What if HP was an American movie?

[Mr Ollivander 382]

OK , I don't mean any offence to our American friends ....... :sorry: ...... but I was wondring , what if WB made the HP films as an American virsion of Hogwarts , what would you think of it ..... ?

as you all know that HP is not only set up in Britain , but also based on British myths and legends , way of life , education system and the every day life of modern Britain .

and I remember reading somewhere that many directors refused to make the films with British cast or for the movies to be filmed in England .... :rasp:
some even said that they wanted Hogwarts to be a school in LA , so what do you think about :

1- American Hogwarts school in LA or NYC or any other city .
2- American Harry , Ron , Hermione , Draco .... etc
3- what if Haley Joel Osment did play Harry as some director wanted him for the role .


the question is : if WB made that sort of film , would you go and watch it ........ ?

if yes , why ?
if no , why ?


as for me I will never watch it - no offence Americans ;) , because that's not the story that I read and loved , and I refuse to see them ruined like that ...... just imagine Haley Joel Osmont as Harry ..... :D

and imagine people's reaction when Haley Osment see nearly headless nick or any other Hogwarts ghost for that matter , every one in the theater will whisper ... ( I see dead people ) ... :rotfl:



P.S : if there was a similar thread , then I don't mind this one being wiped .

[Cat]

That's not just pathetic, it's appalling. Culture is a dynamic power in all books. Sometimes, you can make alterations and the story doesn't miss much, but most often there will be so much lost that the story will lose a great deal of its character. Would you alter a story based in Indian or Chinese origin? You could change the language, but there's always the heritage in the writing. Especially if it's based in that culture's myths and folk tales.

Britain is no different. We're a soggy and eccentric culture, but we're a culture nonetheless. To destroy the British aspects in Harry Potter would change far too much. The schooling, the history, certain characters (like the ghosts, you said), the setting, the castle... for goodness sake! What's the point?! The characters are all British, whether you like it or not. Harry, Sirius, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Professor Lupin, Dobby - they all speak in British accents. It's how they were written and it's firmly implanted in the series. So nyeh, snooty directors!

Oh, how I wish there was a mooning smilie.

Heh, no, I wouldn't watch the movie if that much was ignored, direspected and fully extracted.

PS: hehe, I was purposefully trying to name the nicer characters before. I suppose it might be easier to imagine the unpleasant ones like Snape and Lucius Malfoy with British accents. What is it with British bad guys?

[Mr Ollivander 382]

I agree with you cat .... :)

and also remember the places , Diagon Ally in London , King's cross train station , Privet Drive .... also the weasly's house near the village of Ottery st Catchpole , the Riddle house in Little Hangleton .

it won't work in America .

[Anne]

I completely agree that an Americanized HP would be an atrocity. The story is so wonderfully British that I am astonished that anyone would ever want to have the story set in America.

However, if such a film were made, I'd still go see it. I'd be overcome by curiosity. I'd hate every minute of it, but I'd still see it.

[Inkwolf]

It just wouldn't be Harry Potter if it was set in America. I mean, all the wizards and settings are just so....British! The language is British, the people are British, the whole ambiance is British. I think that's actually half the FUN of it for us Americans. ;D

How would they hide a castle in LA?? What would it be doing there in the first place? I know they were hoping to put some American actors in who they thought would be a draw, and pushed for JKR to approve the addition of an American character, but are you sure the location change idea was real? It seems sorta....impossible.

Any American wizard school would have to be very American. If it was old-fashioned, as the wizard world is in the HP books, it would have to be set in an old, ivy-covered brick school, or something equally old-fashioned. In point of fact, the Indians would provide the oldest basis of magical talent in the country. Would they have their own school, or run one where anyone was welcome? Or do they maintain some traditional system of individual teaching?

And instead of dragons, we'd have to deal with Sasquatches and Thunderbirds and Windigos and things.

Anyway, the point is--it couldn't possibly be like Hogwarts if it was American. Hogwarts reflects the British mythos.

I'd love to see a Harry Potter spin-off movie or series based in America (written at least in part by JKR), but it would probably be rotten, and should by no means displace the REAL Harry Potter stories.

And JKR, being British, probably couldn't write a truly convincing old-fashioned America than I could an old-fashioned England.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

actually Inkwolf , one director really wanted a normal school in Hollywood to be the setting of Hogwarts ..... :D
I'm not kidding ,and don't ask me how would a normal school in LA would be Hogwarts ..... :D

and when JKR refused they tried to cast Harry, Ron and Hermione as American kids in England , because they thought that American kids won't like to watch English kids , they need to see American heros like them .

Steven Spielberg wanted Haley Joel Osment ( the sixth sense ) to play Harry ..... :D ..... so every time he see a ghost he really see dead people ...... :D

[Fuchsia]

The thing is these HP films *are* American movies. That is who paid for it.

I resent the implication that we don't have a culture.
We do too. I don't want to see HP in America either but we *DO* have a culture.
To "Americanize" is a phrase that I would be happy to never hear again. I don't know a single person who goes to a movie and says "It wasn't American enough." Do you?

It is all good and well to say don't be offended but this thread *is* offensive wether you say that or not. I have heard this far too many times and I'm tired of it.
They don't have to get Haley Joel Osment either. England has plenty of child actors that are just as bad as he is anyway.

If you put a movie in Texas it would be different than if you set one
in New Jersey.
Please stop saying Americanize. PLEASE.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

calm down Fuchsia , no one here is saying that Americans have no culture .. the point we are discussing is the fact that some directors did indeed try to either film HP in America or cast American kids .
simply to please American audience .

now with the fact that HP is a story based on British culture , how would an American Version of HP be viewed .... ?

[Cat]

Originally posted by Fuchsia

I resent the implication that we don't have a culture.


Is the statement of fact that the books have a British culture enough to imply to you that it is being said that America has no culture? If so, I think you need to relax from your defence pose. Saying that Harry Potter has a strong culture already standing in it and shouldn't be replaced is not an insult to America. In no way, shape or form!!

Nobody has yet insulted America - alright, 'Americanised' is a rotten phrase but I would say something is 'Made British' or 'Australianised' or 'Made French' if it I thought it was so. It's rotten all around.

[GryffndorBeater]

I would hate it if they set HP in America. No offense to Fushia, but I hate living here. It's so crowded and fake. There would be no room anywhere to hide the school, not to mention the fact that Americans don't act like the kids in Harry Potter, they all act british. We have a culture all our own and it's NOT Potterlike at all. Making it American would change everything. And as for American kids not wanting to watch British kids, maybe they shouldn't be reading a British book.

[Cat]

Originally posted by GryffndorBeater
Americans don't act like the kids in Harry Potter, they all act british.

:p I'm curious now, how do British and American kids act differently? I know American kids have more more mini-cultures in school.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

how do British and American kids act differently?

British boys don't show emotions , they hide them instead .. through out the ehtire series Harry's taers are only seen twice , once in PoA and another in GoF .... and Ron's only once in CoS .

while American kids will show more emotions .
that's just an opinion , I could be wrong .

[Fuchsia]

I'm sorry. I reacted a little too strongly. I'm hearing this *a lot* and I'm getting to the point where I get mad if I even see the word "Americanize". That is one word I would love to ban from peoples vocabularies. I'm calm now.

I don't think American kids don't want to watch British kids. The movies are a huge success so doesn't that prove otherwise??
Just because some stupid studio suits think something doesn't make it true. They'll do anything they can to make $$ and they are hurting us in the process. I don't care how many people call Julia Roberts "America's Sweetheart". I do not like her. They cannot decide that for me and they can't decide if I like British kids or not.

I don't think British kids act that differently anyway. They are pop culture obsessed. We're pop culture obsessed. They have snotty *******s and we do too.
Anyway, a lot of Americans (at least in the South where I am from) came from England. So their history is our history up to a point.

At any rate the British film industry is in a *terrible* state.

[Inkwolf]

Originally posted by Cat
:p I'm curious now, how do British and American kids act differently? I know American kids have more more mini-cultures in school.

It's very hard to describe a culture you live in. Especially as I've never been to your country and can't make a detailed comparison. But I do know that Americans are much less reserved than the English, for one thing, and we shoot off our mouths more. :D The sense of ethics is a bit different, too....some of the things seen as good sportsmanship and (to use a cliche) 'playing the game' in England are subtly different here.

But as I've said, I've never been there, and I doubt many of us have been in both places long enough to compare seriously.

And in any case, as I keep saying--America is many, many cultures. The culture of the Midwest is quite different from the culture of the Northwoods, which is different from the California culture, or the New York culture or the New England culture. And that's not even touching on the differences between rural vs city or race. I'm sure there's a variety of cultures in England as well, but we have a lot more space to spread them out over. ;)

[Cat]

Originally posted by Inkwolf
I'm sure there's a variety of cultures in England as well, but we have a lot more space to spread them out over. ;)

Aaah, but then our cultures have lived longer. Some of them are as pungent as very old cheese.

Actually, the young children of Britain are uncivil thugs who know more swear words than a dictionary can hold. Well, not all of them. The others just take drugs.
Mwahahahahaha.

[Ninya]

Originally posted by Mr Ollivander 382
[B]OK , I don't mean any offence to our American friends ....... :sorry: ...... but I was wondring , what if WB made the HP films as an American virsion of Hogwarts , what would you think of it ..... ?
No offense taken; but, what difference would it make if it were an all-American cast? Do you go to a movie for the actors, or for the story?
as you all know that HP is not only set up in Britain , but also based on British myths and legends , way of life , education system and the every day life of modern Britain .
Well, I think probably WB wanted to stay as close in-line with the books as possible. The author is from Great Britain, and authors do have certain preferences and rights when assigning rights to their works. Did she not express preference that it be an all British cast? I think so.

I could not care either way if the film was all British or all American, simply because it is the story that interests me. How many times were Mexicans cast as Native Americans? Many times, but that didn't take away from the story usually.

Yes, I would go to see it if it were an all-American cast, just as I did with the all-British cast. ;D

[Cat]

Well, the cast doesn't bother me either but if it was all-American I would be under the shrewd impression that production is NOT in the United Kingdom, where the outdoor sets should be :D

[The Oracle]

Originally posted by Ninya
I could not care either way if the film was all British or all American, simply because it is the story that interests me. How many times were Mexicans cast as Native Americans? Many times, but that didn't take away from the story usually.


I think what people are trying to say is that when Steven Spielberg(sp) wanting to place Haley Joel Osdork in the cast as Harry, he wouldn't have an english accent, neither would Hermione, etc. They wouldn't play British parts, but play them as Americans. That would be changing the story and changing the characters.

As a side note, I thought that Spielberg wasn't going to make a live action movie, but an animated one. I'd have to find the actual interview by Chris Columbus but I swear that's what it was and Haley Osdork would be the voice. An animated HP? Whether British or American, that would have ruined the story altogether.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

An animated HP ...... :wow:
that would've made it a re-run of Alladin ...... :rotfl:

with Harry and Hermione flying over Hogwarts on magic carpet with sappy music background ...... :love:

oh , it's so silly .... :rasp:
thank God they didn't make it an animated movie ..... :clappy:

[harryton]

it would ruin the movie, becuase it just wouldnt look right, having a book written in England with british accents and then making the movie with an English accent and in the US.

It would be horrible.

[Inkwolf]

I think it would have made a pretty good animated film...but how much more fun to see it all for real!

Aaah, but then our cultures have lived longer. Some of them are as pungent as very old cheese.


And that's where our cultures evolved from. :D Lemme tell ya...I live in a state originally settled by French fur traders (after the Indians, of course)and invaded later by waves of immigrants from every country. I'm mostly French, and my grandparents have all these French-type traditions and recipes from the northern part of my state....I was born in Milwaukee with its German immigrant traditions, then we moved more toward the middle of the state where I went to school in a mainly Polish town where everyone knew Polish swear words and cooked kielbasa and listened to the Polka station on the radio...now I work in a town 15 miles from there where most of the inhabitants are Belgian and Dutch descendants and have traditions I never heard of growing up. All this just a short distance from the reservations of three different Indian tribes, and among all those Norwegian and Swedish gift shops from other nearby areas.....in a single morning, I could make a European-American mini-tour by driving through the towns of Denmark, Krakow, New London, New Berlin, Oslo, Belgium, Brussels, Little Norway, New Amsterdam etc....

It's really sort of mind-boggling. :)

Of course, as time goes on and the older generations die, the European immigrant traditions are fading, but we have new Hmong and Mexican immigrants bringing in their own traditions and customs now....things just keep changing here. It will be interesting to see what America is like in another generation or two.

[Ninya]

Originally posted by harryton
it would ruin the movie, becuase it just wouldnt look right, having a book written in England with british accents and then making the movie with an English accent and in the US.
It would be horrible.
I was looking at it like this....the story and its settings remained as they were written, but American actors who spoke with the accent. I mean, that's what they do...act. British actors have altered their voices to reflect, uhm, say a Louisiana accent. (I think Alan Rickman did this in one of his movies. I'm not too familiar with his works, but am pretty sure he did.)

As far as the setting, well, if the settings of the books were changed..am not sure it would still make a difference. Here's why: The wizardry world co-exists with the Muggle world, right? But, when Muggles see the Hogwarts' castle they see only ruins. Which could only mean it exists on a different dimension if there are such things (my opinion). So, why could it not exist in the USA? I personally don't see the setting as an issue, since there are American movies filmed abroad because the setting is more appropiate for the storyline.

Bottom line: You have to do what is best for you. And, if not going to see a movie or read a book because it is American or British is what is best for you...well, gotta do what you gotta do. We all view this or that with different perspectives from time to time, and that is fine.

An animated HP movie? Hmmm...that would be different, wouldn't it? Yes, I think I'd go to see it also. :)

Btw, the British cast of HP...excellent job! I hope they are adequately recognized for their performances, by the entertainment industry.

