll bet someone's selling one of those!

The dolls are are limited edition so if you do want one...get one!

I can't wait for all the other outfits and accessories too!


DeNece 









From siskiou at vcem.com  Mon Dec 26 19:07:56 2005
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 11:07:56 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <dopdl5+c6o1@eGroups.com>
References: <dopdl5+c6o1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <323322805.20051226110756@vcem.com>



Hi,

Monday, December 26, 2005, 10:43:49 AM, rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu wrote:

> Why in the world use that dreadful scene? To what end did 
> it serve? Was it an unavoidable mistake? Did it give us something
> necessary about Harry? Please, if you have any thoughts, share them.

Well, I actually think Cuaron took a lot of missteps in this
movie, all related to characterization, so this scene is
just one of many that make this movie one I have no desire to
re-watch (after seeing it twice in the theater, hoping I'd
like it better on the second run).

He made a beautiful movie, but I didn't recognize the three
main characters much at all.

I'm not sure about the crying scene in particular.
Maybe another nod to one of Cuaron's other movies?
Maybe he thought this was the easiest (or most dramatic) way
to explain the Pettigrew back story without going into much
detail?
Or maybe he thought Harry needed to be more emotional?

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 27 09:56:08 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:56:08 -0000
Subject: New Tonner Harry Potter Dolls based on Daniel Radcliffe
In-Reply-To: <dopecb+tt46@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dor33o+d2fn@eGroups.com>

DeNece:
> LOL! I bought one of each also and did the same thing when my 
dolls arrived!!

Diana:
Messing up their hair is irresistible, isn't it?  It's like an 
addiction.....  LOL

DeNece:
> I love Tonner dolls and own several. I was soo buzzed when I heard 
> he was making GOF dolls that I  ordered mine the next day.
> I got them as an early Xmas present to myself. I think they are a 
> very good depiction of Dan Radcliffe as Harry.  Too bad that the 
ties don't go entirely around the neck though <snip>

Diana:
I think the likeness is also very good.  I can hardly wait to see 
what the re-painters will do to this doll as I expect there will be 
many artists who will increase the resemblence through shading and 
painting -including making his eyes green to match the character.  I 
haven't undressed my dolls so I didn't realize the tie wasn't a full 
tie. I have one other Tonner doll, one of the very first ones, but 
I'll probably end up with the entire Harry Potter line, if I can 
find a way to afford it all. :)

DeNece:
 > I hope that Tonner does also use Rupert and Emma's likeness for 
Ron and Hermione.  I think it would be a little odd if he didn't. 
> I can't wait for all the other outfits and accessories too!

Diana:
I agree that it would be strange if he *didn't* use the actors 
likenesses for Ron and Hermione since he obviously went to a great 
deal of effort to copy Daniel's appearance.  I have a friend who's 
mom is friends with Robert Tonner, so I'll ask her to relay our 
question to Tonner through her mom.  My friend really, really wants 
Hermione's Yule Ball dress so I hope they make that one for her 
sake.  I still want Harry's Tri-Wizard outfit for the first task.  
According to the info on Tonner's website, the extra outfits and 
accessories will be based upon the MOVIE costumes, so it will be 
interesting to see which costumes they decide to copy.  We 
definitely need a Ginny Weasley doll too so I hope he makes one.

DeNece:
> In November, to coinside with GOF being released,  FAO Schwartz 
had special party and sale of a limited edition of Harry @ Hogwarts 
with Hedwig.  I haven't checked online but I'll bet someone's 
selling one of those! The dolls are are limited edition so if you do 
want one...get one!

Diana:
There were quite a few of the FAO Schwartz dolls on eBay, selling 
for around $250 to $350 each, which didn't make sense as they are 
the same as the school unform Harry except they have Hedwig added.  
>From what I understand Hedwig will be available in the 2006 regular 
line for around $25 so I can't understand spending $150 to $250 more 
than regular price for just the owl. 

Diana L.
"Now we can retire and give up this life of crime." - Zoe
 







From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Tue Dec 27 16:19:30 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 11:19:30 -0500
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <1135688199.3223.51544.m16@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1135688199.3223.51544.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <8C7D918733E9ED3-954-D1C6@mblk-r43.sysops.aol.com>

Jen D:
Why in the world use that dreadful scene? To what end did 
it serve? Was it an unavoidable mistake? Did it give us something 
necessary about Harry? Please, if you have any thoughts, share them.


Personally I thought it was good. It was a piece of emotional Harry that I have been hoping to see, and hopefully consistently see through the next film(s) as it usually progresses (which is up to par in GoF). Anger, tears, frustration, sadness....These things I'm expecting because of how the books are played. It's dark. It's getting darker. I wonder how I would react when I first learn that my Godfather was involved in the death of my parents. How would I take it? I'm not caring whether it was strictly from the book or not. I personally wanted to see some emotion like that coming from Harry. Just my two cents.
 
Jade
 
Harry's To-Do List:
1. Get Up
2. Survive
3. Go Back To Bed


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




From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 27 17:38:30 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 17:38:30 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <323322805.20051226110756@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <doru6m+580e@eGroups.com>

Hi there, 
I just thought I'd come out of the woodwork to put in my 2 cents 
from the perspective of someone who saw this film BEFORE reading the 
book (which, I'm not sure is a popular perspective).

1. I loved this film.  The visual effects were absolutely stunning, 
and it seems no one disagrees with me here.

2. And did I mention the MUSIC?  I just LOVE this soundtrack, I just 
got it for Christmas, have been playing it nonstop, and find it 
preferable to GoF's.

...But the characters...While they do differ in slight ways from the 
book, I don't think their integrity is changed.  The scene with 
Harry crying under the cloak may not have been in the book, but I 
think it was a powerful scene visually, and also helps you see the 
depth of the friendship that these kids have with one another.  In 
fact, there are many scenes in this film that I believe illustrates 
that more powerfully than the book.  For instance, the scene where 
the trio views the execution.  That was a very powerful scene as 
well.

As someone who has seen the movies (1, 2 & 3) before reading the 
books, I can see where Mr. Cuaron glazed over a few points (most 
notably, the patronus), but overall this scene in particular doesn't 
seem out of place in context.

Dan's acting skills, on the otherhand, could maybe have been a 
little bit better, but he has totally topped himself with the crying 
scene in GoF over Cedric's dead body.  Very chilling.

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at v...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Monday, December 26, 2005, 10:43:49 AM, rdas at f... wrote:
> 
> > Why in the world use that dreadful scene? To what end did 
> > it serve? Was it an unavoidable mistake? Did it give us something
> > necessary about Harry? Please, if you have any thoughts, share 
them.
> 
> Well, I actually think Cuaron took a lot of missteps in this
> movie, all related to characterization, so this scene is
> just one of many that make this movie one I have no desire to
> re-watch (after seeing it twice in the theater, hoping I'd
> like it better on the second run).
> 
> He made a beautiful movie, but I didn't recognize the three
> main characters much at all.
> 
> I'm not sure about the crying scene in particular.
> Maybe another nod to one of Cuaron's other movies?
> Maybe he thought this was the easiest (or most dramatic) way
> to explain the Pettigrew back story without going into much
> detail?
> Or maybe he thought Harry needed to be more emotional?
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at v...
>







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Dec 27 20:52:19 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 20:52:19 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
Message-ID: <dos9i3+ancg@eGroups.com>

Hi  Guys,
I just had to tell you all that I saw GOF on an IMAX screen last 
night and it was a super experience! Others have mentioned the 
detail you can see in a 50 ft. screen and I want to tell you, words 
can not fully explain just how much more you can catch with such a 
large screen. The opening WB came at me and pulled me in like being 
pulled into a pensieve! It was incredible! 

Of the many things I could see for the first time was that famed 
tombstone before Nagini gets to the Riddles stone. Still can't read 
it, you have some eyes there Richard! Richard also talked about 
visual signals that Newell uses and so many more were evident to me 
on the IMAX screen. I could see for the first time (sad to admit) 
that Fake Moody wore that same infamous black leather jacket he wore 
when meeting the Dark Lord and at the World Cup, another one of 
Richard's visual links (as in the tongue flicking tic).

