|
Post by trisha on Apr 22, 2004 8:48:59 GMT -5
For future joiners and onlookers, this conversation began here. Major spoilers await all who dive in here before reading the books... fair warning. Hobo, I'm a Potter aficionado, too And I also enjoyed Snape for the most part until The Order of the Phoenix. I think it really adds to the depth of Harry's story to have an antagonist like Snape, who has a heart and does care about Harry just because he is human being, and has his reasons not to like Harry. His reasons are extremely childish, but they are psychologically plausible. What really got me not liking Snape was my second reading of the Order of the Phoenix, (yes, I've read them all at least twice.) I really feel like if Snape had just been point blank with him about the importance of occlumency, he could have prevented Harry from running off into Voldemort's trap. Plus, he is constantly on the side of that nasty little Malfoy. I understand that Lucius is one of his best connections to the Deatheaters, but some of what he does for Draco and against Potter are things that will do nothing to strengthen the tie with Lucius. He just comes off as petty and vindictive for the most part, and though I feel terrible for him for the way he was treated by James, Sirius, and Reamus, I can't ignore that he takes out his revenge on a little boy who already has a lot of problems that Snape himself is very aware of.
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on Apr 22, 2004 13:34:32 GMT -5
I kind of feel like Snape cares about Harry in a very fatherly way - he wants to make him stronger. Everybody else genuflects to Harry and gives him whatever he wants. That's no way for a kid to grow up. So I think Snape provides a very good, realistic way of teaching Harry to think and do for himself.
His behavior is definitely childish at times, I'll admit. He was treated horribly by James, but that's really not Harry's fault. I think in the chapter where Harry looks in Snape's Pensieve is really telling of their relationship - Snape is angry because Harry has seen something fairly embarassing. As a dignified man, in an authoritarian position, that can't be easy for him to take. But Harry is genuinely sorry that he saw it, not just because it was private, but because he realizes something bad about his father. And to some degree, he gets a shock about his mother as well. Yet neither of them makes an effort to communicate what the problem is - Snape just gets mad and kicks Harry out. At this point, I lose a little Snape-sympathy. Despite his personal feelings, he should have continued the Occlumency lessons. It was vitally important. I agree, too, that somebody (Snape, Dumbledore, McGonagall - somebody!) should have told Harry that Voldemort might try to lure him or trick him. We've learned in the previous 4 books that Harry doesn't always think things through before he acts (if he ever does!). A warning about that kind of thing would have helped him. Although, given the degree of his concern and love for Sirius, it's probable he would have gone anyway.
As far as Snape and Malfoy, I really can't defend that one. He does favor Draco, to an extent that doesn't seem explained away by the Malfoy connection. Perhaps it's another facet of keeping up the 'evil' image.
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Apr 22, 2004 15:13:33 GMT -5
Surely not *everyone* gives Harry what he wants. I admit that Dumbledore, Mr & Mrs. Weasley, Lupin, and Sirius let Harry get away with a lot, but Professor McGonnagal and the other teachers don't. Most of the students definitely don't, and we also can't forget that Harry goes back to Private Drive every summer. That is certainly no treat. All in all, Harry has it pretty rough. I won't totally discount that Snape wants him to toughen up, and lose his surly attitude- which alone causes a *lot* of problems for him. I'm sure that is part of Snape's drive with Harry, but a lot of it is just him punishing James through his son. It just doesn't help Harry that he looks and acts a lot like James, too.
There are actually a lot more things that bothered me during my second read of TOTP than just Snape.
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on Apr 22, 2004 21:39:07 GMT -5
Order of the Phoenix isn't my favorite by far. Goblet of Fire is the best in my opinion. I feel like the plots have gotten a little too convoluted - I don't like the idea of a 'prophecy' saying either Harry or Voldemort's got to die. I've also only read Order once, well, I got about halfway through a second reading. I never did finish the re-read, since I got sucked into school and Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles.
My friends love to debate Harry Potter stuff, so over the summer I'll probably re-read the whole series. There are many nuances.
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Apr 23, 2004 16:16:34 GMT -5
I was also a little unimpressed by the whole "prophecy" thing, but it served it's purpose as a vehicle for the rest of the story. My favorite of the series so far is definitely Prisoner of Azkaban. It was a very fun book, and both GOF and OOTP have been really dark compared to it. After the last two books, it seems like the adventures of Harry Potter: magical boy wonder is starting to become a horror story. My kids really loved the first 3, but now I am half way through GOF with them, and they are getting too scared. I don't know if I can finish it because of what happens to Cedric, not to mention moving on to OOTP... even I cried when Sirius was killed.
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on Apr 23, 2004 18:42:16 GMT -5
The stories definitely aren't made for kids anymore. I think even towards the end of Prisoner of Azkaban, the darker stuff starting coming out.
Goblet of Fire, right from the start, was dark and scary. I think Rowling realized that most of her readers were adults and teenagers, so she tried to write it at a more adult level.
Besides which, I don't know how many kids have the patience for a 700 page book!
I like the overarching theme - it's good vs. evil, and it's very conventional, but she throws in a lot of ambiguity. There are characters all along the good/evil continuum. I wish I was half as talented as her. All my stories come out with flat, one dimensional characters.
