HP does not better in the summer than Fall

[bgrugin]

> Chris Coloumbus was probable the better of  the first directors of the Harry
> Potterfilms. They are deep and thoughtful and tell teh whole story unlike
> some of the others example - 
> Prizoner of Azkaban (which felt more like a Harry Potter for dummies
> novel).. I felt like the Prizoner of Azkaban movie was the movie that all
> the writers/directors/producers forgot. Its like they just read the first
> page and said this will be good enough. 
> Love,Red
> :::::::::::::::
> 
> I thought, when Columbus was announced to direct, what a horrible mistake.
> Home Alone, bad, Mrs. Doubtfire, horrible. Then I saw SS and thought, yep, I
> was right, he has no style whatsoever, the story is stagnant, the acting
> wooden, the camera stiff. 
> 
> As for POA, yeah, abridged but excellent in every way. It was the first film
> that really bonded non-readers to the films. It's cinematic, stylish, well
> acted and concentrates on characters as much as plot. I think POA and OOTP
> are the best of the five.
> 
>  
> 
> md
> 



MusicalBetsy here:
I must say that I agree with Red.  It was the first film - SS - that made me fall in love with HP.  I thought Columbus captured the innocence of the children perfectly.  And then when I read the book, yes, I discovered there was so much more to the book than the film.  Sure, some things were left out (very small things), but at least nothing was radically changed.  BUT in PoA, there were WAY too many things that were non-canon.  I HATED the shrunken heads and Flitwick's new look and the kids in muggle clothes.  And there was so much important stuff - like the origin of the Marauder's Map - that was left out.  In fact, after the movie, I had to explain so much to my husband just so he could understand it.  It was a difficult movie to follow if you hadn't read the book - and it shouldn't have to be like that.

It IS interesting how we all see things differently, isn't it?  I guess that's what makes life interesting.

Cheers,
Betsy