Harry Potter Movie IV
November 28th, 2005 at 8:37 am by David FarrarSnuck out last Thursday to see the Harry Potter movie during the afternoon. It was a good movie but that is because it is based on a great book.
Three of the four HP movies, including this one, follow the book almost religiously. And as I said the books are great, so they make good movies. But never do the movies grip you, never do they fill you with suspense. They really don’t come close to say Lord of the Rings. Perhaps it is that the books are so fresh on everyone’s memories, but the third movie which didn’t follow the book so tightly, was in my opinion the best.
The movie I am really waiting for is The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe. Yes, like many, I grew up on those books and still have the full set as a precious collection. And no I never caught on back then to the metaphors.
The trailers look great. What will be interesting is how well they capture the personalities. Lucy is the small girl filled with wonder, Edmund the troubled whiny younger brother and Peter the typical eldest responsible sibling in the books. I can’t actually recall much of a niche personality for Susan, which may be why they wrote her out in later books!
I do hope the movie does well, for I would love to see all seven books made. I see it opens in NZ the day after I get back. Wish one could book cine-lounge tickets over the Internet!
Tags: Reviews
November 28th, 2005 at 9:22 am
Oh dear.
I hate to sound like a stick in the mud, but I’m really a bit sick of kids books and movies suddenly becoming all the rage.
LOTR I can cope with, Harry Potter perhaps, but The Lion, Witch & the Wardrobe?
Please..next everyone will be going on about how the ‘Cat in the Hat’ speaks volumes about the post-modern world and existentialism in a crisis-laden era of artistic nepotism.
Scott.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:27 am
Doesn’t it?
personally I like Robots best for a look at societal change since the industrial age.
Vote:MikeNZ
November 28th, 2005 at 9:28 am
DPF, I suppose the National Party will look at anyway of getting into power. I suppose the power of magic must be next on the list after everything else has failed.
Vote:It might pay you to catch up with young Harry Potter when you are on your travels, and get him to cast a few spells on the evil NZ Labour Party. Sorry I forgot Harry must support Labour, Tony Blair & his party has been in power ever since Harry & his magical powers has been around.
On the postive side at least the above two movies may help with right wing depression over the festive season, enjoy!
November 28th, 2005 at 9:43 am
Cadmus, you really need to get a life. I would hate to think what your comment would have been if DPF had gone to see Must Love Dogs.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:52 am
If anyone’s interested, it’s received mixed reviews so far.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/6/story.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=10357339
(spoiler alert)
RE Religious subtext: When I was a kid I think I knew there was something up, but I couldn’t put my finger on it. The whole Aslan resurrection thing totally blew my mind.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:52 am
Great stuff Cadmus, you deserve a tennis ball.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:00 am
DPF, I am in this movie as an extra – it is sticking totally to the book storyline, with a few added bonuses, such as Aslan having a tomb.
Special effects and make up look fantastic. Will be well worth the view – seems like it will be much more watchable than LOTR.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:04 am
“Cadmus, you really need to get a life. I would hate to think what your comment would have been if DPF had gone to see Must Love Dogs.”
Something like this:
“DPF, I think it’s disgusting that you and your dog-loving pals in the National party are trying to force your right-wing ways upon decent New Zealand. Didn’t the Bestial Brothers Brash/Hide learn that the majority of NZ is just not interested in those kinds of antics?”
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:15 am
Now Cadmus, this wasn’t a political blog, nor should it be.
I share DPFs love of all those series – LOTR, Narnia, and now Potter.
I agree in finding Harry Potter a bit less engaging. But I’m sure that’s entirely due to being an adult when I read these books. Also, the style of them is modern, not early 20th century. That style is part of the charm of LOTR and Narnia – not only are they fantasy worlds but they are a glimpse at the minds of the english middle classes of that period too. I think Potter is also coming from that demographic – but it’s a very different mind now. For starters the author is a woman, and she makes an effort to include interesting female characters and people of other races, although the main characters are completely english. Her language is much more modern.
I do think she’s also suffering a little bit from padding the stories out further and further – every book is thicker than the last. That means they begin to diverge more and more from what can be acheived in a movie. There is no need for it – in fact it’s counterproductive because children are daunted by great big fat books that take months to read (if you’re chipping away at it every night at bedtime). Narnia was very good because it was also concise – you get the idea and that’s enough. If you want more, read it again – a shorter book is often meatier – you only have to read Heart of Darkness to see that. But suppose she has realized that most of her readership are probably adolescents and adults now.
I saw Potter on the weekend too, and the kids were all fidgeting by the end. Not quite as much as at the end of LOTR, but it was clearly dragging – kids have good instincts for when a story’s going sentimental and stink. And I totally agreed with the M rating. Too dark. Potter is getting darker every year, in the movies and the books.
