tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-776205147286643847.post704857312335033146..comments2023-12-18T13:55:50.256-08:00Comments on Thinking as a Profession: Harry Potter and the Half-Comprehensible ScriptDerekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-776205147286643847.post-36279617523156838862009-07-27T16:21:56.498-07:002009-07-27T16:21:56.498-07:00cont from below...
As for the fixing of the Vanis...cont from below...<br /><br />As for the fixing of the Vanishing Cabinet.. they actually handled that better in the movie than they did in the book. In the book we had no scenes of Malfoy in the Room of Requirement while fixing the cabinet. We just got the monologue at the end which explained it.<br /><br />I will definitely agree that the reasoning behind why it has to be Draco is light in the movie and makes more sense in the book. The part with Snape making the unbreakable vow was never supposed to happen. Voldemort sent Draco to kill Dumbledore and Snape wasn't part of the plan. It was unfortunate that Snape was forced to agree to it to keep his cover. The truest point though is held in the description of how to make a Horcrux. Dumbledore doesn't want Draco to do it because he knows that it will tear Draco's soul apart. The three baddies were there in case Draco failed to kill Dumbledore then they could finish the job. They wouldn't step in though because Voldemort doesn't like it when people mess with his plans... and his plan was to corrupt or destroy Draco. His plan was, of course, only lightly discussed in the movie. It was definitely more clear in the books.<br /><br />I would never say, "You're not supposed to analyze the story that much." :) I'm a story analyzer. It has to make sense for me or I think it's a cheap, lame trick. Potter doesn't fall into that category.<br /><br />Ok, ok, I'll get off your lawn now.Kenny Wylandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17129538093718977326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-776205147286643847.post-48303132661796553932009-07-27T16:21:34.614-07:002009-07-27T16:21:34.614-07:00Preface: I'm a fan and I've read all the b...Preface: I'm a fan and I've read all the books.<br /><br />I agree with some parts and disagree with most of what you've said here. I definitely would have liked to have a scene connecting the opening bridge attacks and such, but really I think that was the only major bit that was missing.<br /><br />Perhaps it would have made more sense if you had the previous movies fresh in your mind? At the end of the Goblet of Fire when Voldemort returns to full being we get a long speech from Dumbledore to the students that "war is upon us" or something of that sort. Then the next movie, Order of the Phoenix, is centered around the fact that the War HAS indeed begun but the Ministry refuses to admit it. Dumbledore is forced out of Hogwarts and goes on the war-path against the Deatheaters and Voldemort. The Order of the Phoenix is doing the same and the movie ends in a massive battle at the Ministry of Magic between the Order and the Deatheaters... and between Voldemort and Dumbledore.<br /><br />The opening of this movie plays right into that. The War is on and now it's starting to have an effect in the Muggle world. Yes, I agree, I would liked to have a scene about that. In the book, the Minister of Magic goes and meets with the Prime Minister of Britain to tell him that there are dark wizards who are at-large. However, even without that scene, if you've watched the other movies (just the movies, not the books) you should understand that this is the third movie in an escalating war between the good and evil wizards... and the opening scene shows that not only are wizards being kidnapped but that the fighting is spilling over and affecting the Muggle populace. You don't need to read the book to get that.<br />As for moving the kidnapping scene into the last movie, I completely reject that assertion and the logic behind it. :) These movies (and books) are FILLED with back references and foreshadowing. Don't hate on the story for actually having a plan for the future. I'll take a well planned storyline that gives me an event now that doesn't make sense until later over the pull-something-outta-my-ass writing that Lost brings to the table.<br /><br />Also, why assassinate Dumbledore? Really? Does that NEED to be explained to you? Cmon man. You're a really smart guy and this is really simple stuff. Even if you want to reach for "bad guy wants to kill good guy" it makes perfect sense. To answer the "why now" question though, I think it would make more sense if you had the previous movies fresh in your mind. Voldemort has ALWAYS feared Dumbledore because Dumbledore was the only one that Voldemort wasn't able to deceive and/or control. Voldemort was previously trying to kill Harry, but was foiled multiple times BY Dumbledore (in the Chamber of Secrets Dumbledore saved Harry via the Phoenix and the Sorting Hat, in Order of the Phoenix Dumbledore saved Harry at the Ministry by engaging in direct combat with Voldemort). So... gotta get Dumbledore out of the way so he can get to Harry.Kenny Wylandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17129538093718977326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-776205147286643847.post-74941851685977318472009-07-27T08:54:35.456-07:002009-07-27T08:54:35.456-07:00The movie I wanted to see was the one where Potter...The movie I wanted to see was the one where Potter & Co. head out for the other bits of item-bound soul. The one we got seemed all preface and no payoff.<br /><br />The only cool elements were the memory vials with the liquid visions and the menace of Tom Riddle of the past -- which I could have done with some more of in present.<br /><br />Potter continues to be the Keanu Reeves of fantasy films -- it's called facial expressions, kid. Use em.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com