posted
I feel conflicted. I've watched every single movie so far and I really don't want to kill that trend... but I've done such a good job of entirely blocking out the last book's existence from my mind... DILEMMA.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
IP: Logged |
posted
Well now, that is interesting. I wonder how long each part will be? That they've decided to break it up is reassuring.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
oh oh oh oh! I am so excited. And I am so glad the rumor about them making it into two movies is true. Hopefully the pair of movies will allow for a more accurate portrayal of the book.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually hoping that cutting down the book to fit roughly four hours will improve my opinion of Deathly Hallows. The book had some great moments but it was also in desperate need of an editor. Just imagine all that camping nonsense cut down to ten minutes!
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shanna: yes, the camping! The freakin' camping that took up literally half the book. And the slide into fuzzy emotiveness which gave us reformed!heroic!Kreacher and suddenlydown20IQpoints!Voldemort and a bunch of other things I've probably blocked out. I don't know if the movie can rescue it for me. Maybe if they do Ron and Snape's arcs really well. I think I'll wait for reviews before deciding.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sinflower: Shanna: yes, the camping! The freakin' camping that took up literally half the book.
Skimming over the American edition of Deathly Hallows, I see that Harry, Ron, and Hermione began camping on page 268. They stopped camping on page 445 when they were captured. The space between these two pages were not taken up soley by camping. They went to Godric's Hollow, visited Xenophilius Lovegood, etc. Since the book is 759 pages, you can't really say that literally half the book is taken up by camping. Less than a fifth, perhaps.
Of course, if you define "camping" more broadly as the time Harry, Ron, and Hermione were fugitives and not simply camping in a tent in the woods, then yes, that takes up a significantly greater portion of the book.
posted
I don't understand why the camping sections bother people so much. I compare it to why the episodes of LOST where Kate and Sawyer are in cages bother people.
If you had to wait a week between each episode, it takes a long time and it feels like they're in those cages forever. But if you didn't watch it until it came out on DVD and were able to watch one episode after another, it just zoomed by.
Could it be that because I first read Deathly Hallows in one sitting that the camping didn't seem to take nearly so long?
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually liked the camping bits quite a bit. I feel like that's true to how life is sometimes, it's just tons of time and seemingly meaningless grunt work that doesn't always pan out.
It made Harry, Ron, and Hermione more human to me. I mean I enjoy having my heroes constantly in a state of adventure, but just once in awhile it was nice to read about a hero with no direction grasping at straws and stumbling around in the dark like most of us.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't mind the camping. I will NOT watch these movies. Nope. I won't compromise on this. Last time I did this I was crushed and disapointed, and who needs that when I can buy a bag of chips and some dips and re-read the books?
posted
The camping is annoying because of the genre. The series is fantasy, but it also is school genre (all those books about teenagers at boarding school). As such, I had certain expectations of the novel, and that included time at Hogwarts, not 20% of the time camping, 5% at Hogwarts. She did not ignore the genre in a clever way or anything like that, she set up certain expectations in the first 6 books and then failed to deliver in the 7th, but not in an innovative way that made you go, wow, that was cooler than the expected.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
My rebuttal to that is the vast majority of the Star Wars expanded universe. Although I might be willing to consider that all to fall under "well justified exceptions".
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anthonie: oh oh oh oh! I am so excited. And I am so glad the rumor about them making it into two movies is true. Hopefully the pair of movies will allow for a more accurate portrayal of the book.
... I feel as if I should point out that J.K. Rowling hates us all, and two movies for one book is just for double ticket sales. If each of the Lord of the Rings movies can run on and on forever, skewer some of the best plot lines and still manage to get a pass from most fans then why do we need two HP movies?
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is the one movie that I will actually be quite disappointed if they mess it up. The book was clearly written with the movie in mind. They more or less have a screenplay handed to them. But, we'll see.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They'll mess it up anyway. Hurm. Should have made two movies out of each of the long behind books, 4 and 5, but noooo. They had to take out the pulp of the orange, add water and high fructose corn syrup and say HERE is an orange.
