New icon, errands, and Harry Potter
Nov. 27th, 2005 04:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
annathepiperOne of these days I think I shall have to upgrade my number of userpics, because it's starting to get harder to choose which ones to swap out when I make a new one! I just finally whipped together an icon for book posts, based on an Arwen base by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
underdark_icons:
(The text says "girl just needs a good book".)
In the meantime, I went down withsolarbird to run assorted errands this afternoon, picking up groceries and Christmas lights and such. It's been an otherwise uneventful afternoon.
Yesterday was somewhat more eventful, as Dara,spazzkat, and I went to go meet mamishka, darthhellokitty, kingchiron, and one other person I don't think I know to see Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire at the Cinerama downtown. Picoreview: I liked it well enough, and there were one or two bits that were genuinely creepy, which is in keeping with the story getting darker and more complex as its target audience gets older. I have a quibble with the ending, though.
There's a particular plot point at the end of this movie that felt totally inadequately explained to Dara and me: i.e., Harry telling everybody that Voldemort is back, and especially that Lucius Malfoy was among his followers in the graveyard. Those in our crowd who have read the books explained that in the book, Harry is telling people right and left about this and he is not believed. That, in fact, the Ministry of Magic makes a huge point of covering it up. In the movie this is only briefly alluded to, where Dumbledore tells the students that the Ministry doesn't want them to reveal that Cedric Diggory was murdered by Voldemort. We don't see Harry blowing the whistle on Lucius at all, whether to Dumbledore or whoever. We don't see any sign at all that anyone outside Hogwarts does not believe what happened to Harry. And these things seem just too damned important to leave out of the movie adaptation. If nothing else, I would have liked to see two or three lines between Harry and Dumbledore about it--just enough to show the audience that Harry tried to tell him this vital piece of information, and Dumbledore warning him that it would have to be handled with the utmost discretion, and to ask him to trust him and the other adult wizards to pursue it on the sly. Something. Anything. That way, seeing Harry try to go along with the upbeat spirits of everyone else at the end, but perhaps with a camera shot or two on him looking solemn and worried when no one else is looking, could have been cool.
The point was raised in our group that perhaps the moviemakers were assuming that everyone has already read the book and would just understand what's going on. I hope that isn't actually the case, because if it is, I think that's a cop-out. I would not have liked Joss Whedon saying "oh, you have to have watched the Firefly episodes to understand Serenity", for example. The Lord of the Rings trilogy of movies would have been much diminished if they had not stood coherently together on their own, and required viewers to go and read Tolkien to understand what happened. Sure, go and read the source material to enhance the movie experience. I'm all for that. But you shouldn't have to do so in order to actually understand fundamental plot points of a movie's storyline.
But just for the sake of talking about what I did like--I really liked the bit where Snape kept whapping Harry and Ron upside the head while they were trying to talk about getting dates for the dance during class. The first camera shot of Hermione, Ron, the Chinese girl Harry was crushing on (I didn't catch her name), and the French girl's little sister under the lake--genuinely creepy. The shots of Voldemort's followers in the graveyard--also genuinely creepy. Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, two thumbs up. The attack on the Quidditch World Cup--actually a little frightening. And Harry coming back with Cedric's dead body--very high-impact and emotional. I actually started tearing up.
There's lots of goodness all over the movie, in fact. Goblet of Fire holds together very well on its own up until the very end, so it's kind of irksome that it does fall apart in those final few minutes. Like Dara, I think this makes this movie a less coherent work than Prisoner of Azkaban, which remains my favorite of the movies to date.
Sunday miles: 2.1
Miles out of Hobbiton: 514.1
Miles out of Rivendell: 56.1
Miles to Lothlórien: 405.9
underdark_icons:(The text says "girl just needs a good book".)
In the meantime, I went down with
solarbird to run assorted errands this afternoon, picking up groceries and Christmas lights and such. It's been an otherwise uneventful afternoon.Yesterday was somewhat more eventful, as Dara,
spazzkat, and I went to go meet mamishka, darthhellokitty, kingchiron, and one other person I don't think I know to see Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire at the Cinerama downtown. Picoreview: I liked it well enough, and there were one or two bits that were genuinely creepy, which is in keeping with the story getting darker and more complex as its target audience gets older. I have a quibble with the ending, though.There's a particular plot point at the end of this movie that felt totally inadequately explained to Dara and me: i.e., Harry telling everybody that Voldemort is back, and especially that Lucius Malfoy was among his followers in the graveyard. Those in our crowd who have read the books explained that in the book, Harry is telling people right and left about this and he is not believed. That, in fact, the Ministry of Magic makes a huge point of covering it up. In the movie this is only briefly alluded to, where Dumbledore tells the students that the Ministry doesn't want them to reveal that Cedric Diggory was murdered by Voldemort. We don't see Harry blowing the whistle on Lucius at all, whether to Dumbledore or whoever. We don't see any sign at all that anyone outside Hogwarts does not believe what happened to Harry. And these things seem just too damned important to leave out of the movie adaptation. If nothing else, I would have liked to see two or three lines between Harry and Dumbledore about it--just enough to show the audience that Harry tried to tell him this vital piece of information, and Dumbledore warning him that it would have to be handled with the utmost discretion, and to ask him to trust him and the other adult wizards to pursue it on the sly. Something. Anything. That way, seeing Harry try to go along with the upbeat spirits of everyone else at the end, but perhaps with a camera shot or two on him looking solemn and worried when no one else is looking, could have been cool.
