View Single Post
Old December 29th, 2009, 9:19 pm
Wimsey's Avatar
Wimsey  Male.gif Wimsey is offline
Curse Breaker
Join Date: 05th December 2004
Location: What day is it?
Posts: 7,036
Re: Half-Blood Prince Movie Reviews v.2

Originally Posted by lesleyit View Post
Based on the book by JK Rowling? I don't think so!
Isn't the real issue whether it told Rowling's story? Books are no more movies than fish are lizards. A carnivore, however, is a carnivore and a story is a story, regardless of the media in which they lurk.

Originally Posted by CrazyMuggle View Post
Dumbledore was not buried with his wand and so you can tell that they are going to have to rip Deathly Hallows to shreds when they make that.
Couldn't this be shown in (and more than likely will be) in Deathly Hallows when it is relevant? The funeral would have ruined the pacing but I'm more than certain that they will address where the wand is when Voldemort discovers it. That's the next film's job.
I would add to this that the "wand lighting" over Dumbledore's body was a far more cinematic expression of the funeral than any funeral could have been: it showed, rather than attempted to tell, the emotions of the protagonist and the student body.

And you are spot on regarding the Wand issue. In a rare appropriate use of double negatives, it was not not buried with Dumbledore, as Dumbledore's burial is not shown. Indeed, I do not remember that the HBP book ever specified where Dumbledore's wand was: insofar as I remember, the first time that we are told that it was buried with him is in DH. I seem to recall that a couple of the "Snape is Evil" hypotheses revolved around the fact that Dumbledore's Wand was missing.

Regardless, setting up where the Wand is will be a task for DH2. There is little point in doing it in DH1: that is 6 months too early and the audience will not remember some oblique and (apparently) meaningless reference to Dumbledore's wand after that much time. (Of course, if they can find some way to work it into what is happening in the first half of DH1, then more power to them!)

Originally Posted by GinnyPotter15 View Post
it isn't really Harry's point of view, just like the book isn't. There's a narrator.
The book is from Harry's point of view: it is a 3rd person single-protagonist subjective narrative. We read Harry's thoughts, get Harry's insights (and miss his lack of insights) and the adjectives/adverbs reflect Harry's biases. If you replaced the "Harry/he/him" with "I/me" and adjusted the verbs accordingly, the novels would read fine as first person subjectives, with the exceptions of a couple of points in Stone, the first two chapters in Prince and the opening chapter in Hallows. (Even the opening chapter of Goblet has Harry present via a link through Voldemort.)

Movies cannot quite do that: but for the most part they have been faithful about showing us only what Harry might witness. Without a narration, we do not hear his thoughts: but, as the movie Adaptation stresses, never resort to a narrator! (The narrator even emphasized that.... )

(It doubles for The Hobbit, too!)
If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - A. P. Chekhov, Gurlyand's Reminiscences, and who knew why the Dog was long before the Shack!

Last edited by Wimsey; December 29th, 2009 at 9:23 pm.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links