I could also see his face better after he put up the dark mark. It 
was just barely visible as opposed to being a silhouette on smaller 
screens.  The dragon sequence was much more frightening IMAX-style. 
Even though I knew I was being made to watch an obligatory action 
bit, the huge screen combined with the enhanced audio  made it 
pretty hard to withstand in a detached manner. My knuckles were 
white. The falls from the various parts of the roof look heart-
stopping.

 The improved sound quality also adds tremendously to the feud 
between Harry and Ron. Much of the dialogue overlaps and with the 
better sound, you can catch little odd bits. During the Yule Ball 
run-up,  I finally  caught all the hilarious things Ron said off-
camera as he recounted his ill-fated attempt to invite Fleur to the 
ball. Also his face was visibly ashen, a fact I hadn't registered in 
smaller versions.  

Weirdly enough, Emma's performance seemed to fit better in a large 
format. She was certainly in "worried" mode most of the film and it 
seems to work really well writ large. During the first task, I saw 
her visibly shaking and I hadn't seen that earlier. I also loved her 
reaction to Harry's safe return from the lake. The solidly-planted 
maternal kiss on the top of his head was just better in this big 
format. Some have suggested she had an over-the-top performance and 
perhaps that works well the bigger you can see it. Does that make 
sense? 

The graveyard scene packs a much bigger punch in IMAX. I could see 
the Death Eaters surrounding LV and Harry and make out how they were 
hissing and laughing, esp. Lucius. The scene was much more intense, 
the torture more horrible. LV looked so much more menacing on the 
large screen. I saw the veins running close to the surface of his 
deathly-pale skull, and his eyes, so cold and evil. His eyes were 
mesmerizing and chilling as he tortured Harry. Ralph Fiennes brings 
a very controlled and almost courtly evil to this part. His LV is 
larger than life and perfect for IMAX. As for Harry, near the end of 
the duel I caught for the first time the look of longing that he 
gives his mother when she says "It's time, sweatheart. You're 
ready." The blood, the bruises and contusions were much more vivid 
as well. At the return scene, the camera's lingering on so many 
stunned faces was an agonizing time. Harry's sobs just seemed to 
echo for ages. 

You know I could go on but I will refrain. Please share your 
experiences if you care to. And if you haven't seen it in IMAX and 
have the opportunity, do so. It's well worth the price. I'm just 
going out to sell plasma so I can go again!
Jen







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Dec 27 20:57:16 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 20:57:16 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <doru6m+580e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dos9rc+oseo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "laurenmcoakley" 
<laurenmcoakley at y...> wrote:
>
> 
...But the characters...While they do differ in slight ways from the
book, I don't think their integrity is changed. The scene with
Harry crying under the cloak may not have been in the book, but I
think it was a powerful scene visually, and also helps you see the
depth of the friendship that these kids have with one another. In
fact, there are many scenes in this film that I believe illustrates
that more powerfully than the book. For instance, the scene where
the trio views the execution. That was a very powerful scene as
well

Hi there again,
Jen here,
I have to restate my question though, why have Harry do something so 
out of character, to cry in front of his friends, when there are or 
were so many  more subtle ways of demonstrating emotion? Is this in 
character for Cuaron but not Harry? It didn't happen in the book, 
true but if you are going to invent a bit for Harry to show emotion, 
why include that really odd sound? Couldn't Cuaron have found a more 
convincing sound? Do 13 year old boys cry like tiny babies? I think 
if they cry, they do it as silently as possible. I just think this 
scene sticks out and as others say, there's a reason for everything 
in a Harry Potter film, given the time constraints. I just want to 
hear a convincing explanation for this inclusion. I haven't been 
convinced yet.
Jen D






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 28 00:50:50 2005
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 00:50:50 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <dopdl5+c6o1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dosnha+fepl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> wrote:
>
> Hi fellow film lovers,
> I have been reading posts from when POA was released and I am 
> learning a lot about a film I formerly dismissed. ...edited...
>
> Why put in the "Crying Scene?" [in PoA] Various and sundry of
> you all weighed in back then. Most of us who are way too 
> emotionally attached to Daniel ... thought that the tears were
> there, that the emotion was believable and we worked hard to 
> overlook the bizarre sound coming from under the cloak. 
> ...edited... 
> Why in the world use that dreadful scene? To what end did 
> it serve? Was it an unavoidable mistake? Did it give us something 
> necessary about Harry? Please, if you have any thoughts, share them.
> Jen D
>

bboyminn:

I think it's a matter of expedience and time compression. When you are
racing the clock to squeeze a four hour movie into 2.5hrs, you take
shortcuts. 

This scene would have played out more believably if the Director had
taken some time to establish the mood, time for emotions to build,
time for Daniel to get into the character and reflect his emotions.
Unfortunately time was one thing they didn't have. So, they started
from a wide angle with Harry sobbing, no explanation needed, then
zoomed in on Hermione pulling Harry's I-Cloak, Harry yells, then we're
off to a new scene. Short, quick, and off you go.

Simple as that.

Steve/bboyminn







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Dec 28 02:28:59 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 02:28:59 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <dosnha+fepl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dost9b+6m5c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
> >SNIPPED HERE:> >
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> I think it's a matter of expedience and time compression. When you 
are
> racing the clock to squeeze a four hour movie into 2.5hrs, you take
> shortcuts. 
> 
> This scene would have played out more believably if the Director 
had
> taken some time to establish the mood, time for emotions to build,
> time for Daniel to get into the character and reflect his emotions.
> Unfortunately time was one thing they didn't have. So, they started
> from a wide angle with Harry sobbing, no explanation needed, then
> zoomed in on Hermione pulling Harry's I-Cloak, Harry yells, then 
we're
> off to a new scene. Short, quick, and off you go.
> 
> Simple as that.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn

Simple as that, I agree, but totally out of character for Harry. And 
totally weird for a director to choose such an odd way to 
demonstrate emotion. I agree again with you that a film can only do 
so much but look at that film! We took lots and lots of time to 
establish the whimsy of the Whomping Willow. It got lots more 
character development than Harry did at the moment he had to do 
something he'd never do in the books, i.e. cry in front of anyone. 
Even Dumbledore had the civility to contemplate other things whilst 
Harry shed tears in the wrap up of Philospher's Stone. And now you 
will tell me that Cuaron never read any HP. Alrighty. I can grasp 
that but he's the artiste of that coming of age film about you 
guessed it ! Teen age boys! How could he get it so wrong? He's 
supposed to have feeling for that age group! I don't think the 
motivation for tears is there, I don't think tears were in 
character. And I don't think Cuaron is a sloppy director. I don't 
know how he came to give Harry the short shrift there. My only 
explanation is that he cares less for Harry than for visual impact. 
Breath-taking shots. Nice little sepia moments. I just can't explain 
it any other way.
But thanks for your thoughts, Steve.
Jen D
>







From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 28 09:37:53 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 09:37:53 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <dos9i3+ancg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dotmdh+7rmk@eGroups.com>

Jen wrote:
> I just had to tell you all that I saw GOF on an IMAX screen last 
> night and it was a super experience! Others have mentioned the 
> detail you can see in a 50 ft. screen and I want to tell you, 
words can not fully explain just how much more you can catch with 
such a large screen. 

Diana:
It is a beautiful movie on IMAX, isn't it?  The wealth of detail is 
truly astounding, which I commented on as well.  It's doubly amazing 
considering I had seen GoF on Nov. 18th at a regular theater using a 
digital projector yet the IMAX still dwarfed it in comparsion, 
literally and figuratively.  :)

Jen wrote:
> Of the many things I could see for the first time was that famed 
> tombstone before Nagini gets to the Riddles stone. Still can't 
read it, you have some eyes there Richard! Richard also talked about 
> visual signals that Newell uses and so many more were evident to 
me on the IMAX screen. I could see for the first time (sad to admit) 
> that Fake Moody wore that same infamous black leather jacket he 
wore when meeting the Dark Lord and at the World Cup, another one of 
> Richard's visual links (as in the tongue flicking tic).

Diana:
I didn't notice the coat!  It didn't occur to me that BartyJr!Moody 
could possibly fit any of the same clothing sizes while disguised as 
Moody's much thicker body.  Just another Newell (or wardrobe 
department?) nugget.  And I couldn't read the tombstone either.  
Okay, someone give - what did it say?  

Jen wrote:
> I could also see his face better after he put up the dark mark. It 
> was just barely visible as opposed to being a silhouette on 
smaller screens.  

