Movies are not Books (very slight PoA movie spoilers towards end)

[eloiseherisson at aol.com]

I'm one of those people who has a problem with film adaptations of books.  
Books reign sovereign, they are the *real* version of the story and I hate  
alterations.
 
For this reason, I'm one of the apparent minority of fans who *don't* get  
majorly excited when a new HP movie comes out. I'm not expecting a faithful  
rendition of the book. There were many things in CoS especially (the  
reassignation of dialogue in particular) that irritated me hugely. And missing  out 
Snape's opening scene, grrrr, (that's my biggest gripe with the movies:  never 
enough Snape, or enough Rickman for that matter, though I try to keep them  as two 
separate issues. <g>)
 
However the omission of that Snape scene from CoS was my wake up call to  
think seriously about the obvious. What makes a good book doesn't necessarily  
make a good film. A film which is slavishly true to the book on which it is  
based, unless the original is very cinematic to begin with, will likely be poor  
cinema.
 
So why was that wonderful scene of Snape accosting Harry and Ron when they  
arrived at Hogwarts at the begining of CoS changed like that? Well, it had to  
be, otherwise we would have had no background (in that movie) to the  
relationship between Harry and Filch prior to the attack on Mrs Norris. It was  
essential for that later scene to make the fullest sense that their relationship  
was established within the movie itself. Movies don't generally have the  luxury 
of a narrator (these ones certainly don't) and we might remind  ourselves 
that JKR in her earlier books had what to me was a very annoying way  of telling 
us stuff we already knew from earlier volumes in order to put the  action of 
that story into context. This is the cinematic equivalent.
 
Another fact that I bore in mind as I went to see PoA was that JKR herself  
has been very positive about it. In particular she spoke in advance about her  
admiration for Cuaron's adaptation of _A Little Princess_.  Well, guess  what, 
that's a movie I have problems with because I am just hopping about the  
location being changed from London to the US! But she pointed out the fact that  a 
movie adaptation can be faithful to the spirit of a book even if details are  
changed. She also said in interview (London premiere?) that she had no 
problems  with her books being shortened to make good cinema. If JKR has no problem, 
 then I'm not sure that it should be a big issue for us.
 
Now, I don't want to go through the PoA and give lots of concrete  examples, 
partly because I don't have the time right now, but mostly because I  don't 
want to contaminate this post with spoilers for people like Shaun, but I  
actually thought that this movie was very well done. Yes, it was shortened a  lot. 
No, there wasn't enough Snape (or Rickman <g>). But as I watched, I  was doing 
so consciously thinking about how the storyline had been adapted in  order to 
make a film of reasonable length which got in all the major elements of  the 
action and relationships between characters and which made cinematic sense. 
 
>From time to time I smiled from the fandom perspective, as for instance,  
when a convenient, non-canon solution to a problem that has caused endless  
discussion on this and I'm sure other groups was found. There were things that  are 
very important in the book (at least important to us) which were glossed  
over, or not explained in the movie - I don't think it's giving too much away to  
say that most of the Shrieking Shack dialogue had to be cut - but I thought  
myself that that scene was very well done; I really don't think that it could  
have been filmed exactly as it is in the book. I thought that other scenes 
which  were altered were mostly done sympathetically and for good reason.
 
I only had two gripes, really. First is that I didn't like the way they did  
the werewolf. Secondly I didn't like the one major change to the Boggart 
class,  which didn't make sense. But another change in that scene I thought 
improved on  the book (again it made it visually better) and Boggart Snape was superb.
 
I was curious about the already much discussed new dialogue given to Lupin  
and wonder if it does mean what others have speculated. It could certainly give 
 Snape even more reason to dislike Lupin, however, I thought it a little 
strange  in the light of the relationship he had with James and Sirius at the time.
 
In all, I suppose I regard it as "Scenes from" PoA. There's a lot more to  
the story as we all know, but this fleshes some of the action. It's successful  
cinema. There is of course a lot more to the story than even we know, all  
stashed away in JKR's notebooks. It gets us back to all those old main list  
discussions about canon and authorial intent and whether it matters.
 
Just one thing, though. Someone really out to tell Mr. Kloves that it is  
*not* normal for a modern British teenager to address his friends' father as  
"Sir". I'm afraid we're not that formal over here. Harry'll be talking about his  
"Mom" next*.
 
BTW, there was a reference in this Week's _Big Issue_ to Warner having  
confirmed that there will be an entirly new cast for OoP. Is that right? Please  
tell me it's not.
 
~Eloise
*Yes, I do know that Mum was translated Mom in some of the US  editions.
 


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