Cinematical

Hey, remember me? I berated your comments in the other thread, but here I'm going to, shock of all shocks, agree with you.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but that was my main problem with the fourth book, which I honestly do think is the weakest of the series. Nothing. Happens. Until the end of course, when it's all like, sorry about that Harry and, oh yeah, this guy was under the floor the whole time!

The fourth book is a bore for the reasons you stated. I'm not going to speak for all fans, but for me personally I was very, very disappointed. Luckily things pick up in 5&6 but what you describe is a problem of the narrative, and it's a shame, too, because it basically dictates all that's going to come.

So, thanks for recognizing what I saw, too. So many Potter fans are all about the fourth book, and I just think it's kind of a big waste.

Reply

Honestly, C.K. *rolls eyes*

Yes, of course it would make a difference if you read the books. It would give you the perspective on the films that you clearly lack. Would you have a Microsoft enthusiast writing on TUAW about how they just don't "get" what's so great about Apple?

I was going to launch into a diatribe here, but I think I'll go work it into a post instead. :-)

K.

Reply

Kim, speaking as somebody who's only read the books (all of them, yes) and hasn't seen the new film I can safely say that I had the EXACT problem with the book that CK does with the film.

I'm not saying that it's a universal concern, but he's certainly not the only one who feels that way.

Reply

I dont know if you, CK and Adam, realize that your coming off narrow minded, but you are. Its quite funny because you two are probabaly both adults, where as this is mainly directed at children, so why are you taking your time to pick out every little thing thats in your mind, wrong. I'd like to see you try and make a movie that could even come close to getting the same attention as the Harry Potter films. On one last note I will remind you, this movie is based on a book that is fictional, it in no way is going to be completely realistic. I mean come on, its about wizards. Its also aimed at children, not a bunch of so called professionals who can tell the difference between a good movie and a bad one. The real problem is CK trying to prove a moving point that harry potter is so called overrated, when the people that this movie is suppose to pleased LOVED IT. To be perfectly honest it just seems like you CK are just looking for attention. The world renound Harry Potter series has had more sucess in the past five years than most likely anything you've done. At last I must say, you my good friend need to lighten up and look at the big picture of Harry Potter, its mean't to be a funny film that kids can enjoy, not something you should take seriously.

Reply

I totally agree. Harry Potter is like the kid in high school whose parents donated the east wing. Sure, he's a nice enough guy, but he's not on the football team because that's his own passion, and he doesn't get out of trouble because of his personally-achieved merit. Even his great grades are suspect because he's so "special." He's got some real friends, but most poeple love him or hate him because he own's a Corvette.

Reply

Funny thing is, C.K., I'm going the same route as Adam; I thought your other seven reasons were... well, crap, to be honest.
This one, though, nailed it in one. The problem is exactly as you state it, but, then, it's also one of the major weaknesses of the overall series (books and movies); Harry is not so much about acting as *re*acting. Yes, he does take initiative, and often, but also, often, the initiative is in response to some occurrence.
And one of the first rules of storytelling is that you can't have a passive protagonist. Protagonists should *do* something, not let things be done. Harry is, unfortunately, very often of the latter.

I can't yet comment on the 4th movie. I was supposed to see it last night, and went, but my sister and I left ten minutes in because of IMAX screen problems.

As for the argument that the movie's for children, Regan, that holds no water whatsoever. That holds even less water than C.K.'s other reasons for hating on Harry. If anything, children's books need to have *more* internal consistency, and children are *less* likely to suspend their disbelief than adults. Oh, sure, arguably, many have better imaginations, I don't dispute that, but... well, I'm mainly thinking of Neil Gaiman and his comments about writing his novel *Coraline*. That was the gist of them, and if you want to hear more about his thoughts, Regan, you can probably Google it.
I also think your comment about not taking it seriously is offbase, because, really, why take any "art" seriously? It's just a movie. It's just a book. They're all just movies, and they're all just books.

Reply

I with C.K. that the films should stand on their own, regardless of whether or not he's read or enjoyed the books - all adaptations should stand apart as seperate entities with their own merits. See my upcoming review of "Rent: The Movie" for more...

Reply

i believe if you read the book, it goes into a bit more detail on the second challenge, and afterwords they said something about them not actuially being in danger. it has been a while since i read it, so i coauld be wrong, but i think i do remember something being said.... i gues you'll just have to read it....

Reply

C.K., I reiterate that I love you. Platonically.

One reason the Lord of the Rings films were so successful were that they appealed to almost everyone, regardless of whether or not they'd read the books -- which was good for Peter Jackson et al, because the LotR series was not nearly as widely-read as the Potter books, especially in the young child core demographic. In fact, the LotR films could actually be quite unpleasant for people like me (my hatred for Elijah Wood aside) because of their sometimes inexplicable differences from the books. The Pottermovies are, of course, wildly popular with the legions of brainwashed Potter fans, though they may complain about the differences. To those outside the Potter loop, it feels bizarre to hop into the Potter movies, especially mid-series. It's a bad disconnect, especially considering the brilliant job of marketing that Rowling and Co. managed to do.

Reply

harry potter is popular like hitler was popular in germany.

and the movie should be able to exist on it's own terms and i don't believe you should have "read the books" to understand. that's stupid. someone should be able to sit down enjoy the movie without even knowing the books existed.

Reply

The main issue I have with your second task argument is that you're not looking at the situation through the character's (in this case Harry's) eyes. Although the dialogue was cut out of the film all the champions are told that should they fail to retrieve what was lost to them they would lose it forever (this is later revealed to be false) so it would be natural for Harry to want to save Ron and Fleur's younger sister as well as struggling to survive the tasks because he didn't know that it was all set up.

Reply

I am one who saw the first three movies before ever reading a book. I was satisfied that I knew and understood Harry Potter. But when the newest book came out I felt left out and started reading the series. I have finished all the books and loved ALL of them. It wwas more difficult to see the movie from a non-readers point of view since I knew the whole story. But I do feel the movie, as the others before it have, gives the overall feel of the book. Yes you miss many details that are in the book but I do feel the movie does a good job to set up for future movies. The details that are left out will not effect understanding in future films.

Also, someone here made the comment that Harry is not on the football team. YES he is!! He is the star of the wizarding football! He is the ultimate wizard athelete.

But, my comment to those who don't like the movies - - don't go see them! If you don't like Harry Potter then why are you in a Harry Potter discussion??? If you don't find these books and movies relevant to society - why are you wasting your time talking about them. I don't spend my precious time on something I don't like!

Reply

Well, I've just finished listening to the "Unofficial Podcast" you've recorded, and now I'm going officially give you a couple of death threats. Well, okay, I'm really not.

Coming from a very huge Harry Potter fan, I'm going to have to say that I really do agree with you on certain counts. I've never been 100% happy with the way the movies turn out, but I've learned to look at them on their own.

Yes, they do have loads of mistakes. And yes, they do sometimes have plot-holes for those who haven't read the books, but I guess I don't mind.

I really enjoyed the fourth movie, and yes "maybe if you read the books" then you would have understood it all a little bit better, but I know that not everyone has the urge to pick up the series and read it.

So, whatever, you think its overrated, and that's quite alright with me.

Reply

Is anyone else slightly disturbed by Shawn's post, with the comparison of Harry Potter's popularity to that of Hitler (presumably) pre 1939? At this time Hitler was systematically indoctrinating an entire nation to dispise a totally innocent group of people, to justify their eventual mass exicution in the chillingly euphamised "final solution". Harry Potter is a fictional teenage wizard, and an incredibly successful book and movie franchise. Are you mental?

Reply