Can’t see all the Narnia stories making movies. In order of preference as possible movies:
1. The Lion, Witch etc
2. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
3. The Silver Chair
4. A Horse and his Boy
5. Prince Caspian
6. The Magician’s Nephew
7. The Last Battle
These last two are pot-boilers. They stain the series, with their boring stories and blatant symbolism. But the other 5 are good. I actually don’t like Lion, Witch as much as all that, but it’s the first and it has to be done. If it was on enjoyability, it would go after The Silver Chair. I also missed the symbolism as a child. It’s not a reason in itself to condem the books. Sure there’s symbolism and moralizing, but much of it is actually good moralizing – promoting to children values that are not unbecoming – such as courage, honesty, kindness, diligence, love, duty.
Mike, Robots are choice too. But they’re not children’s stories! Far too complicated. Fun though. Do you like Foundation too?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:24 am
Scott:
I don’t think studios are interested in “kid’s books” (or comic books, for that matter) per se – but reliable ‘properties’ that come with rabid fan bases that will pay up to see the movies, and (more profitably) buy various iterations of the DVD, the PS2 game, the Macdonald’s Happy Meal etc. etc. ad nauseum et. infinitum. This has been a pretty dire year for Hollywood: Declining revenues while too many films that cost too much have tanked.
I’m probably going to get flamed without mercy for saying this, but I think the Harry Potter books are rubbish, and the last two films have been watchable (as opposed to the first two, which are over-produced nonsense) but still far too long.
But, millions disagree – violently – with my assessment of Miss Rowling’s literary output, which is what WB was banking on.
That’s what really surprised me aout Disney doing TLTWATW and pouring some serious money into it. The Narnia books are well-respected and steady sellers, but they don’t have the cult following of Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings by any stretch of the imagination.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:33 am
HP&TGOF is definitely the best of the four movies and probably one of the better books too, even if it is terribly over-written.
JK Rowling has only gotten more indulgent as the books go on. #5 was a bore and I haven’t even bothered with #6. I think also the novelty of reading kidult books has worn off, and I’d rather spend time ticking off some of those classics I’ve avoided, rather than reading the latest Stephen King or JK Rowling book.
Does anyone else find they forget the plot of Harry Potter books as soon as they finish the last page?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:45 am
Interesting, but what makes people so sure that CS Lewis’ symbology is particularly christian ? The words and overt images are, but the philosphical underpinings are not. An all conquering Lion is not a christian symbol, it is much closer to Mithraism. Maybe this is why many children who sense the story but not the outward symbols don’t see the supposed christian links as strongly.
I would agree with you David the HP III is the superior film, mostly I think down to a change of director. I don’t myself think that the story deviates that much from the book, but it is much more intelligently directed. The first two films were very poorly acted and directed, very wooden.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:47 am
Ben:
If I was pitching the rest of the books, I’d actually do it like this –
1. ‘The Magician’s Nephew’. It’s centered around a girl and Uncle Digory as a young boy (audience identification), explains the origin of Narnia – and the lamp-post in the wood and the wardrobe). The story is also relatively cinematic. Also wouldn’t hurt being able to bring back Jadis, thought I’d watch Tilda Swinton reading VCR instructions so I’m biased.
2) ‘The Horse and His Boy’.
Vote:3) ‘Prince Caspian’
4) ‘The Voyage of the Dawn Treader’
5) ‘The Silver Chair’
6) And rather reluctantly, ‘The Final Battle’. To be honest, this books sits as badly with me as ‘The Scourging of the Shire’ does in LoTR – the place where there is a message you are going to get OR ELSE. While I don’t object to moralism or didactic symbolism, per se, it doesn’t overwhelm the need to tell an engaging story. It just doesn’t work for me.
November 28th, 2005 at 10:53 am
err, Must love Dogs, No I saw the tailer of that movie several times. Even I wouldn’t stoop that low to associate such a tacky piece of B grade trash, with the NZ National Party.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:56 am
Yeah, I can’t see the whole Narnia series being filmed, most of them aren’t worth it (I’d be more specific, but I can see from previous comments that it is entirely subjective). Although looks like we all agree the last two reek.
As for the Christian allegory, so what? I reread these books in my 20s & was astonished at how blatant some of the allegory is, but that is just part of what they are. It’s not like they’re part of some conspiracy to capture the minds of children
Personally, I’d like to see Susan Cooper’s The Dark is Rising sequence filmed.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:56 am
I read (somewhere) there will be only three Narnia Movies – Wardrobe, Prince Caspian and The Last Battle. Couldn’t possibly see the Magician’s Nephew as a standalone movie – Aslan could give a fuller explanation after his resurrection and take care of it all.
