Post a reply
8/09/2011 5:40 pm
I was overseas when these came out, and after Charlotte's Web and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, I concentrated on the "Little House" books as I was most concerned with how to see that my first child grew with American values, although living in Southeast Asia. I think we also did Narnia and the Hobbit before we lost the time to read books in the evening.
I have a hunch that the HP books are good, and maybe we will do those with my younger daughter, as she approaches the age for chapter books.
8/09/2011 5:10 pm
I'm pretty sure I posted this before, but when we moved in December 2003, our neighbors across the street from our old home allowed us to live in theirs while they were in Costa Rica and our new house was being prepped. They're kind of minimalists, so they only had basic cable (no ESPN!). Their daughter was 13 at the time and she owned the first three books, which seemed like the only entertainment option at the time.
Like Fors' son, my kid had his first real reading experience with Harry Potter. Almost any kind of literature at that age is good literature.
8/09/2011 4:36 pm
Max wrote:
Dudes, thanks for the clarifications, but I am bit surprised at your passion for these books. No more wisecracks about John Cusack movies . . . especially the good ones!
Harry Potter was the first significant reading (i.e., non-childrens book) that I did with my son. I think he was 7 when we dove headfirst into Sorceror's Stone. It took several months, but we finally made it through. Our deal was simple--we didn't watch any of the movies until we had finished that respective book. We finished the entire series before Half Blood Prince hit the theaters, so we had to wait for the release of the last 3 movies before we could see the cinematic end of the story.
I went back and re-read the series a second time on my own just to catch things I realized I missed as I was going through the story.
8/09/2011 3:18 pm
There are so few original ideas these days. In any medium.
The lyrical version of Cage's 4'33"?
8/09/2011 2:44 pm
"I am bit surprised at your passion for these books."
Rowling created this perfectly-wound, or almost perfectly-wound (I could have easlily lived without the first 200-300 pages of Deathly Hallows), tome out of nothing, and she was able to present it in an entertaining way. There are so few original ideas these days. In any medium.
8/09/2011 2:39 pm
"Snape relationship, they at least took the time for Harry to go into the pensive. Thank goodness, otherwise naming his son Albus Severus would have seemed a bit bonkers."
Especially the part about "He was the bravest man I've ever known."
8/09/2011 1:58 pm
Dudes, thanks for the clarifications, but I am bit surprised at your passion for these books. No more wisecracks about John Cusack movies . . . especially the good ones!
8/09/2011 12:28 pm
Horcrux selection, great point. They do take great pains to explain that Riddle would not want any ordinary piece of shit housing part of his soul. Instead he chose items that were personally owned by the owners of the great houses, though never getting anything from Gryffindor.
Snape relationship, they at least took the time for Harry to go into the pensive. Thank goodness, otherwise naming his son Albus Severus would have seemed a bit bonkers.
8/09/2011 11:39 am
Alz,
Agree to all, but don't forget one other important part of Harry's dialogue. Throughout that conversation, Harry kept calling Voldy "Tom" or "Riddle". You can only imagine the horror in the people who for years had refused to utter the name Voldemort hearing Harry refer to him by his given name. The disdain in Harry's speech was almost palpable in the book as you were reading it, particularly if you read it aloud, as I did, since my first time through the books I was reading them to Bob.
8/09/2011 11:37 am
"the complicated relationship with Snape."
The Snape thing is really kind of glossed over in the movie, but in the book it's one of the more powerful chapters. Thus is the problem I had with the entire series, at least after Prisoner of Azkaban, when the books started getting longer and the producers had to be more selective about what went into the films.
The most disappointing omission for me was the lack of the Tom Riddle storyline. The most fascinating passages in the sixth book, at least for me, were the ones with his ancestral Gaunts. There was absolutely no mention of his mother in the entire film series, unless it was a passing one and I missed it, and he only refers to his Muggle-born father once or twice.
