From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 00:13:46 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:13:46 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <48BA5B2A.000005.02372@ANGELICA>
Message-ID: <g9fc3q+3vpd@eGroups.com>

---  "Gerlinde Kenkel" <kenkel20002000 at ...> wrote:
>
> I wonder, why the press talk so much about Emma Watson and
> Daniel Radcliffe, but not a word about Rupert Grint. Is there
> nothing to tell us? 
> 
>

bboyminn:

I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation as
a bad interview, or at least a difficult interview. I'm not
saying he is bad or difficult as in the disagreeable or 
uncooperative sense, not at all. He is very friendly, but
when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say beyond
'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 

Dan and Emma are extremely talkative and articulate, and as 
such are a great interview. You can come way with lots of
quotes to put into tomorrows paper. 

This is one of the reasons I think Rupert should get into 
Stand-Up Comedy. Not as a serious profession, but as a way
of learning to engage his audiences more. And as a way of
feeling more comfortable expressing himself spontaneously
on the air. 

Look at Rupert's interview on Craig Ferguson-Late Late Night
show. It's actually very good, and very funny, but it is
Craig that is doing all the talking and cracking all the 
jokes. Craig, being the excellent interview he is, was able
to turn an interview with someone who isn't very talkative
into something that was fun for us the viewer and even fun
for Rupert.

I personally, though without foundation, think Rupert has a
lot of things to say, but he has trouble getting them from
his brain to his mouth. 

Again, if he got an act together and did a few open-mic 
nights at comedy clubs with some success, I think he would
be more spontaneous and open in interviews. Just my 
opinion of course. 

I just don't think Rupert understands that an interview is
a performance just like a role in a movie. And to be a good
interview, you have to put on a good performance.

Keep in mind that I love Rupert and think he is terribly 
underused in the movies. I'll really be eager to see
'Cherry Bomb' to see him in a new light.

I know some said his performance in 'Driving Lessons' was
a bit wooden and inhibited, but I think they forget that 
his character Ben was a very wooden and inhibited person.
So, in that sense, he go it dead-on.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bluewizard





From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 00:29:37 2008
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris22)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:29:37 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9fc3q+3vpd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> ---  "Gerlinde Kenkel" <kenkel20002000@> wrote:
> >
> > I wonder, why the press talk so much about Emma Watson and
> > Daniel Radcliffe, but not a word about Rupert Grint. Is there
> > nothing to tell us? 
> > 
> >
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation as
> a bad interview, or at least a difficult interview. I'm not
> saying he is bad or difficult as in the disagreeable or 
> uncooperative sense, not at all. He is very friendly, but
> when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say beyond
> 'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 
> 
> Dan and Emma are extremely talkative and articulate, and as 
> such are a great interview. You can come way with lots of
> quotes to put into tomorrows paper. 
> 
> This is one of the reasons I think Rupert should get into 
> Stand-Up Comedy. Not as a serious profession, but as a way
> of learning to engage his audiences more. And as a way of
> feeling more comfortable expressing himself spontaneously
> on the air. 
> 
saroris22:

I think you make a good point about Rupert being a bad interview. But 
doesn't Rupert have a manager or someone advising him about his 
career who might help him with his speaking problem.  When Emma 
Watson was asked what one thing annoyed her about her castmates, she 
responded that Rupert said "um" and "yeah" too much. If you watch the 
interviews in the special features of the dvds, Dan and Emma 
practically talk over each in their excitement to speak, while Rupert 
stares dreamily into Rupertland.  I too think that he's a bright and 
intersting guy who has much to contribute, but it's difficult to 
discern that from his responses, or lack of them. IT seems as if 
Rupert's silence hurts his career, and I hope he does something about 
it. I know that his unwillingness to write the essay or articulate 
his feelings about his character for Alfonso diminished his role in 
POA.
> 




From siskiou at gmail.com  Mon Sep  1 02:05:24 2008
From: siskiou at gmail.com (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:05:24 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com>
References: <g9fc3q+3vpd@eGroups.com> <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <417141856.20080831190524@gmail.com>



Hi,

Sunday, August 31, 2008, 5:29:37 PM, sartoris22 at yahoo.com wrote:

> I know that his unwillingness to write the essay or articulate
> his feelings about his character for Alfonso diminished his role in
> POA.

This is the first I've ever heard this mentioned.
Can you point to an interview where Alfonso (or
someone else) said this, please?

I know about the essays, but it sounded to me that
everyone enjoyed how their personalities reflected
the ones they are playing on screen in the way
they approached this assignment. Never heard that
Alfonso decided to cut down Ron's role in the
movie because of it.
It always seemed to me that *everyone* was
diminished in favor of Super!Hermione, and while
PoA is my favorite book, it's my least favorite
movie because of the way Alfonso changed the
characters.

-- 
 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at gmail.com




From kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de  Mon Sep  1 02:08:42 2008
From: kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de (Gerlinde Kenkel)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 04:08:42 +0200 (Westeurop?ische Sommerzeit)
Subject: Another Test
Message-ID: <48BB4EAA.00001B.04072@ANGELICA>

Today's test could be much difficult than the first one. Our Test today is
about the actors and actresses, and what we know about them. Here my
questions:

What was one of the first movies in which Daniel Radcliffe was in front of a
camera?

Were was Emma Watson born?

Which Harry Potter actor/actress played in the Agatha Chriestie movies with
Peter Ustinov?

Which actor of HPM lives in Stirlingshire

Which HPM actor got an ice-cream van?

Who played in "Rain Fall"?

Which director of a HPM was first inspired by "Jaws" to become a director?

Which actor in HPM played also in Die Hard?

Which actress played on TV Mary I of Scotland?

If you didn't know the ral name,it is okay to use the name of the character they play.

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




From md at exit-reality.com  Mon Sep  1 02:23:51 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:23:51 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <417141856.20080831190524@gmail.com>
References: <g9fc3q+3vpd@eGroups.com> <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com> <417141856.20080831190524@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006801c90bd9$c6337680$529a6380$@com>

Actually on the extras on the DVD Grint jokes about how he did not write the
essay and about how that was exactly his character.

 

I just watched POA tonight (my kids requested) and he's in every scene he
could be. The book ended with him in the hospital wing, Harry and Hermione
go back in time without him so there was no way include him in that
sequence.

 

It sounds like a rumor to me, but I've heard nor read anything about it.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Susanne
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 10:05 PM
To: sartoris22
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint

 



Hi,

Sunday, August 31, 2008, 5:29:37 PM, sartoris22 at yahoo.com
<mailto:sartoris22%40yahoo.com>  wrote:

> I know that his unwillingness to write the essay or articulate
> his feelings about his character for Alfonso diminished his role in
> POA.

This is the first I've ever heard this mentioned.
Can you point to an interview where Alfonso (or
someone else) said this, please?

I know about the essays, but it sounded to me that
everyone enjoyed how their personalities reflected
the ones they are playing on screen in the way
they approached this assignment. Never heard that
Alfonso decided to cut down Ron's role in the
movie because of it.
It always seemed to me that *everyone* was
diminished in favor of Super!Hermione, and while
PoA is my favorite book, it's my least favorite
movie because of the way Alfonso changed the
characters.

-- 

Best regards,
Susanne mailto:siskiou at gmail.com <mailto:siskiou%40gmail.com> 

 



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




From stephab67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 02:32:33 2008
From: stephab67 at yahoo.com (stephab67)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:32:33 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9fk81+3p00@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> > 
> > I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation as
> > a bad interview, or at least a difficult interview. I'm not
> > saying he is bad or difficult as in the disagreeable or 
> > uncooperative sense, not at all. He is very friendly, but
> > when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say beyond
> > 'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 
> > 
> > Dan and Emma are extremely talkative and articulate, and as 
> > such are a great interview. You can come way with lots of
> > quotes to put into tomorrows paper. 
> > 
> saroris22:
> 
> I think you make a good point about Rupert being a bad interview. But 
> doesn't Rupert have a manager or someone advising him about his 
> career who might help him with his speaking problem.  When Emma 
> Watson was asked what one thing annoyed her about her castmates, she 
> responded that Rupert said "um" and "yeah" too much. If you watch the 
> interviews in the special features of the dvds, Dan and Emma 
> practically talk over each in their excitement to speak, while Rupert 
> stares dreamily into Rupertland.  I too think that he's a bright and 
> intersting guy who has much to contribute, but it's difficult to 
> discern that from his responses, or lack of them. IT seems as if 
> Rupert's silence hurts his career, and I hope he does something about 
> it. 
> >
Steph:
I've heard that Rupert is rather shy, at least around people he doesn't know, and that likely 
contributes to the problem.  Emma and Dan have said that Rupert is funny and clever, so 
it's too bad that his shyness prevents him from showing that in interviews (and at least he 
has a reputation for being incredibly polite and very nice to his fans).  I also wonder if he 
doesn't really know why people would actually want to interview him ("why the heck does 
anyone care what I think?") which could add to it.

I do agree that Rupert's all too willing to let Dan and Emma do the talking when it's the 
three of them together, although if he's comfortable he's just fine.  Did any of you see the 
MovieFone Unscripted interview, where the questions were put up on the monitor and the 
trio asked each other the questions?  Rupert actually contributed quite a bit to that 
interview, probably because there wasn't an interviewer there.  It's on YouTube if you want 
to see it.

The other problem is that too many media people see Dan and Emma as the leads and 
don't really get the concept that it's Dan as the lead with Emma and Rupert as the 
sidekicks, so Emma gets as much attention as Dan while Rupert gets pushed to the 
background.

With Cherry Bomb coming out, he'll have to do more interviews, so I really hope he figures 
out how to get comfortable with it, because I also think it could hurt him in his career if he 
doesn't, especially now that he's an adult.  I used to do PR, and if I was advising him, I'd 
tell him to just play this character who just happened to have the same name.  Memorize a 
few talking points and stories ahead of time so he's not thrown, and doesn't have to repeat 
the same answers over and over.  The reporters all ask pretty much the same questions on 
the junkets anyway, so if he has a few answers/stories up his sleeve each reporter feels 
like he/she got something special from him, and will be more likely to want to talk to him 
again.




From stephab67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 02:32:34 2008
From: stephab67 at yahoo.com (stephab67)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:32:34 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9fd1h+1l3c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9fk82+umc7@eGroups.com>

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> > 
> > I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation as
> > a bad interview, or at least a difficult interview. I'm not
> > saying he is bad or difficult as in the disagreeable or 
> > uncooperative sense, not at all. He is very friendly, but
> > when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say beyond
> > 'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 
> > 
> > Dan and Emma are extremely talkative and articulate, and as 
> > such are a great interview. You can come way with lots of
> > quotes to put into tomorrows paper. 
> > 
> saroris22:
> 
> I think you make a good point about Rupert being a bad interview. But 
> doesn't Rupert have a manager or someone advising him about his 
> career who might help him with his speaking problem.  When Emma 
> Watson was asked what one thing annoyed her about her castmates, she 
> responded that Rupert said "um" and "yeah" too much. If you watch the 
> interviews in the special features of the dvds, Dan and Emma 
> practically talk over each in their excitement to speak, while Rupert 
> stares dreamily into Rupertland.  I too think that he's a bright and 
> intersting guy who has much to contribute, but it's difficult to 
> discern that from his responses, or lack of them. IT seems as if 
> Rupert's silence hurts his career, and I hope he does something about 
> it. 
> >
Steph:
I've heard that Rupert is rather shy, at least around people he doesn't know, and that likely 
contributes to the problem.  Emma and Dan have said that Rupert is funny and clever, so 
it's too bad that his shyness prevents him from showing that in interviews (and at least he 
has a reputation for being incredibly polite and very nice to his fans).  I also wonder if he 
doesn't really know why people would actually want to interview him ("why the heck does 
anyone care what I think?") which could add to it.

I do agree that Rupert's all too willing to let Dan and Emma do the talking when it's the 
three of them together, although if he's comfortable he's just fine.  Did any of you see the 
MovieFone Unscripted interview, where the questions were put up on the monitor and the 
trio asked each other the questions?  Rupert actually contributed quite a bit to that 
interview, probably because there wasn't an interviewer there.  It's on YouTube if you want 
to see it.

The other problem is that too many media people see Dan and Emma as the leads and 
don't really get the concept that it's Dan as the lead with Emma and Rupert as the 
sidekicks, so Emma gets as much attention as Dan while Rupert gets pushed to the 
background.

With Cherry Bomb coming out, he'll have to do more interviews, so I really hope he figures 
out how to get comfortable with it, because I also think it could hurt him in his career if he 
doesn't, especially now that he's an adult.  I used to do PR, and if I was advising him, I'd 
tell him to just play this character who just happened to have the same name.  Memorize a 
few talking points and stories ahead of time so he's not thrown, and doesn't have to repeat 
the same answers over and over.  The reporters all ask pretty much the same questions on 
the junkets anyway, so if he has a few answers/stories up his sleeve each reporter feels 
like he/she got something special from him, and will be more likely to want to talk to him 
again.




From stephab67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 02:46:48 2008
From: stephab67 at yahoo.com (stephab67)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:46:48 -0000
Subject: Running Gags
In-Reply-To: <g99dhm+k22a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9fl2o+ppbq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Cat" <CatMcNulty at ...> wrote:
>
> My favorite running gag was in SS/PS when Hagrid kept spilling the 
> beans about stuff and catching himself too late and uttering the 
> line "Shouldn't have tol' ya that."
> 
Steph:
Hagrid saying stuff he shouldn't is definitely a running gag, as is Hagrid collecting dangerous 
pets, including Grawp.  I was a bit disappointed there were no Blast-Ended Skrewts in PoA, 
but I suppose they thought one dangerous creature (Buckbeak) was enough.

Most of the others seem to center around Ron, such as his eating habits, the Weasley 
sweaters (note the vest with the big R on it in OotP), and his wardrobe in general.  The 
costume designers have to find Ron some truly hideous clothes to wear, and from the HBP 
photos that have come out, the trend is continuing.  Cracks me up every time, especially the 
ridiculous dress robes in GoF.






From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 02:59:17 2008
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris22)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:59:17 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <417141856.20080831190524@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g9flq5+36d9@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at ...> wrote:

> diminished in favor of Super!Hermione, and while
> PoA is my favorite book, it's my least favorite
> movie because of the way Alfonso changed the
> characters.
> 
 Best regards,
>  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at ...
>
sartoris22:

When I used the word "diminished" in regards to Rupert's role in POA, 
I was thinking about quality raher than quantity. Hermione is very 
positively portrayed in POA, primarily, I believe, because Emma wrote 
seventeen pages about her character, which Ron is more negaively 
portrayed because Rupert didn't write anything. For example, in the 
Shrieking Shack scene, Hermione speaks lines that Ron actually says 
in the book; moreover, Ron appears afraid in that scene, whereas in 
the book, he brandishes his wand and says, essentially, that Sirius 
will kill Harry only over his (Ron's) dead body, even though he, Ron, 
has a broken leg, which they changed to a deep cut in the movie. By 
the way, in the book Ron is brave and dismissive about his injury, 
while in the movie Ron both whines about and exaggerates the injury. 
Alfonso said, seemingly with irritation,that Rupert was in a better 
place called Rupertland. He also likened Rupert to Chauncy Gardiner 
in "Being There, asking, "Is he a fool or genius?" Rupert's refusal 
to write about his character, or engage successfully with Alfonso, 
did, in my opinion, effect the way his character was portrayed in 
POA. 




From Englishlady at gmail.com  Mon Sep  1 03:25:33 2008
From: Englishlady at gmail.com (Aryn Culbertson)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:25:33 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Another Test
In-Reply-To: <48BB4EAA.00001B.04072@ANGELICA>
References: <48BB4EAA.00001B.04072@ANGELICA>
Message-ID: <dc3be0ab0808312025rcd74fe2nf66f64a52e60dfc1@mail.gmail.com>

Umm, let's give this a go--

  1.  David Copperfield  (BBC version I believe)

  2.  Paris, raised in Oxfordshire though (unsure of exact village/town)

  3.  Dame Maggie Smith

  4.

  5.  Rupert Grint

  6.  Gary Oldman

  7.  Christopher Columbus?

  8.  Alan Rickman

  9.  ??  *Rats, on tip of tongue just not able to remember this one, darn
it all*

Cheeres,  Aryn

On 31/08/2008, Gerlinde Kenkel <kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>   Today's test could be much difficult than the first one. Our Test today
> is
> about the actors and actresses, and what we know about them. Here my
> questions:
>
> What was one of the first movies in which Daniel Radcliffe was in front of
> a
> camera?
>
> Were was Emma Watson born?
>
> Which Harry Potter actor/actress played in the Agatha Chriestie movies with
> Peter Ustinov?
>
> Which actor of HPM lives in Stirlingshire
>
> Which HPM actor got an ice-cream van?
>
> Who played in "Rain Fall"?
>
> Which director of a HPM was first inspired by "Jaws" to become a director?
>
> Which actor in HPM played also in Die Hard?
>
> Which actress played on TV Mary I of Scotland?
>
> If you didn't know the ral name,it is okay to use the name of the character
> they play.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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




From siskiou at gmail.com  Mon Sep  1 03:35:53 2008
From: siskiou at gmail.com (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:35:53 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9flq5+36d9@eGroups.com>
References: <417141856.20080831190524@gmail.com> <g9flq5+36d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5810317385.20080831203553@gmail.com>



Hi,

Sunday, August 31, 2008, 7:59:17 PM, sartoris22 at yahoo.com wrote:

>  Rupert's refusal 
> to write about his character, or engage
> successfully with Alfonso, 
> did, in my opinion, effect the way his
> character was portrayed in 
> POA. 

Ah, okay, so you believe Alfonso changed the
characters because of the essay? If he did, he
didn't do the HP movies a favor and would sink
even lower in my regard for him as a director.

-- 
 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at gmail.com




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 05:25:10 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:25:10 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9flq5+36d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9fubm+6mep@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sartoris22" <sartoris22 at ...> wrote:

> When I used the word "diminished" in regards to Rupert's role 
> in POA, I was thinking about quality raher than quantity. 
> Hermione is very positively portrayed in POA, primarily, 
> I believe, because Emma wrote seventeen pages about her 
> character, which Ron is more negatively portrayed because 
> Rupert didn't write anything.


zanooda:

I mostly agree with your post, but I don't think that Rupert's role
was diminished as a punishment for not writing some essay :-). It was
just a part of the general trend in the movies, the trend to make Ron
look more like some kind of clown than an integral part of the trio.
This happened in all the movies, not just PoA, except for the first
movie and maybe the fifth. 

Remember a scene in Hagrid's hut, from CoS, when Ron explains to Harry
and Hermione what "mudblood" means, and says how disgusting it is to
call somebody "a dirty blood", and says that if wizards didn't marry
Muggles they would have died out? It's a great speech that shows Ron's
knowledge of the WW, and his convictions, and even certain maturity.
And guess what? In the movie (not Cuaron's, Columbus's :-)) part of
those lines went to Hermione, and part of them went to Hagrid, and Ron
was just sitting there burping out slugs.
And in GoF movie what was the deal with Ron knowing about the dragons
and not telling Harry? What was that added for? To make him look worse
than in the book?


> sartoris wrote: 

> For example, in the Shrieking Shack scene, Hermione speaks lines 
> that Ron actually says in the book; moreover, Ron appears afraid 
> in that scene, whereas in the book, he brandishes his wand and 
> says, essentially, that Sirius will kill Harry only over his 
> (Ron's) dead body, even though he, Ron, has a broken leg


zanooda:

Ron (Hermione in the movie :-)) said: "If you want to kill Harry,
you'll have to kill us too". And yes, he said it, being barely able to
stand because of his broken leg. It was really unfair to take this
line away from Ron, IMO.




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 06:58:06 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:58:06 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9fk81+3p00@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9g3pu+ucba@eGroups.com>

---  "stephab67" <stephab67 at ...> wrote:
>
> > --- "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> > > 
> >> I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation
> >> as a bad interview, .... I'm not saying he is bad ... as 
> >> in the disagreeable ... sense,.... He is very friendly, 
> >> but when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say 
> >> beyond 'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 
> > > 
> > > ...
> > saroris22:
> > 
> > I think you make a good point about Rupert being a bad 
> > interview. But doesn't Rupert have a manager or someone 
> > advising him about his career who might help him with his
> > speaking problem.  ...
> > >
> Steph:
> I've heard that Rupert is rather shy, ..., and that likely 
> contributes to the problem.  Emma and Dan have said that 
> Rupert is funny and clever, so it's too bad that his shyness
> prevents him from showing that in interviews .... I also 
> wonder if he doesn't really know why people would actually 
> want to interview him ("why the heck does anyone care what I
> think?") which could add to it.
> 

bboyminn:

I agree on both points, but many, if not most, movie stars are
shy, but they understand that a TV interview is a performance,
and must be approached as such.

I also, think that perhaps his daily life is so normal, that he
really, subconsciously, can't fathom why all these people 
want to talk to him.

As to an agent and/or manager, sadly, I think too many of
them are in it for the short term. As long as the free money
is rolling in, they are happy, and when the gravy train stops,
there are plenty of other kids out there to exploit. 

I've also notice that as Rupert gets older, he tends to
restrain his voice. It's like he is holding it in his chest
rather than projecting it. That could easily be fixed with
some voice lessons. And both his hesitance to talk, and his
'restrained' voice might simply be something he'll grow out
of.

> Steph: 
> ...
> 
> ...
> 
> With Cherry Bomb coming out, he'll have to do more interviews,
> so I really hope he figures out how to get comfortable with it,
> because I also think it could hurt him in his career if he 
> doesn't, especially now that he's an adult.  
>
> I used to do PR, and if I was advising him, I'd  tell him to 
> just play this character who just happened to have the same 
> name.  Memorize a few talking points and stories ahead of time
> so he's not thrown, ...

bboyminn:

That's sort of why I thought Stand-Up Comedy would be good for
Rupert, even if it was just a few Open Mic Nights. He needs a
sense of how to interact and entertain a live audience, whether
that live audience is a single interviewer or a live crowd.

Many comedians are also very shy, frequently more shy than 
actors. They use the character they play on the stage as sort
of an alter ego for themselves. Then when they do an interview
it is the alter ego being interviewed and not them personally.

Most interviewers like Craig, Conan, and Jay do a pre-interview,
so if the comic needs a few laughs, they tell Jay/Conan and 
the interviewer sets them up with the straight line to get them
into the joke. 

But if Rupert were to do stand-up, I think he would need some
professional writers to help him. Being a Stand-Up Comic is
not just standing on stage and telling jokes. You have to
engage the audience, you have to string them along until you
unexpectedly drop the punch line on them. Timing is also 
very important, too slow and they get bored, too fast and they 
can't keep up, you also need a sense of when to pause, to 
build suspense and so forth. It is really a very tricky art.

But again, Rupert doesn't have to become a professional, he 
merely needs a few successful amateur nights on the stage and
I think it would loosen him up nicely.

Back to the people advising him, sadly, I think they are not
advising him. They are hanging around collecting their 
commission, and happy for a big pile of free money. Personally,
I would make them work for it.

steve/bluewizard




From mellyf at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 15:27:51 2008
From: mellyf at aol.com (mellypf)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:27:51 -0000
Subject: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <925388.42611.qm@web45503.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g9h1ln+6k4k@eGroups.com>

*Lurker de-lurking briefly.*

I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.  I think 
David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't Lupin for me.

Add me to the list who would have liked to have seen Peter O'Toole as 
Dumbledore (from the beginning...I would have preferred him over 
Richard Harris, and definitely over Gambon).  I think McKellen would 
have been good, too, and possibly Michael Caine, but I think O'Toole 
would have had that authority as well as eccentricity, (and twinkle) 
that Dumbledore is supposed to have.

Melissa

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mrs. Lex Luthor" 
<lexluthorslady at ...> wrote:
>
> If you haven't seen them you should watch his "Richard Sharp" 
Series its a very well done British series. Which I paid an arm and a 
leg to get lol
> 
> Another actor I'd like to see is Ewan McGregor (He's not everyone's 
cup of tea) I would like to see him as a death eater.? though he's 
not British either so that rules him out too, oh well.
> 
> Love,
> Red
> 
> 
> --- On Fri, 8/29/08, Carol <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> From: Carol <justcarol67 at ...>
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, August 29, 2008, 7:01 PM
> 
> Carol earlier:
> 
> > I hated what the LOTR film did to the character of Faramir <snip>.
> That's not David Wenham's fault, of course.
> > 
> > As for a role in the HP films, I can see him as Sirius Black 
<snip>.
> Unfortunately, he's Australian, and JKR wants the casting (except 
for
> roles like Krum and Karkaroff in GoF) to be strictly British.
> > 
> > Carol, who would have loved to see Sean Bean (Boromir) as a 
hoodless
> and unmasked Death Eater
> 
> "Mrs. Lex Luthor"  (Red) responded:
> >
> > I was just thought about that when I sent the email about David. I
> don't think its really fair how J. K just wanted all British she was
> limiting herself very much. I love Sean Bean as the bad guy he plays
> such a good one.
> 
> Carol again:
> 
> I guess I made it sound as if Sean Bean, like David Wenham, is
> Australian. He isn't; he's British, and fair game for HP casting. I
> just meant that I wish he'd been cast in some HP role. I suppose 
they
> could have cast him as Thorfinn Rowle, the big blond DE who wreaks
> such havoc in HBP, but he'd have to wear padding, and I'd rather see
> him fight well than badly. So I'm back to a miscellaneous DE, 
unhooded
> and unmasked. But I wouldn't call Boromir in LOTR, either the book 
or
> the film, a bad guy (in contrast to, say, Ian in "National
> Treasure").
> He was a very sympathetic Boromir. I especially loved the scene in 
the
> forest after Gandalf's fall when he talked to Aragon about the White
> City and hearing the people shout, "The lords of Gondor have
> returned!" That man can act, and, if I may say so, he's beautiful to
> look at.
> 
> Carol, who suspects that Gellert Grindelwald in his prime looked
> something like Sean Bean (with a German accent)
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Remember 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





From md at exit-reality.com  Mon Sep  1 15:37:30 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 11:37:30 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9g3pu+ucba@eGroups.com>
References: <g9fk81+3p00@eGroups.com> <g9g3pu+ucba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <025601c90c48$a62fd120$f28f7360$@com>

I think the problem is that the diminished story lines in the films. Because
all the focus is put squarely on Harry the other characters don't get the
chance to grow that they do in the books. 

 

Because of this you don't see Ron in many of the just Harry-Ron scenes you
get in the book, or Ron at home or around his brothers. I think what happens
is they look at certain lines and they think, well book Ron has this, that
and the other thing to make that line sound right but Movie Ron had all
those other moments cut out so he'll stay comic relief and Hermione will say
it.

 

In a lot of ways COS would have been the film to give Ron a fighting chance
in the film. He has to spend half the film without Hermione while she's
petrified. But, Columbus makes Ron into a crying, whining dork in that film,
he does not but "squeak" and "squeal" through then entire film.

 

I guess after Columbus made Ron into the ass-of-a-comic-relief-sidekick he
was in COS they didn't seen opportunities to fix it later.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 2:58 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint

 

--- "stephab67" <stephab67 at ...> wrote:
>
> > --- "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> > > 
> >> I think partly it is because Rupert is and has a reputation
> >> as a bad interview, .... I'm not saying he is bad ... as 
> >> in the disagreeable ... sense,.... He is very friendly, 
> >> but when asked a question, he doesn't have a lot to say 
> >> beyond 'yeh, that was cool' and similar. 
> > > 
> > > ...
> > saroris22:
> > 
> > I think you make a good point about Rupert being a bad 
> > interview. But doesn't Rupert have a manager or someone 
> > advising him about his career who might help him with his
> > speaking problem. ...
> > >
> Steph:
> I've heard that Rupert is rather shy, ..., and that likely 
> contributes to the problem. Emma and Dan have said that 
> Rupert is funny and clever, so it's too bad that his shyness
> prevents him from showing that in interviews .... I also 
> wonder if he doesn't really know why people would actually 
> want to interview him ("why the heck does anyone care what I
> think?") which could add to it.
> 

bboyminn:

I agree on both points, but many, if not most, movie stars are
shy, but they understand that a TV interview is a performance,
and must be approached as such.