Craig – To each their own preferences. I think Tolkein is an absolute bore. The Hobbit is 3/4s full of Bilbo whining and LOTR is far too long.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:01 am
I have never disagreed with you more Mr Farrar! This Harry Potter movie did not follow the book religiously and to be frank had enough left out of it to be incoherent at times. Like the last Star Wars movie, there are bound to be millions of fans that want this movie to be good, but I am afraid they will be disappointed. The scenes many fans were looking forward to simply disappeared, significant sub-plot points were missed and the character changes induce whiplash (as in Star Wars ROTS).
Hopefully the DVD will be a directors cut (or at least a version of the movie created after bitch-slapping the editor back into competence).
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:24 am
Michael:
You’re not going to get much argument from me where Tolkien is concerned. IMO, The Lord of the Rings is a long, dull, faintly creepy book made into three long, dull, faintly creepy movies. OTOH, you do have to acknowldge it has been vastly influential (for good and for ill) and if Tolkien inspires a hunger for the written word, and inspires people to explore some of the incredible talent on the shelves, then I won’t complain. I’ll happily send Harry Potter a thank you note for my partner’s nine year-old neice who’s roaring through (good) books as fast as I can throw them her way. And after taking her and her little brother to see ‘Howl’s Moving Castle’ my heart sang when I asked her what she thought, and the response was “It was really good, but the book was better.” Yay! Nerds 1, Barbarians 0.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:27 am
Michael:
You’re not going to get much argument from me where Tolkien is concerned. IMO, The Lord of the Rings is a long, dull, faintly creepy book made into three long, dull, faintly creepy movies. OTOH, you do have to acknowldge it has been vastly influential (for good and for ill) and if Tolkien inspires a hunger for the written word, and inspires people to explore some of the incredible talent on the shelves, then I won’t complain. I’ll happily send Harry Potter a thank you note for my partner’s nine year-old neice who’s roaring through (good) books as fast as I can throw them her way. And after taking her and her little brother to see ‘Howl’s Moving Castle’ my heart sang when I asked her what she thought, and the response was “It was really good, but the book was better.” Yay! Nerds 1, Barbarians 0.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 12:36 pm
Mike, you’ll get some argument from me though, futile though such arguments about matters of taste are. LOTR was the first and still the best. I’ve read a great deal of fantasy since and nothing else compares, except perhaps Stephen Donaldson (and only because he’s trying something quite different, breaking completely with the idea of writing fantasy stories for children and exploring ideas that are difficult and controversial.
Narnia stories aren’t even in the same genre. They’re childrens books with morals. Well done though. Potter is somewhere in between in style and intent.
Craig, you go for the Narnia chronology? It does make some sense, movie wise, but you can make successful prequels. I think it would be a novel idea to muck with the chronology completely, and approach them in order of how good they are. Putting Magicians Nephew straight after Lion, Witch, etc would be the death of the series. I’m sorry but it’s just a really boring story trying far too hard to be allegorical, as is the Last Battle (btw it’s also the scouring, not scourging of the shire and I liked it. What’s wrong with the Hobbits getting a wakeup call?).
My justification for my ordering is on enjoyability and message. Lion comes first simply because it is required to set the scene, and it’s a good story, full of various morals. Dawn treader is next because it’s a completely different setting, a different mission, an engaging mission of voyage and discovery, and also I just loved the conversion of Eustace – I think it’s one of the best character developments in a story aimed at children I’ve read. Silver Chair is next because it’s about unheroic heroes. Puddleglum is a great character, and I always found Eustace’s struggle to be good far more engaging than the natural goodness of the 3 Pevensy children. Edmund’s treason was cool, but it was induced from the outside which makes it much more forgiveable. A Horse and his Boy comes next because Bree is an interesting character, and it’s an exciting redemption story. Prince Caspian is a Lion, Witch rewrite, and done OK, but it’s not new. And the Magician’s nephew beats the Last Battle only because the Magician is interesting – in every other way it’s a contrived book of Genesis. The Last Battle was just a joke. An extremely long Aesop’s fable symbolising Judgement Day.
Call the series ‘Tales from Narnia’ or something, and don’t worry about the chronology at all.
Ed, I think it’s pretty obviously Christian. Mith-what? Yeah, right. The Lion is God and Jesus, man, it’s obvious. He dies and is reborn to save us? Hell he even calls the kids ‘Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve’ all the time. Doesn’t mean it’s shit, though. Just obvious to an adult, and probably slides off most kids without leaving a trace (thankfully).
Who was it said they forgot the plot of the last HP as soon as they closed the last page? Me too. It suffers from the fact that every plot is the same, so they blur into one another. But I feel less competent to judge than I used to – kids obviously love HP, and that’s the most important survey. They aren’t very original, but then even though I love Tolkien, I’m aware he just used plots from ancient mythology too. It works. Rowling is far more a product of our era – much more about the $ than the literature. The books are clearly written for film – she puts great emphasis on clear descriptions of the magic and what it looks like, whereas Tolkien made a real point of making the magic unmagical, just a natural aspect of the characters, intangible and remote. Very hard to film, and Jackson did a great job.