[Jedi Potter]

It would have been horrible like setting LOTR in space or Star Wars in medival times, it wouldn't work. Thank god it never happened.

[hedwigs_keeper]

I think setting the HP movies in America would definately have been a bad idea. It wouldn't have been true to the story, which is the whole point of making a movie from a book. I am American, and I don't think we could do it justice. When I think of England, I think of a more sophisticated lifestyle, as well as a cultured one, and I am fascinated by it. I think by setting the movies in America, some of the charm would have been taken away. And I actually think that having them in Britian, where they are supposed to be, makes the American audience want to see it more - they get a look at a different culture as well as a different world.

As for setting LOTR in space and Star Wars in the Medevil times - that would definately be a sight to see! :rotfl: Could you image? I can just picture Legolas trying to fly a pod-racer! And Han Solo trying to fight with a sword instead of his blaster! Goodness that's funny.

[Fuchsia]

I don't read the books just because of the castle and suits of armor though.
Harry would still have his battle against evil and his friendships.
Harry is Harry no matter where he is.

They don't *need* to do this though and they didn't.
What Speilberg would have done is a moot point. They didn't hire him.

[Firebolt]

Well, I am a US resident (not citizen though, I just live here) and I don't think HP as American version would attract people to see because it already has original HP based on JKR book that based in England. Most people don't like to see a copycat movie with the same story line. They won't make a sell or get into the box office. American Financial advisors with the Moviemaker know this.
Also, JKR will not too happy about it.

[lanifiel]

Simply put I think it would of sucked very muchly... No offense to America but I'm an Europe movie kind of guy...

[Llopin]

If HP was set in USA it would be a totally different enviorement (well, depends on where it was set on US) and the story would lose its appeal/magic in part. Definetively not a good idea. Why change the place wihout any smart reason?
About the casting, I understand that JK wants to have brits, but this doesn't care very much after all. The actors can do british accents (thats why they're actors) and only the british would protest about that. The rest of the world wouldn't care a crap because most of them they get the movies dubbed.

[Cat]

Originally posted by Fuchsia
I don't read the books just because of the castle and suits of armor though.
Harry would still have his battle against evil and his friendships.
Harry is Harry no matter where he is.


Right, but lots of stories include such things. Is Harry Potter exactly the same as all other books? No, it's different. Why? Because of it's different definitions. Sorry, but the culture is included in that. The strong characters are at the top but the location is high up there as well. Harry Potter is good for everything it is, to ignore a large chunk of it would alter it as Harry Potter.

This isn't a prejudiced thing to say! I mean, if Huckleberry Finn was set in Germany it would lose the 'Huckleberry Finn' charm. It would cease to be that story. That's the way things are.

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by Fuchsia
I don't read the books just because of the castle and suits of armor though.
Harry would still have his battle against evil and his friendships.
Harry is Harry no matter where he is.
Whether or not they interest you, they play an important role - you need to set a scene if you want a good book. Location, dialect, the manners of the characters, the descriptions - all can be taken for granted, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't matter if they weren't there. It would matter - because you'd be have taken out bricks that built the story, even you only see the wall as the finished result.

But I don't think that the characters in the story are all you should see, in any case. The creatures are mostly taken from European folklore, or even directly English/Scottish folklore. The places Harry sees are important - otherwise it'd read like he were blind. And the castle and suits of armour all help to make this image of an older set world, of magic and history, and the ways of the wizarding world. You can't just strip a story down to it's basic point.

[Llopin]

Just imagine Tom Sawyer set on London, A Christmas Carol set in Spain, Edgar Alla Poe's novels set in Japan and The Godfather set in France.
They are differesnt cultures and different enviorements, the story would change and be different.
Definetively, if Harry Potter was not set on Britain and Hogwarts, it would be Harry Potter, but not the same magical Harry Potter that we know.

[Lord_Chatterley]

JKR refused Spielberg because he wanted cheerleaders for the Quidditch,Fred&George should have been potheads,and Hagrid a afroamerican keeper!for crying out loud!More american than this!

[Cat]

Spielberg's a twit anyway. If he'd got his grubby mits on the books I would have screamed the house down.

Sorry, random spurts of aggressive insult.

[Jedi Potter]

Spielberg is a very good director he needs to stick to his own thing and not adapt any more books, he trashed the Lost World I can only imagine what he would have done to Harry Potter.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

Originally posted by Lord_Chatterley
JKR refused Spielberg because he wanted cheerleaders for the Quidditch,Fred&George should have been potheads,and Hagrid a afroamerican keeper!for crying out loud!More american than this!


cheerleaders for the Quidditch ....... :clappy:
I would like that actually ..... ;)

[Llopin]

Cheerleaders! How horrible! It would be REALLY american with cheerleaders, it would turn the entire movie into crap. I'm scared of it.
However, Bulgaria's team has "cheerleaders" in the Quidditch final in GoF.
But imagine Hermione wearing a tank top, dancing and screaming "Go Harry Go.. arg can't continue too pathetic, grotty and terrible.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

yes , but the Bulgarian team's "cheerleaders" were magical , I wonder how would they look like on screen .... :)

[Fuchsia]

It was never proven that Speilberg wanted Cheerleaders. A stupid journalist made the joke and people ran with that without bothering to check the facts. I would like to see this end now thank-you.
It wasn't true.

He would have made it into less movies and *that* is what would have been bad. What about him making it sappy and overly sentimental?
I wouldn't want Speilberg for that reason. He changed parts of Empire of the Sun though and it is still a pretty good movie.


If Guy Ritchie did it I wouldn't have gone to see it plain and simple.
John Turturro is a superior actor to Daniel Day Lewis.
Turturro isn't British but Lewis is. Should they suffer through Lewis' method acting for a voice?

Don't get a bad actor because they are British. It is just a voice. It is acting. Where *You* are from has nothing to do with where your *character* is from. It is called *acting*.
You don't have to have had the same background as your character.
Christopher Eccleston is from a working class background but the British film industry think he can only play that. Why??? Eccleston beats all of them. Who cares what his family did for a living???
*ACT* people!!


Speilberg may be one of the most popular directors but he doesn't only sell tickets in the USA thank-you very much.
He makes choices as a filmmaker that *he* believes in.
That has nothing to do with everyone else.

The castle is important to Hogwarts but to Harry?
It is his home that he loves but to being a wizard is it really that integral? They have wizards in Egypt too.
They don't have castles.

OH yes and HP *IS* an American movie.
IT IS.
This what if scenario has already been proven wrong.

But what do I know? I'm an American who only likes American actors set in America with Vin Diesel playing a football player who dates cheerleaders and eats hamburgers all day right?

EDIT : For a good example of a film in one culture but with American actors look at Dangerous Liaisons.
That is an amazing film.
And for an example of an American actor being better for the part all you have to do is watch Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons and then see Colin Firth in the same role in 'Valmont'.
Firth was horrible. Malkovich was brilliant.

It is the talent involved that counts people.

[Ninya]

I think having cheerleaders even for 'real' sports events is silly. If the fans, and players, are paying attention to them then where is the focus for the event? But what the heck...

Give me an, S!

L-Y!

Give me a, T!

H-E!

Go, go, go, R-I-N!

SLYTHERIN!

shake and twirl...shake and twirl...victory!

Ok, I'm done now. lol

[Mr Ollivander 382]

(( OH yes and HP *IS* an American movie .... IT IS. ))
:D :D :D

could you be kind enough to tell us what makes HP an American movie ... ?
as far as I know , all the cast memebers are British, filmed in Britain and the novels are written in Britain , and the producer Heyman is also a British .... only the director and screen writer are Americans .

and soon the director will be a mexican .... :clappy:

so how is it that HP is an American movie , Fuchsia ......... ;)

[Ninya]

Sorry to interrupt, but Warner Bros, is an American company. It's an American movie, given that fact (maybe a matter of legal ownership, in ref to the movie itself, not the books/story). It's a British movie, too. ;) But more importantly, it's a movie of a wonderful story.

[Fuchsia]

Yes I meant what Ninya already has said. Warner Bros. is an American studio.
And if an American studio made it and still kept it British I think it is high time that people shut up about Americans ruining
the British part of HP.
It DIDN'T happen.

And a Mexican director is in fact American. North American.
Thank-you.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

as far as I know Fuchsia , Mexico is part of Central America , not north America ...... :D

[Fuchsia]

Well, where I live it is becoming Mexico and I'm North American. :)

[Dedalus]

Fuchsia, please, please read what people are actually saying. You seem to be getting angry for no reason, when it's probably just down to misunderstanding. For instance ...

"The castle is important to Hogwarts but to Harry?
It is his home that he loves but to being a wizard is it really that integral? They have wizards in Egypt too.
They don't have castles."

Like I said - the castle might not be important to Harry, no. But it is important to the story. Just because something can be taken for granted doesn't mean that it wouldn't matter if it didn't exist. It would be extremely noticable if it those surroundings were removed. The "small" things (I don't personally think that location is a small detail, but never mind) are just as important as the big things. The wall would fall down if you remove a few bricks.


"OH yes and HP *IS* an American movie.
IT IS.
This what if scenario has already been proven wrong."
Not really. It may have been bought by Warner Brothers, but that doesn't mean it's an American movie. It could mean that, yes - but it's a debatable issue. So it hasn't yet been proven wrong.

NOBODY is dissing Americans. Nobody. With a capital N. What people are saying is that the cultures are different, and so it wouldn't be accurate to change those from the books. Like Llopin said "Just imagine Tom Sawyer set on London, A Christmas Carol set in Spain, Edgar Alla Poe's novels set in Japan and The Godfather set in France.
They are differesnt cultures and different enviorements, the story would change and be different".

[Cat]

Poopy doops, I made a reply and then realised Dedalus said more and more to the point.

But I want to point out that nobody is suggesting that Americans ruin the movie. Nobody. The point, and it's completely different, is that the books are British and there would be a gaping hole if somebody decided to set them anywhere else. The location IS a large chunk of the series. It just is.

[Gandalf]

I agree with what everybody's saying. It wouldn't ruin the series but you can't have Harry Potter set in America. There's no King's Cross in America, which (apart from Paddington) is an important station in London.
Also there's no castles in America (Las Vegas gambling and hotels in a castle shaped building don't count) so it would be a veeery strange Hogwarts.
Cheerleaders in Quidditch would ruin it slightly, but you could only have pretty girls as cheerleaders *goes in a dreamy state imagining Hermione as one*. Ok just ignore that.

[Ninya]

Originally posted by Gandalf
but you could only have pretty girls as cheerleaders *goes in a dreamy state imagining Hermione as one*. Ok just ignore that.
Well, you could have guys doing the cheerleading, there are male cheerleaders. LOL...can't you see Snape as a cheerleader? Oh my, getting all flustered here. :p ;D

:clappy:

[Llopin]

There couldn't be Hogwarts at America! And Hogwarts is important to the story - not to Harry if you want, but to the story it is. As I've said, wihout Hogwarts, Harry Potter would still be Harry Potter, but not the magical Harry Potter that we know.
No offense, but americans haven't got history as the british do: the manticores, the basiliscs, goblins... they are all european myths, part of the british and european culture (Tolkien-like and nordic mythology beings) that wouldn't suit in America.
Also, there are many castles in Britain because of it's history, but America doesn't have any castle that could suit the magical world, because it's a different place.
It would be a different Harry Potter.

[Inkwolf]

Originally posted by Llopin

No offense, but americans haven't got history as the british do: the manticores, the basiliscs, goblins...

Errrmmm....we don't have history? What did we do, suddenly pop into existence? And if manticores, goblins, and basilisks are in British history, I'll eat my computer.

Sorry, I think I AM a little offended.....

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by Inkwolf
Errrmmm....we don't have history? What did we do, suddenly pop into existence? And if manticores, goblins, and basilisks are in British history, I'll eat my computer.
Erm ... I think Llopin meant that American doesn't have the same history as Britain, not that it doesn't have one altogether.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

Inkwolf , I agree that the phrase " America has no history " is offending .
but what Llopin meant is that America is called the new world , and the history of the English speaking people there started in 1620 , so it is relatively new compared to thousends of years of European , Indian , African , Chinese and Egyptian histories .

cheer up Inkwolf ..... :)
no one meant to offend you ........ :)

[Inkwolf]

American history didn't start with the Europeans turning up, you know. Even if it did, there is evidence that there were plenty of others who were here long before Columbus showed up in 1492. There were viking settlements, and even evidence that some of the Indian tribes were trading with Africa, and other countries. Apart from that there's the history of the indians (much of it now unknown because the Europeans did their best to destroy all Indian writings as satanic and struggled to eradicate their culture entirely) and plenty of interesting prehistory involving mammoth hunters and such.

What makes you think American history started only when YOUR relatives turned up? :evil:

And to carry out Ollivander's argument that the English-speaking population started in 1620....well, when did the British start speaking recognizable English? Try reading Beowulf in the original language. Shall we assume that England had no history prior to the Norman Invasion in 1060, when the language changed drastically? (if that's the right date)

[Llopin]

Inkwolf, I'm really sorry if I offended you I didn't want to - of course not!
What I meant is that the americans have a different history that the british. It has been discovered that vikings and some other nordic tribes arrived to Canada sometime during Middle Age, and that is true, and of course there were also the indians.
But what I mean is that the british have shared the history with the europeans and their cultures have been quite similar (but of course not the same!) and it's a different history that the american one.
As I said, Harry Potter is based in some Middle Age myths, such as the creatures and the castles, that belonged to the european Middle Age, and that couldn't belong to America.
I'm sorry if I offense some of you, that's not my intention. Also sorry if I don't make myself clear.

[Mr Ollivander 382]

actually Inkwolf I'm not English , I'm from the middle east .... :D

second , I did my studies for a MA degree in history and politics in England ... :)
so I know a little bit about English history , your date of the Norman Invasion in 1060 was close , it was in 1066 , when king Harold was defeated by the Duke of Mormandy later to be known as king William the Conqurer in the battle of Hastings south of England .

as far as I know England as we know it today was formed in 837 by king Alfred the great , but the language wasn't very much as English as today , in fact it sounded more celtic than of the Franco German Anglo Saxonian English of today .

[Inkwolf]

Okay, apology accepted, Llopin. :)

(1066--d'oh! Oh, well, only 6 years off...for that matter, I thought the Jamestown settlement was a little earlier than 1620....I have to hit the history books more often, I see....)

[daniel4hp]

Its really hard to say when England began since it has such a rich history. Many consider modern English history to have begun in 1066 (still a very long time ago) but Alfred united England 200 years before that. Even before Alfred England had a rich history and things as far back as the Romans still efect England today.

It is equally hard to say when America began. If we look at the Europeans (as our culture is primarily based on them), our history wouldn't have begun until the 1600's, with the founding of Jamestown. Earlier than that there were no permanent settlements by Europeans in what is today the United States. Obviously the Indians existed here prior to the Europeans, but although their culture does, to some extent, effect the culture of America today, the history most relevent to most Americans (that of the Europeans) does not begin until the 1600's, making England's modern history over 500 years older than that of America. No offense intended to Americans (of which I am one).

Sorry for being off-topic, but it seems that conversation has moved to the history of England and America...

[Oddment]

Just a minor point.....although Mexico, Canada and the US are all 'American' in the sense that they are the North American continent, when people use the term 'American' they mean the USA, and you know that perfectly well, Fuschia. You may not have *meant* to sound arrogant in calling the Mexican director an American, but speaking as a Canadian I can tell you that's how it sounds.

[Ninya]

I don't know much about Cuaron, only that he is from Mexico City. He used to live in LA, but resides in New York, at least he did as of May 2002. :)

Here's a link to an interview about a movie he did.
http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/zforum/02/entertainment_cuaron050102.htm

[Inkwolf]

I know of many South Americans (and yes, even Canadians) who get very miffed at people who don't consider them American. :p

[hpangel102]

If Harry Potter were an American movie, I would have auditioned to be Hermione....

Think about that though.... if Harry Potter were American, we wouldn't know who Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, or Daniel Radcliffe was. We'd all be saying someone else was cute/hot! lol

[Ronman]

NO!!!
Because It Would Lose It's Meaning And I Think It Would Be :censored: :censored:

[You-Know-Who]

Seriously, people should stop getting offended by this thread

Second off Harry Potter is officially speaking an American film, just because everything if filmed in UK doesn't make it British. (nice example Star Wars is filmed mostly in Australia, but it's still an American film).

To be honest I am bit confused about the question, if every cast member was American and they could do they do a good English accent (which I highly doubt with the kids) then I wouldn't not mind.

However if the film was Americanized (Fuchsia I do not see anything wrong with this word) then it would not be the same simply because cultural difference in high school and how kids act.

[Starsaber]

Originally posted by Cat
Would you alter a story based in Indian or Chinese origin?


You can if it's done well. Take The Magnificent Seven, for example. A remake of The Seven Samurai, transposed into a more US-friendly setting, yet working very well (apart from the end, which is rather pointless, and doesn't hold a whole lot of impact today anymore)

However, the trend in American youth cinema at the moment is to make comedy-dramas with a 'young' cast, 'sassy' 'wacky' and self-referential

So we'd probably have a 30 year old actor playing Zack Potter, the Wildest Wizard in the West! And his wacky adventures.

[Cat]

Originally posted by Starsaber
You can if it's done well.

Ah, yes, you can do anything if it's done well. Actually, I think the original has to have some room for leeway, too. I don't think it's possible to extract that much of Harry Potter without making it worse. Especially not with this fandom.

[HandsClean]

Actually, all I can say is that it will be really wierd...:sorry:

[venus1818]

It's funny you mention this: recently I was in an IMDB forum in which someone suggested that the movie should be made with american accents. According to that person, people around the world would relate better to the movie if they were made with american accent!
I have nothing against americans, but HP in an american set would be as ridiculous as Spiderman in an English set!
HP is fine as it is. It's set in Britain and it was written by an english author, therefore it has to be british!
However, I do agree that there are non-british actors that could make a good non-british accent.

[remusjlupin1980]

I can't imagine Harry Potter as an American movie or a book set in America because simply the magic described in the books have a distinctly British/European touch. NOT because Americans have no culture but because the kind of folklore/traditions Americans have is not exactly compatible with the world J.K. Rowling created.

BTW, Haley Joel Osment is a GREAT child actor. He would'v pulled off a British Harry, IMO.

[Lee]

I wouldn't go and see it. Ever. Harry is British. Hogwarts is British. End of story.

[tizzy weasley]

ok, yes i'm american but i wouldn't go for the harry potter american movie. i like the british accents and i like how everything fit well into england. i know this does not make sense but it's my way of writing things.

[Cat]

Originally posted by tizzy weasley
ok, yes i'm american but i wouldn't go for the harry potter american movie. i like the british accents and i like how everything fit well into england. i know this does not make sense but it's my way of writing things.

It makes perfect sense. You can take Harry Potter out of Britain but you can't take Britain out of Harry Potter.
The location and the story itself are tightly woven. If you say the location doesn't matter, you can say the personality of the characters don't matter, either. Do the minor characters matter? Do the little gizmos and gadgets matter? Does Harry's name matter? Yes, of course. The story is all that and a cup of tea.

[DarlingChild]

Originally posted by Inkwolf
It just wouldn't be Harry Potter if it was set in America. I mean, all the wizards and settings are just so....British! The language is British, the people are British, the whole ambiance is British. I think that's actually half the FUN of it for us Americans. ;D

How would they hide a castle in LA?? What would it be doing there in the first place? I know they were hoping to put some American actors in who they thought would be a draw, and pushed for JKR to approve the addition of an American character, but are you sure the location change idea was real? It seems sorta....impossible.

Any American wizard school would have to be very American. If it was old-fashioned, as the wizard world is in the HP books, it would have to be set in an old, ivy-covered brick school, or something equally old-fashioned. In point of fact, the Indians would provide the oldest basis of magical talent in the country. Would they have their own school, or run one where anyone was welcome? Or do they maintain some traditional system of individual teaching?

And instead of dragons, we'd have to deal with Sasquatches and Thunderbirds and Windigos and things.

Anyway, the point is--it couldn't possibly be like Hogwarts if it was American. Hogwarts reflects the British mythos.

I'd love to see a Harry Potter spin-off movie or series based in America (written at least in part by JKR), but it would probably be rotten, and should by no means displace the REAL Harry Potter stories.

And JKR, being British, probably couldn't write a truly convincing old-fashioned America than I could an old-fashioned England.


OOH I so agree with everything you just said!! It wouldn't be Harry Potter if it wasn't in Britain. Thats just the way it is. Perhaps there is an equivalent American school for young witches and wizards in America, but not Hogwarts. It's SET in England...so...any other place wouldn't work!

Also, I LOVE the way they talk! It cracks me up! Especially when Fred and George call Ron a 'stupid great prat.' I call my brother that all the time now, lol. It's fun to read Harry Potter because it's British, and everything like that. Sorry to my country and everything, but I would be sick to my stomach if they ever Americanized Harry Potter. I even kind of took offense when they changed 'football' to 'soccer' for us dumb Americans. I mean I know that Football in the UK is Soccer here, so why change it? I think I need to buy a British version of the books and compare :D

Hayley Joel Osmond as Harry? Someone give me a barf bag!

[WatsonFan11]

I think it would be bad, because Harry Potter is British. So if you have people talking in American english, it wouldn't be a good movie.

[EvilMeghan]

I live in America and HP over here doesn't seem the same at all. I could see some filming here, like in New England, or some actors who put on accents, but to totally change the movie would be an insult to the book.

Imagine Ron saying "bloody" with a midwest accent :rotfl:

Off-topic question: Is "bloody" like a British curse word or something? Anytime I see a movie that takes place in Britian, they almost always say "bloody." No offense to anyone by that. Just curious about culture over there. ;D

[Snowangel]

I wouldn't want them to make Harry Potter into an "American" movie. However, I don't see why they couldn't have American actors as long as those actors could do a good English accent.

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by EvilMeghan

Off-topic question: Is "bloody" like a British curse word or something? Anytime I see a movie that takes place in Britian, they almost always say "bloody." No offense to anyone by that. Just curious about culture over there. ;D
Aye, but it's a mild curse, really. I have to say, though, I've never heard anyone say "bloody brilliant" before ... perhaps it's used in some places as an intentional oxymoron, but normally bloody is used negatively or in annoyance, ie "bloody awful". Ah well.

[EvilMeghan]

Thanks for clearing that up! lol :D

[Yavanna]

OMG, if HP was an American movie it would ruin the whole thing! I am American, but you can't have Hogwarts without the english accents!

[doctor23]

Originally posted by Mr Ollivander 382 (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=110069#post110069))
as far as I know Fuchsia , Mexico is part of Central America , not north America ...... :D


Well you were wrong then weren't you. Mexico is most definately in North America. As is Central America for that matter. Central America is an aberation. Just something some journalists developed to be Politically correct. However, by definition Mexico is in North America "Central America" starts at it's southern border.

[doctor23]

Originally posted by Inkwolf (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=110970#post110970))
Shall we assume that England had no history prior to the Norman Invasion in 1060, when the language changed drastically? (if that's the right date)


*Whispers in Inkwolf's ear*

psst it's 1066.

[virtuousbumblebee]

I'm glad they didn't set the movies in America or significantly Americanize them because they *are* British- and I suppose I'm glad that the actors are all British (not *all* glad b/c I didn't even have a chance at being Hermione since they were only taking Brits and I'm an American :) ) , but I really wouldn't mind if the actors were Americans. In my mind the only different would be their accent (I love the British accent though so ya know) - and I think Haley Joel Osment's acting talent is better than Dan's (sorry). But oh well.

[RupertsPryncezz_07]

I really wish that they would've made the movies in America, if not that, just not only limit the roles to actors that live in the U.K. If I lived in Britain at the time that they were casting roles for the movies, I would so have tried out for a role. Since physically I fit her qualifications the most, probably Alicia Spinnet. Yeah, the ultimate Quidditch Chick!

[tabby]

RupertsPryncezz_07 : Why do you wish they had made the movies in America? What would they have gained from the move?

I'm with the majority in the thread. I would be awfully annoyed if HP was set in America. To act as though the two cultures are interchangable with little consequence is insulting to both cultures. They're are each unique. I don't think America could pull off Harry Potter in it's current form. It would take a fair amount of change. I wouldn't be happy with that change.

Just for reference sake, I'm Australian. I'd be just as annoyed if HP was set in Australia. It doesn't belong here either.

[RupertsPryncezz_07]

I'm not very particular about it being set in America. It's just that I wish the casting wasn't only limited to U.K. residents. There are a lot of talented actors in the U.S. And by only setting a limit for British actors they are excluding any other talent that they could get from other places not necessarily America. I mean I feel really passionate about it, b/c personally I feel as if I'm a really good actress, and I could've portrayed a role better than that of a lot of people who are on the cast now. But there wouldn't've been any chance for me to be on there because they only let British people be on the cast.
And I don't personally think that it makes that much of a difference if they would have it set in Britain. What's in a setting. Just like someone said when they mentioned 'The Lord of the Rings', that book isn't originally set in this place, (mainly due to the fact that it's set in Middle Earth, and imaginary location), but they set the movies in New Zealand and cinematically and picture-esquely the movies look just how you would've envisioned it while reading the books.

[tabby]

^No, LOTR's wasn't set in NZ. It was made there. It was still set in Middle Earth.

They weren't wanting to simply move where the film was made but still set it in England. They wanted to change the story so that it was about American kids. LOTR didn't do that. The story isn't in NZ, and it's not about Kiwis.

As for wanting US actors. Why? There are plenty of talented Brits who are more than capable of filling the role. Why bother hiring someone who has to do a fake accent when you can hire the real thing and they'll do just a good a job?

I'm just going to ignore your comment that you can do a better job than the actors employed. Come back and say that when you actually are employed in a major production. The States has more than enough movies for you to audition for.

[Sirius83]

If it was filmed in the US, no offense but i think it would suck. The setting just isn't right. I also fully agree with them keeping an all british cast. The UK is full of talent and the US has so many othe rmovies for its talent. Let the British actors act the parts. The live the culture, they know how to do it best, and its a chance for many of them to get international recognition. As far as locales and cast go, i wouldn't change a thing from how they are now.

[Ezra Pippen]

Well-why try to reinvent the wheel when you already have a good thing-I am glad they filmed it in Britain (far more suitable settings for the astle and its rooms, far easier to get kids who are acculturated in British mannerism as they are mostly British) and darn glad that they didn't Americanize (or 'Californize', as is far more likely) it.

[dementorsscareme]

ummm...*cough*...wasn't LOTR an american movie...

[Cat]

Originally posted by dementorsscareme (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=263641#post263641))
ummm...*cough*...wasn't LOTR an american movie...


Ignoring the randomness of this comment (since the LOTR series doesn't actually reveal its setting, if it is set in any modern landscape at all)... no, the film is not American. I don't know, maybe the funding is American. But who cares where the money is. The director is from either New Zealand or Australia (not sure which), the film is set in New Zealand and the actors are Aussies, Brits and Americans. The film is diverse.