I also, think that perhaps his daily life is so normal, that he
really, subconsciously, can't fathom why all these people 
want to talk to him.

As to an agent and/or manager, sadly, I think too many of
them are in it for the short term. As long as the free money
is rolling in, they are happy, and when the gravy train stops,
there are plenty of other kids out there to exploit. 

I've also notice that as Rupert gets older, he tends to
restrain his voice. It's like he is holding it in his chest
rather than projecting it. That could easily be fixed with
some voice lessons. And both his hesitance to talk, and his
'restrained' voice might simply be something he'll grow out
of.

> Steph: 
> ...
> 
> ...
> 
> With Cherry Bomb coming out, he'll have to do more interviews,
> so I really hope he figures out how to get comfortable with it,
> because I also think it could hurt him in his career if he 
> doesn't, especially now that he's an adult. 
>
> I used to do PR, and if I was advising him, I'd tell him to 
> just play this character who just happened to have the same 
> name. Memorize a few talking points and stories ahead of time
> so he's not thrown, ...

bboyminn:

That's sort of why I thought Stand-Up Comedy would be good for
Rupert, even if it was just a few Open Mic Nights. He needs a
sense of how to interact and entertain a live audience, whether
that live audience is a single interviewer or a live crowd.

Many comedians are also very shy, frequently more shy than 
actors. They use the character they play on the stage as sort
of an alter ego for themselves. Then when they do an interview
it is the alter ego being interviewed and not them personally.

Most interviewers like Craig, Conan, and Jay do a pre-interview,
so if the comic needs a few laughs, they tell Jay/Conan and 
the interviewer sets them up with the straight line to get them
into the joke. 

But if Rupert were to do stand-up, I think he would need some
professional writers to help him. Being a Stand-Up Comic is
not just standing on stage and telling jokes. You have to
engage the audience, you have to string them along until you
unexpectedly drop the punch line on them. Timing is also 
very important, too slow and they get bored, too fast and they 
can't keep up, you also need a sense of when to pause, to 
build suspense and so forth. It is really a very tricky art.

But again, Rupert doesn't have to become a professional, he 
merely needs a few successful amateur nights on the stage and
I think it would loosen him up nicely.

Back to the people advising him, sadly, I think they are not
advising him. They are hanging around collecting their 
commission, and happy for a big pile of free money. Personally,
I would make them work for it.

steve/bluewizard

 



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




From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 17:15:42 2008
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris22)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:15:42 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <025601c90c48$a62fd120$f28f7360$@com>
Message-ID: <g9h7vu+uv8h@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> Because of this you don't see Ron in many of the just Harry-Ron 
scenes you
> get in the book, or Ron at home or around his brothers. I think 
what happens
> is they look at certain lines and they think, well book Ron has 
this, that
> and the other thing to make that line sound right but Movie Ron had 
all
> those other moments cut out so he'll stay comic relief and Hermione 
will say
> it.
saroris22

I've often wondered if the movie Ron influenced Rowling's writing of 
the book Ron. He's an oddly static character, who doesn't seem to 
grow even though he meets challenges. For example, Ron is a quidditch 
winner in OOTP, yet is still an unsure quidditich player in HPB. In 
some ways, it doesn't make sense. And the fact that Ron has still not 
approached Hermione by the beginning of DH seems improbable. I know 
that Ron has to earn Hermione's love by getting the basilik fangs and 
showing compassion for elves, but he knows that he likes Hermione, so 
what is he waiting for? After all, Hermione kisses him in DH. If she 
hadn't kissed him, would Ron have waited forever? I suppose Rowling 
had the kissing scene planned out well in advance, but I can't help 
thinking that the book portrayal of Ron was somewhat effected by the 
movie Ron, because he has such a weird course of development.
> 
>  
> 
>




From md at exit-reality.com  Mon Sep  1 18:02:41 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 14:02:41 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9h7vu+uv8h@eGroups.com>
References: <025601c90c48$a62fd120$f28f7360$@com> <g9h7vu+uv8h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007401c90c5c$f0976cf0$d1c646d0$@com>

Speaking as someone who suffered from extreme anxiety as a teenager I can
say that I completely buy Ron as a character in books and films. 

 

The thing is, Ron has lead an entire existence of feeling second rate. Not
only did he have a horde of brothers to live up to, but when a new younger
sibling came along it was the families only girl! Worse, his mom "adopts"
Harry and acts as though he can do no wrong, further weakening his
self-esteem. Add to that, the  girl he's in love with is so smart and
succeeds so well that he feels infinitely inferior to her. He's a teenage
boy, born to a poor family known for their bright, red hair (red hair, btw,
has been widely looked down upon in Britten in an almost racist way) who's
best friend is rich, the most famous wizard there is, is doted on by many of
the teachers, many of his family and even his little sister prefers him.

 

Ron's just a down in the mud sort-of-kid. A few good Quiddtich games aren't
going to give him all kinds of confidence. Besides, Ron's a born follower
and Harry's a born leader.

 

I saw the whole thing with Ron trying to tell Harry about the dragons in the
film GOF as a way of keeping tension between the characters when the books
subplots had to be cut for time. Besides, Hermione's line "I'm not an owl!"
was one of the most genuine moments in the series and an excellent use of a
reference that would only make sense in HP context.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of sartoris22
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 1:16 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Rupert Grint

 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <mailto:HPFGU-Movie%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> Because of this you don't see Ron in many of the just Harry-Ron 
scenes you
> get in the book, or Ron at home or around his brothers. I think 
what happens
> is they look at certain lines and they think, well book Ron has 
this, that
> and the other thing to make that line sound right but Movie Ron had 
all
> those other moments cut out so he'll stay comic relief and Hermione 
will say
> it.
saroris22

I've often wondered if the movie Ron influenced Rowling's writing of 
the book Ron. He's an oddly static character, who doesn't seem to 
grow even though he meets challenges. For example, Ron is a quidditch 
winner in OOTP, yet is still an unsure quidditich player in HPB. In 
some ways, it doesn't make sense. And the fact that Ron has still not 
approached Hermione by the beginning of DH seems improbable. I know 
that Ron has to earn Hermione's love by getting the basilik fangs and 
showing compassion for elves, but he knows that he likes Hermione, so 
what is he waiting for? After all, Hermione kisses him in DH. If she 
hadn't kissed him, would Ron have waited forever? I suppose Rowling 
had the kissing scene planned out well in advance, but I can't help 
thinking that the book portrayal of Ron was somewhat effected by the 
movie Ron, because he has such a weird course of development.
> 
> 
> 
>

 



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




From stephab67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 21:07:52 2008
From: stephab67 at yahoo.com (stephab67)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:07:52 -0000
Subject: Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <025601c90c48$a62fd120$f28f7360$@com>
Message-ID: <g9hlj8+cqnb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> I think the problem is that the diminished story lines in the films. Because
> all the focus is put squarely on Harry the other characters don't get the
> chance to grow that they do in the books. 
> 
> Because of this you don't see Ron in many of the just Harry-Ron scenes you
> get in the book, or Ron at home or around his brothers. I think what happens
> is they look at certain lines and they think, well book Ron has this, that
> and the other thing to make that line sound right but Movie Ron had all
> those other moments cut out so he'll stay comic relief and Hermione will say
> it.
> 
> In a lot of ways COS would have been the film to give Ron a fighting chance
> in the film. He has to spend half the film without Hermione while she's
> petrified. But, Columbus makes Ron into a crying, whining dork in that film,
> he does not but "squeak" and "squeal" through then entire film.
> 
> I guess after Columbus made Ron into the ass-of-a-comic-relief-sidekick he
> was in COS they didn't seen opportunities to fix it later.

Steph:
The trend toward making Ron the comic relief definitely started with Columbus, and 
Kloves said that Hermione was his favorite character, so I blame them.  Cuaron and Newell 
just continued with what Columbus/Kloves put in place, then focused the story more on 
Harry, which diminished both Ron and Hermione's storylines even more.  It's sad when 
even Rupert was saying that Ron was a wimp and that for OotP he was happy that Ron got 
to be braver.  

Sartoris, I actually interpreted Cuaron's comments about Rupert entirely differently.  
Cuaron seemed to actually really like Rupert, and complimented his acting skills.  I don't 
think the essay had anything to do with Ron's role being diminished, I think it was part of 
a decision that was made to put the focus on Harry and cut out other storylines.  And as 
for Ron taking too long to get going with Hermione, I agree with Nightbreed that he had a 
lot of insecurities to work through.  I do think that if it hadn't been for the LocketCrux he 
would have made a move much quicker.  Ron was already getting pretty touchy with her at 
that point.

> > > --- "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> 
> I also, think that perhaps his daily life is so normal, that he
> really, subconsciously, can't fathom why all these people 
> want to talk to him.

Steph:
Agreed.  I think Rupert really tries to maintain as much of a normal life as possible, and 
therefore still seems surprised that anyone wants his autograph.  He's not letting it go to 
his head, which is really fantastic.  How many other young stars can we say that about?
>
Steve: 
> As to an agent and/or manager, sadly, I think too many of
> them are in it for the short term. As long as the free money
> is rolling in, they are happy, and when the gravy train stops,
> there are plenty of other kids out there to exploit. 
> 
Steph:
It's too bad if they have that attitude, because Rupert seems like a dream client.  I didn't 
work in entertainment PR, I did technology, but the number of jerks definitely outweighed 
the nice clients.  If I got a client like Rupert I'd work my butt off for him or her because 
working for somebody nice was so much rewarding than working for horrible people.  

Steve:
> 
> That's sort of why I thought Stand-Up Comedy would be good for
> Rupert, even if it was just a few Open Mic Nights. He needs a
> sense of how to interact and entertain a live audience, whether
> that live audience is a single interviewer or a live crowd.

Steph:
Rupert should do Saturday Night Live when either Cherry Bomb or HBP comes out.  I think 
he'd do a great job with the monologue and sketch comedy!  The material would be 
written by someone else, with his help, but he'd perform it.  




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Mon Sep  1 15:45:48 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:45:48 -0000
Subject: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <g9h1ln+6k4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9h2nc+hg6l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mellypf" <mellyf at ...> wrote:
>
> *Lurker de-lurking briefly.*
>
> I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.
> I think David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't
> Lupin for me.


Me:
I have to say that it was David's portrayal of Lupin in POA
that turned me on to the character. It was great and now I
cannot imagine anyone else playing the part. He is Lupin to
me


Jayne
Just popping in on this discussion




From wildirishrose at fiber.net  Mon Sep  1 21:58:17 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:58:17 -0000
Subject: The funniest scene in a HPM
In-Reply-To: <384049.22445.qm@web45507.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g9hohp+23c1@eGroups.com>

I like that scene, but the Snape, Umbridge scene is really
funny when it's portrayed in the book on tape/CD.  The tone
that Jim Dale puts in Snape's voice is great.  And it's like
you said, it sounds like Snape wants to throttle her.  He's
doing his best to keep his temper.

I have a question.  In PoA.  When Harry and Hermione went
back in time and they are watching themselves from the back
in the pumpkin patch. What is Hermione saying?  Something
about is that what ?????? from behind????  I think Harry
says "Huh"?????  Then she says Never mind?????  I don't
know how many times I've tried to get those lines, but for
some reason I can't.

Marianne


> <snip quoted>
> --- On Sun, 8/31/08, Nightbreed <md at ...> wrote:
> From: Nightbreed <md at ...>
> Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] The funniest scene in a HPM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 12:43 AM
>
> (Paraphrasing)
>
> Umbrige
>
> "You've applied several times for the Defense against
> the dark arts position"
>
> Snape
>
> "Yes"
>
> Umbrige
>
> "And each time you've been unsuccessful"
>
> Snape
>
> "Obviously"
>
> Everyone snickers, but Snape only hits Ron.
>
> md
>

<snip>




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 23:10:45 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:10:45 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <007401c90c5c$f0976cf0$d1c646d0$@com>
Message-ID: <g9hspl+i374@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:

> Besides, Hermione's line "I'm not an owl!" was one of the 
> most genuine moments in the series and an excellent use of a
> reference that would only make sense in HP context.


zanooda:

I really hated this line :-). Hermione supported Harry and helped him
during his falling-out with Ron and his preparation to the first task.
I think that her support and her loyalty were the only things that
have gotten Harry through that horrible time, when he didn't have Ron
anymore and everyone around was tormenting him. 

The filmmakers made Hermione part of the tormenting crowd, which is
totally wrong. Besides, she appears quite unbalanced as a result - one
moment she "I'm not an owl"s Harry very angrily, and the next moment
she throws herself into his arms (in the tent) - H/H shippers were
very happy about this one, I'm sure :-).

I suppose they made Hermione say this line to show how lonely Harry
was, but it's unfair to other characters - it was really low of them,
when they all just turned around and walked away, leaving poor Harry
standing there alone ;-(. It's understandable in Ron's case, but
Hermione and Ginny??? I will never believe this.

They did the same thing in OotP, when they moved Harry and Ron's
confrontation with Seamus from the dorm to the common room, so the
rest of the Weasleys were also there. In the book all the Weasleys
believed Harry about LV's return unconditionally and supported him.
They just spent the summer together at 12 GP, talking about it and
all, and what I see in the movie? Fred and George and Ginny just sit
there, staring at Harry curiously and not interfering - totally OOC.

I can understand the movie-makers' desire to make us feel for Harry,
but it shouldn't be at the expense of other characters. I can
disregard the fact that they made Cho a traitor - she is not very
important to the story. But Ron, Hermione and the Weasleys are too
important to me, and I just can't accept such a major change in their
characters. 




From md at exit-reality.com  Mon Sep  1 23:12:16 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 19:12:16 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The funniest scene in a HPM
In-Reply-To: <g9hohp+23c1@eGroups.com>
References: <384049.22445.qm@web45507.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <g9hohp+23c1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004f01c90c88$2d0fb720$872f2560$@com>

"Is that really what my hair looks like from behind."

 

"Huh? What?"

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of wildirishrose01us
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 5:58 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The funniest scene in a HPM

 

I like that scene, but the Snape, Umbridge scene is really 
funny when it's portrayed in the book on tape/CD. The tone 
that Jim Dale puts in Snape's voice is great. And it's like 
you said, it sounds like Snape wants to throttle her. He's 
doing his best to keep his temper.

I have a question. In PoA. When Harry and Hermione went 
back in time and they are watching themselves from the back 
in the pumpkin patch. What is Hermione saying? Something 
about is that what ?????? from behind???? I think Harry 
says "Huh"????? Then she says Never mind????? I don't 
know how many times I've tried to get those lines, but for 
some reason I can't.

Marianne

> <snip quoted>
> --- On Sun, 8/31/08, Nightbreed <md at ...> wrote:
> From: Nightbreed <md at ...>
> Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] The funniest scene in a HPM
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <mailto:HPFGU-Movie%40yahoogroups.com> 
> Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 12:43 AM
> 
> (Paraphrasing)
> 
> Umbrige
> 
> "You've applied several times for the Defense against 
> the dark arts position"
> 
> Snape
> 
> "Yes"
> 
> Umbrige
> 
> "And each time you've been unsuccessful"
> 
> Snape
> 
> "Obviously"
> 
> Everyone snickers, but Snape only hits Ron.
> 
> md
> 

<snip>

 



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




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 23:30:34 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:30:34 -0000
Subject: The funniest scene in a HPM
In-Reply-To: <g9hohp+23c1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9htuq+8ubq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "wildirishrose01us"
<wildirishrose at ...> wrote:

> I have a question.  In PoA.  When Harry and Hermione went
> back in time and they are watching themselves from the back
> in the pumpkin patch. What is Hermione saying?  Something
> about is that what ?????? from behind????  I think Harry
> says "Huh"?????  Then she says Never mind?????  I don't
> know how many times I've tried to get those lines, but for
> some reason I can't.


zanooda:

I think she says: "Is that what my hair really looks like from the
back?" - or something like this :-).




From wildirishrose at fiber.net  Mon Sep  1 23:45:39 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:45:39 -0000
Subject: The funniest scene in a HPM
In-Reply-To: <004f01c90c88$2d0fb720$872f2560$@com>
Message-ID: <g9hur3+8htt@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> "Is that really what my hair looks like from behind."

Thank you for telling me what the line really said.

I was thinking it sounded like "Is that what my butt looks like from
behind."

Marianne



From kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de  Tue Sep  2 00:42:50 2008
From: kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de (Gerlinde Kenkel)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 02:42:50 +0200 (Westeuropische Sommerzeit)
Subject: Answers
Message-ID: <48BC8C0A.000001.03040@ANGELICA>

 
 
What was one of the first movies in which Daniel Radcliffe was in front of a
camera?
 1999: David Copperfield (TV-Movie) http://www.fan-lexikon
de/film-tv/daniel-radcliffe/ or: The Tailor of Panama (http://www
danradcliffe.com/index
php?view=article&catid=23%3Afilmprojects&id=5%3Atailorofpanama&option=com_con
ent&Itemid=7)
Were was Emma Watson born?
 (* On April 15th 1990 in Paris, France)  http://de.wikipedia
org/wiki/Emma_Watson
Which Harry Potter actor/actress played in the Agatha Christie movies with
Peter Ustinov?
 Maggie Smith in EVIL UNDER THE SUN (1982) as Daphne Castle, and in  DEATH
ON THE NILE (1978) as Miss Bowers.  
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001749/
 
Which actor of HPM lives in Stirlingshire
 Robbie Coltane  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbie_Coltrane
Which HPM actor got an ice-cream van?
 Rupert Grint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Grint
Who played in "Rain Fall"?
 Gary Oldman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Oldman
Which director of a HPM was first inspired by "Jaws" to become a director?
 David Yates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Yates
Which actor in HPM played also in Die Hard?
 Alan Rickman  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095016/
Which actress played on TV Mary I of Scotland?
 Cl?mence Po?sy (Fleur) http://en.wikipedia
org/wiki/Cl%C3%A9mence_Po%C3%A9sy
 
 
Do you find always the right answer? 

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




From lexluthorslady at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 01:51:58 2008
From: lexluthorslady at yahoo.com (Mrs. Lex Luthor)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 18:51:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <g9h1ln+6k4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <840971.79834.qm@web45510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

If you ever watched a Peter O'Toole movie you'll notice he has that sparkle in his eyes if he plays a bad guy or good.

Love,
Red

You should watch him in "Stardust" He was really good in that one.

--- On Mon, 9/1/08, mellypf <mellyf at aol.com> wrote:
From: mellypf <mellyf at aol.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 1, 2008, 3:27 PM

*Lurker de-lurking briefly.*

I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.  I think 
David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't Lupin for me.

Add me to the list who would have liked to have seen Peter O'Toole as 
Dumbledore (from the beginning...I would have preferred him over 
Richard Harris, and definitely over Gambon).  I think McKellen would 
have been good, too, and possibly Michael Caine, but I think O'Toole 
would have had that authority as well as eccentricity, (and twinkle) 
that Dumbledore is supposed to have.

Melissa

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Mrs. Lex Luthor" 
<lexluthorslady at ...> wrote:
>
> If you haven't seen them you should watch his "Richard
Sharp" 
Series its a very well done British series. Which I paid an arm and a 
leg to get lol
> 
> Another actor I'd like to see is Ewan McGregor (He's not
everyone's 
cup of tea) I would like to see him as a death eater.? though he's 
not British either so that rules him out too, oh well.
> 
> Love,
> Red
> 
> 
> --- On Fri, 8/29/08, Carol <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> From: Carol <justcarol67 at ...>
> Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
> To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, August 29, 2008, 7:01 PM
> 
> Carol earlier:
> 
> > I hated what the LOTR film did to the character of Faramir
<snip>.
> That's not David Wenham's fault, of course.
> > 
> > As for a role in the HP films, I can see him as Sirius Black 
<snip>.
> Unfortunately, he's Australian, and JKR wants the casting (except 
for
> roles like Krum and Karkaroff in GoF) to be strictly British.
> > 
> > Carol, who would have loved to see Sean Bean (Boromir) as a 
hoodless
> and unmasked Death Eater
> 
> "Mrs. Lex Luthor"  (Red) responded:
> >
> > I was just thought about that when I sent the email about David. I
> don't think its really fair how J. K just wanted all British she was
> limiting herself very much. I love Sean Bean as the bad guy he plays
> such a good one.
> 
> Carol again:
> 
> I guess I made it sound as if Sean Bean, like David Wenham, is
> Australian. He isn't; he's British, and fair game for HP casting.
I
> just meant that I wish he'd been cast in some HP role. I suppose 
they
> could have cast him as Thorfinn Rowle, the big blond DE who wreaks
> such havoc in HBP, but he'd have to wear padding, and I'd rather
see
> him fight well than badly. So I'm back to a miscellaneous DE, 
unhooded
> and unmasked. But I wouldn't call Boromir in LOTR, either the book 
or
> the film, a bad guy (in contrast to, say, Ian in "National
> Treasure").
> He was a very sympathetic Boromir. I especially loved the scene in 
the
> forest after Gandalf's fall when he talked to Aragon about the White
> City and hearing the people shout, "The lords of Gondor have
> returned!" That man can act, and, if I may say so, he's beautiful
to
> look at.
> 
> Carol, who suspects that Gellert Grindelwald in his prime looked
> something like Sean Bean (with a German accent)
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Remember 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



------------------------------------


Remember 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






      

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




From Englishlady at gmail.com  Tue Sep  2 01:54:16 2008
From: Englishlady at gmail.com (Aryn Culbertson)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 18:54:16 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Answers
In-Reply-To: <48BC8C0A.000001.03040@ANGELICA>
References: <48BC8C0A.000001.03040@ANGELICA>
Message-ID: <dc3be0ab0809011854x78866f41hbb35426e784c061c@mail.gmail.com>

Odd that, I submitted answers to this an hr after the original posting
yesterday, umm..

On 01/09/2008, Gerlinde Kenkel <kenkel20002000 at yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> What was one of the first movies in which Daniel Radcliffe was in front of
> a
> camera?
> 1999: David Copperfield (TV-Movie) http://www.fan-lexikon
> de/film-tv/daniel-radcliffe/ or: The Tailor of Panama (http://www
> danradcliffe.com/index
>
> php?view=article&catid=23%3Afilmprojects&id=5%3Atailorofpanama&option=com_con
> ent&Itemid=7)
> Were was Emma Watson born?
> (* On April 15th 1990 in Paris, France) http://de.wikipedia
> org/wiki/Emma_Watson
> Which Harry Potter actor/actress played in the Agatha Christie movies with
> Peter Ustinov?
> Maggie Smith in EVIL UNDER THE SUN (1982) as Daphne Castle, and in DEATH
> ON THE NILE (1978) as Miss Bowers.
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001749/
>
> Which actor of HPM lives in Stirlingshire
> Robbie Coltane http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbie_Coltrane
> Which HPM actor got an ice-cream van?
> Rupert Grint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Grint
> Who played in "Rain Fall"?
> Gary Oldman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Oldman
> Which director of a HPM was first inspired by "Jaws" to become a director?
> David Yates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Yates
> Which actor in HPM played also in Die Hard?
> Alan Rickman http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095016/
> Which actress played on TV Mary I of Scotland?
> Cl?mence Po?sy (Fleur) http://en.wikipedia
> org/wiki/Cl%C3%A9mence_Po%C3%A9sy
>
>
> Do you find always the right answer?
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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




From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 02:27:37 2008
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris22)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 02:27:37 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9hspl+i374@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9i8ap+9s7e@eGroups.com>


> 
> zanooda:
>> I can understand the movie-makers' desire to make us feel for 
Harry,
> but it shouldn't be at the expense of other characters. I can
> disregard the fact that they made Cho a traitor - she is not very
> important to the story. But Ron, Hermione and the Weasleys are too
> important to me, and I just can't accept such a major change in 
their
> characters.
>
Sartoris22:

I totally agree. I too hate it when they demean other characters for 
the sake of their version of the story. In most ways, Fred and George 
treat Harry much better than they do Ron, and always rush to Harry's 
support. Even before Harry gives them his Triwizard winnings, the 
Wesleys give Harry the Mauraders Map. And in the movies, they take 
away some of Hermione's emotionality for the sake of her cleverness. 
Although the scene in which she embraces Ron at Buckbeak's beheading 
is nice, in the book she cries in Ron's arms when he says that he'll 
help her with Buckbeak's appeal. It's a fairly long scene during 
which Hermione cries almost uncontrollably while Ron awkwardly pats 
her on the head. I think that scene is more revealing of the 
characters than the one in the movie. When Ron and Harry make up 
after the first task of the Triwizard Tournament, Hermione hugs them 
both then runs away in tears. She is much more emotional in the 
books, and I hope that HPB conveys more of that. However, we already 
know from the Entertainment Weekly story that Hermione doesn't attack 
Ron with birds after his and Lavender's initial snogfest, although 
she does cry in the scene. 




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  2 03:40:35 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 23:40:35 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9i8ap+9s7e@eGroups.com>
References: <g9hspl+i374@eGroups.com> <g9i8ap+9s7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007701c90cad$a9470850$fbd518f0$@com>

At least with Cho, she was given the Viratiserum, so she wasn't a traitor in
the film she could not have possibly of not told the truth. 

 

I also think that by and large similar emotional sentiment has been
demonstrated for each character that you find in the book, the specific
moments may not be there, but the relationships and the audiences awareness
of the characters has been well done, I think, considering how much they cut
out.

 

I really liked that Cauron had several moments between Ron and Hermione
whether it be the momentary handholding before Buckbeak or Hermione
instinctively embracing Ron with Harry standing there too, or my favorite (a
funny moment) when she says "Would you like to move closer" and Ron replies
"What?"  

 

What they need to do, I think, is expand Ginny in the last two films.
Rowling never made Ginny a character, yet Harry and her fall in love and get
married and have children. To not ever really make Ginny come alive on the
page was the single, great flaw I think in the series, for her to be so
important to Harry yet never really be a character we can see and know is a
huge misstep. I really wanted her to tell Mrs. Weasley in no uncertain terms
that she loved Harry and was leaving with he, Ron and Hermione in the last
book.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of sartoris22
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 10:28 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint

 


> 
> zanooda:
>> I can understand the movie-makers' desire to make us feel for 
Harry,
> but it shouldn't be at the expense of other characters. I can
> disregard the fact that they made Cho a traitor - she is not very
> important to the story. But Ron, Hermione and the Weasleys are too
> important to me, and I just can't accept such a major change in 
their
> characters.
>
Sartoris22:

I totally agree. I too hate it when they demean other characters for 
the sake of their version of the story. In most ways, Fred and George 
treat Harry much better than they do Ron, and always rush to Harry's 
support. Even before Harry gives them his Triwizard winnings, the 
Wesleys give Harry the Mauraders Map. And in the movies, they take 
away some of Hermione's emotionality for the sake of her cleverness. 
Although the scene in which she embraces Ron at Buckbeak's beheading 
is nice, in the book she cries in Ron's arms when he says that he'll 
help her with Buckbeak's appeal. It's a fairly long scene during 
which Hermione cries almost uncontrollably while Ron awkwardly pats 
her on the head. I think that scene is more revealing of the 
characters than the one in the movie. When Ron and Harry make up 
after the first task of the Triwizard Tournament, Hermione hugs them 
both then runs away in tears. She is much more emotional in the 
books, and I hope that HPB conveys more of that. However, we already 
know from the Entertainment Weekly story that Hermione doesn't attack 
Ron with birds after his and Lavender's initial snogfest, although 
she does cry in the scene. 