I’m not surprised the first movies had wooden acting – the kids were younger and less experienced.
Llew. The Dark is Rising would be cool. But the need to wait for a lull in the Arthurian legend hack movies. Timing is everything. I found the series a bit laboured myself – I think it would be better as a trilogy than a pentology.
Kimble, as always I disagree with you. I think the ROTS was the best of the prequels by a huge margin. And I can’t imagine that the extremely long Potter movie which had kids just giving up and talking to each other or running around would have been improved by more subplots. But the book was OK, I liked it more than the previous 3. How religious can you be in a movie of a 650 page long book?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:08 pm
Firstly Ben, I agree that it LOOKS like christian theology, but what i suggest you are missing is an understanding of what is christian theology. You can have lion/lamb dualism and resurrection all you like but that doesn’t make it actually christian even if it sounds christian. It may be going too far to equate LWW with Mithraism, which was a mystery based religion current around 2000-1600 years ago, derived from Persian rites. Probably better to say that CS Lewis undoubtedly intended some form of christian message, but the symbolism is actually not very christian.
As for HP, I agree that book 5 is the worst, but book 6 is much better and worth a read. One must always remember that HP is by no means great literature, but it like a good “B” movie, enjoyable in its own right.
Llew, Susan Cooper is sort of OK (IMHO of course), but a bit tedious other than the first book and the blessedly short third volume. I reckon that by far the best writer in the genre is Alan Garner although his output is not large, and his last novel (I think) “Redshift” close to impenetrable at times.
Nania, I think you could make passable movies of all the books except maybe the Last Battle which I agree would be hard. There have been a number of dramatisations, I’ve seen TV adaptions of The Silver Chair and The Dawn Treader, neither of which were memorable. It would take good directing, but doesn’t at always ?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:24 pm
Narnia is Christian. C S Lewis (I will have to see if I can find the quote online later) described his writing of the series as an allegorical retelling of the bible story.
Which is one of the more ironical elements of the series. A fundamentally Christian tale, written by a devout Christian, which contains pagan imagery and mythology. In fact when it first came out, some Christians had a go at it, using similar criticisms that have been aimed at Rowling et al.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:33 pm
Ed, I bow to anyone who is really knows their religious symbolism. But Mith-what? Mith-eh? Who’s heard of it? Show of hands please.
You’re possibly right, but it’s never going to come across that way. The evil queen eats the apples she’s forbidden? The humans are natural kings over all animals, even talking ones? You can mess up all the signs, but so long as you get the last one right (on your death bed perhaps) all is well? The people from A Horse and His Boy are clearly middle eastern (and meant to be evil). Doesn’t really square with a worshipper of an ancient Persian cult. Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve? Does it get any more obvious, really?
Haven’t read Garner…is it really good? I got bitter on fantasy after coming away from Eddings, Brooks and Feist with the thought that rip offs really are the modern way.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:33 pm
Have a look at the wikipedia entry on Lewis and his Christian writings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_s_lewis
Note, my bad, he said they weren
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:43 pm
Holds hand up.
I used to be dubious about wikipedia, but it’s getting to be a first port of call on any search I do now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:44 pm
Holding hands up.
I used to be dubious about wikipedia, but it’s getting to be a first port of call on any search I do now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:48 pm
Fred, christianity has always been about pagan mythology. At least since Jesus died. He probably wouldn’t be bitter on being cast as a lion, even if he would probably take exception to the idea that middle easterners are all evil.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:52 pm
Fred I wasn’t asking you to look it up. I was doing a completely unscientific judgement call that someone writing in the 20th century using religious symbols that occur all through catholicism, probably is pushing christianity. I used the ‘have you ever heard of it’ test. If you want something pithier, try the ‘Name 10 famous Mithraists’.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 2:06 pm
Holding hand up – Mithraism used to be big amongst roman soldiers didn’t it?
Ed – C S Lewis made it pretty clear that it was meant to be a christian analogy, and groups like Focus on the Family put out the series as a taped reading of it. It may have symbolism that matches other religions etc, but it was most definately meant to be christian symbolism. (I like it despite the christian symbolism – I reckon Horse and His Boy should be the second movie).
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:06 pm
Matt, a horse lover, or just sticking to chronology? That one’s tricky, since the Pevensies are adults in it, and children again in Prince Caspian and Dawn Treader. I think time is almost irrelevant in the series. Hence my backing the use of the good stories first. Since these stories are intended to be legends, well known to the hearer, and the fun in the telling and hearing, not in the plot surprises, I’d risk it. Who ever reads the bible cover to cover? You’re meant to pick readings out from it here and there. Only genesis and judgement day really need to be located carefully.
