Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.2 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthorlewisCFC
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    I went to the cinema today, eagerly anticipating the arrival of the new
    Harry Potter film; The Half Blood Prince. Like hundreds of others, the fantastic
    trailers advertising this movie had taken me in. For once, it seemed, they had decided
    to focus on the plot, something no other Harry Potter movie had achieved. But alas, these
    trailers, not unusually, had led me astray. This is with-out denial the single worst Harry
    Potter film to-date. Sure, the acting talents of Mr.Radcliff have certainly increased, as
    should be expected, the CGI wasn't bad, however, the deviation from the actual story was
    almost farsical. This became obvious within the first five minutes of the film. As an avid
    fan of the series, I was somewhat surprised to find Harry in a random train-station at the
    beginning of the movie, instead of where he should be; at the Dursley's. These meanderings from
    the plot were plentiful and frequent. Not only were there meanderings at unimportant times of the
    story, but at the most significant point in the film; Dumbledore's death. Plus, we can thank the script
    writer for the completely new scene near the middle of the film. Harry decides to spend his holidays
    at the Burrow, where Belatrix Lestrange and Fenrir Greyback decide to attack the Weasley family, this
    scene ends with the destruction of the Burrow and the Weasley family in tears. Sound familiar? It shouldn't.
    To conclude, this is the second-worst ever adaptation from book to film I have ever seen, second only to
    Eragon. This film should probably be re-named; Harry Potter and the Director Who Didn't Know When to Stop.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMicroFX
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    Well you're pretty naive for expecting a book to film translation, thats not what these are about, the books are source material and the film makers (who are highly talent) are at liberty to do whatever they like with them. For HBP they have stuck pretty close to the book, more so than any other film in the series, yes cuts are made and things added in, and we may not all agree with the decisions but this film is a pretty damn good film and excellently written.
    • CommentAuthorlil_miss
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    I have to agree with you on this one lewisCFC. I understand that they dont have to be an exact book to film translation, but there were, what i consider to be significant parts of the book missing from the film. The other Horcruxes for a start, what about the action at the end of the book deatheaters v's teachers and DA. Dumbledores death was nothing to what i would of expected as he was such an important/main character.
    Utterly disappointed!!!! I only hope they dont make such a pigs ear of the last film.
    •  
      CommentAuthorkeet
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    Thats the only thing with us all being big fans and reading the books, we know what we want the films to be like coz we knw what happens in the books and sometimes it doesn't turn out s we expected. however i do understand that if they pu everything in the film it would go on for a very long time
  1.  
    david yates needs sacking. end of.
  2.  
    I haven't seen the movie yet so I can't whole-heartidly comment about the Half-blood Prince. But for now I totally agree with lewisCFC about Eragon: the movie made me cry-- mad tears of rage. It's a pitty how one overzealous screenwriter could ruin a perfectly good fantasy novel like Eragon. How could anyone go wrong with magic and dragons? I don't know, somehow they managed. Same thing happened to twilight... ugg. Seriously.
    • CommentAuthorapaulo
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    I totally agree with LewisCFC.
    I have read all the books a few times and must admit I have become rather bais in my thinking to what is important as an inclusion to this film and it's story line. I cant understand why Yates and the script writer felt it important to add two new scenes which
    LewisCFC had mentioned and to omit vital parts of the story. Some movie critics have noticed this as well. "The movie seems to assume people have read the book, but if one has not it would be rather difficult to follow the plot" (Stratin at el 2009).
    Yates in my option has also made a mess of the Phoniex ,and I am afraid he will do the same to the "Deathly Hallows". I believe J.K.Rowlings had placed cues, teasers and important insights into the story line and it's chartacters but Yates and his script writer's had failed to notice this. A good example of this would be the Role of the "DA" and the final fight in the last chapters of the book (Half Blood Prince), the involvement of the Ministery Of Magic throughout the story and finaly the roles of Dobby and Kreacher. Still I enjoyed the movie and it has been mentioned in this forum already, the book is always going to be different to the movie.
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilbo421
    • CommentTime3 days ago edited
     
    I agree with Micro.

    And I add that anyone who judges these films on how different they are from the book doesn't have a serious opinion on the movie, because they are not judging the movie on it's qualities. You, for instance, are completely ignoring it's qualities (which you have actually said are good) to label this the worst HP movie and David Yates the worst director simply because they didn't do exactly as the book says. A director and a screen writer are supposed to focus on making a good film. Not appeasing purists like yourself.

