OotP revisited (and another thing...)

[trude]

I know that others have bitched about this, but...

Many years ago I borrowed a copy of Katherine Paterson's Bridge to Terabithia. The cover depicted a sturdy stone bridge, on which a teen-age (maybe 15-16 years old) couple was sitting. The girl had long hair and wore a pretty dress, and the whole thing was green and lush and romantic like a shampoo commercial.
If you read the book, you know that this is about as WRONG as it could be. Or at least it was, until the trailer for the movie version came along.
Sigh.
(Or maybe they've remade it as a kids' fantasy adventure. Which would be...very wrong, too.)

Yeah, I went to see OotP again last night:

* It's really weird seeing the first half-hour or so, with Remus and Moody and Tonks and the twins (can't tell them apart) and Hedwig all alive, and feel sorry for them for having so little time left - but then again, some of them might get to survive in the movieverse due to time and budget constraints? Anyway, Moody's "we don't break formation for anyone" gave me a little lump in my throat.

* Then again, seeing Sirius (whom I love, love, LOVE here) made me realize emotionally that yes, they are fictional characters and that means I can go back to the point in the story where they are alive whenever I want to. Shouldn't take me three bloody weeks at my age, I know.

* This film is sooo good-looking. I wouldn't want to live in it, but a week-end might be nice.

* Kingsley's robes are the BEST.

* Lupin's hands. They are just amazing. (Lupin's haircut in the old order photo is also rather amazing, but in a very different way.)

* I cannot really dislike Fudge as much as I should. Damn Robert Hardy and early imprinting on All Creatures Great and Small.

* NEVILLE LONGBOTTOM DOES NOT HAVE "HITLER HAIR". HIS HAIRCUT IS CUTE AND FLOPPY, LIKE HUGH GRANT'S IN THE EARLY NINETIES! Well, almost.

* What I love about Evanna Lynch's Luna is that she manages to be so matter of fact in the middle of all her dreaminess.

* Please stop giving Emma Watson all those expositionary lines, she really can't handle them.

* Bonnie Wright has some lovely facial expressions here (I especially like her when she watches Ron eating).

* The "emotional teaspoon"-scene is rather sweet and makes good use of the trio's rather different acting styles.

* I really could have lived without Gwarp, but on the other hand, that would have meant less Robbie Coltrane, and I still think he's adorable as Hagrid.

* And what the heck is Nigel doing here, really?

* Dumbledore's "I don't tell you stuff because I care so much about you" sound quite unpleasant after DH. (Though now I'm interested in seeing how Michael Gambon will handle DH-Dumbledore.)

* The end feels...shallow compared to the books. First of all, Harry's grief, which I really like, gets very truncated. Also, I would have liked to see the Order again after Harry runs after Bellatrix - I get why we didn't get the Kings Cross ending (no, really), but it would have been nice to glimpse them - like we see the kids - in the ministry when Fudge arrives.

* Aunt Petunia's sundress FTW!

Comments

[meddow.livejournal.com]

Haven’t read the book, but I have seen the movie of Bridge and bloody hell is that trailer misleading. What made it even worse was that I was watching it on a plane so I couldn’t hide the fact I was balling my eyes out to what had been advertised as a nice family fantasy movie.

[trude.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm happy to hear that they didn't butcher the story. Still, as bleak as it is, I don't really think its the Most Traumatic and Horrible Children's/YA-novel of All Time, and I don't get why it has to be marketed as something it isn't.* I think I've only read it once, but another one of Paterson's books Jacob Have I Loved is one of my favorite YA-novels of all time, and it is pretty depressing in places, too - but I've never seen that one marketed as a teen romance, or whatever.

*OK, I think I've seen one of the producers saying that they had to play up certain elements of the story and downplay others to get it made at all, but the trailer seems to go overboard completely...

[meddow.livejournal.com]

I think the producers were trying to jump on the LotR & Narnia fantasy bandwagon. After all it's got kids, CGI and was filmed in New Zealand - it's not hard to lump it in with those two. Really though, they should have marketed it for what it was, since it was an incredibly good movie and I hate to think people didn't like it just because their expectations were different from what it was.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

I know. I hadn't read the book, but I'd heard about it (it's been banned a lot, and I've done numerous projects on book censorship), and when I saw the trailer I honestly thought they were going to change it completely.

*Sigh* I've been surprised too, with misleading movie trailers. It does suck, doesn't it? Especially when one movie (The Family Stone) hit home in all sorts of awful ways.

[trude.livejournal.com]

Why is it banned?

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

The same reasons as most of the book bannings out there:

- Religious beliefs getting in the way of basic reading comprehension, and therefore the Book Banners thinking innocent child's play = satanism. (See also: Laura Mallory.)

- Protective, old fashioned parents who can't be bothered to monitor what their kids read themselves, so they leave it up to people who have more important things to worry about. (Again, see also: Laura Mallory.)

I know, it's insane.

[wildmagelet.livejournal.com]

It's really weird seeing the first half-hour or so, with Remus and Moody and Tonks and the twins (can't tell them apart) and Hedwig all alive, and feel sorry for them for having so little time left - but then agian, some of them might get to survive in the movieverse due to time and budget constraints?