Note that ‘The Hobbit’ was not done first. Wise choice, I think. It’s basically not such a good story. It will be done as a prequel one day though. I’m personally waiting for the day when the Silmarillion is done. They will have to start with Beren and Luthien to get the viewers, but I think PJ could do excellent justice to the breaking of Thangorodrim or the fall of Numenor. Ambitious series idea – enough material there for about 30 LOTR length trilogies. That’s what set LOTR apart from all others – amazing depth. Amazing what can be acheived when the money motive is extracted.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
Seems kinda childish to me, a man in his 40s like Farrar who lives to see the latest kid’s movie. What else is he into? The Wiggles? Hi-5?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:10 pm
I agree with Craig Ranapia. The potter books and films are rubbish. Philip Pulman leaves JK Rowling in his wake with his Dark Materials trilogy. Should that ever make to film and I have heard a rumour that the film rights to book 1 Northern Lights have been sold, then we are all in for a treat.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:12 pm
I’m all for kid’s movies. There’s not much else out there, at least they’re escapist. Gimme LOTR any day over some another rehash of Pride and Prejudice.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:14 pm
“I think the ROTS was the best of the prequels by a huge margin.” Rather faint praise. ROTS was bearable in the parts without Anakin, but the movie had a damned “NOOOOoooooo!” scene, I thought they were too cliche for even George “Everyone will love kooky Jar Jar Binks” Lucas. And pasting Chewbacca in was just plain stupid, transparant and desperate.
“And I can’t imagine that the extremely long Potter movie… would have been improved by more subplots” And it is this failing of imagination that plagues all your comments. Editing. The movies fails in the editing. (Unlike ROTS which failed in the story, writing, and acting, excepting McGregor, McDiarmind and Morrison.) Things like the little dances the students from the rival schools performed when entering the hall for the first time were superfluous to the plot and the characters, whereas Krums performance at the QWC is rather important in developing his character.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:27 pm
Mithras. The soldiers god. Very popular with the legions.
Born in a cave that was being used a stable. Had twelve guys who hung out with him being all wise and stuff.
Sybolised by the bull.
The Mithras religion lasted through the old Roman empire well after the Romans had left.
Supresed along with all the other older religions by psycos like Padrig who had no tolerence for others.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:29 pm
“another rehash of Pride and Prejudice”
What can you say about the man that cannot appreciate the splendour that is Kiera Knightly?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:32 pm
Yup, Noooooo was very cheezy. But there were some pretty good moments, I reckon. The conversion of Anakin was good and I really liked General Grievous. I actually thought Hayden redeemed himself in this one – it was possible to see what Armidala saw in him, unlike Episode 2 where I just thought he was an annoying sulky teenager.
But I didn’t particularly like McGregor’s performance. He had slipped into cheeze mode too and only really shone in the final scenes.
Wrt Potter, sorry my imagination fails me and my comments need editing. I think that’s a fair rip on the Potter movie – I was expecting more of Krum, more focus on the grand ball, which set this movie apart from all the previous – the love interest thing is, well, interesting. I’m merely saying that it was pretty long already – what subplots would you have added, and what would you have taken out?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:39 pm
Trying to think where a bull god figured in the Narnia series…did I miss something?
Kimble, she’s just not my bag, sorry. I dig Natalie Portman more, and life would be complete if Liv Tyler ever even looked at me.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 4:04 pm
Ben:
I’m not that fetishistic about internal chronology, after all Lewis wan’t by any stretch of the imagination. We’re also just going to have to agree to disagree on the merits of The Magician’s Nephew.
My point was that the Narnia books don’t have the narrative spine of the Rings trilogy or the Harry Potter books. It just seems to me, from a purely cinematic POV, that Nephew has a better line from ‘Lion’ than ‘The Silver Chair’. (I do like the book, but Eustace works better as a lead if you already know what a thorough shit he used to be and his tale of repentance and change in Dawn Treader.) There’s more to grab on to if you don’t have a Potter-head like grasp of the books.
Anyway, if even Aslan can’t triumph over King Kong it may all be something of a moot argument. It seems to me that Disney took a calculated risk opening this between Harry Potter and the PR leviathan that is Peter Jackson in full flight rather than earlier this month, and I hope it pays off.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 4:06 pm
I don’t disagree that CS Lewis was writing with what he thought was a christian message in mind, I just reckon that despite the outward forms everyone concentrates on, the message isn’t very christian in its philosphy. The forms are, yes, but distinctly old testament style in many ways, Aslan is a jewish style messiah, coming to sweep all before him in triumph, but I would argue that isn’t very christian in concept.
The Calormenians are not innately evil in the Narnian books, although many aspects of their civilisation are designed to contrast with the idealised Narnian state. There are also “evil” Narnian types, the distinctly unpleasant Telmarines in “Prince Caspian”. One can be too sweeping in denouncing the stereotypes, and also get into other stereotypes by thinking that the Calormenes represent “all middle easterners”.