You could say that HP is an American film because some of the crew is American. But then you'd be ignoring the rest of the crew. Harry Potter is also a diverse film, which happens to be set in the UK. Americans love it. The world loves it. The Brits are proud of it. Now will everybody stop picking at it? :p

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

The nationality of the cast and crew is something of a red herring, I think. I'd never heard the cheerleaders thing with Spielberg (though I did hear something about studio executives wanting Harry to have a girlfriend--blech), but I know he wanted to essentially condense the first three books and focus on the death of Harry's parents. Does that make it an American movie? No, it makes it Spielberg's movie--a movie that wouldn't have been Harry Potter as we know it, American or otherwise. Likewise, the fact Columbus was chosen doesn't make them American. And though I don't think that having the cast affect British accents (as I'm fairly sure Spielberg wanted Osment to do) detracts from the Britishness of the setting and tone, that's Rowling's call. Besides, if you have actors who are perfect for the part anyway, it does seem a shame to overlook them in favor of whoever the studio thinks will draw an audience. Insisting that they be British probably tempers that pressure.

As a side note, does Inkwolf or anyone else know of good fantasy that incorporates American folklore? The only example I can think of is Michael Chabon's Summerland, and he just doesn't have the knack for it.

[lorna]

that's what Spielburg wanted to do!!!!!
three cheers for those who nixed that idea in the bud.
LOTR thing - Middle Earth isn't an actual place so I don't see the relation in this discussion. And I think Peter Jackson is a New Zealander.

[Inkwolf]

Originally posted by Rowena Ravenclaw (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=264477#post264477))

As a side note, does Inkwolf or anyone else know of good fantasy that incorporates American folklore?


Whoa, did someone page me? :D

Sorry, I wish I did. Maybe we should revive that thread about establishing American schools for fan fics? Anyway, if you look at indian monsters and legends, there's a vast wealth of cool critters that could be used in an American fantasy. Almost all the tribes have legends about huge, magical, horned water snakes/dragons, some of whom are friendly and others just want to devour people. Some can transform themselves into humans or other animals, and they are at war with the thunder spirits, and are prey of thunderbirds.

There's also a recurring fairy tale from many tribes, about a child being raised by a family member, except they never see the person's face (hidden by hair or mask) and never see them eat. One day the child meets an animal who warns them that they are in danger, and that they should stay awake and watch their guardian eat. The kid stays awake and peeks, and sees that the guardian has the face of a monster and devours raw flesh. The monster says, "That child has grown big enough, and I'm tired of these stringy rabbits. Tomorrow I eat him/her and have a REAL feast." The next morning, the kid runs away, and eventually escapes to find their real family.

Anyway, those are just a tiny sample of the vast amount of American folklore waiting for some fantasy writer to dive into it. :)

Sorry for ranting off-topic so long!

[Shi]

I'm from the US and I'm glad they made Hogwarts in England, because that is just how it is supposed to be (oh, and because I love British accents). Even if it were an American movie and horribly butchered, I still would have seen it. Nothing could have kept me away from this movie.

[Puffskein]

The thing about Harry Potter series is that the basic story itself could work anywhere, because it's set in a magic world first and foremost. BUT the details of the magic world come from British culture and folklore, simply because the author is British. That's enough reason why filmmakers shouldn't try and turn it into an American story, because that wouldn't be true to the magic world in the books.

However, if JKR happened to be American, the series would no doubt be set in America and involve magic based on American folklore. So it's still worth wondering what HP would be like if it was an American book series, even if we think it's wrong to turn a British book into an American movie.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

As a very proud American, I want to say that the appeal that Harry Potter had for me was that it was so authentic in the British sense. I loved the British aspect of HP.
IMO, I think the production of the HP movies is considered American, so technically it is an American movie. However, I maybe be wrong and it could be a British/American co-production.
The movie had to be shot in Britain to get all the scenery and atmosphere right. I wouldn't have worked in New England I think.

IMO, JKR's Wizard world includes schools from around the world, not just Britain. There could be schools for every region of the U.S (Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Westcoast, etc.) and they could have had places to easily hid them. There might be a smaller voodoo denominated one in New Orleans. I also think there are Wizarding Schools in all parts of Asia. I wonder if the spells in the Asian countries use Latin or if they use their own language since their language doesn't come from Latin like Spanish, French, Italian does.
That is a reason why I think they should keep Hogwarts in Britain. To me, Hogwarts is a specific school in the Wizarding World and we are reading what is going on at Hogwarts at that certain time.

[MotherBear1975]

If it were Americainized... *no way*. If it was done true to the books in America... Ok. We'd probably fly over British kids for the main Charicters... 'cept I think they'd catch the almond eyed thing and get a Half brit/half Asain For Harry. I do *NOT* think it would be as good... while we have some lovely scenery over here (Wa State's rainforests would be good as the forbidden forest) I just don't think we could match it. Tho, come to think of it, Snoqualmie pass could do for 9 3/4, and the Cascades could be the mountains around Hogwarts (can anyone tell I love Wa State?) :elaugh:

Edit: The hal Brit/half Asain would have to have genuine British accent!

[Jonny Boy]

No offence to anyone but I don't think it would be as good.

[Cat]

The thing about Harry Potter series is that the basic story itself could work anywhere, because it's set in a magic world first and foremost.

It's also set in London streets and Scottish mountains. Oh, and the distinctly British boarding school setting that the plot revolves around isn't a minor detail, either.

[lorna]

I think this is a very British story and wouldn't work if Americianized.
The whole boarding school thing to start with, it simply isn't as entrenched in North America. The humour is very British as is it's very subtle hits on the British class system. For me the whole mudblood/pureblood thing is more class than say race.
One of the reason I suspect Harry Potter is so popular is that the magical aspect isn't the only thing it's got going.
It would be a little like trying to do a version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer set in British boarding school. On the surface, no problem but
when you consider a large part of that show was the way it used the Americian style of language and the kinds of problems Americian teens have I highly doubt it would work as well.

[NiCk RiDdLe]

Oh gosh, you people with your "Americanize" word. Yes it would of been diffrent if it was set in America. But hey, it would still be Harry Potter. And a lot of kids in Britian or England are a lot wrose than over here. A lot of them do drugs and all of that stuff. I just hope the majority of them don't. Just get over it, they already made the movies. You don't have to start saying how bad it would be in America. You make us sound so horrible even though I really wouldn't want to see that kid play Harry Potter. His acting is so poor...

[tabby]

Oh gosh, you people with your "Americanize" word. Yes it would of been diffrent if it was set in America. But hey, it would still be Harry Potter. And a lot of kids in Britian or England are a lot wrose than over here. A lot of them do drugs and all of that stuff. I just hope the majority of them don't. Just get over it, they already made the movies. You don't have to start saying how bad it would be in America. You make us sound so horrible even though I really wouldn't want to see that kid play Harry Potter. His acting is so poor...

No one is saying an Americanised film would be bad because America is "bad" or American kids are "bad", but simply because they're not British. The British setting and culture are an important part of the books backdrop.

The same would be said if the suggestion had been to make Harry Potter French, Russian or Australian.

Stop seeing insults where there isn't one.

[Azimuth]

Because the Steve Kloves is american, what the characters say sometimes does have a bit of an american influence.

"Crabbe, Goyle, where have you two been? Pigging out in the great hall all this time?"

This is an american phrase that isn't said over here.

"And to think, I've been worrying about my potions finals!"

Again, no British kid would say something like that. It'd be "Potions Exams".

[daniel4hp]

Because the Steve Kloves is american, what the characters say sometimes does have a bit of an american influence.

"Crabbe, Goyle, where have you two been? Pigging out in the great hall all this time?"

This is an american phrase that isn't said over here.

"And to think, I've been worrying about my potions finals!"

Again, no British kid would say something like that. It'd be "Potions Exams".
This is one reason I think that Kloves should go over the scripts with someone from Britain. It would be easier to just have a British screenwriter, but if the screenwriter isn't British, he's prone to using American (supposing he's American, like Kloves) language. Just having someone from Britain go over the scripts would help make it much more authentic.

[Mega]

And a lot of kids in Britian or England are a lot wrose than over here. A lot of them do drugs and all of that stuff.

I like the way you when you think people are insulting america you decide to reply by insulting the english. I'm an english teenager and I have never taken drugs or anything like that. What you have just said could be said for american kids aswell. Some people whould say it is worse in america.

HP in america would suck. The books where written with england as the set. If it was done in america it would take away from the HP story.

[hotchck663]

I would hate it if they set HP in America. No offense to Fushia, but I hate living here. It's so crowded and fake. There would be no room anywhere to hide the school, not to mention the fact that Americans don't act like the kids in Harry Potter, they all act british. We have a culture all our own and it's NOT Potterlike at all. Making it American would change everything. And as for American kids not wanting to watch British kids, maybe they shouldn't be reading a British book.

u know wut's the problem with u guys, u guys think that america is like new york, and to be honest, is not, every state in this country is very different! where i live is not crowd and fake, thank u very much, and another thing, it would b very interesting to c an american version, but it will just take the plot out of it, so i don't th8nk it would work!

[nhut]

Because the Steve Kloves is american, what the characters say sometimes does have a bit of an american influence.

"Crabbe, Goyle, where have you two been? Pigging out in the great hall all this time?"

This is an american phrase that isn't said over here.

"And to think, I've been worrying about my potions finals!"

Again, no British kid would say something like that. It'd be "Potions Exams".See, this is the thing. It's pretty much Americanised already. I say this meaning no offence (although I know some people will deliberatly view it as such:rolleyes:) but it angers me somewhat to see how much they've already made it to suit an American audiance. Ever since I heard that they were going to title it "Sorcerer's Stone" in America I knew where their priorities lay.

I yearn for when Kloves is booted off the team and a more competent British guy takes his place, but I see they've got him signed on for OotP, so I'm not holding my breath.

[daniel4hp]

u know wut's the problem with u guys, u guys think that america is like new york, and to be honest, is not, every state in this country is very different! where i live is not crowd and fake, thank u very much, and another thing, it would b very interesting to c an american version, but it will just take the plot out of it, so i don't th8nk it would work!
Maybe America is not all crowded and fake, but you have to face the reality that no state in the US really compares to England. You could set it here, but the tone of the movie would be entirely different. Now, if you want it set in the States and you like the idea of a Harry Potter that's totally American, then that's fine, but for me, I'd rather keep to the original setting and spirit of the books.

[truegryffingirl]

OK , I don't mean any offence to our American friends ....... :sorry: ...... but I was wondring , what if WB made the HP films as an American virsion of Hogwarts , what would you think of it ..... ?

as you all know that HP is not only set up in Britain , but also based on British myths and legends , way of life , education system and the every day life of modern Britain .

and I remember reading somewhere that many directors refused to make the films with British cast or for the movies to be filmed in England .... :rasp:
some even said that they wanted Hogwarts to be a school in LA , so what do you think about :

1- American Hogwarts school in LA or NYC or any other city .
2- American Harry , Ron , Hermione , Draco .... etc
3- what if Haley Joel Osment did play Harry as some director wanted him for the role .


the question is : if WB made that sort of film , would you go and watch it ........ ?

if yes , why ?
if no , why ?


as for me I will never watch it - no offence Americans ;) , because that's not the story that I read and loved , and I refuse to see them ruined like that ...... just imagine Haley Joel Osmont as Harry ..... :D

and imagine people's reaction when Haley Osment see nearly headless nick or any other Hogwarts ghost for that matter , every one in the theater will whisper ... ( I see dead people ) ... :rotfl:



P.S : if there was a similar thread , then I don't mind this one being wiped .
I would still watch the movies!!! but heres a funny thing...JKR only wanted british actors to work on the movie no american actors and wasn't it Chris columbus(sp)who came to JKR about the idea?? thats what i heard

[Dedalus]

it angers me somewhat to see how much they've already made it to suit an American audiance. Ever since I heard that they were going to title it "Sorcerer's Stone" in America I knew where their priorities lay.
.
I agree with you. I also get the feeling that the target audience for the film is American, which I don't think is right, really, since there's an equal amount of fans worldwide and since the books, the author, the characters and the original publishers are all set in Britain. And since the entire cast and almost all of the crew are British, too.

But I get that feeling because of the merchandise more than the film. A lot of it has "Sorcerer's Stone" on it, even over here in England, and the adverts are all American. But it shows up in the film too ... there's little British slang, and where there is it's intended as humour rather than natural speech (like "bloody brilliant"). But you can tell that some of the language is forced into the script, and doesn't come naturally. That's because, with Kloves, it really doesn't come naturally, and that can't really be helped. I liked the use of "arse", though - I'm glad he slipped that in there :D

[MotherBear1975]

Okay... hold up. All y'all who are saying that we've got *nothing* to compare to England have never seen the Cascades and Olympics in WA state, the Olympic rainforests, Crater Lake national park in Oregon, and the Redwoods in So. Oregon. Look before ya speak.

The screenplay was *written* by an American. J.K. *could* have said no. She said herself she had some reservations about it... but she did *not* say no. They could have corrected it after it was written... they chose not to. Obviously J.K. didn't think the errors were signifigent to fuss about. If the creator isn't fussing, we've no business fussing. And I would *so* like to use stronger language here. :sigh:

[miku_miku_kwi]

Okay... hold up. All y'all who are saying that we've got *nothing* to compare to England have never seen the Cascades and Olympics in WA state, the Olympic rainforests, Crater Lake national park in Oregon, and the Redwoods in So. Oregon. Look before ya speak.

The screenplay was *written* by an American. J.K. *could* have said no. She said herself she had some reservations about it... but she did *not* say no. They could have corrected it after it was written... they chose not to. Obviously J.K. didn't think the errors were signifigent to fuss about. If the creator isn't fussing, we've no business fussing. And I would *so* like to use stronger language here. :sigh:

Calm down! Calm down! America and England both have their perks and problems! I think most people understand by now.... I hope, at the least. There's no reason to get very serious and fussy.
:frown:

[daniel4hp]

Okay... hold up. All y'all who are saying that we've got *nothing* to compare to England have never seen the Cascades and Olympics in WA state, the Olympic rainforests, Crater Lake national park in Oregon, and the Redwoods in So. Oregon. Look before ya speak.
Certainly America has some very nice scenic areas -- I don't think anyone would question that. But, the point is, it's not Britain. The Olympic Rainforests may be very nice, but don't you think that if you put Hogwarts there, it would kinda change the feel?

I have nothing against America (I live there), but to me, the books are British, and it just wouldn't fit to make it American. There are plenty of books that are American; why do you need to go and put HP in the US? America has its good (and bad) aspects, but in any case, they're quite clearly different than Britain's good (and bad) ones.

[MotherBear1975]

you're right, you're right. I just got incensed at the insinuation that We're all concrete an skyscrapers. And I *don't* think it *should* have been done anywhere other than where it was... but it's *not* impossible. The rainforest would have done well for the forbidden forest.

[Cat]

Okay... hold up. All y'all who are saying that we've got *nothing* to compare to England have never seen the Cascades and Olympics in WA state, the Olympic rainforests, Crater Lake national park in Oregon, and the Redwoods in So. Oregon. Look before ya speak.


Nobody is saying that America is worse or less attractive. But the fact of the matter is that the series is set in Britain and America is not and does not look like Britain. It might be possible to set the story somewhere else but it would change a lot... the U.K. is a perfectly genuine place and there is no reason on earth why the films should be shot anywhere else. Would you set Huckleberry Finn in China?


The rainforest would not make the best Forbidden Forest because the Forbidden Forest is not a rainforest, regardless of its exotic fauna and possibly flora.

[MotherBear1975]

Nobody is saying that America is worse or less attractive. But the fact of the matter is that the series is set in Britain and America is not and does not look like Britain. It might be possible to set the story somewhere else but it would change a lot... the U.K. is a perfectly genuine place and there is no reason on earth why the films should be shot anywhere else. Would you set Huckleberry Finn in China?


The rainforest would not make the best Forbidden Forest because the Forbidden Forest is not a rainforest, regardless of its exotic fauna and possibly flora.


China, I couldn't say, as I've not seen enough to venture a guess. But there are some beautiful places in Japan and Thailand where you could get away with Huck Finn for *scenery*...

But I think we've trailed from the subject. The question wasn't so much to do with the scenery (which I still say they could get away with) but the actors and the dialogue. *THAT* you could *not* get away with replacing as pure British.

[Buckbeak]

I agree with everything Cat says, she knows how to get a point across,well done :tu: .
Anyway i have to say that i'm 100% glad that the HP movie kept true to the books and had everything british what was supposed to be british, i mean whats the point of looking for a kid (american or otherwise) to play a british boy when there are millions of british boys already able to play the part, there is no point in it what-so-ever. Now i'm sorry to the americans who weren't aloud to even audition for the part, but had Harry Potter been American anyway, a british kid would not even get a look in, nobody would think twice about filming the movie in the UK and everything about it would be american.
Its not as though the Brits get much praise when it comes to the movie industry i think its only fair to let us have this one.
Saying that however the movies were not that great anyway (CoS was ok) and whether that had anything to do with it being british or not i don't know and frankly i don't care, its the books that interest me anyway. But overall i'm sticking to my belief that the actors, scenery etc etc should be british and once we have a british director and script writer the movies will be more 'Harry Potter' to my line of thinking

[nhut]

The screenplay was *written* by an American. J.K. *could* have said no. She said herself she had some reservations about it... but she did *not* say no. They could have corrected it after it was written... they chose not to. Obviously J.K. didn't think the errors were signifigent to fuss about. If the creator isn't fussing, we've no business fussing. And I would *so* like to use stronger language here. :sigh:JK has as much input as they let her. They could tell her to go screw themselves, and Americanise the whole thing (even more than it already is), if they wanted to. We can never really know what JKR thinks. If she said she hated what they'd done they would probably sue her for defamation.

[Looneylove22]

I wouldn't watch it if it were the last movie on Earth! It would completely ruin the whole entire idea of the movie! (at least it would to me.) I know it would be great to have it filmed in America (only 'cause I live here) but not great enough to ruin the books.:no:

[tabby]

JK has as much input as they let her. They could tell her to go screw themselves, and Americanise the whole thing (even more than it already is), if they wanted to. We can never really know what JKR thinks. If she said she hated what they'd done they would probably sue her for defamation.

I've heard (and I could be wrong) that when JKR sold the rights to the Harry Potter movies she made it a part of the agreement that it's "British". Set in britain, casted with brits etc. etc.

That's essentially why quite a few directors (including Spielburg) were passed up for the Potter movies. They wanted to Americanise and JKR said to stuff it.

[Bexfizz]

That's essentially why quite a few directors (including Spielburg) were passed up for the Potter movies. They wanted to Americanise and JKR said to stuff it.
:clap: Go JKR :clap:

[nhut]

I've heard (and I could be wrong) that when JKR sold the rights to the Harry Potter movies she made it a part of the agreement that it's "British". Set in britain, casted with brits etc. etc.

That's essentially why quite a few directors (including Spielburg) were passed up for the Potter movies. They wanted to Americanise and JKR said to stuff it.Yes, that's true. But after the rights were sold, there was nothing she could do, unless the studio let her. Of course, they'd want to keep up a good relationship, otherwise they can kiss rights to the other books goodbye, and that wouldn't be good for them..:rolleyes:

[Buckbeak]

Yes, that's true. But after the rights were sold, there was nothing she could do, unless the studio let her. Of course, they'd want to keep up a good relationship, otherwise they can kiss rights to the other books goodbye, and that wouldn't be good for them..:rolleyes:
Well obviously they would have signed a contract, their solistors would have triple checked it, there was no way WB could go against what they had agreed to or Jo would have been quite in her right to sue them. and as sueing is so easy to do now a days that contract had to be perfect.

[tabby]

Yes, that's true. But after the rights were sold, there was nothing she could do, unless the studio let her. Of course, they'd want to keep up a good relationship, otherwise they can kiss rights to the other books goodbye, and that wouldn't be good for them..:rolleyes:

Perhaps I wasn't clear. When I said JKR made it a part of the "agreement" with the studios that it won't be Americanised I meant in the legal sense. It would have been written into the contract which would have been checked a million times before it was signed. JKR could do a lot more than nothing. She could hurt them where it hurt most. The bottom line. Warner Brothers is legally obligued to keep the movies "british". To do otherwise would open themselves up to a million dollar courtcase bought by JKR. One they would lose.

[Amadeus]

Oh gosh, you people with your "Americanize" word. Yes it would of been diffrent if it was set in America. But hey, it would still be Harry Potter. And a lot of kids in Britian or England are a lot wrose than over here. A lot of them do drugs and all of that stuff. I just hope the majority of them don't. Just get over it, they already made the movies. You don't have to start saying how bad it would be in America. You make us sound so horrible even though I really wouldn't want to see that kid play Harry Potter. His acting is so poor...Please restrain yourself from making racial comments as I am very sure that it is part of the forum rules (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=16174), Nick Riddle.
I think I prefer it as British film since the book was originally written with England as the setting. Also, I personally love the English accent and it would have been greatly disappointing if it were missing from the movie :D

[mina]

Though I am pleased with the cast and setting chosen for the films, I don't necessarily agree that it has to have an all-British cast. I believe it should be whoever will be the best choice for the role (I'm pretty sure that Kenneth Brannagh is actually Irish, yet he was a fantastic Lockhart).

[Dedalus]

Though I am pleased with the cast and setting chosen for the films, I don't necessarily agree that it has to have an all-British cast. I believe it should be whoever will be the best choice for the role
There will never just be one person who's best for the role. People might say "This person would be the perfect so-and-so, but they're Australian!" but chances are they're not the only perfect person, because there will be several people perfect for the role in all aspects, even if they vary visually. And they'd opt for the British one, because it's easier for them.

(Keneth Branagh was born in Britain - it was in Northern Ireland :) )

[mina]

Oops, sorry. Thanks for correcting me.

[Liselle]

I'm fairly sure I wouldn't have gone to see any of the movies if they had been transplanted to America. Come on, we'd have missed out on the sweet tones of Sean Biggerstaff talking about Bludgers *swoon*

Spielberg wanted HJO I think, ugh I'm allergic to him!!!the thought of it just gives me the heebie jeebies!!

I have been critical before of the movies not being more true to the canon but I'm glad at least the setting is as I imagined it, it would have ruined the great tradition of the British boarding school (I grew up reading St Claires, Malory Towers by Enid Blyton) I just couldn't imagine it being set in the US....

Just my view

Liselle

[Chartreuse]

I think HP would be better off as a British franchise. If it were American, I don't think it'll ever be the same, because the book is British in the first place. It wouldn't have the quality or shall we say, 'magic'. And I think everything is doing fine as it is right now. Can't wait for "Prisoner of Azkaban" (my fave of 'em all!)!!!

[Liselle]

I think HP would be better off as a British franchise. If it were American, I don't think it'll ever be the same, because the book is British in the first place. It wouldn't have the quality or shall we say, 'magic'. And I think everything is doing fine as it is right now. Can't wait for "Prisoner of Azkaban" (my fave of 'em all!)!!!
I think you're right on the money there!! Having said all I did above I have been reminded that High Fidelity was transfered to America although the book is decidedly set in the UK. With the right directors/producers and scriptwriters I suppose it would be possible to transfer Harry to the US. Personally I'm glad though that its as is :)

Liselle

[skullkid]

actually , it WAS going to be "americanized" and I wrote a thread about this a while ago:http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=16303


here are some facts about the characters:(I forgot to put some details in the older article)
1.Ron was going to come from a big family like the one in the film MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING and he was going to be like fred and george

2.Hermione was going to be called Bailey and also she was supposed to be a preppy chearleader and Harry's girlfriend.

3.Draco was going to have a different name

4.Quirell was going to kidnap Hermione and her family and Harry had to rescue them

(the cast list were only actors considered for the roles)

[Dedalus]

Is that actually true, skullkid? It sounds more like a joke somebody made saying "what it'd be like if it were an American movie" than truth, but then I wouldn't know where it comes from.

[skullkid]

Is that actually true, skullkid? It sounds more like a joke somebody made saying "what it'd be like if it were an American movie" than truth, but then I wouldn't know where it comes from.


some filmmakers wanted it to be like that and it was only one of the proposals for the film(spielberg's) but it was rejected by Warner Bros and JKR(in 1999 when the idea to make a HP film started)

[skullkid]

Is that actually true, skullkid? It sounds more like a joke somebody made saying "what it'd be like if it were an American movie" than truth, but then I wouldn't know where it comes from.


some filmmakers wanted it to be like that and it was only one of the proposals for the film(spielberg's) but it was rejected by Warner Bros and JKR(in 1999 when the idea to make a HP film started)

but then again IN power magazine is known to lie so it may not be true


EDIT:sorry for double posting

[SnorkackCatcher]

An American version of HP would have needed significant changes to the characters and settings to reflect US culture. That would have then inevitably affected the plot. The setting is an important part of any story, and it's essentially impossible to transplant it to another setting without making it into a different story.

An analogy that sprang to mind when I was typing this was an old B&W B-movie I once saw called Joe Macbeth. This takes the basic plot of Shakespeare's Macbeth and puts it in an American gangster setting, with Joe as a mobster urged to take over the crime syndicate by his wife. It's an interesting concept, and follows the general plot twists of Macbeth, but some things just don't translate.

For example, the witches, the ghosts, and the background air of prophecies fit well in a semi-mythical Dark Ages Scottish setting, but not in a 20th century gangster movie. Since the protagonists are now criminals, you also lose the theme of rebellion against the rightful king that you get in the play. You end up with something that's an interesting tale, that is obviously based on Macbeth, but isn't actually Macbeth.

Presumably, Hogwarts would have been translated into the sort of generic school you see in US teen movies ("Hogwarts High"). The characters would then have had to have been modified so as not to appear incongruous against the new background, various plot elements would have had to shift about to fit, and the end result simply wouldn't have been Harry Potter, just a story based on it using some of the same names and plot elements.

[daniel4hp]

Well, Hogwarts could be a Prep School set in a rural location (ie, White Mountains of New Hampshire, or somewhere like that). This would allow for some of Hogwarts' oddities, as well as partially keeping the Hogwarts feel. However, its hard to get past the fact that American secondary schools run for 4 years, not 7. This would obviously lead to certain changes. In short, it could be done, but as you said, SnorkackCatcher, there would have to be changes.

[Discordia]

I think that id it were an American movie it would end up being changed so much that it wouldn't truly be Harry Potter anymore bc everyone would want things done there way. Personally I'm glad it's an all British cast because it stays true to the stories rather than some American boy putting on a fake accent and is like 10 years to old for the part.

[Dedalus]

An American version of HP would have needed significant changes to the characters and settings to reflect US culture. That would have then inevitably affected the plot. The setting is an important part of any story, and it's essentially impossible to transplant it to another setting without making it into a different story.

An analogy that sprang to mind when I was typing this was an old B&W B-movie I once saw called Joe Macbeth. This takes the basic plot of Shakespeare's Macbeth and puts it in an American gangster setting, with Joe as a mobster urged to take over the crime syndicate by his wife. It's an interesting concept, and follows the general plot twists of Macbeth, but some things just don't translate.

For example, the witches, the ghosts, and the background air of prophecies fit well in a semi-mythical Dark Ages Scottish setting, but not in a 20th century gangster movie. Since the protagonists are now criminals, you also lose the theme of rebellion against the rightful king that you get in the play. You end up with something that's an interesting tale, that is obviously based on Macbeth, but isn't actually Macbeth.

Presumably, Hogwarts would have been translated into the sort of generic school you see in US teen movies ("Hogwarts High"). The characters would then have had to have been modified so as not to appear incongruous against the new background, various plot elements would have had to shift about to fit, and the end result simply wouldn't have been Harry Potter, just a story based on it using some of the same names and plot elements.

I agree with you. They couldn't just cut out Hogwarts and put it in an American setting, and turn the characters into American ones ... they would have to "convert" a lot of the whole story, so that it'd be based on the books but be little like them.

Locations are important, because they shape the things that are on them. There are also lot of British customs mentioned in the books, and a lot of British myths and creatures that wouldn't be found in America, and Britain and America have an entirely different school system, so they'd have to jumble up a lot of the story that takes place in Hogwarts (which is most of it!). And many more things besides. But places are important in the books because there were reasons they were set where they were, and the story, containing the characters and the magical places, mould into the places they were set. London, for instance, is very important in the books and it'd be hard to put a lot of the places set with London in mind somewhere else. Even somewhere else in England!

[hermy_weasley2]

I wanted to comment on the setting if the movies were shot in america. There's a movie coming out sometime soon that's about a group in the American South in the past, but they're not shooting it here in the American South. I don't remember the title. Anyway, they're shooting it in Transylvania(spelling?), and the outdoor setting looks nothing like the American South. It's a beautiful setting, but it looks nothing like where it's supposed to be. I don't know what's wrong with it, it's just not right. Most of the cast isn't even American. In the trailer, they were putting on good accents, but it's not the same. Anyway, the Harry Potter books aren't American, and it wouldn't be the same if it were set in America. It would be like watching cowboys take their cattle through the middle of London.


I'm with Fucshia, I hate the word " Americanize" too for the same reasons talked about at the beginning of this thread.

[SnorkackCatcher]

Anyway, the Harry Potter books aren't American, and it wouldn't be the same if it were set in America. It would be like watching cowboys take their cattle through the middle of London.

Just noted in the TV listings for this week: a film which emphasises the point - it's called Dennis, and takes the British children's comic character "Dennis the Menace" and completely (excuse the term) Americanizes the background, to a degree where basically only the name is the same. Which sort of leaves me asking: what was the point? (Gratuitous large-scale changes in film versions of books - any gratuitous large-scale changes - are something I find particularly irritating. If the story's worth filming in the first place, why would you rewrite it into something different?)

I'm with Fucshia, I hate the word "Americanize" too for the same reasons talked about at the beginning of this thread.

Well, it may have additional undesirable connotations, but basically it's still an indispensable shorthand to describe the concept "adapt something in a such a way as to make it more familiar to Americans"? The equivalent here would be "Anglicise", which I honestly don't mind people using ...

[SaveeSurpens]

Okay we get it. The movies would officially suck if it were completely Americanised. But hypothetically, what American actors or actresses would you like to see as playing the characters? I mean, British accents included. Personally, I'd cast Johnny Depp for Professor Snape.



There's a nice picture for you poor visualizers.

[jennymac]

even better one...johnny depp as mundungus fletcher!! :rotfl:

anyway. i don't think the movies would have been as good "americanized" (i use this for lack of better wording) for one thing IT IS BRITISH. we are not british. sure, even if they decided to leave the story the way it way, just american setting and actors, they are still so many things they would have to change. (eg. as someone mentioned before, american high schools are 4 yrs, not 7.)

i'm actually very sorry that they are americanizing it to begin with (finals, pigging out, sorcerers stone.) i'd personally like to see the british culture. what would you have said instead of "pigging out" or do you even have a term for it?

they tried to americanize the first book a bit too. not much, but i definately noticed a small difference between it and the other books. they thought some american children wouldn't understand.

as for steve kloves, jrk said in the cos dvd interview that she loved working with him and trusts him. she writes the scripts with him. so if there was something she didn't like, she would be there to say so. and he's always asking her opinion on it. i say if she trusts him, then he's perfect. (imo) not many script writers would care.

one more thing...whether intended or not, there seems to be alot of hate in this thread. :sad: :upset: america and britain BOTH are beautiful and wonderful countries, and BOTH have their share of problems too! as does any country! please stop going back and forth about "this country is like this...that country has problems..." and your country doesn't? also i would like to ask non-americans to not judge america by new york and LA (at least the people who do judge us by them), as i wouldn't judge england by london, or japan by tokyo. there are hundred of thousands of square miles in between the 2 cities, and so many different cultures in different states. nothing in this paragraph has anything to do with harry potter and where the movie should be shot, just the general hate i've seen in this thread. "We're only as strong as we are united..." remember that?

sorry if i offend anyone or shown a lot of ignorance, as i tend to do from time to time....:blush: it's just that i don't want to be judged by those cities. i've never even been to them, nor have i met anyone from there, or met anyone like the people portrayed in movies there. my cities (the one i'm from and the one i live in now) are vastly different.

and haley joel osment for harry potter??!! :nc: what were they thinking...?

my friends and i have played this game before though...who would make a good so and so...we always choose american actors because we don't know many british actors...

i personally always saw viggo mortesen (aragorn from LOTR) as sirius. :rolleyes:
fran dreysher (sp?) would be a good rita...if not for that horrid voice!!!! :scared: :no:

[Azimuth]

Who's judging America by those two cities? Most people call Americans stupid and ignorant etc. based on the 'hilbillies' in the south. Most people over here love New York, and never say anything negative about America based on it.

what would you have said instead of "pigging out" or do you even have a term for it?

I don't know. Maybe "stuffing your faces" or something.

[jennymac]

Who's judging America by those two cities? Most people call Americans stupid and ignorant etc. based on the 'hilbillies' in the south. Most people over here love New York, and never say anything negative about America based on it.ah...well that's where i'm from... and stupid and ignorant or not, they are the nicest sweetest people you'll ever meet and that's all that matters. i have yet to meet anyone from any american city who is as nice as them and i'd love to move back there. and i do know some people who have judge us by those cities...i'm not saying anyone on here has yet, i'm just saying in general.

also, how can you judge a country as large as the u.s. based on a VERY minute group of people? :huh:

sorry, i got off topic...

[SnorkackCatcher]

m actually very sorry that they are americanizing it to begin with (finals, pigging out, sorcerers stone.) i'd personally like to see the british culture. what would you have said instead of "pigging out" or do you even have a term for it?

they tried to americanize the first book a bit too. not much, but i definately noticed a small difference between it and the other books. they thought some american children wouldn't understand.

"Pigging out" would be generally understood, and quite often used, in Britain. What's the context? - I could look up the passage in the UK version.

"Finals" (assuming you mean in the educational sense) as used in the UK is pretty specific to the exams you take at the end of a university degree course. The exams you take at 18 in your final year of school would normally be referred to by name as "A levels" - i.e. GCE Advanced level exams.

(For the record, in case anyone outside the UK is interested: formerly there used to be two sets of exams taken at 16. There were GCE "O levels" - GCE for General Certificate of Education, O for Ordinary - and an easier exam called the CSE for Certificate of Secondary Education, a top grade being considered equivalent to a minumum O level pass. To avoid accusations of CSEs being worthless, these were merged about 15 or so years ago into the General Certificate of Secondary Education or GCSE, with a broader range of pass grades incorporating all the levels of the previous O levels and CSEs. A levels stayed the same, although there have been suggestions that both GCSEs and A levels have been dumbed down in recent years. The main relevance of all this to Harry Potter is that the O level/A level exam structure was what JKR would have had at school, and was probably the inspiration for the OWLs and NEWTs.)

I can understand why they would make some changes in the earlier books to avoid idioms that might be confusing, although I think a lot of people now wish they hadn't changed the title because that makes it awkward to refer to in discussion (especially on general forums like this). I gather that they didn't make many changes to OotP due to time pressure, which is fine - most readers with English as a native language will probably grasp the different usages from the context anyway, and for most readers with English as a foreign language I imagine one set of idioms is as good as another?

[Mad Macca]

Harry Potter is a British story. No matter how hard they tried, an American film company could never make it as British as a British crew could. It not only matters on the actors, the settings and whatever, but also on the writing. The writers for Harry Potter (so far as I know) are British, they would be sub consciously putting British language into the scripts, where if an American, or any other nationality writer for the matter, tried to do this, it wouldn't achieve the full effect.
The movies wouldn't be Harry Potter if they were made by a different country. I think the British were the only ones for the job. Good work guys!

[daniel4hp]

Actually, Steve Kloves, the screenwriter, is an American, and, in my opinion at least, it does show in his work. He may have been told to "Americanise" it -- I don't know -- but his use of the British language is quite poor. Note expressions such as "bloody brilliant" -- it may sound cool, but the use of "bloody" is entirely wrong.

[SnorkackCatcher]

Note expressions such as "bloody brilliant" -- it may sound cool, but the use of "bloody" is entirely wrong.

What was the context? It sounds reasonable enough to me.

[SaveeSurpens]

Excuse my paraphrasing and all, but the context was the scene in the first movie when Ron and Harry just burst into Transfiguration class. Theres some random cat sitting on the desk up front, but no Professor McGonagal.
Ron: Can you imagine the look on old McGonagal's face if she saw we were late?
The cat then leap off the desk toward Harry and Ron, simultaneously transforming into Professor McGonagal.
Ron: That was bloody brilliant!
And then some other stuff about turning people into pocket watches. You get the picture. In the corresponding book, she neither transforms into an animagus in front of the class, nor as a result does Ron say this. In fact, she waits until the third year to show her class, but I suppose Steve Kloves was eager to cut and paste. Personally I don't like a lot of what he did with the movie. Part of this is because he is an American, and probably hasn't had that much experience around the British. I think they could have gotten a better writer, if American, one who is more familir with the dialects and culture, if a British one, all the better. Almost any other aspect besides actors could easily be one or the other, but the writer has a much more profound impact on the movie.
And I am American.

[hawk1245]

I would have to agree. But, you have to consider that Ron IS quite the poty-mouth in the books, and has said stupid things in front of the teachers before(and gotten in trouble). So it isn't COMPLETLEY out of character. It WAS out of character for McGonagall not to take points away though. Maybe she cuts first years slack on their first time offence? I don't know. I love the movies though, but I have to admit that was a slight hiccup.

[jennymac]

is bloody a bad word in britain or something? :shrug: and he was complimenting mcgonagall. she has been know to let them slide on a few things...that probably flattered her. :)

[Godrics_Heiress]

i thought saying 'bloody' is the same as saying 'darn' or '****' or 'what-the' or the likes. but i don't know--i'm american.

[Cat]

i thought saying 'bloody' is the same as saying 'darn' or '****' or 'what-the' or the likes. but i don't know--i'm american.

And you wouldn't be likely to say 'That was darn brilliant!'. It just sounds wrong. There are certain word couplets that we don't put together as a matter of course.

I think 'bloody brilliant' is one of those. 'Bloody' tends to be followed by a negative or just 'good' (as in 'That was a bloody good cup o' tea'). I don't know why. There are no rules about it, it's just happened that way.

Besides, it was well over the top. I think it was a 'Look, Americans - British swear words! Huh huh huh!'.

The word '****' (EDIT: Backside. Bum. Buttocks. It's censored now? Aw, I thought I could get away with using British swear words forever!) was a bit strange. I don't think I've ever heard that word in a children's movie before. Not that I mind, of course, I'm just saying.

[hawk1245]

The word '****' (EDIT: Backside. Bum. Buttocks. It's censored now? Aw, I thought I could get away with using British swear words forever!) was a bit strange. I don't think I've ever heard that word in a children's movie before. Not that I mind, of course, I'm just saying.[/QUOTE]

I thought that was a good addition. It shows what a brat Draco is even more. School kids DO swear alot when teachers aren't around, so that is accurate. And Draco DOES say it with an "R", so it is legit.

[Cat]

I thought that was a good addition. It shows what a brat Draco is even more. School kids DO swear alot when teachers aren't around, so that is accurate. And Draco DOES say it with an "R", so it is legit.

I'm not saying they don't, I'm just saying it's weird that they had him say it. If you'd have asked me beforehand I might have said that they'd have made it more namby-pamby and cuss free.

Yay for them for not doing! Hooray for 'a*se'!

Note to self: isn't it a tad strange that it's blanked in this forum, yet said uncensored in a Harry Potter film? Young impressionable children on this forum will have heard it before- if they've watched the films!

[hawk1245]

I'm not saying they don't, I'm just saying it's weird that they had him say it. If you'd have asked me beforehand I might have said that they'd have made it more namby-pamby and cuss free.

Yay for them for not doing! Hooray for 'a*se'!

Note to self: isn't it a tad strange that it's blanked in this forum, yet said uncensored in a Harry Potter film? Young impressionable children on this forum will have heard it before- if they've watched the films!

Uncle Vernon says "D**n in COS as he watchs the Weasley's car speed away! LOL! Listen carefully. I bet there will be more language in POA. I hope they keep ginny cussing in OOTP! That was great! :)

[SnorkackCatcher]

"Bloody" is a fairly mild swear word these days, anyway. I believe it was relatively shocking back in the 1960's when used in Till Death Us Do Part, but it doesn't cause much ire nowadays. I don't think most kids would be shocked by this, your average 11-year-old would be more likely to say something a lot more forceful! You get stonger language in other films - Jurassic Park and Star Trek Generations both had the word "sh*t".

The books contain "prat" and "git" which are slightly more risque, but still far more innocuous than they used to be, and "effing" which was quite unusual given that it's an obvious reference to something stronger.

"Bloody brilliant" seems a plausible enough expression to me, BTW.

[daniel4hp]

I don't have any objections at all to the use of "bloody." I take a very mild view of swears in general, and don't object in the slightest to them being used in films. What I have a problem with is them being used in entirely wrong contexts. As Cat has already said, "bloody brilliant" isn't exactly a common phrase in Britain, and I find it unlikely Ron would say it in front of a teacher (there are things you say with your friends that you refrain from saying in some contexts, you know...). Ron's upbringing also has to be considered; Ron would have learned at an early age that you don't say some things around figures of authority.

I don't object to bloody, or a*se, or prat or git or effing or d*mn or whatever else is used in the films. It would just be nice if Kloves actually knew how to use British swears, and didn't just throw them in here and there for American laughs.


One question. One of Ron's favorite phrases seems to be "bloody hell." (PS: Mirror of Erised, CoS: Polyjuice Potion, among others). In the contexts in which he uses them, it tends to denote surprise. Is this a legitimate use of the word bloody? Would someone like Ron say it when he was merely surprised (as opposed to angry/upset/etc.)? Just wondering, since I'm not British...

[Cat]

One question. One of Ron's favorite phrases seems to be "bloody hell." (PS: Mirror of Erised, CoS: Polyjuice Potion, among others). In the contexts in which he uses them, it tends to denote surprise. Is this a legitimate use of the word bloody? Would someone like Ron say it when he was merely surprised (as opposed to angry/upset/etc.)? Just wondering, since I'm not British...

I think saying it out of surprise is probably the most genuine. If you were angry, say you'd just stood on a nail, I think you'd only really say it to avoid saying something worse.

SnorkackCatcher, are you from the UK? Maybe it depends whereabouts you are. The words 'bloody brilliant' just sound unnatural together to me.

[SnorkackCatcher]

I don't have any objections at all to the use of "bloody." I take a very mild view of swears in general, and don't object in the slightest to them being used in films. What I have a problem with is them being used in entirely wrong contexts. As Cat has already said, "bloody brilliant" isn't exactly a common phrase in Britain, and I find it unlikely Ron would say it in front of a teacher (there are things you say with your friends that you refrain from saying in some contexts, you know...). Ron's upbringing also has to be considered; Ron would have learned at an early age that you don't say some things around figures of authority.

I don't object to bloody, or a*se, or prat or git or effing or d*mn or whatever else is used in the films. It would just be nice if Kloves actually knew how to use British swears, and didn't just throw them in here and there for American laughs.


One question. One of Ron's favorite phrases seems to be "bloody hell." (PS: Mirror of Erised, CoS: Polyjuice Potion, among others). In the contexts in which he uses them, it tends to denote surprise. Is this a legitimate use of the word bloody? Would someone like Ron say it when he was merely surprised (as opposed to angry/upset/etc.)? Just wondering, since I'm not British...

Yes, the phrase "Bloody hell" is by far the most common use of the word "bloody" as an expletive in the UK, and the way Ron uses it is entirely normal. "Bloody brilliant" is a phrase I've heard used as well (it probably just depends who you happen to be talking to). Since JKR had input into the script (not to mention a lot of other Brits) no really anachronistic usage is likely to stay in the finished movies.

I'm a bit hazy on the details of the scene in the film (I've only seen it once, when it came out), but if I remember correctly Ron is commenting to Harry, and therefore it wasn't necessarily supposed to be a remark that McGonagall was meant to overhear? Even so, it's still mild enough not to draw much comment anyway (let's face it, nobody got too bothered about a pre-teen actor sayng it).

[SaveeSurpens]

Maybe JKR was just being polite, or she was having a bad day and really didnt feel like correcting it. Or maybe it is a legitimate colloquialism. How the bloody hell would I know? But McGonagal definitely hears it. After Ron says "That was bloody brilliant" quite loudly, McGonagal says to him "Well thank you for that asessment Mr. Weasley," before lecturing him. I just didn't put that in my synopsis a few posts ago because I didn't think it was important, but apparently it is.

[SnorkackCatcher]

Maybe JKR was just being polite, or she was having a bad day and really didnt feel like correcting it. Or maybe it is a legitimate colloquialism. How the bloody hell would I know? But McGonagal definitely hears it. After Ron says "That was bloody brilliant" quite loudly, McGonagal says to him "Well thank you for that asessment Mr. Weasley," before lecturing him. I just didn't put that in my synopsis a few posts ago because I didn't think it was important, but apparently it is.

Ah, right, thanks. I'll have to watch the films again some time. :)


SnorkackCatcher, are you from the UK? Maybe it depends whereabouts you are. The words 'bloody brilliant' just sound unnatural together to me.

Yup, Devon (originally Nottingham). I'm fairly sure I've heard at least one person use the phrase, either at uni or at work. Like you say, it probably depends where you are.

[Jillstar03]

Yeah, the words "bloody brillient", sound a bit 1950's boarding school for me, like the phrase "that was super fun!" from Legally Blonde!
It just doesn't sound right!
I think that as the films go on, they should start using a more selective range of swear words in maybe GoF onwards because, in loads of schools across the world, although i in no way shape or form agree with it, swear words such as f***, are being said much more commonly by kids aged 11+. This will make it a lot more realistic and so not a world of "happy families" anymore. I also think GoF should be a 12 cert.

[hermy_weasley2]

Most people call Americans stupid and ignorant etc. based on the 'hilbillies' in the south.

That's not good either. People in the South aren't all hillibillies, and hillbillies aren't all ignorant and stupid. I should know I'm surrounded by them (and one of them). But they're (we're) a minority in the country, and I would hate it if people judged the rest of the country based on us.

Anyway, the language in Harry Potter isn't any where near as bad as it could be. The kids in Harry Potter are growing up, and if they use one or two swear words, it's okay with me. It makes the book more realistic.

[SnorkackCatcher]

Yeah, the words "bloody brillient", sound a bit 1950's boarding school for me, like the phrase "that was super fun!" from Legally Blonde!

Maybe that's where I heard it - at uni and work I've met a number of ex-boarding school people. Or maybe it's just me. :)

[Dorkus221]

If the harry potter movies were American no ifense but they would be horoble they would have fat crummy actors eating french fries all the time doing corny things to make the movie a "better" film i pray that no book as great as the hp books will half to sufer

[Doggy]

If the harry potter movies were American no ifense but they would be horoble they would have fat crummy actors eating french fries all the time doing corny things to make the movie a "better" film i pray that no book as great as the hp books will half to sufer
There have been good American movies I personally think, so being American wouldn't necessarily make Harry Potter bad :), but personally, I'd only accept a British Harry Potter. It wouldn't make a difference if it was a German, a Mexican, a Thai, a Portugese, a Brasilian or an American movie, it just wouldn't be the same. The books are just British and so the movies should be British as well, to tune in with the books.

[daniel4hp]

If the harry potter movies were American no ifense but they would be horoble they would have fat crummy actors eating french fries all the time doing corny things to make the movie a "better" film i pray that no book as great as the hp books will half to sufer
That's a very unfair evaluation of American movies, and I could see that offending many Americans. I don't think Harry Potter should be an American film, simply because the books are British, the story is set in the UK, etc. But this does not mean that I view all American films as being bad. Your assessment of American movies seems, to me at least, entirely ungrounded in fact, and I would be interested to know where exactly you got such an impression.

[Dedalus]

Perhaps the stereotyping and insults might be avoided if the thread was to become more on the lines of "What if HP was not a British movie?" rather than specifically American. Because that's the answer most people are giving, that they're just glad it's British because the books are, so really the films would be ruined if they were set in Australia or Japan or Norway or any where else as well as just America.

To use that example, a lot of people use the Japanese Anime style to draw Harry Potter fan art, which I'm not entirely sure fits, though I appreciate the style. I've seen a lot that are very fitting and absolutely great, because they make alterations to the style, to make it fit the books and the settings of the books, but a lot of fan artists copy all aspects of the art, unconnecting the story from Britain and the British characters.

I'm glad the films are British, generally, and think it'd be just as wrong set anywhere else, and not just the US. A lot of British terms, places, objects and themes keep cropping up which would be lost elsewhere, and the story would only be vaguely the same. You'd still have the main plot, but the main plot needs to be woven out of all the little things and it has to belong somewhere. Every story needs a place to live!

I think some stories can be changed, but then you just use the essence of the story. For something like Harry Potter, I don't think any of us want that. A lot of classics and fairy tales keep cropping up in films set in weird places and with weird alterations, but I'm not sure Harry Potter is something that could be used in that way. These stories are usually ones where everybody know the story exactly, even if they don't know the names or authors - Harry Potter is too big and intricate a story to do that.

[SnorkackCatcher]

You'd still have the main plot, but the main plot needs to be woven out of all the little things and it has to belong somewhere. Every story needs a place to live!

I think some stories can be changed, but then you just use the essence of the story.

Yes, that's important - it's not only HP, something like Cinderella just wouldn't be the same if it was relocated to New York, and for that matter Gone With The Wind would have to be a different story in many ways if reset against a background of (say) the English Civil War.

[Manwë]

It would be awful!!!!
with no offence to the American people: The main reason is VERY clear, Hogwarts is an old castle, it was built like 1000 years ago, and 1000 years ago, there were just some buffalo's going around America. For goodness sake! how on earth would they explain that the castle was there before the Spanish discovered America?
I'ts a British story, there's no point is setting it in America (would you set Don Quijote in LA in stead of setting it in Spain?? Would you set Isabell Allende's "la casa de los espíritus" (I don't know how you call it in Britain... The house of ghosts?) in England?).
And anyway, the American are harmless, let them add some Quidditch Cheerleaders, some pizza in the great hall, a good healthy number of silly mistakes (like someone listening to a walkman or electricity) and they are happy enough (this was totally ironical. I don't want to be misunderstood).

[Alicia]

HP an American movie? That would never work!

[MotherBear1975]

Ok... we need to re-ask the question.

is the question: "What if HP were *Americanized*?" meaning that things were changed to American slang, strange things were changed to familiar for Americans (what the heck is a chipolata? or spotted dick?!) That would be a bad idea.

*OR* is the question: "What if HP was filmed in America?" meaning that the directors stay true to the story... flying over actors/actresses as needed (we're just weird like that). This could work. There are plenty of places in America that could be used for scenery.

However, it really is a moot point, as it isn't either of those... and never will be.

[Rose Hunter]

My two cents:

If the Harry Potter movies had been produced by American companies, chances are I wouldn't have been so ready to go see them.

It wouldn't feel right to me.

:p

[daniel4hp]

Ok... we need to re-ask the question.

is the question: "What if HP were *Americanized*?" meaning that things were changed to American slang, strange things were changed to familiar for Americans (what the heck is a chipolata? or spotted dick?!) That would be a bad idea.

*OR* is the question: "What if HP was filmed in America?" meaning that the directors stay true to the story... flying over actors/actresses as needed (we're just weird like that). This could work. There are plenty of places in America that could be used for scenery.

However, it really is a moot point, as it isn't either of those... and never will be.
You bring up a good point. An American studio could shoot Harry Potter in America while still staying true to the books. Its not uncommon for a film to be shot in an entirely different place than where the events supposedly happened, and you probably could find American scenery that would work.

The next step would be to use a totally American crew, have American actors, etc., but still stay true to the story. The story would still be set in Britain, no one would be eating "freedom" fries, and the actors would use British accents. It would be an American film, but the story would not be Americanised.

Then, the final level, which is what most people seem to be assuming here, is that the story would be altered to fit Americans. Some or all would be set in America, the leads would probably Americans, anything unusual to Americans would be dropped. It would become an American story, although it might still follow the basic plot.

Some important distinctions to make...

[Moonlight]

The next step would be to use a totally American crew, have American actors, etc., but still stay true to the story. The story would still be set in Britain, no one would be eating "freedom" fries, and the actors would use British accents. It would be an American film, but the story would not be Americanised.


If the acting was very good (and I'm not saying American acting isn't!), there shouldn't really be a problem with having American actors. I'm mostly concerned with the accents, because we don't all talk the "Queen's English", and I think it would be difficult for American kid's to immitate various British accents authentically.

As for the settings, I haven't been to America so I can't really judge if their building's etc. are anything like ours, and then there's the infamous British weather but that's probably more of a disadvantage.

Then, the final level, which is what most people seem to be assuming here, is that the story would be altered to fit Americans. Some or all would be set in America, the leads would probably Americans, anything unusual to Americans would be dropped. It would become an American story, although it might still follow the basic plot.

Oh dear. That wouldn't be Harry Potter at all. just another story about a Magical School.


I think the one of the main points in having HP a British film is that it a bit of a National Gem, something Britain can be proud of.

[Cat]

The next step would be to use a totally American crew, have American actors, etc., but still stay true to the story. The story would still be set in Britain, no one would be eating "freedom" fries, and the actors would use British accents. It would be an American film, but the story would not be Americanised.


No, but the British would be up in arms.

There are many false on-screen British accents that, although completely plausible to an American, really grates against the Brits.

Then there would be the question the total lack of respect for the British film industry and its many fine actors. Why bother ship over an American bunch? It would seem like a studied insult.

When the films were in the planning, a wave of pride swept the land because Harry's 'one of ours'. He's a British lad. Hogwarts is in Britain. The author of the books is British. I hate to say it, but there was probably a bit of an 'In your face!' anti-Hollywood thing going on.

Speaking of Hollywood - the fear, secondary to 'Americanising' the story, is Hollywoodising it. But if the films was made by an entirely American crew, that's probably what would have happened. I think the first two films still were slightly Hollywoodised, but they could have been much worse. I think it's the actors that stop it to some extent. British actors are an entirely different species to American ones.

[daniel4hp]

As for the settings, I haven't been to America so I can't really judge if their building's etc. are anything like ours.
In terms of Harry Potter, most buildings would be sets (Hogsmeade, Diagon Alley, etc.). Being no castles in America, Hogwarts would have to be completely done with sets as well. It might be difficult to replicate London; American cities tend to have a different feel (and certain obvious differences, such as road lines and street signs). However, natural settings probably could be found reletively easilly.

[hermy_weasley2]

My two cents:

If the Harry Potter movies had been produced by American companies, chances are I wouldn't have been so ready to go see them.

It wouldn't feel right to me.

:p

But it was produced by an American company though wasn't it? Or was that just here in America? Warner Bros. produced it, there was just a British cast and settings.

Perhaps the stereotyping and insults might be avoided if the thread was to become more on the lines of "What if HP was not a British movie?" rather than specifically American.

I think that would be a little more fair at least. Pin-pointing America brings out some incorrect stereotypes. Many of which are offensive.

