Comments on: Episode #96: Harry Potter Books vs. Movies

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:07:08 +0000

I think they’re a bit ruined by the films…but not always…movie Luna for instance is perfect. However, I was watching Order of the Phoenix today and I noticed that a LOT of the things Harry says aren’t from the books at all, and it made me wonder, why do they not bother to quote canon Harry, yet they bother re-writing? Movie Hagrid and Lucius are perfect, too. Alan Rickman is a very good Snape, he has the perfect voice, but he just needs to be a lot thinner! And I won’t even go into Michael Gambon as Dumbledore…
Who thought Order of the Phoenix was a bit of a letdown? I do like it a lot, but there’s just so many things they change, like adding new characters, Nigel, having Neville discover the Room of Requirement when it was actually Harry, who heard it from Dobby. And it would have been great to see Dobby on screen again. A big disappointment was that they didn’t do Snape’s memory properly.s Snape’s Worst Memory during the lessons, but we all know Harry only saw things like Snape’s parents arguing while a child Snape cowered in a corner during the lesson…Harry actually sees Snape’s Worst Memory through the Pensive. Worst of all, they leave out Lily and the “I don’t need help from a filthy Mudblood like her!” This is pivotal to the story. When they get to book 7, it’s going to seem to come out of the blue, (Snape/Lily) especially for non readers of HP. It makes sense if you remember that Harry only saw part of the memory in 5th year, when Harry saw Lily for a bit, but only the trails end of the full story, so in the movie adoption of book 7 are they just gonna try and stuff it all in?

I think they should have given Bonnie Wright more lines for Ginny, since she suddenly becomes Harry’s love interest in the next film. I noticed that Hermione is used heavily for an information device in the movies too much like she explains what the Room of Requirement is. Handy. Movie Ron gets a pretty bad deal, a bad representation. They try and make him Ron-ish by adding in ‘mate’ to many dialogue between him and Radcliffe, but for most of OotP he didn’t say much…(no mention of making the Quidditch team or prefect, hmm.) Ron isn’t a one dimensional character who says very little, or occasionally ‘mate’
Oh and then they make Cho the person that told Umbridge about DA. And when people who haven’t read the books watch it with me, they constantly ask questions because they don’t get it, and I have to always explain and then I end up having to say, look, that’s not how it is in the books, the producers and screenwriters just change everything.

They’re prepared to make Deathly Hallows a two part movie, and yet Order was the biggest book of all, that should have been the two part one, but even in a one part movie, they could have made it longer, got it right..or even if they wanted to keep it the time that it is, as long as the scenes…and characters accurate.

The best people to make HP film adaptations would be fans, but maybe the producers are more interested in money they staying true to the books. I think the constant change of directors is partly why, wish they had stayed with Chris Columbus.

By: Nadia

Nadia — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:45:14 +0000

Also conversely, can someone be a fan of HP if they know the books inside out but haven’t seen any of the movies and have no intention of ever doing so? People think I’m really weird for that, but I don’t want to alter the mental pics of the characters that I have in my head(Snape looks very different to me as well).
Hey I just discovered this site, great stuff.

By: Alez

Alez — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:06:46 +0000

Hermine forget to fix Harry’s glasses in TSS book. Unforgivable sin.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 03:14:59 +0000

I went and watched ballet shoes out of curiosity and i really think its just Emma Watson that can’t act. It wasn’t that she was awful she just wasn’t great. Emma plays an orphaned actress out of all things. The movie was cute but boring. I’m glad i saw it, but wouldn’t watch it again.

By: First time Poster

First time Poster — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:42:44 +0000

Movies are not as good but are still great if you just think of them as movies

By: Niki

Niki — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:21:35 +0000

See, I’m not a lurker anymore…really, I promise, I will never lurk again! Well, that is probably a lie. I am a notorious lurker, because I listen on my ipod and always forget to comment when I get home from work. But, I am making a genuine effort to stay in in contact. This has been made much easier by finally getting unlimited texting to use with twitter. -Niki

By: Penny

Penny — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:10:22 +0000

I couldn’t agree more, Yinka. That *was* her shining moment.

By: Yinka

Yinka — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:11:29 +0000

Just a thought WB. If you put hairspray in Emma Watson’s hair and have her go to sleep. Maybe we’ll see brushy hair before DH 2. Then she won’t have to stay in hair and makeup so long ruining her lines while she gets “curly waves” in her hair. And maybe Emma Watson will end the series with a BANG. Seriously Emma’s only Hermione momment was movie one with the quote “You’ve got dirt on your nose, did you know just there”.

Thanks from,
Still Waiting for a Hermione Momment Emma

By: Christina

Christina — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 02:15:57 +0000

Since I was a tiny child, I loved the HP books and movies equally. But, I use each for different reasons. The books I use for more plot and critical examination, but the movies I watch to see the adaptations the cast and crew uses in their minds to create the movie. I never really got upset if a certain part or crucial scene was not used in a HP movie (although I secretly REALLY WAS), because I finally realized that the movies are adaptations. Versions of something else. So therefore it cannot be perfect, and it cannot be the books.
When I watch the movies, I look for effects and the ways the director and editors used their mental images to create the movie on the screen, and how close or not close they get. When I read the books, I look for plot complication/etc., messages in the text to the reader (such as morals.), sub-plots, symbolism, and all else crucially important. I also love to look at how far each and every character (even Voldemort!) has come and grown and changed and developed in each added books, and how the mystery unravels a little more every time I open each novel.
In my opinion, Prisoner of Azkaban TRUMPS the rest of the movies. The style of filming, plot (this is also my favorite book.), the dialogue, effects, acting and actors, and the SOUNDTRACK (most triumphant! best soundtrack of all the films!) are phenomenally written, edited, etc. Alfonso Curan outdid himself in this film, and I think he should have been kept for all the films. Also, I liked/like the new Dumbledore. He seems more magical and mysterious in his presence and way of acting. His costume’s the BOMB too. The old Dumbledore was too…too Santa-Clausy. Haha!

By: Grabmale

Grabmale — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:16:32 +0000

The movies have definitely influenced my mind concerning the look of the main characters. But I always liked the actors, and so it’s not bad at all. But some of the movies could have been longer.

By: Yinka

Yinka — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:39:30 +0000

Hi guys just wanted let you know my fave movies in order. 1, 5, 4, 2, 3.
Movie 1 was my intro into the magical world of J.K. Rowing. Movie 5 bc just like Greg it was my least fave book. Movie 4 Rupert grew up ;o). Movie 2 would have been my second choice but my 21 yr. old brother was sacred of the Aragog scene and wouldn’t let me watch it so I’ve only seen it a few times. And movie 3 I cried at the end only bc of disappointment. Book 3 is my favorite bc it’s the only book that doesn’t have Voldy causing the mayhem at Hogwarts. And Cuar’on ruined it for me. One it didn’t show any of the emotion of the trio’s friendship half the book is them not talking to Hermione. It would have shown true, strong, and powerful friendship one of the themes in Harry Potter. One good thing out of that movie was that the twins had more face time. Thanks for the shows I love you guys. Thanks for making work go by faster. Greg you rock and Penny you rule!

YOUR BIGGEST FAN IN MESQUITE, TX
Yinka

By: Vince

Vince — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:32:22 +0000

Penny & Greg,

Been ages since I’ve commented, but I still do catch the podcasts . . . Hope you guys are well and happy new year to you and yours . . .

Aside from the first movie, I just think the books are way too deep to be made effectively in the films – you can see it in the progression of the films. As the books get thicker, each director seems to struggle with how to get as much of the sub-text in there as possible. They increasingly become a cut-up series of highlights and sometimes with no context unless you’ve read the books. In the fourth movie, it was almost music video-esque . . .

Unfortunately Michael Gambon is permanently etched as General Leland Zevo in the movie “Toys” in my mind (fantastic movie in its own right). More recent portrayals by him of Dumbledore don’t project that “Gandalf-like” platitude and certainty that the books exude, thus the movie character never quite sat right with me, except when Richard Harris played it (you should have seen him on stage in King Lear) . . .

The characters that work are Alan Rickman as Snape, Harry is pretty spot on (although he’ll never escape from the role) Hagrid and McGonagall. Draco and Lucius are pretty well cast as well . . . I thought Cho was perfect (aaanh…if only I was twenty years younger).

I think its not really the actors fault, its the nature of the material and how it really isn’t suited for an effective film portrayal. You would immediately think otherwise because of the intensely visual nature of the books, but the underlying power of the book is in the prose and story. Also the merry-go-round of directors doesn’t help with continuity at all . . .

BTW – Equus is a bit of a strange production. It really comes from the premise and context of the story – the play was born out of the whole pseudo-intellectual silliness coming out of the 60’s. The nudity in the production was meant to be controversial and pull the audience’s attention to the moment – but since we see so much nudity in our times, it is no longer as effective in its original purpose. I find it a bit pretentious all around – something that is intrisically classist, but it has its moments.

Promise to check in more often – thanks for keeping on!

Vince

By: John

John — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:06:16 +0000

I thought I would pop in and say hello. I tend to listen to your podcast when I’m at work and took off between Christmas and New Years. Listening to the last two podcast, this is my post per your request.

An interesting thing about fans and many people in general, there is a continual competition of one upping the other in an attempt to illustrate how wondrous they are on a subject compared to who they are talking to. In the end it doesn’t matter, only what you take away from an experience.

Having read the series once and starting a second time (just finished book 1) I enjoy the movies overall, but the books are still my best way to leave the worries of the world behind. Having read the books it helps fill in questions the movies don’t always answer and there is the occasional reference that readers of the books only understand.

I enjoy your podcast. In a society that is falling behind in education and not thinking or taking responsibility is on upswing, intelligent debate and examination on any subject is a breath of fresh air.

By: amy

amy — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:09:05 +0000

I think the movies enhance the books. But that might be relative to how many books you read before you see/saw the movie(s). It took a viewing of half of Sorcerer’s Stone at the theatre and then one viewing of Chamber of Secrets at the theatre before I RAN to grab every HP book available off the shelf. ;p At that time Goblet was the last book released. I’m actually really glad it happened that way for me because I technically saw a little of the movies first before reading and had my own experience with them without the books influencing anything. A lot of people complain about the movies not living up to the books, but for me, I feel in love with bascially the first movie and that got me into the books. Then of course, I became obsessed with the books and thus they were the reason to see the films, so it became the reverse. Because of that, I will admit I have much higher expectations of the films, and yes, the first time I see them, I usually am disappointed. But after even just the second viewing, I grow to love them more and more. The initial thing is just the shock and slight disappointments as to what was left out. I do really love seeing the films now (after having read the books first) and catching little tidbits and tie ins from the books. It’s kind of like a secret club where you know things the average movie goer doesn’t. But maybe that’s just me and the obsession I have with the books, I probably am spending way too much time thinking about things from them/analysing them while watching the films. Anyways, just my .02.

By: Potters Number 1 Fan

Potters Number 1 Fan — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 00:45:16 +0000

if you like the forest again, click on my name potters number one fan and watch the video!

By: Nathalie

Nathalie — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:13:18 +0000

Hey guys! I really enjoyed this recent episode, especially because it made me realise that I shouldn’t be so judgmental of those who just see the movies, they are still fans! Also, I would just like to put in my two cents. First, while I agree that the first movie isn’t the greatest, I still really enjoy it because it offers the perfect background movie to start off the series. Even though it is not as “dark” as the others, neither is the book, and both media increase in their intensity as teh series progresses. Another opinion of mine is that although the books were popular to begin with, I do think that the movies helped to further the fandom, especially after the success of the first movie.
On a different note, I would like to offer a couple suggestions for future episodes. One is to do an episode devoted to the “Forrest Again” chapter in DH, as it seems that it is one of JK Rowling’s favorite chapter/part of the series, and many other fans feel the same way (including me!). Also, I mentioned this previously in last episode’s comments, but an interesting discussion might also be numerology in harry potter, such as the significance of the numbers 3 and 7.
Thanks and keep up the great work!