I am not fooled -_-.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They may be splitting up Deathly Hollows into two movies, but I feel like the movie CAN fill two movies.
The last Twilight movie will be two movies.....And it shouldn't be. By the time part two comes out all of the 15 year old girls will probably be graduating high school.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The last Twilight movie shouldn't be any movies. In fact, I would suggest it ought to be -3 movies, heh.
quote:... I feel as if I should point out that J.K. Rowling hates us all, and two movies for one book is just for double ticket sales. If each of the Lord of the Rings movies can run on and on forever, skewer some of the best plot lines and still manage to get a pass from most fans then why do we need two HP movies?
...yeah, if one set of books-made-films was done one way, others must be done the same way else the creators hate us all.
Anyway, some folks - myself included - were pretty darn unhappy, while still liking the film overall, with what happened to RotK, what with its removal of arguably one of the most important sections of the entire story completely.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I, too, never really understood why the camping section bothered everybody. I was on the edge of my seat, personally, and really anxious about the relationship between Harry and Ron, and all three, really. I found it to be glum and melancholy and downright depressing, of course, but I think that was the point. Of course I'm not fond of those emotions, but I thought the camping section actually made for some of the more compelling reading of the entire series.
Guess I'm just weird.
Posts: 196 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: They may be splitting up Deathly Hollows into two movies, but I feel like the movie CAN fill two movies.
The last Twilight movie will be two movies.....And it shouldn't be. By the time part two comes out all of the 15 year old girls will probably be graduating high school.
There are alot more girls than the mid-teen range that read the Twilight series and watch the movies.
I don't particularly like them, but that's been my experience. All the important women in my life read them.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
Are you referring, perchance, to the nasty rumors that there were sequels to The Matrix? Or that the numbering of the Star Trek films didn't actually skip over 1, 5, 9 and 10?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
3D?!? Are they giving this movie the god awful post-3D treatment?
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by ricree101:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
My rebuttal to that is the vast majority of the Star Wars expanded universe. Although I might be willing to consider that all to fall under "well justified exceptions".
The Star Was EU is a special case of where it IS canon unless George Lucus makes a film that contradicts something in the books, in which case Movies/Films > Books in contrast to Star Trek where no book barring possibly the Titan series is canon.
IP: Logged |
quote:3D?!? Are they giving this movie the god awful post-3D treatment?
I hope not! 3-D is going to become the kiss of death for movies. It comes off as a last-ditch effort to rake in audiences.
Just because it worked for Avatar, which was created for 3-D, doesn't mean it'll work for anything else.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I heard it's actually going to be 4-D, with a timeline going from the beginning of the movie to the end.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
3-D would make any movie better, just as color and stereo sound make any movie better (sorry B&W afficionadoes, you can have your greytone Casablanca). But 3-D should be treated as just another commonplace element, not some spectacular feature that makes the movie by itself. And of course they have to use the best technology, like was used with Avatar. Then we need to develop televisions that can present the dual-polarized image needed. (The cheaper red and green--or blue--system just is not elegant enough, and distorts the color.)
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I disagree Ron. 3D, even with Avatar, leads to darker movies due to the way you have to split the images. Also, they impose a false image on your brain, which leads to headaches (even with Avatar).
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
Blayne, ranting about immaturity? In an run on sentence?
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
Blayne, ranting about immaturity? In an run on sentence?
Is this a parody?
IS this post whistled? Why I think it is! Funny that.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Considering I consider the practice of any fanbase of Discontinuality to be immature at best barring a few well justified exceptions and an extreme case of denial of reality at worse I am not sympathetic considering I enjoyed the books.
Blayne, ranting about immaturity? In an run on sentence?
Is this a parody?
Could you please play nice Kwea?
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to mention that at a non-local amusement park I watched a show called "Journey to the Center of the Earth in 4D". It was a 20 minute version of the movie "Journey to the Center of the Earth in 3D" that came out a few years ago.
The 4D Version, which included water splashed into my face, stale air blown on my neck and a seat that rattled on cue, was much better than the 3D version.
Though the reason it was better was that I only had to endure for 20 minutes, not the torturous 2 hours of the 3D version.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