 



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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Sep  2 12:38:32 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:38:32 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <007701c90cad$a9470850$fbd518f0$@com>
Message-ID: <g9jc48+r6sl@eGroups.com>

 "Nightbreed" wrote:
>
> At least with Cho, she was given the Viratiserum, so she wasn't a 
traitor in
> the film she could not have possibly of not told the truth. 


Potioncat:
Yes, but that changed Snape's role. In the book he gave Umbridge a fake 
potion--protecting Potter, or rather the Order. In the movie, he goes 
out of his way to show that it wasn't really Cho's fault.





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 15:42:51 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:42:51 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9i8ap+9s7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9jmtr+lmvk@eGroups.com>

Sartoris22 wrote:
<snip> She [Hermione] is much more emotional in the books, and I hope
that HPB conveys more of that. However, we already know from the
Entertainment Weekly story that Hermione doesn't attack Ron with birds
after his and Lavender's initial snogfest, although she does cry in
the scene.

Carol responds:
We did see something of her emotional side after the Yule Ball scene
in GoF. but I agree that they've underplayed it (and played up her
Gryffindor traits, such as changing her slap to a punch when she hits
Draco in PoA). 

I think that leaving out her hexing Ron with canaries is a good move
on the filmmakers' part, assuming that they want the viewers's
sympathies to be with her rather than Won Won.

Carol, who assumes that Ron went to Madam Pomfrey afterward and
wonders why she didn't give him dittany for the scars





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 16:13:41 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:13:41 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <007701c90cad$a9470850$fbd518f0$@com>
Message-ID: <g9jonl+l5vv@eGroups.com>

Nightbreed wrote:
>
> At least with Cho, she was given the Viratiserum, so she wasn't a
traitor in the film she could not have possibly of not told the truth.
<snip> 

Carol:
Unfortunately, that small plot alteration requires Snape to provide
Umbridge with real Veritaserum for use on the whole DA, which
eliminates his subversive move in providing her with fake Veritaserum
and leaves viewers to wonder why no one else told the truth under the
influence of the Veritaserum (and why Cho was stupid enough to drink
anything that Umbridge served). I didn't like that plot twist at all.
The only good thing that it accomplished was removing Hermione's hex
and the SNEAK pustules (another of Hermione's less than stellar
moments that might dilute the viewers' sympathy for her. (I mean, of
course, viewers who haven't read the books.)
 
nightbreed wrote: 
<snip> To not ever really make Ginny come alive on the page was the
single, great flaw I think in the series, for her to be so important
to Harry yet never really be a character we can see and know is a huge
misstep.

Carol responds:
For me, Book!Ginny's best moment comes early in CoS when she stands up
to Draco in Flourish and Blotts. (At least that moment gets into the
film.) And I suppose that the pickled toad poem, dreadful as it is,
does show her personality (and her crush on Harry in case we didn't
already know about it). I didn't like her at all in OoP (lying to her
mother about Crookshanks playing with the dungbombs) although she did
have one good moment when she confronted Harry, telling him that *she*
knew what it was like to be possessed and that he should ask her. I
didn't like her hexing Zacharias Smith; she reminded me of James
Potter. (Oh, great. James Jr. has that obnoxious, "mischievous" streak
coming from both sides.) I didn't like her in HBP, either. I saw no
reason whatever for her supposed popularity. Luna said that Ginny was
nice, but the reader never saw it. She was still hexing Zacharias
Smith, and she also referred to Sectumsempra as "something good" to
use on Draco. (Where is your mind, Ginny? That spell nearly made Harry
an accidental killer and it could have gotten him expelled, or worse,
sent to Azkaban. And then Harry gets, in effect, rewarded or at least
recompensed for a much-deserved detention with Snape by a Gryffindor
victory, courtesy of Seeker!Ginny, and a prologned kiss. Blecch!) IMO,
she's a character, all right, just not the ideal mate for Harry that
JKR thinks she is. (If her older daughter turns out to be "spunky"
like Ginny, JKR will find out that those traits aren't quite so
wonderful as she thinks they are.)

nightbreed wrote:
 I really wanted her to tell Mrs. Weasley in no uncertain terms that
she loved Harry and was leaving with he, Ron and Hermione in the last
book.

Carol responds:
And I couldn't be happier that she was underage and had to stay home.
Her presence would distract Harry, she and Ron (or she and Hermione)
would always be bickering, and the dynamics of the Trio would be
wholly spoiled. (One of Ron's concerns when the locket is tormenting
him is the safety of his family. Having Ginny with him would ruin
that; instead of not knowing what was going on and fearing the worst,
he'd constantly feel the responsibility of protecting her and she'd be
constantly arguing that she was old enough to do whatever they were
doing. Three's company; four's a crowd.

Getting back to the movies (I almost forgot which list I was posting
to!), it looks as if Ginny will have a larger part in this film and
will be established as Harry's love interest early on. One good thing:
the moviemakers left out Quidditch from OoP, so she'll have no motive
for hexing Zacharias Smith in HBP. (I suppose that she'll get into the
Slug Club by hexing a Slytherin.)

Carol, glad that Ginny had her own friends at Hogwarts, leaving the
Trio largely to themselves when they weren't at the Burrow or 12 GP




From kempermentor at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 16:41:14 2008
From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:41:14 -0000
Subject: Movie taint that I want to see in DH
Message-ID: <g9jqba+r48o@eGroups.com>

I would love to see moral questioning of his use of Crucio: either
self-reflective or my McG... or even Bella or LV!  That would be
awesome!  Having them encourage that behavior... Delicious, delicious.
 I'd settle for anything that has Harry abashed or remorseful.

Slytherin students sneaking back in to battle for Hogwarts (even
awesomer--I know it's not a word, but it should be--would be a student
fighting a parent. Malfoy v Malfoy?) 

I was never a fan of movie taint, but now... it has so much potential!

What movie taint would others like to see?

Kemper




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  2 17:08:52 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 13:08:52 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9jonl+l5vv@eGroups.com>
References: <007701c90cad$a9470850$fbd518f0$@com> <g9jonl+l5vv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00ba01c90d1e$933df160$b9b9d420$@com>

Umbrige wasn't just interviewing the people in DA, she was interviewing
anyone she thought connected. It's possible that Cho was just the first
member of the DA. 

 

I also assumed Snape to by lying when she wanted the veritaserum for Harry
and he said she'd used it all. 

 

As for Ginny, first of all, the trio fights too much by the last book. In
HBP it annoys me that they never believe Harry about Draco because they have
all been on the same page before, especially in the first book regarding
Snape. In the Last I find it irritating that Ron leaves and "the trio" as
you put it is gone anyway for large chunk. Ginny being one year younger
hardly makes her underage (especially if you buy into the girls mature
faster than boys theory.)

 

My issue is just this, by the end of the books as a reader I didn't feel,
grasp, understand Ginny and Harry having a bond of love to last a lifetime,
or even much of a friendship beyond the casual. What I hope for the film is
that Ginny is given more than she had in the book so that you actually see
them together and buy the relationship. Rowling mostly glossed over it (they
spent long afternoons together., blah, blah, blah) she was all tell and no
show. So an expanded part for Ginny in the book would simply mean some
genuine moments that cement love between her and Harry.

 

md

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Carol
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 12:14 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint

 

Nightbreed wrote:
>
> At least with Cho, she was given the Viratiserum, so she wasn't a
traitor in the film she could not have possibly of not told the truth.
<snip> 

Carol:
Unfortunately, that small plot alteration requires Snape to provide
Umbridge with real Veritaserum for use on the whole DA, which
eliminates his subversive move in providing her with fake Veritaserum
and leaves viewers to wonder why no one else told the truth under the
influence of the Veritaserum (and why Cho was stupid enough to drink
anything that Umbridge served). I didn't like that plot twist at all.
The only good thing that it accomplished was removing Hermione's hex
and the SNEAK pustules (another of Hermione's less than stellar
moments that might dilute the viewers' sympathy for her. (I mean, of
course, viewers who haven't read the books.)

nightbreed wrote: 
<snip> To not ever really make Ginny come alive on the page was the
single, great flaw I think in the series, for her to be so important
to Harry yet never really be a character we can see and know is a huge
misstep.

Carol responds:
For me, Book!Ginny's best moment comes early in CoS when she stands up
to Draco in Flourish and Blotts. (At least that moment gets into the
film.) And I suppose that the pickled toad poem, dreadful as it is,
does show her personality (and her crush on Harry in case we didn't
already know about it). I didn't like her at all in OoP (lying to her
mother about Crookshanks playing with the dungbombs) although she did
have one good moment when she confronted Harry, telling him that *she*
knew what it was like to be possessed and that he should ask her. I
didn't like her hexing Zacharias Smith; she reminded me of James
Potter. (Oh, great. James Jr. has that obnoxious, "mischievous" streak
coming from both sides.) I didn't like her in HBP, either. I saw no
reason whatever for her supposed popularity. Luna said that Ginny was
nice, but the reader never saw it. She was still hexing Zacharias
Smith, and she also referred to Sectumsempra as "something good" to
use on Draco. (Where is your mind, Ginny? That spell nearly made Harry
an accidental killer and it could have gotten him expelled, or worse,
sent to Azkaban. And then Harry gets, in effect, rewarded or at least
recompensed for a much-deserved detention with Snape by a Gryffindor
victory, courtesy of Seeker!Ginny, and a prologned kiss. Blecch!) IMO,
she's a character, all right, just not the ideal mate for Harry that
JKR thinks she is. (If her older daughter turns out to be "spunky"
like Ginny, JKR will find out that those traits aren't quite so
wonderful as she thinks they are.)

nightbreed wrote:
I really wanted her to tell Mrs. Weasley in no uncertain terms that
she loved Harry and was leaving with he, Ron and Hermione in the last
book.

Carol responds:
And I couldn't be happier that she was underage and had to stay home.
Her presence would distract Harry, she and Ron (or she and Hermione)
would always be bickering, and the dynamics of the Trio would be
wholly spoiled. (One of Ron's concerns when the locket is tormenting
him is the safety of his family. Having Ginny with him would ruin
that; instead of not knowing what was going on and fearing the worst,
he'd constantly feel the responsibility of protecting her and she'd be
constantly arguing that she was old enough to do whatever they were
doing. Three's company; four's a crowd.

Getting back to the movies (I almost forgot which list I was posting
to!), it looks as if Ginny will have a larger part in this film and
will be established as Harry's love interest early on. One good thing:
the moviemakers left out Quidditch from OoP, so she'll have no motive
for hexing Zacharias Smith in HBP. (I suppose that she'll get into the
Slug Club by hexing a Slytherin.)

Carol, glad that Ginny had her own friends at Hogwarts, leaving the
Trio largely to themselves when they weren't at the Burrow or 12 GP

 



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




From charober at sympatico.ca  Tue Sep  2 17:26:37 2008
From: charober at sympatico.ca (Charlotte Roberts)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:26:37 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <g9h2nc+hg6l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BAY122-F37370F77564303F00336CDB35F0@phx.gbl>

I have to say I think David Thewlis nails it as Lupin, but his hair isn't as 
grey as it is mentioned in the books, he doesn't have the dark circles under 
his eyes and he doesn't look prematurely wrinkled either.  Perhaps the hair 
and makeup people should have read the books there!  ;)  I can't name any 
other actor to picture as Lupin.  I can't say I've seen David Thewlis in any 
other movies though.  He wrote this book called "The Late Hector Kipling" 
and I really want to read it!

Charlotte the reading geek (not just HP!)


>From: "Jayne" <jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
>Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:45:48 -0000
>
>--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mellypf" <mellyf at ...> wrote:
> >
> > *Lurker de-lurking briefly.*
> >
> > I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.
> > I think David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't
> > Lupin for me.
>
>
>Me:
>I have to say that it was David's portrayal of Lupin in POA
>that turned me on to the character. It was great and now I
>cannot imagine anyone else playing the part. He is Lupin to
>me
>
>
>Jayne
>Just popping in on this discussion
>





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 17:31:39 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:31:39 -0000
Subject: Draco HBP calendar photo
Message-ID: <g9jt9r+66ou@eGroups.com>

Anyone care to speculate as to why Draco (whose roots are showing)
would be holding a bird (not an owl), apparently gently?

http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/displayimage.php?album=59&pos=106

The photo is from a French site and will apparently appear on the
French 2009 HP calendar.

Carol, mildly puzzled and hoping that nothing sinister will happen to
the bird




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Sep  2 17:37:57 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:37:57 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <00ba01c90d1e$933df160$b9b9d420$@com>
Message-ID: <g9jtll+opa@eGroups.com>

 
> Nightbreed:
> I also assumed Snape to by lying when she wanted the veritaserum for 
Harry
> and he said she'd used it all.

Potioncat:
In the book, it seems pretty clear that Snape gave Umbridge fake serum. 
When he said there wasn't any more, he also adds that it only takes a 
few drops, surely she hadn't used it all? Showing that she doesn't know 
much about the potion. 

In the movie, he gave her the real thing. His comment is that she used 
the last of it on Cho. So that changes Snape's behavior completely. Of 
course, it covers for the fact that Movie!Snape poured an entire vial 
of it down Barty's throat.  





From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 17:55:23 2008
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris22)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:55:23 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9jmtr+lmvk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9jumb+i9ie@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
I think that leaving out her hexing Ron with canaries is a good move
> on the filmmakers' part, assuming that they want the viewers's
> sympathies to be with her rather than Won Won.
> 
sartoris22:

But deleting the bird attack robs us of a wonderful moment in DH when 
Ron says, after Hermione's physical assault, "At least she didn't 
attack me with birds" (or something like that), and Hermione 
responds, "I haven't ruled that out." I take great pleasure in the way 
Rowling links previous scenes and dialogue, and by changing scenes and 
dialogue in the movies, we lose that. For example, we lose the fact 
that Hermione always uses Ron's words to atack or needle him, as when 
Hermione expresses surprise that Ron behaves well during the rescue of 
Harry scene in DH and Ron says grumpily, "always the note of surprise," 
and Hermione uses those same words when Ron compliments her at Fleur 
and Bill's wedding. Those touches of wordplay are delightful to me, and 
as important to Hermione's character as her intellect, insecurity, and 
emotion. By the way, I know that some people think that Columbus's 
faithful movie versions of the books are not very good (although I 
think history will be kinder to his adaptations), but is there a way to 
make great movies that are more faihful to the books, and was the 
solution to make most of books into two movies?
>





From graynavarre at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 18:06:17 2008
From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 11:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie taint that I want to see in DH
In-Reply-To: <g9jqba+r48o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <796019.34964.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I would like to see an injured Draco with Narcissa holding him, while Lucius is standing over both, firing hexes at any Death Eaters that come near him. Mama Bear and enraged Papa Bear protecting their cub is the idea I would go for.
?
Barbara

--- On Tue, 9/2/08, kempermentor <kempermentor at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: kempermentor <kempermentor at yahoo.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Movie taint that I want to see in DH
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 12:41 PM






I would love to see moral questioning of his use of Crucio: either
self-reflective or my McG... or even Bella or LV! That would be
awesome! Having them encourage that behavior... Delicious, delicious.
I'd settle for anything that has Harry abashed or remorseful.

Slytherin students sneaking back in to battle for Hogwarts (even
awesomer--I know it's not a word, but it should be--would be a student
fighting a parent. Malfoy v Malfoy?) 

I was never a fan of movie taint, but now... it has so much potential!

What movie taint would others like to see?

Kemper

 













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




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  2 18:26:25 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 14:26:25 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Draco HBP calendar photo
In-Reply-To: <g9jt9r+66ou@eGroups.com>
References: <g9jt9r+66ou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007d01c90d29$68ffbae0$3aff30a0$@com>

Since it's  a publicity still and not a film still I would say it's symbolic
of Draco (holding a dove) to be struggling with the fact that he's a bully
and a coward not a killer like his father. Draco really has an "Anakin"
moment at the end, but he fails and, though he may not grow up to win a
Nobel Peace Prize, he doesn't end up a true death-eater either. He's a jerk
not a killer. 

 

I think it's just symbolic of the choice Draco must make, he holds peace in
his hands, he can destroy it and become his father or his aunt or he can let
it go and take a better path.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Carol
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 1:32 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Draco HBP calendar photo

 

Anyone care to speculate as to why Draco (whose roots are showing)
would be holding a bird (not an owl), apparently gently?

http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/displayimage.php?album=59
<http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/displayimage.php?album=59&pos=106> &pos=106

The photo is from a French site and will apparently appear on the
French 2009 HP calendar.

Carol, mildly puzzled and hoping that nothing sinister will happen to
the bird

 



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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Sep  2 20:41:03 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:41:03 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <00ba01c90d1e$933df160$b9b9d420$@com>
Message-ID: <g9k8cv+ip9s@eGroups.com>

Nightbreed wrote: 
snip
 Ginny being one year younger
> hardly makes her underage (especially if you buy into the girls 
mature
> faster than boys theory.)

Potioncat:
"Underage" or "of age" is important in RL and in canon. Being "of 
age" has little to do with real maturation or maturity. It's a legal 
term (sort of) that sets an age when "adults" can enter into 
contracts and make their own decisions.

At this point Harry and Ron are 17 and can legally drop out of 
school. The Weasleys were able to assert their authority over the 
twins to keep them in school after 17 (OoP), but the boys could have 
stood their ground and refused to go.

Ginny isn't 17 and does not have the right to make that decision. Nor 
can she join the Order and fight. McGonagall brought up the "of age" 
standard when she invited those students who were of age to remain 
and fight.

A RL example is that my 18-year-old daughter had to give written 
permission for us to see her college grades. 




From CatMcNulty at comcast.net  Tue Sep  2 23:40:39 2008
From: CatMcNulty at comcast.net (Cat)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:40:39 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
Message-ID: <g9kitn+cc61@eGroups.com>

There has been alot of discussion about the mis-casting of Michael 
Gambon as Albus after the unfortunate passing of Rchard Harris. It 
has been my contention all along that Peter O'Toole would have made a 
better Albus. What's done is done and the subject is really moot. 
HOWEVER, something just occured to me during my rereading of Deathly 
Hallows -- If I could turn back time  -- Peter O'Toole would be cast 
as Albus and Gambon as Aberforth. Gambon's edgy and excitable 
characterization is a much better fit for Abeforth rather than the 
calm and omnipotent Albus. 

Hmmm ... I wonder if they are considering O'Toole as Aberforth?

Also, I like Ian McKellan as an actor but I think it would 
have been a BIG mistake casting him as Albus,(as has also been 
discussed) it would have been very confusing for younger kids. 
Many years ago Disney Studios did make such a mistake (IMHO) by 
casting Fess Parker as both Davey Crockett and Daniel Boone. As a 
child I found it quite confusing and I think similiar confusion would 
exist if McKellan played both Gandalf and Dumbledore.

Cat






From stephab67 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 01:48:39 2008
From: stephab67 at yahoo.com (stephab67)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:48:39 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9jonl+l5vv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9kqdn+7dii@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> And I couldn't be happier that she was underage and had to stay home.
> Her presence would distract Harry, she and Ron (or she and Hermione)
> would always be bickering, and the dynamics of the Trio would be
> wholly spoiled. (One of Ron's concerns when the locket is tormenting
> him is the safety of his family. Having Ginny with him would ruin
> that; instead of not knowing what was going on and fearing the worst,
> he'd constantly feel the responsibility of protecting her and she'd be
> constantly arguing that she was old enough to do whatever they were
> doing. Three's company; four's a crowd.

Steph:
I agree.  It's always been the Trio, no matter what Ginny came to mean to Harry by the end 
of HBP.  Notice that Harry asked DD if he could tell Ron and Hermione about the 
Horcruxes.  He never considered bringing Ginny into his confidence about them.   It would 
have ruined the dynamic for me, as well, if JKR had decided to let Ginny go on the camping 
trip with them.  Plus, it would have negated her own canon, since Ginny wasn't yet 17 and 
still had the Trace on her.  There's no way she could have gone, even if Harry wanted to 
bring her (and can you imagine the conversation with Ron about that, let alone Molly.  
Yikes.)

Carol:
> Getting back to the movies (I almost forgot which list I was posting
> to!), it looks as if Ginny will have a larger part in this film and
> will be established as Harry's love interest early on. One good thing:
> the moviemakers left out Quidditch from OoP, so she'll have no motive
> for hexing Zacharias Smith in HBP. (I suppose that she'll get into the
> Slug Club by hexing a Slytherin.)
> 
> Carol, glad that Ginny had her own friends at Hogwarts, leaving the
> Trio largely to themselves when they weren't at the Burrow or 12 GP

Steph:
Ginny in the movies has been far more likable than Ginny in the books.  I don't really find 
her objectionable, but just a typical teen girl who's had to hold her own with her brothers.  
Sometimes she does stuff which isn't exactly nice, but she was one of the few people who 
was nice to Luna before OotP.  Remember, in the book it's Ginny who introduces Luna to 
everyone, not Hermione, and Luna mentions how Ginny stops people from calling her 
"Loony."   In HBP, Ginny tells Harry how nice it was of him to invite Luna to Sluggy's party, 
and how much Luna was looking forward to it.  If Ginny's willing to befriend someone 
who's an outcast, she can't be that bad, in my book.

Then again, the twins are much nicer in the movies than in the books, too.  Sometimes I 
found both their and Ginny's behavior toward Ron pretty nasty, especially in OotP.  He got 
it on both sides from them.  Well, Hermione wasn't always nice to him in OotP, either.  But 
I digress.  

I'm looking forward to how they're going to play out the romances.  I saw a spoiler 
elsewhere for a scene which sets them all up pretty nicely.  Won't say more, though.

Slightly off topic: I saw scans of a couple of HBP calendars, and there's a distinct lack of 
Hermione in them.  Harry, like usual, gets a lot of space, but Ron really gets a lot more 
than what we've seen in the past few years.  Draco, Snape, Lavender, and DD also are 
featured heavily.






From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 03:01:15 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:01:15 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <g9i8ap+9s7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9kulr+r9kv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "sartoris22" <sartoris22 at ...> wrote:

> And in the movies, they take away some of Hermione's emotionality
> for the sake of her cleverness. 


zanooda:

Yes, Hermione is much more emotional and vulnerable in the books.
Almost for the entire PoA she was on the verge of tears, being
overloaded with work and upset that the boys didn't talk to her ;-(.
All this was lost in the movie. In the book she was on the defensive
about her cat, but in the movie, when Ron told her that Crookshanks
ate Scabbers, she just said "rubbish" very dismissively, and this was
it :-). 

Also, book!Hermione seems funny to me sometimes, she makes me giggle
when she nags the boys to do their homework, or when she gets too
enthusiastic about SPEW and other stuff like that :-). Movie/Hermione
is never funny (except for the first movie, maybe), she is too tense
and over-dramatic. I don't want to say anything bad about Emma, BTW, I
kind of like her, although she is not *exactly* Hermione that I have
in my head :-). Unfortunately, I don't always understand what she is
saying, but that's OK - I understand Rupert Grint even less :-).




From lexluthorslady at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 03:12:07 2008
From: lexluthorslady at yahoo.com (Mrs. Lex Luthor)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9kulr+r9kv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <506105.54168.qm@web45505.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Was anyone else horrible upset that they left out the entire Spew story of out the movies? I mean i think that was Hermione's best goal, she was so passionate about it that I think it radiated from the books; trying to free the house-Elves. I think it changed Hermione allot in the movies and it left you wanting more. Now if the directors wanted to do more with Hermione's character they should have left that in there. 

Love,
Red






      

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




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 03:20:41 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:20:41 -0000
Subject: Characters acting OOC/Was:Rupert Grint
In-Reply-To: <007701c90cad$a9470850$fbd518f0$@com>
Message-ID: <g9kvq9+h9dl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:

> I really liked that Cauron had several moments between Ron and 
> Hermione whether it be the momentary handholding before Buckbeak 
> or Hermione instinctively embracing Ron with Harry standing there 
> too, or my favorite (a funny moment) when she says "Would you like 
> to move closer" and Ron replies "What?" 


zanooda:

Yeah, I like "moments" between Ron and Hermione in the movies too, but
I don't understand why you single out Cuaron :-). It was actually
Columbus who introduced us to R\H budding mutual attraction, LOL.
Remember the end of CoS, when de-petrified Hermione runs towards the
boys in the Great Hall? She and Harry hug, and next she and Ron are
about to hug as well, but then stop and shake hands instead? And Ron
mumbles something unintelligible? This scene was not from the book,
but I don't mind, because I believe that hints like that should be
more obvious in the movies than in the books :-).





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 03:37:32 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:37:32 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9kitn+cc61@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l0ps+pnru@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Cat" <CatMcNulty at ...> wrote:

> If I could turn back time  -- Peter O'Toole would be cast 
> as Albus and Gambon as Aberforth. Gambon's edgy and excitable 
> characterization is a much better fit for Abeforth rather than the 
> calm and omnipotent Albus. 
 

zanooda:

Hehe, maybe Gambon still *can* play Aberforth, LOL! Some good makeup,
different clothes - and here we go, he can play both brothers in the
7th movie :-)! They are supposed to look very much alike, aren't they
:-)?. But, seriously, some actor already played Aberforth in OotP.
OTOH, we only saw *that* Aberforth from a distance, and no one really
noticed how he looked, so now that they know that Aberforth plays an
important part, they may consider hiring someone else, I don't know.





From tfaucette6387 at charter.net  Wed Sep  3 03:49:01 2008
From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:49:01 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <506105.54168.qm@web45505.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g9l1fd+r40f@eGroups.com>

 "Mrs. Lex Luthor" wrote:
>
> Was anyone else horrible upset that they left out the entire Spew
story of out the movies? I mean i think that was Hermione's best goal,
she was so passionate about it that I think it radiated from the
books; trying to free the house-Elves. I think it changed Hermione
allot in the movies and it left you wanting more. Now if the directors
wanted to do more with Hermione's character they should have left that
in there. 
> 
> Love,
> Red
> 
>
Anne Squires:

Actually I was very pleased that all references to SPEW have been
purged from the films.  The entire SPEW plotline really got on my
nerves.  Also, if they tried to film everything in GoF the film would
easily be a least five hours long.  They had to pick and choose. 
Focusing on Harry, the Tri-Wizard Tournament, and the return of
Voldemort were wise decisions, IMO.

Anne Squires




From tfaucette6387 at charter.net  Wed Sep  3 03:55:01 2008
From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:55:01 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9l0ps+pnru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l1ql+63se@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Cat" <CatMcNulty@> wrote:
> 
> > If I could turn back time  -- Peter O'Toole would be cast 
> > as Albus and Gambon as Aberforth. Gambon's edgy and excitable 
> > characterization is a much better fit for Abeforth rather than the 
> > calm and omnipotent Albus. 
>  
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> Hehe, maybe Gambon still *can* play Aberforth, LOL! Some good makeup,
> different clothes - and here we go, he can play both brothers in the
> 7th movie :-)! They are supposed to look very much alike, aren't they
> :-)?. But, seriously, some actor already played Aberforth in OotP.
> OTOH, we only saw *that* Aberforth from a distance, and no one really
> noticed how he looked, so now that they know that Aberforth plays an
> important part, they may consider hiring someone else, I don't know.
>
Anne Squires:

That was Gambon playing Aberforth in OotP.  I hope they continue with
that choice.  Very inspired, IMO.




