Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Jul. 8th, 2004 12:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
yrieithyddWell I didn't hate it!
(Those who were unfortunate to be present when I saw the first will understand why that's immpressive!)
I did a much better job of watching it as a film rather than the book as people told me I should have done with the first. Thus I put up with the little things which were wrong and those things which didn't look like how I imagined them and it was only with the appearance of Peter Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map that I started getting annoyed. There was even one thing which was better in the film than the book.
The opening was a bit odd. It appeared as though Harry was actually doing magic when he was doing his homework under the bedclothes which doesn't really make sense with the decree against underage sorcery. I enjoyed the blowing up of Aunt Madge even though it was more graphic than in the book. It worked on film. I was diappointed by the fact that Harry wasn't nearly killed by the knight bus -- in the book the first couple of times he sees the Grim he nearly dies which keeps up the Grim = omen of death thing. I did like the knight bus especially when it went between the two double deckers. Robert Hardy was good as Fudge -- he's definitely pompous enough. He did cause me an 'It's him, oh who is he?' moment. When he came to the school I got as far as Siegfried from All creature Great and Small (although the title didn't quite get to my mind) and so I had to watch the credits and recognised the name! I understood why they cut the time he spent at Diagon Alley, although I thought it strange that Mr Weasley told Harry rather than him overhearing. I didn't like Mr and Mrs Weasley -- the actors are too well known and thus have too much baggage and the characters have baggage from the books and these two sets of baggage were incompatible.
The dementors were good -- especially on the train. The frosting of the glass and the being able to see their breath was a good way of conveying the dread and cold feelings invoked. I wasn't sure about them flying though. And the way Harry's face was sucked towards them made me think too much of the kiss. Lupin wasn't how I imagined him although I can't quite put my finger on why.
School was ok, although as![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
senji said there were too many children in each class and I'm sure that Defense against Dark Arts is not taken with the Slytherins nor Divination. Maybe that's the explanation for the number of children -- all four houses take classes together. Which would explain what senji was saying last night about Columbus' daughter being in all the class scenes. There was a Buckbeck per two or three children (so about 6 as there seem to be about 10 children per house per year and that is taken with the Slytherins). Ron's comments of 'Where'd she come from?' when Hermione appeared were good as indicators of her doing extra lessons.
The time lapse photography to show the passing of time was okay although I wondered what happened to the Easter holidays. There was a decided lack of presents in the film -- Harry's birthday is omitted at the beginning and Christmas is lacking too. I forgot about the firebolt (even though I'd been told about that bit) until it came at the end. But that was symptomatic of the downplaying of the fight between Ron and Hermione. In the books they aren't speaking to each other for much of the book -- what with Hermione reporting the firebolt and Crookshanks attacking Scabbers. Crookshanks is very underplayed -- and appears to be all cat! In the book Harry sees him and a black dog. You even lost the attack on Ron by Black -- there was only one entrance
I even forgave the conflation of two Hogsmeade trips at firstbecause the snowball fight was more fun that throwing mud. I was amused by the fact that the kids were not allowed in to the Hogshead. Not encouraging drinking -- I wondered if that was a particular issue in the US given they're even stricter than we are. However, I got irritated with it when they had then to come up with a way of getting the map into Lupin's hands. In the book, there are three Hogsmeade trips: the first at Hallowe'en (which was about right in the film even if Hallowe'en wasn't mentioned, it even coincided with the attack on the Fat Lady) on which Harry did not go but talks to Lupin about the Boggart and Dementors; the second at the end of the first term (so in the snow) which is when Fred and George give Harry the map and he goes (sans Invisibility Cloak) and overhears the conversation in the Hogshead (hiding under a table behind a tree which Hermione moves) and the third at some point in the second term when Ron and Hermione aren't speaking to each other. Hermione doesn't want him to go -- it's too dangerous -- and so he goes in the invisibility cloak and hangs around with Ron. It is then that he gets annoyed with Malfoy and throws things (mud in this case). He trips on the cloak and his head appears. Malfoy tells Snape which is why Snape stops Harry in the corridor when he returns and examines the map. Lupin comes along and covers for him. In the film because they'd conflated this Hogsmeade trip with the pre-Christmas one, they have to get Harry into the corridor at some other point with the map and give Snape and excuse to stop him. Seeing Pettigrew's name on the map is this excuse -- but this messes up the explanation (actually it did enable it to go quicker in the Shrieking Shack). Lupin was too teachery as well, telling Harry off for not handing it in. In the book, he says more about the manufacturers -- who'd have wanted to draw Harry out into the corridors. This started my thinking 'Wrong, wrong'. (This was better than the first when that happened just after Hagrid appeared at the shack on the island)
They lost all the exam tension (which worked for filmic purposes) but made things make slightly less actual sense if you know the chronology. I heard that Hermione slapped Malfoy on the day of the denoument which I thought was wrong because it happened the day she walked out of Divination, which is actually the case in the film too (although in the book I think it happens earlier in the day, she then misses Charms and then she walks out of Divination). This means that the denoument happens before Easter in the film (which explains the lack of exams -- although it does mean that it stayed light too long for the time of year!) except that Professor Trelawney's comment about 'before Easter, one of our number will leave us for every' is omitted so we don't know for sure -- we're latish spring by the time lapse photography.