Diana:
Yes, this scene is much better being able to see some of his face as 
he casts the Dark Mark as he seems almost cheerfully giddy when 
setting it off.  The menace to Harry was much more palpable in this 
scene as well because of it.

Jen wrote:
The dragon sequence was much more frightening IMAX-style. Even 
though I knew I was being made to watch an obligatory action bit, 
the huge screen combined with the enhanced audio  made it pretty 
>hard to withstand in a detached manner. My knuckles were white. The 
>falls from the various parts of the roof look heart-stopping.

Diana:
Definitely scarier dragon task all the way around in IMAX.  My 
husband was greatly annoyed at the expansion of the dragon task into 
an airborne chase around Hogwarts in the movie since he feels 
Harry's calmness and confidence at the task as soon as he gets on 
his broom are important to Harry's character.  I sort of agree with 
him, but it's hard to argue the point when a photo-realistic 
actually-50-foot dragon is chasing Harry around on a screen right in 
front of you. 

Jen wrote: 
>  The improved sound quality also adds tremendously to the feud 
> between Harry and Ron. Much of the dialogue overlaps and with the 
> better sound, you can catch little odd bits. During the Yule Ball 
> run-up,  I finally  caught all the hilarious things Ron said off-
> camera as he recounted his ill-fated attempt to invite Fleur to 
>the ball. Also his face was visibly ashen, a fact I hadn't 
>registered in smaller versions. 

Diana:
Ron's dialog in that scene (post asking Fleur to the ball) reminded 
me a great deal of his background dialog in PoA after the trio had 
come out of the Whomping Willow and Ron was talking about Madame 
Pomfrey having to 'chop' his leg.  Both were pushed to the 
background of the scene, but are quite funny when you catch what 
he's saying.  I noticed Ron's ashen appearance as well on IMAX and 
wondered how they got Rupert looking so white.  Makeup just didn't 
seem capable of that level of ashenness.  LOL

Jen wrote:
> Weirdly enough, Emma's performance seemed to fit better in a large 
> format. She was certainly in "worried" mode most of the film and 
it seems to work really well writ large. During the first task, I 
saw her visibly shaking and I hadn't seen that earlier. I also loved 
her reaction to Harry's safe return from the lake. The solidly-
planted maternal kiss on the top of his head was just better in this 
big format. Some have suggested she had an over-the-top performance 
and perhaps that works well the bigger you can see it. Does that 
make sense? 

Diana:
Makes sense to me as I felt the same way, except once or twice.  
Hermione did seem overly emotional throughout the film, which isn't 
necessarily a detriment to the film and her performance, except a 
couple times her emotional reactions seemed to occur just before the 
events she was supposed to be reacting to, such as with Moody's 
first DADA lesson.  Not a big deal, but I noticed it (and other 
posters have mentioned it as well).  I really liked seeing 
Hermione's, Angelina's and Ginny's reactions to Ron and Harry 
burying the hatchett in the common room after the first task.  The 
look on Angelina's face is priceless as Hermione says "Boys!".
Gambon's Dumbledore was also more visibly worried throughout the 
movie.  In fact, the first time I saw the movie, I was rather 
surprised at how constantly upset Dumbledore is just under the 
surface from the scene where Harry's name comes out of the Goblet 
onward.  It was much easier to pick up when Gambon's face was 40-
feet tall.  It made me appreciate the performance much more.  Though 
nothing will ever quite explain to me the rough-handling of Harry by 
DD in the trophy room immediately after his name comes out the 
Goblet, I can put it into better context with the extreme uneasiness 
displayed on DD's face throughout the rest of the movie.   

Jen wrote:
> The graveyard scene packs a much bigger punch in IMAX. I could see 
> the Death Eaters surrounding LV and Harry and make out how they 
were hissing and laughing, esp. Lucius. The scene was much more 
intense, the torture more horrible. LV looked so much more menacing 
on the large screen. I saw the veins running close to the surface of 
his deathly-pale skull, and his eyes, so cold and evil. His eyes 
were mesmerizing and chilling as he tortured Harry. Ralph Fiennes 
brings a very controlled and almost courtly evil to this part. His 
LV is larger than life and perfect for IMAX. As for Harry, near the 
end of the duel I caught for the first time the look of longing that 
he gives his mother when she says "It's time, sweatheart. You're 
> ready." The blood, the bruises and contusions were much more vivid 
> as well. At the return scene, the camera's lingering on so many 
> stunned faces was an agonizing time. Harry's sobs just seemed to 
> echo for ages. 

Diana:
The bigger screen does make for a bigger emotional impact.  Harry 
looked much more battered after coming back from the graveyard in 
IMAX.  He actually looked like he'd been tortured as I could see him 
shaking in several scenes.  The expressions on Harry's face when LV 
made him bow, when LV told him he would be a merciful Lord while 
granting Harry's wish to die and when Harry refused to let go of 
Cedric's body were heart-wrenchingly vivid in IMAX.  I hadn't seen 
nearly the detail when I'd seen the movie on a regular screen.  
Another scene that had more impact was the one where Harry walked up 
the hall after his name came out of the Goblet as it was easy to see 
not only the confused, scared, embarassed expression on Harry's face 
but the negative, curious, contemptuous expressions on the other 
students' faces as well.

At $11 a ticket, IMAX isn't cheap, but I agree with Jen that is more 
than worth the investment on this movie. 

Diana L. 







From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 28 17:11:40 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:11:40 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <dost9b+6m5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <douh0c+mmh3@eGroups.com>

 
> > bboyminn says:
> > 
> > I think it's a matter of expedience and time compression. When 
you are racing the clock to squeeze a four hour movie into 2.5hrs, 
you take shortcuts. 
> > 
> > This scene would have played out more believably if the Director 
> had taken some time to establish the mood, time for emotions to 
build, time for Daniel to get into the character and reflect his 
emotions. Unfortunately time was one thing they didn't have. So, 
they started from a wide angle with Harry sobbing, no explanation 
needed, then zoomed in on Hermione pulling Harry's I-Cloak, Harry 
yells, then we're
> > off to a new scene. Short, quick, and off you go.
> > 
> > Simple as that.
> > 
> > Steve/bboyminn

And then Jen D says:
> Simple as that, I agree, but totally out of character for Harry. 
And 
> totally weird for a director to choose such an odd way to 
> demonstrate emotion. I agree again with you that a film can only 
do 
> so much but look at that film! We took lots and lots of time to 
> establish the whimsy of the Whomping Willow. It got lots more 
> character development than Harry did at the moment he had to do 
> something he'd never do in the books, i.e. cry in front of anyone. 
> Even Dumbledore had the civility to contemplate other things 
whilst 
> Harry shed tears in the wrap up of Philospher's Stone. And now you 
> will tell me that Cuaron never read any HP. Alrighty. I can grasp 
> that but he's the artiste of that coming of age film about you 
> guessed it ! Teen age boys! How could he get it so wrong? He's 
> supposed to have feeling for that age group! I don't think the 
> motivation for tears is there, I don't think tears were in 
> character. And I don't think Cuaron is a sloppy director. I don't 
> know how he came to give Harry the short shrift there. My only 
> explanation is that he cares less for Harry than for visual 
impact. 
> Breath-taking shots. Nice little sepia moments. I just can't 
explain it any other way.
> But thanks for your thoughts, Steve.
> Jen D


And now Lauren says:

JenD-
I'm sorry, but I think I am having trouble with what you keep 
calling "a weird/odd way" to express emotion.  Harry is 13 years old 
in this film for heaven's sakes!  I'm not sure how mature the 13 
year-olds you hang around with are, but I think crying as a way to 
express emotion is perfectly acceptable! (Even for those of us way 
way waaaay older than 13!) :-)

And the debate about the necessity of the emotion-showing at all?!  
Does it HAVE to be word-for-word in the book to make it appropriate?

And, as I've mentioned before, there are other themes that are 
reinforced by this very scene.  I just love the FRIENDSHIP the 
children have.  I think the director even takes advantage of the 
real-life friendships these children have with each other.  And how 
wonderful it is to be able to see it and believe it, both as actors 
and as the characters they play.

And to Steve-
I believe, in general, the films don't receive enough respect.  It's 
very popular to bash the films in comparison to the books.  But, 
they are clearly two different mediums.  (as other people have often 
said on this board).  Why do you feel that moods weren't able to 
properly develop and the movie had to rush through ?  Like I 
mentioned in my previous post, I saw this movie BEFORE I read the 
book, and I never felt confused about what what going on with Harry 
or his emotions.  The only issue I had with not reading the book 
beforehand was the background to the patronus.  I'm curious- did you 
read the books before seeing the films?  JK, while clearly talented 
in her writing does have a tendency to be "too wordy".  Does the 
movie feel rushed because what took you an hour to read only plays 
out in a movie to be a fraction of that?  I'm just asking, because 
I'm having trouble understanding your point of view on this.

And to both, and everyone else reading this-
Please excuse me if I seem confrontational- It's really not my 
style, but I am a little tired of reading such negativity about the 
films.  I am making my stand.  I love Harry Potter, the books, and 
the movies too.  Flaws and all.  And by the way, the books have 
flaws too!







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Dec 28 17:27:37 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:27:37 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <douh0c+mmh3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <douhu9+5t6v@eGroups.com>


> 
> And now Lauren says:
> 
> JenD-
> I'm sorry, but I think I am having trouble with what you keep 
> calling "a weird/odd way" to express emotion.  Harry is 13 years 
old > in this film for heaven's sakes!  I'm not sure how mature the 
13 
> year-olds you hang around with are, but I think crying as a way to 
> express emotion is perfectly acceptable! (Even for those of us way 
> way waaaay older than 13!) :-)

Jen interjects:
I have absolutely no problem with Harry expressing emotion! I am 
always moved at how Jo writes about him expressing emotions, how 
much it seems to mirror how a real boy feels, how well he "gets" it 
such as when Dumbledore explains his mother's sacrifice. Harry's 
emotions are fine with me. But you have to understand my question. 
Why "make up" an incident to demonstrate emotion on Harry's part 
when you have so many really fine examples in the books (which 
somehow should relate to the script)? And moreover, why make up 
an "out-of-character" incident that lacks proper motivation? You 
seem to be foregetting that I am very interested in understanding 
this film, a film that I haven't given enough attention to. I am not 
decrying it, just hoping someone out there understands this scene 
better than me. You don't have to do a cheer for the films as films. 
I am first in line for that. It's just that a film must have some 
relationship to the characters that operate in it and some of that 
relationship must spring from the books, they are the text. And as I 
understand it, Harry would never have willingly shed tears in front 
of his friends. He does his crying as sereptitiously as possible. If 
you can explain how the scene works, then we have something to 
discuss. You don't need to stand up for the film. We'd be on the 
same side. 
Jen D



>







From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 28 19:54:33 2005
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 19:54:33 -0000
Subject: DAN on Regis&Kelly
Message-ID: <douqhp+9n4o@eGroups.com>

Hi I'm NEW here !

This morning on the TV I saw that DAN

is going to be on Regis & Kelly,

12-29-05, looked like talking about G O F !

Gail in NE IND









From mike4521daron at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 28 20:36:11 2005
From: mike4521daron at yahoo.com (Mike Daron)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] DAN on Regis&Kelly
In-Reply-To: <douqhp+9n4o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051228203611.60228.qmail@web52913.mail.yahoo.com>

what state are you livin. I'm in southern california thank you in forming us on dan where-abouts good eyes you have . mike .

gwharrison53 <gwharrison53 at yahoo.com> wrote:  Hi I'm NEW here !

This morning on the TV I saw that DAN

is going to be on Regis & Kelly,

12-29-05, looked like talking about G O F !

Gail in NE IND








________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________




  SPONSORED LINKS 
        Harry potter   Entertainment movie   Entertainment new york 
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie" on the web.
    
    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! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less

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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Dec 29 05:10:41 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:10:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <dos9i3+ancg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFD8DA01.1AE6%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> 
> 
> You know I could go on but I will refrain. Please share your
> experiences if you care to. And if you haven't seen it in IMAX and
> have the opportunity, do so. It's well worth the price. I'm just
> going out to sell plasma so I can go again!
> Jen
> 
> It sounds terrific!!! I?ve been trying to get there. It?s playing at the
> Smithsonian IMAX theatre in Washington, DC, but only at 5:30 pm, and I can
> never seem to make it. Not sure how much longer it will be there. Can I ask
> how much you paid? Is it way more expensive than the regular theatres? Someone
> said $70 a ticket. Surely not?!?!?!?!
> Valerie




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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Dec 29 05:17:39 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:17:39 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <dotmdh+7rmk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFD8DBA3.1AE7%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> 
> 
> At $11 a ticket, IMAX isn't cheap, but I agree with Jen that is more
> than worth the investment on this movie.
> 
> Diana L. 
> 
> 
$11 is nothing for IMAX considering I paid $8.50 or $9.00 for regular
viewing. I?m definitely going to have to fit that in to my schedule! :-)
Valerie



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




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 29 12:18:30 2005
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 04:18:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <BFD8DA01.1AE6%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20051229121830.79077.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at verizon.net> wrote:    Can I ask how much you paid? Is it way more expensive than the regular theatres? Someone said $70 a ticket. Surely not?!?!?!?!
> Valerie

  akh answers:
    In Chicago, the tickets are $14.50, which is a bit less than $70.  Buying online adds $1 per ticket, but because the Navy Pier IMAX has reserved seating, it's worth it to get a good seat.  Having gone three times with packed houses each time, I was always glad I bought in advance.
   
  akh, who would explain why she "inadvertently" went three times to the IMAX, but would have everyone snoozing by the fourth word...
  
 


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
 Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec 29 12:51:39 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:51:39 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <20051229121830.79077.qmail@web36814.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dp0m4r+1rro@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at y...> 
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Valerie Flowe <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:    Can I ask how much 
you paid? Is it way more expensive than the regular theatres? 
Someone said $70 a ticket. Surely not?!?!?!?!
> > Valerie
> 
>   akh answers:
>     In Chicago, the tickets are $14.50, which is a bit less than 
$70.  Buying online adds $1 per ticket, but because the Navy Pier 
IMAX has reserved seating, it's worth it to get a good seat.  Having 
gone three times with packed houses each time, I was always glad I 
bought in advance.
>    
>   akh, who would explain why she "inadvertently" went three times 
to the IMAX, but would have everyone snoozing by the fourth word...
>   
>  
>JenD here!
I would be very interested to know how one inadvertently goes to an 
IMAX screening 3 times (It might work with my husband you see....) 
but back to my reason for responding, here in Madison, IMAX is 8.50 
for a matinee showing (WHAT A BARGAIN!) and $11.00 for the evening 
show. Again, I urge you to see it on that BIG BIG screen. It's 
brilliant! 
JenD







From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 29 13:27:32 2005
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 05:27:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <dp0m4r+1rro@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20051229132732.53312.qmail@web36807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



susanbones2003 <rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote:    I would be very interested to know how one inadvertently goes to an IMAX screening 3 times (It might work with my husband you see....)
   
  akh warns:
   
  OK, you asked for it.  I had always planned to see the movie once in the regular theatre on opening weekend and once in the IMAX theatre.  Opening weekend went as planned, but then Thanksgiving weekend, my friend from Columbia, MO came up to see me, and she knew of no IMAX there.  Well, of course we had to see it in IMAX, for HER sake.  I had already promised another friend we'd see it at IMAX when she got back from her Thanksgiving vacation, so that was the planned IMAX outing. 
   
  Then, mid-December, I received a call from a friend I'd invited to my holiday party who managed to open the invitation TWO DAYS after the event.  (He has got to start letting his SO open his mail!)  To make it up, he wanted to go see HP in IMAX.  Given that the three of us had seen POA in IMAX, how could I refuse?!?
   
  The moral of the story is, if you can convince your husband he's doing it as a good deed for a friend, you might succeed.  Got any friends who are IMAX-deprived?  There's your ticket!
   
  akh, who secretly hoped her SO (who is exiled in Canada right now) would need to see HP in IMAX when he visits in January.  However, he's seen it, so hope wanes...


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. 

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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec 29 13:35:42 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:35:42 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <20051229132732.53312.qmail@web36807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <dp0one+mf6q@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at y...> wrote:
>From akh:>    
>   akh, who secretly hoped her SO (who is exiled in Canada right now) 
would need to see HP in IMAX when he visits in January.  However, he's 
seen it, so hope wanes...
> 
>
I will keep this note on topic, just barely, by urging you to get your 
SO to read various and sundry glowing and effusive posts about how very 
much MORE brilliant GOF is in IMAX! Maybe he's not seen many IMAX 
films, and you can angle it that way...I am already working on 
your "invitation from a friend" line. It just might work...
JenD







From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 29 14:55:31 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 09:55:31 -0500
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
References: <dp0one+mf6q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <017901c60c87$eba8bbe0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

Hi! You've convinced me, folks. Anyone know where the nearest IMAX would be for me? I'm about 70 miles west of Boston.

Michelle
Mother, Scholar, Gardener, Aviator

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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Dec 29 15:13:55 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:13:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <20051229132732.53312.qmail@web36807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFD96763.1AF9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

On 12/29/05 8:27 AM, "AnitaKH" <anita_hillin at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   
>   The moral of the story is, if you can convince your husband he's doing it as
> a good deed for a friend, you might succeed.  Got any friends who are
> IMAX-deprived?  There's your ticket!
>    
>   akh, who secretly hoped her SO (who is exiled in Canada right now) would
> need to see HP in IMAX when he visits in January.  However, he's seen it, so
> hope wanes...


My husband DOES NOT understand or support my HP obsession. I?ve seen GOF 3x,
with HP friends, with my kids and alone. Husband only knows of the first 2.
Never seen an HP movie on IMAX. :-(  5:30pm, the only showing here in DC, is
a very awkward time, as I don?t get off work till 6pm, and am with the kids
at any other time. Sigh...what?s an adult HP fanatic to do?! This is why I
am online at 1am reading/responding to HPFGW e-mails, surfing HP websites,
reading HP fanfic. What IS it about this series that obsesses some people
so? I read an article entitled ?Narnia..the new Harry Potter?? Naahhh!!!
Valerie


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




From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Dec 29 15:43:08 2005
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:43:08 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] re: Dan vs. Harry's emotions
In-Reply-To: <douhu9+5t6v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BFD96E3C.1AFB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>

> 
> Jen interjects:
> I have absolutely no problem with Harry expressing emotion! I am
> always moved at how Jo writes about him expressing emotions, how
> much it seems to mirror how a real boy feels, how well he "gets" it
> such as when Dumbledore explains his mother's sacrifice. Harry's
> emotions are fine with me. But you have to understand my question.
> Why "make up" an incident to demonstrate emotion on Harry's part
> when you have so many really fine examples in the books (which
somehow should relate to the script)?

I just finished reading GOF, which I had refused to read PRIOR to the movie.
I did not want to be disappointed at how much was changed/left off of the
book. There were many, many changes from the book, obviously for the sake of
time. After re-reading the book I do feel that the movie is not quite as
rich in story as the book. That?s why if you become an HP fan as a RESULT of
watching the movies, you owe it to yourself to go back and read the books.
That said, I was surprised when I re-read the Molly/Harry interaction at the
end. It was not as outwardly emotional as I recalled.
As we know it was changed in the movie to have Harry sobbing over Cedric
upon his return (very well done, Dan, as we?ve all agreed!). In the book,
Harry DID NOT sob over Cedric.
[He clutched Cedric to him more tightly...?Harry, let go of him ,? he heard
Fudge?s voice say, and he felt fingers trying to pry him from Cedric?s limp
body, but Harry wouldn?t let him go. Then Dumbledore?s face came closer.
?Harry, you can?t help him now. It?s over. Let go.?
?He wanted me to bring him back,? Harry muttered ? it seemed important to
explain this. ?He wanted me to bring him back to his parents?] then Moody
comes and drags him away...
So in this regard the movie was MUCH more emotionally impactful than the
book. The movie audience was either tensely silent or sniffling during this
harrowing scene.

For some reason I thought that the Molly/Harry scene was when book Harry
broke down and sobbed. But he did not.
[The thing against which he had been fighting on and off ever since he had
come out of the maze was threatening to overpower him. He could feel a
burning, prickling feeling in the inner corners of his eyes. He
blinked/stared up at the ceiling. ?It wasn?t your fault Harry,? Mrs. Weasley
whispered. ?I told him to take the cup with me,? Harry said.
Now the burning feeling was in his throat too. He wished Ron would look
away. Mrs. W put her arms around Harry. He had no memory of ever being
hugged like this, as though by a mother (sniff!!! poor Harry, having just
seen the ghost of his mom!!!!) The full weight of everything he had seen
that night seemed to fall in upon him as Mrs. W held him to her. His
mother?s face, his father?s voice, the sight of Cedric, dead on the ground
all started spinning in his head until he could hardly bear it, until he was
screwing up his face against the howl of misery fighting to get out of him.
There was a loud slamming noise and Mrs. W and Harry broke apart. (Hermione
catching Rita-the-beetle).]
So yes, there was a big difference in book Harry, who has a VERY hard time
letting his gut-wrenching emotions out, and movie Harry who cried in public
in GOF after the maze task. Both different, yet effective for their
respective mediums.
I still love the movies, as a companion piece to the wonderful books!

Valerie


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




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec 29 18:50:41 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 18:50:41 -0000
Subject: Dan vs. Harry's emotions
In-Reply-To: <BFD96E3C.1AFB%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dp1b61+duh2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> 
> I just finished reading GOF, which I had refused to read PRIOR to 
the movie.> I did not want to be disappointed at how much was 
changed/left off of the> book. There were many, many changes from 
the book, obviously for the sake of> time. After re-reading the book 
I do feel that the movie is not quite as> rich in story as the book. 
That?s why if you become an HP fan as a RESULT of> watching the 
movies, you owe it to yourself to go back and read the books.
> That said, I was surprised when I re-read the Molly/Harry 
interaction at the> end. It was not as outwardly emotional as I 
recalled.> As we know it was changed in the movie to have Harry 
sobbing over Cedric> upon his return (very well done, Dan, as we?ve 
all agreed!). In the book,> Harry DID NOT sob over Cedric.
> [He clutched Cedric to him more tightly...?Harry, let go of him ,? 
he heard> Fudge?s voice say, and he felt fingers trying to pry him 
from Cedric?s limp> body, but Harry wouldn?t let him go. Then 
Dumbledore?s face came closer.> ?Harry, you can?t help him now. It?s 
over. Let go.> ?He wanted me to bring him back,? Harry muttered ? it 
seemed important to> explain this. ?He wanted me to bring him back 
to his parents?] then Moody> comes and drags him away...
> So in this regard the movie was MUCH more emotionally impactful 
than the> book. The movie audience was either tensely silent or 
sniffling during this> harrowing scene.
> 
> For some reason I thought that the Molly/Harry scene was when book 
Harry> broke down and sobbed. But he did not.
> [The thing against which he had been fighting on and off ever 
since he had> come out of the maze was threatening to overpower him. 
He could feel a> burning, prickling feeling in the inner corners of 
his eyes. He blinked/stared up at the ceiling. ?It wasn?t your fault 
Harry,? Mrs. Weasley> whispered. ?I told him to take the cup with 
me,? Harry said> Now the burning feeling was in his throat too. He 
wished Ron would look> away. Mrs. W put her arms around Harry. He 
had no memory of ever being> hugged like this, as though by a mother 
(sniff!!! poor Harry, having just> seen the ghost of his mom!!!!) 
The full weight of everything he had seen> that night seemed to fall 
in upon him as Mrs. W held him to her. His> mother?s face, his 
father?s voice, the sight of Cedric, dead on the ground
> all started spinning in his head until he could hardly bear it, 
until he was> screwing up his face against the howl of misery 
fighting to get out of him.> There was a loud slamming noise and 
Mrs. W and Harry broke apart. (Hermione> catching Rita-the-beetle).]
> So yes, there was a big difference in book Harry, who has a VERY 
hard time> letting his gut-wrenching emotions out, and movie Harry 
who cried in public> in GOF after the maze task. Both different, yet 
effective for their> respective mediums.
> I still love the movies, as a companion piece to the wonderful 
books!> 
> Valerie
> 
Valerie,
Don't know what part of that lovely post to snip so I left it all. I 
think what you have brought up is the essential component of GOF 
that makes it more like a HP book than POA was. (Not arguing whether 
POA was a good film, it just didn't catch the spirit of the book POA 
as well for me as the GOF film did). Mike Newell had 120 pages of 
script to give to Goblet. Now we know the book is substantially 
longer. He found a main thread, the thriller aspect, and he put 
everything at his disposal into telling that slice of the book. The 
last task, the events in the maze, the graveyard and the entire long 
series of events after Harry exits the maze could have easily taken 
the 120 pages. I was awfully sorry not to see Harry get a real 
motherly hug. But I think the director and script writers had a feel 
for what resonated with viewers. No, Harry didn't cry upon return 
with Cedric in the book, and the tears that threateded to overwhelm 
him with Molly didn't fall either. But Newell used that return scene 
to demonstrate the range of things that happened in the book, as a 
condensation without losting the spirit of the book. It never seemed 
forced or odd. It was a believable reaction to the events. 