From tfaucette6387 at charter.net  Wed Sep  3 04:02:54 2008
From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:02:54 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9l1ql+63se@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l29e+85q7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "anne_t_squires"
<tfaucette6387 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Cat" <CatMcNulty@> wrote:
> > 
> > > If I could turn back time  -- Peter O'Toole would be cast 
> > > as Albus and Gambon as Aberforth. Gambon's edgy and excitable 
> > > characterization is a much better fit for Abeforth rather than the 
> > > calm and omnipotent Albus. 
> >  
> > 
> > zanooda:
> > 
> > Hehe, maybe Gambon still *can* play Aberforth, LOL! Some good makeup,
> > different clothes - and here we go, he can play both brothers in the
> > 7th movie :-)! They are supposed to look very much alike, aren't they
> > :-)?. But, seriously, some actor already played Aberforth in OotP.
> > OTOH, we only saw *that* Aberforth from a distance, and no one really
> > noticed how he looked, so now that they know that Aberforth plays an
> > important part, they may consider hiring someone else, I don't know.
> >
> Anne Squires:
> 
> That was Gambon playing Aberforth in OotP.  I hope they continue with
> that choice.  Very inspired, IMO.
>
Anne Squires:

I stand corrected.  I always thought it was Gambon.  I was just
informed that it is Jim McManus who plays Aberforth.

Anne Squires (I apologize for the confusion and I still think Gambon
would be a good choice for Aberforth)




From kempermentor at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 04:31:53 2008
From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:31:53 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <506105.54168.qm@web45505.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g9l3vp+srjp@eGroups.com>

> Red wrote:
> Was anyone else horrible upset that they left out the entire Spew
story of out the movies? I mean i think that was Hermione's best goal,
she was so passionate about it that I think it radiated from the
books; trying to free the house-Elves. I think it changed Hermione
allot in the movies and it left you wanting more. Now if the directors
wanted to do more with Hermione's character they should have left that
in there. 

Kemper now:
I wasn't.
SPEW didn't take into account what the House Elves wished.  It was
human centric.  I realize her heart was in the right space, and it's
admirable to some extent. But her cause was for welfare promotion. 
Giving clothes to elves is freedom promotion which include welfare as
it did (mostly) with Dobby yet was absent for Winky. 

Leaving SPEW out bettered Hermione.  YEAH for movie taint!!!

Kemper 




From kempermentor at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 04:36:12 2008
From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:36:12 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9l1fd+r40f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l47s+no7q@eGroups.com>

> Anne Squires:
> Actually I was very pleased that all references to SPEW have been
> purged from the films.  The entire SPEW plotline really got on my
> nerves.  Also, if they tried to film everything in GoF the film would
> easily be a least five hours long.  They had to pick and choose. 
> Focusing on Harry, the Tri-Wizard Tournament, and the return of
> Voldemort were wise decisions, IMO.

Kemper now:
I agree about the SPEW plotlame.
But less first task in the Tri-W Tourney, and more SWM in the movie
would've been super awesome!

Kemper




From tfaucette6387 at charter.net  Wed Sep  3 04:40:48 2008
From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:40:48 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9l47s+no7q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l4gg+i8p0@eGroups.com>


>
> > Anne Squires:
> > Actually I was very pleased that all references to SPEW have been
> > purged from the films.  The entire SPEW plotline really got on my
> > nerves.  Also, if they tried to film everything in GoF the film would
> > easily be a least five hours long.  They had to pick and choose. 
> > Focusing on Harry, the Tri-Wizard Tournament, and the return of
> > Voldemort were wise decisions, IMO.
> 
> Kemper now:
> I agree about the SPEW plotlame.
> But less first task in the Tri-W Tourney, and more SWM in the movie
> would've been super awesome!
> 
> Kemper
>
Anne Squires now:

I wish we had more of SWM also.  However, I thought that SWM first
came up when Harry went into the pensieve in OotP.  SWM wasn't in GoF,
IIRC.

Anne




From eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 06:14:19 2008
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 06:14:19 -0000
Subject: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.
In-Reply-To: <g9jqba+r48o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9l9vr+eg07@eGroups.com>

I'd love to see Percy turn out to be a evil Death Eater who gets
killed by a member of his own family; we really don't need yet another
good Weasley. JKR had everything set up perfectly for a very
interesting betrayal subplot, but she chickened out, it turns out that
Percy was good (yawn) after all.

I'd also like to see Harry keep the Elder Wand, and in the last scene
in the last movie I'd like to see Harry walking with a limp,
indicating that the last 19 years have not been entirely uneventful.
Remember Harry is a Auror now and that profession can really put
mileage on you, just look at Moody. 

Speaking of that last scene, I wonder if they will hire another actor
to play the part of the older Harry. Some have said Radcliff is too
old for his character, I don't think so myself although in that last
scene the problem is the opposite, he would be way too young. On the
other hand good makeup can do a lot. 

Barbara Key graynavarre at ... 

> I would like to see an injured Draco with Narcissa holding him,
> while Lucius is standing over both, firing hexes at any Death
> Eaters that come near him. Mama Bear and enraged Papa Bear
> protecting their cub is the idea I would go for 

Yes, that could make for a powerful scene, but it wouldn't really be a
movie taint, there are scenes close to it in the book.

"kempermentor" <kempermentor at ...>

> I would love to see moral questioning of his use of Crucio 

I profoundly disagree, I would be outraged if the movie does that! I
was delighted when Harry not only used the Crucio he ENJOYED it. It's
about time we saw a little Dirty Harry in Harry Potter, I just wish
JKR had taken it farther.

Voldemort sneered "So Potter, you come to challenge me but you don't
even have a wand". Harry thought furiously and then an old memory came
to him and he knew what to do.  He walked forward until he was just
inches from Voldemort's face and with an air of quiet confidence said:
"I know more magic than you do Tom Riddle Junior, you're too ignorant
to know it but some curses need no wand, like the most powerful curse
of them all, the Magnum curse. 

Looking even paler than normal Voldemort said, "You're bluffing".

In a low menacing voice Harry growled, 
"Well maybe I am and maybe I'm not, but seeing as how I'm talking
about the Magnum  curse, a curse so powerful it would blow your head
clean off you have to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky
today? Well do you Punk!? Come on, make my day.

 John K Clark

 





From CatMcNulty at comcast.net  Wed Sep  3 15:26:00 2008
From: CatMcNulty at comcast.net (Cat)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:26:00 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9l0ps+pnru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9maa8+nemi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> wrote:
> 
> Hehe, maybe Gambon still *can* play Aberforth, LOL! Some good makeup,
> different clothes - and here we go, he can play both brothers in the
> 7th movie :-)! They are supposed to look very much alike, aren't they
> :-)?. But, seriously, some actor already played Aberforth in OotP.
> OTOH, we only saw *that* Aberforth from a distance, and no one really
> noticed how he looked, so now that they know that Aberforth plays an
> important part, they may consider hiring someone else, I don't know.
>

Brilliant minds do work a like~ LOL! (Believe it or not)In an earlier 
vesion of my post I did suggest that very thing. But, there was a 
power surge and my computer ate the old post. I left out that 
suggestion in the second version of the post. Anyway, 1 actor playing 
dual or multiple roles is a long standing plot "convenience". You are 
quite right, Gambon sans the beard, shorter hair, a little make-up and 
different costume (definitely)... it could absolutely be done!

One thing I've always wondered ... if an actor plays multiple roles, 
do they get a proportionally larger paycheck? 

Cat




From karategal1210 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:00:15 2008
From: karategal1210 at yahoo.com (Danielle Butler)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 09:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.
Message-ID: <834284.65480.qm@web30603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I don't think of JKR as chickening out with Percy being good in the end. His story is a harder one to tell. He is a son who grew up hearing his father was a disgrace to all wizards. He made it his mission to be accepted in society, where his father has learned that it is more important to be accepted by those you love and those who loves you. With the questionable return of Lord Voldemorte, Percy finds the one reason to believe his parents were wrong and others were correct. Instead of having faith and truly knowing his parents, he chooses a path that collides with them. His enlightenment comes in the last hour when realizing the errors of his ways, he returns to fight alongside his family. I think his story is universal to teenagers who learn to doubt their parents and have to experience life to find what their parents told them has merits.
----- Original Message ----
From: eggplant107 <eggplant107 at hotmail.com>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 2:14:19 AM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.


I'd love to see Percy turn out to be a evil Death Eater who gets
killed by a member of his own family; we really don't need yet another
good Weasley. JKR had everything set up perfectly for a very
interesting betrayal subplot, but she chickened out, it turns out that
Percy was good (yawn) after all.

I'd also like to see Harry keep the Elder Wand, and in the last scene
in the last movie I'd like to see Harry walking with a limp,
indicating that the last 19 years have not been entirely uneventful.
Remember Harry is a Auror now and that profession can really put
mileage on you, just look at Moody. 

Speaking of that last scene, I wonder if they will hire another actor
to play the part of the older Harry. Some have said Radcliff is too
old for his character, I don't think so myself although in that last
scene the problem is the opposite, he would be way too young. On the
other hand good makeup can do a lot. 

Barbara Key graynavarre@ ... 

> I would like to see an injured Draco with Narcissa holding him,
> while Lucius is standing over both, firing hexes at any Death
> Eaters that come near him. Mama Bear and enraged Papa Bear
> protecting their cub is the idea I would go for 

Yes, that could make for a powerful scene, but it wouldn't really be a
movie taint, there are scenes close to it in the book.

"kempermentor" <kempermentor@ ...>

> I would love to see moral questioning of his use of Crucio 

I profoundly disagree, I would be outraged if the movie does that! I
was delighted when Harry not only used the Crucio he ENJOYED it. It's
about time we saw a little Dirty Harry in Harry Potter, I just wish
JKR had taken it farther.

Voldemort sneered "So Potter, you come to challenge me but you don't
even have a wand". Harry thought furiously and then an old memory came
to him and he knew what to do.  He walked forward until he was just
inches from Voldemort's face and with an air of quiet confidence said:
"I know more magic than you do Tom Riddle Junior, you're too ignorant
to know it but some curses need no wand, like the most powerful curse
of them all, the Magnum curse. 

Looking even paler than normal Voldemort said, "You're bluffing".

In a low menacing voice Harry growled, 
"Well maybe I am and maybe I'm not, but seeing as how I'm talking
about the Magnum  curse, a curse so powerful it would blow your head
clean off you have to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky
today? Well do you Punk!? Come on, make my day.

John K Clark

 


      

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




From md at exit-reality.com  Wed Sep  3 16:26:31 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 12:26:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.
In-Reply-To: <834284.65480.qm@web30603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <834284.65480.qm@web30603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003401c90de1$d31214b0$79363e10$@com>

I always figured, Percy was a Republican born to a family of Democrats.
After eight years of Bush/Cheeny, he see's John McCain and realizes his
family's been on the right side all along. So he switches sides, votes for
Hillary and then backs Obama begrudgingly.

 

A classic family story.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Danielle Butler
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:00 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.

 

I don't think of JKR as chickening out with Percy being good in the end. His
story is a harder one to tell. He is a son who grew up hearing his father
was a disgrace to all wizards. He made it his mission to be accepted in
society, where his father has learned that it is more important to be
accepted by those you love and those who loves you. With the questionable
return of Lord Voldemorte, Percy finds the one reason to believe his parents
were wrong and others were correct. Instead of having faith and truly
knowing his parents, he chooses a path that collides with them. His
enlightenment comes in the last hour when realizing the errors of his ways,
he returns to fight alongside his family. I think his story is universal to
teenagers who learn to doubt their parents and have to experience life to
find what their parents told them has merits.
----- Original Message ----
From: eggplant107 <eggplant107 at hotmail.com
<mailto:eggplant107%40hotmail.com> >
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <mailto:HPFGU-Movie%40yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 2:14:19 AM 



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




From karategal1210 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 23:24:42 2008
From: karategal1210 at yahoo.com (Danielle Butler)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.
Message-ID: <252882.75846.qm@web30606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I love that take....classic


----- Original Message ----
From: Nightbreed <md at exit-reality.com>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 12:26:31 PM
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.


I always figured, Percy was a Republican born to a family of Democrats.
After eight years of Bush/Cheeny, he see's John McCain and realizes his
family's been on the right side all along. So he switches sides, votes for
Hillary and then backs Obama begrudgingly.

A classic family story.

md

From: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com] On
Behalf Of Danielle Butler
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:00 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.

I don't think of JKR as chickening out with Percy being good in the end. His
story is a harder one to tell. He is a son who grew up hearing his father
was a disgrace to all wizards. He made it his mission to be accepted in
society, where his father has learned that it is more important to be
accepted by those you love and those who loves you. With the questionable
return of Lord Voldemorte, Percy finds the one reason to believe his parents
were wrong and others were correct. Instead of having faith and truly
knowing his parents, he chooses a path that collides with them. His
enlightenment comes in the last hour when realizing the errors of his ways,
he returns to fight alongside his family. I think his story is universal to
teenagers who learn to doubt their parents and have to experience life to
find what their parents told them has merits.
----- Original Message ----
From: eggplant107 <eggplant107@ hotmail.com
<mailto:eggplant107 %40hotmail. com> >
To: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:HPFGU- Movie%40yahoogro ups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 2:14:19 AM 

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

 


      

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




From lexluthorslady at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 23:27:23 2008
From: lexluthorslady at yahoo.com (Lady Luthor)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.
In-Reply-To: <252882.75846.qm@web30606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3556.94237.qm@web45510.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

It doesn't make any sense what so ever to me.

Love,
Red



----- Original Message ----
From: Nightbreed <md at exit-reality.com>
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 12:26:31 PM
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.


I always figured, Percy was a Republican born to a family of Democrats.
After eight years of Bush/Cheeny, he see's John McCain and realizes his
family's been on the right side all along. So he switches sides, votes for
Hillary and then backs Obama begrudgingly.

A classic family story.

md

From: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com] On
Behalf Of Danielle Butler
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 12:00 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Movie taint that I want to see in DH.

I don't think of JKR as chickening out with Percy being good in the end.
His
story is a harder one to tell. He is a son who grew up hearing his father
was a disgrace to all wizards. He made it his mission to be accepted in
society, where his father has learned that it is more important to be
accepted by those you love and those who loves you. With the questionable
return of Lord Voldemorte, Percy finds the one reason to believe his parents
were wrong and others were correct. Instead of having faith and truly
knowing his parents, he chooses a path that collides with them. His
enlightenment comes in the last hour when realizing the errors of his ways,
he returns to fight alongside his family. I think his story is universal to
teenagers who learn to doubt their parents and have to experience life to
find what their parents told them has merits.
----- Original Message ----
From: eggplant107 <eggplant107@ hotmail.com
<mailto:eggplant107 %40hotmail. com> >
To: HPFGU-Movie@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:HPFGU- Movie%40yahoogro
ups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 2:14:19 AM 

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

 


      

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


------------------------------------


Remember 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






      

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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 05:20:52 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 05:20:52 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <506105.54168.qm@web45505.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g9nr7k+fofi@eGroups.com>

Mrs. Lex Luthor (Red) wrote:
>
> Was anyone else horrible upset that they left out the entire Spew
story of out the movies? I mean i think that was Hermione's best goal,
she was so passionate about it that I think it radiated from the
books; trying to free the house-Elves. I think it changed Hermione
allot in the movies and it left you wanting more. Now if the directors
wanted to do more with Hermione's character they should have left that
in there. 

Carol:

True, House-Elf rights are Book!Hermione's passion, but I hated the
aptly acronymed SPEW from the moment I first read about it. Hermione
was trying to force freedom on creatures who didn't want it. Freedom
to a House-Elf and freedom to a human being are two different things,
or, at least, they're perceived differently. (I don't want to say any
more; We discussed House-elves on the main list so exhaustively that
most of us have had enough of the topic!) Anyway, far from being
horribly or even mildly upset when SPEW was left out of the movies, I
was happy. Plotwise, it didn't lead anywhere. If Hermione speaks up in
defense of Kreacher and Elf rights/Elf abuse in HBP, that will be
sufficient (with a brief reiteration in DH at 12 GP) to pave the way
for Ron's remark and THE KISS in DH. Or so I hope.

Carol, who thinks that Hermione's character traits have been
sufficiently established by the films, much more so than Ron's  





From kempermentor at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 06:25:50 2008
From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 06:25:50 -0000
Subject: Snape cut too
In-Reply-To: <g9nttr+cb6o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9nv1e+rhvs@eGroups.com>

> Kemper:
> I actually don't like that line.  It's funny for sure, but I don't
> think JKR totally fleshed out Snape's character during that writing. 

> Anne Squires:
> I don't agree.  IMO, Snape abuses his students.  He is abusive towards
> Harry.  ...snip...
> Here are a few Hermione examples:
> 
> IIRC, he calls Hermione, "an insufferable know-it-all" in PoA.  In PS,
> he told her, "Put down your hand, you silly girl."  In GoF I think, I
> could be remembering wrong, he made inappropriate insinuations about
> Hermione's and Harry's love life when they were reading the Skeeter
> article in his class. 
> 
> However, none of this compares to the way he treats Neville throughout
> the series.  He is constantly demeaning to Neville.  

Kemper now:
But the character of Snape is abusive in books 1-4.  It changes in 5.
 It's as though JKR realized what she wanted Snape to be.  I think had
she known postGOFSnape in the earlier writings of the earlier books,
he would be shown as less abusive though not less snarky and biting.

As for Neville, even McG is mean to Neville in a similar way that
Snape is.  Refusing a 13 year old boy access the password that would
grant him the safety of his common room when there was a suspected
killer on the grounds is a bit effed up.

Kemper




From md at exit-reality.com  Thu Sep  4 11:43:03 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 07:43:03 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9nr7k+fofi@eGroups.com>
References: <506105.54168.qm@web45505.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <g9nr7k+fofi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01e101c90e83$63f958c0$2bec0a40$@com>

I think it was nuts for Rowling to make Hermione the Rosetta stone of
Wizarding World information (and Rowling has stated numerous times that
information comes readily from Dumbledore and Hermione because the reader
will believe what they say) and not until her second year at Hogwarts even
know House Elves exist. OTOH that's part of what outrages the 12 year old
Hermione of COS, she thinks House Elves are a dark, wizard secret and coming
from Muggles she thinks they are slaves. Of course, in the U.S. wealthy
people treat migrant workers from Mexico with much the same lack of
humanity. 

 

I know that Rowling wanted to make social statements with her books, and
death eater's Nazi-like mantra and the mistreatment of house elves (remember
wizards also don't allow non-humans to have wands) makes their society as
flawed as all the others. The wizard world is magic, not perfect. However,
SPEW ran out of steam, and jokes, and it was obvious Rowling started
something she couldn't finish. 

 

At first I was miffed that SPEW was not in GOF, but, now that I read all the
books and see that it never pans out as a subplot I am perfectly happy it's
not there. There are so many better threads the film makers could have
picked up.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Carol
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:21 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish
Welfare)

 

Mrs. Lex Luthor (Red) wrote:
>
> Was anyone else horrible upset that they left out the entire Spew
story of out the movies? I mean i think that was Hermione's best goal,
she was so passionate about it that I think it radiated from the
books; trying to free the house-Elves. I think it changed Hermione
allot in the movies and it left you wanting more. Now if the directors
wanted to do more with Hermione's character they should have left that
in there. 

Carol:

True, House-Elf rights are Book!Hermione's passion, but I hated the
aptly acronymed SPEW from the moment I first read about it. Hermione
was trying to force freedom on creatures who didn't want it. Freedom
to a House-Elf and freedom to a human being are two different things,
or, at least, they're perceived differently. (I don't want to say any
more; We discussed House-elves on the main list so exhaustively that
most of us have had enough of the topic!) Anyway, far from being
horribly or even mildly upset when SPEW was left out of the movies, I
was happy. Plotwise, it didn't lead anywhere. If Hermione speaks up in
defense of Kreacher and Elf rights/Elf abuse in HBP, that will be
sufficient (with a brief reiteration in DH at 12 GP) to pave the way
for Ron's remark and THE KISS in DH. Or so I hope.

Carol, who thinks that Hermione's character traits have been
sufficiently established by the films, much more so than Ron's 

 



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




From tfaucette6387 at charter.net  Thu Sep  4 12:18:32 2008
From: tfaucette6387 at charter.net (anne_t_squires)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:18:32 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <01e101c90e83$63f958c0$2bec0a40$@com>
Message-ID: <g9ojmo+qat2@eGroups.com>

 "Nightbreed"  wrote:
>
> I think it was nuts for Rowling to make Hermione the Rosetta stone of
> Wizarding World information (and Rowling has stated numerous times that
> information comes readily from Dumbledore and Hermione because the
reader
> will believe what they say) and not until her second year at
Hogwarts even
> know House Elves exist. OTOH that's part of what outrages the 12
year old
> Hermione of COS, she thinks House Elves are a dark, wizard secret
and coming
> from Muggles she thinks they are slaves. Of course, in the U.S. wealthy
> people treat migrant workers from Mexico with much the same lack of
> humanity. 
> 
>  
> 
> I know that Rowling wanted to make social statements with her books, and
> death eater's Nazi-like mantra and the mistreatment of house elves
(remember
> wizards also don't allow non-humans to have wands) makes their
society as
> flawed as all the others. The wizard world is magic, not perfect.
However,
> SPEW ran out of steam, and jokes, and it was obvious Rowling started
> something she couldn't finish. 
> 
>  
> 
> At first I was miffed that SPEW was not in GOF, but, now that I read
all the
> books and see that it never pans out as a subplot I am perfectly
happy it's
> not there. There are so many better threads the film makers could have
> picked up.

Anne Squires:

Actually I think JKR always meant for SPEW to be a major joke to the
reader and the Wizarding World.  I think she had plotted out the
entire story arc from beginning to end.  The purpose of the SPEW
plotline was to show character growth in Hermione.  She finally comes
around to realizing that she is not, nor has she ever been correct in
her pov.  It is important to her character that she learn this. This
epiphany on Hermione's part was instrumental in allowing for Kreacher
to come around to being a true ally for the trio.

Having said all of that, I still could not stand the SPEW plotline. 
It really annoyed me.

Also, many of Ron's lines are put in Hermione's mouth in the films.
Hermione is not a Rosetta stone in the books. In the novels it is Ron,
not Hermione, who provides a lot of information about the Wizarding
World.  Ron is a great source of information.  However, Kloves decided
to have DD and Hermione provide exposition, never Ron.  He regulated
Ron to the status of comic-relief, side kick.  Harry, after meeting
Dobby, learns more about house elves from the Weasleys.  I don't think
Hermione even knows about house elves until GoF.  Harry has known
about them since CoS.  Also, it is Ron, not Hermione who explains
"mudblood" to Harry.  In the book Hermione plainly states that she
didn't know what the Slytherins were talking about.  Although she
could tell it was something, "rude."
> 
>  
Nightbreed:
Of course, in the U.S. wealthy
> people treat migrant workers from Mexico with much the same lack of
> humanity.

Anne:

Do you mean the way illegal immigrants are treated?  Immigrants who
come from many countries not just Mexico.  The same ones who have
children over here so that their children can collect welfare.  The
same ones I stand behind in the grocery store line who are using food
stamps that are paid for by my hard earned tax dollars. The same ones
who send their children to our schools and put a burden on our
education system while not paying anything.  The same ones who are
clogging up the emergency rooms and collecting free medical care
which, I reiterate, I pay for in higher insurance rates.  The same who
are also clogging up the criminal justice system because they have
certain rights to habeus corpus and court appointed lawyers and
translators. Then when they do get sent to jail  my tax dollars pay to
house them.  The same ones who are here illegally. If they are here
illegally then they are criminals.  That's what illegal means.  Not
legal equals criminal.  Also, if they don't like the way they are
treated, they can go back to where they came from.  These people do
not compare to house elves.
End of rant.

Anne Squires
> 




From md at exit-reality.com  Thu Sep  4 13:09:29 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:09:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9ojmo+qat2@eGroups.com>
References: <01e101c90e83$63f958c0$2bec0a40$@com> <g9ojmo+qat2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009601c90e8f$7769bba0$663d32e0$@com>

It was Rowling's comment, not Clove's, that I was referring to in regards to
going to Hermione and Dumbledore for information. Rowling stated, in regards
to the books, that the two voices the reader would never question would be
Hermione and Dumbledore. Since Dumbledore couldn't provide all the
information Harry needed she made Hermione into the bookworm so that any
facts about anything she stated the reader would presume she knew what she
was talking about. Yes, Ron is a source of practical source of information
because of the trio only he grew up in the wizarding world, it's Hermione
who from the beginning provides the basic information for plot elements when
she constantly quotes "Hogwarts: A History" and explains things like what
the Philosopher's Stone is. 

 

The point isn't that no one but Hermione or Dumbledore knows anything, it's
that when she needed facts in story that where indisputable or
unquestionable she purposefully went to Hermione and Dumbledore. These
aren't my inferences or ideas or opinions, this is from Rowlings lips.

 

As for you narrow view on "illegal" immigrants, this is hardly the forum for
such rants. As much as I want to, I'll not respond.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of anne_t_squires
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:19 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish
Welfare)

 

"Nightbreed" wrote:
>
> I think it was nuts for Rowling to make Hermione the Rosetta stone of
> Wizarding World information (and Rowling has stated numerous times that
> information comes readily from Dumbledore and Hermione because the
reader
> will believe what they say) and not until her second year at
Hogwarts even
> know House Elves exist. OTOH that's part of what outrages the 12
year old
> Hermione of COS, she thinks House Elves are a dark, wizard secret
and coming
> from Muggles she thinks they are slaves. Of course, in the U.S. wealthy
> people treat migrant workers from Mexico with much the same lack of
> humanity. 
> 
> 
> 
> I know that Rowling wanted to make social statements with her books, and
> death eater's Nazi-like mantra and the mistreatment of house elves
(remember
> wizards also don't allow non-humans to have wands) makes their
society as
> flawed as all the others. The wizard world is magic, not perfect.
However,
> SPEW ran out of steam, and jokes, and it was obvious Rowling started
> something she couldn't finish. 
> 
> 
> 
> At first I was miffed that SPEW was not in GOF, but, now that I read
all the
> books and see that it never pans out as a subplot I am perfectly
happy it's
> not there. There are so many better threads the film makers could have
> picked up.

Anne Squires:

Actually I think JKR always meant for SPEW to be a major joke to the
reader and the Wizarding World. I think she had plotted out the
entire story arc from beginning to end. The purpose of the SPEW
plotline was to show character growth in Hermione. She finally comes
around to realizing that she is not, nor has she ever been correct in
her pov. It is important to her character that she learn this. This
epiphany on Hermione's part was instrumental in allowing for Kreacher
to come around to being a true ally for the trio.

Having said all of that, I still could not stand the SPEW plotline. 
It really annoyed me.

Also, many of Ron's lines are put in Hermione's mouth in the films.
Hermione is not a Rosetta stone in the books. In the novels it is Ron,
not Hermione, who provides a lot of information about the Wizarding
World. Ron is a great source of information. However, Kloves decided
to have DD and Hermione provide exposition, never Ron. He regulated
Ron to the status of comic-relief, side kick. Harry, after meeting
Dobby, learns more about house elves from the Weasleys. I don't think
Hermione even knows about house elves until GoF. Harry has known
about them since CoS. Also, it is Ron, not Hermione who explains
"mudblood" to Harry. In the book Hermione plainly states that she
didn't know what the Slytherins were talking about. Although she
could tell it was something, "rude."
> 
> 
Nightbreed:
Of course, in the U.S. wealthy
> people treat migrant workers from Mexico with much the same lack of
> humanity.

Anne:

Do you mean the way illegal immigrants are treated? Immigrants who
come from many countries not just Mexico. The same ones who have
children over here so that their children can collect welfare. The
same ones I stand behind in the grocery store line who are using food
stamps that are paid for by my hard earned tax dollars. The same ones
who send their children to our schools and put a burden on our
education system while not paying anything. The same ones who are
clogging up the emergency rooms and collecting free medical care
which, I reiterate, I pay for in higher insurance rates. The same who
are also clogging up the criminal justice system because they have
certain rights to habeus corpus and court appointed lawyers and
translators. Then when they do get sent to jail my tax dollars pay to
house them. The same ones who are here illegally. If they are here
illegally then they are criminals. That's what illegal means. Not
legal equals criminal. Also, if they don't like the way they are
treated, they can go back to where they came from. These people do
not compare to house elves.
End of rant.