I also would have preferred some inclusion about the line of possession of the Horcruxes. Rowling explains the rationale quite vividly, but in the movies it's kind of just passed off as, "Well, he likes shiny things ..."
Fors' issues with how the Battle of Hogwarts unfolded are mine, as well. Had I not read the book, I would have been entirely confused. For instance, having not been in the movie for the first two hours, Hagrid just kind of shows up at the end. What the hell?
And the very end in the movie, while an accurate account of what happens in the book, doesn't capture the emotion of what was written on the pages. It's just sort of throwaway scene of passing the torch to the next generation of Weasleys and Potters and Malfoys at Hogwarts, but the book gives you so much more description.
Again, on the whole I thought the entire series was exceptional, and I understand the time constraints of fitting a book into a movie. But there were just plot lines in the book that could have been handled better in the movie.
8/09/2011 11:27 am
Fors, excellent analysis, and things that I would have clarified more had I directed the film.
In addition to that.... One massively dissappointing thing about the movie's final fight. In the book, Harry is set down at the feet of Voldemort, who taunts Neville, covers his head with the Sorting hat, and then set it on fire. He puts a mute spell on the crowd, and it doesn't hold. Neville breaks free from Voldemorts attempted murder, takes the sword from the hat and kills Nagini (Who voldemort no longer protects, as he's "won").
At this point Harry, lying on the ground, covers up with the cloak, and a battle begins which moves into the Great Hall. Harry tries to stun and shield who he can while making his way to Voldemort, who is fighting against 3 people, as is Belatrix. She dies to Mrs Weasley after trying to kill Ginny. Voldemort knocks his three opponents down in a fury, when Harry comes out from his cloak for a final fight. Everyone basically stops to watch them decide it. In that moment, they have a dialogue, and that dialogue was (in my opinion) one of the greatest parts of the entire book series. Harry explains that Voldemort can no longer hurt anyone because Harry sacrificed himself to save them (like his mother did for him). He also explained that Voldemorts' last hope was to have remorse for what he did, to mend his soul. "I've seen what you become otherwise. For once in your life, try for some remorse." He concluded this epic dialogue by explaining the wand to Voldemorte. That Voldemorte did not win the wands allegiance because it never belonged to Snape. Snape and Dumbledore was a planned death, and the wand's power would have died, but instead someone disarmed him before that death blow was landed. Without knowing it, Draco Malfoy commanded the allegiance of the worlds most unbeatable wand. When Voldemort sneers that he'll deal with Draco after Potter, he's told that he's too late. I took this wand from Draco three days back (don't remember the specified time), so the real question is this.... Does your wand know that it's master was disarmed, because if so, I am the master of the Elder Wand.
They throw spells, and Voldemorts wand refuses to kill it's master, his killing spell recoils off the disarm spell Harry threw, and the wand flew through the air to Harry. While Voldermort fell over dead. This happened in front of the entire crowd.
I wanted that dialogue.. I wanted Harry up in the Headmaster's office with the portraits after, and neither of those were in the very end. I was dissappointed with the bridge nonsense, and breaking the elder wand.... Beyond this last minute right turn, I loved the movie. Spot on.
8/09/2011 10:51 am
Max,
In reading your posts, I take it you did not read the books. As with many movies made from best-selling books, the movies have to leave certain things out that otherwise wouldn't capture the attention of the average movie-going audience.
Throughout the books, the Sorting Hat plays a prominent role, both in the placement of witches and wizards in their respective houses, but also the ability to provide what is needed. I can't remember whether the movie accurately depicted it, but in the book, Chamber of Secrets, when Harry is about to become lunch for the Basilisk, Dumberdore's phoenix, Fawkes brings Harry the Sorting Hat, and Griffendor's sword appears in the hat. In the book version of Deathly Hallows, after Harry's purported death, Voldemort attempts to torture Neville and puts the Sorting Hat on Neville's head as part of a spell to burn him. The sword appears in the hat, and Neville uses it to kill Nagini.
