More Chicago screening reviews

[Carol]

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