While I imagine it would be pretty easy to kill them all off seeing as how it happened it about two seconds in the book (not that I'm still bitter or anything!), I am wondering if they'll bother with the Remus/Tonks sub-plot or not. Solely in terms of the story, it didn't really advance anything and when you're working to time constraints and a budget, and you already have at least two romances to play up, I don't see why they'd bother, honestly.

And what the heck is Nigel doing here, really?

Most random character in the movies! It's like they ran a competition for a walk-on part or something, and let a fan join in just for the heck of it.

(Though now I'm interested in seeing how Michael Gambon will handle DH-Dumbledore.)

I've never felt right about the way that Michael Gambon played the role, but now that we've seen how Dumbledore's character was developed and became significantly darker, I actually think he'll be much more suited to it.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

Most random character in the movies! It's like they ran a competition for a walk-on part or something, and let a fan join in just for the heck of it.

Now that you mention it, I actually think I heard of that happening once... seriously. But years ago, way before Nigel/GoF. I think it was more during PS/SS and/or CoS coming out.

[trude.livejournal.com]

I am wondering if they'll bother with the Remus/Tonks sub-plot or not.
I think it is rather likely to be ditched (though I'm actually less sure about this now than I was before DH.)

I'm pretty certain that Fred will die - there's no way they'll forget about the twins after all these movies - and probably Lupin, too. But Moody and Tonks might go MIA after this movie and survive. (If the R/T- and Teddy-plots are cut, and Tonks shows up in DH and dies anyway, I'm gonna be really sad, though.)

I've never felt right about the way that Michael Gambon played the role, but now that we've seen how Dumbledore's character was developed and became significantly darker, I actually think he'll be much more suited to it.

Manipulative!Dumbledore will be less of a surprise in the movieverse, but Gambon's performance might be good.

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

NEVILLE LONGBOTTOM DOES NOT HAVE "HITLER HAIR". HIS HAIRCUT IS CUTE AND FLOPPY, LIKE HUGH GRANT'S IN THE EARLY NINETIES!

Exactly. I liked his hair in this.

What I love about Evanna Lynch's Luna is that she manages to be so matter of fact in the middle of all here dreaminess.

I know. Evanna really got Luna down to the core - which makes me happy, really. Granted, I know the writers and director probably helped, but so did she. She even has the voice for Luna. I just feel like any other combination would've had Luna horribly exaggerated. :/

And what the heck is Nigel doing here, really?

Who the heck is Nigel, really? I never did figure that out. He just showed up in GoF, and it was like - huh? He's like this random OC they created. Ha - Nigel the Gary Stu! ;)

The end feels...shallow compared to the books. First of all, Harry's grief, which I really like, gets very truncated. Also, I would have liked to see the Order again after Harry runs after Bellatrix - I get why we didn't get the Kings Cross ending (no, really), but it would have been nice to glimpse them - like we see the kids - in the ministry when Fudge arrives.

I didn't mind the end, but yeah, the DoM scene wasn't as great as it could've been (although Harry's posession was.) SIrius's death just felt anti-climatic, and it shouldn't have been.

Aunt Petunia's sundress FTW!

Oh, I know.

[trude.livejournal.com]

Who the heck is Nigel, really? I never did figure that out. He just showed up in GoF, and it was like - huh? He's like this random OC they created. Ha - Nigel the Gary Stu! ;)
There was some tounge-in-cheek discussion about Nigel's true purpose in fernwithys journal a couple of weeks ago.

(Right after finishing DH I got this crack-plotbunny about Nigel really being Teddy, who has traveled back in time to try and meet/save his parents, but ends up in the wrong year. Eventually grown-up Harry takes him to Kings Cross, where he manages to throw himself in Tonks arms and she - really young movie Tonks, with her jeans skirt and excessive eye-make-up and all - goes "who the heck is this small kid and why has he attached himself to my midriff?". But the scenario is too sad to be crack and to weird to be serious.)

[lizetm.livejournal.com]

(Right after finishing DH I got this crack-plotbunny about Nigel really being Teddy, who has traveled back in time to try and meet/save his parents, but ends up in the wrong year. Eventually grown-up Harry takes him to Kings Cross, where he manages to throw himself in Tonks arms and she - really young movie Tonks, with her jeans skirt and excessive eye-make-up and all - goes "who the heck is this small kid and why has he attached himself to my midriff?". But the scenario is too sad to be crack and to weird to be serious.)

OMG, that would be fantastically funny! XD I would love to see it...it reminds me of this fic (http://community.livejournal.com/wolfandlady/259566.html)

[lizetm.livejournal.com]

but then again, some of them might get to survive in the movieverse due to time and budget constraints?
As much as that would be wrong and totally non-canon (though it wouldn't be nothing new in the movie world), I would LOVE to see them all alive and well at the end of the DH movie. I don't think, sadly, that it'll ever happen. :(

I get why we didn't get the Kings Cross ending (no, really), but it would have been nice to glimpse them
Yeah, me too. It would have been really reasuring to the non-reading audience to see them there, to see them care about harry to the point of threatening his awful muggle family....ok, I just wanted to see the Order one last time together before the movie ended. :D

Well see what they do in the next two movies, hopefully they'll learn their lesson after reading DH, but I doubt it. :(

[trude.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to see the Order one last time together before the movie ended. :D

It's a bit surprising how little we see of them - I'm not even 100% sure that Kingsley showed up for the DoM-fight!