Garner writes children’s books, you may have come across “The Owl Service”, and a TV version was made some years ago.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 4:09 pm
“The conversion of Anakin was good”. See, now, this is one of my main gripes about the movie, and it can be isolated to one scene. When Mace Windu (the most underused character) is standing over the Sith Lord (ie the bad guy that everyone knows is bad and that Anakin knows will lie and cheat) Anakin stops him from killing the Emperor. The Emp immediately kills Windu then Anakin swears his allegiance to the Dark Side. Then he goes off and kills thousands of people and seems to forget the reason for his conversion in the first place.
This is the most improbable scene in the movie. Anakin converts based upon the unlikely possibility that the Emperor was telling the truth about being able to save Armidala from a fate foreseen in a ten second dream sequence. Nah, I dont think so. You can explain it by saying that the emperor warped Anakins reality or something, but you shouldnt have to.
“McGregor’s performance”. McGregor acted well with what he was given, i think. As a younger Sir Alec Guinness, he was impeccable. As Obi Wan, he was okay even managing to deliver the gawdawful line “Only the Sith deal in absolutes!” with some style.
“I really liked General Grievous” Fair enough, he could have been a great character. But come on, the thing was called General GRIEVOUS! How comic book is that!?
“unlike Episode 2 where I just thought he was an annoying sulky teenager” He never grew out of that. He still comes across as a sulky teenager. Right up past his conversion he was self-centred and arrogant. Even his (poorly expressed in the film) desire to ‘save’ his wife was simply a desire to keep what was his.
What annoys me about ROTS is that there were any number of better ways to write the story and any number of better ways to tell it. Anakins conversion would have worked much better if Palpatine had tricked him into believing that the Jedi Council killed or was about to kill Armadala. The whole “killing that which we are trying to protect” storyline, with Anakin choking Armadala at the end of the movie, was lame. The storyline would have been consistent, with Anakin going crazy after losing someone he loved, as in the Clone Wars when he lost his mother.
The fact that it could have easily been done much better makes the mediocrity of what Lucas presented more obvious.
“what subplots would you have added, and what would you have taken out?”
I would have made two shorter films, one premiering four week after the other. If a schlocker like Kill Bill can be two volumes, why not a genuinely good story?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 5:15 pm
“If a schlocker like Kill Bill can be two volumes, why not a genuinely good story?”
Two words: Quentin Tarantino. Few others would have got away with it, and he earned his right to be self-indulgent with a whole batch of genre-defining movies. The latest Harry Potter movie, directed by somebody who’s made a few too many movies starring Hugh Grant for comfort… maybe not.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 5:50 pm
The last Harry Potter book will outsell Kill Bill, Resevoir Dogs AND Pulp Fiction. Who cares who directed the Harry Potter movie? The star is the story, which is bigger than the director and all the actors combined (though the actors can’t really be replaced). The story earns two movies.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 6:20 pm
Kimble, it matters not whether a Harry Potter book will outsell the entire works of Tarantino. We’re talking about movies here, and in movies Tarantino is a name – for good reason. Or do you think that a book adaptation of Star Wars, regardless of author, would merit an advance larger than that of a great current literary talent.. just because it’s Star Wars?
Quite simply, Harry Potter is a franchise. If you’re willing to put your $10 on the counter and walk in the door, it’s done the job it was made to do already. If you want all 700 pages, go read the book. If you want to see another book get the one-director, one-production, many-movies treatment that LOTR got then you’re going to have to find a director willing to put a decade or so of work into it and fight tooth and nail to get their way.
Harry Potter is a valuable property for a studio, not a work of cinematic artistry. Expecting anything else is a bit unreasonable.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 6:20 pm
That post caused a number of interesting comments. I worked on The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe film for 2 months, but I’ve learnt quite a bit more about the books. During my stint, I talked to C S Lewis’ relative (his nephew I believe) who came over to watch some of the filming. It was his hope that there would be more films made of the series, but he also believed that a couple of them were just not suitable for adaption. I don’t recall which ones, but there seems to be a couple of obvious candidates, from what has been written.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 7:36 pm
I think you could create the azimov world and create a movie series to dwarf all other series.
create a whole sort of universe in which stories, tv series toys etc can occur – rather like how some fantasy novels or star trek novels etc work.
It would take some investment to set up though I guess..
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
“it matters not whether a Harry Potter book will outsell the entire works of Tarantino” HA!
Tarantino could make two movies based on the fact that he captured an audience with his previous works. People went to Kill Bill for no other reason than it was the next offering from Tarantino. People went to the second because they saw the first and because it was the next offering from Tarantino.
