The Snape-loves-Lily theory is shot, thanks to the briefness of the occlumency scene.
You think so? There's still potential for that one, isn't there?
Rowling clears all the scripts and ensures that things that will be important later don't get cut (Kreacher was to be omitted but she told them to put him back in). No Lily = no Snape love.
Yeah, I was talking with a friend who hadn't read the books who went to the movie with us and he was like "so what was the big deal about that prophecy? who cares?" and explained the whole Neville and Trelawny stuff they cut out and he agreed that would have made for a much better story.
You might want to bold "spoiler" in the post.
'Cause I didn't see the word. And it hurts.
So you just thought ogged said "but death was more affecting", etc?
What are you talking about? Some kind of book or film?
Nah, this kid I used to know in school. Weird dude, wizarding powers, not a lot of friends. I think I've mentioned him in the archives, if you feel like searching.
7 - I'm all confused. Because just the fact there is a death is too much of a spoiler for you or because the sentence in 8 hurts?
Look, 5 was idiotic, but Timbot can't admit that now, and you're not making it any easier for him by pretending it made sense.
10: Oh, more inside baseball. Sheesh. Do you ever post anything with wider appeal?
I had some posts about Saiselgy's trip to Narnia that were wizard cocksucker.
This unfoggedbot is pretty cool, btw.
Yeah, it's great. Soon I think we're going to give it a more reliable home on the Unfogged server.
Of course what it really needs is the ability to post to threads from the IM client. Not that I have any useful skillz to offer in that regard.
Your request has been anticipated and rejected.
17 - The Unfogged Technical Team has already decided that's an undesirable feature.
I bow to our fascist control-freak sysadmins.
Now, the ability to write posts via IM, that would be something.
Or to edit comments. We'd just need a password system and a suitable query language.
It's also well known that any useful bit of software expands its functionality until it can read mail.
Gawd'amnit. I didn't know anyone died, I thought the post seemed to point out who died, but Becks's question makes clear that such is not true. So, what ogged said in #12. Lets all just forget this unfortunate incident.
I'd also like the bot to cc my comments to my facebook profile and turn a different color if a post involves plot spoilers.
Nothing could be simpler. We'll just configure the unfoggedbot with each blogger's screen name (that of each blogger who has one, anyway) and set it to periodically check the @unfogged.com mailboxes, IMing new messages to the relevant blogger when he or she is online.
As soon as we perfect natural language processing, the bot will also reject any comment that misuses an apostrophe.
Ideally, the bot would pass along only funny or informative comments, and, in case they depend on previous comments for intelligibility, send those too.
See now that's customer service. Speaking of facebook, everyone should join this group.
Or alternatively, everyone should ignore garbled links.
Ideally, the bot would pass along only funny or informative comments, and, in case they depend on previous comments for intelligibility, send those too.
This effect can be simulated by only reading my comments.
Is someone working on some sort Milgram feature that allows commenters to shock w-lfs-n when he's being ALB? Or, you know, whenever?
That group's description employs "drank" when it should employ "drunk". NEXT.
32 and 33 move me to comment on the wondrous serendipity in the universe.
stupid question. How do you put something in italics from the comments page?
Can you get the Unfoggedbot to find the 45th Mersenne prime while it's at it?
Do you remember where you left it?
Ogged, who do you think puts those curses on the prophesies? I don't think we know exactly how they get there. It could be that the dept. of Mysteries wizards place the curses on the prophesies, and ergo would have, after the attack, chosen Harry.
My own 7th book theory based on the film:
Rawling revealed in an interview that she had shared Snape's final character with Alan Rickman, so that he could act the part. Rickman's Snape has been more amusing than evil.
What made me happiest -- that they barely used that horrible, inappropriate John Williams theme.
I haven't read Harry Potter because when it came out everybody and his brother was talking about how it was "encouraging children to read again" and so on and so forth. Now, I'm no snob, but my grandparents lived in Marin so I'm at least 1/8 snob, and this heritage has consequences, one of which is that I will vehemently scoff at any bestseller, much less one that appeals to those who do not read. Am I shooting myself in the foot here? Would the HP novels still be worthwhile to a person who has read most things? Note that I have read fantasy books in the past, and do not excuse poor writing on the basis of imagination, unless spaceships are involved.
Dear god, please not another Harry Potter vs. fantasy thread. Just read the first one and see if you like it.
Would the HP novels still be worthwhile to a person who has read most things? Note that I have read fantasy books in the past, and do not excuse poor writing on the basis of imagination
full of yourself much?
47: it is fiendishly difficult to write well aboard a spaceship, I agree.
The use of the phrase "now, I'm no snob" is prima facie evidence that you are a snob.
I remember exactly the sentence that made me realize I was no longer willing to forgive terrible writing in the serve of science fictional excitement: "Kirk struggled to hide the gleam in his eyes."
