well, no surprise: i didn't like it very much (though of course i did cry several times). most of my problems are with the script--the acting, with the exception of the dude playing dumbledore, was actually pretty good, and i had no serious issues with the directing or cinematography (ok, there were a few weird camera angles). and don't think my issues are with the things that were cut--i get that they have to allot for movie-time--b/c my problems were with the things they ADDED. it's not like the movie needs more dramatic tension, so why does the dragon fight have to be so much more troublesome in the movie? it's just as scary without crushing buildings and hanging-off-rooftops. and dumbledore's speeches! ugh! i'm not sure how all the people i was with felt, but those in my immediate vicinity also had some serious dumbledore-related annoyance. and this is a minor thing, but why mention the foe-glass at all if it's not going to be featured in the climactic scene (which was hardly climactic at all, i thought--i missed the explanation of all the motives, and the flicking tongue was way too renfield in dracula).
seriously, harry potter screenwriters--i would be happy to go over the scripts for future movies and explain fully why your awkward writing and lame additions should be changed to better reflect the spirit of the book. you have the teen angst/romance down, and you put neville in a bunch of scenes, and that's awesome, but stop making such sucky harry potter movies!!!
on a slightly related note, i got to see the superman trailer. as sarah mentioned, the trailer REALLY portrays superman as a jesus-figure--totally freaky and slightly inappropriate, since superman was created by jews (i've never fully bought the superman as golem legend, but certainly he's not a jesus kind of guy). friggin' christianizing of our society. quit it, already.
5 comments:
I usually only go opening weekend for Coens, Anderson, and Gilliam films, but was convinced to go anyway. Got there early, still only seats left were way up front. This is okay (but not good) for some movies, but definitely not for quick-cutting editing like HP has. Unenjoyable experience for me and worse for others. One member of our party got very nauseated so we had to bail just after the Goblet, but at least we got our money back.
From my unreliable and skewed viewing of the first twenty minutes, I wasn't that keen on it. I was suprised at how much they seemed to be omitting from the book, and kinda bored by what they decided to keep. I absolutely loved Cuarón's Prisoner of Azkaban. I'll wait for the video or TV viewing for the last two hours of this one.
On the Bryan Singer Superman film: The Marlon Brando voiceover was from the Richard Donner films, which very much attempted to make Superman a Christ-figure. I've long thought Shuster and Siegel were more interested in Superman representing the Jewish Messiah, more in line with the militant savior/expected interpretion of prophecy rather than the Golem or than what Jews-turned-Christians found in Jesus. If both Superman and Jesus are interpretations of or answers to the same story and prophecy, then it makes sense that there will be comparisons, whenever Superman peeks back into popular culture.
That said, it's a fair guess that I'm less versed in both comics history and Jewish studies than you are, so I might be looking at this with even less depth than the Donner films (which I do remember enjoying) did.
I'm pretty much in agreement of your take on HP4, although, I like it better this morning than I did last night. They do have a serious problem of messing up plot points that could be very easily included, but this one didn't make me as mad as not explaining why his patronus was a stag in the 3rd movie. The stuff they did get right, they nailed - so that's good!
yeah, i did like a lot of the movie--i just found it pretty disappointing on the whole. i did like it better than the third--i was actually ranting about the animagus/patronus thing this morning to someone. :)
I have not seen the Superman preview, but I am reminded of the recent CS Lewis article in the New Yorker where they point out that a big powerful ass lion is totally the wrong stand in for Jesus. I think the same holds for Superman. JC wasn't too much of a ass-kicking caped crusader (and certainly wasn't much into the American Way).
I guess an appropriate way to make Superman like Jesus would be to have him show up at Lex Luthor's and say, "Hey I'm Superman" and then Lex Luthor kills him--without a fight--but Superman comes back to life and takes off, saying, "See you all later, I'm out!" Then comic book lovers talk about him for years and years and argue over whether or not he could have kicked Lex Luthor's ass. When they disagree, they fight.
david, that is an EXCELLENT point. and not being much of a superman fan (i'm a batman kind of gal), i really wish they'd take your advice just for my own entertainment's sake. :)
anyway, the christian allegory stuff in the narnia books is mainly in the last book--i never realized aslan was considered a jesus figure until way after i figured out the death/heaven thing in the last battle.
Post a Comment