90 replies to this topic

[SDG]

There is no such thing as an iPhone GS3. Surely you mean the iPhone 3GS. If you suspect that my rather pathetic pettiness in making this correction is due to jealousy, you could be on to something there...

Heh. I should have left it at G3 rather than going back to add the s and fat fingering the cursor placement. Still don't always remember to use the magnifier. (I had an iMac G3 for at least five years, so I do know that those two characters go together!)

(Still typing on my new iPhone... whatever it's called. )

[SDG]

I think the thing that agitated me in Goblet of Fire was that the ENTIRE story consisted of Harry being manipulated into becoming a key ingredient in Voldemort's bring-me-back-from-the-dead recipe. Harry doesn't WANT to compete in the Tri-Wizard Tournament, he's just FORCED to after his name is magically added to the list of contestants. And then, each step of the way, he wins (or at least passes to the next stage) because people (sometimes Ron/Hermione, sometimes other people) keep feeding him the answers, or helping him cheat. And then, finally, at the end, when he wins the tournament, he's zapped away to Voldemort's special hiding place, where a sample of his blood is taken to help bring Voldemort back to life.

Speaking of which, have we ever talked about how stupid all that is as a plot? For Voldemort, that is.

I mean, you've got a confederate inside Hogwarts, you have the ability to make a Portkey and transport Harry anywhere you want. Who says the Portkey has to be an object that Harry will only touch (if at all) after an incredibly complex gauntlet with any number of opportunities for things to go wrong (and even if they go right the whole wizarding world is onto you instantly)?

Why don't we have Harry walking down the corridor in, like, chapter three or so, and Professor Moody sticks his head out of his office door and says, "Harry, can you come here a second? I want to show you something?" And Harry picks up a quill pen or something and boom, no more Harry, and it's hours or days before anyone suspects foul play.

[pilgrimscrybe]

Speaking of which, have we ever talked about how stupid all that is as a plot? For Voldemort, that is.

I mean, you've got a confederate inside Hogwarts, you have the ability to make a Portkey and transport Harry anywhere you want. Who says the Portkey has to be an object that Harry will only touch (if at all) after an incredibly complex gauntlet with any number of opportunities for things to go wrong (and even if they go right the whole wizarding world is onto you instantly)?

Why don't we have Harry walking down the corridor in, like, chapter three or so, and Professor Moody sticks his head out of his office door and says, "Harry, can you come here a second? I want to show you something?" And Harry picks up a quill pen or something and boom, no more Harry, and it's hours or days before anyone suspects foul play.

Heh, that's kinda like the way that Gandlof didn't just use the eagles and fly to Mt. Doom, drop the ring, and be done with it. (For what it's worth, I still love both stories.)

[bowen]

There is no such thing as an iPhone GS3. Surely you mean the iPhone 3GS. If you suspect that my rather pathetic pettiness in making this correction is due to jealousy, you could be on to something there...

Heh. I should have left it at G3 rather than going back to add the s and fat fingering the cursor placement. Still don't always remember to use the magnifier. (I had an iMac G3 for at least five years, so I do know that those two characters go together!)

(Still typing on my new iPhone... whatever it's called. )

See, now if you had just called it a new iPhone 3G, you would not have inflamed me to heights of irrational and stupid gadget jealousy, because I have a 3G, which I bought about 30 days before Apple introduced the 3GS. Woody's feelings about Buzz in Toy Story make so much sense to me. (See? A movie reference! A religion reference would make this completely compatible with Arts & Faith, although many would argue that people who own Apple products automatically have the religion angle covered and need add nothing more.) The time we have on the cutting edge of adult toydom is so short...

[Thom Wade]

Heh, that's kinda like the way that Gandlof didn't just use the eagles and fly to Mt. Doom, drop the ring, and be done with it. (For what it's worth, I still love both stories.)

And really, couldn't you play this game pretty successfully with any book or film? I think it just is a matter at where one draws the line of suspension of disbelief... man is Batsuit fights crime-okay. Invinicble man from another planet who can fly and punch stuff really hard-a little tougher for some... and so on.

[Peter T Chattaway]

Nezpop wrote:
: And really, couldn't you play this game pretty successfully with any book or film? I think it just is a matter at where one draws the line of suspension of disbelief... man is Batsuit fights crime-okay. Invinicble man from another planet who can fly and punch stuff really hard-a little tougher for some... and so on.