So the millions of people who already love the book AREN’T a captured audience? People will go to this movie because they liked the book. Even if this movie blows it will still attract people because it is the next Harry Potter movie. The popularity of the books (and the previous movies)
is more than enough for two movies a few weeks apart.
“not a work of cinematic artistry.” I hope you arent refering to Kill Bill here. If so I will guess you also own one of the biege cricket shirts from the 1980′s because it is delightfully kitch.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 7:52 pm
I agree with kimble partly – I thought the conversion of anakin was weak and could have been much stronger.
Vote:He should have been forced to fight someone after he kills Windu. or some other method of making him evil step by step before he could suddenly realize just how bad he had become.
November 28th, 2005 at 9:13 pm
i thought the movie was fantastic. and hermione is hot*
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:22 pm
“Tarantino could make two movies based on the fact that he captured an audience with his previous works. People went to Kill Bill for no other reason than it was the next offering from Tarantino. People went to the second because they saw the first and because it was the next offering from Tarantino.”
No, people went to see Kill Bill pt1 because it was a new Tarantino movie, they went to see Pt2 because for the most part the first was well received by audiences. If the first part had been tedious, badly paced crap that not even a mother could love, pt2 would have been massive flop that not even Tarantino’s name could save. As it was, part 1 was a slight but entertaining bit of what Tarantino does well – remaking Asian movies for Western audiences – but this time a little bit more overtly than usual. It worked. Not deep, but fun and stylish. I left with no objection to more of the same.
Releasing a movie in two parts is a big gamble for the studios. Two movies = 2x distribution and marketing costs to get the audiences in the seats. If the first half doesn’t engage enough people to come back for the second then they stand to lose more money than if they just take the one-movie cram job approach.
Since Harry Potter was about money and, whether you like it or not, Kill Bill was about Tarantino making the movie he wanted to make… well, Tarantino got to make it that way because he has some weight to throw around these days. On the front of pure commercial sense it’s a smaller gamble just to release one movie, which is why a franchise like Harry Potter is always going to work that way unless a director with a bigger name than any attached to the series so far gets involved.
Personally, if you pushed me out of a cinema half way through a Harry Potter movie I doubt I’d pay to go back.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:30 pm
Craig, no sweat. Tastes differ. I have read Magician’s Nephew 4 times so it’s not all bad, just not as good in my opinion as the other books. It has some good moments.
I agree about the placing of Dawn Treader before Silver Chair for Eustace’s sake. That is vital. But the Pevensies really don’t develop as characters so they don’t really need any particular placement. Perhaps I’m being foolish – Dawn Treader before Prince Caspian does cause some troubles since Caspian is a main character in Dawn Treader. I think Horse and Boy could fit anywhere, it’s a self contained story.
Potter-head. Nice one. It’s the opposite of a Pothead, since it means they actually can remember the details?
Ed, I still have to say I think the books are proselytizing. Perhaps it’s Lewis’ own brand of christianity, but that’s always how proselytizing is. I do think the Calormen are depicted as generally evil, although not necessarily ‘innately’, more as a function of their society, which is depicted as cruel and unjust. And thx for Garner, will check it out for my kids when they get to the right age.
Kimble, I empathize. The conversion to the dark side of a Jedi does take some explaining, for sure. Particularly poorly explained was why none of them suspected Palpatine but the entire audience knew right from Episode 1. Makes a mockery of their wisdom. I think the point is that people do insane things for love. And Anakin was a very angry person, probably because of his slave childhood. He was also powerful beyond his level of self control, a perfect candidate for the dark side – isn’t the point he was already flawed before he ever became a Jedi? Palpatine just pushed his buttons. I thought it was done well, that his sulkiness came together in a believably angry, passionate, dangerous man. And chicks dig guys like that, for some wierd perverse reason. Finally, as you say, there’s always the ‘power of the dark side’ argument that he fell under the Sith’s power. It’s magic anyway, how much explanation do you really need?
The conversion scene I meant was not actually during the Windoo/Palpatine standoff. I figured that he converted already when he was sitting in the Jedi Temple worrying about his wife – I thought it was a really powerful scene that stood out as really unlike Lucas. All done with mood, sound, lighting, scenery and facial expressions. That intuition is borne out by the titling of the chapter on the DVD ‘Anakin’s Fatal Decision’.
I do agree that the Mace/Palpatine fight was lame. I don’t like Samuel L Jackson in the role and found it very hammy. But he was annoying enough that I felt like cutting his hands off myself.
We can agree to disagree about the film. I thought it was pretty good despite disliking Episode 1 & 2. No annoying cheezy sidekick, much better special effects, new ideas. It could have stood alone without the first two. And Grievous was choice, unashamedly comic book, like the entire series always has been.