    You are certainly right about Eragon. That was just a bad film.
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilbo421
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    I loved it. And I LIKE most of the changes they made.
    •  
      CommentAuthorLESTRANGE
    • CommentTime3 days ago
     
    I totally agree with Wilbo and Micro.
    • CommentAuthorapaulo
    • CommentTime2 days ago
     
    Dear Wilbo421 and Mirco
    You have a point regarding the problems and issues that can arise when adapting a novel to the big screen. Throughout cinema history films had never done the novel any justice. You both are missing Lewis and my point of agruement, simply being, a story requires important pits of information to make the plot conjuant (sic). When one adapts a novel to film they risk omiting these vital bits of information, it is different when you screen write for a movie. A simple way of proving my point is to ask someone to watch the film who hasn't read or seen any of the other films or books, and see if they can follow and or understand the concept and the plot. As I have said before I enjoyed the film and the escapism I had for 153 minutes was fantastic.
    Best Regards Apaulo.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMicroFX
    • CommentTime2 days ago
     
    Most of my friends and certainly lots of people who ive heard from enjoyed the movie and they've never read the books, it depends what you look for in a movie, the majority is for entertainment which the movie provides a lot, and the plot is pretty easy to understand.
    • CommentAuthorapaulo
    • CommentTime2 days ago
     
    I am pleased to hear that Micro, I will be taking my family to see it next week, some of the kids haven't read the book, so will be interesting to see what they think. Never the less looking forward in the next two instalments of the HP saga.
  3.  
    i agree with micro . They did miss some things but i feel that by me reading the books i enjoyed it more! i loved the scene at the burrow! and like they skipped the da teacher against death eater fight but they hinted at something cause they were all down stairs when the death eaters came up to the astonomy tower! i thought the scenes with dumbledore and harry about the horcrux were wonderful! oh and Lestrange i'm in love with helena bonham carter she did such a good job i loved when bellatrix was destroying the castle and hagrids hut she is so evil its scary what she will do to get the attention of and please the dark lord!
    • CommentAuthorcobftw
    • CommentTime1 day ago
     
    I think the clarification that needs to be made here is that IF YOU ARE AN AVID HARRY POTTER READER/FAN OF THE BOOKS, you will be completely and utterly disappointed by this movie! At least I was.

    Yes, the special effects kicked ass and certain scenes were spot on. And yes, it is true, Wilbo421 and Mirco, certain changes need to be made from the source material in order to successfully adapt a novel to the screen. However, this does NOT mean you have to rewrite the majority of the dialogue, add new scenes, change the characters around (both in terms of what scenes they are in and HOW they are) or exclude important, pivotal moments! The book was an international best seller, why not stay loyal to it? Rowling is a good writer! USE THE BOOK TO WRITE THE SCREENPLAY, DON'T JUST REWRITE THE WHOLE DAMN STORY!!!

    To me, the best part of the book was the development of Dumbledore/Harry's relationship while the two of them gained insight together into all of the Horcruxes/Voldemort's past, and this part was almost COMPLETELY GLOSSED OVER! A tragic, tragic shame. This movie was a farce of an adaptation, if you ask me, which nobody is. ;-)

    You want to see a good screenplay adapted from original material, see the Lord of the Rings series. They made certain, necessary changes, but didn't redo almost every scene/plot detail!!

    Another potentially great film ruined by the powers that be in Hollywood...sigh.
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilbo421
    • CommentTime1 day ago edited
     
    cobftw wrote:
    I think the clarification that needs to be made here is that IF YOU ARE AN AVID HARRY POTTER READER/FAN OF THE BOOKS, you will be completely and utterly disappointed by this movie! At least I was.


    Absolutely wrong. If you are a purist, you will hate the movie. Purists aren't bigger Harry Potter fans, they just have an incapability of being reasonable or having the slightest clue what must happen when a book is adapted to the big screen.

    And I'm sorry, but anyone who says the Lord of the Rings films are closer to the LotR books than the Hp films are to their books are absolutely deluding themselves.