Not the same thing at all. It's perfectly all right to create worlds in which the laws of physics are somewhat different from what they are in our world; as Tolkien pointed out, we "create belief" when we enter into such stories, and we only "suspend disbelief" when something about that world doesn't add up even on its own internal terms. Characters having the ability to fly on broomsticks falls into the "create belief" category. Characters failing to think and act in a world with such powers like real people would think and act in a world with such powers falls into the "suspend disbelief" category.

[Thom Wade]

Characters having the ability to fly on broomsticks falls into the "create belief" category. Characters failing to think and act in a world with such powers like real people would think and act in a world with such powers falls into the "suspend disbelief" category.

Good point. But I think pilgrimscrybe asks a good question. And I am pretty sure we could take almost any book or movie and ask, "Well, why didn't they just do this?" and have the story completed in 50 words or less.

[Harris-Stone]

Characters having the ability to fly on broomsticks falls into the "create belief" category. Characters failing to think and act in a world with such powers like real people would think and act in a world with such powers falls into the "suspend disbelief" category.

Good point. But I think pilgrimscrybe asks a good question. And I am pretty sure we could take almost any book or movie and ask, "Well, why didn't they just do this?" and have the story completed in 50 words or less.

Well, as an aspiring fiction writer myself, let me say writers do THINK about such things and usually there answers. Whether those will satisfy everyone...well no, but:

1. For Gandalf, the temptation of the ring was too much. He couldn't be the Ring bearer so he couldn't just fly to Mount Doom. Also, those eagles weren't stealth eagles. He would be dealing with a head on, mental and spritual fight with Sauron, WHILE all 9 Nazgul tried to take him and his eagles out, WHILE an army of orcs rushed the enterance to the shaft. Without surprise, it would not have worked.

2. In Harry Potter, Harry is being watched more closely than the reader...who is viewing everything through Harry's mind...might realize. If the fake Moody tried to kidnap Harry that way, I suspect BOTH Dumbledore and Snape would have been on him like a bat out of hell. Magic leaves traces and can be detected. It's just not that easy. And Voldemort doesn't initiate the whole Triwizard tournament. Like the Joker in Batman he just "spins" it to his advantage, using it to misdirect those guarding Harry so they aren't looking the right way when the attack comes. So to me anyway, it remains very plausable within the context of the world that's built.

I agree that one can play "what if.." with most stories, and that also that this is fair game, especially as Peter points out, where suspension of disbelief is concerned.

Edited by Harris-Stone, 21 July 2009 - 11:07 AM.

[SDG]

I've started a new thread called Idiot Plots for discussing the sort of plot-level objections raised in this thread regarding Goblet of Fire -- and Lord of the Rings -- as well as rebuttals to such objections, suspension of disbelief, and related issues.

[mrmando]

I note that Jim Broadbent has now appeared in three different blockbuster* film series — albeit, thus far, in only one film out of each series — and in each film he plays a professor.

*Perhaps wannabe-blockbuster in the case of Narnia. We shall see.

[Peter T Chattaway]

Surprisingly, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was only #3 yesterday, its second Friday -- behind G-Force and The Ugly Truth. And while it soared ahead of the previous Harry Potter movies in its first few days, it is now tracking behind them on a day-by-day basis. (If you discount their Wednesday-Thursday lead-ins, Half-Blood Prince actually made slightly less money in its first week than Order of the Phoenix did.)

But as of yesterday, Half-Blood Prince is now only the 12th film ever to gross $200 million in 10 days or less. So it's all good, I guess. (But will it gross $300 million? None of the Harry Potter sequels have managed this to date; only Philosopher's Stone has crossed that milestone, way back in 2001.)

mrmando wrote:
: I note that Jim Broadbent has now appeared in three different blockbuster* film series — albeit, thus far, in only one film out of each series — and in each film he plays a professor.

The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter and...? I'm trying to figure out what the third one is.

(Okay, fine, I'll check the IMDB.)

Oh! You must mean Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, where he played the college/university dean.

He also played an arms trader, I think it was, in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. Does that count as a "blockbuster film series"? (Maybe the fourth film wasn't a blockbuster, per se, but the series as a whole...?)

