MOVIE: The Turban & Other Wrongs

[caliburncy at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 27330

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Ali Wildgoose" <diagonalley_ at h...> wrote:
> Either way, it makes very little sense to me that Quirrel was 
> possessed sometime after that encouter but before the start of term. 
> A couple of weeks doesn't seem like enough time to get yourself in 
> that much trouble, does it? ;}

Right, I think the confusion people are having is that Quirrel DID 
meet Voldemort in Albania before Harry met him in the Leaky Cauldron, 
and was at this time already working for Voldemort, but it was not 
until after the failed stone theft that Voldemort decided to take 
residence on the back of Quirrel's head in order to avoid any further 
failures as explained from the quote Kelly excised from the end of the 
book:

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Kelly Hurt <klhurt at y...> wrote:
> "....When I failed to steal the stone from Gringotts, he was most
> displeased.  He punished me...decided he would have to keep a closer
> watch on me..."

This seems a clear imposition that it was only at this point Quirrel 
"built a little birdhouse in his soul" (Dark Lord-house in his 
cranium) even though he had made Voldemort his master long before 
this.

***

On book discrepancies:

Actually, I find the fact that most of the discrepancies are not in 
any way plot-relevant to be quite heartening.  We can be a bit too 
L.O.O.N.y this way.  They have logistical reasons for the changes they 
made (whether that affects the perfection of it or not in your mind), 
but they seem to be remaining true to the SPIRIT of the books, which 
is, in the end, the most important thing.

I do not advocate changing things for no good reason, but they may 
have had specific motivations to make Hagrid's hut out of stone, for 
example.  And they had logistical filming considerations to take into 
account with Dan Radcliffe's haircut and what would be the best 
balance of easy to work with on set and accurate to the JKR vision.  
And people have pointed out why benches might be necessary instead of 
chairs.

Or even like the fact that JKR pictures the Dursley's house as 1930s 
style, but they instead went for a blanket early 1990s look, just 
because a 1930s house would look too substantial, classy, and 
non-"cookie cutter" suburban to much of the audience.  That's a 
legitamitely motivated change to my mind, even if it isn't 100% 
accurate and I secretly wish they wouldn't bother doing things like 
that.

Better that then handing the movie rights over to people who would 
have "tightened" (read as: euphemism for ruined) the plot or 
characters.

-Luke