And I feel the same way about Kill Bill 1 – it was good, in my opinion. I think the final fight sequence stands out in martial arts movie history, surpassed only by a few greats. Excellent soundz too. It wasn’t new or original, just well done. I know several people who hated Tarantino until this movie. Kill Bill 2 was a potboiler though. Too long and laboured. Only the chickfight was good. Quirky film though, I liked it, but it was not in the same league.
Can you truly see a 2 part Harry Potter? I can’t – each story is meant to be hermetic. They always conclude with a Voldemort confrontation, and the first of the series would end up having no dramatic resolution! Interesting, but not formula enough for HP, I think.
Genius, I guess so. It could have been dragged out more and more, little by little. But I think it was a long enough film as it was. I think a sudden violent act was very much in keeping with Anakin’s character, particularly since he never got on with Windu, the Chancellor was his friend and Windu was striking to kill. A crime of passion. It happens, and is even understandable. The dark side is a metaphor for powerful selfish human urges that we all feel, and I can’t see that powerful people feel them any less keenly.
It’s all down to taste though. I’m extremely wary of slagging off modern cinema and music – it just shows my age, and I think there’s a fair bit of that flowing around this thread.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:33 pm
Ben, I did try to say that I don’t disagree that Lewis is proselytizing, I just am not convinced it is a really christian message he is using. I agree that he thinks it is christian and that his imagery is christian. Yes, the Calormene society is presented as relatively cruel, although one can be a good calormene and be a good person in Lewis’ eyes as a result. The good soldier in the Last Battle is an example. The Calormene “god”, Tash, does not seem all that hot on forgiveness however. And presumably the girl in “The Horse and his Boy” converted when she marries the “boy” although this is not mentioned at all.
With your kids, whatever you may want to throw in front of them, they won’t necessarily want to read them ! Mine like HP, the elder has finished Book 4 but couldn’t stay interested in Book 5. He also likes the Narnia books and has discovered a few on his own, one series about owls, and the Deltora Quest series (which I find fairly poorly written but they are probably easier to read). They have shown little interest in the Arthur Ransome books which I adored from about their ages on. In the end they will read what they find interesting, and will discover their own preferences.
Personally I find the Star Wars “universe” so boring that I can’t follow any of the stuff about Anakin at all, but that is purely taste, and tastes vary, so no criticism intended.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:21 pm
No offence taken. I only like Star Wars because I grew up with it. Anakin is Darth Vader after all, a character I’ve loved ever since “I am your father”. Now we see how and why. It’s been a long time coming and we didn’t really need episode 1 and 2, but I guess there’s symmetry in it or something.
I can’t argue against saying that Lewis may have a non-christian message. There’s plenty of different opinions about what that really is. I think Lewis believed in one version and that makes him a christian proselytant every bit as much as the mormons who hassle me every second week. But I can very well believe he had some kooky mystical stuff in there – seems to me it’s not uncommon amongst people of a religious bent. Perhaps that’s a bit mean, but I don’t get any of it, so one mysticism seems much alike to another to me.
Entertaining though. Can’t wait for the movie.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 7:19 am
As most people know, non-Christian mythology in a big way, especially Middle English and Viking Mythology, e.g. Beowulf. In ‘Mere Christianity’ Lewis says that myths from other cultures are a blurred image of the true religon.
My point is that Lewis uses sub-Christian imagery to get a Christian message accross.
As for which of the Chronicles will make films, I think all of them except the Last Battle, whose finale is too surreal. People have said the Magician’s Nephew isn’t suitable, but I think it would be great. Jadis and Uncle Diggory are such engaging characters. The Horse and His Boy might not be the best either, since it is a little confusing at to where it fits in the the other books. Prince Caspian would be good. Voyage of the Dawn Treader I think will be the best. I’ve always loved the setting and I think it could make a spectacular movie. That doesn’t neccessarily mean that I wouold do it right after The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe though.
The Chronicles of Narnia are miles better than Harry Potter. I like Harry Potter a lot in the same sort of way I like McDonalds. They both taste good, but you couldn’t label HP a great book, or McDs great food.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 10:51 am
I think it’s more the Wendy’s. You get filled up and it’s quite nice, but still not fine cuisine.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 11:17 am
Sorry err but are you seriously trying to say that a purely creative film enterprise is a better bet for the studios than a franchise that is both popular and profitable and with an audience that is much less discerning?
You said it yourself, if the first Kill Bill was bad then the second would have flopped. That is the risk the studios were facing. With Harry Potter however it mattered less whether the first movie flopped, because the audience for the most part isnt there to see the movie, they are there to see the book in film form. The movie already has a guaranteed audience because of the popularity of the book. Consider Passion of the Christ. Another crap movie that still made a lot of money because of the popularity of the book.
Also consider Star Wars ROTS. The first two prequels were quite poor. I mean come on! A precocious nine year old AND Jar Jar Binks! Why were another two movies made? Because the audience was gauranteed there was much less risk.
Vote: