Oceania Harry Potter :: Your reaction

> If anyone ever does a movie of Stephen Donaldson's 'Mordant's Need' series, I think they will have to hire the same director/producer as Harry Potter.

Suddenly, we have a winner for 'stupidest comment ever'.

The Eddings' Belgariad/Mallorean - yes.
Donaldson's Mordant's Need - NO.

 

Read the book the other day, not a bad little read. Might catch the movie if I'm very bored, but not sure why its such a big thing.

 

I went in expecting a tedious, boring, childish movie, and I came out pleasantly surprised. The acting was good, especially Alan Rickman as 'Snake'.

I was surprised that it also had some genuinely scary bits, such as the scene in the Old Forest.

As for the 'Forbidden Love' trailer....damn Natalie Portman is hot...

 

Alan Rickman is always good. I've liked him ever since Galaxy Quest - he was actually pretty good as Snape, I guess.

I must say, I preferred Chris Columbus' directing of Bicentennial Man. Now that was a family film ...

 

From the reaction's I guess this is "this generation's SW".

People in the audience dressed up for this and although I'm not sure if the same marketing idea was in place in other areas I spent a bloody fortune buying glow things for the kids I got suckered into taking.

This movie has brought kids into the cinema and most said it was close to the books. To some of the kids I took-it was the first time they had even seen a movie-pretty awesome thought. Even better because they loved it.

 

Yeah, I can agree there mutley. When I saw Harry Potter, it was the only film I can remember people actually standing and clapping cheering at the end of the film.

 

i saw it a couple of days ago, and i liked it, however a buddy i went with thought it pretty average, i 'd read the book, he hadn't.....................how did people find it if they hadn't read the book in your areas?

 

I saw it a couple of days ago and was surprised, for a kids movie it was really very enjoyable.
I haven't read the book so I really didn't know what the story was, but still enjoyed it anyway. Williams' score was good too.

 

Well, I've already made my opinion clear on the NSW board, but for the rest of you:

I have a fair idea of the book - haven't read all of it, but most of what I haven't read I've heard from the audio cassette (of the book).

After seeing the movie I realised that HP is perhaps the best Roald Dahl story ever. Not exactly the highly original children's book that it had been made out to be when they were first published. Realising that HP was so similiar to many of Dahl's stories was kinda killed it for me, I am very dissappointed with J.K. right now. But if what has been said about books 3 and 4 is true, then that's good. I mean, I read The Hobbit when I was in year 4 I think, and I'd read all of LotR by about the end of year 7.



Oh, and Hi Everybody. This is my first post on the Aus Gen board, up til now I've been posting on NSW. You can expect me to stick around though.


Edit - I realised that "around" isn't spelt "aounf"...

 

I really enjoyed the movie!

 

Book three was scary!

I'm sure I saw an interview with Speilberg where he said the main reason he didn't want to do it was he was scared of his kids if he stuffed them up.

I liked the movie, but having read the book I'd imagined it a little differently. Loved the Quidditch match.

 

I saw it not too long ago. As a person who's read the books already, I thought it was ok, but not spectacular.

The film just felt a bit bland to me - probably because they had to cut out bits and pieces here and there that made the novel that bit more entertaining for me at least.

Still, it was a good effort (they could have done much worse).

 

i may go again, with my flatmate, she just read the book...

 

I thought that Professor Snape was the sexiest man ever to grace the silver screen.

Of course I have been trapped in Wodonga away from any semblance of a dating scene for a year now...

(At least it's cured me of my Big Kev obsession.)

 

Well, I finally gave in to peer pressure and curiosity and went to see it yesterday. (Well, it's that much easier to bag a film if you've seen it).

First off, the Monsters Inc. + epii trailers were great. But what the hell have they done to Scooby??? NO NO NO! That is just sick and wrong!! I am shocked and dismayed by this shocking dismayance!! Not to mention the ribbing I got from my friend (she is not a SW fan) when they came on: "Oh! Look! Here comes the Star Wars trailer! Wooohooooo!" etc

I'm not a fan of the books. Tried to read one, and didn't get past page 1. It had a line about the neighbours neck being stretched because she spent all her time looking over fences. Good grief. I figured if that was the best she could do for page 1, the rest would be pretty smeggin naff.

But the movie was good-ish. Mostly cos of the adult type references in it. All the "got it from a guy down the pub" lines, etc. And it would have been right rotten without Robbie Coltrane. And the Dark Forest bit was good. Would have had the little sprogs right cacking themselves for sure.

Now for what I didn't like.
* The music. Yes, good. But good grief was just me or did they just use The Best Of John Williams for the soundtrack? The Imperial March anyone? Jurassic Park? Did he actually write anything new for it?
* All the "tributes" (ahem) to other films like SW. "He turned them to the darkside..." (I got a real glare for laughing at that). And the bit in the Dark Forest ... I couldn't decide who they were stealing from most ... Star Wars or LOTR. When it showed the black caped figure for the first time, was I the only one who thought Black Rider?
*Quidditch. What's the bloody point of everyone bashing the hell out of each other for 1 point when some twit can go and win the game and get 150 points for catching that winged thing? Fnah.

Okay, I think it's time for my medication. Here comes the nurse...

 

Finally saw this on Monday, and I enjoyed it. Good way to spend my holiday time.

You only realised how good Alan Rickman was in Galaxy Quest??? He was the only saving grace for Die Hard, and I've been a fan since, especially in ones like Prince of Thieves (another movie where he was the only saving grace), and at the Metatron in Dogma.

But the only problem I had was with some of the special effects. They were great, but there were a couple of scenes that they needed to have spent a bit more time on.

 

You must remember that, as a 17-year-old, he was acting well before my time. I didn't see Prince of Thieves until early last year ...

 

He's one of those guys that one day you wtch a film, and realise you've seen him in heaps of other stuff,
But he has been the only good part of SO many movies...

 

Hey OzHaggis, I think you'll find that JK ripped off a lot more than just LOTR for the Dark Forest scene. Like I said before, for all the hype that was made about how refreshingly original the books were, and how they had finally gotten kids back to reading after this new-fangled internet thingy started hogging their brains, she's hardly done anything more than mix other peoples' stories together.

 

Hey, I'm only two years older than you. Now I feel like an old foogie.

 

I know they ripped off a lot.
They were just the things that I noticed most.

eg, the entrance of Hagrid on Harry's birthday is EXACTLY the same as a scene that coltrane did in the blackadder xmas special - he had the same hair, beard, etc, and he came in the same way: knocked down the door, flooded the room with light, came in looking scarey, then did something funny and made everyone laugh...

It was ridiculous.

 

Yeah, but how much of HP's intended audience will have watched any Black Adder?

 

Not many.


Which is why we must stop her!!



Of course, if we start deconstructing Hairy, people might turn on ol Georgey and realise that Star Wars isn't all that pure either...

(eg, Samuel L Jackson isn't the only thing Lucas stole from Pulp Fiction...)

But anyway.

Ooops. Here comes nursey. Time for my medication...

 

I agree that much of Harry Potter is not original, but it's a kid's book not high brow literature! Part of the appeal is that the book mines established cultural myths, like the child brought up by wicked step-parents, who only discovers his real identity later in life... who is really a famous wizard even though his family don't appreciate that... I could go on and on but I'm too lazy

If you're trying to read it thinking that it's another LOTR or even the Hobbit you'll be disappointed. If you approach it like an amusing Roald Dahl children's book you'll probably find yourself pleasantly surprised (It takes more than one page to get into it as well!)

 

Ah, but you see, there's the catch.

People are saying it's NOT just a kids book. They are claiming it IS high literature.

"Oh look, she's named a character after a german literary movement!!! This isn't a kids' book, it's high art, darling!!!"

And now, with the new ones coming out, folks are saying the story is getting more and more "adult," so they're no longer Kids Books.

What a load of horse-hockey.