Robes once more -- MOVIE: an extra scene

[prefectmarcus at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 27445

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., prefectmarcus at y... wrote:
> > So from the text, what are the right kind and why are the ones in 
> > the movie wrong?  
> 
> Marcus is correct that from the text we do not have enough evidence 
to 
> concretely prove the robes are wrong (i.e. no direct descriptions), 
> though we do have some suggestive evidence.
> 
> However, if you accept JKR's word as canon, then according to The 
> Sunday Times article (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/magazine/)
> 
>    The author, J K Rowling, specifies the children's school wear 
as:  
>    plain work robes (black), pointed hat (black) and winter 
cloak    
>    (black). But the costume designer, Judianna Makovsky, with 
the    
>    backing of the director, Chris Columbus, and the director of    
>    photography, John Seale, wanted to create a look for them 
that    
>    would give them an immediate on-screen identity, one that would 
be 
>    rooted in magical tradition and history. 
> So, no, they didn't do it "accurately" to how JKR imagines it.  
> However, JKR has given us no reason to believe she does not support 
> this decision, so it's just fine with me.  And I think they look 
> pretty good, just taking into account the visual style of the film.

It still does not specifically say that Rowling said that in this 
context.  The article writer seems (at least to me) to be quoting 
from the list found in SS, which we are nigh close to memorizing.

I agree that the uniforms look great.  That might be clouding my 
thinking here, but I am trying hard to be objective.  She is allowing 
a great deal of artistic license with the book covers, why not the 
school uniforms for the movie?  

> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Steve Vander Ark" <vderark at b...> wrote:
Then he adds 
> > a little snippet that's bound to have Potter fans bashing down 
the 
> > door of their nearest cinema come release time. Asked whether 
> > there's anything new in the film, Columbus tells Empire that `[JK 
> > Rowling] did a little piece for us that wasn't in the first book 
but 
> > she had written it and she authorised it and it's in there and 
it's 
> > a little secret that you won't expect to see.


> Although I generally like to avoid speculation like this, I find 
this 
> very much in keeping with the other rumors about them having a 
> Godric's Hollow set they filmed in, which AFAIK were never debunked.
> 
> It all fits: Rowling might have written a small portion of the 
scene 
> for somewhere in the first book (not necessarily the beginning of 
the 
> book, mind you, and not necessarily the whole of the events that 
> evening).  And it's certainly a key into Harry's past.

> -Luke

My first thought exactly.

Marcus