[AffectedMangoO]

If HP was an american DD would have to install a Mc Donalds in Hogwarts.
:)
j/k, please don't be offended

[Cat]

But it was produced by an American company though wasn't it? Or was that just here in America? Warner Bros. produced it, there was just a British cast and settings.


And crew. Don't forget crew. The director and the screenwriter are the only Americans on board that I know of.

Why they hired an American screenwriter to write British dialogue still baffles me...

[hermy_weasley2]

And crew. Don't forget crew. The director and the screenwriter are the only Americans on board that I know of.

Why they hired an American screenwriter to write British dialogue still baffles me...


If there's one thing I learned so far in high school, it's that life very rarely makes sense.

And, yes, you're right, the crew too. Thanks. :)

[hesdead-dealwithit]

Cuaron isn't American, though, of course.

Am I the only one that thought some of the dialogue felt fake-British? I'm American, so I don't know, but ...

[lupinlover]

If the harry potter movies were American no ifense but they would be horoble they would have fat crummy actors eating french fries all the time doing corny things to make the movie a "better" film i pray that no book as great as the hp books will half to sufer

Okay, that's completely unfair, rude and offensive. (Note to everyone- the term "No offense" {even when spelled correctly} does not give you complete coverage when you are saying something) The implication that American films contain fat, sloppy actors is completely preposterous. As a matter of fact, there is much controversy in this country over the obsession with how skinny actors/actresses should be. You would know that if you've seen and fully comprehended any American movie, which clearly you haven't, and therefore, cannot make such ridiculous comments. I'm sure not all British films have been absolute masterpieces.

Oh, and by the way, if you're going to insult our country, at least spell some of the words right. This fat, sloppy American eating her French Fries can.

I know everyone thinks that America's just some over-industrialized country with our superhighways and McDonalds (by the way--they have those in London too), but we have an awesome history and an amazing culture (they don't call us the big melting pot, for nothing) I don't have anything against the British people (in fact, I am part English), after all, you guys helped, in part, to start our country, and Americans are forever thankful for that, but I'm sensing just a little bit of a negative attitude toward Americans in this thread. You'd swear by reading some of the posts in this thread that America just an uncultured block of British cheese. Remember a little ole place called Yorktown, Virginia ;)? We're a failed colony of the British, and we're darn proud of it. I bear absolutely no resentment towards the British people. Our countries are allies, and we have helped each other, when we've needed it the most.

I also have to say that everyone shouldn’t be so shocked that some of the Americans are getting a little steamed. If you know Americans, you know were passionate about our country. I think that the British people would be also be a little indignant if an innocent and interesting thread contained negative implications towards their country, too. I’m really disgusted with some of the startling displays of ignorance in this thread.

Anyway, back to the original question. I feel that Harry Potter belongs in England. The nature of the plots, dialogue and characters, almost requires it to take place in England, and I like the fact that they are. I wouldn’t change it. I also don’t think that the books, or any other part of the Harry Potter series, needs to be changed for American kids. We’re smart enough to understand the differences in culture, and wouldn’t have too much difficulty with the British lingo. It’s not like we’re going to bang our heads against a wall if we hit a word like “philosopher” instead of “sorcerer”.

Just some thoughts from a highly uncultured and inarticulate American :)

[rebus]

Firstly I am NOT am Anerican But I do think that some folk are taking the oppurtunity to bash the Americans in this thread, and that is wrong.
Secondly, I think that there are many, many very good American actors and actresses (Robert de Nero, Kevin Spacy etc) they just wouldn't be correct for any of the parts in Harry Potter; Just as some British Actors/Actresses wouldn't (Michael Cain as DD anyone?). However there are a great number of actors from the US that can do very good British accents (Cary Elwes in The Princess Bride and Robin Hood: Men in Tights is just one example). I think that by restricting the cast to just British actors is wrong, if an actor is great for the part then where they are from should not matter (but they should be able to use the correct accent.
Where the films are actually shot is unimportant as long as they look right. For hevens sake Braveheart (what some would say is the utimate Scottish movie was shot in the Republic of Ireland, incidentally using an Australian- American in the Lead role and no one complanes about that!) America, being so big, has many differnet topographys and landscapes; I am sure that they would be able to find locations that would look as good as Scotland or England. Also remember that much of the films a re actually filmed inside and a sound stage looks the same (once the set is made) in LA as it would in London.
Lastly I think that Americanising Harry Potter (or any other British, French, Austraiian etc... story) is an insult. This insult is NOT directed at the Brits, Aussies, French Chinese etc... but rather AT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. What the executives at WB (or Fox, Universal or any other studio) are saying by Americanising somthing (film OR book) is that the American Public is to unintelligent to understand other countries and their cultures, which is patently false or why is Harry Potter and LOTR so popular in the Sates? SO what you ( as Americans ) should be getting angry at is the fact that other Americans think that you are stupid and can only understand America as it is showen in films and on television.
These are just my thoughts on this subject.

BTW: chipolats are small sausages (a bit like wieners) and Spotted Dick (despite all the jokes) is a steamed pudding containing rasins and sultanas.

[hermy_weasley2]

Okay, that's completely unfair, rude and offensive. (Note to everyone- the term "No offense" {even when spelled correctly} does not give you complete coverage when you are saying something) The implication that American films contain fat, sloppy actors is completely preposterous. As a matter of fact, there is much controversy in this country over the obsession with how skinny actors/actresses should be. You would know that if you've seen and fully comprehended any American movie, which clearly you haven't, and therefore, cannot make such ridiculous comments. I'm sure not all British films have been absolute masterpieces.

Oh, and by the way, if you're going to insult our country, at least spell some of the words right. This fat, sloppy American eating her French Fries can.

I know everyone thinks that America's just some over-industrialized country with our superhighways and McDonalds (by the way--they have those in London too), but we have an awesome history and an amazing culture (they don't call us the big melting pot, for nothing) I don't have anything against the British people (in fact, I am part English), after all, you guys helped, in part, to start our country, and Americans are forever thankful for that, but I'm sensing just a little bit of a negative attitude toward Americans in this thread. You'd swear by reading some of the posts in this thread that America just an uncultured block of British cheese. Remember a little ole place called Yorktown, Virginia ;)? We're a failed colony of the British, and we're darn proud of it. I bear absolutely no resentment towards the British people. Our countries are allies, and we have helped each other, when we've needed it the most.

I also have to say that everyone shouldn’t be so shocked that some of the Americans are getting a little steamed. If you know Americans, you know were passionate about our country. I think that the British people would be also be a little indignant if an innocent and interesting thread contained negative implications towards their country, too. I’m really disgusted with some of the startling displays of ignorance in this thread.

Anyway, back to the original question. I feel that Harry Potter belongs in England. The nature of the plots, dialogue and characters, almost requires it to take place in England, and I like the fact that they are. I wouldn’t change it. I also don’t think that the books, or any other part of the Harry Potter series, needs to be changed for American kids. We’re smart enough to understand the differences in culture, and wouldn’t have too much difficulty with the British lingo. It’s not like we’re going to bang our heads against a wall if we hit a word like “philosopher” instead of “sorcerer”.

Just some thoughts from a highly uncultured and inarticulate American :)

I agree with you completely. I hate it when people say "No offense" and continue to call us fat,ignorant, lazy (etc.) slobs. And let's not forget arrogant. They're insulting our country, but we're the arrogant ones? Of course I don't mean everyone or even very many people, but there are people in the world who do.

[Dedalus]

Cuaron isn't American, though, of course.

Am I the only one that thought some of the dialogue felt fake-British? I'm American, so I don't know, but ...
It seemed to me that the lines were British for a non-British audience, if you know what I mean.

Lupinlover, just because a few Brits (and non-Brits) have insulted the US in this thread doesn't mean all do. One person can't speak for all, so though all though what that person said was horrible I'm not sure you can classify it as the opinion of the entire British race. I don't believe what Dorkus221 said, for one. And likewise I've been given stick from a lot of American people but as you say, you have nothing against British folk yourself so evidentally they don't speak for all either.

[hawk1245]

Why can't we all get along? I am sick of hearing coments like "That was a stupid question, let me guess you are American?" and "British peopl would have ruined America" and stuff like that! I am American, and have the upmost respect for peopl of ALL nations, and I think it is so STUPID to judge people by their nationality, just STUPID! And the last place you would expect it woud be from between America and Britan, when you think about it, though we ARE very different, we are more alike then we give ourselves credit for. I vote for respect, who agrees with me? And even I, who am American, think that a HP set here in th US would be beyond stupid, so it's not anti-americanism. HP is a British story, and should be told in Britan. Period. I sure wish all the arguing would stop, we are missing out on great friendships, and by 'we' I mean all nations.

[rebus]

Why can't we all get along? I am sick of hearing coments like "That was a stupid question, let me guess you are American?" and "British peopl would have ruined America" and stuff like that! I am American, and have the upmost respect for peopl of ALL nations, and I think it is so STUPID to judge people by their nationality, just STUPID! And the last place you would expect it woud be from between America and Britan, when you think about it, though we ARE very different, we are more alike then we give ourselves credit for. I vote for respect, who agrees with me? And even I, who am American, think that a HP set here in th US would be beyond stupid, so it's not anti-americanism. HP is a British story, and should be told in Britan. Period. I sure wish all the arguing would stop, we are missing out on great friendships, and by 'we' I mean all nations.

This is very true. I am wtih you.

[lupinlover]

It seemed to me that the lines were British for a non-British audience, if you know what I mean.

Lupinlover, just because a few Brits (and non-Brits) have insulted the US in this thread doesn't mean all do. One person can't speak for all, so though all though what that person said was horrible I'm not sure you can classify it as the opinion of the entire British race. I don't believe what Dorkus221 said, for one. And likewise I've been given stick from a lot of American people but as you say, you have nothing against British folk yourself so evidentally they don't speak for all either.

Dedalus, sorry if you took my response the wrong way, but I was directing most of my comments at Dorkus221, because her post was completely disgusting. I know that all Brits don't look down on Americans, I was just reminding those who do, that they are being ignorant (as I would say for any other person looking down on another country) :)

[LuckyPheonix]

I dont see why we all can't get along. There are things us America shouldnt be proud of *cough* Bush *cough* and there are things Britian shouldnt be proud of, but I personally think its the differences that makes places around the world cool bacause if everything was the same, the world would be boring. Plus, when the Gulf Streams stops and Northern Europe turns into a glacier once again, they will all move over here anyways!! :p



But, thats off the topic. I think its a good thing that Harry Potter is a British movie, because it just wouldnt seem right if it wasnt!

[MotherBear1975]

BTW: chipolats are small sausages (a bit like wieners) and Spotted Dick (despite all the jokes) is a steamed pudding containing rasins and sultanas.

Thank you! The pudding sounds nummy, but I'm suprised about the Chipolatas! They put them in the "vegetarian" chili we just started serving where I work!

[rotsiepots]

Err, could we get back on topic?

Thanks.

[Nick]

If the two movies were American (and I mean American actors and a Hollywood-esque skript) then I would have mocked them more the first time I saw them, I would have made the mistaken assumption that the books were American, I would not have wanted to read them, and consequently I would not be here.

[hermy_weasley2]

If the two movies were American (and I mean American actors and a Hollywood-esque skript) then I would have mocked them more the first time I saw them, I would have made the mistaken assumption that the books were American, I would not have wanted to read them, and consequently I would not be here.


I'm a little confused. Sorry, I get that way sometimes. :blush: If you saw the movies with a "Hollywood-esque" script and American actors, you would assume the books were American and wouldn't want to read them. Why not? If you saw the "American" movie and it assumed it was an American book, then what would the problem be? Like I said, maybe it's me, but I don't understand that. I've been up since early this morning, but I can't sleep.

[Nick]

I'm a little confused ..

Simple. I'm sick of Americans in difficult situations coming out on top without even chipping their fingernails. At the end of the first movie I was ranting about how predictable the movie was and how I "knew" that Quirrel was the bad guy and so on .. if it was American it would have confirmed in my mind that it was more Hollywood garbage that I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

To put it simply, I don't want to read about another American who saves the [insert something here].

[hermy_weasley2]

Simple. I'm sick of Americans in difficult situations coming out on top without even chipping their fingernails. At the end of the first movie I was ranting about how predictable the movie was and how I "knew" that Quirrel was the bad guy and so on .. if it was American it would have confirmed in my mind that it was more Hollywood garbage that I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

To put it simply, I don't want to read about another American who saves the [insert something here].


Okay, if I ever find myself in a situation where I have to save the world, I won't. Someone might write a book about me. No, I'm just kidding.

Why is it a bad thing that American movie-makers make movies with American characters? Sure, Hollywood doesn't always have the best movies, but the American writers write about American characters. They write what they know about. It's hard to create someone in a culture that you're not accustomed to and have it be accurate. Hollywood has a strong stand in film- making business, and most Hollywood movie makers are American. If they tried to make foreign characters, they'd be criticized for doing it wrong. Besides, just because the character is American, doesn't mean the movie has to be about "an American saving the day."Maybe people interpret things differently. And what does that have to do with books? The book being "American" or of any other nationality (books don't have nationalities) is not a good reason to call it "garbage."

[Nick]

Your post is certainly worth rebutting but I'm afraid it'd be pointless. Me no likee another American superboy, and that's that.

[hesdead-dealwithit]

Not Superboy. Cowboy.

It's the American Hero, the cowboy - even if he's Vin Diesel or somebody, a private detective, or whatever - at heart, he's a cowboy. I don't think there's anything wrong with American movies having those themes. French movies have more French themes/topics, and you're not complaining.

[Nick]

^ Because I don't get anywhere near enough French movies here.

My initial post, I believe, stated that I would disregard the series because it is "just another American cowboy film". Another. The blasted keyword is ANOTHER. The Australian market is too full of American exports, and as a result you get people like me who disregard anything from America. The price of being the top dog, I suppose.