91 replies to this topic

[Peter T Chattaway]

Links to our threads on the film versions of Prisoner of Azkaban (2004), Goblet of Fire (2005), Order of the Phoenix (2007), Half-Blood Prince (2008) and Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010); and links to our threads on the book versions of Half-Blood Prince (2005) and Deathly Hallows (2007).

- - -

Edited by Peter T Chattaway, 19 March 2011 - 03:02 PM.

[Peter T Chattaway]

The first scene. Or one of them, at any rate.

[Peter T Chattaway]

[Peter T Chattaway]

Edited by Peter T Chattaway, 17 June 2011 - 12:55 AM.

[BethR]

At least three of my study-abroad students plan to join the throng around the red carpet in Trafalgar Square this evening, hoping to catch a glimpse of the stars. They haven't snowball's chance of getting into the actual premiere, of course. Weather calls for rain (it's raining now, in fact). Wish them luck!

[Overstreet]

The Guardian:

Quote

With one miraculous flourish of its wand, the franchise has restored the essential magic to the Potter legend – which had been starting to sag and drift in recent movies – zapping us all with a cracking final chapter, which looks far superior to CS Lewis's The Last Battle or JRR Tolkien's The Return of the King.

I... I don't understand.

[Peter T Chattaway]

[bloop]

Overstreet, on 07 July 2011 - 11:56 AM, said:

The Guardian:

Quote

With one miraculous flourish of its wand, the franchise has restored the essential magic to the Potter legend – which had been starting to sag and drift in recent movies – zapping us all with a cracking final chapter, which looks far superior to CS Lewis's The Last Battle or JRR Tolkien's The Return of the King.

I... I don't understand.

The British press are notoriously sensationalistic.

Example: How many "best British bands" have we gone through while the previous one is better than when they were crowned (and significantly outclasses the latest FOTM)?

I'm a Harry Potter fan, but I know better.

Edited by bloop, 11 July 2011 - 07:31 AM.

[SDG]

bloop, on 11 July 2011 - 06:22 AM, said:

Overstreet, on 07 July 2011 - 11:56 AM, said:

The Guardian:

Quote

With one miraculous flourish of its wand, the franchise has restored the essential magic to the Potter legend – which had been starting to sag and drift in recent movies – zapping us all with a cracking final chapter, which looks far superior to CS Lewis's The Last Battle or JRR Tolkien's The Return of the King.

I... I don't understand.

The British press are notoriously sensationalistic.

Example: How many "best British bands" have we gone through while the previous one is better than when they were crowned (and significantly outclasses the latest FOTM)?

I'm a Harry Potter fan, but I know better.

I think Jeffrey's bewilderment is compounded by the comparison of the latest Harry Potter movie -- specifically, how it "looks" -- to "CS Lewis's The Last Battle," which has never been adapted in any screen version.

[NBooth]

SDG, on 11 July 2011 - 07:55 AM, said:

bloop, on 11 July 2011 - 06:22 AM, said:

Overstreet, on 07 July 2011 - 11:56 AM, said:

The Guardian:

Quote

With one miraculous flourish of its wand, the franchise has restored the essential magic to the Potter legend – which had been starting to sag and drift in recent movies – zapping us all with a cracking final chapter, which looks far superior to CS Lewis's The Last Battle or JRR Tolkien's The Return of the King.

I... I don't understand.

The British press are notoriously sensationalistic.

Example: How many "best British bands" have we gone through while the previous one is better than when they were crowned (and significantly outclasses the latest FOTM)?

I'm a Harry Potter fan, but I know better.

I think Jeffrey's bewilderment is compounded by the comparison of the latest Harry Potter movie -- specifically, how it "looks" -- to "CS Lewis's The Last Battle," which has never been adapted in any screen version.

In which case, it's indisputable that, no matter what Deathly Hallows Part II looks like, it looks better than The Last Battle.

Edited by NBooth, 11 July 2011 - 08:07 AM.