By: Potters Number 1 Fan

Potters Number 1 Fan — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 02:20:56 +0000

it’s a shame he died in 2000

By: Happy New Year! — The Hog's Head

Happy New Year! — The Hog's Head — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:47:19 +0000

[...] HP Progs episode #96 is up! [...]

By: Potters Number 1 Fan

Potters Number 1 Fan — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:27:19 +0000

I personally think Obi-wan Kenobi from the episode 4 A New Hope would have made a good Dumbledore

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 05:35:01 +0000

hahahahahahahahaha

By: revgeorge

revgeorge — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 05:21:15 +0000

Adam wrote: “…the only other actor who could portray Dumbledore worse than Michael Gambon, is Steven Segal.”

That is freaking hilarious!! I nearly split a gut.

Ah well, at least, Seagal could’ve put a nice Aikido throw on Harry in GOF instead of that lame shoulder shaking.

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 05:01:15 +0000

Wow! I guess this is the first comment of 2009! My favorite movies were the first and third. I didn’t care much for the second and fourth. The fifth was definitely my least favorite because of everything they left out. However, I think the casting of the movies was decent compared to whom they could have picked. Yet, the only other actor who could portray Dumbledore worse than Michael Gambon, is Steven Segal. Alan Rickman was a good choice, even though the Snape I imagined was nothing like him.

P.S. I loved the “Coffee Talk” skit reference!!!

By: Shimon

Shimon — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:28:42 +0000

I must confess that I have not even seen all the movies.

By: Potters Number 1 Fan

Potters Number 1 Fan — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:57:19 +0000

I am sorry for the spelling errors, all the people I mentioned (Snape, Dumbledore) are the ones that I think do a good job.

By: Potters Number 1 Fan

Potters Number 1 Fan — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:50:45 +0000

I would like to give you my perspective on the movies and the actors who play in them. Because I am blind and can not see the details and or expressions of the actors, it is not how I judge them. I judge them based on there bvoices and the inflections and the way they use them in moments of powerful emotion. I think that Snape, Harry, Ron, Dumbledore (of the first two movies), Hagrid, and Mc.gonigal. I have thought this ever since the first film, witch is almost the same way you put them in the podcast. I guess one does not have to have the sight to annalize movies! And no, Hermione does not do it for me! She does a horrible job at portraying the loveable know-it-all we all love.

By: revgeorge

revgeorge — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:29:43 +0000

“even _with_ what I’m sure is stellar commentary by you.”

That’s a bit better.

By: revgeorge

revgeorge — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:28:45 +0000

Here, in no particular order, are some of my answers to the questions you asked in your latest, and very good, podcast.

Order of preference for favorite HP movie: 3, 2, 1, 5, 4.

Can someone be a fan of HP if they’ve only seen the movies but not read the books? Well, assuming such a creature exists who’s only seen the movies & not read the books at all, yes, I suppose they could be considered an HP fan but they’d better not try to comment on the series & expect to be taken seriously. It’d probably be better to say that they can be fans of the movies but not necessarily of HP because they’re missing the main part of the HP world, which is the books.

Does it hurt our imagination to have our view of characters influenced by the movies’ visualizations? Well, it doesn’t hurt mine because I rarely imagine any of the characters looking like their movie counterparts. I view Harry, Hermione, & Dumbledore pretty much as they’re written. Which in at least two cases is greatly relieving.

I somewhat view Ron as a combination of the book Ron & Grint. Same with Ginny, a combination of the book & Wright. Lupin I kind of see as Thewlis, Trelawney as Thompson, & Lockhart as Brannagh. Lucius Malfoy as Isaacs. But I don’t consider this to be a failing of imagination but a combining of the good characterizations in the movies with the descriptions of the books.

Good podcast, guys. Sorry, though, Penny, I still can’t bring myself to listen to Mugglecast, even what I’m sure is stellar commentary by you.

By: Neko

Neko — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:22:51 +0000

Hey guys! just leaving a comment like you said in an earlier episode and I just thought I ought to say that in Beedle when albus mentioned that women haven’t claimed the elder wand, I interpreted that as saying that witches have had it in the past but have never CLAIMED or made it known that they had it. just wanted to hear your thoughts about that, keep posting!