The Harry Potter Thread, General Thread Options

[Everlong]

It just said you only found out after he died but then didn't tell you after building it up so much.

Yup. Told in flashback (well, sort of, via something called a Pensieve) in both the book and film.

[Raven]

Yup. Told in flashback (well, sort of, via something called a Pensieve) in both the book and film.

I found that bit really creepy in the books, as Snape comes across as some kind of massive stalker. I'm in the process of re-reading them at present, so I'll have to see how it goes the second time around.

It did seem to be better handled in the film, though.

[Raven]

The last few weeks have been a strange mash up of Harry Potter books and films for me.

I started re-reading the books just before Christmas and have seen several of the films on DVD and TV over the last few days (the latter all out of sequence: 2, 6, 1 & 5).

I watched The Half Blood Prince last night and before I started it I was racking my brain trying to remember what happened in the book. The reason I found I couldn't remember was because very little actually does happen! You have two plot lines; Harry and Dumbledore trying to work out what happened between Tom Riddle and Horace Slughorn and Malfoy's secret mission. Around that you have the Half Blood Prince mystery that is barely touched on, a lot of teenagers making out and the growing threat from the Death Eaters. It is largely 2½ hours of exposition that just seems to be acting as filler between films 6 and 7.

Having said that though, I did enjoy watching it and I think that is largely due to the cinematography, which was excellent (especially the attack on the Burrow).

[Serafina_Pekkala]

The cave scene and the bits about the horcruxes was some of the best things in the series.

[Raven]

The cave scene is a good character piece between Harry and Dumbledore.

The horcruxes are an excellent idea, but it just feels as though the story takes a very rambling path to get to them.

[sweetbutinsane]

I disliked Half-Blood Prince as a book so the film didn't really stand a chance. The only parts that I enjoyed were the cave scene, as Sefi and Raven mentioned, and the bits looking back into Voldemort's childhood. All the ridiculous love triangles/squares annoyed me muchly.

This post has been edited by sweetbutinsane: Jan 3 2012, 09:03 PM

[Raven]

I finished reading The Prisoner of Azkaban yesterday and I also watched the film last night.

This is the first time I've read the book since Rowling finished the series, so it was interesting to go back over the first appearances of Sirius and Lupin and to also see how hostile Snape is to the pair. I remember the book as being the best in the series, but this re-read has left me questioning that. The plot is certainly a step up from the first two books, with more depth and complexity, but once you know what is going on there are parts that are frustrating to read (especially the protracted stand-off in the Shrieking Shack that takes forever to get to the point). Snape's behaviour during the book is interesting for just how spectacularly vindictive he is (the reason for which, of course, isn't revealed until the end of the series). I did enjoy re-reading this book, for the most part, but overall I was also slightly disappointed by it. Perhaps my expectations were too high.

As for the film, I've never really been a fan of it because I used to think that it did a bad job of explaining what was happening (on previous viewings I've been left with the feeling that it was a good job I had read the book, otherwise I wouldn't have understood what was going on). With hindsight, after watching the film so closely after finishing the book, I think I can say I've been judging it a bit harshly in that regard and that it makes a better fist of it than I used to think. Still, some explanation of who Moony, Wormtail, Proudfoot and Prongs were - and their significance - wouldn't have gone amiss. The film certainly has a different feel to the first two, thanks to Alfonso Cuarón's rather whimsical direction, but I found myself missing the darker tone of the later David Yates films and I also felt some of the pivotal scenes ended up being a little flat (especially the one where Harry finally manages to summon a Patronus). It's not a bad film, by any means, but it occasionally feels like it is a case of style over substance which detracts from the viewing experience for me.

[Chapman Baxter]

J.K Rowling is writing a book, though she's not giving anything away other than it's not for kids.

Although I’ve enjoyed writing it every bit as much, my next book will be very different to the Harry Potter series, which has been published so brilliantly by Bloomsbury and my other publishers around the world. The freedom to explore new territory is a gift that Harry’s success has brought me, and with that new territory it seemed a logical progression to have a new publisher. I am delighted to have a second publishing home in Little, Brown, and a publishing team that will be a great partner in this new phase of my writing life.

[Raven]

I've been meaning to update this for a few weeks, having now finished The Goblet of Fire and having re-watched the film as well.

This is where the sh*t gets real, as it were . . .

Whilst good, all of the books before this one have an element of filler to them, and although they do progress the plot this is where it all starts to come together with the return of Lord Voldemort. First off, the book is big - nearly as long as the first three books combined - and it packs an awful lot into the page count; the Quidditch World Cup, The Tri-wizard Tournament, the return of Voldemort and a whole heap of exposition. At no point though does the book feel padded and this makes for a real page turner. I certainly enjoyed this more than the previous three books, and it felt as though some real progress - both in terms of the plot and character development - was being made come the end.

The film, however, was a complete let down. I've seen it a few times over the last few years and not having read the book for so long believed it to be one of the better adaptations, but it's a real dog's diner. Details, sometimes important ones, are glossed over or missing entirely; scenes from the book are omitted and original ones inserted and the worst crime of all for an adaptation is committed - not sticking to the spirit of the original work. At times the film seems to be playing more as a comedy and you really have to wonder what Mike Newell was trying to achieve. On top of all that, even the performances are poor, with Dumbledoor being particularly bad and Snape becoming a comedy character in what is little more than a cameo. The worst offenders though are Watson and Grint, both of whom fail to deliver adequate performances (Watson in particular). There are some pluses; most of the Tri-wizard scenes are suitably impressive and some of the comedy does work quite well (despite it not being part of the book) but by-and-large it is a pretty poor effort.

[Outatime]

I always felt the Quidditch World Cup should have been edited out of the book. I thought the fourth book was the point at which the publishers were too scared to edit J.K Rowling and the book suffered for that, admittedly I haven't read it since it came out.

[Raven]

It's a very different start from the earlier books because it delays the kids return to Hogwarts by a good few pages, but at the same time it also lays a lot of ground work for what happens later in the story.

I know what you mean about the length of the books though, after reading Azkaban it is a significant step up in the page count but unlike some of the later books The Goblet of Fire doesn't feel to me like it is carrying extra weight.

[Raven]

I finished The Order of the Pheonix last night, comments to follow soon, but I have to say it is a relief to pick up The Half-Blood Prince and find it is over 150 pages shorter.

Five down, two to go . . .

[logger]

If Harry Potter was an 80s teen movie

[sweetbutinsane]

Love it.

[Raven]

I'm on the last lap, I started The Deathly Hallows last night!