Anne Squires
> 

 



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




From kempermentor at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 14:08:39 2008
From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:08:39 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9ojmo+qat2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9oq57+8hk5@eGroups.com>

> Anne Squires:
> Having said all of that, I still could not stand the SPEW plotline. 
> It really annoyed me.

Kemper now:
Me too.
I wonder if the House Elves were cut out of the movies not only for
time but for what it would suggest of the 'good' wizards in the WW.

I replied to the migrant worker topic that you and Nightbreed touched
upon over at OTC (Off-Topic Chatter).

It can be found here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/37574

Kemper







From md at exit-reality.com  Thu Sep  4 14:42:20 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 10:42:20 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9oq57+8hk5@eGroups.com>
References: <g9ojmo+qat2@eGroups.com> <g9oq57+8hk5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00d001c90e9c$6f6f9340$4e4eb9c0$@com>

I can't access that list. It tells me to enter my e-mail, then tells me the
link is invalid and to use the one on the next page, then it takes me to a
log on page, then it takes me to my profile, then it returns me to the log
on page. It's a vicious circle.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of kempermentor
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:09 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish
Welfare)

 

> Anne Squires:
> Having said all of that, I still could not stand the SPEW plotline. 
> It really annoyed me.

Kemper now:
Me too.
I wonder if the House Elves were cut out of the movies not only for
time but for what it would suggest of the 'good' wizards in the WW.

I replied to the migrant worker topic that you and Nightbreed touched
upon over at OTC (Off-Topic Chatter).

It can be found here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/37574

Kemper

 



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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:15:10 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:15:10 -0000
Subject: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <00d001c90e9c$6f6f9340$4e4eb9c0$@com>
Message-ID: <g9p8je+p6u3@eGroups.com>

---  "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> I can't access that list. It tells me to enter my e-mail, 
> then tells me the link is invalid and to use the one on the
> next page, then it takes me to a log on page, then it takes 
> me to my profile, then it returns me to the log on page. 
> It's a vicious circle.
> 
>  
> 
> md
> 

bboyminn:

I agree the on-line web interface log in is confusing. It
seems to be asking for your Email address but it is not,
it is asking for your Yahoo username and password.

The log in says to seeming opposite things -

Yahoo! ID:
[______________]
(e.g. free2rhyme at yahoo.com)

Password:
[______________]

While it uses a full email address as an example, it really
only wants /free2rhyme/ and the password.

Try it again, only this time just enter your Yahoo ID name,
which appears to be 'marcdaneker' then the appropriate
password. 

If you are not a member of the Off-Topic group, just join and
you should have access right way. There may or may not be a 
delay in your post appearing on the forum. I'm not sure if 
there is a probation period in that forum or not. 

Steve/bluewizard




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:45:44 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:45:44 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Let's play nice and stay on topic, please
Message-ID: <g9paco+lgl0@eGroups.com>

Greetings from the Hexquarters!

Please keep the discussion on the subject of the movies and related
indicia and do not stray into areas that are best discussed
elsewhere.  This means that discussions of politics are allowed at 
HPfGU-Movies only as
they relate to the HP movies.  Please feel free to
discuss politics on the OTC list, while being careful to be polite to
your fellow list members and to use opinion language where
appropriate.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter

Thank you,

The List Elves





From md at exit-reality.com  Thu Sep  4 18:46:38 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 14:46:38 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare)
In-Reply-To: <g9p8je+p6u3@eGroups.com>
References: <00d001c90e9c$6f6f9340$4e4eb9c0$@com> <g9p8je+p6u3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009601c90ebe$904efac0$b0ecf040$@com>

Kemper was nice enough to send me an invite link.

 

Thanks!

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:15 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: SPEW (Society for the Promotion of Elfish
Welfare)

 

--- "Nightbreed" <md at ...> wrote:
>
> I can't access that list. It tells me to enter my e-mail, 
> then tells me the link is invalid and to use the one on the
> next page, then it takes me to a log on page, then it takes 
> me to my profile, then it returns me to the log on page. 
> It's a vicious circle.
> 
> 
> 
> md
> 

bboyminn:

I agree the on-line web interface log in is confusing. It
seems to be asking for your Email address but it is not,
it is asking for your Yahoo username and password.

The log in says to seeming opposite things -

Yahoo! ID:
[______________]
(e.g. free2rhyme at yahoo.com <mailto:free2rhyme%40yahoo.com> )

Password:
[______________]

While it uses a full email address as an example, it really
only wants /free2rhyme/ and the password.

Try it again, only this time just enter your Yahoo ID name,
which appears to be 'marcdaneker' then the appropriate
password. 

If you are not a member of the Off-Topic group, just join and
you should have access right way. There may or may not be a 
delay in your post appearing on the forum. I'm not sure if 
there is a probation period in that forum or not. 

Steve/bluewizard

 



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




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 00:33:35 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:33:35 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9maa8+nemi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9puov+tt4c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Cat" <CatMcNulty at ...> wrote:
 
> You are quite right, Gambon sans the beard, shorter hair, a little 
> make-up and different costume (definitely)... it could absolutely 
> be done!


zanooda:

Hehe, I meant it more as a joke :-), but I agree that Gambon could 
make a good Aberforth. But why "sans the beard"? Aberforth *does* 
have a beard! His hair and beard just have to be shorter than 
Albus's, all untidy and tangled, you know :-)


> Cat wrote:

> One thing I've always wondered ... if an actor plays multiple 
> roles, do they get a proportionally larger paycheck?


zanooda:

I'm not an expert, but that would be my guess :-). 
 





From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 19:48:26 2008
From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gail harrison)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 12:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: ADMIN: Let's play nice & stay on topic, please*
Message-ID: <191571.1193.qm@web53708.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

?? HI !

THANK YOU ! !

Gail?
Hufflepuff


--- On Thu, 9/4/08, dumbledore11214 <dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com> wrote:
From: dumbledore11214 <dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] ADMIN: Let's play nice and stay on topic, please
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 2:45 PM


            Greetings from the Hexquarters!

Please keep the discussion on the subject of the movies
and related indicia and do not stray into areas that are
best discussed elsewhere.  This means that discussions
of politics are allowed at HPfGU-Movies only as they
relate to the HP movies.  Please feel free to discuss
politics on the OTC list, while being careful to be
polite to your fellow list members and to use opinion
language where appropriate.

http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/HPFGU- OTChatter

Thank you,

The List Elves



From CatMcNulty at comcast.net  Fri Sep  5 01:48:19 2008
From: CatMcNulty at comcast.net (Cat)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:48:19 -0000
Subject: Albus vs Aberforth
In-Reply-To: <g9puov+tt4c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9q353+e2rf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> wrote:
> zanooda:
> 
> Hehe, I meant it more as a joke :-), but I agree that Gambon could 
> make a good Aberforth. But why "sans the beard"? Aberforth *does* 
> have a beard! His hair and beard just have to be shorter than 
> Albus's, all untidy and tangled, you know :-)
> 
> > Cat wrote:
> 
> > One thing I've always wondered ... if an actor plays multiple 
> > roles, do they get a proportionally larger paycheck?
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> I'm not an expert, but that would be my guess :-).


Okay. Leave the beard. :-) It just needs to be a little less 
flamboyant than Albus'. Hee Hee

Cat






From spi00000000 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 04:49:21 2008
From: spi00000000 at yahoo.com (spi00000000)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 04:49:21 -0000
Subject: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <g9h1ln+6k4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9qdoh+94ab@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mellypf" <mellyf at ...> wrote:
>
> *Lurker de-lurking briefly.*
> 
> I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.  I think 
> David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't Lupin for me.
> 
I have always pictured Colin Firth as Lupin. He is like the perfect 
stuffy british guy. I could really picture him as a former prefect- and 
wanting to follow the rules all the time.

spi- de-lurking




From lexluthorslady at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 23:14:15 2008
From: lexluthorslady at yahoo.com (Lady Luthor)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 16:14:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
In-Reply-To: <g9qdoh+94ab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <729875.38797.qm@web45515.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I never would have thought of of Colin Firth as Lupin..You have a good idea there...

Love,
Red

--- On Fri, 9/5/08, spi00000000 <spi00000000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
From: spi00000000 <spi00000000 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Your favorite actor/actress in HP movies
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 4:49 AM

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "mellypf" <mellyf at ...>
wrote:
>
> *Lurker de-lurking briefly.*
> 
> I always thought Ewen McGregor would make a great Lupin.  I think 
> David Thewlis does a nice job, but he just isn't Lupin for me.
> 
I have always pictured Colin Firth as Lupin. He is like the perfect 
stuffy british guy. I could really picture him as a former prefect- and 
wanting to follow the rules all the time.

spi- de-lurking


------------------------------------


Remember 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






      

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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 15:54:38 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 15:54:38 -0000
Subject: Young Snape in HBP
Message-ID: <g9u93u+flit@eGroups.com>

According to a new video interview with Alec Hopkins, who played him
in the OoP film, Young Snape is back in HBP for, apparently, two
moving shots of a few seconds each. He jokes with the interviewer
about making a new film with Alan Rickman called "Snapes on a Plane."
The interview can be found at SnitchSeeler.com:

http://www.snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/alec-hopkins-reprises-young-snape-role-half-blood-prince-58801/

(or try http://tinyurl.com/6yt57e )

BTW, the "Snapes on a Plane" idea isn't new. You Tube has a cute
little spoof called "Snape's on a Plane" (with the contraction
"Snape's" rather than the plural "Snapes" because there's only one
Snape in various guises, mostly Alan Rickman but also some fan art).
Check it out; it's worth a chuckle or two:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDddgbGz3_4&feature=related

Carol, who suspects that Young Severus appears in the same uncanonical
scene or scenes as Young Lucius and Young Regulus (and I'm afraid it's
the Slughorn memory, which would make them as old as Tom Riddle!)




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 18:37:24 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 18:37:24 -0000
Subject: Young Snape in HBP
In-Reply-To: <g9u93u+flit@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9uil4+stnv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> Carol, who suspects that Young Severus appears in the same uncanonical
> scene or scenes as Young Lucius and Young Regulus (and I'm afraid it's
> the Slughorn memory, which would make them as old as Tom Riddle!)


zanooda:

Well, one of the scenes is from the "moving picture" - I suppose it's a 
picture in Slughorn's office, where some of Sluggy's old students (Slug 
club members?) are shown. Severus, Lucius and Regulus could all be in 
such picture. As for another, "non-picture" scene, I really can't 
imagine what this can be, but I'm sure it's *not* Sluggy's memory :-)! 
Even those movie-makers can't be *so* ignorant about the books!  






From juli17 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 06:31:24 2008
From: juli17 at aol.com (julie)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2008 06:31:24 -0000
Subject: Young Snape in HBP--correction
In-Reply-To: <ca3.3d80bada.35f47c52@aol.com>
Message-ID: <g9vsfs+f0ks@eGroups.com>

quoted from my previous post:

<snip> it turns out to be a portrait of teenage Snape that was  
> shoved
> in a closet for many years. The Snape side of the family had 
commissioned  and
> then shortly discarded it <snip>

Of course I meant the "Prince" side of the family! 

Julie




From md at exit-reality.com  Sun Sep  7 23:27:29 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 19:27:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Venting Frustration
In-Reply-To: <38988.9403.qm@web57105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <1220811398.710.55543.m43@yahoogroups.com> <38988.9403.qm@web57105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00bb01c91141$4ba0ddf0$e2e299d0$@com>

>From what I read, which was a lot, they completely re-wrote the story from
scratch keeping only the main points and totally scrapping everything from
the book.

 

I loved OOTP, I think OOTP & POA are the very two best made of the films and
for all they left out I was shocked at how much made it into the 2:25
running time of OOTP.

 

If the person at the Leaky Cauldron is telling the truth they outlined the
main events of HPB, then started writing from scratch. 

 

Why, they don't think anything can be cut from DH but everything can be cut
from HBP?

 

OTOH, maybe with the extra year to work on it and if the audience told them
off in their report cards, they'll fix some of it. That would be worth the
year wait.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of can can
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 6:55 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Venting Frustration

 

Sorry, but I have to vent to people that just may understand.  Apparently
they had a showing of HBP here in Chicago, where I live, last night(?)
according to mugglenet.  I haven't been in a big hurry to see this movie
because I'm not fond of what Yates did to Order, but for goodness SAKES, it
was in my own CITY!  I could just SCREAM!  I would have been there
regardless!  Twice now, since I've been a fan, this has happened to me.
Order was screened here as well.  This is just torture!
Okay, sorry for the venting, I just had to let that out.

peace...real love...

Candace

"It is not our abilities that make us who we are. It is our choices." Albus
Dumbledore (JKR)

"Life's too short to be kissing someone elses behind, especially since mine
is so big." Whoopi Goldberg

"Be at one with your love, as below, so above..." Melanie C

"..just ignant, attackin', actin' rough...maybe then, will I be Black
enough?" Will Smith

"To live and not to breathe, is to die in tragedy." Green Day

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

 



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




From eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 06:45:05 2008
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:45:05 -0000
Subject: Venting Frustration.
In-Reply-To: <38988.9403.qm@web57105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ga2hlh+pc19@eGroups.com>

Take a look at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXnt8_okeRA

Eggplant








From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 20:41:40 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:41:40 -0000
Subject: Venting Frustration.
In-Reply-To: <ga2hlh+pc19@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ga42m4+2g9e@eGroups.com>

--- \ "eggplant107" <eggplant107 at ...> wrote:
>
> Take a look at
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXnt8_okeRA
> 
> Eggplant
>

That was SOOOO funny, I can't count the number of times I
burst out laughing.

Steve/bboyminn





From lothtm01 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 21:11:51 2008
From: lothtm01 at hotmail.com (Tiffany Lothamer)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 17:11:51 -0400
Subject: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test screening experience
 and review by Eric Scull   ~~~~SPOILER WARNING!~~~~
Message-ID: <BAY105-W1675CC7D2602DCF930855AC8550@phx.gbl>




Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
A test screening experience and review by Eric Scull




~~~~SPOILER WARNING!~~~~  The review below includes mild spoilers for the film adaptation of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Read at your own discretion, but consider yourself forewarned.  

First, let me explain that what we saw was a pre-release test screening of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
? the first one, apparently, which is always held in Chicago stemming
back to the days of the first two films. There were, if I had to guess,
I?d say 300 people who made it, and none of the people I talked to knew
what we were going to see beforehand. All we had been told was that the
movie was expected to be rated PG-13, no video or audio recording
devices were in any way allowed (they confiscated our phones) and the
purpose of the screening was to obtain feedback from the diverse
audience prior to the film?s actual release. Rather standard, I?m sure.

While sitting in the theatre all we could do was speculate what the
movie would be. We were completely unsure, until something happened
that made me look twice. David Heyman entered the auditorium and
started talking to an associate. Although I hadn?t met him in person
before, I?d seen him in enough interviews that, once I saw him, my
furthest hopes came to mind. Sure enough, the lights dimmed, and it was
announced that we were going to be seeing a rough cut version, not
fully completed but generally in tact, of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

Onward to the movie.

We knew they had filmed a bridge collapse scene which in the book
was mentioned during the first chapter, ?The Other Minister.? This
makes for a great opening sequence and, although we don?t meet the
Muggle Prime Minister, we get to see the disaster happen from the
Muggle perspective. Actually it?s from both Muggle and a wizarding
perspective that we see what happens ? a really cool trick which you
can do with film. It?s pulled off quite nicely. Already I like the
style and care that is put in to characterizing people in this world
who we don?t even meet.

The Dursleys are not in this film, but that information was also
already available. Instead, we find Harry waiting for Dumbledore, and I
won?t say where except to say that they?ve constructed a scene which I
think works well. The movie has already given a couple of seconds to
reflect quickly on the horrors of Harry?s previous year, and we are
ready as moviegoers to watch Harry pick up the journey and go further
from there.

Harry and Dumbledore Side-Along Apparate (the special effect, which
appeared to be completed, was perfect in matching the canon description
of the act) to the village where Slughorn is staying, and one of my
largest concerns for the movie was getting to see Jim Broadbent as
Horace Slughorn. Don?t worry. Throughout the movie, I was continuously
impressed with how they adapted the character to the film, and to say
that he does reflect my Slughorn from the books satisfactorily, with a
little extra, is true. The scene where they meet Slughorn is
surprisingly close to the events of the book, as is most of this movie,
actually. I was surprised and delighted to see Couch-Slughorn put to
film.

The events of ?Spinner?s End? take place also in the beginning of
the film. We?ve received a promo picture of Alan Rickman?s Snape and
Helen McCrory?s Narcissa doing the Unbreakable Vow, and that?s why -
it?s in the movie. Alan Rickman looks good. They?ve tailored his Snape
suit and he?s got nicer hair, the full main villain treatment I
suspect. The scene is compellingly acted and doesn?t feel out of place
with the many events of the start of the film.

And thus, the movie continues. With the initial story-setting behind
them, although it didn?t feel rushed at all, we are taken to the
Burrow. Here is where I?ll speed up the review.

A lot of the things people seemed to dislike about the fifth HP
film, such as vast amounts of time passing in visually appealing yet
otherwise disappointing montages, does not happen in this. The film
maintains its director?s neat visuals, however. Right from the initial
Burrow scene, it is clear that Mr. Yates has not lost his creative edge
and rather moved on to do different and wonderful things with the
camera.

The entire movie seems to keep its pace, and I think one of the
things that has helped the filmmakers is a clear-cut set of events
spread almost evenly throughout the year in the book. There?s not too
much stuff going on, rather just enough things at significant enough
times of year so that they can document the full year without it
feeling rushed. Again I mention the closeness of the movie to the book
particularly. Some scenes are almost verbatim, but the ones that aren?t
serve to really enhance the movie?s impact and its ability to stand
alone as a film.

All of my concerns about Bonnie Wright as Ginny were washed away in
her first scene. Book Six has either too much snogging or too much
Voldemort ? neither of which I complained about and both which I rather
enjoyed ? but this movie completely balances the two quite nicely. It
seems effortless almost. But there are really dark scenes and then
there are very fun scenes. If you know the characters from having read
the books, I think you?ll get more out of the movie than those who
haven?t and that?s surprising to me. For the first time, it seems, the
filmmakers have made a movie which is REALLY true to the characters of
the book and almost not afraid to leave newcomers with the shorter
stick.

Also important to mention is that this movie is in NO way, at all,
in any shape or form, a children?s movie. I?ve said that before
regarding the Potters, but this time it couldn?t be truer.
Everything about this movie screams serious intensity, like the Katie
Bell necklace scene, and it makes me so happy that they could make such
an intense movie, because it gives me real hope for the adaptations of
the seventh book. But I think you should think twice before bringing
your kid brother to see it. 

Such effort is spent on the characters of the trio throughout the
course of the movie. In fact, Emma Watson?s never been better. There?s
a moment in this movie where I almost screamed ?THAT?s my book
Hermione!? which hadn?t happened to me since the first movie. Similarly
Rupert has had some REAL fun scenes to play with in this film. The
Lavender subplot is hilarious and, surprisingly, not annoying at all.
And oh, what a joy it is to see Quidditch back!

The movie focuses on the trio perhaps more than ever, but the
surrounding characters are well portrayed. Matthew Lewis as Neville
again has a small amount of screen time, but we all know how awesome
his role is going to be in the next movie. Even in scenes where the
characters we all know by now aren?t featured or speaking, their
characters show through. That?s no doubt due to improved acting all
around, and a seriously commendable tolerance for their bit parts. They
do the characters well. Evanna Lynch?s Luna gets perhaps equal screen
time as she did in the last movie, and many things from her character
in the books are brought to screen and fun to see.

Also commendable is the new casting. Cormac McClaggen?s character
and Lavender Brown?s really help to push the school side of the plot
throughout the film. The movie almost relies on their convincing roles
at times because it?s easier to forget that we?re in school with how
dark and mysterious everything else is that?s going on.

There are many scenes with Draco. I?m surprised I haven?t mentioned
him yet. From early on, Tom Felton has a lot to work with in this movie
and it?s very pleasant to see him get to play his character for a good
amount of time. The movie is sympathetic ? the story focuses on his
plight as a subplot, and we?ll often see him lurking around the castle
in the backgrounds of other scenes. We?re being ?reminded? that he?s
got his mission, without being told everything.

Michael Gambon, in this movie, has finally satisfied me. He has the
right inflection of the lines which is necessary for Dumbledore, and
altogether seems to be really with it. The climax of the film is very
wonderfully done, and throughout the film you are able to embrace his
Dumbledore quite nicely.

 Another great thing about this film is the reappearance of the little things. Tom Riddle?s diary, from Chamber of Secrets,
and The Marauder?s Map, for instance. It?s the little things that add
continuity from previous films which I?m a stickler for. Also, the
twins! While I realize they?re not props, by far my FAVORITE scene in
the movie is the one that takes place at Weasley?s Whizarding Wheezes!
It?s so good to see them after the initial subdued opening of the film
and their scene, while about five minutes long, is the best. The
filmmakers simply couldn?t leave it out ? and it does well to show that
some people in the wizarding world are able to break through all the
fear going on out there. Diagon Alley is otherwise almost completely
empty ? Ollivander?s shop is empty. Can you believe they mention it?
They do. They even have time to walk inside and feel sad.

Next to mention are the Pensieve scenes. It?s been confirmed that
there are a lot fewer in the movie than there are in the book. I didn?t
have a problem with scenes cut from Movie Five, and I have even less of
a problem with them not being included in Six. What the filmmakers have
done is meticulously crafted a movie to portray the events that happen
in the book and to tell a really compelling story which includes all
the most adaptable parts they could to fit the time frame. Would I have
liked to have seen The Gaunts? Maybe. But that?s easily a ten to
fifteen minute scene which has little to do with the actual path ahead
of Harry. There are some things which I?m proud that I can just read
them in the book and they?ll always be there, so well done, without a
film adaptation. 

There are only two Pensieve scenes included. The scene from the
teaser trailer, Young Tom Riddle in the orphanage, and the scene in
Slughorn?s classroom both shortened and elongated just like in the book
where we learn about Horcruxes. These three journeys into the Pensieve
are so well-placed in the film and the film doesn?t feel short of them.
Nor is there too much snogging. Overall, once more, a great balance
between.

The cave scene at the end of the book could have been messed up so
badly in the film, but it?s not. It?s amazing. It?s exactly what I
imagined and conveys amazing emotional impact. The special features are
great. Watching Harry force-feed Dumbledore is just as raw and
scary as it was in the book. Dan Radcliffe?s acting all throughout is
top-notch.

I forgot to mention the Half-Blood Prince subplot. With so many
subplots, it?s a wonder how they all fit into the movie so well, but
they do! They weren?t cut! And Slug Club scenes, oh yes, there are a
few. And Quidditch, as mentioned. So much is back I am overwhelmed with
how much of each that I didn?t think we?d see.

Finally, the climax. It, too, is adapted very well. There is such
emotion behind it and, when the score is completed, I?m sure it will be
one of the defining moments of the series. I liked watching it much,
much better than Sirius? death scene. There was a funny moment for me
at the Burrow with Lupin and Tonks and Mr. Weasley in the room when I
thought, ?Hey wait a minute, where?s Gary Oldman?? Dumbledore?s death
will stick.

The movie score, although we did hear an un-finalized version, was
great. They have used some recurring themes, including several from the
Prisoner of Azkaban film! I was very in awe to hear the tune to
?Something Wicked This Way Comes? set to book six events - so ominous
and truly perfect. I have full faith that, when completed, it will be
wonderful.

After the movie I introduced myself to David Heyman. Not only was he
there, but so was Alan Horn, president of Warner Bros. And David Yates,
the director, David Barron the co-producer, and Mark Day the film
editor! They all sat for a twenty minute ?focus group? afterwards which
I did not attend, and when they came out I spoke with them at length
about the film and how I felt it was a big success.

I wrote this review so that I could express to everyone how worth
the wait this movie is going to be. I know it?s been delayed and I know
that stinks. But they?re going to use the time they now have, screen it
some more, and a better movie will be made as a result of it, I am
completely convinced. I can?t wait to see proper movie trailers, a
movie poster, and all of that because my worries are completely gone. I
am sure that the movie I saw is not the final film and once the CGI is
completed and feedback considered, there will be plenty more to make it
a completely different experience.

Seeing it is still a bit of a blur, but hopefully this helps the
wait, and to assure you that the people who are making the movie have
the fans? concerns at heart. We all took surveys which begged us to be
as specific as possible about what we did and didn?t like, who our
favourite characters were, questions about the pace of the film and all
of that. This movie is going to be the best one yet. They have the time
and the will-power to make it so.




9/7/08
Posted by: Eric
 ~~Tiffany Marie
  (?`v??)   `?.?.??  ?.???.???) ?.?*?)(?.??    (?.??   (??.???`?.)




 EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD
Join me

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




From md at exit-reality.com  Mon Sep  8 22:26:30 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Nightbreed)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 18:26:30 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test screening experience and review by Eric Scull   ~~~~SPOILER WARNING!~~~~
In-Reply-To: <BAY105-W1675CC7D2602DCF930855AC8550@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY105-W1675CC7D2602DCF930855AC8550@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <00db01c91201$f15ad960$d4108c20$@com>

I read another review of a pre-screening I have to say, I think the one I
read is full of BS! This sounds so much better. The one I read at the Leaky
Cauldron basically implied they re-wrote the entire book and you won't
recognize anything. I hope this person really saw it and the other person is
just trying to get 15 little minutes

md

-----Original Message-----
From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Tiffany Lothamer
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 5:12 PM
To: hpfgu-movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test
screening experience and review by Eric Scull ~~~~SPOILER WARNING!~~~~




Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
A test screening experience and review by Eric Scull





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 00:52:59 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:52:59 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test screening experience and revie
In-Reply-To: <BAY105-W1675CC7D2602DCF930855AC8550@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <ga4hdb+ivoc@eGroups.com>

Tiffany posted the following review:
> 
> Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
> A test screening experience and review by Eric Scull
<snip>
> First, let me explain that what we saw was a pre-release test
screening of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince <snip>

> We knew they had filmed a bridge collapse scene which in the book
> was mentioned during the first chapter, "The Other Minister." <snip>
Harry and Dumbledore Side-Along Apparate (the special effect, which
appeared to be completed, was perfect in matching the canon
description of the act) to the village where Slughorn is staying
<snip> I was surprised and delighted to see Couch-Slughorn put to film.
> 
> The events of "Spinner's End" take place also in the beginning of
the film. We've received a promo picture of Alan Rickman's Snape and
Helen McCrory's Narcissa doing the Unbreakable Vow, and that's why -
it's in the movie. Alan Rickman looks good. They've tailored his Snape
suit and he's got nicer hair, the full main villain treatment I
suspect. The scene is compellingly acted and doesn't feel out of place
with the many events of the start of the film. <snip>
 
> Also important to mention is that this movie is in NO way, at all,
in any shape or form, a children's movie. I've said that before
regarding the Potters, but this time it couldn't be truer. Everything
about this movie screams serious intensity, like the Katie Bell
necklace scene, <snip> But I think you should think twice before
bringing your kid brother to see it. <snip>

> There are many scenes with Draco. I'm surprised I haven't mentioned
him yet. From early on, Tom Felton has a lot to work with in this
movie and it's very pleasant to see him get to play his character for
a good amount of time. The movie is sympathetic ? the story focuses on
his plight as a subplot, and we'll often see him lurking around the
castle in the backgrounds of other scenes. We're being "reminded" that
he's got his mission, without being told everything.
> 
> Michael Gambon, in this movie, has finally satisfied me. He has the
right inflection of the lines which is necessary for Dumbledore, and
altogether seems to be really with it. The climax of the film is very
wonderfully done, and throughout the film you are able to embrace his
Dumbledore quite nicely. <snip>

> The cave scene at the end of the book could have been messed up so
badly in the film, but it's not. It's amazing. It's exactly what I
imagined and conveys amazing emotional impact. The special features
are great. Watching Harry force-feed Dumbledore is just as raw and
scary as it was in the book. Dan Radcliffe's acting all throughout is
top-notch.
> 
> I forgot to mention the Half-Blood Prince subplot. With so many
subplots, it's a wonder how they all fit into the movie so well, but
they do! They weren't cut! <snip>

> Finally, the climax. It, too, is adapted very well. There is such
emotion behind it and, when the score is completed, I'm sure it will
be one of the defining moments of the series. I liked watching it
much, much better than Sirius' death scene. <snip>

Carol responds:

I snipped most of this excellent review (much more professionally
written than the one posted at Leaky) to emphasize the parts that are
important to me. Slughorn tranfigures himself into an armchair! (Well,
couch, per the reviewer, but that will do.) They kept side-along
apparition. The kept the Unbreakable Vow (as we knew from the photo)
and Snape is given "the full main villain treatment"--not sure what
that means, except that he should have a lot of scenes (and,
apparently, he looks great). A lot of viewers who haven't read the
books are going to think he's a "murderin' traitor"! Draco is treated
sympathetically. The HBP plot is not forgotten. The death scene and
cave scene are well done (despite some weird differences mentioned by
the Leaky Cauldron reviewer, such as Harry force-feeding the potion to
DD using a large clam shell). Gambon is finally becoming more like
Dumbledore (the Leaky reviewer disagrees). Still, given the
sophistication of this review, I respect his judgment and hope for the
best.

This review, BTW, can be found at Mugglenet:

http://www.mugglenet.com/movies/movie6/ejsreview.shtml

The Leaky Cauldron report is in two parts (major spoilers), but
unfortunately I can't get the pages to come up right now to provide
the links. The links can be found at HPana: 

http://www.hpana.com/news.20596.html

Spoilers can be found on this page if you scroll down and highlight
the gray spaces with your mouse:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=783561&page=190

The review that precedes them seems to be the same as the first part
of the Leaky review, but I can't access Leaky at the moment to be sure.

Anyway, if we put all the information from all the sources together,
it looks as if the chief liberty they took (other than the attack by
the DEs at the Burrow) is the omission of Kreacher. That may cause
problems for DH, but we shall see.

Carol, counting on lots of scenes with the quasi-villain, Snape!




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Mon Sep  8 20:55:07 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:55:07 -0000
Subject: Venting Frustration.
In-Reply-To: <ga42m4+2g9e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ga43fb+n7l8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> --- \ "eggplant107" <eggplant107@> wrote:
> >
> > Take a look at
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXnt8_okeRA
> > 
> > Eggplant
> >
> 
> That was SOOOO funny, I can't count the number of times I
> burst out laughing.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>
Yes . It was great. LOL .It was very clever too

Jayne
England




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  9 01:19:24 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:19:24 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test screening experience and revie
In-Reply-To: <ga4hdb+ivoc@eGroups.com>
References: <BAY105-W1675CC7D2602DCF930855AC8550@phx.gbl> <ga4hdb+ivoc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <023c01c9121a$18a66ee0$49f34ca0$@com>

 

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Carol
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 8:53 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A test
screening experience and revie

 


Carol responds:

I snipped most of this excellent review (much more professionally
written than the one posted at Leaky) to emphasize the parts that are
important to me. 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

I don't honestly think the person at the Leaky Caldron saw this film. The
Review here makes sense, it fits with how they maintained the story in OOTP,
the review at the Caldron confused me because it seemed as though she was
saying they outlined the main events then wrote an entirely new story to put
them in. When I read the first review I was crestfallen and hoping it was
fake, now I read the one posted here and I have no doubt.

 

md



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




From jeanico2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 14:27:02 2008
From: jeanico2000 at yahoo.com (jeanico2000)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:27:02 -0000
Subject: More Chicago screening reviews
Message-ID: <ga613m+da4h@eGroups.com>

******* MASSIVE SPOILER WARNING *******

If you are interested in other reviews from the Chicago test screening 
of HBP, you will find a couple on the following website: 
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38251

I found it interesting to read reviews posted on a site other than TLC 
or Mugglenet, which are both splendid Potter sites of course but, 
IMHO, very much in WB's back pocket.

Anyway... please don't read unless you don't mind really massive 
spoilers.

Nicole   




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  9 15:59:23 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 11:59:23 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <ga613m+da4h@eGroups.com>
References: <ga613m+da4h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <03bd01c91295$074e0330$15ea0990$@com>

On second thought, I take it back, I don't want them to release "this" movie
in November. 
I want them to do re-shoots and re-edits and release it next year so that it
resembles the book it was based on!

 

What really shocked me is the 2hr 45min running time, HPB is not as densely
plotted as Phoenix or Gobet, so I'm thinking in that time frame they could
do a hell of a job.

 

I think reducing Tom Riddle's life to 2 events is just crazy. The films and
the final film would be so much richer if, like the book, we learn more
about Voldy. One issue with books like LOTR is that the evil is just there,
it never becomes a character. This movie should have been cleverly edited
with the flash-backs and main story criss-crossing. Especially since the
main story is the flashbacks. There's not much other than hormones and
Slughorn in the book except the flashbacks and Malfoy.

 

Sounds to me like the dropped the ball, stepped on it, popped it, threw it
in the trash.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of jeanico2000
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 10:27 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] More Chicago screening reviews

 

******* MASSIVE SPOILER WARNING *******

If you are interested in other reviews from the Chicago test screening 
of HBP, you will find a couple on the following website: 
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38251

I found it interesting to read reviews posted on a site other than TLC 
or Mugglenet, which are both splendid Potter sites of course but, 
IMHO, very much in WB's back pocket.

Anyway... please don't read unless you don't mind really massive 
spoilers.

Nicole 

 



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




From gloworm419 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 17:59:23 2008
From: gloworm419 at yahoo.com (Gloria)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:59:23 -0000
Subject: More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <03bd01c91295$074e0330$15ea0990$@com>
Message-ID: <ga6dhr+bdgh@eGroups.com>

Gloria says:

I don't want them to release 'this' movie either. I certainly hope 
they have other takes of theses scenes and were just looking for 
feedback from the audience. Hopfully there MUST of been Harry 
Potter fans present to set them straight.
Snape speaking and not yelling at Harry in that final scene between 
them is ridiculous and will most definitely leave us fans feeling 
betrayed yet again. True to the book! When did all that change?

Didn't they say the movie ran 145 minutes? That's 2 hours and 25 
minutes, not 2hrs and 45 min. I'm hoping for that long of a movie or 
even 3 hours; but I doubt it.

I truly believe WB's decision was based partly upon Dan's Equus run. 
How could it not be related? The man cannot be in several places at 
once. He HAS to be in NY constantly for 8 shows a week. I am one of 
Dan's biggest fans, so I'm not blaming him at all; but WB could have 
at least released HBP after Equus ends in Feb 2009. 


snip:
>
> On second thought, I take it back, I don't want them to 
release "this" movie
> in November. 
> I want them to do re-shoots and re-edits and release it next year 
so that it
> resembles the book it was based on!
 > What really shocked me is the 2hr 45min running time, HPB is not 
as densely
> plotted as Phoenix or Gobet, so I'm thinking in that time frame 
they could
> do a hell of a job.





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 18:39:23 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:39:23 -0000
Subject: More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <03bd01c91295$074e0330$15ea0990$@com>
Message-ID: <ga6fss+2m8u@eGroups.com>

Cabal wrote:
>
> On second thought, I take it back, I don't want them to release
"this" movie in November. I want them to do re-shoots and re-edits and
release it next year so that it resembles the book it was based on!
 
> What really shocked me is the 2hr 45min running time, HPB is not as
densely plotted as Phoenix or Gobet, so I'm thinking in that time
frame they could do a hell of a job.
 
> I think reducing Tom Riddle's life to 2 events is just crazy. The
films and the final film would be so much richer if, like the book, we
learn more about Voldy. <snip> This movie should have been cleverly
edited with the flash-backs and main story criss-crossing. Especially
since the main story is the flashbacks. There's not much other than
hormones and Slughorn in the book except the flashbacks and Malfoy.
 
> Sounds to me like the dropped the ball, stepped on it, popped it,
threw it in the trash.

Carol responds:

I know that each person's interpretation is different, and I'm not
arguing with yours, but I don't see the flashbacks (Riddle's story) as
the main story at all. It's backstory, preparing Harry for the Horcrux
hunt in DH, but the main story (IMO) is that set up in "Spinner's
End": Draco's mission, Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and Harry's
determination to find out what they're up to. Ironically, he's forming
a bond, almost a friendship, with the HBP, the brilliant boy who wrote
all those helpful Potions improvements and invented all those clever
(and, in the case of Muffliatio, useful) spells at the same time that
he suspects the adult HBP (Snape) of helping Draco do some evil deed
for the Dark Lord.

I do think that Quidditch and hormones and all that are just
atmosphere, an illusion of normal Hogwarts life as Voldemort plots in
the background, using Draco (and, so he thinks, Snape) as his tool(s).
But I can fully understand eliminating the Gaunts if they can find
some other way of establishing the locket as Slytherin's and bringing
in Hufflepuff's cup. (Harry has to know what the cup looks like for
the Gringotts robbery scene in DH to work.)

Anyway, the book is called "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"
for a reason, and that double-edged, ironic relationship between Harry
and the Prince on the one hand and Harry, Draco, DD, and Snape on the
other is (IMO) the key to the book and ought to be the key to the film.

I don't like the added scenes, and some of the alterations may prove
problematic (though I understand why, for the sake of filming, they
did away with the Invisibility Cloak in the cave and tower scenes). I
can also understand why they omitted DD's funeral which, while moving
for readers of the books, would just slow down the films.

I'm not sure that I agree about HBP not being as densely plotted as
OoP or GoF. I think it's intricately plotted, with, for example, love
potions leading to poisoning tying in with bezoars (first introduced
by Snape in SS/PS and brought into a Potions lesson so that one just
happens to be in Slughorn's office and Snape's teaching, as adult and
HBP, enables Harry to save Ron) leading to Hermione's and Ron's love
coming out into the opening and Lavender being discarded. That whole
incident stems from Draco's attempt to poison Dumbledore, which ties
in with the Katie Bell incident and Snape's attempt to deter Draco
from foolish plots that could easily go astray and, of course, to the
Vanishing Cabinet plot that brings the DEs to Hogwarts and the scene
on the tower which ends in DD's death. That, IMO, is just one
illustration of HBP's densely and intricately constructed plot, in
which all the subplots, even Quidditch (which is tied in with Felix
Felicis, romance, and Sectumsempra, not to mention Ron's problems with
self-confidence, which will be critical in DH) are interwoven and all
the minor characters, from Slughorn to Romilda Vane, exist for a reason.

It's impossible to include everything, but we have, to name a few,
Spinner's End, Slughorn turning into a chair/couch, the HBP's Potions
book, Felix Felicis, Slughorn's party and the Snape/Draco
confrontation (indicated by online photos, not the reviews of the
screening), glimpses of young Tom Riddle in the Pensieve visits, the
cursed necklace, the poisoned mead, the ring Horcrux, Sectumsempra,
the cave (complete with Inferi), the tower, and the duel in which
Snape deflects Harry's spells. I may have forgotten something, but
that's a pretty good indication, to me, that the screenwriter and
director *do* recognize the key elements of HBP's very complex plot. I
agree that it would be better to include more scenes from the book
rather than adding scenes like the one at the Burrow (or Harry
flirting with a waitress!), and omitting Kreacher seems unwise, but
overall, I think they've done a good job. I can live with changes in
the story (such as Harry hiding behind a plank instead of his
Invisibility Cloak) if they serve a cinematic purpose (I hated the
prolonged encounter with the dragon in which the dragon got killed in
GoF, but that was just to show off CGI, not to help tell the story for
a film audience).

Carol, still expecting HBP to be the best of the HP films and
certainly better than OoP, which cut too many crucial elements




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  9 18:42:10 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:42:10 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <ga6dhr+bdgh@eGroups.com>
References: <03bd01c91295$074e0330$15ea0990$@com> <ga6dhr+bdgh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <011c01c912ab$c546aa20$4fd3fe60$@com>

I don't think Equus had anything to do with it, because everyone forgets he
was in Equus last summer when OTTP came out, but it was in Britain not he
U.S. Since OTTP was the second highest grossing of the films and it came out
concurrent with his acting in Equus, I doubt they care. 

 

You are correct, I misread about the running time, it's 145 min.

 

As for why they are releasing it next summer, that's a balance sheet issue.
A publically owned company like WB has to make its balance sheet and other
financial info available to shareholders every year. What happened this year
is that "The Dark Knight" earned double or more than they expected and added
to a year in which they already made a ton of money. The problem is, with
the exception of "Watchmen" they didn't feel they had big movies for next
year. The issue for them was this, if you show HUDGE profits this year and
don't earn nearly as much next year, it's looked at as a loss. It doesn't
matter that the still make money, to earn less on year than the previous is
considered a loss. Soooo, they take the one last blockbuster in the '08
fiscal year and they move it to the '09 fiscal year to balance the profits
between the two years.

 

This is completely normal for large companies during really good years they
will delay releasing new products to boost the next year's profits just as
they will rush new things out to jack-up a sagging year. WB had a windfall
this year they know they can't repeat in '09 so they took their heaviest
hitter and moved him.

 

Hopefully, they will get a TON of negative feedback from the early
screenings. They are shooting DH this fall, which means the sets and actors
could be readily available for second-unit re-shoots.

 

Lets cross our fingers!

 

md 

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Gloria
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 1:59 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More Chicago screening reviews

 

Gloria says:

I don't want them to release 'this' movie either. I certainly hope 
they have other takes of theses scenes and were just looking for 
feedback from the audience. Hopfully there MUST of been Harry 
Potter fans present to set them straight.
Snape speaking and not yelling at Harry in that final scene between 
them is ridiculous and will most definitely leave us fans feeling 
betrayed yet again. True to the book! When did all that change?

Didn't they say the movie ran 145 minutes? That's 2 hours and 25 
minutes, not 2hrs and 45 min. I'm hoping for that long of a movie or 
even 3 hours; but I doubt it.

I truly believe WB's decision was based partly upon Dan's Equus run. 
How could it not be related? The man cannot be in several places at 
once. He HAS to be in NY constantly for 8 shows a week. I am one of 
Dan's biggest fans, so I'm not blaming him at all; but WB could have 
at least released HBP after Equus ends in Feb 2009. 

snip:
>
> On second thought, I take it back, I don't want them to 
release "this" movie
> in November. 
> I want them to do re-shoots and re-edits and release it next year 
so that it
> resembles the book it was based on!
> What really shocked me is the 2hr 45min running time, HPB is not 
as densely
> plotted as Phoenix or Gobet, so I'm thinking in that time frame 
they could
> do a hell of a job.

 



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




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep  9 19:22:47 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:22:47 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <ga6fss+2m8u@eGroups.com>
References: <03bd01c91295$074e0330$15ea0990$@com> <ga6fss+2m8u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004501c912b1$719632f0$54c298d0$@com>

I don't think the titles of HBP or DH really had much to do with the plot,
but more with the titles being fluid from one book to the next. "Harry
Potter and the History of Tom Riddle" would not have been the same just like
"Harry Potter and Winter Long Camping Trip" wouldn't have sounded right for
the last book.

 

My thing is this the plot of Harry / Malfoy and the two love triangles could
have been a 90 min movie. Really, I'm reading the book to my daughters right
now (just happened that way, we started last year with the first one) and
we're halfway and Malfoy is barely there. Mostly it's been Harry between
Hermione and Ron fighting.

 

What they leave out that harms the films (not in relation to the book) is
that all that Riddle story helps Harry figure out what might be Horcrux's,
it also makes Voldy come alive in a way we don't otherwise get and makes
him, IMO, more rich as a character and not just a symbol of evil like the
EYE in LOTR. My idea, as a writer, would have been to intercut moments form
the book flashbacks in-between other scenes and just slide in and out of
them once it's established what Harry and DD are doing. We could have DD
fill in the blanks by telling Harry some of the story while they were in the
flashbacks.

 

Also, from the trailer you see this HUDGE case filled with memories, you
expect them to explore more than two (since the one memory is just two
versions of the same).

 

Also, leaving out Fleur and Bill in the beginning is bad as well because DH
MUST open with the wedding scene, and likely it will, but it will feel out
of nowhere because they were not in this film.

 

OTOH I am very, very happy Ginny is given more screen time with Harry than
she had on the page.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Carol
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:39 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: More Chicago screening reviews

 


I know that each person's interpretation is different, and I'm not
arguing with yours, but I don't see the flashbacks (Riddle's story) as
the main story at all. It's backstory, preparing Harry for the Horcrux
hunt in DH, but the main story (IMO) is that set up in "Spinner's
End": Draco's mission, Snape's Unbreakable Vow, and Harry's
determination to find out what they're up to. Ironically, he's forming
a bond, almost a friendship, with the HBP, the brilliant boy who wrote
all those helpful Potions improvements and invented all those clever
(and, in the case of Muffliatio, useful) spells at the same time that
he suspects the adult HBP (Snape) of helping Draco do some evil deed
for the Dark Lord.



 



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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 22:39:48 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:39:48 -0000
Subject: More Chicago screening reviews
In-Reply-To: <ga6l7p+u26e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gaer3k+508t@eGroups.com>

sartoris22 wrote:
> 
> <snip> there is no way to please the majority of the fans. For
example, some people loathe Luna; others love her. <snip> Others
disagree upon the "focus" of the book/movie; some think it's the Half
Blood Prince; others the Voldermort memories; still others the
relationship stuff. Perhaps the best outcome is to try to create a
movie that the majority of Potter fans don't absolutely hate, and
focus on catering to a general audience. If it were me, I'd go heavy
on the relationship stuff because it doesn't require as much knowledge
of the series to enjoy it.  Besides, if the number one theme of Harry
Potter is "Will Harry beat Voldermort and survive? number 1a has to be
"Will Hermione and Rone get together? Although good versus evil is a
universal theme and remains, I think, the central theme in Potter, the
relationships in Potter are equally compelling, and probably most