Back in POA, Harry's crying under the cloak just didn't strike a 
believable note. Of course he was angry with Sirius for (he thought 
at the time) betraying his parents but I can't for the life of me 
see him crying in an audible way. Shouting, which he did, I can see. 
But no, the tears didn't make sense in that context. And at best, I 
still maintain, they'd have been silent tears. The return from the 
graveyard, the depth of the experience, torure and facing the most 
evil wizard in the world, then seeing his parents, being asked to 
return a body, the piling on of things, it is understandable that 
someone would experience a break. All in all, Newell had a feeling 
for Harry that wasn't quite there for me in POA. It won't stop me 
from digging into POA and reading good posts about the structure of 
the film (and maybe,hopefully writing a good post or two). So keep 
the thoughts coming!
Jen D






From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Dec 29 19:07:25 2005
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 19:07:25 -0000
Subject: One Scene from POA
In-Reply-To: <douhu9+5t6v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dp1c5d+tcrp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
>
> 
> > 
> > And now Lauren says:
> > 
> > JenD-
> > I'm sorry, but I think I am having trouble with what you keep 
> > calling "a weird/odd way" to express emotion.  Harry is 13 years 
> old > in this film for heaven's sakes!  I'm not sure how mature 
the 
> 13 
> > year-olds you hang around with are, but I think crying as a way 
to 
> > express emotion is perfectly acceptable! (Even for those of us 
way 
> > way waaaay older than 13!) :-)
> 
> Jen interjects:
> I have absolutely no problem with Harry expressing emotion! I am 
> always moved at how Jo writes about him expressing emotions, how 
> much it seems to mirror how a real boy feels, how well he "gets" 
it 
> such as when Dumbledore explains his mother's sacrifice. Harry's 
> emotions are fine with me. But you have to understand my question. 
> Why "make up" an incident to demonstrate emotion on Harry's part 
> when you have so many really fine examples in the books (which 
> somehow should relate to the script)? And moreover, why make up 
> an "out-of-character" incident that lacks proper motivation? You 
> seem to be foregetting that I am very interested in understanding 
> this film, a film that I haven't given enough attention to. I am 
not 
> decrying it, just hoping someone out there understands this scene 
> better than me. You don't have to do a cheer for the films as 
films. 
> I am first in line for that. It's just that a film must have some 
> relationship to the characters that operate in it and some of that 
> relationship must spring from the books, they are the text. And as 
I 
> understand it, Harry would never have willingly shed tears in 
front 
> of his friends. He does his crying as sereptitiously as possible. 
If 
> you can explain how the scene works, then we have something to 
> discuss. You don't need to stand up for the film. We'd be on the 
> same side. 
> Jen D
> 
Now Theresa:
Sorry I finally had to delurk here. I must be a rare person as I 
actually liked this scene. I wasn't sure of the real tears until I 
saw it on IMAX - that was the only issue I had before. As for 
whether a 13 year old boy would cry or not - I think depends on the 
boy. I have two sons - one 14 and one nearly 11 and they do cry on 
occassion (usually go hide in their rooms but I still hear them and 
go and see). I do not think Harry intended to cry in front of his 
friends as he bolted from the Three Broomsticks and had the cloak 
on. In fact I noticed on rewatching it recently that Ron actually 
tries to stop Hermione from going to Harry. I think Ron being the 
good best friend realized Harry wanted a little privacy but the 
mother instinct in Hermione pushed her foward. I do think that this 
was a great way to take several scenes from the book and roll it 
into one. In the book Harry overhears (as do Hermione and Ron) from 
hidden under a table. He was shocked and nearly didn't come out from 
under the table (R/H stare at him "lost for words" - was he showing 
his upset then?). Then the next day in the Gryffindor room the trio 
have the conversation about revenge and R/H try to convince Harry 
not to go after Black. Anyway, I just wanted to say that I actually 
liked the scene in the film and most of all of the films. I was a 
tiny bit disappointed with the werewolf but then I am a big scifi 
fan when it comes to vampires, werewolves and the like and saw 
Underworld and Van Helsing and thought their werewolves were great. 
Big hairy wolves with tails. Anyway, I digress - I just wanted to 
add my 2 knuts that I thought the scene was great and did think it 
was in character for Harry as I believe in the books he would be 
emotional (maybe he cried in the tunnel on the way back to the 
school).

Theresa







From starjackson1 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 29 19:32:02 2005
From: starjackson1 at yahoo.com (starjackson1)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 19:32:02 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures! Washington D.C.
In-Reply-To: <BFD8DA01.1AE6%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dp1dji+p96g@eGroups.com>

I live in the D.C. area too, and HP is showing at the Air & Space 
museum only until Saturday, January 1st!  So you'd better get there 
quick! And the show plays TWICE a day - 5:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.

I will not get the chance to see it in IMAX however.  So please go 
for me! Tickets are $10.


> > 
> > It sounds terrific!!! I?ve been trying to get there. It?s 
playing at the
> > Smithsonian IMAX theatre in Washington, DC, but only at 5:30 pm, 
and I can
> > never seem to make it. Not sure how much longer it will be 
there. Can I ask
> > how much you paid? Is it way more expensive than the regular 
theatres? Someone
> > said $70 a ticket. Surely not?!?!?!?!
> > Valerie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Dec 29 19:38:44 2005
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 19:38:44 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <BFD96763.1AF9%valerie.flowe@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <dp1e04+281c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
<valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
> My husband DOES NOT understand or support my HP obsession. I?ve 
seen GOF 3x,
> with HP friends, with my kids and alone. Husband only knows of the 
first 2.
> Never seen an HP movie on IMAX. :-(  5:30pm, the only showing here 
in DC, is
> a very awkward time, as I don?t get off work till 6pm, and am with 
the kids
> at any other time. Sigh...what?s an adult HP fanatic to do?! This 
is why I
> am online at 1am reading/responding to HPFGW e-mails, surfing HP 
websites,
> reading HP fanfic. What IS it about this series that obsesses some 
people
> so? I read an article entitled ?Narnia..the new Harry Potter?? 
Naahhh!!!
> Valerie
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
I feel your pain. My husband has only seen the films in theaters one 
time each and thinks our two boys and I are weird to pay again to 
see it in the theater. He does watch it repeatedly on the DVDs and 
has pointed out that he missed things the first time around. As for 
an IMAX experience...I usually have to wait a few months at least 
for POA I did. There are two IMAX theaters in the Phoenix area and 
one got both POA and GOF about when they were released and it of 
course is the one that is 50 plus miles on the other side of town 
from me (one way). The one close to me has to wait until it has been 
there awhile before it gets it. That one is currently showing Polar 
Express. Anyway, I WILL see it in IMAX with my boys (and hubby if we 
can drag him since he really liked this one) but it probably wont 
arrive until mid to late January. (POA didn't come to it until mid 
August after the June 4th release that year). Anyway, best of luck 
with getting to see it in IMAX Valerie and I agree about the Narnia 
comment. I haven't seen it yet and grew up loving those books but 
they are totally different than HP. Also, my 5th grader saw it on a 
school field trip and he has read the book recently and said "it was 
ok but I liked the GOF better". I think there was not enough action 
in it for him - he didn't say but it is a mother's feeling. He loves 
the dragon scene in GOF.

Theresa







From sweetnightingale at sbcglobal.net  Thu Dec 29 20:06:57 2005
From: sweetnightingale at sbcglobal.net (Sharon Hawkinson)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:06:57 -0600
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
References: <dp1e04+281c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <09bf01c60cb3$6c1ac1d0$210110ac@621B10B>

Man, I resemble that one!!!!! Hubby thinks I'm a mental case (what else is new?) as I'm such a HP fan. I dragged him off to see GOF the night after it came out. Then I went to the IMAX to see it. I absolutely LOVED it there. The dragon scenes in the IMAX were excellent! If felt (to me anyway) like you're right in the middle of it. Hubby hasn't seen the other HP movies or read the books, so I think GOF was kidna lost on him--just wasn't his thing. He doesn't know a good thing when he sees it. LOL!!!!!!