[bowen]

Surprisingly, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was only #3 yesterday, its second Friday -- behind G-Force and The Ugly Truth. And while it soared ahead of the previous Harry Potter movies in its first few days, it is now tracking behind them on a day-by-day basis

The Harry Potter films have always been notoriously front-loaded; only the various X-Men films are in their class when it comes to opening huge and then dying fast. Also, there is a general industry-wide trend for all movies (even during the relatively few years since the first movie in the series) towards larger openings and shorter legs. That this movie is following that trend should not come as a surprise.

There has been one wildcard in this comparison: this is the first HP movie since the book series finished, and nobody was sure how much of an effect it would have. The answer appears to be not much. At over $200M already, it is pretty much of a lock to finish in the same range as its predecessors, neither above them nor below.

Of course, HP has always been much more of an international series than a domestic one. Of the top 10 all-time international grossers, 4 of them have been Harry Potter movies. Only one HP movie (the third) finished out of the top 10. The newest Harry Potter movie has a good chance to join them, grossing $236M in its opening weekend internationally.

Edited by bowen, 25 July 2009 - 11:02 PM.

[Peter T Chattaway]

bowen wrote:
: Of course, HP has always been much more of an international series than a domestic one.

Very true. Proportionally, though, every movie has performed about as well overseas as it has in North America, compared to the other movies in the series.

The 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th movies have all made between 31.1% and 32.6% of their money in North America; and the 2nd one made only 29.8% of its money in North America, which is still more or less on-par with the other films in this series. So the international trend has so far been pretty much identical to the North American trend: a huge opening for Philosopher's Stone (which remains the top-grossing Harry Potter film both here and abroad), a decline over the course of Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban, and then a rebound and a steady rise over the course of Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix, the last of which came closest to matching Philosopher's Stone both here and abroad.

It will be interesting to see if Half-Blood Prince can keep the rise going, or if it marks the beginning of another decline, as it were.

[mrmando]

Why does Dumbledore act as though it's crucial that Harry convince Slughorn to divulge his unedited memory about Horcruxes, when Dumbledore has in fact already guessed about the Horcruxes and tracked down two of them?

[mrmando]

FWIW, I like the way John Williams' Harry Potter theme, once so bright and sparkly, has turned so deep and serious, like the theme to a war movie:

Did anyone besides me think he was copping from the Barber Adagio for Strings in the latter part of the film?

(There's a bit in the original theme cribbed from Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet ...)

[Jason Panella]

Why does Dumbledore act as though it's crucial that Harry convince Slughorn to divulge his unedited memory about Horcruxes, when Dumbledore has in fact already guessed about the Horcruxes and tracked down two of them?

I'm wondering if it's to get confirmation on the number of Horcruxes Tom asked about, or just act as final confirmation. I can't remember what the book says about this (if anything)....

[mrmando]

The older Tom Felton gets, the more he looks like Jason Isaacs. Very prescient bit of casting there.

[Phill Lytle]

But as of yesterday, Half-Blood Prince is now only the 12th film ever to gross $200 million in 10 days or less. So it's all good, I guess. (But will it gross $300 million? None of the Harry Potter sequels have managed this to date; only Philosopher's Stone has crossed that milestone, way back in 2001.)

I would wager that it will cross the $300 million mark if it gets a good bump from the IMAX screens on July 29th.

[Peter T Chattaway]

mrmando wrote:
: The older Tom Felton gets, the more he looks like Jason Isaacs. Very prescient bit of casting there.

Hmmm, in what sense? Felton was cast for the 1st film, but Isaacs wasn't cast until the 2nd film.

I have to say, I have always loved that quote of Isaacs' from when he made the 2nd film, to the effect that he wanted to be such a mean dad that the audience would feel a little sorry for Draco. And learning to feel sorry for Draco is, of course, a key aspect of the 6th film.

[mrmando]

Hmmm, in what sense? Felton was cast for the 1st film, but Isaacs wasn't cast until the 2nd film.

Hmmm, is it less "prescient" to find an actor who looks like an older version of Tom Felton than to find an actor who looks like a younger version of Jason Isaacs? Seems to me that you take the same gamble either way.