    The point is, this is a GOOD film. It has a very well written screenplay, very good acting, very good cinematography, very good special effects and visuals, a very good score and certainly not least of all, fantastic direction. Just because it changes things from the book, doesn't stop it from being a good film, it literally ONLY stops it from being completely accurate to the book. Something purists can't (or won't) get their heads around.
    • CommentAuthorcobftw
    • CommentTime18 hours ago edited
     
    Hahahaha! "Absolutely wrong." ??!! It's an opinion, my post. It can't be "wrong" because I'm telling you that's how I feel, personally. And that's that. You can disagree if you'd like! I certainly do with you. I do not think it's a good screenplay for all the reasons I just listed and because it comes across as a jumbled conglomeration of individual scenes that have little to nothing to do with each other. It left many non-readers confused. The movie was less of an adaptation than a rewrite, in my opinion, and I found the screenplay laughable just like I do your staunch defense of the film. The special effects, cinematography, etc. were all spectacular, you are right-- as they have been in the last four or so films. Yates doesn't mess around. He's solid. I agree. That's not my problem with it. I merely think it's a travesty that the movie version strayed so very much from the book, which is undeniable, and that it did so without reason. Why take out all the horcrux scenes with a younger Voldemort? Why add the Burrow scene? Why leave out the funeral/fight? They'll likely put a lot of that stuff in the last 2 films, but it's not because you HAVE to make those changes to make a good screenplay. And don't say it made the movie better, or tenser, or whatever. The book already had every dramatic element you could ever ask for on the big screen. Romance, mystery, action, violence, death, hope, etc. The book already had a good beginning, middle, and end (rife with character motivations and the whole nine yards). The only reason I can see to change it is to make it more Hollywood (ie. formulaic and cliched) because that's what works and that's what guarantees you butts in those seats, ie. ticket sales, ie. the highest box office gross possible (bingo!). I'm disappointed, and I'm entitled to that because it's my opinion.
    • CommentAuthorapaulo
    • CommentTime10 hours ago
     
    Wiblo again you are missing the point of debate. There seems to be two sides of this arguement. One being an adaption of screenplay by the sceenwriter is justified for the sake of the movie. That is a valid point to consider. There is the "purist" point of view, which i hold closer bond to being certain vital and important parts of the novel should have been included in the film but where omited This is not a bad mark about the quality of the film just the quanity. This point is sadly not addressed by your arguement Wiblo.
    Regards Apaulo.
    • CommentAuthorhp4gw
    • CommentTime7 hours ago
     
    ok, so i saw harry potter yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it - as a movie
    because i heard it wasnt close to the book and some vitally important things were missed out
    when i watched it i didnt want to be biased and so i pushed the book 'purist' out of me and just watched - point blank
    now, i was enjoying every minute of it - until the dumbledore scene - and that turned my smile upside down
    dumbledore is such an amazing character - he cannot die like that!
    anyway, moving swiftly on, harry/ginny ron/hermione - she is NOT supposed to bloody CONFESS to harry that she loves ron! wth?! she's not even supposed to know herself yet!
    h/g was - as u no by my name - an important part i was looking out for, movie or book lover, and as it stands i was, quite frankly, dissapointed - so let's hope there is more of that in DH
    now, draco - bad boy... i loved all his scenes and all dark scenes because they were actually close to the book - but they were mixed in, making the plot unrecognisable to an outsider
    the ron love potion scene was OK - and i liked, not loved - i must confess, like i did in the book - slughorn
    but overall, it didnt do the book much justice - no plot, and it just seemed like another hollywood fantasy light and dark with not much of a plot ---
    o yer, another thing....the train station??? wth???
    i'll leave that to anyone's imagination...
    o - and it was very funny - for anyone looking for a bit of cheering up, looking at these hormonal teens falling in and out of love with each other is sure to get a few smiles :) except if ur looking for lots of h/g snogging stuff - it aint guna happen - 1 kiss, and then nothing??? until a little ginny comforting harry in the end???
    book lover - not purist - in me was xtrememly dissapointed
    movie lover - which i had to struggle to pull out of me, i admit, because book lover was saying stuff - in me was jumping up and down for joy, she was ecstatic
    btw ron lovers - he is BUFF - even I had trouble concentrating on harry loll
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilbo421
    • CommentTime7 hours ago
     
    apaulo wrote:
    This point is sadly not addressed by your arguement Wiblo.