Sharon



  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Valerie Flowe 
  <valerie.flowe at v...> wrote:
  > My husband DOES NOT understand or support my HP obsession. I?ve 
  seen GOF 3x,
  > with HP friends, with my kids and alone. Husband only knows of the 
  first 2.
  > Never seen an HP movie on IMAX. :-(  5:30pm, the only showing here 
  in DC, is
  > a very awkward time, as I don?t get off work till 6pm, and am with 
  the kids
  > at any other time. Sigh...what?s an adult HP fanatic to do?! This 
  is why I
  > am online at 1am reading/responding to HPFGW e-mails, surfing HP 
  websites,
  > reading HP fanfic. What IS it about this series that obsesses some 
  people
  > so? I read an article entitled ?Narnia..the new Harry Potter?? 
  Naahhh!!!
  > Valerie
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >
  I feel your pain. My husband has only seen the films in theaters one 
  time each and thinks our two boys and I are weird to pay again to 
  see it in the theater. He does watch it repeatedly on the DVDs and 
  has pointed out that he missed things the first time around. As for 
  an IMAX experience...I usually have to wait a few months at least 
  for POA I did. There are two IMAX theaters in the Phoenix area and 
  one got both POA and GOF about when they were released and it of 
  course is the one that is 50 plus miles on the other side of town 
  from me (one way). The one close to me has to wait until it has been 
  there awhile before it gets it. That one is currently showing Polar 
  Express. Anyway, I WILL see it in IMAX with my boys (and hubby if we 
  can drag him since he really liked this one) but it probably wont 
  arrive until mid to late January. (POA didn't come to it until mid 
  August after the June 4th release that year). Anyway, best of luck 
  with getting to see it in IMAX Valerie and I agree about the Narnia 
  comment. I haven't seen it yet and grew up loving those books but 
  they are totally different than HP. Also, my 5th grader saw it on a 
  school field trip and he has read the book recently and said "it was 
  ok but I liked the GOF better". I think there was not enough action 
  in it for him - he didn't say but it is a mother's feeling. He loves 
  the dragon scene in GOF.

  Theresa






  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________




  SPONSORED LINKS Harry potter  Entertainment movie  Entertainment new york  


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    a..  Visit your group "HPFGU-Movie" on the web.
      
    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 artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Dec 29 20:25:06 2005
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:25:06 EST
Subject: Article on Steve Kloves in magazine
Message-ID: <249.47b2dbe.30e5a022@aol.com>

"Creative Screenwriting" magazine, Nov/Dec 2005, Volume 12 #6  (cover has the 
"sweet smile" pic of Harry from GoF -- quite an unusual HP photo,  IMO, but a 
nice one).  Anyway, there's an article pp. 52-55 titled "Four  Years at 
Hogwarts" about Kloves screenwriting techniques.  I haven't had  time to read the 
article yet, just found the mag on the newstand in a bookstore,  but thought 
I'd mention it in case you were interested in getting a  copy.
 
The one thing I've noticed from just scanning it is that Kloves  admits 
Hermione is his favorite character -- that explains a lot  *sigh*
 
Skimming through the article, on pg. 54, he says he likes writing  for the 
actors, that it "invigorates" him.  He says "I think I know what  Emma can do, I 
think I know what Dan can do, I think I know where Dan can be  funny and 
where it's forcing it.   It has less to do with Dan than it  does with Harry.  
Harry can be funny in a certain kind of moment.  You  don't want him to carry the 
joke.  Hermione is funnin in her obsessiveness,  and Emma can handle that 
very, very well.  And Rupert is a kind of  genius.  I really believe that.  I 
think Rupert is someone who has  made lines hysterical that, honestly, I dno't 
think are that  funny."
 
He also says he's fought to give Ron more dimension, and has  "believed for a 
couple of movies that Ron needs to evolve and show some spine,  which he does 
in Goblet of Fire."  Kloves appealed to Newell to not make  Ron just some 
kind of "trembling sidekick."
 
The article also says Kloves will return to writing HP scripts with  the HBP 
movie (another writer is doing OoP, in case you didn't know).  He  says he 
wants to write it for THESE actors (Dan, Rupert, Emma).  Hopefully,  he'll get 
his way!  

Anyway, it looks like an interesting article that I found quite  by accident. 
 The magazine's website is _www.creativescreenwriting.com_ 
(http://www.creativescreenwriting.com)  if  you're interested.
 
 
Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

Read my Harry Potter fics here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/




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




From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 29 21:16:51 2005
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:16:51 -0000
Subject: * DAN on Regis&Kelly
In-Reply-To: <douqhp+9n4o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dp1jo3+jpc7@eGroups.com>

O K . . .

Sorry !   I didn't know that it was a re-run,

but I hadn't seen it, so it worked out good

for me.   Seeing that dragon, and I wanted to

go see the movie again !

Gail in NE IND



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "gwharrison53" 
<gwharrison53 at y...> wrote:
>
> Hi I'm NEW here !
> 
> This morning on the TV I saw that DAN
> 
> is going to be on Regis & Kelly,
> 
> 12-29-05, looked like talking about G O F !
> 
> Gail in NE IND
>







From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Thu Dec 29 22:53:11 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 22:53:11 -0000
Subject: * DAN on Regis&Kelly
In-Reply-To: <dp1jo3+jpc7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dp1pcn+the4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "gwharrison53" 
<gwharrison53 at y...> wrote:
>
> O K . . .
> 
> Sorry !   I didn't know that it was a re-run,
> 
> but I hadn't seen it, so it worked out good
> 
> for me.   Seeing that dragon, and I wanted to
> 
> go see the movie again !
> 
> Gail in NE IND
> 
> Hi there!
I watched the segment with Dan and felt so helpless that Kelly 
hogged up all the time. I wanted to hear Dan talk! Anyway, it was 
good to see him looking so grown and fit.
Jen D







From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 30 00:44:08 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 00:44:08 -0000
Subject: IMAX Adventures!
In-Reply-To: <017901c60c87$eba8bbe0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>
Message-ID: <dp1vso+tolm@eGroups.com>

Try this website, Michelle, for the one nearest you:

http://www.imax.com/ImaxWeb/welcome.do

You won't be sorry for making the effort to see it in IMAX.

Diana L.

> Hi! You've convinced me, folks. Anyone know where the nearest IMAX 
would be for me? I'm about 70 miles west of Boston.
> 
> Michelle
> Mother, Scholar, Gardener, Aviator
 






From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 30 00:50:14 2005
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 00:50:14 -0000
Subject: re-run* DAN on Regis&Kelly
In-Reply-To: <dp1pcn+the4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dp2086+8kvb@eGroups.com>

HI!

Thank's . . . it is nice to know that someone else

besides me watched it, and that was really the only

part of the show that I watched, it was there for

DAN and DAN alone ! ! !

Gail in NE IND



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "gwharrison53" 
> <gwharrison53 at y...> wrote:
> >
> > O K . . .
> > 
> > Sorry !   I didn't know that it was a re-run,
> > 
> > but I hadn't seen it, so it worked out good
> > 
> > for me.   Seeing that dragon, and I wanted to
> > 
> > go see the movie again !
> > 
> > Gail in NE IND
> > 
> > Hi there!
> I watched the segment with Dan and felt so helpless that Kelly 
> hogged up all the time. I wanted to hear Dan talk! Anyway, it was 
> good to see him looking so grown and fit.
> Jen D
>







From dianasdolls at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 30 01:01:14 2005
From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 01:01:14 -0000
Subject: Article on Steve Kloves in magazine
In-Reply-To: <249.47b2dbe.30e5a022@aol.com>
Message-ID: <dp20sq+cpvb@eGroups.com>

I read that article as well.  It was interesting learning how Kloves 
tackled condensing such huge books into such short movies.  And his 
comment about liking Hermione the best, sadly, does explain an awful 
lot about super-Hermione in PoA.  Here's the cover for those wanting 
to see it:

http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/creative_screenwriting1.jpg

The same picture is also on the cover of Starlog:

http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/starlog_mag2.jpg

Three other magazines had interesting Harry Potter cover photos:

Unusual photo of Harry in his Yule Ball outfit on 8 Days magazine:

http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/8_days_mag2.jpg

Awesome photo of Harry in his post-dragon task Tri-Wizard outfit on 
SFX magazine.  This is the subscribers' copy which has no other 
words on the cover except the magazine's name: 

http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/sfx1.jpg

And I just got this magazine, which has artist drawings of Harry, 
Mad-Eye, Dumbledore and Hermione on the cover:

http://image.inkfrog.com/pix/dianasdolls/realms_of_fantasy1.jpg

I read the article on GoF in the Realms of Fantasy magazine and was 
amused at the numerous inaccuracies in their rather long synopsis of 
the GoF book.  You'd think some HP fanatic working for the magazine 
could have helped them avoid such mistakes.