accessible to a general audience.
>
Carol responds:

The thing is, though, that the relationship angle isn't really a plot
or even a subplot in itself. It's all mixed in with other things, such
as the accidental poisoning of Ron, which results from Draco's attempt
to kill dumbledore (and his growing desperation regarding the
Vanishing Cabinet). Certain plot elements must be established because
they'll reappear in DH. Snape's role, for example, is crucial. (Just
look at the Borders Books advertising campaign for DH, the centerpiece
of which was The Great Snape Debate.) He has to remain ambiguous,
appearing to be what Bellatrix and Narcissa and Draco (and LV) think
he is to prepare for the shocking scene on the tower but leaving the
way open to a different interpretation, Dumbledore's (or Lily's) man
in DH. Snape is crucial, and not just because of the HBP's Potions
book. I really hope that we get the "I trust Severus Snape completely"
line and DD's similar statement to Draco, who needs to reply that DD
is a foolish old man. (JKR set it up beautifully in the books, but the
OoP film failed to establish Snape's crucial role in sending the Order
to the DoM (and thwarting Umbridge with fake Veritaserum). If, as Eric
Scull's review said, the HBP film treats Snape as "the main villain,"
where is the ambiguity that will prepare the viewer for Snape's death
scene and the Pensieve excursion in DH?

Also, of course, we have the whole problem of no Mundungus, no
Kreacher, no Hepzibah, and no Gaunts, which presents major obstacles
for the Horcrux plot in DH, and no Bill and Fleur, which can only be
resolved with a Lupin/Tonks wedding--attended by Xeno Lovegood? (Maybe
Lupin was Luna's favorite teacher and she drags Daddy along?) But, no.
they had to emphasize the relationships (though I've read that Ginny
has no lines) and put Quidditch back in. (One of the few failings of
HBP, the book, was, IMO, reintroducing Ron's insecurities regarding
Quidditch. He'd overcome them in OoP--"Weasley Is Our King"--and yet
we have to go through all that a second time in "Felix Felicis." At
least that chapter serves a purpose related to Felix, which is related
to the HBP's book and the Slughorn memory and, in the book but not the
film, the battle at Hogwarts between the staff, a few DA members, and
the DEs.)

Obviously, no film can duplicate the rich complexity of HBP's
interwoven themes and subplots and relationships (quite a feat
considering that JKR for the most part limited herself to Harry's
point of view!) but it should at least focus on the key elements,
those that relate to the Snape/Draco subplot and lead up to the cave
and tower scenes and the Snape/Harry duel near the end of the film,
and those that lead up to the Horcrux hunt in DH. Sure, the
Ron/Lavender subplot provides comic potential (and a chance for Ron to
get some screen time), but it's a given that Ron will end up with
Hermione. It's not a given that Snape is on the same side as Harry and
will end up aiding him twice (three times, if you count saving Lupin)
in DH.

Carol, who thinks it was a mistake to make the films before the books
were out because the cut or altered scenes in early films caused
unforeseeable and perhaps irremediable problems with their sequels




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 20:29:54 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:29:54 -0000
Subject: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
Message-ID: <gb1242+7u6a@eGroups.com>

Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in the
Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? The U.K. release date was
September 12, but the U.S. release date isn't till November 14, right
around the time when we would have seen HBP. However, David Thewlis in
this film is no Lupin: He's the commandant at Auschwitz whose
eight-year-old son befriends a Jewish boy on the "farm" where all the
workers (some of them children) wear "striped pajamas." It looks like
a beautiful but ultimately tragic film that operates on two levels,
introducing older children very gradually to the horrors of the
Holocaust and pulling in older viewers who sense impending tragedy but
are nevertheless compelled to empathize with the child protagonists.
The film is rated 12A in England and PG13 in the U.S., but I have a
feeling that even thirteen-year-olds will find it very disturbing.
It's based on a book with the same title by John Boyne. 

Here's a link to the trailer (HD, downloads instantly with broadband):

http://www.thefilmfactory.co.uk/boy/

The synopsis on the official site,
http://www.boyinthestripedpajamas.com/ is very detailed and all but
reveals the ending (which the trailer doesn't hint at but which we,
knowing what Auschwitz was, can partially guess without having seen
even the trailer). I suggest not reading it all the way through unless
you can't stand not knowing what to prepare for.

Fans of Remus Lupin may find it disturbing to see David Thewlis as a
Nazi officer, believed by his son to be a "good man," "not the kind of
soldier who takes away people's clothes." (Obviously, he's much
worse.) Still, though, it looks like a good film, and children at some
point need to learn about the Holocaust, but I wonder how a
ten-year-old, even a mature one, would react to this particular story.

BTW, and this is a very minor point, the German characters speak with
their natural British accents, possibly indicating their social class
to those familiar with the accents. It took me a moment to realize
that the main character, Bruno, was not an English schoolboy from the
1940s. I thought at first that he was one of the children who had to
evacuate London during the Blitz. But once I realized that he was
German and his father a Nazi officer, I made a quick mental
adjustment. I recognized "Lupin" from his voice rather than his face,
but I quickly made that adjustment, too. (Potioncat, was it you who
had trouble accepting thewlis as Lupin because you'd first seen him as
a bad guy? Maybe you shouldn't see this film!)

Carol, who's definitely planning to see Ralph Fiennes in "The Duchess"
and tentatively planning to see David Thewlis in the "Striped Pajamas"
film




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 22:13:46 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 22:13:46 -0000
Subject: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
In-Reply-To: <gb1242+7u6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb186q+kdv1@eGroups.com>

Carol earlier:
>
> Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in
the Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? <snip>

Sorry to respond to myself, but I forgot to mention that David Heyman,
the producer for the HP films, is also the producer for "Striped
Pyjamas." Here's more, attached to an update on the scripts for DH
(they considered omitting the Deathly Hallows form "Deathly Hallows"
before deciding that it *had* to be two films!!):

http://www.hpana.com/news.20606.html

Scroll to the end of the DH interview for the one on "Pyjamas."

BTW, does anyone know exactly what a movie producer does?

Carol, who still wants to spell "pajamas" the American way




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Sep 20 13:08:49 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:08:49 -0000
Subject: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
In-Reply-To: <gb1242+7u6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb2sl1+adnb@eGroups.com>

>Carol:
> Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in 
the
> Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? The U.K. release date was
> September 12, but the U.S. release date isn't till November 14, 
right
> around the time when we would have seen HBP. However, David Thewlis 
in
> this film is no Lupin: He's the commandant at Auschwitz whose
> eight-year-old son befriends a Jewish boy on the "farm" where all 
the
> workers (some of them children) wear "striped pajamas." 

snip


Potioncat:
Oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. 

Michael is reading that book now and said he thought the dad was a 
Nazi. I'd better start reading it too. This isn't going to be pretty. 
He gets very emotional about this subject. (I think one 14-year-old 
and one 55-year-old are going to find it disturbing.)

On to the movie.

OK, now all I can picture is Ralph,(but we call him Rafe) Fiennes as 
the commandant in Schindler's List. I'm trying to put Lupin's face in 
a Nazi uniform, but it won't fit.


Carol: 
> Fans of Remus Lupin may find it disturbing to see David Thewlis as a
> Nazi officer, believed by his son to be a "good man," "not the kind 
of
> soldier who takes away people's clothes." (Obviously, he's much
> worse.) Still, though, it looks like a good film, and children at 
some
> point need to learn about the Holocaust, but I wonder how a
> ten-year-old, even a mature one, would react to this particular 
story.

Potioncat:
Hmm. I'll have to think about this. I wonder if I should tell my son 
that Thewlis plays the dad in a movie version---before he reads the 
book or after. He's going to be very interested in that.

> Carol:
> BTW, and this is a very minor point, the German characters speak 
with
> their natural British accents, possibly indicating their social 
class
> to those familiar with the accents.


Potioncat:
Are all the characters German, and are all the actors British? Did 
the movie makers decide not to "do" German accents at all? I've seen 
movies done that way before. It works if it's consistent. 

Carol:
snip
 (Potioncat, was it you who
> had trouble accepting thewlis as Lupin because you'd first seen him 
as
> a bad guy? Maybe you shouldn't see this film!)
> 
> Carol, who's definitely planning to see Ralph Fiennes in "The 
Duchess"
> and tentatively planning to see David Thewlis in the "Striped 
Pajamas"
> film
>

Potioncat:
No, it wasn't me. The fist time I saw Thewlis he was a cricket, or a 
catepillar. I can't remember which. (James and the Giant Peach.) I'll 
go see this one---probably with a teen. I'd like to see the Duchess 
too, although I haven't had time to read about it.

By the way, speaking of pyjamas---what was with 'Bananas in Pyjamas'? 
Was that British or Australian?

Potioncat, who notices she's dropping words in most of her posts 
lately and asks kindly will readers pick them up they find any.






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Sep 20 16:12:36 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:12:36 -0000
Subject: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
In-Reply-To: <gb1242+7u6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb37dk+9kim@eGroups.com>

Carol:
> Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in the
> Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? 
snip
It looks like
> a beautiful but ultimately tragic film that operates on two levels,
> introducing older children very gradually to the horrors of the
> Holocaust and pulling in older viewers who sense impending tragedy but
> are nevertheless compelled to empathize with the child protagonists.
> The film is rated 12A in England and PG13 in the U.S., but I have a
> feeling that even thirteen-year-olds will find it very disturbing.
> It's based on a book with the same title by John Boyne. 


Potioncat:
I just read the book, a quick but disturbing read for an adult. Carol's 
description of the movie fits the book completely. The author has 
revealed things that the child protagonist doesn't begin to understand. 
I suppose a young reader may not pick up on all of the nuances either. 
I don't want to say any more; wouldn't want to spoil any of it. 

I think Thewlis will do an excellent job of the father. I'm not so sure 
about taking my son to see the movie, but I wouldn't want him to see it 
without a parent. Of course, by then he will have read the book. No 
surprises---just the visual reality of the situation.

Kathy




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 19:52:12 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:52:12 -0000
Subject: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
In-Reply-To: <gb2sl1+adnb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb68lc+bu2n@eGroups.com>

Carol earlier:
> > Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in
the Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? <snip> David Thewlis in
this film is no Lupin: He's the commandant at Auschwitz whose
eight-year-old son befriends a Jewish boy on the "farm" where all the
workers (some of them children) wear "striped pajamas." 
 
> Potioncat:
> Oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. 
> 
> Michael is reading that book now and said he thought the dad was a 
Nazi. I'd better start reading it too. This isn't going to be pretty.
He gets very emotional about this subject. (I think one 14-year-old
and one 55-year-old are going to find it disturbing.)

Carol again:
Let me know, offlist or on, how he reacts.

Potioncat: 
> On to the movie.
> 
> OK, now all I can picture is Ralph,(but we call him Rafe) 

Carol:
LOL. If anyone doesn't follow the allusion, go to OT Chatter.

Potioncat:
Fiennes as the commandant in Schindler's List. I'm trying to put
Lupin's face in a Nazi uniform, but it won't fit.

Carol:
Did you watch the trailer at http://www.thefilmfactory.co.uk/boy/ ?
I know that your monitor was acting up, but you can at least *hear*
Lupin, I mean Thewlis, in the part. I think he's very well cast, and
very believable. the official site (link in the earlier post) has
still photos, too, but, of course, if your monitor is acting up, you
can't see them. Anyway, shave off Lupin's mustache, put him in a Nazi
uniform, make him an apparently kindly father who believes in what
he's doing (but gets angry when his wife challenges him) and you've
got Thewlis in this role.
> 
> Potioncat:
> Hmm. I'll have to think about this. I wonder if I should tell my son
that Thewlis plays the dad in a movie version---before he reads the
book or after. He's going to be very interested in that.

Carol:
You decided to let him finish the book first, right? I hope the movie
doesn't ruin Lupin for him, assuming that he sees it. 
> 
Carol earlier:
> > BTW, and this is a very minor point, the German characters speak 
with their natural British accents, possibly indicating their social
class to those familiar with the accents.
> 
> Potioncat:
> Are all the characters German, and are all the actors British? Did 
the movie makers decide not to "do" German accents at all? I've seen
movies done that way before. It works if it's consistent.

Carol:
Right. And once you understand that the characters are German even
though they sound British, the accents somehow seem appropriate or you
just forget about them and accept them, more so, I think than we would
if they were played by American actors. I think it was the right
decision. The casting is perfect, even down to the innocence of the
little boy who plays Bruno and knew nothing about the Holocaust before
he made the film. I can't imagine boys with real German accents doing
a better job (they'd have been harder to understand, too), much less
these children faking German accents.

> Potioncat, who notices she's dropping words in most of her posts
lately and asks kindly will readers pick them up they find any.

Carol, who hasn't spotted any dropped words, but will send any missing
"was's" or "the's" by e-mail if she catches them 
>





From graynavarre at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 19:57:28 2008
From: graynavarre at yahoo.com (Barbara Key)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 12:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
In-Reply-To: <gb68lc+bu2n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <854785.13391.qm@web30102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

If you go to imdb.com and put The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, you can view trailer for the film.

It looks very good, but? very harrowing.

Barbara

--- On Sun, 9/21/08, Carol <justcarol67 at yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Carol <justcarol67 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 3:52 PM










    
            Carol earlier:

> > Has anyone in the UK seen the new David Thewlis film, "The Boy in

the Striped Pyjamas" ("Pajamas" in the U.S.)? <snip> David Thewlis in

this film is no Lupin: He's the commandant at Auschwitz whose

eight-year-old son befriends a Jewish boy on the "farm" where all the

workers (some of them children) wear "striped pajamas." 

 

> Potioncat:

> Oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. 

> 

> Michael is reading that book now and said he thought the dad was a 

Nazi. I'd better start reading it too. This isn't going to be pretty.

He gets very emotional about this subject. (I think one 14-year-old

and one 55-year-old are going to find it disturbing.)



Carol again:

Let me know, offlist or on, how he reacts.



Potioncat: 

> On to the movie.

> 

> OK, now all I can picture is Ralph,(but we call him Rafe) 



Carol:

LOL. If anyone doesn't follow the allusion, go to OT Chatter.



Potioncat:

Fiennes as the commandant in Schindler's List. I'm trying to put

Lupin's face in a Nazi uniform, but it won't fit.



Carol:

Did you watch the trailer at http://www.thefilmf actory.co. uk/boy/ ?

I know that your monitor was acting up, but you can at least *hear*

Lupin, I mean Thewlis, in the part. I think he's very well cast, and

very believable. the official site (link in the earlier post) has

still photos, too, but, of course, if your monitor is acting up, you

can't see them. Anyway, shave off Lupin's mustache, put him in a Nazi

uniform, make him an apparently kindly father who believes in what

he's doing (but gets angry when his wife challenges him) and you've

got Thewlis in this role.

> 

> Potioncat:

> Hmm. I'll have to think about this. I wonder if I should tell my son

that Thewlis plays the dad in a movie version---before he reads the

book or after. He's going to be very interested in that.



Carol:

You decided to let him finish the book first, right? I hope the movie

doesn't ruin Lupin for him, assuming that he sees it. 

> 

Carol earlier:

> > BTW, and this is a very minor point, the German characters speak 

with their natural British accents, possibly indicating their social

class to those familiar with the accents.

> 

> Potioncat:

> Are all the characters German, and are all the actors British? Did 

the movie makers decide not to "do" German accents at all? I've seen

movies done that way before. It works if it's consistent.



Carol:

Right. And once you understand that the characters are German even

though they sound British, the accents somehow seem appropriate or you

just forget about them and accept them, more so, I think than we would

if they were played by American actors. I think it was the right

decision. The casting is perfect, even down to the innocence of the

little boy who plays Bruno and knew nothing about the Holocaust before

he made the film. I can't imagine boys with real German accents doing

a better job (they'd have been harder to understand, too), much less

these children faking German accents.



> Potioncat, who notices she's dropping words in most of her posts

lately and asks kindly will readers pick them up they find any.



Carol, who hasn't spotted any dropped words, but will send any missing

"was's" or "the's" by e-mail if she catches them 

>




      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	

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




From terrianking at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 22:19:45 2008
From: terrianking at aol.com (theterrianking)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 22:19:45 -0000
Subject: New Pictures
Message-ID: <gb6ha1+a02v@eGroups.com>

My daughter and I were looking around for new pictures from HBP and 
ran across this German site which is kind of in keeping with the 
current topic. It's German anyway.

http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/thumbnails.php?album=59&page=11


Someone who does not post much.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 22:27:57 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 22:27:57 -0000
Subject: New Pictures
In-Reply-To: <gb6ha1+a02v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb6hpd+anfj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "theterrianking" <terrianking at ...>
wrote:

> My daughter and I were looking around for new pictures from HBP and 
> ran across this German site which is kind of in keeping with the 
> current topic. It's German anyway.
 
> http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/thumbnails.php?album=59&page=11


zanooda:

There are a few new pictures on Leaky too, some of them probably from
this German site - Luna in her lion hat, and with Sanguini the
vampire, and others :-).





From terrianking at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 22:49:39 2008
From: terrianking at aol.com (terrianking at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 18:49:39 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: New Pictures
Message-ID: <c73.3bc2e6a1.36082983@aol.com>



In a message dated 9/21/2008 5:28:09 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
zanooda2 at yahoo.com writes:

>  My daughter and I were looking around for new pictures from HBP and 
>  ran across this German site which is kind of in keeping with the 
>  current topic. It's German anyway.

> _http://galeriehpprihttp://gahttp://galeriehttp://galht&page=11_ 
(http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/thumbnails.php?album=59&page=11) 

zanooda:

There  are a few new pictures on Leaky too, some of them probably from
this German  site - Luna in her lion hat, and with Sanguini the
vampire, and others  :-).



Hmmm. But I'll bet Leaky didn't include the pictures of the Harry Potter  
yarn labels.
 
Someone






**************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial 
challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and 
calculators.      (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)


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




From terrianking at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:10:15 2008
From: terrianking at aol.com (terrianking at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:10:15 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: New Pictures
Message-ID: <bed.2cbf451e.36082e57@aol.com>



In a message dated 9/21/2008 5:28:09 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
zanooda2 at yahoo.com writes:
 
zanooda:

There are a few new pictures on Leaky too, some of them  probably from
this German site - Luna in her lion hat, and with Sanguini  the
vampire, and others :-).
My mistake: it's a French site and the picture scans are from a German  
calendar and date book, it appears to be. I found a caption in French where  
Hermione is worried about Harry's obsession with his potions book and she's  
wondering what kind of book it really is.









**************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial 
challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and 
calculators.      (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)


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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 17:20:28 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:20:28 -0000
Subject: New Pictures
In-Reply-To: <gb6hpd+anfj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb8k4s+fs9p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "theterrianking" <terrianking@>
> wrote:
> 
> > My daughter and I were looking around for new pictures from HBP and 
> > ran across this German site which is kind of in keeping with the
current topic. It's German anyway.
>  
> > http://galeriehpprince.free.fr/thumbnails.php?album=59&page=11
> 
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> There are a few new pictures on Leaky too, some of them probably
from this German site - Luna in her lion hat, and with Sanguini the
vampire, and others :-).
>
Carol:
Yes, the photos are from the German site. There are also some new
shots of Snape, two of them thumbnails, unfortunately. The big
headshot has the same billowy green background (curtains?) as the
shots of Slughorn's party (e.g. Luna, who looks very small, with
Sanguini, who looks utterly harmless). One of the thumbnails shows
Snape confronting Draco and the other shows Snape standing alone in
the same corridor, apparently watching Draco walk away. Whether Harry
is watching them under the Invisibility Cloak is not clear.

Carol, wondering if there will be any surprises left by the time the
film comes out what with all the photos and interviews and,
eventually, a full trailer (around February???)




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 17:25:42 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:25:42 -0000
Subject: New Pictures
In-Reply-To: <gb8k4s+fs9p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gb8kem+l75g@eGroups.com>

zanooda:
> > 
> > There are a few new pictures on Leaky too, some of them probably
from this German site - Luna in her lion hat, and with Sanguini the
vampire, and others :-).
> >
> Carol:
> Yes, the photos are from the German site. 

Carol again:

French, I mean. I looked at the photos yesterday, not paying attention
to the language (except that it wasn't English!)

Carol, glad that there are three of us sharing the blunder




From madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 23 06:34:30 2008
From: madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au (Alison)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:34:30 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gb186q+kdv1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gba2lm+ft3u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> <snip>
>I forgot to mention that David Heyman,
> the producer for the HP films, is also the producer for "Striped
> Pyjamas." Here's more, attached to an update on the scripts for DH
> (they considered omitting the Deathly Hallows form "Deathly Hallows"
> before deciding that it *had* to be two films!!):
> 
> http://www.hpana.com/news.20606.html
> <snip>


When I read this article, I wondered what they were going to call the 
movie if they had intended dropping the Deathly Hallows from the 
plot ???

However, David Heyman then goes on to say that in splitting the films 
in two they are going to do so by focussing on separate themes for 
each movie. I guess the two obvious themes are Horcruxes versus 
Hallows, although given how the Horcrux hunt went on for so long with 
little immediate result (otherwise referred to by many as the great 
camping trip) and 3 horcruxes were destroyed very near the end of the 
book, I'm not sure how this could be done. 

For all that we complain about the scriptwriters deleting and moving 
things around, it sounds like a difficult task to me. 

Any thoughts on what other themes might be used to split the movies 
into two ? 

Alison, also wondering if they are just going to go with Part 1 and 
Part 2 as titles. 




From md at exit-reality.com  Tue Sep 23 12:22:31 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:22:31 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gba2lm+ft3u@eGroups.com>
References: <gb186q+kdv1@eGroups.com> <gba2lm+ft3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01b301c91d77$0f60ddd0$2e229970$@com>

There are two ways, I see of cutting the film.

 

The first is linear. Basically I think you end part one when Ron returns and
destroys the locket.  This is literally the dead center of the book and
marks the end of the camping trip.

 

The problem here is that the first film will be rather slow compared to the
second, only three main sequences, the wedding, Godrics Hollow and Bathilda
/ Snake.

 

The other option is to focus the first half on the Horcruxes (knowing the
final Horcrux is in Hogwarts and has to wait until the end) and moving
things around so that they go to Bill & Fleurs before visiting Lovegood.
This way you concentrate the first film on the horcruxes and end on the
grand finale of breaking out of Gringots and flying away on a dragon.

 

The second film would then start at the Lovegoods, where the search for the
Hallows really takes off. It would make a good bit of action for the
opening. You could still have them get caught and escape to Bills but
instead of plotting the Gringots heist again they would simply bury Doby and
move on. 

 

It would mess up continuity, but maintain faithfulness, spread out the
action more evenly and allow the entire second half of the second film to be
what it should be, the assault on Hogwarts and the destruction for the tiara
and nagini.

 

IMO

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Alison
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 2:35 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped
Pajamas/Pyjamas)

 

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com <mailto:HPFGU-Movie%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> <snip>

Any thoughts on what other themes might be used to split the movies 
into two ? 

Alison, also wondering if they are just going to go with Part 1 and 
Part 2 as titles. 

 

 



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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 23:43:22 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:43:22 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gba2lm+ft3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbbuuq+qikh@eGroups.com>

Carol earlier:
> > <snip>
> >I forgot to mention that David Heyman, the producer for the HP
films, is also the producer for "Striped Pyjamas." Here's more,
attached to an update on the scripts for DH (they considered omitting
the Deathly Hallows from "Deathly Hallows" before deciding that it
*had* to be two films!!):
> > <snip>
> 
Alison responded: 
> When I read this article, I wondered what they were going to call
the movie if they had intended dropping the Deathly Hallows from the 
> plot ???

Carol:
My reaction exactly.

Alison: 
> However, David Heyman then goes on to say that in splitting the
films in two they are going to do so by focussing on separate themes
for each movie. I guess the two obvious themes are Horcruxes versus
Hallows, although given how the Horcrux hunt went on for so long with
little immediate result (otherwise referred to by many as the great
camping trip) and 3 horcruxes were destroyed very near the end of the
book, I'm not sure how this could be done. <snip>

> Any thoughts on what other themes might be used to split the movies
into two ? <snip>

Carol responds:
Before I can answer that question, I need to know how Heyman defines
"theme." As a former English teacher with a PhD in literature and
consequently a lit/crit perspective that may not match Heyman's
perspective as a film producer, I would say that Hallows and Horcruxes
are not themes but motifs (recurring elements in a work of art that
may or may not have thematic significance). Motifs like wands,
broomsticks, spells, Dark creatures, the DADA jinx, potions, Quidditch
games, and a host of other objects, incidents, phrases, and devices
recur throughout the series, but none of them really qualifies as a
theme. (It would be interesting to explore the thematic significance
of some of those motifs on the main list, preferably without bringing
in Freudian implications, but obviously that discussion is out of
place here.)

A theme, OTOH, is a concept, often a controlling idea around which the
writer structures the work or an insight that he or she is consciously
trying to convey. (In a film, unlike a literary work, getting the
theme across is a collaborative effort.) Some critics (and, for all I
know, movie producers) consider certain conflicts or universal
experiences to be themes. (Anyone remember man vs. man, man vs. woman,
man vs. nature, man vs. himself and the rest of that list that your
high school English teacher called "themes"?) I've also heard
"jealousy" or "revenge" or "love and death" referred to as themes.
That use of the term may be closer to Heyman's definition of theme
than mine, which is an idea that can be stated as a complete sentence,
for example, "Life is meaningless" or "Love conquers all." (Bad
examples, but you get the idea.)

If I were looking for a theme in the first half of DH, it would
probably be related to Harry's attempt to perform a seemingly
impossible task assigned him by a dead mentor in whom he's rapidly
losing faith. How I'd express that in one sentence, I don't know. The
second half is easier since it's the resolution of the entire series
and (to me) is clearly something like, "Despite loss and suffering,
good will triumph in the end." IIRC, Heyman mentions that the break
between the two films doesn't come where he would have expected it to,
probably in terms of page count or a dramatic incident like the doe
Patronus. If he's seeing the same themes that I do, the natural break
would be somewhere around "The Wandmaker" or "Shell Cottage," with
about 450 pages crowded into the first half and only about 200 given
full development in the second half. The first film would end soon
after Dobby's burial and the second would begin with the planned break
in to Gringotts and would be nearly non-stop action, broken by Snape's
memories and a bit of tense waiting for LV but not much else.

Obviously, though, I'm not David Heyman (or Steve Kloves or David
Yates), and they may see the whole concept of theme differently, or at
least see the dominant messages or insights of the two halves of the
last book differently, than I do. 

Carol, wishing she had time to read a lot of Heyman interviews to get
a sense of how he uses the term "theme"




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 00:18:24 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:18:24 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <01b301c91d77$0f60ddd0$2e229970$@com>
Message-ID: <gbc10g+itba@eGroups.com>

Cabalwrote:
>
> There are two ways, I see of cutting the film.
 
> The first is linear. Basically I think you end part one when Ron
returns and destroys the locket.  This is literally the dead center of
the book and marks the end of the camping trip.
 
> The problem here is that the first film will be rather slow compared
to the second, only three main sequences, the wedding, Godrics Hollow
and Bathilda / Snake.
> 
Carol:
You forgot the MoM invasion in which they steal the locket, and the
doe Patronus (which is tied in with the destruction of the locket), as
a climactic fifth sequence. (There's also Kreacher's backstory; he and
Regulus will definitely be in the film, so we can add that to the
"action" count even though it will be a flashback.) I agree, though,
that the first half of the book is *comparatively* short on action (at
any rate, it's spread out with lots of thinking and talking and
camping in between. The filmmakers would have to squeeze the
disastrous visit to Xeno Lovegood and the Malfoy Manor sequence into
the second half if they divided the film by page count. In my view,
those incidents belong thematically to the first film, not to mention
that they would provide additional action sequences to the first half
while allowing the second half to concentrate on the defeat of
Voldemort. (FWIW, the action from the Gringotts break-in to the defeat
and death of Voldemort takes place in about twenty-four hours.)

Cabal wrote: 
> The other option is to focus the first half on the Horcruxes
(knowing the final Horcrux is in Hogwarts and has to wait until the
end) and moving things around so that they go to Bill & Fleurs before
visiting Lovegood. This way you concentrate the first film on the
horcruxes and end on the grand finale of breaking out of Gringots and
flying away on a dragon.
> 
Carol responds:
That would work, I suppose, especially if Heyman considers Hallows and
Horcruxes to be "themes" (see my earlier post). But as I see it, the
Gringotts break-in is the first step in the defeat of Voldemort and
sets in motion everything else, including Voldemort's panicked Horcrux
search for his Horcruxes and invasion of Hogwarts. It also, as I said,
occurs in the same twenty-four hours as the battle of Hogwarts. IMO,
it definitely belongs in the second film in terms of both plot and theme. 

Cabal: 
> The second film would then start at the Lovegoods, where the search
for the Hallows really takes off. It would make a good bit of action
for the opening. You could still have them get caught and escape to
Bills but instead of plotting the Gringots heist again they would
simply bury Doby and move on. 

Carol:
I think that the first half of the film would benefit from the
Lovegood scene, which in any case has nothing to do with the final
destruction of Voldemort and his Horcruxes. (They may find and destroy
one Horcrux in the first half, but if we're dividing between Hallows
and the nearly omitted Hallows, the place to break would be where
Harry chooses Horcruxes over Hallows. From Gringotts to the end, the
focus is on Horcruxes, with the Hallows playing a role only in "The
Forest Again." Really, I can't see organizing the film around either
of them.
> 
Cabal: 
> It would mess up continuity, but maintain faithfulness, spread out
the action more evenly and allow the entire second half of the second
film to be what it should be, the assault on Hogwarts and the
destruction for the tiara and nagini.

Carol:
I agree that the second film should focus on the defeat of Voldemort,
but it doesn't have to involve only the last nine chapters (and
possibly the Epilogue). Put Gringotts in the second film, and you have
a unified assault on Voldemort, with all the other action, including
the Lovegood house and Malfoy Manor, in the first film.

As I said, the first film would focus thematically of Harry's struggle
to embark on and make sense of the impossible mission that Dumbledore
has assigned him. The film could end at the point where he finally
understands what he has to do and why. (Not counting the
self-sacrifidc, of course.) The second film would focus on carrying
out the mission.

Carol, who thinks there are more than two ways to divide a two-part
film and the key in this case is theme




From madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 24 06:05:42 2008
From: madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au (Alison)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:05:42 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gbbuuq+qikh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbclbm+s7qc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> Carol :
><snip>
> As a former English teacher with a PhD in literature and
> consequently a lit/crit perspective that may not match Heyman's
> perspective as a film producer, I would say that Hallows and Horcruxes
> are not themes but motifs (recurring elements in a work of art that
> may or may not have thematic significance).

<snip>

> A theme, OTOH, is a concept, often a controlling idea around which the
> writer structures the work or an insight that he or she is consciously
> trying to convey. 

<snip>

Alison :

I am going to have to bow to your experience here in defining theme vs 
motif, since it is definitely not and never was my forte. But yes, 
possibly Heyman might be thinking in different terms. 

Earlier you asked just what a film producer does. Again, I'm no expert, 
but I've always thought he's much like an overall project manager. That 
is, goes out and gets the funding and then manages all other aspects of 
the film in total, such as hiring, contracts, budgets, locations. But 
it's probably more than that as well, in that he's the overall boss 
man. He still has to answer to the movie company, ie WB executives. So 
more like a specialised businessman. 

I guess from that assumption I then leap to a further speculation that 
he might have a different concept of what the 'themes' are. 








From madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 24 06:24:30 2008