Regarding Dumbledore's brother Aberforth, one major storyline that was left out of the Deathly Hallows movies was the Rita Skeeter's book about Dumbledore's life. One of the big issues is that Albus' relationship with Gellert Grindewold (the character who is shown in the movie stealing the Elder Wand). Grindewold wanted Albus to join him in taking over the wizarding world, and in a fight between the two, Dumbledore's sister, Arriana is killed, which is why Aberforth harbors so much animosity towards Albus. Again, one of the subplots of the books (somewhat developed in the movie) is that Harry should not place blind trust in Albus, because Albus isn't trustworthy. Aberforth's perceptions are substantiated when Harry looks into Snape's memory and learns that Albus knew the whole time that Harry must be kept alive so he could eventually be "killed" be Voldemort. Aberforth's character doesn't really play much of a role in the books until Deathly Hallows, but without the backstory of Dumbeldore, his appearance in the movie makes little sense.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie and plan to see it again. My main issue was with the ending. I fully expected them to expand on the Battle for Hogwarts because it made for good cinema, but the way it played out didn't make sense. In the movie, Harry springs back to life and begins his duel with Voldemort before Nagini has been killed. Harry would know full well that a duel with Voldemort at that point would be futile because until Nagini is dead, Voldemort can't be killed. In the book, Harry remains "dead" until Neville kills Nagini, at which point he leaps out of Hagrid's arms and confronts Voldemort with the facts that Voldemort doesn't possess the powers behind the Elder Wand. I get that the directors/producers were trying to add dramatic effect with the hunt for Nagini being carried out simultaneous to the duel between Harry and Voldemort, but knowing that Nagini was a Horcrux, there's no reason for those things to be happening at the same time.
With respect to the Malfoys, keep in mind that Ms. Malfoy actually saves Harry's life (after Harry saved Draco) by pronouncing him dead to Voldemort when, in fact, he was not. I suppose that get's her and the family a pass.
8/09/2011 10:04 am
I wasn't trying to run the movie down. I just wanted to flush out any other people who might not have seen it yet and did not want any spoilers.
I thought the movie was very good and I definitely didn't predict the exact relationship between Harry and Voldemort, nor the complicated relationship with Snape.
It did seem to me, however, that the movie almost expected you to know the book, as otherwise you had to make many, many leaps of logic for some parts to make much sense. My daughter explained these to me, but:
1. if the Sword of Griffindor disappeared in the goblins hand, why did Neville suddenly have it later in the movie? and if the sword in the hands of the goblin was the fake, then why didn't he know it, being a goblin?
2. I guess we're just supposed to assume that Dumbledore's brother is a powerful wizard, and if he were to join the forces of good that he would make a big difference.
3. The Malfoy's skeedaddle off, but later we see Draco acting casual. Howzabout his mum and dad, after conspiring with the Dark Lord to end life as we know it, I guess all's forgiven?
8/09/2011 10:01 am
Is there any reason not to begin this discussion? I have been a potter-fan long before they ever made a movie, and own all of the books, and almost all of the movies.
I will refrain from posting spoilers for a little longer to be safe.
IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE AND PLAN TO, PLEASE SPEAK UP OR AVOID THIS THREAD
8/09/2011 8:12 am
I saw DH2 yesterday afternoon.
Anyone else before the discussion begins?What the Hell is DH2?
I finally saw HP7ii. It turns out that my 2-3 week home leave, which has stretched to 6 weeks, is finally now due to end, so I am running around trying to do all the things I put off.
I was surprised by Ron and Harry's gay make out scene, but other than that, the movie was quite predictable.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2. Take the "D" from Deathly and the "H" from Hallows, add a "2" to incidate it's the second movie based on the book of the same name, and you have "DH2."
I would assume 99 percent of the theater audience knew how the story ends. The book sold reasonably well.