[SDG]

NBooth, on 11 July 2011 - 08:05 AM, said:

SDG, on 11 July 2011 - 07:55 AM, said:

I think Jeffrey's bewilderment is compounded by the comparison of the latest Harry Potter movie -- specifically, how it "looks" -- to "CS Lewis's The Last Battle," which has never been adapted in any screen version.

In which case, it's indisputable that, no matter what Deathly Hallows Part II looks like, it looks better than The Last Battle.

Not necessarily. Some movies have been known to be a step down from watching a blank screen for the same length of time.

[bloop]

ROTK definitely does exist, however.

[SDG]

bloop, on 11 July 2011 - 09:03 AM, said:

ROTK definitely does exist, however.

Yes, which only adds to the confusion. You don't know whether apples are being compared with oranges, or whether one apple is being compared with another apple and an orange at the same time, or what.

[Peter T Chattaway]

bloop wrote:
: ROTK definitely does exist, however.

But the article does refer to TOLKIEN'S Return of the King, rather than Jackson's. So the comparison is still to the books.

Incidentally, Jeffrey Wells, who hasn't liked any of the Harry Potter movies since Prisoner of Azkaban (i.e. the third film, which came out seven years ago), apparently liked THIS one well enough. (Warning: There are major end-of-movie spoilers in his post, for those who have not already read the book.) So that may dovetail with the article's claim that this film "restore[s] the essential magic to the Potter legend – which had been starting to sag and drift in recent movies".

[SDG]

Peter T Chattaway, on 11 July 2011 - 11:54 AM, said:

: ROTK definitely does exist, however.

But the article does refer to TOLKIEN'S Return of the King, rather than Jackson's. So the comparison is still to the books.

But is it a movie-to-books comparison? What would it mean to say that a movie "looks" better than a pair of books?

Quote

Incidentally, Jeffrey Wells, who hasn't liked any of the Harry Potter movies since Prisoner of Azkaban (i.e. the third film, which came out seven years ago)

Inclusive or exclusive? It's pretty funny that after jokingly "striking out" deliberately on his first three attempts to get Voldemort's name, he still spelled it wrong (presumably inadvertently) on the fourth attempt!

[Peter T Chattaway]

SDG wrote:
: But is it a movie-to-books comparison? What would it mean to say that a movie "looks" better than a pair of books?

I have no idea.

: Inclusive or exclusive?

He liked Prisoner of Azkaban. I'm not sure if he liked the two films that Chris Columbus directed before that; it's possible that Prisoner of Azkaban is the ONLY movie in this series that he liked, until now.

[Lauren Wilford]

I'm one of the kids who grew up going to the midnight book releases, and let the series be this magical home for me, so I've found myself absolutely impotent about judging the merits of the films as films-- it's the only place I have the problem. I'm happy to let myself have at least one thing I'm thoroughly caught up in, and am looking forward to the inevitable sobfest that this Thursday night is going to be. Ebert tweeted something about it being satisfying, but a bit over the top. Perhaps it's ROTK ending syndrome-- a surfeit of closure. But I'm glad they do that, for the people like me. Sometimes, gifts to fandoms are appropriate-- at least when I'm in one .

[MrZoom]

Lauren Wilford, on 11 July 2011 - 11:25 PM, said:

I'm one of the kids who grew up going to the midnight book releases, and let the series be this magical home for me, so I've found myself absolutely impotent about judging the merits of the films as films-- it's the only place I have the problem. I'm happy to let myself have at least one thing I'm thoroughly caught up in, and am looking forward to the inevitable sobfest that this Thursday night is going to be. Ebert tweeted something about it being satisfying, but a bit over the top. Perhaps it's ROTK ending syndrome-- a surfeit of closure. But I'm glad they do that, for the people like me. Sometimes, gifts to fandoms are appropriate-- at least when I'm in one .

FIRST POST ALERT!!! Welcome to Arts and Faith, Lauren!

[SDG]

Lauren: no ROTK surfeit of closure symptom, definitely.

[Lauren Wilford]

I'm happy either way, but for the sake of it as a film, good!