The denoument scene -- why didn't they have the invisibility cloak? I suppose because a lot less had been made of the restrictions in school and Harry not being to wander the grounds so it was less needed. This meant Snape just appeared (although how he found out wasn't explained -- in the book, Lupin sees the movements on the mpa and goes and Snape sees the map when he takes Lupin the potion -- which means we know that Lupin hadn't taken the potion which works better in the final scene.). I felt this whole bit was too much abridged and a lot of the sense was lost. I think I worked out whatsenji meant about the dodgy chronology too. In the second time around there's no chance for Sirius to control Lupin. Snape was never unconcious to miss the explnation (which was severally lacking -- although the fact Harry had already seen Pettigrew's name meant some of it was implied. They also cut my favourite line. When Sirius and Lupin hug, Hermione as well as saying that she'd trusted him had being covering up the fact he was a werewolf and that he was friends with Lupin (as she did in the film) accused him of helping to get Black into the castle. Lupin responds 'Not up to your usual high standard only one out of three'. (which reminds me the boggart was too obviously the moon when Lupin fought it -- in the book they thought it was a crystal ball which was impossible with the bit of the night sky there too!)
I noticed at the end a credit for Ginny Weasley but I didn't see her. (I can't remember how much she comes in the book). I suppose had I seen the second one, I might have seen her by knowing who she was! Percy too was downplayed -- there was someone who said 'I'm the head boy' when the Fat Lady was attacked but that was about all. The twins had a bit more although I felt they were too old (they seemed more like 17/18 than 15/16) and too rough (but that's probably just my imagination.
The werewolf was wrong. It was wrong even for within the film. Snape asked in the film (although not I think in the book) what the difference between an animagus and a werewolf was and Hermione answered correctly that an animagus chose to change into an animal whilst a werewolf had no choice. From the depiction of Scabbers, Padfoot and the werewolf there was another answer to that question -- an animagus looks like an animal a werewolf looks like a monster! Werewolves are men who become wolves in moon light (and possibly by choice at other points -- à la Angua) not strange half-man half-wolf monsters.
I know why Snape had to ask the question about the animagus in the film when I didn't think it was in the book. It all goes back to the thing that was in the first film which did not happen until the third book.* I wondered how they'd get round that. In her first lesson in the film of the Philosopher's Stone, Professor McGonnall (rather than turning her desk into an animal) transforms into a cat. I said at the time that that did not happen until the third book. She does that when she teaches them about Animagi in this book. Because it had already been done, Animagi had to be brought in to this one somehow, hence Snape's question.
*I mentioned this to someone before they saw it and neither she nor her boyfriend could work out what I meant. Who was that?dunelmgrad? No, I didn't know her then (in fact I don't think she was then!) I know it was Gnome the ASNC.
I nearly forgot -- the thing which was better in the film than the book. In the book when Hermione and Harry use the time-turner rather than ending up in the same place as they currently three hours earlier (i.e. the hospital wing ward) they inextricably end up in the entrance hall. This random translocation always bugs me when I read the book but does not occur in the film. They go back in time on the spot (in fact you even see the events in that room reversed fast past them as they go!)
The person who hadn't read the book felt it work while the two of us who had felt too much had been missed out to entirely make sense. I suppose if you haven't read the book there's a lot that's not explained, but one does not know about it and so doesn't pick up on it. Like who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs are!
I've also realised part of what I don't like about films of books. For all I say things look wrong and Hermione's hair is just not frizzy enough and far too manageable, I do not tend to visualise hugely. I'm not particularly a visual thinker and concentrate more on what the characters think and feel. However, that doesn't across well in the film and gets missed out. Because this is one of the main things I read for, I feel short-changed when I see the film.
Anyway, I've been typing for an hour and a quarter and probably ought to go to bed. (and it's taken by another 15 mins editing to make it work!)
(Those who were unfortunate to be present when I saw the first will understand why that's immpressive!)
