A couple of OotP puzzles for me

[Steve]

---  "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> 
> Carol respponds:
> 
> I had the same reaction to the talk. I can see why
> it was shortened, but why rob it of all emotional 
> impact? And what about Harry's resentment of Snape?
> And having Harry hear the Prophecy at the MoM ... 
> means that the DEs heard it, too, so LV's rage at 
> Lucius Malfoy in the next two films will be stripped
> of its motive.
> 
> Also, didn't having Cho confess to Umbridge mean that
> Umbridge used Veritaserum on her, which would mean 
> that Snape must have supplied her with real rather 
> than fake Veritaserum? If so, there goes his subtle
> undermining of Umbridge. And he didn't even get his
> Babbling Beverage line or his order to Crabbe to 
> release his choke hold on Neville. Sigh!
> 

bboyminn:

Do you get the feeling that the Movie Makers are
painting themselves into a corner? Leaving out so
many critical aspects that they won't be able to
effectively pull it together in the end? 

I do agree that the movie makers are so intent on
keeping the movie short that they skimp on any 
character or plot development. How can I become
emotionally invested in a story or a character, 
when it is little more than 'stand here, say your
line; move over there say you line -- next scene'. 

In another discussion, people were speculating on
ideal directors for the final film; someone
suggested Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings). I
don't know whether he would be ideal or not, but
I know he is not afraid to linger; to linger in
a moment or to linger on a face to allow some
emotion to develop. 

I think the current director showed the best 
potential at capturing the mood of Hogwarts and the
wizard world. I saw great potential in his film. But
at the same time, why should I care about Sirius? Why
should I be sad that he died? A wink and a hug from
Sirius for Harry certainly aren't enough to make 
us care. 

And who couldn't have known that the Locket was 
important? Now, they have many many things that
are important to the last movie that they never
bother to develop in the earlier movies. They
are going to be play a lot of 'catch up' in the
next two. 

Roger Ebert (I believe) said something to the 
effect that no good movie is ever long enough, and
not bad movie is every short enough. Make a good
movie and the audience won't care how long it is. 

I've said this before, but the relevant deleted scenes
on the DVD usually run 10 to 15 minutes of extra movie,
and the certainly make the movies make more sense. 
Would any of us really get up and walk out if the 
movies were 10 to 15 minutes longer; I don't think
so. 

Perhaps the next movie will improve and clear up some
of the discrepancies that have crept in. Now that
they can see the end, they know what they have to do,
and perhaps can now spend a little time doing it.


> Carol, who thought that Snape seemed more sinister
> and scary in this film than the earlier ones, 
> possibly to prepare for the "murder" in HBP
>

bboyminn:

It's all camera angles and attitude. The best Snape
portrayals are in the first and the current (OotP)
movies because they shoot Snape from a low angle
and that enhances how sinister and intimidating he
looks. 

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn