A couple of OotP puzzles for me

[lupinlore]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
> 
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
> 

> On the other hand, what struck me in a couple of places was what 
> they elected to leave IN, given the things they had elected to take 
> OUT.  
> 
> For example:
> 
> (1) Why leave so much Grawp in, including his being struck by a 
> centaur's arrow & then pulling it out -- all of which mattered in 
> the book because the blood from that drew the thestrals -- but that 
> part of the story wasn't even used in the movie.  

Well, I think it relates to the difference in the media.  Movies are 
a visual medium even more than theater and much more so than books.  
Directors will naturally grab any dramatic visual possibilities.  
Given that we didn't have Quidditch, etc., this was probably, like 
the fireworks, a chance to do some good visuals.

> 
> Also, why have Harry hear the prophecy *at* the DoM, rather than 
> later, in DD's office?  Why cut the 'Big Talk in DD's Office' which 
> is supposed to be Harry *really* angry and then DD *really* 
> emotional as well?  As it came out, it was woefully brief and 
fairly 
> emotionally flat.  
> 
> Just some things I'm about which I'm curious to have others' input.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan
>

Well, two possibilities.  First of all, let me say I very much doubt 
that JKR has nearly as much input into the movies as a lot of people 
seem to think.  That just isn't the way studios work.  Generally they 
pay for the rights and hand things over to a script writer who might, 
or might not, consult with the author on specific points, as might 
the director.  Sometimes they give the author script approval, but 
that's pretty rare, no matter how successful, rich, and eminent the 
author in question.  In other words, they usually don't give the 
author the right to veto things or demand that certain things be 
included, although given that this is a series of movies they would 
almost certainly put in a given scene if JKR absolutely insists that 
it's vital to the plot.  And JKR seems to be very respectful of the 
moviemakers -- at one point during the making of GoF, as I recall, 
she declined to intervene when Richard Griffiths (who plays Vernon 
Dursley) appealed to her about his character being cut out 
completely.  She certainly allowed (if she was consulted, that is) 
several troubling bits to slip into GoF -- deliberately using Harry 
as bait, for instance.

Having said all that, if the DID ask JKR about this particular scene 
she might have warned them that it proved, errr, controversial shall 
we say, when OOTP first appeared in print.  Given that, they might 
have decided it just wasn't worth it and that this was a good place 
for a large cut.

More likely, however, is that the directors and writer just didn't 
think that scene would work well in a movie.  Long "talky-talky" 
scenes generally don't come over well on screen, even if they do work 
in the theater.  It's one reason movies based on Shakespeare plays, 
particularly the tragedies, are very difficult (but of course, not 
impossible) to make.  Its hard for someone, even in the intimate 
setting of a theater, to do Lear's long monologue cursing Goneril and 
have it come off as other than overwrought and hysterical, while on 
screen something like that usually just seems ludicrous.  It may have 
been that the people involved just decided it would be too hard to 
pull that intense of a scene off correctly with the tools at hand, 
and altered the narrative accordingly.


Lupinlore