Diana L.
dianasdolls




> "Creative Screenwriting" magazine, Nov/Dec 2005, Volume 12 #6  
(cover has the 
> "sweet smile" pic of Harry from GoF -- quite an unusual HP photo,  
IMO, but a 
> nice one).   
>  
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"
 







From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 30 02:14:15 2005
From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Chandler)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:14:15 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX Adventures!
References: <dp1vso+tolm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <037301c60ce6$bc73e0c0$6402a8c0@GARDENROOM>

Thanks, Diana! The closest is an hour and a quarter away... I'll have to work something...

Michelle
Mother, Scholar, Gardener, Aviator
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Diana 
  To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:44 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: IMAX Adventures!


  Try this website, Michelle, for the one nearest you:

  http://www.imax.com/ImaxWeb/welcome.do

  You won't be sorry for making the effort to see it in IMAX.

  Diana L.

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




From GryffindorAuburn at aol.com  Fri Dec 30 01:37:23 2005
From: GryffindorAuburn at aol.com (GryffindorAuburn at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 20:37:23 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] re-run* DAN on Regis&Kelly
Message-ID: <80.35bf2dcb.30e5e953@aol.com>


In a message dated 12/29/05 7:50:59 PM, gwharrison53 at yahoo.com writes:


> HI!
> 
> Thank's . . . it is nice to know that someone else
> 
> besides me watched it, and that was really the only
> 
> part of the show that I watched, it was there for
> 
> DAN and DAN alone ! ! !
> 
> Gail in NE IND
> 

Hey everyone!
I'll delurk for this thread. My name is Amy and I am a new member. I am a 
huge fan of the movies and just beginning to read the books!   ( a pressie from 
my husband) I made sure to watch Daniel this morning as I didn't see it back in 
November :-) He certainly seems like a fine young man and   I look forward to 
seeing him continue to grow and do well :-)
Anyway I look forward to many great conversations on here and making new HP 
friends.

Amy....Gryffindor Auburn


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






From dragonjcndm2 at aol.com  Fri Dec 30 16:20:18 2005
From: dragonjcndm2 at aol.com (dragonjcndm2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 11:20:18 -0500
Subject: DAN on Regis & Kelly
Message-ID: <8C7DB740F2BFBC6-9BC-2B97@mblk-r14.sysops.aol.com>

Jen D
I watched the segment with Dan and felt so helpless that Kelly 
hogged up all the time. I wanted to hear Dan talk! Anyway, it was 
good to see him looking so grown and fit.


Grraaaahhh! I missed it! I would have loved to have seen it. It's probably the last time it will repeat I bet. Bummer. Well, you win some lose some...
 
Jade
 
Harry's To-Do List
1. Get Up
2. Survive
3. Go To Bed


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




From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 30 17:28:53 2005
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:28:53 -0000
Subject: StarWars(6) = 1 and HarryPotter(4) = 2
Message-ID: <dp3qol+q3uk@eGroups.com>

HI!

I was watching the 11am NEWS/CBS and they had the 

top 5 movies, per $ for year 2005 and G O F

came in 2nd after Star Wars 'Seith', ahead of

Tom Cruse in War of the Worlds.   But what got me 

was the fact that G O F only came out 11-18-05

and came in 2nd ! ! !

1 = Star Wars

2 = G O F

3 = War of the Worlds

4 = Wedding Crashers

5 = ? it ws a re-make movie ?

This is terrible, I just saw it !

Gail in NE IND








From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Dec 30 17:35:29 2005
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:35:29 -0000
Subject: DAN on Regis & Kelly
In-Reply-To: <8C7DB740F2BFBC6-9BC-2B97@mblk-r14.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <dp3r51+jldf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, dragonjcndm2 at a... wrote:
>
>> 
> Grraaaahhh! I missed it! I would have loved to have seen it. It's 
probably the last time it will repeat I bet. Bummer. Well, you win 
some lose some...
>  
> Jade
>  
> Harry's To-Do List
> 1. Get Up
> 2. Survive
> 3. Go To Bed
>Hey Jade,
Listen, sweetie,
if you had to miss Dan somewhere in the universe(a thing I do not 
like to do either, but hey, RL gets in the way sometimes) you 
couldn't have picked a better thing to miss! Regis and Kelly hardly 
let the poor lad get a word in edgewise. I had to subsist off the 
view. He's looking swell.
Jen






From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 31 14:01:14 2005
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:01:14 -0000
Subject: *StarWars(6) = 1 and HarryPotter(4) = 2
In-Reply-To: <dp3qol+q3uk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <dp62va+gd54@eGroups.com>

HI!

Movie #5 was Charlie & the Choc Factory,

But do you see how much Harry Potter is loved,

that it was out for a short time and still

came in 2nd place !

Gail in NE IND



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "gwharrison53" 
<gwharrison53 at y...> wrote:
>
> HI!
> 
> I was watching the 11am NEWS/CBS and they had the 
> 
> top 5 movies, per $ for year 2005 and G O F
> 
> came in 2nd after Star Wars 'Seith', ahead of
> 
> Tom Cruse in War of the Worlds.   But what got me 
> 
> was the fact that G O F only came out 11-18-05
> 
> and came in 2nd ! ! !
> 
> 1 = Star Wars
> 
> 2 = G O F
> 
> 3 = War of the Worlds
> 
> 4 = Wedding Crashers
> 
> 5 = ? it ws a re-make movie ?
> 
> This is terrible, I just saw it !
> 
> Gail in NE IND
>








From jellocat at comcast.net  Sat Dec 31 16:59:44 2005
From: jellocat at comcast.net (Jellocat)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 11:59:44 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Digest Number 1367
In-Reply-To: <1136035482.988.94080.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.24.1576048068.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

> 
> 
> Grraaaahhh! I missed it! I would have loved to have seen it. 
> It's probably the last time it will repeat I bet. Bummer. 
> Well, you win some lose some...
>  
> Jade
>  
> Harry's To-Do List
> 1. Get Up
> 2. Survive
> 3. Go To Bed
> 
If you click this link:
http://www.danradcliffe.us/videos/regiskelly_20051110.wmv
You can d/l it or watch it. It's windows media file.

jellocat




From HMaffioli at cox.net  Sat Dec 31 18:35:22 2005
From: HMaffioli at cox.net (Heather Maffioli)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 10:35:22 -0800
Subject: Could GOF be #1 next weekend?
Message-ID: <002601c60e38$f5e327a0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>

Hey I had this crazy idea...with all of the BIG movies out and GOF still in the top 10 I bet if enough people made an effort to go see it again next weekend, which we all will want to do anyway as it will be nearing the end of its run in theaters, we could put it back in to the top 3 if not number 1.

Let's get as many people as possible to go next Friday or Saturday to see GOF again and put it back on top!!


Heather

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




From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 31 22:40:25 2005
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 22:40:25 -0000
Subject: IMAX included? (Was Re: Could GOF be #1 next weekend?)
In-Reply-To: <002601c60e38$f5e327a0$6401a8c0@sd.cox.net>
Message-ID: <dp71cp+ade9@eGroups.com>



--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Heather Maffioli" 
<HMaffioli at c...> wrote:
>
> SNIP
> Let's get as many people as possible to go next Friday or Saturday 
to see GOF again and put it back on top!!
> 
> 
> Heather
> 

I have a question- does GoF in IMAX count in the tally for movie 
sales/rank?
I haven't seen it yet in Imax and I am begging my husband to go.  I 
think he'll give in, but I was wondering if IMAX ticket sales are 
included in the movie tallies.  Anyone know?

Lauren