What? How? Did he put on sunglasses? Were they really heavy? Does he have a complex? He shut his eyes but the gleam was visible through his eyelids? So he had to struggle to keep them closed? What are you talking about?
Thank you, crappy Star Trek novel of my youth, for giving me the strength to quit reading The Da Vinci Code after less than a page.
Wait: Have you ever seen photos of the actors who play James and Lily Potter at a premiere or cast party?
Ogged, I worry about you.
Would the HP novels still be worthwhile to a person who has read most things? Note that I have read fantasy books in the past, and do not excuse poor writing on the basis of imagination, unless spaceships are involved.
Entetaining fiction for younger readers. Good times. Don't expect a Tolkien/Robert Jordan like detailed development of a fictional world.
47.1 is nice in a " I once shot leon trotsky in my spaceship" kind of way, and 47.2 is obviously true, but everyone else, apart from 53, have been generally unhelpful. Let me clarify my position: I have a certain degree of tolerance of bad writing, if the ideas are good. However, this tolerance is small. I also have a small, but limited, tolerance of formulaeity. Is the HP series novel or well-written enough to overcome the inevitable formulaeity of the genre?
Inflammatory postscript: I enjoyed Tolkien, but I consider him akin to Max Weber and Abraham Lincoln:He defined both a genre/field/party, and marked it's upper limit. After each of these gentlemen, it has been all downhill.
Wait, this is the fifth HP movie? How did that happen? I thought there was, like, one before this. Weird.
That's "its upper limit", thanks kindly.
Mr Durkheim would contest your characterization of Mr Weber as having "defined" sociology, I think.
60: foolishmortal was referring to the painter.
60: If I can write a comment and the worst w-lfs-n can come up with is the tweetyite its/it's then I have succeeded.
61:60 was right, of course. I'm talking about the guy who wrote "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism." Durkheim can suck my balls ; he's the Arthur Machen of sociology.
The numbering in 58 is a little weird.
tweetyite its/it's
Excuse me? Tweetyite? Oh, my.
I have a certain degree of tolerance of bad writing... I also have a small, but limited, tolerance...
Tolerance, like bad writing, begins at home.
Arthur Machen sucked a mean ball, I gather?
Y'all are totally going to force me to read the seventh book in, like, an afternoon because otherwise you'll spoil the heck out of it, won't you.
Oh my, was that poorly written?
63: the Tweetyites, like the Deadites, should not be taken lightly, lest they besiege you with a deadly hail of misplaced apostrophes.
"To the ramparts! The Tweetyite army prepares it's attack!"
"ITS TOO LATE!"
Point taken, Sifu. I do not pretend that my prose has any literary merit. But I wll not concede that Weber's doesn't.
I was correcting misplaced apostrophes on this blog in, like, 2003.
Of course you were: who else would?
70: any right-thinking person. Our shame is well earned, foolishmortal.
The Growth of Cities in the Nineteenth Century: a Study in Statftitcs was quite influential, I hear.
And don't forget Alfred. And Eugen.
Cutting and pasting uncorrected OCR can be risky: statftitcs s/b statistics
foolishmortal, if you read even the title page of a single HP novel your membership in the Poundtown Pubic Library group on LNS is going to be in serious danger. I feel it's only fair to warn you ahead of time.
Was it just me, or was this entire movie, like, exposition?
PK liked it, though. Particularly the Weasley twins, who I think are his personal heroes. I also could see why people are perving on Harry (damn, there's a boy you can tell has muscles under his tshirt) but actually Ron is better-looking.
BPhd, only men are allowed to perv on young members of the opposite gender. When woman do it, it's creepily predatory! We can't have that.
re: 77
Germaine Greer would like to disagree.
http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,1059174,00.html
Tweety has been misplacing correct apostrophe's here only since about last month.
"Statftitcs" is correct AFAIC.
I'm seeing the movie tonight, and I realized you're talking about the movie because, nerd that I am, I immediately checked the text. In the book, Harry picks up the prophecy.
I saw the movie yesterday, and I thought they did a very good job of paring a 700 page book down to a 2.5 hour movie. They cut the stuff that was cuttable, and shortened stuff like the flashback to Snape's student days without losing anything important.
The only thing I wish they could have left in the movie (although I understand why they cut it) was "Christmas at St. Mungo's". I did tear up pretty bad when Neville was looking at the picture that included his parents.
Book 5 was my least favorite book, but I enjoyed the movie more than most of the others, except Azkaban. I think that's because it was less annoying to watch Harry as a surly teenager than to read about him as a surly teenager.
Also, the actress playing Luna Lovegood was perfect in the role.
58: My sense is that if you're the kind of person who finds formulaic books objectionable, you'll find HP objectionable in this respect.
I don't read enough fiction to catch on to the formulas, so they never bother me.