From: madammilliemarsh at yahoo.com.au (Alison)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 06:24:30 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gbc10g+itba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbcmeu+9mgk@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
<snip>
> Cabalwrote:
> > 
> > Cabal wrote: 
> > The other option is to focus the first half on the Horcruxes
> (knowing the final Horcrux is in Hogwarts and has to wait until the
> end) and moving things around so that they go to Bill & Fleurs 
before
> visiting Lovegood. This way you concentrate the first film on the
> horcruxes and end on the grand finale of breaking out of Gringots 
and
> flying away on a dragon.
> > 
> Carol responds:
> That would work, I suppose, especially if Heyman considers Hallows 
and
> Horcruxes to be "themes" (see my earlier post). But as I see it, the
> Gringotts break-in is the first step in the defeat of Voldemort and
> sets in motion everything else, including Voldemort's panicked 
Horcrux
> search for his Horcruxes and invasion of Hogwarts. It also, as I 
said,
> occurs in the same twenty-four hours as the battle of Hogwarts. IMO,
> it definitely belongs in the second film in terms of both plot and 
theme. 
> 

Alison : 
I agree that makes some sort of sense, although it would be a shame 
to miss out on the fact that it was while digging Dobby's grave, that 
Harry's thoughts clarified and he decided to focus back on Horcruxes. 
Still I'm not sure how that could be adequately portrayed in a movie, 
and I realise I can't have everything anyway.

One other problem here though, is that they only learn Luna is 
missing after the visit to the Lovegoods, and rescue her from Malfoy 
Manor before going to Shell Cottage. 

That suggests that either Luna being held hostage is cut, or they 
simply discover her there, just as they do Ollivander.

They seem to also need to further include more backstory, such as the 
identification of the Hufflepuff cup since it's unclear if this is 
going to be in HBP.

<snip>

> Carol:
> As I said, the first film would focus thematically of Harry's 
struggle
> to embark on and make sense of the impossible mission that 
Dumbledore
> has assigned him. The film could end at the point where he finally
> understands what he has to do and why. (Not counting the
> self-sacrifidc, of course.) The second film would focus on carrying
> out the mission.
> 
> Carol, who thinks there are more than two ways to divide a two-part
> film and the key in this case is theme
>

Alison : 

Wouldn't this then need to include some of Harry's disillusionment 
with Dumbledore since that contributes to his, and indirectly to 
Ron's, frustration and therefore more of DD's backstory ? In my mind 
this is all mixed up together with the appearances by & discovery of 
Grindelwald, and then further mixed in with Harry's flashes of 
Voldemort's search for the Elder Wand, for which Grindelwald is 
pretty much the key. 

Probably more telling of my state of mind than anything else.... 




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 07:32:38 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:32:38 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <gbbuuq+qikh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbcqem+4a02@eGroups.com>

---  "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> 
> Carol responds:
> Before I can answer that question, I need to know how Heyman
> defines "theme." ... I would say that Hallows and Horcruxes
> are not themes but motifs ...
> 
> A theme, OTOH, is a concept, often a controlling idea around
> which the writer structures the work or an insight that he or
> she is consciously trying to convey. ...

bboyminn:

Sorry to cut so much, but you have brought up an interesting
point. Though I don't know if I can officially call it 'themes',
but there are two distinct parts to the final book.

The first section is about Seeking, learning, and resolving a
mystery. The second section is about acting on that knowledge.

In a sense, by some definition, the first half is Mystery,
and the second half is Suspense.

>From this perspective, it seems the transition occurs when
Harry is burying Dobby. That is when he has resolved the
Mystery to his own satisfaction, and in doing so has set 
himself on a course of action. 

Up until that point Harry is in turmoil. He is torn between 
Hallows and Horcruxes. He is tormented because Dumbledore
expects overwhelmingly big things from him, but has left him
little to go on. There are many mysteries and frustrations
in this first half that Harry and the gang have to deal with.

>From another perspective, the first section is all about internal
conflict; the second section is about external conflict. The
battle with himself vs the battle against others.

Now, it is not completely cut and dried. Harry certain does
battle with other earlier in the book, and certainly has
internal battles in the latter part of the book, but on a 
broad and general scale, I think the internal vs the external
conflict divides the book nicely

Still, were to cut? I think possible Ron rescuing Harry and
getting the sword, and ending with Ron saying (paraphrased)
'well it sounds much cooler that it was when you say it like
that', and Harry repling to the effect that 'I've been telling
you that for years'. That concludes with a climax, and a bit 
of a wind down, and ends with a clever remark by both Ron and
Harry. 

When we begin the next movie, we start with Ron and Harry in 
the forest, perhaps with a slight replay of the last of the
previous movie, then the go to the tent and Hermione freaks
out on Ron. 

>From there, it is on to the Snatchers, Malfoy Manor, the
Rescue, Dobby's death, and then we begin the second movie
in earnest. From that point on Harry has made a choice and
his course of action is clear and unwavering. They break into
Gringott's to get the Cup, Harry has his vision, then it is
off to Hogsmeade and the first flairings of the Battle of 
Hogwarts begins.

Not knowing what they will keep and what they will lose, it's
hard to determine how that balances out in movie time, but
from a thematic point of view, Dobby's burial is the clear
transition point in the story. 

Of course, the transition in the story, doesn't necessarily
mark the transition point between the two movie. I think the
first movie needs to end before that transition point, so
that's way I say the 'finding the Sword' scene is a good
place to end.

I think Yates has tremendous potential as a director. I think
OotP was brilliantly constructed, but it was cut far too lean.
And there were some real mistakes made in it, that effected
my enjoyment. For example, the scene where Harry hands the
Prophecy over to Lucius should have never happened. To me,
that undermined everything.

I can't help wondering if Yates is trying his best to satisfy
the story, or if his primary objective is to satisfy the
studio? From my point of view, to satisfy the story, will do 
the best job of satisfying the Studio in the long run. But to
satisfy the studio in the short run will not satisfy the fans.

There is a story that needs to be told, and to satisfy the
fan, that story must actually get told. It is not enough just
to have Harry, Ron, and Hermione running around on screen for
a few hours. If this as a fan boy puff piece like the Jonas 
Brother's 'Camp Rock'. Where it is nothing but an excuse for
us to see our favorite boy-crush/girl-crush stars, then I 
think it will fail as a movie. 

Like I said, there is a story that MUST be told. I'm convinced
Yates will make it look good, I'm just not convinced of his
ability as a cinematic story teller. 

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bluewizard




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 19:41:40 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:41:40 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ? (was Re: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas/Pyjamas)
In-Reply-To: <gbcmeu+9mgk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbe55k+hr4n@eGroups.com>

Cabal wrote: 
> > > The other option is to focus the first half on the Horcruxes
(knowing the final Horcrux is in Hogwarts and has to wait until the
end) and moving things around so that they go to Bill & Fleurs before
visiting Lovegood. This way you concentrate the first film on the
horcruxes and end on the grand finale of breaking out of Gringots and
flying away on a dragon.
> > > 
Carol earlier:
> > That would work, I suppose, especially if Heyman considers Hallows
and Horcruxes to be "themes" (see my earlier post). But as I see it,
the Gringotts break-in is the first step in the defeat of Voldemort
and sets in motion everything else, including Voldemort's panicked 
<snip> search for his Horcruxes and invasion of Hogwarts. It also, as
I said, occurs in the same twenty-four hours as the battle of
Hogwarts. IMO, it definitely belongs in the second film in terms of
both plot and theme. 
> > 
Alison responded: 
> I agree that makes some sort of sense, although it would be a shame
to miss out on the fact that it was while digging Dobby's grave, that
Harry's thoughts clarified and he decided to focus back on Horcruxes.
Still I'm not sure how that could be adequately portrayed in a movie,
and I realise I can't have everything anyway.

Carol:
True, it would be hard to portray. But if, as I suggested, the "theme"
of the first half is something like confusion and resentment over a
seemingly impossible mission, Harry's decision to focus on Horcruxes
rather than Hallows would be the resolution of that conflict and the
perfect ending to Part I. (How they would present it, I don't know.
Presumably a bit of dialogue, with Harry talking to Ron and Hermione
instead of the usual Harry/Dumbledore conversation.)

Alison: 
> One other problem here though, is that they only learn Luna is 
missing after the visit to the Lovegoods, and rescue her from Malfoy
Manor before going to Shell Cottage. <snip>

Carol:
Exactly. The Lovegood segment can't come after the Malfoy Manor
segment, and there's no need for any alteration of the chronology if
both segments are included in Part One. Part Two would begin with the
break-in to Gringotts (or the preparations for it), followed by LV's
discovery that his Horcruxes are missing and HRH Apparating to
Hogwarts. Everything follows from there, a unified film that takes
place mostly if not entirely in one day. (I doubt that they'll include
the epilogue.) 

Carol earlier:
> > As I said, the first film would focus thematically of Harry's
struggle to embark on and make sense of the impossible mission that
Dumbledore has assigned him. The film could end at the point where he
finally understands what he has to do and why. (Not counting the
self-sacrifice, of course.) The second film would focus on carrying
out the mission.
> > 
> > Carol, who thinks there are more than two ways to divide a
two-part film and the key in this case is theme
> >
> 
> Alison : 
> 
> Wouldn't this then need to include some of Harry's disillusionment
with Dumbledore since that contributes to his, and indirectly to 
Ron's, frustration and therefore more of DD's backstory ? In my mind
this is all mixed up together with the appearances by & discovery of
Grindelwald, and then further mixed in with Harry's flashes of
Voldemort's search for the Elder Wand, for which Grindelwald is 
pretty much the key. 
> 
> Probably more telling of my state of mind than anything else....
>
Carol:
well, no. Harry's disillusionment with Dumbledore can't be resolved
until King's Cross and will have to continue into DH so that it's
still the same story. But the "theme" of Part 1, Harry's inability to
make sense of his impossible mission, is resolved with the decision he
makes as he digs Dobby's grave. I agree with you that the film needs
to end just after that point. In Part 2, he still won't have come to
terms with Dumbledore--in fact, that conflict actually intensifies as
the conflict with (unfortunately dead) Snape is resolved, and Harry
thinks that DD has "betrayed" him. But a conflict is not a theme. the
theme of Part 2 as I'm envisioning it is that Voldemort must be
destroyed at whatever cost to Harry and others. So Part 2 would follow
up on Harry's decision to forgo the Hallows and destroy the Horcruxes
to defeat Voldemort even though it means (as Harry will discover when
he visits Snape's memories) that he has to sacrifice himself. The
resolution of the conflict with Dumbledore comes in King's Cross,
which I hope is fully developed as a kind of interlude between Harry's
self-sacrifice and his defeat of Voldemort. Of course, it won't be as
long and detailed as it is in the book, but it will clear up any
remaining questions that the viewer has if he or she hasn't read the
books. I hope that Harry publicly vindicates Snape before killing LV,
but that can't be fully developed, either (though if played right,
that scene will build tension before the final, all-too-quick, duel to
the death.

Anyway, I think that part 2 will more or less structure itself (though
maybe we won't be limited to Harry's pov. The problem is how to get
all those important scenes in Part 1 in a unified two-and-a half hour
movie.

Carol, who thinks that the two films will feel very different, just as
the last nine or so chapters felt different from the rest of DH, the
book, at least to me




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 20:43:33 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:43:33 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <gbcqem+4a02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbe8pl+no6s@eGroups.com>

Carol earlier:
> > Before I can answer that question, I need to know how Heyman
defines "theme." ... I would say that Hallows and Horcruxes are not
themes but motifs ...
> > 
> > A theme, OTOH, is a concept, often a controlling idea around which
the writer structures the work or an insight that he or she is
consciously trying to convey. ...
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> Sorry to cut so much, but you have brought up an interesting point.
Though I don't know if I can officially call it 'themes', but there
are two distinct parts to the final book.
> 
> The first section is about Seeking, learning, and resolving a
mystery. The second section is about acting on that knowledge.
> 
> In a sense, by some definition, the first half is Mystery, and the
second half is Suspense.
> 
> From this perspective, it seems the transition occurs when Harry is
burying Dobby. That is when he has resolved the Mystery to his own
satisfaction, and in doing so has set himself on a course of action. 
> 
> Up until that point Harry is in turmoil. He is torn between Hallows
and Horcruxes. He is tormented because Dumbledore expects
overwhelmingly big things from him, but has left him little to go on.
There are many mysteries and frustrations in this first half that
Harry and the gang have to deal with.

Carol responds:
So far I agree with you, only I would say that the "halves" are by no
means equal in terms of page count.

bboyminn: 
> From another perspective, the first section is all about internal
conflict; the second section is about external conflict. The battle
with himself vs the battle against others.
> 
> Now, it is not completely cut and dried. Harry certain does battle
with other earlier in the book, and certainly has internal battles in
the latter part of the book, but on a broad and general scale, I think
the internal vs the external conflict divides the book nicely

Carol:
Well, yes and no. The central conflict remains Harry vs. Voldemort
(who maintains a presence within Harry's mind in both parts). Ron also
has his inner demons in Part 1, which he conquers through action, and
Harry is struggling with self-doubt and his loss of faith in
Dumbledore. But Harry's loss of faith, his inner conflict with DD,
continues into Part 2 and actually intensifies just at the point when
the ongoing conflict with Snape is resolved. But conflict is not
theme, which is what Heyman says he's organizing around. I think you
were closer to the mark with the first half being about Harry's
confusion and frustration and lack of direction, which I agree are
resolved by the choice of Horcruxes vs. Hallows (the mystery of the
Hallows having been previously solved). The second half, I agree, is
Harry acting on this resolution. The internal conflicts remain in some
form, resolved through "The Prince's Tale" and "King's Cross"; the
central conflict between Harry and Voldemort is resolved sequentially
through the destruction of the Horcruxes, Harry's self-sacrifice, and
the final battle, which, of course, is the climax of the film and the
series. So, yes, the primary conflict is external, but I don't think
that in itself would be a reason to divide the films there if the
externalization of the conflict didn't coincide with or follow
naturally from the resolution of Harry's doubts and confusion in Part 1. 

bboyminn: 
> Still, were to cut? I think possible Ron rescuing Harry and getting
the sword, and ending with Ron saying (paraphrased) 'well it sounds
much cooler that it was when you say it like that', and Harry repling
to the effect that 'I've been telling you that for years'. That
concludes with a climax, and a bit of a wind down, and ends with a
clever remark by both Ron and Harry. 

Carol:
Well, true, but that scene involves the resolution of *Ron's*
self-doubts, not Harry's. The mystery of the Hallows remains
unresolved until the visit to the Lovegoods, which follows Ron's
destruction of the locket Horcrux, and surely Luna's rescue should
occur in the same film as the discovery of her disappearance. And, as
we've both said, Harry's doubts are resolved with the burial of Dobby.
Surely *that's* the natural resolution of part 1, and Gringotts, the
theft of the cup Horcrux which sets off the climactic events of the
second half, is the logical place to begin the second film.

bboyminn: 
> When we begin the next movie, we start with Ron and Harry in the
forest, perhaps with a slight replay of the last of the previous
movie, then the go to the tent and Hermione freaks out on Ron. 
> 
> From there, it is on to the Snatchers, Malfoy Manor, the Rescue,
Dobby's death, and then we begin the second movie in earnest.

Carol:
Why not put Malfoy Manor and Dobby's death in the first film, so that
the second film can begin in reality rather than "in earnest" with
Harry's "clear course of action"? In the book, there's an interlude of
about a month between Malfoy Manor and Gringotts. That's a natural
break in terms of time, plot, and theme. Why crowd the Snatchers and
Malfoy Manor (and the visit to Xeno Lovegood, which you've omitted)
into an already action-filled film rather than placing them in the
slower-paced, somewhat action-poor first half, in which they fit
thematically, in any case?

bboyminn:
> From that point on Harry has made a choice and his course of action
is clear and unwavering. They break into Gringott's to get the Cup,
Harry has his vision, then it is off to Hogsmeade and the first
flairings of the Battle of Hogwarts begins.

Carol:
Exactly. which is why it makes sense to me to begin the second film
with the first step in Harry's unwavering course of action. Wavering
and hesitation and confusion (and stupid moves like saying
"Voldemort") belong to the first half of the film. Knowing what to do
and doing it belong to the second half. IMO, of course.

bboyyminn: 
> Not knowing what they will keep and what they will lose, it's hard
to determine how that balances out in movie time, but from a thematic
point of view, Dobby's burial is the clear transition point in the story. 

carol:
Exactly.

bboyminn: 
> Of course, the transition in the story, doesn't necessarily mark the
transition point between the two movie. I think the first movie needs
to end before that transition point, so that's way I say the 'finding
the Sword' scene is a good place to end.

Carol:
That's what I thought at first, simply because the destruction of the
locket Horcrux is an important event that occurs mid-book, but the
problem with that division, aside from crowding too much action into
the second film and omitting action from the first film is that the
scenes you suggest putting into the second film aren't directly
related to the defeat of Voldmort. They don't fit with the rest of
that film in terms of theme *or* plot, and they're needed in terms of
both plot and theme in part 1. The Xeno Lovegood scene solves the
mystery of the Hallows and sets up the Horcrux/Hallows choice that
ultimately resolves Harry's indecision and sets him on his course of
action. Malfoy Manor reveals the location of one of the Horcruxes,
making that decision easier. It also results in Dobby's death, which
enables Harry to see from a perspective of love and pity instead of
fear, confusion, anger, and vengeance.

I think your instintive sense of the thematic division between the two
parts of DH is right on the money, and I'll bet that both Heyman and
Steve Kloves ended up seeing that same dividing point once Kloves
started writing and talking about the script.

bboyminn: 
> I think Yates has tremendous potential as a director. I think OotP
was brilliantly constructed, but it was cut far too lean. And there
were some real mistakes made in it, that effected my enjoyment. For
example, the scene where Harry hands the Prophecy over to Lucius
should have never happened. To me, that undermined everything. <snip>

Carol:
I agree, though I'm more concerned about changes involving Snape. I
also didn't like Neville's actively seeking vengeance or the Prophecy
(or half of it) being heard by everybody present. I did like what the
filmmakers did with Sirius Black (except for the way his death was
depicted). Film!Sirius is a much more sympathetic character than
Book!Sirius, who's too depressed and self-absorbed to be much of a
godfather to Harry. (Just my opinion. Sirius fans will disagree, I'm
sure.)

bboyminn: 
> There is a story that needs to be told, and to satisfy the fan, that
story must actually get told. It is not enough just to have Harry,
Ron, and Hermione running around on screen for a few hours. If this as
a fan boy puff piece <snip> Where it is nothing but an excuse for us
to see our favorite boy-crush/girl-crush stars, then I think it will
fail as a movie. <snip>

Carol:
Are you talking about HBP now? I've seen enough photos and interviews
to be satisfied that the Snape/Draco subplot will be fully developed,
and we'll get at least the essence of Tom Riddle's backstory and an
introduction to the Horcruxes. I don't like added scenes like the one
at the Weasleys, but most of the key elements (the cursed locket, the
poisoned mead, Draco's mission, the Unbreakable Vow, the cave, the
tower, the duel with Snape) are definitely there. Slughorn fans will
be happy even though he doesn't look like Mary GrandPre's sketches.

My feeling is that Yates is now aware of the places where earlier
scripts went wrong, changing too much or omitting scenes and
characters that turned out to be important. If he applies that lesson
to HBP and DH, I'll be happy.

Carol, actually happy that the inescapable two-year wait between films
is now between OoP and HBP rather than HBP and DH, part 1




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 06:49:14 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:49:14 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <gbe8pl+no6s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbi0la+ogfp@eGroups.com>

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


> 
> bboyminn: 
> > Still, were to cut? I think possible Ron rescuing Harry
> >  and getting the sword, ...
> 
> Carol:
> Well, true, but that scene involves the resolution of *Ron's*
> self-doubts, not Harry's. The mystery of the Hallows remains
> unresolved until the visit to the Lovegoods,...
> 

bboyminn:

My point is that the first movie needs to end before that is
resolved. In a sense, the second movie needs a brief 
introcution and the transition between finding the sword, and
temporarily losing it at Malfoy manor are the introduction 
that bring us up to Dobby's burial. And that event, leads us
into the next phase of the story.

But again, not knowing what they will and won't cut, it is
hard to tell if that is an effective breaking point. But in
the story, it is the breaking point for Harry, it represents
a transition in his attitude toward what he is doing. So, the
end either has to be before Dobby's death or just after.

> bboyminn: 
> > When we begin the next movie, we start with Ron and Harry in
> > the forest, perhaps with a slight replay of the last of the
> > previous movie, then the go to the tent and Hermione freaks
> > out on Ron. 
> > 
> > ...
> 
> Carol:
> Why not put Malfoy Manor and Dobby's death in the first film,
> so that the second film can begin in reality rather than "in 
> earnest" with Harry's "clear course of action"? ...
> 

bboyminn:

We agree that from a story perspective, Dobby's death is a 
transition point, but is it a good place to break the movie?

What do we need in terms of movie elements to make a satisfactory
break? Well we need climax, wind down, and resolution. Is the
escape from Malfoy Manor a sufficient climax, and does Dobby's
burial constitute sufficient wind down, and resolution? 

> ...
> 
> Carol:
> That's what I thought at first, simply because the destruction
> of the locket Horcrux is an important event that occurs 
> mid-book, but the problem with that division, aside from 
> crowding too much action into the second film and omitting 
> action from the first film is that the scenes you suggest 
> putting into the second film aren't directly related to the
> defeat of Voldmort. ...

bboyminn:

Dividing the last two movies is not an enviable task. What to 
keep and what to lose is difficult. But I do know this, the
existing parts of the Series have been tolerable, but just.
They did a fair, but thin, job on the first movie. The second
was a mess especially the end. The third was moderately good,
but there were some bad choices made there too. ...and so on,
but these last two movies of the final books are their chance
to redeem things. They've got the time, let them tell the 
story. But I fear they have so many poorly developed characters,
and no motivation setup up in earlier movies for action that
must take place in the later movies, I'm not convinced they 
can pull it off. I hope they do, I really hope they do. And,
like I said, OotP was very well constructed as a movie in 
general, but in several places, it made disastrous plot
choices. If the theme continues, I don't hold out much hope.
I'm sure the final movies will be OK, but I was really, as
a fan, hoping for more than OK.

Steve/bluewizard




From md at exit-reality.com  Fri Sep 26 12:09:34 2008
From: md at exit-reality.com (Cabal)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:09:34 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <gbi0la+ogfp@eGroups.com>
References: <gbe8pl+no6s@eGroups.com> <gbi0la+ogfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <017e01c91fd0$bd25cec0$37716c40$@com>

If they do two 2hr 30min films they won?t have to cut much if anything. I
mean, 4 ? - 5 hrs is a lot of screen time.

 

The book is not as long as OOTP, and if it was printed in standard type and
margins for adult readers it would actually be about 100 pages shorter (HP
hardcover?s have about 250 words per page, most adult fiction has 300 ? 350
per page ? less white space)

 

The only real issue at 5 hrs is where to separate the head from the body.

 

I think the best option for two films (aside from just stopping a la ?Lord
of the Rings?) is to devote the first half of the film to the Hallows and
the second film to Horcrux?s.

 

You?d have to change the timeline to do that, but I think having all the key
scenes is more important than the order they happen, and anything they can
do to make the Camping Trip more exiting (like cutting most of it) will be
welcome to most fans, I think.

 

md

 

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 2:49 AM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Undeathly Hallows ?

 

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

> 
> bboyminn: 
> > Still, were to cut? I think possible Ron rescuing Harry
> > and getting the sword, ...
> 
> Carol:
> Well, true, but that scene involves the resolution of *Ron's*
> self-doubts, not Harry's. The mystery of the Hallows remains
> unresolved until the visit to the Lovegoods,...
> 





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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 20:10:59 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:10:59 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <gbi0la+ogfp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <gbjfkj+5qek@eGroups.com>

bboyminn:
> 
> My point is that the first movie needs to end before that is
resolved. In a sense, the second movie needs a brief 
> introcution and the transition between finding the sword, and
> temporarily losing it at Malfoy manor are the introduction 
> that bring us up to Dobby's burial. And that event, leads us
> into the next phase of the story.
> 
> But again, not knowing what they will and won't cut, it is
> hard to tell if that is an effective breaking point. But in
> the story, it is the breaking point for Harry, it represents
> a transition in his attitude toward what he is doing. So, the
> end either has to be before Dobby's death or just after.

Carol:
I'm not suer what we're arguing, then, because I agree that the movie
had to end with Dobby's death or just after. That's the point at which
Harry's doubts and wavering end (even though the inner conflict
regarding DD remains unresolved), when Harry at last has a clear
course of action, The second DH film would begin with Gringotts or the
planning for Gringotts, carrying out the action on which Harry
resolved at the end of the first film.

Whether the movie needs a brief introduction or not is up to the
filmmakers. I'd say that beginning in medias res with preparations for
the Gringotts break-in is a better option. Any background or other
exposition to clarify for the reader what's going on can be done
through dialogue as they prepare for the break-in). 

Carol earlier:
> > Why not put Malfoy Manor and Dobby's death in the first film, so
that the second film can begin in reality rather than "in earnest"
with Harry's "clear course of action"? ...
> > 
bboyminn:
> 
> We agree that from a story perspective, Dobby's death is a 
> transition point, but is it a good place to break the movie?

Carol:
Well, Heyman says he's organizing thematically, and certainly breaking
after Dobby's burial (rather than immediately after his death) makes
sense from that perspective, assuming that Harry talks to Ron and
Hermione about his decision. How the filmmakers will deal with
Ollivander and Griphook is anybody's guess. That could be your
"introduction"! 

bboyminn: 
> What do we need in terms of movie elements to make a satisfactory
break? Well we need climax, wind down, and resolution. Is the escape
from Malfoy Manor a sufficient climax, and does Dobby's burial
constitute sufficient wind down, and resolution? 

Carol:
Harry's escape and Dobby's death: climax.
Dobby's burial: Wind down.
Harry's decision to forgo the wand and go after the Horcruxes (no more
indecision or confusion): Resolution.

Works for me. Besides, putting Xeno Lovegood and Malfoy Manor in the
first half gives that film more action and ties in thematically with
Harry's indecision and lack of direction, which is the chief "theme"
of the first film/first "half" of the book.

> bboyminn:
> 
> Dividing the last two movies is not an enviable task. What to keep
and what to lose is difficult. But I do know this, the existing parts
of the Series have been tolerable, but just. <snip> but these last two
movies of the final books are their chance to redeem things. They've
got the time, let them tell the story. But I fear they have so many
poorly developed characters, and no motivation setup up in earlier
movies for action that must take place in the later movies, I'm not
convinced they can pull it off. <snip>

carol:
Well, true. But that doesn't really tie in with where they'll break
the two halves of DH. Anything that was left out of the previous films
will have to go into HBP, or into dialogue when HRH talk during the
long camping trip. But I have a feeling that we'll just have to live
without an adequate explanation of Snape's role in sending the Order
to the DoM, adequate development for Kreacher, and so on. The
requirements for a successful film are obviously different than for a
successful film, the audiences and their expectations are different,
and the alterations and omissions already made can only partly be
remedied. That's the problem with basing a series of films on a series
of books that has not been completed. (Chris Columbus, for all his
faults, was wise to deviate as little as possible from the books in
making the first two films. Cuaron started a trend of altering
elements of the books, continued in GoF and OoP, from which the films
may never recover. But making DH in two parts will insure that it, at
least, incorporates as many as possible of the structural and thematic
elements of the book. Will we see Auntie Muriel? Who knows? Will we
see Bellatrix and the Malfoys and Snape and Wormtail? you bet.

Carol, who sees no resolution except to *Ron's* internal conflict with
the destruction of the locket Horcrux, whereas Harry's decision to
pursue the Horcrux would resolve not only his dilemma but the loose
ends of the necessarily episodic plot of the first film




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 22:38:27 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 22:38:27 -0000
Subject: Undeathly Hallows ?
In-Reply-To: <017e01c91fd0$bd25cec0$37716c40$@com>
Message-ID: <gbjo93+fuo1@eGroups.com>

Cabal wrote:
>
> If they do two 2hr 30min films they won't have to cut much if
anything. I mean, 4 ? - 5 hrs is a lot of screen time.
> 
> The book is not as long as OOTP <snip>   
> 
> The only real issue at 5 hrs is where to separate the head from the
body.
> 
> I think the best option for two films (aside from just stopping a la
"Lord of the Rings") is to devote the first half of the film to the
Hallows and the second film to Horcrux's.
> 
> You'd have to change the timeline to do that, but I think having all
the key scenes is more important than the order they happen, and
anything they can do to make the Camping Trip more exiting (like
cutting most of it) will be welcome to most fans, I think.

Carol responds:
Easiest, maybe, but probably not the most satisfying. And why change
the timeline when you have a natural break between the confused
preparations and an indecisive Harry and the actual confrontation with
Voldemort, starting with seizing a Horcrux and ending with voldemort's
defeat?

You have to have a coherent plot with its own resolution for Part 1,
and you need thematic unity (which an awkward switch from the rather
boring Hallows mystery in Part 1 to actively dsstroying Horcruxes and
confronting Voldemort in Part 2 would only partially accomplish. You'd
have to move the whole locket subplot, including the MoM raid, the Doe
Patronus and Ron's destruction of the Horcrux, to Part 2. What would
Part ! be left with? (You can't do it the other way around--Horcruxes
first and Hallows second, because the theft of the cup Horcrux sets
off the main action, and Neville's killing of Nagini has to occur
after Harry's "death"--otherwise, there would be no Horcrux holding
him and Voldemort to life.

BTW, Malfoy Manor has to occur at Easter break so that Draco will have
a reason to be home. The main action has to occur after he's returned
to school (though not necessarily a full month later. Easter 1998
should be in June, not March, anyway. JKR either forgot which year it
was, just as she has DD dying in 1997 on her website, or she forgot to
consult a calendar. There's really no practical reason for Malfoy
Manor to occur in March, not April; it's just a blunder, IMO.)

Regarding LOTR, the filmmakers didn't "just stop," IMO. Fellowship
ends exactly where it should end, with Frodo and Sam starting off
alone (so they think) on their journey to Mordor, leaving Aragorn and
the others to search for the young Hobbits. It's not much different
from the book. They've just included a couple of chapters from Two
Towers to make a satisfying ending to that part (with a sequel or two
obviously coming). Two Towers focuses on Rohan (including the search
for the young Hobbits and the Battle of Helm's Deep) on the one hand
and Gollum's externalized internal conflict on the other. I can't
recall exactly where that film ends, but I don't remember it's seeming
arbitrary, however different it may have been from the division of the
books (which was also somewhat arbitrary, even if we look at Tolkien's
original six book division as opposed to the publisher's three volumes
of two books each). 

Carol, who see no need to distort the chronology and thinks that doing
so would cause more problems than it solves




From destiny_spells at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 11:54:05 2008
From: destiny_spells at yahoo.com (Xydia Mae Rojas)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: hp7
Message-ID: <519097.80845.qm@web59712.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

whats the plot summary of hp7?


      




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 18:52:30 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:52:30 -0000
Subject: hp7
In-Reply-To: <519097.80845.qm@web59712.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <gblvde+rffo@eGroups.com>

Xydia Mae Rojas wrote:
>
> whats the plot summary of hp7?

Carol responds:
If you mean an official plot summary for the first and second films,
none has been published yet. All our information about the two filsm
so far comes from interviews.

Most of the publicity at the moment (naturally) surrounds HBP, for
which we have many photos, a teaser trailer, and quite a bit of
information. The official synopsis for HBP can be read here:

http://harrypotter.warnerbros.com/harrypotterandthehalf-bloodprince/

Once production of the first DH film is completed, we can expect the
official website to shift its focus to DH. (When I tried substituting
"deathlyhallows" for "half-bloodprince" in the URL above, I got a
message saying that I'd reached an invalid page.)

If you want an official synopsis for DH, the book, go to
http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/hallows/ 

Bloomsbury is no help at all:

"[H]ere, in this seventh and final book, Harry discovers what fate
truly has in store for him as he inexorably makes his way to that
final meeting with Voldemort.

In this thrilling climax to the phenomenally bestselling series, J.K.
Rowling reveals all to her eagerly waiting readers."

http://www.bloomsbury.com/books/details.aspx?isbn=9780747595830 

Carol, hoping that she's answered your question 





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 19:01:48 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:01:48 -0000
Subject: Teeny article on Professor Sprout
Message-ID: <gblvus+mfat@eGroups.com>

The DH cast will include Professor Sprout, again played by Miriam
Margoyles, who hasn't appeared in an HP film since CoS:

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0417741/news#ni0573279

The author of the article isn't sure whether Sprout will appear in
"all two" [sic] halves of the DH film or only one. Given that Harry
doesn't attend Hogwarts for his seventh year and that Sprout appears
only in the battle scene near the end of the book, my guess is that
she's only in the second film. Still, we can now hope for DEs
struggling with Devil's Snare. Maybe we'll also see McGonagall
ordering a bunch of desks to "Charge!" and the suits of armor doing
battle. Should be fun for the special effects people if that's the case.

Carol, hoping that we get to see spells other than AK and Stupefy