Harry Potter Revisited

[poliphilo]

I was tough on the Harry Potter movies when they first came out (not a patch on the books I said) but I notice I tend to settle down and watch them whenever they come on TV. Last night it was Order of The Phoenix. "What's this?" asked my mother. "Harry Potter." I said. "No wonder I don't understand a word of it!" she replied.

There were several attempts to replicate the success of the Potter franchise but none of them caught on. For instance I caught a few minutes of something starring Nicolas Cage the other day. Sorcerer's Apprentice it was called and it was crap. There was a kid in it who whined. Then ten years passed and he'd been transmogrified into an equally whiney adult. No, no, no, no- that's not the way to do it!

Comments

[halfmoon-mollie.livejournal.com]

I concur, the Harry Potter books were just wonderful for everyone who read them. The movies are pretty good, I try to remember that they are someone else's idea of how things look. Their idea of Quiddich was not anything at all like I imagined it. When I was off my feet after my surgery I reread every single one of the books. Alan Rickman was not my idea of Snape, either...his voice, maybe. I finally sat down and saw the last movie, a few weeks ago. The books give a much clearer idea of the relationship between Snape and Harry's mother Lily, but the last scene in the movie, when Harry says to his son 'Albus Severus....you are named for...." you know the rest. I must admit, that scene in the movie brought a tear.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The books have their strengths and faults. And so do the movies. It probably helps to separate them- and think of the movies not as a version of the books but as existing in their own right.

I enjoyed the books- but they didn't particularly draw me in. The same goes for the movies. I feel very little connection with the characters. I enjoy visiting them in their world but I don't take them home with me.