    That's because it's ridiculous. Maybe important points DO get left out. But for some reason, purists automatically think when something they deem important is left out that there is no other way they can get to the same ending the books got to. There are other ways of making the movies work without those important points.

    And I'm sorry, I'm not missing the point. You guys are saying the film is bull cause it misses so called "important" plot points and changes things. That is not the film, that is YOUR incapability to either let those things go or understand that not everything works exactly how it did in the books. The important things they apparently missed out will more than likely still be there. Just not introduced at the point of time they are in the books.

    And yes cobftw, absolutely wrong. THAT is MY opinion. And only an idiot would deny yours is immature. "I'm a bigger fan cause I get upset at changes" No your not. Same goes for the "I'm a bigger fan, cause I know more about the books". Again, no your not. To claim yourself so is downright arrogant AND ignorant.

    And without reason? You need to read up on things, mate. There WAS reason, otherwise they wouldn't have changed anything. Somethings maybe your purist mind can't comprehend:

    - Go into the memories = Going back in time, pretty much. It stops dealing with the here and now, for the moments it is on screen. It would disrupt the flow of ANY film. Needless to say, the other memories that contain important information will be re-inserted somewhere into the storyline of Deathly Hallows.

    - The Burrow scene is needed to pick up the pace in the middle, otherwise the movie WOULD have started dragging. It added a sense of urgency, danger and also very plainly illustrated how nowhere is safe. Not for Harry, not for anyone. Especially not for Molly. Remember? At the start of the film, Ron mentions Molly's unwillingness to let the kids go back to Hogwarts, thinking the Burrow is safer. You wouldn't have thought of that stark realisation for Molly because "Oh no! That's not in the book!" And in fact, JK Rowling WROTE the Burrow attack. She left it out of the book in the end, but it was there originally.

    - The fight is easy. Do you even remember reading the book? It was Harry running through the entrance hall where people were fighting, running straight through and out. THAT was it. The rest was relayed to Harry afterwards. Things can work the other way as well, opposite to "There's no point in leaving it out". That also quite often means "There's no point in putting it in". Remember Deathly Hallows? Remember that big ol' fight in Hogwarts at the end? The culmination and peak of the entire series? You wouldn't, of course, have considered that maybe another full-blown fight in Hogwarts might distinctly lessen the impact of the final battle.
    The funeral? They already had the wandlit tribute, and the funeral would have served as overkill because of one too many endings for Dumbledore's character.

    Changes are ALWAYS made for a reason. Whether you like the reason or not is neither here nor there, but the point is these changes were made to make the film a better film. Who gives a shit how the purists feel. These are films, first and foremost.
    • CommentAuthorhp4gw
    • CommentTime7 hours ago
     
    now wilbo - please do not call cobftw opinion immature, everyone has a right to their OWN opinion - and to call it immature is stupid, yet u cud argue that is your opinion - in which case i could reply that your opinion is immature...see how things can get out of hand?
    remember guys, we are all harry potter fans and that is what is tying us together ok? we all have different views, and maybe that is a good thing - we can share our ideas and having someone else's view on something helps you see it in - perhaps - a different light, though you may still think of it in your way ok?
    o and now u mention it, i think if they make the fight scene in DH really excellent and long, putting most the little things in DH part 1, then it could be worth the wait, instead of having the other HBP big fight scene
    true true good point !
    •  
      CommentAuthorkeet
    • CommentTime5 hours ago
     
    hp4gw wrote:
    btw ron lovers - he is BUFF - even I had trouble concentrating on harry loll

    phwoar lol cant wait, rons gorgeous!
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilbo421
    • CommentTime5 hours ago
     
    hp4gw, are you seriously trying to tell me that when someone says they are a bigger and better fan of Harry Potter than other people, it doesn't irritate you? If someone were to tell you "You're not a REAL Harry Potter fan cause you liked this film", you wouldn't think "Now wait a minute..."?

    I'm sorry if you don't like that, but that's the way I am with everything.

    For instance, there is a band I am almost obsessed with. I listen to them so much that my sister gets completely sick of it. I know all the lyrics to all the songs, I can play a few of them, but I would not, for one single second, even suggest I am a bigger fan of that band than anyone else out there. It's boasting, it's a way of trying to say you are better than someone else. Even if it's not worded like that, that IS the mentality of those who say it. It is childish and immature.