The point was raised in our group that perhaps the moviemakers were assuming that everyone has already read the book and would just understand what's going on. I hope that isn't actually the case, because if it is, I think that's a cop-out. I would not have liked Joss Whedon saying "oh, you have to have watched the Firefly episodes to understand Serenity", for example. The Lord of the Rings trilogy of movies would have been much diminished if they had not stood coherently together on their own, and required viewers to go and read Tolkien to understand what happened. Sure, go and read the source material to enhance the movie experience. I'm all for that. But you shouldn't have to do so in order to actually understand fundamental plot points of a movie's storyline.
But just for the sake of talking about what I did like--I really liked the bit where Snape kept whapping Harry and Ron upside the head while they were trying to talk about getting dates for the dance during class. The first camera shot of Hermione, Ron, the Chinese girl Harry was crushing on (I didn't catch her name), and the French girl's little sister under the lake--genuinely creepy. The shots of Voldemort's followers in the graveyard--also genuinely creepy. Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, two thumbs up. The attack on the Quidditch World Cup--actually a little frightening. And Harry coming back with Cedric's dead body--very high-impact and emotional. I actually started tearing up.
There's lots of goodness all over the movie, in fact. Goblet of Fire holds together very well on its own up until the very end, so it's kind of irksome that it does fall apart in those final few minutes. Like Dara, I think this makes this movie a less coherent work than Prisoner of Azkaban, which remains my favorite of the movies to date.
Sunday miles: 2.1
Miles out of Hobbiton: 514.1
Miles out of Rivendell: 56.1
Miles to Lothlórien: 405.9
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 01:02 am (UTC)And finally found Urban Shaman. Then had to go out and buy the minor anthology. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 02:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 02:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 01:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 01:53 pm (UTC)I love having new authors to blame.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 09:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 02:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 09:39 pm (UTC)There's some other stuff to read--a short story I wrote for eharlequin.com, and a tv tie-in Highlander novel--online and linked to from my website, cemurphy.net (http://cemurphy.net).
Ok, I now return you to your regularly scheduled Annablog. (Sorry, Anna!)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-05 05:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 07:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 09:52 am (UTC)I know Ralph Fiennes primarily from The English Patient, in which he was fantabulous. I also liked him in Quiz Show and Strange Days. I barely remember him in Schindler's List, but it's been some time since I saw that film. I was very amused to hear him voicing the smarmy bad guy in the recent Wallace and Gromit movie, too.
But I never saw Prince of Egypt!
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 01:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-06 07:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 10:24 am (UTC)What we get at the end of the book is vague hints at the level of denial that comes later...maybe the movie makers decided that it would work better NOT to make this movie required for the NEXT movie...do all the buildup on the denial early in the next one as it were.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 08:09 pm (UTC)Really must read that book! We'll see what I'm in the mood for after I finish plowing through the Kathleen Ann Goonans on my To Read shelf. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-28 04:21 pm (UTC)As far as the ending's concerned, I'm thinking along the same lines as
no subject
Date: 2005-12-05 05:34 am (UTC)Your comments about Fleur make me half-wish they'd tried the Veela thing--that way at least she might have had a tad bit more screen presence or something. I was rather disappointed at her wimpy performance in the competition. :P You'd know it'd be the girl who has to screw up so Harry can swoop in and save her sister, and the girl who gets glommed by the maze. (Though okay, granted, that was a significantly better fate than being slain by Voldemort, so I can't exactly quibble too hard with that.)
Guess we'll see what happens with the next film!
no subject
Date: 2005-12-07 11:11 pm (UTC)I guess the maze part was changed a lot, though. And Cedric got glommed by the maze too, in the film - just they had Harry save him.
I was dreading their attempt at the half-Veela thing. But I agree that she could've had more of a presence.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 05:48 am (UTC)And I know Cedric got maze-glommed too, but he also had a much stronger showing in the story than Fleur did, and wasn't just a pretty presence who was largely there to make Ron's hormones percolate.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:47 pm (UTC)I'm with you on the "girl power" but she kind of set it up that way. And since she's got other strong female characters, I guess I just decided to forgive her for making Fleur crap out in the tournament. (Still, 'losing' the tournament is still a pretty big accomplishment - the girl fought off a dragon singlehandedly, after all! But I know, she didn't do as well as the boys.)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 04:24 am (UTC)I would have been more impressed by Fleur with the dragon if we'd actually seen Fleur with the dragon. We didn't. So that got breezed right past. Granted, it's not Fleur's story, it's Harry's, so all the screen time needed to go to Harry--but still, if you're going to want to try to impress a viewer (or a reader) with the accomplishments of a character, those accomplishments need to actually be SHOWN. ;) It's the whole Show, Not Tell thing, after all.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-11 02:38 am (UTC)Icon and Potter
Date: 2005-12-03 02:05 pm (UTC)And, Anna, that icon is gorgeous beyond belief, and adorable with its caption. =D You've made excellent use of a very picturesque shot.
Re: Icon and Potter
Date: 2005-12-03 07:28 pm (UTC)Thinking about it, the idea of starting off the next film with the cover-up stuff sounds plausible to me. Guess we'll see what happens!