View Single Post
Old November 25th, 2006, 11:32 pm
Hirayuki Hirayuki is offline
First Year
Join Date: 10th January 2006
Posts: 1
Re: What Movie 5 Means For Book 7

I hope I can make some comments about the film business, both touching on either Harry Potter or the Potter films without getting stoned (killed by rocks, not drunk, or drugged)!

I've worked in the film business. I used to draw animated special effects with a pencil until computers made my specialty obsolete. People in the business do not know tons more about film than informed fans do. One thing they do know, though, is how money often affects the look of the film they see in the theatre relative to what it could have been. They ought to! They're the one's making the extra money!

My 17 year old nephew has not read any of the Potter books (Please, don't stone him either! He's really okay, and mentioning this has a point). He could not make any sense out of the movie of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire." I don't think he's stupid at all. I think he's right. There's just too much left out.I don't think you can make enough sense out of Movie #4 unless you've read the book first, which is just plain sloppy filmmaking.

I'm not slamming the makers of the film at any level, not at all. I'm coming to the defense of screenwriter Steve Kloves (did I spell his name right?). HPATGOF is already the most expensive film ever made without making the screenplay the proper length. The original draft probably was a standalone work of art. I gnash my teeth at how much of a narrative mess the "Goblet of Fire" when a tiny piece of the film itself gives enough evidence of how good Mr. Kloves is.

When Voldemort calls Lucius Malfoy his "slippery friend" in the film, he replies that the face he puts before the public: "That is my true mask. I love how he speaks of a false face being 'true!'

That's rant number one. The last concerns "Harry Potter" series film score composer John Williams. I wish that Peter Jackson had used Williams rather than James Newton Howard to score "King Kong."

Mr. Howard provided a very atmospheric score to Jackson's labor of love. But the first "King Kong" had the very first full symphonic film score. Max Steiner's score blew the heads off the audiences back in 1933, and the new "Kong" should have done the same. As good as it is, the new score doesn't do that. I believe that if John Williams had scored "King Kong," it might have been the highest grossing movie in history, with nothing else changed.

I'm not implying that James Newton Howard is a budget score choice or anything....this is a rant, only a loud opinion, and should be taken just as seriously. Which is really, not at all.

Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links