66: I'm planning to completely isolate myself from the internet from Friday evening until I finish the book.
58: I've been curmudgeonly all over the site about HP, and I'm a reasonably avid fantasy reader. Everything interesting about them you've seen before someplace else, and the formulaic elements aren't well put together. OTOH, everyone else on the planet disagrees, so you might as well read them anyway.
My son came back from camp yesterday, and I asked him what movie we should go see. Being terrified that he'd pick the HP. Nope, we went to the new Werner Herzog movie, which we both liked. (My son noticed the craft of filmmaking more than usual -- camera angles, difficult locations, no cgi, etc)
OTOH, everyone else on the planet disagrees
Further proof that I live on the planet Ngarloc.
Ignore 80, I misread and thought you said Neville picked up the prophecy, making a mismatch between the book and the movie.
My wife and I are rereading the series prior to the next book, as we've done either time. She has some theory about the importance of Neville, and I mentioned to her that, "Ogged is talking about Neville and the prophecy." She thought I was talking about the Hogwarts groundskeeper prior to Hagrid, whose name was Og.
the actress playing Luna Lovegood was perfect in the role
Agreed. And apparently she'd been in the news a few years ago for being such a huge fan of the books, had corresponded with Rowling, etc. She went to an open audition and got the part.
Dudes, you can't "pick up" a prophecy. You can only pick up something on which a prophecy is recorded.
As usual, I dissent from finding the movie anything like good -- too many cuts, too rushed (no time to feel anxious for Harry when Voldemort appears, b/c Dumbledore's there like THAT).
Harry worries about being bad, Sirius reassures him that he's like James, and then Harry sees James being a prick -- but there's no reflection upon what this means for Harry's nature.
The practice scenes w/ Dumbledore's Army ran too long & could've been cut.
Terrible revision of the Cho plotline.
If they won't do a 3-hour movie -- like people wouldn't go? -- they should do a Peter Jackson & film the 2-DVD director's cut at the same time, & then release that in due time & make loads of $$$.
I loved the actress playing Luna Lovegood as well, and PK allowed as how he liked her a lot more now than he had while reading the book.
Why didn't you like her in the book?
Because she talked like a teacher.
Honey, you're not allowed to dislike girls who talk like teachers. Your mama was one of those girls.
My thoughts are in more detail at my own blog but I thought it was the best of the movies so far by a long shot, which is impressive considering Book 5 is the weakest of the series.
You're so right about Gambon, Matt. He's been a disaster from the start.
Ah, but you already commented in that thread.
You're so right about Gambon, Matt. He's been a disaster from the start.
I haven't seen the past couple of Harry Potter films, so I'm not going to object to this--it's probably true. But I thought Richard Harris sucked as well, an opinion that pains me but can't be avoided. Too much slow dithering for my taste.
I agree, mostly. I wouldn't say he sucked, but he wasn't the Dumbledore of the books. Compared to Gambon, however, he was great.
I prefer Michael Gambon I think, although I haven't watched the first ones for a while. Richard Harris is always a bit too Richard Harris.
Doesn't the fact that Neville *found* the prophecy count for anything? Thought the film was pretty boring, but true to the book, if cut too much. Everything's skimmed over so quickly that if you haven't read the book, there must be lots of significance that you miss.
My eldest had been moaning about Luna before the film, because she didn't like the look of her, but we agreed we liked her very much. Thought DR was better than in #4, but still can't understand how he got the Equus proper acting gig. And he's not crushable. I like Lucius (and the Weasley twins, though not so much in this one).
Doesn't the fact that Neville *found* the prophecy count for anything?
No... Ron found it in the book.
Ogged, who do you think puts those curses on the prophesies? I don't think we know exactly how they get there. It could be that the dept. of Mysteries wizards place the curses on the prophesies, and ergo would have, after the attack, chosen Harry.
This, again, is explicit in the book. Harry could pick it up because the keeper of the Room of Prophecy decided, after Voldemort's attack on the Potters, that the prophecy was about Harry.
Richard Harris is always a bit too Richard Harris.
Richard Harris's Dumbledore was too dottering (and not whimsical enough) in the first two movies, but I think that, given the scripts in 3, 4, and 5, he would have surpassed Gambon's performance. Someone suggested that Gary Oldman would have made a great Dumbledore. I like it, although obviously the correct answer is, as always, Ian McKellan.
Oh yeah, Ian McKellen would have been great, if only New Line hadn't snapped him up first.
What about the new-style Dementors? Opinion is divided here, but I liked them.
Richard Harris is always a bit too Richard Harris.
The English never let up, do they?
Oooh. Ian McKellan would be a good choice.
The Times interactive review of the films is fun. Check out how young the kids are in the first one.
101 - ?
Bit of a gross generalisation by me though, I've probably seen fewer than half a dozen RH films. He's just one of those people who's such a character, that he's always *him*, in my mind.