I did a much better job of watching it as a film rather than the book as people told me I should have done with the first. Thus I put up with the little things which were wrong and those things which didn't look like how I imagined them and it was only with the appearance of Peter Pettigrew on the Marauder's Map that I started getting annoyed. There was even one thing which was better in the film than the book.
The opening was a bit odd. It appeared as though Harry was actually doing magic when he was doing his homework under the bedclothes which doesn't really make sense with the decree against underage sorcery. I enjoyed the blowing up of Aunt Madge even though it was more graphic than in the book. It worked on film. I was diappointed by the fact that Harry wasn't nearly killed by the knight bus -- in the book the first couple of times he sees the Grim he nearly dies which keeps up the Grim = omen of death thing. I did like the knight bus especially when it went between the two double deckers. Robert Hardy was good as Fudge -- he's definitely pompous enough. He did cause me an 'It's him, oh who is he?' moment. When he came to the school I got as far as Siegfried from All creature Great and Small (although the title didn't quite get to my mind) and so I had to watch the credits and recognised the name! I understood why they cut the time he spent at Diagon Alley, although I thought it strange that Mr Weasley told Harry rather than him overhearing. I didn't like Mr and Mrs Weasley -- the actors are too well known and thus have too much baggage and the characters have baggage from the books and these two sets of baggage were incompatible.
The dementors were good -- especially on the train. The frosting of the glass and the being able to see their breath was a good way of conveying the dread and cold feelings invoked. I wasn't sure about them flying though. And the way Harry's face was sucked towards them made me think too much of the kiss. Lupin wasn't how I imagined him although I can't quite put my finger on why.
School was ok, although as
senji said there were too many children in each class and I'm sure that Defense against Dark Arts is not taken with the Slytherins nor Divination. Maybe that's the explanation for the number of children -- all four houses take classes together. Which would explain what senji was saying last night about Columbus' daughter being in all the class scenes. There was a Buckbeck per two or three children (so about 6 as there seem to be about 10 children per house per year and that is taken with the Slytherins). Ron's comments of 'Where'd she come from?' when Hermione appeared were good as indicators of her doing extra lessons. The time lapse photography to show the passing of time was okay although I wondered what happened to the Easter holidays. There was a decided lack of presents in the film -- Harry's birthday is omitted at the beginning and Christmas is lacking too. I forgot about the firebolt (even though I'd been told about that bit) until it came at the end. But that was symptomatic of the downplaying of the fight between Ron and Hermione. In the books they aren't speaking to each other for much of the book -- what with Hermione reporting the firebolt and Crookshanks attacking Scabbers. Crookshanks is very underplayed -- and appears to be all cat! In the book Harry sees him and a black dog. You even lost the attack on Ron by Black -- there was only one entrance
I even forgave the conflation of two Hogsmeade trips at firstbecause the snowball fight was more fun that throwing mud. I was amused by the fact that the kids were not allowed in to the Hogshead. Not encouraging drinking -- I wondered if that was a particular issue in the US given they're even stricter than we are. However, I got irritated with it when they had then to come up with a way of getting the map into Lupin's hands. In the book, there are three Hogsmeade trips: the first at Hallowe'en (which was about right in the film even if Hallowe'en wasn't mentioned, it even coincided with the attack on the Fat Lady) on which Harry did not go but talks to Lupin about the Boggart and Dementors; the second at the end of the first term (so in the snow) which is when Fred and George give Harry the map and he goes (sans Invisibility Cloak) and overhears the conversation in the Hogshead (hiding under a table behind a tree which Hermione moves) and the third at some point in the second term when Ron and Hermione aren't speaking to each other. Hermione doesn't want him to go -- it's too dangerous -- and so he goes in the invisibility cloak and hangs around with Ron. It is then that he gets annoyed with Malfoy and throws things (mud in this case). He trips on the cloak and his head appears. Malfoy tells Snape which is why Snape stops Harry in the corridor when he returns and examines the map. Lupin comes along and covers for him. In the film because they'd conflated this Hogsmeade trip with the pre-Christmas one, they have to get Harry into the corridor at some other point with the map and give Snape and excuse to stop him. Seeing Pettigrew's name on the map is this excuse -- but this messes up the explanation (actually it did enable it to go quicker in the Shrieking Shack). Lupin was too teachery as well, telling Harry off for not handing it in. In the book, he says more about the manufacturers -- who'd have wanted to draw Harry out into the corridors. This started my thinking 'Wrong, wrong'. (This was better than the first when that happened just after Hagrid appeared at the shack on the island)
They lost all the exam tension (which worked for filmic purposes) but made things make slightly less actual sense if you know the chronology. I heard that Hermione slapped Malfoy on the day of the denoument which I thought was wrong because it happened the day she walked out of Divination, which is actually the case in the film too (although in the book I think it happens earlier in the day, she then misses Charms and then she walks out of Divination). This means that the denoument happens before Easter in the film (which explains the lack of exams -- although it does mean that it stayed light too long for the time of year!) except that Professor Trelawney's comment about 'before Easter, one of our number will leave us for every' is omitted so we don't know for sure -- we're latish spring by the time lapse photography.