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on May 5, 2004 0:59:30 GMT -5
Have you seen the previews for the Prisoner of Azkaban film? I am so excited. Partially because I have a small 'thing' for Professor Snape, and also because it just looks really, really good. I'm already counting down the days, lol.
|
|
|
Post by Morrigan13 on May 5, 2004 12:38:53 GMT -5
Very excited about the new movie. I am interested in how Michael Gambon will handle the role of Dumbledore since Richard Harris has passed On a happier note, two words: Gary Oldman (drool). Liked him in Dracula, loved him in Immortal Beloved.
|
|
|
Post by trisha on May 5, 2004 16:18:54 GMT -5
Oh, yeah, and don't forget The Scarlette Letter [which wasn't a great film butt for the nice shots of Mr. Oldman ;D]
Hobo, where did you see the trailer? After I read your post I went to HarryPotter.com and tried to view it there, but there must have been too many other people on because it kept cutting out and freezing on me.
Besides the wonderful Gary Oldman and Alan Rickman, I'm also very excited about David Thewlis as Remus Lupin. I loved him in Seven Years in Tibet and Besieged [Dear Mr. Kinsky, I love you]
The only thing that could make me more excited about this film is if Peeves would finally make an appearance.
|
|
|
Post by janetcatbird on May 5, 2004 17:18:53 GMT -5
I dunno, I need to reread the books since it's been awhile. I don't remember being terribly impressed with "Order of the Phoenix" I actually don't remember anything except Harry being very ANGRY through that (oh, don't we love these teenage hormones?).
I was disappointed that they didn't cast Derek Jacoby as Dumbledore, either initially or in the recast. Alan RIckman I have only seen in two things: the first Harry Potter and "Dogma", but what I saw I liked. Have barely seen any Gary oldman, but I think he'd keep his part interesting.
In my mind I kept seeing different people in the roles. I imagined Tony Slattery from the British "Whose Line is It Anyway" as Quirrell in "Sorcerer's Stone", and Mark Charnock (Brother Oswin in the Cadfael mysteries) as Lupin with his hair died grey. Although he could also look like Matt Doherty, though I doubt the coach has much acting ability...it's been a while, I actually made up a list somewhere of my dream cast back before the first movie was released. Haven't seen all of the second one, although that was a stroke of genius to cast Kenneth Branaugh as Lockeharte. One of my friends actually suggested that even before we saw the official notices.
|
|
|
Post by Morrigan13 on May 5, 2004 21:26:28 GMT -5
Catbird, Alan Rickman's first US movie debut was in "Die Hard" with Bruce Willis. He played Hans Grueber, a German terrorist. If you can stand the violence, watch it for him. He stole that movie from Willis.
Mo
|
|
|
Post by trisha on May 7, 2004 7:47:16 GMT -5
Okay, I saw the trailer. Holy cow, the part where Harry is flying on BuckBeak is amazing. Remind me again why they can't create Peeves?
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on May 7, 2004 13:50:57 GMT -5
I know. The absence of Peeves has been a peeve of mine- haha! Okay, I'm sorry, that was corny. Peeves is actually important to the plot on more than one occasion. I have no idea why they wouldn't include him. They included all the ghosts. Point of annoyance.
I saw the trailer through Windows Media Player, I just went to the media guide and searched for it. I also caught 2 different versions on TV.
I have only seen Gary Oldman in Lost in Space, but he is pretty attractive. Has anyone seen the film Underworld? I pictured Sirius looking more like the man who played Lucian, the head lycan.
I haven't managed to catch a decent glimpse of Lupin, but from what I did see, it doesn't look like what I pictured.
*spoiler alert*
The preview I saw showed Hermione punching Draco right in the face. I am SO glad they kept that true to the book. I would've been so angry if they had skipped it. Go Hermione!!!
|
|
|
Post by trisha on Jun 5, 2004 12:47:49 GMT -5
Yea! I saw it this morning. It was pretty good. Spoilers ... The grounds have changed. There is a lot of focus placed on rough terrain and ruins, which ties in with the darkness of the theme and the bumpy ride we are on, but it is the opposite of the expansive, well maintained grounds we saw in the first two movies. There were some liberties taken with the story in this one, too. One, I believe, wasted precious time that could have been devoted to the marauders map, which was present, but undervalued. It only got the chance to insult Snape once, and Harry never did find out who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs are. Disappointing Other than that, it was a fair representation of the book.
|
|
|
Post by hobo_hobisho on Jun 17, 2004 19:22:25 GMT -5
I absolutely LOVED this installment. It was amazing! Cuaron is a very talented director. He drew excellent performances from the leads, especially the kids who did a really good job of showing some of the complexities of their lives.
There were a few scenes which were somewhat pointless, but I really found them enjoyable and engaging. It made the kids look more like kids for once. I really liked the way Hermione kept popping up out of nowhere, it conveyed the message very clearly.
My biggest annoyance was the exclusion of Snape's temper tantrum in the end of the book after the escape of Sirius. I would have LOVED to see Alan Rickman screaming about how it's all Potter's fault.
The new Dumbledore is very good, he was more as I imagined Dumbledore--twinkly and cheery. Richard Harris left some big shoes to fill but I feel Gambon (sp?) filled them quite well.
GREAT film. Highly recommended.
hobo
|
|