The denoument scene -- why didn't they have the invisibility cloak? I suppose because a lot less had been made of the restrictions in school and Harry not being to wander the grounds so it was less needed. This meant Snape just appeared (although how he found out wasn't explained -- in the book, Lupin sees the movements on the mpa and goes and Snape sees the map when he takes Lupin the potion -- which means we know that Lupin hadn't taken the potion which works better in the final scene.). I felt this whole bit was too much abridged and a lot of the sense was lost. I think I worked out what
senji meant about the dodgy chronology too. In the second time around there's no chance for Sirius to control Lupin. Snape was never unconcious to miss the explnation (which was severally lacking -- although the fact Harry had already seen Pettigrew's name meant some of it was implied. They also cut my favourite line. When Sirius and Lupin hug, Hermione as well as saying that she'd trusted him had being covering up the fact he was a werewolf and that he was friends with Lupin (as she did in the film) accused him of helping to get Black into the castle. Lupin responds 'Not up to your usual high standard only one out of three'. (which reminds me the boggart was too obviously the moon when Lupin fought it -- in the book they thought it was a crystal ball which was impossible with the bit of the night sky there too!)I noticed at the end a credit for Ginny Weasley but I didn't see her. (I can't remember how much she comes in the book). I suppose had I seen the second one, I might have seen her by knowing who she was! Percy too was downplayed -- there was someone who said 'I'm the head boy' when the Fat Lady was attacked but that was about all. The twins had a bit more although I felt they were too old (they seemed more like 17/18 than 15/16) and too rough (but that's probably just my imagination.
The werewolf was wrong. It was wrong even for within the film. Snape asked in the film (although not I think in the book) what the difference between an animagus and a werewolf was and Hermione answered correctly that an animagus chose to change into an animal whilst a werewolf had no choice. From the depiction of Scabbers, Padfoot and the werewolf there was another answer to that question -- an animagus looks like an animal a werewolf looks like a monster! Werewolves are men who become wolves in moon light (and possibly by choice at other points -- à la Angua) not strange half-man half-wolf monsters.
I know why Snape had to ask the question about the animagus in the film when I didn't think it was in the book. It all goes back to the thing that was in the first film which did not happen until the third book.* I wondered how they'd get round that. In her first lesson in the film of the Philosopher's Stone, Professor McGonnall (rather than turning her desk into an animal) transforms into a cat. I said at the time that that did not happen until the third book. She does that when she teaches them about Animagi in this book. Because it had already been done, Animagi had to be brought in to this one somehow, hence Snape's question.
*I mentioned this to someone before they saw it and neither she nor her boyfriend could work out what I meant. Who was that?
dunelmgrad? No, I didn't know her then (in fact I don't think she was then!) I know it was Gnome the ASNC.I nearly forgot -- the thing which was better in the film than the book. In the book when Hermione and Harry use the time-turner rather than ending up in the same place as they currently three hours earlier (i.e. the hospital wing ward) they inextricably end up in the entrance hall. This random translocation always bugs me when I read the book but does not occur in the film. They go back in time on the spot (in fact you even see the events in that room reversed fast past them as they go!)
The person who hadn't read the book felt it work while the two of us who had felt too much had been missed out to entirely make sense. I suppose if you haven't read the book there's a lot that's not explained, but one does not know about it and so doesn't pick up on it. Like who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs are!
I've also realised part of what I don't like about films of books. For all I say things look wrong and Hermione's hair is just not frizzy enough and far too manageable, I do not tend to visualise hugely. I'm not particularly a visual thinker and concentrate more on what the characters think and feel. However, that doesn't across well in the film and gets missed out. Because this is one of the main things I read for, I feel short-changed when I see the film.
Anyway, I've been typing for an hour and a quarter and probably ought to go to bed. (and it's taken by another 15 mins editing to make it work!)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-08 02:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-08 04:44 pm (UTC)--- SPOILERS START ---
When Harry-1 and Sirius are being attacked by the Dementors, we see the Dementors driven off, then Harry-2 ending his Patronus Charm, then Harry-1 collapsing.
When we see this from Harry-2's perspective it is Dementors driven off, Harry-1 collapsing, Harry-2 ending the Charm.
---- SPOILERS END ----
I agree that Hermione Is Just Wrong :). Do you agree that Sirius was very good though?